Geotech Notes 1
Geotech Notes 1
Geotech Notes 1
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
Geotechnical Engineering 2
Origin of geotechnical engineering
⚫ Based on the emphasis and the nature of study in the
area of geotechnical engineering, the time span
extending from 1700 to 1927 can be divided into four
⚫ major periods :
⚫ 1. Pre-classical (1700 to 1776 A.D.)
⚫ 2. Classical soil mechanics—Phase I (1776 to 1856 A.D.)
⚫ 3. Classical soil mechanics—Phase II (1856 to 1910
A.D.)
⚫ 4. Modern soil mechanics (1910 to 1927 A.D.)
Geotechnical Engineering 1 3
1. Pre-classical era (1700 to 1776 A.D)
⚫ This period concentrated on studies relating to natural
slope and unit weights of various types of soils as well
as the semi-empirical earth pressure theories.
⚫ In 1717 a French royal engineer, Henri Gautier (1660 –
1737), studied the natural slopes of soils when tipped
in a heap for formulating the design procedures of
retaining walls.
⚫ The natural slope is what we now refer to as the angle
of repose.
⚫ According to this study, the natural slopes of clean dry
sand and ordinary earth were 31° and 45°, respectively.
Geotechnical Engineering 1 4
⚫In 1729, Bernard Forest de Belidor (1694 –1761)
published a textbook for military and civil engineers in
France.
⚫ In the book, he proposed a theory for lateral earth
pressure on retaining walls
⚫ He also specified a soil classification system in the
manner shown in the following table.
⚫ A French Engineer Jean Rodolphe Perronet (1708–
1794), studied slope stability around 1769 and
distinguished between intact ground and fills
Geotechnical Engineering 1 5
Belidor soil classification system
Geotechnical Engineering 1 6
2. Classical Soil Mechanics—Phase I
(1776 –1856)
⚫ Most of the developments in the area of geotechnical
engineering came from engineers and scientists in
France in this era.
⚫In 1776, French scientist Charles Augustin Coulomb
(1736 –1806) used the principles of calculus for maxima
and minima to determine the true position of the sliding
surface in soil behind a retaining wall.
⚫ In this analysis, Coulomb used the laws of friction and
cohesion for solid bodies.
Geotechnical Engineering 1 7
⚫ In 1820, special cases of Coulomb’swork were studied
by French engineer Jacques Frederic Francais (1775–
1833) and by French applied-mechanics professor
Claude Louis Marie Henri Navier (1785–1836).
⚫ These special cases related to inclined backfills and
backfills supporting surcharge.
⚫ In 1840, Jean Victor Poncelet (1788–1867), an army
engineer and professor of mechanics, extended
Coulomb’stheory by providing a graphical method for
determining the magnitude of lateral earth pressure
on vertical and inclined retaining walls with arbitrarily
broken polygonal ground surfaces.
⚫ Poncelet was also the firs to use the symbol 𝜑𝜑 for soil
friction angle.
Geotechnical Engineering 1 8
⚫ He also provided the first ultimate bearing-capacity
theory for shallow foundations.
⚫ In 1846, Alexandre Collin (1808–1890), an engineer,
provided the details for deep slips in clay slopes,
cutting, and embankments.
⚫ Collin theorized that, in all cases, the failure takes
place when the mobilized cohesion exceeds the
existing cohesion of the soil.
⚫ He also observed that the actual failure surfaces could
be approximated as arcs of cycloids.
Geotechnical Engineering 1 9
⚫ The end of Phase I of the classical soil mechanics
period is generally marked by the year (1857) of the
first publication by William John Macquorn Rankine
(1820 –1872), a professor of civil engineering at the
University of Glasgow.
⚫ This study provided a notable theory on earth pressure
and equilibrium of earth masses.
⚫ Rankine’s theory is a simplificationof Coulomb’s
theory
Geotechnical Engineering 1 10
3. Classical Soil Mechanics—Phase II
(1856 –1910)
⚫ Several experimental results from laboratory tests on
sand appeared in the literature in this phase.
⚫ French engineer Henri Philibert Gaspard Darcy (1803–
1858) published a study in 1856 on the permeability of
sand filters.
⚫ Based on those tests, Darcy define the term coefficient
of permeability (or hydraulic conductivity) of soil, a
very useful parameter in geotechnical engineering to
this day.
Geotechnical Engineering 1 11
4. Modern soil mechanics (1910 –
1927)
⚫ In this period, results of research conducted on clays
were published in which the fundamental properties
and parameters of clay were established.
