LIMITATIONS OF CONVENTIONAL ANALYSIS OF CONSOLIDATION SETTLEMENT* iscussion by Robert W. Day,? Fellow, ASCE “The author presents an interesting paper on consolidation. He describes an example of San Francisco Bay mud settle ment at four different sections (A, B, C, and D) due to a fill surcharge (see Fig. 13). Using the CONSOL nonlinear stress- strain computer program, the author determined the settle~ ment versus time relationship for sections A, B, C, and D (see Fig. 14), ‘As indicated by the discusser in Fig, 14, the time versus primary consolidation curves are identical for seetions A. B. Cand D. This does not seem to be possible. Identical primary consolidation curves (Fig. 14) would imply that the upper 20 ff of Bay mud must first completely consolidate before the deeper Bay mud can even begin to consolidate In Fig. 13, the discusser has divided the cross section into four horizontal layers (layers I through 4). As layer I con- solidates, the other three layers have excess pore pressures that cause an upward flow of pore water toward the sand fill, resulting in settlement of layers 2, 3, and 4, Once pore water from layer 2 flows upward into the sand fill, then section B has a higher rate ofsetlement than section A” Likewise, once Pore water from layer 3 flows upward into the sand fill, then section C has a higher rate of settlement than section B. Thus, the reviewer believes that the relationship of settlement ver- sus time for sections A, B, C, and D should be as illustrated in Fig. 15, rather than as in Fig. 14 for Fig. 12(0)] spain ond it= 19 ps0 remem 00s Aes ° Ea uae TE onom Fimsois LAER?! FIG. 13. Author's Figure 11 with Comments by Discusser Time yrs) ot 1 0 1001000 Setienent =m eoneeem ae gh FIG. 14. Author's Figure 12(b) with Comments by Oiscusser September, 1993, Vol. 119, No, sway ‘Ciel Engr. Am. Geotech., S764 Pacific Center Blvd, Suite 112 Sin Diego, CA 9 “T. Miciaal Duncan (Paper ‘TIME (LOG SCALE) FIG. 15. Settlement versus Time for Sections A, Discussion by Wayne A. Ericson,’ Member, ASCE, and W. David Carrier IIL,* Fellow, ASCE The 1991 Terzaghi lecture, concerning consolidation a ysis, presents an opportunity to discuss the pragmatic appl ‘ation of desiccation as a method of preloading and internal drainage improvement. The author noted that postil settle- ‘ments (and differential settlements) measured on Bay Farm Island were greater in the drainage sloughs that incised the site and had never been desiccated. The discussers propose that this site, and many similar ones, could be significantiy improved by lowering the water table a minimum of 1.5 m prior to placement ofa sand fll. (In some cases, such as Bay Farm, this would require a ring dike around the site and [pumping to remove the water: with other sites, gravity can be used to drain off the water.) Industries such as phosphate mining, alumina processing, and maintenance dredging have been using fine tailings de- ‘watering for the past two decades in order {0 improve equip- ‘ment access for reclamation and to increase the storage vol- ume of upland disposal areas. Reduction of postill settlement has not been an important issue, as it was with Bay Farm Island, But the discussers have had the opportunity to de- ‘water and reclaim thousands of hectares of highly plastic clayey materials; and in most cases, the clay is simply too weak {© support a layer of sand fill. Consequently, large-scale desic- cation of the clay surface has been used to increase the shear strength. We have observed (and are now able to predict ‘numerically that desiccation has the added benefit of greatly reducing the postfll settlement. Hence, desiccation asa method of preloading a site has, for us, become a case of making Virtue of necessity Plastic clay wastes from the phosphate and alumina indus: tries and many dredging projects are generally deposited as low-solids-content slurries in upland ponds, thereby creating elevated, saturated clay deposits that gradually consolidate to asoft, semisolid, high-moisture-content clay, similar tothe Bay muds discussed in the paper. Once a disposal area is full, the surface water is drained through spillways or other outlet structures. The exposed clay around the perimeter of the pond is then drained using shallow, incrementally deepened ditches that flow to the outlet structures. ‘This process, referred to as “aggressive dewatering,” cre- ates a desiccated crust on the surface of the clay. This desi cated crust thickens with time, provided the surface water is controlled and drained, and the perimeter ditches deepened periodically (i.c., typically every 4 to 6 months). The desic- cated clay begins t0 form interconnected cracks that act like "Exes Vi Lakeland, FL 33807 “CEO, Brome & Carrier, Ine, P.O, Bor S467, Lakeland, FL res. Bromwell & Inc, PO. Box 5467, JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING JUNE 1005, 518an Internal macro drainage system for the near-surface