J. Cent. South Univ. Technol.

(2011) 18: 2137−2142

DOI: 10.1007/s11771−011−0954−5

Effective stress in soils under different saturation conditions

XU Hao-feng(徐浩峰)1, 2, XIE Kang-he(谢康和)1

1. Key Laboratory of Soft Soils and Geoenvironmental Engineering of Ministry of Education,
Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China;
2. Ningbo Institute of Technology, Zhejiang University, Ningbo 315100, China
© Central South University Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Abstract: BISHOP’s effective stress or two state stress variables are unsatisfactory for unsaturated soils where one of fluid phases is
discontinuous, so new expressions of effective stress should be founded. The approach for derivation was according to the principle
of equilibrium of forces (i.e., the stress-sharing principle), and it was firstly validated by demonstrating TERZAGHI’s principle of
effective stress. And then, the derivations were subdivided into four parts according to different pore air states: 1) air bubbles were
spherical and suspended in pore water; 2) air bubbles were bound on soil skeleton; 3) air bubbles held almost the single section of
pore; 4) air phase was continuous. The different formulae of effective stress were presented. Conclusions are drawn as follows: 1)
For nearly-saturated soils, the “real” effective stress would be a little smaller than TERZAGHI’s effective stress; 2) For soils in which
air phase is discontinuous in the form of bubbles, a new concept of pore air elastic pressure is put forward, and the total stress can be
constituted by effective stress, pore water pressure and pore air elastic pressure; 3) For soils in which air phase is continuous,
effective stress is equal to the value of the total stress plus suction; 4) Suction can be divided into two parts: one is the effect caused
by additional pressure, and the other is the contract action by the “skin”.

Key words: unsaturated soils; effective stress; suction; surface tension; occluded gas; saturation

effective stress by “operative stress”; however, its

1 Introduction
The principle of effective stress is very important in
the discipline of soil mechanics, but it remains vague for
unsaturated soils, even for saturated soils. Although
TERZAGHI’s principle of effective stress has been
extensively acknowledged and used, the effective stress
of saturated soil was usually regarded as the “inter-
particle forces” [1]. And in order to get a mathematical
confirmation for the principle, the wave-shaped plane
was often used to traverse the interface of soil grains, so
that the area of solid in the plane was the smallest [2].
This approach can be understood and accepted to sandy
soils, but the explanation for clay is unacceptable. SHEN
[3] opposed the introduction of the concept of inter-
granular stress into the discipline of soil mechanics.
For nearly saturated soils, TERZAGHI’s principle
of effective stress is commonly used without being
testified. How extent would the bubbles of gas act on the
principle? Some researchers [4−5] regarded water and air
as mixture fluid, while the values of pore mixture fluid
pressure were often different among these literatures.
Some researchers substituted the terminology of
expression was wholly the same to the effective stress
[6].
For unsaturated soils, there are two types of stress
framework [7]: one is single stress framework, e.g.,
BISHOP single effective stress; the other is two
independent stress state variables framework, e.g.,
FREDLUND independent stress variables.
BISHOP [8] had derived the formula of effective
stress according to the equilibrium of forces for every
phase in soil. Subsequently, the parameter of effective
stress was tested by many researchers [9]. However, in
BISHOP’s derivation, he had ignored the effect of
surface tension on the interface between water and air
[10]. The air/water interface was also called as the
contractile skin or the surface film. It was regarded as a
fourth independent phase by FREDLUND [11]. The
contractile skin is known to play a dominant role in
unsaturated soil. It is acknowledged widely that the
surface tension should not be neglected when attempting
to found the effective stress equation for unsaturated
soils.
Besides the approach that was used by BISHOP of
establishing the effective stress, there was another usual

