Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of K 0 in stiff clay by back-analysis of convergence measurements from unsupported cylindrical cavity

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Acta Geotechnica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The coefficient of earth pressure at rest K 0 of fine-grained soils is often being estimated empirically from the overconsolidation ratio (OCR). The relationships adopted in this estimation, however, assume that K 0 is caused by pure mechanical unloading and do not consider that a significant proportion of the apparent preconsolidation pressure may be caused by the effects of ageing, in particular by secondary compression. In this work, K 0 of Brno Tegel, which is a clay of stiff to hard consistency (apparent vertical preconsolidation pressure of 1800 kPa, apparent OCR of 7), was estimated based on back-analysis of convergence measurements from unsupported cylindrical cavity. The values were subsequently verified by analysing a supported exploratory adit and a two-lane road tunnel. As the simulation results are primarily influenced by soil anisotropy, it was quantified in an experimental programme. The ratio of shear moduli \(\alpha _G\) was 1.45, the ratio of horizontal and vertical Young's moduli \(\alpha _E\) was 1.67, and the value of Poisson ratio \(\nu _{tp}\) was close to 0. The soil was described using a hypoplastic model considering very small strain stiffness anisotropy. For the given soil, the OCR-based estimation yielded \(K_0=1.3\), while Jáky formula estimated \(K_0=0.63\) for the state of normal consolidation. The back-analysed value of K 0 was 0.75. The predicted tunnel displacements agreed well with the monitoring data, giving additional confidence into the selected modelling approach. It was concluded that OCR-based equations should not be used automatically for K 0 estimation. K 0 of many clays may actually be lower than often assumed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20
Fig. 21

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Their distance in the portal area is 10 m, and their axes are diverging, but most of their lengths run parallel at an average distance of 70 m.

  2. \(\alpha _G=1.35\) was a preliminary experimental estimate of \(\alpha _G\), more detailed experimental study has later indicated \(\alpha _G=1.45\).

References

  1. Bača J, Dohnálek V (2009) Královo Pole tunnels—experience obtained during the construction to date. Tunel 18(3):27–32

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bjerrum L, Andersen K (1972) In-situ measurement of lateral pressures in clay. In: Proceedings of the 5th European conference on soil mechanics and geotechnical engineering, Madrid, vol 1, pp 12–20

  3. Boháč J, Mašín D, Malát R, Novák V, Rott J (2013) Methods of determination of \(K_0\) in overconsolidated clay. In: Delage P, Desrues J, Frank R, Puech A, Schlosser F (eds) Proceedings of the 18th international conference on soil mechanics and geotechnical engineering, vol 1, pp 203–206

  4. Borja RI (1990) Analysis of incremental excavation based on critical state theory. J Geotech Eng ASCE 116(6):964–985

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Burland JB, Maswoswe J (1982) Discussion on In situ measurements of horizontal stress in overconsolidated clay using push-in spade-shaped pressure cells. Géotechnique 32(2):285–286

    Google Scholar 

  6. Doležalová M (2002) Approaches to numerical modelling of ground movements due to shallow tunnelling. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on soil structure interaction in urban civil engineering, ETH Zürich, pp 365–376

  7. Doran I, Sivakumar V, Graham J, Johnson A (2000) Estimation of in situ stresses using anisotropic elasticity and suction measurements. Géotechnique 50(2):189–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Franzius JN, Potts DM, Addenbrooke TI, Burland JB (2005) The influence of building weight on tunnelling-induced ground and building deformation. Soils Found 44(1):25–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Gudehus G (1996) A comprehensive constitutive equation for granular materials. Soils Found 36(1):1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Gudehus G, Mašín D (2009) Graphical representation of constitutive equations. Géotechnique 59(2):147–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hamouche K, Leroueil S, Roy M, Lutenegger AJ (1995) In situ evaluation of k0 in eastern canada clays. Can Geotech J 32(4):677–688

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Horák V (2009) Královo Pole tunnel in Brno from designer point of view. Tunel 18(1):67–72

    Google Scholar 

  13. Jáky J (1944) The coefficient of earth pressure at rest (in Hungarian). J Soc Hung Archit Eng 78:355–357

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kavazanjian E, Mitchell JK (1984) Time dependence of lateral earth pressure. J Geotech Eng ASCE 110(4):530–533

