Proceedings of the Institution of

Civil Engineers
Geotechnical Engineering 161
October 2008 Issue GE5
Pages 259267
doi: 10.1680/geng.2008.161.5.259
Paper 800031
Received 25/06/2008
Accepted 20/07/2008
Keywords: embankments/
foundations/subsidence
Briony Rankine
Geotechnical Engineer,
Golder Associates, Brisbane,
Australia (formerly James
Cook University)
Buddluma Indraratna
Professor, School of Civil En-
gineering, University of Wol-
longong, Wollongong City,
Australia
Nagaratnam Sivakugan
Associate Professor, School
of Engineering, James Cook
University, Townsville, Aus-
tralia
Vasantha Wijeyakulasuriya
Principal Engineer, Queens-
land Department of Main R-
oads, Brisbane, Australia
Cholachat Rujikiatkamjorn
Research Fellow, School of
Civil Engineering, University
of Wollongong, Wollongong
City, Australia
Foundation behaviour below an embankment on soft soils
B. R. Rankine BEng (Hons), PhD, B. Indraratna PhD, DIC, FIEAust, FASCE, FGS, FIES, MIMMM, MAUSIMM, N. Sivakugan
PhD, MASCE, FIEAust, CPEng, RPEQ, V. Wijeyakulasuriya MEng, MIEAust and C. Rujikiatkamjorn BEng (Hons), PhD
The Sunshine Motorway is one of the major trafc
corridors that service the South East region of
Queensland, Australia. Initial investigations for the
construction of pavements in area 2, stage 2 of the
motorway began in late 1990. Large areas of soft, highly
compressible organic clays were found to exist over the
length of the upgrade. Also, because the topography of
the proposed alignment was mostly low lying,
earthworks were required over a large portion of the
route. Prior to any earthworks for the stage being
undertaken, a trial embankment was constructed in the
area to provide an understanding of the foundation
behaviour and to also ensure the overall success of the
project. The nite difference code FLAC was employed
to investigate the performance of the full-scale trial
embankment, and the underlying soft clay. Predictions of
the excess pore pressure and both vertical and lateral
displacements are made and compared with eld
observations.
NOTATION
B equivalent unit cell width (plane strain case)
b
s
equivalent smear radius (plane strain case)
b
w
equivalent radius of drain (plane strain case)
c9 cohesion
E elastic modulus
G elastic shear modulus
K
max
maximum elastic bulk modulus
k
hp
plane strain horizontal permeability
k
h
axi-symmetric horizontal permeability
k
hp
plane strain horizontal permeability in smear zone
k
h
axi-symmetric horizontal permeability in smear zone
k
v
average vertical permeability
M frictional constant (Cam clay parameter)
n spacing ratio, R/r
w
R radius of inuence zone for each drain (axisymmetric
case)
r
s
radius of smear zone (axisymmetric case)
r
w
radius of drain (axisymmetric case)
s smear ratio, r
s
/r
w
v
0
initial specic volume
v
cs
critical specic volume at 1 Pa
, geometric parameters dened in equations (2)
and (3)
k slope of isotropic swelling line (Cam clay parameter)
slope of isotropic consolidation line (Cam Clay
parameter)
Poissons ratio
r dry density
9 friction angle
1. INTRODUCTION
Located approximately 100 km north of Brisbane, the Sunshine
Coast is one of Queenslands main tourist attractions, and one
of Australias fastest-growing regions, recording a high rate of
annual population growth of 3
.
6%, that is, approximately
500 000 by the end of 2021. As one of the major carriageways
for the region, the Sunshine Coast Motorway provides an
integral part of the South East Queensland road network, and
not surprisingly is one of the key development projects for the
Queensland Department of Main Roads (Main Roads). A
proposed route alignment through Area 2 of the second stage
of the motorway (Fig. 1) was xed in October 1990, and the
total length of this section is approximately 4
.
7 km. The
topography to be traversed within this stage of the motorway
was predominantly low lying (less than 1 m above sea level),
requiring signicant earthworks along the majority of the
route. Embankment construction was mainly in the order of
N
(Not to scale)
Study area
Brisbane
Fig. 1. Map showing approximate location of area 2, stage 2, of
the Sunshine Motorway
Geotechnical Engineering 161 Issue GE5 Foundation behaviour below an embankment on soft soils Rankine et al. 259
23 m in height, but increased up to 7 m or more on the
approach to various structures along the route.
Initial site investigations were used primarily for the purpose of
proling the soil conditions along the proposed route. These
tests showed that the original alignment would inevitably cross
over large sections of highly compressible soft marine clays
(undrained shear strength less than 10 kPa). Road
embankments constructed on soft soils are often subjected to
large deformations, and can be rendered unserviceable owing
to excessive settlements. Following careful consideration, the
proposed development path was moved further east, and a new
alignment was xed in December 1990. Additional
geotechnical investigations undertaken along this new
alignment showed that although soft clays were still traversed
along the changed route, the area being crossed had been
signicantly reduced.
Given the geotechnical problems expected in an area with a
large proportion of soft clay to be traversed, a trial
embankment was built to ensure the overall success of the
project. This fully instrumented embankment (maximum height
2
.
85 m) allowed the soft clay foundation behaviour to be
observed, and the parameters to be established for preliminary
design to be veried. More signicantly, this embankment
provided a means of evaluating the effectiveness of
prefabricated vertical drains (PVD). Construction was
undertaken in multiple lifts over a period of approximately 2
months. PVDs were installed in a triangular pattern underneath
two separate sections of the embankment.
This paper describes the predicted and measured behaviour of
the embankment and the underlying soft clay foundation. Field
behaviour was simulated using a fully coupled Biot
consolidation model, and the modied Cam clay theory was
adopted for all clay layers, except for the weathered surface
crust and the sand layer, which were modelled according to the
MohrCoulomb theory. The effectiveness of PVDs was
evaluated on the basis of excess pore pressure dissipation and
both the vertical and lateral displacements below the
embankment.
2. GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS
Because of the large amounts of earthworks required, an
extensive in situ and laboratory testing schedule was
undertaken by Queensland Department of Main Roads
13
to
prole the soils. The total scope of the investigation included
(a) 48 drill boreholes*
