EELASTIC LASTIC SSETTLEMENT ETTLEMENT OF OF

SSHALLOW HALLOW FFOUNDATIONS OUNDATIONS ON ON

GGRANULAR RANULAR SSOIL OIL
A C A CRITICAL RITICAL RREVIEW EVIEW AC ACRITICAL RITICAL RREVIEW EVIEW
BBRAJA RAJA M.D M.DAS AS
Settlement,S
Elastic settlement S Elasticsettlement,S
e
Consolidation settlement Consolidationsettlement
Primary,S
p
Secondary S Secondary, S
s
S=S
e
+S
p
+S
s e p s
Inhislandmarkpaperin1927entitledTheScienceof
Foundations,KarlTerzaghiwrote:
Foundationproblems,throughout,areofsuchcharacterthat
a strictly theoretical mathematical treatment will always be astrictlytheoreticalmathematicaltreatmentwillalwaysbe
impossible.Theonlywaytohandlethemefficientlyconsists
offindingout,first,whathashappenedonprecedingjobsofa
similarcharacter;next,thekindofsoilonwhichthe
operationswereperformed;and,finally,whytheoperations
have led to certain results. By systematically accumulating haveledtocertainresults.Bysystematicallyaccumulating
suchknowledge,theempiricaldatabeingwelldefinedbythe
resultsofadequatesoilinvestigations,foundationengineering
could be developed into a semi empirical science couldbedevelopedintoasemiempiricalscience....
Thebulkoftheworkthesystematicaccumulationof
empiricaldataremainstobedone. empirical data remains to be done.
Toevaluatethecurrentstateoftheartfor
settlementpredictionsofshallowfoundationsin p
sand,inanattempttopromotetheuseofshallow
foundations.
AFHWAinitiative
1 F d l Hi h Ad i i t ti (FHWA) 1. FederalHighwayAdministration(FHWA)
2. TexasA&MUniversity
3 Geotest Engineering 3. Geotest Engineering
4. AmericanSocietyofCivilEngineers(ASCE)
T A&M U i it TexasA&MUniversity
NationalGeotech ExperimentSite
Approximately12m 28m
5 Square Footings: 1m 1m
1 1 1.5m 1.5 m
2.5m 2.5m
3m 3m (North) 3m 3m (North)
3m 3m (South)
PROBLEM: PROBLEM:
Predicttheloadat25mmsettlement
InSitu TestSummary
h l h 3 Boreholesheartest 3
Crossholetest 4
Cone penetration test 7 Conepenetrationtest 7
Dilatometertest 4
Pressuremeter test 4
Stepbladetest 1
Standardpenetrationtest 6
Numberofparticipants: 31
15consultants
16academics
Israel 1 Brazil 1
Japan 1 France 1 Japan 1 France 1
Canada 2 Italy 1
Hong Kong 1 Australia 2 HongKong 1 Australia 2
USA 21
MethodsUsedforSettlementPrediction
22 different methods 22differentmethods
Schmertmann(1970,1978),BurlandandBurbidge(1985)
andFEMbeingpopular
Alpan (3times)
Bowles (4)
Menard/Briaud (5)
Meyerhof (4) Bowles(4)
Buisman, DeBeer (3)
Burland &Burbidge(9)
Meyerhof(4)
NAVFAC(4)
Oweis (4)
CanadaFound.Manual(1)
DAppolonia (4)
DeBeer (1)
Parry(1)
Peck(2)
Robertson&Campanella (1) ( )
Decourt (1)
FEM(1)
Hanson (1)
p ( )
Schmertmann (18)
Schulze&Sherif (3)
Terzaghi & Peck (5) Hanson(1)
Leonard&Frost (4)
Terzaghi&Peck(5)
Vesic (6)
P di d M d V l f Q Predictedvs.MeasuredValuesofQ
25
Footing(m)
Item
11 1.51.5 2.52.5 33 33
P di i Prediction
range(kN)
591100 1162950 2954271 4075600 4156400
Measured 850 1500 3600 4500 5200 Measured 850 1500 3600 4500 5200
Elastic Settlement S ElasticSettlement,S
e
Existingmethodsforpredictingsettlementmaybe
groupedintothreecategories:
A Methodsinwhichobservedsettlementof
structuresarelinkedtoinsitu testresults
( t d d t ti t t (standardpenetrationtest,cone
penetrationtest,Pressuremeter tests)
B S i i i l th d B Semiempiricalmethod
C Useoftheoryofelasticityandmodulusof
l i i E elasticity,E
s
CATEGORYA
TerzaghiandPeck(1948,1967)
Meyerhof(1956,1965)
DeBeer andMartens(1957)
Hough(1969)
PeckandBazaraa (1969) ( )
Burland andBurbidge(1985)
Terzaghi and Peck (1948 1967) TerzaghiandPeck(1948,1967)
4 S
2
1
) 1 (
1
4

