First Technical Session

Monday morning, 5 June, 1950 Mr L. F. Cooling, M.Sc., in the Chair

The following Paper was introduced by the Authors and submitted for discussion. On
th motion of the Chairman, the thanks of the Conference were accorded to the
Authors.

THE MEASUREMENT OF THE SHEAR STRENGTH OF SOILS

by A. W. SKEMPTON, D.Sc., and A. W. Bishop, M.A.
SYNOPSIS
Tests are described for determining the shear strength parameters c and fi of the
principal soil types under controlled conditions of pore pressure dissipation. The
significance of the results is discussed in terms of their application in stability
analyses. The presentation is necessarily a personal one, but the Authors believe that
the Paper is not unrepresentative of the views and of the practice of other soil
laboratories in Great Britain.

FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS
EFFECTIVE STRESS
The fundamental principle underlying all work on the shear strength of soils is that
the mechanical properties are controlled by the intergranular forces. If “” denotes
the total normal stress acting on any plane in a soil and if “u” the pressure in the pore
space, then, to a close approximation, the effective stress ’ is given by the equation:
’ =  – u …. (1)
In this expression ’ is the sum of the intergranular forces resolved normal to the
plane per unit area of the plane.
An examination of this equation is given in a recent paper by Bishop and Eldin (1950),
but here it is necessary only to note that equation (1) has been substantiated
experimentally by Terzaghi (1936) for sand clay and concrete, by Rendulic (1937) and
Taylor (1944) for clays, and by Bishop and Eldin for sands. There is, therefore, no
reason to doubt the general validity of the principle of effective stress.
TRUE COHESION AND INTERNAL FRICTION
In 1773 Coulomb suggested that the shear strength characteristics of a soild could be
represented by the expression:
s = c +  tan 
where, in modern nomenclature,
“s” denotes shear strength
“c” denotes apparent cohesion
“” denotes total pressure normal to shear plane
“” denotes angle of shearing resistance
In Coulomb's equation “c” and “” are empirical constants the values of which, for any
given soil, depend upon the conditions of test or the conditions under which the soil is
stressed in the field; in particular, whether or not the soil is allowed to drain during
the shearing process.
In a more fundamental form, first put forward by Hvorslev in 1937, Coulomb's
equation is rewritten
s =Ce + (s — u) tan e
where Ce= denotes true cohesion
e= denotes true angle of internal
The cohesion and internal friction will, in general, depend upon the void ratio of the
soil at the instant of shear failure.
For purposes of simplicity the rate of strain is taken as an independent variable and
its efíect on the shear strength will be considered separately. Existing data do not
justify any more elaborate treatment, and, so far as the authors are aware, no serious
error is thereby introduced.
In any isotropic soil the cohesion is a non-directional property and it may be regarded
as the resultant of the physico-chemical forces acting between the particles. In clean
sands these forces are negligibly small, whilst in clays they are important. Indeed,
there is evidence to suggest that in bentonite the shear strength is composed almost
wholly of true cohesion (Skempton, 1948).
Internal friction is derived principally from the actual friction of grain on grain. It is,
however, also taken as including the resistance to shear developed as a result of the
work which has to be done when the soil changes volume during shear. Internal
friction is not itself a directional property, but in the general case of an element under
unequal principal stresses the shear resistance along different planes will vary in
accordance with the variation in , and hence the internal friction imparts directional
properties to the soil.
Whether or not this view of the physics of shear strength is wholly acceptable, the
Coulomb- Hvorslev equation has been confirmed experimentally, at least as a first
approximation, by Hyorslev (loc. cit), Peynircioglu (1939) and recent research at
Imperial College. In the Authors' opinion it must form the basis of any fundamental
consideration of shear strength.
ANGLE OF SHEARING RESISTANCE
The measurement of “ce”, and e is, however, a matter of some difficulty in many soils
and, moreover, an analysis of stability based on these basic properties is likely to be
rather elaborate in practical use. Ultimately such analyses will be carried out, as has
been done already in a provisional way for certain relatively simple cases by
Skempton (19485) and Hansen and Gibson (1949). But at the present time the usual
method of procedure is:
(i) To determine the values of “c” and ““in Coulomb's equation under definite
conditions of water-content change during shear; namely, no water-content
change (un-drained test), or full water-content change (drained test).

(ii) To use these values of c and “” as if they denoted the cohesion and internal
friction of the soil : where practical conditions approximate to zero water-content
change the undrained test parameters are used, with respect to total stresses:
where practical conditions approximate to full water-content change the drained
test parameters are used, with respect to effective stresses : where practical
conditions cannot be even approximately represented by either drained or
undrained tests, both tests should be made and the appropriate strength deduced
from a knowledge of the degree of consolidation under field conditions.

This procedure is semi-empirical; its justification must be judged by three criteria:

(a) simplicity;

(b) reliability in practice;

(c) small errors as compared with a more rigorous analysis based on “ce”, and “e”,
and a knowledge of the pore pressure “u”.

