Cve40001 Kho+lee+tan PVD Sem1 2015

Swinburne University of Technology
Faculty of Engineering, Computing and Science

ASSIGNMENT AND PROJECT COVER SHEET
CVE40001
Geotechnical Engineering
TU1
01/2015
Tutorial Group:
CHOO CHUNG SIUNG
PREFABRICATED VERTICAL DRAIN DESIGN
5 MAY 2015
Date Received:
Unit Code:
Semester / Year:
Lecturer Name:
Assignment Title:
Due Date:
Unit Title:
We declare that this is a group assignment and that no part of this submission has been copied from
any other student's work or from any other source except where due acknowledgment is made
explicitly in the text, nor has any part been written for us by another person.
Student
ID
Family
Name
Other Names
Sections Written
4322754
KHO
KEVIN KA YONG
4309561
LEE
SIMON YEW SENG EQUALLY DIVIDED
4327268
TAN
SZE NIAN
EQUALLY DIVIDED
EQUALLY DIVIDED
Marker's comments:
Total Mark:
Extension certification:
This assignment has been given an extension and is now due on _____________
Signature of convenor: _____________
Signature
Swinburne University of Technology (Sarawak Campus)

Assessment of Students Assignment
Subject Code / Name:
Assessment for:
Tutorial session:
CVE40001 Geotechnical Engineering (Sem 1, 2015)

PVD Assignment (10% of unit marks)
Mon 1:30 / Tue 3:30 / Thu 1:30
Name of Group:
Name(s) of Student(s):
KEVIN KHO KA YONG, SIMON LEE YEW SENG,

TAN SZE NIAN
TREPORT WRITING /
ePRESENTATION / LAYOUT
xt(2 marks)
Excellent
1.0 pt
V. Good
0.8 pt
Good
0.6 pt
Acceptable
0.4 pt
Poor
0.2 pt
V. Poor
0.1 pt
Total
Reporting format
(Intro, Body, Appendix, etc.)
Effective use of Tables & Figures

Total marks out of 2 for Report Writing Skills
TECHNICAL CONTENT
(7 marks)
Excellent
1.0 pt
V. Good
0.8 pt
Good
0.6 pt
Acceptable
0.4 pt
Poor
0.2 pt
V. Poor
0.1 pt
Total
Cross-sections of sub-surface
conditions
Characterisation of soil properties
Technical design of ground
improvement scheme
Bearing capacity considered
EXCEL spreadsheet computation
of ground improvement scheme
Appropriate charts and figures to
help explanation
Geotechnical instruments for
monitoring of ground improvement
Total marks out of 7 for Technical Content
USE OF ENGLISH
(1 mark)
Excellent
1.0 pt
V. Good
0.8 pt
Good
0.6 pt
Acceptable
0.4 pt
Poor
0.2 pt
V. Poor
0.1 pt
Grammar, spelling, ability in

getting points across
Total marks out of 1 for Use of English
Grand total marks out of 10
Grand total as 10% of unit mark
Overall comments, if any:
Total
CVE 40001 Geotechnical Engineering - PVD
Table of Contents
1
Introduction ....................................................................................................... 2
Objective ............................................................................................................ 2
Executive Summary ........................................................................................... 3
Cross-sectional view of sub-surface soil profile ................................................ 4
Plots and Graphs ............................................................................................... 6
Assumptions ..................................................................................................... 11
PVD Design ...................................................................................................... 12
Tabulation of Calculations .............................................................................. 16
10
Amount of PVD required .............................................................................. 19
11
Geotechnical Instrument ............................................................................... 20
12
Recommendations .......................................................................................... 24
13
Conclusion ...................................................................................................... 24
14
Appendix ........................................................................................................ 25
1 Introduction
Construction along riverbanks is common in Sarawak as it has a vast river network.

