S Kempton 1955

SKEMPTON, PECK, ANDMACDONBLD ON
SETTLEMENT 525
ANALYSES OF SIX STRUCTURES I N CHICAGO AND LONDON
Paper No. 6070
SETTLEMENTANALYSES OF SIX STRUCTURES IN CHICAGO

AND LONDON
bY
* Professor Alec Westley Skempton, D.Sc.(Eng.), A.M.I.C.E.,
Professor Ralph Brazelton Peck, D.C.E., M.A.S.C.E., and
Donald Hugh MacDonald, Ph.D., M.E.I.C.
(Ordered by the Council to be published with written discussion)
SYNOPSIS
The Paper describes a development of the existing methods of calculating settle-
ments of structures founded onclay. It is applied to the analysisof the settlementsof
three buildings in Chicago, founded onthe soft normallyconsolidated clayof that city ;
also to theanalysis of two bridges and abuilding onthe stiff over-consolidated London
Clay. Thethree Chicago buildings arelargestructuresconstructedabout 1890
and thesettlement recordscover a period of 20 to GO years. The two London bridges
which span the Thamesa t Chelsea and near the City, have detailed records extending
for about 15 years ; whilst the building, situated at Elstree, has small concrete footings
and the settlements were observed for 4 years. In all cases the settlements have
reached almost their final value and thus, with the wide range of foundation size
and thetwo verydifferent clays,the records provide a good basis for comparison with
theoretical calculations ; especially since there is a considerable amount of data on
the geotechnical properties of the clays in Chicago and London, The comparisons
show that thesettlements, both final and at the end of construction, canbe computed
with errore not exceeding the limits of about -30% and +boyo.
SETTLEMENT ANALYSIS
Definitions and aims of settlement analysis
ON opening an excavation for a foundation the pressure acting on the soil
below the excavation is reduced and hence the soil will heave upwards.
This heave is shown as p h in Fig. 1. When the structural load becomes
equal to the weight of soil removed the settlement is roughly equal to
p!, the original stress state having been restored. At thisstage the founda-
tion is fully buoyant and the net pressure is zero. Further structural
loads increase the stresses in the soil beyond their original values and it is
the corresponding " net settlements " resulting from the increase in net
* Professor Skempton is University Professor of Soil Mechanics, Imperial College,
London. Professor Peck is ResearchProfessor of Foundation Engineering, University
of Illinois. Dr MacDonaldwas NationalResearch Council of Canada Scholar a t
Imperial College, London, at the time of writing.
34
Downloaded by [ Purdue Univ Lib TSS] on [15/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
526 SKEMPTON, PECK, AND MACDONALD ON SETTLEMENT
foundation pressure that are calculated in the methods of settlement analy-

sis. At theend of construction the netsettlement is made up of two parts :
the " immediate " settlement due to deformations of soil taking place
without change in water content (and hence without volume change in a
saturated clay); and the" consolidation " settlement arising from extrusion
of some of the pore water from the clay (and hence a volume decrease).
Owing to the low permeability of clays the amount of consolidation at the
end of the construction of a building is usually small and, as anapproxima-
tion, it may often be neglected.
4
N e t conrohdation settlement at end of construction
l* -
__CiConsolidation --
settlement
Q
- ----.___
E pfina,.net find settlement L
E
L
PIG.SET FOUNDATION SETTLEMENTS

GENERALDEBTNITIONS
In the course of time, however, the consolidation settlement increases

until all the excess pore-water pressures set up by the netbuilding load are
dissipated. This process generally requires for its completion a period of
years or even decades ; the net " final " settlement is typically between
two and six times the settlement a t the end of construction. Strictly
speaking it is not possible to refer to the final settlement of a clay as an
absolute quantity, since the time/settlement curves usually approach a
slightly inclined asymptote, and not a horizontal asymptote as would be
expected from consolidation theory. This slow continued settlement is
referred to as " secondary compression " and in some clays may be of
importance. In the present cases, however, it seems to be a minor com-
ponent and certainly of little structural significance.
The aims of a settlement analysis are therefore to estimate :
(1) the settlements during replacement of the overburden pressure,
i.e., the settlementsunder zero net pressure. The dak on
this matterare still insufficient to permit any general
ANALYSES OF SIX STRUCTURES IN CHICAGO AND LONDON 527
conclusion to be drawn and no further reference to the
problem will be made in this Paper ;
(2) the net final settlement ;
(3) the net immediate settlement at the end of construction ; and
(4) the rate of settlement during and subsequent to construction.
Calculation of net f i n a l settlement

