STRESS-STRAIN BEHAVIOUR OF COMPACTED RESIDUAL

SOIL IN DIRECT SHEAR TEST

Mohd. Raihan Taha1, Syed Abdul Mofiz2 and Md.Kamal Hossain3

ABSTRACT

This paper reports the shear strength and deformation characteristics of compacted residual granite soil.
Nine series of tests were conducted using computer control direct shear box apparatus with normal stress
level ranging between 0.05 to 0.4 MPa. The influence of moisture content on the shear strength properties
is specifically discussed. A relationship between the angle of internal friction and moisture content for
residual soil is also proposed. Test results are then used to calculate the non-linear (hyperbolic) model
constants and analyse the stress-strain response of the compacted residual soil under direct shear loading.
Comparison of numerical predictions and results of direct shear tests are made for verification of the model
parameters. It is observed that the predicted stress-strain behaviour using model constants showed fairly
reasonable agreement compare to that of the laboratory test results.

INTRODUCTION

In tropical or semi-tropical area compacted residual soil has been widely used as fill material for
different geotechnical structures such as road pavements, embankments, retaining structures, land
reclamation and landfills. The assessment of the properties and prediction of the behaviour of such fills
have often been based on limited information. In spite of various semi-empirical test methods developed to
correlate engineering experience, proper design and construction uncertainty still remains. The variation of
strength parameters and compressibility of residual soils are mainly caused by differences in moisture
contents, which are most likely to occur in such soils. Because of the seasonal variations in rainfall, the
degree of saturation changes throughout the year. This results in seasonal variation in strength, which have
considerable influence on the geotechnical structures. Still, the failure mechanism, effect of moisture on
shear strength, and dilation-contraction behaviour of tropical soil composites are not yet well understood
due to limited studies. This paper describes the experimental results of nine series of direct shear test on
compacted granite residual soil. The effect of moisture contents on the cohesion intercept, angle of internal
friction and volume change properties are specifically discussed. The test results are then used to evaluate
the non-linear elastic model parameters. Finally, these model constants are used to evaluate the mechanical
stress-strain characteristics of the residual soil in direct shear test. Comparisons between model prediction
and laboratory test results are also discussed.

PROPERTIES OF SOIL

The soil used in this study was obtained from a granite soil formation. The soil is reddish in colour. It is
classified as CH in Unified Soil Classification (USC) system with liquid limit LL= 73%, plastic limit
PL=39% and particle specific gravity Gs=2.63. It contains 64 % silt and clay, 36% sand and no gravel. The
maximum dry density, γd = 14.42 kN/m3 and optimum moisture content, wopt=24.6% were found from the
standard compaction test.

1
Associate Professor, Department of Civil & Structural Engineering, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, UKM Bangi
43600, Selangor Malaysia.
2
Research Assistant, Department of Civil & Structural Engineering, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, UKM Bangi
43600, Selangor Malaysia.
3
Research Assistant, Department of Civil & Structural Engineering, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, UKM Bangi
43600, Selangor Malaysia
SAMPLE PREPARATION

The soil was first dried under laboratory air dry conditions, then ground and passed through 2 mm sieve.
The dry powder was carefully wetted with a spray gun to the standard optimum moisture content. The
moist soil was then stored in sealed plastic bags in moist room for about a week before use. The moist
residual soil was then compacted in the shear box mould through machine compaction procedure to the
desired height, moisture content and unit weight.

TEST PROGRAM

The experimental program consists of nine series of direct shear test using a 100-mm x 100-mm standard
shear box. The soil specimens were prepared at moisture contents between 18 to 34 percent. In this study
four tests were conducted with moisture content on the dry side of the optimum moisture content and other
five tests on the wet side. Each series of tests were carried out at normal pressure varying between 0.05 -
0.40 MPa. During shearing, the machine strain rate was set at 0.10 mm/min. The vertical displacements,
shear displacements and shear force were monitored using linear variable differential transducers (LVDT)
and proving ring with LVDTs. A computer control data acquisition system was used to record the shear
force, vertical and shear displacements.

HYPERBOLIC MODEL

In this study, the non-linear elastic (hyperbolic) model (Duncan and Chang 1970; Clough and Duncan
1971) has been used to simulate shear stress and shear deformation behaviour of the granite residual soil.
The frictional resistance and relative shear displacement relationship at any normal pressure is expressed as

∆hs
τ = (1)
1 ∆h
+ s
E si τ ult

where τ is the frictional shear resistance, ∆hs is the horizontal shear displacement, Esi is the initial shear
tangent stiffness, and τult is the asymptotic value of shear at infinite displacement of the hyperbolic curve.
The initial tangent shear stiffness is related to the normal pressure and can be determined as

n
σ 
E si = kγ w  n  (2)
 Pa 

where k is the shear stiffness number, γw is the unit weight of water, n is the shear stiffness exponent
number, and Pa is the atmospheric pressure. The different constants in above equation are obtained by
conducting direct shear tests at varying normal stress and following the procedures of Duncan et al. (1980).
The values of k and n are determined by plotting the experimental data of Eis/γw vs σn/Pa on a log-log scale.