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Lefebvre G, Bozozuk M, Philibert A, Hornych P (1991) Evaluating k0 in champlain clays with hydraulic fracture tests. Can Geotech J 28(3):365–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Marchetti S (1980) In situ tests by flat dilatometer. J Geotech Eng Div ASCE 106(NoGT3):299–321

    Google Scholar 

  17. Mašín D (2005) A hypoplastic constitutive model for clays. Int J Numer Anal Methods Geomech 29(4):311–336

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Mašín D (2012) Asymptotic behaviour of granular materials. Granul Matter 14(6):759–774

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Mašín D (2012) Hypoplastic Cam-clay model. Géotechnique 62(6):549–553

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Mašín D (2013) Clay hypoplasticity with explicitly defined asymptotic states. Acta Geotech 8(5):481–496

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. Mašín D (2014) Clay hypoplasticity model including stiffness anisotropy. Géotechnique 64(3):232–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Mašín D, Rott J (2014) Small strain stiffness anisotropy of natural sedimentary clays: review and a model. Acta Geotech 9(2):299–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Mayne PW, Kulhawy FH (1982) \({K}_0\)-OCR relationships in soil. Proc ASCE J Geotech Eng Div 108:851–872

    Google Scholar 

  24. Mesri G, Castro A (1987) \(C_\alpha \)/\(C_c\) concept and \(K_0\) during secondary compression. J Geotech Eng ASCE 113(3):230–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Mesri G, Hayatt TM (1993) The coefficient of earth pressure at rest. Can Geotech J 30:647–666

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Niemunis A, Herle I (1997) Hypoplastic model for cohesionless soils with elastic strain range. Mech Cohes Frict Mater 2(4):279–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Pavlík J, Klímek L, Rupp D (2004) Geotechnical exploration for the Dobrovského tunnel, the most significant structure on the large city ring road in Brno. Tunel 13(2):2–12

    Google Scholar 

  28. Potts DM, Zdravkovic L (1999) Finite element analysis in geotechnical engineering. Volume I: Theory. Thomas Telford, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  29. Rott J (2014) Homogenisation and modification of composite steel-concrete lining, with the modulus of elasticity of sprayed concrete growing with time. Tunel (www.ita-aites.cz/en/casopis) 23(3):53–60

  30. Schmertmann JH (1983) A simple question about consolidation. J Geotech Eng ASCE 109(1):119–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Skempton AW (1961) Horizontal stresses in an over-consolidated eocene clay. In: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on soil mechanics and foundation engineering, vol 1, pp 351–357

  32. Svoboda T, Mašín D, Boháč J (2009) Hypoplastic and mohr-coulomb models in simulations of a tunnel in clay. Tunel 18(4):59–68

    Google Scholar 

  33. Svoboda T, Mašín D, Boháč J (2010) Class a predictions of a NATM tunnel in stiff clay. Comput Geotech 37(6):817–825

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Svoboda T, Mašín D (2011) Comparison of displacement fields predicted by 2D and 3D finite element modelling of shallow NATM tunnels in clays. Geotechnik 34(2):115–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Tedd P, Charles JA (1981) In situ measurements of horizontal stress in overconsolidated clay using push-in spade-shaped pressure cells. Géotechnique 31(4):554–558

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Wroth C, Hughes J (1973) An instrument for the in-situ measurements of the properties of soft clays. In: Proceedings of the 8th international conference on soil mechanics and foundation engineering, Moscow, vol 1, pp 487–494

  37. Zemánek I, Lossmann J, Socha K (2003) Impact of exploration galleries for the Dobrovského tunnel on surface development in Brno; application of the observation method. Tunel 12(3):33–37

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Financial support by the research grants 15-05935S, 14-32105S and P105/12/1705 of the Czech Science Foundation and by the research grant No. GAUK 243-253370 of the Charles University Grant Agency is greatly appreciated.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Hydrogeology, Engineering Geology and Applied Geophysics, Charles University in Prague, Albertov 6, 12843, Prague 2, Czech Republic

    J. Rott, D. Mašín, J. Boháč, M. Krupička & T. Mohyla

Authors
  1. J. Rott
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. D. Mašín
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J. Boháč
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. M. Krupička
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. T. Mohyla
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to D. Mašín.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rott, J., Mašín, D., Boháč, J. et al. Evaluation of K 0 in stiff clay by back-analysis of convergence measurements from unsupported cylindrical cavity. Acta Geotech. 10, 719–733 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-015-0395-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-015-0395-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation