MRP Webinar Effective Stress and The Triaxial Test - 8!4!2021

MRP Webinar Series 8 April 2021
MRP Webinar Series:

The principle of effective stress and
measuring soil strength using the triaxial test
Michael Dobie
BSc MSc DIC CEng FICE FCIHT
Regional Manager Asia Pacific, Tensar International
Aim and summary
 This is the third in a series of webinars on the topic of

geotechnical engineering
 We shall look at the principle of effective stress and measuring
soil strength using the triaxial test
 The target is to measure shear strength in terms of effective
stress (c and ) in order to carry out designs, especially when
soils are used as fills
 We shall also look briefly at measuring undrained shear
strength (su)
 In the next webinar we shall examine the practical use of clay

fills in (reinforced) soil structures
Principle of effective stress and measuring soil strength using the triaxial test
Michael Dobie 1
MRP Webinar Series
Webinar Content
February 2021 An introduction to soil behaviour and index properties
March 2021 Measuring soil strength using the shear box – dos and don’ts
April 2021 The principle of effective stress and measuring soil strength
using the triaxial test
May 2021 Practical use of clay fills in (reinforced) soil structures
June 2021 Site investigation of soft soils and measuring compressibility
July 2021 The preconsolidation pressure of soft clays – relevance and
methods of determination
August 2021 Using the CPT in soft clays
If you are interested to watch earlier webinars, then there are

links which can be provided by PT Multibangun Rekatama Patria
Principle of effective stress & the triaxial test
Michael Dobie 2
Who should attend this webinar?
 The content of this webinar is two parts

 Firstly, we shall look at the principle of effective stress which is
the most important concept in soil mechanics
 Secondly, we shall look at the triaxial test, equipment, procedure
and results, in order to provide guidance to engineers when
reviewing soil shear strength data provided in geotechnical reports
Look out for the blue boxes which provide additional
information and pose some questions too…
 This material is aimed at civil engineers who have some involvement

in ground engineering
 Some of the information might be of interest to more experienced
geotechnical engineers
 The main target is for reinforced soil applications, but the information
should be useful for a wide range of design situations
Who should attend this webinar?
 Especially for engineers who receive reports

with data such as shown in this table, and
must use this information for their designs
Triaxial test
Depth wn  G e N S PL LL PI c 
(m) % kN/m3 % % kPa deg
2.2 83.5 14.51 2.65 2.29 69.6 96.7 43 91 48
3.2 101.5 14.25 2.67 2.70 73.0 100.2 45 107 62 29 8
4.3 102.9 14.20 2.68 2.76 73.4 100.0 50 113 63 35 9
5.2 95.3 14.35 2.64 2.62 72.4 99.7 41 84 43
6.2 88.2 14.71 2.61 2.28 69.5 101.2 41 75 34
7.2 38.7 16.88 2.54 1.05 51.2 93.8 35 60 25 3 29
8.2 39.1 17.12 2.58 1.06 51.5 95.5 37 63 26 2 32
9.2 50.3 16.21 2.62 1.38 58.0 95.3 39 74 35 50 4
10.2 45.6 16.68 2.62 1.24 55.4 96.1 37 68 31 55 8
11.2 43.3 16.71 2.59 1.18 54.1 95.1 37 66 29
This table has triaxial test results. Can we use these values
as they are or should we carry out some investigation?
Michael Dobie 3
Principle of effective stress – let’s jump in
 =  + u
F1  F2 F3
Where:
  = total stress
applied to soil
element
u
 u = pressure
carried by water
in the pore spaces
  = effective
stress
 This is the load
carried through
soil particle
contacts averaged
over the area

 =  + u
F1  F2 F3
Important:
 Shear strength
depends on  V
 Volume change
u
depends on the
change in 
We shall return to
this soil element a bit
later, but first let’s
learn about the
background

Michael Dobie 4
 =  + u
Background:
 Attributed to Karl Terzaghi
 Well established for permeable
soils like sands and gravels
 The situation with clays was
less clear and left as more of
an empirical solution
Karl Terzaghi (1883-1963)
 =  + u
Background:
 In the 1940’s Bishop started
work on improving this
situation
Alan W Bishop (1920-1988)
10
Michael Dobie 5
 =  + u
Background:
situation
 This included developing the
triaxial test as a means of
understanding pore water
Bishop’s first triaxial apparatus
pressure (u) in clays (1944)
11
 =  + u
Background:
situation
 This included developing the Bishop moved to Imperial
triaxial test as a means of College in 1946
understanding pore water
Bishop’s first triaxial apparatus
pressure (u) in clays (1944)
12
Michael Dobie 6
A personal recollection of Bishop

BGS meeting
29 May 1974
13
14
Michael Dobie 7
Suggested reading
A must read: “The Bishop Method” by Laurie Wesley

