MEMORIAL UNIVERSITY OF NEWFOUNDLAND

Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science

ENGI 9094: Advanced Numerical Structural Analysis

(Assignment-1)

Submitted By:
Rabindra Subedi
Student Id: 201693038
rabindras@mun.ca

Submitted To:
Dr. Bruce W.T. Quinton
Faculty of Civil Engineering
Memorial University

January 24, 2017

Adv. Num. Structural Analysis

Rabindra Subedi

Table of Contents
1 Continuous Mesh for the Grillage.igs File
1.1 Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1
1

2 Engineering Consulting
2.1 Q(a)Solution . . . .
2.2 Q(c) Solution . . . .
2.3 Q(d) Answer . . . .

Firm with
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .

the contracts
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1
1
1
1

3 Stresses in Soil Mass

3.1 Q(a) Solution . . .
3.2 3b(Answer) . . . .
3.3 Q3(c) . . . . . . . .
3.4 Q3(d) . . . . . . .
3.5 Q3(e) . . . . . . . .

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

4 Consolidation Settlement
4.1 Magnitude and time required for consolidation settlement

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

3
3
7
10
11
12

. . . . . . . . . .

15
15

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

Continuous Mesh for the Grillage.igs File

1.1

Solution

The continuous mesh for the Assign Grillage.igs file, using primarily quadrilateral shell
elements is shown below. The mesh is generated using HyperMesh software. Surface edit
command is used for surface with surface/plane and trim with lines in order to generate the
smooth quad continuous elements.

Engineering Consulting Firm with the contracts

2.1

Q(a)Solution

2.2

Q(c) Solution

The relative compaction is the ratio of dry unit wight in the field to the maximum dry
unit weight in the lab, expressed in terms of percentage. Mathematically:
Relative Compaction(%) =

d in f ield
100
()d max in laboratory

The test result with relative compaction more than 100% (101-103)% seems the field is
experiencing over-compaction. The compaction test results indicate values exceeding 100%,
it only means that the in-situ compaction is more than that being carried out in laboratories
which is treated as the basic criterion for satisfactory degree of soil compaction. Therefore,
the soil results are acceptable in case compaction test results are over 100%. However,
excessive compaction poses a risk of fracturing granular soils resulting in the reduction of
soil strength parameters. For cohesive soil the relative compaction will be in the range of 90
to 95%. And for the cohesionless soil relative compaction can be 100% or more.
It is not impossible to get relative compaction more than 100%. The dry unit weight in
the field can be greater than the maximum dry unit weight from Proctor Compaction test.
In order to standardized the relative compaction, lab test can be performed for heavier
loads like modified proctor compaction test which gives higher value of dry unit wight in
the lab. Standard or modified proctor test uses specific amount of energy into a standard
testing mold. There may be application of more energy into the field compaction than that
was performed in the lab to get more than 100%. So, I dont agree with the construction
manager that the test is incorrect. I would like to see the report of compaction effort in the
field, also the type of soil used in the lab and field test.

2.3

Q(d) Answer

The following geotechnical issues are available if the soil is compacted at significantly
higher moisture content than the optimum moisture content in Proctor Compaction tests:
Soil compacted higher than the optimum moisture content requires more compactive
effort to get the maximum dry density. More energy requirement is uneconomical.

Adv. Num. Structural Analysis

Rabindra Subedi

The quality of compaction control becomes erratic when the soil is compacted more
than 2.8% from optimum water content. For the compaction less than 1.5% from OMC
is very good for the engineering point of view. Compaction not more than 2.8 % is
fairly good .
If the soil is compacted more than the OMC, there is a high risk of future pore pressure
development in the soil. The main factors influencing pore pressure development in
earth dams during the construction are the moisture content, degree of compaction,
permeability, compressibility, applied load, rate of construction, and drainage features.
The main factor for the development of construction pore pressure in compacted embankments are: a) the magnitude of the principal stresses and the principal stress
ratio; b) the compressibility of the pore fluid and the soil structure (compressibility
affected by soil type, moisture content, and degree of compaction) ; c)the permeability
of embankment soils; and d) the influence of drainage layers.
As the coil is compacted over OMC, the pore pressure coeffieicnt ( U3 ) increases remarkably.
If a soil is placed 1 or 2% dry of optimum water content, the pore pressures developed
will be low regardless of embankment height.
If a soil is placed at optimum water content, the pore pressure developed in an embankment less than 15 m in height will not be of in appreciable magnitude
If a soil is placed above optimum water content, high pore pressures will develop,
High pore pressures can develop in low embankments if the placement water content
is greater than 2% wet of optimum water content.
Compacting soil at higher moisture content reduces the shear strength of the soil. The
shear strength equation is given by the following equation:

