Course Outline:: Ece 2311: Soil Mechanics Ii

JKUAT 2014………………………………………….
ECE2311 Soil Mechanics II……………………………………
ECE 2311: SOIL MECHANICS II

COURSE OUTLINE:
1. Shear strength
- Principal planes and stresses
- Morhr’s circle
- Mohr-coulombs failure theory
 Shear strength tests
- Direct shear tests
- Triaxial shear strength tests
2. Stability of slopes
- Stress and stability analysis
3. Soil stabilization
- Mechanical and chemical methods
4. Site investigations
- Reconnaissance
- Sampling
- Field tests
REFERENCES
1. Mohr circles, stress paths and geotecchnics by R.H.G Parry
2. Basic and applied soil mechanics by G. Ranjan & A.S.R Rao
3. Elements of soil mechanics by G.N Smith
4. Solving problems in soil mechanics by H.C Sultaon
5. Soil Mechanics by F.F Craig
6. Hand book of soil mechanics: Soil testing by Arpad Kezdi
Mungathia©2014 Page 1
JKUAT 2014………………………………………….ECE2311 Soil Mechanics II……………………………………
CHAPTER I
SHEAR STRENGTH OF SOILS
Introduction
- Shear strength is a term used in soil mechanics to describe the magnitude of the shear stress that
a soil can sustain. The shear resistance of soil is a result of friction and interlocking of particles,
and possibly cementation or bonding at particle contacts.
- Soil shear strength is a term used to describe the maximum strength of soil at which point
significant plastic deformation or yielding occurs.
- It is the property that enables a material to remain in equilibrium when its surface is not level
- Soils in liquid form have virtually no shear strength and even when solid have shear strengths of
relatively small magnitudes compared to those exhibited by steel or concrete.
- The ability of a soil mass to support an imposed loading or for a soil mass to support itself is
governed by the shear strength of the soil. As a result, the shearing strength of the soil becomes
of primary importance in foundation design, highway and lateral earth pressure problems that
deals with forces exerted on underground walls, retaining walls, bulkheads and excavations
bracing.
- In the study of soil shear strength, two major categories of soil types are considered. The soil
types are cohesionless and cohesive soils
- Overall, the factors that affect the shearing strength of both soil types are the same. However
practically, the factors that have the most influence on the shearing strength that is or will be
developed by each soil type are different.
FACTORS WHICH CONTROL SHEAR STRENGTH OF SOILS
The stress-strain relationship of soils, and therefore the shearing strength, is affected (Poulos 1989) by:
1. Soil composition (basic soil material): mineralogy, grain size and grain size distribution,
shape of particles, pore fluid type and content, ions on grain and in pore fluid.
2. State (initial): Defined by the initial void ratio, effective normal stress and shear stress (stress
history). State can be described by terms such as: loose, dense, overconsolidated, normally
consolidated, stiff, soft, contractive, dilative, etc.
3. Structure: Refers to the arrangement of particles within the soil mass; the manner the particles
are packed or distributed. Features such as layers, joints, fissures, slickensides, voids, pockets,
cementation, etc., are part of the structure. Structure of soils is described by terms such as:
undisturbed, disturbed, remolded, compacted, cemented; flocculent, honey-combed, single-
grained; flocculated, deflocculated; stratified, layered, laminated; isotropic and anisotropic.
4. Loading conditions: Effective stress path, i.e., drained, and undrained; and type of loading,
i.e., magnitude, rate (static, dynamic), and time history (monotonic, cyclic).
To appreciate this section some knowledge of the relevant strength of materials is useful. A brief
summary of this subject is set out below.
Friction
Consider a block of weight W resting on a horizontal plane (Fig. 1). The vertical reaction (R) equals
W, and there is consequently no tendency for the block to move.
If a small horizontal force (H) is now applied to the block and the magnitude of H is such that the
block still does not move, then the reaction R will no longer act vertically but becomes inclined at
some angle (  ) to the vertical.
By considering the equilibrium of forces, first in the horizontal direction and then in the vertical
direction, it is seen that:
Horizontal component of R  H  R sin 
Vertical component of R  H  R cos 
W W
R
N(=W)
H(=  )
R
R  ( atsliding )
(a) No horizontal force applied (b) Horizontal force applied
Fig. 1 Friction
The angle  is called the angle of obliquity and is the angle that the reaction on the plane of sliding
makes with the normal to that plane. If H is slowly increased in magnitude a stage will be reached at
which sliding is imminent; as H is increased the value of  will also increase until, when sliding is
imminent,  has reached a limiting value  . If H is now increased still further the angle of obliquity
 will not become greater and the block, having achieved its maximum resistance to horizontal
movement, will move (  is known as the angle of friction). The frictional resistance to sliding is the
horizontal component of R and, as can be seen from the triangle of forces in Fig 1b, equals N tan 
Where N equals the normal force on the surface of sliding (in this case N=W).
As  only achieves the value  when sliding occurs, it is seen that the frictional resistance is not
constant and varies with he applied load until movement occurs. The term tan  is known as the
coefficient of friction.
NB
Complex stress
When a body is acted upon by external forces then any plane within the body will be subjected to a
stress that is generally inclined to the normal to the plane. Such a stress has both a normal and
tangential component and is known as a compound, or complex, stress (Fig 2)
= +
 n 
Fig. Complex stress
Principal plane
A plane that is acted upon by a normal stress only is known as a principal plane, there is no tangential,
or shear, s tress present. As is seen in the next section dealing with principal s tress, only three
principal planes can exist in a stressed mass.
PRINCIPAL STRESS
The normal stress acting on a principal plane is referred to as principal stress. At every point in a soil
mass, the applied stress system that exists can be resolved into three principal stresses that are
mutually orthogonal. The principal planes corresponding to these principal stresses are called the
major, intermediate and minor principal planes and are so named from a consideration of the
principal stresses that act upon them.
The largest principal stress,  1 , is known as the major principal stress and acts on the major principal
plane.
Similarly the intermediate principals stress,  2 , acts on the intermediate principal plane whilst the
smallest principal stress,  3 , called the minor principal stress, acts on the minor principal plane.
Critical stress values and obliquities generally occur on the two planes normal to the intermediate
plane so that the effects of  2 can be ignored and a two-dimensional solution is possible.
THE MOHR CIRCLE DIAGRAM 1

1 

Major Principal Plane 3


n
3
Minor Principal Plane
Fig 3B
Fig 3A
Fig. 3A shows a major principal plane, acted upon by a major principal stress,  1 , and a minor
principal plane, acted upon by a minor principal stress, σ3.
Fig 4
By considering the equilibrium of an element within the stressed mass (Fig 3B) it can be shown that on
any plane, inclined at angle  to the direction of the major principal plane, there is a shear stress,  n ,
and normal stress,  n . The magnitudes of these stresses are:
1   3
 sin 2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------1
2
 n   3   1   3 cos 2  -------------------------------------------------------------------------2
These formulae led themselves to graphical representation, and it can be shown that the locus of stress
conditions for all planes through a point is a circle (Generally called a Mohr circle). In order to draw a
Mohr circle diagram a specific convention must be followed, all normal stresses (including principal
stresses) being plotted along the axis OX while shear stresses are plotted along the axis OY; for most
cases the axis OX is horizontal and OY is vertical. The convention also assumes that the direction of
the major principal stress is parallel to axis OY, i.e the direction of the major principal stress is parallel
to axis OY and the direction of major principal plane is parallel to axis OX.
D