clays. ‘These cracks intersect the perimeter ditches to form a drain- age network, Depending on the plasticity of the fine mate- Nials, the cracks widen and deepen as the water table is low- cred. Cracks in high-plasticity clays, such as phosphatic and alumina wastes and clayey dredged spoil materials, are often several centimeters wide and as much as 12 m deep. This cracking not only aids with surface drainage and increased ‘evaporation surfaces for the desiceating elay, it shortens the ‘drainage path for the underlying saturated clay Although the settlement prediction for an area having a desiceated clay surface is more difficult to quantify, the ad- vantage of desiccation as a preloading method is confirmed in Duncan et al. (1991), where Figs. Sa and Sb separate the settlement data for the Bay Farm site into areas with and without a surface crust. In the paper under discussion, the data for these two areas are combined in Fig. 3, showing a ‘wide variation in the measured settlement with time and "t= fective fill depth.” The average settlements for a 15.2-m (50- fi) thick bay mud deposit (alter 8 years) for the noncrusied areas and the crusted areas were reported by Duncan etal (1991) to be 1.6 and 1.2 m (5.1 and 3.8 ft), respectively. The lesser settlement for the crusted areas supports the use of “aggressive dewatering/desiccation”” as a preload method. Furthermore, the settlements would have been even less if the water table had been lowered within the site The discussers have also observed that the highly cracked surface of a desiccated clay acts to shorten the drainage path vis-a-vis long-term settlement rates due to additional surface fill. The bulk permeability ofthe desiccated clay with infilled cracks is higher than the underlying consolidating clay and, hence, it behaves like a sand lens to reduce the drainage path and the time for consolidation ‘As the author indicates, the selection of a representative value forthe coefficient of consolidation, taking into account all the soil variables and the different methods to determine «can be a dicey business, particularly if an owner has high expectations regarding the accuracy of settlement-rate pre- ‘ictions. The consideration of desiccated clay strata as drain- age layers should be evaluated, just as one would consider the presence of internal sand lenses when computing overall settlement rates. When planning a project involving soft, compressible materials that can be partially drained to form ‘crust, one should consider the length of time for crust de- velopment and creation of a higher permeability zone, versus the length of time for consolidation of a thicker, uncracked clay layet beneath the surface fill Discussion by D. Hossain,’ Member, ASCE ‘The author is to be congratulated for his selection of the subject for the 27th Terzaghi lecture. The diseusser wishes to (1) supplement the data in Table 4 on the ratio of the two values of coefficient of consolidation (obtained by the two well-known curve-fitting methods), designated as ¢/é., by those of three other clays; and (2) to present his experience fon the variation of the ¢,-value across the preconsolidation pressure p. ‘These three clays arc (1) a stiff fissured overconsolidated {overconsolidation ratio (OCR) > 4 based on p. determined bby Schmertmann’s (1953) method] glacial till from Glasgow, Scotland; (2) a soft to medium, normally consolidated to lightly overconsolidated (1.3 > OCR > 2.4) sensitive sabkha ~ Assoc, Prof of Engrg, Geol, Fac. of Earth Sei, King Abdul Aziz Unin PO. Box 1764 Jeddah 21881, Kingdom of Saudi Acadia 1514 JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING JUNE 1995 clay from Obhor, Saudi Arabia; and (3) a stiff overconsoli- dated (5 > OCR > 8) brown clay, occurring below the sabkha clay. The OCRs for these two clays are based on p, from Casagrande’s method (Casagrande and Fadum 1940). Some consolidation results of the Scottish till are reported by Hos- sain and McKinlay (1991), and those of the two Saudi clays by Hossain and Ali (1988), The ¢, values from the two methods, for 26 tests, each with four stress increments for the Scottish ill for effective stresses {at the end of load increment) in the range of $0400 kPa, are compared in Fig. 16. The specimens were of 7o-mm dic ameter (conventionai), 152-mm, and 254-mm diameters, and tested in hydraulic consolidation cells (Rowe and Barden 1966) ‘with usual diameter/height ratios and vertical drainage con- Gitions.Itis observed that the c, (Taylor) values are generally higher than the c, (Casagrande) values, leading 10 ¢/¢q eerie 4 Cros meted 1, mt er Cy (Cements mad 3, 8/9 FIG. 16. Comparison of Cooticlent of Consolidation trom Taylor nd Casagrande Metod for Sootish TH A if 19 he 5 g = a & = ae LEGEND ole. y Sabkne cloy 4 Stitt ctoy tk 97 ; x , i “5 Cyc, m?/ year FIG, 17. Comparison of Cooticient of Consolidation trom Taylor ‘and Casagrande Method for Two Saudl ClaysFIG. 