Typical riverine development includes construction of buildings, waterfronts, jetties
and bridges. Construction along riverbanks is usually very challenging because of the
presence of soft soil deposits, which are naturally weak and very compressible.
Sometimes these soft soil deposits could reach thickness in excess of 60m before a
firm later is found. If the consolidation process of the soft soils takes up too much
time and differential settlement is found to be potentially damaging to services such
as water pipes and high-tension electrical cables, then the viability of project will be
questioned.
A system of prefabricated vertical drain (PVD) with surcharge load to accelerate
consolidation by shortening the drainage path is one of the most popular methods of
soft ground improvement. It is also one of the most general methods used to increase
the shear strength of soft soil and control its post-construction settlement. The
predicted smear zone and effects of drain unsaturation are compared with laboratory
data obtained from large-scale radial consolidation tests. Since the permeability of
soils is very low, consolidation time to the achieved desired settlement or shear
strength might take too long. By using the pre-fabricated vertical drains technology
(PVD), the drainage path can be shortened from the thickness of the soil layer to the
radius of the drain influence zone, which means the acceleration of consolidation.
2 Objective
Our objectives is to provide the cross-sectional view of the sub-surface soil profile
and to provide a complete design calculation for the selection and design of PVD,
necessary surcharging height, amount of topping up of sand fill considering finished
platform levels, which is needed to achieve 90% consolidation of approximately
22,000m2 of the riverine land in 6 months. Bearing capacity of the ground is also
checked to determine the amount of the surcharge height that is needed. An Excel file
that asks for all necessary input values to design the PVD will be produced together
with this report. Not only that, the necessity of geotechnical instruments is to be
explained on how it is able to monitor ground improvement works.
3 Executive Summary
This report provides an analysis and evaluation of designing the preloading and prefabricated drains (PVD). It consists of the application of Meyerhof`s method to
calculate the bearing capacity of the clay layer. The formulas for finding surcharge
height, settlement with preload as well as the consolidation time,
and degree of
consolidation, U% are shown in the report. There are some graphs and charts that are
added in together with its explanation. Besides that, the amount of PVD required is
also been calculated and showed in this report. Different type of geotechnical
instruments and their necessity that is important in monitoring of the ground
improvement works are displayed in this report. The last part of this report will be
interpreting the result that obtained from the calculation as well as some
recommendations for the project.
4 Cross-sectional view of sub-surface soil profile
Figure 1. Cross-Sectional Soil Profile Between Borehole 1 and Borehole 2
Figure 2. Cross-Sectional Soil Profile Between Borehole 2 and Borehole 3
5 Plots and Graphs

Plots of Moisture Content Against Depth
Natural Moisture Content against

Depth
0.00
0.00
Natural Mositure Content (%)

20.00
40.00
60.00
80.00
100.00
2.00
4.00
Borehole 1
6.00
Borehole 2
Depth (m) 8.00
Borehole 3
10.00
12.00
14.00
16.00
Graph 1. Plots of Moisture Content against Depth

Plots of Cu Against Depth
Graph of Cu against Depth

0.00
0.00
Undrained Cohesion Strength, Cu (kN/m2)

5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
1.00
2.00
Depth (m)
3.00
Borehole 1
Borehole 2
4.00
Borehole 3
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
9.00
Graph 2. Plots of Cu against Depth

Plots of SPT N Against Depth
Graph of SPT 'N' against Depth

0.00
0.00
10.00
SPT 'N' value

20.00 30.00 40.00
50.00
60.00
5.00
Depth (m)
Borehole 1
10.00
Borehole 2
Borehole 3
15.00
20.00
25.00
Graph 3. Plots of SPT N against Depth

Computation of Consolidation Graph
To construct the graph, we had used the data from the lab test, which give us various
points at different depth. Below each graph are the steps on how Cc is calculated
before using that particular value for design of PVD.
Void ratio against Pressure (log

scale) for Borehole 1 UD2
2
1.9
1.8
1.7
Void Ratio, e 1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
10
100
Pressure (kPa)
1000
Graph 4. Graph of Consolidation for Borehole 1 UD2 soil sample.