(b) 10 electric static friction cone penetrometer tests
(c) 64 standard bridge probes
(d) 6 inspection trenches.
Standard penetration testing (SPT), vane shear tests and
undisturbed soils sampling were also undertaken at boreholes
drilled close to the pier or abutment locations. Boreholes were
extended until the bedrock had been cored to a depth of 3 m.
Additionally, in situ shear vanes were conducted along the
entire length of the proposed route. The recovered samples had
a diameter of either 50 mm or 75 mm, and were individually
tested to obtain their index properties, organic content, natural
moisture content, and particle size distribution curves.
Additionally, unconsolidated undrained, isotropically
consolidated undrained and consolidated-drained triaxial tests
were performed on selected soft clay samples.
3. SUBSOIL CONDITIONS
Because of the limited amount of testing undertaken along the
nal alignment, soil properties were estimated using results
from laboratory and eld testing carried out along both the
new and the old alignments. A typical soil prole within area
2, Stage 2 of the Sunshine Motorway is shown in Fig. 2. As
shown, testing revealed the existence of a 0
.
5 m thick
weathered crust above 10 m of silty clay (with the exception of
Section A, in which the crust extended further to a depth of
1
.
5 m). Laboratory testing conducted on this clay layer
indicated that it could be divided into three sublayers. The
uppermost of these layers exhibited an average water content
of 82% and an approximate liquid limit of 60%. The middle
layer of clay was more plastic than the upper layer, and
exhibited average water content and liquid limit values of 90%
and 65% respectively. The bottom layer of clay had the same
plasticity as the upper layer of clay, with averaged water
content and liquid limit of approximately 75% and 66%
respectively. Wijekulasuriya et al.
4
noted that the liquidity
index did not exceed 2 for all soil layers below the weathered
crust, indicating a non-sensitive nature. This suggests the soils
were very soft clay, with relatively high organic content
(510%). Further underlying this soft clay was a clayey sand
layer that extended to a depth of approximately 16 m below
the ground level.
Although many types of soft clay are normally consolidated,
overconsolidation can sometimes occur close to the soil surface
because of weathering, erosion or desiccation (Fig. 2). The
overconsolidation ratio (OCR) was determined from results
obtained from the standard oedometer testing. It was also
observed that the unit weight of the clay was fairly consistent
with depth, ranging between 13
.
9 kN/m
3
and 15
.
7 kN/m
3
, with
the exception of the topmost overconsolidated crust, which
measured 17
.
4 kN/m
3
. Interestingly, the average specic
gravity for all ve layers varied between 2
.
48 and 2
.
63. These
values are lower than the range normally expected for clayey
soils (usually around 2
.
65), and can be attributed to the
presence of organics within the soil. Average values of organic
content reported by Litwinowicz et al.
5
range between 4
.
8%
and 10
.
7% for layers within 10 m below the ground level.
Undisturbed samples used in evaluating the subsoil conditions
were taken in both the vertical and horizontal directions.
Consolidation (oedometer) tests were also undertaken on both
vertically and horizontally oriented specimens. To obtain an
indication of the permeability anisotropy, the average
horizontal permeability was divided by the average vertical
permeability, giving a k
h
/k
v
ratio of 2
.
85. Such anisotropy in
permeability is comparable to observations made by other
researchers for marine clays of similar properties (e.g. Bo et
al.
6
). For selected specimens, Table 1 details the permeability
coefcients in the horizontal and vertical directions.
* In some cases, holes were redrilled to obtain additional samples. The additional
samples were identied using prexes (e.g. DH5A).
Several probes were redone. These probes were identied using sufxes (e.g.
P15B).
260 Geotechnical Engineering 161 Issue GE5 Foundation behaviour below an embankment on soft soils Rankine et al.
Soil properties established through laboratory and in situ
testing were unique to this project, and differed substantially
from any other soils encountered previously by Main Roads.
This warranted the construction of a trial embankment to
observe the real foundation behaviour, and also to verify the
design parameters previously established. In order to ensure
effective subsurface drainage of the motorway, PVDs were
chosen as the method of ground improvement below the
surcharge loading and two different drain spacings (1 m and
2 m) were implemented.
4. FULL-SCALE TRIAL EMBANKMENT
An observational approach, based on performance monitoring,
is generally undertaken by Main Roads to address issues
associated with uncertainties in ground conditions, design
parameters and calculation
methods.
4
The trial
embankment considered in
this paper, more specically,
was constructed to
(a) assess the feasibility and
stability of staged
construction of the
embankment,
(b) assess the effectiveness of
the mandrel driven PVDs
(c) verify the compressibility
and consolidation
characteristics assumed
for design calculations.
The overall design of the trial
embankment, shown in Fig.
3, comprised three sections,
referred to in this paper as
sections A, B and C. The two
primary sections (sections A
and B) were 35 m long.
section A represented the
design case (vertical drains
installed at 1 m spacing) and
section B was the control (i.e.
undisturbed virgin ground
with only preloading
applied). Section C,
measuring 20 m, was used as
an intermediate case with PVDs installed at 2 m spacing.
Installation of vertical drains was in a triangular grid
arrangement, and to a depth of 10 m (for both sections), close
to the bottom of the silty clay layer, implying upward
drainage. In conjunction with section A, section C was used to
assess the inuence of drain spacing and the suitability of
PVDs to accelerate consolidation and facilitate embankment
construction on Sunshine Coast soft clay.
The nominal crest width and height of all sections of the
embankment were 17 m and 2
.
85 m respectively. Berms were
constructed to widths of 5 m on the instrumented side of the
embankment and to 8 m on the opposite side. The height of all
berms was approximately 1 m. Construction of the
embankment was carried out using a multi-staged approach
(Fig. 4).
00 m
05 m
25 m
50 m
105 m
160 m
Weathered
crust
Silty
clay
Silty
clay
Silty
clay
Sand
Description
0 5 10 15
OCR Unit weight,
: kN/m
3
174
139
140
151
157
175
Water
content: %
0 50
Index properties
LL 60, PI 27,
LI 033

