Sridharan, A., Murthy, N. S. & Prakash, K. (1987).Glotechnique 37, No.

3,355-368

Rectangular hyperbola method of consolidation analysis

A. SRIDHARAN,* N. S. MURTHY* and K., PRAKASH*

The time factor 2’and the degree of consolidation
U relationship from Terzaghi’s theory can be
shown to be a rectangular hyperbola over the
degree of consolidation range 6040%. In this
Paper, the similarities between theoretical T/U
versus T and experimental t/8 versus t plots (where
t is the time and S is the compression) are used to
present a simple method of determining the coefi-
cient of consolidation. Many consolidation test
results were analysed, and the values of the coeffi-
cients of consolidation obtained by the rectangular
hyperbola method are seen to lie in between those
obtained from the Taylor and Casagrande
methods. Further, the rectangular hyperbola
method provides a simpler method of predicting
the magnitude of primary compression. The non-
dimensional slope of the t/8 versus t plot is a useful
parameter in predicting the magnitude and time
for primary compression.
KEYWORDS: analysis; clays; consolidation; deforma-
tion; settlement; soil properties.
On dimontre que le rapport entre le facteur de
temps T et le degrk de consolidation U selon la
thkorie de Terzaghi reprksente une hyperbole rec-
tangulaire sur un palier de consolidation de
60-90%. L’article utilise les ressemblances entre
les tracks thkoriques T/U centre T et les tracks
experimentaux t/s centre t (ou t reprksente le
temps pour la compression) pour p&enter une me-
thode trb simple pour determiner le coefficient de
consolidation. Une analyse de nombreux rbultats
d’essais de consolidation montre que les valeurs des
coeffkients de consolidation obtenus par la m&
thode de I’hyperbole rectangulaire sont inter-
mkdiares entre celles obtenues A partir des
mkthodes de Taylor et de Casagrande. La mkthode
de l’hyperbole rectangulaire est d’ailleurs &dike
de faeon plus dktailke et employ& pour prkdire la
valeur de la compression primaire avec facilitk.
L’article dkmontre que la pente non-dimensiontAle
du track t/S centre t est un paramktre utile pour
prkdire la valeur de la compression primaire et le
temps relatif nkcessaire.

NOTATION the load increment

A ratio of the slope of the line joining the K’ correction factor for the m/c ratio
origin to a point on the linear portion of m slope of the linear portion of the t/6 versus
the T/U versus T plot to the slope of the t plot
linear portion of the T/U versus T plot M slope of the linear portion of the T/U
B non-dimensional constant equal to 0.297 versus T plot
B’ non-dimensional constant equal to 0.241 m’ slope of the linear portion of the t/(6 - Si)
C intercept made by the linear portion of the versus t plot
t/ii versus t plot on the t/i? axis R dial gauge reading
C intercept made by the linear portion of the time
T/U versus T plot on the T/U axis ; time factor
C” coeficient of consolidation U percentage degree of consolidation
C”C coefficient of consolidation obtained from 6 observed total compression at any time t
Casagrande’s method (inclusive of initial compression)
cvR coefficient of consolidation obtained from initial compression obtained from Casa-
the rectangular hyperbola method grande’s method
C”T coefficient of consolidation obtained from &iT initial compression obtained from Taylor’s
Taylor’s method method
C' intercept made by the linear portion of the 4 magnitude of primary compression
t/(6 - SJ versus t plot on the t/(6 - Si) axis 6 100 compression corresponding to 100% con-
H length of the drainage path of a consoli- solidation
dating layer
Hi initial thickness of the soil sample before INTRODUCTION
Consolidation is one of the three major aspects of
Discussion on this Paper closes on 1 January 1988. For soil engineering, the other two being the shear
further details see p. ii. strength and permeability of soils. Since deforma-
* Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore. tion is one of the design criteria for structures