|
.
|

\
|
+
=
B
B
S
S
e
e
S = settlement of prototype foundation measuring

|
.

\
B
S
e
=settlementofprototypefoundationmeasuring
BB
l f l i S
e(1)
=settlementofatestplatemeasuringB
1
B
1
B
1
isusuallyoftheorderof0.3mto1m
1
y
TerzaghiandPeck(1948,1967)
2
3
| |
B
2
60
3 . 0
3
|
.
|

\
|
+
=
B
B
N
q
C C S
D W e
whereq isinkN/m;B isinm;S isinmm
C
W
=groundwatertablecorrection
= 1 if depth of water table is greater than 2B 1ifdepthofwatertableisgreaterthan2B
belowfoundation
=2ifdepthofwatertableislessthanorequal p q
toB
C
D
=correctionfordepthofembedment
D
p
=1 (D
f
/4B)
Si ak gan Eckersle and Li (1998) Sivakugan,EckersleyandLi(1998)
analyzed79settlementrecords
offoundationsprovidedby
JeypalanandBoehm(1986) yp ( )
andPapadopoulos(1992).
4
2
B S
e
|
.
|

\
|
=
1
3 . 0
4
2
) 1 (
S B
B S
e
|
|

|
| |
|
.

\
+
4
1
3 . 0
) 1 (
S
S
B
B
e
e
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
|
.
|

\
|
+
3 0
3
2
60
B
B
N
q
S
e
|
.
|

\
|
+
=
1 3
3 . 0
60
S q
S
B N
e
|
|
|

|
=
. \
+
4
60
) 1 ( 60
N q
S N
S
e
e
|
|
.

\
75 . 0
60
) 1 (
N
S
q
e
=
Meyerhof y

s = m) 22 1 (
) (kN/m 2
(mm)
2
B
q
S

>
|
|

|
s =
m) 22 1 (
) (kN/m 3
(mm)
m) 22 . 1 ( (mm)
1956
2
2
60
B
B q
S
B
N
S
e

>
|
.

\
+
= m) 22 . 1 (
3 . 0
(mm)
60
B
B N
S
e

/
2

s = m) 22 . 1 (
) (kN/m 25 . 1
(mm)
1965
2
2
60
2
B
N
q
S
e

>
|
.
|

\
|
+
= m) 22 . 1 (
3 . 0
) (kN/m 2
(mm)
2
60
2
B
B
B
N
q
S
e
Note:q increasedbyabout50%
m) 22 . 1 (
25 . 1
(mm)
60
s = B
N
q
C C S
D W e
and
60
N
) 22 1 (
) (kN/m 2
( )
2
2
|
|

|
B
B q
C C S m) 22 . 1 (
3 . 0
) ( /
(mm)
60
>
|
.
|

\
|
+
= B
B N
q
C C S
D W e
and
0 . 1 =
W
C
and
B
D
C
f
D
4
0 . 1 =
Meyerhofs Analysis (1965) MeyerhofsAnalysis(1965)
Structure
B
(m)
Average
N
60
q
(kN/m
2
) ) observed (
) predicted (
e
e
S
S
T.Edison,SaoPaulo
Banco doBrasil,SaoPaulo
Iparanga,SaoPaulo
18.3
22.9
9.15
15
18
9
229.8
239.4
220.2
1.95
0.99
1.29 p g ,
C.B.I.Esplanada,SaoPaulo
Riscala,SaoPaulo
Thyssen Dusseldorf
14.6
3.96
22 6
22
20
25
383.0
229.8
239 4
1.20
1.56
0 77 Thyssen,Dusseldorf
Ministry,Dusseldorf
Chimney,Cologne
22.6
15.9
20.4
25
20
10
239.4
220.4
172.4
0.77
0.98
3.30
Average1.50
DeBeerandMartens(1957)
H S
o
|
|

| o A + o
'
log
3 . 2
H
C
S
o
o
e
|
.