⚫ The most notable publications are given in the
following table
Geotechnical Engineering 1 12
Important studies on clay 1920-1927
Investigator Year Topics
Albert Mauritz 1911 Consistency of soil that is: liquid,
Atterberg (1846-1916), plastic and shrinkage limits
Sweden
Jean Frontard (1884- 1914 Double shear tests (undrained)
1962), France in clay under constant vertical
load
Arthur Langtry Bell 1915 Lateral pressure and resistance of
(1874- 1956), England clay; Bearing capacity of clay,
Shear box test for measuring
undrained shear strength using
undisturbed specimen
Wolmar Fellenius 1918, 1926 Slip circle analysis of saturated
(1876- 19570), Sweden clay slopes
Karl Terzaghi (1883– 1925 Theory of consolidation for clays
1963), Austria Geotechnical Engineering 1 13
4. Modern Geotechnical Engineering post 1927
⚫ The publication of
Erdbaumechanik auf
Bodenphysikalisher
Grundlage by Karl
Terzaghi in 1925 gave
birth to a new era in the
development of soil
mechanics.
⚫ Karl Terzaghi is known
as the leader of modern
Geotechnical
engineering.
Karl Terzaghi (1883 -1963)
Geotechnical Engineering 14
⚫ The first conference of the International Society of Soil
Mechanics and Foundation Engineering (ISSMFE) was
held at Harvard University in 1936 with Karl Terzaghi
presiding.
⚫ It was through the inspiration and guidance of
Terzaghi over the preceding quarter-century that
papers were brought to that conference covering a
wide range of topics such as:
i. shear strength
ii. effective stress
iii. in situ testing
Geotechnical Engineering 15
i. Cone penetrometer test
ii. Consolidation settlement
iii. Elastic stress distribution
iv. Preloading for soil improvement
v. Frost action, expansive clays
vi. arching
vii. theory of earth pressure
viii. earthquakes
Geotechnical Engineering 16
Geotechnical Engineer
Geotechnical Engineering 17
1. Laboratory and Field techniques
Laboratory tests
Soil classification
Consistency limits - Atterberg limits
Compaction test
Specific gravity test
Shear strength – direct shear test, triaxial test
Geotechnical Engineering 18
Soil classification
Sieve analysis
Hydrometer analysis apparatus
Geotechnical Engineering 19
Consistency limits
Geotechnical Engineering 20
Compaction test
Proctor method
Geotechnical Engineering 21
Specific gravity test
Geotechnical Engineering 22
Direct shear test
Geotechnical Engineering 24
In-situ tests
Geotechnical Engineering 25
2. Slope stability analysis
Geotechnical Engineering 26
Geotechnical Engineering 27
Gabion wall – Gokwe, Zimbabwe
Geotechnical Engineering 28
Slope reinforcement
⚫ Soil nails Geosynthetics
Geotechnical Engineering 29
3. Design and construction of soil
retaining structures
Geotechnical Engineering 30
Basement
Geotechnical Engineering 31
gravity wall cantilever wall
Geotechnical Engineering 32
4. Design and construction of
tailings dams
Geotechnical Engineering 33
cyclone deposition
Geotechnical Engineering 34
5. Ground improvement
techniques
Geotechnical Engineering 35
stone columns vibro compaction
Geotechnical Engineering
dynamic compaction 36
5. Design of foundations
Geotechnical Engineering 37
Geotechnical Engineering 38
6. Rock engineering
Geotechnical Engineering 39
Geotechnical Engineering 40
Geotechnical Engineering 41
Types of Rock Support Systems
Shepherd crooks
Split set
Rockbolt
Timber poles
Geotechnical Engineering 42
GEOTECHNICAL
ENGINEERING
Geotechnical Engineering 43
Geotechnical Engineering – Course outline
Content
1 Ground improvement techniques
2 Slope stability analysis
3 Lateral earth pressure
Geotechnical Engineering 44
Geotechnical Engineering - References
1. Das, B. M. 2007. “Fundamentalsof Geotechnical Engineering.” Chris
Carson ISBN-13: 978-0-495-29572-3.
2. Das, B. M. 2009. “Shallow foundations – Bearing capacity and
settlement”. CRC. New york.
3. Das B.M. and Sobhan. “Principlesof Geotechnical Engineering. 8th
Edition.” CRC. New york.
4. Craig R.F and Knappett J.A. 2012. “Craig’ssoil mechanics”
5. Singh A. “Modern geotechnical engineering 3rd Edition”
6. Whitlow R. “Basic soil mechanics .” Addison Wesley Longman
Limited. Essex
Geotechnical Engineering 45
1. GROUND IMPROVEMENT
TECHNIQUES
Geotechnical Engineering 46
Ground improvement …………….
It is the controlled alteration of the
state nature or mass behaviour of
ground materials in order to achieve an
intended satisfactory response to
existing or projected environmental and
engineering actions.
