QUESTIONS AND SOLUTIONS: CHAPTER 8

Shallow foundations

Q8.1 Figure 8.38 shows a cross section through a shallow strip footing. Estimate lower and
upper bounds to the vertical load Q (per metre length) that will result in the rapid (undrained)
failure of the footing.
[University of London 2nd year BEng (Civil Engineering) examination, King's College]

Q8.1 Solution
Note: this question is rather trivial unless the formulae used are derived from first principles.
This was expected of students in the examination, but the derivations are not repeated here.

Lower boud solution based on frictionless stress discontinuities: use the reasoning in Section
8.2.2 (page 439) of the main text to derive Equation 8.3a,

(Vf – V0) = 4.Wu (8.3a)

More advanced students might be expected to use the reasoning given in main text Section
9.5.2 (pages 507-508) to derive Equation 9.13,

(Vf – V0) = (2 + S).Wu (9.13)

In the present case,

Wu = 35 kPa

V0 = 1 m u 18 kN/m3 = 18 kPa on either side of the footing

Hence

Vf = (4 u 25 kPa) + 18kPa = 118 kPa using Equation 8.3a, or

Vf = (5.14 u 25 kPa) + 18kPa = 146.5 kPa using Equation 9.13

Multiplying by the foundation width 2 m,

Q = 236 kN/m

using the most conservative possible approach (Equation 8.3a; the answer using Equation
9.13 is 293 kN/m)

Upper bound solution: use the reasoning in Section 8.3.1 (pages 439-443) of the main text to
derive

(Vf – V0) = 5.52.Wu

for a circular slip with its centre located above the centre of the footing (main text Figure
8.5). More advanced students might reasonably be expected to follow the reasoning given in
main text Section 9.9.1(b) (pages 536-539) to derive Equation 9.47,

125
(Vf – V0) = (2 + S).Wu (9.47)

In the present case, with Wu = 35 kPa and V0 = 1 m u 18 kN/m3 = 18 kPa on either side of the
footing

Vf = (5.52 u 25 kPa) + 18 kPa = 156 kPa using the slip circle mechanism, or

Vf = (5.14 u 25 kPa) + 18 kPa = 146.5 kPa using Equation 9.47

Multiplying by the foundation with 2 m,

Q = 312 kN/m

using the slip circle. (Equation 9.47 is the same as Equation 9.13: these upper and lower
bounds are the same and the solution is therefore correct – provided of course that the
conditions assumed in the analysis apply!)

Q8.2 (a) Explain briefly the essential features of upper and lower bound plasticity analyses as
applied to problems in geotechnical engineering.

(b) A long foundation of depth D and width B is built on a clay soil of saturated unit weight
Js, undrained shear strength W u and frictional strength I'. The water table is at a depth D below
the soil surface. Show that the vertical load Q, uniformly distributed across the foundation,
that will cause failure is given by

(Q/B)t(J s.D + 4.W u)

in the short term, and by

(Q/B)t(K p2J s.D)

in the long term, where K p is the passive earth pressure coefficient,

1  sin I '
Kp
1  sin I '

(c) If Js = 20 kN/m3, Wu = 25 kPa, I' = 22q and D = 1.5 m, is the foundation safer in the short
term or in the long term?
[University of London 2nd year BEng (Civil Engineering) examination, Queen Mary and
Westfield College]

Q8.2 Solution
(a) An upper bound is based on an assumed mechanism of collapse. If the assumed
mechanism is incorrect, the analysis will err on the unsafe side. A lower bound solution is
based on finding a system of stresses that can be in equilibrium with the applied loads
without violating the failure criterion for the soil. It may be that a more efficient stress
distribution exists, in which case the analysis will err on the safe side.

126
(b) Use the analyses given in main text Sections 8.2.2 (page 439) and 8.2.1 (pages 437-438)
to derive the short term (undrained) and long term (effective stress) bearing capacities

(Vf – V0) = 4.Wu (8.3a)

and

(V'f/V'f 0) = Kp2, where Kp = (1 + sinI')/(1 - sinI') (8.1)

Substituting Vf or V'f = Q/B (Q is the load per metre length of the foundation) and (with zero
pore water at depth D) V0 or V'0 = Js.D kPa, and noting that our answers are lower bounds
to the actual failure loads,

Q/B t 4.Wu + Js.D (short term), and

Q/B t Kp2.Js.D (long term)

(c) Substituting Js = 20 kN/m3, Wu = 25 kPa, I' = 22q and D = 1.5 m gives Kp = 2.197 and

Q/B t (4 u 25 kPa) + (20 kN/m3 u 1.5 m) = 130 kPa, short term

Q/B t (2.1972) u (20 kN/m3 u 1.5 m) = 145 kPa, long term

Therefore the short term case is the more critical (this is usual with a foundation on a soft
clay).

