Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
1.
Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 8
2.2
2.3
2.3.1
2.3.2
2.3.3
2.4
3.
1|Page
1.
Following gives the effect of OCR on the strength parameters of the cohesive soil and confining
pressure on the non cohesive soil.
In the present study, all soil samples were tested after being subjected to different initial
consolidation pressure. The initial consolidation pressures (0) applied to the soil sample were
50kPa, 200kPa and 400kPa. It was found that with increase of over consolidation ratio increases,
the maximum deviator Stress/c ratio (c=confining pressure), angle of internal friction and
cohesion value increases.
This effect is verified by two separate experiments. Experiments were carried on the normally
consolidated soil and Over consolidated soil.
Please note that for Normally consolidated soil OCR value is 1 and for over consolidated soil the
OCR >1.
2|Page
Figure 1.2 represents Triaxial Test results on normally consolidated and over consolidated soil.
fig 1.2 Failure envelope for (a) Normally consolidated and (b) over-consolidated clay from
consolidated drained triaxial test. (Das B.M., Advanced Soil Mechanics)
The value of c is obtained by drawing a common tangent to Mohrs circle which is Mohrcoulombs envelope. In figure 1.2(a), it is clear that in normally consolidated clay the cohesion is
zero. But when over consolidated clay as shown in figure 1.2(b) the failure envelope makes an
intercept with the vertical giving cohesion value. Thus as the OCR value increase, the increase in
the cohesion value is observed.
3|Page
The change in the angle of internal friction is verified in the following experimental observation.
Please refer figure1.3. If a soil is initially consolidated by an encompassing chamber pressure of
c=c, and allowed to swell under reduced chamber pressure of 3=3, the specimen will be
over-consolidated. The failure envelope obtained from the consolidated drained triaxial tests of
this type of specimen has two distinct branches. Portion ab of the envelope has flatter slope
with a cohesion intercept and portion bc represent the normally consolidated soil with zero
cohesion. Thus as the soil turns from over-consolidated to normally consolidated or the OCR
value decreases, the angle of internal friction of the soil is increasing.
Effect of OCR on the Elastic modulus of soil:
The following correlation gives relation between the soil elastic modulus and undrained shear
strength of soil:
Es = Kc.Cu
Kc = correlation factor (Figure 1.4)
Cu = undrained shear strength, tsf
4|Page
Fig. 1.5. Stress Ratio ~ Axial Strain and volumetric Strain ~ Axial strain relationship from h =
constant tests starting from isotropic Stress State (Sheared Air-dried; 0=0.125% per minute)
(Yasin, S.J.M and Tatsuoka, F., March16&17, 2006 Stress-Strain Behaviour of a Micacious
Sand in plane Strain condition, Geotechnical Symposium in Roma )
Figure 1.5 shows the effect of initial density and confining stress on the stress-strain behavior of
soil where h or h = minor principal stress or confining pressure = constant. The starting point
of each curve correspond to isotropic stress state of either (h)c = 100 KPa or (h)c = 400 KPa.
The specimens were air dried.
5|Page
The continuous lines represent the curve obtained for the test on dense sand and the dotted for
loose sand. Following are the observation:
1. Test J319C with dense initial state and low confining stress show sharp peak in axial
stress~axial strain relation and sample also starts dilating at peak stress level and still vol
is positive (i.e. the volume is lower than the initial volume).
2. On the other hand test J318C with dense initial state and high confining pressure showed
a more ductile behavior without any sign of dilation even at peak state that resemble the
volume change behavior of loose specimens.
Thus dense sand at high confining stress may behave like a loose sand at low confining stress.
Figure 1.6 verifies the observation.
Fig 1.6 Deviator Stress and Axial Strain confining Pressure of 50 kPa, 200 kPa and 400 kPa
Sivadass, T., Lee, C.Y. & Karim M.S.A, 2003, Behavior of a tropical residual soil, ISBN 90 5809 604
6|Page
Fig 1.7 Relation between the initial elastic modulus and confining pressure
(Jui-Pin Wang and Hoi I. Ling, Mohri, L., 16 & 17 March 2006, Stress Strain Behaviour Of
Compacted Sand Clay Mixture, Geotechnical Symposium in Roma)
Figure 1.7 shows that Elastic modulus of unsaturated specimen at higher confining pressure has
high elastic modulus. Generally the initial elastic modulus increased logarithmically with
increase of confining pressure.
7|Page
2.
2.1 Introduction
The modulus of elasticity or Young's modulus of a soil is an elastic soil is useful for a variety of
applications within geotechnical engineering including shallow foundations, deep foundations
and slope stability or retaining structures
Young's soil modulus, Es, may be estimated from empirical correlations, laboratory test results
on undisturbed specimens and results of field tests. Laboratory tests that may be used to
estimate the soil modulus are the triaxial unconsolidated undrained compression or the triaxial
consolidated undrained compression tests. Field tests include the plate load test, cone
penetration test, standard penetration test (SPT) and the pressuremeter test.
8|Page
Fig 2.1 Approximate correlation between CBR and long term Elastic modulus
(Design applications of raft foundation By J.A. Hemsley)
Figure 2.1 gives correlation between CBR and long term Elastic modulus. The short term
elastic modulus may be derived from the equation
Es (Long Term) = Es (Short Term) x
Where the value of is as found from the table below:
Soil Type
Gravel
Sand
Silt, Silty clay
Stiff clay
Soft clay
Factor
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.4
Alternatively the value of Subgrade modulus E value, in MPa, may be found using the
following convention formula:
E = 10.3 CBR
To find E based on modulus of Subgrade reaction, k, the equation is:
E = 26 k1.284
The above conversation is provided by the FAA.
9|Page
Fig 2.2 Correlation between short term youngs modulus, SPT value and plasticity index
(Design applications of raft foundation By J.A. Hemsley)
Figure 2.2 gives correlation between youngs modulus of soil, SPT values and plasticity index.
For sands and Gravel PI = 0.
NAVFAC DM-7.1, 1892 proposed following approximate correlation between soils youngs
modulus and SPT value for cohesionless soil (Geotechnical Engineers Portable Handbook,
Robert W. Day):
Cohesion less soil type
10 | P a g e
Es/N
(tsf 100
kPa)
4
7
10
12
Silt
Silty clay
Clay
Soil type
-loose
-medium dense
-dense
-highly plastic
Factor ()
5
8
10
12
15
20
11 | P a g e
Following correlation is suggested between SPT, CPT and elastic modulus (Table 5-6,
Foundation Analysis and Design, Bowels J.E. ) :
Following range of values are proposed for the Poissons ratio and Elastic modulus (Das, Braja
M., Principles of Foundation Engineering)
Soil
Loose Sand
Medium Sand
Dense Sand
Silty Sand
Soft Clay
Medium Clay
12 | P a g e
Poissons Ratio
0.20.4
0.250.4
0.30.45
0.20.4
0.150.25
0.20.5
Soil
Soft Clay
Hard Clay
Loose Sand
Dense Sand
Es (kPa)
17253450
586013,800
10,35027,600
34,40069,000
A separate and simplified relation between SPT, CPT and elastic modulus is
provided in Practical Foundation Engineering Handbook, McGraw-Hill:
SOIL
Sand
Clayey sand
Silty sand
Gravelly sand
Soft clay
SPT (KPa)
Es = 500(N + 15)
Es = 18,000 + 750N
Es = (15,000 to 22,000) lnN
Es = 320 (N+15)
Es = 300 (N+6)
Es = 1,200 (N+6)
Es = (6 to 8)qc
This relation holds good for both vertical and lateral soil elastic coefficient.
Cohesionless soil and normally consolidated clay are two cases where the stiffness is zero at the
surface and increases rather linearly with depth. The value is Es for some over-consolidated clay
and rocks are approximately constant throughout the depth (Section 3.2.3, Single pile and pile
group under lateral loading, Reese, L.C. and Van Impe W.F.). in Table 3.7 is suggested the
following range for Kpy (KE for lateral load) for laterally loaded piles in sand.
13 | P a g e
Relation between horizontal soil elastic Modulus and soil Youngs Modulus (as per Section
3.2.4.1, Single pile and pile group under lateral loading, Reese, L.C. and Van Impe W.F.) is
given below:
Where,
Epy
Es
Ip
:
:
:
:
The value of can be approximated to 1.0 on the conservative side. Hence, Epy Es.
Hence same relation as mentioned above in table 3.7 can be assumed for soil elastic modulus as
well. Thus Kpy in the above table can be assumed to be equal to Ks on the conservative side.
The weighted average Es of the soil can be obtained using formula:
1 1 + 2 2 + 3 3 + +
( ) =
Where,
E1, E2, E3, E4.. En are the Elastic modulus of different Layer of soil.
H1, H2, H3, H4.. Hn are the thickness of each Layer of soil.
H is the total thickness of the soil.
14 | P a g e
3.
REFERENCES
Bowels J.E. , Foundation Analysis and Design.
Das B.M., Advanced Soil Mechanics.
Das, Braja M., Principles of Foundation Engineering.
Day, R. W., Geotechnical Engineers Portable Handbook.
eHow . com (http://www.ehow.com/list_7590255_elastic-modulus-soils.html)
Geotechnical Info . com (http://www.geotechnicalinfo.com/youngs_modulus.html)
Herv Di Benedetto, Deformation characteristics of Geomaterials.
Hoe I. Ling, Luigi Callisto, Dov Leshchinsky, Junichi Koseki, Soil stress-strain
behavior: measurement, modeling and analysis.
9. J.A. Hemsley, Design applications of raft foundation.
10. Jui-Pin Wang and Hoi I. Ling, Mohri, L., 16 & 17 March 2006, Stress Strain Behaviour
Of Compacted Sand Clay Mixture, Geotechnical Symposium in Roma
11. NAVFAC DM-7.1, 1892.
12. Paul W. Mayne, Harry G. Poulos (June, 1999), Approximate displacement influence
factors for elastic shallow foundations, Journal Of Geotechnical And Geoenvironmental
Engineering, 453-460.
13. Practical Foundation Engineering Handbook, McGraw-Hill.
14. Robert W. Day , Geotechnical Engineers Portable Handbook.
15. Reese, L.C. and Van Impe W.F., Single pile and pile group under lateral loading.
16. R.K. Rowe, Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental engineering handbook.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
17. Sivadass, T., Lee, C.Y. & Karim M.S.A, 2003, Behavior of a tropical residual soil, ISBN 90
5809 604.
18. Yasin, S.J.M and Tatsuoka, F., March16&17, 2006 Stress-Strain Behaviour of a
Micacious Sand in plane Strain condition, Geotechnical Symposium in Roma
15 | P a g e