16

VICTORIA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ENG’G & SCIENCE

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

PROBLEMS: In-ground Stress Distribution, SHEET No: SDIS-6

Immediate Settlement

6. A stiff 4.5m square foundation exerts a total load of 3180 kN on a deep sand layer. Assuming
that the contact stress distribution may be approximated by taking the 2.5m square central
area to be loaded at twice the intensity of the remainder, use fig. 5.12 (from Barnes 2000 –
copy in notes) and the principle of superposition to estimate the vertical stress increase at a
depth of 4.5m beneath the centre of the foundation.

Assume q1 = additional contact stress beneath 2.5m square central area, and q2 = contact stress beneath
the whole area. Then the total contact stress distribution specified in the question will be satisfied if
q1 = q2.
Then q1 x 2.52 + q2 x 4.52 = 3180, giving q1 = q2 = 120 kPa.

Although the central area is therefore loaded at 2 x 120 = 240 kPa and the outer area at 120 kPa, these
pressures will be considered separately (as in the first paragraph above) when using superposition.

For the small square, L = B = 2.5m and z / B = 4.5 / 2.5 = 1.8., I1 = 0.13 (from fig 5.12)
For the large square, L = B = 4.5m and z / B = 4.5 / 4.5 = 1.0., I2 = 0.30 (from fig 5.12)

Vertical stress increase = q1 I1 + q2 I2 = 120 (0.13 + 0.30) = 51.6 kPa

7. A rectangular footing 12m x 8m exerts an average contact pressure of 215 kPa on a clay soil
whose elastic modulus is 30MPa. Determine the immediate settlement for the cases set out
below.

(a) Beneath (i) the centre & (ii) a corner of a flexible footing on the surface of a deep saturated
clay layer
Given: q = 215 kPa, L = 12m, B = 8m, deep & saturated clay ( assume = 0.5), E = 30 MPa, flexible
footing.

The method given in Foundation Settlement slide 7 is relevant to this problem. Therefore use formulae
2
i = 2qBRNp (at centre) or i = qBRNp (at corner), where R = (1 – )/E

(i) L / B = 12 / 8 = 1.5, and from relevant table Np 0.66. Also R = (1 – 0.52) / 30,000 = 2.5 x 10 -5
-5
i = 2 x 215 x 8 x 2.5 x 10 x 0.66 = 5.68 x 10 -2m or ~ 57mm

This could also be obtained by finding the settlement beneath a corner of a small “quarter” rectangle
(ie, 6 x 4m) & then using superposition (ie, multiplying by 4) Æ settlement at the centre
-5
i = (215 x 4 x 2.5 x 10 x 0.66) x 4 = 5.68 x 10 -2m or ~ 57mm

(ii) i = 215 x 8 x 2.5 x 10 -5 x 0.66 = 2.84 x 10 -2m or ~ 28mm

 17

VICTORIA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ENG’G & SCIENCE

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

PROBLEMS: In-ground Stress Distribution, SHEET No: SDIS-7

Immediate Settlement

(b) Beneath a rigid footing with its base at a depth of 3.2m in a deep saturated clay layer
Given: As in part (a), except that footing is now rigid, & at depth of 3.2m – note that this means it will
settle uniformly, ie, with no difference between centre and corners.

The settlement could be taken as approximately 0.8 x settlement at the centre of the flexible footing in
part (a) above – see foundation settlement slide 10
i = 0.8 x 57 = 45.6 or (say) 46mm
Note that this method ignores the depth of embedment.

Embedment depth can be taken into account by using Janbu et al method & charts, if it is assumed that
the average settlement for a flexible foundation the settlement for a rigid foundation.

the following formula can be used: i(ave) = 0 1qB / E

In this case, H/B = ∞, but can be taken as 1000 (limiting value on chart), L/B = 1.5, and D/B = 3.2 / 8
= 0.4. Therefore, from the Janbu charts, 0 0.91 & 1 0.87. Putting these values in the formula Æ
-3
i = 0.91 x 0.87 x 215 x 8 / 30000 = 45.4 x 10 m or ~ 45mm (ie, virtually same as estimate above)

(c) Beneath a rigid footing on the surface of a saturated clay layer underlain by a rigid rock
layer at 20m depth.

Given: As in part (b), except that footing is now on surface, and have only 20m of clay over rock.

Steinbrenner’s method can be used by taking i(rigid) 0.8 x i(flexible) at centre, and finding the latter by
using superposition of 4 smaller rectangles (each 6m x 4m), as in part (a)

L/B = 6/4 = 1.5, and H/B = 20/4 = 5, and since = 0.5, Ip = F1, since coeff of F2 term becomes zero
From chart, Ip = F1 0.48

i = qBRIp = 215 x 4 x {(1 – 0.52) / 30,000} x 0.48 = 10.3 x 10-3 m or 10.3mm (ie, cnr, small rect.)

settlement at centre of large flexible footing = 4 x 10.3 41mm,

& settlement of rigid footing = 0.8 x 41 = 33mm

(d) Beneath the centre of a flexible footing on the surface of a saturated clay layer underlain
by a rigid rock layer at 16m depth, if (i) = 0.5, and (ii) if = 0.3.