3.55
356 SRIDHARAN. MURTHY AND PRAKASH

founded on cohesive soils, the consolidation test and to interpret the results. It is shown that this
is important. method is simple and gives good results.
Many sophisticated theories on consolidation
have been proposed which take into account RECTANGULAR HYPERBOLA METHOD
various factors which were not considered by The rectangular hyperbola method recognizes
Terzaghi. Nevertheless, because of its simplicity, that Terzaghi’s U-T relationship is a rectangular
Terzaghi’s theory is still widely used. hyperbola over a fairly wide range of T. Hence,
One important aspect of the laboratory con- when T and U are plotted in the form T/U
solidation test is the determination of the coefli- versus T, a curve is obtained up to about
cient of consolidation c,, for predicting the rate of U = 60% and a straight line for 60% < U <
settlement, even though its applicability to field 90% (Fig. l(a)) for linear initial porewater pres-
conditions is questionable. sure distribution and double drainage. The
Several researchers have proposed methods for portion of the relationship for the T/U versus T
obtaining a more reliable value of c, from labor- plot which is linear has a correlation coefficient of
atory oedometer tests. The usual technique is to 0.9999. The corresponding least squares line can
compare some characteristic features of the theo- be expressed as
retical time factor T-degree of consolidation U T/U =8.208 x IO-'T+2.44 x 1O-3 (la)
relationship with the compression and time data
obtained from the laboratory test. This forms the The T/U versus T plot shows that the ratios of
basis for most of the graphical techniques that are the slopes M, and M, of the lines joining the
available in the literature (Gilboy, 1936; Casa- origin to the points on the curve corresponding
grande & Fadum, 1940; Naylor & Doran, 1948; to U = 60% and U = 90% to the slope M of the
Su, 1958; Scott, 1961; Madhav, 1964; Cour, 1971; linear part of the plot are 2.031 and 1.354 respec-
Rao, 1975; Sivaram & Swamee, 1977; Parkin, tively (Fig. l(a)). This can be used to locate the
1978,1981; Asaoka, 1978). t,, and t,, points on the experimental curve.
A method which has been proposed recently is Similarly points corresponding to other degrees
the rectangular hyperbola method (Sridharan & of consolidation can be located with the help of
Sreepada Rao, 1981). Of the various methods, the corresponding ratios M,/M which are henceforth
square root of time fitting method (also known as termed A values. Referring to Fig. l(a), for any
Taylor’s method) and the logarithm of time fitting degree of consolidation (60% < U < 90%)
method (also known as Casagrande’s method) are T/U=MiT (lb)
the most widely used in practice and will be dis-
cussed further here. or
Although the method of successive approx- l/U = Mi w
imation (Naylor & Doran, 1948) is supposed to
and hence
give reliable values of initial dial reading R, and
dial reading corresponding to 100% consoli- A = l/MU (2)
dation, R 1oo,the iterative process is laborious The linear portion of the t/(6 - Si) versus t plot
and consumes considerable time (Leonards, 1962). can be represented by the equation
Moreover, it does not give a visual picture of con-
solidation as the test proceeds. Scott’s (1961) t
- = m't+ c' (3a)
method involves a time consuming trial and error 6 - hi
procedure for the determination of the corrected
initial dial gauge reading. Sufficient care should where di is the initial compression, m' is the slope
also be exercised in the selection of the two times of the line and c’ is the intercept on the t/(6 - Si)
t and Nt required in the procedure. Otherwise, axis. Also, the equation of the line joining the
the interpolation involved may not yield accurate origin to any point on the linear portion of the
results. The inflexion point method (Cour, 1971) t/(6 - SJ versus t plot can be written as
involves the identification of an inflexion on the t
semilogarithmic plot of 6-t data, which is - = Am't (3b)
assumed to correspond to 70% consolidation. 6 - si
The reliability of the results obtained from this where A is a dimensionless quantity and is purely
method depends on the judgement or accuracy a function of the degree of consolidation
with which the inflexion point can be identified, (equation (2)). Equations (3a) and (3b) yield
and it cannot be adopted for all types of 6 versus
log t curves, because the inflexion point could be (4)
r=&
absent (Mesri & Godlewski, 1977).
In this Paper, the rectangular hyperbola Equation (4) gives the times for various degrees of
method is studied in detail to examine its validity consolidation in an experiment.
 RECTANGULAR HYPERBOLA CONSOLIDATION ANALYSIS 357

Slope M, = 2.031 M
M 1 354M
M=8208x 10

(b)
Fig. 1. (a) Theoretical T/U versus T relationship from Terzaghi’s
consolidation equation (rectangular/linear porewater pressure
distribution); (b) theoretical T/U versus T relationship (half-sine
curve porewater pressure distribution)

The coefficient of consolidation can be m’H2

obtained from the relation c, = T(A - 1) -
c’ (6)
c, = TH2/t (5) c, = Bm’H2/c’
where H is the length of the drainage path of a
consolidating layer, i.e. where B = T(A - 1) = C/M = 0.297.
 RECTANGULAR HYPERBOLA CONSOLIDATION ANALYSIS 359

I- H 4’

Fig. 2. Typical 6 versus Jt curves(remoulded soils)

The test data were also used to evaluate the
two widely used methods attributable to Taylor
and Casagrande. An important point is that both
these methods give a visual picture of the consoli-
dation process as the test proceeds.
Taylor’s method requires that the dial gauge
readings be taken at close intervals of time, after
the sample has been loaded, until more than 90%
consolidation is attained. This is essential to iden-
tify the initial straight line portion such that a
slope of l/1.15 times that of the initial line can be
used to establish the intersection of the S versus
Jt curve at the 90% consolidation point. Fig. 2
shows some typical 6 versus Jt curves. Curve 1

7
Oi
r I

Fig. 3. Typical 6 versus log t curves

360 SRIDHARAN, MURTHY AND PRAKASH

represents an ideal curve for which the procedure lished clearly, it is not suitable for commercial
can be applied without difficulty. The other laboratories (Scott, 1961).
curves represent other forms which introduce dif-
Figure 3 shows some typical 6 versus log t
ficulties that are often encountered with the
curves for remoulded and undisturbed soil
method.
samples. With the exception of curve 9, the tests
involved load increment ratios of unity. Similar
(4 For some soils, the curve does not have an test results have also been obtained for remould-
initial linear portion at all, but instead
ed soils with load increment ratios other than
exhibits continuous curvature (Fig. 2,
unity. The shape of the curves does not follow the
curve 2).
classical Casagrande curve in many cases. Some
(4 There are instances where the soil, in the early
of the curves can be grouped into the type II and
part of the test, exhibits a slow rate of com-
type III curves of Leonards & Girault (1961), but
pression and rapid compression thereafter.
there are several curves which cannot be identi-
Hence, the curve may show a negative value
fied with any of these groups. Casagrande’s
for the initial compression and there may be
method can be applied only to typical S-shaped
difficulty in locating the 90% consolidation
curves but for other curves the method is unsatis-
point (Fig. 2, curve 3).
factory.
(4 For soils exhibiting rapid consolidation in the
Figure 4 shows the tJb versus t curves for the
early stages of the test (e.g. coarse kaolinite), it
test data presented in Figs 2 and 3 analysed by
is difficult to record the dial gauge readings at
the rectangular hyperbola method. From these,
close intervals initially. A sudden large com-
there is no difficulty in identifying the straight line
pression and thereafter flattening of the curve
portion in t/s versus t curves, irrespective of the
can be seen (Fig. 2, curve 4).
various difficulties faced in the Taylor and Casa-
grande methods. This shows the applicability of
In Casagrande’s method, 100% consolidation
the rectangular hyperbola method for all types of
is identified as the point of intersection of the line
soils and for all conditions.
which represents secondary compression with the
tangential line through the inflexion point in the
primary consolidation stage. This method suffers
from the following disadvantages. Initial compression
Previous studies on the rectangular hyperbola
(a) It requires the identification of the linear method (Sridharan & Sreepada Rao, 1981) did
portion representing secondary compression. not take account of the initial compression which
In some cases it is not possible to distinguish is considered here.
the secondary compression from primary Using the experimental results from the present
compression which can happen when the soil investigation and published results, which cover a
exhibits large secondary compression (Taylor, wide range of soils, the initial compression was
1948; Wahls, 1962; Mesri & Godlewski, obtained where possible from both Taylor’s
1977). It is thus difficult to locate the R,,, method, dir, and Casagrande’s method, &c (Fig.
point on the curve (e.g. Fig. 3, curve 5). 5). A linear relationship can be obtained for this
(b) It is assumed that the initial portion of the data
curve is a parabola, but owing to the presence 6, = 0.9516,, (8)
of a small amount of gas in the soil or
unknown reasons the compression in the This relation has a correlation coefficient of
initial stages may be delayed substantially, 0.9848 which indicates the degree of linearity.
thus resulting in a curve which deviates from This further shows that there is not much differ-
the assumed parabolic shape (e.g. Fig. 3, curve ence between 6, and &. Hence, in all sub-
6). The computed initial compression will be sequent computations ai, values are used.
in error and hence also t,, (Leonards, 1962).
(4 It is possible to obtain a curve in the semi-
logarithmic plot which instead of showing a Correction factor for c,
concave-down shape in the initial stretch The net compression values without the initial
shows a sudden drop, thus indicating a compression are used in plotting t/(S - Si) versus
concave-up shape. This poses a difficulty in t to obtain the slope m’ and the intercept c’. The
computing the initial compression as well as values of compressions recorded during the test
in locating the Rio0 point (e.g. Fig. 3, are used in plotting t/S versus t, to obtain the
curve 7). slope m and the intercept c. When m/c values are
(4 Since this method takes a substantially longer plotted against ml/c’ on an arithmetic scale, a
time for the secondary portion to be estab- fairly unique linear relationship is observed (to
 RECTANGULAR HYPERBOLA CONSOLIDATION ANALYSIS 361