\
o
'
=
10
log
o
o
=effectiveoverburdenpressureatadepth
Ao =increaseinpressureduetofoundationloading
H =thicknessoflayerconsidered
c
q
C
'
~ 5 . 1
FieldTestResults:
o
o
'
9 . 1
observed
predicted
~

e
e
S
S
observed e
S
DeBeer (1965)
Method applied to normally consolidated sand Methodappliedtonormallyconsolidatedsand
Reduction factor needed for over consolidated Reductionfactorneededforoverconsolidated
sand
Hough(1969)
C
|
|

| o A + o
'
log
1
10
H
e
C
S
o
o
o
c
e
|
.
|

\
|
o
'
o A + o
+
=
) ( b e a C
o c
=
Valueof
t t
Typeofsoil
constant
a b
Uniform cohesionless material Uniformcohesionlessmaterial
(uniformitycoefficientC
u
2)
Cleangravel 0.05 0.50
Coarsesand
Mediumsand
Finesand
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.50
0.50
0.50
Inorganicsilt 1.00 0.50
Wellgradedcohesionlesssoil
Siltysandandgravel
Clean,coarsetofinesand
Coarsetofinesilty sand
0.09
0.12
0.15
0.20
0.35
0.25 y
Sandysilt(inorganic) 0.18 0.25
PeckandBazaraa(1969)

3 0 ) (
) (kN/m 2
(mm)
2
2
|
.
|

\
|
+
=
B
B
N
q
C C S
D W e
whereB isinm
3 . 0 ) (
60 1
. \
+ B N
(N
1
)
60
=correctedstandardpenetrationnumber
C
W
=o
o
/o
o
at0.5B belowthebottomoffoundation
W o
/
o
o
o
=totaloverburdenpressure
o
o
=effectiveoverburdenpressure
o
p
C
D
=1.0 0.4(D/q)
0.5
= unit weight of soil unitweightofsoil
PeckandBazaraa (1969)
) kN/m 75 (
4
) (
2
60
60 1
> o
'
=
o
N
N ) kN/m 75 (
01 . 0 25 . 3
) (
60 1
> o
o
'
+
o
o
N
) kN/m 75 (
04 . 0 1
4
) (
2
60
60 1
s o
'
o
'
+
=
o
o
N
N
o
PeckandBazaraasMethod
( f DA l i l 1970) (afterDAppoloniaetal.1970)
GRANULARSOIL
BurlandandBurbidge(1985)
60 ) ( 60
25 . 1
gravel sandy
or gravel For
N N
a
~
g y
or sand fine For
) 15 ( 6 . 0 15
15 d
water ground the
below sand silty
or sand fine For
60 ) ( 60
+ ~
>
N N
N
a
15 and
60
> N
whereN
60(a)
=adjustedN
60
value
Depth of Stress Influence, z' DepthofStressInfluence,z
IfN
60(a)
[orN
60(a)
]isapproximatelyconstant(or
increasing)withdepth,
75 . 0
4 . 1 |
.
|

\
|
=
'
B
B
B
z
where
. \
R R
B B
B
R
=referencewidth=0.3m
B =widthoftheactualfoundation(m) width of the actual foundation (m)
DepthofStressInfluence,z'
IfN
60(a)
[orN
60(a)
]isdecreasingwithdepth,calculate
z=2B andz =distancefromthebottomofthe
foundationtothebottomofthesoftsoillayer(z ).
Use z = 2B or z = z, whichever is smaller. Usez 2B orz z ,whicheverissmaller.
DepthofInfluence
| |
H H
1 2 factor, Correction s
|
.
|

\
|
'

'
= o
z
H
z
H
H=thicknessofcompressiblelayer
For Normally Consolidated Soil ForNormallyConsolidatedSoil

e
S 71 . 1
14 0
)
`

o =
a
R
e
N N B
2
4 . 1
) ( 60 60
] or [
14 . 0
|
|

|
|
|

| |
|
.
|

\
|
q B
B
L
7 . 0
2
25 . 1
|
.

\
|
.

|
.
|

\
|
+
a R
p B
B
L
25 . 0
whereL =lengthofthefoundation
/
2
p
a
=atmosphericpressure(=100kN/m
2
)
ForOverconsolidatedSoil
pressure) idation overconsol ; ( = o
'
o
'
s
c c
q

o
e
S 57 . 0
447 0
)
`

o =
a
R
e
N N B
4 . 1
) ( 60 60
] or [
447 . 0
|
|

|
|
|

|
.
|

\
|
q B
B
L
7 . 0
2
25 . 1
|
.

\
|
.

|
.
|

\
|
+
a R
p B
B
L
25 . 0
For Overconsolidated Soil ForOverconsolidatedSoil
: ) (
c
q o
'
>

)
`

o =
e
S 57 . 0
14 . 0
4 1
| |
)
`

a
R
L
N N B ] or [
2
4 . 1
) ( 60 60
|
.
|

\
| o
'

|
.
|

\
|

|
|

|
+
|
.
|

\
|
a
c
R
p
q
B
B
L
B
L
67 . 0
25 0
25 . 1
7 . 0
. \ . \

|
.
|

\
|
+
a R
p
B
25 . 0
ProbabilityofExceeding25mmSettlementintheField
(After Sivakugan and Johnson 2004) (AfterSivakugan andJohnson2004)
Predictedmethods
Predicted
settlement
(mm)
Terzaghi&Peck
(1948)
Schmertmann
(1970)
Burland &
Burbidge
(1985)
(mm)
(1948) (1970) (1985)
1
5
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.03
10
15
20
0.00
0.09
0 20
0.02
0.13
0 20
0.15
0.25
0 34 20
25
30
35
0.20
0.26
0.31
0 35
0.20
0.27
0.32
0 37
0.34
0.42
0.49
0 44 35
40
0.35
0.387
0.37
0.42
0.44
0.51
CATEGORYB
Schmertmann (1970),
Schmertmann et al (1978) Schmertmann etal.(1978)
Briaud (2007)
Terzaghi,PeckandMesri (1996)
Akbas andKulhawy (2009)
Schmertmann (1970)
] ) 2 1 [(
) 1 (
B A
E
q
s
s
s
z
'
+
'
u
u
= c
] ) 2 1 )[( 1 ( B A
E
I
s s
s z
z
'
+
'
u u =
c
=
q
s s z
I

A = z
E
I
q C C S
s
z
e 2 1
q =netstressatthelevelofthefoundation
C correction factor for the depth of the foundation C
1
=correctionfactorforthedepthofthefoundation
=1 0.5(q
o
/q)
q = effective overburden pressure at the level of the q
o
=effectiveoverburdenpressureatthelevelofthe
foundation
C = correction factor to account for creep in soil C
2
=correctionfactortoaccountforcreepinsoil
=1+0.2log(t/0.1)
E
s
=2q
c
Thesame79foundationsrecords
givenbyJeypalan andBoehm(1986)
andPapadopoulos(1992)
wereanalyzedby y y
Sivakugan etal.(1998).
Schmertmannetal.(1978)
5 . 0
0 0 |
|

|
q
(peak)
1 . 0 5 . 0 |
.
|

\
|
o
'
+ =
o
z
q
I
Item L/B=1 L/B > 10
I
z
atz =0 0.1 0.2
z
p
/B 0.5 1.0
/B 2 0 4 0 z
o
/B 2.0 4.0
E
s
2.5q
c
3.5q
c
Salgado(2008)
2 0111 . 0 1 . 0
) 0 (at
s
|
.
|

\
|
+ =
=
B
L
I
z z
1 1 0555 0 5 0 s
|
|

|
+
. \
L
z
B
p
1 1 0555 . 0 5 . 0
| |
s
|
.
|

\
|
+ =
L
B B
p
4 1 222 . 0 2 s
|
.
|

\
|
+ =
B
L
B
z
o
Leeetal.(2008)
FEMAnalysis
5 . 0
) (peak
~ I
z
1 1 11 0 5 0
) (peak
s

|
|

|
+ =
L
z
p
z
6 at 1 of maximum a with
1 1 11 . 0 5 . 0
=
s

|
.