Q8.3 A long concrete strip footing founded at a depth of 1 m below ground level is to carry an
applied load (not including its own weight) of 300 kN/m. The soil is a clay, with undrained
shear strength Wu = 42 kPa, effective angle of friction I' = 24q, and unit weight J = 20 kN/m3.
Calculate the width of the foundation required to give factors of safety on soil strength of 1.25
(on tanI') and 1.4 (on Wu). Both short-term (undrained) and long-term (drained) conditions
should be considered. The water table is 1 m below ground level.

Use Equation 8.9, with Nc = (2 + S , and a depth factor dc as given by Skempton (Table 8.2);
and Equation 8.7, with Nq = Kp.eStanI' where Kp = (1+sinI')/(1-sinI'), with dq, NJ, dJ and rJ as
given by Meyerhof and Bowles (Table 8.1). Take the unit weight of concrete as 24 kN/m3.
[University of Southampton 2nd year BEng (Civil Engineering) examination, slightly
modified]

Q8.3 Solution
(a) Undrained case
The design undrained design bearing capacity is given by main text Equation 8.9,

(Vf - Vo)design = {Nc u scu dc}u Wu,design (8.9)

with Nc = (2 + S) = 5.14; Wu,design = 42 kPa y 1.4 = 30 kPa and Vo = J.D = 20kN/m3 u 1m

= 20kPa

127
From Table 8.2 (Skempton), the shape factor sc = 1 (because this is a long foundation with L
>>B, whatever the value of B) and the depth factor dc = {1 + 0.23—(D/B)} assuming (D/B) d
4. The foundation width B is as yet unknown.

The actual pressure at the base of the foundation is 300 kN/m divided by the footing width B,
i.e. (300/B) kPa, plus the pressure due to the concrete foundation, Jconc.D = 24 kPa (D = 1 m;
Jconc= 24 kN/m3).

Equating the actual and design base pressures,

Vf,design = [{Nc u scu dc}u Wu,design] + 20 kPa = 300/B + 24 kPa

[5.14 u {1 + 0.23—(D/B)} u 30 kPa] + 20 kPa = 300/B + 24 kPa

Solve by trial and error: with B = 1.7 m, D/B = 0.588 and the depth factor dc = 1.176. The
left hand side of the equation (the design base pressure) is then numerically equal to 201.4
kPa; the right hand side (the actual base pressure) is 200.5 kPa, which is close enough.

Thus the required foundation width for the short term case is approximately 1.7 m

(b) Long term (effective stress) case

The long term (drained) design bearing capacity is given by main text Equation 8.7,

V'f,design = {Nqusqudq}uV'o + {NJusJudJurJu[0.5JB - u]} (8.7)

with Nq = Kp.eStanI'des, Kp = (1+sinI'des)/(1-sinI'des),and dq, NJ, dJ and rJ as given by

Meyerhof and Bowles (Table 8.1).

The design strength is now given by

tanI'des = (tan24q) y 1.25 Ÿ I'des = 19.6q

I'des =19.6q, Kp = 2.0096 and Nq = 6.151. From Table 8.1,

sq = sJ = 1 (because L>>B)

dq = dJ = 1 + 0.1 u (D/B) u—Kp = 1 + 0.142D/B

NJ= (Nq – 1) u tan(1.4I'des) = 5.151 u tan27.44q = 2.675

rJ= 1 - 0.25.log10(B/2)

V'o = J.D = 20 kPa

The pore water pressure u at a depth of B/2 below the bottom of the foundation = Jw.B/2, so
that [0.5JB - u] = 5B kPa (with B in metres)

128
The design effective stress on the base of the foundation is V'f,design:

V'f,design = {Nqusqudq}uV'o + {NJusJudJurJu[0.5JB - u]}

or

V'f,design = {6.151 u (1 + 0.142D/B ) u 20 kPa}

+ {2.675 u (1 + 0.142D/B )u [1 - 0.25.log10(B/2]) u 5B}
The pore water pressure acting on the base of the foundation is zero.