LL 60, PI 30,
LI 173

LL 65, PI 42,
LI 160

LL 36, PI 42,
LI 134

Fig. 2. Typical soil prole beneath Area 2, Stage 2, of the Sunshine Motorway
Section ID Parameter Soil layer
Layer 1 2 3 4 5
Description Weathered
crust
Silty clay Silty clay Silty clay Clayey sand
Depth: m 00
.
5 0
.
52
.
5 2
.
55
.
0 5
.
010
.
5 10
.
516
.
0
All sections Vertical permeability, k
v
: m/s 3
.
8 3 10
8
4
.
1 3 10
8
3
.
3 3 10
8
9
.
4 3 10
9
7
.
8 3 10
8
Horizontal permeability, k
h
: m/s 6
.
3 3 10
8
6
.
8 3 10
8
5
.
4 3 10
8
1
.
5 3 10
8
1
.
3 3 10
7
Table 1. Permeability coefcients for untreated foundation soils
Geotechnical Engineering 161 Issue GE5 Foundation behaviour below an embankment on soft soils Rankine et al. 261
The layout of instrumentation below the embankment was
designed to optimise the range of equipment installed without
sacricing the quality and extent of information being
obtained, whereby the bulk of instruments were placed on one
half of the embankment cross-section. The instrumentation
included inclinometers, settlement gauges, horizontal prole
gauges, piezometers (pneumatic, standpipe and vibrating wire)
and earth pressure cells. The locations of each of the
piezometers (PP pneumatic, PV vibrating wire), settlement
gauges (SC) and inclinometers (I) are shown in Fig. 3, and the
recorded led data were used to verify the numerical model
predictions, as explained below.
5. NUMERICAL MODELLING
A numerical analysis of the trial embankment from this case
study was undertaken using the two-dimensional nite
difference package FLAC,
7
which is an explicit nite difference
program. A fully coupled Biot consolidation model was
adopted to mimic the soft clay foundation behaviour below the
embankment. This type of model has been found by other
researchers, including Indraratna et al.,
8
to provide a realistic
representation of the actual eld behaviour of soft clays.
The modied Cam-clay constitutive model, derived by Roscoe
and Burland,
9
was used to describe each of the clay sublayers
(excluding the crust). Parameters required for this model
include the gradients of volume against natural log mean
effective stress relations for consolidation and swelling ( and
k respectively), the frictional constant (M), the specic volume
at unit mean effective stress (1 Pa) on the CSL (v
cs
), the density
(r), the elastic shear modulus (G) and the maximum elastic
bulk modulus (K
max
). The crust and remaining sand layer were
modelled assuming MohrCoulomb constitutive behaviour.
Values for the parameters used in both types of foundation
model are shown in Table 2.
The geometry and response of PVDs are three-dimensional
(axisymmetric). However, for the purpose of computational
efciency, the analyses of most multi-drain systems can be
conducted using an equivalent plane-strain model.
1014
Conversion to equivalent plane strain is achieved by
transforming the vertical drain system into a set of equivalent
drain walls, which can be achieved through geometric and/or
permeability matching.
8, 1416
For the treated soil, horizontal permeabilities were calculated
using the method outlined by Indraratna and Redana.
14
Using
this method, the plane-strain ratio of smear zone horizontal
permeability k9
hp
to the undisturbed horizontal permeability k
hp
is given by
k9
hp
k
hp

k
hp
= k
h
[ln n=s

k
h
=k9
h
ln s 0
:
75] g
1
where n is the spacing ratio (R/r
w
), s is the smear ratio (r
s
/r
w
),
r
s
is the radius of the smear zone, r
w
is the radius of the drain,
and R is the radius of the inuence zone for each drain
( 1
.
05 3 drain spacing for triangular grid arrangement).
The geometric parameters and are dened as

2
3

2b
s
B
1
b
s
B

b
2
s
3B
2

2

1
B
2
b
s
b
w

2

b
s
3B
3
3b
2
w
b
2
s

3
Parameters from equations (1)(3) are dened
diagrammatically in Fig. 5.
Well resistance is not signicant when the drains have very
high discharge capacity. Thanks to the modern-day
manufacture of PVDs, their discharge capacity can be assumed
to be large enough to ignore any well resistance compared with
the smear effect.
In this study, the extent of the smear was taken as ve times
(a)
(b)
PVB22
PVC39
PVA4
PVA 10
PVB32
PPC45
C
L
C
L
A B C
Design case
drains at 1 m
spacing
Control case
No drains
Intermediate case
drains at 2 m
spacing
5 m 26 m 85 m 85 m 25 m 8 m
IC5 185 m
10 m
50 m
50 m
50 m
IA1
IB3 SCA1, SCB3, SCC5
Fig. 3. Sketch depicting design of trial embankment and
instrumentation layout: (a) plan view; (b) elevation view
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
05
0
F
i
l
l

h
e
i
g
h
t
:

m
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 43 50 55
Time: days
Section A
Section B
Section C
46
Fig. 4. Actual construction sequence for trial embankment
sections
262 Geotechnical Engineering 161 Issue GE5 Foundation behaviour below an embankment on soft soils Rankine et al.
the equivalent radius of the drain.
17
Permeability within the
undisturbed region can be derived by ignoring all smear and
well resistance terms, and is given by
k
hp
k
h