(i) Use same method as in (c), but with H/B = 16/4 = 4, Ip = F1 0.44, & the final result not
multiplied by 0.8. settlement at centre of large flexible footing = 4 x 10.3 x (0.44 / 0.48) 38mm
 18

VICTORIA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ENG’G & SCIENCE

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

PROBLEMS: In-ground Stress Distribution, SHEET No: SDIS-8

Immediate Settlement

(ii) In this case, the coeff. of F2 is not zero, & Ip = F1 + F2 (1 – 2 ) / (1 – ). From chart, F1 0.44 &
F2 0.05, so Ip = 0.44 + (0.05 x 0.4 / 0.7) = 0.47

i = qBRIp = 215 x 4 x {(1 – 0.32) / 30,000} x 0.47 = 12.3 x 10-3 m or 12.3mm (ie, cnr, small rect.)

settlement at centre of large flexible footing = 4 x 12.3 49mm

(e) Beneath a flexible footing with its base at a depth of 3.2m in a saturated clay layer
underlain by a rigid rock layer at 16m depth below the base (ie, find average settlement)

Embedment depth can be taken into account by using Janbu et al method & charts, which give the
average settlement for a flexible footing. the following formula can be used: i(ave) = 0 1qB / E

L/B = 12/8 = 1.5; H/B = 16/8 =2; D/B = 3.2/8 = 0.4

Therefore, from the Janbu charts, 0 0.91 & 1 0.65. Putting these values in the formula Æ
-3
i = 0.91 x 0.65 x 215 x 8 / 30000 = 33.9 x 10 m or ~ 34mm

(f) As in (e), except that a second clay layer 16m thick and with E = 15 MPa lies between the
clay layer above and the rock layer.

In this case Janbu’s method can still be used, but with a weighted average E value calculated over the
32m of clay as follows: E ave = (H1E1 + H2E2) / (H1 + H2), where H1 & H2 are the respective
thicknesses of the layers. Note that if H1 = H2 as here, then Eave becomes the simple numerical average,
ie, 0.5 (30 + 15) = 22.5 MPa.

L/B = 12/8 = 1.5; H/B = 32/8 = 4; D/B = 3.2/8 = 0.4

Therefore, from the Janbu charts, 0 0.91 & 1 0.75. Putting these values in the formula Æ
-3
i = 0.91 x 0.75 x 215 x 8 / 22500 = 52.2 x 10 m or ~ 52mm
________________________________________________________________________________
With any geotechnical (or other) problem, it is essential to look carefully at the answer (whether
calculated manually or by computer) and see if it seems to make sense.
The problems above allow comparisons to be made b/n answers for immediate settlement beneath a
footing (same dimensions, same load) but on different soil conditions. Even before looking at the
answers, one might expect
Other conditions being equal, settlement should be greater for a greater clay depth (eg, now
compare answers to a(i) and d(i), or (e) and (f))
Other conditions being equal, settlement of a rigid footing would lie between that at the
corners and centre of a flexible footing (this is reflected in the “0.8 x settlement at centre of
flexible footing” relationship) – see (a) & (b) above.
 19

VICTORIA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ENG’G & SCIENCE

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

PROBLEMS: In-ground Stress Distribution, SHEET No: SDIS-9

Immediate Settlement

50m
8. A plan of the base perimeter of a proposed municipal
landfill is shown at right. The landfill will be constructed
by filling an old extractive industry sandpit cut through E F
the full depth of a 20m sand layer which overlies a deep
saturated alluvial clay deposit. The in-situ compacted
waste fill / soil cover unit weight is expected to be about 1 4
7.5 kN/m3, and the elastic modulus of the clay = 15 MPa.
For leachate collection, it is proposed that part of a 150m
perforated pipe drainage system will be placed around
the base perimeter of the fill and graded to a sump well.
In order to design the drainage system, it will be required A B
to estimate the immediate settlement which will occur due 2 3 50m
to the fill. Making whatever comments or assumptions D C
you consider appropriate or necessary, calculate the
immediate settlement (relative to current empty pit levels)
80m
which would occur at each corner of the fill.

Comments / Assumptions:
Batter slopes are ignored, & pressure over fill base due to compacted waste etc is uniform
Water is excluded from pit to greatest extent possible, & drainage system ensures that fill
does not become saturated
In reality, immediate settlement will actually occur as series of small steps, with
consolidation settlement occurring as pit is gradually filled - drainage pipe grades would
have to take account of both types of settlement
for clay = 0.5
Corner settlements can be found by superposition using combinations of rectangles 1 – 4

Pressure q at base of landfill = z = 7.5 x 20 = 150 kPa (Note this would be less than the
original loading at this level due to the sand overburden layer)

(Which method should be used? Janbu’s method takes account of the depth effect (ie, base of fill is
20m below natural surface). However, this would only give ave settlement for each rectangle, whereas
settlement at the corners is req’d if pipes are to be properly graded to take account of settlement
effects. Also settlement is req’d relative to current in-pit ground levels, so the prior loading conditions
and depth of the hole would not be so important. It is probably best therefore to use the simple formula
for immediate settlement at a corner of a flexible rectangular foundation, ie, i = qBRNp

This formula can be applied for each of a series of rectangles which together via superposition will
give the same effect as the full loaded area on the particular cornerpoint concerned. The “trick” with
this approach is to determine which rectangles have to be added and subtracted in each case. Note that
each of these rectangles must have a corner over the point of interest.
 20

VICTORIA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ENG’G & SCIENCE

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

PROBLEMS: In-ground Stress Distribution, SHEET No: SDIS-10

Immediate Settlement

Full calculations are only given below for a few of the corner points, but the rectangles to be added and
subtracted are shown for all points. Students should do the calcs for the missing points.

