Indian Geotech J

DOI 10.1007/s40098-017-0237-7

ORIGINAL PAPER

pffiffi
Accelerated Consolidation Test Using t Method
M. Raheena1 • Retnamony G. Robinson1

Received: 14 December 2016 / Accepted: 18 April 2017

Ó Indian Geotechnical Society 2017

Abstract Consolidation parameters are essential for the Introduction

design of a variety of geotechnical structures. These
parameters are commonly determined by performing lab- Consolidation is one of the important engineering proper-
oratory one-dimensional consolidation test. The conven- ties of soils and knowledge of consolidation parameters is
tional one-dimensional consolidation test takes about 10– required for the design of several geotechnical engineering
14 days to complete one test. This paper describes an structures. The important consolidation parameters are the
accelerated
pfficonsolidation testing procedure, in which the compression index (cc) or coefficient of volume change
standard t method is used to decide the subsequent (mv), preconsolidation pressure (r0c ), recompression index
increment. To validate the suggested testing procedure, (cr), coefficient of consolidation (cv) and the coefficient of
tests were conducted on five reconstituted and three secondary compression (ca). In addition, hydraulic con-
undisturbed soil samples. Results from the suggested pro- ductivity (k) is often derived from the consolidation test
cedure and the conventional incremental load one-dimen- results. These properties are conventionally determined by
sional consolidation data are analysed and compared. The performing one-dimensional consolidation test, often
time required to complete the test using the accelerated called as oedometer test. The procedure for performing the
consolidation method could be as low as 2–5 h for most of one-dimensional consolidation test is well developed and
the soils compared to 10–14 days in the case of the con- many protocols are available [1–3]. In this test, a laterally
ventional consolidation test. Soils with very low coefficient confined soil sample is subjected to Increment Loading
of consolidation, of the order of 10-9 m2/s, requires about (IL) with a load increment ratio of generally 1.0. The test is
30 h (11 h during loading stage and 19 h during unloading a stress controlled test and the time–settlement data is
stage) to complete the test. continuously recorded for 24 h under each loading stage.
Many load increments are required to establish the void
Keywords Clays  Compressibility  ratio (e)-consolidation pressure (r0v ) relationship, both
One-dimensional consolidation test  during loading and unloading stages. Usually, the tests take
Coefficient of consolidation  Consolidation parameters about 10–14 days to complete. The main advantage of IL
test is that the testing procedure is well established and the
interpretation of data is straight forward. However, the test
takes very long time.
In order to reduce the duration of IL testing, alternative
testing procedures such as Constant Rate of Strain (CRS)
& M. Raheena consolidation test [4, 5] and Controlled Gradient test [6]
raheenamoozhikkal@[Link]
were developed by researchers. In the CRS test, the later-
Retnamony G. Robinson ally confined soil sample is subjected to constant rate of
robinson@[Link]
deformation under one-way drainage. During the test, the
1
Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of total stress (rv) acting on the sample, settlement (d) and
Technology Madras, Chennai 600036, India pore pressure (ub) developed at the undrained boundary are