Cc Calculation:
Obtain gradient to find Cc
Therefore, Cc for soil sample obtained from Borehole 1 UD_2 is :

(

1.6
1.5
1.4
Void Ratio, e 1.3
1.2
1.1
1
10
100
Pressure (kPa)
1000

Cc Calculation:
Therefore, CC for soil sample obtained from Borehole 1 UD_3 is :

(

2.2
2
1.8
Void Ratio, e 1.6
1.4
1.2
1
10
100
Pressure (kPa)
1000

Cc Calculation:

(
10

2.5
2.3
2.1
Void Ratio, e
1.9
1.7
1.5
1.3
1.1
10
100
Pressure (kPa)
1000

Cc Calculation:

(
6 Assumptions
Before proceeding to the design of PVD, there were few assumptions made and will
be listed below.
Meyerhofs method will be used to calculate the bearing capacity of soil
There will be no point load on the surface
Load will be acting on the surface
Fill Unit Weight is to be 19 kN/m3
Factor of Safety is to be greater than 2
Time available to consolidate will be 6 months
PVD used will be from Azko with Nylon web as core material and Geotextile
as filter material. This PVD has a size of 100mm x 6mm
There will be a smear factor of 0.8
Diameter of well is to be assumed as 0.1m
11
7 PVD Design
To help end readers understand the formulation and computation of the PVD design,
workings will be shown for the first clay layer of Borehole 1. The rest of the clay
layers will be tabulated and given appropriate explanation.
Step 1: Determine Bearing Capacity of soil
To determine the bearing capacity of the clay layer, we will be using Meyerhofs
method.
Meyerhofs Method
c = 13.6 kN/m2 (referring to lab report)

Nc = 5.14 for = 0
Sc = 1 + 0.2 Kp = 1 + 0.2 tan2 45 x = 1.2
as there is no point load

= 0 as the load is on the surface
Step 2: Determine surcharge height

Max surcharge height =
Allowable surcharge height =
(Adopt FOS = 2)
Therefore, assume surcharge height as 2.5m with pressure of 47.5kPa

From the consolidation graph of BH1 UD2, Pc = 49kPa
Total applied pressure = Pc + Psurcharge = 49 + 47.5 = 96.5kPa
From lab report, cv = 5.8m2/yr

t = 6 months
Hd = 4.8m (single drainage)
Tv = 0.13, with Tv we can get U% from Figure 2.2 which was 9%.
To determine the required preload, we need to refer to Figure 2.1.
Pp = 0.7 x 19 = 13.3kPa
Po = 49kPa from consolidation graph
12
, from Figure 2.1

Pf = 2.48 x 13.3 = 32.98kPa
Total Preload required = Pf + Pp = 46.28kPa
We assumed a surcharge pressure of 47.5kPa, which is greater than required preload
pressure. therefore it is adequate to adopt surcharge height of 2.5m.
Step 3: Find the settlement with preload
Mv method
To get mv, we need to use total applied pressure (96.5kPa) to refer to the lab report.
= 0.72
H = 4.8m (soil profile)
= 47.5kPa (surcharge pressure)
100% consolidation settlement = 164.16mm
10% consolidation settlement =16.42mm
Cc method
{
)}
eo = 1.86 (from consolidation graph)

P0 = 49 kPa (from consolidation graph)
Cc = 0.478 (from consolidation graph)
H = 4.8m (soil profile)
= 47.5kPa (surcharge pressure)
10% consolidation settlement =26.24mm
Critical settlement
100% consolidation settlement,
= 262.36mm
90% consolidation settlement, = 236.12mm
10% consolidation settlement, =26.24mm
13