Of these (a) is undoubted, and there is some evidence for (b) ; but principally from
that type of problem which has been shown by Skempton and by Hansen and Gibson
to conform also to (c)—namely those problems where a saturated clay is stressed
without any change in water content and “ = 0” with respect to applied stresses. One
of the most urgent needs in the subject at the present time is thus for a theoretical
examination, and practical results, concerning the reliability of the present procedure
in those cases where a water content change precedes the stage for which it is desired
to calculate the factor of safety (typical cases include the foundation stability of slowly
constructed earth dams, rapid draw-down, and the stability of roads and runways).
But even in the absence of such results the present conventional procedure will
probably continue to be used ; and the purpose of the more advanced theoretical
examination will be to provide information on the corrections which must be applied
in the conventional analyses. Consequently the Authors will consider the various tests
by which the values of “c”, the apparent cohesion, and “” the angle of shearing
resistance, can be measured on samples of the principal soil types.
SAMPLING
No matter how correct a theory of shear strength may be, and no matter how carefully
the laboratory tests are carried out, the results will be misleading unless samples have
been taken which are closely representative of the soil as it exists in Nature.
Consequently it is of the utmost importance to obtain undisturbed samples, or in the
case of fills and sub-grades to predict with reasonable accuracy the state of the soil
during and after construction,
Unless this is possible, the testing programme is likely to yield results of very. limited
value. For example, it appears that it is difficult, or even impossible, to obtain
undisturbed samples of sensitive silty clays from depths of more than about 50 feet
(Carlson, 1948 : Skempton, 1948c). For such cases the vane test has been developed
(see Section VI) and it would be inadvisable to carry out any elaborate laboratory
shear tests to determine the in-situ strength. As a second example, the problem of
predicting the moisture contents in a clay subgrade some years after construction is
still a matter of practical difficulty, although recent work (Croney, Lewis, and
Coleman, 1950) at the Road Research Laboratory shows great promise in this
direction. In highway and airfield work, this is a far more important matter than any
refinements of testing technique or stability analysis.
Nevertheless there is a wide range of practical problems where the conditions are
known with sufficient accuracy and adequate samples can be obtained. lt is with these
cases that this Paper is mainly concerned. The techniques of sampling lie outside the
scope of the present discussion.
PRINCIPAL SOIL TYPES
From the point of view of studying shear strength, soils may be classified into five
principal types. Any one of these types may be either fully or partially saturated ; and
its properties have to be considered in either the undisturbed or remoulded states.
Broadly speaking, undisturbed soils beneath ground-water level are fully saturated;
and partially saturated when above water level. Soils used in the construction of dams,
embank- ments, or subgrades are generally remoulded and, at least initially, only
partially saturated.
Sands and gravels. - In this type of soil only a small percentage of the particles are
smaller than 0.06 millimetre. The true cohesion is negligible and the permeability is
relatively great. Most sands and gravels, unless in a loose state of packing, exhibit
positive dilatancy during shear.
Clay-gravels. - This type of soil contains sufficient silt and clay fractions to impart
appreciable cohesion, but not so much of these finer fractions as seriously to reduce
the angle of shearing resistance under normal conditions. Hoggin forms a familiar
example. But in many boulder clays, the clay content is so high as to place the soil in
the class of “ clays.”
Silts. - In its most characteristic form this type of soil has a liquid limit of less than 35
and contains not more than about 15 per cent. clay fraction (less than 0.002
millimetre). Unless very soft, silts exhibit positive dilatancy.
Non-fissured clays.—This class of soil is plastic and smooth to the touch, with a liquid
limit typically greater than 35, and without any obvious macro-structure. The clay
fraction is usually in excess of 15 per cent. Unless highly over-consolidated most clays
exhibit negative dilatancy.
Fissured clays.—This type of soil is identical with that described above, except for the
presence of a network of fissures. These fissures can be readily seen if a sample is
broken apart. They are of greatest significance in over-consolidated clays, and require
special con- sideration in predicting the effects of softening.
THE BASIC SHEAR TESTS
GENERAL
The outstanding importance of the drainage conditions during shear has been
recognized since 1932, when Terzaghi published the results of two series of triaxial
tests on a saturated clay. In the first of these no drainage was allowed and the angle of
shearing resistance “” was found to be approximately zero; whilst in the second
series the clay was allowed to consolidate during the test, when the value of “” was
found to be 23 degrees.
At the present time the tests normally carried out may be classified as follows (after
Casagrande 1941) : *
No drainage during shear—
Undrained (Quick) Test : the samples are placed in the testing apparatus in any given
state (undisturbed, compacted to a specified density, etc.), subjected to an applied cell
pressure under conditions of no drainage and then sheared, also under conditions of
no drainage. At least three samples must be used, each being tested under a different
cell pressure. ,
Consolidated-undrained (Cons.-Quick) Tests: several (not fewer than three) samples
are allowed to consolidate, or soften, under a defined pressure and are then subjected
to undrained tests; each sample being under a different cell pressure. The procedure
is then repeated on further sets of samples, each set being consolidated under
different pressures.
Full drainage during shear—
Drained (Slow) Test : the samples are allowed to consolidate, or soften, under a
defined pressure and are then sheared under conditions of no excess pressure in the
pore space, the cell pressure (or vertical pressure in the shear box) being held
constant.
RATE OF STRAIN
Recent research by Casagrande and co-workers has shown that the strength of a sand
is virtually uninfluenced by the rate of strain but that, on the other hand, the strength
of a clay depends to an appreciable extent on this factor.
Undrained tests are usually completed within a period ranging from 5 minutes to 30
