18/10/2013

CE6101-
More On Cam Clay and
Modified Cam Clay

MODIFIED CAM CLAY – RELATIONSHIP

BETWEEN CU, EFFECTIVE STRESS AND OVER-
CONSOLIDATION RATIO Equation of NCL:
v v =  + (-) ln 2 -  ln p’
NCL v0 =  + (-) ln 2 -  ln p0’
v1 = v0 +  ln p0’ -  ln p’
 p '
=  - (-) ln  0  -  ln p’
CSL
 2 
(-)ln2
 Rp' 
=  - (-) ln  -  ln p’
 2 
v1 =  -  ln p’ - (-) ln  R 
2
(1)
v'
v0'
in which R is the over-
consolidation ratio, given by
R =  p 0 ' 
 p' 
(1)

pc' p' p0' ln p'

1
 18/10/2013

On the CSL, v1 =  -  ln pc’ (2)

Equating Eqs. 1 and 2 leads to

R
pc’ = p’   (3)
2

where  =


M R
At critical state, cu = qu/2 =   p’   (4)
 2  2
1
 2c  
Or R = 2  u  (5)
 M p' 

For Fluvial clay F2: take  = 0.105 &  = 0.03 & M = 0.95
Then  = 0.714
1.4
 2.105c u 
And R = 2  
 p' 
At 18m depth, take v’ = 7x18kPa = 126kPa to 8x18kPa = 144kPa
Taking K0 ~0.8 gives p’ = 0.867v’ = 109kPa to 125kPa
Setting cu = 105kPa and p’ = 109kPa  R = 5.4!
Setting cu = 105kPa and p’ = 125kPa  R = 4.4
Setting cu = 5N = 65kPa and p’ = 109kPa  R = 2.7
Setting cu = 5N = 65kPa and p’ = 125kPa  R = 2.3
Thus, lowest R (or OCR) ~ 2.3

2
 18/10/2013

DEDUCTION OF CAM CLAY PARAMETERS FROM LAB TESTS

1.1 Relationship Between Compression and Re-Compression Indices In One-Dimensional

And Isotropic Compression

1.1.1 Slope of the Normal Compression Line

Cam Clay is formulated using the isotropic stress state as a reference point. On the other
hand, most of the laboratory tests relating to consolidation are 1-D compression tests. It can
be shown (see practice problem) the compression index measured in 1D compression is the
same as that measured under isotropic compression in the Cam Clay framework. The value
of Knc (i.e. K0 under normally consolidated condition) can be deduced either empirically or
from the model itself. Empirically, the most widely used relationship is the Jaky’s rule which
gives
Knc = 1 – sin ’ (1)
The full derivation of Knc from the Cam Clay model is complicated because it requires
consideration of elastic and plastic strains. However, the situation can be approximated and
simplified if we assume that elastic strains are small compared to plastic strains. This is often
approximately true in normally consolidated soils. If we assume that elastic strains are small,
then the volumetric and shear strain in triaxial conditions can be expressed as
dεvp = dεap + 2dεrp = dεap if elastic radial strains are also zero. (2)

Note, if elastic radial strains are non-zero, then

dεr = dεre + dεrp = 0, but dεrp ≠ 0 if dεre ≠ 0 (3)
p
Similarly, dεs = 2(dεap - dεrp)/3 =2 dεap/3 (4)
d p
v
≈ 3/2 = 1.5 (5)
d p
s

Using the modified Cam Clay work equation:-

q dεsp + p’ dεvp = p' 2 d pv 2  M 2 p' 2 d sp 2 (6)

Letting stress ratio  = q/p’ in Eq. 6 leads to

2
d pv  d pv 
+  p   M2
d sp
=  d  (7)
 s
Substituting Eq. 5 into Eq. 7 leads to
9 3
q/p’ =  = M2  - (8)
4 2
q = v’ - h’ => q/v’ = 1 – Knc (9)
1 1  2K nc
p’ = (v’ + 2h’) => p’/v’ = (10)
3 3