0
:
67
ln n 0
:
75
4
Base permeability values were established using this method,
and are detailed further in Table 3 for both the undisturbed and
smeared sections of the affected foundation layers.
The basic nite difference grid used to compute lateral and
vertical displacements, as well as excess pore water pressure,
for this study is shown in Fig. 6. The soil was modelled to a
depth of 16 m. This boundary was assumed as rigid, and the
soil below as dense enough to neglect any deformations
associated with it. This bottom boundary was further assumed
to be non-draining, while the uppermost was assumed to be
freely draining.
The lateral boundaries of the nite difference mesh were xed
at 150 m from the centreline. By exceeding the vertical
boundary dimension by at least ve times, it was possible to
minimise boundary effects. The mesh density was increased
below the embankment to improve the computational
accuracy. In order to include the smear zones, the mesh was
adjusted slightly for each of the sections up to 10 m deep,
which is the vertical drain installation depth. Prior to full
multi-drain simulation of each section, a single cell model was
run and calibrated for establishing the relevant soil layer
properties. The total width of the embankment modelled was
35 m.
In the numerical model, the groundwater table was assumed at
the ground surface, although the results from standpipe
piezometers installed in the trial embankment indicated a slight
variability in the height of the water table. The embankment
was modelled using a MohrCoulomb model. The soil
parameters of the embankment ll are shown in Table 4. The
rate of construction simulated in the model followed the actual
construction sequence (Fig. 4). Owing to the lack of symmetry
along the centreline of the embankment sections, it was
Parameter Method of testing Soil layer
Layer 1 2 3 4 5
Description Weathered
crust
Silty clay Silty clay Silty clay Clayey sand
Depth: m 00
.
5 0
.
52
.
5 2
.
55
.
0 5
.
010
.
5 10
.
516
.
0
Model MC
1
MCC
2
MCC MCC MC
Oedometer test 0
.
27 0
.
48 0
.
27
k Oedometer test 0
.
013 0
.
016 0
.
013
Slope, M Standard penetration
test
1
.
2 1
.
2 1
.
06
Critical specic
volume at 1 Pa, v
cs
Triaxial tests 5
.
5 7
.
4 5
.
6
Initial specic
volume, v
0
Oedometer test 3
.
2 3
.
1 2
.
9
Poissons ratio, 0
.
3 0
.
25 0
.
25 0
.
25 0
.
3
Dry density, r: kg/m
3
1249 850 725 1000 1280
Elastic modulus, E:
MPa
Oedometer test 23
.
4 7
.
8
Shear modulus, G:
MPa
9 3
Cohesion, c9: kPa Vane shear test 13
.
5 13
.
5
Friction angle, 9:
degrees
Standard penetration
test
35
.
0 35
.
0
Table 2. Parameters used in FLAC analysis
l
Drain
Smear zone
r
w
r
s
R
D
(a)
2B
(b)
b
w
b
s
B
l
Fig. 5. Conversion of an axisymmetric unit cell into plane
strain:
16
(a) axisymmetric case; (b) plane-strain case
Geotechnical Engineering 161 Issue GE5 Foundation behaviour below an embankment on soft soils Rankine et al. 263
necessary to model the whole width of the embankment for
each simulation.
To account for the multiple layering within each of these
models, and to ensure equilibrium, gravity was switched on
following the specication of all initial in situ stress with
K
0
0
.
5 and pore water pressures, and all models were iterated
to the unbalanced force of 0
.
1%. Displacements resulting from
this solve command were initialised back to zero prior to the
rst embankment loading.
6. ANALYSIS OF RESULTS
Actual eld measurements of the foundation response were
monitored by Queensland Department of Main Roads.
13
These
eld measurements of surface settlements, pore water
pressures, and lateral displacement are compared with the
values obtained from the modelling exercise in the following
sections.
6.1. Excess pore pressures
Pore pressure generation was analysed at two separate
locations within each section. Piezometers PPA4, PVA10,
PVB28, PVB32, PVC39 and PPC45 were selected for
comparison. The locations of these piezometers were shown in
Fig. 3. Plots of pore pressure variation against time for each of
the piezometers are given in Fig. 7.
Excess pore pressures were estimated extremely well for the
initial stages of sections B and C, but a slight overestimation of
pressures was observed for section A. The maximum deviation
between the observed and predicted pore pressures within these
stages occurred at PVA4, and measured approximately 10 kPa.
This overestimation is hypothesised to be an effect of excessive
groundwater pumping from machinery installing adjacent
instrumentation or vertical drains. The overall maximum
excess pore pressures achieved following these initial loading
stages were also predicted well, with a discrepancy of only
5 kPa observable at the point of maximum pore pressure.
Signicant disparity can be seen with regard to the rate of
dissipation present for the treated sections of the embankment.