The usual method of computing net final settlement is based on the
simplified assumption that this settlement is equal to the consolidation
of a vertical column of clay beneath the foundation. The h s t step is to
calculate the effective verticalstress a,, in the ground before building
operations commence. The increase in vertical stress do at any depth -2
below foundation level, due to the net structural load, is then calculated
from elastic theory,l-5 and the netfinal settlement is :
Pfinal =
1: 172, . do.az . . . . .
*
where m, is the oedometer compressibility of the clay a t this depth as

(1)
measured in thestandard laterally-confined consolidation test,and 2

is the full thickness of the clay strata.
For normally-consolidated clays it is necessary to correct the pressure/
void-ratio curve from which the compressibilibity is deduced, and the
accepted manner of making this correction has been described by Terzaghi
and Peck.6 For heavily over-consolidated clays, where the pre-consolida-
tion load is ten or more times the existing overburden pressure, the sensi-
tivity is low and sampling disturbance probably has little effect on com-
pressibility. For such clays the compressibility can be taken directly
from the test curve. With lightly over-consolidated clays a correction is
necessary, especially where the applied net pressure from the building is
small, but the best form of the correction is still in doubt. The procedure
suggested by Schmertman' points towards a solution of this problem.
The method of analysis expressed by equation (1) was originally
proposed by Terzaghi *,g for calculating the settlement of a layer of clay
subject toappreciable lateral restraintas, for example, ? clay lying between
beds of sand. In this case, and particularly if the layer is thin compared
with the width of the loaded area, equation (1)is a close approximation.
This method has, however, been extended to cases where the clay layer is
relatively thick and even where the foundation rests directly on a deep
bed of clay. Under these conditions there are important lateral deforma-
tions (causing the so-called " immediate settlement ") in addition to con-
solidation. Sometimes equation (1) has been taken, in such cases, as
giving only the consolidation settlement, and to this theimmediate settle-
ment has been added ; whilst by other engineers equation (1) has been
assumed to give a t least an approximate estimateof the netfinal settlement.
The references are given on p. 543.
An examination of twenty case records,lO where comparisons can be

made between the actual final settlement and the calculated settlement,
shows that thesecond of the two assumptions mentioned above is the more
correct. It is perhaps surprisingthat, in fact, the maximum errors in these
twenty cases, involved in taking equation (1)as giving the netfinal settle-
+
ment, do notexceed the limits of - 27% and 57% ; whilst the average
+
error is only 5%. Theoretical considerations of this problem are difficult
and have not yet been completed. Nevertheless an analysis11 does suggest
that equation (1)over-estimates the consolidation settlement of a thick
clay layer by an appreciable amount, and that (in accordance with the
field evidence) the settlements given by thisequation are of the same order
of magnitude as thecombined consolidation and immediate settlements.
Owing to these circumstances and to the very simple nature of the calcu-
lations involved, equation (1)therefore provides a ready means of estimat-
ing the net final settlement, although it cannot be expected, in general,
to give a correct estimate of net consolidation settlement.
It may be noted that thestress da is usually computed on the assump-
tion that the structureis flexible, but quite often the condition of rigidity
is more nearly approached. In such conditions corrections should be made
to the stressdistributions or settlements. Also, where thedepth of a
foundation is appreciable the settlements will be less than those resulting
from the application of the same net pressure on the surface. As an
approximation, the reduction in settlement due to this “ depth effect ”
can be estimated from the curves published by FOX,^^ although there are
theoretical limitationsto thevalidity of these consequent upon the assump-
tion of continuity of the soil above foundation level.
CaZcuZation of net immediate settlement

