See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309557729

A History of the Development of Isotache

Models

Article April 2007

CITATIONS READS

0 39

1 author:

Evert Den Haan

Deltares
27 PUBLICATIONS 133 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Evert Den Haan on 31 October 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document
and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately.
A History of the Development of Isotache Models
E.J. den Haan, april 2007 (translated from Dutch, february 2011)

The isotache model is the fruit of insight in the creep behaviour of soils, accumulated slowly
over many decennia. The rle of the most important actors in this process will be described,
but in short the milestones were the log(t) creep law of Keverling Buisman (1934), the first
formulation in terms of rate of strain by Taylor & Merchant (1940), the "time lines" of Taylor
(1942), the first isotache model and the first use of the word "isotache" by uklje (1957), the
"time lines" and "equivalent time" by Bjerrum (1967), and the first computer programme for the
combination of consolidation and isotache behaviour by the school of Leroueil (1986). Den Haan
(1994) combined isotaches with natural strain and large deformations. Kutter & Sathialingam
(1992) generalised the isotache principle to multi -dimensional deformation, and Vermeer did the
same and developed for this the Soft Soil Creep model (circa 1995). Grondmechanica Delft (now
Deltares, unit Geo-Engineering) took the initiative in 1996 to make the isotache model
commercially available for settlement calculation with MSettle (now D-Settlement). It may now
again be said that The Netherlands is leading the way forward in this field. De Rijk (1977, 1978)
already formulated what in effect is a complete isotache model, and the Dutch could therefore
have taken the lead much earlier.

The following subjects will be treated:

- The Founders
- Settlement-asymptote models
- Rheological models
- Time line models
- Isotache models.

The Founders
Keverling Buisman (1936)
The logarithmic creep law is due to prof. A.S. Keverling Buisman, the founder of the Dutch
geotechnical institute Laboratorium voor Grondmechanica1. In his contribution to the first
international soil mechanics conference at Harvard in Cambridge Massachusetts he wrote

zt p s log10 t

We often think that the p refers to 'primary' and the s to 'secondary'. Buisman was indeed
familiar with these terms - in his introduction he refers to recent American work on the
"secondary time effect", and both are also to be found in a paper by Gray in the same
proceedings. In 1936 the creep phenomenon was therefore already well established. Buisman
however used the ..p for the "direct compression effect" of the load (load was signified by p at
that time) and the s signifies the "secular effect" (from saeculum, meaning something like the
lifespan of a human). Buisman's terminology fits seamlessly with the distinction between
elastic and visco-plastic deformations as assumed in isotache models.

The terms primary and secondary have sown enormous confusion. Logically they refer to
consecutive phases in compression. In the primary phase only consolidation would take place,
and in the secondary phase only creep. An impossible distinction! At which magical time
does the transition occur? At 95% consolidation? 99%? If it is at 100%, creep will never
occur. The trouble is that consecutive phenomena are being identified with constitutive
behaviour. This is the essential difference with isotache models, where the ..p and ..s
components are separate constitutive effects. The primary/secondary models are often termed

1
founded in 1934, renamed to Grondmechanica Delft in 1986, again to GeoDelft in 1999, and
integrated into Deltares in 2008).

-1-
End of Primary models because of the hypothesis that the settlement at the end of the primary
phase is independent of the thickness of the consolidation layer. The controversy between
Leroueil as proponent of the elastic - viscoplastic model and Mesri of the End of Primary
model is described further on.

Buisman took the parameters p en s to be linearly proportional to the load p. Koppejan

(1948) changed that to achieve accordance with Terzaghi's logarithmic compression law by
letting the parameters depend on log(v)

1 1
ln( v / v 0 ) ln( v / v 0 ) log t
Cp Cs

A further inheritance from Buisman is his superposition method to derive the asymptote of the
settlement - log(t) curve during multi-stage loading, showing how to account for the
contributions of previous, lower loads to the present curve under load p. Such a superposition
principle is essential because of the widespread use of multi-stage oedometer tests. Field
loading too is usually applied in stages. Buisman's superposition principle, of which he wrote
".. if further a superposition that takes into account the different timescale might prove to be
justified.." was accepted at face value until De Rijk (1977, 1978) showed it to be false.

It is necessary to point out Buisman's use of time-shift in his book "Grondmechanica" (1940)
(fig. 71). He writes that it can sometimes be useful to find that time zero that renders the
settlement diagram linear. He uses

zt p s log10 (t tc )

The isotache model has clarified that this timeshift tc corrects the difference between the
"intrinsic creep time" of the soil = (t - tc) and the chosen "clock time" t. Buisman was
already close to formulating isotaches.

Gray (1936). Gray describes the "secondary time effect" and indicates that it has already been
observed and described many times both in the laboratory and in the field. He states that it
occurs in all types of soil but is strongest in soil containing organic matter. "Highly organic
soil" was thought to always produce steepening z-log(t) curves. This however is now a dated
insight.

Gray processes creep deformation in a simple manner. After 90% consolidation the creep
deformation associated with the creep tail is added to the theoretical consolidation
deformation. That this violates the mass balance in the consolidation equation is accepted
(possibly: not realised). Note too how the use of the distinction between the "primary" and
"secondary" phases already appears to lead to a constitutive understanding of these terms.

Taylor & Merchant (1940). This is probably the first paper to mathematically combine creep
with consolidation:
de e e dp
.
dt t p dt
with e = voids ratio, and p = vertical effective stress, and this is equated to the net rate of
discharge using Darcy's law. The first term on the right hand side is the creep; the second the
direct contribution. The creep term is given by:
e
(cd )
t
with cd being the distance as shown in Figure 5 of the paper. This distance first increases and
then gradually decreases as the consolidation proceeds.