This difference is believed to be due primarily to a
phenomenon known as the MandelCryer effect. This effect is
characterised by stress redistribution associated with large
lateral strains, where the increase in localised stresses in some
regions of the soils due to stress redistribution can in fact
generate additional pore pressures, hence mimicking the effect
Section
ID
Parameter Soil layer
Layer 1 2 3 4
Description Weathered crust Silty clay Silty clay Silty clay
Depth: m 00
.
5 0
.
52
.
5 2
.
55
.
0 5
.
010
.
5
A Plane-strain horizontal
permeability (no smear), k
hp(SA)
:
m/s
5
.
3 3 10
8
7
.
0 3 10
8
5
.
6 3 10
8
1
.
6 3 10
9
Plane-strain horizontal
permeability (with smear), k9
hp(SA)
:
m/s
1
.
6 3 10
9
2
.
1 3 10
8
1
.
7 3 10
9
4
.
8 3 10
9
C Plane-strain horizontal
permeability (no smear): k
hp(SC)
:
m/s
4
.
2 3 10
8
5
.
5 3 10
8
4
.
3 3 10
8
1
.
2 3 10
8
Plane-strain horizontal
permeability (with smear), k9
hp(SC)
:
m/s
1
.
1 3 10
8
1
.
5 3 10
8
1
.
2 3 10
8
3
.
4 3 10
8
Table 3. Plane-strain permeability values for subsoil layers treated by PVDs
Ground surface
Smear
zone
10 m
6 m
Drain spacing/2
Fig. 6. Finite difference mesh for full embankment analysis
(main) and unit cell analysis (subset)
Parameter Value
Dry density, r: kg/m
3
2039
Shear modulus, G: MPa 10
Cohesion, c9: kPa 10
Friction angle, : degrees 32
Poissons ratio, 0
.
25
Table 4. MohrCoulomb parameters of embankment ll
264 Geotechnical Engineering 161 Issue GE5 Foundation behaviour below an embankment on soft soils Rankine et al.
of retarded pore water pressure dissipation.
1820
Such a
phenomenon has been observed in the development of excess
pore water pressures in thick deposits of normally consolidated
clays, and similarly below various surcharge loadings,
including trial embankments built upon soft clays from the
Muar Plains, Malaysia.
21
6.2. Surface settlements
Comparisons of predicted and observed surface settlement were
made for each of the three sections. The points selected for
comparison were located at settlement gauges SCA1 (section
A), SCB3 (section B) and SCC5 (section C). Gauges SCA1 and
SCB3 were located under the centreline of the embankment,
and at SCC5, 1 m left of the centreline (see Fig. 3). Fig. 8 shows
the predicted and observed settlements for each embankment
section.
As clearly demonstrated, the magnitudes of vertical settlement
under the embankment are generally well computed. Slight
underestimations and overestimations were predicted for
sections A and C respectively. As expected, the treated sections
displayed a faster consolidation rate than the untreated section
B. Furthermore, the settlement consolidation rate for section A,
in which the drains were spaced at 1 m, was quicker than for
section C, which was treated with drains at 2 m spacing.
However. the difference between values (both predicted and
observed) for sections A and C was minimal, and thus any
benet derived from installing the vertical drains at spacing
closer than 2 m is negligible, as the smear effect produced by
drain installation largely negates it. The divergence observed
between the predicted settlementtime relationships for the
treated sections is greater than that shown by the eld
readings. This may be due to physical problems with the
vertical drains installed (i.e. kinking and/or clogging of the
drain), but is more likely to be due to the differences with the
smear effects assumed from drain installation.
6.3. Lateral displacements
The predicted and measured lateral soil deformations were
measured for inclinometers IA1, IB3 and IC5 (locations shown
in Fig. 3). Displacements have been compared at 69 days (end
of construction) for all three sections. Inclinometer
displacement proles for measured and predicted results in
each of the sections are shown in Fig. 9.
It is observed that the maximum lateral movement below the
embankment was predicted well, with only slight
overestimation for sections A and C, and only slight
underestimation for section B. The predicted displacement
proles for sections A and B also compared favourably when
evaluated with respect to that measured in the eld. These
inclinometers were installed 10 m left of the centreline. A less
favourable comparison was found for section C: although the
maximum lateral displacement was predicted reasonably, the
displacement prole generated by the model was quite
different from that which occurred in the eld. Errors in the
prediction of lateral movement for section C may be partly due
to the corner effects of the embankment. These are not properly
modelled in two-dimensional plane strain. Such effects would
be less of a concern for inclinometers IA1 and IB3, as they are
located away from the toe of the embankment. However, the
inclinometer in section C, IC5, was located at the toe of the
10000
9000
8000
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
E
x
c
e
s
s

