PVD Case Study by Soham Foundations

Case Study for Ground Improvement Using PVD with Preloading for Coal & Iron Ore Stackyard
IGC 2009, Guntur, INDIA
CASE STUDY FOR GROUND IMPROVEMENT USING PVD WITH

PRELOADING FOR COAL & IRON ORE STACKYARD
Pallavi Bhosle
Sohams Foundation Engg. Pvt. Ltd., Navi Mumbai400614, India.
E-mail: [email protected]
V.V. Vaishampayan
MD, Sohams Foundation Engg. Pvt. Ltd., Navi Mumbai400614, India.
E-mail: [email protected]
ABSTRACT: PVD with Preloading was used as the technique for the ground improvement below the Coal and Iron Ore
Stackyards at port near Visakhapatnam, AP. The top layer of subsoil consisted very soft clay upto a depth of 12 m to 18 m.
PVD was effectively used to accelerate the settlements. The settlements and pore pressure dissipation was monitored using
instruments as Piezometers and Settlement Recorders. The paper describes the effectiveness of the technique and monitoring
of the instrumentation. The settlements recorded were analysed by Asaoka Method and Hyperbolic Method. The analysis
indicated close proximity between the percentage settlements observed and pore pressure dissipation.
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project
The development of the new port at Gangavaram located at
about 15 kms south of Visakhapatnam Port, Andhra Pradesh
commenced in December 2005. The site for Gangavaram
Port is the best location for development of a modern all
weather, deepwater, multipurpose and truly next generation
port (Fig. 1). The development of port facilities included
development of back up facilities for coal and iron ore
storage and stacking and handling facilities. The proposed
height of coal stack was 12.00 m and that of iron ore was
10.00 m.
The preliminary soil investigation revealed the presence of

soft clay upto a depth of 10.00 to 18.00 m with very low safe
bearing capacity and high consolidation parameters. It was
hence decided to enhance the soil properties using a ground
treatment method of Use of Band Drains/PVD with
Preloading. The turnkey contract was awarded to M/s Sohams
Foundation Engg. Pvt. Ltd., Navi Mumbai.
1.2 Geotechnical Investigation
As a part of the project, 8 Nos boreholes were taken to
ascertain the design parameters. In general the area was fairly
levelled and a thin layer of dredged sand of thickness 0.20 to
0.30 m was present at most of the locations. Immediately
below the dredged sand was the marine clay with shells with
thickness varying from 1.00 to 3.00 m. A layer of soft marine
clay of thickness varying from 7 m to 15 m was observed
following this layer of marine clay with shells. The standard
penetration test was conducted in this stratum at various
depths, indicated the penetration of 45 to 60 cms in one
blows thus N resistance as 0 to 1. At a depth of 12.00 to
18.00 m below the existing ground level the penetration
resistance N was observed to be increasing with depth. The
laboratory tests conducted on selected disturbed soil samples
and undisturbed soil samples indicated the following range of
values (Table 1).
The safe bearing capacity of the existing soil was worked out
as 3 T/m which was very low to take the loads. The
consolidation settlements were worked out about 10001600 mm.
Fig 1: Plan of the Project Site

506
Table 1: Typical Soil Properties

1281
2.522.65
1.241.52
00
231
763
21102
1547
0.6272.249
0.380.92
(%)
(g/cc)
(%)
(%)
(%)
(%)
(%)
0.721.95
(m/yr)
0.191.05
1829
0.0950.991
(kg/cm)
(deg)
(kg/cm)
2.2 Post Treatment Assessment

The instruments as Piezometers; Settlement Recorders;
Inclinometers were installed to assess the post treatment
performance of the adopted method of treatment.
Table 2 shows the details of the instruments installed in
project area (Fig. 2).
Table 2: Details of Instruments
2.1 Salient Features of Scheme
Spacing of PVD:
Consolidation Period:
Thickness of sand mat:
Hydraulic Stitchers
10.00 m to 18.00 m below
OGL
1.00 m c/c in Triangular Grid
below the stacker reclaimers
1.50 m c/c in Triangular Grid
in other area
For 1.00 m spacing: 65 days
For 1.50 m spacing: 174
days
300 mm
Section 2
CP4
Section 3
CP3
Section 4
CP2
VP4, VP5
PS3, PS4
MS3,
MS4
Section 5
CP5
VP12, VP13,
VP14
PS11,
PS12,
PS13
MS7
IN 4
VWP4(6m)
MS3
IN 10
IN 3
PS12
AREA - B
IN 5
IN 7
IN 1
VWP6(9m)
PS5
CP4(9m)
MS6
VWP9(6m)
PS8
VWP1(9m)
MS1
VWP2(6m)
PS1
MS6
MS5
PS9
VWP10(6m)
VWP3(6m)
VWP11(9m)
PS10
CP1(9m)
PS2
IN 2
VWP7(6m)
PS6
PS11
CP2(9m)
PS3
IN 9
C'
MS4
Preload As Per Design
PS8, PS9,
PS10
PS5, PS6,
PS7
MS1,
MS2
VWP13(6m) VWP12(9m)
CP5 (6m)
VWP14 (9m)
PS13
VWP5(6m)
CP3(6m)
PS7
PS4
GL
6m
MS2
Vwp8(9m)
MS5
CP PS
Soft Clay
PS1, PS2
The readings were taken every 4 days when loading started,

continued for a month after final preload height is achieved.
The frequency was later extended to 7 days.
Section 5
MS7
VP1, VP2,
VP3
VP9,
VP10,VP11
VP6,
VP7,VP8
Magnetic
settlement
recorder
CP1
Plate
settlement
markers
Section 1
Vibrating
wire
piezometer
Section
2. GROUND IMPROVEMENT SCHEME

