Reconstructing oedometric compression curves

Page 1 of 55
For personal use only. This Just-IN manuscript is the accepted manuscript prior to copy editing and page composition. It may differ from the final official version of record.
Reconstructing oedometric compression curves for selecting design parameters
Raphael Felipe Carneiro, M. Sc, DSc Candidate (*)
Denise Maria Soares Gerscovich, DSc.(**)
Bernadete Ragoni Danziger DSc.(***)

Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIVERSITY OF WOLLONGONG on 07/30/18
(*) Rio de Janeiro State University
Rua Sao Francisco Xavier 524, sala 5034 Bl. D, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil 20550-013,
raphaelfc1987@gmail.com
(**) Rio de Janeiro State University
deniseg@uerj.br
(***) Rio de Janeiro State University
brdanzig@uerj.br
Corresponding author: Gerscovich, D.

Address: Rua Professor Alfredo Gomes 15 apt 503, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 22251-080
Phone +55 (21) 23340979 (BR)
Email: deniseg@uerj.br; denisegerscovich@gmail.com
1
For personal use only. This Just-IN manuscript is the accepted manuscript prior to copy editing and page composition. It may differ from the final official version of record. Page 2 of 55
Abstract. The mineral structure of soft clays is extremely fragile. Sampling operations
and laboratory handling causes unavoidable disturbance. Undisturbed sampling is a
theoretical concept since the stress release imposes disturbance. Consolidation tests on
disturbed samples provide 1D-compression curves very different from field response, which
leads to inaccurate settlement estimates. Among the approaches for curve reconstruction,
Schmertmann's method is probably the most commonly adopted in engineering practice.
However, it presents difficulties in determining preconsolidation stress. The paper primarily
addresses Schmertmann's and Nagaraj et al.’s propositions and discuss their advantages and
shortcomings. A new approach for reconstructing the 1D-compression curve is proposed with
the main objective of being independent of the interpretation of the experimental results. The
validity was examined by comparing the reconstructed curves obtained by other methods.
Experimental results on high and low-quality specimens have been analyzed, as well. The
results revealed that the reconstructed curves for the cases analyzed are almost unique and
independent of specimen quality. The proposed method allows both graphical and analytical
implementation and the reconstructed curves are unaffected by experimental curve
interpretation.
Key-words: 1D-compression curve, consolidation; sample disturbance; compression
curve reconstruction, settlement.
2
Page 3 of 55
Introduction
When dealing with soft soil deposits, settlement prediction presents a challenge, even to
the most experienced geotechnical engineers. The limitations inherent in the theories, the
representativeness and quality of the soil samples and the difficulty in selecting parameters
often lead to estimates that diverge from the actual settlement in the field. Laboratory tests are
carried out under controllable stress, boundary and drainage conditions enabling relatively
easy interpretation. However, the sample representativeness and quality are essential issues.
It is worldwide accepted that the virgin compression line is a soil property of the clay.
Schmertmann (1953) showed the differences between laboratory and geological
consolidation curves. Mesri and Choi (1985) proved the uniqueness of the End of Primary
(EOP) consolidation curve and vertical effective stress (log). Thus, once the true
geological consolidation curve is known the magnitude of the settlement in the field can be
reliably computed.
The compression curve ( − log ) is very sensitive to sample disturbance, among other
factors. The sampler design and operation procedures must consider all measures to reduce
the well identified causes of disturbance (La Rochelle et al. 1981; Ladd 1971; Baligh et al.
1987; Hvorslev 1949; Ladd and Lambe 1964; Lunne et al. 1997; Schmertmann 1953;
Santagata and Germaine 2002; Andrade 2009). The loss of quality may starts at the beginning
of the field investigation, due to the inappropriate operations of drilling, pushing the sampling
tube or retrieving the sampler. The merely unloading causes mechanical distortion and pore
pressure redistribution. Additionally, the soil stress condition is irreversibly changed during
the processes of handling, shipping, storage, extrusion, trimming and, in the laboratory,
specimen preparation and application of the stress system. In truth, cautious drilling
operations and handling may reduce the undesired effects of structural distortion, but will
3
never make them disappear. The term "undisturbed" sample should be replaced by
“acceptable” sample to indicate a sample obtained by using techniques to minimize material
disturbance.
Oedometer tests are time-consuming and performing loading and unloading paths may
take a couple of weeks. In practice, even when the 1D-compression curve exhibits sign of
disturbance, it is unlikely that the engineer requests a new set of in situ investigation. As an
alternative, corrections methods have been proposed to modify the − log curve to get it
closer to the field behavior.
This paper revisits some methods to compression curve reconstruction, discusses their
main points and proposes an alternative methodology.
Sample Disturbance
When compared to high-quality samples, oedometric compression curves of disturbed
specimens presents: i) a lower void ratio for any given vertical effective stress; ii) a flattened
− log curve, making it difficult to determine the preconsolidation effective stress; iii)
reduced value of the preconsolidation stress; iv) lower compressibility of the virgin
consolidation slope; v) higher compressibility of the recompression slope; vi) fallacious
linearity of virgin consolidation curve. In synthesis, disturbance affects both the slopes of
one-dimensional consolidation curves and the estimate of field preconsolidation stress .
Hvorslev (1949) was probably the first to present a comprehensive study on sample
disturbance. He discussed the various methods of exploration and sampling, the basic types
of interference and their influence on the soil response in different laboratory tests and a
closer definition of the requirements for obtaining undisturbed soil samples. The degree of
4
Page 5 of 55
disturbance could be qualitatively evaluated by visual inspection of the sample surface or by
recovery ratios higher or smaller than unity.
Degree of disturbance
Before advising a method to reconstruct the 1D- compression curve it is necessary to

define the degree of disturbance.
Ladd and Lambe (1964) proposed a criterion by measuring the ratio ⁄

, where is
the actual effective stress of the sample before any reloading and

is the theoretical value
for "perfect sampling" (Fig. 1). The perfect sampling effective stress

denotes an idealized
process of undrained unloading from the anisotropic in situ stress state to a final hydrostatic
stress condition of the sample before testing. This criterion does not take into account
operator-dependent disturbances, water changes and straining history of the sample during
retrieval and extrusion (Baligh et al. 1987).
Andresen and Kolstad (1979) suggested that the magnitude of volumetric strain of a
specimen when subjected to an oedometer test to the in situ vertical stress

