Professional Documents
Culture Documents
ABSTRACT
The Changi East Reclamation Project in the Republic of Singapore comprises the ground improvement of marine clay
with the installation of prefabricated vertical drains and subsequent preloading. Prior to the commencement of land
reclamation works, a series of in situ tests were conducted under marine conditions with the help of various in situ
testing equipment. The In Situ Testing Site was located in the northern part of the project where the thickest
compressible marine clay existed. The in situ tests carried out were with the field vane, piezocone, flat dilatometer,
self-boring pressuremeter and BAT permeameter. In situ tests were conducted to determine the undrained shear
strength, overconsolidation ratio, soil stiffness and coefficient of consolidation and permeability of the marine clay. In
situ dissipation tests provide a means of evaluating the in situ coefficient of consolidation and hydraulic conductivity
due to horizontal flow of soft soil and were used to estimate these properties of Singapore marine clay at Changi.
1 INTRODUCTION
In order to allow for the future expansion of Changi International Airport in Singapore, an additional 2000 hectares of
land was reclaimed next to the existing airport. The shear strength, overconsolidation ratio, permeability and
consolidation properties of the soil in the horizontal flow direction are important design parameters which need to be
determined prior to reclamation. The determination of these design parameters are traditionally based on laboratory
consolidation tests with the use of horizontally cut samples. Results of these laboratory tests however are usually
subject to uncertainties primarily due to inevitable disturbance of the samples. In situ testing is an alternative to these
traditional laboratory testing methods and furthermore the effect of disturbance to marine clays is minimal. In situ
testing enables the undrained shear strength and overconsolidation ratio of the marine clay to be determined at various
levels. In situ dissipation tests can also be conducted at various levels in the marine clay to estimate the variation of the
coefficient of consolidation and hydraulic conductivity due to horizontal flow with depth. The last two decades have
seen an emergence of in situ testing methods as an alternative to laboratory testing methods. Accordingly, the objectives
of this paper are: 1) to describe the testing and analysis procedure for the various in situ tests; 2) to determine the
undrained shear strength and overconsolidation ratio of Singapore marine clay at Changi prior to reclamation; 3) to
determine the coefficient of consolidation due to horizontal flow (Ch) of Singapore marine clay prior to reclamation; 4)
to determine the horizontal hydraulic conductivity (kh) of Singapore marine clay prior to reclamation; 5) To compare
and discuss the results of the various in situ tests.
2 SITE DESCRIPTION
The In Situ Testing Site comprises two distinct layers of marine clay, which are the Upper Marine Clay layer and the
Lower Marine Clay layer. The Intermediate Stiff Clay layer separates these two distinct marine clay layers. The
upper marine clay is soft with undrained shear strength values ranging from 10 kPa to 30 kPa. Marine or organic matter
is found in the upper marine clay. The intermediate layer is a silty clay layer and its formation is believed to have
occurred during the lowering of sea level, which was then followed by a rise in sea level and further deposition of the
upper marine clay layer. The lower marine clay is lightly overconsolidated with an undrained shear strength varying
from 30 kPa to 50 kPa. It is not homogeneous but occasionally interbedded with sandy clay, peaty clay and sand layers.
Below the lower marine clay is a stiff sandy clay layer locally known as Old Alluvium. The original seabed level in the
site was 3.29 metres below Admiralty Chart Datum (3.29 mCD).
The In Situ Testing Site was located just adjacent to the proposed future airport runway. Figure 1 indicates the soil
profile of the pre-reclamation borehole at the In Situ Testing Site. In situ tests carried out at the In Situ Testing Site were
the field vane shear test (FVT), cone penetration test (CPT), dilatometer test (DMT), self-boring pressuremeter test
(SBPT) and BAT permeameter test (BAT).
-20
-25
Figure 1: Typical soil profile and engineering parameters at the In Situ Testing Site.
At a given degree of consolidation, the predicted horizontal coefficient of consolidation can be obtained from the
following expression published by Baligh and Levadoux (1986):
Ch (probe) = (R2 T50) / t (8)
2
where Ch is in units of m /yr; R is radius of cone shaft in metres (0.01785 m for the type of cone used); T50 is
time factor which is 3.65 for a 60 degree tip at 50% normalised excess pore pressure; t is time elapsed for 50%
degree of consolidation to take place.