Also, a collection of Bishop’s most important papers
15
Vital reading The Boulder, Colorado paper
Bishop “only” published 68 papers
“The principle of effective stress” and “The relevance of the

triaxial test to the solution of stability problems”
16
Michael Dobie 8
Books on the triaxial test
Volume 3 of the books on soil laboratory testing by Head

Bishop & Henkel’s book on the triaxial test
17
Summary and content
 Introduction
 Effective stress rules – OK!!
 Embankment stability
 Look at stresses inside our soil element
 Triaxial test procedure – important aspects of the test
 Triaxial test results – CU and CD
 Solutions to two questions posed in Webinar 1
There will be a quiz at the end of this webinar related to some of

the material presented, with prizes for the winners
In this webinar we shall only look at the case when soil is fully
SATURATED
In the next webinar we shall look at the use of clay fills which
are generally PARTIALLY SATURATED or UNSATURATED
18
Michael Dobie 9
Effective stress rules – OK!!
 Failure of a low height embankment
19
 Failure of a low height embankment founded on Holocene marine clay
20
Michael Dobie 10
 Failure of a low height embankment founded on Holocene marine clay
….?
Let’s have a look at

the stresses in the
foundation soil
when you build an
embankment
21
Embankment stability
 Initial conditions at a site
Stresses
 = h
h hw u = whw
 =  - u
 =  - u
 is the effective stress
Subsoil c, , 
22
Michael Dobie 11
 Build an embankment
New stresses
e = h + e
h hw ue = whw + ue
 = e - ue
 = e - ue
23
 For all subsoil types the embankment loading will result in an

increase in pore water pressure, ue
 But if the subsoil has high permeability, then the increased water
pressure can dissipate or drain as quickly as the embankment is
built
24
Michael Dobie 12
 Build an embankment
 High permeability subsoils
New stresses
e = h + e
h hw ue = whw
 = e - u
 = e - u
Highly permeable
Subsoil c, ,  sand & gravel
25
 Look at stability
R
s
Driving moment
resisted by R  s
s Highly permeable
26
Michael Dobie 13
 We know e and u, so we can find the shear resistance using Mohr

Coulomb:
s = c + (e - u)tan
Drained analysis: always used

for highly permeable soils
27
 Look at stability
 In terms of effective stress (drained)
s
 = e - u
 = e - u s
s from Mohr Coulomb

 = e - u
s = c + (e - u)tan
s Highly permeable
28
Michael Dobie 14
 e is calculated (eg. by method of slices)

 u is required, OK if hydrostatic as shown
s
 = e - u
 = e - u s
s from Mohr Coulomb

 = e - u
s = c + (e - u)tan
s Highly permeable
29
 For low permeability finer subsoils (clays and clayey silts) it may
take a long time for excess pore water pressure to dissipate or
drain
 This will make the effective stress approach difficult to apply when
the embankment load is first applied (short to medium term)
 In this case we can use an alternative approach where we assess
or measure “s” directly
30
Michael Dobie 15
 If embankment load changes u therefore  not known

 s not known, so measure it in the field directly
s
 = e - ?
 = e - ? s
u=?
s from Mohr Coulomb
 = e - ?
s = c + (e - ?)tan
s Low permeability silt &
Subsoil c, ,  clay
31
 This is “undrained shear strength”

 So, we use the simple definition:
s = su
 So now we do not need to know e or u
 But we need to measure su for every site and every situation
32
Michael Dobie 16
We shall look at methods of
measuring undrained shear
 Do not use  or u in analysis strength in a later webinar
 su assessed from lab or in-situ testing
Undrained analysis: used for su

short term stability with low
permeability soils
su
If s is measured directly
then water pressures or
levels are not needed
su Low permeability silt &
Subsoil c, ,  clay
33
 If we wait a long time

 u returns to the hydrostatic condition (drained condition)
Drained analysis: used for s

 = e - u
long term stability with low
permeability soils
 = e - u s
s from Mohr Coulomb

 = e - u
s = c + (e - u)tan
s Low permeability silt &
Subsoil c, ,  clay after a long time
34
Michael Dobie 17
 But if we want to analyse the short-term condition in the clay

foundation using c and  is there a way to assess u?
 Yes
 We can use Skempton’s pore pressure parameters A and B
35
 So, let’s go back to the beginning again, but add horizontal stress
Initial vertical stress

1 = vertical stress = h
h hw 1 = h - whw
1
36
Michael Dobie 18
 So, let’s go back to the beginning again, but add horizontal stress
Initial horizontal stress

3 = K01 + whw
h hw
1
3
37
 Build the embankment

 This adds additional total stresses
New stresses
1 + e1
h hw 3 + e3
1 + e1
3 + e3
38
Michael Dobie 19
 Predict increase in pore pressure using Skempton’s parameters

A and B
Increase in pore pressure

u = B[3 + A(1 - 3)]
h hw = B3 + Ā(1 - 3)
1 + e1
3 + e3
Pore water pressure = whw + u
39
 Predict increase in pore pressure using Skempton’s parameters

A and B
For Plaxis users: this is essentially
the “Undrained A” procedure but
see Section 2.5 of Plaxis Material
Models manual concerning warnings
B = 1 for saturated soils

A gives pore pressure
There is further
information h hw response to shearing
about the “A” Depends on OCR
parameter later 1 + e1 A  1 for soft soils
in this webinar
A  0 for stiff soils
3 + e3
Pore water pressure = whw + u
40
Michael Dobie 20
Let’s look at stresses inside our soil element
41
42
Michael Dobie 21
43

 =  + u
 Soil inside box
with rigid sides
held in position
by horizontal
stresses
 Top can move
downwards like
a piston
 REMEMBER
 Soil particles
are
incompressible
 The soil
skeleton is
compressible
In this case we are

looking at dry soil
44
Michael Dobie 22

 =  + u
 Apply stress 
  is 
transmitted
through
particle
contacts
 Until it reaches
the base
 Here stress is K K
also 
 And stress on
sides is K
45

 =  + u
 As soon as you
apply  there
is a change in 
volume (V)
 Compressibility
is V/ V
 This is
compressibility
of the soil
skeleton K K
46
Michael Dobie 23

 =  + u
 IMPORTANT
 Sum of all the
F1  F2 F3
forces passing
through the
soil skeleton
over the V
element area
 Fn/A = 
  =
effective stress K K
 Compressibility
is V/
assuming that
the element
has unit
volume
47

 =  + u
 Let’s look at a
possible shear
surface F1  F2 F3
 What is the
shear
resistance on V
the surface?
  =   friction
between soil K K
grains
48
Michael Dobie 24

 =  + u
 Now look at
box again but
full of water 
 Water is
incompressible V
u=?
 What is u?
 What is V?
K K
 What is K?
Water 1

49

 =  + u
 Now look at
box again but
full of water 
 Water is
incompressible V
 V/ = 0
u=
 u=
 V = 0
 
 K = 1.0
 No drainage
Water 1

50
Michael Dobie 25

 =  + u
 What happens
if you open the
tap? 
V
u=?
 u=?
 V = ?
 
 K=?
 With drainage
Water 2

51

 =  + u
 What happens
if you open the
tap?
 V
u=
 u=
 V = …….
 
 K = 1.0
 With drainage
Water 2

52
Michael Dobie 26

 =  + u
 What happens
if you leave the
tap open?
V
u=
Before the box is  

empty, does the
rate of water
flow remain
constant?
Water 2

53

 =  + u
 Now let’s put
the water and
soil particles
together
possible shear
surface
 What is the
shear
resistance on
the surface?
 =0
Soil & water 1
54
Michael Dobie 27

 =  + u
 Add the water
pressure gauge
and tap 
 Keep tap
closed V
 Apply 
u=?
Soil & water 2


55

 =  + u
 What happens?
F1  F2 F3
 What is u?
 What is V?
 What is K? V
 And what is u=?

Fn/A?
K K
Soil & water 2


56
Michael Dobie 28

 =  + u
 What happens?

 u=
 V = 0
 K = 1.0 V
 Fn/A =  = 0 u=
Why? The soil  

particles and the
water are both
incompressible…
BUT the soil
This is also why Skempton’s
skeleton is
“B” = 1.0 for saturated soils
compressible
Soil & water 2


57

 =  + u
possible shear
surface 
 What is the
shear V
resistance on
the surface?
u=
 =0
 Because  = 0  
Soil & water 2


58
Michael Dobie 29

 =  + u
 Now open the
tap and let
water flow out F1  F2 F3
until it stops
 What has V
changed?
u=?
 What is u?
 What is V?
K K
 What is K?
 And what is
Fn/A?
Soil & water 3


59

 =  + u
 Now open the
tap and let
water flow out F1  F2 F3
until it stops
 What has
changed? V
u=?
 What is u?
 What is V?
 What is K? K K
 And what is
This process is
Fn/A? “consolidation”
Does the rate of

water flow
remain constant?
Soil & water 3


60
Michael Dobie 30

 =  + u
 After full
drainage
F1  F2 F3
V
u=0
 u=0
 V = dry case
 K = K0 K0 K0
 Fn/A =  = 
K0 is the coefficient
of earth pressure
at rest
Soil & water 3


61

 =  + u
possible shear
surface F1  F2 F3
 What is the
shear
resistance on V
the surface?
u=0
  =   friction
between soil K0 K0
grains
 Same as dry
case
Soil & water 3


