KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering

, Volume 24, Issue 3, pp 752–761 | Cite as

Study on Consolidation Behaviors of Peaty Soils Using a Viscoelastic Rheological-Consolidation Model in Kunming, China

  • Fan-Ge Zhang
  • Kan LiuEmail author
  • Min Yang
Geotechnical Engineering


Due to the presence of organic matters, peaty soils have a highly compressible nature, and the consolidation process is complicated by the occurrence of rheological deformation. This paper presents the behaviors of the peaty soils sampled from the city of Kunming, the capital of Yunnan province in southwestern China. A series of one-dimensional compression tests are carried out on the peaty soil specimens with different organic matter contents. Considering the rheological properties of peaty soils, the three-element viscoelastic rheological model is introduced into the consolidation equation, then the analytical solution is derived for the viscoelastic rheological-consolidation model. Finally, the influences of consolidation pressures and organic matter contents on the model parameters determined by test data fitting are investigated. It has been shown that the model is coinciding fairly well with test results, and the consolidation pressure and organic matter content have a remarkable effect on the model parameters.


Peaty soils Organic matter One-dimensional compression Rheological model Parameters 



Coefficient of compressibility from 100 kPa to 200 kPa


Compression index


Void ratio

E0, E1, η0, kv

Parameters of the viscoelastic rheological-consolidation model


Mean specific gravity


Inorganic specific gravity


Organic specific gravity


Consolidation pressure


Axial deformation of the sample


Elapsed time


Liquid limit


Plastic limit


Natural water content


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant No. 41572258.


  1. ASTM D854 (2014) Standard test methods for specific gravity of soil solids by water pycnometer. ASTM D854, American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, USA, DOI: Google Scholar
  2. ASTM D1997 (2013) Standard test method for laboratory determination of the fiber content of peat samples by dry mass. ASTM D1997, American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, USA, DOI: Google Scholar
  3. ASTM D2974 (2014) Standard test methods for moisture, ash, and organic matter of peat and other organic soils. ASTM D2974, American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, USA, DOI: Google Scholar
  4. ASTM D4318 (2010) Standard test methods for liquid limit, plastic limit, and plasticity index of soils. ASTM D4318, American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, USA, DOI: Google Scholar
  5. ASTM D4531 (2015) Standard test methods for bulk and dry density of peat and peat products. ASTM D4531, American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, USA, DOI: Google Scholar
  6. Barden L (1968) Primary and secondary consolidation of clay and peat. Geotechnique 18(1):1–24, DOI: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Berry PL, Poskitt TJ (1972) The consolidation of peat. Geotechnique 22(1):27–52, DOI: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Berry PL, Vickers B (1975) Consolidation of fibrous peat. Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division 101(8):741–753, DOI: Google Scholar
  9. BS1377 (1990) Methods of test for soils for civil engineering purposes (classification tests). BS1377: Part 2, British Standards Institution, Milton Keynes, UKGoogle Scholar
  10. Butterfield R (1979) A natural compression law for soils. Géotechnique 29(4):469–480, DOI: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Choo H, Bate B, Burns SE (2015) Effects of organic matter on stiffness of overconsolidated state and anisotropy of engineered organoclays at small strain. Engineering Geology 184:19–28, DOI: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cola S, Cortellazzo G (2005) The shear strength behaviour of two peaty soils. Geotechnical & Geological Engineering 23(6):679–695, DOI: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dhowian AW, Edil TB (1980) Consolidation behaviour of peats. Geotechnical Testing Journal 3(3):105–114, DOI: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Elsayed A, Paikowsky S, Kurup P (2011) Characteristics and engineering properties of peaty soil underlying cranberry bogs. Geo-frontiers congress 2011, March 13–16, Dallas, TX, USA, 2812–2821, DOI:
  15. Fox PJ, Edil TB, Lan LT (1992) Cα/Cc Concept applied to compression of peat. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering 118(8):1256–1263, DOI: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. GB/T50123-1999 (1999) National standard of the People’s Republic of China: Standard for soil test method. GB/T50123-1999, China Planning Press, Beijing, ChinaGoogle Scholar
  17. Gibson RE (1961) A theory of consolidation for soils exhibiting secondary compression. Report No. 41, Norwegian Geotechnical Institute Publication, Oslo, NorwayGoogle Scholar
  18. Gunaratne M, Stinnette P, Mullins AG, Kuo CL, Echelberger WF (1998) Compressibility relations for peat and organic soil. Journal of Testing and Evaluation 26(1):1–9, DOI: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hendry MT, Barbour SL, Martin CD (2014) Evaluating the effect of fiber reinforcement on the anisotropic undrained stiffness and strength of peat. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering 140(9):04014054, DOI: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hendry MT, Sharma JS, Martin CD, Barbour SL (2012) Effect of fibre content and structure on anisotropic elastic stiffness and shear strength of peat. Canadian Geotechnical Journal 49(4):403–415, DOI: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. JTG E40-2007 (2007) National standard of the People’s Republic of China: Test methods of soils for highway engineering. JTG E40-2007, China Communications Press, Beijing, ChinaGoogle Scholar
  22. Karunawardena WA, Oka F, Kimoto S, Kulatilaka SAS (2007) Prediction of consolidation behavior of Sri Lankan peaty clay using an elasto-viscoplastic theory. PhD Thesis, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, JapanGoogle Scholar
  23. Kazemian S, Prasad A, Huat BB, Barghchi M (2011) A state of art review of peat: Geotechnical engineering perspective. International Journal of Physical Sciences 6(8):1974–1981, DOI: Google Scholar
  24. Kværner J, Snilsberg P (2008) The romeriksporten railway tunnel-drainage effects on peatlands in the lake Northern Puttjern area. Engineering Geology 101(3–4):75–88, DOI: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lee JS, Seo SY, Lee C (2015) Geotechnical and geophysical characteristics of muskeg samples from Alberta, Canada. Engineering Geology 195:135–141, DOI: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Liingaard M, Augustesen A, Lade PV (2004) Characterization of models for time-dependent behaviour of soils. International Journal of Geomechanics 4(3):157–177, DOI: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Long M, Boylan N (2013) Predictions of settlement in peat soils. Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology & Hydrogeology 46(3): 303–322, DOI: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Madaschi A, Gajo A (2015) One-dimensional response of peaty soils subjected to a wide range of oedometric conditions. Géotechnique 65(4):274–286, DOI: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mesri G, Ajlouni M (2007) Engineering properties of fibrous peats. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering 133(7): 850–866, DOI: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mesri G, Choi YK (1985) Settlement analysis of embankments on soft clays. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering 111(4):441–464, DOI: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mesri G, Stark TD, Ajlouni MA, Chen CS (1997) Secondary compression of peat with or without surcharging. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering 123(5):411–421, DOI: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Oikawa H (1987) Compression curve of soft soils. Soils and Foundations 27(3):99–104, DOI: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. O’Kelly BC, Sivakumar V (2014) Water content determinations for peat and other organic soils using the oven-drying method. Drying Technology 32:631coi200122000002643, DOI: Google Scholar
  34. Onitsuka K, Hong Z, Hara Y, Yoshitake S (1995) Interpretation of oedometer test data for natural clays. Soils and Foundations 35(3): 61coi20012200000270, DOI: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Robinson RG (2003) A study on the beginning of secondary compression of soils. Journal of Testing and Evaluation 31(5):388–397, DOI: MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  36. Skempton AW, Petley DJ (1970) Ignition loss and other properties of peats and clays from Avonmouth, King’s Lynn and Cranberry Moss. Geotechnique 20(4):343–356, DOI: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sobhan K, Ali H, Riedy K, Huynh H (2007) Field and laboratory compressibility characteristics of soft organic soils in Florida. Proceedings of Geo-Denver 2007, February 18–21, Denver, CO, USA, 1–10, DOI:
  38. Taylor DW, Merchant W (1940) A theory of clay consolidation accounting for secondary compression. Journal of Mathematics and Physics 19(1–4):167–185, DOI: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Xie KH, Xie XY, Li XB (2008) Analytical theory for one-dimensional consolidation of clayey soils exhibiting rheological characteristics under time-dependent loading. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics 32(14):1833–1855, DOI: zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Yue G, Jian FU, Cheng-Kun WU, Jing C, Yu-Feng G (2016) Hydraulic conductivity of lacustrine peaty soil in plateau areas and its mechanism analysis. Rock & Soil Mechanics 37(11):3197–3207, DOI: Google Scholar
  41. Zhang L, O’Kelly BC, Nagel T (2017) Tensile and compressive contributions of fibres in peat. 6th Biot conference on poromechanics, July 9–13, Paris, France, 1466–1473, DOI:
  42. Zwanenburg C, Den Haan EJ, Kruse GAM, Koelewijn AR (2012) Failure of a trial embankment on peat in Booneschans, the Netherlands. Géotechnique 62(6):479, DOI: CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Korean Society of Civil Engineers 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dept. of Geotechnical EngineeringTongji UniversityShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations