Geotechnical Issues With Horizontal Construction - Part One: Pdhonline Course C-837 (4 PDH)

PDHonline Course C-837 (4 PDH)
____________________________________________________
Geotechnical Issues
with Horizontal Construction - Part One
Instructor: T. E. McLaughlin, PE
07-14-2016
PDH Online | PDH Center

5272 Meadow Estates Drive
Fairfax, VA 22030-6658
Phone & Fax 703-988-0088
www.PDHonline.com
www.PDHcenter.org
An Approved Continuing Education Provider

www.PDHcenter.org PDH Course C837 www.PDHonline.com
Geotechnical Issues with Horizontal Construction - Part One
T. E. McLaughlin, PE
Course Content
A. OVERALL REVIEW - PLANNING, DESIGN, & DOCUMENT PREPARATION PROCESS
Outline of the Process
1. Project Planning: The engineering or architectural professional should review the project scope, location,
suitability of the site, and available data with the owner or owners representative and project geotechnical en-
gineer to determine the extent of the geotechnical involvement, as far as site geotechnical work, number of soil
borings, if any, depth of those borings, extent of the geotechnical analysis, and further involvement of the geo-
technical engineer in the project after the initial geotech report has been issued. Difficult sites will, of course,
require more intensive geotech engineer involvement, with added expense. For example, a site with a high
groundwater table will present several problems to the designer and contractor. Pavement will generally not
have a long life with a high groundwater level immediately under it, neither will building foundations hold up
well in the same circumstances unless special design measures are taken. The geotech engineer is the best
source for advice and recommendations for dealing with such circumstances.
2. Preliminary Design: After the rough sketch phase has been completed, and the geotech report has been
submitted, a materials inventory should be completed; by materials inventory we refer to onsite soil, rock, grav-
el, topsoil, and nearby locally available materials such as gravel, sand, earth fill, suitable fill material, river
gravel, and similar materials. Will there be landscaping with gravel or decorative rock-like materials required?
What type of pavement is to be used? Pavement on small sites can be nearly anything allowed/permmitted,
such as compacted gravel, concrete, wood mulch, paving bricks in all their variations, asphalt surface on a
base course, etc. If the project is a highway owned by a government agency, the choices may have been de-
termined by that agency prior to engaging a professional to complete the design. If so, it remains only to
choose the most economical materials available to complete the construction document package.
3. Design/Engineering/Construction Plans Preparation: At this stage in the process, the design is pre-
pared and construction details are generated and/or provided from standard details, with sufficient instructions
to the contractor to allow the project to be constructed as desired by the owner and maintaining entity or
agency. Unusual site conditions, poor soil, high groundwater conditions, and known construction problems
should be noted either on the drawings or in special conditions to the specifications and contract documents,
so the contractor is not surprised during construction by some site condition [usually a hidden soils situation or
underground hydrogeologic condition] which was not obvious or not immediately apparent from site surface re-
view.
4. Integration of specifications and pay items into the construction document package: Pay items and
specifications should accurately represent the work, and should conform to generally accepted current con-
struction practice for the type of project being built. Earthwork is always a primary consideration, and is the
one single item which may make or break the contractor. [We will examine the role of earthwork in greater de-
tail in the following sections of this course]. If odd or unconventional pay items are required, a special condi-
tion or detailed description of this pay item or items is usually required to be placed into the document pack-
age. All work should be described in the documents in a written description of work in the contract itself, or as
notes on the appropriate pages of the drawing package. Special groundwater control measures such as
trench drains, gravel beds, pumping, etc. may need to be noted on the drawings, and a pay item or several
pay items inserted into the document package. Some agencies prefer to leave such items to the contractors
T. E. McLaughlin Page 2 of 33
discretion and cover such work as part of mobilization or another pay item, with appropriate contract lan-
guage included in order to avoid change orders. This situation, if present on a particular site, should be dis-
cussed with the owners representative prior to finalizing the construction document package.
B. HORIZONTAL CONSTRUCTION - GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS
For a typical project involving horizontal construction, there are five primary components: (1) earthwork;
(2) drainage; (3) underground utilties; (4) paving; and (5) concrete [slab-on-grade] work. Drainage,
underground utilities, paving, and concrete work are normally associated with standard pay items, and if no
special soils conditions exist, these customary standard pay items can be used directly in the contract docu-
ments. Earthwork is a separate consideration, and requires site-specific details, pay items, and some times,
special specifications. The remainder of Part One is concerned with earthwork, soil density, compaction, sub-
sidence, and associated geotechnical considerations.
C. EARTHWORK
Coordination with the geotech engineer for the project is usually required if unusual conditions exist. Several
items to review are: a) topsoil, and will it be re-used for final grading? b) is the work depth composed of good
material ? c) is offsite material required to be hauled to, and/or stored on the project site itself? d) is a nearby
work area or storage yard required due to removal of unsuitable material or extreme site restrictions [such as
small size, etc.]? e) does the contractor take ownership of all unsuitable material? f) is there a pay item for
hauling and dumping unsuitable material? g) is ground water or high groundwater present? [which is best ad-
dressed in the construction documents]; h) does the site require dewatering during performance of earthwork
and/or utility construction? i) is a pay item or items for dewatering included in the construction documents? (j)
hidden or unknown underground features; (k) subsidence of the existing soil; (l) soil type [here we are refer-
ring to plastic clay, rock, or other unmanagable soils]. Earthwork is a fundamental issue. Site and highway
contractors usually make the bulk of their profits from earthwork.
1. Staging area or work yard - Is a staging area required for the contractors material and equipment while
the job is in progress? If a government project, adjacent land may be available, but its use should be outlined
in the construction documents. Most governments will require some type of rental fee for use of their land. In
some cases, a separate land use agreement will have to be processed through the governmental agency
which initiated the project and which executes the construction contract. Can the existing right-of-way be used
for staging? If so, this also may require explicit permission, either by inclusion in the contract documents or by
separate agreement. Does allowing use of existing right-of-way jeopardize safety of the roadway for vehicle
users? If the project involves a bridge, what are the limitations involved in operating construction equipment
on the existing bridge, if any? Should material storage on an existing bridge be expressly prohibited due to
dead load restrictions? Some projects are too large or too land-locked, and a separate work area will be nec-
essary.
2. Earthwork details - In order to properly understand earthwork and related geotechnical issues, we review
how a contractor views a horizontal construction project, and how he will calculate his earthwork costs.
These are the customary steps involved in providing earthwork & pavement for a typical project:
1. perform demolition of structures, remove buried objects;

2. clear large objects from the site; [trees]
3. strip grass and vegetation from the work area;
4. stockpile re-usable strippings/topsoil;
5. proof-roll the building and parking (pavement) areas;
6. perform cut operations where required;
7. stockpile usable onsite cut material;

8. perform onsite fill operations using onsite cut from stockpile;
9. compact the fill material;
10. haul fill material from offsite sources and dump/stockpile on site;
11. load and spread fill material from offsite stockpile;
12. compact the offsite fill material placed and spread in #11, above;
13. haul onto site the material used for pavement subgrade; or -
14. scarify the in-place subgrade material; and -
15. haul onto site additional subgrade material to be mixed with in-situ material;
16. mix the subgrade material to uniform consistency; [14 & 15, above]
17. compact the pavement area subgrade material to specified density;
18. place curbs where specified;
19. spread the pavement base course in lifts; [or, mix soil-cement, etc. for base]
20. compact the pavement base course; [may require multiple operations]
21. pave the pavement area in accordance with specified layers and thicknesses;
22. place sidewalk concrete if specified;
23. remove concrete forms, concrete rubble, and any other debris or excess fill;
24. fine grade the work area prior to topsoil placement;
25. place topsoil if specified;
26. place sod if specified;
26. seed the work area where specified;
27. place mulch material where specified;
28. water the grassed area;
29. final clean-up and inspection.
Some of these items will require multiple sub-operations. For earthwork, it is likely a contractor will estimate
part of its costs by equipment time and personnel on the job site. The wild card in the project contract price to-
tal is not the earthwork itself, assuming hard quotes are received for utilities, paving, concrete, and offsite fill
prior to bid submission. The wild card is always unknown subsoil conditions, or worse, concealed conditions,
and this includes subsidence of the existing soil on the project site, reviewed in greater detail in the following
paragraphs.
3. Problem soils, also noted as Special Materials - Most projects are not located on sites with fairly com-
pact, well-graded sand or sand-clay mixes. Plastic clays, soil with high organic content [usually over 30%],
loosely-consolidated sand of uniform grain size [within a narrow grain size band on the grain size distribution
chart], and other soils described in Table 12 from NAVFAC DM 7.01 Soil Mechanics Manual, page 61,
shown second below, can be difficult to deal with, both for the designer and contractor. Review Chapter One
from this Manual to be familiar with the various soil types, classifications, and identification of soils from field
and lab tests. Test questions will refer to this Chapter One as well as the two Tables shown below.
Table 4 from DM 7.01, p. 17
Table 12 from DM 7.01, p.61
From Table 4, first above, we see the description of soil with an SPT of 2 or less as being very soft, and with
SPT of 2 to 4 as being soft. From Table 12, immediately above, we see the description of hydraulic fills,
with a)- high void ratio, b)- uniform gradation, and c)- easily eroded, among other characteristics. Table 12 al-
so describes collapsing soils, which can be encountered nearly anywhere. A simple test for determining the
workability of a project site, as well as determining a couple of basic soil characteristics, is to flood the work
area or part of the work area with about six inches of water, and then carefully note the length of time it takes
for the water to drain into the soil. This will give some information on the soil permeability as well as grain size
[fineness] of the soil and whether or not clay particles [fines or plastic clay] are present in quantity in the sur-
face of the soil. This test can perhaps be performed by the geotechnical engineering firm during its initial site
exploration and soil testing operation.
An analogy to the descriptions in Table 4 and the preceding paragraph is a shoreline with coarse sand,
pounded by moderate wave action, with the water constantly soaking and then running out, allowing the upper
sand surface to compress and solidify somewhat until the next wave hits it. The pounding of the wave action
will compress the soil to a limited extent, and the repeated soaking will help to consolidate the upper sand sur-
face. Passenger vehicles can usually be driven along this semi-compacted shoreline without becoming stuck
in loose sandy material. As the observer moves inland and away from the wave action, dry sand may be en-
countered, loosely compacted if at all, and may present a problem for any vehicles unless they have special
large balloon-type tires. This type of loosely-compacted soil, in sufficient depth, will present the subsidence
problem we are concerned with in this part of the course.
D. SOIL STRESS CALCULATION
NAVFAC DM 7.01 - FIGURE 2, p. 207
Figure 2, above, is a summary of subsurface consolidation, or subsidence, as we are describing it here, and it
shows the soil stress distribution with changing ground water level and initial fill on an existing ground surface.
Note the description (4) of how rising ground water level decreases the effective overburden pressure.
OTHER METHODS OF CALCULATING SOIL STRESS:
BOUSSINESQ PRESSURE CHART
BOUSSINESQ THEORY - EXAMPLE
Wheel load = 20 Kip Wheel contact area = 8 x 8 = 64 sq. in.
Soil stress loading at wheel surface = 20 Kip / 64 sq. in.
or, p = 0.3125 Kip / sq. in.

_______________________________________________________________________
for boussinesq chart, b = 8 in. [wheel width]
Soil stress at depth below wheel = boussinesq factor x surface stress
Depth on boussinesq chart is based on wheel width b.
Soil stress at 6 x b = 0.1 x 0.3125 Kip / sq. in. = 0.03125 Kip / sq. in.
depth is 6 x b = 48 inches, or 4 ft.
_______________________________________________________________________
Soil pressure from weight of soil only:
assume 110 pcf soil density [pounds per cubic ft.]
pressure at one ft. depth - 110 pounds / 144 sq. in.
soil pressure at 4 ft. depth = [4 ft. x 110 pounds] / 144 sq. in.
= 3.056 psi
_______________________________________________________________________
Converting 0.03125 Kip / sq. in. to psi, we get 31.25 psi from wheel load.
Compare to the above soil pressure load from soil weight alone.
NOTE: There will be test questions on this type of stress

distribution shown in the example above.
LINEAR STRESS DISTRIBUTION THEORY
=====================================================================
CONICAL STRESS DISTRIBUTION THEORY:
E. SUBSIDENCE OR SETTLEMENT IN GENERAL
1. Review of Subsidence on a Project Site - What does subsidence entail? For a job located in an area
known to be either rock or hard soil [either clay, gravel, or some mix of sand, clay, and gravel which is firmly
consolidated], subsidence is not a primary issue if the existing soil is uniformly consolidated, has medium to
high blow counts, and is of good quality. For example, we assume that subsidence is not a factor if the top 10
ft. or 15 ft. of soil has the aforementioned characteristics. Organic material and poorly-consolidated granular
material will present a subsidence issue, and should be addressed during the design phase, in conjunction
with the geotechnical engineer. Obviously, organic material or plastic clays will have to be excavated and re-
placed with an approved backfill material prior to proceeding with construction. Poorly-consolidated in-situ
granular material may be overlooked during design, but if present in sufficient depth, will become the con-
cealed subsidence problem to which we are referring.
2. Soil density is one factor in subsidence. In most horizontal construction situations such as paving, slabs
on grade, or sidewalks, soil density generally refers to surface density of the top one to two feet or so of the
soil being worked. This one to two feet of surface soil is usually compacted by either a vibratory compactor, or
by repeated working of the surface from trucks and construction equipment. We need to determine projected
subsidence of the top 10 ft. to 15 ft. of soil in the work area. There does not appear to be a system for design-
ers to use to predict actual subsidence of a work area at such depths aside from on-site measurements using
the exact type of compaction equipment which will be used by the contractor. Some prediction of subsidence
can be made, as seen in the references noted below, by determining the soil type(s), and measuring blow
counts to some estimated depth, probably 15 to 20 ft. minimum for a surface project with loose granular soils.
NAVFAC DM 7.01 p.14 - Estimated Compactness of Sand from SPR Test

