Advertisement

Acta Geotechnica

, Volume 12, Issue 1, pp 145–156 | Cite as

Estimation of undrained shear strength in moderately OC clays based on field vane test data

Research Paper

Abstract

The undrained shear strength (s u) of cohesive soils is a crucial parameter for many geotechnical engineering applications. Due to the complexities and uncertainties associated with laboratory and in situ tests, it is a challenging task to obtain the undrained shear strength in a reliable and economical manner. In this study, a probabilistic model for the s u of moderately overconsolidated clays is developed using the Bayesian model class selection approach. The model is based on a comprehensive geotechnical database compiled for this study with field measurements of field vane strength (s u), plastic limit (PL), natural water content (W n), liquid limit (LL), vertical effective overburden stress (\(\sigma_{\nu }^{\prime }\)), preconsolidation pressure (\(\sigma_{\text{p}}^{\prime }\)) and overconsolidated ratio (OCR). Comparison study shows that the proposed model is superior to some well-known empirical relationships for OC clays. The proposed probabilistic model not only provides reliable and economical estimation of s u but also facilitates reliability-based analysis and design for performance-based engineering applications.

Keywords

Bayesian inference Empirical correlation Field vane test Model class selection Overconsolidated clay Undrained shear strength 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the researchers who published the data in the literature but findings and conclusions expressed in this paper do not reflect the views of those researchers. The generous support from the research committee of the University of Macau under research Grant MYRG039(Y1-L1)-FST12-NIT is gratefully acknowledged.

