Soil Science and Plant Nutrition

ISSN: 0038-0768 (Print) 1747-0765 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tssp20

Relationship between soil cohesion and shear

strength

Hajime Yokoi

To cite this article: Hajime Yokoi (1968) Relationship between soil cohesion and shear strength,
Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 14:3, 89-93, DOI: 10.1080/00380768.1968.10432750

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00380768.1968.10432750

Published online: 29 Mar 2012.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 48553

View related articles

Citing articles: 2 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tssp20
 (Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, Vol. 14, No.3, 1968)
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SOIL COHESION
AND SHEAR STRENGTH
Hajime
National lnsfltute of Agricultural Sciences, Tokyo, Japan
RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 1967
Introduction
Cohesion of soil is an important factor of
soil consistency. The word cohesion, however,
has acquired two connotations. In soil physics,
BA VER (2), for example, defines it as "the
cohesive force that takes place between adja-
cent particles". On the other hand, in soil
mechanics, cohesion means "the shear strength
when the compressive stresses are equal to
zero". It is apparent that these two meanings
differ. For convenience in this report "soil
cohesion" refers to the soil physics definition,
while "shear cohesion" refers to that of soil
mechanics.
Theoretical concepts of soil cohesion in
an ideal soil composed of uniform spherical
particles have been developed by HAINES (4),
FISHER (3), YAMANAKA (10), and others on
the basis of surface-tension force due to water
films between particles. Furthermore, ATTER-
BERG (1), NICHOLS (6), YAMANAKA (10),
and others have carried out experimental stud-
ies on soil cohesion. However, the relationship
between soil cohesion and shear cohesion was
not investigated. In the meeting report of the
Society of Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering, YAMANAKA and others (11)
emphasized the urgent need of investigating
the effect of soil internal stress on shear
strength. Furthermore, TSCHEBOT ARIOFF (9)
considered soil cohesion as true cohesion. The
author investigated field· soil resistance to
tractor tillage and found a positive relationship
between soil cohesion and shear cohesion.
Theoretical Considerations
It is generally assumed that in cohesive soils
the relationship between compressive stress (p)
and the corresponding shear strength (s) can
be represented by an empirical equation, which
89
YOKOI
is known as COULOMB's equation:
s=c+p tan cp (1)
where c: shear cohesion as a constant
cp: angle of shear resistance (internal fric-
tion)
The symbol c represents shear cohesion as
a constant, which is equal to the shear strength
when the compressive stress is equal to zero.
In the equation 0), if s=O, then C=-Po tan cp
or Po = -c/tan cp, where Po is equivalent to the
soil internal stress at the shear surface. Such
a relation is illustrated in Figure 1.
..c.
~
c
~I
; Shear strength line
1(/)
Shear
cohesion
T
(C
L 0 Compressive stress (P)
Initial stress
(Po)
Fig. 1. Shear strength factors.
It is thought that there is no force which is
able to act as internal stress without soil co-
hesion. Such an internal stress corresponding
to OL in Figure 1 was described as initial stress
by JUMJKI(5). Consequentry, it is reasonable to
assume that soil cohesion is equal to initial
stress calculated from shear test under the same
soil condition. The assumption may be con-
firmed by two kinds of experiments. First. since
sieved soil does not develop soil cohesion under
saturated condition according to the soil co-
hesion theory based on surface-tension force,
shear strength may be almost the same as that
of cohesionless soil. Therefore, the correspond-
 H. YOKOI

ing equation of the shear strength under after the experiments.

saturated condition may be expressed in the
following formula:
s=p tan tp
Such a problem was described by TERZAGHI
(8) as an interesting phenomenon associated
with change of water content and with degree
of permeability. In the second place, under
unsaturated condition, soil cohesion directly
measured by the metal-wedge method should
have a firm relation to initial stress calculated
from the shear test. However, as will be dis-
cussed later, it is very difficult to measure the
absolute value of soil cohesion by the metal-
wedge method.
Soil cohesion: The force necessary to cause a
metal-wedge to penetrate the soil mass was de-
termnied with the apparatus devised by YAMANAKA
(10). The trimming case was a sectional metal box
with inside dimensions of 6x 2x 1 ems. The area of
the surface of rupture was about 2 cm 2 and was
measured after each experiment. The moisture con-
tents of the tested samples were also determined
after the experiments.
Pre-treatment of soil sample: The air-dried soils
were wetted near to the moisture content of the
upper plastic limit and were allowed to stand for
about a day and then after sufficient paddling the
soil were taken in the trimming cases for eacb
experiment.

Results and Discussion

Materials and Methods
Soil Samples Saturated condition

1. Kibushi clay is porcelain clay taken from The trimmed soil was wetted sufficiently by
Tajimi city, in Gifu Prefecture. This sample is upward capillary movement of water and the
expected to have rather strong soil cohesion. shear strength was measured. The shear
2. Kashima soil is Ando soil (volcanic ash soil) strengths and the soil moisture contents are
from Ibaragi Prefecture. This sample is expected shown in Table 2 and Figure 2. As a matter of
to have weak soil cohesion, according to YAMANAKA's
studies (10).
Some soil properties are shown in Table 1. The
soil samples were previously air-dried and passed 4
through a 2 mm sieve.
3
~
Table I. Properties of samples
~ 2
~
Samples Mechanical composition Soil Organic VI

Coarse Fine Silt Clay

texture carbon o -::;::.:
sand sand 0 1 2 3 4 5
0'
,0

p (kg/em')
Kibushi 0.2 7.S 27.6 64.4 HC 0.4
clay Fig. 2. Shear strength lines under saturated
condition.
Kashi· 6.0 31. 4 44.3 IS.3 CL 7.0
rna soil
Table 2. Shear strength under saturated
condition
Experimental methods
Kibushi clay Kashima soil
Compressive
Shear strength: The apparatus used was a one- stress Shear Moisture Shear Moisture
dimentional shear apparatus (direct shear apparatus). kg/em 2 strength content strength content
The trimming case was a cylindrical metal, 5 cm in -~------~
kg/ern' % kg/ern' ~t"

inside diameter, and 1. 2 cm in height. The area of 1 0.59 33.5 0.64 71. 3
shear surface was about 20 cm'. The experimental 2 1.11 32.7 1. 23 68.0
procedure was carried out with reference to Methods 3 l.64 31. 5 l. 75 67.2
of Soil Analysis (7). The compressive stresses ap- 2.14 29.6 2.31 65.4
4
plied were from 1 Kg/cm' to 5 Kg, cm'. The mois-
5 2.65 29.1 2.74 64.2
ture contents of the tested samples were determined

90
 SOIL COHESION AND SHEAR STRENGTH

Table 3. Shear strength of Kibushi clay under unsaturated condition

----- -- -- - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - -
Compressive Shear Moisture Shear Moisture Shear Moisture
stress strength content strength content strength content
kg/em' kg/em' % kg/em' ~'O kg/em' %
----- -------
2.01 30.0 1. 70 25.7 3.68 19.6
2 2. 75 29.8 2.26 25.2 4.21 20.6
3 1. 69 29.4 2.82 24.8 4.81 20.3
4 2.05 29.0 3.29 25.0 5.43 19.9
5 2.52 28.8 3.86 25.5 6.21 20.1

course, soil moisture content decreased with the Table 4. Shear strength of Kashima soil
increase of compressive stress, and bulk density under unsaturated condition
of the sheared soils increased with the increase
Compressive Shear Moisture Shear Moisture
of compressive stress, because excess water stress strength content strength content
was drained through porous plate. As shown kg/cm' kg/em' % kg/cm' %
in Figure 2, the shear strength lines obtained 1 O. 75 62.6 0.86 37.5
are almost straight for both soils, and it is 2 1. 25 59.6 1. 62 35.6
found that the shear strength lines pass through 3 1. 73 61.1 2.39 37.1
very near the point of origin on the abscissa. 4 2.40 58.6 2.99 38.8
This fact shows that initial stresses calculated 5 2.79 58.5 3.51 39.6
from shear experiments under saturated condi-
tion are almost equal to zero, and does support
the assumption mentioned above; that is, shear
5 /
~
strength of sieved soil under saturated condi-
tion is almost the same as that of cohesion less

/~
soil.
4
'"' /~
In connection with this problem, it was found e 3 l' .'

that many soils except for very coarse soils u

"--
bI)
~:. : v.::(
gave almost the same value of shear strength C- 2 0/ ::.,..-./v
under saturated condition; the average shear UI

strength obtained under the stress of 1 kg/cm 2

was 0.627 kg/cm 2 and the coefficient of varia- 0
tion was about 7 % (2). Although shear strength 0 234 5
was expected to be affected by soil properties p (kg/em')
such as clay mineral composition, humus con-
Fig. 3. Shear strength lines of Kibushi clay
tent, etc., even under saturated condition, the under unsaturated condition.
resultes showed no apparent difference among
soils. For this reason, it is assumed that shear
strength which is regarded as frictional resist-
4
ance, is affected mainly by water films exist-
ing between adjacent particles and there is no 3
apparent difference in frictional resistance owing
to water conditions of saturated soils that con- 2
tain considerable amount of colloidal materials
such as clay, humus, etc.. Based on these
views, further investigations are now carried
ouL 00 2 3 4 5
p (kg/cm')
Unsaturated condition Fig. 4. Shear strength lines of Kashima soil
Trimmed soil was dried slowly in a glass under unsaturated condition.
91
 H. YOKOI

Table 5. Soil cohesion strength. From those results, the theoretical

assumption mentioned above seems to be con-
Kibushi clay Kashima soil
-- -----~
firmed qualitatively.
Moisture Soil Moisture Soil The shear cohesion and initial stress calcu-
content cohesion content cohesion lated from the results of the shear experiments
00 kgcm2 0'
,0 kg/cm 2
- ---------------- are shown in Table 6. In the case of Kashima
0.0 6.5 0.0
2.6 .t.8 8.3 Table 6. Comparison between soil cohesion
5.3 4.3 25.0 0.2 and shear constant
17.5 3.8 38.5 0.2
19.9 2.6 48.7 0.4 Sample Soil
Exp. No cohesion Shear Initial
22.3 1.4 60.4 0.4 soil cohesion stress
25.1 l.1 67.0 0.5
2 0.6 1.2 1.3
27.4 0.7 69.6 0.2 Kibushi
clay 3 1.1 1.1 2.0
30.4 0.6
4 2.6 3.1 5.3
Soil cohesion was calculated by the following
formula.
c=W where W: measured weight soil, both soil cohesion and shear cohesion are
A A: surface area. so weak that it is impossible to compare them
exactly. As a matter of course, shear strength
desiccator without any desiccant to prevent the lines S-2 and S-3 pass through very near the
formation of cracks owing to rapid drying. point of origin owing to weak soil cohesion as
Furthermore, by this treatment, the author in the case of saturated soils. In the case of
minimized the error due to the variation of Kibushi clay, it is found that soil cohesion is
moisture content of the samples tested at the closely related to initial stress; however, the
same time. The results obtained from the shear soil cohesion values were about half of the
experiments are shown in Tables 3 and 4, and initial stresses. For this reason, it was presum-
Figures 3 and 4 respectively, and those from ed that the angle of extreme edge affected.
soil cohesion experiments are shown in Table the experimental results of soil cohesion, and
5. As shown in Figures 3 and 4, the shear the following tests were carried out.
strength lines are almost straight with the Although the metal-Wedge method is based
exception of line C-2. Line C-2 representing upon the dynamics of the wedge, the angle of
slightly unsaturated Kibushi clay before the extreme edge is very important for experimental
experiment, seems to be composed of two determination and one can not determine ex-
straight lines. The part of line C-2 to the right actly the effective angle of extreme edge. The
under compressive stresses more than 3 kg/cm 2 effective angle of extreme edge may not be 80
is very similar to the line obtained under sharp as the angle of the whole wedge body
saturated condition. It is understood for this but rather blunt, and perhaps, the force nec-
reason, from the results of moisture contents essary to cause the metal-wedge to penetrate
shown in Table 3, that an application of strong the soil mass could not be equal to the force
compression brought the soil sample to saturated calculated from using the angle of the whole
condition. wedge body. The necessary force is expressed
Simply speaking, both soil cohesion and shear in the following formula on the basis of the
strength of Kibushi clay are stronger than those dynamics of the wedge in general:
of Kashima soil. In other words, it is highly W
probable, as previously suggested, that Kibushi c= 2A tan fJ/2
clay which has strong soil cohesion under dried where c: soil cohesion
condition has strong shear strength, and that W: measured weight
Kashima soil which has only weak soil cohesion A: surface area
even under dried condition, owing to the prop- fJ: angle of wedge
erty of volcanic ash soil, has rather weak shear The results obtained from the experiments
92
 SOIL COHESION AND SHEAR STRENGTH
Table 7. Comparison of soil cohesion in
relation to angle of wedge
Soil cohesion
Soil
moisture
content 13° wedge 30° wedge 60° wedge
°0 kg/cm 2 kg/cm 2 kg/cm 2
5.5 4.2 4.4 6.1
20.4 1.8 1.9 2.8
30.8 0.5 0.6 0.9
for reference; tan 13°/2=0.114
tan 30°/2=0.268 tan 60°/2=0.577.
of soil cohesion by the use of three kinds of
wedges are shown in Table 7. The force deter-
mined by the use of 13° wedge is theoretically
expected to be two times larger than that meas-
ured by the use of 30° wedge. As shown in
Table 7, however, the differences between the
forces measured by the use of 13° wedge and
those of 30° wedge are very small, but the
forces measured by the use of 60° wedge are
much larger. From these results and other
results described above, it is thought that the
effective angle of extreme edge of 13° wedge,
which has been used up to the present time,
is larger than 13°, and that the corresponding
tan 0/2 may be nearly equal to 0.25, at least
for this test. However, it is necessary to note
that the use of a blunt wedge is not always
profitable for the measurement of soil cohesion
because the adhesion of soil to the wedge and
the compression by a blunt wedge affect the
measurement of soil cohesion. For the present,
therefore, it is experimentally feasible that
soil cohesion measured by 13° metal-wedge
could be calculated by the following formula:
KW
c=--p;
where K is constant owing to the effective
angle of the used wedge. From these results,
the soil cohesion values determined by the
metal-wedge method can not be compared ex-
actly with the initial stresses. However, it is
possible to assume that soil cohesion acts as
initial stress equivalent to compressive stress.
For further determinations, detailed studies
using many kinds of artifical and natural soils
are being carried out.
Summary
The definition of cohesion used in soil physics
93
has not been the same as that in soil mechanics,
and it is assumed that there is a firm relation-
ship between soil cohesion and shear cohesion;
that is, soil cohesion is equivalent to initial
stress which acts as a compressive stress to
the corresponding shear cohesion.
From the experimental results, it is found
that shear lines under saturated condition pass
through very near the point of origin, because
sieved soils under saturated condition have lit-
tle soil cohesion, and that soil which has
strong soil cohesion has strong shear strength.
Although the absolute value of soil cohesion
can not be measured owing to the effective
angle of extreme edge, soil cohesion measured
by the metal-wedge method is closely related
to initial stress. Consequently, it is probable
that soil cohesion acts as a compressive stress
to the corresponding shear cohesion.
Acknowledgment
The auther is indebted to Dr. K. YAMANA-
KA for his theoretical suggestion, and thanks
Dr. S. MOTOMURA, Mr. Y. AKIYAMA, and
Mr. S. FUKUZAKURA of the Institute for the
help they rendered in this investigation.
References
1) ATTERBERG, A.: Intern. Mitt. Bodenk., 2, 149
(1912)
2) BAVER, L. D.: Soil Physics, 3rd ed., John
Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1959, p. 99.
3) FISHER, R. A.: j. Agr. Sci., 16, 492 (1926)
4) HAINES, W. B.: j. Agr. Sci., 15, 529 (1925)
5) JUMIKIS, A. R.: Soil Mechanics, D. Van Nos-
trand Company, Inc., New York, 1962, p. 477.
6) NICHOLS, M. L.: Agr. Eng., 12, 259 (1931)
7) SALLBERG, J. R.: Methods of Soil Analysis,
Part 1, Amer. Soc. of Agr., Inc., USA, 1965,
p. 431
8) TERZAGHI, K.: Theoretical Soil Mechanics,
John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1959, p. 7.
9) TSCHEBOTARIOFF, G. P.: Soil Mechanics,
Foundations, and Earth Structures, Me Graw-
Hill Book Company, Inc., New York, 1951,
p. 126
10) YAMANAKA, K.: Bul. Nat. Inst. Agr. Sci.
(Japan) Ser. B. No. 6 (1955)
11) YAMANAKA, K. et a!.: Soil Mechanics and
Foundation Engineering (japan), 12, 40 (1964)
12) YOKOI, H. and FUKUZAKURA, S.: Abstracts of
Annual Meeting, Soc. Sci. Soil and Manui'e,
japall., No. 13, 6 (1967)