or in a triaxial
compression test to the in situ effective vertical and lateral stresses could be used to define a
quality criterion, termed as specimen quality designation (SQD). Those authors proposed five
levels of classification from εv less than 1% to greater than 8%; good quality samples must
provide ε < 2% (Terzaghi et al. 1996).
Baligh et al. (1987) proposed the “ideal sampling approach” (ISA) as an extension of the
“perfect sampling” concept (PSA). The authors have recognized the importance of
distinguishing between operator-dependent disturbance and a minimum degree of sampling
disturbance. Despite the best available sampling equipment and the most experienced
operator, there will always be a certain amount of disturbance. The strain history, predicted
by the strain path method (Baligh 1985), revealed that a point at the centerline of a tube
5
sampler undergoes undrained compression, extension, and compression due to its steady
penetration. The authors also observed that sample disturbance was erratic, and no clear
correlation could be established between the sampling tube diameter, location of the
specimen along tube length and in situ and laboratory operation procedures. However,
sampling disturbance effects on the undrained behavior of clays could be reduced by
reconsolidating the soil to 1.5 to 2 times the in situ effective overburden pressure, then
allowing rebound to the estimated in situ overconsolidation ratios, before undrained shearing.
Lunne et al. (1997) presented the Norwegian Geotechnical Institute (NGI) criteria for
evaluating sample disturbance mainly based on tests on marine clays (PI = 6% to 43%; ω =
20% to 67%; OCR = 1 to 4 and depth = 0m to 25m). The authors realized that the change in
pore volume relative to the initial pore volume, ∆⁄ , was more systematically influenced
than the change in volumetric strain (e.g., Andresen and Kolstad 1979). Ranges of ∆⁄
used to qualify sample quality are summarized in Table 1. The criteria must be used with
caution with soils with OCR outside these ranges.
It is worth to remark that the void ratio in the field is usually different from sample
void ratio . After sampling operation, if the sample is protected against moisture loss, the
water content does not change. The stress release tends to cause an expansion of the sample.
If the specific gravity of the solids is a constant, the expression = indicates that the
swelling produces a reduction of the degree of saturation S. In the laboratory, it is not
uncommon the use of techniques to recover the in situ saturated condition. Under saturated
conditions, the void ratio in the field may be estimated by = .
The boundaries of Lunne et al. (1997) classification were considered severe for Brazilian
clays from Rio de Janeiro (PI = 11% to 250%; ω = 35% to 500%; OCR = 1 to 4 and depth =
6
Page 7 of 55
6m to 15m). Coutinho (2007) and Andrade (2009) refined the ranges and solved boundaries
issues. Andrade (2009) ranges are also presented in Tab. 1.
Based on the results of Holtz et al. (1981), Nagaraj et al. (1990) assumed that the locus of

for any degree of disturbance lies in a straight-line perpendicular to the compression curve
at their points of maximum curvature, as shown in Fig. 2. In this limiting condition, this line
may logically be expected to be perpendicular to the remolded sample curve. Therefore, the
preconsolidation stress, in the field may be obtained by drawing the recompression line up
to the line that contains the locus of the preconsolidation stresses. If the swelling of the
sample is disregarded, is obtained by drawing a horizontal line at .
To quantify the degree of disturbance Nagaraj et al. (1990) proposed an equation that
compares the predicted preconsolidation stress with preconsolidation stress ,

obtained
from laboratory compression curve:

− ,

(%) = × 100

(1)
Reconstructing field consolidation curve
As the disturbance level increases, the shape of the compression curves becomes more
rounded, and the breakpoint between recompression and virgin consolidation that is used to
define preconsolidation stress disappears.
Estimating preconsolidation stress
The preconsolidation stress represents the boundary at which significant structural
changes including the breakdown of interparticle bonds and interparticle displacement begin
to occur. In fact, the term preconsolidation effective stress is inappropriate, because it leads
7
to an incorrect interpretation of . The term has been originally defined based on a
mechanical concept denoting a past unloading history. The sharp change on soil response
may be a result of many factors including past depositional and stress history, chemical-
physical reactions (weathering, cementation, etc.) and/or viscous (aging) processes (Boone,
2010).
There are several methods for the interpretation of the preconsolidation stress from the
consolidation curve; some of them are listed in Table 2. Casagrande’s method is probably the
most used worldwide. The definition of the minimum radius of curvature on semi-log plots is
usually exposed to uncertainties; the judgment is human-dependent. Moreover, Clementino
(2005) has demonstrated how scale effect influences the Casagrande's graphical method
result (Fig. 3) and proposed the use of Pacheco Silva's method which is less sensitive to
graphical interpretation. However, Grozic et al. (2005) showed that Pacheco Silva's method
could also provide different results depending on the tangent of the virgin curve.
Grozic et al. (2003) presented 187 attempts at estimating

using different methods (Fig.
4) and realized a high disparity among them; for the same sample (vertical dotted line) OCR
varied from 1 to 27. The strain energy density approach (Becker et al. 1987), which is more
theoretically based, is also somewhat subjective in the determination of the best fit linear
interpretation of the cumulative strain energy density (Boone 2010).
Instead of a graphical approach on a smooth consolidation curve, Boone (2010) proposed
using straight lines between each load increment to estimate , without any subjective
interpretation. He tested 160 oedometer tests with low-plasticity silty clays and sensitive
clays and estimated values in a range between Casagrande and Pacheco Silva prediction
methods.
8
Page 9 of 55
Paniagua et al. (2016) used 169 oedometer test results to evaluate five methods for
interpreting , and experienced the uncertainties produced by graphical methods. Small
changes in the slope of the tangents resulted in significant changes in and the scale type of
the plot increased the difficulties in reading the stress values.

Umar and Sadrekarimi (2017) conducted a series of laboratory oedometer tests on
Canadian clay specimens, subject to cycles of one-dimensional compression loading and
unloading to produce a known stress history and the preconsolidation stress . The imposed
compared with the predictions obtained by different methods revealed a trend of
overestimation of . Kootahi (2017) and Sadrekarimi (2017) discussed the accuracy and
simplicity of the several methods analyzed by Umar and Sadrekarimi (2017). Those authors
considered the methods proposed by Oikawa (1987), Burland (1990), Onitsuka et al. (1995)
and Jose et al. (1989) as being the more trustworthy.
The truth is that a reliable

is still unknown and predicting settlement is still a
challenge. Ideally, the determination of the preconsolidation stress should not depend on the
chosen interpretation method nor involve subjectivity. This is one of the main concerns in
geotechnical engineering practice, because of the uncertainties involving determination
compromise the assessment of the compressibility parameters. Besides, many of the
empirical correlations, available in the literature to estimate clay properties depends on a
questionable value of OCR or .
Methods for reconstruction the one-dimensional compression curve
Rutledge (1944) and Hvorslev 1949) proposed an alternative for reconstructing the one-
dimensional virgin compression curve. For normally consolidated soils, the reconstructed

slope is obtained by drawing a line through point (, ), point E in Fig. 5(a), parallel to or
9
intersecting the extrapolation of the experimental virgin curve at the void ratio equal to zero.
For overconsolidated soils, the preconsolidation stress is initially determined – for
example by means of Casagrande’s graphical method – and the virgin slope determined by
drawing a line through point E’ in Fig. 5(b) parallel to or slightly steeper than the virgin
compression curve for the disturbed soil. For samples with a high degree of disturbance, the
method is highly questionable due to the inherent difficulty in determining ; in the field,
preconsolidation stress is certainly higher than the estimated value in the laboratory. For both
consolidation conditions, the transition between the initial recompression and the virgin slope
of the curve is kept undetermined.
Nagaraj et al. (1990) identified three zones on field compression curves of soft, sensitive
soils, as shown in Fig. 6. For the undisturbed sample, the recompression path (zone 1:
≤ ) undergoes a negligible vertical strain. Zone 2 ( ≤ ≤ % ) is defined by a steep
slope that occurs due to the breakdown of mineral bonds and their aggregates and in zone 3
( > % ) the soil has achieved the full remolded state. This results in a characteristic inverse
S-shaped curve. In general, the field − log curve can be predicted if the two transitions
points (% and ) are located.
Nagaraj et al. (1990) proposed that the field preconsolidation stress is obtained by the
perpendicular line crossing laboratory preconsolidation stress ,

and intercepting initial
void ratio (Fig. 6). Based on experimental observations, the resistance due to cementation
bonds revealed insignificant beyond a stress value of 10 . Thus, the transition stress can be
approximated by % ≅ 10 . The virgin compression curve in field reveals a curvature as the
stress levels increases. So, after a few trials, the path between the transitions stresses has been
reasonably represented by a n-power equation, given by
10
Page 11 of 55
= (()*+ ), + . (2)
Having determined the two transition stresses, and % the probable field compression
curve can be easily drawn. The constants A, B, and n can be obtained from the boundary
conditions (% , % ) and ( , ) and from the condition that at % both experimental and
reconstructed curves present the same tangent.
/1 = (6(log ′),78