R = (1 – 2) / E = (1 – 0.52) / 15,000 = 5.0 x 10 -5 kPa-1, & q = 150 kPa (from earlier calc)
qR = 7.5 x 10-3, which is a constant in the formula for all cases below.

In each row below, i is found by multiplying qR by the B and Np in that row. Note the negative signs
where appropriate. Then i represents the total immediate settlement at the point concerned.

Point A: Rectangles 1 + 2 + 3
Rectangle L (m) x B (m) L/B Np (from table) (m)
i
1 100 x 50 2.0 0.76 0.285
2 50 x 50 1.0 0.56 0.210
3 50 x 30 1.7 ~0.70 0.158
i 0.653

Point C: Rectangles (1 + 2 +3 + 4) – (3 + 4) + 3
Rectangle L (m) x B (m) L/B Np (from table) i (m)
(1 + 2 + 3 + 4) 150 x 80 1.9 0.74 0.444
- (3 + 4) 150 x 30 5.0 1.00 - 0.225
3 50 x 30 1.7 ~0.70 0.158
i 0.377

Point E: Rectangles (1 + 2 + 3 + 4) – (1 + 4) + 1
Rectangle L (m) x B (m) L/B Np (from table) i (m)
(1 + 2 + 3 + 4) 150 x 80 1.9 0.74 0.444
- (1 + 4) 100 x 80 1.25 0.63 - 0.378
1 100 x 50 2.0 0.76 0.285
i 0.351

Point B: Rectangles (2 + 3) + (1 + 4) - 4

Point D: Rectangles (1 + 2) + (2 + 3) - 2

Point F: Rectangles (1 + 2) + (3 + 4) - 4

(Note that in all cases where rectangles are added and subtracted, the net area involved
= 1 + 2 + 3, ie, the actual loaded area)
 21

VICTORIA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ENG’G & SCIENCE

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

PROBLEMS: Consolidation Settlement, SHEET No: CS-1

Total & Differential Settlement

1. During an oedometer test on a sample of saturated clay, the thickness of the sample decreased
from 19.931mm to 19.720mm under an increase of stress from 200 to 400 kPa which was
maintained for 24 hours. The stress was then removed from the sample, its thickness was
measured at 19.842mm, and its water content found to be 26.8%.
(a) Taking Gs of the particles to be 2.70, calculate the void ratio before and after the application
of the stress increase, and the coefficient of volume decrease (mv) for this stress range
(b) If a stress increase from 200 to 350 kPa were applied to a 4m thick layer of this soil, calculate
the resulting consolidation settlement which would occur.

This is an introductory problem on analyzing oedometer test results, and although not strictly
necessary in this case, a standard type of table (which can be used in later more complicated
problems) will be set up below to find the answers required. The following formulae are required to
develop the table and solve part (b)
[eSr = wGs, e / (1 + ef) = H / Hf, mv = (1 / (1 + e1)) x e / ’, & c = mv ’H1]

(a) Since the sample is saturated & Sr = 1, the void ratio at the end of the test ef = wGs = 0.268 x 2.7 =
0.7236. The final thickness of the sample Hf = 19.842mm (given)

The table can be developed, filling in the entries for H, e and e working from the bottom upwards.
Note that all calculations are related to values in the bottom row of the table. (it is also possible to
complete the table by working upwards in pairs of rows, eg, from 0 to 400 kPa, then 400 to 200 kPa,
but this approach is not used here)

Effective Stress ’ Thickness H (mm) H e Void Ratio e

(kPa)
200 19.931 + 0.089 + 0.0077 0.7313
400 19.720 - 0.122 - 0.0106 0.7130
0 19.842 ------ ------- 0.7236

Carefully note the signs in the H and e columns above, and relate these and the void ratios to the
physical reality of the test. For example, when the stress increase from 200 to 400 kPa is applied, it
would be logical to assume that the sample is being compressed (this is also obvious from the H
column) and that the voids (and therefore the void ratio) would decrease.

Using the figures & formula above, for this stress range mv = (1 / 1.7313) x (0.7130 - 0.7313) / 200
= 5.29 x 10 -5 m2 / kN
(NB: the –ve sign here is ignored, as if used it would lead to a –ve answer in (b) below. This simply
means the soil is being compressed, or reduced in thickness.)

(b) The mv value above is relevant for the stress increase from 200 to 350 kPa. Therefore using
c = mv ’H1, consolidation settlement c = 5.29 x 10 -5 x 150 x 4 = 0.032m = 32mm.
 22

VICTORIA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ENG’G & SCIENCE

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

PROBLEMS: Consolidation Settlement, SHEET No: CS-2

Total & Differential Settlement

2. The raft foundation of a very wide building is to be founded at a depth of 2.5m below the
ground surface. Site investigation test holes show a layer of sandy silt (average density 1920
kg/m3, both above and below the water table) from the surface to 2.5m depth, underlain by a
4.5m thick clay stratum (average density 1800 kg/m3) which in turn sits on rock. The water table
lies at a depth of 2m. The estimated average gross contact stress at the underside of the
foundation (ie, on the clay layer) will be 120 kN/m2. An oedometer test carried out on a sample
from the centre of the clay layer gave the following results.
Effective stress ’ (kPa) 25 50 100 200 400
Void ratio e 1.163 1.160 1.130 1.093 1.055
(a) Plot e vs log ’ and hence estimate the value of c’ for the clay in the test, and also the
value of Cc.
(b) Calculate the effective stress at the centre of the clay layer before construction, and hence
determine whether the clay is normally- or over-consolidated.
(c) Estimate the likely consolidation settlement of the raft using the compression index
method.