Foundation item: Project(50878191) supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China; Project(Y12E090030) supported by Zhejiang
Provincial Natural Science Foundation, China
Received date: 2010−09−27; Accepted date: 2011−01−24
Corresponding author: XU Hao-feng, PhD Candidate; Tel: +86−574−88229512; E-mail: xuhaofeng@nit.zju.edu.cn
2138
approach according to the principle of deformation
equivalence [12−14]. However, when CHEN et al [13]
derived the formula, they provided the premise that
air phase and water phase were both continuous in the
soil.
The above premise was also adapted to two
independent stress state variables framework [7]
(suction Su=ua−uw and net normal stress σ−ua, or suction
Su=ua−uw and net normal stress σ−uw). When air bubbles
were embedded in liquid phase, i.e., air phase was
discontinuous and water phase was continuous, the
pressures of air in the bubbles were not measurable [15].
When water was discontinuous and air phase was
continuous, the equal pressure of water would not exist
and the average pressure of water would not be defined
easily.
Previous studies can only be applicable to soils
where both the water and the air are continuous [16], e.g.
LU et al’s equation [17]. Thus, to soils where either the
water or the air is discontinuous, these previous results
are unsatisfactory.
In this work, the formulae of effective stress were
derived under the stress-sharing principle. Firstly, the
approach was used and validated by demonstrating
TERZAGHI’s effective stress. And then, considering the
different saturated conditions of soils, derivations were
subdivided into four stages: 1) air bubbles were spherical
and suspended in pore water; 2) air bubbles were bound
on soil skeleton; 3) with degree of saturation decreasing,
air bubbles held almost the single section of pore; 4) air
phase was continuous.
2 Derivation of effective stress
2.1 Demonstration of TERZAGHI’s formula of
effective stress
A point in the earth was picked, and a plane where
one primary stress acted was got. And the area of plane
was postulated as A. For saturated soils, the plane
contained only soil grains and water. Assuming the area
of grains to be As,i, the stress acted on grains to be σs,i, the
area of pore water to be Aw, and the pressure of pore
water to be uw, each phase and its stress were shown in
Fig.1. The equation could be gotten as
A    s,i As,i  u w Aw 
 ( s,i  u w ) As,i  u w ( As,i  Aw ) (1)
Because ∑As,i+Aw=A, the above equation became

 ( s,i  u w ) As,i  u (2)
w
A
Defining the effective stress σ′ to be
J. Cent. South Univ. Technol. (2011) 18: 2137−2142
Fig.1 Each phase and its stress in section of point of saturated
soil
  ( s,i  u w ) As,i (3)
A
Then, Eq.(2) was transformed to be
     uw (4)
Equation (4) is TERZAGHI’s formula of effective stress
exactly.
Through the derivation, we can conclude: 1) the
effective stress is not the stress acting on the interface
between grains, but the average value to the whole area.
The effective stress is not a real stress. 2) The ratio of
grain area in the whole plane would not influence the
validity of the principle. 3) There is a postulation that the
soil grains are incompressible. Otherwise, the pressure of
pore water uw should not be subtracted in Eq.(3).
2.2 Effective stress in nearly saturated soils
For nearly saturated soils, the air phase was
discontinuous in the form of bubbles entrapped in the
water phase. According to BARDEN [18], when the
saturation degree of soil was more than 95%, mostly air
bubbles were bound on the soil skeleton, and the number
of air bubbles that flowed with pore water was very few.
Now, we considered this problem to be analyzed in two
steps. Firstly, air bubbles were all suspended in pore
water; secondly, air bubbles were bound on the soil
skeleton.
1) Spherical air bubbles suspended in pore water [5]
Assuming the number of air bubbles in the plane to
be n, the spherical radius of one bubble intercepted to be
Ri, the area intercepted of one bubble to be Aa,i, circular
radius to be ri, air pressure in the bubble to be ua,i, and
the coefficient of surface tension to be T, from Fig.2, we
could get
A   s,i As,i  u w Aw   ua,i Aa,i  T  la,i sin  i (5)
where la,i was the length of circumference of air bubble i,
la,i=2riπ; θ was the tilt angle between the direction of
surface tension T and the plane, as shown in Fig.3.
From Fig.3, we could get ri=Risinθi. And according
to Laplace’s formula, we got the following equation:
2T
ua,i  u w  (6)
Ri
J. Cent. South Univ. Technol. (2011) 18: 2137−2142 2139
grains, Aa2 was the area of part of ex-circle that was out
of soil grains minus the real area of the bubble, l1 was the
length of circular arc overlapping the bubble, l2 was the
length of circular arc in the water, l3 was the length of
circular arc in the soil grains, and l4 was the length of
curve-part of the bubble which was not matched by the
circle.
Explicitly, Aa+Aa1+Aa2=r2π, and l1+l2+l3=2rπ, where
Fig.2 Each phase and its stress in section of point of nearly-
r was the radius of the circle. If we subtracted the effect
saturated soil
of surface tension from the pressure of air in the area of
the bubble, we could get
ua Aa  T  sin  (l )dl  u a ( Aa  Aa1  Aa 2 ) 
l1 l4