f = ( u)tan0
Here, due to significantly higher moisture content of the soil, pore pressure(u) increases,
which leads to decrease in soil shear strength. So, the soil fails on the load below design
limit. Also after long time , all the pore water dissipated, results high settlement
in the soil. High vale of settlement results surface cracks in the soil and ultimately
fracture/failure of the structure.
If water content is too much than OMC during compaction (more than 2% of OMC),
its better to change the location of site. Trying to remove excess water than OMC and
again compaction results future instability due to pore pressure and pumping.
At low moisture content than OMC, the bonding between the soil particles is large
because of the thin water film around the soil. Also, the capillary force and particles
friction is high at low moisture content. This factors makes particle rearrangement
difficult at low moisture content. With the increase of moisture content, the water film
becomes thicker, results the decrease in bonding force, friction and capillary forces, so
2

Adv. Num. Structural Analysis

Rabindra Subedi

that the particles can be easily rearranged into a dense state. All of this condition
becomes the optimum moisture condition for particle rearrangement at the optimum
moisture content. With the further increase of the moisture content, most of the air
voids are occupied by water. The remaining air voids to be compressed become less.
In addition, the soil becomes too soft to carry the impact force so that shear failure
happens during compaction. As these result in a loose state.
The increase of the moisture content and or compaction effort changes the soil fabric
from flocculation to dispersion. This soil fabric change affect the geometrical behavior.
Also the soil compacted at higher than optimum moisture content soil becomes less
permeable(low permeability) than at the dry of optimum. [Delage and Audiguier(1996)]

3
3.1

Stresses in Soil Mass

Q(a) Solution

Given, Compacted sand thickness = 2m, Unit weight of compacted soil () = 20 kN/m3
Diameter of tank = 10 m, Unit weight of tank fluid = 10 kN/m3
Height of the fluid in tank = 8 m, Volume of tank = 4 102 8 = 628.32m3
Total load on the soil due to tank with fluid= 10 628.32 = 6283.18 kN(Assuming self weight
of tank negligible)
Consider Unit weight of pore water (w ) = 9.81kN/m3
(i) Before the placement of the fill
Total vertical stress (v ):
v (0 m) = 0, v (2 m) = sat h = 18.812 = 37.62 kN/m2
Pore Water Pressure (u) = w h = 9.81 2 = 19.62 kN/m2
Total effective vertical stress (v ) = v u
v (0 m) = 0, v (2 m) = 37.62-19.62 = 18 kN/m2
The variation of stress for depth up to 20m from existing ground level is shown in fig. 1
(ii) After placement of 2 m fill
Once the fill is placed over the large area, the total vertical stress added up with the
fill also. At immediate fill pore water pressure is also increase by 40 kN/m2 in the stiff
clay layer as the clay is undrained. After long term pore water pressure dissipated and
becomes zero.
Immediately after fill: At 0 m depth (existing ground level) v , 0 m = f ill 2 =
20 2 = 40kN/m2
Total vertical stress at X(2 m) = 40+18.812 = 77.62kN/m2
Effective vertical stress at ground level (0 m) = 40-0 = 40kN/m2
v0 at 2 m = 77.62 (9.81 2 + 40) = 58 kN/m2
The variation of immediate stress for depth from fill level to 20 m below existing ground
is shown in fig. 2 It is observed that there is no immediate change in effective stress
after the fill of 2 m compacted sand.

