Advance Soil mechanics

Present by Mr. Sieng PEOU

Master science of
geotechnical engineering
 Soils particle size

S o i ls

C o a r s e g r a i n e d s o i ls F i n e g r a in e d s o i ls

G ra v e l S and S i lt C la y

1 9 .5 m m > d > 4 . 7 6 m m 4 .7 6 m m > d > 0 .0 7 5 m m 0 . 0 7 5 m m > d > 0 .0 0 2 m m d < 0 .0 0 2 m m

.
 Sieve analysis method
For coarse
grained soils
Retained cumulative

%R= weight.retained .cumulative

 100%
total.weight

Passing cumulative
%P = 100-%R
 Logarithm scale
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100

a
Logd

If 0.001<d<0.01 If 0.01<d<0.1 If 0.1<d<1 If 1<d<10

X=a.Log(1000d) X=a.Log(100d) X=a.Log(10d) X=a.Log(d)

If 10<d<100
X=a.Log(0.1d)
Hydrometer
analysis

For fine
grained soils
 Hydrometer analysis
P%-passing cumulative
a- soil factor
R  R
P%  a *100% R-hydrometer reading
WS R-corrected factor
Ws-weight of dry soil
L
DK D-soil diameter
T
K-hydrometer factor
L-depth of hydrometer in
Solution
time in minute
Soil particle size curve Uniformity coefficient UC=D60/D10

d10 d60
 Weight and volume relation ship

Va Wa=0

Vw Ww
V W

Vs Ws
W=Ws+Ww
V=Va+Vw+Vs
Vv =Va+Vw
V= Vv+Vs
 Soils sampling
• Disturbed sample for determine properties
physics of soils
• Undisturbed sample for determine
properties mechanics of soils, we call
undisturbed when AR(%)<10%
D02  Di2
AR (%)  2
 100
• AR :Area ratio Di

• Do: Outside diameter of the sampling tube

• Di:Inside diameter of the sampling tube
 Soils unit weight
Natural water

content:
Ww
 100%
Ws

Bulk unit W  Gs 

weight: S e
  w
V  1 e 

Dry unit weight:

Ws  
 d
V 
1
100
Ws
Unit weight of particle solid: s
Vs
Another parameter
Void
Vvratio: s   d
e  d
Vs
Degree of saturation:
Vw s 
S 100% 
Vv e  w
Saturated unit weight:
 Gs  e 
 sat    W
 1 e 
Effective unit weight:  G  1 
 '   sat   w  
s
  w
 1 e 
 Another parameters
Specific gravity:
Ws
Gs 
Vs   w
Relative density:
emax  e
DR   100%
emax  emin
Saturated water content:
 1 1 
 sat       w  100%
 d s 
 Typical values of unit weight of
soils
Soil type sat(KN/M3) d(KN/M3)

Gravel 20 to 22 15 to 17

Sand 18 to 20 13 to 16

Silt 18 to 20 14 to 18

Clay 16 to 22 14 to 21
 Description based on Relative
density
DR(%) Description
0 to 15 Very loose
15 to 35 Loose
35 to 65 Medium dense
65 to 85 Dense
85 to 100 Very dense
Soil consistence

A tte r b e r g
li m it

S h r in k a g e P la s t ic L iq u id
li m it li m it lim it
W s W p W L
State of cohesion soils
Plastic index
IP=L-P

   PLiquidity index
IP IL=
 State of cohesion soils

• If 0<<s : State solid

• If s<<p: State semi-solid

• If p<<L: State Plastic

• If >L : State Liquid

 CH

MH
CL
CL-ML

ML
 Soil classification
USCS:Unified soil classification system
(ASTM Test Designation D-2487)
ASTM: American Society for Testing
and Materials
Proposed by Casagrande in 1942,this
system was revised in 1952 by U.S
Bureau of Reclamation.
 Coarse grained soils

% R (0 .0 7 5 m m ) > 5 0 %
C o a r s e g r a in e d s o il s

% R ( 4 .7 6 m m ) > 0 .5 % R ( 0 .0 7 5 m m ) % R ( 4 .7 6 m m ) < 0 .5 % R ( 0 .0 7 5 m m )
G ra v e l S and
Gravel

C le a n G r a v e l
% P ( 0 .0 7 5 m m )< 5 %

UC<4 UC>4
P o o r ly g r a d e d G r a v e l W e ll g r a d e d G r a v e l
G P G W
 Gravel
M ix e d G r a v e l
5 % < % P ( 0 .0 7 5 m m ) < 1 2 %

UC<4 UC>4
O n p la s tic C h a rt C a s a g r a n d O n p la s tic C h a r t C a s a g r a n d e

L o c a te d C L o r C H L o c a te d M L o r M H L o c a te d C L - M L L o c a te d C L o r C H L o c a te d M L o r M H L o c a te d C L - M L
P o o rly g ra d e d P o o rly g ra d e d P o o r l y g r a d e d c la y e y W e ll g r a d e d W e ll g r a d e d W e ll g r a d e d c la y e y
c la y e y G r a v e l s ilty G r a v e l s ilty G r a v e l c la y e y G r a v e l s ilty G r a v e l s ilty G r a v e l
G C -G P G M -G P G C -G M -G P G C -G W G M -G W G C -G M -G W
 Gravel
M ix e d G r a v e l
% P ( 0 .0 7 5 m m ) > 1 2 %

L o c a te d C L o r C H L o c a te d M L o r M H L o c a te d C L -M L
c la y e y G r a v e l s i lty G r a v e l c la y e y s ilt y G r a v e l
GC GM G C -G M
Sand

C le a n S a n d
% P (0 .0 7 5 m m ) < 5 %

U C <6 U C >6
P o o r ly g r a d e d S a n d W e ll g r a d e d S a n d
S P S W
 Sand
M ix e d S a n d
5 % < % P ( 0 .0 7 5 m m ) < 1 2 %

UC<6 UC>6
O n p la s tic C h a r t C a s a g r a n d O n p la s tic C h a r t C a s a g r a n d e

L o c a te d C L o r C H L o c a te d M L o r M H L o c a te d C L - M L L o c a te d C L o r C H L o c a te d M L o r M H L o c a te d C L - M L
P o o rly g ra d e d P o o rly g ra d e d P o o r l y g r a d e d c la y e y W e ll g r a d e d W e ll g r a d e d W e ll g r a d e d c la y e y
c la y e y S a n d s ilty S a n d s ilty S a n d c la y e y S a n d s ilty S a n d s ilty S a n d
S C -S P S M -S P S C -S M - S P S C -S W S M -S W S C -S M -S W
 Sand
M ix e d S a n d
% P ( 0 .0 7 5 m m ) > 1 2 %

L o c a te d C L o r C H L o c a te d M L o r M H L o c a te d C L -M L
c la y e y S a n d s i lty S a n d c la y e y s i lt y S a n d
SC SM S C -S M
Fine grained soils

% R (0 .0 7 5 m m )< 5 0 %
F i n e g r a i n e d s o i ls
o n p la s t ic C h a r t C a s a g r a n d e

F o r C la y F o r S i lt F o r S ilt y c la y

C L C H M L M H C L -M L
 Lean Clay(CL)
If:% R ( 0 .0 7 5 m m )< 1 5 %
L e a n c la y
If% R ( 0 .0 7 5 m m ) > 1 5 %
Look

1 5 % < % R (0 .0 7 5 m m ) < 3 0 % 3 0 % < % R (0 .0 7 5 m m )< 5 0 %

% S >% G % S <% G % S >% G % S <% G

L e a n C la y L e a n C la y
W ith s a n d W it h g r a v e l

% G <15% % G >15% % S <15% % S >15%

S andy S andy G r a v e l ly G r a v e l ly
le a n C la y le a n C la y le a n C la y le a n C la y
w ith g r a v e l W ith s a n d
 Fat Clay(CH)
If:% R ( 0 .0 7 5 m m ) < 1 5 %
F a t c la y
If% R (0 .0 7 5 m m )> 1 5 %
Look

1 5 % < % R (0 .0 7 5 m m )< 3 0 % 3 0 % < % R (0 .0 7 5 m m )< 5 0 %

% S>% G % S<% G % S>% G % S<% G

F a t C la y F a t C la y
W ith s a n d W it h g r a v e l

% G <15% % G >15% % S <15% % S >15%

S andy S andy G r a v e l ly G r a v e l ly
F a t C la y F a t C la y F a t C la y F a t C la y
w ith g r a v e l W ith s a n d
 Silt (ML)
If:% R (0 .0 7 5 m m )< 1 5 %
S i lt
If% R (0 .0 7 5 m m )> 1 5 %
Look

1 5 % < % R ( 0 .0 7 5 m m )< 3 0 % 3 0 % < % R ( 0 .0 7 5 m m )< 5 0 %

% S >% G % S <% G % S >% G % S <% G

S i lt S i lt
W ith s a n d W it h g r a v e l

% G <15% % G >15% % S <15% % S >15%

S andy S andy G r a v e l ly G r a v e l ly
S i lt S i lt S i lt S i lt
w ith g r a v e l W ith s a n d
 Elastic Silt (MH)
If:% R ( 0 .0 7 5 m m )< 1 5 %
E l a s t i c S i lt
If% R (0 .0 7 5 m m ) > 1 5 %
Look

1 5 % < % R (0 .0 7 5 m m )< 3 0 % 3 0 % < % R (0 .0 7 5 m m )< 5 0 %

% S>% G % S<% G % S>% G % S<% G

E l a s t i c S i lt E l a s t i c S i lt
W ith s a n d W it h g r a v e l

% G <15% % G >15% % S <15% % S >15%

S andy S andy G r a v e l ly G r a v e l ly
E l a s t i c S i lt E l a s t i c S i lt E l a s t i c S i lt E l a s t i c S i lt
w ith g r a v e l W ith s a n d
 Silty clay (CL-ML)
If:% R ( 0 .0 7 5 m m )< 1 5 %
S ilty c la y
If% R (0 .0 7 5 m m )> 1 5 %
Look

1 5 % < % R (0 .0 7 5 m m ) < 3 0 % 3 0 % < % R (0 .0 7 5 m m )< 5 0 %

% S>% G % S<% G % S>% G % S<% G

S ilty c la y S ilty c la y
W ith s a n d W it h g r a v e l

% G <15% % G >15% % S <15% % S >15%

S andy S andy G r a v e l ly G r a v e l ly
S i lty c la y S i lty c la y S ilty c la y S ilty c la y
w ith g r a v e l W ith s a n d
 Soil classification
• AASHTO:Association American for
State Highway and Transportation
official, was developed 1929 and
proposed by the committee on
Materials for sub grades and
Granularity Type Boards of the
Highway Research Road in
1945(ASTM Test designation D-
3282;AASHTO method M145)
 Granular Materials %P(0.075mm)<35%
Group A-1 A-3 A-2
classificati
A1-a A1- A2-4 A2-5 A2-6 A2-7
on
b

%P(2mm) <50
%
%P(0.425 <30 <50 >51
% % %
mm)
%P(0.075 <15 <25 <10 <35% <35% <35% <35%
% % %
mm)
WL <40 >40 <40 >40

IP <6% NP <10 <10 >10 >10

Usual type Stone Fine Silty or clayey gravel and sand

fragment, sand
of gravel., sand
 Silty - clay material
%P(0.075mm)>35%
Group
Group A-4A-4 A-5 A-6 A-7
classification A-7-5
A-7-6
%P(2mm)
%P(0.425mm)
%P(0.075mm) >35% >35% >35% >35%

WL <40 >40 <40 >40

IP <10 <10 >10 >10

Usual type of Silty soils Clayey soils

materials

General Fair to poor

subgrade rating
For A-7-5: IP<WL-30 For A-7-6: IP>WL-30
 Group index GI

GI=(%P(0.075)-35)[0.2+0.005(WL-40)]+0.01(%P(0.075)-15)(IP-10)
 Soil compaction
• Standard Proctor test

• Modified Proctor test

Specification for standard Proctor test(based on ASTM test
designation 698-91)
Item Method A Method B Method C
Diameter of mold 101.6mm 101.6mm 152.4mm
Volume of mold 943.3cm3 943.3cm3 2124cm3
Weight of hammer 24.4 N 24.4 N 24.4 N
Height of hammer 304.8mm 304.8mm 304.8mm
drop
Number of hammer 25 25 56
blows per layer
Number of layer of 3 3 3
compaction
Energy of 591.3KNm/m3 591.3KNm/m3 591.3KNm/m
compaction 3

Soil to be used %R(4.75)<20 %R(4.75)>20 %R(9.5)>20

% % %
Used soil %R(9.5)<20% %R(19)<30
Specification for modified Proctor test(based on ASTM test designation 1557-91)

Item Method A Method B Method C

Diameter of mold 101.6mm 101.6mm 152.4mm
Volume of mold 943.3cm3 943.3cm3 2124cm3
Weight of hammer 44.5 N 44.5 N 44.5 N
Height of hammer 457.2mm 457.2mm 457.2mm
drop
Number of hammer 25 25 56
blows per layer
Number of layer of 5 5 5
compaction
Energy of 2696KNm/m3 2696KNm/m3 2696KNm/m
compaction 3

Soil to be used %R(4.75)<20% %R(4.75)>20 %R(9.5)>20

Used soil % %
Compaction equipment
 Compaction curve
MOISTURE DENSITY RELATIONSHIP CURVE

2.200

dmax

2.100
Dry Density g/m3

2.000

1.900
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00
Wopt
Moisture content %
 California Bearing Ratio(CBR)
• For study the strength of soils after
compacting in optimum state.
1-Recompaction the soil in optimum
state
2-Determine CBR in dry condition
3-Saturated the soil under water 4 days
4-Determine CBR in soaked condition
Test .unit.load
CBR= standard.unit.load 100%
 BEARING RATIO TEST (CBR)

Project: Pochentong Airport Job No.

Location of Project: Pochentong Airport Boring No 2 Sample No.2
Description of Soil:
Tested by: Mr. Men Tharith Date of Testing. 16/05/2002

CBR Test Load Data (soaked)

Mold
Surrcharge Curve CBR Test
Piston load Load.
2
Penetration. dial reading kgf/cm 20
mm ( unit )
0.000 0 0 18

1.00 0.045 2.3077 16

2.00 0.075 3.8462
14
3.00 0.11 5.641

)
2
4.00 0.145 7.4359 12

5.00 0.175 8.9744 Load (kgf/cm

10
6.00 0.21 10.769
7.00 0.25 12.821
8
P2.54
8.00 0.28 14.359 6
9.00 0.31 15.897 4
10.00 0.34 17.436
2
CBR(2.54)= 7.1429
0
Acceppted CBR= 7.14 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0

Renetration (mm)
Final water Top 7.9
conten, w% Midle 7.8
(soaked) Bottom 7.99
sample Averagee 7.8967
3 3
Wet unit wt. = 2.2952 g/cm Dry unit wt. = 2.13444 g/cm
3
Wet unit wt.(soaked) = 2.303 g/cm
Penetration(mm) Standard unit
load(Mpa)
2.5 6.9

5 10.3

7.5 13

10 16

12.7 18
CBR equipment
CBR equipment
 CBR special for field control
• Compaction the soils in optimum state with
different energy
1-Compaction 10 blows per layer and
saturated the soil under water during 4 days
2-Compaction 25 blows per layer and
saturated the soil under water during 4 days
3-Compaction 55 blows per layer and
saturated the soil under water during 4 days
4-Determine CBR in soaked condition for each
5-Plotted values CBR with dry density on
chart
CBR chart
CBR General Uses Classification system
rating
USCS AASHTO

0-3 Very Subgrade OH,CH,MH,OL A5,A6,A7

poor
3-7 Poor to Subgrade OH,CH,MH,OL A4,A5,A6,A7
fair
7-20 Fair Subbase OL,CL,ML,SC,S A2,A4,A6,A7
M,SP
20-50 Good Base GM,GC,SW, A1b,A2-5,
subbase SM,SP,GP A3,A2-6
>50 Excellent Base GW,GM A1-a,A2-4
A3
Control soils compaction
 d . field 100%
• %Compaction=  d max

• Determine field density by using:

1-Undisturbed sampling
2-Sand cone method
3-Balloon density equipment
4-Nuclear method
Sand cone method
 Control CBR
• Field CBR
• By using Dynamic cone penetration test DCP
1-Kleyn and Van Heerden(600cone) : Lg.(CBR)=2.632-1.28Lg.
(mm/blow)
 
2-Smith and Pratt (300cone) : Lg.(CBR)=2.555-1.145Lg.
(mm/blow)
 
3-VanVuuren (300 cone) : Lg.(CBR)=2.503-1.15Lg.
(mm/blow)
 
4-TRRL Road Note 8(600cone) : Lg.(CBR)=2.48-
1.057Lg(mm/blow)

• By using CBR Chart

CBR control
 Shear strength of soils
• Total Stress Analysis (TSA)
-for clayey soils with permeability very low,
so for short term loading soils and water
work together.
• Effective Stress Analysis(ESA)
-for sandy soils with high permeability,so for
short term loading soils work yourself only
• For analyze soils stability problems(bearing
capacity,slope stability,lateral pressure on
earth-retaining structure)
Effective stress in soils mass

• Total stress sat.Z

• Effective stress ’0’.Z
• Pore water pressure U= w.Z
’= sat- w
w unit weight of water
 Mohr-Coulomb Criteria
• The shear stress on the failure plan as
a linear function of the normal stress
(Coulomb,1776)
  c   tg
• A material fails because of a critical
combination of normal stress and
shear stress, and not from either
maximum normal or shear stress
alone (Mohr,1900)
Failure plan
x

f y




 Mohr-Coulomb failure criteria

Line Coulomb’s: tgC

C

 Unconfined compression test
• Type TSA test
• Undisturbed sample with
h0=2do
• Speed =2%/min
=2%/min=h/h0*100%/mi
n

• For determine undrained

cohesion Cu, in this case
u=0
qu
Mohr circle


Cu
0 qu

 Direct shear test
• Type undrained
test or drained
test
• Undisturbed
sample
• For determine
cohesion of soils
C and internal
friction angle of
soils 
• Build by
Casagrande
 Shear box
Loading plate Normal force
Porous
stone

 Shear force

 Shear box

Soil sample

Porous
stone
 Determine C & 


n ( i i )   i   i
tg 
n  i    i 
2 2

 i  tg   i
C 
n
C

0

 Triaxial test

• UU test: Unconsolidated undrained test

• CU test: Consolidated undrained test

• CD test: Consolidated drained test

Triaxial equipment
UU test


Cu
0  qu 
General relationship of consistency and
unconfined compression strength of clay
Consistency qu(KN/m2)
Very soft 0-25
Soft 25-50
Medium stiff 50-100
Stiff 100-200
Very stiff 200-400
hard >400
Empirical equation related to Cu and ’0
Reference Relationship Remarks
Skempton Cu=[0.11+0.0037.IP]. For normally
(1957) ’ 0 consolidated
clay
Cu from vane shear
test
Chandler(1988 Cu=[0.11+0.0037.IP]. Can be use for
) ’ c over
consolidated
Cu from vane shear
clay not valid
test
for sensitive
’c preconsolidation clay

pressure
Jamiolkowski Cu=[0.23 0.04].’c For lightly over
CU & CD test


C
0  

Typical values of drained Angle of friction
for Sand and Silt
Soil type  (degree)
Sand : Rounded grains
Loose 27-30
Medium dense 30-35
Dense 35-38
Sand : Angular grains
Loose 30-35
Medium dense 35-40
Dense 40-45
Gravel with some sand 34-48
Silts 26-35
Typical values of drained Angle of friction
and Cohesion for Gravel
USCS degree) C(KN/m2)
GW 40  5 0
GP 38  6 0
GM 36  4 0
GC 34  4 0
GM-ML 35  5 0
GM-GC 33  3 2  2
GC-CL 29  4 3  3
GC-CH 28  4 4  4
Typical values of drained Angle of friction
and Cohesion for Sand
USCS degree) C(KN/m2)
SW 38  5 0
SP 36  6 0
SM 34  3 0
SC 32  4 0
SM-ML 34  3 0
SM-SC 31  3 5  5
SC-CL 28  4 5  5
SC-CH 27  3 10  10
Typical values of drained Angle of friction
and Cohesion for Fine grained soils
USCS degree) C(KN/m2)

ML 33  4 0

CL-ML 30  4 15  10

CL 27  4 20  10

CH 22  4 25  10

OL 25  4 10  5

OH 22  4 10  5

MH 24  6 5  5
 Stress in soils mass
2a=L

Q
2b=B
O

M1
Determine stress in soils mass
1-Stress at the center of footing
vM=4.I2.q = 4.K.q

B L Z
q Q
BL
m
2Z
n
2Z
 
a

1  2mn m 2  n 2  1  m 2  n 2  2   2mn m 2  n 2  1 
I2   2  2   arctg  2 
4  m  n  m n  1  m  n  1 
2 2 2 2  m  n  m n  1 
2 2 2
 
Determine stress in soils mass
2-Stress at the corner of footing
vM1=I2.q = K.q

B L Z
q Q
BL
m 
Z
n 
Z

2a

1  2mn m 2  n 2  1  m 2  n 2  2   2mn m 2  n 2  1 
I2   2  2   arctg  2 
4  m  n  m n  1  m  n  1 
2 2 2 2  m  n  m n  1 
2 2 2
 
 Determine stress in soil mass by
using table b/a

K 0 0.1 0.2 1/3 0.4 0.5 2/3 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 5 10 

0 0.000 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.250

0.2 0.000 0.137 0.204 0.234 0.240 0.244 0.247 0.249 0.249 0.249 0.249 0.249 0.249 0.249 0.249
0.4 0.000 0.076 0.136 0.187 0.202 0.218 0.231 0.240 0.243 0.244 0.244 0.244 0.244 0.244 0.244
0.5 0.000 0.061 0.113 0.164 0.181 0.200 0.218 0.232 0.238 0.239 0.240 0.240 0.240 0.240 0.240
0.6 0.000 0.051 0.096 0.143 0.161 0.182 0.204 0.223 0.231 0.233 0.234 0.234 0.234 0.234 0.234
0.8 0.000 0.037 0.071 0.111 0.127 0.148 0.173 0.200 0.214 0.218 0.219 0.220 0.220 0.220 0.220
1 0.000 0.028 0.055 0.087 0.101 0.120 0.145 0.175 0.194 0.200 0.202 0.203 0.204 0.205 0.205
1.2 0.000 0.022 0.043 0.069 0.081 0.098 0.121 0.152 0.173 0.182 0.185 0.187 0.189 0.189 0.189
1.4 0.000 0.018 0.035 0.056 0.066 0.080 0.101 0.131 0.154 0.164 0.169 0.171 0.174 0.174 0.174
 1.5 0.000 0.016 0.031 0.051 0.060 0.073 0.092 0.121 0.145 0.156 0.161 0.164 0.166 0.167 0.167
1.6 0.000 0.014 0.028 0.046 0.055 0.067 0.085 0.112 0.136 0.148 0.154 0.157 0.160 0.160 0.160
1.8 0.000 0.012 0.024 0.039 0.046 0.056 0.072 0.097 0.121 0.133 0.140 0.143 0.147 0.148 0.148
2 0.000 0.010 0.020 0.033 0.039 0.048 0.061 0.084 0.107 0.120 0.127 0.131 0.136 0.137 0.137
2.5 0.000 0.007 0.013 0.022 0.027 0.033 0.043 0.060 0.080 0.093 0.101 0.106 0.113 0.115 0.115
3 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.016 0.019 0.024 0.031 0.045 0.061 0.073 0.081 0.087 0.096 0.099 0.099
4 0.000 0.003 0.006 0.009 0.011 0.014 0.019 0.027 0.038 0.048 0.055 0.060 0.071 0.076 0.076
5 0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.007 0.009 0.012 0.018 0.026 0.033 0.039 0.043 0.055 0.061 0.062
10 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.003 0.005 0.007 0.009 0.011 0.013 0.020 0.028 0.032
15 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.010 0.016 0.021
20 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.006 0.010 0.016
50 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.006
Consolidation
 Settlement of soils

Before loading After loading

S S

hi

ho
Ho
Consolidation curve
’ p
    
Log
e1
e2

e3

e4

e
Determination parameter of
consolidation
h0  H 0
Natural void ratio e
H0
h0  H 0  hi
ei 
Void ratio after consolidation H0
e1 e2
Cs 
Swell index log  2  log  1

e 3 e4
Compression index Cc 
log  4  log  3
Determination parameter of
consolidation
1  e0
Modulus of elasticity Es   .mk 
 e
e and located between 100 Kpa to 200KPa

Compression index

Swell index
Types of soil
emKuNsMBaF m k

GaRs½yeTAnwgemKuNes<at e o

0.45 0.55 0.65 0.75 0.85 0.95 1.05

 

Sandy silt 4.00 4.00 3.50 3.00 2.00 - -

             
Silt 5.00 5.00 4.50 4.00 3.00 2.50 2.00
 
-
           
-
Clay  
 
6.00 6.00 5.50 5.00 4.50
 
 Soil type RbePTdI  

Sand xS ac;/l ,ayxSac; 0.30 0.74

Silt l ,aydI \dæ 0.35 0.62

Clay dI\dæ 0.42 0.40

Elastic parameter of various soils
Type of soils Modulus of Poisson’s ratio s
elasticity Es(Mpa)
Loose sand 10-25 0.20-0.40
Medium dense 15-30 0.25-0.40
sand
Dense sand 35-55 0.30-0.45
Silty sand 10-20 0.20-0.40
Sand and gravel 70-170 0.15-0.35
Soft clay 4-20
Medium stiff clay 20-40 0.20-0.50
Coefficient of consolidation
1min t 50 t 100
Log t

t1/4

t1





h
 Determination coefficient of
consolidation
Coefficient of consolidation from Casagrande
method Cv[m2/s] H2 h0   50
Cv  0.197 H
t50 2
h0- initial thickness of sample
Permeability coefficient K  C v .a v . w

1 e
e
Coefficient of compressibility av  

av
Coefficient of volume change mv  1  e
0
 Typical values of coefficient of
consolidation Cv[cm2/s]
Liquid limit Lower limit of Undisturbe Upper limit
recompressio d virgin remolded
n compressio
n
30 3.5*10-2 5*10-3 1.2*10-3

60 3.5*10-3 1*10-3 3*10-4

100 4*10-4 2*10-4 1*10-4

Source U.S Navy 1962
In situ test

• Static cone penetration test

• Dynamic cone penetration test DCP
• Standard penetration test
• Shear vane test
• Pocked penetration test
 Static cone penetration test
qc   0
Cu 
NK

  qc 
  Arctg 0.1  0.38 log 
   '0  

E=2.qc

qc:cone resistance

Nk=20
Dynamic cone penetration test
M M .H
qd  .
e.( M  M ' ) A

qd :cone resistance
M:weight of hammer
M’:weight of rods
A:cone area
H:height hammer falling
e:penetration for one blow
Standard penetration test
 Index SPT
N value is amount of blows for penetration split spoon
sampler in soils 30 cm
N=N1+N2 For fine sand or silt saturated with N >15
Ncor= CN.Nfield Ncor=15+0.5 (Nfield-15)

2000
C N = 0.77log Peck1974
 .D
1
C N  9.78 Liao & Whihman 1986
 '0
2
CN  Skempton1986
1  0 .01 ' 0
  '0 
C N  1  1 .25 log   Seed 1975
 95 .6 
Relationship of SPT and properties
mechanics of soils
  20 N  20
  27 . 1  0 . 3 N  0 . 00054
  18 N  15
  0 . 36 N  27
  0 . 45 N  20
E (K P a) = 7 6 6 N
E (K P a) = 5 0 0 (N + 1 5 )
E (K P a) = 2 6 0 0 N
E (K P a) = 6 0 0 (N + 6 )
E (K P a) = 6 0 0 (N + 6 ) + 2 0 0 0
E (K P a) = 3 2 0 (N + 1 5 )
E (K P a) = 3 0 0 (N + 6 )
H a t a n a k a & U c h id a 1 9 9 6
N 2
W o lff 1 9 8 9
F o r r o a d a n d B r id g e s d e s ig n s Mrab ;f ñ;l ;n ig s <an
F o r b u ild in g d e s ig n s M r ab ; G aKar
in g e n e r a l s Mr ab ;k rN IT UeT A
F o r sa n d sa tu ra te d s M r ab ;x Sac ;C aMT wk
F o r d ense sand s M r ab ; x Sac ;h ab ;
F o r d ense sand s M r ab ; x Sac ;h ab ;
F o r G r a v e lly s a n d ( N < 1 5 ) s M r ab ; RKYs l ay x Sac ;
F o r G r a v e lly s a n d ( N > 1 5 ) s M r ab ; RKYs l ay x Sac ;
F o r C la y e y S a n d s M r ab ; x Sac ; l ay d I\ d æ
F o r S ilt ,s a n d y s ilt ,c la y e y s ilt s M r ab ; d Il ,ay m :d æ
Relationship of SPT and properties
mechanics of soils

• Undrained cohesion Cu=K.N Stroud(1974)

3.5KPa <K <6KPa in general we take K=4.4KPa

• Cu=29.N0.72 Hara et al(1971)

Soils type N DR  
blows % degree KN/m3

Very loose 04 0  15 < 28 11  16

Loose 4  10 15  35 28  30 14  18

Medium 10  30 35  65 30  36 17  20
dense

Dense; 30  50 65  85 36  41 17  22

Very dense > 50 85  100 > 41 20  23

Soils type N qu KPa

Very soft <2 < 25

Soft 24 25  50

Medium 48 50  100

Stiff 8  15 100  200

Very stiff 15  30 200  400

Hard > 30 > 400

 Thank you for your attention

• Mr. Sieng PEOU

• Master science of
geotechnical
engineering