/(log ′)2% 35 (3)
4
The exponent n must be negative and parameter B close to zero, because if tends to
infinity, void ratio tends to zero.
The method is attractive but strongly dependent on preconsolidation stress in the field
(Fig. 6). For different degrees of sampling disturbance, the locus of lies along the normal
line at the points of maximum curvature of the − log curves. There is always a
subjectivity in defining these points, particularly when dealing with a bad quality sample.
Besides, small changes in the slope of the perpendicular line has a strong influence in
locating the field preconsolidation stress.
Another important issue in Nagaraj et al.’s (1990) procedure is the scale effect
dependency. The more elongated the graph on the horizontal axis, the flatter the tangent line.
Thus, the line representing the locus of line will tend to be vertical, and the intersection
with will occur to a smaller effective stress.
The authors remark that Rutledge (1944) and Nagaraj et al. (1990) do not make a clear
distinction between the void ratio in the field and in the sample .
Terzaghi et al. (1996) consider good quality specimens those that present a volumetric
strain equal to or less than 2% to the in situ effective vertical stress

in an oedometer test.
11
Nonetheless, those authors still recommend the reconstruction of the field virgin curve (end
of primary – EOP) by starting at point ( , ) in Fig. 7, drawing a parallel curve to the
recompression path up to the preconsolidation stress, and then gradually joining it to the
laboratory EOP compression curve.

Schmertmann’s (1953) graphical approach for reconstructing − log curve is probably
the most commonly used method worldwide. The method was conceived from the
observation of the main characteristics of one-dimensional consolidation-curves of
reasonably high-quality samples. The main aspects of Schmertmann’s approach are presented
below and illustrated in Fig. 8: Some comments from the authors are presented as well.
i) The virgin consolidation slope is a geotechnical property of the clay and is
independent of the initial void ratio ( ) and preconsolidation stress ;
ii) The intersection of the field virgin slope with the virgin slopes of oedometer tests
occurs at a void ratio from 37% to 60% of the initial void ratio. The value
= 42% (point i in Fig. 8) was considered a reasonable estimate for most
clays.
The authors consider worth to mention that conceptually the point i in Fig. 8 (item
ii) is similar to the transition stress % defined by Nagaraj et al. (1990). However,
point i defines the interception of the maximum tangent of any experimental virgin
curve (usually at the vicinity of the preconsolidation stress ), while the
transition stress % represents the interception point of the remolded and
undisturbed sample compression curves.
iii) Sample disturbance has a minor influence on the unloading slope;
12
Page 13 of 55
iv) If the sampling procedure does not allow swelling during storage, the initial void
ratio corresponds to the field value . The consolidation curve is mainly
horizontal at the initial void ratio , to the existing overburden pressure

;
v) Field recompression slope Cr between

and is approximately parallel to
unloading slope Cs. Later, Schmertman (1953) showed that cycles of
recompression and rebound provided a recompression slope Cr around 1.15 Cs.
The authors point out that Ladd (1971) showed that the average slope of the
unloading-reloading cycle increases with the increasing rebound. However, Cr is
independent of the maximum past pressure .
On normally or slightly overconsolidated clay deposits, the slope of the
recompression zone has a nearly negligible influence on settlement predictions
and, therefore, it has minor importance in any attempt of reconstructing − log
curve. Thus, the parallelism or any other correlation (Cr = 1.15 Cs) between the
recompression and the unloading slope are almost irrelevant. In fact, Schmertmann
have shown that small changes in recompression slope did not virtually affect the
estimation of .
vi) The difference between the void ratio of the reconstructed consolidation curve and
the corresponding value of a 1D-compression-test curve, referred to void-ratio-
reduction, indicates a normal-like symmetric distribution, with a maximum value
around and this peak value increases with the degree of disturbance of the
sample;
vii) The preconsolidation stress is one of the key aspects to address true 1D-
compression behavior. The higher the degree of disturbance of the sample, the
more uncertain the definition of the minimum radius of curvature of Casagrande’s

13
method. Schmertmann, therefore, suggests two methods that use either water
content data or void-ratio-reduction pattern. The water content data approach uses
the concept that soil moisture is independent of sample disturbance, to define in
situ condition −

. The preconsolidation pressure is obtained by

comparing this conditions to the corresponding one on the virgin compression
curve at normally consolidated state . The void-ratio-reduction graph approach is
carried out iteratively by varying and reconstructing the 1D-compression curve.
The best estimate of provides a symmetrical void-ratio-reduction pattern curve.
Despite being worldwide accepted and conceived through experimental results,
Schmertmann’s approach presents some issues regarding the slope of the virgin curve and the
estimate of preconsolidation stress that may introduce some bias on the reconstructed
curves.
Some researchers (Bartlett and Alcorn, 2004; Gilbert, 1992) suggested that Casagrande’s
method is the best way of predicting

independently of the degree of disturbance.
However, a number of experimental results (Ladd 1971; Coutinho 1976; Nagaraj et al. 1990;
Lunne et al. 1997; Terzaghi et al. 1996; Sangata and Germain 2002; Hammam et al. 2015)
have clearly shown of high quality samples higher than the predicted value from disturbed
samples. The void-ratio-reduction pattern approach proposed by Schmertmann is
questionable since, even in his work, a perfect symmetry has not been verified
experimentally.
Schmertman (1953) and others (Coutinho 1976; Butterfield 1979; Nagaraj et al. 1990;
Martins 1983) have demonstrated an S-shape curvature of the virgin compression line. After
the preconsolidation stress, the slope is steeper as a result of the breakdown of cementation
14
Page 15 of 55
bonds between particles or their aggregates. With the increase of the effective stress, this
process gradually reduces, and the slope decreases. Beyond this point, herein called transition
effective stress (% ), interparticle bonds control compression, and the soil behavior is similar
to its remolded state condition.

It also worth to mention that after drawing the three basic lines (Fig. 8) Schmertmann
suggests that the straight line between

and be replaced by a curve to assure that the
sharpest curvature yields a

that agrees with the maximum value of the void-ratio-reduction
curve.
Proposed Approach
Either using Casagrande's approach or the void ratio reduction pattern, Schmertmann's
method is doubtful in estimating preconsolidation stress. The method herein proposed
reduces these uncertainties and overcome any subjectivity in the interpretation of

.
Fig. 9 compares a hypothetical in situ one-dimensional consolidation curve with expected
results of two samples with different degrees of disturbance. Both indicate an intersection
point i, which can be considered to occur at = = 0.42: and = . If one considers
two stresses ; and ;; equidistant from

, the corresponding void ratios ; and ;; can be
analytically expressed by:
;
; = − <= log > ? − <@ log > ?

(4)
;;
;; = − <= log > ?

(5)
where Cc and Cr are, respectively, the compression and recompression indices of the
undisturbed curve.
Similarly, the void ratios corresponding to the highly disturbed sample are expressed by
15
;
;,A = − <=,A log > ?

(6)
′;;
;;,A = − <=,A log > ?

(7)
where <=,A is the compression index of the disturbed specimen.

According to Schmertmann’s symmetry assumption of the void-ratio-reduction pattern
curve, independently of the degree of disturbance, the same void ratio difference is expected
at ; and ;; . So, one may write:
∆; = ; − ;,A = ∆;; = ;; − ;;,A (8)
Substituting Eqs. (4) to (7) in Eq. (8), gives:
; ;
<=,A log > ? = <= log > ? + <@ log > ?
;; ;;
(9)
If stresses ; and ;; are symmetric from in log scale, the following relationship holds:
; (1
=
;;
0)
Summing and subtracting the term <=,A log in the left hand side of Eq. (9) and
inputting the logarithm property (Eq. 10), Eq. (10) becomes:
D

<=,A Blog > ?C = <= log > ? + <@ log > ?
;; ;; ;; (11)
or
2<=,A = <= + <@ (12)
Eq. (12) defines the necessary condition to assure symmetry of the void-ratio-reduction
pattern curve for high-disturbed specimens. Usually, the degrees of disturbance of laboratory
samples provide 1D-compression curves that show a clear distinction between the
16
Page 17 of 55
recompression and virgin compression slopes (Fig. 9). So, independently of the degree of
disturbance, the authors propose as a general approach that the left-hand side of Eq. (12) be
represented by the two slopes:
<=,E + <@,E = <= + <@ (13)

Where <@,E and <=,E are, respectively, the recompression and compression indices of a
disturbed specimen.
Eq. (13) reveals that there is a direct relationship between recompression and compression
slopes of the disturbed sample and the in situ compression behavior. So, to reconstruct in situ
one-dimensional − log , curve two aspects must be addressed: i) the slopes must satisfy
Eq. (13) and ii) the intersection of recompression and virgin slopes depends on estimate.
Three terms of Eq. 13 can be easily estimated and the virgin compression slope <= is the
only unknown variable. The recompression Cr,d and compression <=, indices can be
computed from experimental tests on disturbed samples (Fig. 9). The recompression Cr index
of the undisturbed curve can be defined as <@ ⁄< = 1~1.15 (Schmertmann, 1953), since the
swelling slope does not depend on the degree of disturbance.
It worth to remark that Eq. (12) and Eq. (13) are approximated solutions, based on the
void-ratio-reduction pattern for bi-rectilinear compression curves. In fact, the compression
indices depend on the effective stress level. A progressive increase of the effective stresses
causes the break of particles bonding and the loss of the structure. Therefore, the compression
slope <= decreases to a lower magnitude similar to <=,A .
Besides, the condition shown in Eq. (12) is not true. There is a contradiction regarding the
concept of uniqueness of the compression virgin curve. For example, if the recompression
slope Cr is assumed to be constant and the slope Cc,hd varies depending on the degree of
sample disturbance, the virgin compression slope in the field Cc would not be unique for a
17
given soil. Ideally, the virgin slope of the reconstructed curve should be similar to field
compression curve.
Nonetheless, aiming to reduce uncertainties associated to the interpretation of the curve
parameters, the authors suggest the use of the highest slopes of the virgin curve for the
application of the method. The authors also recommend Pacheco Silva’s method to assess the
preconsolidation stress ,

of experimental 1D-compression curves, because this method is
not sensitive to the scale of the axes and it is independent of the recompression slope,
sometimes difficult to be determined.
It is also interesting to note that the preconsolidation stress can be estimated
numerically. Considering that the void ratio ep at the preconsolidation stress may be
computed by using either corresponding variation of the void ratio within the recompression
or compression slopes (Fig. 9), one can write:

= − <@ log > ? = − <= log > ?

(14)
Or
(<= − <@ ) log = <= log( ) − <@ log(:

)
− − (15)
Therefore, the preconsolidation stress may be expressed by:
8
( )HI (HI 7HJ )
= B H 107KLMNO 7L C
(: ) J
(16)
By the use of Eq. 16, the proposed method to reconstruct the experimental compression curve
can be solved not only graphically but also analytically.
18
Page 19 of 55
The step-by-step graphical procedure, for different degrees of disturbance is illustrated in Fig.
10 and described below. The first four steps are common for all condition of sample
disturbance.
i. Draw a horizontal line in to field vertical effective stress

(point E);
ii. Draw a parallel line to the unloading slope (<@ = < ) at the point E, to create the
recompression slope. The relationship <@ = 1.15< (Schmertmann 1953) had no
significant influence on the reconstructed curve;
iii. Draw an auxiliary line parallel to the unloading slope < at point i ( = 42% : );
iv. Draw a tangent line (Point M) that expresses the highest slope of the experimental
virgin curve <=,

∗
. This line defines the position of point F, at horizontal line;
If point F lays on the left side of point E (Fig. 10a), the sample is classified as being
highly disturbed. Otherwise, it has a minor degree of disturbance (Fig. 10b);
v. For highly disturbed samples (Fig. 10a) the remaining steps are:
a. Draw a vertical line at any stress level to obtain point A on the parallel line to
unloading slope Cr and point B on the auxiliary line MF. Point C is determined
by keeping the vertical distance AB equal to BC. This graphical procedure
assures the relationship between the slopes given in Eq. (12). The segment AB
QQQQQ − ((
((. = .( QQQQQ ) is equivalent to the subtraction (<=,
∗
− <@ ) and is equal to
QQQQ − .(
segment CB (= Q<( QQQQQ ) that corresponds to (<= − <=,
∗
);
b. The virgin compression slope is obtained by a line connecting the point C to
point R;
c. The intersection of recompression and compression slopes defines
preconsolidation stress .
v. For less disturbed samples (Fig. 10b) the remaining steps are:
19
a. Determine the preconsolidation stress ,

;
b. Extend line MF until it crosses the overburden pressure, obtaining point G;
c. Draw a vertical line through ,

and obtain point Q, along with the line MFG
(see construction detail in Fig. 10b)