Adv. Num. Structural Analysis

Rabindra Subedi

5
Total Stress (v)
Pore Water Pressure(u)
Effective Stress(v)'

depth(z) m

-5

-10

-15

-20
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Stress (kN/m 2 )

Figure 1 Stresses variation on depth before placing fills

5
Total Stress (v)
Pore Water Pressure(u)
Effective Stress(v)'

depth(z) m

-5

-10

-15

-20
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Stress (kN/m 2 )

Figure 2 Stresses variation immediately after the fills

After long time of fill: The increase in pore water pressure reduces to zero. There
is no pore pressure increase. At o m depth (existing ground level) v , o m = 40 kN/m2
Total vertical stress at X(2 m) = 40 + 18.812 = 77.62 kN/m2
Effective vertical stress at ground level (0 m) = 40 kN/m2
v0 at 2m = 77.62 (9.81 2) = 58kN/m2
The variation of stress is shown in fig. 3
(iii) Immediately after filling the tank

Adv. Num. Structural Analysis

Rabindra Subedi

5
Total Stress (v)
Pore Water Pressure(u)
Effective Stress(v)'

depth(z) m

-5

-10

-15

-20
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Stress (kN/m 2 )

Figure 3 Stresses variation long time after the fills

Vertical stress increase for a circular tank load on soil is given by:

!1.5
1

v = qo 1
1 + ( Rz )2

(1)

Here for the circular load, Radius (R) = 5 m

Variable depth is (z)
The total load from the tank to the soil = 6283.18 kN
The contact stress (qo ) between the tank foundation and the soil equals the tank load
divided by the area of foundation.
6283.18
load
2
= /410
i.e. qo = area
2 = 79.99 80 kN/m
The excess pore pressure increase in stiff clay (clay is undrained) (u) at X, -2 m from
existing ground = 60.50 kN/m2
Initial stresses:
Vertical total stress (v ) 0 m = 202 + 75.90 = 115.90 kN/m2
Vertical total stress (v ) 2 m = 80 kN/m2
Vertical total stress (v ) -2 m = 202 + 18.81 2 + 60.50 = 138.12 kN/m2
Pore pressure (u) at -2 m= 9.812 + u = 19.62 + 60.50 = 80.12 kN/m3
Vertical effective stress (v0 ) at -2 m= (v u) = 138.12 80.12 = 58kN/m2 ( No
immediate change in effective vertical stress) The diagram for stresses is shown in fig. 4:
(iv) After long time when excess pore water pressure is completely dissipated
The excess pore pressure in the clay is dissipated i.e. u = 0
Vertical total stress at 0 m = 75.90 + 20 2 = 115.90 kN/m2
Vertical total stress at 2 m = 80kN/m2
Vertical total stress at -2 m = 20 2 + 18.81 2 + 60.50 = 138.12 kN/m2
5

Adv. Num. Structural Analysis

Rabindra Subedi

5
Total Vertical Stress ( )
v

Pore Water Pressure(u)

Effective Vertical Stress(v)'

depth(z) m

-5

-10

-15

-20
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Stress (kN/m 2 )

Figure 4 Stresses variation Immediately after filling the tank

Pore pressure (u) at -2 m = 9.81 2 + 0 = 19.62 kN/m2
Vertical effective stress (v0 ) at 2 m = 138.12 19.62 = 118.5 kN/m2 (long term
increase)
The diagram for various stresses is shown in fig. 5
5
Total Vertical Stress (v)
Pore Water Pressure(u)
Effective Vertical Stress(v)'

depth(z) m

-5

-10

-15

-20
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Stress (kN/m 2 )

Figure 5 Stresses variation after long time filling the tank

Adv. Num. Structural Analysis

3.2

Rabindra Subedi

3b(Answer)

The effective horizontal stress is given by the following formula:

= ko v0
= v u = T otal V ertical Stress(v ) = v0 + u
Total horizontal stress (h ) = h0 + u
From the manual by [Kulhawy and Mayne(1990)] for estimating soil properties, following
relation for o is used:

h0
v0

ko = (1 sin0 )OCRsin

The value of friction angle 0 and OCR for stiff clay is chosen according to the following information. For stiff clay the value of SPT between 8 to 15 and pqac between 15 to 30. [Kulhawy
and Mayne(1990)] p(2-35). With the baseline SPT value for stiff clay, the over-consolidation
ratio of the stiff clay can be approximated from [Kulhawy and Mayne(1990)] fig(3-18). Assume that the SPT of this clay = 11.5 (average from guideline) and the corresponding OCR
= 6 ( interpolation from chart 3-18(SPT vs OCR)). The value of friction angle for soil is
taken as 27 for stiff clay with plasticity index (30 to 40 %) [Terzaghi et al.(1996)Terzaghi,
Peck, and Mesri]
Now, 0 = 27 and OCR = 6 (for stiff clay )

Now the value of ko = (1 sin27 )6sin27 = 1.23 (for stiff clay)

(a) Before the placement of fill
Total effective vertical stress at X(2m) = 18.812 9.81 2 = 18 kN/m2
Pore water pressure (u at 2 m) = 19.62 kN/m2
Effective horizontal stress (h0 ) = ko v0 = 1.23 18 = 22.14kN/m2
Total horizontal stress at 2 m (X) = 22.14 + 19.62 = 41.76kN/m2 . The plot is shown in
fig. 6
5
Total Horizontal Stress (v)
Pore Water Pressure(u)
Effective Horizontal Stress(v)'

depth(z) m

-5

-10

-15

-20
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Horizontal Stress h (kN/m 2 )

Figure 6 Horizontal Stresses variation before fill

Adv. Num. Structural Analysis

Rabindra Subedi

(b) After Placement of fill (Consider after long time)

Total effective vertical stress at g.l. = 202 = 40 kN/m2
Total vertical stress at 2 m (x) = 20 2 + 18.81 2 = 77.62 kN/m2
Effective vertical stress at 2m (x) = 77.62-19.62 = 58 kN/m2
For compacted sand, the value of 0 = 34 [Mayne and Kulhawy(1982)]. Which gives:
ko = (1 sin34 ) = 0.44(f or sand), h0 0 m = 0.44(ko f or sand) 40 = 17.6kN/m2
h0 at 2 m = 1.23(ko f or clay) 58 = 71.34kN/m2
Total horizontal stress:
h (0 m) = 17.6 + 0(u) = 17.6 kN/m2 , h (2 m) = 71.34 + 19.62 = 90.96 kN/m2 , Pore
pressure (u) = 19.62 kN/m2 at (2 m depth from g.l.)
The diagram of immediate and long term horizontal stress variation is shown in fig. 8:
5
Total Horizontal Stress ( )
v

Pore Water Pressure(u)

Effective Horizontal Stress(v)'

depth(z) m

-5

-10

-15

-20
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Stress (kN/m 2 )

Figure 7 Horizontal Stresses variation immediately after fill

5
Total Horizontal Stress (v)
Pore Water Pressure(u)
Effective Horizontal Stress(v)'

depth(z) m

-5

-10

-15

-20
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Horizontal Stress (kN/m 2 )

Figure 8 Horizontal Stresses variation long time after fill

Adv. Num. Structural Analysis

Rabindra Subedi

(c) Immediately after filling the tank

Effective horizontal stress at tank contact = 0.44 80 = 35.2kN/m2
Effective horizontal stress at the existing ground level = 0.44(sand) 40 = 17.6kN/m2
Effective horizontal stress at (x = 2 m below existing gl.) = 1.23(clay)58 = 71.34 kN/m2
Total horizontal stress:
h (tank contact) = 35.2 kN/m2
h (existing gl.) = 17.6 + 75.9 = 93.5 kN/m2
h (2m below existing gl.) = 71.34 + 80.12 = 151.46 kN/m2
The variation of horizontal stresses after immediate fill is shown in fig. 9

5
Total Horizontal Stress (v)
Pore Water Pressure(u)
Effective Horizontal Stress(v)'

depth(z) m

-5

-10

-15

-20
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Stress (kN/m 2 )

Figure 9 Horizontal Stresses variation immediately after filling tank

(d) After long time when excess pore water pressure dissipated
Effective vertical stress at contact with tank = 80 kN/m2
Effective vertical stress at existing g.l. = 115.90 kN/m2
Effective vertical stress at (x = 2 m) = 118.5 kN/m2
Effective horizontal stress at contact with tank = 0.44(sand) 80 = 35.2k kN/m2
Effective horizontal stress at existing g.l. = 0.44 115.90 = 51 kN/m2
Effective horizontal stress at (x = 2m) = 1.23(clay) 118.5 = 145.75 kN/m2
Total horizontal stress:
h (tank contact) = 35.2 kN/m2
h (g.l. existing) = 51 kN/m2
h (2m below existing gl.) = 145.75 + 19.62 = 165.37 kN/m2
The plot for horizontal stress variation is shown in fig. 10.

