Engineering Geology 277 (2020) 105785

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Geology
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/enggeo

Engineering geology of residual soil derived from mudstone in Zimbabwe T

a,c,⁎ a,b a a a,b
Xianwei Zhang , Xinyu Liu , Cheng Chen , Lingwei Kong , Gang Wang
a
State Key Laboratory of Geomechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, Institute of Rock and Soil Mechanics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Wuhan, China
b
University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
c
State Key Laboratory of Geohazard Prevention and Geoenvironment Protection, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu, China

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: As increasing amounts of civil engineering work are carried out on mudstone-derived residual soils, it has be-
Mudstone residual soil come important to systematically assess their geological engineering properties. Thus, the properties of mud-
Engineering geological characteristics stone-derived residual soils were evaluated in this study via a series of comprehensive laboratory tests to assess
Shear strength physical, mechanical, mineralogical, and microstructural variations. Results show that the physical properties of
Microstructure
these soils are inadequate in terms of engineering applications; these soils can be classified as highly plastic clays
Mineralogy
Iron-bearing cementation
that are hard to compact. Natural mudstone-derived residual soils undergo severe disintegration underwater
while remolded examples are similar but tend to exhibit more stable responses. Natural mudstone-derived re-
sidual soils behave in a structured way when subjected to shear and compression; these soil types possess su-
perior natural shear resistance but their strength decreases significantly following saturation as well as in
wetting and drying cycles. Data show that the microstructures of mudstone-derived residual soils are char-
acterized by the presence of aggregations with fissures; although iron-bearing cementation between these ag-
gregations is responsible for high soil strength, bonds can be damaged, or even destroyed, when samples are
saturated or subjected to wetting and drying cycles leading to a reduction in shear strength. The results of this
research provide clear parameters for related engineering applications and enhance our understanding of re-
sidual mudstone-derived soils.

1. Introduction
Residual soil is generally recognized to have peculiar behavior
which is considerably different from that of sedimentary soil because of
the ways in which it is formed. Sedimentary soil is formed by trans-
portation and deposition, generally enhancing soil strength and stiff-
ness, while the residual soil is the result of the weathering of parent
rock, a process weakening and softening the original strength. These
soils can be highly variable in nature, depending on the type of parent
rock, and the weathering process influenced by climatic conditions. The
natural variability of residual soil has posed obstacles in predicting soil
parameters precisely (Rahardjo et al., 2012). More importantly, the
mechanical properties of residual soil are not controlled by stress his-
tory but rather the outcome of weathering, making the framework
developed for sedimentary soils fail to predict the behavior of residual
soil accurately (Huat et al., 2004, 2012). Generally, residual soils show
poor physical properties, disintegration upon soaking but basically sa-
tisfactory strength, thereby making its behavior in engineering hard to
predict. To meet the requirements generated by comprehensive devel-
opment in civil engineering in some developed regions, such as South of
China and Singapore, residual soil derived from igneous rock including
granite and basalt has been studied in detail with regard to soil en-
gineering geology, including formation (Rahardjo et al., 2004), physical
properties (Chiu and Ng, 2014), permeability (Agus et al., 2005), shear