d. Draw a line connecting point Q to a mid-distance between the points E and G;
e. Draw a parallel line to the segment HQ at the point i;
f. Draw a vertical line at any stress level to determine point A, on the parallel
line to the unloading slope, and point B, on the parallel line to the segment
QQQQ = .<
HQ. Point C is such that (. QQQQ . This graphical procedure satisfies Eq. (13)
and the idea is analogous to step (a) of the highly disturbed sample;
g. The virgin compression slope is obtained by the line that connects the point C
to point i;
h. The intersection of recompression and compression slopes defines
preconsolidation stress ;
Application of the proposed method
The validity of the proposed methodology was firstly examined by the results of
reconstructing 1D-compression curves presented by Schmertmann (1953) and Nagaraj et al.
(1990). Then, high quality and remolded samples of marine soft clays, from Rio de Janeiro,
Brazil, have also been evaluated. In all cases, the variation of volume due to sampling
procedure was disregarded; the initial and in situ void ratios are considered the same.
Schmertmann (1953) presented an example of the use of his method to reconstruct a
laboratory compression curve. His goal was to predict the settlement of the foundation mat of
a silo structure, directly from the reconstructed compression curves. The deposit consisted of
20
Page 21 of 55
a 2.4m thick compressible layer (S = 75%; T = 25%; G = 2.73), river-deposited. The void-
ratio-construction-pattern method provided the most probable preconsolidation stress =
479kPa.
The proposed method was applied to the experimental compression curve (dotted line in
Fig. 11), and the results were reasonably similar to Schmertmann’s reconstructed curve
(Fig.13 from Schmertmann (1953)). The virgin compression slope did not differ significantly
and the predicted preconsolidation stress was slightly higher (4.4%) from Schmertmann’s
prediction. The peak of void-ratio-reduction pattern curve coincides with the preconsolidation
stress since the symmetry assumption is incorporated in the mathematical development of the
proposed method.
Another example presented by Schmertmann (1953) refers to consolidation tests on a
glacial soil, highly overconsolidated and with very low initial void ratio (Northern Michigan
clay). The liquid and plastic limits are 22% and 12%; respectively. The tests were carried out
on good quality and disturbed samples of the same soil. Sample disturbance was caused by
the use of poor sampling technique. Fig. 12 shows the experimental and the reconstructed
curves. It interesting to note that the reconstructed curves for both degrees of disturbance are
quite similar. Insignificant differences were verified on the estimate of field preconsolidation
stress and on the slope of the virgin line. These results may suggest that the use of the
methodology of reconstructing compression curves may enhance the reliability of the
experimental result for settlement predictions.
The symmetry and the peak stress of the void-ratio-reduction pattern curve are in
agreement with Schmertmann’s method. The void-ratio-reduction curve due to sample
disturbance is symmetric but with a tendency to bend to the left side of the void-ratio-
reduction pattern curve.
21
Nagaraj et al. (1990) tested their method by reconstructing − log curve obtained
from a high quality sample of Leda Clay. The results, shown in Fig. 13, revealed a reasonable
agreement between the virgin slopes. Nagaraj et al. neglect the recompression slope by
assuming it horizontal. The present approach practically coincided with the experimental
curve at the vicinity of the preconsolidation stress. However, the proposed method’s
assumption of a straight line to the virgin path was incapable of reproducing the reduction of
soil compressibility with the increase in effective stress. On the other hand, the
recompression slope was reasonably fitted.
The validity of the present approach has also been tested in oedometer tests on marine
clays from Sarapuí river clay deposit, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The tests were carried out on
both high quality and remolded soil samples. The disturbance of the specimen was attained
by placing it inside a plastic bag and kneading it manually, to cause the complete loss of the
structure. The plastic bag prevented the loss of moisture to the air or to the operator's hand
(Da Silva 2013).
The clay layer is about 8m thick, formed in the Holocene between approximately 2000
years and 8500 years ago. The soil moisture at surface ranges from 200% to 100%,
decreasing to about 110% at the bottom, similarly to the liquid limit. The plasticity index
increases from 70% at the surface to 170% at 3.0m depth and then decreases to about 90%
(Januzzi et al. 2015). All samples revealed organic matter. Table 3 shows soil
characterization of the three samples. Despite the difference in the extraction depth, the
results may be considered as being representative of a single layer.
Each set of experimental curves from high and low-quality specimens was analyzed, and
predicted curves are plotted in Fig. 14, as well as the corresponding void-ratio-reduction
pattern curves. Similar to the observations made with the reconstruction of Leda Clay
22
Page 23 of 55
compression curves (Fig. 13), the predicted field compression curves have shown to be fairly
independent of the degree of disturbance.
As expected, the void-ratio-reduction patterns corresponding to the remolded samples
revealed the higher peak value. The void-ratio-reduction patterns computed using the
difference between the void ratios of the high-quality and remolded samples (experimental
data in Fig. 14) were approximately symmetric, and the peak value did not agree with the one
obtained with the reconstructed curves.
Fig. 15 compares the compressibility parameters of the experimental and reconstructed
compression curves. The high-quality samples revealed almost no improvement with the
reconstruction of the experimental curve. The difference between the experimental and
predicted values was nearly negligible. The compressibility parameters of the remolded
samples showed significant changes. The preconsolidation stress, initially estimated around
7kPa, increased to an average value of 23kPa (Fig. 15a). The same pattern has been observed
with the compression index Cc (Fig. 15b). The slope of the reconstituted virgin line showed
an increase of 76% ( from 1.7 to 3.0). On the other hand, the recompression slope Cr reduced
50% (from 0.6 to 0.3).
Depending on the degree of disturbance of the clay sample, the reconstruction of the
laboratory consolidation curve has a significant influence on settlement estimates. As an
example, consider a large 3m-high embankment (U% = 17 kN/m³) built on Sarapuí clay
deposit. The clay layer is reasonably homogeneous with an average specific weight of
12.75kN/m³. The water level is very close to the ground level. Assuming the geotechnical
parameters of Sample 3 (Table 3 and Fig. 14c) as being representative of the whole layer, the
predicted settlements are summarized in Table 4. The results indicate the need of
reconstructing laboratory compression curves obtained from poor quality soil specimens. The
23
proposed method produced corrected curves that are very close to the high-quality specimens
ones. On the other hand, for a practical point of view, the improvement achieved with of
high-quality sample curve is small.
The method herein proposed revealed as a promising alternative to correct the behavior of
poor quality experimental soil specimens. Independent of the degree of disturbance, the
reconstructed curve is nearly unique. However, it revealed incapable of fitting the curvature
of the virgin path. To overcome this limitation, the authors suggested the use of the non-
linear equation proposed by Nagaraj et al. (1990). The corrected virgin slope, between the
preconsolidation stress and the transition stress % = 10 , is drawn by using Eq.(2). This
hybrid approach was applied to the compression curves of the six oedometer tests of Sarapuí
clay and the results are presented in Fig. 16. Except for sample S2, the reconstructed virgin
curves showed a significant improvement and fitted reasonably well the compression curves
of the high-quality samples, for the whole range of effective stress. The reconstituted virgin
paths of sample S2 were not entirely coincident, due to the offset between the high-quality
and disturbed samples experimental curves. The transition stresses are similar, but the void
ratios are different and the reconstituted virgin path is forced to be tangent to the
experimental curve at the transition stress % .
Conclusions
The common effects of sample disturbance on compressibility parameters are the decrease
in preconsolidation stress, increase in reconsolidation slope and reduction in virgin
compression slope. In these cases, settlement predictions uncertainties vary in a large extent.
Thus, for design purposes, the authors strongly recommend the use of a quality criteria to
24
Page 25 of 55
evaluate the experimental curves and, except for the high-quality samples, a corrected curve
may be adopted as an alternative in design.
Among the proposals available in the literature, Schmertmann (1953) and Nagaraj et al.
(1990) approaches have also been analyzed. Schmertmann’s method is probably the most
accepted worldwide, but it involves uncertainties regarding the interpretation of the
preconsolidation stress. Besides, it is not adequate for sensitive clays that exhibit an S-shape
virgin path. Nagaraj et al. (1990) method has the advantage of proposing a nonlinear equation
for the virgin curve but also presents some issues in the determination of the preconsolidation
stress. Additionally, the process is limited to very good to excellent samples.
The main difficulty in getting a reliably reconstructed curve resides in the prediction of
the preconsolidation stress . The method herein presented minimize this issue and provided
a more consistent and independent way to proceed the reinterpretation of experimental
oedometric test results. The procedure is simple, easily incorporated in a spreadsheet, less
dependent on curve interpretation and nearly independent of the degree of sample
disturbance.
The proposed method may be used either numerically or graphically. The accuracy was
first verified by reconstructing two experimental oedometric curves presented by
Schmertmann (1953). Later, the method was applied in a curve presented by Nagaraj et al.
(1990). The reconstituted curves were very close to the curves of high quality specimens.
The proposed approach was also applied to high-quality and remolded samples from the
Sarapuí river clay deposit, in Rio de Janeiro. A single reconstructed compression curve was
obtained, regardless of the degree of sample disturbance. An example of settlement
calculation was made based on these results, showing that the reconstituted curves allow
much better settlements estimates than the bad quality specimen curve.
25
To achieve a better fit for the nonlinear behavior of the virgin curve, the n-power
equation, proposed by Nagaraj et al. (1990) was successfully incorporated. The hybrid
method showed to be a promising tool to reconstruct 1D-compression curves derived from
bad quality samples.