See also DM 7.01 p. 85, Section 7 - Penetration Resistance Tests.
3. Prediction of subsidence - Look carefully at Figure 1 [shown immediately above] on page 7.1-14 of the
DM 7.01 Soil Mechanics Manual, which is part of the course material shown on the download links. What
can we extract from this chart concerning the subsidence issue? This chart gives only a description of soil
density derived from blow counts. See the description of the hammer weight used to drive the sampler and de-
termine the blow count, N, on page 7.1-7. Even if a detailed geotechnical exploration of the job site is per-
formed prior to design, there still wont be a direct correlation between the contractors compaction equip-
ment and predicted subsidence.
4. Correllation of Soils Types - Review also Table 12 on page 7.1-35 of the DM 7.01 Soil Mechanics
Manual. Again there is no direct correlation between soil type and subsidence, but this table does tell you
when to look for problems. Read on down to Section 3, COLLAPSING SOILS, on page 7.1-39, and Figure 5
on page 7.1-40. Note that this information refers to the standard plate load test.
5. Analysis of Settlement and Volume Expansion - Chapter 5 from NAVFAC DM 7.01 Soil Mechanics
Manual. Read this chapter carefully. It begins on p. 7.1-205 and includes a number of tables and figures from
which test questions will be composed. Understanding this chapter and being able to solve problems related
to the information therein is of primary importance.
6. Plate Load Tests - See page 7.1-102 Figure 12, the Analysis of Plate Bearing Tests, shown on the
second page following. The plate load test will give a value for settlement under static load, but this sit-
uation is somewhat different from a construction crew using vibratory roller compaction equipment on
the construction site.
FIELD PLATE LOAD TEST SETUP [Static weight]
FIELD PLATE LOAD TEST DIAGRAM [Static weight]
FIELD PLATE LOAD TEST EQUIPMENT SETUP
NAVFAC DM 7.01 p. 102 Figure 12 - Analysis of Plate Bearing Tests
Study this diagram for test questions. An example problem will be solved in the following sections
to illustrate the use and application of this diagram.
6. Measurement of Subsidence - can be measured during construction using several methods, one of
which is the settlement gage. Review the New York State DOT Technical Manual GCP-15,
Settlement Gages and Settlement Rods, [August 2015], which is part of the course materials.
On page 4-28, Figure 1, the standard settlement rod / gage is shown, also reproduced below:
7. Determination of subsidence volume - How can the subsidence issue and what will appear to be vanish-
ing dirt be addressed in the contract documents? If the geotechnical report and blow counts from the subsur-
face investigation indicate poorly-consolidated soil in the top 20 ft. of the work area, subsidence will likely be
an issue. The geotechnical report should be the best source of information for subsidence, and the report
should be referenced in the contract documents, preferably included. But we still need to address the vanish-
ing dirt in the pay items. Instead of just guessing at some subsidence figure and adding something on the or-
der of 10% to the onsite fill pay items, we look again at the New York State DOT Settlement Gages and
Settlement Rods, Manual GCP-15. If an accurate figure for subsidence volume is desirable, the pay items
should include the installation of one or more settlement rods as described in this publication, and shown
above in Figure 1. The designer will need to specify locations & depths of the rod installations.
To provide a back-up measurement, the elevations of the tops of all the settlement rods should be surveyed
prior to the contractor performing any earthwork, using an offsite elevation benchmark which is far enough
away from the work area so as not to be affected by the vibratory compaction equipment. This distance may
be on the order of one-quarter to one-half mile or so.
8. Alternative subsidence volume determination method - a site elevation survey can be performed prior
to construction, with another survey being taken immediately after stripping and proof-rolling the work area.
The drawback to using elevation surveys is that the ground will continue to settle while it is being worked, and
a completely accurate measurement will not be possible. On a paved area, some subsidence will likely be hid-
den in extra, unexpected base course thickness. For example, a hidden 1-inch earth subsidence would most
likely be compensated for by an additional 1-inch of base course. An experienced contractor will recognize the
problem and may present an earthwork claim.
9. Calculation of Subsidence: Unit Weight, Moisture / Density, Blow Counts
Subsidence Example #1 Assume a project site has in-situ, untouched soil with an approximate modified
proctor density of 95 pcf (pounds per cubic ft.), and a blow count of between 10 and 15 for the first 10 feet of
soil depth at the work site. For this example, the in-situ soil is 93 pcf at dry density. Also assume the soil has
(by testing) a 100% modified proctor unit weight of 108 pcf and 95% modified proctor unit weight of 102.6 pcf.
This is a fractional relationship, with [95/100] = [102.6/108]. Now, we attempt to calculate some type of value
for subsidence. Study NAVFAC DM 7.01 p.87 - Figure 3, Correlations...Density and SPR in blows / ft.
********************************
Start with a cubic foot container, exactly 12 inches on a side. Into this container we place 93 pounds of soil,
and it fills the container up to the top surface. On top of this container we place a flat plate and use pressure
to compress the soil in the container. We are assuming that the one cubic foot container does not deform in
any way during the testing operation. Applying pressure to the top plate, the 93 pounds of soil then com-
presses to a volume of 11.3 inches by 12 inches by 12 inches. The 93 pounds of soil has compressed by 0.7
inch, or to put it another way, the soil in the container has subsided seven-tenths of an inch. We insert a nu-
clear density guage into this compressed soil and find we have a density of 95% modified proctor. However,
we have disturbed this compacted dry soil by measuring the density, so our results are suspect. If the reading
on the nuclear density guage were absolutely accurate, we could make the correlation as follows:
93 pounds = weight of soil in container (no water)