The actual stress applied at the base of the foundation is 300 kN/m divided by the footing
width B, i.e. (300/B) kPa, plus the stress due to the weight of the concrete foundation, Jconc.D.
The foundation width B must be chosen so that the actual and design stresses are the same.

Equating the design and actual stresses,

{6.151 u (1 + 0.142D/B ) u 20 kPa}

+ {2.675 u (1 + 0.142D/B )u [1 - 0.25.log10(B/2]) u 5B} ^(300/B) + 24 kPa}

Solve by trial and error: with B = 2.18 m, D/B = 0.459, dq =dJ = (1 + 0.142D/B) = 1.065,
and rJ = 0.99 so that the left hand side is numerically equal to

{6.151 u 1.065 u 20 kPa} + {2.675 u 1.065u 0.99 u (5 u 2.18) kPa} = 161.8 kPa

The right hand side is numerically equal to (300/2.18) + 24 = 161.6 kPa,

which is near enough the same.

Thus the required foundation width for the long term case is approximately 2.2 m

Generally, it is unusual for the drained (long term) analysis to give a more critical result than
the undrained (short term) analysis.

Deep foundations

Q8.4 Figure 8.39 shows a soil profile in which it proposed to install a foundation made up of a
number of circular concrete piles of 1.5m diameter and 10m depth. Using the data given
below, estimate the long-term allowable vertical load for a single pile, if a factor of safety of
1.25 on the soil strength tanI' is required.

(Assume that the horizontal effective stress at any depth is equal to (1-sinI') times the vertical
effective stress at the same depth, that the angle of friction G between the concrete and the soil
is equal to 0.67I', and that the long-term pore water pressures are hydrostatic below the
indicated water table. Take the unit weight of water as 10kN/m3, and the unit weight of
concrete as 24kN/m3.)

Data:

129
Bearing capacity factor = Kp.eStanI' u depth factor u shape factor, where
Kp = (1+sinI')/(1-sinI')
Depth factor = (1+0.2[D/B]) up to a limit of 1.5
Shape factor = (1+0.2[B/L])
and the foundation has width B, length L and depth D

Comment briefly on the assumptions V'h=(1-sinI').V'v and G= 0.67I'. Why in reality might it
be necessary to reduce the allowable load per pile?
[University of London 3rd year BEng (Civil Engineering) examination, Queen Mary and
Westfield College, slightly modified]

Q8.4 Solution
In the sands & gravels,I' = 30q and I'des = tan-1{tan30qy1.25} = 24.79q. The angle of
soil/wall friction Gdes= 0.67I' des = 16.61q. In the clay,I' = 20q; I'des = tan-1 {tan20qy1.25} =
16.23q and Gdes= 10.88q.

Note that the horizontal effective stresses are calculated as V'h=(1-sinI').V'v using the full soil
strength in each stratum, as to use the design soil strength would lead to increased values of
V'h and hence unduly optimistic increased values of skin friction shear stress W.

The skin friction shear stress W = V'h.tanGdes, and varies linearly between successive “key
depths”, i.e. the soil surface, the water table, the interface between the sands & gravels and
the clay, and the base of the pile. The skin friction shear stresses at these key depths are
calculated as shown in Table Q8.4. The sands & gravels have saturated unit weight J= 20
kN/m3; the clay has saturated unit weight J= 18 kN/m3. In the sands & gravels, V'h = (1-
sinI').V'v with I' = 30q, giving V'h = 0.5 u V'v. In the clays, V'h = (1-sinI').V'v with I' = 20q,
giving V'h = 0.658 u V'v.