For foundation clays consolidated in the normally consolidated range, estimates of the coefficients of consolidation can
be obtained from Ch(probe) by means of the following expression published by Baligh and Levadoux (1986):
Ch (NC) = (Cr / Cc) [Ch(probe)] (9)
2
where Ch (NC) is in units of m /yr; Cr = recompression index and Cc = compression index
In order to obtain the hydraulic conductivity in the normally consolidated condition, a correction taking the
recompression ratio into account needs to be applied. The horizontal hydraulic conductivity, kh is given by the
following equation:
where po is the A-reading corresponding to the membrane lift-off pressure in units of bar; p1 is the B-reading
corresponding to the pressure required for the centre of the membrane to deflect by a preset distance of 1 mm
into the soil in units of bars.
Marchetti (1980) proposed the following correlation between the undrained shear strength, Cu, with the horizontal stress
index, Kd:
Cu = 0.22 vo (0.5 Kd) (14)
Kd = (P0 - U0) / vo (15)
where Cu is in units of kN/m2; vo = vertical effective stress; Kd = material index; P0 = the A reading from
dilatometer; U0 = pre-inserting water pressure and is a constant depending on the clay type. For Singapore
Marine Clay at Changi, can be taken as 1 for upper marine clay and intermediate clay while can be taken
as 0.7 for lower marine clays (Bo et al., 1997a, 1998a, 2000, 2003,2004).
Marchetti (1980) proposed the following correlation for the estimation of the overconsolidation ratio, OCR, for soft
clay:
OCR = (0.5 Kd)n (16)
where Kd = the material index; n = 1 for upper and lower marine clays and 0.8 for intermediate clays (Bo et
al., 1997a; 2000; 2004).
Care should be taken in determining the dilatometer modulus, Kd, since soil is still undergoing consolidation with
current surcharge load. Some current pore pressure values from the piezometer should be used for equilibrium pore
pressure. With OCR values worked out from the dilatometer tests the degree of improvement of compressible soil can
be evaluated.
In the dissipation test procedure which makes use of the C-reading, the C-reading is plotted against square root time and
the time corresponding to 50% consolidation, t50 is determined and used in the interpretation of Ch (Schmertmann,
1988); Gupta (1983) procedure, developed for piezocone dissipation analysis was modified and used in the
interpretation of Ch. The dissipation test which makes use of the C-reading is called the DMTC dissipation test and can
be performed at any depth. The procedure involves estimating rigidity index, Eu/Cu, and pore pressure at failure, Af, for
the clay and determining the time factor corresponding to 50% pore pressure dissipation, T50, from the dissipation
curves for Af = 0.9 (Schmertmann, 1988). An adjustment of the time factor may be required if Af is different from 0.9.
The T50 can then be used in the following equation which assumes R2 = 600 mm2 for a test involving the standard
Marchetti dilatometer (Chu et al., 2002), which is based on the radius of cavity expansion:
Ch (DMTC) = 600 (T50 / t50) (19)
where Ch is in units of mm2/min; T50 is the theoretical time factor; t is time elapsed for 50% degree of
consolidation to take place.
Similar to CPTU tests, the Ch values determined from either DMTA or DMTC corresponds to the unloading/reloading
range. Corrections have to be made to obtain the in situ Ch value. When converting the Ch(DMT) values into the Ch
value at the normally consolidated state, the conversion using Equation (9) has been found to provide consistent results.
Equation (10) can be used to determine the horizontal hydraulic conductivity of the marine clay.
of 0.1 mm. The instrument consists of strain gauge type transducers attached to the central core or pressuremeter body.
The pressuremeter body was covered with a rubber membrane for direct recording of the radial displacement and the
applied pressure. A rotary bit is present at the base of the equipment. The self-boring pressuremeter also requires certain
specialised skill and technical knowledge to operate.
relationship given by Clarke et al. (1979); t50 is time elapsed in years for 50% degree of consolidation to take
place.
kh = (Ch / G) w [(1 2)/ {2 (1 )}] (24)
where kh is in units of m/yr; G is shear modulus in MPa; is poisson ratio which was assumed to be 0.5 for
the current test and w is the unit weight of water.
