Highway construction at Kvithammar-Åsen, mid-Norway: Geotechnical characterization of very sensitive clay deposits

Anders Lindgård; Vidar Gjelsvik; Åse Marit Wist Amdal; Sølve Hov; Jean-Sébastien L'Heureux; Katharina Kahrs; Sigbjørn Rønning; Anders Lindgård; Vidar Gjelsvik; Åse Marit Wist Amdal; Sølve Hov; Jean-Sébastien L'Heureux; Katharina Kahrs; Sigbjørn Rønning

doi:10.3934/geosci.2025041

AIMS Geosciences

2025, Volume 11, Issue 4: 946-978. doi: 10.3934/geosci.2025041

Previous Article Next Article

Research article Special Issues

Highway construction at Kvithammar-Åsen, mid-Norway: Geotechnical characterization of very sensitive clay deposits

Norwegian Geotechnical Institute, Trondheim, Norway

Received: 01 March 2025 Revised: 26 August 2025 Accepted: 26 September 2025 Published: 17 November 2025

The properties of vast, sensitive clay deposits have been investigated for the construction of the E6 Kvithammar-Åsen highway, north of Trondheim, in mid-Norway. Highway construction included the design of up to 14 m thick road embankments, made possible by stabilization works using lime-cement and vertical drains. Airborne electromagnetic scanning was performed to optimize the field investigation program, which included a large number of total and rotary pressure soundings, CPTU, piezometers, and undisturbed sampling. Advanced laboratory testing was performed to characterize the engineering properties of the clay (i.e., strength, stiffness, and hydraulic properties). In this paper, the properties of the clay deposits were compared to reference data from multiple sites in Norway. The laboratory results indicated that sample disturbance is a key uncertainty, affecting the interpretation of both strength and stiffness parameters. The undrained shear strength ranged approximately from 20 to 120 kPa. The friction angle, interpreted from undrained triaxial tests, was approximately 30°–33°. The overconsolidation ratio ranged from 1 to 6, depending mainly on depth. A correlation with the least scatter for the stiffness parameters was found between the modulus in the overconsolidated range (M₀) and the preconsolidation stress (σ_p'). For samples of quality 1, the average ratio of M₀/σ_p' was 33. In addition, some results from large-scale testing of lime-cement stabilization and road embankments on soft ground are presented. For lime-cement-stabilized clay, the ratio of passive to active maximum shear strength was between 0.45 and 0.95, with an average of 0.67. This ratio is crucial in design. Settlement predictions from the design phase for road embankments on soft soil at Holan agreed with measured values during construction.
- site characterization,
- sensitive clay,
- highway construction,
- large-scale field tests
Citation: Anders Lindgård, Vidar Gjelsvik, Åse Marit Wist Amdal, Sølve Hov, Jean-Sébastien L'Heureux, Katharina Kahrs, Sigbjørn Rønning. Highway construction at Kvithammar-Åsen, mid-Norway: Geotechnical characterization of very sensitive clay deposits[J]. AIMS Geosciences, 2025, 11(4): 946-978. doi: 10.3934/geosci.2025041

Related Papers:

Abstract

The properties of vast, sensitive clay deposits have been investigated for the construction of the E6 Kvithammar-Åsen highway, north of Trondheim, in mid-Norway. Highway construction included the design of up to 14 m thick road embankments, made possible by stabilization works using lime-cement and vertical drains. Airborne electromagnetic scanning was performed to optimize the field investigation program, which included a large number of total and rotary pressure soundings, CPTU, piezometers, and undisturbed sampling. Advanced laboratory testing was performed to characterize the engineering properties of the clay (i.e., strength, stiffness, and hydraulic properties). In this paper, the properties of the clay deposits were compared to reference data from multiple sites in Norway. The laboratory results indicated that sample disturbance is a key uncertainty, affecting the interpretation of both strength and stiffness parameters. The undrained shear strength ranged approximately from 20 to 120 kPa. The friction angle, interpreted from undrained triaxial tests, was approximately 30°–33°. The overconsolidation ratio ranged from 1 to 6, depending mainly on depth. A correlation with the least scatter for the stiffness parameters was found between the modulus in the overconsolidated range (M₀) and the preconsolidation stress (σ_p'). For samples of quality 1, the average ratio of M₀/σ_p' was 33. In addition, some results from large-scale testing of lime-cement stabilization and road embankments on soft ground are presented. For lime-cement-stabilized clay, the ratio of passive to active maximum shear strength was between 0.45 and 0.95, with an average of 0.67. This ratio is crucial in design. Settlement predictions from the design phase for road embankments on soft soil at Holan agreed with measured values during construction.

References

[1]	Lacasse S (2013) 8th Terzaghi Oration Protecting society from landslides–the role of the geotechnical engineer, Proceedings of the 18th international conference on soil mechanics and geotechnical engineering, Paris, 15–34.
[2]	Gregersen O (1981) The quick clay landslide in Rissa, Norway, Norwegian Geotechnical Institute Publication, 135: 1–6.
[3]	Solberg IL, Long M, Baranwal VC, et al. (2016) Geophysical and geotechnical studies of geology and sediment properties at a quick-clay landslide site at Esp, Trondheim, Norway. Eng Geol 208: 214–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2016.04.031 doi: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2016.04.031
[4]	Norwegian Geotechnical Institute, 20180628-12-R R1-GEOT-08 Tolkning av geotekniske parametere, Stjørdal, rev. 03. 2021.
[5]	Long M, Heureux J-S, Bache BKF, et al. (2019) Site characterisation and some examples from large scale testing at the Klett quick clay research site. AIMS Geosci 5: 344–389. https://doi.org/10.3934/geosci.2019.3.344 doi: 10.3934/geosci.2019.3.344
[6]	L'Heureux J-S, Lunne T (2020) Characterization and Engineering properties of Natural Soils used for Geotesting. AIMS Geosci 6: 35–53. https://doi.org/10.3934/geosci.2020004 doi: 10.3934/geosci.2020004
[7]	NGU, Løsmasser—Nasjonal løsmassedatabase, 2024. Available from: https://geo.ngu.no/kart/losmasse_mobil/.
[8]	Kartverket, Norgeskart, 2024. Available from: https://norgeskart.no/.
[9]	Christensen C, Skurdal G, Pfaffhuber A, et al. (2020) Airborne geoscanning and efficient geotechnical ground investigation workflows: A road-building case study from Central Norway, Helsinki, Finland, 25–27.
[10]	Norsk geoteknisk forening (NGF), Melding nr. 9 rev. 1 Veiledning for utførelse av totalsondering, 2018. Available from: https://ngf.no/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/NGF-Melding-9-Totalsondering-Rev-1-2018.pdf.
[11]	Norsk geoteknisk forening (NGF), Melding nr. 7 rev. 1 Veiledning for utførelse av dreietrykksondering, 1989. Available from: https://ngf.no/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/7_NGFMelding07.pdf.
[12]	Lunne T, Powell JJ, Robertson PK (2002) Cone penetration testing in geotechnical practice, CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781482295047
[13]	Norwegian Geotechnical Institute, 20180628-06-R R1-GEOT-02 Datarapport grunnundersøkelser Holvegen og E6 Stjørdal, rev. 5. 2024.
[14]	Norsk geoteknisk forening (NGF), Melding nr. 5 rev. 3 Veiledning for utførelse av trykksondering, 2010. Available from: https://ngf.no/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/5_NGF-Melding-5-CPTU-_revisjon-3.pdf.
[15]	Norsk geoteknisk forening (NGF), Melding nr. 6 rev. 2 Veiledning for måling av grunnvannsstand og poretrykk, 2017. Available from: https://ngf.no/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/NGF-melding-6-Poretrykksmaling-2017.pdf.
[16]	Norsk geoteknisk forening (NGF), Melding nr. 11 Veiledning for prøvetaking, 2013. Available from: https://ngf.no/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/NGF-Melding-11-Provetaking-2014.pdf.
[17]	Emdal A, Gylland A, Amundsen HA, et al. (2016) Mini-block sampler. Can Geotech J 53: 1235–1245. https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2015-0628 doi: 10.1139/cgj-2015-0628
[18]	Reite AJ, Misund A, Banks D, et al. (1994) Weichselian and Holocene geology of Sør-Trøndelag and adjacent parts of Nord-Trøndelag county, Central Norway.
[19]	L'Heureux JS, Lindgård A, Emdal A (2019) The Tiller-Flotten research site: Geotechnical characterization of a sensitive clay deposit. AIMS Geosci 5: 831–867. https://doi.org/10.3934/geosci.2019.4.831 doi: 10.3934/geosci.2019.4.831
[20]	Rosenqvist IT (1953) Considerations on the sensitivity of Norwegian quick-clays. Geotechnique 3: 195–200. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.1953.3.5.195 doi: 10.1680/geot.1953.3.5.195
[21]	Karlsrud K, Hernandez-Martinez FG (2013) Strength and deformation properties of Norwegian clays from laboratory tests on high-quality block samples. Can Geotech J 50: 1273–1293. https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2013-0298 doi: 10.1139/cgj-2013-0298
[22]	Moum J (1965) Falling drop used for grain‐size analysis of fine‐grained materials. Sedimentology 5: 343–347. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3091.1965.tb01566.x doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3091.1965.tb01566.x
[23]	Norsk geoteknisk forening (NGF), Melding nr. 2 rev. 2 Veiledning for symboler og definisjoner i geoteknikk, 2011. Available from: https://ngf.no/publikasjoner/melding-nr-2-veiledning-for-symboler-og-definisjoner-i-geoteknikk-1982/.
[24]	Standard Norge, NS-EN ISO 14688-2: 2018 Geotechnical investigation and testing—Identification and classification of soil - Part 2: Principles for a classification (ISO 14688-2: 2017), 2018. Available from: https://online.standard.no/nb/ns-en-iso-14688-2-2018.
[25]	Sandven R, Montafia A, Gylland AS, et al. (2015) NIFS Rapport nr. 126/2015. Detektering av kvikkleire—Sluttrapport, 2015. Available from: https://publikasjoner.nve.no/rapport/2015/rapport2015_126.pdf.
[26]	Leroueil S, Tavenas F, Samson L, et al. (1983) Preconsolidation pressure of Champlain clays. Part Ⅱ. Laboratory determination. Can Geotech J 20: 803–816. https://doi.org/10.1139/t83-084 doi: 10.1139/t83-084
[27]	Standard Norge, NS 8015: 1988 Geoteknisk prøving—Laboratoriemetoder—Bestemmelser av udrenert skjærstyrke ved konusprøving, 1988. Available from: https://online.standard.no/nb/ns-8015-1988.
[28]	Sandven R, Vik A, Rønning S, et al. (2012) NIFS Rapport nr. 46/2012. Detektering av kvikkleire fra ulike sonderingsmetoder. Available from: https://publikasjoner.nve.no/rapport/2012/rapport2012_46.pdf.
[29]	Norsk geoteknisk forening (NGF), Melding nr. 12 Veiledning for detektering av sprøbruddmateriale, 2019. Available from: https://ngf.no/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/NGF-melding-12-Veiledning-for-detektering-av-sprobruddmateriale.pdf.
[30]	Karlsrud K, Lunne T, Kort DA, et al. (2005) CPTU correlations for clays, AA BALKEMA PUBLISHERS, 693.
[31]	Paniagua P, D'Ignazio M, L'Heureux J-S, et al. (2019) CPTU correlations for Norwegian clays: an update. AIMS Geosci 5: 82–103. https://doi.org/10.3934/geosci.2019.2.82 doi: 10.3934/geosci.2019.2.82
[32]	Mayne PW (1986) CPT indexing of in situ OCR in clays. Use of In Situ Tests in Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, 780–793.
[33]	Lunne T, Berre T, Strandvik S (1997) Sample disturbance effects in soft low plastic Norwegian clay. Symposium on Recent Developments in Soil and Pavement Mechanics, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 81–102.
[34]	Berre T, Lunne T, L'Heureux J-S (2022) Quantification of sample disturbance for soft, lightly overconsolidated, sensitive clay samples. Can Geotech J 59: 300–303. https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2020-0551 doi: 10.1139/cgj-2020-0551
[35]	Ofstad CS, Lindgård A (2017) Field and Laboratory Investigations to Evaluate the Coefficient of Earth Pressure at Rest-NGTS Flotten Quick Clay Test Site, Master's thesis, NTNU.
[36]	L'Heureux J-S, Ozkul Z, Lacasse S, et al. (2017) A revised look at the coefficient of earth pressure at rest for Norwegian Clays. Norwegian Geotechnical Society (NGF), Oslo, Norway.
[37]	Ladd CC, Foott R (1974) New design procedure for stability of soft clays. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 100. https://doi.org/10.1061/AJGEB6.0000066 doi: 10.1061/AJGEB6.0000066
[38]	Thakur V, Oset F, Viklund M, et al. (2014) NIFS-rapport nr. 14/2014. En omforent anbefaling for bruk av anisotropifaktorer i prosjektering i norske leirer, NVE.
[39]	Lunne T, Andersen KH (2007) Soft Clay Shear Strength Parameters For Deepwater Geotechnical Design, Proceedings of the 6th International Offshore Site Investigation and Geotechnics Conference: Confronting New Challenges and Sharing Knowledge, London, UK.
[40]	Norsk geoteknisk forening (NGF), Recommendations for ground improvement with lime-cement columns, 2012. In Norwegian.
[41]	Hov S, Paniagua P, Karlsrud K (2024) A Study of the Anisotropy of Improved Clay Using the Nordic Dry Deep Mixing Method, Hanoi, In: Duc Long, P, Dung NT, Eds., Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Geotechnics for Sustainable Infrastructure Development, 395: 1113–1123. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-9722-0_73.
[42]	Devico, DeviGyro RG30 SLIMLINE, 2024. Available from: https://www.devico.com/product/devigyro/devigyro-rg30/.
[43]	Hov S, Berner MN, Rønning S, et al. (2024) Strength and Verticality of Nordic Dry Deep Mixing Columns—A Case Study in Norway, In: Duc Long P, Dung NT, Eds., Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Geotechnics for Sustainable Infrastructure Development, 395: 1051–1066. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-9722-0_69
[44]	Amdal ÅMW, Hov S (2023) E6 Kvithammar—Åsen: Embankment on clay in combination with vertical drains and preloading, Oslo, Norway.
[45]	Consoil Consoil Hydrostatic Profiler. Available from: https://hmagrp.com/consoil-hydrostatic-profiler/.
[46]	Nøst HA, Amdal ÅMW, Tsegaye AB, et al. (2025) Predicting settlements development under road embankment using Probabilistic models, Oslo, Norway, In press.

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2025 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)