\
+ =
B
L
B B

| |
t L z
B
6
4 f i i h
4 3 1
5
cos 95 . 0 s +
)
`

|
.
|

\
|

t
=
L
B
L
B
z
o
6
at 4 of maximum a with
=
B
Terzaghietal.
(1996)
4 log 1 2 s

|
|

|
+
L
z 4 log 1 2 s

|
.

\
+ =
B
z
o
z z
z
z
I
q S
o
A

'
=
=
0 z s
e
z
E
q S A

=
=
4 . 1 log 4 . 0 1
) 1 / (
) / (
B L s
B L s
B
L
E
E
s
|
.
|

\
|
+ =
=
5 . 3
) 1 / ( c B L s
q E =
=
day 1
days
log
1 . 0
(creep) o e
t
z
q
S
|
.
|

\
|
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
) MN/m (in value mean weighted
day 1
2
(creep) o
c
e
q q
q
. \
|
.

\
) MN/m (in value mean weighted
c c
q q =
81Foundationand92PlateLoadTests
LoadSettlementCurve
BasedonPressuremeterTest
Briaud(2007)
PressuremeterTest
] , , , [
(mean) ) / (
=
| o
I p f f f f q
p d e B L
24 . 0
A
=
R
R
B
S
e
function gamma = I
R B
SHAPEFACTOR
L
B
f
B L
2 . 0 8 . 0
) / (
+ =
ECCENTRICITYFACTOR
B
e
f
e
Center 33 . 0 1
0

|
.
|

\
|
=
e
B
e
f
e
Edg 1
0.5

|
.
|

\
|
=
LOADINCLINATIONFACTOR
Center
90
(deg)
1
2

o
=
o
f
Edge
360
(deg)
1
90
5 . 0

o
=

o
f
SLOPE FACTOR
360

SLOPEFACTOR
slope 1 : 3 1 8 . 0
1 . 0
,

|
.
|

\
|
+ =
|
B
d
f
d
slope 1 : 2 1 7 . 0
15 . 0
,

|
.
|

\
|
+ =
. \
|
|
d
f
B
d
d
slope 1 : 2 1 7 . 0
,
|
.

\
+
|
B
f
d
L l i l di Longtermsettlement,includingcreep=
03 . 0
|
|

| t
S
1
|
.
|

\
|
t
t
S
e
t =designlife(inhours)
t 1 hour t
1
=1hour
Akbas and Kulhawy (2009) Akbas andKulhawy (2009)
L
1
L
2
Method
37 Sites 37Sites
167Axialcompressionfieldloadtests
Mean S = (0 23%)B MeanS
e(L1)
=(0.23%)B
Mean S
e(L2)
= (5.39%)B MeanS
e(L2)
(5.39%)B
S
e

68 . 1 69 . 0
2
+
|
.
|

\
|
=
B
S
B
Q
Q
e
L
. \
B
B > 1 m B >1m
Q
L2
= ultimate bearing capacity Q
u
(Vesic 1973, 1975) Q
L2
ultimatebearingcapacityQ
u
(Vesic 1973,1975)
B 1 B1m
Q
|
|

|

2
q
u
u
L
Q
B
Q
Q +
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
theory s Vesic' of portion
u
N Q =

theory s Vesic' of portion

q
q
u
N Q =
Note:Vesics theoryincludescompressibilityfactor.So
) , , , , ( B E f Q
s u
o
'
u =
Proper assumption of E and o' is needed ProperassumptionofE
s
ando isneeded.
CATEGORYC
UseofTheoryofElasticityand
ModulusofElasticityy
2
1 u
f s
s
s
o e
I I
E
B q S
1
) (
u
'
o =
E
s
=averagemodulusofelasticity(z = 0toz = 4B)
B =B/2
u
s
=Poissonsratio
Steinbrenner(1934)
I
s
=shapefactor=f(m,n)
ForS
e
atthecenter :o =4
=
B
L
m
|
.
|