volume of dry, compacted soil = [11.3 in. x 12 in. x 12 in.] /1728 = 0.94167 c.f.
Now we can say that 93 pcf of dry, uncompacted soil will subside 0.7 inch if
compacted to 95% modified proctor, with a dry density of 98.8 pcf:
unit weight = [93 pounds of soil / 0.94167 cf] = 98.8 pcf

If we add water, all the values change and the subsidence will change also.
So, what is the correlation? Compaction of in-situ soil from this site to 95% modified proctor density will result
in 0.7 inch settlement in the top one ft. of soil. Or, in the top five feet of soil, we will have [0.7 inches settle-
ment / ft. x 5 ft.] = 3.5 inches overall subsidence for an approximate value. What kind of errors may result?
As noted, adding water will change the numbers. Also, a subsidence value cannot be calculated for in-place
soil like was done using the exact cubic foot volume. This volume calculation assumed the sides of the cube
did not deflect. The in-place soil may heave and compress laterally as well as vertically, making any calcula-
tion like this somewhat inaccurate. And the assumption that the top five feet of surface soil will subside in a
linear manner, as we assumed in the example above, may result in an over-estimation of the actual subsi-
dence figure.
NAVFAC DM 7.01 Figure 3, p. 87 - Correlations

SPR [N] vs. Density
NAVFAC DM 7.01 p. 207 Figure 2 - Profile of Vertical Stresses

Before Construction
NAVFAC DM 7.01 p. 206 Figure 1 - Consolidation Settlement Analysis
From the diagram above we can calculate a consolidation / settlement / subsidence number for a work area
which is pre-loaded with a soil berm of known weight [ p ] and duration of pre-loading. Note the reference to
Figure 9, shown below.
NAVFAC DM 7.01 p. 227 Figure 9 - Time Rate of Consolidation for Vertical

Drainage Due to Instantaneous Loading
Subsidence Example #2 The work area has fine, well-graded sand for the first one ft. of depth over the sur-
face. We will call this the pervious incompressible stratum. Immediately below this stratum is a five ft. depth
of very loosely consolidated sandy material with a blow count of between 2 and 3, thus indicating to us that this
stratum is compressible. The existing water table is one-half ft. below the ground surface prior to pre-loading.
The upper pervious incompressible stratum has a dry unit weight of 118 pcf, and the compressible stratum
immediately below this upper layer has a dry unit weight of 93 pcf.
e
H = ---------------(Ht) ( referring to Figure 1, above )
[1 + 0]
If e0 has been determined to be 0.2 from laboratory analysis of the compressible material, and e has been
derived from the [ e - log P ] curve, 0.05, we can then solve the equation and arrive at a number for H.
0.05
H = ---------------( 5.0 ft.) ( referring to Figure 1, above )
[1 + 0.2 ]
H = 0.208 ft. settlement in the compressible stratum.
Note carefully that this settlement results from a reduction in the void ratio of the granular compressible
material when the groundwater is forced out of this stratum by the pre-loading surcharge on the soil surface.
All these numbers have been determined by a laboratory consolidation test and analysis. The test results and
analysis may not conform to actual field conditions.
Continuing the example, we can also calculate H using the compression index, Cc in the following equation:
CcHt [ Po+P ]
H = --------------- (Log --------------- ) ( referring to Figure 1, above )
[1 + 0 ] Po
We need to calculate Po in order to solve the equation. Refer to NAVFAC DM 7.01 p.161 & 162 - Section 2,
Stress Conditions at a Point. Effective stress, Po, is the weight of the overburden of soil minus the pore
water pressure. See also Figure 1, above. From soil tests, the compression index, Cc has been determined
to be 0.009 for this type of granular material. See NAVFAC DM 7.01 p. 224 Table 3. Table 3 refers to Cc,
Coefficient of Consolidation, while Figure 1, above, calls this same number the Compression Index.
Po = [ 118 pcf x 1.0 ft.] + [ 93 pcf x 2.5 ft.] - [ 62.4 pcf x 3.0 ft.] = 163 pounds / sq.ft.
For a pre-loading surcharge of 15 ft. of soil with an average 100 pcf dry unit weight, we calculate H ---
[0.009 x 5.0 ft.] [ 163 +1500 psf ]