3
 18/10/2013

Dividing Eq. 9 by Eq. 10,

3(1  K nc )
q/p’ = = (11)
1  2K nc

Re-arranging the terms in Eq. 11 leads to

3 9
Knc = = -½ (12)
3  2 9
4 M2 
4
6 sin '
Substituting M = into Eq. 12 leads to
3  sin '

 3(3  sin ' ) 

Knc = ½   1 (13)
 17 sin '6 sin '9 
2

Table 1. Comparison of K0 predicted by Jaky’s Rule and Eq. 13.

Friction
Angle Mod Cam
(deg) sin Ø' Jaky's rule Clay
20 0.342 0.65797986 0.83370316
22 0.3746 0.62539341 0.80274896
24 0.4067 0.59326336 0.77063975
26 0.4384 0.56162885 0.7377827
28 0.4695 0.53052844 0.70455651
30 0.5 0.5 0.67130321
32 0.5299 0.47008074 0.63832341
34 0.5592 0.4408071 0.60587448
36 0.5878 0.41221475 0.57417122
38 0.6157 0.38433852 0.5433881
40 0.6428 0.35721239 0.51366277
42 0.6691 0.33086939 0.48510015
Table 1 and Fig. 1 compare the values predicted by Jaky’s Rule and those by Eq. 13. As can
be seen, Eq. 13 consistently predicts higher value than Jaky’s prediction by ~0.15 to 0.18.
The original Cam Clay predicts even higher K0, in fact, it can be readily shown that the Knc
predicted by the original Cam Clay is always equal to 1.0 for a wide range of friction angles.
This is clearly unrealistic. The modified Cam Clay is more realistic, but nonetheless still
differs from Jaky’s rule.

4
 18/10/2013

Comparison of K0 predicted by Mod Cam

Clay and Jaky's Rule

0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
K0

0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Eff. Friction Angle

Jaky's rule Mod Cam Clay

Fig. 1
From Eq. 8, it can be seen that for a given friction angle (i.e. M is constant), then the stress
ratio  for K0-compression is also constant. In other words, in p’-q space, the stress path for
K0-compression is a straight line passing through the Origin.

CSL

Fig. 2

v
0
NCL
O p, p'
p1 ' p 0'

1-D
VCL

Fig. 3
ln 

p1' p0' ln p'

ln 

5
 18/10/2013

Fig. 2 shows the modified Cam Clay yield locus with the K0-stress path. The stress path is
represented by  = 0 which is constant. Using the modified Cam Clay yield locus,
p0 ' 2
= 1 + 02 = constant, say  (14)
p1 ' M
Thus, ln p1’ = ln p0’ – ln  (15)
Thus, as Fig. 3 shows, a point on the 1-D virgin compression line is always horizontally
offset leftwards of the isotropic normal compression line by an offset equal to ln  in v-ln p’
space. In other words, the 1-D virgin compression line is parallel to the normal compression
line in compression space. We can therefore write the equation of the 1-D virgin
compression line in the form
v = A -  ln p1’ (16)
in which A is a constant. We note that
p1’ = 1 3 v’ (1 + 2Knc) (17)
Substituting Eq. 17 into Eq. 16 and re-arranging terms,
1  2K nc
v = A -  ln - ln v’ (18)
3
1  2K nc
or e = A – 1 -  ln - ln v’ (19)
3
1  2K nc 
e = A – 1 -  ln - lg v’ (20)
3 lg e

This is the Cam Clay prediction of the equation of the virgin compression line as it is
1  2K nc
normally plotted (i.e. e vs. lg v’). Since A – 1 -  ln is a constant, we deduce that
3
the often measured compression index Cc is given by
 Cc
Cc = or  = (21)
lg e ln 10