Adv. Num. Structural Analysis

Rabindra Subedi

5
Total Horizontal Stress (v)
Pore Water Pressure(u)
Effective Horizontal Stress( )'
v

depth(z) m

-5

-10

-15

-20
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Stress (kN/m 2 )

Figure 10 Horizontal Stresses variation after filling tank long time

3.3

Q3(c)

Problem: A 5 m vertical excavation is required in the stiff clay. The excavated area is
filled with water. The variation of vertical and horizontal stresses with depth long time after
excavation at least upto 20 m depth.
Assuming that the soil around excavated area is stiff clay. Since the water table is at the
top of excavation hole, there is no change in immediate seepage variation. After long time,
the water table in the excavated hole diminishes. For the horizontal stress the value of ko is
used as for the stiff clay used in question 3(a). The plot for variation of stresses is shown in
fig. 11. After long time all the water in the excavated hole gets dissipated, there will no more
water in the hole. The horizontal stress develop in the soil becomes equal to ka soil H.
0

= 1sin27
= 0.3755
i.e. ka (active earth pressure) = 1sin
1+sin0
1+sin27
Now, total vertical stress = soil depth(z) + 0(u)
Total horizontal stress = ka v0 + 0(u)
The diagram for total vertical and horizontal stress distribution is shown in fig. 12

10

Adv. Num. Structural Analysis

Rabindra Subedi

0
Total Vertical Stress (v)
Pore Water Pressure(u)
Effective Vertical Stress( )
v

Total horizontal stress ( )

h

Effective horizontal stress (h )

-5

depth(z) m

-10

-15

-20

-25
0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Stress (kN/m 2 )

Figure 11 Vertical and Horizontal Stresses variation immediately

0
Total Vertical Stress (v)
Total horizontal stress (h )

-5

depth(z) m

-10

-15

-20

-25
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Stress (kN/m 2 )

Figure 12 Vertical and Horizontal Stresses variation immediately

3.4

Q3(d)

If the native soil were sand instead of stiff clay, the saturated unit weight of the sand can
be used for the calculation of stresses. Before the placement of fill, there will be no more
changes in vertical stresses distribution. Pore pressure by saturated sand = w (z)

11

Adv. Num. Structural Analysis

Rabindra Subedi

Total vertical stress(v ) = sand (z)

Effective vertical stress = v u(the pattern of stress distribution is same)
After immediately filling the fill(short term) the sand will drained horizontally or into
the underlaying soil. So, there will be no increase in pore pressure (like in clay layer there
was immediate increase in pore water pressure).
i.e. v = sand z + v(vertical stress increase)
u = w (z) + u(= 0)
v0 = v u After placing the tank same thing happens immediately and after long time,
there will not be change in the total vertical stress and vertical effective stresses.
In the case for question 3(c), if the native soil were sand, water starts to percolate on the
sides of hole very fast. So, the vertical stress variation at short and long term stage will be
the same. The effective vertical stress in the soil will be equal to total vertical stress(no pore
water pressure)

3.5

Q3(e)

Mohrs circles for a soil element 2 m below the initial ground surface under the tank
foundation (point x).
(a) Before the placement of fill:
At (X) effective vertical stress v0 = 18 kN/m2
At (X) effective horizontal stress h0 = 22.14 kN/m2
= 2.07 kN/m2
Maximum shear stress (max ) = 22.1418
2
The Mohr cicrle is shown in fig. 13

max

(MPa)

1
0

1
A (22.14, 0)

B (18, 0)

-1
-2
max

18

19

20

21

22

(MPa)