H = --------------------------- x (Log --------------------------- ) = 0.0445 ft.
[1 + 0.2 ] 163 psf
A test question will ask for a H calculation using slightly different parameters than used in this example.
Subsidence Example #3 The work area has dense, well-graded sand for the first one ft. of depth over the
surface. We will call this the pervious incompressible stratum. Immediately below this stratum is a fifteen ft.
stratum of loosely consolidated sandy material with a blow count of between 4 and 5, thus indicating to us that
this stratum is compressible. The existing water table is 20 ft. below the ground surface prior to pre-loading.
The upper pervious incompressible stratum has a dry unit weight of 130 pcf, and the compressible stratum
immediately below this upper layer has a dry unit weight of 100 pcf.
Using the information found in NAVFAC DM 7.01 Table 6, p.22 above, we determine that the compressible
stratum should have a void ratio somewhere between 0.80 and 1.00 in loose condition. If e0 has been deter-
mined to be 0.90 from laboratory analysis of the compressible material, and e has been derived from the
[ e - log P ] curve, 0.30, we can then solve the equation and arrive at a number for H.
0.30
H = ---------------( 15.0 ft.) ( referring to Figure 1, above )
[1 + 0.90 ]
H = 2.37 ft. settlement in the compressible stratum.
This large settlement or subsidence number is an extreme example of what may be encountered in the field
when working with loosely-consolidated granular materials. It would urge caution during construction docu-
ment preparation because the fifteen ft. of loose sandy material will not compress uniformly during construc-
tion, and may present a long-term settlement or subsidence issue over a period of several years.
Continuing the example, we can also calculate H using the compression index, Cc in the following equation
-
CcHt [ Po+P ]
H = --------------- (Log --------------- ) ( referring to Figure 1, above )
[1 + 0 ] Po
We need to calculate Po in order to solve the equation. Refer to NAVFAC DM 7.01 p.161 & 162 - Section 2,
Stress Conditions at a Point. Effective stress, Po, is the weight of the overburden of soil minus the pore
water pressure, in this example = 0.00. See also Figure 1, above. From soil tests, the compression index,
Cc has been determined to be 0.90 for this type of granular material. See NAVFAC DM 7.01 p. 224 Table 3.
Table 3 refers to Cc, Coefficient of Consolidation, while Figure 1, above, calls this same number the
Compression Index. See also NAVFAC DM 7.01, p. 233 & 234, Figure 14, Cc from Field Measurements.
Po = [ 130 pcf x 1.0 ft.] + [ 100 pcf x 7.5 ft.] - [ 62.4 pcf x 0.0 ft.] = 880 pounds / sq.ft.
For a pre-loading surcharge of 10 ft. of soil with an average 100 pcf dry unit weight, we calculate H ---
[0.90 x 15.0 ft.] [ 880 +1000 psf ]

H = --------------------------- x (Log --------------------------- ) = 2.34 ft.
[1 + 0.90 ] 880 psf
A test question will ask for a H calculation using slightly different parameters than used in this example.
Also study the NOMOGRAPH, Figure 11, on p. 229 of NAVFAC DM 7.01.
NAVFAC DM 7.01 - TABLE 6 P. 243 METHODS OF REDUCING

OR ACCELERATING SETTLEMENT OR COPING WITH SETTLEMENT
Review NAVFAC DM 7.01, p. 226 thru p. 246 ending with Limitations on Surcharge, the last
paragraph before Section 5, Vertical Drains. Test questions will be taken from this text as well as
the chart shown above..
NAVFAC DM 7.01 p. 102 Figure 12 - Analysis of Plate Bearing Tests
We display this Figure 12 again to eliminate the need to scroll up to it in the preceding pages.
In Subsidence Example 4, below, we will calculate a corrected settlement number for
coarse-grained cohesionless soils, using the information from Figure 12.
Subsidence Example #4 - Plate Bearing Test Analysis
Referring to the setup shown above, for this example we assume a deadweight of 100 tons on the support
beam assembly, or 200 Kips. If we have an hydraulic cylinder underneath this dead load, pushing against a
bottom plate of 1.5 ft. x 1.5 ft square, we then measure settlement vs. time duration of the cylinder pressure.
For an initial cylinder pressure of 30 Kips, the plate soil stress = 30 Kips / [ 1.5 ft.] or 13.3 KSF. We then
measure an instantaneous settlement of 0.05 ft. of the plate. A time-dependent graph is shown below -
Increasing the hydraulic cylinder force to 150 Kips at the conclusion of the test, we obtain the diagram above.
Since the deadweight on the beam structure is 200 Kips, we have not exceeded the limits of the test setup.
The test setup measured an initial zero-point settlement of 0.05 ft., eliminating the need to extrapolate this
number. for this soil can be determined from the graph, and is 0.10 ft.
From NAVFAC DM 7.01, Figure 12, (on preceding page), we can determine Kvi, the modulus of subgrade
reaction, and since we are working with a cohesionless soil and no interfering ground water, we use the
following equation for Kvi, modulus of subgrade reaction for a one ft. square bearing plate -
4 B
Kvi = --------------Kv We also need to calculate Kv before we can use this equation.
[ B + 1]
Kv = q / In this case, q = 60 Kips, and = 0.10 ft. We want Kv in psi / inch.