$ 006- -1.5(-

0
x -02- -

2
N
Iii 004- - -
s; - -lO-

0
c
s -01- -
2 0.02 - - -
5
2
5 - -05r-
2

o-o- -

I ’ ’ ’ ’ ’
540 500 1000
I I 1 I
I I 1 1 ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’
10 20 30 40
6--o
I 1 1 1 ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’
100 200 300 400
g--o
i ml”
(b)
Fig. 4. Typical t/6 versus I curves
362 SRIDHARAN, MURTHY AND PRAKASH

47 x 0 00254 mm
Fig. 5. Relationship between initial compressions obtained from the Taylor and Casagrande
methods (IS,,versus 6,c)

accommodate the wide range of values, the graph be obtained by modifying equation (4) with the
is presented in logarithmic form in Fig. 6). Sta- help of equation (9) to
tistically, this relationship is expressed as c
t= (10)
K’(A - 1)m

where K’ = 0.809. The value of c, can therefore

This has a correlation coefficient of 0.9944. be obtained by rewriting equation (6) as
Hence, the times corresponding to various
degrees of consolidation (60% < U < 90%) can c,a = B’mH’lc (11)

fl-
P . r-09944
m’/c’ = O-809 m/c

J.
ati

0.

Fig. 6. Relationship between m’/c’ and m/c

 RECTANGULAR HYPERBOLA CONSOLIDATION ANALYSIS 363

C, (Taylor’s method) cm*/s

Fig. 7. Comparison of the values of c, obtained from the Casag-

rande and Taylor methods (c,, versus c,~)

where B’ = BK’ = 0.241 and c,s is the coefficient Magnitude of primary compression
of consolidation obtained from the rectangular As T -+ 00, U -+ 100%. The relationship
hyperbola method. between T/U versus T in the linear portion can
be written as

Relationship between c,c, cvTand cvR T

u=- (13)
On the basis of a large amount of experimental MT+C
data, the values of c, were calculated using the AsT+c.o
rectangular hyperbola method (c,,), Taylor’s (c,,) T 1
method and Casagrande’s (c,,) method. The U(predicted) = lim - = -
relationships between c,c, c,r and cVRare shown .,,MT+C M
in Figs 7-9. It is evident from these figures that Using the value of M from equation (la)
the rectangular hyperbola method gives c, values
which fall in between those obtained from U(predicted) = 121.83%
Taylor’s and Casagrande’s methods, i.e. so
U(actual) = 0,8208/M (14)
GC G C”R G C”T (W
When the primary compressions 6, (without
initial compression) obtained from the rectangu-
The values of cVRso obtained therefore can be
lar hyperbola method are plotted against l/m’, a
taken as satisfactory. Further, for the cases where
linear relationship is observed between them
it is difficult to use either of the other methods it
was possible, with some judgement, to compute (Fig. 10). The regression equation which connects
6, and l/m’, for which the correlation coefficient
the values of c, . Table 3 gives a comparison of c,
is 0.9963, can be written as
from the three methods. The large difference
between the c, values obtained from the rectangu- 6, = 0.8399/m’ (15)
lar hyperbola method and from the other two
methods indicates the extent to which they can The agreement between the numerical values of
differ. the right-hand sides of equations (14) and (15),
364 SRIDHARAN, MURTHY AND PRAKASH

cv (rectangular hyperbola method) cm’is

Fig. 8. Comparison of the values of c, obtained from the Taylor

and rectangular hyperbola methods (c,, versus c,,)

C, (rectangular hyperbola method) cm’/s

Fig. 9. Comparison of the values of c, obtained from the Cssag-

rande and rectangular hyperbola methods (c,, versus c,,)
 RECTANGULAR HYPERBOLA CONSOLIDATION ANALYSIS 36.5
Table 3. Comparison between c, values obtained from Taylor’s and Casagrande’s methods with
those obtained from the rectangular hyperbola method