minutes. But in the subgrade of a road or runway, for example, the shear stresses are
applied at a rate of the order of 1,000 or even 10,000 times greater than that used in
the laboratory test. With special equipment Casagrande and Shannon (1948) have
carried out shear strength measurements under such transient rates of loading and
they find that the results may be 30 to 60 per cent., or in extreme cases 100 per cent.
greater than those obtained in the normal tests. Clearly some allowance for this effect
should logically be made in subgrade design.
In contrast, the rate of loading in most constructional operations is measured in terms
of weeks or months: a rate of the order of 10,000 times smaller than that in the
routine tests. Taylor (1943) and Casagrande and Wilson (1949), have investigated the
influence of very low rates of strain on clays and it appears that the shear strength
typically falls to values about 15 to 30 per cent. lower than that normally measured.
Here again some allowance for this effect should be made in an analysis which
attempts to be thoroughgoing. From the theoretical considerations put forward by
Hansen and Gibson (1949), it is probable, however, that the “ = 0” analysis contains
an implicit factor of safety of the same order as the decrease in strength due to slow
rates of loading. It may well be that the two effects tend-to balance out and there is, at
any rate, a considerable body of evidence pointing to the reasonable accuracy of the
simple “ = 0” analysis, as shown by Skempton and Golder (1948) and Cadling and
Odenstad (1950).
So far as laboratory practice is concerned the variation in rates of loading in
undrained tests are of little consequence. A considerable number of experiments in
the Authors' labora- tory indicate that the differences in strength obtained in tests
carried out 5 times faster or 5 times slower than the standard rate (about 10 minutes
to failure) do not amount to more than about 5 or, in extreme cases, 10 per cent ; even
at water contents equal to the liquid limit. But in drained tests on clays the time of
loading varies from about 8 hours to 3 days ; and consequently for research work it is
necessary to apply corrections to those results before comparing them with
undrained tests.
LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES
GENERAL
The choice of apparatus for carrying out a shear test is primarily determined by the
conditions of drainage under which it is desired to carry out the test.
Table 1 indicates the procedure which is generally followed in testing the main soil
types. For example, the use of the small shear box for undrained and consolidated-
undrained tests is limited to clays of low permeability tested at a rapid rate of shear,
owing to the relatively short drainage paths in the apparatus.
Other factors also have to be considered, such as- whether samples can be
satisfactorily prepared (in very soft, friable or coarse grained soils), and the degree of
operational skill required to carry out the test.
Tests are normally carried out under a controlled rate of strain, as the conditions at
failure are then completely specified.
TRIAXIAL APPARATUS
The triaxial compression test is carried out under a constant cell pressure on a sample
3 inches long x 1 ½ inch in diameter in the apparatus shown diagrammatically in Figs
1 and 2 (for sand, silts and clays) or 9 inches long X 4 inches diameter (for gravelly
soils). The cell pressure is maintained constant in long duration tests by the mercury
control which, once it has been set at the correct level, automatically compensates for
any leakage of water out of the triaxial apparatus. For short duration tests (normally
about 10 to 20 minutes) the compressed air in the cylinder is sufficient to maintain a
constant pressure.
Table 1
Apparatus used tor shear-strength measurements in relation to main soil types
Soil type Test conditions: Undrained; Consolidated-Undrained; Drained
Sand: - ; Triaxial ; Triaxial or shear box, deep sounding in situ.
Gravel; - ; - ; Large shear box
Clay-gravel; Triaxial or large shear box (if of low permeability); Large shear box or
triaxial, depending on grading and permeability.; Large shear box or triaxial,
depending on grading.
Silt; Triaxial vane in situ ; Triaxial; Triaxial or shear box.
Peat; Triaxial; Triaxial: Triaxial or shear box
Fissured clay, Triaxial; Triaxial or oedometer triaxial; Triaxial
In an undrained test on a cohesive soil the specimen is simply placed between two
solid end pieces (of duralumin or “* Perspex ”) and enclosed in a thin rubber
membrane which is sealed against the end pieces by rubber rings. The rubber
membranes in general use in Britain are about 0.2 millimetre in thickness, and it has
been found that these givenan apparent increase in compression strength of about 0.8
lb, per square inch. At Imperial College, when very soft clays are being tested, a
membrane only about 0.1 millimetre in thickness is used ; this being made in the
laboratory from self-vulcanizing latex. The correction is then about 0.3 lb. per square
inch.
In the consolidated-undrained test, for any type of soil, the sample is placed on a
porous disc, which is connected through the base of the cell to a burette. This permits
consolidation to take place under the applied pressure. When consolidation is
complete | the valve to the burette is closed, and the sample is sheared under
undrained conditions with any desired cell pressure. When clays are being tested, side
drains made of thin strips of filter paper are employed to increase the rate of
consolidation.
The procedure is similar in the case of the drained test, except that the valve to the
burette remains open throughout the test: and in testing clays the shearing process
must not be completed in less than about 1 to 3 days (using side drains).
In the case of saturated non-cohesive sands, the rubber membrane is surrounded by a
E while the sample is placed in it, and the cap sealed in place. The burette is then
lowered to apply a small negative pressure sufficient to hold the sample rigid while
the former is removed, the cell assembled, and the lateral pressure applied. A
consolidated-undrained or drained test is then carried out.
The same method is applied in the case of dry sands (Fig. 2), where a lowering of the
mercury level in the burette (by the screw control) sets up a negative pore pressure
while the cell in being assembled. Volume changes are measured during the test by
maintaining atmospheric pressure in the pore space (indicated by the oil manometer),
which means that the volume of air in the system is constant, and hence changes in the
volume of the sample are indicated by changes in mercury level in the burette. This
procedure if, of course, applicable only to drained test.