O
 2
 E X
A F B 
3
1

  45 o
2 Fig 5 Mohr Circle
To draw the diagram, first lay down the axes OX and OY, then set off OA and OB along the OX axis
to represent the magnitudes of the minor and major principal stresses respectively, and finally
construct the circle with diameter AB. This circle is the locus of stress conditions for all planes
passing through the point A, i.e. a plane passing through A and inclined to the major principal plane at
angle  cuts the circle at D. The co-ordinates of the point D are the normal and shear stresses on the
plane (Fig 5)
In Fig. 5, OE and DE represent the normal and shear stress components of the complex stress acting
on plane AD. From the triangle of forces ODE it can be seen that this complex stress is represented in
the diagram by the line OD, whilst the angle DOB represents the angle of obliquity (  ) of the
resultant stress on plane AD.
Limit conditions
It has been stated that the maximum shearing resistance is developed when the angles of obliquity
equals its limiting value,  . For this condition the line OD becomes a tangent to the stress circle,
inclined at angle  to axis OX (Fig 6)
An interesting point that arises from Fig 6 is that the failure plane is not the plane subjected to the
maximum value of shear stress. The criterion of failure is maximum obliquity, not maximum shear
stress. Hence, although the plane AF in Fig.6 is subjected to a greater shear stress than the plane AD, it
is also subjected to a larger normal stress and therefore the angle of obliquity is less than on AD which
is the plane of failure.
F
D


O
 2
 E X
A F B 
3
1
Fig 6 Mohr Circle
Strength envelopes
If  is assumed constant for a certain material, then the shear strength of the material can be
represented by a pair of lines passing through the origin (O) at angles +  and -  to the axis OX (fig
7). These lines comprise the Mohr strength envelope for the material.
Y
C
B
A

 X
Fig 7: Mohr circle envelope

In Fig.7 a state of stress represented by circle A is quite stable as the circle lies completely within the
strength envelop. Circle B is tangential to the strength envelope and represents the condition of
incipient failure, since a slight increase in stress values will push the circle over the strength envelope
and failure will occur. Circle C cannot exist as it is beyond the strength envelop.
Relationship between  and 
  2
O A C B
n
Fig 8: Relationship between  and 
In figure 8 above, angle DCO=1800-2 

In triangle ODC, angle DOC=  , angle ODC=90o, angle OCD=1800-2 
These angles summate to 1800
i.e  +90o+1800-2  =1800

Hence    45 o
2
EXAMPLE 1
1. On a failure plane in a purely frictional mass of dry sand, the total stresses at failure were:
Shear stress 3500N/m2 and normal stress is 10000N/m2.
Determine (A) by calculation and (B) graphically

i) The resultant complex stress on the plane of failure.
ii) The angle of shearing resistance of the soil.
iii) The major and minor principal stresses,  1 and  3
iv) The angle of inclination of the failure plane to the major principal
plane
Solution
(A) by calculation
The soil is frictional; therefore the strength envelope must go through the origin. The failure point is
represented by point D in figure below with ordinates (10, 3.5).
i. The resultant complex stress on the plane of failure.
Resultant stress  OD  3.5 2  10 2  10.6kN / m 2
ii. The angle of shearing resistance of the soil,  and angle of inclination of the failure plane to
the major principal plane 
D
3.5
Tan   0.35
10 3.5
O
  19 17 o '
10
Fig 9A

  45o  54 o 38'
2
iii. The major and minor principal stresses,  1 and  3
1   3 1   3
 sin 2 = 3.5  sin 2 x54 o 38' ------------------------------------------------1
2 2
 n   3   1   3 cos 2  = 10.0   3   1   3 cos 2 54 0 38' ------------------------------2
Solve the two equations simultaneously to get
 1 =15kN/m2
 3 =7.6kN/m2
  2
O A C B
n
Fig 9B: Example 1
(A) Graphically
The procedure is first to draw the axes OX and OY and then, to a suitable scale, set off point D with
co-ordinates (10, 3.5); join OD (this is the strength envelop). The stress circle is tangential to OD at
the point D; draw line DC perpendicular to OD to cut OX in C, C being the centre of the circle. With
centre C and radius CD draw the circle establishing the points A and B on the X-axis. By scaling, OD
= resultant stress = 10.6 kN/m2. With protractor,  = 190;  =550.
COHESION
It is possible to make a vertical cut in silts and clays and for this cut to remain standing, unsupported,
for sometime. This cannot be done with dry sand which, on removal of the cutting implement, will
slump until its slope is equal to an angle known as the angle of repose. In silts and clays, therefore,
some other factor must contribute to shear strength. This factor is called cohesion and results from the
mutual attraction existing between fine particles that tend to hold them together in a solid mass without
the application of external forces. In terms of the Mohr diagram this means that the strength envelope
for the soil, for undrained conditions, no longer goes through the origin but intercepts the shear stress
axis (see figure below). The value of the intercept, to the same scale as  n , gives a measure of the
unit cohesion available and is given the symbol c or cu.
cu

A cohesive soil, subjected to undrained conditions and zero
total normal stress will still exhibit a shear strength, cu
Coulomb’s law of soil shear strength

It can be seen that the shear resistant offered by a particular soil is made of the two components of
friction and cohesion. Friction resistance does not have a constant value but varies with the values
of normal stress action on the shear plane whereas cohesive resistance has a constant value which is
independent of the value of  n .
Mohr-Coulomb Failure Criteria
This theory states that a material fails because of a critical combination of normal stress and shear
stress, and not from their either maximum normal or shear stress alone
The Mohr–Coulomb failure criterion represents the linear envelope that is obtained from a plot of
the shear strength of a material versus the applied normal stress.
In 1766 Coulomb suggested that the equation of the strength envelope of a soil could be expressed by
straight line equation:
 f  c   tan 
Where
 f = Shear stress at failure i.e the shear strength
c = Unit cohesion
 = Total normal stress on failure plane
 = Angle of shearing resistance
The equation gave satisfactory predictions for sands and gravels, for which it was originally intended,
but it was not so successful when applied to silts and clays.
The reasons for this are that the drainage conditions under which the soil is operating together with the
rated of the applied loading have a considerable effect on the amount of shearing resistance the soil
will exhibit. None of this was appreciated in the 18th century and this lack of understanding continued
more or less until 1925 when Terzaghi published his theory of effective stress.
Note: It should be noted that there are other factors that affect the value of the angle of shearing
resistance of a particular soil.
They include
- The effects of such items as the amount of friction between the soil particles,
- The shape of the particles
- The degree of interlock between the particles
- The density of the soil
- Its previous stress history, etc.
Effective stress,  '

The stress that controls changes in the volume and strength of a soil is known as the effective stress.
A soil mass consists of a collection of mineral particles with voids between them. These voids are
filled with water, air and water or air only.
For saturated soils only, when a load is applied, it will be carried by
- The water in the soil voids (causing an increase in the pore water pressure)
- The soil skeleton ( in the form of grain contact stresses)

- Or else it will be shared between the water and the soil skeleton.
The effect that a load has on soil depends upon the drainage conditions.
The principle of effective stress, introduced by Karl Terzaghi, states that the effective stress σ' (i.e., the
average intergranular stress between solid particles) may be calculated by a simple subtraction of the
pore pressure from the total stress:
 '   u
Where
 '  The effective stress
  The total stress
u  Is the pore water pressure
It is not practical to measure σ' directly, so in practice the vertical effective stress is calculated from
the pore pressure and vertical total stress. The distinction between the terms pressure and stress is also
important.
By definition, pressure at a point is equal in all directions but stresses at a point can be different in
different directions. In soil mechanics, compressive stresses and pressures are considered to be
positive and tensile stresses are considered to be negative, which is different from the solid mechanics
sign convention for stress.
In 1955 Bishop suggested a similar formula for a partially saturated soil.