\
|
=
2
B
H
n
. \
2
Fox(1948) ( )
and , factor depth
s
f
f
B
L
B
D
f I
|
.
|

\
|
u = =
center) (flexible, (rigid)
93 . 0
e e
S S ~
VariationofI
f
D
f
/B
L/B
1.0 2.0 5.0
Poissons ratio u 0 30 Poissonsratiou
s
=0.30
0.20
0.40
0 60
0.902
0.808
0 738
0.930
0.857
0 796
0.951
0.899
0 852 0.60
0.80
1.00
2 00
0.738
0.687
0.650
0 562
0.796
0.747
0.709
0 603
0.852
0.813
0.780
0 675 2.00 0.562 0.603 0.675
Poissonsratiou
s
=0.40
0.20 0.932 0.955 0.970
0.40
0.60
0.80
1 00
0.848
0.779
0.727
0 689
0.893
0.836
0.788
0 749
0.927
0.886
0.849
0 818 1.00
2.00
0.689
0.596
0.749
0.640
0.818
0.714
Bowles (1987) Bowles(1987)
z
z E
E
i s
s
A
=
) (
average, Weighted
z = H or 4B whichever is smaller
z
z =H or4B,whicheverissmaller
E 500(N + 15) kN/m
2
E
s
=500(N
60
+15)kN/m
2
MayneandPoulos(1999)
o s
z k E E + =
) 1 (
2
s
E R G e
e
E
I I I B q
S u =
o
E
f t i fl |
|

|
|
H E
f I
o
, factor influence |
.

\
= | = =
B B k
f I
e e
o
G
factor correction embedment foundation
factor correction rigidity foundation
=
=
I
I
E
R
5 . 0
4
factor correction embedment foundation
|
|

|
=
BL
B
I
E
|
.

\
t
= B
e
t 1
|
|

|
|
|
|

|
+
+
t
=
2
10 6 . 4
1
4
3
f
R
t
E
I
|
.

\
|
|
.

\
+
+
2
10 6 . 4
e
e
o
B
k
B
E
|
|

|
=
1
1
E
B
I
( )
|
|
.
|

\
|
+ u 6 . 1 4 . 0 22 . 1 exp 5 . 3
f
e
s
D
B
BerardiandLancellotta(1991)
s
s e
E
qB
I S =
I
s
=influencefactorforarigidfoundation (
s
= 0.15)
(Tsytovich,1951)
s
H
1
/B
L /B 0 5 1 0 1 5 2 0 L/B 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
1
2
0.35
0 39
0.56
0 65
0.63
0 75
0.69
0 88 2
3
5
0.39
0.40
0.41
0.65
0.67
0.68
0.75
0.81
0.84
0.88
0.96
0.99 5
10
0.41
0.42
0.68
0.71
0.84
0.89
0.99
1.06
BerardiandLancellotta(1991)reanalyzedfield
performanceof130structuresonpredominantly p p y
silicasandasreportedbyBurlandandBurbidge
1963) (Janbu,
5 . 0
5 . 0
|
.
|

\
| o
'
A + o
'
=
a
o
a E s
p
p K E
p atmospheric pressure
. \ a
p
p
a
=atmosphericpressure
atadepthB/2belowthefoundation o
'
A o
'
and
o
( )
60
1
= N f K
E
( )
( )
i fl th i b
n penetratio standard corrected average
60
1
60
1
=
=
N
N f K
E
Influence zone for square foundation:
zone influence the in number
Influencezoneforsquarefoundation:
H
15
=(1.2to2.8)B
H (0 8 to 1 3)B H
25
=(0.8to1.3)B
InfluencezoneforL/B 10: /
H
15
~ (1.8to2.4)B
H
25
~ (1.2 to 2.0)B H
25
~ (1.2to2.0)B
Skempton(1986)
( )
2
|
|

|
N N ( )
kN/ i i
01 . 0 1
2
60
60
1
'
|
.
|

\
|
o
'
+
=
o
N N
( )
kN/m in is
2
o
'
o
( )
60
2
60
1
=
r
D
N
ProcedureforCalculatingS
E
g
E
BerardiandLancellotta(1991)
1. ObtainthevariationofN
60
withintheinfluencezone
(i.e.,H
25
). ( ,
25
)
2. Obtain(N
1
)
60
withintheinfluencezone.
3 Obtain ( )
1
N 3. Obtain
4. ObtainK
E
atS
e
/B =0.1%.
( ) .
60
1
N
5. Calculate .
5 . 0
5 . 0
|
.
|

