8991

J une, 1972

SMb

Journal of the
SOIL MECHANICS AND FOUNDATIONS DIVISION
Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers

THE SEVENTH TERZAGHI LECTURE

Presented at the American Society of Civil Engineers Annual and Environmental Engineering Meeting, New York City, New York
October 19, 1970

. WILLIAM LAMBE

INTRODUFTION OF TERZAGHI LECTURER

By James K. Mitchell

In honor of the "Father of Soil Mechanics," Dr. Karl Terzaghi, the Soil Mechanics and
Foundations Division established the Terzaghi Lectureship in 1960. At about yearly
intervals the Executive Director, upon recommendation of the Executive Committee of
the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, invites a distinguished geotechnical
engineer to deliver the Terzaghi Lecture. This invitation is considered one of the highest
honors that can be bestowed on a member of the soil mechanics fraternity by his
colleagues and, at the same time, it serves as a living memorial to the late Dr. Terzaghi.
The six previous Terzaghi Lectureres are:
1963, Ralph B. Peck
1964, Arthur Casagrande
1966, Laurits Bjerrum

1967, H. Bolton Seed

1968, Philip C. Rutledge
1969, Stanley D. Wilson

When outstanding individuals are introduced we very often hear the clich, 'He really
needs no introduction." However, to properly appreciate the magnitude and scope of the
contributions of this year's Lecturer, the facts are as follows:
He received the Bachelor of Civil Engineering degree in 1942 from North Carolina
State University. After a period in engineering practice he joined the faculty of the
Department of Civil Engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In 1944 he
was awarded the S.M. degree, and in 1948 the Doctor of Science degree from that
institution. He advanced rapidly through the academic ranks and served from 1956 until
1969 as Head of the Soil Engineering Division. In 1969 he was appointed the Edmund K.
Turner Professor of Civil Engineering, the first person to hold this new chair.
In the early 1950's he directed his research activities at problems in soil technology,
soil stabilization, and frost action in soils. He has been generally recognized as one of
the pioneers in the application of physico-chemical principles and compositional
considerations to the study of soil behavior. Just as Karl Terzaghi recognized in the early
stages of his career in soil mechanics that the solution of important problems required
improved knowledge of the physical properties of soils, our speaker tonight recognized
that many facets of soil behavior can only be understood by probing into the
compositional and structural characteristics of soil as an engineering material.
Throughout these years he engaged in an active consulting practice and became recognized as an outstanding engineer who could identify problems and who wasn't afraid
to try innovations in their solution.
Starting in the last half of the 1950's he began to direct his research and consulting
efforts more and more towards the use and evaluation of soil mechanics methods for the
prediction and assessment of the field performance of engineering structures. This
research has resulted in major advances in techniques for settlement and stability
analysis, improvements in construction practice, and extensive developments in field
measurement techniques. One of his best known and most significant contributions
from this work is the Stress Path Method for analysis of deformation and stability
problems. Also evolving from these studies has been the ICEP, or Integrated Civil
Engineering Project, concept, which is the subject of tonight's lecture. His many
important consulting projects ah over the world have served as excellent case studies for
the development of this approach.
Our Lecturer has authored or coauthored some 70 papers on a variety of topics in
the field; he is the author of the book Soil Testing for Engineers, which is known around
the world; and he is a coauthor with R. V. Whitman of the recently published book Soil
Mechanics. He is a registered Professional Engineer in Massachusetts and in Vermont,
and a member of several professional societies. His service to ASCE has included the
chairmanship of the Soil Properties and Session Programs Committees of the SMFD and
service on the Executive Committee, where he was chairman in 1967.
His awards are many, including from ASCE, the Collingwood Prize (1951), the
Wellington Prize (1961), and the Norman Medal (1964). He has twice received the

Desmond Fitzgerald Medal of the Boston Society of Civil Engineers, and has been twic
cited by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration for contributions to Th
Apollo program.
These are the facts about Thomas William Lambe. To those who know him there i,
considerably more. Almost 20 yr ago, in the summer of 1951, I began as an eager nes
graduate student and fumbling research assistant under the supervision of Bill Lambe
Our association has been close since. His inspiration and guidance over the years have
(been of inestimable value to me. I am sore these feelings are echoed by all those who
(have been his students.
His enthusiasm, energy, and zest for Life serve as an outstanding example. He
brings an intensity and efficiency to his work that are matched by few others.
Jf
present to you Professor Lambe, the Terzaghi Lecturer for 1970.
1

'I HE INTEGRATED CIVIL ENGINEERING PROJECT

By T. William Lambe,' F. ASCE

NATURE OF THE INTEGRATED CIVIL ENGINEERING PROJECT

The Integrated Civil Engineering ProjectICEPis an approach to civil
engineering that my MIT colleagues and I have evolved during the last decade
and a half. Fig. 1 summarizes the essentials of the Integrated Civil Engineering
Project. The objective of ICEP is to create and to utilize a constructed facility
to meet specified criteria of function, economy, life, safety, and compatibility.
All of these criteria except compatibility are well under-stood by the civil
engineer. The term compatibility means that the constructed facility must
harmonize with and complement its environment. It must not offend nature and
life near the facility; it must obtain public acceptability.
The underlying principle of ICEP is: in order to obtain a constructed
facility that meets the specified criteria, it is essential to integrate the
components of the project. These components range from project conception
to project completion and include: (1) Establishment of the need of a facility:
(2) financing; (3) planning; (4) investigation and evaluation of sites; (5) design; (6) construction; (7) surveillance; (8) operation; (9) maintenance; and
(10) alteration.
The whole point of the ICEP concept is to overcome the isolation of project
components. ICEP was devised to help ensure that the components were integrated, to ensure that the boundary conditions employed in the various
components were consistent, and to ensure that the engineers' efforts were
used most effectively. Of course, I am not the first engineer to worry about
treating a project in its entirety, i.e., as a system. Terzaghi himself worried a
great deal about the lack of cooperation between designer and builder. In his
paper "Consultants, Clients, and Contractors" (1958) he deplored the usual
situation of little cooperation between the designing department and
constructing department of a company. Rutledge in his Terzaghi Lecture
lamented the lack of close cooperation between the planner and the designer.
The Observational Method, developed by Terzaghi and by Peck, attempts to
tie design and construction together. Surely other engineers have worried
about the lack of integration of the components of a project.
The key feature, in fact, the heart, of ICEP is the way in which the project
components are integrated. The execution of ICEP is: evaluate each important
prediction and use this evaluation to improve the present facility and future
facilities. Thus the essential actions of ICEP are to identify and check the
Note.Discussion open until November 1, 1972. To extend the closing date one
month, a written request must be filed with the Executive Director, ASCE. This paper is
part of the copyrighted Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division,
Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 98, No. SM6, June, 1972.
Manuscript was submitted for review for possible publication on September 28, 1971.
' Edmund K. Turner Prof. of Civ. Engrg., MIT, Cambridge, Mass.

ENGINEERING PROJECT

various predictions made during the course of the project and then to employ
the results of these checks.
In the typical project, many of the predictions critical to the planning and
designing can only be checked by observing and measuring actual conditions
encountered during construction and operation of the facility. For example,
when designing a dam, the engineer uses the results of subsoil exploration to
predict the dimensions and properties of the various soil strata. During
construction he may find the thickness or permeability of one of the layers
quite different from that predicted. He should then use this information
obtained during construction to alter the design and method of construction as
required. Thus, using data obtained during construction, the engineer
integrates the design and construction phases of the project.

ICEP
DEFINITION
An Approach to Civil Engineering.
OBJECTIVE
To c r e a t e a n d u t i l i z e o C o n s t r u c t e d Fa c i l i t y t h a t
m e e t s s p e c i fi e d C r i t e r i a o f Fu n c t i o n , E c o n o m y,
L i f e , S a f e t y & C o m p a t i b i l i t y.

PRINCIPLE
A close integration of Project Components
is required to obtain Objective.

EXECUTION
Evaluate Critical Predictions and use
evaluation on present facility - ICEP
PRACTICE - and on future facilities -ICEP
RESEARCH.

I'IG. 1.ICEP ESSENTIALS

On civil engineering projects the engineer's predictions are almost never
precisely correct. Among the reasons these predictions are incorrect are:
1.

Subsoil conditions are generally ver y complex and difficult to characterize accuratel y on the basis of a reasonable exploration and testing
progra m.
2.
Facility loadings arising from nature's actionearthquakes, wave forces,
storms, etc.defy precise predictions.
3.
Construction procedures, especially those involving soil are highly dependent on conditions encountered at the site, weather conditions, human behavior, etc.
4.
Alterations in the environment caused by the presence of the constructed
facility are very difficult to predict.
Un fo rtun at el y, fe w eng ine er s re al ic e how unr eli abl e the ir p red ic tion te chniqu es ar e and how gene ra ll y poo r a re the dat a used in th ei r pr edi ct ions.

TERZAGHI LECTURES

Even worse, few engineers know the extent that their work is based on
predicted conditions. Further, because the engineer seldom checks his
predictions in actual practice, he generally builds up an unjustified
confidence in his procedures.
There are, of course, predictions that cannot be readily checked. For
example, the effects of a design earthquake or design flood on a structure can
rarely be fully checked because the earthquake or flood is not likely to occur.
Even so, a partial check can be obtained by measuring and interpreting the
performance at a loading less than the design loading.
ICEP is based on evaluating the critical predictions made during the
project and using the results of the predictions. In ICEP Practice, the
prediction evaluation is used on the project at hand or on a similar project in
the same area, typically for the same owner. In ICEP Research, the
prediction evaluation is used to check and, hopefully, improve prediction
techniques, i.e., improve the state of knowledge for use on facilities to be
constructed later. A sharp boundary does not exist between ICEP Practice
and ICEP Research. In carrying out ICEP practice one frequently also does
ICEP Research.
To execute ICEP Practice requires both that the predictions be evaluated
and that the evaluations be used. In executing ICEP Research, the main effort
is devoted to evaluating the predictions. To use effectively the results of prediction evaluation on a current project, i.e., to carry out ICEP Practice
requires:
1.

Obtaining, processing, and interpreting appropriate information, usually field data, very
expeditiously.
2.
Close communications among the various organizations and engineers
within the organizations involved with the project.
3.
A project setup that is responsive enough to utilize the results from checking predictions.
The difficulties associated with obtaining accurate field data and using it
expeditiously are much greater than many engineers realize. One cannot help
but suspect that filing cabinets are bulging with incorrect field data and field
data that have never been utilized.
This presentation describes several illustrations of ICEP. After the ICEP
examples, some general findings are presented and discussed.

AMUAY RESERVOIRS
Project Description.An excellent example of ICEP Practice consists of
the oil storage reservoirs built by the Creole Petroleum Corporation at
Amuary, Venezuela. In 1955, Creole built its first fuel oil storage reservoir
FORS-1 and in 1956 built its secondFORS-2. (FORS comes from Fuel Oil
Reservoir Storage.) In 1962, FORS-1 was expanded from its original volume
of 4,000,000 barrels to 11,000,000 barrels by raising the dam from 13 my
high to 24 m high. [Measured volumes of the reservoirs in 1970 were: FORS1 volume = 11,363,010 barrels; FORS-2 volume - 9,490,400 barrels; and
FORS-3 volume - 7,874,000 barrels. (One barrel = 42 gal = 5.610 ft 3 0.610
m 3 )] The third Amuay Fuel Oil Storage ReservoirFORS-3was built during
the summer of 1969. FORS-3 was formed by constructing a dam

ENGINEERING PROJECT

230 m long and 22.3 m high (at its maximum height) to enclose a natural
quebrada, i.e., a small ravine.
The fuel oil storage reservoirs have proved to be spectacular successes. In
comparison with conventional storage in steel tanks, open reservoir storage
has certain inherent advantages, i.e.;
1.
2.
3.
4.

Much greater storage capacity per unit area of real estate.

Simpler pumping facilities needed.
Shorter time required for design and construction.
Much cheaper per unit storage capacity for both initial cost and maintenance
cost.
These technical and economic advantages for a reservoir far outweigh the
technical advantages of tank storage, i.e., steel tanks permit more flexible
operation of the refinery and result in lower oil loss from evaporation and
leakage.
The oil retention capacity of the reservoirs is based on the phenomenon of
Interfacial tension. A fine grain soil properly compacted at a high water
content will retain oil with zero leakage. Using the setup shown in Fig. 2,
one can demonstrate that until the pressure of oil exceeds the oil entry
pressure, no oil will invade the water-wet soil sample.
Critical Predictions.among the many predictions required in the creation
and utilization of the oil storage reservoirs were two critical ones, namely:
(1) the soil lining the reservoir would retain the oil; and (2) the soil slopes
would remain stable. Field exploration and extensive laboratory tests
indicated that a local plastic clay would satisfactorily retain oil with no
leakage under a head of 30 m. Laboratory tests were run to measure the
strength characteristics of both undisturbed and compacted soil. Stability
analyses were based on the laboratory determined soil parameters and
predicted values of pore pressure.
Evaluation of Predictions.Creole's sudden need for a large amount of
storage for fuel oil placed a severe restriction on the time available for
planning, investigation, testing, and designing. The time available, a few
months, was much too short for conventional steel tankage to be built. This
fact significantly influenced Creole's decision to employ the untried scheme
of an earth reservoir to store fuel oil.
The severe time restriction precluded an adequate field exploration program. Because of this fact and because the scheme of storing oil in an earth
lined reservoir was untried, Creole agreed to a field surveillance program. To
execute surveillance and maintenance programs for an oil storage reservoir was
logical for Creole, an organization that normally carries out inspection and
maintenance programs on its steel storage tanks. Fifteen years of experience at
Amuay have shown that surveillance and maintenance of oil storage reservoirs
costs much less (per barrel of oil stored) than does the Inspection and
maintenance of steel tanks. The surveillance program consists of installing and
reading field measuring devices (oil detection wells, water wells, piezometers,
inclinometers, bench marks from which vertical and lat eral movement could be
detected, stress cells, and temperature measuring devices), sampling
periodically the embankment and natural slopes, and periodic inspections by an
engineer. The field measuring system was installed gradually over a long
period of time.

TERZAGHI LECTURES
The evaluation of fi eld perfo rmance has shown that the compacted clay
core in the earth embankments has retained oil with zero leakage. On the
other hand, measurements made in the oil detection wells and examinations

PRESSURE, P

AIR

PRESSURE

OIL

WATER,

5
O

i O 0%

% VOID VOLUME
IN SOI L

FIG. 2.DEMONSTRATION OF OIL ENTRY PRESSURE

w
CC

.25

QJ
ffi
/1 11'

2
5

Phrea tic Surfoce in Soil

"Aboye Fat Clay

.20

ELEVATION

.15
z

+lo

FAT

+10

CL AY

.5

*5
15hr ea lic
Surface
B e l o w Fai C l a y

o________
O C E A N

+15

in

501

1 km

4 _________________________________o
Horizanlal

5cole

FIG. 3.WEST-EAST SECTION, REFINERY AREA

made in test pits have revealed that oil has penetrated cracks in the natural
soil slopes of FORS-1 at least as far as 30 m. In the abutment areas oil
penetration into cracks of natural soil caused concern both from the view of

ENGINEERING PROJECT

oil loss and from the view of slope stability near the abutments. The natural
slopes that formed three sides of both FORS-2 and FORS-3 were lined with
compacted clay based on the experience at FORS-1.
The most troublesome aspect of the stability studies made in connection
with the design of the oil storage reservoirs was the prediction of pore water
pressure that would exist in and under the embankments, and in the natural
hillsides. We predicted that pore water pressures in the embankments would
be negative and in the foundations of the embankments the total head would
average less than 13.5 m, corresponding to an excess pressure of 12 tons/m 2 .
(See Lambe, 1963, for a discussion of stability studies on FORS-1.) Field
measurements have indicated that negative pare water pressures do exist in
the embankments and the excess water pressures in the foundations are far
below 12 tons/rn 2 .
In studying the stability of the natural hillside, the engineer predicted that
the phreatic surface would remain at El. 1.5 m, as determined from borings
made during the exploration for the projects. This prediction turned out to be
incorrectin fact, horrendous! Fig. 3 shows measured total heads. There
exists a perched water table trapped above El. + 10 by the layer of fat clay.
There appear to be two sources of the perched ground water. First, the
extensive construction of refinery structures, roads, and asphalt sheets to
retard erosion have significantly reduced the evaporation of ground water;
second, leaks in the refinery drainage system and especially in the pipes
carrying water for fire protection have introduced large quantities of water
into the ground.
Use of Prediction. Evaluations.Prediction evaluations have been used in
nearly every component of the FORS projects. In planning FORS-3,
consideration was given to selecting a site with a minimum of cracks in the
natural hillside. In designing FORS-3, the entire reservoir was sealed with a
clay core in the embankment and a clay liner over the floor and along the
natural hillside. Further, a drain and water collection system was installed at
FORS-3 to facilitate the lowering of pore water pressures in the natural
hillside.
On several occasions the field measuring system has been used to guide
the safe operation of the oil storage reservoirs. For example, during 1969 the
permissible minimum level of oil in FORS-3 was based on readings from the
piezometers in the east wall of the reservoir. Rising piezometer levels in the
north abutment of FORS-2 during 1967 and 1968 led to the decision to
execute a surface drainage maintenance program behind FORS-2. This
surface drainage program resulted in a lowering of subsurface pore pressures.
Other examples could be cited to show that the results of field
measurements and performance evaluation have been and are now extensively
used in the planning, design, construction, maintenance, operation, and
alteration of the oil storage reservoirs at Amuay.
MIT FOUNDATIONS
Project Description.in 1960, MIT began a major expansion of its physical
plant. Because of the high cost of foundations and construction delays attributal
to foundations of campus buildings, MIT initiated in November, 1962 the
program, "Foundation Evaluation and ResearchMIT" called, FERMIT. The

TERZAGHI LECTURES

E XC A VAT ION

purposes of FERMIT are: (1) To ensure that building foundations constructed

on the MIT campus perform satisfactorily; (2) to reduce the chances of
foundation construction damaging existing structures; and (3) to reduce the cost
and construction delays associated with foundations. The heart of FERMIT is
the evaluation of field performance, i.e., evaluation of the important predictions
made in the planning, design, and construction of the MIT foundations.

0.2

0
ce
o

WESTGATE(0)
hiAcGRE 08(4

0 o 6
Cr

o
4

STUDENT CENTER
(A)

o.e

ro

200

400

600

1000

Boo

D I S TA N C E F R O M E X C A VAT 1 O N , i n f e &

FIG. 4.DRAWDOWN FROM DEWATERING

500

C
80

2
N

ce 60

Lu
cr
O

40

TILL

te
45'

45 -80'

15 I 50 ro 60' I

NO

PILE
i0

ORiviNG

20

30

ELAPSED
IN

FIG. 5.P0Ft E

40

T tHE

D AY S

PRESSIJRES GENERATED BY PILE DRIVII\IG

Critical Predictions. The design and construction of foundations built

be-fore the mid-1960's were based on the following three critical predictions:
1. Dewatering for the construction of a given foundation would lower the
water table only in the vicinity of that excavation.

ENGINEERING PROJECT
2.

Foundations of long end-bearing piles would perform better than shallow

floating foundations, i.e., undergo less total settlement and less differential
settlement.
3.
The construction of foundations on long piles would cause less dis-turbance
to adjacent saructures than would the construction of floating foundations .
There were a number of other predictions made, some of them being used
TABLE 1,MIT BUILDINGS
Foundation
type

Number of
buildings

Number of
stories

Settlement, in
inehes

Floating
Piles

7
5

6 to 29
6 to 30

1 Lo 2
1/2

TABLE 2.DIFFERENTIAL SETTLEMENT

Piles

Floating

otrAnax

Buildi g

1/2,250

Materials
Space
Refrigeration

Life Selences
Student
CAES
Chemistry
MaeGregor

1/2,250
1/1,550
1/570

Eastgate

190

OISTANCE FROM

Building

200

05
NEAREST
PILE , pri fe/4

-rue

FIG. 6.EFFECT OFAPILE

l s ; wDRIVING
h t , A A ON NEARBY BUILDINGS
MOVEME NT

AS- A 9
o

0o0o

o
o

Do

oo

- - -----o

(/Lyn,a.
1/1,500
1/1,400
1/1,400

1/1,100
1/900

TERZAGHI LECTURES
to arrive at the three critical predictions. For example, predictions of the rate
of bottom heave of an excavation and settlement following foundation
construction were employed in the prediction of behavior of floating
foundations.
Evaluations of Predictions.Observations at many wells around the MIT
campus have proved that the first prediction was very bad. The data in Fig. 4
indicate that dewatering for an excavation can depress the ground-water
piezometric level for a very large distance from the excavationgreater than
1,000 ft.
Extensive field measurements have shown that foundations on end-bearing
piles do perform better than buildings on floating foundationshowever this
Superiority in performance is very slight. The data in Table 1 indicate that
foundations on bearing piles settled about 0.5 in. whereas floating foundations
settled up to 2 in. Data on differential settlement presented in Table 2 indicate
that the floating foundations have behaved about as well as the pile
foundations
Extensive field measurements have shown that Prediction 3 is not correct.
Pile driving causes greater disturbance to adjacent structures than does a
Properly mute excavation for a floating foundation. As indicated in Fig. 5,
Pile driving, even in preaugered holes, develops large excess pore pressures
in the foundation clay. During pile driving adjacent structures heave and, as
the excess pore pressures dissipate, the structures settle. The field data in
Fig. 6 illustrate this point. On the other hand, settlements resulting from
nearby excavations have been minor--less than 0.04 ft.
Use of Prediction Evaluations.Extensive use has been made of the
results from FERMIT. The evaluations of the three critical predictions have
resulted in several actions by MIT. Unrestricted ground-water pumping on the
MIT campus is no longer permitted. Engineers and. contractors must submit
dewatering schemes to MIT for review and approval.
The evaluations of Predictions 2 and 3 have led to the conclusion that
floating foundations on the MIT campus are superior to foundations on bearing
piles. In addition to this technical superiority, floating foundations have a
distinct economic advantage over deep pile foundations. Thus, MIT is going
more and more to floating foundations. Only for unusual situations will MIT
approve a proposal involving a deep pile foundation.
Both engineers and contractors have requested that FERMIT participate on their
projectsa true measure of the value of FERMIT.

LAGUNIL LAS PRELOADS

Project Description.in early 1960 the Creole Petroleum Corporation was
faced with the necessity of constructing three very heavily loaded tanks on
weak sub soils at Lagunillas, on the east coast of Lake Maracaibo, Venezuela.
The three tanks were part of a dehydration process and would operate at
capacity. A foundation analysis based on in situ undrained shear strengths
showed a factor of safety for each tank less than unity, in fact, about 2/3,
Close to the area where the three tanks were to be built, another oil company
had constructed a tank on subsoil conditions presumably similar to those at
the Creole site. During the test loading of the tank, the foundation suffered a
complete shear failure. At the time of the foundation failure, the applied
surface load was about 1/2 of the design load for the tanks Creole proposed

ENGINEERING PROJECT
to build. This other company founded their rebuilt tank on piles.
An engineering Study revealed that Creole could save considerable money
by employing a preload technique for their tanks rather than installing a pile
foundation. Fig. 7 shows the size of preload used at two of the tank sites. The
preloading was successfully carried out. Lambe (1962) describes certain
aspects of the Lagunillas preload project.
ti
- 28.3

r = 25'

PRELOA
D
4 , 700

SOIL

lb / 112

I`
u.
u.

SILT
o

r 35 %
,.
28%
33

-20.

Ct. 0.115
su= ayo ro {000-

73

.0

-9 5
-95

lb

P23

= 0.80

23%
su, .65%

CLAY

=69'
y

=400 lo 5002

P21

P15

PIEZOMETERS
P25

-11CLAY
P27 P17

14

-so

FIG. 7.LAGUNILLAS PRELOAD

O

,...
.,..
,.

,,,i
-u

0;0
7o
o
o

,
,

4:0
o

60

80

oi.
9

eu

e 40
M e _
: 1
a

. 1
4 5

8 0

9
o
1590
9

tO0

300

.4.

Elopse0 T'ese in Ooss

400
500

1 .....____,.

. Eftwar
iffiligari

g
a
~
Lim m
a
1911

sor/

700

900

1111111
51

_
962

1991

FIG. 8.LAGUNILLAS PRELOAD SII

Critical Predictions.On the Lagunillas preloads there were two critical predictions,
namely:
1.
2.

The preload could be fully built in a reasonable time.

The weak and compressible foundation could be adequately improved in a reasonable
time.
Since the preload was to be built at such a rapid pace that essentially no
dissipation of pore pressure was expected at the center of the clay layer, the
Lagunillas project offered an excellent opportunity to examine available

TERZAGHI LECTURES
techniques for predicting pare pressures developed under
undrained conditions. Evaluations of Predictions. the results
of the field measurements shown in Fig. 8 proved that both of
the critical predictions were correct. The full

REMO LDED

1 ST U R 8 E D

STRENGTH

-13

0.5
STRENGTH - Ajos/

SHEAR

2.5

STRENGTN

-13

fi"
o

1111.19.
1990
'1,04.
1990
DEL. 1960
JUNI 1961

02
SHEAR
-20

FIG. 9.SHEAR
STRENGTH OF
LAGUNILLAS
PRELOAD
...---.
FOUNDATION
q

JURE

tftwin-

aa

O
P15

P21

963

P27

W _3

-4

AUG.
304.
DEC.
JURE
4 A N.

11------O
...----o
SYMNOI
DESCRIPT10N
'ten
--'
AIJABIS

1
FRIE
514010tarnzni
P.
o'
2
1210,

1960
1960
1960
l961
1962

a
O
"...

:
P17

wituk,
1.111111ffinal
mign

..

LO
I5
STRENGTH 5- kio3Fff2

1965

JUME

3 ..-----....
1 tlei .. 1C001
.
0.69110001
Act, + 0.05 inCri - AV 11 ,
4
acr. II .b.9 fromectu1rokint 4/4104r
5
,573 40.95
e/C5
P19
P25
free tttek .1 piolas ; ofrom turba
6
.0.(3 3 ... 0.99 l.0.01 A.75): aer, a.acr,
from 41049O 00194; : from eh 400/4

. I)
V

7
9

A5.0.650000)
En/00410+0 fram d> ef q25009

...
co.

.----- ..--.
es

---. ---

.,
-

----0

EffiN\
0

0
DISTANC E IN

FEET FROM PRELOAD

G.

FIG. 10.COMPARISON OF PREDICTED AND MEASURED PORE

PRESSURES

preload was placed in a little over a 3-rnonth period

without a foundation failure occurring. Settlements were
very large, almost a meter, during loading.
The data in Fig. 8 also indicate that a large portion of the
excess pare

ENGINEERING PROJECT
'FABLE 3.SHEAR STRESS AT P1EZOMETERS
(Ao. -

Piezometer
nurnber

)/2 by elastic theory,

in pounds per square foot
1,220
1,290
1,360
1,390
1,460

P21
P15
P23
P27
P17
P25
P19

330
290

Shear strength of elay = 400 psf to 500 psf.

500 rn
Horizontal Scaie

33 -7-

4.0

-0

10
-11.0

210

- -30 0

35.0
ar

--40

-51.0

FIG. 11.GENERALIZED SOIL PROFILE

TERZAGHI LECTURES

pressure in the foundation was dissipated during the preloading period.

Originally it was thought that only 6 months were available for improving the
foundation by preloading. The process engineers had difficulty in debugging
the dehydration process and the preloads were thus permitted to remain in
place almost 3 yr. Thus the second predictionthat the foundation could be
improved during the available time for preloadingwas correct, but in fact
the actual time was far greater than initially thought.
Fig. 9 presents the results of field vane shear tests run in the foundation
soils during the preloading period. These data indicate a considerable
strengthening of the soil, especially in the upper boundary. On the basis of
subsoil exploration and laboratory tests, the engineer predicted that the clay
layer was freely drained both at the top and the bottom. Piezometers installed
in the silt layer above the clay confirmed that the silt served as a free
drainage layer for the clay. The prediction of free drainage at the bottom of
the clay was checked by the insertion of Piezometer P-31. As can be seen in
Fig. 8, the clay was not freely drained at the bottom.
Fig. 10 presents a comparison of predicted and measured pore pressures
at the center of the clay for an undrained loading. The details of these predictions are described elsewhere (Lambe, 1962). The comparison shows a
very close agreement between predicted and measured pore pressures. The
closeness of this agreement is remarkable in view of the fact that the
computed shear stress at most of the piezometers far exceeds the shear
strength of the clay (see Table 3). Note that techniques 4 and 5 gave
precisely correct predictions of the pore pressure at P-21 even though both
techniques are based on elastic theory. Elastic theory predicts a shear stress
of 1,220 psf for the clay which has a shear strength of 400 psf to 500 psf, as
indicated in Fig. 9.
Use of Prediction Evaluations.The Lagunillas preloads actually served
two purposes. First, by using a preload which subjected the foundation to a
more severe loading than did the fully loaded tank, the preloads served as
test loads. If the preloads could be satisfactory built to full height, it was
then almost certain that the tanks could be built without causing a foundation
failure. The preloads were built at a rate determined by stability analyses for
partially drained foundation conditions, tempered by judgment from the field
measurements. Thus the performance evaluations proved that the stability
techniques used worked for the Lagunillas conditions. The stability
techniques were then applied with confidence to the three tanks for which the
pre-loading was done and for later construction at Lagunillas. The
evaluations of predictions were also used to design and construct the tank
foundations and to guide the tank test loading.

KAWASAKI RECLAIMED LAND

Project Description.the desperate shortage of land available in Japan
for industrial development has necessitated extensive site construction by
reclamation of underwater areas. Fig. 11 presents a generalized soil profile
of two sites developed by the Toa Nenryo Company. Aspects of this project
are described in detail in Lambe (1969).
Critical Predictions.The development of the Toa industrial sites involved two
critical predictions, namely:

ENGINEERING PROJECT
Cfn

O
___

SITE
300
15 cm

20 cm

SITE 400

2 5

cm

3 0

c m

33 cm

40 cm

FIG. 12.-KAWASAKI SITE SETTLEMENT, JULY 1963 TO FEB. 1965

a.

'1

.cr
a.
a - I^
SETTLEMENT

2 0.5

z
w

.1
a.

1- W
W
m

W
cc
z
Z
0
u

u.
o

1.0

Feb. 1963.

la 0
z

1,
1

1.5

1962 I 1963

LEGEND
9

18-4-

17

- A

19

18

19-2 -

20 cm/yr

- 2 - 43- 19-4 -

30 cm /yr

18

18 -3 - 19 20
I

10 cm/yr

1964

1955

1967
SETTLEMENT OF REVETMENT StTE 400

FIG. 13.-SETTLEMENT OF SITE 400

1966

1968

TERZAGHI LECTURES

1. The subsoils were in static equilibrium.

2. The hydraulic fill required no special drainage.
Evaluations of Predictions.the initial planning and design for
the Kawasaki industrial sites were based on the assumption that
conditions were static. Because of the recent placement of the
hydraulic fill and because of the well-known pumping of water from
the subsoils for industrial use, the engineer predicted that conditions
were not static. Settlement devices and piezometers were installed
throughout the two sites. Figs. 12 and 13 proved that the Kawasaki
area was not in static equilibrium but was settling at a rapid rate.
Fig. 24 compares predicted and measured values of total head for
Site 400. This figure indicates that considerable excess pore
pressure still exists and that continued settlement can be
expected. Attempts to limit the
o
le)

4 -

4 , 4

FI LL
7 0

20

CLAY 1

z
210
z
o
CL AY II
- 40

36.0
CLAY

III

46.0

- 60
0

+10
TOTAL HEAD IN METERS

FIG. 14.TOTAL HEAD AT SITE 400 (19(38)

pumping of ground water may prove to be effective in reducing
the general site settlement.
To check the need for special drainage in the fill and to evaluate
the relative effectiveness of paper and sand drains, the load test
shown in Fig. 15 was carried out. By having settlement observation
points at the top and bottom of fill in each of the three treated zones,
a determination could be made of the effectiveness of the drains. The
settlement of the fill is shown in Fig. 16. These data show that the
fill consolidates almost as rapidly as the test load was built and there
was no significant difference in settlement behavior among the three
zones. Pore pressure readings in the fill confirm that essentially no
excess pore pressures were developed by placement of the load test.

These measurements of settlement and pore pressure confirm that

Prediction

ENGINEERING PROJECT

El

SI

SE ,I3 ,I4
PIO

"-...

--\

'`,..
',...,

..-----.4,,,,. --- -SANO

' ' , . .
D R A I N S

,
11 1:3.111.
" --).
0
o
57,8,9 l'Iss
P8
\ii

INCUNOMETER

z r
rc

'4-.11510,11,12
P9 j
4

SI
ID
=

k_

5
4
.
4

-6-4.4
4.3.3

m
- 7

1
w2

0
=
4
0
-21

-20
O

i
m

- 36

1-E7.0
Y1

59

,r,
/
+4-4 SI, SE
512
1
+1.7. P1

qs 1 6.0 x1.7

-$.0,P2
-3.3,P3
57

-46
Si

.52 513
/
1
-13.3 .P4
-14.0 PB
-14.0. P10
58

53 514

510

N.
A
=
1a Ln
L z
oc a

FiLL -4 0

E
o- 1
+o

T_ 10.6

P9 -J40 ,
511

CLAY 1

-23.B.P5
1
I

CLAY

II

CLAY

}II

I
54
I
-42.3 P6
I
S5
49 .8 P7

15.LOAD
TEST SITE 400

TERZAGHP LECTURES

Center of Load S 1 -5 2
No Treo ?mear

9 - ST

O Sond Orme

5,3

0.1
z

O,

NOV

DEC.

JAN.

OCT.

FEEI 1 MAR.1 APR 1 MAY 1 JUNEJ111Jef AUG l SEP

967

1966

FIG. 16.-SETTLEMENT OF FELL

TIME
3

.119631

19645

IN

YEARS

4
119651

SET TLEMENTS

5
119661

6
119171

7
119581

P R ED IC T E D SI T E SE T T LE M E NT
(Fr o m fi n p l o c e m e n 1 o n d
p u m p oo fr o m d e e p p i c u yi

S E T T L E M E N T O F TA N K
SHELL

Tonk 3.

Ilion, Sheil Sel7le1nen1

Tonel, Average 5he11

elllement

11.6rn - atter 25
Yo r k 2 , Av e r a g e
iSheH Senlement

P R E D I C T E D S E T T L E M E N T , S I T E + TA N K

yeorsl

(2.5 fr- oft tv 25 veces)

FIG. 17.-COMPARLSON OF PREDICTED AND MEASURED TANK SETTLEMENTS

ENGINEERING PROJECT
2no drains needed in fillwas correct.
Fig. 17 shows a comparison of predicted settlement and measured
settlement for the large crude oil storage tanks built at Site 200. The field
data show that Tanks 1, 2, and 3 settled almost the same amount and the
prediction of tank settlement was correct. The close agreement between
predicted and measured tank settlements is remarkable in view of the fact
that the engineer used the wrong tank load in making his settlement
prediction. Based on information supplied to him, the soil engineer predicted
that for the first few years the tanks would operate at near capacity. He thus
made his settlement predictions on the basis of a tank full of oil. The actual
loading history of one of the large tanks indicated that the tank operated
close to half capacity. The engineer making the settlement prediction should
have somehow approximated the predicted loading with a cyclic load,
averaging hall capacity, rather than a static load of full capacity.
DIFFICULTIES WITH ICEP
The initiation and execution of ICEP has encountered both technical and
nontechnical difficulties. To obtain and install field measuring devices usually
required considerable time and money. Even though there have been recent
developments in field instrumentation, the profession is a long way from having
reliable devices to obtain all of the types of data needed for performance
evaluation. When a device goes bad on a field project, the consequences are
generally more serious than would be true in a laboratory experiment. One
seldom gets a second chance on an actual project whereas a laboratory
experiment can usually be repeated.
The most troublesome of the nontechnical problems is the difficulty of
obtaining the opportunity to do ICEP. Many owners are understandably
reluctant to finance ICEP because of its preventive rather than its remedial or
curative nature and because of the uncertain results of the performance
evaluation. Owners are much more receptive to programs of field
measurements after serious troubles have developed.
The systems normally employed to create and operate a constructed
facility are not ideal for the close integration of project components. On the
typical complex project the large number of organizations involved, the system of payments, the allocation of responsibilities, etc., combine to make it
very difficult to obtain maximum value out of a performance evaluation.
ICEP IN THE UNIVERSITY
The conduct of ICEP Research and the study of examples of ICEP Practice are of
great value to the student and to the profession.
ICEP has developed knowledge and fed it directly into the classroom,
thereby making courses relevant and, in fact, exciting. Many of today's students
want the opportunity to apply recently learned fundamentals to real field cases.
They want and need the perspective which can be gained from studying the
integration of project components on a constructed facility.
For the last couple of decades the university has been the most important
source of research in civil engineering in the United States. A
disproportionately high percentage of papers published by the ASCE are
authored

332

TERZAGHI LECTURES

by educators and further a disproportionately high percentage of ASCE Prizes

awarded for research and publications are won by educators. For example,
during 1969 there were a total of 95Q authors of papers published in the
Journals of the American Society of Civil Engineers. Sixty-six percent of
these authors were educators; a group that constitutes 8 % of the total
membership of the ASCE.
Two reasons why the university is such a powerful force in civil engineering research
are:
1.
2.

A major objective of the university is to produce and disserninate knowledge.

The university has a continuous flow of students who question the
accepted and then search for the answers to questions that they (and their
professors) raise.
Unlike industry, the university does research primarily to contribute to
knowledge, not to produce proprietary products and techniques. Publication of
the results of research is encouragedmaybe over encouraged.
ICEP Research constitutes an ideal format for university research. It
gives the professor and his students real cases lo study. It indicates to the
professor those aspects of prediction techniques that are deficient. ICEP thus
gives the professor and his student the opportunity to select significant
problemsthose most in need of research. ICEP Research would seem to
offer a solution to the problem of a growing percentage of published papers
being theoretical, whereas the percentage of case studies is declining.
A potential problem with ICEP Research is the tendency for the
researcher to be drawn into the engineering of the project on which the
research is being conducted. Having field performance data, the professor
and his research team are prime candidates for helping the engineer and
contractor solve problems which arise during the project. This potential
problem can be pre-vented by the professor's maintaning close
communication with the project engineer, supplying him field data as he
needs them. At the present time, both engineers and contractors working on
the MIT Campus request that ICEP Research be conducted on projects with
which they are involved. I consider this solid proof of the success of ICEP!

CONTRIBUTIONS OF ICEP
Successful.On the whole, both ICEP Research and ICEP Practice have
proved highly successful. The ICEP format was developed to attack and
hopefully salve some of the shortcomings, weaknesses, and neglect in civil
engineering research and practice which I myself have done and have
observed others do. ICEP was intended to help: (1) Identity the most
significant aspects of a project, and indicate where the engineer should
concentrate his efforts; (2) ensure that the correct model was used in the
design analysis: (3) ensure that the facility was built according to the design;
and (4) evaluate the judgment decisions which had been made during the
planning and design. Fifteen years of experience with the ICEP approach has
shown it to be successful beyond my fondest hopes.
Field performance evaluations have been made on a number of types of

ENGINEERING PROJECT
structures. including: A breakwater; buried structures; braced excavations;
open excavations: earth dams; embankment foundations; building foundations;
and foundations for refrigerated structures. Publications cited in the Appendix
References, and others, describe some of these specific cases. Preceding
parts of this paper illustrate aspects of four ICEP's. In addition, there are
several general findings from ICEP's which are of interest. These are
described in the following paragraphs.
Documented Field Cases.A well-documented field case, even without full
interpretation, can constitute a worthwhile contribution to the profession.
Terzaghi many years ago pointed out the importance of field observations to
our fundamental knowledge. At the 1936 First International Conference on
Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering he stated: ".
Our theories
will be superseded by better ones, but the results of conscientious observations in the
field will remain as a permanent asset of inestimable value to
our profession
.." Well-documented field cases are useful to the researcher who develops a new prediction technique and to the engineer pre-paring a
state-of-the-art evaluation of a topic. For example, H6eg et al. (1969) used the
reported Lagunillas Preload data to help develop their method of estimating in situ
shear strength from measured pore pressures. Further, considerable use has been
made of FERMIT data (e.g., Fig. 5) by engineers doing foundation work in the
Boston area.
Correct Prediction Does Not Prove Technique is Correct.ICEP
Research has shown on several occasions that, even though some prediction
technique correctly predicts performance, the technique may not be a sound
one. For example, a very close prediction was made of the pare pressure at
the bot-tom of the excavation for the CAES Building, Lambe (1968). This
correct prediction resulted to some extent from a cancellation of errorsan
under-prediction of the head drop due to the excavation was offset by an
under-prediction in the rate of pore pressure dissipation. Further, pore
pressures developed in the foundation of the Lagunillas preloads were
predicted very closely by a method based on the theory of elasticity even
though shear stresses predicted by elastic theory were as much as two to
three times the shear strength of the soil.
Importance of Initial and Final Conditions.Field performance
evaluations have repeatedly emphasized that initial and final subsoil
conditions may be far different from those typically assumed by the engineer.
For example, the assumption that static ground water exists before the
construction of the facility and will exist when equilibrium has been reached
can be seriously in error. The Kawasaki and Amuay cases are striking
examples of nonstatic equilibrium ground-water conditions. On important
projects, the engineer should measure ground movements and pore pressure
prior to construction. A measurement of lateral soil stress as a function of
depth would also be very valuable; however, instrumentation for this
measurement is not yet available.
Importance of Construction Details.IC EP experience has repeatedly
shown the great importance that details in construction procedures can have
on performance. This fact is especially true on braced excavations. The
lateral movements of sheeting and the magnitudes of strut loads depend very
greatly on such things as the sequence of excavation, the timing of
construction operations, the extent of strut preloading, the extent of
dewatering, etc.
Need for Improvements in Project Management.there is a great need

TERZAGHI LECTURES
to develop and teach principles of project management.. ICEP experience has
repeatedly shown potentially useful field performance data were not used to
maximum benefit. Field data must be obtained and processed rapidly,
portrayed, and interpreted correctly, andmost importantlythe significant
interpretations must be put at the disposal of the engineer making decisions.
Experience has repeatedly shown the difficulties of processing field data
rapidly and feeding them back to the decision maker.
Partly as a result of experiences with ICEP, MIT plans to initiate a program in Project Management. This program of education and research will
focus on the three major aspects of producing constructed facilities
preconstruction planning, construction management, and post construction
surveillance and evaluation. The program will emphasize integration of the
entire management process through improved information processing and
use. The ICEP theme, prediction evaluation, will be central to the program.
ACKNOW LEDGMENTS
By its very nature ICEP is a team effort. Many of my past and present
colleagues and research students have contributed to the development of
ICEP and to the execution of many successful projects. Credit is due to these
many people who have so greatly contributed to ICEP.
David J. D'Appolonia helped interpret the data from a number of projects.
Harry Horn helped initiate FERMIT. L. A. Wolf skill has worked closely with
all of the ICEP projects for the past 7 yr. His tenacity and skill enabled us to
obtain accurate field data.
Able and progressive management at the Creole Petroleum Corporation and
MIT has substantially aided the ICEP effort. Deserving special credit are: S. J.
Mathis, formerly of Creole now of Standard Oil of New Jersey; R. W.
Willmon, former Manager of Creole's Amuay Refinery; William R. Dickson,
Associate Director of MIT's Department of Physical Plant; and Philip A.
Stoddard, MIT's Vice President-Operations and Personnel.

APPENDIX.RE FERENCES

1. Hdeg, K.. Andersland, O. B.. and Rolsen. E N., "Lindrained Behavior of Quia Clay . Under
Load TeL at Asrum," <;ewechnique Vol. 19. No. I. London. England. March. 1969
2 Lambe, -r" W "Pore Pressures in a Foundation
.bwrtiof ii/ The
ha/n< k and
Finaularitin.
ASCE, Vol, 88, No SM2. Proc Paper 3097. Aprii. 1962, pp 19 47,
3. Lambe. T_ W., "An Earth Darn for the Storage of Fuel Oil (lis Design and Behavior During
Construction). - 2oui Pao-lmervan rwlercop-e on Sol - 1 .tfechanic J'out F()andatirm Enliarering, Vol.
II. Brazil. July. 1963.
4, Lambe, T. W.. "The Behai.ior of Foundations During Construction, - .1ourual
the _Buil
ilfechcalics aoid h,undarriin Dityt.bin. ASCE, Vol 94. No. SM I. Proc. Paper 5740. Jan.. 1968. pp. 93130.
5 Lambe, T
"Ruclaimed 1 and in Kawasakt City, Japan.thi
Afe,'Ilanie and
,
F iututatii)a+ Ditt.vi,n. ASCE, Vol. 95, No. Srv15. Proc. Paper 6780, Sept, 1969. pp. 1181
1198 6. Peck, R B , "Advantages and Limitations of the Observational Method in Appiied Sud
Mechanics, - Gewerhitique. Vol. 19. No. 2. London. England. _lune. 1969

ENGINEERING PROJECT
L:rhan Development,- Jiii/rou/
thc S'in/
M e c h a m , s r m i E L / w i t h / n u m D n i O r f i l , A S C E , u l . 96. 'N o SN. 11, p ro u P a p el - 7 00 0. J an . . Ig7 0.

7, ft

utledge. P. (' "Utilizalion o Marginal

pp. 1 22,

S. Terzaghi, k.. "Consultants. L'iters and Contractur,Eligtneer., Jul y. 1958,

.,1 'he