Step 4: Consolidation Time, Tv and Degree of Consolidation, U%
Total applied pressure = Pc + Psurcharge = 49 + 47.5 = 96.5kPa

t = 6 months
Tv = 0.13, with Tv we can get U% from Figure 2.2 which was 9%.
Therefore PVD is required!
Step 5: PVD Design
Referring to Figure 2.4, we were able to determine that Uv% = 40%
Total consolidated settlement with PVD, Sv =
= 104.94mm
Remaining settlement to treat, St = Sp Sv = 236.12 104.94 = 131.18mm
(
(
)(
)(
)
)
We will be using PVD from Azko with Nylon web as core material and Geotextile as
filter material. This PVD has a size of 100mm x 6mm. There will always be a smear
effect affecting the efficiency of the PVD. So we assume the efficiency of the PVD to
be lowered by 20%. Smear factor, f = 0.8
(
Diameter of well, Dw =
Therefore we adopt Dw = 0.1m.
From Geotechnical properties of Singapore Marine Clay, it is found that C h = 2-3Cv.

Therefore, we assumed Ch to be 2.5 of Cv, which is 2.5 x 5.8 = 14.5m2/year.
With Tw and , we can refer to Figure 2.5 to get the value of n, which is 26.
In our design, we will be adopting the square pattern configuration.
14

Maximum spacing, S =
Provide 100mm diameter well with square spacing of 2m.
Step 6: Check the U% achieved in 6 months
Horizontal Flow
S = 2m
Dw = 0.1m
De = 1.128S = 2.256m
( )
Time factor due to radial drainage,
Degree of Consolidation due to radial drainage,
+-
Vertical Flow

t = 6 months
Tv = 0.13, with Tv we can get U% from Figure 2.4 which was 40% or 0.4.
(
)(
)
(
)(
)
(Primary consolidation had been consolidated in 6 months)
15
9 Tabulation of Calculations
In this section, we will tabulate all the values calculated for the ease of understanding.
For borehole 2, we divided the clay layer into 2 layers with equal thickness. This is
due to the fact that lab and field test had been performed on the clay in different
depth. As of such, different data had been observed. Therefore, separation of the clay
layers will help the design to be more conservative and cost effective.
Bearing Capacity of soil

c
Nc
Sc
dc
Bearing Capacity (kPa)
Borehole 1
Clay 1
Clay 2
13.6
22.3
5.14
5.14
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
100.66
165.06
Borehole 2
Clay 3
Clay 4
9.3
4.8
5.14
5.14
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
68.83
35.53
Borehole 1
Clay 1
Clay 2
5.30
8.69
2.65
4.34
2.5
2.5
49
65
47.5
47.5
96.5
112.5
Borehole 2
Clay 3
Clay 4
3.62
1.87
1.81
0.93
0.9
0.9
38
44
17.1
17.1
55.1
61.1
Surcharge Height
Max Surcharge height (m)
Allowable Surcharge height (m)
Proposed Surcharge height (m)
Pre-consolidation Pressure, Pc (kPa)
Pressure due to surcharge (kPa)
Total applied pressure (kPa)
Find Tv
Cv (m2/year)
T (months)
Hd (m)
Tv
Refer to Fig 2.2, U%
5.8
6
4.8
0.13
9
11
6
3.7
0.40
55
0.9
6
4.3
0.02
0
1.1
6
4.3
0.03
0
Find required preload

Pp (kPa)
Po (kPa)
13.3
49
13.3
65
13.3
38
13.3
44
0.27
0.20
0.35
0.30
2.48
32.984
46.284
0.9
11.97
25.27
2.93
38.969
52.269
2.88
38.304
51.604
47.5
2.12
47.5
3.47
17.1
4.03
17.1
2.08
Pf (kPa)
Preload required, Pf + Pp (kPa)
Proposed Pressure (kPa)
Factor of Safety, FOS
16
Settlement with preload