 '    u a  xu a  u w 
Where
 '  The effective stress
  The total stress
u w = Is the pore water pressure
x = Is a parameter related to the degree of saturation
u a = Is the pore air pressure

The formula agrees with Terzaghi
When S =100 per cent, x = 1 and the expression is
 '    uw
When S = 0 per cent, x = 0 and the expression is
 '  .
For partially saturated soils with Sr ≥90% little error is involved in assuming that the soil is saturated
so that  ' can be taken as equal to   u w .
Modified Coulomb’s law

Shear strength depends upon effective stress and not total stress. Coulomb’s equation must therefore
be modified in terms of effective stress and become.
 f  c' ' tan  '
Where
c ' = Unit cohesion, with respect to effective stresses
 ' = Effective normal stress acting on failure plane
 ' = Angle of shearing resistance, with respect to effective stresses.
It is seen that, dependent upon the loading and drainage conditions, it is possible for a clay soil to
exhibit purely frictional shear strength (i.e to act as a ‘c1 =0’ or ‘  ' ’ soil) when it is loaded under
drained conditions or to exhibit only cohesive strength (i.e to act as ‘  ' =0’ or ‘Cu’ soil) when it is
loaded under undrained conditions.
Obviously, at an interim stage the clay can exhibit both cohesion and frictional resistance i.e to act as a
‘ c' ' ’ soil). The same situation also applies to granular soils.
The Mohr- Coulomb yield theory

Over the years various yield theories have been proposed for soils. These are
- The Tresca theory,
- The von Mises theory,
- The Mohr-Coulomb
- The critical state theory.
The first three theories have been described by Bishop (1966) and the critical state theory by Schofield
and Wroth (“1968)
The Mohr-Coulomb failure theory
 Does not consider the effect of strains or volume changes that a soil experiences on its way to
failure
 Does not consider the effect of the intermediate principal stress,  2 .
Nevertheless satisfactory predictions of soil strength are obtained and, as it is simple to apply, the
Mohr-Coulomb theory is widely used in the analysis of most practical problems which involve soil
strength.
The Mohr strength theory is really an extension of the Tresca thory which, in turn, was probably based
on Coulomb’s work, hence the title. The theory assumes that the difference between the major and
minor principal stresses is a function of their sum,
i.e ( 1   3 )  f  1   3 
Any effect due to  2 is ignored.

Consider Mohr circle diagram below.
 D

c
'  C
3

k 1
Fig 10. Mohr circle
The intercept on the shear stress axis of the strength envelop is the intrinsic pressure, i.e the strength of
the material when under zero normal stress. This intercept is called cohesion in soil mechanics and
given the symbol c.
From fig.10:
1    
DC 2 1 3 1   3
sin    
O' C k  1  1   3  2k   1   3
2
Hence
 1   3  2k sin    1   3 sin 
But
k  c cot 
Therefore
 1   3  2c cos    1   3 sin  .
This is the general form of the Mohr-Coulomb theory.
The equation can be expressed in terms of either total stress (as shown) or effective stress
as:  '1  '3  2c' cos  ' '1  '3 sin  '
SHEAR STRENGTH TESTS

The shear strength of a soil is controlled by the effective stress that acts upon it and it is therefore
obvious that a geotechnical analysis involving the operative strength of a soil should be carried out in
terms of the effective stress parameters  ' and c ' .
The case of a fully saturated clay subjected to undrained loading is much more simple to analyze using
total stress values and  and cu than with an effective stress approach. Such a situation can arise in
both slope stability and bearing capacity problems.
It is seen therefore that both the values of the undrained parameters,  and c (or  u and cu ) and of the
drained parameters,  ' and c ' (or  d and c d ) are generally required.
They are obtained from the results of laboratory tests carried out on representative samples of the soil
with loading and drainage conditions approximating to those in the field where possible.
The tests used are the
1. Direct shear test
2. Triaxial test
Other tests includes
3. • Vane shear
4. • Torsional shear
5. • In situ tests
The direct shear test

The ultimate values of shear parameter for both loose sand and dense sand approximately attain the
same value so, if angle of friction value is calculated at ultimate stage, slight disturbance in density
during sampling and preparation of test specimens will not have much effect.
The apparatus consists of a brass box, split horizontally at the centre of the soil specimen. The soil is
gripped by perforated metal grilles, behind which porous discs can be placed if required to allow the
sample to drain (see Fig below)
The usual plan size of the sample is 60 x 60mm2, but for testing granular materials such as gravel or
stony clay it is necessary to use a larger box, generally 300 x 300 mm2 although even greater
dimensions are sometimes used.
A vertical load is applied to the top of the sample by means of weights. As the shear plane is
predetermined in the horizontal direction the vertical load is also the normal load on the plane of
failure. Having applied the required vertical load a shearing force is gradually exerted on the box,
usually from an electrically driven screw jack. The shear force is measured by means of a proving ring
which is a carefully machined and balanced annular steel ring. When a load is applied through the
proving ring to the shear box the ring deflects and the deflection is measured from a dial gauge placed
across it. The force causing the deflection, i.e the shearing force applied to the shear box, can be
obtained from the ring calibration supplied by the manufacturer (usually in the form of a graph of
deflection against force).
By means of another dial gauge (fixed to the shear box) it is possible to determine the strain of the test
sample at any point during shear.
Movementofbox
Strain 
lengthofth esample
The proving ring reading is taken at fixed displacements, and failure of the soil specimen is indicated
by a sudden drop in the magnitude of the proving ring readings or a leveling off in successive readings.
In most cases the electric motor produces a constant rate of strain so that there is no need for the
second dial gauge and proving ring readings can be taken at fixed intervals of time.
Test procedure
Objective
To determine the shearing strength of the soil using the direct shear apparatus
NEED AND SCOPE
In many engineering problems such as design of foundation, retaining walls, slab bridges, pipes, sheet
piling, the value of the angle of internal friction and cohesion of the soil involved are required for the
design. Direct shear test is used to predict these parameters quickly. The laboratory report cover the
laboratory procedures for determining these values for cohesionless soils.
PLANNING AND ORGANIZATION
Apparatus
1. Direct shear box apparatus
2. Loading frame (motor attached).
3. Dial gauge.
4. Proving ring.
5. Tamper.
6. Straight edge.
7. Balance to weigh upto 200 mg.
8. Aluminum container.
9. Spatula.
KNOWLEDGE OF EQUIPMENT:
Strain controlled direct shear machine consists of shear box, soil container, loading unit, proving ring,
dial gauge to measure shear deformation and volume changes. A two piece square shear box is one
type of soil container used.
A proving ring is used to indicate the shear load taken by the soil initiated in the shearing plane.
PROCEDURE
1. Check the inner dimension of the soil container.
2. Put the parts of the soil container together.
3. Calculate the volume of the container. Weigh the container.
4. Place the soil in smooth layers (approximately 10 mm thick). If a dense sample is desired tamp the
soil.
5. Weigh the soil container, the difference of these two is the weight of the soil. Calculate the density
of the soil.
6. Make the surface of the soil plane.
7. Put the upper grating on stone and loading block on top of soil.
8. Measure the thickness of soil specimen.
9. Apply the desired normal load.
10. Remove the shear pin.
11. Attach the dial gauge which measures the change of volume.
12. Record the initial reading of the dial gauge and calibration values.
13. Before proceeding to test check all adjustments to see that there is no connection between two parts
except sand/soil.
14. Start the motor. Take the reading of the shear force and record the reading.
15.Take volume change readings till failure.
16. Add 5 kg normal stress 0.5 kg/cm2 and continue the experiment till failure
17. Record carefully all the readings. Set the dial gauges zero, before starting the experiment
DATA CALCULATION SHEET FOR DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Normal stress 0.5 kg/cm2 L.C=....... P.R.C=.........
Shear stress =
Shear Vertical
Hori.Dial div.col.(8)x
deformation Vertical gauge deformation=
Horizontal Vertical Dial Proving ring gauge Reading Proving reading proving ring
Col.(4) x reading Initial div.in col.6
Gauge Reading gauge Reading Reading Initial reading Initial reading constant Area of
Leastcount of Reading xL.C of dial
(1) (2) (3) div. gauge (8) the
dial (6) gauge
(4) specimen(kg/cm2)
(5) (7)
(9)
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
250
300
Normal stress 1.0 kg/cm2 L.C=....... P.R.C=........
Shear stress =
Shear Vertical
(1) (2) (3) div. gauge (8) the
dial (6) gauge
(5) (7)
(9)
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
250
300
Normal stress 1.5 kg/cm2 L.C=....... P.R.C=........
Shear stress =
Shear Vertical
(1) (2) (3) div. gauge (8) the
dial (6) gauge
(5) (7)
(9)
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
250
300
ECE2311 Soil Mechanics II JKUAT-CIVIL
OBSERVATION AND RECORDING
Proving Ring constant....... Least count of the dial........
Calibration factor.......
Leverage factor........
Dimensions of shear box 60 x 60 mm
Empty weight of shear box........
Least count of dial gauge.........
Volume change.......
Shear stress
Normal
proving Ring
Normal stress(kg/cm )2
2
reading x
stress(kg/cm )
Normal load calibration /
S.No load x
(kg) Area of
load x leverage/Area
leverage/Area container
Tulatia Mungathia©2012 Page 26