Stratum Depth, Vv, kPa u, kPa V 'v = V'h = (1- Gdes, q W=

m = 6J.z Vv – u, sinI').V'v V'h.tanGdes,
kPa kPa kPa
S&G 0 0 0 0 0 16.61 0
S&G 2 40 0 40 20 16.61 5.97
S&G 5 100 30 70 35 16.61 10.44
Clay 5 100 30 70 46.1 10.88 8.86
Clay 10 190 80 110 72.4 10.88 13.92

Table Q8.4: Calculation of skin friction shear stresses at key depths

The skin friction force over each section of the pile (0 – 2 m depth; 2 – 5 m depth; and 5 – 10
m depth) is given by the pile circumference u the pile section length u the average of the
shear stresses at the top and bottom of the pile section. Hence the skin friction force is

SF = [S u 1.5 m u 2 m u ½ u 5.97 kPa] + [S u 1.5 m u 3 m u ½ u (5.97 + 10.44) kPa] + [S u

1.5 m u 5 m u ½ u (8.86 + 13.92) kPa]

= 28.13 kN + 116.0 kN + 268.37 kN = 412.5 kN

The design base bearing effective stress is given by

130
V'f,des = Kp u exp(S.tanI'des) u depth factor dq u shape factor sq u V'o

V'o is the in situ vertical effective stress at the depth of the base of the pile = 110 kPa.

Kp u exp(S.tanI'des) = {(1+sin16.23q)/(1 – sin16.23q)} u exp(S.tan16.23q) = 4.43

Pile depth D = 10 m, breadth (diameter) B = 1.5 m, Length (on plan, also the diameter) L =
1.5 m

Hence D/B = 8.67 and B/L = 1 Ÿ; shape factor sq = 1.2 and depth factor dq = 1.5

V'f = 4.43 u 1.2 u 1.5 u 110 kPa = 877.14 kPa

Area of pile = S u 1.52m2/4 = 1.767 m2

?base bearing load = 877.14 kPa u 1.767 m2 = 1550 kN

The upthrust on the base due to the pore water pressure is 80 kPa u 1.767 m2 = 141.4kN

The design load is 412.5 kN (SF) + 1550 kN (BB) + 141.4 kN (pwp) = 2103.9 kN

The weight of the foundation is (1.767 m2 u 10 m u 24 kN/m3) = 424.08 kN, giving a design
applied load of

2104 kN – 424 kN = 1680 kN

The in situ horizontal effective stress may well be higher than assumed by the use of V'h = (1-
sinI').V'h in the clay, especially if the clay is overconsolidated. In general, V'h = (1-sinI').V'h
is a conservative estimate, allowing perhaps for some reduction from the in situ value due to
installation effects (see also the earlier note regading the use of unfactored soil strengths in
calculating horizontal effective stresses).

The friction angle G between the pile and the soil is often assumed to be 0.67uI' in coarse
materials. In clays, however, particularly if the pile is rough, any failure surface will
probably form in the soil, so that G = 0.67.I' is again conservative. However,the use of a
bentonite slurry to support the pile bore during construction could reduce interface friction if
a skin of bentonite remains between the pile and the soil.

Interaction between closely spaced piles would probably reduce the ultimate load of n piles to
less than n u the ultimate load of a single pile (due eg to a tendency to block failure).

Slopes

Q8.5 A partly-complete stability analysis using the Bishop routine method is given in the
Table below. The configuration of the remaining slice (slice 4) and other relevant data are
given in Figure 8.40. Abstract the necessary additional data from Figure 8.40, and determine
the factor of safety of the slope for this slip circle.

131
Slice weight u.b, I'crit, q nD u (w - u.b).tanI'crit for
w, kN/m Fs = 1.45, kN/m
kN/m
1 390 0 25 196.5
2 635 90 25 251.8
3 691 163 25 235.1
4 ? ? 30 ?
5 472 130 30 198.9
6 236 20 30 137.7

[University of Southampton 2nd year BEng (Civil Engineering) examination, slightly

modified]

Q8.5 Solution
The Bishop equation must be used in the form given in main text Equation 8.35(a):
­ § ·½
° ¨ ¸°
1 ° ¨ 1 ¸°
u ¦ ® w  u.b . tan I 'crit u
tan I ' crit . sin D ¸¾°
Fs (8.35a)
¦ w.sin D ° ¨
¨ cos D  ¸
°¯ © Fs ¹°¿

(Simplification to the form given in Equation 8.35(b) is not possible in this case, because the
slices have different breadths b.)
§ ·
¨ ¸
¨ 1 ¸ = n 
Let
¨ tan I 'crit . sin D ¸ D
¨ cos D  ¸
© Fs ¹

The solution procedure is as follows:

1. Assume a value of factor of safety Fs

2. Calculate the values of w, sinD, u.b and nD (which depends on Fs) for each slice
3. Determine whether Equation 8.35a is satisfied
4. If not, choose a new value of Fs
5. Repeat stages 2-4 until Equation 8.35a is satisfied