Abbreviation: B, Skempton pore pressure coefficient; C, cohesion; Cc, compression index; c'cu, effective cohesion; cr, residual cohesion; Ct, disintegration index; Cv,
disintegration rate; D, particle diameter; e0, void ratio; Gs, specific gravity; i, hydraulic gradient; Ic, collapse potential; Ip, plasticity index = wL − wp; Iv, void index;
kv, kh, permeability coefficient in the vertical and horizontal direction, respectively; Pc, apparent pre-consolidation pressure for mudstone residual soil; q, deviatoric
stress; qu, unconfined compression strength; s, horizontal displacement in direct test; Sr, saturation; t, Δt, elapsed time; u, pore water pressure; w, water content; wL,
liquid limit; wp, plastic limit; wopt, optimum water content; Δe, wetting-induced variation of void ratio; δef, free swelling ratio; δcp, swelling ratio with load 50 kPa; εa,
axial strain in triaxial test and unconfined compression test; ρ, density; ρdmax, maximum dry density; σ3, cell pressure; σ'v, vertical effective stress; ϕ'cu, effective
internal friction angle; ϕr, residual internal friction angle
⁎
Corresponding author at: State Key Laboratory of Geomechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, Institute of Rock and Soil Mechanics, Chinese Academy of
Sciences, Wuhan, China.
E-mail addresses: xwzhang@whrsm.ac.cn (X. Zhang), liuxinyu17@mails.ucas.ac.cn (X. Liu), cchen@whrsm.ac.cn (C. Chen), lwkong@whrsm.ac.cn (L. Kong),
wanggang191@mails.ucas.edu.cn (G. Wang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2020.105785
Received 23 February 2020; Received in revised form 15 July 2020; Accepted 27 July 2020
Available online 01 August 2020
0013-7952/ © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
X. Zhang, et al.
strength (Kayadelen et al., 2007), stiffness (Rahardjo et al., 2011;
Okewale, 2019b; Okewale and Grobler, 2020), compression behavior
(Martins et al., 2001; Okewale and Coop, 2017; Okewale, 2019a,
2020a), disintegration (Rao and Revanasiddappa, 2006), mineralogy
(Mesida, 1987), chemical composition (Ali, 2004; Okewale and Coop,
2018; Okewale, 2020b) and microstructure features (Gutierrez et al.,
2009; Okewale and Coop, 2020).
However, similar attempts are yet to be made on residual soil ori-
ginated from sedimentary rock. Mudstone residual soil (MRS), one of
typical geomaterial from the weathering of sedimentary rock, is com-
monly encountered in tropical regions including Zimbabwe (Baldock
et al., 1991), Singapore (Pitts and Kannan, 1986) and Australia (Fityus
and Smith, 2004). The weathering of mudstone is facilitated by the
tropical climate in the above regions. Recently, growing major civil
engineering works have been carried out on this soil thus it is important
to assess the geological engineering properties especially soil para-
meters accurately. However, obtaining soil key parameters especially
shear strength, stiffness and bearing capacity is difficult currently be-
cause of the high heterogeneity of MRS as well as its sensitivity to
sampling disturbance. Some peculiar features have not been explained
satisfactorily to date, for example, a great reduction of shear strength
upon soil destructuring and disintegration upon soaking, which brings
uncertainties to engineering construction. Consequently, a systematic
evaluation with regard to the geological engineering properties of MRS
is urgently necessitated.
In terms of the understanding of mudstone residual soil, current
studies are still far from sufficient, despite that Pitts and Kannan
(1986), Fityus and Smith (2004) and Martins et al. (2005) have studied
some basic properties of residual soil originated from sedimentary
rocks. In addition, although there are comprehensive characterizations
of the residual soil derived from granite and basalt, they cannot be
applied directly to mudstone residual soil. Numerous studies have
confirmed that residual soils from different parent rock need to be
studied individually to acquire an accurate understanding of their en-
gineering properties (Zhang et al., 2017). Thus the engineering geology
of MRS may well be different from those well-studied residual soils and
specific research is needed. Besides, the mechanical properties of soil
are influenced by the arrangement of particles and determined by their
mineralogical and chemical properties (Mitchell and Soga, 2005).
Previous studies indicated the difference in mineralogy between MRS
and other residual soil (Huat et al., 2004), which may result in different
mechanical behavior. However, the exact relationship between the
mechanical behavior and mineralogy is to be established yet.
This study presents how the engineering geology of a mudstone-
derived residual soil from Zimbabwe is investigated comprehensively
and interpreted in view of mineralogy and microstructure features. This
paper is organized as follows. Firstly, details of the sampling and la-
boratory testing are described. This included specimen preparation, test
procedures including soil index properties, disintegration test, one-di-
mensional compression test and triaxial tests on natural and saturated
MRS. Next, the results of laboratory tests are presented and both the
shearing, compression and disintegration behavior are discussed.
Following this, the peculiar mechanical properties of mudstone residual
soil are interpreted via a microscopic mechanism based on the experi-
mental findings.
2. Sampling and test procedures
2.1. Sampling and sample preparation
The mudstone used herein was collected from (Q4el) MT Hampden
Formation (Baldock et al., 1991), a typical residual soil in Harare (La-
titude 17°51′50″S, Longitude 31°1′47″E) in Zimbabwe, at depth of
4.5 m. Harare has a tropical climate with an average temperature
ranged between 15 and 23 °C and a mean annual rainfall of 357 mm,
which facilitates the weathering of mudstone. As residual soil is
2
Engineering Geology 277 (2020) 105785
generally vulnerable to the disturbance in the sampling process, a hand-
carved block sampling was adopted (Avşar et al., 2015), which is
proved to be effective to sample completely weathered material with
high quality at shallow depths. Soil blocks with dimensions of about
30 × 30 × 30 cm were firstly retrieved by spade which was subse-
quently trimmed into soil columns with a diameter of 100 mm and a
height of 300 mm using a sharp-edged cutter. Subsequently, soil col-
umns were wrapped with cling film and placed in sample box tubes.
After tightened by tape and sealed by wax, these sample box tubes were
transported to the laboratory.The sample preparation method was as
follows: Firstly, to minimize the effects of trimming disturbance, the
soil block was cut using a vertical trimming lathe into four smaller
blocks without removing the original box tubes because sample must be
continuously supported on its sides to avoid opening of the fissures
during trimming; Then, the smaller block was progressively cut using a
hand saw into a prism with required diameter; Finally, this prism was
carefully shaped into a cylinder for the triaxial shear test, or insert the
specimen into the consolidation ring for one-dimensional compression
test and direct shear test, by hand using a hand lathe and saws. For the
saturated sample, a combination sample saturation of the vacuum
procedure and a nominal back pressure was used (Lade, 2016).
2.2. Test procedures
2.2.1. Physical test
Physical properties of mudstone residual soil were examined ac-
cording to the ASTM standard procedures. Specifically, grain size dis-
tribution (GSD), specific gravity, density, moisture content, Atterberg
limit and swelling test were conducted in accordance with ASTM
standards (ASTM D422-63, 2007; ASTM D854-14, 2014; ASTM D2216-
19, 2019; ASTM D4318-17, 2017; ASTM D4546-14, 2014; ASTM
D7263-09, 2018). With regard to soil grading characterization, particle
sizes greater than 0.075 μm were determined by sieving, whereas for
the finer fractions the hydrometer test was adopted in accordance with
ASTM D422–63. In order to study the stability of soil particles, an ad-
ditional GSD test was carried out on soil suspensions dispersed by
NaOH solution (20 mL 0.5 mol/L NaOH solution per 30 g soil). La-
boratory compaction test was also performed (ASTM D1557-12, 2012).
A flexible wall permeameter was conducted to determine the saturated
permeability coefficient of MRS (ASTM D5084-16, 2016). The samples
(100 mm in height and 50 mm in diameter) were firstly saturated
against a backpressure of 500 kPa and full saturation was achieved
when measured Skempton pore pressure coefficient B (=Δu/
Δσ3) > 0.98. Afterwards, specimens were isotropically consolidated
under in-situ overburden stress σ'v = 90 kPa and subjected to perme-
ability test. A lower hydraulic gradient i = 2 was used because the fine
particles may be washed downstream and plug the effluent end of the
test specimen. The saturated coefficient of permeability was calculated
and corrected to the standard temperature of 20 °C, in accordance with
ASTM D5084–16. Each measure was performed on five samples and the
results have been averaged.
2.2.2. Shear strength tests
The shear strength parameters of the soil were evaluated by a set of
unconfined compression strength test (UC), isotopically consolidated
undrained triaxial test (CIU) and direct shear test (DS) on specimens at
natural water content and saturated conditions (ASTM D2166-16, 2016;
ASTM D3080-11, 2011; ASTM D4767-11, 2020). The detailed test
conditions are presented in Table 1. All the tests were conducted on
hand-trimmed intact specimens unless specified otherwise. The speci-
mens used for CIU tests were saturated against a back pressure of
500 kPa, with full saturation confirmed when B > 0.98. Other satu-
rated specimens were prepared by applying vacuum to them and then
allowing de-aired water to flow through the specimen while main-
taining the vacuum. Besides, additional three samples were subjected to
drying-wetting cycles to simulate the natural climate conditions in
X. Zhang, et al. Engineering Geology 277 (2020) 105785

Table 1
Test scheme for mechanical properties of mudstone residual soil.
Sample Soil state Water content Test Sample Loading Vertical or
typea size rateI confining
(diameter (%/min) pressure
× height, (kPa)
mm)