P0 V 0
kh =
Ft
[ P 1U
0 0
- 1 - 1 ln
P t U 0 U 02
(P 0 -U0
P0
Pt
Pt - U 0
)] (25)
F= 2L (26)
[
ln L +
d
1+ ( )]L
d
2
where kh is the horizontal hydraulic conductivity in units of m/s; P0 is absolute initial system pressure; V0 is
initial gas volume; F is shape factor and is calculated as 228.76 mm for the current test; U0 is static pore water
pressure; Pt is absolute pressure at time t; L is length of filter and d is diameter of filter.
8 RESULTS
10
Depth below seabed (m)
15
20
25
35
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Shear Strength (kN/m2)
Figure 2: Variation of undrained shear strength with depth by various in situ methods prior to reclamation (Arulrajah,
2005).
0
10
FVT2: Prior to reclamation
CPT2: Prior to reclamation
DMT2: Prior to reclamation
Depth below seabed (m)
20
25
30
35
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Overconsolidation Ratio
Figure 3: Variation of OCR with depth by various in situ methods prior to reclamation (Bo et. al., 1998a).
the Ch values of the upper and lower marine clay varies between 2 m2/yr and 6 m2/yr. Ch values of 4 m2/yr to 7 m2/yr
were obtained in the intermediate stiff clay, separating the upper and lower marine clay layers. The CPTU results are
found to be the closest to the laboratory testing results.
Among the in situ tests the Ch values in the marine clay layers from SBPT are the highest overall, while those from the
CPTU dissipation test indicate the least variations with depth. The DMT results are reasonable in the lower marine clay
layer. It is observed that all the methods indicate large Ch values in the intermediate stiff clay layer.
The Ch determined by the various in situ testing methods are relatively higher overall as compared to the laboratory
testing results, as evident in the prior to reclamation test results. Horizontal laminations and micro lenses present in the
marine clay profile will lead to higher Ch values and subsequently higher kh for the in situ tests. The presence of
laminations and lenses is difficult to detect by laboratory tests due to the sampling intervals and the sampling process.
Furthermore, laboratory results are subject to various complexities such as borehole quality, sample quality, testing
methods and method of interpretation which could lead to lower test values.
It is apparent that Ch varied between the various in situ testing methods due to the differing assumption in cavity radius
in the various test methods. The varying Ch values will subsequently lead to differing kh in the CPTU, DMT and SBPT
results as kh computations are worked out indirectly from Ch values.
The Ch value derived from the CPTU dissipation test is generally lower than those obtained from the other in situ
dissipation tests. The Ch value obtained from the DMT dissipation tests is usually smaller than that from the SBPT
holding test. The Ch value obtained from the SBPT exhibits a larger variation in comparison with that of other tests. In
general, the Ch value measured by the SBPT is much larger than those obtained from the other in situ dissipation tests.
The SBPT does not appear to be desirable for the measurement of Ch for soft marine clay at Changi, as the Ch values
obtained from SBPT are normally too high to be directly used for the design. The Ch determined by the DMT and SBPT
is noted to be an order of magnitude greater than the laboratory data.
The smear effect affects the CPTU and DMT measurements for Ch. In the CPTU and DMT dissipation test, a
penetrometer has to be pushed into the clay and a smear effect similar to the insertion of a mandrel could have been
introduced prior to the measurements. This could lead to the CPTU and DMT measurements for Ch being lower than
that of the SBPT.
-5
-10
Elevation (mCD)
-15
-20
Figure 4: Prior to reclamation coefficient of consolidation due to horizontal flow from various in situ dissipation tests.
and CPTU gave the highest values. In situ dissipation tests using the BAT is recommended as the most suitable method
for the determination of the kh of marine clay. The horizontal hydraulic conductivity of Singapore marine clay prior to
reclamation is in the order of 10-9 to 10-10 m/s based on the BAT readings and is close to that of the laboratory testing
results.