123
 Indian Geotech J

measured [7]. Several theories are available to interpret the settlement is divided by time, though it is possible to
CRS test results so as to obtain reliable consolidation estimate the degree of consolidation at any stage of the test
parameters [5, 8–10]. Generally, knowing the pore water based on the slope obtained. pffi
pressure at the base of the sample (ub), the effective stress In the present study, the standard t method is used to
(r0v ) is calculated as [5]: develop a faster increment load consolidation test. The pore
2 pressure is estimated using Terzaghi’s one-dimensional
r0v ¼ rv  ub : ð1Þ consolidation theory so as to evaluate the effective stress.
3
The procedure suggested is validated by performing tests on
Attempts were also made in the literature to reduce the five reconstituted soils and three undisturbed soil samples.
test duration of IL load test. Newland and Allely [11]
recommended applying the subsequent load increment as
soon as 100% consolidation is over. Sridharan et al. [12] Theoretical Considerations
studied the effect of load duration on consolidation test.
One-dimensional consolidation tests were carried out on In the proposed method, the sample is allowed to consol-
two types of soils such as kaolinite and black cotton soil idate up to a degree of consolidation (U) of 90%. When
(which contains montmorollonite as the dominant clay U = 90% is reached, the next pressure increment is
mineral) for varying duration of 30 min to 24 h under each applied. Degree
load increment. They observed that load duration of 30 min pffi of consolidation of 90% is identified using
the Taylor’s t method. The void ratio (e) at any stage can
is sufficient for kaolinite and 4 h is required for a black be computed using the settlement data by knowing the
cotton soil. As the load duration required depends on the initial or final void ratio and thickness of the sample,
type of soil, judging the duration required for different similar to the conventional IL test. The corresponding
types of soils is difficult. Subsequently, Sridharan et al. average effective stress is evaluated similar to the proce-
[13] suggested a method using rectangular hyperbola dure adopted in the CRS consolidation test. The pore
method by Sridharan et al. [14]. The test procedure is pressure developed at the middle of the clay sample under
similar to a typical IL test. The time-settlement data is double drainage is estimated using Terzaghi’s one-dimen-
monitored during the consolidation and the degree of sional consolidation theory [16] as described below.
consolidation is evaluated continuously using the The pore pressure in a sample of clay under double
rectangular hyperbola method. Once the sample reaches a drainage at any time is given by
degree of consolidation (U) of about 60–90% the next
X 2u0
m¼1
Mz  
increment is applied. The effective stress in the sample (r0i ) u¼ sin exp M 2 Tv ð3Þ
due to the pressure increment (Drl) is evaluated as m¼0
M d
r0i ¼ r0i1 þ UDri ð2Þ where, M ¼ ð2mþ1 Þp
, z = depth, u0 = initial pore pressure
2
where r0i1 is the initial effective stress before the appli- at time t = 0, d = drainage path (half of the clay layer
cation of the pressure increment Dri . Tewatia et al. [15] thickness for double drainage) and TV is the time factor
suggested a fastest rapid loading methods for vertical and given by
radial consolidation test in which the subsequent loads can cv t
TV ¼ 2 ð4Þ
be applied once the consolidation is over by about 50–60%. d
However, the suggested method is only for the determi- in which cv is the coefficient of consolidation.
nation of coefficient of consolidation. The time factor corresponding to U = 90% is 0.848.
The above review shows that the literature related to Substituting TV = 0.848, the pore pressure ratio (u/u0) with
procedures to reduce test time for conducting IL consoli- (z/d) for double drainage case is shown in Fig. 1. The pore
dation test is limited. The procedure suggested by Newland pressure ratio at the mid plane for degree of consolidation
and Allely [11] saves consolidation time compared to 24 h of 90% is given by:
duration test. However, high plastic clays may take long
um ¼ 0:157u0 ð5Þ
time for 100% consolidation. It may be noted that U used
in Eq. (2) in the method suggested by Sridharan et al. [13], The initial excess pore pressure is generally taken as the
is derived based on settlement measurements. Interpreta- applied pressure increment ðDrv Þ However, in the present
tion similar to Eq. (1) based on pore pressure measurement case; the pore pressure was not allowed to dissipate fully in
or estimate, as per effective stress principle, is more the previous increment. The pore pressure which has not
appropriate. The other limitation is that the progress of dissipated in the previous increment, referred to as residual
consolidation process is not visibly evident as the rectan- pore pressure, need to be considered to obtain u0 . The
gular hyperbolic plot is a transformed plot in which the residual pore pressure distribution is parabolic, as shown in