62
Michael Dobie 31

 =  + u
 In geotechnical
problems we
can calculate F1  F2 F3
or measure 
 We can
normally V
assess u
u=0
 But we cannot
measure or K0 K0
assess 
 So  =  - u
Soil & water 3


63
 The situation above is the case with SATURATED soils (most natural
soils below the water table)
In the next webinar we shall look at the case where the pore
fluid is a water/air mixture, so that it is compressible, and the
soil is PARTIALLY SATURATED or UNSATURATED
 The next slides look at the situation when shearing takes place
undrained after initial consolidation
 We shall look at two cases:
 Dense (or very stiff) soil
 Loose (or very soft sensitive) soil
64
Michael Dobie 32

 =  + u
 Consolidation
takes place
F1  F2 F3
 u = 0, so total
and effective
stresses given by
 & K0
 Vertical effective
stress F/A = 
u=0
=
Undrained shear & dense (1)


65

 =  + u
 Now close the tap
 The situation
F1  F2 F3
becomes
undrained
 Apply 
 For the soil u=0
particles to shear
in a dense soil
they try to move
apart


66
Michael Dobie 33

 =  + u
 Remembering
that total stresses
do not change F1  F2 F3
 What happens to In this case Skempton’s “A”

F/A = ( - u)? would be low or negative
 What happens u=?
to u?
 What is 
 F/A increases
 As a result, u
decreases,
becomes -ve


67

 =  + u
 So  =
c + [ - (-u)]
tan F1  F2 F3
 Now open the tap V

assuming there is
water available at
atmospheric
u=
pressure -u
 Does water flow

and which way?
 What is u?
 What is V?
 What is ?


68
Michael Dobie 34

 =  + u
 Water flows in
 u becomes 0
F1  F2 F3
 V is +ve
(increase)
  decreases V
 So  was u=0
c + [ + u] tan
 Now becomes c
+ [] tan
This loss of strength

is referred to as
“softening”


69

 =  + u
 Consolidation
takes place
F1  F2 F3
 u = 0, so total
and effective
stresses given by
 & K0
 Vertical effective
stress F/A = 
u=0
=
Undrained shear & loose (1)


70
Michael Dobie 35

 =  + u
 Now close the tap
 The situation
F1  F2 F3
becomes
undrained
 Apply 
 Loose structure is u=0
unstable, so
when shearing it
tends to collapse


71

 =  + u
 Remembering
that total stresses
do not change F1  F2 F3
 What happens to In this case Skempton’s “A”

F/A = ( - u)? would be high, maybe 1.0
 What happens u=?
to u?
 What is ?
 F/A decreases
 As a result, u
increases,
becomes +ve


72
Michael Dobie 36

 =  + u
 So  =
c + [ - (u)]
tan F1  F2 F3
 Now open the tap V

assuming there is
water available at
atmospheric
u=u
pressure
 Does water flow

and which way?
 What is u?
 What is V?
 What is ?


73

 =  + u
 Water flows out
 u becomes 0
F1  F2 F3
 V is -ve
(decrease)
  increases V
 So  was u=0
c + [ - u] tan
 Now becomes c
+ [] tan


74
Michael Dobie 37
 Of course, real soils don’t have taps

 But in low permeability soils the rate
of flow through the pore space is very
slow
 This effectively make the situation
“undrained” in the short term
 Now let’s look at the triaxial test
75
Triaxial test equipment and procedure
 Measuring shear strength in terms of total stress

 UU triaxial tests
Application and
 Main features for Cell measurement of
total stress tests filled deviator stress,
with 1 - 3
 Unconsolidated
water
quick undrained N
(UU) testing to Soil specimen
measure in rubber
membrane
undrained
strength
End
caps
Cell pressure, 3
76
Michael Dobie 38
 Measuring shear strength in terms of total stress

 UU triaxial tests
 Equipment
simpler/cheaper
compared to
effective stress
N tests
 Test procedures
are far quicker
than effective
stress tests
For measuring
undrained shear
strength su
We shall look at this
in a later webinar
77
 Measuring shear strength in terms of effective stress

 CD and CU triaxial tests
Application and
 Main features for measurement of
Cell
effective stress deviator stress,
filled
tests 1 - 3
with
water
 In modern N Soil specimen
equipment in rubber
pressures and membrane
loads measured
by transducers
End Systems attached
caps to measure pore
with pressure (u) or
porous volume change,
stones apply back
pressure and
permit saturation
Cell pressure, 3
78
Michael Dobie 39

 Specimen
placed on
pedestal
79

 Specimen
placed on
pedestal
 With rubber
N membrane
added
80
Michael Dobie 40

 Specimen
placed on
pedestal
 With rubber
N membrane
added
 Full test set up
for effective
stress testing
81

 Basic procedure similar

to drained shear box:
Saturation
Consolidation N
Shearing (CU
undrained or CD
drained)
82
Michael Dobie 41

 Saturation
 It is vital that water in
both the specimen and
pore pressure measuring N
system is free of air
 For fine soils this is done
by applying “back
pressure” to the
specimen
 This dissolves free air
into the water Measuring pore
pressure (u) and
applying back
pressure (ub)
Cell pressure, 3
83

 CD triaxial tests
 Shearing drained
 All excess water Deviator stress,
pressure generated by 1 - 3
shearing must dissipate N
 Therefore, rate of
shearing must be very
slow Zone of shearing
in centre of
specimen
Measuring volume
change & checking
water pressure
u=0
Cell pressure, 3
84
Michael Dobie 42

 CU triaxial tests
 Shearing undrained
 Testing is undrained (no Deviator stress,
water exits or leaves 1 - 3
the specimen), but N
water pressures will
change in the zone of
shearing Zone of shearing
 Shearing must be slow in centre of
enough for this water specimen
pressure to equilibrate
with the specimen ends
Measuring water
pressure (u)
Cell pressure, 3
85

 Test results
Axial strain = 1 Deviator stress,
1 - 3
Cell pressure = 3
Deviator stress = 1 - 3 N
Pore water pressure = u
Measuring water
pressure (u)
Cell pressure, 3
86
Michael Dobie 43

 There are four known or measured values from the test
Measured Calculated
1 3 1 - 3 u
0 250 0 0
0.5 250 100 40
1 250 150 70
2 250 200 110
4 250 250 175
6 250 220 190
87

 Results can be plotted against axial strain
300
CU triaxial test results
250
Stress, pressure (kPa)
200
150
Useful for
100 assessing stiffness
50 Deviator stress We need another

Pore water pressure approach for
assessing failure
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
Axial strain 1 (%)
88
Michael Dobie 44

 We can calculate the other stresses to define the Mohr’s circles
Measured Calculated
1 3 1 - 3 u 1  3  1
0 250 0 0 250 250 250

0.5 250 100 40 350 210 310
1 250 150 70 400 180 330
2 250 200 110 450 140 340
4 250 250 175 500 75 325
6 250 220 190 470 60 280
89

 Results plotted as Mohr’s circles for total and effective stress
300
CU triaxial test results  = 29.5
250 c = 31.1 kPa
Shear stress (kPa)
200
150
100
50
0
-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Total and effective normal stress (kPa)
90
Michael Dobie 45

 Each circle can be fully identified by the coordinates of its top
300
250 c = 31.1 kPa
Shear stress (kPa)
200
150
100
50
0
-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
91

 Calculating the stress point coordinates
Measured Calculated
1 3 1 - 3 u 1  3  1 1 ' 3 ' 1  3 1 ' 3 '
2 2 2
0 250 0 0 250 250 250 0 250 250
0.5 250 100 40 350 210 310 50 300 260
1 250 150 70 400 180 330 75 325 255
2 250 200 110 450 140 340 100 350 240
4 250 250 175 500 75 325 125 375 200
6 250 220 190 470 60 280 110 360 170
Shear stress is same for

total and effective stress
92
Michael Dobie 46

 These points joined together as called stress paths
300
250 c = 31.1 kPa
Shear stress (kPa)
200
150
100
50
0
-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
93

 We can calculate c and  from the geometry of the Mohr’s circle
300
250 c = 31.1 kPa
( 1 -  3)/2 (kPa)
200
Results in different
failure envelope
150
100
50
0
-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
( 1 +  3)/2 & ( 1  +  3 )/2 (kPa)
94
Michael Dobie 47

 Total and effective stress paths define the changes in stress
300
CU triaxial test results  = 26.2
250 d = 27.1 kPa
( 1 -  3)/2 (kPa)
200
Results in different
 = sin-1(tan  )
failure envelope which
c = d tan /tan 
150
can be used to find  & c
100
50
0
-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
( 1 +  3)/2 & ( 1  +  3 )/2 (kPa)
95

 Some important points about stress paths
300
250 d = 27.1 kPa
In the standard CU test
( 1 -  3)/2 (kPa)
200 the total stress path is

always at 45 so
150
normally it is not shown
100
50
0
-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
( 1 +  3)/2 & ( 1  +  3 )/2 (kPa)
96
Michael Dobie 48

300
250 d = 27.1 kPa
Horizontal distance
( 1 -  3)/2 (kPa)
200 between the two stress

paths is the pore water
150
pressure, u
u = 110
100
50
0
-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
( 1 +  3)/2 & ( 1  +  3 )/2 (kPa)
97

