SENSITIVE CLAY
by
PETER MICHAEL BYRNE
. E., University College Dublin, Ireland, 1959
In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s
in p a r t i a l
f u l f i l m e n t of
I agree t h a t the L i b r a r y
r e f e r e n c e and s t u d y .
s h a l l make i t
freely
the
British
available
I f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r
ex-
t e n s i v e c o p y i n g of t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be g r a n t e d
by the Head o f my Department o r by h i s
representatives.
is
finan-
g a i n s h a l l not be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . "
Department of
C/i//'/
tr/?j//2 itcrjrtty
The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia
Vancouver 8, Canada
Date
It
TsVvy
ii
ABSTRACT
Results of drained and
Contours of
water content from both drained and undrained tests are compared,
and
strength
s t r a i n rate.
The
or permea-
This enabled a l -
have more
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Purpose
1.2
Scope
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1
Review of Literature
2.2
Discussion
CHAPTER
CHAPTER
If
TESTING PROCEDURES
^.1
Description of s o i l tested
h.2
*f.3
k,h
Testing technique
5.1
Introduction
5.2
5.3
5.^
5.5
5.6
Rate of testing
5.7
5.8
Membrane leakage
5.9
Ram F r i c t i o n
6.1
Introduction
CHAPTER
CHAPTER
CHAPTER
iv
PAGE
CHAPTER
CHAPTER
6.2
Method 1
75
6.3
Method 2
76
TEST RESULTS
85
Introduction
85
7.1
CHAPTER
7.2
86
7.3
96
7<M-
Energy corrections
107
7.5
115
7.6
122
125
8.1
Conclusions
125
8.2
126
LIST OF SYMBOLS
128
LIST OF REFERENCES
131
APPENDIX I
135
APPENDIX II
lh2
LIST OF TABLES
PAGE
TABLE
31
TABLE II
3f
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
1.
Page
Rendulic Graphical Representation of Stresses
in T r i a x i a l Tests
2.
3.
10
Roscoe et a l . Y i e l d Surface
12
5.
16
6.
18
7.
Strength Parameters
26
8.
32
9.
33
10.
36
11.
37
12.
38
13.
Test Equipment
39
Ik-.
^8
15.
*+8
16.
17.
69
I l l u s t r a t i o n of Method f o r Determining
Rate During Shearing
79
18.
" 53
Drainage
19.
80
20.
82
21.
82
viii
Figure
38.
Page
Comparison of State Boundary Surfaces from
Drained and Undrained Tests on Haney Clay
106
39
109
^0.
Ill
hi.
112
h2.
113
^3.
117
119
1+5.
121
^6.
E f f e c t of S t r a i n Rate on the S t r e s s - s t r a i n
Relations f o r Drained Tests on Haney Clay
123
U-7.
12*f
12h
h9.
136
50.
138
51.
IkO
hh.
h8.
ix
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The
These
Grateful
kindly supplied
CHAPTER 1
PURPOSE AND SCOPE
1.1
Purpose
Rendulic (1936, 1937)
I960) have
The
undrained
remolded i s o t r o p i c a l l y consolidated
to determine
i n p a r t i c u l a r to compare s t r e s s - s t r a i n r e l a t i o n s .
are
It i s gen-
i n terms of ef-
The
testing program
the writer.
Hirst
is
The r e s i s t i n g
tests on the s o i l .
the
No attempt i s made
In
undrained t e s t s .
Settlement analyses are concerned with the magnitude of
deformations.
between stresses and water content or void r a t i o that i s independent of stress path, then the volumetric s t r a i n can be calculated
f o r any stress path which l i e s between a drained and undrained
path.
stress path.
A state boundary or y i e l d
Additional
Scope
A review of pertinent l i t e r a t u r e i s presented i n Chapter 2 .
i n Chapter 6.
triaxial
compression
Chapter 7.
presented i n Chapter
8.
CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1
Review of L i t e r a t u r e
Basic experimental relations
t i o n s , water
c o n t e n t , and pore-water
s o l i d a t e d c l a y s were f i r s t
He
performed
tests
between t r i a x i a l
pressure f o r normally
e s t a b l i s h e d by R e n d u l i c
on s a t u r a t e d remolded V i e n n a
stress condi-
compression
clay.
Test
con-
(1936, 1937).
and e x t e n s i o n
specimens were
pore-water
p r e s s u r e s were t h o s e e x i s t i n g
was made
i n the core.
No a l l o w a n c e
for
the effect
cal
s t r e s s , thus a t l a r g e s t r a i n s t h e v e r t i c a l s t r e s s e s a r e l i k e l y
to-be
o f t h e change i n c r o s s s e c t i o n a l a r e a on t h e v e r t i -
too high.
R e n d u l i c d e v i s e d a method f o r c o m p r e h e n s i v e
p l o t p o i n t s on t h i s
must f i r s t
of s t r e s s f o r any stage i n
on t h e s h a d e d p l a n e .
plane the r a d i a l e f f e c t i v e
be m u l t i p l i e d b y >/2.
stress
test
To
(O^ o r (3^)
makes e q u a l a n g l e s w i t h t h e t h r e e a x e s .
t y p i c a l c o n s o l i d a t e d d r a i n e d and u n d r a i n e d
plane.
Compression t e s t s
t e s t s below.
and
the line
Plotted
l o a d e d c l a y , t h e pore
also a line
tests
plotted
on t h i s
p l o t above t h e space d i a g o n a l , e x t e n s i o n
points represent d i f f e r e n t
j o i n i n g these
l o w e d i n a n y one t e s t .
F i g u r e l b shows
stages
i na test,
I n an undrained
fol-
t e s t on s a t u r a t e d n o r m a l l y
of constant water
content
i s some c u r v e a s i n d i c a t e d .
FAILURE ENVELOPE.
Fig. Ic
Fig. Id
In a d r a i n e d t e s t the r a d i a l e f f e c t i v e
and
stress i s constant,
Curves of constant
The
Contours of water
l i n e A D which makes an
angle
a l l lines
effective
stress
invariant
For l i n e a r l y e l a s t i c
( j { = o]_ + O 2 + G 3 )
m a t e r i a l and
i s con-
f o r s m a l l s t r a i n s , J-|_
path
decrease.
R e n d u l i c found f a i r l y
concluded
stress
It
from d r a i n e d and
undrained
of
t e s t s , and
he
independent
i n water c o n t e n t .
s i m i l a r , they w i l l p l o t on a s i n g l e curve
on the u n i f i e d
Rendulic
R e n d u l i c found
the
t h a t the
geometrically similar.
The
undrained
and
London
compression
o v e r c o n s o l i d a t e d samples.
A few
t e s t s were performed
and
loaded
keeping
the clay was i s o t r o p i c a l l y or a n i s o t r o p i c a l l y consolidated, provided normally loaded and overconsolidated samples were considered
separately.
to be f a i l u r e and he found that the f a i l u r e envelope was independent of the stress path.
Thus from undrained tests alone, the water content and deviator
stress at f a i l u r e f o r a drained test starting from a water content
of 2 9 . 3 per cent and a consolidation pressure of 90 p . s . i . could
be predicted to be 2 5 . 9 per cent and 82 p . s . i . respectively.
If
(I960) suggests
apply to undisturbed c l a y s .
soils.
P. da Cruz ( I 9 6 0 )
describe
a s e r i e s of t e s t s
M i s s i s s i p p i River v a l l e y .
consolidated
I t was
i s o t r o p i c a l l y and
lower
a n i s o t r o p i c a l l y d i d not
produce a
were a n i s o t r o p i c a l l y c o n s o l i d a t e d
(CT^ - 0^)
The
sug-
had
the
sug-
samples which
higher
strength,
maximum p r i n c i p a l s t r e s s r a t i o appeared to be
the
same f o r b o t h .
Henkel and
obtained r e s u l t s s i m i l a r to Whitman.
I t was
batch of Weald c l a y
The
a f u n c t i o n of p' o n l y .
s t r e s s paths f o l l o w e d
v o i d r a t i o are a l s o shown i n F i g u r e
A n i s o t r o p i c a l l y consolidated
d i f f e r e n t s t r e s s path and
envelope i s the
i s shown
q (CJ - (5" ).
a
i t can be
same f o r both.
s t r e s s but
same v o i d
that
the
results
on
They c o n s i d e r
i s o t r o p i c continuum m a t e r i a l .
(C.V.R.) l i n e .
I t was
on
s o i l t o be an e l a s t o - p l a s t i c
an
s i m i l a r t e s t i n g techniques,
This
iso-
suggested, however, t h a t f o r
void
saturated
10
Figure 3
e0
4-0
GO
80
IOO
l0 140
MEAN NORMAL EFFECTIVE STRESS, P' LBb./6<?.IN.
11
equation:
w = f ( p , q)
1
where
w = water content
f = function of
p' = 1/3
5[ + 2C3)
q = (C7]_ - (J3)
This surface i s shown i n Figure ^f.
is comprised of two parts.
paths from a l l normally
shearing
where
given by the
equation:
= increment of volumetric
strain
= increment of major p r i n c i p a l s t r a i n
Poorooshasb and Roscoe (1961) presented data for
loaded
normally
Undrained
Consolidation
(Normally
Lo^deep
Plane o f Const, LU
Overconsolidoted
"Touch this
Samples
(Heavily)
Surface.
o f Surface
of
uj Const
(Normally
Surfqce. A.
Plane
Consolidated
Undroined
Ptoth)
Undrained
Degrees
of
13
ap-
tests.
that a l l energy
= j[ - O 3 )
+ (p
-r ) - ^
(2)
.my
1
3 Sci,
It is sug-
gested, therefore, that f o r normally loaded clays a l l energy transferred across the boundary i s stored e l a s t i c a l l y and hence drained
and undrained tests can be compared d i r e c t l y .
Roscoe and Schofield ( 1 9 6 3 )
Clay". The
(3)
where M,X
, K,T
are four
M = ratio
o f q and
= void
= s l o p e of e vs
soil
constants
p' a t
failure
r a t i o at f a i l u r e
f o r p' =
I n p' c u r v e f o r b o t h
isotropic
and
failure
conditions
K = s l o p e of e vs
&V
I n p c u r v e f o r u n l o a d i n g and
= increment
of s h e a r
= increment
of v o l u m e t r i c
Equation 3 expresses
stresses
and
A. new
equation
void
energy
strain
the unique
ratio
reloading.
strain
r e l a t i o n s h i p between
or water
effective
content.
or work e q u a t i o n i s d e r i v e d which
supersedes
(2):
+ qSe
P'SV
= 5$El
(if)
+ Mp'Se
1 + e
The
terms used
have a l r e a d y b e e n d e s c r i b e d .
E q u a t i o n U- e x p r e s s e s
of
a u n i t volume
the energy
of s o i l
tion
of a probing s t r e s s
hand
side
express
transferred
incrementSp',
this
represents
the energy
stored
represents
the energy
dissipated
sumed t h a t
no
c a n be
E q u a t i o n *f c a n be
% - MPThis
means t h a t
test
the d e v i a t o r
stage
p' and
The
and
by
the
the
terms
i s put.
by t h e s h e a r
stored
= , * p-
stress
energy
elastically
r e w r i t t e n as
i f a t any
oq.
left
hand s i d e
a c r o s s the
subject to stresses
t o what use
energy
The
boundaries
on
applica-
on t h e
The
term
term
right
^p
1 + e
1
Mp'S
stresses.
shear
of
I t is as-
stresses.
follows:
- ^
|El
- -
i n a d r a i n e d or u n d r a i n e d
q i s corrected
f o r both energy
due
(5)
triaxial
to
15
In an undrained test
will
be negative because p' i s decreasing, the e l a s t i c energy correction w i l l add to the measured q.
I f an energy
correction i s applied i n the form of equation 5 then the corrected q w i l l l i e on the f a i l u r e envelope f o r a l l points of the
stress path, i . e . q
Mp'.
(1963)
Poorooshasb
It i s shown that
Figure 5
17
Thus,
s t r a i n at constant volume is known, and also the change i n volumet r i c s t r a i n due to the increment at constant q / p ' .