123
Indian Geotech J

stress so that the error in effective stress calculation using

Eq. (8) is minimum. The expected mid plane pore pressure
under different pressure increments for sample thickness of
20 mm are computed and summarised in Table 1. It can be
clearly observed from Table 1 that the mid plane pore
pressure developed, for all the pressure increments, is
about 8.13% of rv, which is well within the maximum
allowable value of 15%. The load increment ratio (LIR),
calculated as the ratio of applied effective stress increment
to the existing effective stress, is also given in the Table 1.
Except for the pressure increment of 12.5 kPa, the value of
LIR is close to 1. It may be also noted that the effective
consolidation pressure (r0v ) is about 5% less than the
applied total stress (rv). If the effective consolidation
Fig. 1 Variation of pore pressure ratio (u/u0) with (z/d) at U = 90% pressure required is similar to the conventional one-di-
mensional consolidation test, the total stress can be suitably
applied so as to obtain the required values like 12.5, 25, 50,
Fig. 1. Knowing the mid plane pore pressure (um(i-1)) in
100 kPa etc. In other words, if the total stress values of
the previous increment at U = 90%, the average residual
13.1, 26.3, 52.8, 105.5, 211.0, 422.0, 844.1 kPa are
pore pressure in the current pressure increment (uri) may be
applied, the expected average effective consolidation
taken as:
pressures at U = 90% are 12.5, 25, 50, 100, 200, 400 and
2 800 kPa, respectively.
uri ¼ umði1Þ : ð6Þ
3
The initial pore pressure is taken as the sum of the
current pressure increment ðDrvi Þ and the average residual Procedure for the Proposed Accelerated
pore pressure (uri), which is given by Consolidation Test
u0 ¼ Drvi þ uri ð7Þ 1. Assemble the sample in the consolidation set-up as per
Assuming the distribution of pore pressure with depth standard procedures.
 as
parabolic at U = 90%, the average effective stress r0v 2. Apply the seating pressure of about 5–12.5 kPa and
within the sample is pour water in the cell. Even though the idea of the
proposed method is to complete the experiment faster,
2
r0v ¼ rv  um ð8Þ it is recommended to give sufficient time for saturation
3
of sample. Over-night saturation is ideal. The user can
where, rv is the total stress acting on the sample. Similar judge the duration required depending on the type and
procedure is generally used for calculating the effective nature of the soil sample.
stress in the CRS test [5]. It is essential that the value of um 3. Apply the next load increment and monitor the p time-
ffi
is minimum so that the error in r0v is minimum. settlement data. Continuously plot the results, t in
ASTMD4186-12 [7] recommends the maximum allowable the X-axis and settlement in the Y-axis as shown in
pore pressure at the base in CRS test as 15% of the total Fig. 2. Establish the initial linear portion (OA) based

Table 1 Typical calculation of plane pore pressure and effective stress at U = 90%
um
rv , kPa Drv , kPa uri , kPa u0 , kPa um , kPa r0v , kPa LIR rv  100 (%)

6.25 – – 0 0 6.25 – 0
12.5 6.25 0 6.25 0.98 11.85 0.90 7.85
25 12.5 0.65 12.98 2.03 23.65 0.99 8.12
50 25 1.35 25.90 4.07 47.29 1 8.13
100 50 2.71 51.81 8.13 94.58 1 8.13
200 100 5.42 103.62 16.27 189.15 1 8.13
400 200 10.85 207.23 32.54 378.31 1 8.13
800 400 21.69 414.46 65.07 756.62 1 8.13