U1 Intact Natural UC 50 × 100 0.05 –

U2 Intact Natural 50 × 100 0.05 –
U3 Intact Saturated 50 × 100 0.05 –
U4 Intact Saturated 50 × 100 0.05 –
DS1 Intact Natural DS 61.8 × 20 0.01 25
DS2 Intact Natural 61.8 × 20 0.01 50
DS3 Intact Natural 61.8 × 20 0.01 100
DS4 Intact Natural 61.8 × 20 0.01 200
DS5 Intact Saturated 61.8 × 20 0.01 25
DS6 Intact Saturated 61.8 × 20 0.01 50
DS7 Intact Saturated 61.8 × 20 0.01 100
DS8 Intact Saturated 61.8 × 20 0.01 200
CU1 Intact Natural CIU 50 × 100 0.05 25
CU2 Intact Natural 50 × 100 0.05 50
CU3 Intact Natural 50 × 100 0.05 100
CU4 Intact Natural 50 × 100 0.05 200
CU5 Intact Saturated 50 × 100 0.05 25
CU6 Intact Saturated 50 × 100 0.05 50
CU7 Intact Saturated 50 × 100 0.05 100
CU8 Intact Saturated 50 × 100 0.05 200
CU9 After Saturated 50 × 100 0.05 50
2 W–D
cycles
CU10 After Saturated 50 × 100 0.05 100
Fig. 1. A purpose-made instrument for disintegration test in water.
2 W–D
cycles
wetted soil, additional loads were applied to the soaked specimen.
CU11 After Saturated 50 × 100 0.05 200
2 W–D Besides, to acquire full-ranged compression curve, all the samples were
cycles stepwise loaded up to 1600 kPa as detailed in Table 1. A quantitative
C1 Intact Natural ODC 61.8 × 20 – 5, 12.5, parameter, collapse potential Ic calculated by formula 1, was used to
C2 Intact Natural 61.8 × 20 – 25, 50, evaluate collapsibility according to ASTM D5333-03 (2003).
C3 Intact Soaked 61.8 × 20 – 100, 200,
C4 Intact Soaked 61.8 × 20 – 400, 800, Δe
1600II
Ic = × 100%
1 + e0 (1)
D1 Intact Saturated UD 61.8 × 40 – –
D2 Intact Saturated 61.8 × 40 – – where e0 is the void ratio and of soil samples before loading and Δe is
D3 Remolded Saturated 61.8 × 40 – – the wetting-induced variation of void ratio.
D4 Remolded Saturated 61.8 × 40 – –
D5 Remolded Saturated 61.8 × 40 – –
2.2.4. Disintegration test
I The unit of loading rate for the direct test (DS) is mm/min. Residual soil has been proved to exhibit disintegration behavior,
II Stepwise vertical loadings. namely the breakdown of intact soil into smaller aggregates especially
a
UC = unconfined compression strength test; CIU = isotropic consolidated when either soaked or subjected to W-D cycles. Laboratory disintegra-
undrained triaxial test; W-D cycles = wetting and drying cycles; DS = direct tion tests in distilled water were conducted on mudstone residual soil. A
shear test; ODC = one-dimensional compression test; UD = underwater dis-
customed disintegration test apparatus (Fig. 1) was adopted (Zhang
integration test.
et al., 2018). The test scheme is summarized in Table 1. In this research,
undisturbed soil samples under natural moisture content with a dia-
Harare, which is marked by distinct wet and dry seasons. The method of
meter of 61.8 mm and a height of 40 mm were tested. In order to
preparing cyclically wetted and dried specimens has been detailed by
evaluate the effect of disturbance brought with construction or sam-
Zhang et al. (2018). Afterward, the strength properties of these speci-
pling, remolded samples have also been tested. The test procedure and
mens were measured by CIU test, making comparisons with the results
data interpretation were described in detail by Zhang et al. (2018).
of other samples.
Disintegration index Ct (%) and disintegration rate Cv (%/s) were used
to quantitatively describe the behavior of soil samples and the calcu-
2.2.3. One-dimensional compression test lation of each parameter is given in formula 2.
The residual soils derived from the various parent rocks, for ex-
F1 − Ft
ample, basalt (Zhang et al., 2017) and gneiss (Pereira et al., 2005), as Ct = × 100%
F1 − Fe
collapsible soils are found in various regions of the world in arid regions
ΔCt
or in tropical climates. It should be pointed out that not all residual soil Cv =
Δt (2)
is collapsible, for example, the residual soil with cementation bonding
derived from sedimentary rock (Hosseini Kamal, 2012). In order to where Ft (N) is the dynamometer reading during the test, Fe (N) is the
investigate the collapse behavior of MRS, the double odometer test was dynamometer reading when metal net and wire are immersed in water
performed according to ASTM D 5333–03 (2003). Two identical sam- (without the specimen). F1 is the instantaneous reading of digital dy-
ples of the studied soil were tested in conventional odometer, as showed namometer when the sample is completely immersed in water. When
in Table 1. One sample was loaded stepwise in dry (natural water measuring F1, specimens were sealed by wax as disintegration occurs
content) condition up to the desired pressure (σ'v = 200 kPa herein). immediately upon immersion. ΔCt is the variation of the disintegration
The other sample was inundated. On completion of the collapse of the index during the elapsed time Δt.

3
X. Zhang, et al.
Fig. 2. Photograph of mudstone residual soil with a heterogenous nature con-
sisting of two parts in different colors.
2.2.5. Mineralogical investigation
Numerous investigations have confirmed the relationship between
the mechanical behavior and mineralogical composition of residual
soils. X-ray diffractometer (XRD) was adopted to analyze the miner-
alogy of MRS. For sample preparation, samples were first air-dried
under natural conditions and were then ground in a pestle until fine
enough to pass through a 200 mesh screen (particle size < 0.075 mm).
Next, 0.5 g of air-dried soil was mixed with 10 mL distilled water in a
small volumetric flask and shaken by hand for 3 min. The volumetric
flask was immediately centrifuged to remove the particles from the
water column for 15 min at 1500 rpm. Finally, the slurry was applied to
a glass slide using a pipette. Once the slurry was dried, the dried XRD
samples were obtained. Soil samples were scanned using a standard
Philips X-ray diffraction at a speed of 3°/s for 2θ = 0–70°. It should be
noted that field investigation reveals mudstone residual soil consists of
a heterogeneous mixture of materials that can be classified into two
groups according to the color (Fig. 2). Soils in light color, dark color
and a mixture of them (whole soil sample) were tested separately.
2.2.6. Microstructure observation
The microstructure is one of the decisive factors in the behavior of
soils, especially for residual soils that possess structure features in-
herited from parent rock. The microstructure characteristics were
analyzed via scanning electronic microscopy (SEM). The dry samples
for SEM examination were prepared using vacuum freeze-drying tech-
nique (Mitchell and Soga, 2005) to minimize disturbance to micro-
structure as a result of shrinkage. The sample was firstly cut into blanks
Fig. 3. The classification of sample quality.
4
Engineering Geology 277 (2020) 105785
with a size of 10 × 15 × 10 mm using piercing saw blades coated with
Vaseline. An SEM sample was obtained by cutting a blank around for
about 1 mm off. The samples were subsequently placed into a Poly-
methyl methacrylate (PMMA) tube with diameter of 18 mm and height
of 180 mm. Isopentane was also added to the tube in order to avoid
uneven frost. Afterward, the tube was put into liquid nitrogen and
cooled down to −196 °C. Once all water in the soil turned to amor-
phous ice, the samples were placed in the freeze dryer at −50 °C in the
vacuum condition to allow all the amorphous ice to sublimate. In this
way, the dry samples for SEM were obtained. A Quanta 250 scanning
electron microscope was adopted and selected interesting areas (area I
and II) were analyzed simultaneously using an X-ray energy dispersive
system (EDS) attached to the SEM. The selected area II covers the
contacts between soil aggregates, aiming to investigate the bonding
effect among soil particles.
3. Laboratory test results
3.1. Assessment of the sample quality
Sample quality has a direct influence on the results of geo-me-
chanical parameters obtained in laboratory tests. It is well known that
that block sampling is among the best methods of collecting high-
quality samples of residual soils (Avşar et al., 2015; Huat et al., 2012).
However, the disturbance can occur in all steps of the process from
sampling through transport and storage to trimming(Emdal et al.,
2016). The assessment of the sample quality of residual soils was still
necessary before the laboratory test. The change in soil void ratio Δe,
caused by reloading to the in-situ effective stress in the oedometer test,
is recognized as a useful indicator of sample quality. Lunne et al.,
(1997) proposed a criterion for sample quality assessment using the Δe/
e0. The classification ranges for lightly overconsolidated soils based on
Δe/e0 value as follows: below 0.03 for very good to excellent; 0.03–0.05
for good to fair; 0.05–0.10 for poor; above 0.1 for very poor. A similar
criterion suggested by Rocchi and Coop (2015) was taken as a reference
for granitic residual soils, that is, Δe/e0 = 0.046 to define a very good
quality sample. From the results of one-dimensional compression test
on four samples at natural water content and saturated conditions, the
measured values of Δe/e0 = 0.046 were presented and compared with
the criteria established in Lunne et al. (1997) and Rocchi and Coop
(2015), as shown in Fig. 3. The sample quality of all studied samples
can be classified into ‘Very good to excellent’. The relatively low dis-
turbance might be attributed to the meticulous way of retrieving the
samples from the blocks.
3.2. Soil characterization
Table 2 summarizes the index properties of the soils. The studied
X. Zhang, et al. Engineering Geology 277 (2020) 105785