(a) It is useful to first sketch the situation above so as to graphically clarify all the details.

Silt 2.5m Gross q = 120 kPa 2.0m = 1920 kg/m3

Clay 4.5m = 1800 kg/m3

Void ratio e can then be plotted against log ’ (either by taking logs of ’ values and plotting same on
linear graph paper, or by plotting actual ’ values on the log scale of semilog paper as on the next
page). The Casagrande bisection method or construction is then used to find c’, which is 61 kPa.
(see overleaf)

Cc can be obtained from the slope of the straight line part of the plot above (either by measuring rise
over run, if plotted on linear paper, or by inserting values directly in the following formula if plotted
on semilog paper.) Cc = (e1 – e2) / log ( 2’ / 1’) [NB: symbol p is often used interchangeably with ]
Any 2 convenient points on the straight line can be taken as points 1 and 2. In this case values from the
4th and 6th columns above are used.

Cc = (1.130 – 1.055) / log (400 / 100) = 0.1246

 23

VICTORIA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ENG’G & SCIENCE

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

PROBLEMS: Consolidation Settlement, SHEET No: CS-3

Total & Differential Settlement

(b) Unit weights for the silt and clay layers are (1920 x 9.81 / 1000 =) 18.84 kN/m3 and
(1800 x 9.81 / 1000 =) 17.66 kN/m3 respectively.
Since total vertical stress v = z to a point of interest, in this case (at the centre of the clay layer)
v = 2.5 x 18.84 + 2.25 x 17.66 = 86.8 kPa.
Pore pressure u at the same point = 2.75 x 9.81 = 27.0 kPa.
v’ = 86.8 – 27.0 = 59.8 kPa (The v subscript will be omitted below as only vertical stresses
are being considered here)
This value is very close to the c’ value of 61 kPa, which means the clay is normally consolidated (or
very slightly overconsolidated. (Remember overconsolidation has occurred if c’ > ’)

(c) The net stress increase at the top of the clay layer = 120 – 2.5 x 18.84 = 72.9 kPa
[Remember it is the net stress increase (ie, increase above the original stress) which causes settlement]
In this case, as the building is wide relative to the clay layer thickness, a 1-D loading situation can be
assumed (ie, no 3-D stress bulb), & stress increase at the centre of the clay layer also taken as 72.9 kPa

In the compression index method, consolidation settlement c = H = Cc H1 log ( 2’ / 1’)/ (1 + e1)

In this case, 1’ = 59.8 kPa, 2’ = 59.8 + 72.9 = 132.7 kPa, & e1 = 1.156 (from graph at 1’ = 59.8)
c = H = (0.1246 x 4.5 x log (132.7 / 59.8) ) / 2.156 = 0.090m = 90mm
 24

VICTORIA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ENG’G & SCIENCE

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

PROBLEMS: Consolidation Settlement, SHEET No: CS-4

Total & Differential Settlement

3. A saturated sample taken from the centre of a 6m thick layer of normally-consolidated clayey
silt gave the following results when tested in an oedometer for a duration of 24 hours at each
load. At the end of the test the water content was 28.4%, and Gs was measured as 2.65.
Effective stress ’ (kPa) 27 54 107 214 428 0
Sample thickness (mm) 16.66 16.63 16.48 16.16 15.85 16.08
(a) Plot e vs log ’ , estimate the value of c’ for the sample soil, and calculate the value of Cc.
(b) The 6m thick soil layer is subject to an existing overburden effective stress at its centre of 90
kPa, and it is expected that a foundation load will increase this by 85 kPa. Use the compression
index method to estimate the probable consolidation settlement which the foundation will
undergo.

This problem combines elements of problems 1 and 2, & requires an expanded version of the type of
table drawn up in Q.1. (Refer to Q1 for details of how the table should be completed)

(a) Since the sample is saturated & Sr = 1, the void ratio at the end of the test ef = wGs = 0.284 x 2.65 =
0.7526. The final thickness of the sample Hf = 16.08 mm (given above)

Effective Stress ’ Thickness H (mm) H e Void Ratio e

(kPa)
27 16.66 + 0.58 + 0.0632 0.8158
54 16.63 + 0.55 + 0.0600 0.8126
107 16.48 + 0.40 + 0.0436 0.7962
214 16.16 + 0.08 + 0.0087 0.7613
428 15.85 - 0.23 - 0.0251 0.7275
0 16.08 ------ ------- 0.7526

An e vs log ’ (again using semilog paper) can be prepared (see next page), and c’ 88 kPa.

As before, Cc can be obtained from the slope of the straight line part of the plot above (in this case by
inserting values directly in the following formula: Cc = (e1 – e2) / log ( 2’ / 1’) Any 2 convenient
points on the straight line can be taken as points 1 and 2. In this case values from the 4th and 6th rows in
the table above are used.