Machinery Used:
Depth of PVD:
Combined system of
geotextile pipe formed by
boulders/gravels encased in
geotextile and band drains
laid horizontally connecting
these pipes.
Casagrande
piezometer
Natural Moisture content

Specific Gravity
Bulk Density
Gravel
Sand
Silt + Clay
Liquid Limit
Plastic Limit
Initial Void Ratio, e0
Compression Index, Cc
Coefficient of
Consolidation, Cv
Cohesion, Ccu
Angle of Friction, cu
Shear Strength from VST
Horizontal Drainage
System:
3m MS
6m
9m 9m
VWP
Section 4
IN 6
Section 3
Hard / Stiff Strata
SECTION - C-C'
AREA - A
Fig. 2: Location Details for the Instruments

507
IN 8
Section 2
Section 1
2.3 Methods of Data Analysis
predicted ultimate primary settlement, p, should be

multiplied by the theoretical slope such that p = /.
From the observed data of excess pore pressure variation and

settlements the degree of consolidation can be assessed as,
2.4 Analysis of Data
2.3.1 Excess Pore Pressures

The piezometers indicate the increase in excess pore pressure
on application of the load. As the load is transferred to the
virgin soil i.e. with consolidation is in progress, the increased
excess pore pressure dissipates. The degree of consolidation
is then determined as,
U max U t
*100
U t U i
Umax: Maximum Excess Pore Pressure

application
Ut:
Excess Pore Pressure at time t
Ui:
Initial Excess Pore Pressure
Figures 3 & 4 indicate the excess pore pressure variations

with time. For the piezometers installed below the stacker
reclamation the degree of consolidation was observed as 55
65%. For the piezometers installed in other area (PVD
spaced at 1.50 m c/c) the degree of consolidation was
observed as 3040 %.
after
1.30
load
1.20
1.10
2.3.2 Settlements
From settlements, the degree of consolidation can be
assessed by Asaoka Method and Hyperbolic Method. By
these methods the ultimate settlement S100 is evaluated based
on the observed data. Then the degree of consolidation is
determined as,
%U =
Pore Pressure variation
1.40
Pore Pressure (ksc)
%U =
Piezometers were installed at two different depths 6 m and 9 m.
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0
St
* 100
S100
25
50
No of Days
75
100
125
150
CP 1
175
200
CP 2
225
250
CP 3
275
300
CP 4
Fig. 3: Variation of Excess Pore Pressures with Time
St:
Settlement at time t
Ultimate Settlement
S100:
Asaoka Method: This method is based on the Barrons
solution for radial drainage. From the timesettlement
curves the settlements at different time (with equal interval
t) is determined. Then the points (Si, Si-1) are plotted. The
interception of this line and the line drawn with slope = 1
gives the ultimate settlement S100.
1.30
1.20
Pore Pressure (ksc)
1.10
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
Hyperbolic Method: This is based on the Terzaghis theory

for pore water pressure distribution. The average degree of
consolidation when plotted in the form of U Vs T/U is a
hyperbola. Hence, the graph is plotted for time/settlement Vs
settlement. The settlement is determined as the inverse of the
slope of this hyperbola.
However, for the case of Terzaghis theory, the slope of the
hyperbolic line is not constant. In fact, it is valid for Uav
between 60% and 90%, and hence it must be evaluated
between these two points. Theoretically, the average slope of
the first straight line portion is equal to 0.824. The inverse of
this slope gives a corresponding settlement of 1.21%, which
overestimates the ultimate primary consolidation settlement
by 21%. Consequently, Tan (1994) proposed that if the slope
of the first linear portion, , of the hyperbolic plot is used, the
Pore Pressure variation
1.40
0.60
0.50
0.40
0
25
50
No of Days
75
100
VP 2
125
150
VP 11
175
VP 10
200
225
VP 9
250
VP 8
275
300
VP 5
Fig. 4: Variation of Excess Pore Pressures with Time

Settlement markers were installed on virgin soil with
minimum 0.50 m embedment. Some of the plate settlement
markers were damaged during the preloading activity
whereas the magnetic settlement markers showed the erratic
results.
Figure 5 indicates the settlement data with time. The
observed settlements were in the tune of 300500 mm.
508
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
225
250
275
300
Hyperbolic Method - PS 1
1.00
0.70
0.90
0.80
0.60
Time / Settlement
200
300
400
0.70
0.50
0.60
0.40
0.50
0.30
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Time (Days)
PS1
PS2
PS4
PS6
PS9
PS10
Fig. 5: Settlements with Time