GENERAL REMARKS
1. In the shear box test, the specimen is not failing along its weakest plane but along a
predetermined or induced failure plane i.e. horizontal plane separating the two halves of the
shear box. This is the main draw back of this test. Moreover, during loading, the state of stress
cannot be evaluated. It can be evaluated only at failure condition i.e Mohr’s circle can be drawn
at the failure condition only. Also failure is progressive.
2. Direct shear test is simple and faster to operate. As thinner specimens are used in shear box,
they facilitate drainage of pore water from a saturated sample in less time. This test is also
useful to study friction between two materials, one material in lower half of box and another
material in the upper half of box.
3. The angle of shearing resistance of sands depends on state of compaction, coarseness of

grains, particle shape and roughness of grain surface and grading. It varies between
28o(uniformly graded sands with round grains in very loose state) to 46o(well graded sand with
angular grains in dense state).
4. The volume change in sandy soil is a complex phenomenon depending on gradation, particle
shape, state and type of packing, orientation of principal planes, principal stress ratio, stress
history, magnitude of minor principal stress, type of apparatus, test procedure, method of
preparing specimen etc. In general loose sands expand and dense sands contract in volume on
shearing. There is a void ratio at which either expansion contraction in volume takes place.
This void ratio is called critical void ratio. Expansion or contraction can be inferred from the
movement of vertical dial gauge during shearing.
5. The friction between sand particle is due to sliding and rolling friction and interlocking
action.

THE TRAIAXIAL TEST

As its name implies, this test (Fig.12 below) subjects the soil specimen to three compressive stresses at
right angles to each other, one of the three stresses being increased until the sample fails in shear. Its
great advantage is that the plane of shear failure is not predetermined as in the shear box test.
Fig.12
The soil sample tested is cylindrical with a height equal to twice its diameter. For example, in the
United Kingdom the usual sizes are 76 mm high by 38mm diameter and 220 mm high by 110mm
diameter.
The test sample is first placed on the pedestal of the base of the triaxial cell and a loading cap is placed
on its top. A thin rubber membrane is then placed over the sample, including the pedestal and the
loading cap, and made water-tight by the application of tight rubber ring seals, known as ‘O’ rings,
around the pedestal and the loading cap.

The upper part of the cell which is cylindrical and generally made of Perspex is next fixed to the base
and the assembled cell is filled with water. The water is then subjected to a predetermined value of
pressure; known as the cell pressure, which is kept constant throughout the length of the test. It is this
water pressure that subjects the sample to an all round pressure.
The additional axial stress is created by an axial load applied through a proving ring, similar to the way
the horizontal shear force is applied in the shear box apparatus. By the action of an electric motor the
axial load is gradually increased at a constant rate of strain and as axial load applied the sample suffers
continuous compressive deformation. The amount of this vertical deformation is obtained from a
deformation dial gauge. Throughout the test, until the sample fails, readings of the deformation gauge
and corresponding proving ring readings of axial load are taken. With this data it becomes possible to
plot the variation of the axial load on the sample against its vertical strain.
DETERMINATION OF THE ADDITIONAL AXIAL STRESS IN THE TRIAXIAL TEST

From the proving ring it is possible at any time during the test to determine the additional axial load
that is being applied to the sample.
During the application of this load the sample experiences shortening in the vertical direction with a
corresponding expansion in the horizontal direction. This means that the cross-section area of the
sample varies, and it has been found that very little error is introduced if the cross sectional area is
evaluated on the assumption that the volume of the sample remains unchanged during the test. In other
words the cross-sectional area is found from.
volumeofsample
cross  sec tionalarea 
originalle ngth  verticalde formation
PRINCIPAL STRESSES IN THE TRIAXIAL TEST

The intermediate principal stress,  2 , and the minor principal stress,  3 , are equal and are radial
stresses caused by the cell pressure, Pc. The major principal stress,  1 , consists of two parts; the cell
water pressure acting on the ends of the sample and the additional axial stress from the proving ring,
q. To ensure that the cell pressure acts over the whole area of the end cap, the bottom of the plunger is
drilled so that the pressure can act on the ball seating.

From this we see that the triaxial text can be considered as happening in two stages (fig.13), the first
being the application of the cell water pressure (pc i.e  3 ), while the second is the application of a
deviator stress (q, i.e.  1   3  ).

A set of at least three samples is tested. The deviator stress is plotted against vertical strain and the
point of failure of each sample is obtained. The Mohr circles for each sample are then drawn and the
best common tangent to the circles is taken as the strength envelope (Fig. 14). A small curvature
occurs in the strength envelop of most soils, but this effect is slight and for all practical work the
envelope can be taken as a straight line.
1 3 1   3
3 3 = 3 3 +
1 3 1   3
Fig. 13: Stresses in the triaxial test
 3  60

( 1   3 )
 3  40 Best common tangent
 3  20

Strain e
Fig 14: Typical triaxial test results

TYPES OF FAILURE IN THE TRIAXIAL TEST

Not all soil samples will fail in pure shear: there are generally some barreling effects as well. In a
sample that fails completely by barreling there is no definite failure point, the deviator stress simply
increasing slightly with strain. In this case an arbitrary value of the failure stress is taken as the stress
value at 20 per cent strain (See Fig. 15).
 o 
 45  
 2
Shear Barrelling Barrelling

and shear
Fig. 15: Types of failure in triaxial test
Note: A refinement now used in most soils laboratories is the replacement of the dial gauges on the
shear box and the triaxial apparatus by transducers so that the deformation of the sample and the strain
in the proving ring can be recorded electrically. With the triaxial test the cell pressure and the pore
water pressure in the sample can also be recorded electrically. Any or all of the measured values can
be fed into a microcomputer suitably programmed and a print-out of the test results obtained directly,
without the labour of computation or the need for an operator to take readings during the test.
THE UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST

This is a special case of the traixial test in which the all-round pressure on the sample is zero and no
rubber membrane is necessary to encase the specimen (Fig. 16). It is often used as a simple field test,
but can only be used for cohesive soils.
The test specimen is loaded through a calibrated spring by a simple manually-operated screwjack at
the top of the machine. In order to test soils of varying strengths a range of springs is supplied,
generally with stiffness in order of 2, 4, 8, and 16N/mm extension.