Sample Pressure
range:*
-r c,: x 10e3 cm’/s

kg/cm’ Taylor’s method Casagrande’s method Rectangular hyperbola

method
32 0.125-0.25 - 4.684 1,986
52 0.25-0.5 109.517 12,648
3 0.51.0 0.702 0,996
2 O-5-1.0 0.082 0,050
8 0.5-1.0 0.043 0.290
34 0.5-1-O 0.088 0.873
35 O.Sl.0 17.556 2.886
44 0.5-1.0 0.049 0.125
45 0.S1.0 0.08 1 0.133
50 O.Sl.0 49.843 0,156 0.174
51 0.5-1.0 2.034 0.114
52 0.5-1.0 143.327 92.215 25.136
53 0.5-1.0 0.282 1.297
35 l&2.0 7,119 18.734 0.591
50 1.0-2.0 6.797 0,038 3,171
52 1+2,0 15.064 146,427 9,786
34 2G-4.0 0.024 0.320
35 2G4.0 1.681 21.672 0.514
50 2.0-4.0 53.455 3.127
52 2-O-4.0 80.421 92.320 7.815
* 1 kg/cm2 = 98.066 kPa

which are obtained from theoretical and experi- 6, and 6,,,,, where dloo represents the end point
mental considerations, is fairly good. This con- of primary consolidation.
firms the validity of the rectangular hyperbolic Figure 11 is a plot of dP/Hi versus l/mH, . The
relation for predicting primary compression. least squares fit has a correlation coefficient of
0.9921, and the corresponding equation is given
Application of l/mH, by
l/mH, represents the non-dimensional slope of p6 _ 0.829
- - - 4.860 x 1O-3 Wa)
the t/6 versus t plot. This can be used to predict Hi mHi

l/m’: x 0.00254 mm

Fig. 10. Relationship between 6, and l/m’

366 SRIDHARAN, MURTHY AND PRAKASH

Fig. 11. Relationship between 6,/H, and l/mH,

With the help of equation (16a), the magnitude of sion without knowledge of the initial compres-
primary compression can be predicted knowing sion.
only l/mH,. Thus the dial readings need not be Instead of equation (17), a simpler equation
taken beyond the stage at which a clear straight
6,,,/H, = 0.859/mHi (18)
line is identified.
An analytical expression can be derived by can be used to predict S,,,. Equation (18) gives
comparing the theoretical T/U versus T and the values of 6,,,, as accurately as those obtained
experimental t/S versus t curves and using equa- from equation (17).
tion (14)
RECOMMENDED PROCEDURE
~6 _ 0.8208
_p- 0.8208 2 (16b) (a) Obtain the values of t and 6 from the stan-
Hi mH, I dard oedometer test, preferably at equal inter-
vals of time.
Equation (16a) has been obtained from experi- (b) Plot t/S against t.
mental data, whereas equation (16b) is obtained (c) Identify the initial straight line part in the t/b
from theory. The coefficients for l/mH, from versus t plot.
experiment and theory, 0.829 and 0.8208 respec- (d) Measure the values of the slope m and the
tively, are in good agreement. To use equation intercept c.
(16b), the value of ai must be obtained from the (e) Compute the value of c, from
test, whereas equation (16a) defines di implicitly.
In Fig. 12. the values of llmH, are nlotted c, = 0.24mH2/c
against corre$ponding values of 6,,b/H, and give (f) Obtain the value of the primary compression
essentially a straight line. With a correlation coef- 6, (without initial compression) from equation
ficient of 0.9995, a least squares fit can be
(16).
obtained for this relation (g) Obtain the value of 6,,,, which designates
the end of primary compression, from either
6 100 0.862 equation (17) or equation (18).
-=_- 3.677 x 1O-4 (17)
Hi mH, Soils with large secondary compression may
exhibit more than one straight line in the t/6
Equation (17) can be used to predict the value of versus t plot. In such cases, the line which imme-
6 1,,0 quite satisfactorily and assists in directly diately follows the initial curve is identified as the
establishing the end point of primary compres- straight line required.
 RECTANGULAR HYPERBOLA CONSOLIDATION ANALYSIS 361