The smear effect also affects the BAT, CPTU and DMT measurements for kh. In the BAT, CPTU and DMT dissipation
test, a penetrometer has to be pushed into the clay and a smear effect similar to the insertion of a mandrel could have
been introduced prior to the measurements. The smear effect for BAT permeameter could be greater than that for the
CPTU, as the BAT permeameter had a filter with a larger surface area. This may explain why kh measured by the BAT
permeameter is normally lower than that by the CPTU, although the working mechanisms of the two tests are very
similar. The SBPT should not be affected by the smear effect due to its self-boring mechanism.
-5
-10
Elevation (mCD)
-15
-20
-25
CPTU2: Prior to reclamation
DMT2 (A and C readings): Prior to reclamation
SBPT2 (pore pressure cell): Prior to reclamation
BAT2: Prior to reclamation
Laboratory Result: Prior to reclamation
-30
1.00E-11 1.00E-10 1.00E-09 1.00E-08 1.00E-07
Kh (m/s)
Figure 5: Prior to reclamation horizontal hydraulic conductivity from various in situ dissipation tests.
9 CONCLUSIONS
In the shear strength and OCR comparisons, the various tests indicate similar increasing trend profiles for increasing
depths. The undrained shear strength of the Singapore marine clay calculated by the various methods is reasonably
similar. The undrained shear strength obtained from the various in situ test methods was analysed to obtain an empirical
correlation of the undrained shear strength of the marine clay at the In Situ Testing Site.
The upper marine clay is generally overconsolidated with OCR of about 1.5 to 3. The lower marine clay is lightly
overconsolidated with OCR of 1 to 2. The intermediate stiff clay is overconsolidated due to desiccation with an OCR of
1.5 to 3. The desiccated layer found close to the seabed is also found to register high OCR values. The higher OCR at
seabed normally occurs due to an hydrodynamic effect caused by the wave and current action. It is apparent that the
OCR from CPT is the lowest of the in situ tests. This is possibly due to the value of the constant used in the OCR
computations by the CPT.
In situ dissipation tests using the CPTU are recommended as the most suitable method for the determination of the Ch of
marine clay. The CPTU results are found to be the closest to the laboratory testing results. The pre-reclamation CPTU
dissipation test indicate that the Ch values of the upper and lower marine clay varies between 2 m2/yr and 6 m2/yr. Ch
values of 4 m2/yr to 7 m2/yr were obtained in the intermediate stiff clay separating the upper and lower marine clay
layers.
The Ch determined by the various in situ testing methods are relatively higher overall as compared to the laboratory
testing results, as evident in the prior to reclamation test results. Horizontal laminations and micro lenses present in the
marine clay profile, will lead to higher Ch values and subsequently higher kh for the in situ tests. The presence of
laminations and lenses is difficult to detect by laboratory tests due to the sampling intervals and the sampling process.
Furthermore, laboratory results are subject to various complexities such as borehole quality, sample quality, testing
methods and method of interpretation which could lead to lower test values.
It is apparent that Ch varied between the various in situ testing methods due to the differing assumption in cavity radius
in the various test methods. The varying Ch values will subsequently lead to differing kh in the CPTU, DMT and SBPT
results as kh computations are worked out indirectly from Ch values. The Ch value derived from the CPTU dissipation
test is generally lower than those obtained from the other in situ dissipation tests. In general, the Ch value measured by
the SBPT is much larger than those obtained from the other in situ dissipation tests. The Ch determined by the DMT and
SBPT is noted to be an order of magnitude greater than the laboratory data.
The smear effect affects the CPTU and DMT measurements for Ch. In the CPTU and DMT dissipation test, a
penetrometer has to be pushed into the clay and a smear effect similar to the insertion of a mandrel could have been
introduced prior to the measurements. This could lead to the CPTU and DMT measurements for Ch being lower than
that of the SBPT. The smear effect also affects the BAT, CPTU and DMT measurements for kh. In the BAT, CPTU and
DMT dissipation test, a penetrometer has to be pushed into the clay and a smear effect similar to the insertion of a
mandrel could have been introduced prior to the measurements. The smear effect for BAT permeameter could be
greater than that for the CPTU, as the BAT permeameter had a filter with a larger surface area. This may explain why kh
measured by the BAT permeameter is normally lower than that by the CPTU, although the working mechanisms of the
two tests are very similar. The SBPT should not be affected by the smear effect due to its self-boring mechanism.