By means of an autographic recording arm the graph of load against deformation is drawn directly on
to a sheet of paper. Knowing the vertical deformation, the area of the sample at failure can be obtained
and hence the stress: in common practice the cohesion of the soil is taken to be one half for the stress
at failure (i.e  is assumed=0). Unconfined compression strength should be reported to nearest 2kN/m 2
for values up to 50 kN/m2, to the nearest 5 for values 50-100 and to the nearest 10 for values above
100kN/m2.
Determination of the total stress parameters  and c
THE UNDRAINED SHEAR TEST

The simplest method to determine values for the total shear strength parameters of a soil is to subject
suitable samples of the soil to this test. In the test the soil sample is prevented from draining during
shear and is therefore sheared immediately after the application of the normal load (in the shear box).
A sample can be tested in 15 minutes or less, so that there is no time for any pore pressures developed
to dissipate or to distribute themselves evenly through the sample. Measurements of pore water
pressure are therefore not possible and the results of the test can only be expressed in terms of total
stress.
The unconfined compression apparatus is only capable of carrying out an undrained test on a clay
sample with no radial pressure applied. The test takes about a minute.
Undrained tests on silts and sands are not possible in the shear box
Example
A series of undrained triaxial tests were carried out on undisturbed samples of a compacted soil. Each
sample, originally 76mm long and 38mm in diameter, experienced a vertical deformation of 5.1mm.
The results were recorded as shown in the table below:
Cell pressure (kN/m2) Additional axial load at
failure (N)
200 342
400 388
600 465
 Draw the strength envelope
 Determine the coulomb equation for shear strength of the soil in terms of total stresses

Solution
Volume of sample  x382 x76  86193mm3
86193
Therefore cross sectional area at failure   1216mm 2
76  5.1
Cell pressure Deviator stress Major principal stress
3  1   3  1
(kN/m2) (kN/m2) (kN/m2)
200 0.345 x10 2 481
  281
1216
400 0.388 x10 2 719
  319
1216
600 0.465 x10 2 982
  382
1216
The Mohr circles for total stress and the strength envelope are shown in figure below. From the
diagram below
  7 o ; c  100kN / m 2
  7o
100
0 200 400  600 800 1000

Example 2
Sub-surface exploration was done and it was found out that a thin slice of alluvial silt exists at a
depth of 14m below the ground level. The water surface was at the surface. With the help of
undisturbed sampling, the following data was obtained
Cu  50kN / m 2 , u  15o , Cd  40kN / m 2 , d  25o
Estimate the shearing resistance of the silt on a horizontal plane

i) When the shear stress builds up rapidly
ii) When the shear strength builds up very strongly
The average dry density and moisture content may be taken as 1.7 g/cm3 and 30%
respectively.
Solution
Effective stress (σ') acting on a soil is calculated from two parameters, total stress (σ) and pore water
pressure (u) according to:
Typically,
Shear strength depends upon effective stress and not total stress. Coulomb’s equation must therefore
be modified in terms of effective stress and become.
 f  c' ' tan  '
Where

c ' = Unit cohesion, with respect to effective stresses

 ' = Effective normal stress acting on failure plane
 ' = Angle of shearing resistance, with respect to effective stresses.
 '    Xu
  H Soil  14 x17kN / m3  238kN / m 2
u  H wateril  14 x10kN / m 3  140kN / m 2

X  30%
 '    Xu  238  0.3x140  196kN / m 2
i) When the shear stress builds up rapidly
This is a condition when soil is undrained; Hence

 f  cu   ' tan u  50  196 tan15  50  52.52  102.52kN / m 2
ii) When the shear strength builds up very strongly
This is a condition when soil is drained; Hence

 f  cd   tan d  40  238 tan 25  40  110.98  150.98kN / m 2

CHAPTER 2
STABILITY OF SLOPES
Introduction
A slope is an inclined boundary surface between air and the body of an earthwork such as highways,
cut or fill, railway cut or fill, earth dams, levees and river training works. The stability of slope is the
most important one in civil engineering practice. A fairly common engineering failure of slope is
slipping of an embankment or cutting. The factor leading to instability can generally be classified as
1. Those causing increased stress and

2. Those causing a reduction in strength.
Factors causing increased stress include:
a) Increased unit weight of soil by wetting

b) Added external loads (moving loads, buildings etc)
c) Steepened slopes either by excavation or by erosion
d) Shock loads
Loss of strength may occur by
a) Vibration and earthquakes

b) Increase in moisture content
c) Freezing and thawing action
d) Increase in pore pressure
e) Loss of cementing pressure
Therefore a sensible design of the slope of these structures is very essential since a structural failure
may lead to loss of human life and money. The common method of a slope stability analysis of natural

slopes and slopes formed by cutting and filling are based on limiting equilibrium. In this type of
analysis the factor of safety with regard to the slope stability is estimated by examining the condition
of equilibrium when incipient failure is assumed along a predetermined failure plane and then
comparing the strength necessary to maintain equilibrium with the available strength of the soil.
Stability analysis of slopes is based on the following assumptions:
1. Problems are two dimensional

2. Coulomb’s theory can be used to compute shear strength and shear strength is assumed as
uniform along the slip surface.
3. The flownet in case of seepage can be drawn and seepage forces evaluated.
Granular Materials
Soils such as gravel and sand are collectively referred to as granular soils and normally exhibit only a
frictional component of strength. A potential slip surface in a slope of granular material will be planar
and the analysis of the slope is relatively simple. However, most soils exhibit both cohesive and
frictional strength and pure granular soils are fairly infrequent. Nevertheless a study of granular soils
affords a useful introduction to the later treatment of soil slopes that exhibit both cohesive and
frictional strength.
Figure 1 below illustrates an embankment of granular material with an angel of shearing resistances,  ,
and with its surface sloping at angle  to the horizontal.
N  W
T
 W
N
Triangle of forces
Slope
Figure 1: forces involved in a slope of granular material
Consider an element of the embankment of weight W.

Force parallel to slope  W sin 

Force perpendicular to slope  W cos 
For stability,
retainingf orces
Sliding forces 
factorofsa fety (F )
W cos  tan 
i.e W sin  
F
tan 
Therefore F 
tan 
For limiting equilibrium (F=1), tan   tan  i.e   
From this it is noted that

1. The weight of a material does not affect the stability of the slope,
2. The safe angle for the slope is the same whether the soil is dry or submerged
3. The embankment can be of any height.
Failure of a submerged sand slope can occur, however, if the water level of the retained water falls
rapidly while the water level in the slope lags behind, since seepage forces are set up in this situation.
Seepage forces in a granular slope subjected to rapid drawdown.
G.W. z
L b
W.
L
River l
B
A
Figure 2: Seepage due to rapid drawdown
Figure 2A above shows a situation where the level of the river has dropped suddenly due to tidal
effects. The permeability of the soil in the slope is such that the water in it cannot follow the water
level changes as rapidly as the river, with the result that seepage occurs from the high water level in
the slope to the lower water level of the river.
A flow net can be drawn for this condition and the excess hydrostatic head for any point within the
slope can be determined.
 Assume that a potential failure plane, parallel to the slope’s surface, occurs at a depth z
 Consider an element within the slope of weight W.
 Let the excess pore water pressure induced by seepage be, u, at the midpoint of the base of the
element.
Therefore
Normal reaction N  W cos 
W cos  W cos 2  b
Normal stress    where 1 
1 b cos 
W cos 2  zb cos 2 

Normal effective stress  '  u   u  z cos 2   u
b b
(Where  = the average unit weight of the whole slice, it is usually taken that the whole slice is
saturated).
Tangential force  W sin 
W sin 
Tangential shear stress,    z sin  cos 
1
Ultimate shear strength soil   ' tan   F
tan 
i.e z sin  cos   (z cos 2   u )
F
 cos  u 
F     tan 
 sin  z sin  cos  

 u  tan 
F  1  
 z cos   tan 
2
This expression may be written

 ru  tan 
F  1  
  tan 
2
 cos
u
Where ru 
z
ru is the pore pressure ratio. This is the ratio, at any given point, of the pore water pressure to the
weight of the material acting on unit area above it.
Flow parallel to the surface and at the surface
Flow B
line z
hw
A

Equipotentials
Figure 3: Flow net when flow is parallel and at the surface
The flow net for these special conditions is as illustrated in figure 3.