The change i n
kaolin.
Figure 6 b shows
In this manner a r e l a t i o n
Relationships
strain
Values
of
Projection Of
C S . Line
UJ Contour
10
Fig. >a
SO
40
50
GO
70
60
Stress* Paths and Contour*) o f Strain for Constant Volume. Tests on kaolin
2.
o
o"
IfoT
141
to
IS+
"
bv =
5,9
Se
i+e "
g--3ye.-7
I + UJQ=
I0f
6+
4+
o
o
""a
2+
tr
F'cj.kb.
Figure. Q>
Relqtion
5 -Q>
IO
1963)
19
Maximum p r i n c i p a l
Thus at f a i l u r e
the s o i l could be considered to be overconsolidated. This overconsolidation i s referred to as prestress e f f e c t and was considered responsible f o r the additional strength of the undrained t e s t s .
The s t r a i n rate i n the undrained tests was considerably higher
than the drained tests and i t has been argued by subsequent writers
that this could account f o r the higher strength. However, undrained tests were performed as stress controlled and s t r a i n controlled
and although the maximum deviator stress was higher f o r the stress
controlled, the p r i n c i p a l stress r a t i o was the same f o r both. I t
could therefore be implied that the s t r a i n rate affected the stress
20
The s e n s i t i -
This, they
effect.
21
occurs
at low s t r a i n s , as is l i k e l y with a s o i l i n i t i a l l y f l o c c u l a t e d ,
memory of past pressure w i l l be retained and the s o i l w i l l exhibit
a prestress e f f e c t .
ef-
sensitive
soils,
soils,
For compacted
Discussion
It is seen that there is considerable difference
of opinion
It
The
generally
very small or zero so that a boundary energy correction i f app l i e d , w i l l have negligible effect
For
sensi-
In drained t e s t s ,
22
If no correction i s
No
due to end r e s t r a i n t ;
23
stress paths
Non-uniform stresses
If
2lf
CHAPTER 3
MACROSCOPIC COMPONENTS OF SHEAR STRENGTH
The
shear s t r e n g t h of a s a t u r a t e d c l a y i s o f t e n c o n s i d e r e d t o
The f r i c t i o n component i s t h a t
p o r t i o n of t h e shear r e s i s t a n c e w h i c h i s l i n e a r l y r e l a t e d t o t h e
normal e f f e c t i v e s t r e s s .
C o h e s i o n i m p l i e s a shear r e s i s t a n c e which
i s independent of t h e normal e f f e c t i v e s t r e s s .
The s u r f a c e
energy
Taylor
the boundary s t r e s s e s d u r i n g s h e a r i n g
ference
c o u l d account f o r t h e d i f B i s h o p (195 +)
c a l c u l a t e d t h e energy component f o r t r i a x i a l c o n d i t i o n s
at maximum d e v i a t o r s t r e s s as f o l l o w s . :
(G^ = CJ^)
I f an element of m a t e r i a l
Sw = <J[ o
now
+ 2 CJ^
6^
oV = tbE^ + 2 0 6 3 = v o l u m e t r i c
s t r a i n increment, decrease
i n volume p o s i t i v e
t h e r e f o r e oJ - 0 $ - | ^
C3
ff'
----- (6)
i s p o s i t i v e f o r volume i n c r e a s e , n e g a t i v e
zero f o r constant
It
f o r volume d e c r e a s e and
volume or u n d r a i n e d c o n d i t i o n s .
Although Bishop
applied
the c o r r e c t i o n a t o t h e r p o i n t s on t h e s t r e s s p a t h i n a d d i t i o n t o
25
the point of maximum deviator s t r e s s .
Hvorslev ( I 9 6 0 )
suggested
equation discussed
where
(7)
failure
= effective
stress on f a i l u r e plane at
failure
angle of internal f r i c t i o n
For satu-
Therefore, for the one clay there is more than one pos-
sible f r i c t i o n angle.
considered to be merely parameters expressing the slope and i n t e r cept which best approximate the strength envelope i n the region of
interest
(Figure 7 ) .
2fo
t
I
r-
NormaNv- Leaded
O nl
<5n
27
hesion.
and c
Hvorslev ( I 9 6 0 )
as e f f e c t i v e f r i c t i o n and e f f e c t i v e co-
prefer-
Hvorslev
n i f i c a n t differences i n structure.
The very f a c t
Bjerrum and
28
will
Hvorslev
The d i f -
components.
29
separation of Mohr c i r c l e s at f a i l u r e allowed the e f f e c t i v e f r i c t i o n and cohesion components to be determined.
The
authors sug-
gested that the Mohr c i r c l e s might plot quite close to each other
for i n s e n s i t i v e clays making separation of components quite d i f f i c u l t , whereas f o r sensitive material, considerable
could be expected.
separation
ob-
as
M can be
In undrained
s t r a i n is neces-
The
release of i n t e r n a l en-
interest from t h e o r e t i c a l
be neces-
labora-
3 0
CHAPTER If
TESTING PROCEDURES
k-.l
Description of s o i l tested.
The clay used i n this testing program was taken from a de-
The deposit
and i t was from the p i t at the brick factory at Haney that samples
were obtained.
The clay i s thought to have been deposited i n a marine or
brackish environment during or shortly after the l a s t g l a c i a t i o n
of south-western B r i t i s h Columbia (Armstrong, 1957).
Subsequent
Standard
TABLE I
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF HANEY CLAY
S p e c i f i c gravity
2.80
Liquid Limit
hh%
P l a s t i c Limit
26%
P l a s t i c i t y Index
18$
\2% 1%
\6%
O.h
Activity
Undisturbed unconfined compressive
Remolded unconfined compressive
strength 1550 l b s . / s q . f t .
strength
130 l b s . / s q . f t .
Sensitivity
12
5500 l b s . / s q . f t .
Figure 8 G r a i n
3^
TABLE II
CHEMICAL PROPERTIES OF HANEY CLAY
GRAIN SIZE
S i l t Fraction
(greater than
2 microns)
MINERAL
AMOUNT PRESENT
Quartz
Large
Feldspar
Large
Chlorite
Moderate - small
Mica
Moderate - small
Amphibole
Small
Chlorite
Large
Clay F r a c t i o n
Feldspar
Moderate - small
(less than
Mica/chlorite
Moderate - small
2 microns)
Quartz
Small
Mica
Small
Amphibole
Small - questionable
35
+.2
rough cubes of side 9 inches, and were coated with wax at the
s i t e as shown i n Figure 10.
ported to the laboratory and the next day were given further
coatings of wax and then stored i n a moist room u n t i l required.
*+.3
Drained
by the writer.
After completion
of the drained series some modifications were made to the equipment, p r i n c i p a l l y the i n s t a l l a t i o n of a de-aired water tank and a
form of temperature
control.
Two very slow drained tests were then run with pore pres-
These modifications w i l l be
Figure 10 -
37
Proving Ring
Machined Ram
Crauop
Machined Buthing
Saturation
Spiral
Sqmple
D e - a i r e d W a t e r Tank
porous Stona.
Regulators
Presiure.
Supply
vacuum
Supply
Pre*.~ V6nT<y^
To Drainage System I
Electrical Transducer-'
Strain 11 CDonrtjrvoalled
Axial
yr-0-0.
'/
'/^Control
Panel
Copper Tubing
Chamber
Pre&sure
-Steel
Balancing
TanK
L E G E N D
Hoke.
Ball Val^e
(Non-Oisl.)
Hoke
Stem Volve
(Displ.).
NOT TO SCALE.
Figure II Triaxial Cell and Chamber Pressure
System.
e-s
Overflow
Distilled De - Aired
W a t e r Supply
Connections to
Triaxial Cell
(T)
w
Va
o. D.
Copper
LouJer
Stone.
Upper
Stone
Pore Pressure
Gouge ( o - loo
'/fe O P .
-Monomeicr
Pressure
Cylinder
Saran Tubing
Corffro
10 c c . Burette
(Adjusti ble Height)
-Mercury
Over-Tlouj
4 Ft. M e r c u r y Manometer
To S u p p l y IOLb./Sj,
Back P r e s s u r e
LEGEND
(g)
Hoke S a i l -Vblve
(Mon - Displ.)
Hoke S t e m
(Displ.)
Kliner A B I O
Va|ve
Valves
(Non-Displ.)
NOT
TO SCALE
Figure
13 -
Test Equipment
ko
No s i g n i f i c a n t leakage of
rotate was used to minimize the l a t e r a l force and moment transferred to the ram and thus reduce f r i c t i o n at the bushing.
Dis-
t i l l e d de-aired water was used as a chamber f l u i d to reduce d i f fusion of a i r and water through the membranes into the sample.
In the drained test series boiled d i s t i l l e d water was introduced
into the air-water s t e e l balancing tank under a vacuum and allowed
to cool overnight.
a i r pressure.
In the undrained
tank was i n s t a l l e d .
series a d i s t i l l e d
de-aired water
In the undrained
series a 6 f t .
(196 +).
1
1+1
then l o s t .
measured by a 0-100
Ibs./sq.in., and
It was
l b s . / s q . i n . The
possible to
gauge was
lbs./
fitted
estimate
calibrated against
Variations of up to O.h
to occur i n successive c a l i b r a t i o n s .
i n . O.D.
cubic
used,
used.
necessary to adjust
1200
sufficiently
Ibs./sq.in.
Changes i n temperature of +
Ibs./sq.in.
by
1.0c
However,
K2
the mercury which were not r e a l i z e d u n t i l the e l e c t r i c a l transducer was i n s t a l l e d at the end of the testing program. The
reason f o r t h i s i s as follows:
pressure (the
Later,
when the transducer was present, the correct back pressure was
attained by moving the drainage burette u n t i l the desired transducer reading was obtained.
Pore water pressure was measured at the bottom stone only
using the Bishop and Henkel n u l l tube device (1 mm. I.D. tube).
A 5 foot length of 1/8 In. outside diameter copper tube connected
the n u l l tube to the bottom stone.
The compliance
of t h i s system
(1962) suggest that the movement should not be more than 1/2 i n .
over a pressure range of 100 Ibs./sq.in. and the system was
therefore considered s a t i s f a c t o r y from the compliance
view.
point of
>+3
m e a s u r e d w i t h a 0-100
f o r t h i s compliance.
c a l i b r a t e d u s i n g a dead w e i g h t
then read
c a l c u l a t i o n was
pressure
I b s . / s q . i n . b o u r d o n gauge s i m i l a r
t h a t u s e d f o r m e a s u r i n g t h e chamber p r e s s u r e .
w h i c h was
The
on t h e
necessary
The
gauge
was
t e s t e r t o a p p l y a chamber
pore p r e s s u r e gauge.
to. a c c o u n t
to
pressure
I n t h i s way
no
f o r the h e i g h t of mercury
i n t h e n u l l t u b e or t h e c h a n g e i n t h e h e i g h t of t h e m e r c u r y
t o change i n t h e n u l l
c a r e was
always kept
T o w a r d s t h e end
installed.
I t was
rated compliance
(9A0
system.