Borehole 1
Clay 1
Clay 2
Borehole 2
Clay 3
Clay 4
0.72
4.80
47.50
0.55
3.70
47.50
1.7
4.80
17.10
1.7
4.80
17.10
0.16416
0.14774
0.01642
0.09666
0.08700
0.00967
0.13954
0.12558
0.01395
0.13954
0.12558
0.01395
1.86
49
0.478
4.80
47.50
1.48
65
0.369
3.70
47.50
1.9
38
0.655
4.80
17.10
2.2
44
0.743
4.80
17.10
100% settlement (m)

90% settlement (m)
10% settlement (m)
0.26236
0.23612
0.02624
0.14573
0.13116
0.01457
0.19438
0.17495
0.01944
0.17657
0.15891
0.01766
Critical settlement
100% settlement (m)
90% settlement (m)
10% settlement (m)
0.26236
0.23612
0.02624
0.14573
0.13116
0.01457
0.19438
0.17495
0.01944
0.17657
0.15891
0.01766
Mv method
mv
H (m)
(kPa)
100% settlement (m)
90% settlement (m)
10% settlement (m)
Cc method
eo
Po (kPa)
Cc
H (m)
(kPa)
Consolidation Time, Tv and Degree of Consolidation, U%

Borehole 1
Clay 1
Clay 2
Max Surcharge height (m)
5.30
8.69
Allowable Surcharge height (m)
2.65
4.34
Proposed Surcharge height (m)
2.5
2.5
Pre-consolidation Pressure, Pc (kPa)
49
65
Pressure due to surcharge (kPa)
47.5
47.5
Total applied pressure (kPa)
96.5
112.5
Find Tv
Cv (m2/year)
t (months)
Hd (m)
Tv
PVD is required for each four layers.
5.8
6
4.8
0.13
9
11
6
3.7
0.40
55
Borehole 2
Clay 3
Clay 4
3.62
1.87
1.81
0.93
0.9
0.9
38
44
17.1
17.1
55.1
61.1
0.9
6
4.3
0.02
0
1.1
6
4.3
0.03
0
17
PVD Design
Consolidated settlement, Sv (m)
Settlement to treat, St (m)
Average consolidation,
Uh
Dw (m)
Ch (m2/year)
Tw
Refer to Fig 2.5, n
De (m)
Adopt square pattern
Max spacing, S (m)
Adopted Spacing, S (m)
Borehole 1
Clay 1
Clay 2
40
72
0.10494 0.17942
0.13118 -0.04827
1
1
1
1
0.1
0.1
14.5
27.5
725
1375
26
42
2.6
4.2
2.30
2
3.72
2
Borehole 2
Clay 3
Clay 4
18
20
0.05983
0.06039
0.11511
0.09853
1
1
1
1
0.1
0.1
2.25
2.75
112.5
137.5
13
14
1.3
1.4
1.15
1
1.24
1
U% achieved in 6 months
Adopted Spacing, S (m)
Dw (m)
De (m)
n
Fn
Borehole 1
Clay 1
Clay 2
2
2
0.1
0.1
2.256
2.256
22.56
22.56
2.37
2.37
Borehole 2
Clay 3
Clay 4
1
1
0.1
0.1
1.128
1.128
11.28
11.28
1.67
1.67
Horizontal Flow
Ch (m2/year)
t (months)
Rate of consolidation, Th
Degree of consolidation, Uh (%)
14.5
6
1.42
99.19
27.5
6
2.70
99.99
2.25
6
0.88
98.54
2.75
6
1.08
99.43
Vertical Flow
Cv (m2/year)
t (months)
Hd (m)
Tv
Average consolidation,
Average consolidation, (%)
5.80
6.00
4.80
0.13
40
1.00
99.51
11.00
6.00
3.70
0.40
70
1.00
100.00
0.90
6.00
4.30
0.02
17
0.99
98.80
1.10
6.00
4.30
0.03
20
1.00
99.54
Primary consolidation had been achieved in 6 months time with the designed
configuration of PVD from Azko with well diameter 0.1m and square spacing of 2m
for Borehole 1 area and 1m spacing for Borehole 2 area.
18
10 Amount of PVD required
The total area for the development is 22,000m2. Due to insufficient data for Borehole
3, we are unable to design PVD for area surrounding it. Therefore, the development
area will be divided equally into two parts. One part will be using PVD designed
using data from Borehole 1 and so for the other part.
Borehole 1
Area of each part = 11,000m2
Spacing, S= 2m
Effective drainage area = S2 = 4m2
Number of PVD Points =
points
Depth of each PVD points = 9.70m