Compared to Schmertmann’s method the main advantage of the method herein proposed
is that all calculations can be programmed in a spreadsheet with no ambigous interpretation.
Since the proposed method is approximate, it should not be seen as a solution for any
sample disturbances. Nor should it be used to "correct" compression curves of high-quality
samples, intending to reach a state of perfect undisturbed expectation. The best alternative
for the compression curve will always be that obtained from high-quality specimens.
However, the proposed method is useful for estimating the compressibility parameters and
the preconsolidation stress – and the compression curve itself – when no better alternative
from high quality specimens is available.
Besides, the uniqueness of the reconstructed curves, independently of the degree of
disturbance, revealed a promising alternative mean to define the extent of specimen
disturbance.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank Dr. Ian Schumann M. Martins, from Federal University of Rio de
Janeiro, for his contributions on the subject. The authors also thank C. Vipulanandan for the
support as supervisor during the international scholar stage of the second author at
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Houston, Texas. Finally,
the authors thank the Brazilian research agencies CAPES, CNPq and FAPERJ for their
continuous support.
26
Page 27 of 55
Notation list
1D one dimensional;
A equation parameter;
B equation parameter;
Cc compression index;
C r recompression index;
Cs swelling index;
<=, compression index of disturbed sample;
<=,A compression index of highly disturbed sample;
<=∗ reconstructed virgin slope
<@ ∗ reconstructed recompression slope
EOP end of primary (consolidation curve);
ISA ideal sampling concept;
Iv void index;
OCR overconsolidation ratio;
PSA perfect sampling concept;
PI plasticity index;
SD degree of disturbance;
SQD specimen quality designation;
void ratio;
ei void ratio at point i;
eN,hd void ratio of a highly disturbed specimen;
eN void ratio corresponding to vertical effective stress j
initial void ratio or void ratio of the specimen;
% void ratio corresponding to σ’t ;
void ratio in the field;
i Interception of the maximum tangent of any experimental virgin curve
n equation parameter;
εv vertical strain;
effective vertical stress at point i;

theoretical value of the effective stress of the specimen;
effective stress of the specimen;
:

effective vertical stress in the field;
vertical effective stress;
27

ω
%

∆e
,
∆Woed
water content.
preconsolidation stress;
cumulated strain energy;

variation of the void ratio after sampling;
preconsolidation stress of disturbed samples;
transition stress at the field compression curve;
28
Page 28 of 55
Page 29 of 55
References
Andrade, M.E. 2009. Contribution to the study of the soft soils of Santos city. M.Sc.
thesis, Civil Engineering Department, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. (in
Portuguese).
Andresen, A., and Kolstad, P. 1979. The NGI 54-mm samplers for undisturbed sampling
of clays and representative sampling of coarser materials. In Proceedings of the International
Symposium on Soil Sampling, Singapore, pp. 13–21.
Baligh, M.M. 1985. Strain Path Method. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 111(9):
1108–1136.
Baligh, M.M., Azzouz, A.S., and Chin, C.T. 1987. Disturbances due to `ideal` tube
sampling. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 113(7): 739-757.
Bartlett, S. F., and Alcorn, P. 2004. Estimation of preconsolidation stress and compression
ratio from field and laboratory measurements from the I-15 reconstruction project, Salt Lake
City, Utah Department of Transportation Research Report No. UT-03.20, Utah.
Becker, D.R., Crooks, J.H.A, Been, K., and Jefferies, M.G. 1987. Work as criterion for
determining in-situ and yield stresses clays. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 24(4): 549-564.
Boone, S.J. 2010. A critical reappraisal of “preconsolidation pressure” interpretations
using the oedometer test. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 47(3): 281-296.
Burland, J.B. 1990. On the compressibility and shear strength of natural clays.
Géotechnique, 40(3): 329- 378.
Butterfield, R. 1979. A natural compression law for soils (an advance on e-logp´.
Géotechnique, 24(4): 469-480.
29
Casagrande, A. 1936. The determination of the preconsolidation load and its practical
significance. In Proceedings First International Conference on Soil mechanics and
Foundation Engineering., Cambridge, pp. 60-64.
Clementino, R.V. 2005. Discussion of “An oedometer test study on the preconsolidation
stress of glaciomarine clays”. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 42(3): 972-974.
Coutinho, R.Q. 1976. Consolidation tests with radial drainage in Sarapuí soft clay. M.Sc.
thesis, Civil Engineering Department, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. (in
Portuguese).
Coutinho, R.Q. 2007. Characterization and Engineering Properties of Recife Soft Clays -
Brazil, Taylor and Francis – Balkema, Eds Tan, Phoon, Hight and Leroueil, V.3: 2049-2100.
Da Silva, D.M. 2013. Estimation of the Compression Index of the Brazilian Coastal soft
soils from Characterization Tests. M.Sc. thesis, Civil Engineering Department, Federal
University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. (in Portuguese)
Gilbert, P.A. 1992. Effect of sampling disturbance on laboratory-measured soil
properties, Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Miscellaneous Paper GL-92-35,
Washington.
Grozic, J.L.H., Lunne, T. and Pande, S. 2003. An oedometer test study on the
preconsolidation stress of glaciomarine clays. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 40(5): 857-
872.
Grozic, J.L.H., Lunne, T., and Pande, S. 2005. Reply to the discussion by Clementino on:
“An oedometer test study on the preconsolidation stress of glaciomarine clays”. Canadian
Geotechnical Journal, 42(3): 975-976.
30
Page 31 of 55
Hammam, A.H., Abel-Salam, A.I., and Yousf, M.A. 2015. On the evaluation of pre-
consolidation pressure of undisturbed saturated clays. Housing and Building National
Research Center HBRC Journal, 13(1), 47-53.
Holtz, R.D., and Kovacs, W.D. 1981. An Introduction to Geotechnical Engineering,