Incorporated
p o s s i b l e to the
The
I b s . / s q . i n . a b s o l u t e and
was
cell
I b s . / s q . i n . change i n p r e s s u r e .
in null
p o i n t f o r 100
o f t h e a c t i v e f a c e of t h e t r a n s d u c e r .
a f t e r a r e a d i n g was
s u b s e q u e n t r e a d i n g s were
The
and
to
be
This
tube
transducer
t h e s y s t e m was
c a l i b r a t i o n was
I f t h i s were done
pressure surge
to
taken.
c a l i b r a t e d a g a i n s t the dead w e i g h t
t o be
of
dissipate
i s a c c o m p a n i e d by a n e l e c t r i c a l r e a d - o u t
found
the
and c o n t r a c t i o n
t a k e n , then f l o w i n t o or out
The
o r remove w a t e r t o t h e t r a n s d u c e r s y s t e m t o t a k e
p l a c e o f t h e v o l u m e c h a n g e c a u s e d by t h e e x p a n s i o n
immediately
of
Ibs./sq.in.).
c o u l d be c o m p e n s a t e d f o r d u r i n g a t e s t by u s i n g t h e n u l l
d e v i c e t o add
a r a t e d compliance
found
was
to
t r a n s d u c e r had
c h e c k e d w i t h t h e n u l l t u b e and
in. rise
zero
program an e l e c t r i c a l t r a n s -
made by D a t a S e n s o r s
of t h e
0.00027 c u b i c i n . f o r 100
correct
calibration,
same.
p l a c e d as c l o s e a s
the compliance
r a n g e of 0 - 150
the
of t h e t e s t i n g
o f t h e b o n d e d t y p e and
minimize
After
t a k e n t o i n s u r e t h a t the h e i g h t of mercury f o r
gauge r e a d i n g was
ducer
due
l i n e a r w i t h p r e s s u r e t o an
device
tester.
accuracy
The
kh
of +
0.1
I b s . / s q . i n . , and
c o u l d be d e t e c t e d .
s c a l e and
The
A. constant
deformation
and
The
used t o
i n c o n t a c t with the
intended
sample.
deformation
made to measure t h i s .
The
The
measured
friction
lateral
deformation
caused
testing rate
gears.
f o r c e on the ram
rate
A. proving r i n g was
be
placed
t h i r t y deformation
f o r c e may
could
the ram
absolute
pressure.
a p p l i e d to the
without
on an
i n s t a l l e d so t h a t the pressure
Ibs./sq.in.
measures pressure
A l l t e s t s were s t r a i n c o n t r o l l e d .
was
0.025
changes of
transducer
a barometer was
r e f e r r e d to gauge
pressure
the
measured.
was
not a problem.
on the drainage
and
pore pressure
l i n e s where i t was
Four new
0.003
closing valves.
e s s e n t i a l to
Klinger
d e v i c e i n l o c a t i o n s where
A.11
K l i n g e r v a l v e s were s e p a r a t e l y t e s t e d
a l l were found t o l e a k .
under
100
Leakage
I b s . / s q . i n . , which
Poulos
h5
Hoke
Subse-
quently, f o r other apparatus i n the laboratory, Whitey nondisplacement valves were used and were found to behave i n a very
s a t i s f a c t o r y manner.
drainage l i n e s .
the
equipment
After de-airing,
system was allowed to cool and the n u l l tube was then used to
which
he
a 10C difference i n temperature between the room and the compartment but during the test series the difference was never more
than 5C*
A. t y p i c a l cycle was:
a i r conditioner on f o r !- minutes,
found that the optimum adjustment gave a f a i r l y uniform temperature over most of the testing area.
A thermometer placed i n a
surrounded
On a r a p i d l y r i s i n g a i r temperature
the aluminum case of the pressure cylinder having a high conductiv i t y and low s p e c i f i c heat increases i n temperature and expands
allowing the water to increase i n volume and hence reduce i n
pressure.
The copper l i n e to
h7
the
to a lesser extent.
is slow then the water has time to heat and expand and water
having a higher c o e f f i c i e n t of thermal expansion than copper or
aluminum tends to expand more, causing a pressure r i s e .
This
Testing technique
C y l i n d r i c a l samples 2.8 i n . long and l.h i n . i n diameter
were prepared i n a moist room using a wire saw, miter box and
trimming lathe.
sample.
and i t s side trimmings was found to be 0.-2 per cent and i t was
concluded that the trimmings were a r e l i a b l e measure of the average
i n i t i a l water content of the sample.
Figure
15 -
h9
were taken the sample had not been trimmed top and bottom and
therefore the trimmings did not represent the f i n a l
Further trimming was necessary to allow for t h i s .
sample.
If this further
trimming were not done, and i t was not always done by the w r i t e r ,
the check between i n i t i a l and f i n a l water contents based on side
trimmings was as poor as 1.5 per cent, whereas for those samples
i n which i t was done the check was always within 0.2 per c e n t .
The trimmed sample was measured and weighed.
cumferential measurements
Three c i r -
fed over the top loading cap and down the saturation
These were followed by a r o l l e d membrane.
also placed down over the pedestal.
spiral.
A, r o l l e d membrane was
The c y l i n d r i c a l surface of
the bottom drainage l i n e to cover the top of the pedestal and form
a convex meniscus.
was s l i d into place.
stone.
The top cap was inverted and water allowed to flow out
Silicon
grease was now smeared on the top cap and with one hand on the top
50
cap the lower membrane was r a p i d l y r o l l e d up, any excess water
being pushed ahead
of the membrane.
and bottom.
The sample
and the v e r t i c a l d i a l s e t .
water
A. 10 I b s . / s q . i n .
In
minute
The
I t was found
51
clay was
saturated.
applied.
Since
considered
essentially
Burette
be calculated.
In preliminary tests i t was
To prevent this
Ibs./sq.in.
It was
The
vertical
occur-
a strong p o s s i b i l i t y of sample
determined.
This was
In
and
l a t e r subtracted
52
s t r a i n r a t e was
under e i t h e r d r a i n e d or undrained
F i g u r e 16 shows a specimen d u r i n g s h e a r i n g .
about 0.5
f o r both d r a i n e d and
strain
undrained t e s t s .
Some a d d i t i o n a l t e s t s were
run a t other r a t e s but were not used f o r the main purpose of the
thesis.
of the p r o v i n g r i n g .
The
The
a i r r e g u l a t i o n system was
fluctuations
In undrained t e s t s the v a r i a b l e s
pressure r e a d i n g .
Approximately
pore
50 s e t s of readings
d r a i n e d t e s t s were performed
the excess
These were
analyzed.
at one q u a r t e r the
transducer was
permitted.
l i n e so t h a t a v e r y a c c u r a t e measure of
thought
general
a p p l i e d to the drainage
excess
recorded
T h i s was
a l l tests.
l a t e r f e d to a d i g i t a l computer t o be
stone.
strain
In d r a i n e d t e s t s the drainage b u r e t t e r e a d i n g r e p l a c e d
Two
un-
the pore
kept c o n s t a n t throughout
pressure.
deformation
d r a i n e d t e s t s the s t r a i n r a t e was
rate.
to
obtained.
sheared at the u s u a l r a t e .
T h i s w i l l be d i s c u s s e d i n d e t a i l i n Chapter
6.
5V
At the end
r e q u i r e d , water was
first
allowed to back d r a i n
first
suggested
as f o l l o w s :
by Henkel and
This
procedure
test
condi-
I f these
lines
Even i f the t e n s i o n s
be drawn i n t o
This
was
the chamber
maintained
I b s . / s q . i n . a t a l l times.
r a t e of f l o w was
for
the
continued
t i o n and
way
continued u n t i l
p e r m e a b i l i t y a f t e r shearing c o u l d be o b t a i n e d .
the e f f e c t i v e s t r e s s was
reduced
to 2 I b s . / s q . i n .
In t h i s
A f t e r back
The
rubber mem-
branes were cut and removed, the porous stones p u l l e d from the ends
and
then weighed.
I t was
not thought
that
much water would enter the sample from the porous stones s i n c e the
t e n s i o n i n the pore water should not be more than 2 I b s . / s q . i n .
55
T h i s was
t h e n checked
initial
I t was
used
per cent
I n t h o s e t e s t s which
two t e s t s was w i t h i n 0 . 1
per c e n t .
I t may t h e r e f o r e be c o n c l u d e d
The c e l l ,
bottom
pedestal
The equipment
56
CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION OF TESTING TECHNIQUE
3.1
Introduction
The main purpose of the testing program was
to determine i f
or undrained.
It was
other
However, due
to the nature of t r i a x i a l
strain.
Due
to the presence of
These errors
strain
57
porous stones or end platens cause shear stresses to be applied
at the top and bottom of a sample.
During shearing,
centre of the sample becomes greater than that at the ends and
consequently the v e r t i c a l stress at the centre is less than that
at the ends.
increasing
and
- fj^) i s
The devia-
indicate
where
= v e r t i c a l stress at ends
0^ = v e r t i c a l stress at middle
]_ = a x i a l s t r a i n .
58
(1963) showed
Roscoe,
sion tests on loose saturated sand, the a x i a l s t r a i n varies considerably throughout the depth of the sample.
In general, a x i a l
In compression tests on
At an average a x i a l s t r a i n of 20 per
cent, the stresses and strains within the sample may be as much
as 50 per cent d i f f e r e n t from those calculated i n the conventional
manner.
59
i n undrained tests
I960,
I960,
and Blight
1963).
Hence,
In overconsolidated s o i l s where
To speed up equalization
These
60
paper
This reduces
the
rather
than slots i n the f i l t e r paper reduced the time for 100 per cent
primary consolidation of bay mud by a factor
of about 5.
coefficient
(obtained by assuming no
If,
Isotropic c o n s o l i -
sec,
61
in the paper the apparent c was about 5 x 10"^ cm. /sec.
2
Since
2 x 10~3 cm.^/sec. was the correct c and would have been measured
v
had no loss occurred i n the paper (assuming k^ = ky), the eff i c i e n c y of the drains, which i s the r a t i o of the apparent c to
v
the
the
the
smear should then have been present at the top and bottom of the
sample, and so i t seems very unlikely that smear could be responsible f o r such a poor e f f i c i e n c y .
Similar low e f f i c i e n c i e s
It was therefore
It i s
were not used, i t was necessary to have drainage top and bottom i n
drained tests to reduce the testing time.
With a c
of 2 x 10"3
Blight
(1963) suggests that the theoretical times for 95 per cent d i s sipation from which the Bishop and Henkel equation i s derived
62
large reductions i n permeability would take place due to struct u r a l change and decreased void r a t i o .
This
i n Chapter 6.
5.5
This generally
63
More re-
In
of the
A. mathe-
matical expression was derived for this time, and for given values
of A X and AP, i t depends on the nature of the s o i l tested ( c v and
mv) and the r a t i o of the diameter of the n u l l tube to the d i a meter of the surface over which the pore pressure is measured
raised to a power.
Ax = 0 . 0 2 i n . and measurement at the bottom stone, the sensit i v i t y was about 30 seconds.
pressure was measured been very much smaller, say due to the use
of a pore pressure probe, then the s e n s i t i v i t y time would have
been very much greater.
61+
of the testing program, i t was found that for an ambient pressure increase of hO Ibs./sq.in. under undrained conditions, a
time of about 2 minutes elapsed before 98 per cent of this i n crease was recorded on the transducer.
of the compliance
sample material and the area over which the pore pressure i s
measured.
probe i n place of the bottom stone a very much longer time would
have elapsed f o r 98 per cent equalization.
In general the s e n s i t i v i t y time i s very much less than the
time required for reasonable equalization of pore pressures due
to non-uniform stresses and consequently
sidered.
diameter
an important
5.6
factor.
Rate of testing
Since the drainage condition was
was
by Blight f o r drained
65
tests was taken, then the time for both was about h hours.
Preliminary tests indicated that f o r undrained shear the maximum
deviator stress occurred at about 3 per cent a x i a l s t r a i n while
the maximum p r i n c i p a l stress r a t i o occurred at about 1 5 to 17
per cent a x i a l s t r a i n .
How-
sidered unreliable.
i n the measured values of the e f f e c t i v e stresses caused by nonuniform pore pressures depend on the overconsolidation r a t i o of
the material tested.
6 6
I t was found
dif-
loaded sensitive Leda clay i n which pore pressure probes i n add i t i o n to base measurements were used to determine pore pressures.
cent per hour (same as used i n this testing program) and maximum
deviator stress occurred at about 2 per cent a x i a l s t r a i n or after
about h hours.
outside diameter) placed at the lower quarter l e v e l recorded ess e n t i a l l y the same pore pressure as that measured at the base of
67
the sample and that a similar probe placed at mid height recorded
a lower pore pressure.
Taylor
Bishop, Blight
It is f e l t
criteria
that
one quarter
68
Mr. Lou using the same test equipment and the same clay indicated
that after consolidation, pore pressure r i s e w i l l take place i n
the absence of any.applied deviator s t r e s s .
buildup i n pore pressure with time for a sample which was c o n s o l i dated to 75 I b s . / s q . i n .
for tgowas less than 200 minutes i t is f e l t that primary c o n s o l i dation was e s s e n t i a l l y complete after 2*+ hours and could not be
responsible for the observed r i s e .
