Evaluation Methods of Compression Index and the Coefficient of Consolidation by Back Analysis of Settlement Data

현장계측치로부터 역산한 압축지수와 압밀계수의 평가 방법

A large scale field test of prefabricated vertical drains is performed to analyze the effect of parameters of the very soft clay at a test site. Compression index and the coefficient of horizontal consolidation obtained by back-analysis from the settlement data were compared with those obtained by means of laboratory tests. The Hyperbolic, Asaoka's and The Curve fitting methods are used to estimate final settlements and coefficients of consolidation. 1. Final settlement predicted with the Hyperbolic method was the largest, and the settlements predicted with the Asaoka's and the Curve fitting methods were nearly the same range, and it was concluded that smear effect has to be considered on design in the case that spacing of drains is small 2. The relationships of the measured consolidation ratio (Urn) and the designed consolidation ratio($U_t$) were showed as $U_m$ = (1.13~1.17)$U_t$, $U_m$ = (1.07~1.20)$U_t$, $U_m$ = (1.13~1.17)$U_t$ on the Hyperbolic, Asaoka's and the Curve fitting methods, respectively. The relations on the Asaoka's and the Curve fitting methods were nearly the same range. 3. The relationships of the field compression index($C_{cfield}$) and virgin compression index($V_{cclab}$) were showed as $C_{cfield}$ = (1.26~1.45)$V_{cclab}$, $C_{cfield}$ = (1.08~1.15) $V_{cclab}$, $C_{cfield}$ = (1.04~1.21)$V_{cclab}$, on the Hyperbolic, Asaoka's and the Curve fitting methods, respectively. 4. The ratio ($C_h/C_v$) of the coefficient of vertical consolidation and the coefficient of horizontal consolidation that is obtained by back-analysis from the settlement data was $C_h$=(0.7~0.9)$C_v$, $C_h$=(0.9~1.5)$C_v$, $C_h$=(2.4~3.0)$C_v$ on the Hyperbolic, Asaoka's and the Curve fitting methods, respectively. 5. It was concluded that the exact consolidation coefficient must be determined after the final settlement is predicted again when the consolidation is finished, because the field consolidation coefficient is decreased as the time allowed to be alone is increased.

본 연구는 연약지반의 심도가 갚으면서 압밀침하량이 큰 지역에서 연직드레인 공법에 의하여 개량한 지반의 침하거동을 파악하고, 현장계측결과를 기초로 기존의 최종침하량의 예측방법과 현장계측치로부터 역산한 압축지수와 압밀계수의 범위를 실내시험과 비교분석 한 것으로 본 연구 대상지역에서 얻은 결과를 요약하면 다음과 같다. 1. 최종침하량 예측방법에 의하여 구한 최종예상침하량은 쌍곡선 방법이 가장 크고, Asaoka 방법과 Curve fitting 방법은 유사하게 나타났으며, 타입간격이 좁을 경우에는 교란영향을 고려한 설계가 검토되어야 할 것으로 판단된다. 2. 실측압밀도($U_m$)와 설계압밀도($U_t$)와의 관계는 쌍곡선 방법에서 $U_m$=(0.88~1.03)$U_t$으로 약간 작게 나타났고, Asaoka 방법은 $U_m$=(1.07~1.20)$U_t$, Curve fitting 방법은 $U_m$=(1.13~1.17)$U_t$으로 유사하게 나타났다. 3. 실내압축지수($V_{cclab}$)와 현장압축지수($Cc_{field}$)와의 관계는 쌍곡선 방법에서는 $Cc_{field}$=(1.26~1.45)$V_{cclab}$, Asaoka 방법에서는 $Cc_{field}$=(1.08~1.15)$V_{cclab}$, Curve fitting 방법에서는 $Cc_{field}$=(1.04~1.21)$V_{cclab}$의 범위로 쌍곡선방법에서는 약간 크게 나타났고, Asaoka와 Curve fitting 방법은 거의 동일한 값을 나타냈다. 4. 현장계측치로부터 역산한 현장압밀계수 ($C_h$)와 실내시험에서 구한 수직압밀계수($C_v$)와의 비는 ($C_h$/$C_v$) 쌍곡선방법에서는 0.7~0.9. Asaoka 방법에서는 0.9~1.5. Curve fitting 방법에서는 2.4~3.0의 범위로 나타났다. 5. 현장압밀계수는 방치기간이 경과함에 따라서 점차로 감소하는 경향을 나타내므로 압밀이 완료되었을 때에 최종침하량 예측방법에 의하여 재분석한 후 정확한 압밀계수를 산정하는 것이 합리적이라고 판단된다.