300
250 d = 27.1 kPa
In the standard triaxial test
( 1 -  3)/2 (kPa)
200 direction of the effective

stress path is related to
Skempton’s “A” parameter
150
100
50
0
-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
( 1 +  3)/2 & ( 1  +  3 )/2 (kPa)
98
Michael Dobie 49

300
250 d = 27.1 kPa
A = 0 : highly OC clays
( 1 -  3)/2 (kPa)
200 A = 1/3 : elastic condition

A = 0.5 : lightly OC clays
A = 1.0 : soft/sensitive clay
150 A = 1/3
A = 1.0 A = 0.5 A=0
100
50
0
-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
( 1 +  3)/2 & ( 1  +  3 )/2 (kPa)
99
CU triaxial test results – case study
 Sample consists of recompacted “Linko Terrace” residual soil fill

 Material is sandy silty clay
 PL = 29, LL = 58, PI = 29, G = 2.7
 Compaction test gives dmax = 14.97 kN/m3 and wopt = 25.2%
 CU triaxial tests carried out on three samples
DRY (90% of dmax) on dry side
OPT (at optimum)
WET (90% of dmax) on wet side
100
Michael Dobie 50
 Grading of recompacted “Linko Terrace” residual soil
Clay Silt Sand Gravel

100
90
Percentage passing (%)
80
70
60
50
40
Limit PI
30
20 Linko Terrace
10 residual soil
0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Particle size (mm)
101
 Compaction results
 su is undrained shear
strength (in kPa) of each
20 Compaction CUC
sample after compaction
Zero air voids
WET = soft
Dry unit weight (kN/m3)
18 10% air voids

OPT = very stiff
40% air voids
DRY = firm
16
dmax
14
wopt
su =
12 su = su = 19
68 137
10
10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Water content (%)
102
Michael Dobie 51
 Compaction results
 su is undrained shear
strength (in kPa) of each
20 Compaction CUC
sample after compaction
Zero air voids
WET = soft 10% air voids
Dry unit weight (kN/m3)

18
OPT = very stiff 40% air voids
DRY = firm After sat/consol
16
dmax
14
wopt
su =
12 su = su = 19
68 137
10
10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Water content (%)
103
 CU shearing
stage results
 1 - 3
600
 u CU triaxial test results
OPT
 Plotted against 500
( 1 -  3) and u (kPa)
axial strain
 All results for 400 DRY
3 = 392 kPa
300 WET
200
u
100
We need to plot
stress paths to
0
interpret strength
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Axial strain 1 (%)
104
Michael Dobie 52
 Stress paths
300
250
( 1 -  3)/2 (kPa)
 = 29.5
200 c = 0 kPa
150 DRY
100
50
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600
( 1  +  3 )/2 (kPa)
105
 Stress paths
300
250
( 1 -  3)/2 (kPa)
 = 27.3
200 c = 5 kPa
150 WET
100
50
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600
( 1  +  3 )/2 (kPa)
106
Michael Dobie 53
 Stress paths
300
250
( 1 -  3)/2 (kPa)
 = 25.2
200 c = 14 kPa
150 OPT
100
50
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600
( 1  +  3 )/2 (kPa)
107
 Stress paths combined Despite initial conditions varying from

soft to very stiff, the effective stress
strength parameters are the same
300
250
( 1 -  3)/2 (kPa)
 = 26.9
200 c = 5 kPa
150
100
50
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600
( 1  +  3 )/2 (kPa)
108
Michael Dobie 54
 Stress paths combined What is the benefit of higher compaction?

Pore water pressure generated during
shear is much less
300
250
( 1 -  3)/2 (kPa)
 = 26.9
200 c = 5 kPa
150
100
50
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600
( 1  +  3 )/2 (kPa)
109
CD triaxial test results – typical results
 CD triaxial tests on residual

soils from Singapore There is no point in showing stress
paths which are all 45 lines
500
CD triaxial test results
400
( 1 -  3)/2 (kPa)
 = 32.0
c = 10.0 kPa
300
BH4 UD2 BH4 UD4
200 BH5 UD1 BH5 UD3

BH7 UD2 BH7 UD4
100 BH13 UD1 BH13 UD3

BH19 UD2 BH19 UD4
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
( 1  +  3 )/2 (kPa)
110
Michael Dobie 55
CD triaxial test results – typical results
 CD triaxial tests on residual In the CD procedure we lose the

soils from Singapore interesting information about pore
pressure response to undrained shearing
500
CD triaxial test results
400
( 1 -  3)/2 (kPa)
 = 32.0
c = 10.0 kPa
300
BH4 UD2 BH4 UD4
200 BH5 UD1 BH5 UD3

BH7 UD2 BH7 UD4
100 BH13 UD1 BH13 UD3

BH19 UD2 BH19 UD4
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
( 1  +  3 )/2 (kPa)
111
Question 1 from first webinar

 The foot on the
beach question
 Initial loading sand
feels hard
 Also, a dry patch
appears
112
Michael Dobie 56

 The foot on the
beach question
 Initial loading sand
feels hard
 Also, a dry patch
appears
 Wait a short time
and the sand
starts to feel softer
Can you explain

this?
Perhaps you can
after these
webinars!!
113

 Loading is very
fast so initially
undrained, even
on sand
 Sand is dense and
saturated so tries
to dilate which
initially causes
suction resulting
in increased -u -u -u -u
effective stress
so strength is high
There is lot of “soil mechanics” involved in this
114
Michael Dobie 57

 Loading is very
fast so initially
undrained, even
on sand
saturated so tries
to dilate which
initially causes
suction resulting
in increased -u -u -u -u
effective stress
so strength is high
 Water flows
locally towards
zones of suction
115

 Loading is very
fast so initially
undrained, even
on sand
saturated so tries
to dilate which
initially causes
suction resulting
in increased the
effective stress
so strength is high
 Water flows
locally towards
zones of suction
 Water flows from
further away to
restore drained
hydrostatic
conditions
116
Michael Dobie 58
 Two marine clays

 Eocene London Clay (34 to 56 million years old)
 Holocene Juru upper marine clay (3000 to 8000 years old)
wn, PL, LL (%) wn, PL, LL (%)

0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
20 0
h = 2m
2
10 hw= 1m
4
6 Both clays have

0
Elevation (m)
c =2 kPa,  = 27
Depth (m)
-10 10 For the sample at 2m

12
depth, the undrained
-20
shear strength su
London 14 Holocene marine  100 kPa for L Clay
Clay clay (Juru, Malaysia)  8 kPa for Juru
16
-30 Can you explain this?
PL, LL PL, LL
18
water content water content
-40 20
117

10
Soft clay
 = 16 kN/m3
K0 = 0.8
Af = 1.0
5
( 1 -  3)/2 (kPa)
0
0 5 10 15 17.8 20 22.2 25
(1 + 3)/2 (kPa)
-5
1 h = 2m
 = 27.0
3 hw= 1m c = 2 kPa
-10
Both clays have c =2 kPa,  = 27
118
Michael Dobie 59

10
Soft clay
 = 16 kN/m3
K0 = 0.8
Af = 1.0
5
( 1 -  3)/2 (kPa)
0
0 5 10 15 17.8 20 22.2 25
(1 + 3)/2 (kPa)
-5
1 h = 2m
 = 27.0
3 hw= 1m c = 2 kPa
-10
119

10
Soft clay
 = 16 kN/m3
K0 = 0.8
Af = 1.0
5
( 1 -  3)/2 (kPa)
0
0 5 10 15 17.8 20 22.2 25
(1 + 3)/2 (kPa)
-5
 = 27.0
c = 2 kPa
u = -22.2 kPa
-10
120
Michael Dobie 60

10
Soft clay
su  8 kPa
 = 16 kN/m3
K0 = 0.8
Af = 1.0
5
( 1 -  3)/2 (kPa)
0
0 5 10 15 17.8 20 22.2 25
(1 + 3)/2 (kPa)
-5
1 - 3
 = 27.0
3 c = 2 kPa
-10
121

100
Stiff clay
 = 20 kN/m3
K0 = 3.0
Af = -0.1
50
( 1 -  3)/2 (kPa)
su  8
kPa
30.2 90.6
0
0 50 100 150 200 250
(1 + 3)/2 (kPa)
-50
3 h = 2m
 = 27.0
1 hw= 1m c = 2 kPa
-100
122
Michael Dobie 61

100
Stiff clay
 = 20 kN/m3
K0 = 3.0
Af = -0.1
50
( 1 -  3)/2 (kPa)
su  8
kPa
30.2 90.6
0
0 50 100 150 200 250
(1 + 3)/2 (kPa)
-50
 = 27.0
c = 2 kPa
u = -96.6 kPa
-100
123

100
Stiff clay su  100 kPa
 = 20 kN/m3
K0 = 3.0
Af = -0.1
50
( 1 -  3)/2 (kPa)
su  8
kPa
30.2 90.6
0
0 50 100 150 200 250
(1 + 3)/2 (kPa)
-50
1 - 3
 = 27.0
3 c = 2 kPa
-100
124
Michael Dobie 62
 You can find these results from this very nice equation
 It can be derived from the geometry of the Mohr diagrams
above
c cos   1 [K0  A f (1  K0 )]sin 

su 
(1  (2A f  1) sin 
 The problem is:

 You need to know K0
 You need to know Af
Prizes of the book “Mekanika Tanah” by Laurie Wesley

will given to the first three correct derivations of this
equation sent to PT Multibangun Rekatama Patria
(only sent within Indonesia)
Details will be provided
125
Some conclusions and suggestions
 The principle of effective stress is a vital component of soil

mechanics and vital to understanding geotechnical problems
 Soil strength depends on effective stress
 Volume change depends on the change in effective stress
 Total stress () can be calculated or measured quite easily
 Pore water pressure (u) can be calculated in some situations or
measured on site
 The effective stress  can only be found from ( - u)
 The effective stress strength parameters (c and ) can be
measured using CD or CU triaxial tests
 It is important to verify adequate procedure, especially
 Full saturation has been achieved
 The rate of shearing is slow enough for u = 0 in the CD test
and that u is uniform throughout the specimen in the CU test
126
Michael Dobie 63
References
 Bishop, A W (1959). “The principle of effective stress” Teknisk

Ukeblad, 106, pp 859-863
 Bishop, A W & Bjerrum, L (1960). “The relevance of the triaxial
test to the solution of stability problems” Proc Res Conf on
Shear Strength of Cohesive Soils, Boulder, Colorado, USA, pp
437-501
 Bishop, A W & Henkel, D J (1957). “The Measurement of Soil
Properties in the Triaxial Test” Edward Arnold, London, 2nd
Edition
 Head, K H (1986). “Manual of soil laboratory testing, Volume 3,
Effective stress tests” Pentech Press, London.
 Wesley, L D (2019). “The Bishop Method” Whittles Publishing
Ltd, Scotland
 Wesley, L D (compiled 2019) “Professor A W Bishop’s Finest
Papers – A Commemorative Volume” Whittles Publishing Ltd,
Scotland
127
MRP Webinar Series
Webinar Content
February 2021 An introduction to soil behaviour and index properties
March 2021 Measuring soil strength using the shear box – dos and don’ts
April 2021 The principle of effective stress and measuring soil strength
using the triaxial test
May 2021 Practical use of clay fills in (reinforced) soil structures
June 2021 Site investigation of soft soils and measuring compressibility
July 2021 The preconsolidation pressure of soft clays – relevance and
methods of determination
August 2021 Using the CPT in soft clays
128
Michael Dobie 64
Thank you
Any questions?
129
Michael Dobie 65

MRP Webinar Effective Stress and The Triaxial Test - 8!4!2021

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

MRP Webinar Effective Stress and The Triaxial Test - 8!4!2021

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MRP Webinar Series 8 April 2021

MRP Webinar Series:

Aim and summary

 This is the third in a series of webinars on the topic of

 In the next webinar we shall examine the practical use of clay

MRP Webinar Series

If you are interested to watch earlier webinars, then there are

Principle of effective stress & the triaxial test

Who should attend this webinar?

 The content of this webinar is two parts

 This material is aimed at civil engineers who have some involvement

Who should attend this webinar?

 Especially for engineers who receive reports

Principle of effective stress – let’s jump in

Principle of effective stress – let’s jump in

Principle of effective stress – let’s jump in

Karl Terzaghi (1883-1963)

Principle of effective stress – let’s jump in

Alan W Bishop (1920-1988)

Principle of effective stress – let’s jump in

Principle of effective stress – let’s jump in

A personal recollection of Bishop

A must read: “The Bishop Method” by Laurie Wesley

Vital reading The Boulder, Colorado paper

Bishop “only” published 68 papers

“The principle of effective stress” and “The relevance of the

Books on the triaxial test

Volume 3 of the books on soil laboratory testing by Head

Summary and content

There will be a quiz at the end of this webinar related to some of

Effective stress rules – OK!!

 Failure of a low height embankment

Effective stress rules – OK!!

 Failure of a low height embankment founded on Holocene marine clay

Effective stress rules – OK!!

 Failure of a low height embankment founded on Holocene marine clay

Let’s have a look at

 Initial conditions at a site

Subsoil c, , 

Subsoil c, , 

 For all subsoil types the embankment loading will result in an

 We know e and u, so we can find the shear resistance using Mohr

Drained analysis: always used

s from Mohr Coulomb

 e is calculated (eg. by method of slices)

s from Mohr Coulomb

 If embankment load changes u therefore  not known

 This is “undrained shear strength”

 su assessed from lab or in-situ testing

Undrained analysis: used for su

 If we wait a long time

Drained analysis: used for s

s from Mohr Coulomb

 But if we want to analyse the short-term condition in the clay

Initial vertical stress

Subsoil c, , 

Initial horizontal stress

 Build the embankment

 Predict increase in pore pressure using Skempton’s parameters

Increase in pore pressure

 Predict increase in pore pressure using Skempton’s parameters

B = 1 for saturated soils

Let’s look at stresses inside our soil element