Where the claybeneathafoundation is reasonably homogeneous,
the netimmediate settlement can be calculated from the standardequation
in thetheory of elasticity l4:
(2)
where p, denotes the net foundation pressure, B the width of the founda-
tion, E the Young’s modulus of the clay, and Y its Poisson’s ratio. For the
problem under consideration v is equal to 0-5, since for saturated clays
only those settlements occurring with zero volume change are in question.
I,, is the influence valuepertaining to settlement and its magnitude
depends upon the ratios LIB and Z/B, where L denotes the length of the
foundation and 2 the thickness of the underlying clay. The value of I,,
in any given case canbereadily computed from data given by Stein- .
brenner.159 16 Here, again, if the foundation is rigid and if it is a t an
appreciable depth below the surface, corrections have t o be applied, as
previously mentioned.
Young's modulus is measured as the slope of the stress/strain curve
in an undrainkd compression test. In practice the stress applied by a
building is a small fraction of the ultimate, and the stress/strain curve
of a good undisturbed sample is usually linear within this working range.
The value of E is, however, reduced even by a quite small disturbance in
sampling,l' especially in normally-consolidated clays ; in consequence
i t must be anticipated that theimmediate settlement will, in general, tend
to be over-estimated.
Calculation of rate of settlement

If pc is the net h a 1 consolidation settlement (equal to the net final
settlement minus the net immediate settlement pi) then the consolidation
settlement at anytime t after application of the load is :
pct _-= U . pc . . . . . . . (3)
where U denotes the degree of consolidation. By Terzaghi's theory U
is a function of the time factor TV= c,, . t / H z ; c,, being the coefficient of
consolidation as determined in oedometer tests and H the drainage path.
Curves of U and TVhave been given, for the case of one-dimensional con-
solidation, for a range of stress distributions and boundary conditions.16318
Consolidation is, however, almost always three-dimensional in clays
beneath structures and insome cases the errors of using simple one-dimen-
sional theory cannot be ignored. At the present time curves of U and T,,
have been given only for a restricted range of conditions of three-dimen-
sional consolidation IQ and the application of this theory is therefore still
rather limited.
In the majority of settlement analyses that have been published it has
been implicitly assumed that the final settlement given by equation (1)
is an estimate of the h a 1 consolidation settlement and the immediate
settlement has been ignored. Thus, in such analpes, the net settlement
a t any time t is taken to be :
pt = U/pfinal = U(Pi + p , ) . * . (4)
Calculations made in accordance with equation (4)will be referred to as
the " conventional method " of settlement analysis.
The correct expression for the net settlement at any time after con-
struction is, however, given by the equation :
pt = pi + U .p c . . . . . . * (5)
Hence, since U is always less than unity during consolidation, the settle-
ment given by equation (4) is always less than that given by equation
(5), although the two equations naturally give the same value for final
settlement when U = 1, and this final settlement is that calculated from
equation (1).
CASE RECORDS
Fire Testing Station, Elstree
TheFire Testing Station, which is a reinforced concrete structure
138 ft X 36 ft in plan, was built near Elstree, north of London, between
April and August 1935, to the designs of Mr R. T. James. The super-
structure is supported on mass-concrete footings 5 f t X 10 ft in area a t
a depth of about 7 f t in brown London Clay, the footings being spaced a t
15-ft centres. This clay has been proved to a depth of 15 f t below the
footings, and it is probable that shortly below thisdepth there is a
change to the stiffer blue London Clay. The clay is heavily over-consoli-
dated, with a sensitivity of 1.0. Tests on undisturbed samples show that
the average compressibility of the clay is 0.017 ftz/ton and that Young’s
modulus is 100 tons/sq. ft. The coefficient of consolidation has an average
value of 5.0 ft2/year. The gross pressure on the clay is 1.1 ton/sq. f t
(including the weight of the footings) ; allowing for the weight of soil
removed by excavation, the netpressure is 0.8 ton/sq. ft.
Settlement observations bythe Building Research Station began
when the footings were placed, and continued for 4 years. No measure-
ments of heave were made, but in view of the shallow excavation and the
very shorttime during which the pitswere open the heave must have been
negligible. The time/settlement curve, averaged for seven typical footings,
is plotted in Fig. 2 and it can be seen that although consolidation WBS not
complete when the observations ceased thenet final settlement must
almostcertainly lie between 0.6 and 0.8 in. It is therefore sufficiently
accurate to take0.7 in. as the net final settlement. The average net settle-
ment a t the end of construction was 0.3 in.
In calculating the settlements it has been assumed that theclay remains
uniform to a depth of 20 f t beneath the footing, below which depth no
further settlement w ill occur. For the final settlementscomputations
have been made using equation (l),and the result is 0.85 in. Allowing for
Fox’s depth correction this is reduced to 0.65 in. For the immediate
settlement elastic theory (equation (2)) shows 0.36 in., and again withFox’s
correction this is reduced to 0-26in.
It will be seen that, provided the depth correction is applied, very
reasonable agreement is obtained between the calculated and observed
h d settleme,nts. With regard to the rate of settlement, consolidation
theory is applied to the difference between the final and immediate settle=
ments ; namely, it is taken that the h a 1 consolidation settlement is 0.39
in. Theoretical curves relating the degree of consolidation and the time
factor T , have been published for linear pressure distributions, and for the
present case it seems reasonable to approximate the pressure distribution
by a triangle of depth H , such that :
and, moreover, H in the above equation is assumed to be the effective
drainage path. In this manner H is found to be 8 ft andhence HIB = 1.6.
Fortunately three-dimensional consolidation theory has been evaluated10
for this particular case, and the resulting time/settlement curve, using
equation (5), is plotted in Fig. 2. The agreement with the observed time/
settlement curve is acoeptable for practical purposes, and it may be noted
that the calculated settlement a t the end of construction is 0.4 in. as com-
pared withthe observed value of 0.3 in.
As a matter of interest the time/settlement curve as given by the
FIG. 2.-FIRE TESTINQ STATION, EL8TREE
conventional use of equation (4)is also plotted. It under-estimates the