The weight of slice 4 is approximately 5 m u {(6 m+7 m)/2} u 20 kN/m3 = 650 kN/m

The pore water pressure at the left hand edge of slice 4 is approximately 5.4 m u 10 kN/m3 =
54 kPa. The pore water pressure at the right hand edge of slice 4 is approximately 4.6 m u 10
kN/m3 = 46 kPa. The average pore water pressure is therefore approximately 50 kPa, acting
over a width b = 5 m, giving u.b = 250 kN/m. The remainder of the calculation for Fs = 1.45
is tabulated below (entries show in bold have been calculated)

132
Slice weight D w.sinD u.b, I'crit (w-ub)u nD for nD u (w -
w, kN/m kN/m tanI’crit Fs=1.45 u.b).tanI'crit
kN/m
for Fs =
1.45, kN/m
1 390 +46q 280.5 0 25q 181.9 1.080 196.5
2 635 +34q 355.1 90 25q 254.1 0.991 251.8
3 691 +22q 258.9 163 25q 246.2 0.955 235.1
4 650 +10q 112.9 250 30q 230.9 0.949 219.1
5 472 -8.2q -8.2 130 30q 197.5 1.007 198.9
6 236 -11q -45.0 20 30q 124.7 1.104 137.7

Table Q8.5a: trial slope stability calculation for Q8.5

For Fs=1.45, 6^nD u (w - u.b).tanI'crit} (i.e. the sum of the entries in the last column) =
1239.4 kN/m. Dividing this by 6{w.sinD} = 954.1 kN/m, we obtain a calculated value of Fs
(according to Equation 8.35a) of 1239.4 y 954.1 = 1.299, compared with the assumed value
of 1.45. The assumed value is therefore too high.

Try Fs = 1.3:

Slice weight D w.sinD u.b, I'crit (w-ub)u nD for nD u (w -

w, kN/m kN/m tanI’crit Fs=1.3 u.b).tanI'cri
kN/m
t for Fs =
1.3, kN/m
1 390 +46q 280.5 0 25q 181.9 1.050 191.0
2 635 +34q 355.1 90 25q 254.1 1.030 261.6
3 691 +22q 258.9 163 25q 246.2 0.942 231.9
4 650 +10q 112.9 250 30q 230.9 0.942 217.5
5 472 -8.2q -8.2 130 30q 197.5 1.008 199.1
6 236 -11q -45.0 20 30q 124.7 1.115 139.0

Table Q8.5b: second trial slope stability calculation for Q8.5

For Fs=1.3, 6^nD u (w - u.b).tanI'crit} (i. e. the sum of the entries in the last column) =
1240.1 kN/m. Dividing this by 6{w.sinD} = 954.1 kN/m (as before), we obtain a calculated
value of Fs of 1240.1 y 954.1 = 1.3. This is the same as the assumed value of 1.3, hence

Fs = 1.3

Q8.6 A slope failure can be represented by the four-slice system shown in Figure 8.41. By
considering the equilibrium of a typical slice (resolving forces parallel and perpendicular to
the local slip surface), and assuming that the resultant of the interslice forces is zero, show
that the overall factor of safety of the slope Fs = tanI'crit/tanI'mob may be calculated as

133
Fs
¦ > w. cos D  u.l tan I ' @
crit

¦ w. sin D
where the symbols have their usual meaning.

If the pore pressure conditions which caused failure of the slope shown in Figure 8.41 can be
represented by average pore water pressures of 15kPa, 60kPa, 70kPa and 40kPa on AB, BC,
CD and DE respectively, estimate the value of I'crit along the failure surface DE.
[University of Southampton 2nd year BEng (Civil Engineering) examination, slightly
modified]

Q8.6 Solution
A free body diagram showing the forces acting on each of the four slices, ignoring the inter-
slice forces, is given in Figure Q8.6. Resolving parallel to the base of an individual slice,
assuming the inter-slice forces are zero,

T = w.sinD

Resolving perpendicular to the base of an individual slice (again assuming that the interslice
forces are zero),

N = w.cosD

where D is taken as positive when the base of the slice slopes up from bottom right to top left
(i.e. slices 1,2 and 3)

Figure Q8.6: Free body diagram showing the forces acting on each of the four
slices

For each slice,

T = (N-U).tanI'mob = {(N-U).tanI'crit}/Fs

where Fs = tanI'crit/tanI'mob

134
The pore water force U acting on the base of a slice is equal to the average pore water
pressure u u the base length l.