Table 2
Average physical properties of mudstone residual soil.
Index Value

Density ρ (g/cm )3
1.87
Specific Gravity Gs 2.72
Water content w (%) 19.7
Void ratio e0 0.73
Dry density ρd (g/cm3) 1.56
Saturation Sr (%) 72
Optimum water content wopt (%) 24.5
Maximum dry density ρdmax (g/cm3) 1.6
Liquid limit wL (%) 50.4
Plasticity limit wP (%) 24.9
Plasticity Index Ip 25.5
Free swell ratio δef (%) 35.5
Swelling ratio with load 50 kPa δcp (%) Nearly 0
Horizontal hydraulic conductivity Kh (cm/s) 1 × 10−4
Vertical hydraulic conductivity Kv (cm/s) 5.1 × 10‐−5
Electrical resistivity (natural soil, 20 °C, Ω‧m) 1550
Electrical resistivity (saturated soil, 20 °C, Ω‧m) 447
Particles size distributions
Gravel (Particle diameter D > 4.75 mm, %) 0
Sand (0.075 mm < D < 4.75 mm, %) 0.29 Fig. 5. Compaction curves obtained through compaction test.
Silt (0.002 mm < D < 0.075 mm, %) 87.21
Clay (D < 0.002 mm, %) 12.50
Classification Clay with high plasticity (CH) The rich iron-bearing minerals may be also the cause of poor compac-
tion properties of MRS with maximum dry density ρdmax = 1.47 g/cm3
and optimum water content wopt = 21%, obtained from compaction
test (Fig. 5).
Many residual soils have relatively high void ratio due to their
porous structure caused by the considerable leaching of minerals from
the soil in the process of weathering process, during which water and
air replace the soluble mineral (Huat et al., 2004). However, the
mudstone residual soil has a much lower void ratio (e0 = 0.72) im-
plying that this soil has unique structural characteristics. Interestingly,
mudstone residual soil is highly permeable despite the low void ratio. It
is also found that the coefficient of permeability in the horizontal di-
rection (kv) is twice as much as that in the vertical direction (kh), with
kv = 5.1 × 10−5 cm/s and kh = 1 × 10−4 cm/s. This result is very
similar to that of residual soil in Singapore (Rahardjo et al., 2012),
which is possibly caused by the horizontal fissures in the soil.

3.3. Shear strength properties

The strength properties of mudstone residual soil were evaluated by

unconfined compression strength test, direct shear test and CIU tests on
Fig. 4. Grain size distribution (GSD) curves for natural mudstone residual soil the sample at various states. The test details can be found in Table 1 and
and soil dispersed by NaOH solution. the test results of stress-strain behavior are depicted in Figs. 6 and 7.
The strength parameters are summarized in Table 3, making compar-
isons with residual soil derived from other rocks.
soil can be classified as clay with high plasticity (ASTM D2487-17,
Figs. 6 and 7 indicate that the natural mudstone residual soil be-
2017) consisting of the dominant silt of 87.21%. Fig. 4 shows two
haved in a structured way in shear. Under CIU tests with low confining
distinct curves for the particle size distribution (GSD) of untreated
pressures and UC tests, the natural residual soils showed strain-soft-
studied soil and the dispersed one. After adding the dispersants (NaOH
ening behavior with a well-defined peak value on stress-strain curves at
solution), the GSD of soil tends to be finer and the content of particles
around εa = 2.5% (Fig. 6a). Once the peak value is reached, the soils
D < 0.02 mm is increased, which is similar to residual soils originated
tend to exhibit a marked decrease in shear strength, generally with
from basalt (Zhang et al., 2017). This phenomenon implies that the
occurrence of shear bands. The strain-softening feature of natural re-
fine-grained particles in MRS are associated together and that associa-
sidual soil is related to the failure of cementation in soil (Zhang et al.,
tion is broken due to dispersion. The association of soil particles may be
2017). As the confining pressure increased, strain-hardening is ob-
related with the iron-bearing minerals in the soil. Despite the soil ag-
served in natural specimens.
gregates, the MRS does not show obvious swelling potential with a free
In addition, natural mudstone residual soil demonstrates superior
swell ratio δef = 35% and the swelling ratio with load 50 kPa δcp was
shear resistance as shown in Table 3. The average value of qu is
nearly zero.
118.1 kPa. Isotropically consolidated undrained (CIU) triaxial tests
Mudstone residual soil was found to deposit with low water content
showed high soil strength, with an effective cohesion of c'cu = 46.3 kPa
(w = 19.7%). Different from previously studied residual soils by au-
and an effective internal friction angle of ϕ'cu = 26°, while direct shear
thors, the present soil is unsaturated (Sr = 72%), which is typical of
test gave a lower cohesion of cds = 30 kPa and an internal friction angle
residual soils in the tropical region (Futai and Almeida, 2005). The
of ϕds = 21.6°. In addition, two parameters of residual strength,
specific gravity (Gs = 2.72) and density (ρ = 1.92 g/cm3) of studied
cr = 8.6 kPa and ϕr = 19.6°, were obtained at a very large deformation
soil are higher than clay soils, as a result of the accumulation of iron.
(4.0 mm) from the direct shear test. The decrease of cohesion due to the

5
X. Zhang, et al. Engineering Geology 277 (2020) 105785

Fig. 6. The stress-strain curves (q–εa) obtained via CIU test on (a) natural soil samples, (b) saturated soil samples and (c) soil samples subjected to wetting and drying
(W-D) cycles.

caused by weathering. Note that the frictional angel of MRS is still

Fig. 7. The stress-strain curves (σa–εa) of unconfined compression strength test
of natural and saturated mudstone residual soils.
increase of deformation was significant compared with the internal
friction angle. It is implied that the bonding can be progressively de-
stroyed as strains increase. It is peculiar that the mudstone residual soil
shows a high friction angle considering its particle composition. In fact,
many tropical residual soils show an abnormally high frictional angle,
which may be explained through randomly-arranged soil particles
much lower than that of residual soil from granite but quite close to that
of basalt residual soil, showing the effect of coarse-grained particles,
especially the presence of unweathered quartz in granite residual soil.
Comparing the strength properties of samples in different states, it
can be concluded that the strength of mudstone residual soil is highly
sensitive to water. The stress-strain curves obtained by CIU tests on
saturated samples lack a definite peak value compared with that of
natural samples. Besides, the soils display a significant decrease in
strength upon saturation. The unconfined compression strength qu of
soil decreased dramatically by 73% after saturation. A similar pattern
can be also observed in the results obtained from CIU test. From Fig. 6b
it can be observed that the shear strength of saturated samples is overall
lower than that of natural soil samples. Specifically, c'cu decreased to
19.2 kPa and ϕ'cu to 17.5°. More remarkable reduction in shear strength
occurs when samples are subjected to W-D cycles. As shown in Table 3,
ccu was reduced from 46.3 kPa to 7.1 kPa and ϕcu from 26° to 2.6°.
This reduction in shear strength may probably be attributed to the
weakening of the bonding effect among particles, as supported by the
fact that the cohesion of soil is more significantly influenced. From
Table 3 it can be calculated that when soil is saturated, cohesion shows
a 58.5% decrease while the internal frictional angle only displays a
32.6% reduction. A similar trend is also reflected in the change of shear
strength parameter when subjected to W-D cycles, namely a decrease of
90% in cohesion and an 84.7% reduction in internal friction angle. Note
the ‘saw-tooth’ shape of stress-strain curves in Fig. 6c, the momentary
decrease or increase in strength, which is indicative of soil particle
rearrangement and hence the frictional angle decreases remarkably