It was thought, at
first,
pressure increase decreased with time and after two days had
dropped to 0.3 I b s . / s q . i n .
per day.
If further drainage is a l -
lowed secondary compression takes place due to s t r u c t u r a l rearrangement, while i f drainage is prevented pore pressure r i s e
takes place.
Therefore, some of the pore pressure measured during shearing
is not due to applied deviator stresses and this influences the
stress paths followed i n undrained t e s t s .
NOTE".
I.
Sample
4
\dlves
For
Hours a | which
Closed
and
Time
Pore
Drainage
Pressure
Observed.
2.
Time
Measured
Drainage
From
Close
of
Valves.
70
Membrane Leakage
The o r i g i n a l testing procedure involved the use of glycerene
It was thought
membrane.
The pressure
Subse-
(Poulos,
With de-aired
71
5.9
Ram
friction
To minimize t h i s f r i c t i o n force, b a l l
A.
used i n
ea
necessary.
Ram
f r i c t i o n and
not
properly
moved up f o r
It was
No
thought
shearing
(1962)
suggest that a d d i t i o n a l f r i c -
At
Imperial
72
generally between
used.
undisturbed
Bishop
i n t h i s case causing
use
73
CHAPTER 6
RESIDUAL PORE PRESSURES IN DRAINED TESTS
6.1
Introduction
Residual pore pressures of some magnitude are always present
in drained shear t e s t s .
h
T\C
(i-u)
2
(9)
where
= c o e f f i c i e n t of consolidation
7h
sure r i s e i n the undrained condition i s known not to be constant,
their expression for excess pore pressure would"not be suitable
f o r estimating residual pore pressures and was not intended to be
so.
Alternative methods f o r estimating pore pressures were
therefore considered.
to be analyzed on the
Two
made:
1 . Homogeneous s o i l .
2 . Complete saturation.
3 . S o i l grains and water are not compressible.
h. One dimensional flow.
5. V a l i d i t y of Darcy's
6 . k and c
law.
It w i l l be
75
average.
Method 1
This method i s based on the superposition of pore pressures
(10)
This method
i s discussed i n d e t a i l i n Appendix 1,
Method 1 was found to predict zero residual pore pressure at
maximum deviator stress for samples consolidated to k-0 Ibs./sq.in.
However, drainage from the sample was s t i l l taking place at f a i l u r e ,
therefore excess pore pressures must be present.
I t was f e l t that
This a l t e r -
76
6.3
Method 2
The equation of continuity for one dimensional flow leads
b?-
rw
where
at
U 1 ;
k = permeability of the s o i l
Yw = unit weight of water
u = excess pore pressure
z = distance or length measured from centre of sample
= rate of loss of water per unit volume from any
ot
element of s o i l .
If i t i s assumed that the rate of loss of water from every element
of a sample i s the same at any time ty, then q w i l l be a function
of time only.
sample was
equation:
where
d u = _ dq = - R = constant
^
dt
V
R = rate of loss of water from the sample
(12)
V = volume of sample
This can be integrated using the boundary conditions u = 0 at
z = h and |^ = 0 at z = 0 to y i e l d the following expression f o r
dt
77
Uj
(average) = I
YW R^h
Uj
(maximum) = A
" ^ j ^
(1>+)
(15)
~ T i
T
It i s seen from expression (13) that the theory predicts a parabolic d i s t r i b u t i o n of excess pore pressure, and consequently the
average pore pressure i s two thirds the maximum pore pressure.
Expression (ih)
This implies
a sample
the sample.
For slow testing rates, where the per cent pore pressure d i s s i pation i s high, this expression i s considered to give a good approximation of average r e s i d u a l pore pressures.
The variables i n equations l*f and 15 are; the half height of
sample, h; the volume of the sample, V; the rate of drainage, R;
78
this
at one quarter the normal speed, where drainage to the top only
was allowed and pore pressures were measured at the bottom using
the transducer.
The calculated
between void r a t i o and permeability for both tests can be approximated by a straight
It
The
the permeabilities calculated from i n i t i a l consolidation are rel i a b l e , those obtained from swelling appear too low.
80
LES-END
41
Dramed
Test
Drained Test
S-19,
= 70 Lb./ S^. In
4-0
Ini "l<* Inotropic Cono idation
39
S-
!
! j
<
j j
ia
Ii
1
0
i I
i !
i
| j
i ii
i
36
57
'
3fo
z
ui
u
or
35
SI ieor Strain
&
m 34CL
hZ
Ul
r-
33
52
u
or:
ul
r<
1 /
I
\/
A/
*)/
; I
<
31
-7,
' 0 ( 10
oJ*<"
SO
!
I
0757 I
.ECj
~v
I
i
I
/*
Draimr 9 - 19
o
!^
ii
i
iI
i
fc
5
.10'
7 8 9 I0"
2-
PERMEABILITY
lM
CM./SE.C.
NOTE:
S - I B $ I 9 Sh<eqr&<=| a\ Vi, the Normal Pale but mith Drainage from
Top Onl^. Excess Pore. PrS. From which Rermeobility Calculated
. Measurej at Botfofn Stone..
Figure 19 Relationship
Drained
ion
81
For a consolidation
pressure of 70 Ibs./sq.in. the calculated pore pressures are genera l l y high by a factor of about two, while for a consolidation
pressure of ^0 Ibs./sq.in. they are low, apart from an i n i t i a l
peak at 1 to 2 per cent s t r a i n .
actually drained more than those sheared at the normal rate, due
to additional time for secondary
consolidation, i t could be
ex-
drained tests were run at one quarter the normal speed, the
measured pore pressures give r e l i a b l e values of the excess pore
pressures generated at the centre of samples tested at the normal
NOTE
Avcnqge Residual pore Pres. A s s u m e d * ^ Max.
Measured Pore. Pres.
Ul
<r
a.
70 Lbs
IJ
ui
oc
o
a
<
f/
a' iii
cr
10
15
SO
5
SHEAR S T R A I N IN P E R C E N T
Relationship Between Measured Residual Pore. Pressure
Shear Strain in Drained Tests
O
Fjg,0-
3o
and
II
10
a- 9 1
12
1. 1
70Lhs/S^-'f 1.
a 7 in
tr
a
a 6
II
j.
< 5 ll
O
Ul
or
u
<
Of
Method 1
|.
4.1 A
S
^ s ^ M e t h ?d
4-0 P.S.I
ui
7 ^ ^ ^ - S -
19 , ^ 7 0 p..1. (Fig.eo)
aunsd
40 P.S.I. ^ ~ -
/-s-ia,j __(fj3.0;
hod
\
\
^ "^
' ^
<
^ ^ ^ ^
S-17. &JeJfiod|
SO
io
is
ao
SHEAR STRAIN IN PER C E N T
NOTE:
Fig.
Pore
Pres.
Droits?
from
Top
83
speed, so that these measured pore pressures could have been used
to adjust the effective
However,
measurement would be s u f f i c i e n t
of predicting
permeabilities under varying stress conditions when pore pressures are measured i n drained t e s t s .
If the permeability of a
b i l i t y is a measure of s o i l structure,
structural change caused by remolding could be obtained by comparing permeability versus void r a t i o relationships for the same
clay i n the undisturbed and remolded states.
Measurement of residual pore pressures and subsequent calcul a t i o n of permeabilities
same structure,
If
Samples of
Haney clay consolidated to kO Ibs./sq.in. are i n the overconsolidated range, but i t was seen from Figure 19 that after about 6
per cent shear s t r a i n the permeability lay on the straight l i n e
and the sample thereafter behaved as normally loaded.
The
85
CHAPTER 7
TEST RESULTS
7.1
Introduction
The main purpose of the testing program was
to determine i f ,
path.
(C-U)
undisturbed
In addition, 2
Undrained
Typical test
and
S-17.
presented
Con-
86
stress - s t r a i n relations and the effect of s t r a i n rate on stresss t r a i n relations i n drained tests are discussed i n Sections 7U-,
5 and 6.
7.2
rela-
It i s seen that
consolidated water contents from a l l drained tests l i e on a common straight l i n e , whereas consolidated water contents from undrained tests show some scatter and appear to l i e on a straight
l i n e of about the same slope although with a water content about
1-g- per cent higher for the same consolidation pressure.
Block
samples of Haney clay were of such a size that 8 t r i a x i a l specimens could be obtained from any one block, but i n fact the drained
test specimens were taken from 3 d i f f e r e n t blocks.
I t i s un-
Haney
67
LEGEND
C-U-l
Consolidated
S-l
Consolidated
Undrained
Drained
Test No.!".
Test No. I .
88
effect on the stress paths followed i n undrained t e s t s , as may be
seen i n Figure 33, Section 7 . 3 .
has a consolidated water content that a c t u a l l y l i e s on the isotropic consolidation l i n e common to drained t e s t s .
Yet the e f -
= , _ - 1/3 AV = 2/3 ( e - )
x
where
= p r i n c i p a l shear s t r a i n
&L = a x i a l s t r a i n
AV - volumetric s t r a i n
It is
69
'
0
30
40
to <
80
100
ISOTROPIC CONSOLIDATION PRESSURE , RS.I
isotropic
90
seen that while samples consolidated to 75 and 88.5 Ibs./sq.in.
l i e on a straight line passing through the o r i g i n as would be
expected f o r normally consolidated material, samples consolidated
t o 6 0 Ibs./sq.in. show maximum deviator stress above t h i s l i n e ,
indicating overconsolidation. This i s surprising as the water
content versus logarithm of consolidation pressure r e l a t i o n appears to be a straight l i n e f o r pressures greater than k-0 lbs./sq.
in.
Each test
stress occurs at about 3 per cent s t r a i n , while the maximum princ i p a l stress r a t i o occurs at about 15 per cent s t r a i n (Figure 2h).
P r i n c i p a l stress r a t i o versus shear s t r a i n curves are very similar
for a l l tests and are represented by a single line (Figure 25).
Pore pressures (Figure 26) continue to r i s e with s t r a i n , although
the r i s e i s very s l i g h t from 15 to 30 per cent s t r a i n .
value (Figure 27) increases throughout t e s t s .
tor stress i t i s about 1.1,
r a t i o i t i s about 1.7.
The A.
At maximum devia-
shear
50
i
i
i
Si
11
lM
,/ m *fl fa T.
40
^ - C - U - 5 , <S 7 5 P.S.L.
C
^Buckled
11
" V ^^ ^ r B u c k l o d
i
i
I
Sso
ii
02
if
C - U - l ^ . f i c * ^ 0 P.S.I. '
:>
Iii
or
tf>
o
0
Figure 4-
10
15
SHEAR STRAIN IN P E R C E N T
:
i
1
30
as
eo
on
Haney Clay
3-2
30
- q " ^ 3?
f'
A
A
CT
o
fl:
c
til
or
-2
LEfirSND
C - U - 1 , ^ - 6 0 RS.I
c-u-a,
NOTE:
_i
9: 1-8
z
1 1-6
K
1-2
10
iI
&o ps.i
C-U-a45,fiu75
PS.I Ar Not Shown
For Clarity.
10
SHEAR
IS
0
STRAIN IN PER C E N T
30
LEG-END
C - U - l , < - t o o
p.c,.l.
60
C" '=75 Rs. 1.
c
.70
'
Vfl
0^=60 PSi 1.
cr
- u D
00
j 50
40
Ui
CC
^30
Ul
or
W
or
2 10
10
IS
0
SHEAR STRAIN IN PER CENT
SO
30
a.6*3
ti
O*^- CO P.S.I.
< eo
P.S.I.
Ui
1-0
ui
or
a 0-5
20
15
IN PER
PER CENT,
Figure 2 7 - Fbre Pressure fbrameler A Versus Strain for Haney
10
SHEAR
STRAIN
Clay
SO
93
sensitive Norwegian c l a y s .
They
strain.
creasing pore pressures cause release of internal energy i n undrained tests which when corrected f o r by the Roscoe energy
equation suggests that the f u l l " f r i c t i o n angle" i s being mobil i z e d at a l l s t r a i n s .
Deviator stress versus
tests are shown i n Figure 28. I t may be seen that a marked kink
occurs
Maximum
Residual pore
occur
34
LEG-END
A
S - I 2 , 0 " c 40
Lbs./So,.In.
S - 13
Lbs./Sc|.ln.
C' = 55
c
S - 14,
- 70
Lbs./S|. In.
15,
G ' - 70
Lbs./S^.ln.
$> - 16,
C 's 55
S-
S-
17, C"/ MO
Lbs./ 5^.In.
Lbs./ S
in
I30
10
SHEAR
15
STRAIN
IN
20
PER
25
SO
CENT
35
L.E6-END
5.-IS, 0^ = 4 0
3 - 14 , 6e' = 70 L b s . / ^ . l n .
>- 15 ,
o
s-
ol410"
or
^>^3
- 70 Lbs./6cj. In-
5 - 1 7 , <J ' 40
C
Consolidated
Te*t
Lbs./6^ln.
Lbs./Sq,. In.
Drained
No. IE
E f f e c t i v e Isotropic
Pressure.
Consolidation
LI
Q.
Ll
^^^^
I *
0.
_1
<
10
SHEAR
5TRAIN
IS
IN
so
PER
50
CENT
NOTE
1. Exce&S
By
Pore
Method
Pressutes
C|cu|cotee|
96
The prin-
Maximum p r i n c i -
tests
3-0;
IO
'
10
SHEAR
15
20
STRAIN IN PER
SO
CENT
SHEAR
STRAIN
iN
PER
CENT
9a
3 9
100
LEGrEND
A
C - U - 3 , ^ ' - 7 5 P.S.I.
C- U-5,
P.S.I.
C - U - & , 0 ^ 8 6 - 5 P.S.I.
C - U - 7 , ff '=6S-5 PS. |.
Fgure 34 Effective Stress Raths from Consolidated Undrained Tests on Haney Clay
IOI
20
30
40
50
.0
sJZGi I N R5.I.
70
Ro"Pfe*s]3uorPore Pres.
II
Siresi
100
UO
Rath Residual
Horc (-"res. Considered
Tests
102
drained tests are shown i n Figure 3*+ and these are also contours
of water content.
Figure 35.
the Rendulic
Poorooshasb (1961)
dimensions.
103
corresponding
i n i t i a l consolidation pressure.
In drained tests p
increases
to the f i n a l void r a t i o .
line.
It was mentioned e a r l i e r
that samples consolidated to 60 Ibs./sq.in. behave i n an overconsolidated manner, and i t i s this overconsolidation e f f e c t that
is thought responsible f o r the separation of curves shown. The
state boundary surfaces f o r drained tests are shown i n Figure 37.
It i s seen that drained tests from each consolidation pressure
l i e on a d i f f e r e n t surface.
an overconsolidated manner and hence would not l i e on the normally loaded surface.
s i m i l a r , while tests c o n s o l i -
Haney Clay
Gfc=4cps.l.
P / _ N e t ] > s c i i r g Residual
I Pore Pres. (40P-S.1)
<
&
Cloy
(Burland Plot)
/
- State
Bo U n d a r y
si i r f a c e s
/
Drained T< s f e , ^
7( ) P-S.l.
= 75$
/fl /
r~\'~ f
p.s.i.-V
\ \
1
1 i
//
/
0
/
"I
2.
-3
-5
b ^,
p
-7
-3
10
/
II
12
Figure 3> Comparison oF State Boundary Surfaces from Drained and Undrained Tests on, Han<?y Ctay.
107
Residual pore
otherwise
It
is
seen that drained and undrained tests do not l i e on the same surface and that neglecting the residual pore pressures i n drained
tests results i n even poorer agreement.
at a consolidation pressure of 70 I b s . / s q . i n .
the undrained tests at 60 I b s . / s q . i n .
also l i e
the effect
outside
of overconsolida-
This sub-
effective
stresses and water content for Haney clay or that the state boundary
surfaces are not the same for drained and undrained stress paths.
It may be of interest to note that had drained tests been
corrected for energy due to volume change as suggested by Roscoe,
Schofield and Wroth (1958)? the drained surface would be even
further removed from the undrained.
Energy corrections
Energy components of shear strength were discussed
i n Chapters
2 and 3 and i t appears that the Roscoe and Schofield (1963) energy
equation which considers both boundary and i n t e r n a l e l a s t i c energy
changes i s the most l o g i c a l .
108
to the Haney clay test data and the results are i n reasonable
agreement with the predictions of the
The
equation.
equation i s as follows:
p'Sv
where
+ qo
= ^P'
+ Mp'oc
1 + e
(16)
oV = incremental volumetric
strain
S = incremental d i s t o r t i o n a l s t r a i n
K = slope of e Vs. Lnp'
on rebound or reload
and M = r a t i o of q to p
at f a i l u r e .
the
terms on the right hand side determine to what use this energy
is put.
^p'
represents energy stored or released
1 + e
= q
elastically,
can be considered
Equation
by
(16)
Mp'
||
&
KSP
(1 )
7
(l+e)5
(q )
This
was
5 Chapter 2.
The c o e f f i c i e n t of expansion, C ,
e
was
Line
peviot&r
Stress
Figure39Relationships
6 7 6 3 10
d ;
30
40
MEAN NORMAL STRESS p' IN RS.I.
Between Mean
50 60 70 SO
100
00.
110
was readily
M i s seen to decrease
Alter-
Ill
L E G E N D
A
C-U-I
, ^ ' - 6 0 p.S.I.
C - U - 2 , Q = 6>ops.l.
C- U - 3 ,
0r>75pS.|
C-U-5.
<3t'7Sp.S.|.
s
66-5P.S.I.
C - U - 7 \ CQ=S8-5RS.I.
of the Point Scatter
at
40
:-J
60 ^ ao
MEAN NORMAL STESS, PIN P.S.I.
Shewn
LE&END
ao
40
A
V
s-17,
, feo e>o
o;'*4o
100
P.S.I.
lao
P IN P.S.I.
LEGEND
C-U-8,CT.'-60 pS.l
S- |4 ,0^'-7O P S . l
2.0
IS
It
A
35.-70 p.S.I.
>
S
f 12
h- .
Ul
i ffl
i C >
Q(j
^_
8 , $ > f c O f>S.
GD
,0
It
y
o
04'
oa
0
10
SHEAR
15
STRAIN
0
IN P E R
25
CENT
Haney Cloy
SO
I f the Mohr-tCoulomb f a i l u r e c r i t e r i o n i s
ffi/ff. J
If M = 1.27
1 -
tests
. . . . (18)
V3M
yields O^/G^ = 3 . 2
degrees.
Here again f u l l f r i c t i o n i s
115
The Energy
Overconsolidated material
i s assumed to remain
i s reached.
I t i s not
remained constant.
116
However, i f
Contours
were therefore extrapolated for lower water contents and are shown
on Figure h3
discussed i n d e t a i l i n Chapter 2.
The increment of
8v
where
ov
M
-\
- A
volumetric s t r a i n increment
1
(19)
r a t i o of q to p' at c r i t i c a l state
q/p'
Values
40
CO
80
IN RS.I.
IOO
120
of Shear Strain
140
Figure 43 - Contours of Water Content and Strain From Undrained Testa on Honey Cby
118
Sc = shear s t r a i n increment.
The values of M, K and
substituted i n (19) y i e l d
S = J**
....
( o)
2
1.2/-T\
and
SV = Ji_
= 4iw
l+e
1.9*+
(21)
The t o t a l
account f o r the major portion of the calculated strains, s t r e s s s t r a i n relations f o r drained tests cannot be predicted from undrained tests unless contours of water content are independent of
stress path.
Roscoe and Schofield (1963) presented an equation from which
s t r e s s - s t r a i n and pore pressure-strain relations can be predicted
~ f i l
Measur sd Relation
0^'7O
PS.I.
w >
S- 1461
See Fit
ilated Rebtion ,^'70 RS.I.
41k
/ /
/ /
/
/
/
(J
//
/ //
//
//
//
1 t
-'
10
15
20
SHEAR STRAIN IN PER CENT
Figure
,c
25
30
120
However, the r e l a t i o n
KA
= 0.22 i s shown on the two dimensional Bur land plot i n Figure *+5.
It i s seen to d i f f e r from both the drained and undrained state
boundary surfaces. Burland (1965) proposed a v a r i a t i o n on the
Roscoe state boundary surface and his equation i s also shown.
It
It
was
e s s e n t i a l l y independent
of
(apart from an i n i t i a l
Therefore, the
/
/
...
^ >
From Burl<
Uldrained Te;
From Roscoe et
E^udtion
6- M
^ 4 Drainec
'\
K 0 04S
^* dai7
K/A=oaa
Tan
\
<
\ \
M - I-2L7
-5
, ,
-7
-8
"9
10
P/Pe
Figure 45-Comparison of Theoretical and Experimental State Boundary Surfaces (Burland Plot)
122
0J/G3,
tests have
Therefore there is
end
In
mately the same for these tests as for those performed at the
normal rate but with drainage top and bottom.
Deviator and
The water
considered.
123
LEGEND
a S - 18, CT'- 40 pS.l.
O S- 19, %S 70 p.S.I.
t
I40
130
s-i
Sfno'm Rat* = o i e s f c
120
110
30
a:
70
fe
or
60
>
UJ
50
9/
ao
111
\__A
loo
CL
---0
\ C'*70 R5.
4o
_ S-IB, 0"'=
e
4o
17
ps.l.
3o
o
(
0
10
15
20
25
30
(7k ff>
S
Sao
cr
<
a
J
40 PS.l.
talc O S % P e rHr
Strain I
LEGEND
_ S. .'iv
' I strain Rote o-lE5%
IS,^* TO RSI. J par Hr.
Strain
Rate o s % ,terMr.
5trqm
Rote
0-ies%, P c Hr.
6?
a
1-4.
1-2
K>
io :
is
eo
S H E A R STRAIN IM PER C E N T
23
Figure 4 7 - Effect of Strain Rate on the Principal Stress Ratio Vs. Strain
Relations for Drained Tests on Haney Clay
Fgure 46-Effed of Strain Rate . on the, Water Content VS. Strain Relations
for Drained Tests on Haney Clay
30
125
CHAPTER 8
CONCLUSIONS
8.1
CONCLUSIONS
Test
results
following
effective
that
clay,
stresses
there
and water
2. The R o s c o e
clay.
there
f o r sensitive
stress
the r e l a t i o n s h i p
and the d e v i a t o r
varying
lity
from
that
tests
as w e l l
one t o t h i r t y
energy
f o r drained
as c r e e p t e s t s ,
This
friction
which
i s only
of i n t e r n a l
one f u n d a m e n t a l
corresponds to a f r i c t i o n
b o t h s t r a i n and s t r a i n
The
depend
Roscoe
energy
This
and u n d r a i n e d
and f o r s t r a i n s
and e f f e c t i v e
"Independent"
energy changes
strength
cohesion
and t h a t ,
parameter,
M,
component, a n d i s i n d e p e n d e n t o f
rate.
equation further
on s t r a i n ,
f o r both
suggests the p o s s i b i -
arise
there
deformation of
i s a c o n s t a n t , M.
parameters
fact,
complex
soil.
plastic
in
(I960) suggested
t o a p p l y q u i t e w e l l t o Haney
parameters
from n e g l e c t
boundary
between t h e mean n o r m a l e f -
per c e n t .
the Hvorslev e f f e c t i v e
state
be more
stress corrected
was f o u n d t o be a p p r o x i m a t e l y t r u e
controlled
Henkel
might
t h a t whenever
t o volume c h a n g e a n d i n t e r n a l
strain
clay.
clays
between
i s independent of
i s not a unique
energy e q u a t i o n appears
i s occurring,
relationship
proposed f o r remolded
The e q u a t i o n i m p l i e s
fective
due
content which
f o r normally loaded s e n s i t i v e
the r e l a t i o n s h i p
soil
i s not a unique
p a t h , or a l t e r n a t i v e l y ,
surface
to the
conclusions:
1. F o r s e n s i t i v e
stress
i t i s also
implies
independent
that,
since
of p a r t i c l e
M does n o t
orientation
126
or structure.
stress which i s
De-
the subsequent
following
topics:
1. It was
mental strength
parameter.
remolded
of a
calculated.
127
LIST OF SYMBOLS
- area of mineral to mineral contact
- pore pressure parameter
- stress due to e l e c t r i c a l a t t r a c t i v e forces
between
particles
- pore pressure parameter
- coefficient
- effective
of consolidation
cohesion parameter
stress invariant
- permeability
- coefficient
- s o i l strength
parameter
stress
stress
- deviator stress
- deviator stress corrected for energy
- deviator stress corrected for energy
- increment of deviator stress
- stress due to e l e c t r i c a l repulsive forces
particles
between
129
- r a t e of drainage
- time
t^Q
tj*
- time t o f a i l u r e
- time f a c t o r
- pore pressure
- r e s i d u a l pore pressure
AU
- average degree of c o n s o l i d a t i o n
- volume of sample
AV
- volumetric
strain
oV
- change i n v o l u m e t r i c
strain
- water, content
Sw
- change i n energy
AX
- s m a l l change i n l e v e l of n u l l
- length
Yw
- u n i t weight of water
point
unity
- shear
strain
Ei
- axial
strain
- increment of shear
T\
- f a c t o r d e p i c t i n g boundary drainage
T\
- r a t i o of d e v i a t o r
- slope
during
strain
condition
s t r e s s t o mean normal s t r e s s
of v o i d r a t i o versus n a t u r a l l o g a r i t h m
rebound
of pressure
130
0"
- t o t a l stress
Cj
- effective stress
0*^
- a x i a l effective stress
fj"i p :
- p r i n c i p a l t o t a l stresses
1,2,3
131
L . , and SIMONS, N . E . , I 9 6 0 .
"Comparison of Shear
Characteristics of Normally Consolidated C l a y s . " Proc.
C i v i l E n g . , Research Conference on Shear Strength of
S o i l s , Boulder, C o l o . , I 9 6 0 , p p . 711-726.
132
ASTM
John Wiley
133
NOORANY, I., and SEED, H.B., 1965. "A New Experimental Method
for the Determination of Hvorslev Strength Parameters f o r
Sensitive Clays." Proc. Sixth Int. Conf. S o i l Mech. and Found.
Eng., Canada, 1965, pp. 318-322.
POOROOSHASB, H.B., and ROSCOE, K.H., 1961. "The Correlation of
the Results of Shear Tests with Varying Degrees of D i l a t i o n . "
Proc. F i f t h Int. Conf. S o i l Mech., V o l . 1, pp. 297-30*+.
POOROOSHASB, H.B., and' ROSCOE, K.H., 1963. "A Graphical Approach
to the Stress-Strain Relationships of Normally Consolidated Clays."
Proc. NRC/ASTM Symposium on Laboratory Shear Testing, Ottawa,
1963.
POULOS, S.J., 196V. "Report on Control of Leakage i n the T r i a x i a l
Test." Harvard S o i l Mechanics Series No. 71, Cambridge, Mass.,
230 pp.
RENDULIC, L., 1 9 3 6 . "Relation Between Void Ratio and E f f e c t i v e
P r i n c i p a l Stresses for a Remolded S i l t y Clay." Proc. F i r s t Int.
Conference S o i l Mech. Found. Eng., Cambridge, V o l . 3, PP. V8-51.
RENDULIC, L., 1937. "Ein Grundgesetz der Tonraechanik und Sein
Experimentetler Beweiss." Der Bauingenieur, V o l . 1 8 , pp. +59-+67.
l
"On the
Addison-
SEED, H.B., MITCHELL, J.K., and CHAN, C.K., I960. "The Strength
of Compacted S o i l . " Proc. Am. Soc. C i v i l Eng., Research
Conference on Shear Strength of Cohesive S o i l s , Boulder, Colo.,
I960, pp. 887-96V.
SCHMERTMANN, J.H., 1963. "Generalizing and Measuring the Hvorslev
E f f e c t i v e Components of Shear Resistance." Proc. NRC/ASTM
Symposium on Laboratory Shear Testing, Ottawa, 1963.
13V
of S o i l Mechanics."
John Wiley
1056.
135
APPENDIX
I t i s assumed to be
(22)
= AUI
i s A U U * where
(1 - U J J )
By the p r i n c i p a l of
(23)
i=l
Fig.49i
observed Relation
a:
o
I
t
t,t t
4
TIME
4
Fig.49b
u
tt
3
l/
<P
Ul
ACT| (In&tarftaneous)
ar
a.
ul
TIME
Fig. 4 3 c
137
T < .283
(2V)
T ^ .283
(25)
- f n
fT+.0851 \
(1 - U) = 10 V
.9332 ^
where
T = y_t
h2
therefore 1 - U
= f (T ) = f ( C y t i j )
h2
i;j
(26)
i;J
(27)
^GT, f (v*ij)
How-
T y p i c a l devia-
tor stress and pore pressure versus s t r a i n relationships f o r undrained tests are shown i n Figure 50a.
136
to
' PORE
SO
(initial
PRESSURE
Pon
*|.
I*)
40
- DEVIATOR
O-30
STRESS
<n
UNDRAIh IED T E S T
10
io
es
eo
15
30
Fig.50a
1
<
z
o
yQ.
2
inc'ns mental A
&oe* to Infinity ot
Ll
h
or *
-6
io
is
SHEAR STRAIN
IN
eo
PER
CENT
30
Fig. 5 0 b
70
CO
$50
u?
(0
-40
z
iP
Ul 30
Or
or 20
o
> 10
ui
DRAINED
i
i
>
15
SO
SHEAR STRAIN IN PER CENT
10
1 EST
S5
so
139
calculated from Figure 50a are shown i n Figure50b.
It is
seen
goes to i n f i n i t y .
After maximum
AO
after
quite
infinity
However,
Values of
For oedometer
and the r e l a t i o n
straight
1 0
p'
cm 2 /sec.
( 2 8 )
140
L
&
Drain*d
Oedometer
iTion
Tests
NOTE:
I. C Plotted N t e f M J S Average effective.
Stress For Load Increment".
v
K o8
0
ooa
0O25
O
ui
it)
ooe
>
z
g
0015
5
o
<
zo
o
u
u.
o
CV' 0 O 5 l - $ 0 3 l & L O C r p
I N A R E A O F I NTT REST
001
r-
7.
UJ
u.
U-
HJ
C l
\
0005
20
10
30
40
SO
60
70
60 90 100
Clay.
However, i t is understood
mentioned i n t h e i r
The c
10~3
10~3
c 's
v
cmvsec. was
chosen.
known at a l l times
dissipated under
applied immediately
prior to the
APPENDIX I I
143
COMPRESSION TEST
TRIAXIAL
J
SOIL
SAMPLE :
SPECIFIC
TEST
Hon^y
&RAYITY:
Undrained
Height of
Areq
AFTER
g | 0
= 2-77S| ,
n
3 4 C r n
V =
,|.to | t
S
= 32-75 Cm.
in Hf.
Consolidated
WATER
of
Saturation
S -
Change in
^M\tt Content
>
- s-feacrn, " = i - 5 o i n .
He
CONTENTS
Specimen
Location
Container
Si'de
Side
Side
Side
2.
4-
No.
Top
v/hole 4tWhole x .
Initial!*
Finalla
c
6ottolT1
3>9 S3
34-11
42-76
44-37
3S'I9
29- It
35-11
36-30
3.4- IB
6-64
495
7-6S
-o7
17-44.
17-Si
IT 17
17-29
last
17-47
Soil m grn*
15-73
II 63
1794
19-01
15-62
I6-5C
9|>30 91-30
Water Content ( U J ) %
4e-*
44.50 4270
40-4
4o-
4i
Wt. Water
in o/ns
Wt-
Container
Wf.
Dry
i n gms.
CONTENT
3603
94-sa
144 78
6,- 7
li 47 39-54 3501
4&-SO
5-02 53-48
3S-3
CHECK
Initial wt.
Initial
FiHo| ui%
= 4J
111% -From
Change, m m%
REMARKS
Trimming* Mat Further
~ 42-5
and
P,.jc
CONSOLIDATION
Change in Vol. - fe 15 Cc
WATER
Average
Degree
Change
\blume ( V ) 7 3 0 C m \
3-620 10-30
Bottom 11-36
Sample = 7-OSCrn.
A t + 2A -r A
4-
10-36
H-40 3 65 10-33
Centre
RY: RM-6.
TESTED
DIMENSIONS
Dia.
Aneq
in Cm. in Cm?
11-43
N0.:_
TEST
Consolidated
MEASURED
Circ,
in Cm.
Top
Clgy
SO
TYPE :
INITIAL
leacBggasgraagaB
= 43-1
NO.: a
D A T E : Jujy|3ja&5
TESTED BY: RM..B.
TIME
HRJ.
10
10
ft-5
SK6MPT
- B
N
4-1
S3
99
064
zo
-0-1
ll
-0|
-4-4
-4-7
-oa
S9B
-47
-ot
4-9-8 46 a
-4-8
IOO
20
GO
-o-e.59-B
71-3
-Ol
7ia
OVER ALL
540
567
roi
4.4 0
9B
o sa
-4-9
11-4
24
C3-5
IOO
9 9
\<o 50
Ml
10-5
99
40
12-4
ill
ea-2
IE
170
io-o
ao
I9;9
II
70%3 -3-0
B ^-|- *IOO
145
CONSOLIDATED
TRIAXIAL
TEST
P R E L I M I N A R Y CONSOLIDATION
CHAMBER
PRES.
GAU&E =
TEST
7 1 - 3 PS.l-
NO:
- O l
RS-I.
DATE :
JULY
ELEVATION
CORRECTION a r - l - 2
RSI-
TESTED
&Y:
CHAMBER
PRESSURE
G-AUcVE.
CORRECTION
EFFECTIVE
DATE
7 0 0 PS.l.
STRESS
TIME
HRS)
TULYI<1
'65
BACK
CHAN6E
ELAPS66
TIME TIME
MIN.
PRES.
4-7
DIAL
RD.
IN.
TO
BUfi.
RD.
CC
o.oo
OOO
0:04
0>ZG
<] 5 5
0:15
0-50
948
0:34
0-75
9- 3 6
IOO
9 26
IOO
i.i4
940O
171
l'2S
9 Ob
ISO
32.2A
3:04
I7S
4:00
00
6-85
2-SO
6-64
3.00
aqo
8-43
12* 15
3-50
itoo
4..00
600
2SO0
500
75a
36:O0
600 0 ^ 7 0
7-eo
49:00
7 00
a 05
61:00
100:00 1000
&-oa
120.00 I 0 3 S 0 * 9 4 7
sao
131:00
Tuuy to
l:S
a 00
1 l-4a.
5-fc6
08635
15fc
GOO
TEMP
lO-O RS.I
RS.|.
a
IS,
l%5
PM.B
CONSOLIDATED
Consolidated
Consolidated
Chamber
Time
Hn
Por.
Pres.
Gouge
UNDRAINED
> Proving
In
TRIAXIAL
Cor.
TEST
Rin^ No.
Teat
Pressure 70 O P S . l T e m p .
Vertical
Pore
Prv%. Dial
P.S.I.
in-
Proviig
146
- 4 C
Dial
Time
Hr
Pore
Pre*.
No:
Cor.
Pbre
Pres.
RS-I.
CrtlLl^e
Di'c,|
in.
Proving
Dial
15-583
-4-6.
|0-0
8835
42-5
2358
540
-4 8
49-2
77*3 207-3
15-633 iS-(b
-44.
ll-o
86Z2.
5O0
2S-IO
557
-4-8
50-q
7557 206-3
15-717
16- C
-4fe
120
610
25-18
55-1
-4-
SI-1
7414 2 0 4 7
I5-&JS
17-7
-4-fo
13-1
700
2B-28
56-3
-4-9
53*4
7057 2017
15-1+0
l&B
-47
14-1
8815
800
30-4S 5 ^ 5
-4-*)
54-fc
'6676
16-08
-4-7
ISi
8S07 TI-0
33-00 60-2
-4H
55-3
6 340 196-5
16-15
2 a - o -4-7
17*
B80O 100-0
S5-42
60-Q
-4-9
55^
5%7 194-7
23-4
-4-7
167
87=11 lll'O
1733
(*\>B- 4 1
56-3
S66J 1932
16-47
25-3
-47
8778 IC| 0
38-50
-4-9
5-6-3
5488 191-7
Ifc-fcO
26>& - 4 7
67*7 I30-5
40-5& 617
-4-9
S6-8
5 R 5 iqo-o
16-78
-4-7
&750 1407
4|-0
617
-4-q
56-8
5H6. 1 9 0 0
16-^6
-4-7
25-5
8733 i s o - e
4 7 0 8 427
-4--V
57-8
4174
-4-fl
578
4114 1873
56-1
2600 183-3
S8-<|
2I?8
22-1
1717
31*7
-4-7
27-0
7IO Ifeoo
4 7 ' 3 0 62.-7
1742-
33-1
-47
2T-Z
-5682 I70-O
57-50 63-o
I7-7S
"i&-3 -47
3l-6>
8643
leo^
60-17
63-9
IV17
31-8
-47
35-1
8Slo
Ho-o
62-io
64-0
18-17
42-5
-47
37-8
8501 IT* 2
65-00 6 4 2 .
l<V33 44-5
"4-7
11-8
&4 e o s o
72-45
42-8
<S2C6. 2 0 ^ 3
20-38 47-6> - . B
4
ai-2Z
50 5 -4.. 8
4S7
8|3fc 210-0
1-70
sn
4>ff
S062 20<V4r
-4>*
-4-n
I8Z--3
1765 t e 7
-4-T
S<W
51'3
1453 178-6
.0307
m-7
147
TEST NO. 2
CONSOLIDATION PRES.= 60.0
CONSOLIDATED UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL TEST
ELAPSED TI.ME
HOURS
-0.00
0.05
0. 13
0.25
0.36
Oi50
0.60
0.73
0.89
1.02
1.20
1. 38
1.58
1.84
2.17
2.59
3.19
3. 75
4;. 80
5.64
6. 12
7.25
8.00
9.52
10.40
12.70
14.87
17.42
19.84
21 .75
22.92
24.92
25.42
31.50
31*92
41.92
44.58
47.32
49.42
56.87
STRAIN
PFR f.FNT
0.00
0.01
0.03
0.05
0.07
0. 10
0.13
0.16 '
0.21
0.25
0.31
0. 38
0.46
0.56
0.71
0.90
1.20
1.50
2.0.9
2.57
2.84
3.46
3.87
4_.JjO_
5.22
6. 54
7.94
9.17
10.54
11 .66
12.31
13.38
13.67
17. 14
17.36
22.92
24.44
25.99
27. 14
31.35
DEFORMATION
IN._ PER DAY .
-0.000
0.144
0.161
0.125
0.134
0. 135
0.141
0. 144
0.154
0.160
0.170
0.178
0.190
0.200
0.213
0.227
0.245
0.261
0.285
0.298
0.303
0.312
0.316
0.322
0.328
0.336
0.349
0.344
0.347
- 0.350
0.351
0.351
0.351
0.355
0.355
0..J3.5_7_
0.358
0.359
0.359
0.360
SIGMA 1 EFF
PSI
60.0
60.6
61.9
62.7
63.8
64.3
64.8
65.7
64.9
66.4
66.8
6X..2
67.7
67.6
67.3
65.8
64.9
64..0
61.7
58.8
57.8
56.0
54.2
52.0
51.4
48.0
45.7
44.2
42.8
. - 4.L..8.
41.3
40.2
40.1
37.6
37.5
3_4...8
33.4
32.5
31.6
30.3
ROOT 2 SIGMA 3
EFF
I.N PS.I_ .
84.8
83.4
82.0
80.5
79.0
76.5
74.5
72.5
68.4
67.7
65.2
6.2.9
60.8
57.7
54.3
49.3
45.5
42.7
38.5
34.4
33.2
31.4
29.4
2.7_..0.
26.7
23.5
21.8
20.8
19.9
L9...4
19.4
18.7
18.7
17.3
17.3
16.8
15.7
15.4
15.1
15.1
DEVIATOR
SXRESS PS.l
-0.0
1.6
3.9
5.8
7.9
.1.0...2
12.1
14.4
16.5
18.5
20.7
22.7
24.7
26.8
28.9
30.9
32.7
33.8
34.5
34.5
34.3
33.8
33.4
PRINCIPAL
SJRE.S.S RAXID
1.00
1.03
1.07
1.10
1.14
1.19
1.23
1.28
I
1.34
1.39
1.45
1.51
1.57
1.66
1.75
1.88
f
2.02
2.12
2.27
2.42
2.46
2.52
2.61
2 . 72
. 32..J?
_
32.5
2.72
2.89
31.4
2.97
30.3
29.5
3.01
28.7
3.04
28...1 _
3.05
27.6
3.02
[
27.0
3.04
I
26.9
3.04
1
25.4
3.08
25.3
3.07
_ 2.93
. 22..9.
_
3.01
22.3
2.98
21.6
2.96
20.9
2.83
19.6
1
SKEMPTON A
0.00
0.63
0.51
0.53
0.52
0.58
0.60
0.60
0. 70
0.65
0.67
0.68
0.69
0.72
0.75
0.81
0.85
0.88
0.95
1.04
1.06
1.12
1.17
1.24
1.27
1. 38
1.47
1.53
1.60
1.65
1.68
1.73
1.74
1.88
1.89
_ 2. 10
2. 19
2.27
2.35
2.52
PORE PRESSURE
PSI
.
10.0
11.0
12.0
13.1
14. 1
. 15._9
_ _
17.3
18.7
21.6
22. 1
23.9
25.5
27.0
29.2
31.6
35.1
37.8
39.8
42.8
45.7
46.5
47.8
49.2
5.0,._9.
51.1
53.4
54.6
55.3
55.9
56.3. ..
56.3
56.8
56.8
57.8
57.8
58. 1.
58.9
59.1
59.3
59.3
STRAIN
PER CENT
0.00
0.01
0.03
0.05
0.07
0.10
0. 13
0. 16
0.21
0.2 5
0.31
0.38
0.46
0.56
0.71
0.90
1.20
1.50
2.09
2.57
2.84
3.46
3.87
4.70
5.22
6.54
7.94
9.17
10.54
11.66
12.31
13.38
13.67
17. 14
17.36
22.92
24.44
25.99
27.14
31.35
P EFFECTIVE
ROSCOE PSI
60.0
59. 5
59.3
58.8
58.5
57.5
56.7
56.1
53.9
54.1
53.0
52. 1
51.2
49.7
48.0
45.2
43.1
41.5
38.7
35.8
34.9
33.5
31.9
30.1
29.7
27.1
25.5
24.5
23.7
23.1
22.9
22.2
22.2
20.7
20.6
19.5
18.5
18. 1
17.7
17.2
Q
ROSCOE PSI
-0.0
1.6
3.9
5.8
7.9
10.2
12. 1
14.4
16.5
18.5
20.7
22.7
24.7
26.8
28.9
30.9
32.7
33.8
34.5
34.5
34.3
33.8
33.4
32.9
32.5
31.4
30.3
29.5
28.7
28. 1
27.6
27.0
26.9
25.4
25.3
22.9
22.3
21.6
20.9
19.6
TEST
QW
ROSCOE PSI
0.0 "
77.8
59.1
64.0
61.4
87.0
71.9
85.9
61.5
28.9
59.2
52.9
53.0
58.7
59.6
58.2
47.4
46.0
47.2
44.3
41.0
41.1
40.9
35.8
34.8
35.0
32.4
31.1
30.0
28.9
28.5
27.4
27.1
25.7
25.6
23.9
23.2
22.2
21.5
0.0
M
ROSCOE
0.00
1.31
1.00
1.09
1.05
1.51
1.27
1.53
1.14
0.53
1.12
1.02
1.03
1.18
1.24
1.29
1.10
1.11
1.22
1.24
1.17
1.23
1.28
1.19
1.17
1.29
1.27
1.27
1.27
1.25
1.24
1.24
1.23
1.24
1.24
1.23
1.25
1.23_
1.21
0.00
TEST NO. 2
CONSOLIDATION PRES.= 60.0
UNIT P
UNIT Q
ROSCOE
ROSCOE
1.00
-0.00
0.99
0.03
0.99
0.07
0.98
0.10
0.98
0.13
0.96
0.17
0.20
0.95
0.94
0.24
0.90
0.28
0.90
0.31
0.88
0.34
0.87
0.38
0.85
0.41
0.45
0.83
0.80
0.48
0.;75
0.51
0.54
0.72
0.69
0.56
0.57
0.64
0.60
0.57
0.57
0.58
0.56
0.56
0.53
0.56
0.50
0.55
0.50
0.54
0.45
0.52_
0.51
0.43
0.41
0.49
0.39
0.48
0.47
0.38
0.46
0.38
0.37
0_.45
0.37
0.45
0.34
0.42
0.34
0.42
0.33
0.38
0.37
0.31
0.36
0.30
0.29
0.35
0.29
0.33
,
S
TEST NO.17
CONSOLIDATION PRES.= 4 0 . 0
CONSOLIDATED DRAINED TRIAXIAL
NO ALLOWANCE MADE FOR RESIDUAL PORE PRESSURE
SHEAR
AXIAL
DEFORMATION
WATER
DEVIATOR
STRAIN
STRAIN
IN.PER DAY
CONTENT
STRESS
PER CENT
PSI
-0.00
-0.00
-0.000
37.9
0.0
0.04
0.05
0. 146
37.9
4__1
0.13
0.16
0.172
37.8
9.2
0.18
0.23
0.182
37.8
11.9
0. 2 5
0.31
0. 191
37. 8
J___._7
0.35
0.46
0.57
0.73
0.93
1.12
1.42
1.85
2.61
3.40
3.87
4.29
4.77
5.25
8.07
8.72
9.34
10.50
11.22
11.91
12.38
12.95
13.69
_14_._16
14.68
15.20
19.29
20.04
20.78
2_1._9.3_
22.70
23.26
23.59
24.25
25.05
25.42
25.96
26.55
27. 17
27.69
28.03
28.77
29.62
30.65
0.45
0.59
0.74
0.97
1.23
1.50
1.92
2.51
3.57
4.60
5.21
5.77
6.40
7.03
10.50
11.28
12.03
13.39
14.21
15.02
15.56
16.21
17.05
17.58
18.14
18.72
23.20
24.01
24.81
26.03
26.84
27.44
27.79
28.49
29.33
29.72
30.29
30.90
31.54
32.08
32.44
3 3_. 2 0
34.08
35.13
0.211
0.224
0.235
0.248
0.264
0.277
0.288
0.298
0.312
0.321
0.326
0.330
0.331
0.331
0.338
0.338
0.338
0.J39
0.341
0.342
C.34I
0.341
0.341
0.3 42
0.343
0.344
0.345
0.345
0.344
_0.345
0.346
0.346
0.346
0.346
0.345
0.346
0.346
0.347
0.347
0.348
0.348
0.347
0.347
0.348
37.7
37.6
37.5
37.4
37.3
37. 1
36.8
36.4
35.8
35.2
34.9
34.6
34.3
34.0
32.5
32.2
32.0
31 .5
31.3
31.0
30.9
30.7
30.5
30.4
30.2
30.1
29.3
29.1
29.0
28.8.
28.7
28.6
28.6
28.5
28.4
28.4
28.3
28.3
28.2
28.2
28.2
2_8__1
28.0
28.0
17.9
20.8
23.5
26.6
28.6
29.9
30.8
31.5
33.2
34.6
35.7
36.8
37.7
38.8
46.9
48.3
50.4
53. 3
54.8
56.2
57.0
58.6
60.2
61.1
62.1
62.8
68.3
68.8
69.9
70.5
71.0
71.3
71.3
71.3
71.8
71.9
72.6
72.0
72.0
71.9
71.6
JjL. 4
71.8
71.7
SIGMA 1
EFF.
PSI
40.0
44. 1
49.2
51.9
'S*t*3
57.9
60.8
63.5
66.6
68.6
69.9
70.8
71.5
73.2
74.6
75.7
76_-J
77.7
78.8
86.9
88.3
90.4
93.3
94.8
96.2
97.0
98.6
100.2
101.1
102.1
102.8
108.3
108.8
109.9
110.5
111.6
111.3
111.3
111.3
111.8
111.9
112.0
112.0
112.0
111.9
111.6
111.4
111.8
111.7
TEST
ALLOWANCE MADE FOR RESIDUAL PORE PRESSURE
PORE
SIGMA 3
ROOT 2
SIGMA 1PRINCIPAL
PRES.
EFF.
SIGMA 3
EFF.
STRESS
PSI
PSI
E F F . PS I
PSI
RATIO
0.0
40.0
56.6
40.0
1.00
0__5
39.5
55.9
43.6
1. 10
0.8
39.2
55.4
48.4
1-23
0.9
39.1
55.3
51.0
1.30
PRINCIPAL
STRE.SS
RATIO
1.00
1. 10
1.23
1.30
1.37
1.45
1.52
1.59
1.67
1.72
1.75
1.77
1.79
1.83
1.87
1.89
1.92
1.94
1.97
2. 17
2.21
2.26
2.33
2.37
2.40
2.42
2.46
2.51
2.53
2.55
2.57
2.71
2.72
2.75
2_._76.__.
2.78
2.78
2.78
2.78
2.80
2.80
2.80
2.80
2.80
2.80
2.79
2.79
2.79
2.79
UO
1.4
1.3
1^5
1.6
1.8
2.1
2.0
2.2
______
2.4
2.5
______
2.5
2.5
2___3
2.3
2.4
2_.2_
2.2
2.2
______
2.1
1.8
1.7
1.8
1.8
1__5
1.4
1.2
i.JL
1.3
1.1
0__9
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.7
0.7
0__7
0.7
0.8
_0_._5..
0.5
0.0
39.0
38.6
38.7
38.5
38.4
38.2
37.9
38.0
37.8
37.7
37.6
37.5
37.5
37.5
37.5
37.7
37.7
37.6
37.8
37.8
37.8
37.9
37.9
38.2
38.3
38.2
38.2
38.5
.
38.6
38.8
3_j3_._9
38.7
38.9
39.1
39.0
39.0
39.0. .
39.3
39.3
39.3
39.3
39.2
39-A _._
39.5
40.0
55.1
54.6
54.7
54.5
54.3
54.0
53.6
53.7
53.5
53.4
53.2
53.0
53.0
53.0
53.1
53.3
53.3
53.2
53.4
53.4
53.5
53.6
53.6
54.0
5 4_._1 54.0
54.0
54.4
54.6
54.9
55.0
54.7
55.1
55.3
55.2
55.2
55..X.
55.5
55.6
55.6
55.5
55.4
_5 5^. 7
55.9
56.6
53.7
56.5
59.4
62.0
65.0
66.8
67.7
68.7
69.3
70.9
72.3
73.2
74.2
75.2
76.3
84.6
86.0
88.0
91. 1
92.6
94.0
94.9
96.4
98.4
9_9_- 4
100.3
101.0
106.7
107.5
108.7
109.4
109.7
110.2
110.4
110.4
110.8
1.1.0...9
111.2
111.3
111.3
111.1
110.8
110...8
111.3
111.7
1.38
1.46
1.54
1.61
1.69
1.75
1.79
1.81
1.83
1.88
1.92
1.95
1__98
2.00
2.03
2.24
2.28
2.34
2.41
2.45
2.49
2.50
2.55
2.58
2.60
2.63
2.64
2.77
2.78
2.80
2.81
2.84
2.83
2.82
2.83
2.84
2.85
2.83
2.83
2.83
2.83
2.83
2 ._8_1
2.82
2.79
ISO
SHEAR
STRAIN
-0.00
0.04
0.13
0.18
0.25
0.35
0.46
0.57
0.73
0.93
1.12
1.42
1.85
2.61
3.40
3.87
4.29
4.77
5.25
8.07
8.72
9.34
10.50
11.22
11.91
12.38
12.95
13.69
14. 16
14.68
15.20
19.29
20.04
20.78
21.93
22.70
23.26
23.59
24.25
25.05
25.42
25.96
26.55
27.17
27.69
28.03
28.77
29.62
30.65
P
PSI
40.0
41.3
_43.0
43.9
44.9
45.9
46.9
47.8
_48.8
49.5
49.9
50.2
50.4
51.0
51.5
51.8
52.2
52.5
52.9
55.6
56.0
56.7
57.7
58.2
58.7
58.9
59.5
60.0
60.3
60.6
60.9
62.7
62.9
63.2
63.4
63.6
63.7
63.7
63.7
63.9
63.9
63.9
63.9
63.9
63.9
63.8
63.7
63.9
63.9
P MINUS
PP. PSI
40.0
40.8
42.2
43. 1
43.8
44.5
45.5
46.3
47.2
47.7
47.8
48.2
48.3
48.7
49. 1
49.4
49.7
50.0
50.4
53.3
53.7
54.4
55.5
56.0
56.5
56.8
57.3
58.2
58.6
58.9
59.1
61.2
61.5
62.0
62.3
62. 3
62.6
62.8
62.8
62.9
62.9
63.2
63.3
63.2
63.1
63.0
63.1
63.4
63.9
Q
PSI
0.0
4.1
9.2
11.9
14.7
17.9
20.8
23.5
26.6
28.6
29.9
30.8
31.5
33.2
34.6
35.7
36.8
37.7
38.8
46.9
48.3
50.4
53.3
54.8
56.2
57.0
58.6
60.2
61.1
62.1
62.8
68.3
68.8
69.9
70.5
71.0
71.3
71.3
71.3
71.8
71.9
72.0
72.0
72.0
71.9
71.6
71.4
71.8
71.7
QW
PSI
-49.7
-36.8
._rP.8
4.8
22. 1
36.9
42.2
55.0
59.8
76. 1
81.1
85.2
86.3
84.4
82.4
83. 1
84.8
84.1
83.7
79.7
80.1
80.4
78.9
80.0
80.8
80.9
81.3
78.6
78.2
.78.6
79.2
82.8
81.9
81.4
80.3
82.0
79.6
80.3
79.5
79.7
79.9
77.9
78.6
77.4
79.2
78.2
77.5
76.0
0.0
QW(PP)
PSI
28.1
30.0
47_9
46.0
56.1
63.8
64.4
73.6
72.9
83.6
85.5
87.4
87.4 .
84.6
82.1
82.7
84. 1
83.6
83.3
79.9
80.8
81.1
79.6
80.6
81.2
81.6
82.0
79.4
79.1
79.3
79.8
83.0
82_._t
81.8
80.6
82.2
79.7
80.3
79.6
79.8
80.0
78.0
78.5
77.2
78.8
77.9
77.4
76.0
0.0
M
-1.24
-0.89
-0.02
0. 11
0.49
0.80
0.90
1. 15
1.23
1.54
1.63
1.70
1.71
1.66
1.60
1.60
1.62
1.60
1.58
1.43
1.43
1.42
1.37
1.37
1.38
1.37
1.37
1.31
1.30
1.30
1.30
1.32
1 ._30
1.29
1.27
1.29
1.25
1.26
1.25
1.25
1.25
1.22
1.23
1.21
1.24
1.23
1.22
1.19
0.00
M(PP )
0.70
0.73
1.14
1.07
1.28
1.43
1.42
1.59
1.54
1.75
1.79
1.81
1.81
1.74
1.67
1.68
1.69
1.67
1.65
1.50
1.50
1.49
1.43
1.44
1.44
1.44
1.43
1.37
1.35
1.35
1.35
1.36
1 jJ34
1.32
1.29
1.32
1.27
1.28
1.27
1.27
1.27
1.2 3
1.24
1.22
1.25
1.24
1.23
1.20
0.00
P/PE
1.00
1.03
1.07
1.09
1. l l
I . 12
1.13
1.14
1. 14
1. 14
1.12
1.09
1.04
0.97
0.91
0.88
0.85
0.82
0.79
0.68
0.67
0.65
0.62
0.61
0.59
0.59
0.58
0.56
0.56
0.55
0.55
0.50
0.49
0.49
0.48
0.48
0.47
0.47
0.46
0.46
0.46
0.45
0.45
0.45
0.45
0.44
0.44
0.44
0.43
P/PE
( PP)
1.00
1.02
1.05
1.07
1.08
1.08
1.10
1.10
1. 10
1. 10
1.07
1.04
1.00
0.93
0.87
0.83
0.81
0.78
0.75
0.66
0.64
0.62
0.60
0.59
0.57
0. 56
0.56
0.55
0.54
0.54
0.53
0.49
0.48
0.48
0.47
0.47
0.46
0.46
0.46
0.45
0.45
0.45
0.45
0.44
0.44
0.44
0.43
0.43
0.43
'
0.00
0. 10
0.23
0.29
0. 36
0.44
0.50
0.56
0.62
0.66
0.67
0.67
0.65
0.63
0.61
0.60
0.60
0.59
0.58
0.58
0.57
0.58
0.58
0.57
0.57
0. 57
0.57
0.57
0.57
0.57
0.56
0.55
0.54
0.54
0.53
0.53
0.53
0.53
0.52
0.52
0.51
0.51
0.51
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.49
0.49
0.49
<
151
CONSOLIDATION
SHEAR
STRAIN
-0.00
_J0.,Q4
0.13
0.18
0.25
0.35
0.46
_ 0..J57
0.73
0.93
1.12
1.42
1.85
_ 2.61
3.40
3.87
4.29
4.77
5.25
8.07
8.72
9.34
10.50
11.22
11.91
12.38
12.95
13.69
14.16
14.68
15.20
19.29 _
20.04
20.78
21.93
22.70
23.26
2 3...59
24.25
25.05
25.42
25.96
26.55
_2 7_._17
27.69
28.03
28.77
29.62
30.65
PORE P R E S S U R E
CV.H,A
A CONSTANT
K.H
CONSTANT
CV,H VARY
VARY
0.0
0.0
0.0
3_2
3._2
0.5
5.8
5.9
0.8
6.7
6.9
0.9
7____
7_8
l__0_
7.8
8.4
1.4
7.8
8.6
1.3
7 ._7
8.J.
Ls5_
7.0
8.2
1.6
5.8
7.1
1.8
4___5
5__J5
2.1
2.7
3.7
2.0
1.3
1.9
2.2
0.8
1.1
2.3
0.6
0.8
2.4
0.8
0.9
2.5
0___?
1.0
2.5
0.7
0.9
2.5
0.7
0.9
2.5
0.4
0._5
2_3_
0.7
0.8
2.3
l . l
1.2
2.4
0___9
UO
2.2
0.9
1.0
2.2
0.8
0.9
2.2
J3_7
0.8
2.1
0.9
1.0
2.1
0.9
1.0
1.8
0__9
0__9
1.7
0.9
0.9
1.8
0.7
0.8
1.8
0.1
0..1.
1.5.
0.2
0.2
1.4
0.5
0.4
1.2
0__3
0_2
1.1
0.3
0.3
1.3
0.2
0.2
1.1
0,. 2
_0 .JL
0..9.
0.1
0.0
1.0
0.2
0.2
1.0
0__2
0.2
U0_
0.1
0.1
0.7
0.1
0.0
0.7
0_._0
QL._0
JDL._7_
-0.1
-0.1
0.7
-0.2
-0.2
0.8
-Q. 1
-0.1
0.6
0.1
0.1
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
TEST NO.17
PRES.= 4 0 . 0