123
 Indian Geotech J

Experimental Programme

Five reconstituted soils and three undisturbed samples were

used for the study. The soils used for preparing reconstituted
samples were initially processed and sieved through 425 l
sieve so as to remove the shells and other foreign materials.
The processed soil samples were preserved in plastic con-
tainers. Out of the three undisturbed soil (UDS) samples
used, two were marine clays collected from Cochin and
Bombay. The Cochin marine clay was collected from a depth
of 5 m and the Bombay marine clay was collected from a
depth of 12 m. The third UDS sample was collected from a
site at Madhavaram near Chennai at a depth of 6 m.
The basic properties such as the specific gravity, liquid
limit and plastic limit, and Grain size distribution were
Fig. 2 Procedure for the proposed method
determined by following the relevant Indian Standard
Specifications, IS 2720 [16–18]. The basic properties such
on the data obtained in the early stage of consolidation. as specific gravity (Gs), liquid limit (wL), plastic limit (wP)
Construct line OB such that its slope is (1/1.15) times and plasticity index (PI) are summarised along with grain
OA. Continue to plot the test data till the experimental size distribution details in Table 2. The soils used cover a
curve touches the line OB, which is the point at which wide range of plasticity characteristics (32 B wL B 134)
the degree of consolidation of 90% is reached. encountered in practice.
4. Apply the next increment and follow the procedure in Consolidation cell with ring size of 60 mm diameter and
step (iii) and continue the experiment till the last load 20 mm thickness was used for the study. The reconstituted
increment. The same procedure can be adopted during soil samples were prepared by consolidating the soil slurry
unloading stage also. with water content of 1.5–2 times the liquid limit water
5. Calculate the void ratio under each increment from the content of the soil sample. The slurry was initially con-
settlement data. solidated in steps to a consolidation pressure of 12.5 kPa.
6. Calculate the effective stress using Eq. (8), so as to Once the consolidation was over, the soil was trimmed into
plot the e-log r0v curve. the consolidation ring to a thickness of 20 mm. Two such
7. Calculate the value of cv by knowing the time taken for identical samples were prepared, one for conventional IL
pffi
90% consolidation (Taylor’s t method). consolidation test with 24 h loading and the other for
performing the test as per the proposed procedure. The
The procedure outlined above is validated by performing a undisturbed soil samples were directly trimmed into the
series of experiments on reconstituted samples with vary- consolidation ring. The conventional consolidation tests
ing properties and on undisturbed samples. Comparison is were performed on the sample as per Indian standard
made between the results obtained from conventional procedure [3] in which the load was maintained for 24 h
method and the proposed method. and the time-settlement data were recorded throughout the

Table 2 Properties of soils used for the study

Sl. no. Soil type Gs wL (%) wP (%) PI (%) Grain size distribution (%)
Sand Silt size Clay size

1 Red soil 1 2.66 32 15 17 43 43 14

2 Red soil 2 2.70 47 23 24 25 22 53
3 Gummudipoondi clay 2.60 59 25 34 8 34 58
4 Taramani clay 2.67 72 27 45 12 28 60
5 Bombay marine clay-1 2.71 104 47 59 1 40 59
6 Cochin marine clay (UDS) 2.20 134 48 86 2 54 44
7 Bombay marine clay-2 (UDS) 2.75 105 40 55 3 42 55
8 Madhavaram clay (UDS) 2.64 39 16 23 70 8 22

123
Indian Geotech J

loading period. On the second set of samples, tests were shown in Fig. 3a–e. The comparison is very good in the
conducted as per the proposed procedure, in which the loading path suggesting that the proposed method is able to
subsequent increments were applied once the sample yield e-log r0v curves comparable to the 24 h duration test
reached the degree of consolidation of 90%. Knowing the in the loading part. In the unloading path, the proposed
time required for 90% consolidation, the values of coeffi- method is slightly steeper. The possible reason for this will
cient of consolidation were determined. The void ratio (e) be discussed in the subsequent sections.
and effective consolidation pressure (r0v ) were determined The e-log r0v curves for the undisturbed soils are shown
as per the procedure explained in the previous section. in Fig. 4a–c and the comparison is reasonable. The slight
variation in the results is attributed to the sample vari-
ability. The values of preconsolidation pressure of the
Results and Discussions samples were determined by the log (1 ? e) versus log r0v
plotproposed by Sridharan et al. [19]. The values of pre-
The e-log r0v curves of the reconstituted soil samples consolidation pressure are summarised in Table 3. The
obtained from the conventional IL consolidation test with values are comparable, lending support to the validity of
24 h duration and based on the proposed procedure are the proposed testing procedure.