Table 3
Summary of shear strength parameters of mudstone residual soil at different states derived from unconfined compression test, isotropic consolidation undrained
triaxial test and direct shear test⁎
Locations Parent rock Soil state Particle-size distribution Test method

Sand (%) Silt (%) Clay (%) UC CIU DS

qu (kPa) ccu (kPa) ϕcu (°) cds (kPa) ϕds (°)

Zimbabwe Mudstone Natural 0.29 87.21 12.50 118.1 46.3 26.0 30 21.6
Saturated 0.29 87.21 12.50 32.1 19.2# 17.5# 15.5 15.0
After 2 W-D cycles – – – 15.4 7.1# 2.6# 5.2 3.1
Malaysiaa Mudstone Saturated – – – – 3.5# 27–28# – –
Chinab Granite Saturated 48.8 43 8.2 186.5–199.2 8.1# 32.13# 14.5 30.5
Portugalc Granite Saturated – – – – 0.2–18.9 36.3–45.6 – –
Chinad Basalt Natural 2.1 55.9 42 – 43.30 21.55 – –
Saturated 2.1 55.9 42 – 32.5 20.66 – –
USAe Basalt Natural – – – – 7–50 27–52 – –

Data from a Taylor and James (1967), b Zhang et al. (2019), c Pinheiro et al. (2014), d Zhang et al. (2017), e Tuncer and Lohnes (1977).
⁎
qu = unconfined compression strength; ccu = cohesion from CIU test; ϕcu = internal friction angle from CIU test; cds = cohesion from DS test; ϕds = internal
friction angle from DS test.
#
Effective value.

6
X. Zhang, et al. Engineering Geology 277 (2020) 105785

Fig. 8. One-dimension behavior of mudstone residual soils: (a) e-logσ'v curves; (b) Iv-logσ'v curves.

Fig. 9. The disintegration behavior of intact and remolded mudstone residual soil: (a) variation of disintegration (Ct) with time (t); (b) disintegration rates (Cv) for
different samples.

Fig. 10. Comparison of disintegrating process of studied soil: (a) intact soil (From left to right: elapsed time t = 5, 10, 20, 60, 80, 100 s); (b) remolded sample (From
left to right: elapsed time t = 20, 100, 400, 600, 800, 1000 s).

7
X. Zhang, et al. Engineering Geology 277 (2020) 105785

Fig. 11. SEM micrographs of mudstone residual soil in a vertical plane of specimen: (a): visible fissure in soil under the magnification of 100; (b) unweathered quartz
and kaolinite aggerates in studied soil observed under magnification of 800. Area I and II are tested area for EDS; (c) kaolinite aggregates displaying edge-to-edge
contacts observed under magnification of 100; (d) oriented soil particles observed under a higher magnification of 2000.

Table 4
Energy dispersive spectrometer (EDS) results of mudstone residual soila
Tested area Elemental composition (%)

C O Al Si K Fe

wt at wt at wt at wt at wt at wt at

Area I 18.41 25.06 62.42 63.79 6.77 4.10 11.37 6.62 1.03 0.43 0 0
Area II 14.97 21.21 60.10 63.93 9.13 5.76 14.27 8.64 0.82 0.31 1.53 0.47

a
wt = mass percent (%); at = atomic percent (%); C = Carbon, O = Oxygen, Al = Aluminum, Si = Silicon, K = potassium, Fe = Iron.

when subjected to W-D cycles.
3.4. Compression behavior
The results of one-dimensional compression test are depicted in
Fig. 8. The soil is found to have medium compressibility with an
average compression index Cc = 0.5. An apparent pre-consolidation
pressure of pc = 240 kPa was determined from Fig. 8(a) using the
method proposed by Casagrande (1936), which suggests that MRS be-
haves as an overconsolidated soil considering that the in-situ over-
burden stress σ'v = 90 kPa. It should be clarified that the over-
consolidation feature of MRS is not the result of the stress history but
rather due to the bonded structural characteristic formed in the process
of weathering (Leroueil and Vaughan, 1990). Therefore, the over-
consolidation behavior of residual soil and sedimentary soil is essen-
tially different.
Examining Fig. 8(a) it appears that the compression behavior is less
influenced by water in contrast with strength properties. Fig. 8(a)
shows the compression curves for samples under different conditions
are close to each other. Collapsible deformation was measured and
collapse potential, Ic, were calculated according to ASTM standards
(ASTM D5333-03, 2003) and the results show that the collapsible de-
formation of mudstone residual soil is negligible (Ic = 1.70%, average
value). This trend is different from that of residual soil originated from

8
X. Zhang, et al. Engineering Geology 277 (2020) 105785

Remolded sample display a similar but much more stable disintegration

behavior. The Cv of samples is obviously lower than that of intact
specimens (Fig. 9b) and the whole disintegration process typically lasts
for 10–15 min (Fig. 9a). It is therefore concluded that the intact mud-
stone residual soil shows more unstable behavior underwater than re-
molded soil, which is exactly contrary to basalt residual soil China
(Zhang et al., 2017). The natural mudstone residual soil was deposited
in unsaturated condition thus it is easier to absorb water, especially
when facilitated by the fissures in soil. As a result, the intact MRS
displays strong disintegration behavior. However, the original structure
characteristics of soil were destroyed and soil particles and pores were
rearranged in the process of remolding, which leads to the reduction of
fissures in the soil. Consequently, remolded soil samples show a rela-
tively stable disintegration response.