settlement at anytime, but the errors are not great.
Chelsea Bridge, London

The new Chelsea Bridge over the Thames is of the self-anchored suspen-
sion type with two towers supported on river piers spaced 350 f t apart.
Details of the bridge, which was commenced in 1936 and completed early
in 1937 to thedesign of Rendel, Palmer and Tritton,have been published20
and settlements have been observed up to the present time. The piers
are of mass concrete with base dimensions of 28 f t by 106 f t founded a t a
depth of 31 f t below the river-bed in the heavily over-consolidated blue
London Clay. The gross pressure beneath them is 4.0 tonslsq. f t and the
net pressure is 1.9tonlsq. ft. Por the settlement calculations this is
considered to be reduced to 1.7 ton/sq. ft by skin friction along the side
of the pier base. ,
From well boreholes in the neighbourhood i t has been deduced thrlt the
532 SKEMPTON, PECK, AND MACDONALD
ON
SETTLEMENT
London Clay extends to a depth of about 60 f t below foundation level.

Under the London Clay the Woolwich and Reading Beds, which consist
of hard clays and sands, extend to a depth of a further 50 ft. These beds
have been considered incompressible. No samples have been taken of the
London Clay at the bridge, but experience indicates that this stratum is
statistically very uniform over a wide area, and consequently it seems
justifiable to use resultsobtained from tests on the clay a t Waterloo
FIG. 3.-CHELSU BL~IDGE,