SPECIAL CASES OF THE TRIAXIAL TEST

Unconfined compression test— This is the limiting case of the undrained triaxial test,
in which the pressure is zero. The rubber membrane and cell may be dispensed with,
and in this form it provides a test which can be simply and rapidly carried out either
in the laboratory he field (Cooling and Golder, 1940).
In the case of intact saturated “it provides all the information required for a “=0
analysis”, but the results may be misleading in the case of fissured clays. In these the
unconfined compression strength may be 30 per cent, below the value as measured in
an undrained triaxial test under the overburden pressure. The unconfined test is also
misleading in dilating or partly saturated soils, in which the angle of shearing
resistance is not equal to zero. (Bishop and Elgin, 1950)
Samples consolidated in the oedometer. – In certain cases it is convenient to
consolidate the sample (or allow it to swell) in the oedometer before cutting from it a
specimen for an undrained triaxial test (Bishop, 1948a). This approximates to a
special case of the anisotropically – consolidated – undrained test and is useful in
certain practical foundation and runway problems where the corresponding test
carried out wholly in the triaxial apparatus is technically rather complicated.
SHEAR BOX
The shear-box test is normally carried out on samples 6 centimeters square x 2
centimeters in thickness or 12 inches square x 6 inches in thickness. The 6-centimeter
shear box is illustrated in Fig. 3, and details of the large shear box have been given by
Bishop (1948a).
The use of the shear box is normally limited to drained tests, as, owing to the short
drainage paths, undrained and consolidated – undrained tests can only be carried out
on clays of low permeability at high testing rates. In any case the high stress gradients
within the sample make the test unsuitable for a study of rheological properties, as
internal redistribution of the pore water will take place even if drainage is prevented.
For drained tests on clays, using the 6-centimetre box, the time of shearing should not
be less than about ½ -1 day. With the limited data at present available it appears that .
the results are in close agreement with those obtained from drained tests in the
triaxial apparatus.
The large shear box enables gravels with a particle size of up to 1-inch diameter to be
tested (or up to 14-inch diameter if well graded).
VANE TEST
The vane test as used in the laboratory at Imperial College is illustrated in Fig. 4. The
torsion set up in the thin steel rod on which. the vane is mounted, due to the relative
rotation of the sample and the vane, is measured optically. This gives a very sensitive
measurement of the shear strength mobilized on the cylindrical surface bounding the
vane, and is entirely free from frictional errors in the apparatus. Strengths as low as
0.03 lb. per inch may be measured with reasonable accuracy.
Test on seven different saturated non-fissured clays have shown good correlation
between unconfined compression strength and the strength as measured with the
vane; using the expression:
Torque = c , pi (d^2*h/2 + d^2/6
Where d and h denote the diameter and height of the vane, and c denotes the shear
strength of the clay.
The test is primarily used as an undrained test on very soft undisturbed and remolded
clays from which compression specimens are not readily prepared. It is of interest to
note that the value of “c” at the liquid limit is of the order of 0.1 to 0.2 lb. per square
inch for most clays.
PENETRATION TESTS
The type of penetration test which has figured most widely in laboratory procedure is
the cone test, for use on cohesive soils where “u=0”, as a measure of consistency or
shear strength.
As it appeared to have particular advantages in the case of very soft samples, a careful
study of its value as a measure of shear strength has been made at Imperial College.
The is apparatus used for carrying out the test at controlled rates of penetration is
illustrated in Fig 5.
The force required to cause penetration can be expressed as
“P=k.c.pi.tan^2(B/2).p^2” where:
“c” denotes shear strength (=1/2 unconfined compression strength)
“B” denotes cone angle (90 degrees in out test)
“p” denotes penetration
“k” is the cone factor.
It was found, however, that the value of the conversion factor “k” varied with water
content for any given and varied widely from one clay to another, as shown in Table 2.
TABLA 2
The cone test can thus be considered only as a very rough guide to the undrained
shear strength of a clay. Even as a measure of the sensitivity of any particular clay it
may be misleading, as the cone factor (which depends on the ratio of Young's Modulus
to the shear strength of the sample) will in general be different in the undisturbed and
remolded.
Other penetration tests, such as the California Bearing Ratio test and the Proctor
Needle are empirical consistency tests and are not intended as measurements of shear
strength. They will therefore not be considered here.
IN-SITU TESTS
VANE TEST
The vane test was first used as a means of measuring the undrained shear strength of
deep clay strata by Carlson (1948) in Sweden. Another form has been developed in
England by the Authors to overcome the difficulty of penetrating hard layers and sand
or gravel strata overlying the clay; and to permit undisturbed samples to be taken
from the same bore-hole (Skempton, 19480).
Two factors have been given particular consideration: —
(a) the location of the vane at a depth below the bore-hole casing where the clay is
free from any appreciable disturbance or change in stress;
(b) the choice of the dimensions of the apparatus so that corrections due to adhesion
of the clay to the vane spindle and due to friction in the bearings shall be only a small
proportion of the result.
The apparatus finds its main use in deep beds of soft clay or silt, particularly when
high sensitivity makes undisturbed sampling difficult or unreliable. In a simple hand-
operated form the vane also provides a convenient means of measuring shear
strength in the upper few feet of a soil (Smith, 1945; Evans, 1950).
DEEP SOUNDING TEST
This test, which was “originally developed in the Netherlands, is in effect a field
penetration test at a controlled rate of penetration, in which the end bearing pressure
is measured separately from the side friction. It Guide is useful qualitatively in
locating the boundaries of hard and soft strata, and quantitatively in measuring the
bearing capacity of sand and gravel strata (Vermeiden, 1948)
In problems relating to the design of piled foundations, for which it has been most
widely used, the measured ultimate bearing capacity of the cone is taken to be that of
the pile point. This procedure has been confirmed by full-scale loading tests
(Plantema, 1948). The test may, however, be considered as a drained shear test in the
case of sands, and the angle of internal friction calculated, at least approximately, from
bearing capacity theory.
TYPICAL RESULTS AND THEIR PRACTICAL SIGNIFICANCE
DESCRIPTION OF SOILS
Before describing the results of shear tests and discussing their significance it may be
useful to outline the other results which, in the Authors' opinion, are a minimum
requirement for the description of any soil.
In-situ Cohesionless Soils: Particle-size distribution, in-situ density and water content,
upper and lower porosity limits (Kolbuszewski, 1948), degree of saturation.
Compacted Cohesionless Soils: as above, but with Proctor density and optimum water
content instead of the in-situ values.
In-situ Cohesive Soils: Natural water content, Atterberg limits, degree of saturation,
particle-size distribution, sensitivity to remoulding, pre-consolidation load.
Compacted Cohesive Soils: Atterberg limits, Proctor density and optimum water
content, particle-size distribution, natural water content, and density of material in
the borrow pits.
SENSITIVITY
Many normally or lightly over-consolidated clays and silts show a marked drop in
strength on remolding: Terzaghi (1944) defines the “sensitivity” as the ratio of the
undisturbed strength “c” to the remoulded strength “cr”, and a sensitivity of between
2 and 4 is commonly encountered. In clays which may be classified as “sensitive” this
ratio lies between 4 and 8, whilst in “extra-sensitive” clays the ratio is greater than 8
(Terzaghi and Peck 1948).
In some problems the fact that a clay may be sensitive or extra-sensitive is as
important as its undisturbed strength; and for this reason a statement of the
sensitivity is an essential part of the description of a cohesive soil.
The “remolding loss” may be defined as “ c-cr/c” and, apart from extra-sensitive clays,
it is roughly equal to the liquidity index “w-PL/LL-PL”. Most clays which are heavily
over- consolidated show almost no remolding loss; for example, London Clay, boulder
clays, etc.
UNDRAINED TESTS
These tests are carried out with no water-content change. Consequently they can be
applied to those problems in which the soil is stressed at constant water content, and
in which the soil can be sampled, or formed into samples (in the case of compacted
fills) that can be tested immediately in the triaxial apparatus, or by the vane.
The soils included within the scope of these tests are clays, silts, and clay-gravels and
the problems include foundation of structures and dams, provided that consolidation
during construction is negligible, and the design of walls and cuttings where the factor
of safety is required for the condition immediately after construction.
Stability analyses are carried out with respect to total stresses and with the shear
parameters “cu”, and “u”, defined as in Fig. 6. The results fall into two classes : (a)
those in which “u” is not zero and (b) those in which “u” is zero. .
The result “u = 0” is obtained in all saturated clays and in some saturated silts. Golder
and Skempton (1948) have published data for twenty saturated clays in which “u” is
either zero or not greater than I degree and in which “cu” varies from 1 ½ lb. per
square inch to 45 lb, per square inch under cell pressures covering a range from zero
(unconfined compression test) to 60 lb. per square inch. Many other similar results
have been published. Characteristic variations in “Cu” with depth in a normally
consolidated and in an overconsolidated clay are shown in Figs 7. In the former case
the strengths were used in a “ = 0” analysis of a steel sheet pile cofferdam 35 feet
deep, 50 feet wide and 250 feet long, whilst in the latter case they were used in a “f=0”
analysis of the foundation stability of an earth dam 60 feet high. In both examples
consolidation during construction could be neglected without any appreciable error. It
is to be noted that it is this fact which provides the justification of the “ = 0”
assumption (together with the “u = O” result in test), and that the “ = 0” assumption
in analysis is wholly unaffected by the gain in strength with depth.
Figs 6
The angle of shearing resistance “u=0” is not zero in partially saturated clays, silts,
and clay gravels, and in some saturated (dilating) silts. Also it may be accepted as a
definition of a clay-gravel that, even when saturated, it has a value of “u”, greater
than zero; if “u” does equal zero the material should be classified as a gravelly clay.
Many boulder clays fall into this latter category, and they are essentially clays: the
sand and gravel not being present in sufficient proportion to impart any marked
positive dilatancy. Clay shales and siltstones (i.e. intensely over-compacted clays and
silts) also fall into the class of soils with “u” not equal to zero. In most soils in which
“u” is not zero the Mohr envelope is slightly curved, Fig. 6 (a), but it may be taken as
linear over the range of pressure under investigation. Golder and Skempton quote
data on nine partially saturated clays, five saturated silts (LL less than 35) and seven
clay shales or siltstones. The values of “u” typically lie between 15 and 30 degrees. In
a saturated clay gravel, containing 65 per cent. by weight of particles retained on the
½-inch sieve and 15 per cent. clay fraction, “u” was found to be 24 degrees.
CONSOLIDATED-UNDRAINED TESTS
In these tests the soil is allowed to soften or consolidate under a specified pressure,
and is then sheared under conditions of no water-content change. All soil types can be
tested by this procedure, but of the “sands and gravels” category only very fine silty
sands are likely, in practice, to involve shear at constant water content. The problems
in which the test results can be directly applied include the design of earth dams for
the case of rapid draw-down and the design of road and runway bases and subgrades.
In the former problem the samples are allowed to come to equilibrium under the
effective stresses existing in the dam before drawdown and are then sheared under
various cell pressures under conditions of constant water content. In the latter
problem the samples are brought to the water content and density estimated as being
those which will exist under the pavement, and are then tested as mentioned above.
(or, frequently, in the C.B.R. apparatus). The stability calculations are carried out with
respect to changes in total stresses, using the shear parameters obtained from the
tests.
A similar procedure is adopted for determining the strength to be used in calculating
the initial stability of “ impervious ” rolled fill in embankments and dams, since during
the placing of the layers appreciable softening can take place due to rain.
Figs 7
In all saturated clays “ = 0”, and in some cases even a clay which was partially
saturated initially will become fully or almost fully saturated after consolidation or
swelling, and will then show “ =0”. In clay gravels and dilating silts “” will not be
zero. The results are most conveniently plotted as shown in Figs 8. The values of “c”
and “” to be used in the analysis can be read off the graph for any given consolidation
pressure.
A considerable number of tests have been carried out on clays in which “ = 0” after
consolidation or softening, and a typical set of results has been published by Bishop
(1948) relating to undisturbed London Clay. Similarly, in the design of a runway
subgrade, tests have been made on samples of a silty clay which were compacted to a
specified density and water content and then allowed to soften under various
pressures corresponding to different thicknesses of construction. When tested under
undrained conditions it was found that “=0” and a curve could readily be drawn
relating shear strength to pressure.
The Authors have had only one occasion to carry out tests on a material which shows
“” not equal to zero after consolidation. This was a clay gravel (55 per cent. retained
on the ½-inch sieve and 20 per cent. combined silt and clay fraction).
The design of cuttings and retaining walls in stiff fissured clays is still a matter of
uncertainty, but a provisional method has been suggested (Skempton, 1948d) based
on a knowledge of the original unsoftened strength “c1” and the final fully softened
strength “c0”. The strength “c1” is obtained from úndrained tests on undisturbed
samples, while cgis the strength as measured in undrained tests on samples which
have been allowed to soften under zero pressure. These samples are wrapped in filter
paper, with solid end pieces, and immersed in water for several days. This technique
is mentioned since it seems to provide a possible method of tackling the problem, but
it is not considered to be any more than a tentative solution. In foundation problems
there is, of course, no need to allow the clay to soften before testing, since the fissures
cannot open in such cases.
In research, especially on saturated clays, the relation between undrained shear
strength and consolidation pressure is a useful parameter, and especially in the range
of pressure where the clay is normally consolidated. Here the ratio is written (c/p)n,
as in Fig. 8 (a).
Terzaghi and Peck (1948) use the symbol “eq” where “tan(eq) = (c/p)n”. It should
be emphasized that the ratio of “c” to “p” measured by tests on undisturbed samples
may be appreciably greater than that obtained from field evidence in sensitive clays
consolidated under their own overburden pressure (Terzaghi, 1947). This is probably
due to the lateral pressures in the ground, in normally consolidated clays, being less
than the vertical pressure : whereas in the laboratory tests the sample is consolidated
under an isotropic pressure (Hansen and Gibson,1949).
DRAINED TESTS
These tests are carried out with full water content change (i.e. no excess pore
pressures) both in consolidation and in shear. Consequently the results can be applied
directly to those problems in which the soil is stressed at zero excess pore pressure.
All soil types can be tested under fully drained conditions, and the problems include
all stability analyses in sands and gravels, except the case of rapid drawdown or flow
slides in loose silty sands. In clays the drained test can be used directly in analysing
the long-term stability of cuttings, retaining walls and the downstream slope of earth
dams. And the test can be used in problems concerning partial dissipation of pore
pressures.
Stability analyses are carried out with respect to effective stresses and with the shear
parameters “cd” and “d” defined as in Figs 9. The results fall into two classes: (a)
those in which “cd” is zero and (b) those in which “cd” is not zero.
The result “cd = 0” is obtained in all sands and gravels. Many test results have been
published giving values of “d” for these soils, and these can be summarized
approximately as in Table 3.
Table 3
Since effective stresses must be used in stability calculations it is often necessary to
construct a flow net as the first step in an analysis in these soils,
The apparent cohesion “cd”, in general, not zero in clay-gravels, silts, and clays, unless
they are normally consolidated. Not many results of drained tests on undisturbed
samples of cohesive soils have been published. TheVicksburg Triaxial Shear Report
(U.S. War Depart- ment, 1947) is the chief source of information.
Figs 9
PARTIALLY DRAINED CONDITION
In a clay stratum beneath an earth dam there may be appreciable, but not full,
consolidation during construction. No specific test corresponds to this condition, but
in such cases a conservative procedure is to take the values of shear strength as found
from un- drained tests on specimens consolidated to the vertical effective pressure in
the clay as calculated from Terzaghi's theory of consolidation. This method has been
described in some detail (Bishop, 19480).
In the Authors' opinion an analysis more representative of the actual stress change in
the clay layer could be evolved using the drained as well as the consolidated-
undrained test. From these two tests it is possible to estimate the effect of dissipation
of pore pressures set up by shear stresses in addition to those due to the vertical
pressures (weight of bank).
REFERENCES
BisHor, A. W. (19484). A large shear box for testing sands and gravels. Proc. Second
Int. Conf. Soil Mech. 1 : 207-211.
BisHop, A. W. (1948b). Some factors involved in the design of a large earth dam in the
Thames Valley. Proc. Second Int. Conf. Soil Mech. 2 : 13-18.
BisHop, A. W:, and ELpiN, G. (1950). Undrained triaxial tests on saturated sands and
their significance in the general theory of shear strength. Géotechnique. 2: 13-32.
CADLING, L., and ODENSTAD, S. (1950). The vane borer. Proc. Roy. Swedish
Geotechnical Inst. No. 2.
CASAGRANDE, A. (1941). Harvard Triaxial Report No. 3.
CASAGRANDE, A., and SHANNON, W. L. (1948). Research on stress-deformation and
strength character- istics of soils and soft rocks under transient loading. Pub. Harvard
Univ. Grad. Sch. Eng. No. 447. 132 pp.
CASAGRANDE, A., and WiLsoN, S. D. (1949). Final Report to U.S. Waterways
Experiment Station on investigation of effect of long-time loading on the strength of
clays and shales at constant water con- tent. Harvard University. 77 pp-
CARLSON, L. (1948). Determination in situ of the shear strength of undisturbed clay
by means of a rotating auger. Proc. Second Int. Conf. Soil Mech. 1 : 265-270.
CooLinG, L. F., and GoLDEr, H. Q. (1940). Portable apparatus for compression tests on
clay soils. Engineering. 149 : 57-58.
CroNEY, D., Lewis, W. A., and COLEMAN, J. D. (1950). Calculation of the moisture
distribution beneath structures. Civil Eng. (L.). 45 : 103-106.
Evaws, I. (1950). The measurement of the surface bearing-capacity of soils in the
study of earth-crossing machinery. Géotechnique. 2 : 46-57.
EVAns, 1., and SHERRATT, G. G. (1948). A simple and convenient instrument for
measuring the shearing resistance of clay soils. J. Scientific Instruments. 25 : 411414.
GoLDER, H. Q., and SKEMPTON, A. W. (1948). The angle of shearing resistance in
cohesive soils for tests at constant water content. Proc. Second Int. Conf. Soil Mech. 1 :
185-192.
Hansen, J. B., and Gisson, R. E. (1949). Undrained shear strengths of anistropically
consolidated clays. Géotechnique. 1: 189-204,
HvorsLEv, M. H. (1937). Uber die Festigkeitseigenschaften gestoerter bindiger