-2-
Figure 5 from Taylor & Merchant (1940)

The line og is the direct deformation; the line ob the maximum deformation including creep.
In a later discussion of this model, Taylor remarks that the creep in this model is taken
together with the direct deformation which probably induces too high gradients and therefore
rate of consolidation. The model is a theoretical exercise in the first place, but is memorable
because of the early coupling of creep, direct deformation and pore water outflow.

They strengthen the confusion around the terms "primary" and "secondary" by using them in
both the constitutive and the sequential sense.

Taylor (1942). In this work, the 1940 model is termed Theory A, and a new Theory B is
presented. (not to be confused with the Hypothesis A versus Hypothesis B theories).Taylor
points out that although secondary compression is the most obvious difference of real soil
behaviour with the Terzaghi theory, (and Theory A had investigated this difference), the
differences in the primary period are just as important though much less evident. Theory B
focusses on these differences in the primary period. All secondary compression after the
primary period is neglected, but secondary compression in a previous loading step does exert
influence in the next increment.

Figure 40 from Taylor (1942)

Figure 40 of the paper shows time lines, possibly for the first time in the literature (Buisman
could have plotted his settlement asymptotes as time lines, but never did. They would have
diverged because of the superposition principle he introduced; those of Taylor are parallel).
Theory B especially considers the resistance against deformation, which is assumed to depend

-3-
on the rate of deformation. States above the Primary Line are possible and the extra stress pv
(at given voids ratio e) is the "plastic structural resistance" which arises from the "film phase",
that is the bound water between clay platelets. After the primary phase this resistance has
vanished and the remaining stress consists of contributions from the "basic compression
curve" and the "bond resistance" pb. The relative magnitude of these stresses depends on the
duration of loading, with pb increasing with longer duration of loading (giving the time lines).
Theory B did not receive any follow-up, but is important because of the time lines and the
insights with regard to plastic resistance.

uklje (1957) criticised Taylor's work: Theory A does not use the logarithmic creep law, and
the stress components in Theory B have no clear physical meaning. Both theories are unsuited
for application to thick layers. uklje starts from the logarithmic creep law, determines from
that the rate of strain and puts that equal to the rate of pore water outflow. By assuming a
parabolic excess pore pressure distribution (isochrone) for simplicity, the value at the bottom
uo is representative for the whole sample or layer. Relations are given between stress, strain
and rate of strain as in Figure 3 (lower left) in the paper.

Figure 3 from uklje (1957)

Lines of equal rate of strain are called isotaches, possibly here for the first time (in soil
mechanics at least - in hydraulics and meteorology the term was already in use). The stress-
strain path is extrapolated to larger layer thicknesses by an approximate method, and the
result can be seen upper right in Figure 3 of the paper. There n is the ratio of the layer
thickness relative to the thickness of the sample. Thicker layers have lower lying stress -
strain paths. There is a clear effect of creep in a previous step: it reduces the initial settlement
in the new step. This behaviour is retained in modern isotache models. uklje finds that "In
the range of pre-stressing the isotaches of a pre-consolidated soil are less inclined than the

-4-
isotaches corresponding to the first loading." This is not further elaborated, and in later
research it is only sporadically treated (exceptions being Kabbaj et al., 1986, Imai, 1989,
Svan et al., 1991, Den Haan, 1996, 2000). It is an important aspect that still requires
solution. The model is too approximate and involved for use in practice. It was only a
stepping stone on the way to the modern isotache models, albeit an important one.

Gibson, England & Hussey (1967). Herein the consolidation equation (that is, the
combination of outflow of pore water and compression of the soil skeleton) is rigorously
posed and solved. Terzaghi's consolidation equation is improved on by removing the
limitation of small strains, and by allowing variable compressibility and permeability of the
grain skeleton. Also, the effect of the self weight of the consolidating layer is accounted for,
which e.g. in depots of dredged slib is the driving force of consolidation. The term "finite
strain" is used to describe the strains as being finite, instead of infinitesimally small as with
Terzaghi. This is important because the length of the flow path gradually shortens as
compression proceeds, thereby accelerating the consolidation process. Especially in soft soil
this effect is important. Variable compressibility and permeability are the rule rather than the
exception in soil and are therefore also important. The equation however does not account for
creep. Contrary to what often is said, the equation does not include the natural strain
description. The relation between stress and voids ratio, d/de, is left open in the general
equation, but because the derivative is to the present value of the voids ratio, natural strain
does yield the most simple and elegant form of the equation. For completeness, without
further explanation, the full equation is given here.

d k (e) e k (e) d e e
s 1 0
de 1 e z z (1 e) de z t
f f

Any incremental numerical solution to the consolidation equation should be based on this
equation. Small strain theory should not be applied. In the large strain theory the permeability
k and the compressibility d/de can easily be taken as variables. As a consequence however
cv is no longer a useful material parameter.

Znidarcic & Schiffman (1982) show that the original consolidation equation of Terzaghi was
written in terms of finite strain. Gray (1936) was also still using the accurate form. Terzaghi
wrote

k r 2u u

a z 2 t

where z denoted the reduced material coordinate. The solid material is condensed into a
volume without pore space, and z is the coordinate of a material point in that volume. This
simply removes the problem posed by the moving boundary: "Es bietet den Vorteil, da sich
die zur Lsung der partiellen Differentialgleichungen erforderlichen Grenzbedingungen
einfach gestalten..". The original location of the material point is given (by Gibson) by a.
Then dz/da = 1/(1+eo). kr applies to the reduced material; kr=k/(1+e) where k is the
permeability as we know it. The a in the Terzaghi equation is the compressibility; a = -de/d.
The Gibson equation for large strain can be rewritten to Terzaghi's form if the self-weight
term (first term in Gibson's equation) is neglected, and this shows that indeed Terzaghi used
finite strain. In later work with Frhlich the equation was adapted and took on the small strain
form we are now familiar with. A simplification but not an improvement. Peck suspects that
the adaptation is due to Frhlich.