Geotechnical Engineering 47
Course objectives
⚫ To gain an understanding of the concepts behind a
range of ground improvement techniques
⚫ Describe advantages, disadvantages and limitations for
each ground improvement method discussed
⚫ Ability to identify appropriate techniques for a range
of ground and site conditions
⚫ Locate criteria to determine the applicability of each
ground improvement method for a specific project and
soil condition under consideration.
Geotechnical Engineering 48
Introduction
⚫ Where poor ground conditions make traditional forms
of construction expensive, it may be economically
viable to attempt to improve the engineering
properties of the ground before building on it. This
can be done by:
1. Reducing the pore water pressure
2. Reducing the volume of voids in the soil
3. Adding stronger material
Geotechnical Engineering 49
What to do when available
conditions are difficult?
⚫ Select a new site
⚫ Remove the inadequate soil and replace with ‘better’
soil
-sometimes the best option (e.g shallow peat layers)
- Often usually tooexpensivedue to quantityordepth of inadequatesoil
⚫ By pass problem soil altogether
-transferfoundation loads down through the inadequate layer to stronger
layer underneath using piles or similar
⚫ Soil improvement
Geotechnical Engineering 50
What to do? When soil is:
⚫ Too loose – densify it (dynamiccompaction, vibro
compaction
⚫ Too permeable – inject grout/ binder into the soil
pores to reduce the permeability
⚫ Impermeable – install wick drains, stone columns
⚫ Too compressible – preload the site to reduce the
settlement that will be experienced by the structure
⚫ Too soft- mix with cement or lime to make it stronger.
Reinforce the soil to strengthen it by using
geosynthetics, soil nails etc
Geotechnical Engineering 51
When is ground improvement needed?
Ground improvement is needed when working with
difficult soils or conditions:
Geotechnical Engineering 52
Why do we need ground
improvement
i. To increase shear strength – increased shear
strength or relative density improves bearing
capacity or provides sufficient support for
excavations or tunnels
ii. To reduce compressibility to minimize total or
differential settlement of buildings or structures.
iii. To reduce permeability – to seal out ground water
from flowing into basements or to prevent water
damage on isolated zones
Geotechnical Engineering 53
Why do we need ground
improvement
iv. To improve drainage – improved drainage can assist
with preloading or surcharge techniques.
v. To prevent liquefaction – prevent liquefaction or
reduce lateral spreading beneath or near structures
during earthquakes, by densification, replacement
or improved drainage.
vi. To control ground movements which arise from
excavation or tunnelling
Geotechnical Engineering 54
Types of ground improvement techniques
1. Ground improvementwithoutadmixture in coarse grained
soils:
⚫ Vibro compaction
⚫ Dynamic compaction
2. Ground improvementwithoutadmixture in fine grainedsoils:
⚫ Preloading
⚫ Vertical drains
3. Ground improvementwithadmixtureor inclusions
⚫ Vibro replacement Stone columns
⚫ Rigid inclusions
4. Ground improvementwithgrouting typeadmixtures
⚫ Jet grouting
⚫ Deep soil mixing
5. Earth reinforcement
⚫ Geosynthetics
⚫ Soil nails
Geotechnical Engineering 55
1.1 Vibrocompaction
Geotechnical Engineering 56
Vibrocompaction
The vibro- compaction system was
invented in 1934 in Germany by S.
Steuermann and W.L Degen
Geotechnical Engineering 57
Vibrocompaction
⚫ Vibro compaction is a process whereby granular soils
are compacted by depth vibrators
⚫ Natural depositsas well as artificially reclaimed sands
can be compacted to a depth of 70m
⚫ The intensity of compaction can be varied to meet
bearing capacity criteria
⚫ Other improvement effects such as reduction of both
total and differential settlement are also achieved
⚫ The risk of liquefaction in an earthquake prone area is
also drastically reduced
Geotechnical Engineering 58
Vibro compaction process
⚫ The compaction process consists of a floatation of the soil
particles as a result of vibration.
⚫ This then allows for rearrangement of the particles into a
denser state.
⚫ The following diagrams illustrate the compaction process.
Geotechnical Engineering 59
Vibro compaction process
⚫ By definition vibro compaction is a process where the density of
clean loose cohesionless sands is improved by vibrations
produced by high energy vibroflots
⚫ The vibroflot is a long steel tube which consists of two parts: a
large cylindrical vibrator and extension tubes
⚫ Vibro compaction equipment consists of the vibroflot, a
supporting crane power supply and a water pump when required.
⚫ The vibrator is suspended from a crane and lowered to the
desired depth by using its own weight or under pressure
generated by water jetting
⚫ The purpose of the crane is to insert the poker into depths which
are deeper than those achieved by surface compaction. At that
level the vibroflot is rotated in a direction perpendicular to the
long axis of the probe (horizontal plane) thus inducing
vibrations.