Fig. 3 Comparison of e-log r0v

curves of reconstituted soils
obtained from the conventional
IL consolidation test and the
proposed method for a Red soil
1 b Red soil 2
c Gummudipoondi clay
d Taramani clay and e Bombay
marine clay 1
(a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e)

123
 Indian Geotech J

(a)

Fig. 5 Comparison of values compression index obtained from

conventional IL consolidation test and the proposed method

(b)

(c)
Fig. 6 Comparison of values recompression index obtained from
conventional IL consolidation test and the proposed method

Fig. 4 Comparison of e-log r0v curves of undisturbed soils obtained The values of compression index (cc) obtained from
from the conventional IL consolidation test and the proposed method both the conventional consolidation test with 24 h duration
for a Cochin marine clay (UDS) b Bombay marine clay 2 (UDS) and
c Madhavaram clay (UDS)
and the accelerated consolidation test, proposed in the
present study, are compared in Fig. 5. It is seen that the
compression index from both tests are practically the same
Table 3 Values of preconsolidation pressure from the conventional for all the soils. Similarly, the comparison of recompres-
test and Accelerated test
sion index is made in Fig. 6. It is noticed that the values of
Sl. Soil Preconsolidation pressure (kPa) recompression index obtained from the proposed method,
no. obtained from in general, is about 25% higher than the conventional one-
Conventional Accelerated dimensional consolidation test. The values corresponding
test test to the undisturbed Bombay marine clay may be due to soil
1 Cochin marine clay (UDS) 85 90 variability.
2 Bombay marine clay 2 120 120 It may be noted that, in the present analysis, the initial
(UDS) negative pore pressure developed during the current
3 Madhavaram clay (UDS) 120 100 unloading is taken as the same as the magnitude of the
stress decrement and the effective stress is corrected. This

123
Indian Geotech J

It is seen than the duration required to complete the test

depends on the coefficient of consolidation of the soil, as is
expected. The duration required for completion of test for
soils with values of coefficient of consolidation greater
than about 3 9 10-8 m2/s requires only about 2–5 h. For
low permeable soils, with cv \ 10-8 m2/s, the duration
required is higher. Even for such soils, the total duration
required for both loading and unloading stages is only
about 30 h compared to 10–14 days. It may be also noted
that the time required during unloading stage is quite high
for soils with very low values of coefficient of consolida-
tion. If recompression index is not required, the test dura-
tion can be further shortened by reducing the number of
decrements during unloading stage. It may be noted that
some
pffi soils may not show initial straight line portion in the
t plot. For such soils the method is not applicable.
Fig. 7 Comparison of values coefficient of consolidation obtained
from conventional IL consolidation test and the proposed method

Conclusions
assumption may not be valid due to the fact that the
process of unloading is not necessarily one-dimensional
An accelerated consolidation testing procedure is devel-
but is close to isotropic, as brought out by Mair [20]
oped, which requires as little as 2–5 h to complete the
based on analysis and experimental observations. There-
test for soils with values of coefficient of consolidation
fore, Terzaghi’s one-dimensional consolidation theory
of greater than about 3 9 10-8 m2/s compared with 10–
used for computing the pore pressure corresponding to
14 days when using the conventional incremental load
U = 90%, based on settlement measurements may not be
consolidation
pffi test. The proposed method is based on the
appropriate during unloading stage. This may be the
standard t curve-fitting procedure for identifying the
possible reason for significant difference in the values of
degree of consolidation equal to 90% so as to evaluate
recompression index. However, further studies are
the effective stress. Using this procedure the consolida-
required on this aspect.
tion parameters such as compression index, coefficient of
The values of coefficient of consolidation were deter-
consolidation and preconsolidation pressure can be
mined using Taylor’s root method for both conventional
obtained within a very short duration. The accelerated
and accelerated tests and the values are compared in Fig. 7.
testing yields consolidation parameters such as com-
The plot clearly shows that the values are highly
pression index, coefficient of consolidation and precon-
comparable.
solidation pressure, within a very short duration,
The time required for performing the test during loading
comparable to those of the conventional long duration
and unloading stages for all the soils are given in Table 4.