Leonards (in the years around 1960) published much work on the compressibility of clay,
especially with regard to time effects, with many experimental results aimed at revealing the

-5-
influence of the duration of a load increment on the behaviour in a following increment, the
magnitude of a load increment, the behaviour during sedimentation and the influence of the
higher rate of loading in standard laboratory testing relative to sedimentation rates in situ.
Chemical effects of various pore fluids, e.g. CCl4 rather than water, and effects of temperature
were studied. An important discovery was the development of a "quasi-preconsolidation
pressure pcq" in a freshly sedimented "residual clay" (i.e. weathered rock) after a period of
creep, see Figure 9 and Figure 10 of Leonards & Altschaeffl (1964) (Figure 10 is an
enlargement from Figure 9). The preconsolidation pressure is larger than would follow simply
from creep alone and points to a change of structure. Past the preconsolidation pressure the
material is more compressible than it would have been without the creep period: the clay has
developed a sensitive structure. We now know this as "structured clay".

-6-
Figure 9 and Figure 10 from Leonards & Altschaeffl (1964)

In Leonards & Girault (1961) various curve forms of the z- log(t) relationship are
distinguished: Types I, II and III. See Figure 1 of the paper. Type I is the well-known
"Terzaghi + secondary tail" type curve, Type III steepens throughout, and Type II starts as
Type I but eventually switches to Type III steepening. The authors are not successful in
identifying the causes of the differences between the various types. They observe that Type
III occurs after small load increments at large stress, and Type II after small load increments
at low stress. Type I appears to correspond to large load increments. These phenomena can be
simply explained by isotache models, in which they are brought back to the effects of time
shift (Type I: positive time shift, Type III: negative time shift, Type II: negative time shift
following quick consolidation).

Figure 1 from Leonards & Girault (1961)

Bjerrum (1967). Was a Dane, obtained his PhD in Switzerland, became the first director of
the Norwegian Geotechnical Institute NGI. He had the gift of defining concepts by bringing
together and clarifying existing knowledge. His contributions to soil mechanics remain
important. He studied the plastic and lean Drammen clay, the effects of leaching and

-7-
weathering, the formation of "quick clay" (norwegian: kvikkleire), the development of
structure by the formation of chemical bonds (by point welding at grain contacts, by
deposition of cementing material, and by exchange of cations). He identified the confusion
surrounding the terms "primary" and "secondary" and defined instead the terms "instant
compression" and "delayed compression", which in fact are synonymous with Buisman's
direct resp. secular compression (Figure 15 of the paper). He does not mention Buisman
however.

Figure 15 from Bjerrum (1967)

Figure 14 of the paper is a schematic depiction of the time lines concept which is reminiscent
of Taylor (1942). Now however there is no complicated separation of the stress into various
components, but a lucid description of how time influences the development of stress and
strain. During creep successive time lines are crossed at equal stress. A subsequent increase of
stress initially encounters stiff response, up to the "instant" line. The Type I and Type III
curves of Leonards are explained. (Type III occurs after a small load increment because the
"instant line" is not reached but a time line on which time is large. The time since the load
increase will be much smaller and this distorts the z-log(t) curve.) The relationship between
time after loading and time on the time lines remains somewhat unclear, but Bjerrum
evidently already understood the isotache concept as he writes (p. 94 of the paper): "..to any
given value of the overburden pressure and void ratio there corresponds an equivalent time of
sustained loading and a certain rate of delayed consolidation, independent of the way in which
the clay has reached these values." The term "equivalent time" and its correspondence to "rate
of delayed consolidation" is the key here. In the a-b-c isotache model that equivalent time is
related uniquely to the rate of (secular) deformation.

-8-
Figure 14 from Bjerrum (1967)

In the Netherlands, the Cc,C parameters are sometimes attributed to Bjerrum. This is
incorrect: Cc probably pre-dates Bjerrum by many years. Neither are Cc,C rightly called the
Anglo-Saxon compressibility parameters. Cwas probably first used by Schiffman and Ladd
in 1961. The symbols RR and CR, also in use in the Netherlands, appear to originate from
Ladd.
In the Dutch standard on compression testing and in MSettle (now D-Settlement), Bjerrum's
name was first connected to a time - lines interpretation, using the Cc,C parameters. It is now
more correctly connected to an isotache model using either the Cc,C or RR, CR and C
parameters. These are small strain parameters however, while Figure 14 of the paper shows
that the large strain concept was also understood by Bjerrum.

Settlement - asymptote models

Older models such as those of Koppejan and the Dutch NEN standard - Cc,C method
describe the time -settlement asymptote for a given load, and then process the development of
consolidation in an approximate manner. Koppejan used Buisman's equation and only
changed how the settlement asymptotes depend on stress:

1 1
ln( v / v o ) ln( v / v o )log t
Cp Cs

This is an elegant combination of Terzaghi's logarithmic compression law (strain proportional

to logarithm of the effective stress) with Buisman's creep law. The equation gives the z -
log(t) asymptote for a given stress v, and nothing else!. For phased load increase Buisman's
superposition principle is used in reverse order to obtain the asymptotes for the second and
following phases. The direct ("primary") part of the compression can be taken to develop
gradually, e.g. by using Terzaghi's consolidation equation. There are many ways to do this.
The most simple is to use an average cv for all layers together, and to assume each phase goes
through its own independent Terzaghi consolidation process. It is also possible to equate the
direct compression to the pore water outflow, and to solve the consolidation equation,
optionally using the finite strain formulation and variable permeability.