Figure 13 Mohr Circle at (X=2 m) before placing fills

(b) After placing 2 m compacted fill
At (X) effective vertical stress v0 = 58 kN/m2
At (X) effective horizontal stress h0 = 71.34 kN/m2
= 6.67 kN/m2
Maximum shear stress (max ) = 71.3458
2
The Mohr cicrle is shown in fig. 14
12

Adv. Num. Structural Analysis

Rabindra Subedi

max

(MPa)

4
2
0

B (58, 0)

A (71.34, 0)

-2
-4
-6

-8
60

max

65

70

(MPa)

Figure 14 Mohr Circle at (X=2 m) after placing fills

(c) After immediately filling the tank
At (X) effective vertical stress v0 = 58 kN/m2 . At (X) effective horizontal stress h0 =
71.34 kN/m2 . Maximum shear stress (max ) = 71.3458
= 6.67 kN/m2
2
The Mohr cicrle is shown in fig. 15

max

(MPa)

4
2
0

1
A (71.34, 0)

B (58, 0)

-2
-4
-6
max

-8
60

65

70

(MPa)

Figure 15 Mohr Circle at (X=2 m) immediately after placing tank

(d) After long time when excess pore water pressure dissipated:
At (X) effective vertical stress v0 = 118.5 kN/m2 . At (X) effective horizontal stress
h0 = 145.75 kN/m2 . Maximum shear stress (max ) = 145.75118.5
= 13.63 kN/m2
2
The Mohr cicrle is shown in fig. 16 It is observed that the value of maximum shear stress
13

Adv. Num. Structural Analysis

Rabindra Subedi

15

max

10

(MPa)

5
0

B (118.5, 0)

A (145.75, 0)

-5
-10
-15

120

125

max

130

135

140

145

(MPa)

Figure 16 Mohr Circle at (X=2 m) immediately after placing tank

increases from the first case to last i.e. before filling the fill to after completely dissipated
the pore pressure.
(e) What happens to the shear stress if (Ko = 1)
Once the value of (Ko = 1) means that the value of effective horizontal stress(h0 ) becomes
equal to (1 v0 = v0 ). The Mohr circle for all cases becomes a point. No significant
shear strength of soil can be obtained. Theoretical shear strength becomes zero. As
shown in figure for case (d) fig. 17.
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
-1
117.5

118

118.5

119

119.5

Figure 17 Mohr Circle at (X=2 m) immediately after placing tank

14

Adv. Num. Structural Analysis

Rabindra Subedi

Consolidation Settlement

4.1

Magnitude and time required for consolidation settlement

The tank remains filled for a long period of time. The soils is a stiff clay layer. According
to the previous section Q(3b), for the stiff clay, following soil parameter are used:
Angle of friction for clay 0 = 27
Over consolidation ratio for stiff clay (OCR) = 6
The value of specific gravity for the stiff clay = 2.7 (for clay 2.67 to 2.9) is used [Kulhawy
and Mayne(1990)].
For the initial void ratio of soil:

sat = G+e
1+e w
sat = 18.81 kN/m3
= 18.81 = 2.7+e
9.81 gives, void ratio of clay layer (e) = 0.853
1+e
Primary Consolidation Settlement

The vertical effective stress at the middle of the clay layer can be calculated as below:
Assume that the clay layer of 10 meter in thickness.
Total stress from the sand layer = 20 2 = 40 kN/m2
Consider 10 meter strip of clay layer:
The effective stress at the middle of the clay layer of 10 m thick (assume one way
drainage) (50 ) = 20 2 + (18.81 9.81) 5 = 85 kN/m2
The increase in
 vertical stress
 below the center of circular tank is given by eq. (1)
i.e. 50 = 80 1

1
[1+( 57 )2 ]1.5

= 36.89 kN/m2 where, r = 5 m, z = 7m from tank level.