In situ dissipation tests using the BAT are recommended as the most suitable method for the determination of the kh of
marine clay, since the system measures horizontal hydraulic conductivity directly whereas the other in situ tests require
the introduction of additional parameters to evaluate the kh indirectly from Ch values. The horizontal hydraulic
conductivity of Singapore marine clay prior to reclamation is in the order of 10-9 to 10-10 m/s based on the BAT readings
and is close to that of the laboratory testing results.
10 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors are most grateful to Dr. A. Vijiaratnam, the former Chairman of SPECS Consultants (Singapore) Pty. Ltd.
for his encouragement and full support in the submission of these findings. The first and second authors are also most
grateful to Prof. V. Choa the Dean of Students at Nanyang Technological University (Singapore), for his immense
guidance and influence on their respective careers since their working days together in Singapore.
11 REFERENCES
Aas, G. (1967). A Study of the Effect of Vane-Shape and Rate of Strain on the Measured Values of In Situ Shear
Strength of Clays, Proceedings of the International Conference on Soil Mechanics, Montreal, Canada.
Arulrajah, A. (2005). Field Measurements and Back-Analysis of Marine Clay Geotechnical Characteristics under
Reclamation Fills, PhD Thesis, Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Australia.
Baligh, M. M. and Levadoux J. N. (1986). Consolidation after Undrained Piezocone Penetration. II: Interpretation,
Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, 112, No. 7, pp. 727-745.
Barron, P. (1948). Consolidation of Fine Grained Soils by Drain Wells. Trans. ASCE, 113, pp. 718-734.
Bo Myint Win, Arulrajah, A. and Choa, V., (1997a). Assessment of Degree of Consolidation in Soil Improvement
Project, Proceedings of the International Conference on Ground Improvement Techniques, May, Macau, pp.
71-80.
Bo Myint Win, Arulrajah A. and Choa V. (1997b). Performance Verification of Soil Improvement Work with Vertical
Drains, Proceedings of the 30th Anniversary Symposium of the Southeast Asian Geotechnical Society,
Bangkok, Thailand, pp. 191-203.
Bo Myint Win, Arulrajah, A., Choa, V. and Chang, M. F. (1998a). Site Characterization for Land Reclamation Project
at Changi in Singapore, Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Site Characterization, April 1998,
Roberson & Mayne (eds), Balkema, Rotterdam, Atlanta, USA. pp. 333-338.
Bo Myint Win, Arulrajah, A. and Choa. V. (1998b). The Hydraulic Conductivity of Singapore Marine Clay at Changi,
Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology, 31, pp. 291-299.
Bo Myint Win, Chang, M.F., Arulrajah, A., Choa, V. (2000). Undrained Shear Strength of the Singapore Marine Clay at
Changi from In Situ Tests, Geotechnical Engineering, Journal of the Southeast Asian Geotechnical Society,
31, Number 2, August 2000.
Bo Myint Win, Chu, J., Low, B.K. and Choa. V. (2003). Soil Improvement Prefabricated Vertical Drains Techniques,
Thomson Learning, Singapore.
Bo Myint Win and Choa. V. (2004). Reclamation and Ground Improvement, Thomson Learning, Singapore.
Cadling, L., Odenstad. (1950). The Vane Borer, An Apparatus for Determining the Shear Strength of Clay Soils
Directly in the Ground, Swedish Geotechnical Institute, Stockholm.
Cambridge In Situ (1993). Pre-Reclamation Self-Bored Pressuremeter Tests, Reclamation at Changi East Phase 1B
Report, Singapore.
Campannella, R.G. and Robertson, P.K. (1988). Current Status of the Piezometer Test, Penetration Testing, I Sopt-1 De
Ruiter(ed) Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 93-116.
Chandler, R.J. (1988), The In Situ Measurement of the Undrained Shear Strength of Clays Using the Field Vane: Vane
Shear Strength Testing in Soils, Field and Laboratory Studies, ASTM STP 1014, Philadelphia, USA, pp. 13-44.