Cc = (0.7962 – 0.7275) / log (428 / 107) = 0.114

In the compression index method, consolidation settlement c = H = Cc H1 log ( 2’ / 1’) / (1 + e1)

In this case, the initial effective stress at the centre of the clayey silt layer = 1’ = 90.0 kPa,
The effective stress at the centre of the layer after loading = 2’ = 90.0 + 85.0 = 175 kPa, &
from the graph e1 = 0.804 (ie, corresponding to 1’ = 90.0 kPa)

c = H = (0.114 x 6.0 x log (175 / 90) ) / 1.804 = 0.109m = 109mm

 25

VICTORIA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ENG’G & SCIENCE

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

PROBLEMS: Consolidation Settlement, SHEET No: CS-5

Total & Differential Settlement

4. The foundation of a large building is to be placed at a depth of 2.5m in a 5.5m thick stratum of
dense sand which overlies a 6m thick clay layer which in turn overlies hard shale. The water
table is at a depth of 3.6m It has been calculated that the foundation will cause an effective stress
increase across the clay layer decreasing linearly from 140 kPa at its top to 75kPa at its base.
Unit weights sat and d for the sand are 21.2 and 19.6 kN/m3 respectively, and sat for the clay is
19.5 kN/m3. Results from an oedometer test on a soil sample taken from the clay layer are shown
below.
Effective stress ’ (kPa) 0 25 50 100 200 400 800
Void ratio e 0.896 0.892 0.884 0.866 0.834 0.800 0.766
Estimate the consolidation settlement by dividing the clay into four equal sublayers, and using
the compression index method.

It is useful in this case to sketch a diagram of the physical situation so as to visualize the increase in
effective stress at the centre of each of the clay sublayers due to the applied loading. The e vs log ’
curve can then be plotted, and Cc found. The settlement in each sublayer can then be found from
tabular calculations, and these settlements summed to give the total settlement for the clay layer.
 26

VICTORIA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ENG’G & SCIENCE

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

PROBLEMS: Consolidation Settlement, SHEET No: CS-6

Total & Differential Settlement

q
2.5m
3.6m
5.5m Dry sand, d = 19.6 kN/m3

’ = 140 kPa
Sat. sand, sat = 21.2 kN/m3

132 1 4 clay sublayers @ 1.5m each

3
116 2 sat for clay = 19.5 kN/m
6.0m
99.4 3

83.1 4

75 kPa
From values at 200 & 800 kPa on graph below, Cc = (0.834 – 0.766) / log (800 / 200) = 0.113

Using the formula H = Cc H1 log ( 2’ / 1’) / (1 + e1), reading e1 from the curve for each v’ value,
and taking H1 = 1.5m, the consolidation settlement is equal to H from the table below
Layer Depth to v (kPa) u (kPa) v’ (kPa) v’(kPa) v’+ v’ e1 H (m)
centre (m) (= 1’) (at centre) (= 2’)
1 6.25 125.5 26.0 99.5 132 232 0.868 0.0334
2 7.75 154.7 40.7 114 116 230 0.860 0.0279
3 9.25 184.0 55.4 129 99.4 228 0.855 0.0226
4 10.75 213.2 70.1 143 83.1 226 0.850 0.0182
H= 0.102
 27

VICTORIA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ENG’G & SCIENCE

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

PROBLEMS: Consolidation Settlement, SHEET No: CS-7

Total & Differential Settlement

5. Oedometer test results on a sample from the centre of a clay layer are given below. At the end
of the test (when ’ = 0), the water content of the clay was 28.6%, and Gs may be taken as 2.70
Effective stress ’ (kPa) 25 50 100 200 400 800 0
Sample thickness (mm) 19.46 19.39 19.24 18.97 18.68 18.40 18.62
(a) Calculate the void ratio at the end of each stage of the test, plot the e vs log ’ curve, and
estimate the preconsolidation stress.
(b) Estimate the consolidation settlement which might be expected in a 4m thick layer of the
clay due to a stress increase at its centre of 100 kPa if (i) the clay is normally consolidated,
and (ii) the soil is overconsolidated, with an overconsolidation ratio of 2.

(a) Assuming the sample is saturated at the end of the test & Sr = 1, the final void ratio ef = wGs =
0.286 x 2.70 = 0.7722. The final thickness of the sample Hf = 18.62 mm (given above)

Effective Stress ’ Thickness H (mm) H e Void Ratio e

(kPa)
25 19.46 + 0.84 + 0.0799 0.8521
50 19.39 + 0.77 + 0.0733 0.8455
100 19.24 + 0.62 + 0.0590 0.8312
200 18.97 + 0.35 + 0.0333 0.8055
400 18.68 + 0.06 + 0.0057 0.7779
800 18.40 - 0.22 - 0.0209 0.7513
0 18.62 ------ ------- 0.7722

From the e vs log ’ plot, (again using semilog paper, see next page) c’ 91 kPa, at e = 0.836.

As before, Cc can be obtained from the slope of the straight line part of the plot above (in this case by
inserting values directly in the following formula: Cc = (e1 – e2) / log ( 2’ / 1’) Any 2 convenient
points on the straight line can be taken as points 1 and 2. In this case values from the 5th and 7th rows in
the table above are used.