Geotechnical Engineering 60
Vibro- compaction process
1 – Penetration
The vibroprobe penetrates to the
required depth by vibration and jetting
action of water and/or air
2 – Compaction
The vibro-probe is retracted in 0.5m
intervals. The in-situ sand or gravel
f lows towards the vibroprobe
3 – Completion
After compaction the working platform
needs to be levelled and eventually
roller compacted
Geotechnical Engineering 61
Vibroprobe / Vibrofloat
A vibroprobe/ vibrof loat is typically 0.4m in
diameter, however, its size is determined by its
ability to penetrate the ground.
As technology evolves a variety of vibrators have
been manufactured.
The table below presents specifications of some of
the most commonly used vibrators
Length (m) 3,13 4,20 3,30 3,00 4,35 3,10 3,57 3,57
Diameter (mm) 300 420 290 400 290 320 350 350
Weight (kg) 1 000 2 090 1 600 2 450 1 900 1 815 2 200 2 200
Dynamic Force (KN) 150 330 150 280 160 201 300 450
Geotechnical Engineering 62
Vibroprobe /
Vibrofloat
Geotechnical Engineering 63
Vibro-compaction effects
⚫ The sand and gravel particles rearrange into a denser
state
⚫ The shear strength and bearing capacity is increased
significantly
⚫ The permeability of the soil is reduced 2 to 10 fold
depending on many factors
⚫ The friction angle increases by up to 8 degrees
⚫ Enforced settlements of the compacted soil mass are in
the range of 2% to 15%
⚫ The stiffness can be increased 2 to 4 fold
Geotechnical Engineering 64
Vibro compaction functions
⚫ Densify existing soils
⚫ Improve bearing capacity
⚫ Increase shear resistance and stiffness
⚫ Induce settlement
⚫ Accelerate drainage
⚫ Reduce risk of liquefaction
Geotechnical Engineering 65
Vibro compaction – suitable soils
⚫ Vibro compaction cannot be used on all soil types
hence it is important to ascertain whether the soil
characteristics are compatible with the use of vibro
compaction.
⚫ As illustrated coarse material such as sand and gravel
can be treated with vibro compaction while fine
material such as silt and clay cannot
⚫ Materials with fines content which exceeds 10% are not
suitable for vibro compaction.
Geotechnical Engineering 66
Vibro compaction – suitable soils
Geotechnical Engineering 67
Vibro compaction – spacing of
compaction points
⚫ The spacing of compaction points is determined by
the soil’s ability to densify under the vibratory action
of the vibrofloat.
⚫ Soil properties chief lycohesion and permeability
affect the soil densification.
⚫ Cohesion is most pronounced in silt and clay and
typically increases as the percentage of fines increases.
⚫ Coarsegrained material is more permeable than fine
grained material due to the larger voids that permit
water to f low more readily.
Geotechnical Engineering 68
Vibro compaction – spacing of
compaction points
⚫ If the soil is cohesive the forces generated by the
vibrof lotwill not penetrate radially and this demands a
much closer spacing of the compaction areas,
⚫ when the soil has low permeability; pore water
pressure will not dissipate when it is vibrated
⚫ It is both futile and uneconomic to use vibro
compaction on cohesive soils as this will demand the
compaction points to be very close to each other.
Geotechnical Engineering 69
Vibro compaction – spacing of
compaction points
Vibro compaction points can be spaced using a square or
a triangular pattern
Square pattern
Triangular pattern
Geotechnical Engineering 70
Vibro compaction – depth of
treatment
⚫ Vibro compaction relies on the improved in-situ soil
properties to support the structures.
⚫ As such the depth of treatment becomes a significant
factor because the soil treatment will only be effective
if it is done up to an adequate depth
⚫ The use of boring logs which reveal the soil profile
becomes important in determining the treatment
depth because the treatment depth should penetrate
into a strong underlying soil layer by at least 1m
⚫ This ensures that the load is transferred to the stronger
incompressible underlying layers.
Geotechnical Engineering 71
Vibro compaction- Monitoring
and control
⚫ it is very important to monitor how the soil responds to the
specific technique being employed to treat the ground
⚫ The most commonly used vibro compaction performance
assessment methods are the Standard Penetration Test
(SPT), the Cone Penetration Test (CPT) and Pressure-
meter tests (PMT)
⚫ A comparison of the SPT and CPT graphs before and after
vibro-compaction with the aid of correlation charts and
appropriate equations can be used to evaluate the change
in soil density and strength and the liquefaction potential.
Geotechnical Engineering 72
Vibro compaction- Monitoring
and control
⚫ The improvement factor Id is a parameter which is
used to assess the perfomance of any soil improvement
technique
⚫ It is based on the CPT resistances qc
1975 Las Palmas, Grand Canary Vibro-compaction of 250 000m3 of the Picon material;
a volcanic slag
1978 Thuwal, Saudi Arabia Vibro-compaction of 160 000lin.m for a new harbour
1995 Delta Port, Vancouver, Canada Vibro-compaction of 1,5M m3 of fill up to a depth of 31m
2005 Peribonka dam, Canada Vibro-compaction of 700 000m3 of fill up to a depth of 35m
2012 Davao City, Philippines Vibro-compaction of 100 000 lin.m up to a depth of 18m
Geotechnical Engineering 74
Vibro compaction – Case study
Project title Extension of TATA fertiliser plant
Project location North India
Client TATA Chemicals Ltd
Design engineers Keller Ground Engineering
Contractor Keller Ground Engineering
Geotechnical Engineering 75
Vibro compaction – Case study
TATA Chemicals is a fertilizer plant in North India which has
been operating for more than two decades. The factory was
constructed on ground that had been reinforced with stone
columns. In order to increase the working area and
accommodate automations it was decided to make the
following refurbishments and extensions:
⚫ Expand the Wagon Loading Platform(WLP) by an area of
375.0m length and 18.0m width
⚫ Extend the Motor Control Centre (MCC) room by an area
21.0m long and 12.5m wide
Geotechnical Engineering 76
Case study: Layout drawing
Geotechnical Engineering 77
Case study: Site geology
⚫ The project is located in an area classified under high
seismic zone with Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) of
0.24g (where g is the acceleration due to gravity
usually taken as 9.81m/s2) and an earthquake Richter
scale magnitude of 7
⚫ the Standard Penetration Tests (SPTs) and Electronic
Cone Penetration Tests (ECPT) were conducted to
determine the site’s geology
⚫ The testing involved two boreholes BH1 and BH2
which were drilled to a depth of 16m for the SPT and
three ECPTs namely CPT2, CPT3 and CPT4 which
were inserted up to a refusal depth of 11m.
Geotechnical Engineering 78
Case study: Site geology
The top 1m consists of clays of low
plasticity (CL) with a liquid limit of 50%
or less followed by 1-2.5m layer of low
plasticity silts and clays and silty sands
(CL, ML and SM).
From 2.5m to 12m there is a layer of
saturated poorly graded sands which are
clean sands with no fines or a fines
content of less that 5% and silty sands
(SP-SM).
Beneath this, there is stiff to hard silty
clay to clayey silt / dense to very dense
sand up to termination depth.
Groundwaterwas encountered at a
depth 3.0 to 3.2m below the ground
surface
Geotechnical Engineering 79
Case study: Problem definition
⚫ The subsoil is predominantly composed of loose saturated
cohesionless soil.
⚫ Generally clean loose saturated sands have a high
susceptibility to liquefaction
⚫ Liquefaction is a process whereby the soil loses its strength
and stiffness due to a sudden increase in pore water
pressure due to earthquake shaking causing it to behave
like a liquid
⚫ From the given soil profile it was necessary to conduct a
liquefaction potential analysis .
⚫ Liquefaction occurs when the estimated cyclic stress ratio
(CSR) based on shear stress caused by a seismic event
exceeds the estimated cyclic resistant ratio (CRR) based on
resistance offered by the particular soil strata (Tejas et al,
2013)..
Geotechnical Engineering 80
Case study: Liquefaction potential analysis
⚫ Liquefaction occurs when the estimated cyclic stress ratio
(CSR) caused by a seismicevent exceeds the estimated cyclic
resistant ratio (CRR)
Cyclic Stress Ratio (CSR) -The CSR is a function of the
adopted PGA value (for this project the PGA is 0.24g),
the total and effective overburden stresses at various
depths and correction factors used in equations.
Cyclic Resistant Ratio (CRR) can be computed from the SPT
N values normalized to an effective overburden pressure and
other correction factors applied.
The CRR can also be computed from the normalized cone
penetration resistance qc
Geotechnical Engineering 81
Case study: Liquefaction potential analysis
(Pre ground improvement)
Geotechnical Engineering 83
Case study: Ground treatment
objectives
⚫ The two main treatment objectives were:
i. To reduce the liquefaction potential of the in-situ
material, this would mitigate structural failure in the
event of an earthquake shaking occurring.
ii. To increase the soil bearing capacity; this would
prevent excessive settlement
Geotechnical Engineering 84
Case study: Ground treatment factors
a)Soil type - It had been determined that the site was underlain with
looseclean sand. Possibleground improvement techniqueswere dynamic
compaction, vibro compaction, stone columns or piles.
c)Time – The project was time constrained hence it was deemed that
vibro compaction would be a betteroption because it is time effective
compared to driven piling which takes a longertime and is more costly.
In lightof the above factors it was decided that the ground would be
treated using the vibrocompaction method.