Boeden. (On the physical properties of disturbed cohesive soils.) -
Ingeniorvidenskabelige Skrifter A No. 45. 159 pp.
KoLBUSZEWSKI, J. J. (1948). An experimental study of the maximum and minimum
porosities of sands.
. Proc. S-cond Int. Conf. Soil Mech. 1 : 158-165.
PEYNIRCIOGLU, H. (1939). Úber die Scherfestigkeit bindiger Boeden. (Shearing
resistance of cohesive soil.) Veroeffentlichungen des Instituts der Deutschen
Forschungsgesellschaft fuer Bod: hanik an der Technischen Hochschule, Berlin. No. 7 :
28-52.
PLANTEMA, G. (1948). Results of a special loading-test on a reinforced concrete pile, a
so-called pile sounding ; interpretation of the results of deep-soundings, permissible
pile loads and extended settle- ment observations. Proc. Second Int. Conf. Soil Mech. 4
: 112-118.
RenNDuzic, L, (1937). Ein Grundgesetz der Tonmechanik und sein experimenteller
Beweis. (The funda- mental law of clay mechanics and the experimental proof.)
Bauingenieur. 18: 459-467.
SKEMPTON, A. W. (1948a). A study of the immediate triaxial test on cohesive soils.
Proc. Second Int. Conf. Soil Mech. 1: 192-196. ¿
SKEMPTON, A. W. (1948b). The effective stresses in saturated clays strained at
constant volume. Proc. Seventh Int. Cong. Appl. Mech. 1 : 378-392.
SKEMPTON, A. W. (1948c). Vane tests in the alluvial plain of the River Forth near
Grangemouth. Géo- technique. 1:111-124.
SKEMPTON, A. W. (1948d). The rate of softening in stiff fissures clays, with special
reference to London clay. Proc. Second Int. Conf. Soil Mech. 2 : 50-53.
SKEMPTON, A. W., and GoLDER, H. Q. (1948). Practical examples of the $ = O analysis
of stability of clays. Proc. Second Int. Conf. Sol Mech. 2 : 63-70.
Smith, A. H. V. (1945). Some preliminary trials with the A.O.R.G. vane apparatus. Army
Op. Res. Group Memo. 540. :
TaYLorR, D. W. (1943). M.I.T. Triaxial Report No. 9.
TAYLOR, D. W. (1944). M.I.T. Triaxial Report No. 10.
TayLorR, D. W. (1948). Fundamentals of soil mechanics. Wiley, New York. 700 pp.
TERzZAGHI, K. (1932). Tragfaehigkeit der Flachgruendungen. (Bearing capacity of
shallow foundations.) Prelim. Pub. First Cong. Int. Ass. Bridge Struct. Eng. 659-672.
TERZAGHI, K. (1936). Simple tests determine hydrostatic uplift: Eng. News Rec. 116 :
872-875, e ( 5 108 DISCUSSION ON MEASUREMENT OF SHEAR STRENGTH OF SOILS
TerzaGHI, K. (1944). Ends and means in soil mechanics. Eng. J. 27 : 608-615. Publ.
Harvard Univ: Grad. Sch. Eng. No. 402. 8pp. (1944). TerzacHi, K. (1947). Shear
characteristics on quicksand and soft clay. Proc. Seventh Texas Conf. Soil Mech. 10 pp.
TERZAGHI, K., ña Peck, R. B. (1948). Soil mechanics in engineering practice. Wiley,
New York.
566 pp. VEoRE, J. (1948). Improved soundings apparatus, as developed in Holland
since 1936. Proc.
Second Int. Conf. Soil Mech. 1 : 280-287. U.S. WAR DEPARTMENT (1947). Triaxial
shear research and pressure distribution studies on soils. U.S.
Waterw. Expt. Sta. Vicksburg. 332 pp. ,
DISCUSSION
The Chairman, in opening the discussion, said that he felt that the Paper was repre-
sentative of views widely held in Great Britain at the present time. He emphasized the
point made by Dr Skempton that the usual procedure for the analysis of stability
problems was to use values of “c” and “” in Coulomb's equation which had been
determined from samples subjected to laboratory test-conditions compatible with the
conditions under which'the soil would be stressed in the field. He felt that the
fundamental work being carried out by Dr Skempton on the shear strength of soils
was of considerable importance. On the question of silts, experience in Great Britain
was not extensive and the present position was uncertain, especially in relation to
their behaviour under field conditions. Whilst it was possible to obtain a value of “”
equal to zero with respect to total stresses in undrained triaxial tests, it was doubttul
whether silts ever behaved as ( = 0) materials in the field. It was known that their
true cohesion was very small and that their strength must therefore be derived from
the frictional quality. When it was possible in the practical case to measure pore-
water pressures, he thought that an analysis using “ce” and “e”, based on effective
pressures, would be preferable. He congratulated the Authors on the ingenuity
displayed in their development of laboratory testing equipment.
Mr H. B. Sutherland said that he had received his introduction to soil mechanics from
Mr Cooling at the Building Research Station, having spent some time working at the
laboratory there. Subsequently he had been two years at Harvard University working
under Professor Arthur Casagrande. He had therefore had the interesting experience
of acquiring his initial knowledge of the shear strength of soils in Britain and had then
come into contact with some rather different ideas held in the United States during his
stay there. The tests used in Great Britain for the determination of shear strength
values were modifications of the tests developed and used in the United States, but
whilst those tests were the same in principle there were some differences in
interpretation. From the point of view of practical application the shear strength of
the soil under any one particular condition was the most important factor. To what
extent “c” and “” contributed to the shear strength was relatively unimportant: “c”
and “” could vary with different drainage conditions for the same soil, and once that
was fully recognized many details of the interpretation of shear tests faded into
insignificance.
The work of Hvorslev had been preceded by the researches of A. Casagrande and
Albert (1930) into some of the most important aspects of the characteristics of the
shear strength of soils, particularly the effect of the time-rate of shear-load application
upon the results of shear tests.
He was of the opinion that the terms “ quick ” and “ slow ” tests should be retained as
the standard nomenclature in shear-strength testing. They had originally been
suggested by Casagrande, were widely used in America, and had been adopted by
Rutledge in the Triaxial Shear Research Review published in 1947. He thought that it
would be a mistake to use the terms “ undrained ” and “ drained ” in the new British
Code of Practice, as that would tend to destroy uniformity in nomenclature.
He believed that the effect of the rate of strain on the shear strength of soils was
somewhat larger than that indicated by Dr Skempton. Tests carried out by Casagrande
and Wilson (1949) showed that in one instance, for a clay-shale, the strength obtained
from a 1 month test was only 38 per cent. of the 1 minute test strength ; for a
bentonite the 1 month strength was 56 per cent. of the 1 minute test strength, and for
clay the 1 month strength was 76 per cent. of the 1 minute test strength. Those tests
were undertaken as part of an investigation of the effect of long-time loading on
compressive strength at constant water content.
He would like to ask Dr Skempton the following questions :
(1) What his opinions were regarding the relative merits of the triaxial and shear-box
tests ?