The plate area is 1.5 ft. sq., hence the load intensity, q, is -
60,000 pounds / 18 in. x 18 in. or 185 psi / inch. Hence, Kv = 1850 psi / in.
Now we are able to calculate Kvi for a one ft. square bearing plate in cohesionless coarse drained
soil as follows -
4 (1.5 ft.)
Kvi = ---------------------Kv This equation is used for a square plate and dimension B in
[1.5 ft. + 1] feet only. For this example, B = 1.5 ft.
Kvi, the modulus of subgrade reaction = 2664 psi / in. for a one ft. square plate.
What does this modulus of subgrade reaction tell us about the soil subsidence which we are reviewing?
Immediately below is an excerpt from the Portland Cement Associations publication Concrete Floors on
Ground, 2008, pub. no. EB075.04, available for purchase from the PCA website [www.cement.org] -
There is no reliable correlation between the three measures of soil properties-modulus of subgrade reaction,
soil bearing capacity, and soil compressibility-because they are measurements of entirely different characteris-
tics of a soil. The k-value used for floor-slab design reflects the response of the subgrade under temporary
(elastic) conditions and small deflections, usually 0.05 inches or less. Soil compressibility and bearing capacity
values (normally used to predict and limit differential settlements between footings or parts of a foundation)
reflect total permanent (inelastic) subgrade deformations that may be 20 to 40 (or more) times greater than
the small deflections on which k-values are based. Substantial pavement research has shown that elastic de-
flections and stresses of the slab can be predicted reasonably well when using k-value to represent the sub-
grade response. Consequently, the control of slab stresses based on the subgrade k-value is a valid design
procedure.
The drawing above is from the website www.pavementinteractive.org, and represents the modulus of sub-
grade reaction, shown in this drawing as k, acting as a series of springs under a concrete [PCC] slab.
*******************************************
Excerpt from FHWA publication - Geotechnical Aspects of Pavements Reference Manual,

Chapter 5.0 - Geotechnical Inputs For Pavement Design
NAVFAC DM 7.01 Table 3, p. 224 -
NAVFAC DM 7.01 Figure 8, p. 225 -
NAVFAC DM 7.01 Figure 10, p. 228 -

Verticle Sand Drains and Settlement Time Rate
NAVFAC DM 7.01 Figure 11, p. 229 - NOMOGRAPH

For Consolidation with Vertical Drainage
NAVFAC DM 7.01 Figure 12, p. 230 - Effect of Drainage Conditions

on Time Rate of Consolidation
The charts and figures above [following Example Four] will be used on test questions.
F. SUMMARY OF COURSE - PART ONE
We have demonstrated the use of soil test parameters to determine predicted settlement or consolidation of
soil material under different loading conditions. We have reviewed different types of field tests and testing
procedures used to determine and analyze the soil characteristics associated with settlement. For Part One,
we have essentially ignored groundwater as an influence in settlement calculations. In Part Two, we will
examine the influence of groundwater in greater detail as it involves geotechnical parameters and issues. We
will also examine various geotechnical issues associated with underground piping systems and installations.
For horizontal construction projects, the issue of settlement or subsidence during construction is difficult to
determine with an exact number, primarily due to the unknown factors of: a)- compaction equipment to be
used during construction; b)- type of construction equipment and weight of same involved in working the site;
and c)- surface flooding during construction, both intentional and that caused by rainfall.
Our review of subsidence indicates that some predictions can be made for a work site, but they may not be
entirely accurate. Again, we emphasize the importance of involving the geotechnical engineer at the earliest
stages of project planning and design, in order to properly address work site geotechnical & subsidence
issues.
Some final suggestions - If a project work areas soil has a nominal blow count [N] of 4 to 8 for the top 10 ft.
or so of soil depth, medium density granular material, [the geotechnical engineer may be able to provide a
more reliable figure], the following suggestions may be useful -
a)- Assume a figure such as an extra 6-inches or more of compacted fill over the work area. Add this
calculated volume as in-place fill material as either onsite fill, or as an offsite trucked-in fill pay
item. Payment should be based upon compacted in-place material.
b)- Add a disclaimer to the instructions to bidders, indicating that site subsidence is expected,
and that earthwork quantities include an additional [xxxx] C.Y. of extra fill material. Truck tickets would
normally be required to be taken by the owners field representative prior to such payment.
c)- If the client desires to make a more reliable determination, an onsite test can be arranged using a
vibratory compactor to roll a pre-determined test area (after stripping), and use an elevation survey
both before and after rolling to determine subsidence. Have this test supervised by the geotechnical
engineer, and ask the geotechnical engineer to predict site settlement. Include this report or at least
reference it in the bid documents, and include any volume calculations for subsidence which are fig-
ured into the estimated bid quantities.
d)- Include the settlement gage as a pay item so an accurate determination of subsidence may
be made immediately after the earthwork operations, thus eliminating the need for a claim for
lost dirt or some other description.
***********************************
END OF PART ONE -- JULY 14, 2016

Geotechnical Issues With Horizontal Construction - Part One: Pdhonline Course C-837 (4 PDH)

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Geotechnical Issues With Horizontal Construction - Part One: Pdhonline Course C-837 (4 PDH)

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

PDHonline Course C-837 (4 PDH)

PDH Online | PDH Center

An Approved Continuing Education Provider

Geotechnical Issues with Horizontal Construction - Part One

Outline of the Process

B. HORIZONTAL CONSTRUCTION - GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS

1. perform demolition of structures, remove buried objects;

7. stockpile usable onsite cut material;

Table 4 from DM 7.01, p. 17

Table 12 from DM 7.01, p.61

D. SOIL STRESS CALCULATION

NAVFAC DM 7.01 - FIGURE 2, p. 207

OTHER METHODS OF CALCULATING SOIL STRESS:

BOUSSINESQ PRESSURE CHART

BOUSSINESQ THEORY - EXAMPLE

Wheel load = 20 Kip Wheel contact area = 8 x 8 = 64 sq. in.

Soil stress loading at wheel surface = 20 Kip / 64 sq. in.

or, p = 0.3125 Kip / sq. in.

for boussinesq chart, b = 8 in. [wheel width]

Soil stress at depth below wheel = boussinesq factor x surface stress

Depth on boussinesq chart is based on wheel width b.

Soil pressure from weight of soil only:

assume 110 pcf soil density [pounds per cubic ft.]

pressure at one ft. depth - 110 pounds / 144 sq. in.

NOTE: There will be test questions on this type of stress

LINEAR STRESS DISTRIBUTION THEORY

E. SUBSIDENCE OR SETTLEMENT IN GENERAL

NAVFAC DM 7.01 p.14 - Estimated Compactness of Sand from SPR Test

FIELD PLATE LOAD TEST SETUP [Static weight]

FIELD PLATE LOAD TEST DIAGRAM [Static weight]

FIELD PLATE LOAD TEST EQUIPMENT SETUP

NAVFAC DM 7.01 p. 102 Figure 12 - Analysis of Plate Bearing Tests

9. Calculation of Subsidence: Unit Weight, Moisture / Density, Blow Counts

93 pounds = weight of soil in container (no water)

unit weight = [93 pounds of soil / 0.94167 cf] = 98.8 pcf

NAVFAC DM 7.01 Figure 3, p. 87 - Correlations

NAVFAC DM 7.01 p. 207 Figure 2 - Profile of Vertical Stresses

NAVFAC DM 7.01 p. 206 Figure 1 - Consolidation Settlement Analysis

NAVFAC DM 7.01 p. 227 Figure 9 - Time Rate of Consolidation for Vertical

H = 0.208 ft. settlement in the compressible stratum.

[0.009 x 5.0 ft.] [ 163 +1500 psf ]

H = 2.37 ft. settlement in the compressible stratum.

[0.90 x 15.0 ft.] [ 880 +1000 psf ]

NAVFAC DM 7.01 - TABLE 6 P. 243 METHODS OF REDUCING

NAVFAC DM 7.01 p. 102 Figure 12 - Analysis of Plate Bearing Tests

Kv = q / In this case, q = 60 Kips, and = 0.10 ft. We want Kv in psi / inch.

Excerpt from FHWA publication - Geotechnical Aspects of Pavements Reference Manual,

NAVFAC DM 7.01 Table 3, p. 224 -

NAVFAC DM 7.01 Figure 8, p. 225 -

NAVFAC DM 7.01 Figure 10, p. 228 -

NAVFAC DM 7.01 Figure 11, p. 229 - NOMOGRAPH

NAVFAC DM 7.01 Figure 12, p. 230 - Effect of Drainage Conditions

F. SUMMARY OF COURSE - PART ONE

END OF PART ONE -- JULY 14, 2016

S-ar putea să vă placă și