6
 18/10/2013

1.1.1 Slope of the Recompression Line (Unloading-Reloading Line)

Let 1 and i be the recompression indices under 1-dimensional (1D) and isotropic
compression, respectively. This implies that the specific volume can be expressed as
In 1D compression, v = v01 + 1 ln c’ - 1 ln v’ (22)
In which v01 is the specific volume under the 1D preconsolidation stress c’, and
v’ is the current overburden effective stress.
Differentiating Eq. 22 gives

dv = - 1 dv (23)
v '
so that
dv 
= - 1 dv = -dεv (24)
v v v '
in which εv is the volumetric strain. In 1D compression, dεv = dεa so that Eq. 24 can be re-
written as
d v v v '
= D’ = (25)
d a 1
in which D is the constrained modulus and is given by
E' (1  ' )
D’ = (26)
(1  ' )(1  2' )
Where E’ and ’ are the effective Young’s modulus and Poisson’s ratio, respectively.
Combining Eqs. 25 and 26 leads to
v v ' (1  ' )(1  2' )
1 = (27)
E' (1  ' )

We also know, from the Cam Clay model, that

vp' 3vp' (1  2' )
i = = (28)
K' E'
in which K’ is the effective bulk modulus of the soil. Dividing Eq. 28 by Eq. 27 yields
i 3p' (1  ' ) (1  2K 0 )(1  ' )
= = (29)
1  v ' (1  ' ) (1  ' )

in view of the fact that 3p’ = (1+2K0)v’. If we use the empirical relationship that
K0 = (1 - sin’) OCR1sin ’ (30)
i
In which OCR1 is the 1D overconsolidation ratio, then the ratio can be evaluated.
1
This relationship is independent of the yield function and is therefore valid for both the
original and modified Cam Clay.
i
Table 3 shows some ratios of for various OCR and ’.
1

7
 18/10/2013

Poisson' kappai/ka
Phi' (deg) ratio OCR K0 ppa1
20 0.25 1.1 0.679782 1.415739
22 0.25 1.1 0.648126 1.377751
24 0.25 1.1 0.616713 1.340056
26 0.25 1.1 0.585592 1.30271 Table 3.
28 0.25 1.1 0.554806 1.265768
30 0.25 1.1 0.524404 1.229285
20 0.3 1.1 0.679782 1.270535
22 0.3 1.1 0.648126 1.236443
24 0.3 1.1 0.616713 1.202615
26 0.3 1.1 0.585592 1.169099
28 0.3 1.1 0.554806 1.135945
30 0.3 1.1 0.524404 1.103205
20 0.35 1.1 0.679782 1.136086
22 0.35 1.1 0.648126 1.105603
24 0.35 1.1 0.616713 1.075354
26 0.35 1.1 0.585592 1.045384
28 0.35 1.1 0.554806 1.015739
30 0.35 1.1 0.524404 0.986464
20 0.25 1.2 0.700316 1.440379
22 0.25 1.2 0.669599 1.403519
24 0.25 1.2 0.63893 1.366716
26 0.25 1.2 0.608359 1.330031
28 0.25 1.2 0.577939 1.293527
30 0.25 1.2 0.547723 1.257267
20 0.3 1.2 0.700316 1.292648
22 0.3 1.2 0.669599 1.259569
24 0.3 1.2 0.63893 1.22654
26 0.3 1.2 0.608359 1.193618
28 0.3 1.2 0.577939 1.160857
30 0.3 1.2 0.547723 1.128317
20 0.35 1.2 0.700316 1.15586
22 0.35 1.2 0.669599 1.126281
24 0.35 1.2 0.63893 1.096748
26 0.35 1.2 0.608359 1.067309
28 0.35 1.2 0.577939 1.038015
30 0.35 1.2 0.547723 1.008918
20 0.25 1.3 0.719753 1.463704
22 0.25 1.3 0.689981 1.427977
24 0.25 1.3 0.660074 1.392088
26 0.25 1.3 0.630085 1.356102
28 0.25 1.3 0.60007 1.320084
30 0.25 1.3 0.570088 1.284105
20 0.3 1.3 0.719753 1.31358
22 0.3 1.3 0.689981 1.281518
24 0.3 1.3 0.660074 1.24931