p
o
r
e

p
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
:

k
P
a
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Time: days
(a)
PVA4 (actual)
PVA4 (predicted)
PVA10 (actual)
PVA10 (predicted)
10000
9000
8000
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
E
x
c
e
s
s

p
o
r
e

w
a
t
e
r

p
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
:

k
P
a
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Time: days
(b)
PVB32 (actual)
PVB32 (predicted)
PVB28 (actual)
PVB28 (predicted)
Drilling nearby
10000
9000
8000
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
E
x
c
e
s
s

p
o
r
e

p
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
:

k
P
a
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Time: days
(c)
PVB39 (actual)
PVB39 (predicted)
PVB45 (actual)
PVB45 (predicted)
Fig. 7. Excess pore water pressure variation: (a) Section A; (b)
Section B; (c) Section C
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
Time: days
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
S
e
t
t
l
e
m
e
n
t
:

m
m
Section A (actual)
Section A (predicted)
Section B (actual)
Section B (predicted)
Section C (actual)
Section C (predicted)
Fig. 8. Settlement plot for gauges SCA1, SCB3 and SCC5
during the embankment construction phase
Geotechnical Engineering 161 Issue GE5 Foundation behaviour below an embankment on soft soils Rankine et al. 265
embankment, and would be subjected to subjected to such
effects in the eld.
Also, anisotropy of the mechanical properties of the soil may
have contributed to differences between the predicted and
measured lateral deformation. Inability to input such
directional variation is one of the major drawbacks of the Cam
clay model.
22
7. CONCLUSIONS
This paper presents a classic case history of a trial embankment
built on soft, organic marine clay in Area 2A of the Sunshine
Coast Motorway in South East Queensland, Australia. It details
both the pore pressure response and the vertical and lateral
deformations produced during the construction of a fully
instrumented trial embankment. The trial embankment was
used to assess the feasibility and stability of staged
construction of the embankment, to assess the effectiveness of
installing prefabricated vertical drains, and to verify the
compressibility and consolidation characteristics. The
embankment was constructed using a multi-staged approach,
and three separate sections were considered. These sections
represented the design case (vertical drains installed at 2 m
spacing), a control case (virgin undisturbed soil) and an
intermediate case (vertical drains installed at 1 m spacing). A
fully coupled plane-strain analysis of each of these sections
was carried out and compared with in situ measurements.
The deviations between the measured eld measurements and
the excess pore water pressures predicted by the numerical
model for each section were considered acceptable, given the
limitations of the equivalent plane-strain analysis and the
underlying assumptions. The reduced pore pressure dissipation
in the eld, in contrast to the FEM predictions, implies that the
smear effect around the drains was probably more extensive
than had been assumed in the numerical analysis. If vertical
drains are installed too close to each other (e.g. 1 m spacing in
this case), Walker and Indraratna
23
demonstrate that the rate of
pore water dissipation can be further affected by overlapping
smear zones. In general, the installation of PVDs will certainly
accelerate the excess pore pressure dissipation upon application
of the surcharge load. The maximum deviation between
observed and predicted excess pore pressure occurred at PVC44
at 60 days. Maximum deviations in sections A and C were
predicted at 60 days and 75 days respectively. With the
exception of PVC44, excess pore water pressure was slightly
overestimated for each of the prediction points. Discrepancies
between measured and predicted pore pressures may have been
due to disparities between the actual and assumed loading
conditions, or disparities related to the clay permeabilities
employed in the numerical analysis.
The numerical model predictions of surface settlement were in
excellent agreement with the eld measurements. Both
numerical and eld measurements showed that reducing the
drain spacing from 2 m (Section C) to 1 m (section A) has no
signicant difference on the settlement at any time. The
vertical drains with 2 m spacing were chosen in this project. It
should be noted that the presence of drains, irrespective of the
spacing, has no effect on the nal magnitude of the
consolidation settlement; it only has an effect in hastening the
rate of settlement.
The magnitude of maximum lateral displacement was predicted
well by all three sections; however, although the displacement
prole for sections A and B compared favourably with the
movements measured in the eld, the prole for section C
differed signicantly from the eld prole. This difference may
be due to the positioning of each of the inclinometers. IC5 was
located at the embankment toe. This inclinometer would be
subjected to corner effects from the embankment. Such effects
are not properly modelled by a two-dimensional plane-strain
analysis. There would not be as signicant an effect on the
inclinometers IA1 and IB3 due to their positioning (10 m left of
the centreline).
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors wish to thank the materials and geotechnical
services branch of the Department of Main Roads Queensland,
for their assistance in the provision of eld data for this case
study. The nancial assistance provided by DEST as a part of
ARC-Linkage project is also gratefully acknowledged.
110
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
D
e
p
t
h
:

m
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Lateral displacement: mm
IA1 (actual)
IA1 (predicted)
(a)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
D
e
p
t
h
:

m
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Lateral displacement: mm
IB3 (actual)
IB3 (predicted)
(b)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
D
e
p
t
h
:

m
0 10 20 30 40 100 120
Lateral displacement: mm
IC5 (actual)
IC5 (predicted)
(c)
50 60 70 80 90
Fig. 9. Lateral displacement proles for inclinometers: (a) IA1
(Section A); (b) IB3 (Section B); (c) IC5 (Section C)
266 Geotechnical Engineering 161 Issue GE5 Foundation behaviour below an embankment on soft soils Rankine et al.
REFERENCES
1. QUEENSLAND DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT. Sunshine Motorway
Stage 2: Area 2 Geotechnical Investigation. Queensland
Department of Transport, 1991, Materials and Geotechnical
Services Branch Report No. R1765, Brisbane, Australia.
2. QUEENSLAND DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT. Sunshine Motorway
Stage 2: Area 2 Geotechnical Design Report. Queensland
Department of Transport, 1991, Materials and Geotechnical
Services Branch Report No. R1770, Brisbane, Australia.
3. QUEENSLAND DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT. Sunshine Motorway
Stage 2: Interim Report on the Performance of the Trial
Embankment Area 2A (Ch 2849028640). Queensland
Department of Transport, 1992, Materials and Geotechnical
Services Branch Report No. R1802, Brisbane, Australia.
4. WIJEYAKULASURIYA V., HOBBS G. and BRANDON A. Some
experiences with performance monitoring of embankments
on soft clays, Proceedings of the 8th ANZ Conference on
Geomechanics, Hobart, 1999 (preprint).
5. LITWINOWICZ A., WIJEYAKULASURIYA C. V. and BRANDON A. N.
Performance of a reinforced embankment on a sensitive
soft clay foundation. Proceedings of the 5th IGS
Conference, Singapore, 1995, 1116
6. BO M. W., CHU J., LOW B. K. and CHOA V. 2003. Soil
Improvement: Prefabricated Vertical Drain Techniques.
Thompson Learning, Singapore, 2003.
7. ITASCA. 2005. FLAC 5
.
0 Users Guide. Itasca Consulting
Group, Minneapolis, MN, 2005.
8. INDRARATNA B., BALASUBRAMANIAM A. and SIVANESWARAN N.
Analysis of settlement and lateral deformation of soft clay
foundation beneath two full-scale embankments.
International Journal of Numerical and Analytical Methods
in Geomechanics, 1997, 21, No. 9, 599618.
9. ROSCOE K. H. and BURLAND J. B. 1968. On the generalised
stressstrain behaviour of wet clay. In Engineering
Plasticity (HEYMAN J. and LECKIE F. A. (eds)), Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, 1968, pp. 535609.
10. BERGADO D. T. and LONG P. V. Numerical analysis of
embankment on subsiding ground improved by vertical
drains and granular piles. Proceedings of the 13th
International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering, New Delhi, 1994, 13611366.
11. BERGADO D. T., ASAKAMI H., ALFARA M. C. and
BALASUBRAMANIAM A. S. Smear effects of vertical drains on
soft Bangkok clay. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering,
ASCE, 1991, 117, No. 10, 15091530.
12. CHAI J. C. and MIURA N. Method of modelling vertical drain
improved subsoil. Proceedings of the ChinaJapan Joint
Symposium on Recent Developments of Theory and Practice
in Geotechnology, Shanghai, 1997, pp. 18.
13. INDRARATNA B. and REDANA I. W. Laboratory determination of
smear zone due to vertical drain installation. Journal of
Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, 1998, 124, No. 2, 474478.
14. INDRARATNA B. and REDANA I. W. Numerical modelling of
vertical drains with smear and well resistance installed in
soft clay. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 2000, 37, No. 1,
132145.
15. HIRD C. C., PYRAH I. C. and RUSSELL D. Finite element
modelling of vertical drains beneath embankments on soft
ground. Geotechnique, 1992, 42, No. 3, 499511.
16. INDRARATNA B. and REDANA I. W. Plane strain modelling of
smear effects associated with vertical drains. Journal of
Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE,
1997, 123, No. 5, 474478.
17. REDANA I. W. Effectiveness of Vertical Drains in Soft Clay
with Special Reference to Smear Effects. PhD thesis,
University of Wollongong, 1999.
18. MANDEL J. Etude mathematique de la consolidation des
sols. Actes due Colloque International de Mechanique,
Poitier, 1950, Vol. 4, pp. 919.
19. MANDEL J. Consolidation des sols (etude mathematique).
Geotechnique, 1953, 3, No. 7, 287299.
20. CRYER C. W. A comparison of the 3-dimensional theories of
Biot and Terzaghi. Quarterly Journal of Mechanics and
Applied Mathematics, 1963, 16, No. 4, 401412.
21. INDRARATNA B., BALASUBRAMANIAM A. S. and RATNAYAKE P.
Performance of embankment stabilized with vertical drains
on soft clay. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE,
1994, 120, No. 2, 257273.
22. PARRY R. H. G. and WROTH C. P. 1977. Shear properties of
soft clays. Report presented at Symposium on Soft Clay,
Bangkok, Thailand, 1977.
23. WALKER R. and INDRARATNA B. Vertical drain consolidation
with overlapping smear zones. Geotechnique, 1997, 57,
No. 5, 463467.
What do you think?
To comment on this paper, please email up to 500 words to the editor at journals@ice.org.uk
Proceedings journals rely entirely on contributions sent in by civil engineers and related professionals, academics and students. Papers
should be 20005000 words long, with adequate illustrations and references. Please visit www.thomastelford.com/journals for author
guidelines and further details.
Geotechnical Engineering 161 Issue GE5 Foundation behaviour below an embankment on soft soils Rankine et al. 267