The graphs for ultimate settlement prediction by Asaoka
Method and Hyperbolic Method are indicated in Figures 6
and 7.
1.20
1.10
1.00
0.90
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Time (days)
1.10
1.00
0.70
Asaoka Method - PS4
Settlements (Si)
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Settlements (Si-1)
Asaoka Method - PS9
Settlements (Si)
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Settlements (Si-1)
200
100
0
0
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Settlements (Si-1)
Asaoka Method - PS10
800
500
400
500
400
300
200
100
0
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Settlements (Si-1)
Settlements (Si)
700
600
300
200
100
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Settlements (Si-1)
Fig. 6: Ultimate SettlementAsaoka Method

The degree of Consolidation by both the methods was
observed as (Table 3).
Table 3: Degree of Consolidation from Settlement Data
Asaoka
Method
0.20
0
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Time (days)
0.60
0
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Time (Days)
1.20
1.10
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Time (Days)
3. CONCLUSIONS
500
400
300
800
700
600
0.30
0.70
Fig. 7: Ultimate SettlementHyperbolic Method
100
0
800
700
600
400
300
200
100
0.50
Time /Settlements
500
400
300
200
Asaoka Method - PS6
800
700
600
500
Settlements (Si)
Time / Settlements
Settlements (Si)
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Settlements (Si-1)
Settlements (Si)
0.60
0.40
0.80
1.20
800
700
600
Time (Days)
1.30
0.80
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
1.40
Asaoka Method - PS2
1.50
0.90
Asaoka Method - PS1
0.00
0.80
0.70
Time / Settlements
No of Days
Time / Settlements
Settlement
0.10
1.00
0.90
0.60
0.50
0.40
600
0.20
500
Time /Settlements
100
Settlement (mm)
0.80
Hyperbolic
Method
(Slope =
0.824)
Hyperbolic
Method
(Slope =
1.0)
Spacing 1.00
78115
6384
5270
Spacing 1.50
8592
3953
3243
Plate Settlement Recorders are more reliable than the

Magnetic Settlement Recorders for marine clays.
With the application of the load the pore pressure
increased and dropped down slowly with time. The pore
pressure variation indicated about 5560% dissipation
i.e. degree of consolidation.
The Degree of consolidation based on Asaoka Method
was evaluated as 78115% whereas based on Hyperbolic
method it was evaluated as 3270%.
Hyperbolic Method is more comparable with the Pore
Pressure Dissipation Results. Further the results obtained
with theoretical slope of hyperbola as 1.00 are more
closer to the predicted by pore water pressure analysis.
The consolidation settlements worked out theoretically
from laboratory test results were much higher than that
predicated by Asaoka and Hyperbolic Method.
REFERENCES
Al-Shamrani M.A., Settlement Prediction of Sabkha
Formations Using Rectangular Hyperbolic Method.
Holtz R.D., Jamiolkowski M.B., Lancellotta R. and Pedroni
R. (1991). CIRIA Ground Engineering Report: Ground
ImprovementPrefabricated Vertical drains: Design and
Performance.
Bo M.W., Arulrajah A. and Choa V. (1997). Assessment of
degree of consolidation in Soil Improvement Project,
Proc. of International Conference on Ground
Improvement Techniques, 7180.
509
510

PVD Case Study by Soham Foundations

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PVD Case Study by Soham Foundations

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case Study for Ground Improvement Using PVD with Preloading for Coal & Iron Ore Stackyard

IGC 2009, Guntur, INDIA

CASE STUDY FOR GROUND IMPROVEMENT USING PVD WITH

The preliminary soil investigation revealed the presence of

Fig 1: Plan of the Project Site

Table 1: Typical Soil Properties

2.2 Post Treatment Assessment

2.1 Salient Features of Scheme

Thickness of sand mat:

The readings were taken every 4 days when loading started,

2. GROUND IMPROVEMENT SCHEME

Natural Moisture content

Hard / Stiff Strata

Fig. 2: Location Details for the Instruments

2.3 Methods of Data Analysis

predicted ultimate primary settlement, p, should be

From the observed data of excess pore pressure variation and

2.4 Analysis of Data

2.3.1 Excess Pore Pressures

Umax: Maximum Excess Pore Pressure

Figures 3 & 4 indicate the excess pore pressure variations

Pore Pressure variation

Pore Pressure (ksc)

Piezometers were installed at two different depths 6 m and 9 m.

Fig. 3: Variation of Excess Pore Pressures with Time

Pore Pressure (ksc)

Hyperbolic Method: This is based on the Terzaghis theory

Pore Pressure variation

Fig. 4: Variation of Excess Pore Pressures with Time

50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Fig. 5: Settlements with Time

50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Asaoka Method - PS4

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Asaoka Method - PS9

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Asaoka Method - PS10

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Fig. 6: Ultimate SettlementAsaoka Method

50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Fig. 7: Ultimate SettlementHyperbolic Method

Asaoka Method - PS6

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Asaoka Method - PS2

Asaoka Method - PS1

Plate Settlement Recorders are more reliable than the

You might also like