Worked example

From soil profile to surcharge removal

This is the path a drain project takes through PVDCal. Every project in the app can be loaded as a ready-made example, so you can reproduce each step rather than read about it.

STEP 01

Describe the ground

A two-layer soft-clay profile goes in with its compression indices, preconsolidation pressures and permeabilities. Where a parameter is uncertain, a low and a high value are given instead of one number. The water table sets the in-situ effective stress profile.

Design input page with the layered soil table filled in
The example project file carries a realistic profile, so the first run is a working one.

STEP 02

State the target and the construction

Ninety per cent consolidation within a year, under fill placed in two stages with a rest period. Vacuum can be added here, and drains can be told to stop above the base of the profile.

Two-stage loading schedule with the cumulative embankment stress plot
The loading schedule, with the stress history it produces plotted beside it.

STEP 03

Get a spacing band, not a single number

Each sample of the uncertain parameters runs its own complete spacing search, so the result is the spread of answers the ground allows: the P10, P50 and P90 spacing for square and triangular patterns, and the drains per hectare each implies.

Spacing results for square and triangular patterns
Square and triangular spacing, straight from the search.

STEP 04

Check what the answer depends on

The consolidation curve shows how the ground gets there, and a tornado — What moved the spacing — shows how far each declared range, on its own, moved it. That is where another borehole or laboratory test is worth its cost.

Consolidation curve with P10, P50 and P90 bands
Degree of consolidation against time, with the band the input ranges produce.

STEP 05

Once built, let the ground correct you

Settlement plates and piezometers go in as they are read. The search finds the ground that explains the record, reports how well it fits, and forecasts what is still to come with a credible range — the number that decides when surcharge comes off.

Back-analysis result: fitted curves through readings with a credible band and fit statistics
The calibrated fit, the band, and the statistics behind them.

The design case

What was asked, and what came back

A spacing on its own cannot be checked. These are the inputs of the Design example beside the answer it produced, both taken from the two files published below — the project file and the report it generated.

Input

Target
Us = 90 % at t = 365 days
Profile
Two soft-clay layers, 4 m + 6 m; water table at the surface
Loading
One stage, Δp = 100 kPa, ramped over 30 days
Drains
Band (I-shape) 100 × 4 mm, converted to its equivalent diameter; square pattern
Smear
kh/ks = 2, rs = 75 mm, transition to rt = 150 mm
Vacuum
Off
Creep
On — Cα/Cc = 0.04 in both layers
Vertical drainage
Off (cv = 0): radial only, which tightens the spacing
Sampling
100 Latin-Hypercube samples, seed 20260929

Answer

Percentilere (mm)Square S (mm)Triangular S (mm)Drains/ha
P10slowest tenth of profiles — the conservative design basis6441,1411,2267,680
P50median7541,3371,4375,595
P90fastest tenth — unconservative unless justified9081,6091,7293,863

The design is taken to the P10: a square spacing of 1,141 mm, 7,680 drains per hectare. The report also prints the sampling interval on that percentile — 591–674 mm, the range a fresh set of 100 samples would be expected to give — which is the uncertainty of the sampling rather than of the ground, and the reason a P10 should not be quoted to the millimetre.

The deliverable

A report you can issue, not a screenshot

A run that lives on your screen is not something you can hand to a client. One button turns the whole analysis into a report written to be checked. Page one answers the question the report exists for — the spacing, its pattern and drains per hectare, with smear, vacuum, creep and well resistance stated on or off — and then come every input echoed back, the method, vector figures with the numbers behind them, and a document-control block with the revision, the signatures and the software build that produced the numbers.

First page of an exported PVDCal design report: the decision box with the P10 spacing, the document-control block and the contents with page numbers
Page one of the exported report: the decision, document control, then the contents with real page numbers. Generated by the shipping build from the application's own example project — nothing on this page was written by hand.

Download the examples

Three worked examples, each published as the project file that was run and the report that run produced, with a workbook of the numbers behind its charts beside them. Open the project in PVDCal, press Calculate, and you get them back — the sampling seed travels with the file, so the numbers are the same ones, not merely similar ones.

To open a project file: start PVDCal, choose Project › Open › My projects — or just drag the file onto the window. The same three examples are also built into the app under Project › Open › Example projects. The project files are plain readable JSON, so you can also inspect every input without opening the app at all.

The names in the document-control block are fictional; the soil, the analysis and every number come from these very files, run for real.

Also exports as a workbook

One sheet per chart: the consolidation curve, the settlement curve, the effective-stress profile, every sample behind the band, the tornado of what moved the spacing and the adverse corner built from it — and in back-analysis, a sheet per settlement plate and piezometer with the readings, the fitted curve, the P5–P95 band and the residuals side by side. A checker can re-plot or difference any of it without transcribing a number off a PDF.

The first sheet is a contents saying what each of the others holds, its units, and which result card it came from. Alongside it: document control, the inputs, the soil profile and the loading schedule, so the workbook stands on its own.

The workbooks above came from the same runs as the reports beside them. In the application it is Workbook (Excel), next to Report (PDF) on the results overview of every task.

Written to be checked

The soil profile, drain and smear geometry, the loading schedule stage by stage, the hydrology, the boundary conditions and the discretisation are all tabulated. A reviewer can reproduce the run from the document alone.

Limitations included

The report states what the analysis does not cover, and adapts to your run: if vertical drainage was off, or smear disabled, or a parameter left fixed in a probabilistic run, it says so rather than leaving you to notice.

Traceable to a build

Job and document number, revision, purpose of issue, prepared–checked–approved, and the software build stamp on every page. When a number is queried a year later, the report answers which version produced it.

Does it work?

A named field case: the Ballina trial embankment

The Ballina National Field Testing Facility in New South Wales is a published, instrumented full-scale embankment on soft estuarine clay with vertical drains. PVDCal was calibrated on the early part of its settlement record and asked to forecast the rest.

Ballina embankment: forecasts from 200, 400 and 700 days of monitoring against the M0 extensometer record to day 1080
Ballina: PVDCal given the measured record up to day 200, 400 or 700 (the shading marks the 400-day record), then run forward to day 1080 and scored against the last reading of the M0 extensometer, 1,427 mm. The 400- and 700-day forecasts land 1.5 % and 0.8 % below it; the 200-day forecast is 9.4 % low. The dash-dot line is the same model on laboratory parameters alone, before calibration. The full study, including the head-to-head against a published Bayesian back-analysis of this embankment, is in the user guide (Chapter 24, and Chapter 25 for the comparison).

Ballina, New South Wales

Record givenForecast errorRange
200 days9.4 % lowmissed
400 days1.5 % lowcontained the truth
700 days0.8 % lowcontained the truth

Scored against the last reading of the M0 extensometer, 1,427 mm. From 200 days the record was simply too short, and the guide reports that beside the successes. The same embankment has been back-analysed in the literature by Bayesian updating; the guide sets the two side by side.

A site whose truth was known

On a synthetic test site built from a hidden soil, the typed laboratory values alone drifted to a final settlement about 14 % too high. Given only the noisy record up to the halfway point, the calibrated answer tracked the hidden truth beyond the cut, and the design range of 993 to 1,168 mm contained the true 1,113 mm. It is one case from the campaign of hundreds summarised on the method page, shown because its arithmetic can be followed.

The method behind these numbers is on the method and validation page.

Run this example yourself

Download the project file above, open it in PVDCal and press Calculate. The run you get is the one on this page — the sampling seed travels with the file.

BETA - testing stage. PVDCal is under testing. Results are for evaluation only and must not be used for construction design.