Total length required = No. of PVD point x Depth = 2,750 x 9.7 = 26,675m
Borehole 2
Area of each part = 11,000m2
Spacing, S= 1m
Effective drainage area = S2 = 1m2
Number of PVD Points =
points
Depth of each PVD points = 8.80m

Total length required = No. of PVD point x Depth = 11,000 x 8.8 = 96,800m
Total length of PVD required would be 123475m.
19
11 Geotechnical Instrument
Deformation of soil involves the combined effect of elastic, plastic and viscosity.
Therefore the deformation behavior is rather complex. In addition to the complex
nature of soil deformation, the additional stresses imposed on the soils are varied not
only in terms of magnitude but also in the directions. This makes the prediction of
deformation of soil to be extremely difficult. However, geotechnical engineers have
been predicting ground behavior in advance with the help of finite difference or finite
element computer modeling. Nevertheless in most cases performances were far from
predictions due to the complexity of the soil profile, parameters and hence loading
conditions. Therefore geotechnical instrumentation fills the gap between prediction
and performance and saves the soil mass failure as well as damages to the structure on
the ground. Geotechnical instrumentation can provide construction control as well as
performance monitoring. First one will provide safe construction of earth as
infrastructure on the soil whereas the second one provides in-situ soil parameters from
the back analysis, from which a more economical and safe design can be established.
Many natural and man-made structures such as slopes, buildings, dams, bridges and
tunnels need monitored to determine periodically such parameters of the structures as
deformations and the states of stress. The aims of structural monitoring can vary from
one project to another but generally fall into the following:
a) safety assurance - Many structures can fail under certain conditions.
Monitoring is often one of the most effective ways to understand the safety
status of such structures.
b) validation of design assumptions - Some parameters such as those defining the
properties of soil or rock of a cut slope are often assumed at the design stage
based on some field investigations. Results of monitoring during or after a
construction can help to validate such assumptions so to carry out remedial
work if necessary or to improve future designs.
c) scientific experiments and research - Results from monitoring measurements
may lead to new discovery or help to expand existing knowledge.
The parameters of a structure that need monitored are many but the most common
ones are deformation, load, stress, strain, and ground water pressure. A great number
of methods are available for structural monitoring. These methods can however
generally be classified into geodetic (surveying) methods and geotechnical methods.
Geodetic methods are mainly used to monitor deformations while geotechnical
methods can be used to determine some other important parameters beside
deformations. The two types of methods complement each other in most of the times
in terms of the types of information that they can obtain. It should be noted here that
the above classification of the monitoring methods is mainly used in the fields of
surveying and geodesy. The engineers and geologists often refer all the methods as
geotechnical methods.
20
There are a variety of geotechnical instruments that have been developed for
monitoring the ground improvement works.
Extensometers - Extensometers are used to measure the relative movements
between points. They can be applied to measure the movements across a crack,
inside or on the surface of a slope. Extensometers are made of various types of
material, such as steel tapes and wires, tensioned or untensioned steel rods,
and fiberglass, for different conditions of application. Extensometers usually
use mechanical micrometers, electrical resistance and variable reluctance
transducers. They are commonly used for slope stability monitoring. They can
be used either on the surface or inside a slope, and very easily linked to a data
logger and alarm system.
Figure 3. Extensometer
Inclinometers - Inclinometers are used to measure the subsurface lateral
displacement of soil or rock. An electrical probe is usually lowered through a
guide casing to the base of a near vertical borehole. The probe is then pulled
up while the inclination information of the probe in two orthogonal planes is
registered at certain intervals. The lateral displacements of the borehole can be
determined by comparing the measured profiles of the borehole obtained at
different times. Boreholes of up to 200 m in depth can be measured using
inclinometers. In practice it is usual to extend a borehole into stable ground in
order to have a common reference point to compare borehole profiles for
determining displacements. Inclinometers can also be placed permanently at
important locations to log data continuously. In this situation the inclinometer
is acting as a tilt meter.
21
Figure 4. Inclinometer
Piezometer - An open standpipe piezometer requires sealing off porous filter
element so that the instrument responds only to groundwater pressure around
the filter element and not to groundwater pressures at other elevations.
Piezometers can be installed in fill, sealed in boreholes, or pushed or driven
into place. The water surface in the standpipe stabilizes at the piezometric
elevation and is determined by sounding with a probe. Care must be taken to
prevent rainwater runoff from entering open standpieps, and an appropriate
stopcock cover can be used, ensuring that venting of the standpipe is not
obstructed.
Figure 5. Piezometer
Cell Settlement System - The TCP cell settlement system is used for the
measurement and control of vertical movements which includes the
construction control of road embankments and earth dams and study of the
displacement of individual soil layers. The standard TCP system comprises
22