Now, check for primary consolidation settlement equation;

Here, OCR = 6, so,
Past maximum vertical effective stress in clay c0 = 6 85(50 ) = 510 kN/m2
Here, 50 + 50 = 85 + 36.89 = 121.89 kN/m2
(50 + 50 ) < c0 i.e. 121.89 < 510 kN/m2 , now go for the following primary consolidation settlement equation:
 0

Cs H
5 + 50
Sc =
log
(2)
1 + eo
50
For the stiff clay which is highly Kaolinite in mineral for structural purpose, so we can
assume for Kaolinite clay liquid limit between (35-100). For this stiff clay liquid limit
can be 50. From the Skempton (1944) formulation, compression index (CC ) of clay
given by :
Cc = 0.009(LL 10)
(3)
Which gives Cc = 0.009(50 10) = 0.36
Now the swelling index of this clay Cs = 15 Cc = 1/5 0.36 = 0.072
With the all required value, primary settlement of the soil can be calculated by eq. (1),
which gives


0.072 10
121.89
Sc =
log
= 0.0608 m = 60.83 mm
1 + 0.853
85
15

Adv. Num. Structural Analysis

Rabindra Subedi

The primary consolidation settlement = 60.83 mm for this clay. (For the accuracy of
the result its better to subdivide the clay layer less than 2 m interval )
Secondary Consolidation Settlement

The secondary consolidation settlement is given by:

 
t2
0
Ss = C H log
t1

(4)

C
Where, C0 = 1+e
p
We have ep = eo eprimary

Now, e = Cs log(50 +
50 ) log50 , here, Cs = 0.072
i.e. e = 0.072 log 85+36.89
= 0.0113
85
We have , eo = 0.853 , so ep = 0.853 0.0113 = 0.8417
Hence, CCc = 0.05(0.03 to 0.08 f or OC stif f clay) [Budhu(2008)]
= C = 0.05 0.36 = 0.018
0.018
Which gives,C0 = 1+0.8417
= 0.00977
Now, H = 10 m
The value of coefficient of consolidation Cv based on liquid limit of 50 for stiff clay
[Rashid and Brown(1975)] [Schofield and Wroth(1968)]is 2.15 106 m2 /sec.
Generally we consider 90% primary consolidation for time t1 .
We have,
Cv t
Tv = 2
Hdr

For 90% consolidation, Tv = 0.848, And, For one way drainage, Hdr = 10 m, So the
0.848102
7
time for primary consolidation (t1 = 2.1510
6 = 3.9442 10 sec = 1.25 years)
Now, Assume that the design life of the building foundation project is 100 years. So
t2 = 100 years.
100
) = 185.93 mm
Now, Secondary settlement from 4 Ss = 0.00977 10 log( 1.25
Time Required for 60% consolidation:
Here, for 60% consolidation Tv = 0.286, which gives, t60 =
107 seconds = 0.43 years

0.286(10)2
2.15106

= 1.33

16

References
[Budhu(2008)] Muni Budhu. SOIL MECHANICS AND FOUNDATIONS, (With CD). John
Wiley & Sons, 2008.
[Delage and Audiguier(1996)] Pierre Delage and Audiguier. Microstructure of a compacted
silt. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 33(1):150158, 1996.
[Kulhawy and Mayne(1990)] Fred H Kulhawy and Paul W Mayne. Manual on estimating soil
properties for foundation design. Technical report, Electric Power Research Inst., Palo
Alto, CA (USA); Cornell Univ., Ithaca, NY (USA). Geotechnical Engineering Group,
1990.
[Mayne and Kulhawy(1982)] Paul W Mayne and FH Kulhawy. Ko- ocr relationships in soil.
Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, 108(6):851872, 1982.
[Rashid and Brown(1975)] MA Rashid and JD Brown. Influence of marine organic compounds on the engineering properties of a remoulded sediment. Engineering geology, 9
(2):141154, 1975.
[Reeves et al.(2006)Reeves, Sims, and Cripps] George M Reeves, Ian Sims, and JC Cripps.
Clay materials used in construction. Geological Society of London, 2006.
[Schofield and Wroth(1968)] Andrew Schofield and Peter Wroth. Critical state soil mechanics. 1968.
[Terzaghi et al.(1996)Terzaghi, Peck, and Mesri] Karl Terzaghi, Ralph B Peck, and Gholamreza Mesri. Soil mechanics in engineering practice. John Wiley & Sons, 1996.

17