Fig. 12. X-ray diffraction (XRD) patterns for studied soil. Whole soil sample,
soil in dark color and light-colored soil were tested separately. Q: quartz; I:
illite; K: kaolinite; H: hematite.
basalt in Guangdong, China (Zhang et al., 2017).
In order to investigate the effects of structure (such as bonding),
Fig. 8(b) presented the normalized compression behavior of MRS in Iv-
logσ'v curves, as proposed by Burland (1990), where Iv was defined as
the void index. An intrinsic compression line, ICL, using Burland's no-
tation is also plotted in Fig. 8(b). It was found that Iv-logσ'v curves lay
well above the ICL, indicating the effects of the structure of MRS.
However, after yielding, the Iv-logσ'v curves of the samples that crossed
the ICL tended to converge back towards the ICL. This is probably due
to the breaking down of the structure by staining. The magnitude of the
effect of the structure was similar to those in shallow extremely weak
completely decomposed granite (Rocchi and Coop, 2015).
3.5. Disintegration characteristics
Tropical residual soils generally exhibit disintegration behavior
(Czerewko and Cripps, 2001; Zhang et al., 2020). To quantitatively
described the disintegration feature of MRS, Fig. 9 depicts the re-
lationship between disintegration index Ct, disintegration rate Cv and
time t. The process was also captured by a digital camera and the ty-
pical photos were presented in Fig. 10.
When immersed in water, the intact sample was coated with air
bubbles. This is because fissures and large pores in soil serve as tunnels
for water penetration. As a result, the value of Ct for sample D1 and D2
at the early stage are minus (Fig. 9a). Subsequently, unstable soil
fragments (Fig. 10a) began to avalanche from the soil sample as more
fissures formed and water turned turbid, which leads to a steep increase
in the disintegration curve in Fig. 9a. At the same time, the curve for
disintegration rate and time show saw-tooth fluctuation. The disin-
tegration process is short and generally within 2 min (Fig. 9b).
4. Mechanism soil strength properties in the view of mineralogy
and microstructure
From the laboratory results mentioned above, the mudstone re-
sidual soil displays peculiar properties. It was deposited with low water
content and void ratio, but higher density, specific gravity and per-
meability, in comparison with other residual soils. However, the soil
exhibits high intact strength but great reduction upon either saturation
or W-D cycles. In this section, an explanation of the peculiar strength
properties of the mudstone residual soils is given from the aspects of
microstructural features and mineralogical composition.
4.1. Microstructure
Multilevel investigations of the soil structure were performed using
scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and SEM images at different
magnifications are shown in Fig. 11. The EDS results were simulta-
neously obtained and summarized in Table 4. The SEM photos indicate
that the microstructure of mudstone residual soil is featured by ag-
gregation of soil particles with fissures (Fig. 11a) among soil aggregates
formed during the weathering process. The fissure may be the cause of
the high permeability of mudstone residual soil. It can be observed from
Fig. 11b that the soil aggregates are in fact cemented kaolinite with the
flaky plate shape. At the enlarged view, the kaolinite is found to be
slightly oriented and exhibit edge-to-edge contact (Fig. 11d). To sum-
marize, different from that of sedimentary clays with a flocculation
structure, the microstructure of mudstone residual soil is characterized
by soil aggregates with fissures, which cannot be the cause of high
strength.
4.2. Mineralogy and chemical composition
The XRD patterns for whole soil, dark-colored soil and light-colored
soil are presented in Fig. 12 and Table 5. The results indicate that the
mineral composition of current soil is typical of that for mudstone

Table 5
Summary of the details of XRD results and the mineralogy of mudstone residual soil.
Locations Parent rock Mineral composition (%)

Quartz Illite Kaolinite Feldspar Gibbsite Mica Hematite

Zimbabwe Mudstone 52.5 32.2 14.7 – – – 0.6I

55.5 27.6 15.5 – – – 1.4II
53.9 33.7 12 – – – 0.4III
Australia#a Mudstone 29 – 16 5 – 5 < 1
Chinab Basalt 15.53 12.33 49.53 – 14.33 – 6.96
Chinac Granite 42.6 – 38.9 5.6 – 9.6 3.3
USAd Basalt Mainly kaolinite, gibbsite and hematite

I – III: The three results were detected in whole soil, dark-colored and light-colored soil, respectively. See Figure 2 and 12.
Data from a Fityus and Smith (2004), b Zhang et al. (2017), c Zhang et al. (2019), d Tuncer and Lohnes (1977).
#
The soil contains 47% unidentified clay minerals.

9
X. Zhang, et al.
residual soil comparing with previous study listed in Table 5. The major
original mineral of the studied soil is quartz. X-ray diffraction patterns
showed that the dominant clay minerals are kaolinite and illite ac-
counting for more than 46% of the soil. Kaolinite is an inactive clay
with negligible effects on the strength of soil (Peterson, 1946) and the
high content of kaolinite suggests that the parent rock has undergone a
long time of weathering. The absence of smectite is consistent with the
low swelling potential of studied soil and hence suggests that the dis-
integration of soil is relative to structural characteristics.
Also detected by XRD was a small amount of the iron-bearing mi-
neral. Obvious discrepancy in its content was observed in the whole soil
sample, dark-colored soil and light-colored soil, as detailed in Table 5.
Consistently, iron oxide, the main constituent of the iron-bearing mi-
neral, with an average content of 5% was detected. Iron oxide is proved
to enhance the cementation and structural strength of the soil
(Cuccovillo and Coop, 1999). Under the acidic environment in the
mudstone residual soil (pH = 6.5), negative charges exist at the surface
of soil particles, or more specifically, clay minerals (Davidtz and
Sumner, 1965). As a result, high cohesion of soil is generated when
these negative charges are attracted by iron oxide with positive charges.
It is interesting here to mention that iron was exclusively detected
through EDS tests at the contacts of soil particles (EDS area II, Table 4),
which confirms the cementation in MRS is the result of iron-bearing
minerals. Due to the tropical climatic conditions of Zimbabwe, intense
weathering has affected mudstone residual soil substantially. Based on
the results of SEM and EDS, the clay particles of MRS are arranged in
face to face orientation to form the aggregates and covered with thin
coatings, and these aggregates further form a stiff network of soil matrix
and that the cementing agent is iron oxide. Zhang et al. (2016) also
revealed that the iron oxide in residual soil is featured by local en-
richment and exists in the form of a coating of clay aggregates, binding
them into coarser aggregations. Consequently, the internal friction
angle of mudstone residual soil is generally high.
The iron-bearing cementation is particularly sensitive to water and
it can be damaged or even destroyed (Zhang et al., 2016). Conse-
quently, when soil is saturated, the bonding effect between soil particles
breaks down leading to an obvious decrease in cohesion while the in-
ternal friction is less influenced. However, when soil is subjected to W-
D cycles, the cohesion and frictional angle show dramatic decline. This
phenomenon is an indirect reflection of the formation of fissures and
the weakening of iron-bearing cementation. This effect does not only
weaken soil structure but also provide passage for water penetration,
which further results in soil softening and severe disintegration.
5. Conclusions
This paper represents how the engineering geology of mudstone
residual soil was (i) evaluated systematically through a series of la-
boratory tests and (ii) interpreted in the view of microstructure and
mineralogy. The main conclusions are as follows.
(a) The mudstone residual soil is classified as clay with high plasticity.
It is deposited with low water content (w = 19.7%), high specific
gravity (Gs = 2.72) and density (ρ = 1.92 g/cm3). Mudstone re-
sidual soil is highly permeable despite the low void ratio
(e0 = 0.72) and the coefficient of permeability in the horizontal
direction is twice as much as that in the vertical direction. In terms
of engineering applications, the physical properties of MRS are in-
adequate.
(b) In shear and compression, the natural mudstone residual soil be-
haved in a structured way, including strain-softening and apparent
overconsolidation. The structural properties of studied soil have no
relation to stress history but are the results of cementation formed
in the process of weathering, which is essentially different from
sedimentary soil.
(c) Natural mudstone residual soil demonstrates superior shear
10
Engineering Geology 277 (2020) 105785
resistance. The average value of qu of the studied soil is 118.1 kPa.
Isotropically consolidated undrained (CIU) triaxial tests showed
high soil strength, with an effective cohesion of c'cu = 46.3 kPa and
an effective internal friction angle of ϕ'cu = 26°, and direct shear
tests gave a cohesion of cds = 30 kPa and an internal friction angle
of ϕds = 21.6°.
(d) The strength of mudstone residual soil is highly sensitive to water.
The soils display a significant decrease in strength upon saturation.
The unconfined compression strength qu of soil decreased drama-
tically by 73%, c'cu decreased by 58.5% and ϕ'cu show a 32.6%
decrease. More remarkable reduction in shear strength occurs on
samples subjected to W-D cycles, c'cu was reduced from 46.3 kPa to
7.1 kPa and ϕ'cu from 26° to 2.6°.
(e) Natural mudstone residual soil shows severe disintegration beha-
vior because it was deposited in unsaturated conditions and easier
to absorb water, especially when facilitated by the fissures in soil.
However, the original structure characteristics of soil were com-
pletely destroyed and soil particles and pores were rearranged in
the process of remolding, which leads to the reduction of fissures in
the soil. As a result, remolded soil shows a similar but much more
stable response underwater.
(f) The microstructure of mudstone residual soil is featured by ag-
gregation of soil particles with fissures and the iron-bearing ce-
mentation among soil aggregation is responsible for the high
strength of studied soil. High cohesion of soil is generated when the
negative charges on the surface of soil particles are attracted by iron
oxide with positive charges, under the acidic environment in the
mudstone residual soil (pH = 6.5). The iron oxide in the soil exists
in the form of a coating of clay aggregates, which binds them into
coarser aggregations and causes a high internal friction angle.
(g) The iron-bearing cementation is sensitive to water. When soil is
saturated, the bonding effect between soil particles breaks down
leading to an obvious decrease in cohesion. However, when sub-
jected to W-D cycles, both the cohesion and frictional angle show a
dramatic decline, as an indirect reflection of the formation of fis-
sures and the weakening of iron-bearing cementation.
Declaration of Competing Interest
None.
Acknowledgments
The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support of the
National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 41972285,
41672293 and 51709290), the Youth Innovation Promotion
Association CAS (Grant No. 2018363), and the opening fund of State
Key Laboratory of Geohazard Prevention and Geoenvironment
Protection (Grant No. SKLGP2020K024). Some special thanks go to Mr.
Li Hongcheng, Zhai Luping and Wang Zhangao, engineering of
Research Institute of electronic comprehensive survey of the Ministry of
information industry, Xi'an, China, for their kind assistance in soil
sampling.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2020.105785.
References
Agus, S.S., Leong, E.C., Rahardjo, H., 2005. Estimating permeability functions of
Singapore residual soils. Eng. Geol. 78, 119–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.
2004.12.001.
Ali, F.H., 2004. Stabilization of a residual soil. Soils Found. 32, 178–185. https://doi.org/
10.3208/sandf1972.32.4_178.
X. Zhang, et al.
ASTM D1557-12, 2012. Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction
Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort. American Society for Testing and
Materials, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM D2166-16, 2016. Standard Test Method for Unconfined Compressive Strength of
Cohesive Soil. American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM D2216-19, 2019. Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Determination of Water
(Moisture) Content of Soil and Rock by Mass. American Society for Testing and
Materials, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM D2487-17, 2017. Standard Practice for Classification of Soils for Engineering
Purposes (Unified Soil Classification System). American Society for Testing and
Materials, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM D3080-11, 2011. Standard Test Method for Direct Shear Test of Soils under
Consolidated Drained Conditions. American Society for Testing and Materials, West
Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM D422-63, 2007. Standard Test Method for Particle-Size Analysis of Soils. American
Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM D4318-17, 2017. Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and
Plasticity Index of Soils. American Society for Testing and Materials, West
Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM D4546-14, 2014. Standard Test Methods for One-Dimensional Swell or Collapse of
Soils. American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM D4767-11, 2020. Standard Test Method for Consolidated Undrained Triaxial
Compression Test for Cohesive Soils. American Society for Testing and Materials,
West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM D5084-16, 2016. Standard Test Methods for Measurement of Hydraulic
Conductivity of Saturated Porous Materials Using a Flexible Wall Permeameter.
American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM D5333-03, 2003. Standard Test Method for Measurement of Collapse Potential of
Soils. American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM D7263-09, 2018. Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Determination of Density