If we consider the same element as before, the excess pore water head, at the centre of the base of the
element, is represented by the height hw in Fig.3.
AB  z cos 
hw  AB cos 
Hence, hw  z cos 2 
Therefore, excess pore water pressure at the base of the element   w z cos 2 

u  w z cos 2   w
ru    cos 2 
z z 
The equation for F becomes:
   tan      w  tan   ' tan 
F  1  w     
   tan     tan   sat tan 
Example
A granular soil located in Isiolo County was found to have a saturated unit weight of 16kN/m3 and an
angle of shearing resistance of 350. If a slope is to be made of this material, determine the safe angle of
the slope
(i) When the slope is dry or submerged
(ii) If seepage occurs at and parallel to the surface of the slope.
Take factor of safety as 1.15.
Solution
(i) When dry or submerged
In this condition,  '   sat
tan 
F
tan 
tan  tan 35 0.7
tan      0.609
F 1.15 1.15
  31.3o
(ii) When flow occurs at and parallel to the surface
In this condition,  '     w  16  10  6
 ' tan 
F
 sat tan 
 tan  6 tan 35 6 x0.7
tan      0.228
 sat F 16 x1.15 16 x1.15
  13o

Seepage more than halves the safe angle of slope in this particular example.
SOILS WITH TWO STRENGTH COMPONENTS

Failures in embankments made from soils that posses both cohesive and frictional strength components
tend to be rational, the actual slip surface approximating to the arc of a circle (Fig. 4)
Crack
Heave of
material at Slip
toe Surface
Figure 4: Typical rotational slip in a cohesive soil
Methods of investigating slope stability
Figure 5: Example of two possible slop surfaces
Contemporary methods of investigation are based on

(i) Assuming a slip surface and a centre about which it rotates
(ii) Studying the equilibrium of the forces acting on this surface
(iii) repeating the process until the worst slip surface is found, as illustrated in Fig.5

Total stress analysis

This analysis, often called the u  0 analysis, is intended to give the stability of an embankment
immediately after its construction. At this stage it is assumed that the soil in the embankment has had
no time to drain and the strength parameters used in the analysis are the ones representing the
undrained strength of the soil (with respect to total stresses), which is found from either the unconfined
compression test or an undrained triaxial test without pore pressure measurements.
O

B
r
G
e
A
W
l  r
Figure 6: Total stress analysis
Consider in Fig. 6 the sector of soil cut off by arc AB of radius r.
W is the weight of the sector

G is the position of its centre of gravity.
When u  0 o , shear strength component = Cu.
Taking moments about O, the centre of rotation:
cu
We   crr  cu r 2
r
retainingm oment cu r 2
For equilibrium  
disturbing moment We

The position of G is not needed. It is only necessary to ascertain where the line of action of W is. This
can be obtained by dividing the sector into a set of vertical slices and taking moments of area of these
slices about a convenient vertical axis.
EFFECT OF TENSION CRACKS
O B
' hc
B’
r
G
e
A
W
l  r '
Figure 7: Tension crack in a cohesive soil
With a slip in a cohesive soil there will always be a tension crack at the top of the slope as shown in
fig. 7 along which no shear resistance can develop. In a purely cohesive soil the depth of the crack, hc,
is given by the formula:
2cu
hc 

The effect of the tension crack is to shorten the arc AB to AB’. If the crack is to be allowed for the
angle  ' must be used instead of  in the formula for F, and the full weight W of the sector is still
used in order to compensate for any water pressures that may be exerted if the crack fills with rain
water.
EXAMPLE 5.2
The figure below (Fig 1) gives details of an embankment made of cohesive soil with u =0 and
Cu=20kN/m2. The unit weight of the soil is 19kN/m3. For the trial circle shown, determine the factor of

safety against sliding. The weight of the sliding is 346kN acting at an eccentricity of 5 m from the
centre of rotation.
What would be the factor of safety, if the shaded portion of the embankment were removed? Given
that no tension crack develops.
r=9m
70o
e=5m
3m
1.5m
3m
Fig 1
Solution
Disturbing moment we  346 x5  1730kNm
Retaining moment  cu r 2
70
 20 x9 2 x x  1980kNm
180
retainingm oments c r 2 1980
Since factorofsa fety  F u   1.14
disturbing moments We 1730
Area of portion removed  1.5x3  4.5m 2

Weight of portion removed  4.5x19  85.5kN
3.3  1.5
Eccentricity from 0  3.3   5.7m
2
Relief of disturbing moment we  85.5x5.7  490kNm
retainingm oments 1980
factorofsa fety  F  1.6
disturbingmoments  relief 1730  490

CHAPER THREE
SOIL STABILIZATION
Introduction
Soil stabilization is the alteration of one or more soil properties, by mechanical or chemical means, to
create an improved soil material possessing the desired engineering properties. Soils may be stabilized
to increase strength and durability or to prevent erosion and dust generation. Regardless of the purpose
for stabilization, the desired result is the creation of a soil material or soil system that will remain in
place under the design use conditions for the design life of the project. Engineers are responsible for
selecting or specifying the correct stabilizing method, technique, and quantity of material required.
Soils vary throughout the world, and the engineering properties of soils are equally variable. The key
to success in soil stabilization is soil testing. The method of soil stabilization selected should be
verified in the laboratory before construction and preferably before specifying or ordering materials.
Methods of Stabilization
Two broad categories are
1. Mechanical stabilization.
2. Chemical admixture stabilization.
**Some stabilization techniques use a combination of these two methods.
MECHANICAL STABILILIZATION
Mechanical stabilization relies on physical processes to stabilize the soil, either altering the physical
composition of the soil (soil blending) or placing a barrier in or on the soil to obtain the desired effect.
In mechanical methods of soil stabilization, the bulk density is increased using vibro or dynamic
compaction. In vibro compaction process of stabilization, a vibratory poker is kept into a granule
material resulting in compaction. However, the process of vibro compaction is not applicable for suing

in chemically unstable, biodegradable or combustible material because any penetration might create
routes through which landfill gases might leak.
A point worth mentioning here is that the efficacy of stabilization is wholly dependent on the ability to
achieve uniformity in blending all the materials well. Another method of soil stabilization is chemical
stabilization. This is quite an old method; however, this method came to be used more often especially
after 1960s. At the outset, cement suspensions and lime suspensions were used more commonly
because of being the cheaper options and continue to be preferred even now.
The three essentials for obtaining a properly stabilized soil mixture are—
 Proper gradation.
 A satisfactory binder soil.
 Proper control of the mixture content. To obtain uniform bearing capacity, uniform mixture and
blending of all materials is essential.
The mixture will normally be compacted at or near OMC to obtain satisfactory densities.
Mechanical soil stabilization may be used in preparing soils to function as—
 Subgrades.
 Bases.
 Surfaces.
CHEMICAL ADMIXTURE STABILIZATION
Chemical admixtures are often used to stabilize soils when mechanical methods of stabilization are
inadequate and replacing an undesirable soil with a desirable soil is not possible or is too costly. Over
90 percent of all chemical admixture stabilization projects use
1. Cement.
2. Lime.
3. Fly ash.
4. Bituminous materials.
When selecting a stabilizer additive, the factors that must be considered are the—
 Type of soil to be stabilized.
 Purpose for which the stabilized layer will be used.
 Type of soil quality improvement desired.
 Required strength and durability of the stabilized layer.
 Cost and environmental conditions.