Table 4 Time required for the consolidation test as per the proposed method
Sl. no. Soil type Range of cv, m2/s Number of increments Time taken, h
Loading Unloading Loading Unloading Total

1 Red soil 1 3 9 10-8–9 9 10-8 6 3 2.5 0.5 3.0

2 Red soil 2 1 9 10-8–3 9 10-8 6 3 7.0 1.5 8.5
3 Gummudipoondi clay 2 9 10-8–5 9 10-9 6 3 11 19 30
-8 -8
4 Taramani clay 2 9 10 –1 9 10 5 3 7.0 6.0 13
5 Bombay marine clay 1 2 9 10-8–7 9 10-7 6 3 3.25 1.25 4.5
6 Cochin marine clay (UDS) 2 9 10-7–5 9 10-8 6 3 1.75 1.75 3.5
7 Bombay marine clay 2 (UDS) 9 9 10-8–3 9 10-8 6 3 2.5 2.5 5.0
8 Madhavaramclay (UDS) 2 9 10-7–1 9 10-7 6 3 1.5 0.5 2.0

123
 Indian Geotech J

tests and saves a significant amount of time and effort. 9. Vikash G (2013) A New CRS Consolidation Theory and A
The method overestimates the values of recompression Compressibility Model for Kaolin Clay with Micro-fabric
Effects. PhD Thesis, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, India
index by about 25%. 10. Yoshikuni H, Moriwaki T, Ikegami S, Xo T (1995) Direct
determination of permeability of clay from constant rate of strain
consolidation tests. Proc Int Symp Compress Consol Clayey Soils
1:609–614
References 11. Newland PL, Allely BH (1960) A study of the consolidation
characteristics of a clay. Geotechnique 10:62–74
12. Sridharan A, Sivapullaiah PV, Stalin VK (1994) Effect of short
1. ASTMD2435/D2435M-11 (2011) Standard Test Methods for duration of load increment on the compressibility of soils. Geo-
One-Dimensional Consolidation Properties of Soils Using tech Test J 17(4):488–496
Incremental Loading. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, 13. Sridharan A, Nagaraj HB, Srinivas N (1999) Rapid method of
PA, USA consolidation testing. Can Geotech J 36:392–400
2. BS 1377-5 (1990) Methods of test for soils for civil engineering 14. Sridharan A, Murthy NS, Prakash K (1987) Rectangular hyper-
purposes. Compressibility, permeability and durability tests. bola method of consolidation analysis. Géotechnique
British Standards Institution, London 37(3):355–368
3. IS 2720-15 (1986) Method of tests for soils, determination of 15. Tewatia SK, Bose PR, Sridharan A (2013) Fastest rapid loading
consolidation properties. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi methods for vertical and radial consolidations. Int J Geomech
4. Hamilton JJ, Crawford CB (1959) Improved determination of ASCE 13(4):332–339
preconsolidation pressure of a sensitive clay. ASTM Spec Tech 16. IS 2720-3 (1980) Method of tests for soils, determination of
Publ 254:254–270 specific gravity. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi
5. Wissa AEZ, Christian JTDEH, Heiberg S (1971) Consolidation 17. IS 2720-5 (1985) Method of tests for soils, determination of
testing at constant rate of strain. J Soil Mech Found Div ASCE liquid limit and plastic [Link] of Indian Standards, New
97(10):1393–1413 Delhi
6. Lowe J III, Jonas E, Obrician V (1969) Controlled gradient 18. IS 2720-4 (1985) Method of tests for soils, Grain size analy-
consolidation test. J Soil Mech Found Div Proc Ame Soc Civ Eng [Link] of Indian Standards, New Delhi
95:77–97 19. Sridharan A, Abraham BM, Jose BT (1991) Improved technique
7. ASTM D4186/D4186M-12e1 (2012) Standard test method for for estimation preconsolidation pressure. Geolechnique
one-dimensional consolidation properties of saturated cohesive 41(2):263–268
soils using controlled-strain loading. ASTM International, West 20. Mair RJ (1979) Centrifugal modelling of tunnel construction in
Conshohocken, PA, USA soft clay. PhD Thesis, University of Cambridge, UK
8. Smith RE, Wahls HE (1969) Consolidation under constant rate of
strain. J Soil Mech Found Div ASCE 95:519–539

123