Hence for each slice,

T = w.sinD = {(w.cosD - u.l).tanI'crit}/Fs, or

w. cos D  u.l . tan I ' crit

Fs
w. sin D

The overall factor of safety Fs for the system is given by

Fs
¦ > w. cos D  u.l . tan I ' @ crit

¦ w.sin D
For each slice in the four slice system shown in Figure 8.41, the values of b, w, D, w.sinD,
w.cosD,, u.l and (w.cosD - u.l).tanI'crit (="NUM") are tabulated below:

Slice b, m w, D wsinD wcosD l, m u, u.l, I'crit NUM

kN/m kN/m kN/m kPa kN/m kN/m
1 8 640 47q 468.1 436.5 11.73 15 176.0 20q 94.8
2 25 5750 25q 2430.1 5211.3 27.58 60 1654.8 25q 1658.4
3 14 3640 12q 756.8 3560.5 14.31 70 1001.7 25q 1193.2
4 16 1920 -5q -167.3 1912.7 16.06 40 642.4 I'DE 1270.3
utanI'DE

Table Q8.6: second trial slope stability calculation for Q8.6

In calculating w for slice 2, it is necessary to take account of the different unit weights of the
two soil types present. The base length l of each slice is equal to b/cosD, where b is the slice
width.

As the system is at failure, Fs = 1. Hence 6w.sinD = 6{(w.cosD - u.l).tanI'crit} = 6{NUM}

From the table,

6w.sinD = 3487.7 kN/m,

and

6{(w.cosD - u.l).tanI'crit} = 6{NUM} = 2946.4 + 1270.3.tanI'DE kN/m.

Hence

3487.7 = 2946.4 + 1270.3.tanI'DE

135
Ÿ tanI'DE = 541.3 y 1270.3

Ÿ I'DE = 23q

136
QUESTIONS AND SOLUTIONS: CHAPTER 11

Modelling

Q11.1 Compare and contrast the use of physical and numerical models as aids to design. Your
answer should address issues such as the assumptions that have to be made in setting up the
model, limitations as to the validity of the results, and other factors which would lead to the
use of one in preference to the other.
[University of London 3rd year BEng (Civil Engineering) examination, Queen Mary and
Westfield College]

Q11.1 Solution
The answer should be in the form of a reasonably well-structured essay, illustrated with
diagrams and examples as appropriate. The following notes give an indication of the expected
scope.

Physical models
x A 1/n scale model must be tested in a centrifuge at a radial acceleration of n u g so that
stresses (which govern the soil stress-strain response and possibly peak and/or undrained
strength) are the same at corresponding depths in the model and the field (self-weight stress
Vv at depth z is U.g.z in the field and U.ng.(z/n) =U.g.z in the model).
x A centrifuge model must be operated by remote control - in particular, it must be possible
to simulate geotechnical processes such as excavation, embankment construction, diaphragm
wall or pile installation, addition/removal of props etc.
x Must look carefully at scaling relationships and real-time effects of the simulated events
(e.g. are they essentially drained or undrained?)
x Models are often plane strain, but 3-D modelling is not difficult.

Numerical models
x Often need to run in 2-D (plane strain or axisymmetric) because full 3-D modelling would
require excessive CPU time.
x Plane strain modelling can be difficult to interpret, e.g. for rows of piles. (Physical
modelling would enable this problem to be represented more reasonably by a line of discrete
piles, even if deformation overall were constrained to be in plane strain).
x Results of an analysis can be critically dependent on the soil model and parameters used.
Soil behaviour is still very difficult to describe mathematically. Problems can also arise in the
use/omission of interface elements e.g. between soils and structures.
x It can be easier to follow construction processes in detail than in a physical model.

General
x Before using the results from either technique directly in a design, the applicability of the
simplifying assumptions made in setting up the model would have to be considered very
carefully.
x Physical modelling is useful to identify mechanisms of collapse and deformation, and to
calibrate numerical models.
x Both can be used for parametric studies, to develop an understanding of the relative
influence of different effect, and for investigating the sensitivity of the response of a system to
unknown or uncertain boundary conditions or parameters in design.

137
In situ testing

Q11.2 (a) Describe the principal features of the Menard and self-boring pressuremeters, and
compare their advantages and limitations.

(b) Figure 11.27 shows a graph of corrected cavity pressure p as a function of the cavity strain
Hc for a self-boring pressuremeter test. The test was carried out in a borehole at a depth of 11
m in a stratum of sandy soil of unit weight 20 kN/m3. The piezometric level was 1 m below
the ground surface. Estimate
(i) the in situ horizontal total stress,
(ii) the coefficient of earth pressure at rest, Ko, and
(ii) the soil shear modulus, G;

Q11.2 Solution
(i) The in situ lateral total stress Vho is given by the lift-off pressure at which the cavity starts
to expand. From the graph (Figure 11.27),

Vho | 165 kPa

(ii) At the test depth of 11m, the vertical total stress Vv is 11 m u 20 kN/m3 = 220 kPa. The
pore water pressure (assuming hydrostatic conditions below the piezometric surface) u is 10
m u 10 kN/m3 = 100 kPa. Thus the vertical effective stress V’v = Vv - u = 120 kPa; the
horizontal effective stress V’h = Vh - u = 65 kPa, and

Ko = V’h/V’v =65/120

Ÿ Ko = 0.54

(iii) The shear modulus G is obtained from the slope of the unload/reload cycle using
Equation 11.24:

G = 0.5 u (U/Uo) u (dp/dHc) (11.24)

where U is the current cavity radius and Uo is the cavity radius at the start of the test (i.e. at Hc
= 0). The average cavity strain over the unload-reload cycle shown on Figure 11.27 is about
1.5%, i.e. U/Uo = 1.015 (| 1). From the graph, the slope of the unload/reload cycle dp/dHc |
500 kPa/1.1% = 45.5 MPa. Hence

G = 0.5 u (U/Uo) u (dp/dHc) = 0.5 u 1.015 u 45.5 MPa

Ÿ G | 23 MPa

Ground improvement

Q11.3 Write brief notes on:

(a) Grouting
(b) Surface compaction and heavy tamping

138
 (c) Cement and lime stabilization

In each case, your answer should include (but not be restricted to) a discussion of the ground
conditions and soil types for which the method is suitable.
[University of London 3rd year BEng (Civil Engineering) examination, Queen Mary and
Westfield College]

Q11.3 Solution
(a) Grouting
x Purpose: water stop (physical cut-off) or mechanical improvement (strength/stiffness) by
bonding particles. Usually works by penetrating voids in between particles. Coarser soils are
easier to permeate than finer soils owing to larger voids.
x Materials: cement based grouts are ok for fissured rocks and coarse materials (gravels).
Cement particles will not penetrate a soil finer than a very coarse sand. Chemical/silicate
grouts must therefore be used for medium/coarse sands. For finer soils, acrylic resin solution
grouts are needed. It is, however, possible to inject grout into fissures and slip surface in clay
soils to stabilize (at least temporarily) embankments and slopes.
x If the grout will not penetrate into the voids or pre-existing fissures, it can cause
hydrofracture. Empirically, fracture pressure is ~ 2 to 6 u overburden. Long thin fractures
are not helpful, but short wedge-shaped fractures can be useful in compacting the soil. Need
to use pastes to achieve this.
x Generally, water stopping is easier than ground improvement, because it is necessary only
to permeate the coarser zones. For satisfactory ground improvement all particles must be
bonded, but a strong grout is not always necessary.
x Parameters governing the effectiveness of a grouting operation include the grout viscosity,
shear resistance (shear stress as a function of strain rate), pumping pressure and flowrate
into the ground: all must be carefully controlled. Viscosity varies with gel strength, and rate
of gelation (setting) will depend in turn on factors including the ground temperature.
x Other applications include jacking up buildings, underpinning and compensation grouting
(which is pre-emptive and used to prevent settlements of the ground surface due to e.g.
tunnelling).

(b) Surface compaction and heavy tamping

x Surface compaction is most effective when applied to granular materials placed in layers.
It involves the application of shear stresses (e.g. using smooth, tyred or sheepsfoot rollers);
dynamic energy (e.g. using pounders or rammers); or vibration; or a combination of these.
x The objective is to densify the soil, increasing its (peak) strength and (more especially) its
stiffness.
x Soils must be compacted in thin layers, generally 0.3 m to 0.5 m thick.
x The technique is not suitable for clays, except perhaps clay fills in clods in order to reduce
the volume of air voids between the clods. In this case, there is a need to re-mould the clods
by applying shear stresses: vibratory energy is ineffective.
x Compaction of any material - particularly a clay - requires careful monitoring and control.

x Heavy tamping involves dropping a large mass (up to 170 tonnes) from a height of up to 22
m in order to compact the soil. Usually, the mass is dropped onto a number of points in a grid
or triangular pattern.

