Prefabricated vertical drains represent a soil improvement technique that achieves liquefaction mitigation by decreasing the drainage path length and hence expediting the dissipation of excess pore pressures. When evaluating the required spacing between vertical drains to achieve the desired reduction in pore pressure response, simplified design charts or more sophisticated finite element analyses are used to predict the pore pressure response. These charts and programs have not been evaluated in terms of their accuracy because there exists little data with which to compare the numerical predictions. More recently, the effectiveness of prefabricated vertical drains for liquefaction mitigation has been evaluated via small – scale centrifuge testing performed on untreated soil deposits and on soil deposits treated with vertical drains. In particular, the performance of the soil deposits subjected to sinusoidal motions and actual earthquake recordings was tested. The main goal of this research is to compare the experimental observations of pore pressure response from the centrifuge experiments with the numerical predictions. The comparison focuses on the average excess pore pressure ratio (r_(u,avg)) that was developed in the location of a vertical pore pressure array in both the untreated and drain – treated sides of the models. In parallel, a parametric study is performed for the numerical predictions in order to study the effect of each input parameter that influences the pore pressure prediction, namely the effect of soil properties, ground motion characteristics and drain parameters. The numerical predictions are found to provide reliable predictions of the pore pressure response despite the simplicity of the constitutive model employed. The numerical predictions of r_(u,avg) time – histories are generally in good agreement with the recorded values in the centrifuge experiments. In most of the cases, the numerical model managed to predict the same maximum average excess pore pressure ratio, which is the parameter that is used in drain design. To incorporate any uncertainty on the soil properties or on the characteristics of shaking, the use of a smaller pore pressure threshold for drain design is recommended. / text

Drainage methods for liquefaction remediation have been in use since the 1970's and have traditionally included stone columns, gravel drains, and more recently prefabricated vertical drains. The traditional drainage techniques such as stone columns and gravel drains rely upon a combination of drainage and densification to mitigate liquefaction and thus, the improvement observed as a result of these techniques cannot be ascribed solely to drainage. Therefore, uncertainty exists as to the effectiveness of pure drainage, and there is some hesitancy among engineers to use newer drainage methods such as prefabricated vertical drains, which rely primarily on drainage rather than the combination of drainage and densification. Additionally, the design methods for prefabricated vertical drains are based on the design methods developed for stone columns and gravel drains even though the primary mechanisms for remediation are not the same. The objectives of this research are to use physical and numerical models to assess the effectiveness of drainage as a liquefaction remediation technique and to identify the controlling behavioral mechanisms that most influence the performance of sites treated with prefabricated vertical drains. In the first part of this research, a suite of three large-scale dynamic centrifuge tests of untreated and drain-treated sloping soil profiles was performed. Acceleration, pore pressure, and deformation data was used to evaluate the effectiveness of drainage in reducing liquefaction-induced lateral deformations. The results showed that the drains reduced the generated peak excess pore pressures and expedited the dissipated of pore water pressures both during and after shaking. The influence of the drains on the excess pore pressure response was found to be sensitive to the characteristics of the input motion. The drainage resulted in a 30 to 60% reduction in the horizontal deformations and a 20 to 60% reduction in the vertical settlements. In the second part of this research, the data and insights gained from the centrifuge tests was used to develop numerical models that can be used to investigate the factors that most influence the performance of untreated and drain-treated lateral spread sites. Finite element modeling was performed using the OpenSees platform. Three types of numerical models were developed - 2D infinite slope unit cell models of the area of influence around a single drain, 3D infinite slope unit cell models of the area of influence around a single drain, and a full 2D plane strain model of the centrifuge tests that included both the untreated and drain-treated slopes as well as the centrifuge container. There was a fairly good match between the experimental and simulated excess pore pressures. The unit cell models predicted larger horizontal deformations than were observed in the centrifuge tests because of the infinite slope geometry. Issues were identified with the constitutive model used to represent the liquefiable sand. These issues included a coefficient of volumetric compressibility that was too low and a sensitivity to low level accelerations when the stress path is near the failure surface. In the final part of this research, the simulated and experimental data was used to examine the relationship between the generated excess pore water pressures and the resulting horizontal deformations. It was found that the deformations are directly influenced by both the excess pore pressures and the intensity of shaking. There is an excess pore pressure threshold above which deformations begin to become significant. The horizontal deformations correlate well to the integral of the average excess pore pressure ratio-time history above this threshold. They also correlate well to the Arias intensity and cumulative absolute velocity intensity measures. / text