18. Setiement versus Square Root Time Plots for Specimen Cyr and Cye,m*/ year Wo 200 300-400-800 600 Stress, KPa FIG. 18. Variations of Coeticent of Consolidation with Etfective Stree for SUM Clay from Saudl Arabia values mostly in the range of 0.7-3.8, with a mean and stan- dard deviation of 1.49 and 0.66, respectively. These are in line with the findings of the paper. Fig. 17 presents similar comparisons for the sabkha clay for effective stresses between S0 and 400 kPa and for the stiff brown clay for effective stresses in the range of 100-800 kPa (these stress ranges encompassing the respective p, values). The range, mean, and standard deviation of ce. for the sabkha are 0.70-2.34, 1.18, and 0.28, respectively. and for the stiff lay are 0.77-2.10, 1.33, and 0.33, respectively, These results suggest that the two methods are at closer agreement for these two clays than with the Scottish tll. ‘These results show relatively higher ¢/.,ratios for over consolidated clays, and this is supported by the relatively greater departure of points from the line of equality in Fig, 16 for higher values of c, (representing low stress levels and higher OCR during testing). The settlement versus root time curves of one specimen of the Scottish till in Fig. 18 show how deviations from nonlinearity in the intial parts (indi- cation of difference between ¢,,and c.) are reduced gradually with the increase of stresses. Further, the discusser's own experience suggests that the Gy/.« ratio depends appreciably ‘on the judgement exercised in drawing “the most reasonable” initial straight-line part ofthe settlement-root time plot. This is because ¢, depends on whether the straight line is drawn through the first two to three points or as an “average line” through more points, aiming at obtaining a ta value, corre- ng closely to the “most reasonable” 90% primary con- solidation settlement. This may. sometimes, need to neglect the first few points, For example, three initial points were sisregarded in drawing line 1a for curve 1 of Fig. 18, This practice is in line with the recommendations of BS’ 1377 ( Methods" 1975), Fig, 19 shows the ¢.- and c,, versus average stress plots for the Saudi stiff clay. Its observed that at stresses below p the cand c,- values are higher (two- to threefold) than those at stresses higher than p,, but they are not “one order of ‘magnitude higher” as noted in the paper. For the two other clays the changes were even smaller. It may, however, be noted that larger reduction inc, values with increasing stresses (out below p,) were reported by Hossain and MeKinlay (1991) for some large till specimens due to the reduction in the influence of fissures. It would be of interest to see the pattern of the change of measured c, values across p, for other un- fissured clays. Finally, the writer wishes to draw attention to some important Works of Rowe and others on the influence of fabric on ¢, published in Géotechnique during the 1960 and 1970s, APPENDIX. REFERENCES (Casagrande, A. and Fadum. R. E. (1940). “Notes on sol testing for “engncering purpores” Soi! Mech, Ser. No. Pub, Grad. School of Enprp, Harvard Uni. No. 288 Hossain: D.. and All, K.'M. (1988) “Shear stength and consolidation harscteritie of Obhor Sabha, Saush Arabia.” Quart. Engrs Geol London, England 21. 347~350 Hossin,D. and Mekinly, D”G. (1991), “The influence of faseres on he consolidation of & aca ill” Quaternary Engrg. Geol. Geo. Soe: Engrg. Geol. Spec Publ No. 7, A. Forster, MG. Cala Cripps, J. Lite. apd C. P. Moon, eds 13188 ‘Method of test for soils Tor civil engineering Parpos, 1377, Baits Standands Institution, London, England Rowe, P. W.. and Barden, L. (1960) A new consolidation cel" G Tecinigu, Landon. Engin, 1, 162-170 Sehnert. JH. (1953). "Etinating the iru constiation behavior ‘lay tom laboratory tes ents "Proc, ASCE, 79, Separate NO, 3 (1975). Bs Discussion by Curtis N. Jensen,® Member, ASCE It is with interest thatthe diseusser read the 27th Terzaghi lecture, relating to consolidation of Bay mud at Bay Farm Island (the project site is actually called Harbor Bay Isle) Harbor Bay Isle is approximately 900 acres of land re- Claimed from the edge of San Francisco Bay with hydraulic fill in 1967 and 1968, under the auspices of a reclamation ‘istrict. Firm A was the geotechnical engineer for the rec- lamation district at that time, The reclamation district stalled 73 settlement monuments (not 45 as noted by the author) throughout Harbor Bay Ise Firm B was retained by the owner of Harbor Bay Isle in 1974. At that time, the area zoned residential was being di- vided into smaller development areas called "villages. In 1976, a developer negotiated with the owner to buy the 67-acre Village Il. The developer retained firm A (not firm B) tomake a geotechnical engineering investigation of Village “Pac. jensen Van Lenden Awoe, IHOC Akatraz Ave, Berkely ‘703. JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING /JUNE 1005,518