LONDON
Bridge21 and also from a recent deep boring a t Paddington.22 At an aver-
+
age depth beneath the river-bed of 45 f t (equal to D B/2)it is estimated
that the compressibility of the clay is about 0.0075 ft2/ton and that the
Young's modulus is about 350 tons/sq. ft. The coefficient of consolida-
tion is estimated to be 3.5 ftZ/year. The sensitivity of the London Clay
is 1.0.
The observed settlements of the two piers are closely similar and the
average settlement is plotted against time in Fig. 3. During excavation
there was a heave of 0.25 in., and when the overburden pressure had been
ANALYSES OF SIX STRUCTURES I N CHICAGO AND LONDON 533
replaced the settlement was 0.15 in. The observations have been continued
for 18 years and it seems that themovements have now practically ceased.
The net h a 1 settlement can be taken as 2.1 in. and the settlement
net at the
end of construction was 1.2 in.
The settlement calculations have been based on the assumption that
only the 60 ft of London Clay beneath the piers is involved, and themethods
of calculation are exactly the same as those in the previous case. The
computed net final settlement is 3-3 in., and the netimmediate settlement
is 0.80 in. (the depth correction being applied in both calculations). The
calculated final consolidation settlement is therefore 2.5 in. and, using three-
dimensional consolidation theory with LI =43 ft, thetime/settlement curve
obtained from equation (5) is that shown in Big. 3. The calculated net
settlement a t the end of construction is 1.0 in., as compared with 1.2 in.,
and the calculated net final settlement is 3.3 in., as compared with 2.1 in.
These results are inonly moderate agreementand the actual rate of settle-
ment in the first few years is considerably greater than thecalculated rate.
Nevertheless, the calculated settlements during a period of 20 years follow-
ing construction are in error by not more than j, 0.4 in., or f 20% of
the observed h a 1 settlement.
Again, as a matter of interest, the conventional method of calculation
using equation (4)leads to settlements which are considerably too small-
a t least duringthis period of 20 years after construction.
Waterloo Bridge, London

Waterloo Bridge, the modern reinforced concrete bridge over the
Thames which replaced Rennie’s famous structure, was built between
1938 and 1941 to the designs of Rendel, Palmer and Tritton.23 Borings
and laboratory tests weremade21 prior to construction, and settlement
records have been kept from the earliest stage of the work until thepresent
time.Thefoundations of the piers resemble those ofChelsea Bridge.
Settlement calculations, made in the same manner as described above for
that bridge, have been published by Cooling and Gibson,24 to whom the
Authors are indebted for the results summarized in Table 1 and Fig. 4.
I n the former the average observed settlements of the four piere are
given, whereas in Fig. 4 the time/settlement curve is for pier No. 3,
which can be taken as typical. The comparison between calculated and
observed settlements is similar to that obtained a t Chelsea Bridge.
Masolzic Temple, Chicago

Settlement observations have been made on a number of buildings in
Chicago, but, among these, three are of outstanding value for the length
and completeness of their settlement records.25 The first to be considered
here is the Masonic Temple, known later as theCapitol Building, which was
a steel-frame structure completed in late 1891 and the earliest twenty-
storey building in the world. The architects were Burnham and Root,
534 SKEMPTON, PECK, AND MAUDONALD
ON
SETTLEMENT
and Mr E. C. Shankland was the engineer. The Masonic Temple was

superseded by a more modern structure in 1939. The columns were sup-
ported on steel-grillage footings typically 20-ft square, and occupying
73% of the total plan area. They were founded a t a depth of 14 ft, and
under the whole building there was a basement about 10 f t deep. The
gross pressure under the footings was 1.38 tonJsq. ft and the corresponding
net pressure was 067tonlsq.ft. The footings were placed on a thin
crust of stiff clay (2 to 3 f t thick) underlain by soft glacial clay, followed
by a comparatively stiff glacial clay and a hard stony cIay with rock
a t a depth of about 100 ft. Full details of the Chicago soils are given by
Peck and Reed.26
The strength of the soft clays increases with depth and the compressi-
bility decreases, ranging from 0.07 fte/tontoabout 0.03 ftZ/$on. The
compressibility is computed from the pressure/void-ratio curve corrected
m m
z
m Q, 0 W
c? 0 P- 7
3
3 3 i
z c"
3 z
3
- -
i r iag i c? 3
i 0 h.* 0 3
0 m
L0
3
c-
0
m
0 0
W
0 2 2 0.1
0.1
_-
t: F) P
0 01 W
01 0.1
0 '9 P-
* 3 O
__
0 3
dr W
536 SKEMPTON,PECK, AND MACDONALD
ON
SETTLEMENT
for sample disturbance in the manner described by Terzaghi and Peck.6