T sin  (l )dl  u a ( Aa1  Aa 2 )  T  sin  (l )dl 

l1 l2 l3 l4

T sin  (l )dl (8)

l2 l3

According to Eq.(7), on any section of the intact

spherical bubble, the pressure of water was equal to the
pressure of air minus the corresponding effect of surface
Fig.3 Radius of bubble cut and surface tension tension. This gave
u a ( Aa  Aa1  Aa 2 )  T  sin  (l )dl 
And we derived the equation: l1 l2 l3

u w ( Aa  Aa1  Aa 2 ) (9)
 ua,i Aa,i  T  la,i sin  i 
2T Assuming l4≈l2 gave
 (u w  R ) Aa,i  T  2πri sin  i 
i
T  sin  (l )dl  T  sin  (l )dl (10)
l4 l2
2r 2 π
u w  Aa,i  T  ( i  2πri sin  i )  u w Aa (7)
Ri According to Laplace’s formula, there was

Inserting the above equation in Eq.(5), the equation 2T

gotten is not different to Eq.(2). So, air bubble suspended
in pore water does not influence the principle.
TERZAGHI’s principle of effective stress is still
applicable.
2) Air bubbles bound on soil skeleton
If air bubbles adhered on the soil grains, the bubble
would not be an intact sphere and the plane cut would
not be a regular circle. The shape was postulated, and the
smallest ex-circle was drawn containing the bubble. As
shown in Fig.4, Aa was the area intercepted of one bubble,
Aa1 was the area of part of ex-circle that was in soil
u a ( Aa1  Aa 2 )  u w ( Aa1  Aa 2 )  ( Aa1  Aa 2 ) (11)
R
The area of Aa1 plus the area of Aa2 would be smaller
than the area of sector. Then, we could get
1 1
Aa1  Aa 2  l3 r   r 2 (12)
2 2
where α was flare angle, as shown in Fig.4. If air bubble
did not adhere on the soil grain, then α=0. η was a
parameter representing the ratio of the area of the circle
minus the area of the bubble to the area of the sector with
flare angle α, maybe less than 1.
The force of surface tension along the circular arc in
the soil grains could be expressed as

T  sin  (l )dl  Tl3 sin   rT sin  (13)

l3

Inserting Eqs.(9)−(13) into Eq.(8) yielded

u a Aa  T  sin  (l )dl  u w Aa  (1   )rT sin  (14)
l1 l4

From Eq.(14), we can conclude that the bound

bubbles are different from the suspending bubbles.
Beside the pressure of water, there is the effect of surface
Fig.4 Sketch map of bubble adhered to surface of soil granule tension.
2140 J. Cent. South Univ. Technol. (2011) 18: 2137−2142
Then, the total stress could be expressed as arbitrary face which were perpendicular each other).
T Inserting Eq.(17) into Eq.(16), the resultant force
     uw 
A
 (1   i ) i ri sin  i (15) could be expressed as