Cc = (0.8055 – 0.7513) / log (800 / 200) = 0.090

(b) (i) If the clay is normally consolidated, the initial effective stress 1’ at the centre of the clay
layer (due to the existing overburden) = c’ 91 kPa (with e1 = 0.836 from above).
The effective stress at the centre of the layer after loading = 2’ = 91 + 100 = 191 kPa.
Consolidation settlement c = H = Cc H1 log ( 2’ / 1’) / (1 + e1)

c = H = (0.090 x 4.0 x log (191 / 91) ) / 1.836 = 0.063m = 63mm

(ii) If the clay is overconsolidated with an overconsolidation ratio of 2, the initial (present)
effective stress at the centre of the clay layer = c’ / 2 45 kPa. This will therefore be 1’ (with e1 =
0.847 from the e vs log ’ plot)
 28

VICTORIA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ENG’G & SCIENCE

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

PROBLEMS: Consolidation Settlement, SHEET No: CS-8

Total & Differential Settlement

The effective stress at the centre of the layer after loading = 2’ = 45 + 100 = 145 kPa

The effective stress increase spans across two different sections of the e vs log ’ plot, and consol’n
settlement must be found from H = Cr H1 log ( c’ / 1’) / (1 + e1) + Cc H1 log ( 2’ / c’) / (1 + ec),
where Cr is a recompression index obtained from a straight line approximation to the LHS of the curve
(see foundation settlement slides 34 – 36)
In this case, Cr (0.847 – 0.836) / log (91 / 45) 0.036

H = 0.036 x 4 x log (91 / ) / (1 + 0.847) + 0.09 x 4 x log (145 / ) / (1 + 0.836)

= 0.024 + 0.040 = 0.064m = 64mm

(Note that several approximations have been made above in drawing straight lines to fit sections of the
curve, and hence with reading values from the graph. Therefore the apparent accuracy in some of the
calculations above is greater than would in reality be the case).
 29

VICTORIA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ENG’G & SCIENCE

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

PROBLEMS: Consolidation Settlement, SHEET No: CS-9

Total & Differential Settlement

6. A square footing with plan dimensions 3m x 3m is to be founded at a depth of 1m in a 6m

thick stratum of (assumed to be) normally consolidated clay overlying rock. It will impose a net
foundation stress of 150 kPa on the soil. The water table is at ground level, and the saturated
unit weight of the clay is 21kN/m3. From triaxial tests, cu = 45 kPa and E = 16 MPa. An
oedometer test on a sample taken from 3.5m depth gave the following results:
Effective stress ’ (kPa) 12.5 25 50 100 200
Void ratio e 1.007 1.004 0.989 0.953 0.918
(a) Plot e vs log ’ , estimate the value of c’ for the sample soil, and calculate the value of Cc.
(b) Estimate the total settlement of the footing, assuming that conditions at 3.5m depth are
average for the consolidating clay layer, and that the foundation is rigid. The value of the
pore pressure parameter A for the clay can be taken as 0.85.
3m 1m
Given
qnet = 150 kPa
cu = 45 kPa
E = 16 MPa sample 5m
3
sat = 21 kN/m 2.5m
square footing 3m x 3m

(a) From the e vs log ’ plot, c’ 42 kPa, at e = 0.998. Taking Cc = (e1 – e2) / log ( 2’ / 1’) and
using e values corresponding to 50 & 200 kPa in the table above,
Cc = (0.989 – 0.918) / log (200 / 50) = 0.135
 30

VICTORIA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ENG’G & SCIENCE

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

PROBLEMS: Consolidation Settlement, SHEET No: CS-10

Total & Differential Settlement

(b) Immediate settlement can be calculated by Janbu et al’s method i(ave) = 0 1qB / E), assuming
settlement of the rigid footing average settlement of a flexible footing. From dimensions given,
D = m, H = 5m, L = B = 3m, and D/B = 0.33, and L/B = 1.0

Therefore, from the Janbu charts, 0 0.91 & 1 0.55. Putting these values in the formula Æ
-3
i = 0.91 x 0.55 x 150 x 3 / 16000 = 14.0 x 10 m or 14mm

Consolidation settlement: Before the foundation is constructed, the effective stress at the centre of
the clay layer beneath the proposed base (ie, 3.5m below the ground surface) = 3.5 (21 – 9.8) =
39.2 kPa. This is reasonably close to the previously calculated value of c’ 42 kPa, so the clay
appears to be slightly overconsolidated. However for practical purposes, it may be taken as
approximately normally consolidated (eg, consider the situation if the water table was actually at a
depth of approx 0.3m below the surface). H can therefore be estimated approximately using the
previously calculated Cc value, and an e1 value obtained from the virgin curve straight line projected
back to ’ 39 kPa, ie, ~ 1.002.