The coefficient of consolidation has an average value of 45 ft2/year and
Young's modulus has an average value of 35 tonslsq. ft. The sensitivity
of the soft clay is about 4.
Excavation was completed in January 1891 and settlement records
commenced in May 1891a t a time when the netloading was approximately

zero. Construction was completed in November 1891 and detailed settle-
ment observations27 were continueduntilSeptember 1895. There was
then a gapof about 18 years until 1913 whena complete settlement survey
was again made. The building in plan is essentially in theform of a hollow
rectangle and consequently the settlements are small near the centre of the
area. The average time/settlement curve for the four corners of the build-
ing is shown in Fig. 5 from which it will be seen that by 1913, 22 years
after construction, settlement was virtually complete a t an average valueof
9.8 in. The settlement at the completion of the building was 2.3 in.
Since the observations commenced at a time when the netload was approxi-
mately zero these settlements are closely equal to the net values. The
gross settlements are probably 0.5 to 1.0in. greater than these.
The footings are taken as flexible and thegross load is considered to be
reduced only by theweight of soil removed immediately above each foot-
ing. The net final settlement of a corner footing, calculated from equation
(l),is found to be 8.8in. ;and the net immediate settlement, from equation
(2), is found to be 3.0 in. Since three-dimensional theory has not been
evaluated for the ratio of foundation width and clay thickness existing
at this building, one-dimensional theory has had to be used. To apply
this theory to thepresent case, where the compressibility decreases appreci-
ably with depth, time/settlement curves have been calculated for a
number of layers of increasing thickness and the envelope of these curves
has been taken as the required time/settlement relation for the building
(see Fig. 5).
From these calculations the net h a 1 settlement of 8.8 in. is 1 in. less
than the actual value, and the net settlement at the end of construction
is 4 in. as compared with the actual settlement of 2.3 in. The calculated
rate of settlement is rather less than thatobserved.
In Fig. 5 the conventional timelsettlement curve (from equation (4))
is also given and, as usual, it considerably underestimates the settlements
occurring in the years following construction.
The Monadnock Block, Chicago

The Monadnock Block was erected between 1890 and 1892, the archi-
tects being Burnham and Root. The superstructure is a load-bearing
wall building of seventeen storeys ; a height which has probably never been
exceeded by any structure of this type. The interior steel frame and the
exterior bearing walls are supported by steel-grillage footingszs which
occupy 80% of the gross area enclosed by the exterior footing edges. The
footings rest on a crust of stiff clay (4 to 5 f t thick) at a depth of 12.5 ft
below the ground surface. The gross pressure beneath the footings is
1.74 ton/sq. ft and this is reduced by the excavation to a net pressure of
1-10 ton/sq. ft. Below the stiff clay crust there is a deposit of about 38
f t of soft to medium-soft Chicago clay and 18 f t of stiffer clay. These in
turn are underlain by hardglacial clays and sands, with rock a t a depth of
about 100 ft.
The compressibility of the clay decreases with depth; the average
values for the soft, medium soft, and stiff clays being respectively about
638 SKEMPTON,
PECK, AND MACDONALD ON SETTLEMENT
0.05,0.03, and 0-02 ftZ/ton. The average value of the coefficient of con-
solidation is about 45 ftz/year, and Young's modulus is approximately
36 tons/sq. ft.
-1-
Settlement observations were begun in 1890 a t the time when con-