Unloading is described in Koppejan's model by asymptotes in reversed direction, for which

the parameters Ap and As are used. These are subtracted from the loading asymptotes. The
direct deformation is also negative, i.e. swelling occurs. Eventually however the downwards

-9-
deformation takes the upperhand again. This behaviour is qualitatively correct because, see
Figure 72 of Buisman (1940), after unloading there is indeed a period of swelling, followed
by renewed creep along a clearly different, lower asymptote than that associated with a virgin
loading of the magnitude of the reduced load. In this respect Koppejan out-performs present
day isotache models, which do not yet deal with unloading correctly.

Figure 72 from Keverling Buisman (1940)

The divergence of the settlement asymptotes and the timelines in (Buisman and) Koppejan
agrees with the intuition that higher stress should produce more creep. Dutch engineers have
always accepted this expression of the influence of stress on creep as reasonable, but
nevertheless De Rijk (1977, 1978) proved it to be wrong.

In Figure 1 of De Rijk (1978) asymptotes based on Buisman's superposition principle are

drawn as well as the asymptotes which are obtained by assuming that the time on the
asymptote is the same as the time after starting the new step: the memory of the soil for the
effects of previous loads is eradicated. So l2 and l3 are Buisman's asymptotes for the second
and third load steps, and l2 and l3 are obtained by horizontal translation of the deformations
in the 2nd resp. 3rd step, over the distance tb2 resp. tb3, the time of loading of the 2nd and 3rd
steps taken from the beginning of the test. These new asymptotes are less steep, and are
parallel, while Buisman's asymptotes become steeper with each new loading step. The test is
carried to 190 kPa, and the asymptotes l7 and l7 of that step are shown in Figure 3 of De Rijk
(1978). This step was maintained during 4 weeks instead of 1 week as in the preceding steps,
and it transpires that extrapolation of l7 (l72 in terms of total test time: the asymptote is
displaced 6 weeks to the right) exactly tags on to the available measurements, while l7 (l71)
fails completely to join up with the available measurements, and produces much too much
settlement.

The eradication of the soils memory for the effect of past loading is due to the large increase
of load and the short duration of the previous load. This will be explained later on with the
isotache concept. The slope of the parallel asymptotes is reasonably constant, and can be
designated by C. This agrees well with what is often found, namely that Cis constant. At
least in the normally consolidated range.

- 10 -
Figures 1 and 2 from De Rijk (1978)

In the over-consolidated range (OCR>1) Cmay appear to be smaller. The NEN - Cc,C time-
lines method accounted for this by defining C. This gave a jump in the slope of the
asymptotes across the pre-consolidation stress. The method is not suited to phased loading. Of
course it is possible to apply De Rijk's graphical construction in reverse order, but this will
only work well with large load increments. With small load increments or after long duration
of the previous step, the new asymptote will initially lie higher than the already incurred

- 11 -
settlements, and the horizontal translation of deformations would be nonsense. Such
inconsistencies are due to formulating the settlement asymptotes in terms of time. The
isotache concept has solved this problem, at the same time retaining the observation that C is
constant.

Rheological models
Geuze & Tan (1953). Geuze & Tan, at the time researchers of L.G.M., were among the first to
apply rheological models to soil. They showed that some then existing models could be
represented as rheological models, and themselves present a model with a Kelvin element
(dashpot parallel with spring) in series with a spring. Such a model is close to present day
isotache models, because it defines a relationship between stress, rate of stress change, strain and
rate of strain. The creep tends to a limit value.

Gibson & Lo (1961) have a similar model with Hookean springs and Newtonian dashpot, and
acknowledge it is due to Tan. Later rheological models became progressively more complex,
with more and more elements being introduced, often with non-linear properties. The parameters
used are usually not independent of the magnitude of the load increment and the duration of the
previous increment. Most isotache models can conceptually be represented as rheological model,
e.g. the newest developments in isotache modelling by Di Benedetto and Tatsuoka who revert to
the Geuze & Tan set-up, but there is little gain to be made by this due to the highly non-linear
and complex properties of the elements.

Akaishi et al. (1992) use the rheological model of (their) Figure 2.3 to study the behaviour after
unloading. The model is combined with pore water outflow.

Figure 2.3 from Akaishi et al. (1992)

Results of this are shown in (their) Figure 5.2. Observe that no swelling appears after unloading.
Such swelling however is in principle possible, through the spring e.

- 12 -
Figure 5.2 from Akaishi et al. (19920

Time line models

An older category of models makes use of Bjerrum's time lines concept, and translates that
into an incremental constitutive formulation which can be combined with the pore water
outflow. These are the models of Garlanger (1972), Magnan et al. (1979) (Conmult), and
Mesri (1977) (Illicon).

Garlanger developed the following equation

e / eo ( pc / p ) a ( p f / pc ) b ((ti t ) / ti ) c

or

log(e / eo ) a log( p c / p) b log( p f / p c ) c log((t i t ) / t i )

- 13 -
where ti is the time associated with Bjerrum's instant line. The strain measure, -log(e/e0) is due
to Bent Hansen (1968), and is already close to the natural strain, -ln(v/v0). It linearises the e-p
relationship better than the common semi-logarithm. For the direct strains two branches are
used, described by a and b.

The similarity with the constitutive equation of the Deltares isotache model

ln(v / vo ) a ln( v / vo
) b ln( v / vo
) c ln( / o )

inspired the choice of symbols, a-b-c. However, the direct strain with Garlanger occurs in the
first two terms, and the secular strain in the third, while in the isotache model, the direct strain
only occurs in the first term, and the secular strain is given by the last two terms together. The
time ti with Garlanger does not have a fixed value but is used as soil parameter or fit
parameter. Mathematically this is not consistent. Isotache models solve this problem by using
not time but rate of strain as the process variable. The time is in fact the equivalent time
which Bjerrum so intuitively coupled to rate of strain.
Garlanger's model was at the time a large step forward, but it found little or no application in
practice. It has been made redundant by the appearance of the isotache models.

Magnan et al. (1979). Developed the time line model Conmult and implemented it in
accessible software. The model is still used (in adapted form) by the Swedish S.G.I., as part of
the program Embankco. See Figure 5.28 from the book by Leroueil, Tavenas and Magnan.
The model is in turn inspired by Bjerrum's time line concept. The instant time is now chosen
as 1 day. The pre-consolidation pressure p separates two bi-linear branches of direct strain.
It is not clear whether p is adapted (increased) at the beginning of a new loading phase to
account for creep strain, "ageing", in the previous phase. It is also not clear whether Cs is used
during unloading instead of Cc. The program uses variable permeability and the
compressibility of the pore water can be reduced to account for incomplete saturation.

Figure 5.28 from the book by Leroueil, Tavenas en Magnan (1990)

- 14 -
The End of Primary controversy
In the 1980's a controversy raged concerning the application of the End of Primary e - logv
laboratory curve to field circumstances. If secondary settlement does indeed occur only after
the consolidation phase is practically finished, see Figure 22 from Jamiolkowski, Ladd,
Germaine & Lancelotta (1985), the laboratory curve will simply be displaced to larger times
due to the quadratic layer thickness effect. Creep will not occur until the excess pore pressures
have essentially dissipated. This is called Hypothesis A, and is clearly based on the thinking
that primary and secondary compression as distinct and sequential processes, can be treated as
distinctly different constitutive processes, namely direct strain and creep.

Figure 22 from Jamiolkowski, Ladd, Germaine & Lancelotta (1985)

This view is shared by Ladd, Mesri and Leonards. The E.o.P. curve is unique in this view,
and surprisingly, this is explained by stating that the same physical mechanisms cause both
the creep in the secondary phase and the volume change in the primary phase. These
mechanisms are displacement, sliding and re-orientation of clay particles, changes in the
thickness of the absorbed layer of ions around clay particles ("double layer"), and distortion of
the layer of absorbed water around the clay particles. There is a certain analogy with Taylor's
Theory A, where a separation between direct strain and creep strain is also assumed.
Hypothesis B states that creep already starts in the primary phase, and then the curve of a
thick sample will eventually join the settlement asymptote of thinner samples. Bjerrum's and
Garlanger's models are examples of the latter. The basic philosophy now has parallels with

- 15 -
Taylor's Theory B, as a "structural viscosity" is posed, e.g. by the layer of adsorbed water,
which would develop during the primary phase. Mesri and Choi (1985b), see Figure 23 from
the paper by Jamiolkowski et al., found that tests on samples of varying thickness (e.g. in
series connection of multiple thinner samples) have identical E.o.P. curves, and thought that
this proved Hypothesis A to be correct. Somewhat earlier Mesri and Choi (1985a) had
published the Illicon model which is based on Hypothesis A.

Figure 23 from Jamiolkowski, Ladd, Germaine & Lancelotta (1985)

Severe criticism of the mathematical formulation of this model came from Schiffman et al.
and from Tavenas. For one, it is not in terms of finite strain, although its authors claimed it
did, and also the conservation of mass was violated. Mesri's constitutive model and its
hydraulical formulation is unclear, and this remains so in later work: Mesri, Feng & Shahien
(1995). In the primary period some creep is assumed, and this produces rate effects such as
higher pre-consolidation pressure closer to the draining boundaries, but a unique E.o.P. curve
remains the basic assumption. With Illicon many projects have been post-dicted, and beautiful
fits were obtained. It nevertheless has few followers. It is available on the Internet. It also
allows for application of vertical drains to accelerate consolidation.

Leroueil (1995) tries to explain the differences between Illicon and the isotache approach.
The E.o.P. laboratory curve has to be corrected for temperature differences and rate
differences with the field condition, and these differences are partly compensating, see Figure
3 and 4 from the paper. In not too soft clays and with application of drainage-accelerating
methods the E.o.P. approach is then reasonably reliable. In softer clay however
(Cc/(1+eo)>0.25, or b>0.11) it is wise to account for the viscous effects.

- 16 -
Figure 3 and 4 from (Leroueil 1995)

- 17 -
Isotache models
The term isotache model refers to a constitutive relationship between v , and , sometimes
written as

R ( v , , ) 0

The term as such is slowly coming into common use, but many authors of such models did
not actually use the term. Some authors apply the relationship to the creep strains, not the total
strains, and write

R( v , s , s ) 0

in addition defining a relationship for direct strains, usually

R ( v , d ) 0

and add both rates

d s

This variant with distinction in direct strain and creep isotaches is mathematically simpler and
is being used more and more. In all cases these equations are combined with hydraulical
outflow and the resulting consolidation equation is solved incrementally, using appropriate
boundary and initial conditions. This yields strain, effective stress and pore pressure as
function of time and place. There is surprisingly little variation in the form of R in the many
isotache models. The differences regard use of the finite strain formulation and natural strain,
simulation of vertical drainage, of variable permeability, and the formulation of
overconsolidated behaviour. Due to the incremental formulation, phased loading can be
treated in a trivial manner. Unload behaviour is coped with in most models, without however
changing the isotache relationship. It is questionable whether this is correct..

The a-b-c isotache model was posed in terms of R( v , , s ) 0 and R( v , d ) 0 , with the
creep isotaches plotted against total strains (the total strains were depicted in terms of specific
volume v, the natural strain being given by -ln(v/vo) ). This has been criticised by more
mathematically schooled modelmakers who prefer a strict separation between direct and
secular strain, such as in MSettle (D-Settlement) and Plaxis Soft Soil Creep. However the
reference stress on the reference isotache at zero strain then becomes dependent on the values
of the initial stress and the slope a (or Cr) which seems an unnecessary and even erroneous
complication.

There are many isotache models available. In the following the historical path along the most
interesting publications will be followed.