Geotechnical Engineering 85
Case study: Vibrocompaction process
⚫ The compaction points were spaced in a square grid of
2.75m x 2.75m
⚫ The treatment depth was 12m and the spacing of the
vibration was designed at every 0.5m vertically
⚫ On the MCC room a combination of vibro compaction
with vibro stone columns was used to increase stiffness
of the fine grained material for the top 1m below
ground level.
Geotechnical Engineering 86
Case study: Vibrocompaction process
Geotechnical Engineering 87
Liquefaction potential after ground
improvement
CSR – CRR vs Depth Post Soil CSR – CRR vs Depth Pre Soil
Improvement based on SPT Improvement based on ECPT
Geotechnical Engineering 88
Bearing capacity after ground
improvement
⚫ The bearing capacity after ground improvement was assessed
using Plate Load Tests. The test was performed at a load of
240KPa which is up to two times the design load intensity of
120KPa
1. Wagon Loading Platform – Settlements was in the range of
2.42 – 2.91mm
2. Motor Control Centre room – Settlement was 1.42mm
Geotechnical Engineering 89
Plate load tests
Geotechnical Engineering 90
Vibrocompaction : Palm Jumeirah
Island; Dubai
Geotechnical Engineering 91
Liquefaction potential analysis
Geotechnical Engineering 92
Liquefaction
⚫ Liquefaction occurs generally due to rapid loading during
seismic events where there is not sufficient time for
dissipation of excess pore-water pressures through natural
drainage.
⚫ Rapid loading situation increases pore-water pressures
resulting in cyclic softening in fine-grained materials.
⚫ The increased pore water pressure transforms granular
materials from a solid to a liquefied state.
⚫ Shear strength and stiffness of the soil deposit are reduced
due to increase in porewater pressure.
⚫ Liquefaction is observed in loose, saturated and clean to
silty sands.
Geotechnical Engineering 93
Factors that influence Liquefaction
i. magnitude of earthquake
ii. intensity and duration of ground motion
iii. the distance from the source of the earthquake,
iv. Site specific conditions
v. ground acceleration
vi. type of soil; relative density, grain size distribution,
permeability
vii. fines content, plasticity of fines, degree of saturation
viii. thickness of the soil deposit,,
ix. confining pressure
x. position and fluctuations of the groundwater table
xi. Reduction of effective stress
Geotechnical Engineering 94
In-situ tests
⚫ Several field tests can be used to determine the
liquefaction potential of a site which include:
Standard penetration test (SPT)
Cone penetration test (CPT)
Shear wave velocity (Vs)
The SPT-based simplified empirical procedure is widely
used for evaluating liquefaction resistance of soils.
Geotechnical Engineering 95
Liquefaction potential
Input parameters:
⚫ Standard Penetration Test N (SPT N)
⚫ Fine content FC
⚫ Ground water levels
⚫ Liquid limit
⚫ Earthquake magnitude and duration
Geotechnical Engineering 96
Application of SPT N for liquefaction
determination
⚫ The SPT N values are used to determine the liquefaction
resistance of sandy soils.
⚫ The measured SPT N values (Nm) are corrected for:
a) Overburden stress
b) Energy ratio
c) Diameter of boreholes
d) length of sampling rod
e) Type of sampler
(N1)60 is the corrected Nm value
⚫ The subscript 60 is used because it is assumed that 60% of
the energy is transferred from the falling hammer to the
SPT sampler.
Geotechnical Engineering 97
SPT N corrected value
⚫The corrected (N1)60 is calculated as
(N1)60 = NmCNCECBCRCS
CN is a factor to normalize Nm to a common reference
effective overburden stress ≤ 1.7
CEis correction for hammer energy ratio (ER)= 0.6
CBis correction factor for borehole diameter = 1.0
CRis correction factor for rod length and is a function of
the depth
CS is correction for samplers with or without liners= 1.1
Geotechnical Engineering 98
⚫ Rod length correction with respect to depth (CR) at
each borehole location is corrected as
Geotechnical Engineering 99
Example 1
(a)Determine the corrected SPT (N1)60 for the following
measured SPT N values
1. Nm of 4 at a depth of 2.1m
2. Nm of 18 at a depth of 5.5m
3. Nm of 12 at a depth of 22m
Layer 3
12 3% 21.2kN/𝑚𝑚3
22m Geotechnical Engineering 105
Liquefaction potential Safety Factor
⚫ The liquefaction potential safety factor
𝐶𝐶𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅
𝑆𝑆𝐹𝐹 =
𝐶𝐶𝑆𝑆𝑅𝑅
If the SF is less than 1 there is a high risk of liquefaction
and if it is more than 1 the ground has no liquefaction
risk.
A layer may liquefy during an earthquake, even for
FS>1.0. A factor of safety of 1.2 at a particulardepth is
considered as the threshold value for the layer to be
categorized as non-liquefiable.