1lmH
i ’ ’ ’ ’ ’0 20’
’ ’015
Fig. 12. Relationship between 6,,,/H, and l/mH,

LIMITATIONS OF RECTANGULAR necessarily at equal intervals, to obtain a straight

HYPERBOLA METHOD line plot of t/6 versus t. This method gives a
A limitation of the rectangular hyperbola unique value of c, The results obtained from the
method is that it is not possible to obtain the rectangular hyperbola method generally lie
value of the initial compression directly from this between those obtained from the Taylor and
procedure. However, even without such knowl- Casagrande methods.
edge, the primary compression can be obtained Apart from the determination of c,, the
directly using equation (16a). Hence, this is not a method can be used to predict the magnitude of
serious limitation. primary compression. There is good agreement
between theory and the experimental observa-
tions by comparing equations (14) and (15). The
CONCLUSIONS non-dimensional slope of the t/6 versus t plot,
The determination of the coefficient of consoli- l/mHi, is a useful parameter in predicting the
dation with sufficient accuracy is essential for a magnitude of primary compression.
settlement analysis of foundations. Although An analysis of a large amount of experimental
several methods are available for the evaluation data shows good agreement between the Taylor
of c, from laboratory test results, none can be and Casagrande methods of determining the
used under all circumstances. In this Paper, the initial compression (equation (8)).
rectangular hyperbola method has been shown to
offer a more reliable alternative procedure.
Extensive consolidation test results obtained
from both undisturbed and remoulded soils of REFERENCES
various types have been made use of to verify the Asaoka, A. (1978). Observational procedure of settle-
proposed U-T and &t relationships. The prin- ment prediction. Soils Fdns 18, No. 4, 87-101.
cipal conclusions of this investigation are as Casagrande, A. & Fadum, R. E. (1940). Notes on soil
follows. testing for engineering purposes. Ham. Soil Me&
Characterization of U-T and &t relationships Ser., No. 8.
for a rectangular hyperbola analysis has been Choi, Y. K. & Cepeda-Diaz, A. F. (1981). Discussion on
The prediction of settlements and heave in clays.
shown to be valid and can thus be used in the
Can. Geotech. .I. 18,467470.
determination of c,. The method is simple yet Cour, F. R. (1971). Inflection point method for comput-
accurate and can be used for all types of time- ing c,. J. Soil Mech. Fdns Div. Am. Sot. Ciu. Engrs
compression curves unlike the more commonly 97, SM5,827-831.
used Taylor and Casagrande methods. It is suffl- Gilboy, G. (1936). Improved soil testing methods. Engng
cient to record time+compression readings, not News Rec. 116,732-734.
368 SRIDHARAN, MURTHY AND PRAKASH

Leonards, G. A. (1962). Engineering properties of soils. Rao, K. S. S. (1975). Curve fitting method in the analysis
Foundation engineering (ed. G. A. Leonards), pp. of consolidation. Proc. 5th Asian Regional Co@ Soil
164169. New York: McGraw-Hill. Mech. Fdn Engng, Bangalore 2, 177-182.
Leonards. G. A. & Girault, P. (1961). A study of the Scott, R. F. (1961). New method of consolidation coetli-
one-dimensional consolidation test. Proc. 5th Int. cient evaluation. J. Soil Mech. Fdns Div. Am. Sot.
Conf Soil Mech. Fdn Engng, Paris, pp. 213-218. Civ. Engrs 87, SMl, 29939.
.
Madhav, M. R. (1964). Evaluation of the coefftcient of Sivaram, B. & Swamee, P. K. (1977). A computational
consolidation-a numerical method. J. Instn Engrs method for consolidation-coefftcient. Soils Fdns 17,
India 44, No. 11, Part CI6,679-684. No. 2, 48-52.
Mesri, G. & Godlewski, P. M. (1977). Time and stress Sridharan, A. & Sreepada Rao, A. (1981). Rectangular
compressibility interrelationships. J. Geotech. Engng hyperbola fitting method for one dimensional con-
Div. Am. Sot. Ciu. Engrs 103, GT5,417430. solidation. Geotech. Test. J. 4, No. 4, 161-168.
Naylor, A. H. & Doran, 1. G. (1948). Precise determi- Su, H. L. (1958). Procedure for rapid consolidation test.
nation of primary consolidation. Proc. 2nd Int. Conf .I. Soil Mech. Fdns Div. Am. Sot. Civ. Engrs 84, SM3,
Soil Mech. Fdn Engng, Rotterdam 1, 34-40. 1-13.
Parkin, A. K. (1978). Coefficient of consolidation by the Taylor, D. W. (1948). Fundamentals of soil mechanics, p.
velocity method. GCotechnique 28, No. 4,472-4?4. 242. New Delhi: Asia Publishing.
Parkin, A. K. (1981). Consolidation analysis by the Wahls, H. E. (1962). Analysis of primary and secondary
velocity method. Proc. 10th Int. Conf. Soil Mech. consolidation. J. Soi[ Mech. Fdns Dia. Am. Sot. Ciu.
Fdn Engng, Stockholm 1,723-726. Engrs 88, SM6,207-231.