Janbu (1969) looked at the "time resistance" R=dt/d, see Figure 4 from the paper. It is
important however to state that the resistance concept is due to Lundgren (1957), not Janbu.
Janbu has 3 zones, resp. primary consolidation, a transition zone and a secondary phase. In
this last phase

R = r(t-tr ).

- 18 -
This relationship returns in the a-b-c model and other isotache models, and also in the Plaxis
manual of the Soft Soil Creep model. r is in fact the inverse of the creep parameter, C or c,
and tr is the time shift, which originates from the (arbitrary) choice of the time zero. (t-tr) is in
the a-b-c model the intrinsic time and the creep rate follows simply from it s c /

Janbu did not pursue this relationship further. Only much later did his school carry on with it:
Svan, Christensen & Nordal (1991) (model Krykon). This relationship is the link between
the time lines and isotaches: the time t on a time line can better be regarded as meaning (t-tr)
or and with that the time line becomes an isotache!

Figure 4 from Janbu (1969)

De Rijk (1977, 1978) showed convincingly that Buisman's superposition principle (deducing
behaviour under a given load from a multi-stage test) is wrong, and gave the solution, which
in fact was the first isotache model. He too discovered Janbu's time shift, and he too
discovered the constancy of Cc/C (in his work: =(1/C)/c) with values of 18 - 25. It is
probably an injustice that (only) Mesri & Godlewski (1977) received the credits for this. C
was reasonably constant with De Rijk, but c varied rather much from step to step, and this
may have deterred him from drawing isotaches. Sadly the work of De Rijk did not receive any
follow-up or recognition, but in retrospect De Rijk was Right (De Rijk had gelijk).

- 19 -
Christie & Tonks published in 1985, but Tonks' graduation work (under prof. Christie) was
already finished in 1978!. Although they still draw time lines, it is done in a mathematically
rigorous manner, and there is no essential difference with an isotache approach.

Leroueil, Kabbaj, Tavenas & Bouchard (1985) published an isotache model, see Figure 16
from the paper.

Figure 16 from Leroueil, Kabbaj, Tavenas & Bouchard (1985)

The isotaches are in terms of total strains, and describe the complete compression curve
including the overconsolidated region. The curves are normalised by the pre-consolidation
pressure, which is therefore dependent on rate of strain. This dependency is well-known, see
Figure 17 from the paper, and leads to more or less equidistant isotaches if constant intervals
in the logarithm of the rate of strain are used.

- 20 -
Figure 17 from Leroueil, Kabbaj, Tavenas & Bouchard (1985)

In Kabbaj, Oka, Leroueil & Tavenas (1986) a numerical elaboration of the above model is
given, which can cope with a multi-layer system. Multi-linear isotaches can be defined. In
Kim & Leroueil (2001) a revised version of this model is given. It allows for phased loading,
constant rate of strain and relaxation. Figure 6 from the paper illustrates the model. Now, the
distinction between direct and secular components of strain ("elastic" resp. "viscoplastic") is
made more clearly. The isotaches are now bi-linear, with an (initial) pre-consolidation
pressure in the junction. Good agreement with laboratory and field data is claimed. Unloading
is not discussed.

- 21 -
Figure 6 from Kabbaj, Oka, Leroueil & Tavenas (1986)

Yin & Graham (1992) (see Figure 1 from the paper). This is rightly an isotache model but is
written in terms of time. "Equivalent time" is defined after Bjerrum as measure for the creep
time. The "instant compression" is elastic and relatively small. It may be compared to the
direct strain in the a-b-c isotache model. The "reference time line" applies to te=0 and defines
the elastic-plastic deformation in the absence of creep, in the same way as e.g. in the Camclay
model. The "time lines" with te0 define the creep. At constant stress the "time-dependent
plastic strain" is

- 22 -
 t t
tp ln o e in which is the creep parameter, V=1+eo, to a soil parameter, te
V to

equivalent time, that is the duration of the creep at constant stress. The creep rate is

1
tp . and so to determines the creep rate on the "reference time line" with te=0.
V to te
And te is the creep rate on the time lines with te0. Equivalent time <0 is possible, of course as
long as te>-to.

Figure 1 from Yin & Graham (1992)

The model is quite close to the a-b-c isotache model. Yin's to parameter is however not clearly
described and it is also unnecessary: the a-b-c model does not have it. The model is written in
terms of small strains. Yin defines V=1+e but in fact means V=1+eo. Then also /V = of
the Plaxis Soft Soil Creep model. They postulate a limit time line in Figure 1 with te=. This
is formalised in a recent publication, Yin, Zhu & Graham (2000). The logarithmic description
is replaced there by a hyperbolic one, in which the creep asymptotically approaches a final
value.

Imai (1989) performed series-connected oedometer tests on Yokohama Bay mud. This
provides a simple means of consolidating thick samples, at the same time keeping trace of the
pore pressure and voids ratio at various locations over the height. This allowed to draw
isotaches. He observed from these that creep also occurs in the primary phase. He combined
isotaches with a large strain formulation. He studied the effect of the duration of a previous
loading stage on the response in the new step, see Table II and Figure 6, 7 and 8 from the
paper. If loading occurs immediately after E.o.P., the average voids ratio is initially very
different for different layer thicknesses. The settlement in the new step exhibits the quadratic
layer thickness effect, and this looks like the Hypothesis A behaviour (Figure 6) of the E.o.P.
theory. But if creep is allowed under the previous load to obtain the same value of for all the

- 23 -
cases with varying layer thickness, the Hypothesis B behaviour (Figure 8) which is expected
from isotache models is obtained.

Figure 6, 7 and 8 from Imai (1989)

The model distinguishes reload isotaches (parabolae) below e<eyield from the virginal
isotaches (straight). He expresses isotaches in terms of total strain and strain rate.