𝐿𝐿𝑃𝑃𝐼𝐼 = ∑ 𝑤𝑤𝑖𝑖𝐹𝐹𝑖𝑖𝐻𝐻𝑖𝑖
𝑖𝑖=1
Where
i denotes a soil layer
w- weight factor:
w = 10−0.5z for z < 20 m
w = 0 for z > 20 m
F- severity factor:
F = 1−FS for FS <1.0
F = 0 for FS > 1.0
H- thickness of soil layer
Geotechnical Engineering 109
Liquefaction Potential Index (LPI)
The level of liquefaction severity
LPI Severity
0 None
0-5 Low
5-15 Medium
>15 High
Example1 continued
(f ) Determine the Liquefaction potential Index and its
severity
Pad footings
Tank foundations
Railways
Offshore - Marine
Power station
cooling tower,
Chennai
P=
Flow (l/s) 1 1 to 50 1
1.2m
2
3) Vertical and horizontal spacing of nails S xS < 4m v h
50KPa
L =13.3m
C= 42Kpa
9m 𝜸𝜸=18.8KN/m3
𝝋𝝋= 𝟐𝟐𝟓𝟓𝒐𝒐
Fs = 1.5
Chart 1
Geotechnical Engineering 286
4. Determine the horizontal force P that must be resisted by the geosynthetic
layers:
ii. If
Hungary (2010)
Geotechnical Engineering 309
Mariana tailings dam, Brazil 2015
Natural Artificial
Compound slip
Translational slip
d. Overloading
i) By natural causes
• Weightof precipitation (e.g rains, snow)
• Accumulationof materials because of past landslides
ii) By human activity
• Construction of fill
• Buildingsand other overloads at the crest
• Water leakage in culverts, water pipes and sewers
d) Changes in structure
⚫ Stress release
⚫ Structural degradation
Geotechnical Engineering 323
Effect of water on soils
⚫ Dry sand grains form a pile
⚫ The slope angle is determined by the angle of repose
i.e the steepest angle at which a pile of unconsolidated
grains remains- controlled by the frictional contact
between the grains
Wet Sand
Angle of repose
Material densities
Material strengths
Geotechnical Engineering 334
Procedure for estimating stability
There are 3 steps in estimating stability:
1. Estimate disturbing forces
The components are:
⚫ Gravity acting on body of soil
⚫ Super imposed loads if any
⚫ Seepage force due to water f low if any
⚫ Earthquake forces ( not dealt with in this course)
T = Tf
F
Geotechnical Engineering 336
3. Select the appropriate analysis – Limit state
equilibrium
• Determines the overall stabilityof the sliding mass
•Method is used to analyse various potential failure
surfaces to determine which has the lowest F
This method of analysis is generally not sensitive to the
chosen shape of failure surface
•A circular arc is chosen because it is the simplest to
analyse and is sufficiently accurate
T = Cu/F
L
F = R 2 Cu𝜃𝜃……..(4)
Wx
= Resisting Moment
Disturbing Moment
𝜃𝜃𝑐𝑐
R yc
dt
Pw Zc
Wt
F = Cu R 2𝜃𝜃𝑐𝑐 (π /180)
Wtdt + 0.5𝜸𝜸𝒘𝒘 zc 2yc
Cu = 40KN/m2
𝜸𝜸=18.5KN/m3
5m x1 = 6.54m
R X2 =5.86m
6.7m Q yc
R B
w pw
x zc
10m
10m C
10m
10m A
10m
Qc R
O
12.1m
3.5m 89.5
8m
4.5mW
F– factor of safety
W– Weight of soil mass( densitysoil x area of slice(Lxb)
𝑎𝑎 Angle at slice base
– soil cohesion
c’ – width of slice
b- Height of slice
H- height of water level
z- density of water
g- Angle of internal friction of soil
𝝋𝝋 – assumed safety factor
F’-
52o
48m
2
17.5m 1
F = ∑(5)
∑(1)
2. Chemical stabilisation
Lime stabilisation
Lime-f ly ash stabilisation
Cement stabilisation
Asphalt stabilisation
Waste by-products (kiln,dust e.tc)
Soldier piles
𝝈𝝈𝒉𝒉
𝝈𝝈𝒗𝒗
1
z
2
H 𝝈𝝈𝒉𝒉 P1
H/2 P2
H/3
𝑘𝑘𝑜𝑜(𝑞𝑞 + 𝛾𝛾𝐻𝐻)
Geotechnical Engineering 1 435
Estimating Ko
For:
1. normally consolidated clays and granular soils;
2. Coarse grained soils
𝑘𝑘𝑜𝑜 = 1 − 𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑖𝑛𝑛𝜑𝜑
For fine grained normally consolidated soils
𝑘𝑘𝑜𝑜 = 0.44+0.42( PI% / 100)
Soil 𝒌𝒌𝒐𝒐
Dense sand 0.35
Loose sand 0.6
Normally consolidated clays 0.5 – 0.6
Clay, OCR = 3.5 1.0
Clay, OCR = 20 2.8
Wall moves
Wall moves away
towards soil
from soil
n.g.l
𝝈𝝈𝒗𝒗
Z
𝝈𝝈𝒉𝒉
𝝋𝝋
𝝈𝝈𝒉𝒉 𝝈𝝈𝒗𝒗 𝝈𝝈
Geotechnical Engineering 1 444
Active earth pressure in cohesive soils
⚫ Follow the same steps as for granular soils
⚫ The main difference is that c is not equal to 0
𝜎𝜎ℎ,𝑎𝑎𝑐𝑐𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖𝑣𝑣𝑒𝑒 = 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎𝜎𝜎𝑣𝑣 − 2𝑐𝑐 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎
If there is a tension crack, the depth of tension crack
2𝑐𝑐
𝑧𝑧𝑐𝑐 =
𝛾𝛾 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎
𝝋𝝋
𝝈𝝈𝒉𝒉 𝝈𝝈𝒗𝒗 𝝈𝝈
Geotechnical Engineering 1 450
Passive earth pressure in cohesive
soils
⚫ Follow the same steps for granular soils
The only difference is that c is not equal to zero.
⚫ Everything else is the same as for granular soils
n.g.l
𝑃𝑃𝑎𝑎 = 0.5𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎𝛾𝛾𝐻𝐻2 H
D
𝑃𝑃𝑝𝑝 = 0.5𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝𝛾𝛾𝐷𝐷2
𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝𝛾𝛾𝐷𝐷 𝑘𝑘 𝑎𝑎𝛾𝛾𝐻𝐻
C=10, 𝝋𝝋 = 18, 𝜸𝜸 = 18
4m
𝜸𝜸 = 19.5 KN/m3 2m
C = 0, 𝝋𝝋 = 35, 𝜸𝜸 =19.5
4m
𝖰𝖰
Direction o f
wall moven en
t
Excavation
Active pre ssure
Passive pressure
𝝈𝝈𝒉𝒉
x
d
Point of rotation
Active
Passive
Active Passive
PP2
PA2
Pa
H+D D
Pp1 3
D/3
Pp2
𝑘𝑘 𝑝𝑝 𝛾𝛾𝐷𝐷
Geotechnical Engineering 1 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 𝛾𝛾(𝐻𝐻 + 𝐷𝐷) 547
Analysis of cantilever sheet piles-
procedure
⚫ Select a point O arbitrary
⚫ Calculate the active and passive earth pressures
⚫ Calculate the pore water pressure
⚫ Determine the depth by summing points about O
⚫ Determine d=1.2 to 1.3 do
⚫ Calculate R by summing forces horizontally over the
depth (H+do)
⚫ Determine net passive resistance between d and do
⚫ Check that R is greater than the net passive resistance
Penetration depth, d
Approximate penetration depth of sheet piling
RELATIVE DENSITY DEPTH, D
Very loose 2.0 H
Loose 1.5 H
Firm 1.0 H
Dense 0.75 H
𝜑𝜑
45+
2
Geotechnical Engineering 1 559
Tie rod anchor
⚫ If an anchorof height B is buried toa depth da where B is greaterthan
0.5da the anchor is assumed to develop passive resistance over the
depth da
B>0.5da
1
𝑃𝑃𝑝𝑝 = 𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 𝛾𝛾𝑑𝑑𝑎𝑎2
2
1
𝑃𝑃𝑎𝑎 = 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 𝛾𝛾𝑑𝑑𝑎𝑎2
2
1 2
𝑅𝑅𝑇𝑇 = 𝑃𝑃𝑝𝑝 − 𝑃𝑃𝑎𝑎 = 𝛾𝛾𝑑𝑑𝑎𝑎 (𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 − 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 )
2
RT = tie rod force per unit length of wall
𝛾𝛾𝑑𝑑𝑎𝑎2 𝐿𝐿
𝑅𝑅 𝑇𝑇 𝑠𝑠 = 2𝐹𝐹 (𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 − 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎)
Where s= spacing of tie rods, L= length of anchor/tierod, F=safetyfactor.
If the anchor is a continuous plate s = L
`Sheet wall
Strut
B
Z
0.50Z
0.75Z
C
D
0.25Z
0.3m
𝛾𝛾=19KN/m3
1.8m 𝜑𝜑=25deg.
Cu/𝜎𝜎=0.24
1.8m
1.8m
0.4m
6m
Geotechnical Engineering 1 503
Figure: Base
heave Stability