1) Soil cement stabilization
CEMENT can be used as an effective stabilizer for a wide range of materials. In general, however, the
soil should have a PI less than 30. For coarse-grained soils, the amount passing the No. 4 sieve should
be greater than 45 percent.
Since 1915, more than 100,000 miles of equivalent 7.5 m (24 ft) wide pavement bases has
been constructed from cement-stabilized soils. Cement has been found to be effective in
Stabilizing a wide variety of soils, including granular materials, silts, and clays; by-products
Such as slag and fly ash; and waste materials such as pulverized bituminous pavements and crushed
concrete. These materials are used in pavement base, subbase, and
subgrade construction.
Cement-stabilized materials generally fall into two classes—soil-cement and cement modified soil.
Soil-cement is a mixture of pulverized soil material and/or aggregates, measured amounts of portland
cement, and water that is compacted to a high density. Enough cement is added to produce a hardened
material with the strength and durability necessary to serve as the primary structural base layer in a
flexible pavement or as a subbase for rigid pavements. Cement-treated aggregate base and recycled
flexible pavements are considered soil-cement products.
Cement-modified soil is a soil or aggregate material that has been treated with a relatively small
proportion of portland cement (less cement than is required to produce hardened soil-cement), with the
objective of altering undesirable properties of soils or other materials so they are suitable for use in
construction. Cement-modified soil is typically used to improve subgrade soils or to amend local
aggregates for use as base in lieu of more costly transported aggregates. Alternative terms include
cement-treated or cement-stabilized soil or subgrade.
Stabilization Mechanisms
Portland cement is composed of calcium-silicates and calcium-aluminates that, when combined with
water, hydrate to form the cementing compounds of calcium-silicatehydrate and calcium-aluminate-
hydrate, as well as excess calcium hydroxide. Because of the cementitious material, as well as the
calcium hydroxide (lime) formed, portland cement may be successful in stabilizing both granular and
fine-grained soils, as well as aggregates and miscellaneous materials. A pozzolanic reaction between
the calcium hydroxide released during hydration and soil alumina and soil silica occurs in fine-grained
clay soils and is an important aspect of the stabilization of these soils. The permeability of

cementstabilized material is greatly reduced. The result is a moisture-resistant material that is highly
durable and resistant to leaching over the long term.
2) Lime stabilization
LIME STABILIZATION
Experience shows that lime will react with many medium, moderately fine, and fine-grained
soils to produce decreased plasticity, increased workability, reduced swell, and increased strength.
Soils classified according to the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) as CH, CL, MH, ML,
OH, OL, SC, SM, GC, GM, SW-SC, SP-SC, SM-SC, GW-GC, GP-GC, ML-CL, and GM-GC
should be considered as potentially capable of being stabilized with lime.
Lime stabilization is a widely used means of chemically transforming unstable soils into structurally
sound construction foundations. Lime stabilization is particularly important in road construction for
modifying subgrade soils, subbase materials, and base materials. The improved engineering
characteristics of lime-treated materials provide important benefits to both portland cement concrete
(rigid) and asphalt (flexible) pavements. Lime stabilization creates a number of important engineering
properties in soils, including improved strength; improved resistance to fracture, fatigue, and
permanent deformation; improved resilient properties; reduced swelling; and resistance to the
damaging effects of moisture. The most substantial improvements in these properties are seen in
moderately to highly plastic soils, such as heavy clays. Although lime is generally used to transform
fine-grained soils permanently, it may be used for shorter-term soil modification—for example, to
provide a working platform at a construction site.
Reaction Mechanisms
Soil–lime reactions are complex; however, understanding of the chemistry involved and results of field
experience are sufficient to provide design guidelines for successful lime treatment of a range of soils.
The sustained (and relatively slow) pozzolanic reaction between lime and soil silica and soil alumina
(released in the high-pH environment) is key to effective and durable stabilization in lime–soil
mixtures. Mixture design procedures that secure this reaction must be adopted.
In addition to stabilizing materials, lime plays an increasing role in the reclamation of road bases. Lime
has been used effectively to upgrade or reclaim not only clay soils, but also clay-contaminated
aggregate bases and even calcareous bases that have little or no appreciable clay. Work in the United
States, South Africa, and France has established the benefits of lime stabilization of calcareous bases.

The process results in significant improvements in strength, moisture resistance, and resilient modulus
without transforming the calcareous bases into rigid systems that could be susceptible to cracking and
shrinkage.
3) Fly Ash
Fly ash is a pozzolanic material that consists mainly of silicon and aluminium compounds that, when
mixed with lime and water, forms a hardened cementitious mass capable of obtaining high
compression strengths. Fly ash is a by-product of coalfired, electric power-generation facilities. The
liming quality of fly ash is highly dependent on the type of coal used in power generation. Fly ash is
categorized into two broad classes by its calcium oxide (CaO) content.
They are
a. Class C.
b. Class F.
Class C.
This class of fly ash has a high CaO content (12 percent or more) and originates from sub bituminous
and lignite (soft) coal. Fly ash from lignite has the highest CaO content, often exceeding 30 percent.
This type can be used as a stand-alone stabilizing agent. The strength characteristics of Class C fly ash
having a CaO less than 25 percent can be improved by adding lime. Further discussion of fly ash
properties and a listing of geographic locations where fly ash is likely to be found are in Appendix B.
Class F.
This class of fly ash has a low CaO content (less than 10 percent) and originates from anthracite and
bituminous coal. Class F fly ash has an insufficient CaO content for the pozzolanic reaction to occur. It
is not effective as a stabilizing agent by itself; however, when mixed with either lime or lime and
cement, the fly ash mixture becomes an effective stabilizing agent.
4) Bituminous stabilization
BITUMINOUS STABILIZATION Bituminous soil stabilization refers to a process by which a

controlled amount of bituminous material is thoroughly mixed with an existing soil or aggregate

material to form a stable base or wearing surface. Bitumen increases the cohesion and load-bearing
capacity of the soil and renders it resistant to the action of water
In bituminous treatment, the end product performs differently—at least initially, and the product is
much less brittle. Additionally, its behaviour depends on the nature of the loading (static or
dynamic) and the temperature when the load is applied.
CHAPTER FOUR
SITE INVESTIGATION
Subsurface Exploration Program
Preliminary
Information
Steps Reconnaissance
Site Investigation

Type of structure and general use

column loads and spacing (building)
Span length and loading of piers (Bridges)
Preliminary Information
(try to get free information) A general idea of the topography and soil
type
*USGS maps
*State government maps
*Highway department soils manuals
*Air photos
*Seismic potential maps
*Old foundation reports
* Locate utilities !!
General topography of site, existence of

drainage ditches, abandoned debris.
Evidence of creep slopes
Soil stratification from deep cuts (close

to highways and railroads).
Reconnaissance Type of vegetation (may indicate
(Visual inspection and photos nature of soils).
or video)
High water marks, GW T from nearby wells.
Type of construction nearby.

The existence of any cracks.

Based on the above information formulate best possible

Site Investigation concept of subsurface condition.
*Separate potential problems in structure
Planning of *Perform borings

Investigation
*Obtain samples
*Perform in-situ tests

a) Auger boring (simplest method)
*Post hole auger

Hand auger *Helical auger
*(power driven) helical augers ( 76.2mm – 304.8 mm)

Portable
*Flight augers (most common method used

for advancing a bore hole).
Continuous
*Solid stem augers
*Hollow stem augers
Auger Boring. A mechanical auger is a very fast method of excavating a boring. The hole is
excavated by rotating the auger while at the same time applying a downward pressure on the auger to
help obtain penetration of the soil or rock. There are basically two types of augers: flight augers and
bucket augers. Common available diameters of flight augers are 5 cm to 1.2 m (2 in to 4 ft) and of
bucket augers are 0.3 m to 2.4 m (1 ft to 8 ft). The auger is periodically removed from the hole, and the
soil lodged in the groves of the flight auger or contained in the bucket of the bucket auger is removed.
A casing is generally not used for auger borings, and the hole may cave-in during the excavation of
loose or soft
soils or when the excavation is below the groundwater table. Augers are probably the most common
type of equipment used to excavate borings.