Equation (15) is the expression for effective stress A   s,i As,i  u w ( Aw   Aa,i ) 
for nearly saturated soils. If the effect of surface tension  i Aa,i
T  T  sin  (l )dl (18)
can be neglected, i.e., neglecting the last term in Eq.(15), Ri law
the equation would be regressed to Eq.(4), that is,
TERZAGHI’s formula of effective stress. In order to simplify the above equation, according
to Eq.(15), we could introduce a hypothesis: the force by
2.3 Effective stress in unsaturated soils with air additional pressure was equal to or more than the surface
bubbles in any shape tension acting on the water/air interface, i.e.,
1) Deriving formula  i Aa,i
If the degree of saturation became lower (air phase T  T  sin  (l )dl (19)
Ri law
was still discontinuous while the water phase was
continuous), air bubble embedded would not have a Then, Aa could be divided into two parts: Aa and
shape similar to sphere. The shape of air bubble might be Aa. It was appointed that Aa multiplied by the
the shape of soil pore. Picking a point in the soil and additional pressure was equal to surface tension. This
cutting by a plane, the pressure of pore water was gave
constant to be uw, where the air phase was separated, ua,i
T
was the pressure of one of air bubbles, and Aa,i was its Aa  T  sin  (l )dl (20)
area, as shown in Fig.5. R law

And then
 i Aa,i  i Aa, i
T  T  sin  (l )dl  T  (21)
Ri law Ri

Substituting the above equation into Eq.(18), and

according to the above derivation, the formula of
effective stress for unsaturated soils with air bubbles in
Fig.5 Each phase and its stress in section of point of soil when any shape was given as
being surrounded by water      u w  Ta (22)

T  i Aa, i
And then, the resultant force by the stress of each where Ta 
A
 Ri
, was named as “pore air elastic
phase could be expressed as
pressure”. It was part of the effect of the additional
A   s,i As,i  u w Aw   ua,i Aa,i  T  sin  (l )dl
law pressure (ua−uw). It had not direct relationship with
(16) degree of saturation. Considering simply, commonly
where law was the length of interface between air and with the decrease of the degree of saturation, pore air
water. elastic pressure Ta increased.
Because the interface between air and water would 2) Estimation of Ta
not be spherical face, according to Laplace’s formula, the Transforming the expression of Ta gave
relation between ua,i and uw could be expressed as T  i Aa, i 1
Ta 
A
 Ri
  (u a,i  u w ) Aa, i 
A
 iT
u a,i  u w  (17)
Ri a aA
(u a  u w ) Aa, i  a (u a  u w ) (23)
A A
where the last item was named as the additional pressure.
ζ was a parameter. If the interface was spherical face, and where ua was the average pressure of air bubbles; a was
R was the radius of sphere, then ζ=2; if the interface was parameter, and it could be expressed as
cylinder, and R was the curvature radius of cylinder, then
ζ=1; if the shape of interface was arbitrary, then ζ and R a
 (ua,i  u w ) Aa, i (24)
(ua  u w ) Aa, i
could be evaluated relevantly to make Eq.(17) come to
existence (e.g., R  R1R2 ,   ( R1  R2 ) R , where R1 When the pressures of every air bubbles were equal,
and R2 were the curvature radii of two transversals in the a=1.
J. Cent. South Univ. Technol. (2011) 18: 2137−2142 2141
Comparing Eq.(21) with BISHOP’s formula, water phase was discontinuous. The pressure of air was
another expression of Ta could also be given as assumed to be ua. Because the water phase was separated,
Ta  (1   )(u a  u w ) (25) the pressure of one of water drops was assumed to be uw,i,
and the area intercepted to be Aw,i, as shown in Fig.6.
With the aid of Eq.(23), the parameter χ in
BISHOP’s formula of effective stress could be expressed
as
aAa
  1 (26)
A
where A was the whole area of section; Aa was part of
the area of pore air in the section. If the air bubble was
suspended in the water, the value of Aa was equal to 0. Fig.6 Each phase and its stress in section of point of soil when
If air bubbles held the whole section of pore, then being surrounded by air
Aa  Aa . Noting that the average ratio of Aa/A on a set of
parallel test planes passing through the sample equaled And then the resultant force by stress of each phase
n(1−Sr), the minimum value of the parameter χ was given could be expressed as
as A   s,i As,i  ua Aa   u w,i Aw,i  T  sin  (l )dl
law
 min  1  n(1  S r ) (27)
(30)
where n was the porosity of soil, and Sr was the degree of According to LAPLACE’s formula, the relation
saturation. between uw,i and ua could be expressed as
Substituting the above equation into Eq.(25) and
considering Eq.(17), the maximum value of Ta was  iT
u w,i  u a  (31)
approximated to be Ri

