Upload
others
View
64
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
© 2012 Taylor & Francis
Chapter 3
Effective stress
3.1
Figure Q3.1
Total vertical stress at 5 m depth:
kPa
Pore water pressure:
kPa
Therefore, effective vertical stress:
kPa
Alternative method:Buoyant unit weight:
kPa
Effective vertical stress:
kPa σ′v = 51 kPa
The complete stress profile within the ground may be obtained using the spreadsheet tool Stress_CSM8 on the Companion Website. The complete solution is shown on the follow-ing page. The spreadsheet may then be used to query the stresses at 5 m depth, giving the values shown above.
Effective stress 23
© 2012 Taylor & Francis
3.2
Figure Q3.2
Total vertical stress at 5 m depth:
kPakPa
kPa
Alternative method:Buoyant unit weight:
kPakPa σ′v = 51 kPa
The complete stress profile within the ground may be obtained using the spreadsheet tool Stress_CSM8 on the Companion Website. The complete solution is shown on the follow-ing page. The spreadsheet may then be used to query the stresses at 5 m depth, giving the values shown above. Comparing the answer with Problem 3.1, it is clear that when the water table is above the ground surface, the depth of the overlying water has no effect on the effective stresses within the ground (though σv and u do change).
3.3
Figure Q3.3
24 Effective stress
© 2012 Taylor & Francis
At the top of the clay:
kPakPa
kPa σ′v = 51.4 kPa
At the bottom of the clay:
kPa
The elevation head (due to the location of the WT) is 6 m. Artesian pressure is additional to this, 4 m above ground level (AGL), i.e. 6 m above the WT:
kPakPa σ′v = 33.3 kPa
(N.B. The alternative method of calculation shown in Problems 3.1 and 3.2 is not applica-ble under artesian ground water conditions.) The complete stress profile within the ground may be obtained using the spreadsheet tool Stress_CSM8 on the Companion Website. The complete solution is shown on the following page. The spreadsheet may then be used to query the stresses at 4 and 8 m depth, giving the values shown above.
3.4
Figure Q3.4
Total vertical stress at 8 m depth:
kPakPa
kPa σ′v = 106 kPa
The complete stress profile within the ground may be obtained using the spreadsheet tool Stress_CSM8 on the Companion Website. The complete solution is shown on the follow-ing page. The spreadsheet may then be used to query the stresses at 8 m depth, giving the values shown above.
Effective stress 25
© 2012 Taylor & Francis
3.5
Figure Q3.5
(a) Immediately after WT rise:At 8 m depth, pore water pressure is governed by the new WT level because the permeability of the sand is high.
kPakPa
kPa σ′v = 94 kPa
At 12 m depth, pore water pressure is governed by the old WT level because the permea-bility of the clay is very low. (However, there will be an increase in total stress of 9 kPa due to the increase in unit weight from 16 to 19 kN/m3 between 3 and 6 m depth: this is accompanied by an immediate increase of 9 kPa in pore water pressure.)
kPakPakPa σ′v = 154 kPa
(b) Several years after WT rise:At both depths, pore water pressure is governed by the new WT level, it being assumed that swelling of the clay is complete. Therefore, at 8 m depth:
kPa (as above) σ′v = 94 kPa
At 12 m depth:
kPakPa
kPa σ′v = 134 kPa
26 Effective stress
© 2012 Taylor & Francis
The complete stress profile within the ground may be obtained using the spreadsheet tool Stress_CSM8 on the Companion Website. The complete solution is shown on the follow-ing page. The spreadsheet may then be used to query the stresses at 8 m depth, giving the values shown above.
3.6
Figure Q3.6
Total weight of the element = vector ab:
Boundary water force on CD = vector bd. Referring to the figure above:
Boundary water force on BC = vector de. Referring to the figure above:
Resultant body force = vector ea. Measuring from the force diagram (drawn to scale) gives |ea| = 9.9 kN. This acts in a direction of 17° to the vertical. Resultant body force = 9.9 kN (@ 17° to vert.)
Effective stress 27
© 2012 Taylor & Francis
3.7
Figure Q3.7
(a) For case (1), h = 2 m at the top of the element and h = 0 m at the bottom. Seepage is therefore occurring from top to bottom and at the centre of the sample, h = 1 m:
kPa
kPa
kPa σ′v = 30.2 kPa
For case (2), h = 2 m at the bottom of the element, h = 0 at the top and seepage is occurring from bottom to top. As before, h = 1 m at the centre of the sample:
kPa
kPa
kPa σ′v = 10.6 kPa
(b) In both cases, Δh = 2 m across the sample, which has a length of Δs = 4 m. The hydraulic gradient is therefore i = Δh/Δs = 0.5 from top to bottom in (1) and from bottom to top in (2). This gives a seepage pressure j = iγw = 4.9 kN/m3 downwards in (1) and upwards in (2). For case (1):
kPa σ′v = 30.2 kPa
For case (2):
kPa σ′v = 10.6 kPa
28 Effective stress
© 2012 Taylor & Francis
3.8
The flownet for this problem was found in Problem 2.3, and is shown below:
Figure Q3.8
The average exit hydraulic gradient may be found directly using the results of Flownet_CSM8, or reading from the flownet sketch. In the latter case:
Loss in total head between adjacent equipotentials:
Δs ≈ 0.85 m, so exit hydraulic gradient:
The critical hydraulic gradient is given by Equation 3.12:
Therefore, factor of safety against ‘boiling’ (Equation 3.14):
F = 1.76
The pore pressures at C and D may also be found directly using the results of Flownet_CSM8 to get the total head, or reading from the flownet sketch.
Effective stress 29
© 2012 Taylor & Francis
Total head at C:
m
Elevation head at C:
m
Pore water pressure at C:
kPa
Therefore, effective vertical stress at C:
kPa σ′vC = 14.5 kPa
For point D:
mm
kPakPa σ′vD = 93.4 kPa
3.9
The flow net for this problem was found in Problem 2.2, and is shown below:
Figure Q3.9
30 Effective stress
© 2012 Taylor & Francis
For a soil prism 1.50 × 3.00 m adjacent to the piling (shown shaded in the above figure):
m (from Flownet_CSM8)
Factor of safety against ‘heaving’ (Equation 3.13):
F = 1.88
With a filter:
Depth of filter = 17.4/21 = 0.83 m (if above water level). Filter height = 0.83 m