Prentice-Hall, Inc., New Jersey.
Hvorslev, M.I. 1949. Subsurface Exploration and Sampling of Soils for Civil Engineering
Purposes. American Society of Civil Engineers, New York.
Jannuzzi, G.M.F., Danziger, F.A.B., and Martins, I.S.M. 2015. Geological-geotechnical
characterization of Sarapuí II clay. Engineering Geology, 190: 77-86.
Jose, B.T.; Sridharan, A., and Abraham, B.M. 1989. Log-log method for determination of
preconsolidation pressure. ASTM Geotechnical Testing Journal, 12:230-237.
Kootahi, K. 2017. Discussion of “Accuracy of determining pre-consolidation pressure
from laboratory tests”. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 54(3): 441-450.
La Rochelle, P., Sarrailh, J., Tavenas, F., Roy, M., and Leroueil, S. 1981. Causes of
sampling disturbance and design of a new sampler. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 18: 52-66
Ladd, C.C. 1971. Settlement Analysis for Cohesive Soils, MIT Research Report R71-2,
Soils Publication, 272.
Ladd, C. C., and Lambe, R.W. 1964. The strength of undisturbed clay determined from
undrained tests. In Laboratory shear testing of soils. ASTM Special Technical Publication No
361, pp.342–371.
Lunne, T., Berre, T., and Strandvik, S. 1997. Sample disturbance in soft low plastic
Norwegian clay M. Almeida (Ed.), Recent Developments in Soil and Pavement Mechanics,
Balkema, Rotterdam, pp.81-102.
31
Martins, I.S.M. 1983. About a new relationship void ratio-soil stress. M.Sc. thesis, Civil
Engineering Department, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. (in Portuguese)
Mesri, G., and Choi, Y.K. 1985. The uniqueness of EOP void ratio—effective stress
relationship. In Proceedings 11th European Conference on Soil mechanics and Foundation

Engineering, vol. 2, pp.587–590, San Francisco.
Nagaraj, T.S., Murthy, B.R.S., Vatsala, A., and Joshi, R.C. 1990. Analysis of
compressibility of sensitive soils. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 116(1): 105-118.
Oikawa, H. 1987. Compression curve of soft soils. Soils and Foundations. 27(3): 99–
104.
Onitsuka, K., Hong, Z., Hara, Y., and Yoshitake, S. 1995. Interpretation of oedometer
test data for natural clays. Soils and Foundations 35(3): 61-70.
Pacheco Silva, F. 1970. A new graphical construction for determination of the pre-
consolidation stress of a soil sample. In Proceedings 4th Brazilian Conference on Soil
mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Rio de Janeiro, pp.225-232 (in Portuguese).
Paniagua, P., L'Heureux, J.S., Yang, S.Y., and Lunne T.L. 2016. Study on the practices
for preconsolidation stress evaluation from oedometer tests. In Proceedings 17th Nordic
Geotechnical Meeting Challenges in Nordic Geotechnic, 25-28 June 2016, pp. 547-555.
Rutledge, P.C. 1944. Relation of Undisturbed Sampling to Laboratory Testing.
Transactions ASCE, 109, pp. 1155-1183
Sadrekarimi, A. 2017. Reply to the discussion by Kootahi on “Accuracy of determining
pre-consolidation pressure from laboratory tests”. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 54:1799-
1801. doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2017-0349.
32
Page 33 of 55
Santagata, M.C., and Germaine, J.T. 2002. Sampling disturbance effects in normally
consolidated clays. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 128(12):
997-1006.
Schmertmann, J.H. 1953. Estimating the true Consolidation Behavior of Clay from
Laboratory Test Results. In Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 79,
pp 1-26.
Terzaghi, K., Peck,. B., and Mesri, G. 1996. Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice. 3rd
Edition, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York.
Umar, M., and Sadrekarimi, A. 2017. Accuracy of determining pre-consolidation pressure
from laboratory tests. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 54(3): 441–450.
33
Figure Captions
Fig. 1. Hypothetical stress path for normally consolidated clay element during sampling
(modified from Ladd and Lambe 1964).

Fig. 2. Effect of disturbance on eo - log σ’v curves (modified from Nagaraj et al. 1990).
Fig. 3. Interpretation of

using (a) Pacheco Silva (1970) and (b) Casagrande (1936)
methods (modified from Clementino 2005).
Fig. 4. Comparison of OCRs values due to

interpreted data from Grozic et al. (2003)
(Boone 2010).
Fig. 5. Rutledge’s graphical reconstitution method.
Fig. 6. Prediction of field compression curve according to Nagaraj et al. (1990) approach.
Fig. 7. Reconstruction of field virgin curve – EOP (modified from Terzaghi et al. 1996).
Fig. 8. Schmertmann’s method for reconstruction of 1D-compression curve.
Fig. 9. Typical compression curves for different degrees of disturbance.
Fig. 10. Graphical determination of the proposed method.

Fig. 11. Application of the proposed method to Schmertmann’s (1953) example ( =
270nop, S = 75%; T = 25%; G = 2.73).
Fig. 12. Application of the proposed method to the consolidation tests of a sample

( = 43nop, S = 22%, T = 12%) from the Northern Michigan clay (modified from
Schmertmann 1953)
Fig. 13. Application of the proposed method to Nagaraj et al. (1990) example from Leda
Clay

= 30nop, S = 75%, T = 25%)..
Fig. 14. Application of the proposed method to Sarapuí Clay, Rio de Janeiro (ω =200% to
100%. PI=70% to 170%).

34
de Janeiro.
Fig. 16. Hybrid approach – Sarapui Clay
35
Fig. 15. Comparison of the experimental and predicted parameters of Sarapuí Clay, Rio
use only. This Just-IN manuscript is the accepted manuscript prior to copy editing and page composition. It may differ from the final official versio
Page 36 of 55
use only. This Just-IN manuscript is the accepted manuscript prior to copy editing and page composition. It may differ from the final official versio
Page 37 of 55
Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIVERSITY OF WOLLONGONG on 07/
IN manuscript is the accepted manuscript prior to copy editing and page composition. It may differ from th
Page 38 of 55
eotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIVERSITY OF WOLLONGONG on 0
manuscript is the accepted manuscript prior to copy editing and page composition. It may differ from
Page 39 of 55
his Just-IN manuscript is the accepted manuscript prior to copy editing and page composition. It may differ from the final off
Page 40 of 55
use only. This Just-IN manuscript is the accepted manuscript prior to copy editing and page composition. It may differ from the final official versi
Page 41 of 55
l use only. This Just-IN manuscript is the accepted manuscript prior to copy editing and page composition. It may differ from the final official versio
Page 42 of 55
Page 44 of 55
Page 45 of 55
an. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIVERSITY OF WOLLONGONG on 07/30/1
ust-IN manuscript is the accepted manuscript prior to copy editing and page composition. It may differ from the fi
Page 46 of 55
an. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIVERSITY OF WOLLONGONG on 07/30/1
Just-IN manuscript is the accepted manuscript prior to copy editing and page composition. It may differ from the fin
Page 47 of 55
d from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIVERSITY OF W
epted manuscript prior to copy editing and page compositio
Page 48 of 55
nloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIVERSITY OF WOLLO
the accepted manuscript prior to copy editing and page composition. It m
Page 49 of 55
h. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIVERSITY OF WOLLONGONG
uscript is the accepted manuscript prior to copy editing and page composition. It may differ
Page 50 of 55
nloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIVERSITY OF WOLLO
the accepted manuscript prior to copy editing and page composition. It m
Page 51 of 55
Table 1. Sample disturbance evaluation criteria.
( − )⁄

OCR Excellent to Very Good Good to Regular to Poor to very
Very poor
very good to Good Regular Poor poor
Lunne
et al. 1–2 < 0.04 - 0.04 – 0.07 - 0.07 – 0.14 > 0.14
(1997)
2–4 < 0.03 - 0.03– 0.05 - 0.05 – 0.10 > 0.10
Andrade
(2009) 1 – 2.5 < 0.05 0.05 – 0.065 0.065 – 0.08 0.08 – 0.11 0.11 – 0.14 > 0.14
Page 53 of 55
Table 2. Methods to compute preconsolidation stress (modified from Hammam et al.,
2015 and Boone, 2010).
Method Space Comments