struction had reached ground level and the netload on the soil was rather
less than zero. Observations were continued a t a limited number of points
in the building from that time until 1944, and the time/settlement curve
AN'ALYSES OF SIX STRUCTURES IN CHICAGO AND LONDON 539
for the north-east corner is shown in Pig. 6. It willbe seen that about
40 years after the completion of construction the settlement had almost
ceased, and the net final settlement is 22 in. At the end of construction
the settlement was about 5.0 in. Since the observations commenced when
the net load was approximately zero these settlements represent the net
values ; the gross settlements are probably 1 in. greater than these.
Calculations made in the usual manner for the settlement of the
mid-point of the north-east-corner footing, assuming that the footing is
flexible, gave immediate and h a 1 values of 6 in. and 16 in. respectively.
The time/settlement curves computed from equation (5) and by the con-
ventional method are plotted in Fig. 6. The calculated settlement at the
end of construction is 8.5 in.
Auditorium, Chicago
Work on this combined theatre, hotel, and office building, for which
Adler and Sullivan were the architects, commenced in 1887 and construc-
tion vas completed late in 1889. It consists, in general, of a ten-storey
building with a 19-storey tower ; the theatre occupies the central part
adjoining the tower (see cross-section in Pig. 7). The superstructure, like
that of the Monadnock Block, is constructedwith load-bearing walls.
These two buildings are among the lastexamples of large structures of this
type in Chicago, where, by about 1890, the steel frame had become almost
standard for multi-storey buildings. Great care was taken in the design
of the foundations, especially those of the tower,% for which Mr Sooy Smith
was the consulting engineer, and settlement observations were commenced
as soon as the piers reached ground floor level. These observations have
been repeated a t intervals up to the present day and provide a settle-
ment record extending over aperiod of 68 years (Pig. 7). This is
believed to be the longest known settlement record of a building.
The footings beneath the tower form a practically rigid mat and exert
a gross pressure of 1.83 tonlsq. ft, which is reduced to a net pressure of
1-14 ton/sq.ft by the single-storey basement excavation. The underlying
clay has a compressibility of about 0.06 to 0.07 ft2/ton in the upper soft
zone, decreasing to about 0.03 ftZ/ton a t depths of about 60 f t below the
surface. The same values of the coefficient of consolidation and Young's
modulus have been taken as for the clay a t the other two Chicago buildings.
Owing to thesize and relative complexity of the Auditorium the period
of construction was unusually lengthy, amountingto 30 months and by the
end of construction the average settlement of the tower was 9 in. In
another 5 years the settlement had increased to about 18 in., whilst by
1940, about 50 years after construction the settlement was virtually
complete, at an average value * for the tower of about 24 in. (see Pig. 7).
* This is the average of the four corners and the centre of the tower, corrected by
a small amount to allow for the effect of a reduction in ground-water level which
WC& about 192%
Settlement calculations, made exactly as for the two other Chicago

buildings (exceptthat the foundation of the tower is assumed to be rigid),
give the net final settlement as 22 in. and the net settlement at the end of
construction as 10.6 in. The calculated time/settlement curve is plotted
in Fig. 7 and is seen to agree rather well with the actual settlements. The
conventional timelsettlement curve isalso plotted.
DISCUSSION
OF RESULTS
The observed and calculated net settlementsaresummarized in

Table 1 and values for the ratio of calculated to observed settlements,
averaged for Chicago and London, are given in Table 2 .
TABLE2.-AVERAGEVALUESOFTHERATIO OF CALCULATEDTOOBSERVED
NET
SETTLEMENTS
FOR
THREE
STRUCTURES IN LONDON AND THREE IN
CHICAGO
Calculated net settlement

Location and Observed net
settlement
LoncEon
Over-consolidated
clay ' 1 1.33 I 1.08
Chicago
Normally consolidated clay i OS5 I 1.53
Mean for all six stnlctures 1 1.09 I 1.31
In Table 2 the mean ratios for all six structures arealso quoted, and it mill
be seen that the calculated net final settlement is, on the average, only
9% greater than the observed value.
As mentioned earlier,this result is closely similar to thatobtained from
a survey of twenty settlement comparisons.10 The calculated net h a 1
settlements on the over-consolidated clay inLondon are, however, appreci-
ablygreater than the observed values. This clay is fissured and i t is
possible that during samplingthe fissures may open slightly ; thus leading
to the measurement in the oedometer test of a compressibility somewhat
greater than the true in-situvalue. On the other hand the calculated
settlements at theend of construction are in quitegood agreement withthe
observations. Too muchemphasisshould not be placed on this con-
trast, but itis probably not irrelevant that the value of E (upon which the ' ,
end-of-construction settlement chiefly depends) used for the two London

bridges was determined in a recent seriesof tests on London Clay, whereas
the compressibility of the clay a t Waterloo Bridge was measured in 1937
when sampling methods were less satisfactory than at the present time.
In contrast with the London results, the calculated net h a 1 settle-
ments on the soft normally consolidated clay in Chicago differ, on the
35
average, by only 15% from the observed values ; an agreement that is

probably within the range of accuracy of the theory used in the calcula-
tions. Yet thecalculated end-of-construction settlements are conspicuously
greater than theobservations. This is almost entirely due to themeasured
values of E being too low in the Chicago clay ; for it is well known that in
soft clays17 t b s property is the most sensitive to sampling disturbance
and, at present, no method of general validity has been suggested for
correcting the measured values of E . In soft clays the compressibility,
as determined directlyfrom oedometer tests, is also influenced by sampling
disturbance but to a smaller extent than the modulus of elasticity. The
compressibility, however, can be corrected by an accepted method and,
as previously stated, this correction has been applied to the Chicago teat
results.
Turning, lastly, to the shape of the time/settlement curves a tendency
will benoted, a t both Chicago and London, for the calculated rate of consoli-
dation tobe less rapid than that actually taking place. This is particularly
clear a t Chelsea Bridge and the Masonic Temple. Ifthese two records
alone were considered there might be a strong argument for concluding
that consolidation theory required revision, that the laboratory testing
was in error, or that the geological conditions were different from those
assumed in the calculations. Yet the records a t the Pire Testing Station
and at theAuditorium show moderately good agreement between calcula-
tion and observation. It is therefore diflicult to generalize on this matter,
except to say that rate of consolidation seems to be the least satisfactory
part of the settlement analyses of the six structures under consideration in
this Paper. A comparison of the two sets of calculated time/settlement
curves does show, however, that equation (5) is definitely superior to the
conventional equation (4).
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The records of the Elstree building are published by permission of the
Director of Building Research, Department of Scientific and Industrial
Research. The records of Chelsea Bridge have been obtained by the
London County Council and theAuthors are indebted to theChief Engineer
for permission to use them. The settlement calculations were made while
one of the Authors (Dr MacDodd) held a Special Scholarship from the
National Research Council of Canada, whom the Authors wish to thank
for permission t o publish them.

S Kempton 1955

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

S Kempton 1955

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

S Kempton 1955

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SKEMPTON, PECK, ANDMACDONBLD ON

Paper No. 6070

SETTLEMENTANALYSES OF SIX STRUCTURES IN CHICAGO

foundation pressure that are calculated in the methods of settlement analy-

PIG.SET FOUNDATION SETTLEMENTS

In the course of time, however, the consolidation settlement increases

Calculation of net f i n a l settlement

where m, is the oedometer compressibility of the clay a t this depth as

measured in thestandard laterally-confined consolidation test,and 2

An examination of twenty case records,lO where comparisons can be

CaZcuZation of net immediate settlement

Calculation of rate of settlement

FIG. 2.-FIRE TESTINQ STATION, EL8TREE

conventional use of equation (4)is also plotted. It under-estimates the

Chelsea Bridge, London

London Clay extends to a depth of about 60 f t below foundation level.

FIG. 3.-CHELSU BL~IDGE,

Waterloo Bridge, London

Masolzic Temple, Chicago

and Mr E. C. Shankland was the engineer. The Masonic Temple was

for sample disturbance in the manner described by Terzaghi and Peck.6

commenced in May 1891a t a time when the netloading was approximately

The Monadnock Block, Chicago

Settlement observations were begun in 1890 a t the time when con-

Settlement calculations, made exactly as for the two other Chicago

The observed and calculated net settlementsaresummarized in

Calculated net settlement

Mean for all six stnlctures 1 1.09 I 1.31

end-of-construction settlement chiefly depends) used for the two London

average, by only 15% from the observed values ; an agreement that is

You might also like