- 24 -
References
Keverling Buisman A.S. (1936).
Results of long duration settlement tests.
Proc. 1st ICSMFE, Cambridge, Mass. No. F-7:103-106.

Gray, H. (1936).
Progress report on research on the consolidation of fine-grained soils.
Proc. 1st Int. Conf. Soil Mech. and Fdn Eng. Cambridge, Mass. No. D14:138-141.

Taylor, D.W. & Merchant, W. (1940).

A theory of clay consolidation accounting for secondary compression.
J. Math. & Phys., XIX, 3, July:167-185.

Taylor, D.W. (1942).

Research on consolidation of clays.
Mass. Inst. Techn. Publication from Dept. Civil & Sanitary Eng, Serial 82, August, 147p.
(only Figure 40)

uklje, L. (1957).
The analysis of the consolidation process by the isotaches method.
Proc. 4th Int. Conf. Soil Mech. and Fdn Eng. London, Vol. 1, 200-206.

Gibson, R.E., England, G.L. & Hussey, M.J.L. (1967).

The theory of one-dimensional consolidation of saturated clays. 1.
Finite non-linear consolidation of thin homogeneous layers.
Gotechnique 17:261-273.

Znidarcic, D. & Schiffman, R.L. (1982).

On Terzaghi's concept of consolidation.
Gotechnique, 32: 387-389.

Leonards, G.A. & Girault, P. (1961).

A study of the one-dimensional consolidation test.
Proc. 5th Int. Conf. Soil Mech. and Fdn Eng. Paris, 1, 213-218.

Leonards, G.A. & Altschaeffl, M. (1964).

Compressibility of clay.
Jnl. S.M.F. div. ASCE, sep: 133-155.

Leonards, G.A. & Ramiah, B.K. (1959).

Time effects in the consolidation of clays.
A.S.T.M. S.T.P. 254:116-130.

Bjerrum, L. (1967).
Engineering geology of Norwegian normally-consolidated marine clays as related
to settlements of buildings.
Gotechnique 17, 2:81-118.

Koppejan, A.W. (1948).

A formula combining the Terzaghi load compression relationship and the
Buisman secular time effect.
Proc. 2th Int. Conf. Soil Mech. and Fdn Eng. Rotterdam, 3, 32-37.

- 25 -
De Rijk, L. (1978).
The calculation of secondary settlement in one-dimensional compression.
Delft Progress Report 3:237-255.

Geuze, E.C.W.A. & Tan Tjong-Kie (1953).

The mechanical behaviour of clays.
2nd Int. Congress on Rheology, Oxford, p. 247.

Gibson, R.E. & Lo, K.Y. (1961).

A theory of consolidation for soils exhibiting secondary compression.
Report 41, Norwegian Geotechnical Institute.

Akaishi, M., Shirako, H., Takeda, t. & Ochiai, M. (1992).

Prediction of settlement after surcharge removal. Num. Models in Geomechanics.
Balkema. 2:987-996

Garlanger, J.E. (1972).

The consolidation of soils exhibiting creep under constant effective stress.
Gotechnique 22, 1:71-78.

Magnan, J.P., Baghery, S., Brucy, M. & Tavenas, F. (1979).

Etude numrique de la consolidation unidimensionelle en tenant compte des variations de la
permabilit et de la compressibilit du sol, du fluage et de la non-saturation.
Bull. Liaison Lab. Pont et Chausses, Paris, 103, 83-94.

Jamiolkowski, M., Ladd, C.C., Germaine, J.T. & Lancelotta, R. 1985.

New developments in field and laboratory testing of soils.
State of the Art Lecture, 11e ICSMFE, San Fransisco 1: 57-153
(only p. 57-58 + 85-89)

Mesri, G., Shahien, M. & Feng, T.W. (1995).

Compressibility parameters during primary consolidation. Proc. Int. Symp.
Compression and Consolidation of Clayey Soils.
Balkema. 2:1021-1037.

Leroueil, S. (1995).
Could it be that clays have no unique way of behaving during consolidation?.
Proc. Int. Symp. Compression and Consolidation of Clayey Soils.
Balkema. 2:1039-1048

Janbu, N. (1969).
The resistance concept applied to deformations of soils.
Proc 7th Int. Conf. Soil Mech. and Fdn Eng., Mexico 1, 191-196.

Lundgren, H. (1957)
Dimensional analysis in soil mechanics.
Acta Polytechnica scandinavica, 237, Civ. Eng. & Build.
Constr. Series 4/10, 73-107.

Christie, I.F. & Tonks, D.M. (1985).

Developments in the time lines theory of consolidation.
Proc. 11th Int. Conf. Soil Mech. Fdn. Eng., 2:423-426.

Leroueil, S., Kabbaj, M., Tavenas, F. & Bouchard, R. (1985).

Stress-strain-strain rate relation for the compressibility of sensitive natural clays.

- 26 -
Gotechnique 35, 2:159-180.

Kim, Y.T. & Leroueil, S. (2001)

Modeling the viscoplastic behaviour of clays during consolidaton: application
to Berthierville clay in both laboratory and field conditions.
Can. Geot. Jnl. 38:484-497.

Yin, J.H. & Graham, J.H. (1992).

Equivalent times and one-dimensional elastic visco-plastic modelling of
time-dependent behaviour of clays.
Can. Geot. Jnl. 31:42-52.

Yin, J.-H., Zhu, J.-G. & Graham, J. H. (2002).

"A new elastic viscoplastic model for time-dependent behaviour of normally and
overconsolidated clays: theory and verificiation".
Can. Geot. J. 39:157-173.

Imai, G. (1989).
A unified theory of one-dimensional consolidation with creep.
Proc. 12th ICSMFE, Rio de Janeiro, 1:57-60.

Den Haan, E.J. (1994).

A simple compression model for non-brittle soft clays and peat. Ph.D. thesis,
Delft University Press, 61-95.