Unlike the situation in some of the previous problems, the foundation dimensions here are smaller than
the consolidating clay layer, and 3-D consolidation must be assumed, so that the stress increase at the
centre of the layer should be significantly less than the 150 kPa applied at the footing base (consider
the pressure bulbs discussed earlier). Figure 5.12 from Barnes (see notes page 10c) can be used to get
the approx stress increase 2.5m below the footing, although it doesn’t take account of the underlying
rock base. For a square footing with z / B = 2.5 / 3 = 0.83, I 0.38, so ’ = 0.38 x 150 = 57 kPa

Based on the 1-D oedometer test, and using c(oed) = H = Cc H1 log ( 2’ / 1’) / (1 + e1),
c(oed) = 0.135 x 5 log {(39 + 57) / 39} / (1 + 1.002) = 0.132m or 132mm

In order to correct the oedometer-based prediction to allow for the 3-D loading situation, c(oed)
should be multiplied by a coefficient (see Foundation Settlement slides 37 & 38) obtained from
Skempton & Bjerrum (1957) curves – see notes page 18a)

From these curves, for D / 2b = 5 / 3 = 1.67, A = 0.85 and a square (approximated by circular) footing,
0.9, so that c = c(oed) = 0.9 x 132 = 119mm

Total settlement = immediate settlement + consolidation settlement

= 14 + 119 = 133mm

(This problem illustrates the extra complications caused when 3-D field settlement situations cannot be
matched directly with 1-D oedometer test results, and also how in clay soils long term (or
consolidation settlement) is likely to be much greater than immediate settlement.)
 31

VICTORIA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ENG’G & SCIENCE

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

PROBLEMS: Consolidation Settlement, SHEET No: CS-11

Total & Differential Settlement

7. A saturated clay layer extending down 10m from the ground surface is drained at both its
upper and lower boundaries, and is subjected to a vertical stress increase of 50 kPa applied over
a wide area. Assuming that the water table is at the ground surface, and that the coefficient of
consolidation cv for the clay = 1.16 x 10-6 m2/s, calculate (a) the pore pressure at 5m depth in the
clay 50 days after the stress increase is (assume instantaneously) applied, and (b) the percentage
of primary consolidation settlement which has occurred by this time.

(a) First calculate the time factor T = cv t / H2 50 kPa

Remembering to use consistent units, in this case
cv = 1.16 x 10-6 m2/s, t = 50 x 86400 secs & H = 5m
2 way drainage
-6 2
T50 = 1.16 x 10 x 50 x 86400 / 5 = 0.20 clay 10m
H = 5m
From fig 10.23 (notes page 18b), for z = 5 & T = 0.2,
Uz 0.23
But Uz = (ui – uz) / ui , & in this case ui can be assumed to be 50kPa, ie, the initial vertical stress
increase which is wholly taken as an increase in u at t = 0 (ie, assumed to be a uniform pressure
increase across the full layer depth)
Therefore 0.23 = (50 – uz) / 50, Æ uz = 38.5 kPa, ie, pore pressure at 5m depth

(b) The average % of primary consolidation at this time for T = 0.2 (from m = 1 curve on figure
10.4, page 18b) = 51%

8. Estimates of time for consolidation are usually based on parameters (eg, cv) obtained from
laboratory oedometer tests on 70 mm diameter clay samples. Giving reasons, comment on the
likely reliability of these estimates.

The estimates are not likely to be very reliable unless based on quite a few samples from varying
points within the relevant clay layers in the field. Even then there can be many uncertainties, because
small diameter thin layers used in the tests may not be particularly representative of the thick layers
over much larger areas encountered in the field where there can be many complications with drainage
paths (length, permeability, etc), and where the soil properties are unlikely to be homogeneous.

9. A saturated clay layer extending down 8m from the ground surface is underlain by relatively
impervious rock, and is subjected to a uniform vertical stress increase of 100 kPa at the surface.
(a) If cv for the clay = 4.6 x 10-6 m2/s, estimate how long (in days) it will take for 80% of the final
consolidation settlement to occur. (b) Estimate also the excess pore pressures at the base and
mid-depth of the layer after 80% of the final consolidation settlement has occurred.

Initial pore pressure increase is assumed to be uniform across the layer, and drainage is one-way (up).
 32

VICTORIA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ENG’G & SCIENCE

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

PROBLEMS: Consolidation Settlement, SHEET No: CS-12

Total & Differential Settlement

100 kPa
2 -6 2
(a) T = cv t / H , where cv = 4.6 x 10 m /s, H = 8m, and ave
degree of consolidation U = 80%
From fig 10.4 (for m = 1), T80 0.56, and therefore
1 way
t80 = T80H2 / cv = (0.56 x 82 / 4.6 x 10-6 ) x 1 / 86400 clay 8m drainage
= 90 days

(b) From fig 10.23, Uz at base (ie, when z / H = 1 and for T80 0.56) 0.69
Uz at mid-layer (ie, when z / H = 0.5 and for T80 0.56) 0.78

from Uz = (ui – uz) / ui , and taking ui = 100 kPa (ie, initial pore water pressure = applied stress),

At the base of the clay layer, 0.69 = (100 – uz) / 100 Æ uz = 31 kPa
At the mid-point of the clay layer, 0.78 = (100 – uz) / 100 Æ uz = 22 kPa

(Consider whether these two answers make sense, eg, at which point (layer base or mid-point) would
you expect the greater amount of pore pressure dissipation to have occurred, given the drainage
situation)

10. Using the results from oedometer tests (ie, based on 1-D consolidation theory), predicted
settlement at the centre of a 15m square structure founded on a 7.5m thick layer of normally-
consolidated clay is 110mm. Estimate the actual (field) expected settlement if the pore pressure
parameter A for the clay was measured as 0.9

In order to correct the oedometer-based prediction to allow for the 3-D loading situation, c(oed)
should be multiplied by a coefficient (see Foundation Settlement slides 37 & 38) obtained from
Skempton & Bjerrum (1957) curves – see notes page 18a), ie, c(field) = c(oed)

From these curves, for D / 2b = 7.5 / 15 = 0.5, A = 0.9 and a square (approximated by circular) footing,
0.95, so that c(field) = c(oed) = 0.95 x 110 = 105mm

11. A long building structure 8m wide is founded on a 16m thick layer of overconsolidated clay.
Based on oedometer test results, settlement of 50mm would be predicted. If A for the clay was
measured in a triaxial test as 0.4, estimate the actual field settlement which might be expected.