Soil improvement methods are used to minimize the consequences of liquefaction by changing the characteristics and/or response of a liquefiable soil deposit. When considering sites with previous development, the options for soil improvement are limited. Traditional methods, such as compaction and vibratory techniques, are difficult to employ because of adverse effects on adjacent structures. One potential method for soil improvement against soil liquefaction in developed sites is accelerated drainage through in situ vertical drains. Vertical drains expedite the dissipation of excess pore water pressures by reducing the length of the pore water drainage path. For more than thirty years, vertical gravel drains or stone columns have been employed to ensure the excess pore water pressure ratio remains below a prescribed maximum value. In recent years, the use of prefabricated vertical drains (PVDs) has increased because the drains can be installed with less site disruption than with traditional soil improvement methods. To date, little-to-no field or experimental verification is available regarding the seismic performance of sites treated with PVDs. The effectiveness of PVDs for liquefaction remediation was evaluated via small-scale centrifuge testing and full-scale field testing. A small-scale centrifuge test was performed on an untreated soil deposit and on a soil deposit treated with small-scale vertical drains. Compared to the untreated condition, the presence of the small-scale vertical drains provided numerous benefits including smaller magnitudes of excess pore water pressure generation and buildup, smaller induced cyclic shear strains, reduced times for pore pressure dissipation, and smaller permanent horizontal and vertical displacements. In addition, full-scale in situ field experiments were performed in an untreated soil deposit and in a soil deposit treated with full-scale PVDs using a vibrating mandrel as the dynamic source. In the untreated test area, the maximum induced excess pore pressure ratio reached about 0.95. In the treated test area, the vibratory installation of the first few drains generated significant excess pore pressures; however, significant excess pore pressures were not generated during the vibratory installation of additional drains because of the presence of the adjacent drains. Additionally, the vibratory installation of the drains caused significant settlement and significantly altered the shear wave velocity of the sand. Dynamic shaking after installation of all of the drains induced small accelerations, small cyclic shear strains, and negligible excess pore water pressures in the soil. The results of the field experiment indicate that the prefabricated vertical drains were effective at dissipating excess pore water pressures during shaking and densifying the site. / text

Liquefaction is a costly phenomenon where soil shear modulus degrades as the generation of excess pore pressures begins. One of the methods to mitigate liquefaction, is the use of prefabricated vertical drains. Prefabricated vertical drains provide a drainage path to effectively mitigate the generation of pore pressures and aid in shear modulus recovery. The aims of this study were to define shear modulus degradation vs. shear strain as a function of excess pore pressure ratio; define the effects of prefabricated vertical drains on the behavior of pore pressure generation vs. shear strain; and to define volumetric strain as a function of shear strain and excess pore pressure ratios. A large-scale laminar shear box test was conducted and measured on clean sands with prefabricated vertical drains spaced at 3-feet and 4-feet. The resulting test data was analyzed and compared to data without vertical drains. The results show the effect of increasing excess pore pressure ratios on shear modulus and curves where developed to encompass these effects in design with computer programing like SHAKE or DEEPSOIL. The data also suggests that prefabricated vertical drains effectively mitigate excess pore pressure build-up, thus increased the shear strain resistance before pore pressures were generated. Regarding volumetric strain, the results suggests that the primary factor governing the measured settlement is the excess pore pressure ratio. This indicates that if the drains can reduce the excess pore pressure ratio, then the resulting settlement can successfully be reduced during a shaking event. The curves for shear modulus vs. cyclic shear strain as function of pore pressure ratio were developed using data with high strain and small strain which leaves a gap of data in the cyclic shear strain range of 0.0001 to 0.01. Further large-scale testing with appropriate sensitivity is needed to observe the effect excess pore pressure generation on intermediate levels of cyclic shear strain.