Den Haan, E.J. and Sellmeijer, J.B. (2000).

"Calculation of soft ground settlement with an isotache model."
Soft Ground Technology, ASCE Geotech. Spec. Publ. nr. 112, pp. 94-104.

Mesri, G. & Choi, Y.K. (1979).

Excess pore water pressures during consolidation".
Proc 6th Asian Reg. Conf. SMFE, Singapore, 1:151-154),

Mesri , G. & Godlewski, P.M. (1977)

Time and Stress-compressibility interrelationship, Journal of Geotechnical Eng. Division,
ASCE, GT5: 417-430.

B.L. Kutter and N. Sathialingam, "Elastic-Viscoplastic Modeling of Rate-Dependent

Behavior of Clays," Geotechnique, 42, No. 3, pp. 427-441, 1992

- 27 -
Grondmechanica Delft - GeoDelft - Deltares publications on the
Isotache model
Den Haan, E.J. (1991).
Nieuwe theorie over het samendrukkingsgedrag van grond. Machtsrelatie tussen spanning en
soortelijk volume.
Land en Water, 31(1991)10, Okt., pp. 30-33

Den Haan, E.J. (1992).

Nieuw a-b-c vereenvoudigt berekening zetting.
Land en Water, 32(1992)3, maart, pp. 25-29

Den Haan, E.J. (1992).

The formulation of virgin compression of soils.
Gotechnique, 42(3), 465-483.

Den Haan, E.J. (1994).

Vertical compression of soils
Thesis, Technical University Delft, Delft University Press, 96pp.

Den Haan, E.J. (1994).

Stress-independent parameters for primary and secondary compression.
Proc. 13th Int. Conf. Soil Mech. and Fdn Eng. New Dehli, 1:65-70.

Den Haan, E.J. & Edil, T.B. (1994).

Secondary and tertiary compression of peat.
Proc. Int. Workshop Advances in Understanding and Modelling the Mechanical Behaviour of
Peat, Delft, june 1993. Balkema, Rotterdam, 49-60.

Edil, T.B. & Den Haan, E.J. (1994)

Settlement of peats and organic soils.
Proc. Spec. Conf. Settlement '94, New York, ASCE, 1994, Vol. 2, pp. 1543-1572

Den Haan, E.J. (1995).

Generalization of the stress, stain and time measures of soil compression.
Proc. IS-Hiroshima '95 "Compression and Consolidation of Clayey Soils"
Balkema, Rotterdam, Vol. 1, pp. 513-518.

Den Haan, E.J. (1996).

A compression model for non-brittle soft clays and peat.
Gotechnique, 46(1), 1-16.

Den Haan, E.J., Th, B.H.P.A.M. & Van, M.A. (2001)

De Ko-C.R.S. proef.
Geotechniek, nr 4, p. 55

E.J. den Haan (2001)

Evaluation of Creep Models for Soft Soils (under axially symmetric conditions)
DelftCluster/GeoDelft rapport 7010203/21, http://www.library.tudelft.nl/delftcluster/

E.J. den Haan (2001)

Interpretatie meetdata K0-C.R.S-apparaat
DelftCluster/GeoDelft rapport 7010203/22, http://www.library.tudelft.nl/delftcluster/

- 28 -
 H. den Adel, H.M. van Essen, E.J. den Haan en W.O. Molendijk (2002)
Uitvoering K0-CRSproeven t.b.v. zettingsonderzoek Betuwelijn Sliedrecht-Gorinchem
DelftCluster/GeoDelft rapport 710204/90. http://www.library.tudelft.nl/delftcluster/

E.J. den Haan (2002)

The influence of creep ageing on Ko,nc.
In: "Learned and Applied Soil Mechanics out of Delft", Lisse, Balkema, 2002, pp.63-68

Den Haan, E.J. & Kamao, S. (2003).

Obtaining isotache parameters from a C.R.S. Ko-oedometer.
Soils & Foundations. August.

E.J. den Haan (2003)

Het a,b,c-isotachenmodel: hoeksteen van een nieuwe aanpak van zettingsberekeningen
Geotechniek 2003, nummer 4 pagina 20

W.O. Molendijk, C.J. Dykstra (2003)

Restzettingen na oplevering: Het belang van een verbeterde voorspellingskracht. Casus
Betuweroute Sliedrecht-Gorinchem
Geotechniek 2003, nummer 4 pagina 28

H. den Adel, M.A. Van and V. Trompille (2003)

Validation Isotach model by means of "Schiphol 5th runway"
DelftCluster/GeoDelft rapport DC1-142-12, http://www.library.tudelft.nl/delftcluster/

H. den Adel, M.A. Van and V. Trompille (2003)

Validation Isotach model by means of "Barendrechtse weg"
DelftCluster/GeoDelft rapport DC1-142-11, http://www.library.tudelft.nl/delftcluster/

E.J. den Haan, H.M. van Essen M.A.T. Visschedijk, J. Maccabiani (2004)
Isotachenmodellen: Help! Hoe kom ik aan de parameters?
Geotechniek 2004, nummer 1 pagina 62

H. den Adel, V. Trompille, J.B. Sellmeijer en M.A. Van (2004)

Geforceerde drainage 5e Schipholbaan
Geotechniek 2004, nummer 2 pagina 58

J.B. Sellmeijer, M.A.T. Visschedijk en M.J.M. Weinberg (2004)

Rekenen met verticale drains
Geotechniek 2004, nummer 4 pagina 36

E.J. den Haan & G.A.M. Kruse (2007)

Characterisation and engineering properties of Dutch peat
Proc. char. and eng. properties of natural soils, Tan et al. (eds.), 3:2101 2133, Balkema.

E.J. den Haan (2008)

De intrinsieke tijd in het isotachenmodel. Geotechniek, jan. 12:1:34-38

- 29 -

View publication stats