two spherical cells half-filled with an anti-freeze solution and connected to a
reading panel. A hand pump is used to push back the anti-freeze solution to
the reading panel. The difference in elevation between the two cells can then
be read directly on the two sight tubes mounted on the reading panel. The TCP
cell is installed directly in the fill whereas the TCP-R cell and reading panel
are usually mounted on a stable concrete platform.
Figure 6. TCP cell settlement system

Electrical Dipmeter - The most commonly used probe is an electrical
dipmeter, consisting of a two conductor cable with a cylindrical stainless steel
weight at its lower end. The weight is divided electrically into two parts, with
a plastic bushing between, and one conductor is connected to each part. The
upper end of the cable is connected to a battery and either an indicator light,
buzzer, or ammeter. When the probe is lowered within the stand pipe and
encounters the water surface, the electrical circuit is completed through the
water and the surface indicator is actuated. For small-diameter stand pipes
where the water level is no deeper than about 15ft, a coaxial cable with bared
ends can be used.
When selecting instruments, the overriding desirable feature is reliability. In
evaluating the economics of alternative instruments, the overall cost of procuring,
calibration, installation, maintenance, monitoring, and data processing should be
compared. Instruments should have a good past performance record and should
always have maximum durability in the installed environment. Zones of particular
concern should be identified, such as structurally weak zones, most heavily loaded
zones, zones where highest pore water pressures are anticipated. Last but not least,
locations should be selected so that data can be obtained as early as possible during
the construction process.
23
12 Recommendations
Appropriate Prefabricated Vertical Drain (PVD) had been designed to achieve 90%
consolidation in 6 months times to prevent failure of soil layers and structures.
However, this design had been proposed using data from only two boreholes. Due to
this reason, data obtain might not be sufficient to fully adjust to the real life
settlement. Therefore, the design proposed may not be as cost effective and economic.
We strongly recommend more boreholes to be bore throughout the development area
so that more accurate data can be accumulated to design the most effective and
economical soil improvement. Not only that, lab test should also be carried out to find
out the properties of the soil so that design can be carried out. Borehole 3 had been
bored but insufficient lab test had been carried out for us to know the necessary value.
13 Conclusion
The whole development area is being split into 2 parts, which each will be implement
with PVD design from both Borehole 1 and Borehole 2. Area 1 will be topped with
2.5m of preload while Area 2 will be topped with 0.9m of surcharge. The current R.L.
is 2.8m and requires another 0.7m to reach the platform level which is 3.5m. As both
areas are loaded with surcharge more than that, additional surcharge will be cut off
after 6 months. Area 1 will be installed with PVD with well diameter of 0.1m and
spacing of 2m to the depth of 9.7m while Area 2 will be installed with well diameter
of 0.1m and spacing of 1m to the depth of 8.8m. The total length of PVD to be
ordered for this project is 123475m.
24
14 Appendix
25
26
27