Chang, M.F. (1986). The Flat Dilatometer and Its Application to Singapore Clays, Proceedings of the 4th International
Seminar Field Instrumentation and In-situ Measurements, Nanyang Technological Institute, Singapore.
Chang, M.F., Choa, V., Bo Myint Win, Cao, L.F. (1997). Overconsolidation Ratio of a Seabed Clay from In-Situ Tests,
Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Hamburg.
Chu J., Bo Myint Win, Chang M. F., and Choa V. (2002). Consolidation and permeability properties of Singapore
marine clay, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, 128, No. 9, pp. 724-732.
Clarke, B.G., Carter, J.P. and Wroth, C.P. (1979). In-situ determination of the consolidation characteristics of saturated
clays, Proceedings of the 7th European Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol. 2,
pp. 207-213.
De Beer, E.E., Goelen, E., Heynew, W.J. and Joustra, K. (1988). Cone Penetration Test (CPT): International Reference
Test Procedure, Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium on Penetration Testing, Orlando, U.S.A, Vol.
2, pp. 737-744.
Flaate, K. (1966). Factors Influencing the Results of Vane Tests, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 3, No. 1, pp. 18-31.
Gibson, R. E. and Anderson, W. F. (1961). In Situ Measurement of Soil Properties with Pressuremeter, Civil
Engineering Public Works, Review, 56, pp. 615-618.
Gupta R. C. (1983). Determination of the In Situ Coefficients of Consolidation and Permeability of Submerged Soils
using Electrical Piezoprobe Soundings, PhD. Dissertation to the University of Florida.
Hawkins, P. G. Mair, R. J., Mathieson, W. G. and Wood, D. M. (1990). Pressuremeter Measurement of Total
Horizontal Stress in Stiff Clay, Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on Pressuremeters, Oxford
University, U. K., pp. 321-330.
Mair, R.V. and Wood, D.M., (1987). Pressuremeter Testing Methods and Interpretation, CIRIA Ground Engineering
Report : In situ Testing.
Marchetti, S. (1980). In situ Tests by Flat Dilatometer, Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, 106,
No. GT3, Proc Paper 15290, pp. 299-321.
Marchetti, S. and Crapps, D.K. (1981). Flat Dilatometer Manual. Schmertmann and Crapps Inc., Gainsville, Florida,
USA.
Marchetti, S. and Totani, G. (1989). Ch Evaluation from DMTA Dissipation Curves, Proceedings of the 12th
International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Testing Engineering, Vol. 1, pp. 281-286.
Marsland, A. and Randolph, M.F. (1977). Comparison of the Results from Pressuremeter Tests and Large In situ Plate
Tests in London Clay, Geotechnique, 27, No. 2, pp. 985-992.
Mayne, P.W. and Mitchell, J.K. (1988). Profiling of Overconsolidation Ratio in Clays by Field Vane, Canadian
Geotechnical Journal, 25, No. 1, pp. 150-157.
Norwegian Geotechnical Society. (1979). Recommended Procedures for Vane Borings, August.
Schmertmann, J. H. (1988). The Coefficient of Consolidation Obtained from p2 Dissipation in the DMT, Proceedings of
the Geotechnical Conference, Pennsylvania. Department of Transportation, Pennsylvania.
Sugawara, N. (1988). On the Possibility of Estimating In-situ OCR using Piezocone (CPTU), Penetration Testing, Vol.
2, pp. 985-992.
Torstensson B. A. (1983). BAT Monitoring System, BAT AB, Stockholm,.
Torstensson B. A. and Petsonk A. M. (1986). A Device for In Situ Measurement of Hydraulic Conductivity,
Proceedings of the 4th International Seminar Field Instrumentation and In-situ Measurements, Singapore.
Whittle, R.W., Dalton, J.C.P. and Hawkins, P.G. (1993). Shear Modulus and Strain Excursion in the Pressuremeter
Test, Predictive Soil Mechanics, Thomas Telford, London.
Windle, D. and Wroth, C.P. (1997). The Use of a Self Boring Pressuremeter to Determine the Undrained Properties of
Clays, Ground Engineering