24 0.3 1.3 0.660074 1.24931

26 0.3 1.3 0.630085 1.217014
28 0.3 1.3 0.60007 1.184691
30 0.3 1.3 0.570088 1.152402
20 0.35 1.3 0.719753 1.174577
22 0.35 1.3 0.689981 1.145908
24 0.35 1.3 0.660074 1.117108
26 0.35 1.3 0.630085 1.08823
28 0.35 1.3 0.60007 1.059327
30 0.35 1.3 0.570088 1.030455
20 0.25 1.4 0.738229 1.485875
22 0.25 1.4 0.709404 1.451285
24 0.25 1.4 0.680273 1.416327
26 0.25 1.4 0.65089 1.381068
28 0.25 1.4 0.621315 1.345578
30 0.25 1.4 0.591608 1.30993
20 0.3 1.4 0.738229 1.333478
22 0.3 1.4 0.709404 1.302435
24 0.3 1.4 0.680273 1.271063
26 0.3 1.4 0.65089 1.23942
28 0.3 1.4 0.621315 1.20757
30 0.3 1.4 0.591608 1.175578
20 0.35 1.4 0.738229 1.192369
22 0.35 1.4 0.709404 1.164612
24 0.35 1.4 0.680273 1.136559
26 0.35 1.4 0.65089 1.108265
28 0.35 1.4 0.621315 1.079785
30 0.35 1.4 0.591608 1.051178
20 0.25 1.6 0.772726 1.527272
22 0.25 1.6 0.745792 1.494951
24 0.25 1.6 0.718242 1.46189
26 0.25 1.6 0.690128 1.428154
28 0.25 1.6 0.661511 1.393813
30 0.25 1.6 0.632456 1.358947
20 0.3 1.6 0.772726 1.370628
22 0.3 1.6 0.745792 1.341623
24 0.3 1.6 0.718242 1.311953
26 0.3 1.6 0.690128 1.281676
28 0.3 1.6 0.661511 1.250858
30 0.3 1.6 0.632456 1.219567
20 0.35 1.6 0.772726 1.225588
22 0.35 1.6 0.745792 1.199652
24 0.35 1.6 0.718242 1.173122
26 0.35 1.6 0.690128 1.146049
28 0.35 1.6 0.661511 1.118492
30 0.35 1.6 0.632456 1.090513

8
 18/10/2013

1.1 Estimation of ecs (or )

We would recall that  is a parameter of the critical state line.

ecs =  - 1
There are several possible ways of estimating ecs.

1.1.1 Using the 1-D Virgin Compression Line

v

NCL

1-D
VCL

Fig. 4
ln 

v1

v0

p1' p0' ln p'

ln 

9
 18/10/2013

Fig. 4 shows the 1-D virgin compression line and the isotropic normal compression line.
From Eq. 16, we know that
v1 = A -  ln p1’ (31)
The isotropic normal compression line is given by the relation between v0 and ln p0’. We
know that
v1 = v0 +  ln  (32)
and ln p1’ = ln p0’ – ln  (33)
Substituting Eqs. 32 & 33 into Eq. 31 leads to
v0 = A + ( - ) ln  -  ln p0’ (34)
p0 ' 2
wherein  = = 1 + 02
p1 ' M

9 3
in which 0 = M2  - for modified Cam Clay and 0 = 0 for most realistic ’ values
4 2
for the original Cam Clay.