T where the meanings of parameters were similar to

Ta ,max  n(1  S r ) (28) Eq.(17).
R
Substituting the above equation into Eq.(30)
where R was the typical value of radius of curvature of
resulted in
the water/air interface Ri, and  was the typical value of
parameters ζi. A   s,i As,i  ua ( Aa   Aw,i )  Tw A (32)
Since parameters in Eq.(28) could not be directly
where
measured or calculated, it was desirable to establish an
approximation to these parameters based on some T  i Aw,i T
alternative average measures that were identifiable. For
Tw 
A
 Ri
  sin  (l )dl
A law
(33)
this purpose, supposing the diameter of pore, d, was in
the same magnitude to R , Eq.(28) could be written to an And then the formula of effective stress for air
approximation: phase-continuous unsaturated soils containing free water
was given as
T
Ta ,max  n(1  S r ) (29)   Tw     ua (34)
d
Assume some typical material parameters where
corresponding to clay, d=1 μm, n=0.5, Sr=90%, and T=
73×10−3 N/m, then Ta,max was estimated to be 3.65 kPa.    ( s,i  ua ) As,i (35)
The value of Ta would not influence normal soils A
much but special soils such as sludge. Because of Ta, If the pressure of pore air was equal to atmospheric
effective stress σ′ is less than (σ−uw). This must be the pressure, then ua=0.
reason for a phenomenon observed by WICHMAN [19] According to Eq.(33), Tw was constituted by two
when he researched the consolidation of gassy sludgy: parts: one was caused by the additional pressure (ua−uw,i);
the final degree of consolidation was less. the other was caused by the direct effect of surface
tension. If we called Tw as suction, in the opinion of
2.4 Effective stress in unsaturated soils with TANG et al [20], the first part of Tw was “matrix suction”,
continuous air phase and the last one was “absorbed suction”. It was clear that
If the degree of saturation became lower than the the characteristics of these two parts were different. In
above phase, the air phase would be continuous while the addition, the value of Tw was subjected to content of pore
2142
water and the microstructure of soil, as we concluded
from Eq.(33).
As was expressed in Eq.(34), Tw might also be
regarded as a type of load to some extent.
If the soils contained no free water, or even no water,
the applicability of surface tension should be limited.
3 Conclusions
1) Air bubble suspended in pore water does not
influence TERZAGHI’s principle. But if bubbles are
bounded to soil skeleton, bubbles do have their effect.
However, the effect may be negligible. Therefore,
TERZAGHI’s formula of effective stress need not be
changed for nearly-saturated soils.
2) With the degree of saturation decreasing, air
phase is still discontinuous, and the total stress can be
constituted by effective stress, pore water pressure and
pore air elastic pressure. These stresses all act on the
whole section. The value of pore air elastic pressure is
mainly relative to degree of saturation and diameter of
pore.
3) When water phase is discontinuous, neutral stress
is the air pressure. The concept of suction is proposed in
the formula. But this suction refers to not only the matrix
suction, but also the contract action by the “skin”. The
value of suction is subjected to water content and
microstructure of soil.
References
[1] KAYADELEN C. Estimation of effective stress parameter of
unsaturated soils by using artificial neural networks [J]. International
Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics,
2008, 32(9): 1087−1106.
[2] JIE Yu-xin, WEN Qing-bo, LI Guang-xin, XU Yan-chun. Discussion
on the principle of effective stress [J]. Journal of China Coal Society,
2005, 30(2): 202−205. (in Chinese)
[3] SHEN Zhu-jiang. No confusing fiction with reality-analysis of
misunderstanding of some concepts in geotechnical engineering [J].
Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2003, 25(6): 767−768.
(in Chinese)
[4] WEI Hai-yun, ZHAN Liang-tong, CHEN Yun-min. Compressibility
and consolidation of unsaturated soils with high degree of saturation
and its application [J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering,
J. Cent. South Univ. Technol. (2011) 18: 2137−2142
2006, 28(2): 264−269. (in Chinese)
[5] PIETRUSZCZAK S, PANDE G N. Constitutive relations for
partially saturated soils containing gas inclusions [J]. Journal of
Geotechnical Engineering, 1996, 122(1): 50−59.
[6] SILLS G C, WHEELER S J, THOMAS S D, GARDNER T N.
Behavior of offshore soils containing gas-bubbles [J]. Geotechique,
1991, 41(2): 227−241.
[7] NUTH M, LALOUI L. Effective stress concept in unsaturated soils:
Clarification and validation of a unified framework [J]. International
Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics,
2008, 32(7): 771−801.
[8] BISHOP A W. The principle of effective stress [J]. Tecknisk
Ukeblad, 1959, 106(39): 859−863.
[9] KHALILI N, KHABBAZ M H. A unique relationship for chi for the
determination of the shear strength of unsaturated soils [J].
Geotechique, 1998, 48(5): 681−687.
[10] BAO Cheng-gang, ZHAN Liang-tong. Relationship between
unsaturated soil behavior and engineering problems [J]. Chinese
Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2006, 28(2): 129−136. (in
Chinese)
[11] FREDLUND D G. Unsaturated soil mechanics in engineering
practice [J]. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental
Engineering, 2006, 132(3): 286−321.
[12] SKEMPTON W W. Effective stress in soils, concrete and rocks [C]//
Symposium on Pore Pressure and Suction in Soils. London:
Butterworth, 1962: 4−16.
[13] CHEN Zheng-han, XIE Ding-yi, WANG Yong-sheng. Effective
stress in unsaturated soil [J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical
Engineering, 1994, 16(3): 62−69. (in Chinese)
[14] KHALILI N, KHABBAZ M H, VALLIAPPAN S. An effective
stress based numerical model for hydro-mechanical analysis in
unsaturated porous media [J]. Computational Mechanics, 2000, 26(2):
174−184.
[15] SHAHU J T. Effective stress behavior of quasi-saturated compacted
cohesive soils [J]. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental
Engineering, 1999, 125(4): 322−329.
[16] WHEELER S J. A conceptual model for soils containing large gas
bubbles [J]. Geotechnique, 1988, 38(3): 389−397.
[17] LU N, GODT J W, WU D T. A closed-form equation for effective
stress in unsaturated soil [J]. Water Resources Research, 2010, 46(5):
W05515.
[18] BARDEN L. Consolidation of compacted and unsaturated clays [J].
Geotechnique, 1965, 15(3): 257−286.
[19] WICHMAN B G M. A finite strain theory for gassy sludge [J].
Geotechnique, 2000, 50(1): 35−41.
[20] TANG Lian-sheng, YAN Bo, ZHANG Peng-cheng, ZHAN Qing-hua.
Definition and exploration for effective stress and related conception
in unsaturated soil [J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering,
2006, 28(2): 216−220. (in Chinese)
(Edited by YANG Bing)