Use the same correction procedure as above, with D / 2b = 16 / 8 = 2.0, and A = 0.4
Interpolating between the strip footing lines for D / 2B = 1 and 4,
0.7, so that c(field) = c(oed) = 0.7 x 50 = 35mm
 33

VICTORIA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ENG’G & SCIENCE

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

PROBLEMS: Consolidation Settlement, SHEET No: CS-13

Total & Differential Settlement

12. A rectangular building 22m x 16m on a raft foundation has predicted settlements as follows:
centre: immediate (20mm), consolidation (50mm); corners: immediate (5mm), consolidation
(15mm). Briefly discuss whether cracking in brick and panel walls is likely to be a problem in
this structure, and if it is, what could be done about it.

The diagonal length from centre to a corner of the slab = (112 + 82)0.5 = 13.6m
Long term differential settlement between centre and corners (ie, taking both immediate and
consolidation settlement into account) = 70 – 20 = 50mm. This would lead to an angular distortion of
50 / 13600 = 1 / 272. (If a similar calculation is done for differential settlement and angular distortion
considering immediate settlement and consolidation settlement separately, results are 15mm & 1 / 907,
and 35mm & 1 / 389). Therefore the worst case situation occurs when total settlements are
considered at both the centre and corners. (It would also however be a good idea to check predicted
settlements midway along each side to ensure differential settlements & angular distortions between
those points and the centre are OK)

Based on Bjerrum’s table (1962 – see notes page 18a), some (but not a lot of) cracking would be
expected in the panel walls (starts at an angular distortion of about 1 / 300). How serious this might be
will depend to a significant extent on what the building might be used for (see later questions). If the
problem were likely to be serious, the raft would need to be stiffened to reduce differential settlement.
(see next question in relation to how this might be done)

13. It is proposed to found a building on a slab on a clay soil. It is to be used as a machine shop,
and the machinery is known to be sensitive to settlement. With the type of “flexible” slab
proposed, a maximum likely settlement of 25mm has been predicted. Estimate the likely
maximum differential settlement, and determine whether there are likely to be problems with
the machinery. If there are likely to be problems, what could be done to remedy them?

Using the chart on page 18a for differential settlements on clays, the maximum differential settlement
corresponding to a maximum settlement of 25mm for a flexible foundation is about 22mm, and the
associated angular distortion is about 1 / 500, ie, greater than the 1 / 750 at which problems would start
to occur with the machinery. The problem could be remedied if the slab were made a lot stiffer.
(Checking the stiff foundation line on the same chart indicates the differential settlement would drop to
around 12mm, and the associated angular distortion to around 1 / 1000).

The slab could be stiffened by incorporating internal deeper beams crisscrossing at right angles, or
even moving to a waffle type of construction (see next topic). An alternative which might be
investigated, depending on how the machinery was distributed over the floor area, might be to isolate
separate (self-contained) pieces of machinery on individual rigid pad footings, ie, separated by a
jointing compound from the surrounding slab.
 34

VICTORIA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ENG’G & SCIENCE

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

PROBLEMS: Consolidation Settlement, SHEET No: CS-14

Total & Differential Settlement

14. It is proposed to found a building on sand using isolated pad foundations. The building is to
be used for animal health experimentation, for which reason no cracking is permitted as this
could allow the escape of dangerous microorganisms. A maximum settlement of 30mm has been
estimated. Estimate the maximum likely differential settlement, and comment on whether the
foundation system proposed is likely to be acceptable for its purpose.

Using the chart on page 18a for differential settlements on sands, the maximum differential settlement
corresponding to a maximum settlement of 30mm is about 20mm, and the associated angular distortion
is about 1 / 570, ie, less than the maximum value permitted of 1 / 500 which is relevant to this
situation. The building foundation system should therefore be just OK, although there is not much of a
safety factor, given all the uncertainties with accurate settlement prediction and the potentially serious
problems with escape of microorganisms. Hence it would probably be desirable to carry out a more
detailed examination of the foundations and possible alternatives to them.

15. A long low-rise building using brick wall construction on strip footings is proposed for a site
in South Melbourne. Settlements of up to 200mm have been predicted on the soft, silty clay soil
found there. Estimate the maximum differential settlement which might be expected for the
building, and comment on whether the resulting angular distortion would be likely to pose a
problem for this form of construction.

If the strip footings were relatively shallow and therefore could be considered flexible, the maximum
differential settlement would be about 104mm, and resulting angular distortion about 1 / 130 to
1 / 140, ie, greater than the safe limit of 1 / 150 for flexible brick walls, so that problems might be
expected. If on the other hand deep beam strip footings were used and the foundations thus made much
stiffer, then the maximum differential settlement would drop to around 66mm, and the angular
distortion to about 1 / 205. Some cracking would still be expected unless the brickwork was articulated
with appropriate jointing.
_________________________________________________________________________________