\
| o
'
A + o
'
=
a
o
a E s
p
p K E
. \
a
ProcedureforCalculatingS
E
(continued)
6. DetermineI
s
.
7 Use an equation from theory of elasticity to 7. Useanequationfromtheoryofelasticityto
calculateS
e
.
8 Calculate S /B Is it equal to assumed S /B ? 8. CalculateS
e
/B.IsitequaltoassumedS
e
/B?
9. Ifso,thecalculatedS
e
inStep7istheanswer.
10 If not use S /B from Step 8 to obtain the new K 10. Ifnot,useS
e
/BfromStep8toobtainthenewK
E
.
11. RepeatSteps5,7and8untiltheassumedand
calculated S /B are equal calculatedS
e
/Bareequal.
SettlementPredictioninGranularSoils
A P b bili ti A h AProbabilisticApproach
Sivakugan andJohnson(2004),Geotechnique,Vol.54,
No. 7, 449502. No.7,449 502.
PredictedSettlement 25mm
Probability of
exceeding25mm
Method
g
inthefield
Terzaghi &Peck(1948) 0.26(26%)
Schmertmann (1970)
Burland &Burbidge(1985)
B di & L ll tt (1991)
0.27 (27%)
0.42(42%)
0 52 (52%) Berardi &Lancellotta (1991) 0.52(52%)
COMMENTS AND CONCLUSIONS COMMENTSANDCONCLUSIONS
1. Meyerhofsrelations(1965)simpletouse.Onthe
average,willgiveS
e(predicted)
/S
e(observed)
~ 1.5to2.0.
2. Peck&Bazaraamethod(1969)isnotsuperiorto
thatofMeyerhof(1965).
3. Burland&Burbidge(1965)isanimprovedmethod
overthatofMeyerhof(1965)andPeck&Bazaraa
(1969).
Difficulttoestimateoverconsolidationpressure
fromfieldexploration.
4 Modified strain influence factor methods of 4. Modifiedstraininfluencefactormethodsof
Schmertmannetal.(1978),Terzaghietal.(1996),
Salgado(2008)andLeeetal.(2008)willgive g ( ) ( ) g
reasonableresultswithpropervaluesofE
s
.
5. SuggestedE
s
relations: gg
s
B L s
B
L
E
E
4 . 1 log 4 . 0 1
) / (
s
|
.
|

\
|
+ =
c B L s
B L s
q E
B E
5 . 3
) 1 / (
) 1 / (
=
. \
=
=
6. TheE
s(L/B=1)
relationshipcanberelatedtoN
60
via
DD
50
.
7. Pressuremeter method of developing load 7. Pressuremeter methodofdevelopingload
settlementrelationshipisveryeffective,butmay
notbecosteffective.
8. L
1
L
2
(Akbas andKulhawy)isagoodmethod.
HoweverproperassumptionofE ando' neededto o
estimateQ
L2
.
9. Relationshipsforsettlementdevelopedusing p p g
theoryofelasticitywillgiveequallygoodresults
providedarealistic E
s
isused.
Useofiterationmethodissuggested.
Ifnot,usedTerzaghietal.srelationship
(1996).
Whatwehaveseenisasystematic
acc m lation of kno ledge o er 60 ears accumulationofknowledgeover60years.
Theparametersforcomparingsettlement
prediction methods are accuracy and predictionmethodsare accuracyand
reliability.
Reliabilityistheprobabilitythattheactual
settlementwouldbelessthanthatcomputed
byaspecificmethod.
h h d f d ll Inchoosingamethodfordesign,itallcomes
downtokeepingacriticalbalancebetween
reliability and accuracy which can be difficult reliability and accuracy, whichcanbedifficult
attimes,knowingthenonhomogeneous
natureofsoilingeneral.Wecannotbeover g
conservativebut,atthesametime,notbe
accurate.
WeneedtokeepinmindwhatKarlTerzaghi
id i th 45
th
J F t L t t th saidinthe45
th
JamesForrestLectureatthe
InstituteofCivilEngineersinLondon:
Foundation failures that occur are no longer Foundationfailuresthatoccurarenolonger
anactofGod.