Cve40001 Kho+lee+tan PVD Sem1 2015

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Cve40001 Kho+lee+tan PVD Sem1 2015

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Swinburne University of Technology

Faculty of Engineering, Computing and Science

SIMON YEW SENG EQUALLY DIVIDED

Swinburne University of Technology (Sarawak Campus)

CVE40001 Geotechnical Engineering (Sem 1, 2015)

KEVIN KHO KA YONG, SIMON LEE YEW SENG,

Effective use of Tables & Figures

Grammar, spelling, ability in

CVE 40001 Geotechnical Engineering - PVD

Executive Summary ........................................................................................... 3

Cross-sectional view of sub-surface soil profile ................................................ 4

Plots and Graphs ............................................................................................... 6

PVD Design ...................................................................................................... 12

Tabulation of Calculations .............................................................................. 16

Amount of PVD required .............................................................................. 19

Geotechnical Instrument ............................................................................... 20

CVE 40001 Geotechnical Engineering - PVD

Construction along riverbanks is common in Sarawak as it has a vast river network.

CVE 40001 Geotechnical Engineering - PVD

CVE 40001 Geotechnical Engineering - PVD

4 Cross-sectional view of sub-surface soil profile

Figure 1. Cross-Sectional Soil Profile Between Borehole 1 and Borehole 2

CVE 40001 Geotechnical Engineering - PVD

Figure 2. Cross-Sectional Soil Profile Between Borehole 2 and Borehole 3

CVE 40001 Geotechnical Engineering - PVD

5 Plots and Graphs

Natural Moisture Content against

Natural Mositure Content (%)

Depth (m) 8.00

Graph 1. Plots of Moisture Content against Depth

Graph of Cu against Depth

Undrained Cohesion Strength, Cu (kN/m2)

Graph 2. Plots of Cu against Depth

CVE 40001 Geotechnical Engineering - PVD

Graph of SPT 'N' against Depth

SPT 'N' value

Graph 3. Plots of SPT N against Depth

CVE 40001 Geotechnical Engineering - PVD

Void ratio against Pressure (log

Graph 4. Graph of Consolidation for Borehole 1 UD2 soil sample.

Therefore, Cc for soil sample obtained from Borehole 1 UD_2 is :

CVE 40001 Geotechnical Engineering - PVD

Void ratio against Pressure (log

Graph 5. Graph of Consolidation for Borehole 1 UD3 soil sample.

Therefore, CC for soil sample obtained from Borehole 1 UD_3 is :

CVE 40001 Geotechnical Engineering - PVD

Void ratio against Pressure (log

Graph 6. Graph of Consolidation for Borehole 2 UD1 soil sample.

Therefore, CC for soil sample obtained from Borehole 2 UD_1 is :

CVE 40001 Geotechnical Engineering - PVD

Void ratio against Pressure (log

Graph 7. Graph of Consolidation for Borehole 2 UD3 soil sample.

Therefore, CC for soil sample obtained from Borehole 2 UD_3 is :

CVE 40001 Geotechnical Engineering - PVD

c = 13.6 kN/m2 (referring to lab report)

as there is no point load

Step 2: Determine surcharge height

Therefore, assume surcharge height as 2.5m with pressure of 47.5kPa

From lab report, cv = 5.8m2/yr

CVE 40001 Geotechnical Engineering - PVD

, from Figure 2.1

eo = 1.86 (from consolidation graph)