Hollow-Stem Flight Auger. A hollow-stem flight auger has a circular hollow core which allows for
sampling down the center of the auger. The hollow-stem auger acts like a casing and allows for
sampling in loose or soft soils or when the excavation is below the groundwater table.
b) Wash borings
*Coring of about 2-m 3m long is driven into the ground.
*The soil inside the coring is then removed by means of a chopping bit attached
to a drilling rod.
*Water is forced through the drilling rod, and exits at a high velocity through the holes at the
*bottom of the chopping bit.
c) Rotary Drilling
*Rapidly rotating drilling bits attached to the bottom of drill cuts the soil and advances
the bore hole. This can be used in sands, clays and rocks.
*Drilling mud (bentonite) is forced down the drilling rod to the bits and the return flow
forces the cuttings to the surface..
*Drilling mud is a slurry of water and bentonite.
d) Percussion Drilling
A heavy drilling bit is raised and lowered to chop the hard soil (good for hard
soils and rocks) – The chopped soil particles are brought up by circulating water.
Wash-Type Borings. Wash-type borings use circulating drilling fluid, which removes cuttings from
the borehole. The cuttings are created by the chopping, twisting, and jetting action of the drill bit,
which breaks the soil or rock into small fragments. Casings are often used to prevent cave-in of the
hole. Because drilling fluid is used during the excavation, it can be difficult to classify the soil and
obtain uncontaminated soil samples.
Rotary Coring. This type of boring equipment uses power rotation of the drilling bit as circulating
fluid removes cuttings from the hole. Table 6.3 lists various types of rotary coring for soil and rock.

Percussion Drilling. This type of drilling equipment is often used to penetrate hard rock, for
subsurface exploration or for the purpose of drilling wells. The drill bit works much like a
jackhammer, rising and falling to break up and crush the rock material.



Sampling
Disturbed sampling
Undisturbed sampling
Disturbed Sampling
a.1) Purpose
Classification of material
Borrow material
Preliminary information, exploratory

Grain size and Attenberg limits,
Gs, visual classification.
Disturbed Samples
Disturbed soil is defined as soil that has been remolded during the sampling process. For example, soil
obtained from driven samplers, such as the Standard Penetration Test spilt spoon sampler, or chunks of
intact soil brought to the surface in an auger bucket (i.e., bulk samples), are considered disturbed soil.
Disturbed soil can be used for numerous types of laboratory tests
Undisturbed Sample
It should be recognized that no soil sample can be taken from the ground in a perfectly undisturbed
state. However, this terminology has been applied to those soil samples taken by certain sampling
methods. Undisturbed samples are often defined as those samples obtained by slowly pushing
thinwalled tubes, having sharp cutting ends and tip relief, into the soil. Two parameters, the inside
clearance ratio and the area ratio are often used to evaluate the disturbance potential of different
samplers, and they are defined as follows:

where :
De=diameter at the sampler cutting tip
Di = inside diameter of the sampling tube
Do = outside diameter of the sampling tube
In general, a sampling tube for undisturbed soil specimens should have an inside clearance ratio of
about 1% and an area ratio of about 10% or less. Having an inside clearance ratio of about 1%
provides for tip relief of the soil and reduces the friction between the soil and inside of the sampling
tube during the sampling process. A thin film of oil can be applied at the cutting edge to also reduce
the friction between the soil and metal tube during sampling operations. The purpose of having a low
area ratio and a sharp cutting end is to slice into the soil with as little disruption and displacement of
the soil as possible. Shelby tubes are manufactured to meet these specifications and are considered to
be undisturbed soil samplers. As a comparison, the California Sampler has an area ratio of 44% and is
considered to be a thick-walled sampler.

a.2) methods
Augers hard
power
Wash borings
Test pits, trenches or drilled shafts
Split spoon sample

D  40 mm, L 300 – 600 mm
*Samples splits lengthwise
*Two couplings – cutting edge
*Sampler pushed or driven
De 2  Di 2
AR[%]  * 100 must be  20%( prefer  10%)
Di 2
50.8  34.92
2
AR[%]  * 100  115%
34.932
*Advantages: inexpensive, easy, can be driven in almost all soils
*Disadvantages : disturbed sample
Scraper bucket samples D  60 mm, L 750 mm

*Vertical slit in upper half, bent out or sharpened
*Couplings (driving point)
*Advantages: good for sands with catcher can
not keep mat, economical
*Disadvantages : disturbed sample

Undisturbed sampling
b.1) Purpose
Shear strength properties
Compressibility of soils Need structure of soil ( in-situ condition)
permeability
b.2) Methods
Thin walled “Shelby tube” *D 50mm, L 750-900 mm t  1.5mm

AR%  13%
*Must be pushed and not driven
*Advantage: fairly economical
*Disadvantages: poor sample, cutting edge loose sample,
no vacuum at top ---can overdrive!!
Piston samples
*Good samples for soft clays
*Advantage: clean hole, rarely loose sample, can not overdrive,
always get a full tube.
*Disadvantages: slightly expensive, requires more skil.

b.2) Methods continued
*Used if soil too stiff or compacted tube soil and rock.

*Core techniques adapted
Sampling combined *Advantages: good for alternating hard and stiff layers.
with coring ( pitcher samples) *Disadvantages: slightly expensive
Denison Sampler *Double core system

*Excellent for compacted sands.
*From test pits large (accessible) B.H.

Hard trimmed / carved *Advantages: best lowest disturbance
block samples *Disadvantages:
Sherbrooke Sampler *Block samples from bore-holes

D = 250 mm, L = 350 mm 10 inch block.
*Advantages: High quality, minimum disturbance
can go 20m / below GW T
*Disadvantages: expensive

Course Outline:: Ece 2311: Soil Mechanics Ii

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Course Outline:: Ece 2311: Soil Mechanics Ii

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Course Outline:: Ece 2311: Soil Mechanics Ii

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

JKUAT 2014………………………………………….

ECE2311 Soil Mechanics II……………………………………

ECE 2311: SOIL MECHANICS II

FACTORS WHICH CONTROL SHEAR STRENGTH OF SOILS

(a) No horizontal force applied (b) Horizontal force applied

THE MOHR CIRCLE DIAGRAM 1

Major Principal Plane 3

and normal stress,  n . The magnitudes of these stresses are:

Fig 6 Mohr Circle

Fig 7: Mohr circle envelope

In figure 8 above, angle DCO=1800-2 

Shear stress 3500N/m2 and normal stress is 10000N/m2.

Determine (A) by calculation and (B) graphically

ii) The angle of shearing resistance of the soil.

iii) The major and minor principal stresses,  1 and  3

i. The resultant complex stress on the plane of failure.

Resultant stress  OD  3.5 2  10 2  10.6kN / m 2

iii. The major and minor principal stresses,  1 and  3

 n   3   1   3 cos 2  = 10.0   3   1   3 cos 2 54 0 38' ------------------------------2

Solve the two equations simultaneously to get

Coulomb’s law of soil shear strength

Mohr-Coulomb Failure Criteria

Effective stress,  '

- The soil skeleton ( in the form of grain contact stresses)

 '  The effective stress

  The total stress

u  Is the pore water pressure

In 1955 Bishop suggested a similar formula for a partially saturated soil.

 '  The effective stress

  The total stress

u w = Is the pore water pressure

x = Is a parameter related to the degree of saturation

u a = Is the pore air pressure

Modified Coulomb’s law

The Mohr- Coulomb yield theory

Any effect due to  2 is ignored.

Fig 10. Mohr circle

SHEAR STRENGTH TESTS

The direct shear test

NEED AND SCOPE

PLANNING AND ORGANIZATION

1. Direct shear box apparatus

2. Loading frame (motor attached).

7. Balance to weigh upto 200 mg.

1. Check the inner dimension of the soil container.

2. Put the parts of the soil container together.

3. Calculate the volume of the container. Weigh the container.

6. Make the surface of the soil plane.

8. Measure the thickness of soil specimen.

9. Apply the desired normal load.

10. Remove the shear pin.

15.Take volume change readings till failure.

DATA CALCULATION SHEET FOR DIRECT SHEAR TEST

Normal stress 0.5 kg/cm2 L.C=....... P.R.C=.........

Normal stress 1.0 kg/cm2 L.C=....... P.R.C=........

Normal stress 1.5 kg/cm2 L.C=....... P.R.C=........

OBSERVATION AND RECORDING

Proving Ring constant....... Least count of the dial........

Dimensions of shear box 60 x 60 mm