(2) How could one be certain that full drainage occurred in a constant rate of strain
test ?

In conclusion, he would stress his appreciation of the very excellent work on the shear
strength of soils being carried out by Dr Skempton and his staff.
Mr W. Kjellman was of the opinion that the “-theory” due to Dr Skempton was the
most important contribution to the understanding of the fundamentals of shear-
strength theory that had appeared recently. More experimental work should be done
to establish the validity of the relations between strain and effective stress change
upon which that theory was based. It would be necessary to introduce a further
parameter expressing the effect of pure shear, as had been done by Odenstad in a
recent Paper. That theory of Odenstad's, moreover, was in agreement with the
experimental findings of Professor Taylor. Had Dr Skempton any experimental results
which might be used as a check for such theories? He was not in disagreement with
anything in the present Paper, but he wished to make the following comments :
(1) He suggested that the vane should be used only for undrained tests and only in
materials which did not exhibit dilatancy. When the vane was used, samples
should be taken as a check.

(2) When the validity of the cone test was being investigated at the Imperial College
and the cone conversion-factor was found to vary with the soil type, what test
was used as a standard to measure the soil strength ? So far as he was aware, the
only method of measuring the strength of very sensitive clays was with the vane.

(3) He wished to know why dilatancy increased the strength of a soil.

(4) The method of determining the porosity of sands by the use of air pressure and
volume measurements, described by Mr Bishop, was not new. There was, in fact,
a Swiss patent for it.

M. J. Florentin dit qu'il veut remercier tout d'abord les conférenciers du remarquable
exposé relatif aux méthodes expérimentales utilisées en Angleterre pour la mesure de
la résistance au cisaillement des sols. Toutefois, il y a un point qui le trouble et qui
l'améne 4 poser la question suivante: les laboratoires anglais de mécanique du sol,
ont-ils abandonné la mesure de la résistance au cisaillement avec des appareils de
torsion ? Si oui, pourquoi ?
Il pense que la comparaison entre les différents appareils actuellement utilisés aurait
été plus complete si Pon y avait inclus la mesure du cisaillement par torsion. Il pense,
comme beaucoup d'autres, que le cisaillement par torsion est le seul moyen de
produire le cisaillement sans effets parasites. A son avis, la torsion sous des
compressions différentes constitue un bon moyen de contróle de la loi de Coulomb,
puisque les résultats expérimentaux se traduisent par la détermination d'un effort
tangentiel + correspondant á une compression 4. Dans les essais de compression,
(sans ou avec étreinte latérale) on fait appel, en plus, á la théorie de Mohr sur la
rupture des corps. Ce que l'on tire en définitive de ces essais, ce sont les cercles
construits sur les contraintes principales extrémes atteintes au cours de la rupture.
Or, il croit se souvenir que la théorie de la plasticité (et l'on ne peut nier que les
matériaux essayés