Differentiating shear strength equation with respect to ∆hs and using the Mohr-Coulomb strength
equation, the tangent shear stiffness can be calculated as
Rfτ
2
dτ  
E ts = = 1 −  E is (3)
d∆ hs  c + σ n tan δ 

This relationship can be used to calculate the value tangent shear modulus for any normal stress condition if
the values of the parameters k, n, c, φ, and Rf are known.
The value of stress ratio, Rf, can be written by the following equation
 τf
Rf = (4)
τ ult
where τf is the shear stress at failure, and τult is the ultimate shear stress. These parameters should be
determined from the shear stress measured during the travelling shear displacement of the shear box in a
direct shear test. The ultimate shear stress is the asymptotic value of the shear stress and is calculated using
the shear stress, τ, and horizontal shear displacement, ∆hs, at 70 and 95 percent of τf. It can be expressed by
the following equation

∆hs 95 − ∆hs 70
τ ult = (5)
∆hs95 ∆hs 70
−
τ 95 τ 70

Equations 4 and 5 provide a mean for estimating Rf from direct shear test results instead of assuming a
value of 0.85 as suggested by Clough and Duncan (1969). This procedure is similar to that outlined by
Duncan et al. (1980) for determining Rf from triaxial tests except the shear displacement and shear stress are
used instead of axial strain and deviator stress. Initially, efforts were made to normalise the horizontal
displacement using the length of the direct shear specimen. This might have provided a better
correspondence between a triaxial stress-strain curve and the shear stress-displacement curve. Hence, the
direct shear test results provide a value of Rf that is higher than the value of 0.85 proposed by Clough and
Duncan (1969). Therefore, it is recommended that Rf be determined directly from direct shear test results.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The shear stress and shear displacement curves for two representative series of direct shear test, one on
the dry side and the other on the wet side, are shown in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2, respectively. The results indicate
that the shear displacement corresponding to maximum stress increases with normal interface pressure. In
terms of vertical strain, the soil in the dry side exhibits a dilation behaviour for the small normal stress and
gradually decreasing dilation properties for higher normal stress (Fig. 1). On the wet side, contraction
behaviour is more pronounced (Fig. 2). This contraction property may be due to the increasing of moisture
content and vertical settlement, which developed after the application of normal stress on the soil
specimens. It is also observed from the figures that the compacted soil has a strain softening behaviour on
the dry side and strain hardening on the wet side. The shear strength parameters in terms of cohesion
intercept and angle of internal friction were determined by using best-fit straight-line failure envelope. The
failure envelopes with different moisture contents is shown in Fig. 3. The results show that the shear
strength parameters of the residual soil gradually decreases with increasing moisture content. Fig. 4 shows
the cohesion intercept versus moisture content and it indicates on the dry side the cohesion intercept
gradually increases up to the optimum moisture content, and then gradually decreases on the wet side. This
behaviour is similar to the standard compaction curve. The angle of internal friction versus moisture content
(Fig. 5) shows that the angle of internal friction decreases with the increases of moisture contents. This may
due to the fact that the soil particle looses its bonding upon increase in moisture content. During shearing
the soil particles becomes more and more slippery and hence the angle of internal friction reduces. A
proposed relationship between angle of internal friction and the moisture content variation is such that:

φ =A(w)b (6)

where φ is the angle of internal friction, w is the moisture content in percent, constants A = 690;
and b = -0.9933.
 400 1.5
σn = 0.4 MPa Normal Stress
350
1.2
σn = 0.35 MPa 0.05 MPa 0.10 MPa
300 0.15 MPa 0.20 MPa
Shear stress (kPa)

σn = 0.3 MPa 0.9 0.25 MPa 0.30 MPa

Dilation (mm)
250 σn = 0.25 MPa 0.35 MPa 0.40 MPa
σn = 0.2 MPa
200 0.6
σn = 0.15 MPa
150 σn = 0.1 MPa
0.3
100 σn = 0.05 MPa
w = 26 % 0.0
50
0 -0.3
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Shear displacement (mm) Shear displacement (mm)

Figure 1: Shear stress vs shear displacement and dilation vs shear displacement of the compacted
residual soil (w = 26% ).

200 1.5
σn = 0.40 MPa
σn = 0.35 MPa 1.2 0.05 Mpa 0.10 Mpa
150 σn = 0.30 MPa 0.15 Mpa 0.20 Mpa
Shear stress (kPa)

0.9 0.25 Mpa 0.30 Mpa

σn = 0.25 MPa
Dilation (mm)

0.35 Mpa 0.40 Mpa

σn = 0.20 MPa 0.6
100
σn = 0.15 MPa 0.3
σn = 0.10 MPa
σn = 0.05 MPa 0.0
50
-0.3
w = 34 %
0 -0.6
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Shear displacement (mm) Shear displacement (mm)

Figure 2: Shear stress vs shear displacement and dilation vs shear displacement of the compacted
residual soil (w = 34% ).

400 150
w = 24 %
w = 26 % Dry Side Wet Side
Cohesion intercept (kPa)

125
300 w = 28 %
Shear Stress (kPa)

w = 30 % 100
200 w = 32 %

w = 34 % 75

100
50

0 25
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36
Normal Stress (kPa) Moisture content, w ( %)
Figure 3:Best fit failure envelope of residual soil Figure 4: Variation of cohesion intercept
with different moisture content. with different moisture content
 50 30
w = 18 %
45 25
w = 22 %
φ = A (w)
b
40 20

o
o

Dilation angle, δ
Friction angle φ

A = 690 w = 26 %
35 15
b = -0.9933
30 10
w = 30 %
25 5
w = 34 %
20 0

15 -5
16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
Moisture content w (%) Normal stress, σn (kPa)

Figure 5: Relationship between angle of Figure 6: Dilation characteristics of residual soil

internal friction with different moisture in direct shear test under different normal stress.

Test results also show that the dilation angle decreases with the increase in normal stress (Fig.6). From this
figure it can also be observed that the dilation characteristics are more pronounced for samples with less
moisture contents. The non-linear elastic model parameters for the compacted residual soil were then
determined from these tests. The effective stress hyperbolic and Mohr-Coulomb strength parameters using
the procedure outlined by Duncan et al. (1980) are shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Summary of the non-linear model constants for direct shear test.

Parameters Value
Normal stress range σn 0.05 to 0.40 MPa
Shear stiffness number k 17067
Shear exponent number n 0.96
Cohesion intercept c 0.1006 MPa
Friction angle parameter φ 29.03 o
Failure ratio Rf 0.98

Analysis was made to verify the model parameters by comparing numerical predictions with the
experimental test results for the compacted soil on the dry side of optimum. The measured and predicted
stress-displacement curve is shown in Fig.7. In general, the predicted results indicated fairly good
agreement with the experimental results. However, it is obvious that it could not predict overconsolidation
behaviour and it could only handle strain-hardening materials as assumed in the non-linear model.
Nevertheless, the non-linear elastic model using the model parameters obtained from the direct shear test is
sufficiently accurate for modelling and analysis of different types of horizontal shear governing
geotechnical structures under expected working loads.
 400

σn = 0.40 M P a
350
σn = 0.35 M P a
300
σn = 0.30 M P a
S he a r s tre ss (kP a )

250 σn = 0.25 M P a
σn = 0.20 M P a
200 σn = 0.15 M P a
σn = 0.10 M P a
150
σn = 0.05 M P a
100
M e a s ure d V a lue
50 P re dic te d V a lue

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
S he a r displa c e m e nt (m m )

Figure 7: Measured and predicted response of shear stress-shear displacement of residual soil

CONCLUSIONS

Nine series of direct shear tests were carried out and a large data base was developed to evaluate the
shear strength and deformation of compacted residual soil. The test results showed that the stress-
deformation characteristic changes in a significant manner with changes in moisture content. The soil
specimen exhibit strain softening behaviour when the moisture content in the specimens are on the dry side
and strain hardening on the wet side of optimum. During shearing the specimens having moisture content on
the dry side also exhibit dilatant behaviour but degree of dilatantcy being dependent on the interface normal
stress. The cohesion intercept behaves like the compaction curve in which its increases up to the optimum
moisture content and decreases beyond that. The angle of internal friction however continuously decreases
with the increases in moisture content. A simple exponential relationship between the angle of internal
friction and the moisture content was proposed. Numerical analysis using non-linear model indicates fairly
good agreement with the laboratory results.

REFERENCES
Clough, G. W. and Duncan, J. M. (1969). “Finite element analysis of Port Allen and old river
locks”. Report No.TE 69-3, University California, Berkeley, September, pp. 265.
Clough, G. W. and Duncan, J. M. (1971). “Finite element analysis of retaining wall behaviour”.
Journal of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering Division, ASCE, vol. 97, No SM12,
pp. 1657-1673.
Duncan, J.M., and Chang, C.Y. (1970). “Non-linear analysis of stress and strain in soils”.
Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, vol. 96, No 5, pp. 1629-1653.
Duncan, J.M., Byrne, P., Wong, K.S., and Mabry, P. ( 1980). “Strength, stress-strain and bulk
modulus parameters for finite element analysis of stresses and movements in soil”.
Geotechnical Engineering Research Report: UCB/GT/80-01, Department of Civil
Engineering, University of California, Berkeley.