139
x The aim is to treat the soil at depth (up to 40 m: empirically, D (m) ~ 0.5 u —(WH) where W
is the mass in tonnes and H is the height of drop in m), rather than just thin layers as in
surface compaction.
x Originally intended for granular (free-draining materials), it can be effective in low-
permeability soils because it causes fractures in the upper layers which allow water to escape
in response to the excess pore water pressures generated by dropping the weight. Also, air
voids can be compacted quite readily. The timing of the drops requires some thought in these
materials.
x It is necessary to spread a 1 - 2 m thick stone blanket on the surface, to support the plant
and prevent cratering.

(c) Cement and lime stabilization

x Both methods work by chemically bonding the soil particles. Typically, 2 - 10% cement or
lime is added.
x Cement stabilization works with all soils (except perhaps coarse gravels where the voids are
too large, and some inorganic soils). Cement and water react to form cementitious calcium
silicate and aluminium hydrates which bond the soil particles together. This is the primary
reaction, which releases Ca(OH)2 (slaked lime) which may then react with the soil (especially
clay minerals) to give a further beneficial effect.
x Lime stabilization essentially works on the basis of the secondary reaction with cement, and
requires a substantial proportion (>35%) of fine particles (<60Pm). The reaction initially
involves the exchange of cations (e.g. sodium for calcium) between the lime and the clay,
which causes the clay to coagulate.
x In the second stage of the clay/lime reaction, silica is removed from the clay lattice to form
products similar to those resulting from the hydration of cement. This is the main source of
“improvement”, and the effectiveness of the cementation increases with particle surface area.
x Both processes improve volume stability, stiffness and unconfined compressive strength.
Cement stabilization depends on adequate mixing and compaction, which can be difficult to
achieve with clay soils.
x The addition of lime to clay improves workability because the plasticity index is decreased,
although the exact mechanism of this (in terms of changes to wLL and wPL) will depend on the
activity and mineralogy of the clay.
x The degree of cementation increases with the quantity of lime added, but the lime reaction
uses the silica naturally present in the soil. There is therefore no point in adding more lime
than will use up the available silica - indeed, adding further lime beyond this point can be
counterproductive.

Q11.4 Give an account of:

(a) The principal applications of grouting in geotechnical engineering
(b) The factors influencing the penetration of grouts into soils
(c) The major differences in properties and performance between cement-based
grouts and low viscosity chemical grouts
[University of London 3rd year BEng (Civil Engineering) examination, Queen Mary and
Westfield College]

Q11.4 Solution
The answer should be in the form of a reasonably well-structured essay, illustrated with
diagrams and examples as appropriate. The following notes give an indication of the expected
scope.

140
(a) Principal applications of grouting in geotechnical engineering
x Prevention of groundwater flow (formation of a physical cut-off) - by blocking the soil pores
x Increasing soil stiffness and strength - by bonding soil particles
x Jacking up buildings
x Underpinning
x Compensation grouting (used to prevent settlements of the ground surface due to e.g.
tunnelling)
x Stabilization of geotechnical structures such as tunnels, excavations and slopes

(b) Factors influencing the penetration of grouts into soils

x Particle/void size of the soil
x Viscosity and gel strength of the grout
x Pressure at which the grout is pumped

(c) Major differences in properties and performance between cement-based grouts and low
viscosity chemical grouts
x Cement based grouts consist of fine cement particles in suspension, and the pore size that
these grouts can penetrate is limited by the size of the cement particles. Cement grouts will
penetrate into fissures and voids in coarse soils (i.e. gravels), but will not penetrate a soil
finer than a very coarse sand. Grouts containing smaller particles such as sodium silicate in
colloidal suspension are used for medium/coarse sands. For fine sands and silts, an acrylic
resin solution grout must be used.
x Lower viscosity grouts are also better able to penetrate soils at a given pumping pressure,
because the energy lost in overcoming the shear stresses that resist flow is reduced.

141