(Unit Weight) of Soil Specimens. American Society for Testing and Materials, West
Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM D854-14, 2014. Standard Test Methods for Specific Gravity of Soil Solids by Water
Pycnometer. American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA.
Avşar, E., Ulusay, R., Aydan, Ö., Mutluturk, M., 2015. On the difficulties of geotechnical
sampling and practical estimates of the strength of a weakly bonded volcanic soil.
Bull. Eng. Geol. Environ. 74, 1375–1394. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-014-
0710-9.
Baldock, J.W., Styles, M.T., Kalbskopf, S., Muchemwa, E., 1991. The geology of the
Harare Greenstone Belt and surrounding granitic terrain. Zimbabwe. Geol. Den. Surv.
Bull. 94, 213.
Burland, J.B., 1990. On the compressibility and the shear strength of natural clays.
Géotechnique 40 (3), 329–378. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.1990.40.3.329.
Casagrande, A., 1936. The determination of the pre-consolidation load and its practical
significance. Discussion D-34. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on
Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. Cambridge, Mass. vol. III. pp. 60–64.
Chiu, C.F., Ng, C.W.W., 2014. Relationships between chemical weathering indices and
physical and mechanical properties of decomposed granite. Eng. Geol. 179, 76–89.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2004.12.001.
Cuccovillo, T., Coop, M.R., 1999. On the mechanics of structured sands. Géotechnique 49
(6), 741–760. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.1999.49.6.741.
Czerewko, M.A., Cripps, J.C., 2001. Assessing the durability of mudrocks using the
modified jar slake index test. Q. J. Eng. Geol. Hydrogeol. 34 (2), 153–163. https://
doi.org/10.1144/qjegh.34.2.153.
Davidtz, J.C., Sumner, M.E., 1965. Blocked charges on clay minerals in sub-tropical soils.
J. Soil Sci. 16, 270–274. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2389.1965.tb01437.x.
Emdal, A., Gylland, A., Amundsen, H.A., Kåsin, K., Long, M., 2016. Mini-block sampler.
Can. Geotech. J. 53, 1235–1245. https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2015-0628.
Fityus, S., Smith, D., 2004. The development of a residual soil profile from a mudstone in
a temperate climate. Eng. Geol. 74, 39–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2004.
02.001.
Futai, M.M., Almeida, M.S.S., 2005. An experimental investigation of the mechanical
behaviour of an unsaturated gneiss residual soil. Géotechnique 55, 201–213. https://
doi.org/10.1680/geot.2005.55.3.201.
Gutierrez, N.H., Nóbrega, M.T., Vilar, O.M., 2009. Influence of the microstructure in the
collapse of a residual clayey tropical soil. Bull. Eng. Geol. Environ. 68, 107–116.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-008-0180-z.
Hosseini Kamal, R., 2012. Experimental Study of the Geotechnical Properties of UK
Mudrocks. PhD thesis. Imperial College, London, UK.
Huat, B.B.K., Gue, S.S., Ali, F.H., 2004. Tropical Residual Soils Engineering. A. A. Balkema
Publishers, London.
Huat, B.B.K., Toll, D.G., Prasad, A., 2012. Handbook of Tropical Residual Soils
Engineering. CRC Press.
Kayadelen, C., Sivrikaya, O., Taşkıran, T., Güneyli, H., 2007. Critical-state parameters of
an unsaturated residual clayey soil from Turkey. Eng. Geol. 94, 1–9. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.enggeo.2007.05.008.
Lade, P.V., 2016. Triaxial Testing of Soils. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester. https://doi.
org/10.1002/9781119106616.
Leroueil, S., Vaughan, P.R., 1990. The general and congruent effects of structure in
natural soils and weak rocks. Géotechnique 40, 467–488. https://doi.org/10.1680/
geot.1990.40.3.467.
Lunne, T., Berre, T., Strandvik, S., 1997. Sample disturbance effect in soft low plasticity
11
Engineering Geology 277 (2020) 105785
Norwegian clay. Proceedings of the Conference on Recent Developments in Soil
Mechanics 81–102.
Martins, F.B., Bressani, L.A., Coop, M.R., Bica, A.V.D., 2001. Some aspects of the com-
pressibility behaviour of a clayey sand. Can. Geotech. J. 38, 1177–1186. https://doi.
org/10.1139/cgj-38-6-1177.
Martins, F.B., Ferreira, P.M.V., Flores, J.A.A., Bressani, L.A., Bica, A.V.D., 2005.
Interaction between geological and geotechnical investigations of a sandstone re-
sidual soil. Eng. Geol. 78, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2004.10.003.
Mesida, E.A., 1987. The relationship between the geology and the lateritic engineering
soils in the northern environs of Akure, Nigeria. Bull. Int. Assoc. Eng. Geol. 35, 65–69.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02590478.
Mitchell, J.K., Soga, K., 2005. Fundamentals of Soil Behavior, third ed. John Wiley and
Sons, New Jersey.
Okewale, I.A., 2019a. Influence of fines on the compression behavior of decomposed
volcanic rocks. Int. J. Geo-Eng. 10 (4), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40703-019-
0101-y.
Okewale, I.A., 2019b. Effects of weathering on the small strain behavior of decomposed
volcanic rocks. J. GeoEng. 14 (2), 97–107. https://doi.org/10.6310/jog.201906_
14(2).5.
Okewale, I.A., 2020a. On the intrinsic behaviour of decomposed volcanic rocks. Bull. Eng.
Geol. Environ. 79, 1311–1322. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-019-01643-7.
Okewale, I.A., 2020b. Applicability of chemical indices to characterize weathering de-
grees in decomposed volcanic rocks. Catena 189, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
catena.2020.104475.
Okewale, I.A., Coop, M.R., 2017. A study of the effects of weathering on soils derived
from decomposed volcanic rocks. Eng. Geol. 222, 53–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
enggeo.2017.03.014.
Okewale, I.A., Coop, M.R., 2018. Suitability of different approaches to analyze and pre-
dict the behavior of decomposed volcanic rocks. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 144
(9), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001944.
Okewale, I.A., Coop, M.R., 2020. A study of completely decomposed volcanic rocks with
transitional mode of behaviour. Bull. Eng. Geol. Environ. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10064-020-01820-z.
Okewale, I.A., Grobler, H., 2020. A study of dynamic shear modulus and breakage of
decomposed volcanic soils. J. GeoEng. 15 (1), 55–68. https://doi.org/10.6310/jog.
202003_15(1).5.
Pereira, José.H., Fredlund, D.G., Cardão Neto, M.P., Gitirana, G.D.F., 2005. Hydraulic
behavior of collapsible compacted gneiss soil. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. 131 (10),
1264–1273. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2005)131:10(1264).
Peterson, J.B., 1946. The role of clayminerals in the formation of soil structure. Soil Sci.
61, 247–256.
Pinheiro, B.L., Topa, G.A., Silva, C.A., Santos, P.C., 2014. Natural variability of shear
strength in a granite residual soil from Porto. Geotech. Geol. Eng. 32, 911–922.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-014-9768-1.
Pitts, J., Kannan, R., 1986. Residual soil development on sedimentary rocks of the Jurong
Formation in Singapore. Bull. Geol. Soc. Malaysia 19, 453–468.
Rahardjo, H., Aung, K.K., Leong, E.C., Rezaur, R.B., 2004. Characteristics of residual soils
in Singapore as formed by weathering. Eng. Geol. 73, 157–169. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.enggeo.2004.01.002.
Rahardjo, H., Melinda, F., Leong, E.C., Rezaur, R.B., 2011. Stiffness of a compacted re-
sidual soil. Eng. Geol. 120, 60–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2011.04.006.
Rahardjo, H., Satyanaga, A., Leong, E.C., Ng, Y.S., Pang, H.T.C., 2012. Variability of re-
sidual soil properties. Eng. Geol. 141, 124–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.
2012.05.009.
Rao, S.M., Revanasiddappa, K., 2006. Influence of cyclic wetting drying on collapse be-
haviour of compacted residual soil. Geotech. Geol. Eng. 24, 725–734. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10706-004-5077-4.
Rocchi, I., Coop, M.R., 2015. The effects of weathering on the physical and mechanical
properties of a granitic saprolite. Géotechnique. 65, 482–493. https://doi.org/10.
1680/geot.14.P.177.
Taylor, R., James, P., 1967. Geotechnical aspects of the Muda irrigation project. In:
Proceedings of the 1st South-East Asian Conference on Soils Engineering, Bangkok.
1967. pp. 33–42.
Tuncer, E.R., Lohnes, R.A., 1977. An Engineering Classification for Certain Basalt-derived
lateritic Soils. Eng. Geol. 11, 319–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/0013-7952(77)
90037-0.
Zhang, X.W., Kong, L.W., Cui, X.L., Yin, S., 2016. Occurrence characteristics of free iron
oxides in soilmicrostructure: evidence fromXRD. SEM and EDS. Bull. Eng. Geol.
Environ. 75, 1493–1503. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-015-0781-2.
Zhang, X.W., Kong, L.W., Yin, S., Chen, C., 2017. Engineering geology of basaltic residual
soil in Leiqiong, southern China. Eng. Geol. 220, 196–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.enggeo.2017.02.002.
Zhang, X.W., Kong, L.W., Li, J.J., 2018. Influence of dry and wet seasons on disintegration
characteristics of basalt residual soil from the Leizhou Peninsula, China. Q. J. Eng.
Geol. Hydrogeol. 51, 450–460. https://doi.org/10.1144/qjegh2016-128.
Zhang, X.W., Liu, X.Y., Kong, L.W., Xu, C.L., 2019. Experimental study on mechanical
characteristics of granite residual soil under blast loading. SCIENTIA SINICA Technol.
49, 690–702. (in Chinese). https://doi.org/10.1360/N092018-00319.
Zhang, Z., Han, L., Wei, S., Chen, L., Liu, G., Zhang, L., 2020. Disintegration law of
strongly weathered purple mudstone on the surface of the drawdown area under the
conditions of three Gorges Reservoir operation. Eng. Geol. 270, 105584. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2020.105584.