Casagrande (1936) − log Graphical, subjective, most commonly used
Schmertmann
(1953)
− log Suitable for soft and stiff soil
1
−
Empirical; Graphical construction; reflects a
Janbu (1969)
marked drop of constrained modulus
Pacheco Silva Graphical, easy to use, good results for soft
− log
(1970) soils, widely used in Brazil
( ) − log
Tavenas and
Regression analysis
Leroueil (1979)
log(1 + ) − log
Graphical, depends on critical state theory.
Butterfield (1979)
Empirical observation of test plots
log(1 + ) − log
Graphical; intersection of a linear fit. Empirical
Oikawa (1987)
observation of test plots
Graphical; for each successive loading

∆ = 0.5( + )⁄( + );
Becker et al. (1987) ∆ −
intersection of lines of the cumulated strain
energy ∆ and
Jose (1989) log() − log Fitted lines, regression analysis
Empirical; Graphical construction; conceived for
Nagaraj et al.
(1990)
− log sensitive soils (see Error! Reference source not
found.)
Graphical; intersection of a linear fit of the virgin
− log
and void index, = ( − !"# )⁄$%
Burland (1990)

Empirical observations, (%
& = 2.5(%
= point of
Jacobsen (1992)
maximum curvature
Onitsuka et al.
log(1 + ) − log Graphical. Intersection of fitted lines
(1995)
The abscissa of point of intersection between
( ∙ *)
Senol and Saglamer
(2002)
− log the extensions of first and third lines represent
%
Analytical, based on the single slope-intercept
Boone (2010) − log concept. Main advantage is being no subjective
and do not require graphical interpretation
− log
Compression curve expressed by a quartic
Shao et al. (2013)
polynomial; based on Casagrande’s method
Table 3.Characterization and classification of samples from Sarapui River Clay Deposit
(Da Silva, 2013).
Experimental Data
Field data
High-quality samples Remolded sample
Depth
Sample
(m) Effective
Void Initial Initial void Void ratio
vertical
ratio void ratio Sample Quality ratio variation
stress (Andrade, 2009)
(e) ( ) ( ) − )/
( kPa)
Excellent to 5%
S-1 1.71 4.7 4.15 4.22 4.43
Very good
Excellent to 0.02%
S-2 2.56 6.9 4.48 4.55 4.56
Very good
Excellent to 1.8%
S-3 3.72 10.3 4.44 4.54 4.62
Very good
result
curve
compression
Experimental
Reconstituted
Sample Condition
Disturbed
Disturbed
High-quality
High-quality

Table 4. Comparison of settlement estimates
4.54
4.62
4.54
4.62
∆
1.48
1.37
1.42
1.13
(m)
2.14
1.95
2.05
1.61
Settlement
0
5%
-4%
22%
Error

Reconstructing oedometric compression curves

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Reconstructing oedometric compression curves

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Page 1 of 55

Reconstructing oedometric compression curves for selecting design parameters

Raphael Felipe Carneiro, M. Sc, DSc Candidate (*)

Denise Maria Soares Gerscovich, DSc.(**)

Bernadete Ragoni Danziger DSc.(***)

(*) Rio de Janeiro State University

(**) Rio de Janeiro State University

(***) Rio de Janeiro State University

Corresponding author: Gerscovich, D.

and laboratory handling causes unavoidable disturbance. Undisturbed sampling is a

Schmertmann's method is probably the most commonly adopted in engineering practice.

However, it presents difficulties in determining preconsolidation stress. The paper primarily

implementation and the reconstructed curves are unaffected by experimental curve

Key-words: 1D-compression curve, consolidation; sample disturbance; compression

curve reconstruction, settlement.

Schmertmann (1953) showed the differences between laboratory and geological

“acceptable” sample to indicate a sample obtained by using techniques to minimize material

closer to the field behavior.

main points and proposes an alternative methodology.

When compared to high-quality samples, oedometric compression curves of disturbed

consolidation slope; v) higher compressibility of the recompression slope; vi) fallacious

one-dimensional consolidation curves and the estimate of field preconsolidation stress .

disturbance could be qualitatively evaluated by visual inspection of the sample surface or by

recovery ratios higher or smaller than unity.

Before advising a method to reconstruct the 1D- compression curve it is necessary to

define the degree of disturbance.

Ladd and Lambe (1964) proposed a criterion by measuring the ratio ⁄

retrieval and extrusion (Baligh et al. 1987).

provide ε < 2% (Terzaghi et al. 1996).

distinguishing between operator-dependent disturbance and a minimum degree of sampling

sampling disturbance effects on the undrained behavior of clays could be reduced by

caution with soils with OCR outside these ranges.

swelling produces a reduction of the degree of saturation S. In the laboratory, it is not

issues. Andrade (2009) ranges are also presented in Tab. 1.

sample is disregarded, is obtained by drawing a horizontal line at  .

compares the predicted preconsolidation stress with preconsolidation stress ,

from laboratory compression curve:

Reconstructing field consolidation curve

define preconsolidation stress disappears.

Estimating preconsolidation stress

The preconsolidation stress represents the boundary at which significant structural

to an incorrect interpretation of . The term has been originally defined based on a

usually exposed to uncertainties; the judgment is human-dependent. Moreover, Clementino

Grozic et al. (2003) presented 187 attempts at estimating

interpretation of the cumulative strain energy density (Boone 2010).

Instead of a graphical approach on a smooth consolidation curve, Boone (2010) proposed

interpreting , and experienced the uncertainties produced by graphical methods. Small

the plot increased the difficulties in reading the stress values.

Umar and Sadrekarimi (2017) conducted a series of laboratory oedometer tests on

Canadian clay specimens, subject to cycles of one-dimensional compression loading and

compared with the predictions obtained by different methods revealed a trend of

and Jose et al. (1989) as being the more trustworthy.

The truth is that a reliable

geotechnical engineering practice, because of the uncertainties involving determination

compromise the assessment of the compressibility parameters. Besides, many of the

empirical correlations, available in the literature to estimate clay properties depends on a

questionable value of OCR or .

Methods for reconstruction the one-dimensional compression curve

For overconsolidated soils, the preconsolidation stress is initially determined – for

of the curve is kept undetermined.

≤ ) undergoes a negligible vertical strain. Zone 2 ( ≤ ≤ % ) is defined by a steep

points (% and ) are located.

perpendicular line crossing laboratory preconsolidation stress ,

sample is disregarded, is obtained by drawing a horizontal line at .

compares the predicted preconsolidation stress with preconsolidation stress ,

perpendicular line crossing laboratory preconsolidation stress ,

/1 = (6(log ′),78

with will occur to a smaller effective stress.

independent of the initial void ratio ( ) and preconsolidation stress ;

= 42% (point i in Fig. 8) was considered a reasonable estimate for most

v) Field recompression slope Cr between

situ condition −

suggests that the straight line between

where <=,A is the compression index of the disturbed specimen.

∆; = ; − ;,A = ∆;; = ;; − ;;,A (8)

2<=,A = <= + <@ (12)

slope <= decreases to a lower magnitude similar to <=,A .

(<= − <@ ) log = <= log( ) − <@ log(:

i. Draw a horizontal line in to field vertical effective stress

virgin curve <=,

a. Determine the preconsolidation stress ,