At p0’ = 1kPa, then v0 = v00 = A + ( - ) ln . We know that vcs (i.e. specific volume at
critical state at p’ = 1kPa) is given by

vcs = v00 – ( - ) ln 2 = A + ( - ) ln   (35)
2
We already know that the 1-D virgin compression line is given by
1  2K nc 
e = A – 1 -  ln - lg v’ (20)
3 lg e
Let e = e1d0 when v’ = 1, then
1  2K nc
e1d0 = A – 1 -  ln (36)
3
1  2K nc
or A = e1d0 + 1 +  ln (37)
3
Substituting Eq. 37 into Eq. 35 leads to
1  2K nc 
vcs = e1d0 + 1 +  ln + ( - ) ln   (38)
3 2
1  2K nc 
and ecs = vcs – 1 = e1d0 +  ln + ( - ) ln   (39)
3 2
Hence, the procedure is to extrapolate the 1-D virgin compression line backwards until it
intersects the vertical line v’ = 1kPa, the void ratio at this point is e1d0. Substituting e1d0 into
Eq. 39 gives ecs.

10
 18/10/2013

1.1.1 Using the moisture content and OCR at the in-situ state
Suppose we know the following information:
a. ’,  and  from 1-D compression tests,
b. the moisture content or void ratio, OCR, K0 accurately known at a location or a few
locations
e

NCL

Fig. 5

ei

e0

p i' p0' ln p'

In Fig. 5, ei, pi’ and qi represents the in-situ state of a soil. Then
pi’ = 1
3 v’ (1 + 2K0) (40)

qi = v’ (1 - K0) (41)

in which v’ is the in-situ effective vertical stress.
The precompression effective vertical and horizontal stresses v0’ and h0’ are then given by
v0’ = Ocr v’ (42)
and h0’ = Knc Ocr v’ (43)
in which Ocr is the over-consolidation ratio of the soil and a good estimate of Knc is by Jaky’
relation. The precompression stress path parameters pnc’ and qnc are then given by
pnc’ = 1
3 Ocr v’ (1 + 2Knc) (44)

and qnc = Ocr v’(1 – Knc) (45)

Since the stress point (pnc’, qnc) lies on the yield locus, p0’ can be determined via, say, the
modified Cam Clay yield function, i.e.
q 2nc
p0’ = pnc’ + (46)
M 2 p nc '

11
 18/10/2013

 1  2K nc 
 31  K nc  
2

= Ocr v’   2  = β Ocr v’ (47)

 3 M 1  2 K 
nc 

 1  2K nc 
 31  K nc  
2

Wherein β =   2 

 3 M 1  2 K 
nc 
Assume soil is saturated, then en = Gs w in which Gs is the specific gravity and w the
moisture content.
 p '  3O cr 
e0 = en – κ ln  0  = Gs w - κ ln   (48)
 pi '   1  2K 0 
On the isotropic normal compression line, the void ratio e00 corresponding to p’ = 1kPa is
given by
 3 
e00 = e0 + λ ln p0’ = Gs w - κ ln   + (λ – κ) ln (βOcr) + λ ln σv’ (49)
 1  2K 0 
For the modified Cam Clay, ecs = e00 – (λ – κ) ln 2
 3   O cr 
ecs = Gs w - κ ln   + (λ – κ) ln   + λ ln σv’ (50)
 1  2K 0   2 

1.1.1 Using the Liquid Limit and a Estimation of Strength at LL

This is probably the least reliable and accurate method. The assumptions are
(a) In the index test for LL, the soil is brought to the critical state.
(b) The undrained shear strength of the soil at LL is 2kPa.
cu
(c) The ratio = ζ is constant down to the LL and is known.
p'
At the liquid limit, eLL = Gs wLL, in which eLL is the void ratio at liquid limit wLL.
c uLL 2
pLL’ = = kPa (51)
 
in which pLL’ and cuLL are the mean effective stress and undrained shear strength at liquid
limit. Since ecs and eLL both lie on the critical state line,
2
ecs = eLL + λ ln pLL’ = Gs wLL + λ ln   (52)


12