References

  1. 1.
    Arulrajah A, Nikraz H, Bo MW (2005) In-situ testing of Singapore marine clay at Changi. Geotech Geolog Eng 23(2):111–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arulrajah A, Bo MW (2008) Characteristics of Singapore marine clay at Changi. Geotech Geolog Eng 26(4):431–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bergado DT, Long PV, Balasubramaniam AS (1996) Compressibility and flow parameters from PVD improved soft Bangkok clay. Geotech Eng J 27(1):1–20Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Beck JL, Yuen KV (2004) Model selection using response measurements: Bayesian probabilistic approach. J Eng Mech 130(2):192–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bozozuk M, Fellenius BH, Samson L (1978) Soil disturbance from pile driving in sensitive clay. Can Geotech J 15(3):346–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Burn KN (1969) Settlement of a high embankment and overpass structures in Ottawa. Can Geotech J 6(1):33–45MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cai G, Liu S, Tong L, Du G (2009) Assessment of direct CPT and CPTU methods for predicting the ultimate bearing capacity of single piles. Eng Geol 104(1–2):211–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cao Z, Wang Y (2013) Bayesian approach for probabilistic site characterization using cone penetration tests. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 139(2):267–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cao Z, Wang Y (2014) Bayesian model comparison and characterization of undrained shear strength. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 140(6):04014018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chai J, Bergado DT (1993) Performance of reinforced embankment on Muar clay deposit. Soils Found 33(4):1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chandler RJ (1988) The in situ measurement of the undrained shear strength of clays using the field vane. In: STP 1014, vane shear strength testing in soils: field and laboratory studies, pp 13–44Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ching J (2009) Equivalence between reliability and factor of safety. Probab Eng Mech 24(2):159–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ching J, Phoon KK, Chen YC (2010) Reducing shear strength uncertainties in clays by multivariate correlations. Can Geotech J 47(1):16–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ching J, Phoon KK (2013) Multivariate distribution for undrained shear strengths under various test procedures. Can Geotech J 50(9):907–923CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chiu CF, Yan WM, Yuen KV (2012) Estimation of water retention curve of granular soils from particle-size distribution—a Bayesian probabilistic approach. Can Geotech J 49(9):1024–1035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chiu CF, Yan WM, Yuen KV (2012) Reliability analysis of soil-water characteristics curve and its application to slope stability analysis. Eng Geology 135:83–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chung SG, Giao PH, Kim GJ, Leroueil S (2002) Geotechnical properties of Pusan clays. Can Geotech J 39(5):1050–1060CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chung SG, Ryu CK, Jo KY, Huh DY (2005) Geological and geotechnical characteristics of marine clays at the Busan new port. Mar Georesour Geotechnol 23(3):235–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chung SG, Kim SK, Kang YJ, Im JC, Prasad KN (2006) Failure of a breakwater founded on a thick normally consolidated clay layer. Geotechnique 56(6):393–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chung SG, Kim GJ, Kim MS, Ryu CK (2007) Undrained shear strength from field vane test on Busan clay. Mar Georesour Geotechnol 25(3–4):167–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chung SG, Hong YP, Lee JM, Min SC (2012) Evaluation of the undrained shear strength of Busan clay. KSCE J Civil Eng 16(5):733–741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Coutinho RQ (2007) Characterization and engineering properties of Recife soft clays-Brazil. In: Characterization and engineering properties of natural soils. Taylor & Francis Group, pp 2049–2099Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Crawford CB, Eden WJ (1966) A comparison of laboratory results with in situ properties of Leda clay. In: Proceedings of 6th international conference on soil mechanics and foundation engineering, vol 1, pp 31–55Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Devin SC, Sandford TC (1990) Stability of natural slopes in the Presumpscot formation. Maine Geological Survey, Open-File Report 90-24:75 pGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Doherty P, Gavin K (2011) Shaft capacity of open-ended piles in clay. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 137(11):1090–1102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Eden WJ, Bozozuk M (1962) Foundation failure of a silo on varved clay. Eng J 45(9):54–57Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Eden WJ, Crawford CB (1957) Geotechnical properties of Leda clay in the Ottawa area. In: Proceeding of the fourth international conference on soil mechanics and foundation engineering, London, pp 22–27Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Eden WJ, Poorooshasb HB (1968) Settlement observations at Kars Bridge. Can Geotech J 5(1):28–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Emdal A, Long M, Bihs A, Gylland A, Boylan N (2012) Characterisation of quick clay at Dragvoll, Trondheim, Norway. Geotech Eng J SEAGS AGSSEA 43(4):11–23Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Eslami A, Fellenius BH (1997) Pile capacity by direct CPT and CPTu methods applied to 102 case histories. Can Geotech J 34(6):886–904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Fung AKL, Foott R, Cheung RKH, Koutsoftas DC (1984) Practical conclusions from the geotechnical studies on offshore reclamation for the proposed Chek Lap Kok airport. Hong Kong Eng 12(6):17–26Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Gadinsky SP (1983) Evaluation of the engineering properties of clays with the piezocone penetrometer. Master Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Giao PH, Hien DH (2007) Geotechnical characterization of soft clay along a highway in the Red River Delta. J Lowl Technol Int 9(1):18–27Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Hanzawa H, Fuyaka T, Suzuki K (1990) Evaluation of engineering properties for an Ariake clay. Soils Found 30(4):11–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hanzawa H (1977) Field and laboratory behaviour of Khor Al-Zubair clay, Iraq. Soils Found 17(4):17–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Holmberg S (1984) A preliminary database concerning soft Bangkok clay. Danish Geotechnical Institute, 111pGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Indraratna B, Rujikiatkamjorn C, Balasubramaniam AS, Wijeyakulasuriya V (2005) Predictions and observations of soft clay foundations stabilized with geosynthetic drains and vacuum surcharge. Elsevier Geo-Engineering Book Series, vol 3. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 199–229Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Indraratna B, Rujikiatkamjorn C, Geng X, Kelly R, McIntosh G, Buys H (2010) Performance monitoring of vacuum preloading for stabilizing soft foundations for transportation and port infrastructure. In: Proceedings of the Indian geotechnical conference, Geotrendz, vol 3. IIT Bombay, Mumbai, pp 27–37Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Jamal MA, Raihan TM, Jimjali A, Azmi AK, Azmi J, Jamilah J (1997) Prediction and determination of undrained shear strength of soft clay at Bukit Raja. Pertanika J Sci Technol 5(1):111–126Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Karlsrud K (2012) Prediction of load-displacement behavior and capacity of axially loaded piles in clay based on analyses and interpretation of pile load test results. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Civil and Transport Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kietkajornkul C, Vasinvarthana V (1989) Influence of different vane types on undrained strength of soft Bangkok clay. Soils Found 29(2):146–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kim D, Kim KS, Ko S, Choi Y, Lee W (2012) Assessment of geotechnical variability of Songdo silty clay. Eng Geology 133:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Kim Huat B (1994) Behaviour of soft clay foundation beneath an embankment. Pertanika J Sci Technol 2(2):215–235Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Kong Y, Zhao J, Yao Y (2013) A failure criterion for cross-anisotropic soils considering microstructure. Acta Geotech 8(6):665–673CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Ladd CC, Foott R (1974) New design procedure for stability of soft clays. J Geotech Eng Div 100(7):763–786Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Ladd CC, Foote R, Ishihara K, Schlosser F, Poulos HG (1977) Stress-deformation and strength characteristics. In: Proceedings of 9th international conference on soil mechanics and foundation engineering, vol 2, Tokyo, pp 421–494Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Lambe TW, Whitman RV (1969) Soil mechanics. John Wiley & Sons, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Larsson R, Mattsson H (2003) Settlements and shear strength increase below embankments. Geotechnical Institute Report 63, Linköping, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Larsson R (2007) Long-term observations of consolidation processes—results from about fifty years monitoring of Swedish test embankments on soft clay. Swedish Geotech Institute Rep 70, Linköping, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Lunne T, Robertson PK, Powell JJM (1997) Cone penetration testing. Geotechnical PracticeGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Marchetti S (1980) In situ tests by flat dilatometer. J Geotech Eng Div 106(3):299–321Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Marques MES, Leroueil S, Almeida MSS (2004) Viscous behaviour of St-Roch-de-l’Achigan clay, Quebec. Can Geotech J 41(1):25–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Mayne PW, Mitchell JK (1988) Profiling of OCR in clays by field vane. Can Geotech J 25(1):150–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Mayne PW (2012) Quandary in geomaterial characterization: new versus the old. In: Shaking the foundations of geo-engineering education, pp 15–26Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Mesri G (1975) Discussion on new design procedures for stability of soft clays. J Geotech Eng 101(4):409–412Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Mohamad R, Chin CH (1990) Geotechnical design aspects for widening low embankments on soft grounds. In: PLUS seminar on geotechnical aspects of the north-south expressway, pp 177–185Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Mohamad R (1992) Engineering the north-south expressway on soft ground. Keynote Paper. Geotropika’92. Johore, MalaysiaGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Najjar SS, Gilbert RB (2009) Importance of lower-bound capacities in the design of deep foundations. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 135(7):890–900CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Nash DFT, Powell JJM, Lloyd IM (1992) Initial investigations of the soft clay test site at Bothkennar. Geotechnique 42(2):163–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Nguyen HQ (2006) Reanalysis of the settlement of a levee on soft bay mud. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Niarchos DG (2012) Analysis of consolidation around driven piles in overconsolidated clay. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Ohtsubo M, Higashi T, Kanayama M, Takayama M (2007) Depositional geochemistry and geotechnical properties of marine clays in the Ariake bay area, Japan. In: Proceedings of the second international workshop on characterization and engineering properties of natural soils, vol 3, pp 1893–1937Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Ortigao JAR, Sayao ASFJ (1994) Consolidation characteristics of a soft clay, In: Proceedings of settlement’94, vertical and horizontal deformations of foundations and embankments. Texas A&M University, College Station, ASCE Geotechnical Special Publication no. 40, vol 2, USA, pp 1415–1424Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Ozcoban S, Berilgen MM, Kilic H, Edil TB, Kutay Ozaydin I (2007) Staged construction and settlement of a dam founded on soft clay. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 133(8):1003–1016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Quigley RM, Haynes JE, Bohdanowicz A, Gwyn QHJ (1981) Geology, geotechnique, mineralogy and geochemistry, Leda clay from deep boreholes, Hawkesbury, Ontario. Ontario Geological Survey O.F. Report 5357Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Ramalho-Ortigao JA, Werneck ML, Lacerda WA (1983) Embankment failure on clay near Rio de Janeiro. J Geotech Eng 109(11):1460–1479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Seah TH (2006) Design and construction of ground improvement works at Suvarnabhumi Airport. Geotech Eng J Southeast Asian Geotech Soc 37:171–188Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Shibuya S, Tamrakar SB, Theramast N (2001) Geotechnical site characterization on engineering properties of Bangkok Clay. Geotech Eng 32(3):139–152Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Skempton AW (1969) The consolidation of clays by gravitational compaction. Q J Geol Soc 125(1–4):373–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Stavropoulou M, Xiroudakis G, Exadaktylos G (2010) Spatial estimation of geotechnical parameters for numerical tunneling simulations and TBM performance models. Acta Geotech 5(2):139–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Takemura J, Watabe Y, Tanaka M (2006) Characterization of alluvial deposits in Mekong Delta. In: Characterisation and engineering properties of natural soils. Proceedings of the second international workshop on characterisation and engineering properties of natural soils, Singapore, 29 November–1 December 2006, p 1805Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Tan TS, Phoon KK, Lee FH, Tanaka H, Locat J, Chong PT (2003) A characterisation study of Singapore lower marine clay. In: Characterisation and engineering properties of natural soils, Balkema, vol 1, pp 428–464Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Tanaka H, Locat J, Shibuya S, Soon TT, Shiwakoti DR (2001) Characterization of Singapore, Bangkok, and Ariake clays. Can Geotech J 38(2):378–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Tanaka H (2007) Geotechnical properties of Hachirogata clay. In: Characterisation and engineering properties of natural soils, pp 1831–1852Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Vitone C, Viggiani G, Cotecchia F et al (2013) Localized deformation in intensely fissured clays studied by 2D digital image correlation. Acta Geotech 8(3):247–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Wang Y, Au SK, Cao Z (2010) Bayesian approach for probabilistic characterization of sand friction angles. Eng Geol 114(3–4):354–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Wang Y, Cao Z (2013) Probabilistic characterization of young’s modulus of soil using equivalent samples. Eng Geol 159:106–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Yan WM, Yuen KV, Yoon GL (2009) Bayesian probabilistic approach for the correlations of compressibility index for marine clays. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 135(12):1932–1940CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Yuen KV (2010) Bayesian methods for structural dynamics and civil engineering. Wiley, SingaporeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Yuen KV (2010) Recent developments of Bayesian model class selection and applications in civil engineering. Struct Saf 32(5):338–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Yuen KV, Katafygiotis LS (2005) An efficient simulation method for reliability analysis of linear dynamical systems using simple additive rules of probability. Probab Eng Mech 20(1):109–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Yuen KV, Kuok SC (2011) Bayesian methods for updating dynamic models. Appl Mech Rev 64(1):Article number 010802Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Yuen KV, Mu HQ (2011) Peak ground acceleration estimation by linear and nonlinear models with reduced order Monte Carlo simulation. Comput Aided Civil Infrastruct Eng 26(1):30–47Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Zhang LM, Tang WH, Zhang LL, Zheng JG (2004) Reducing uncertainty of prediction from empirical correlations. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 130(5):526–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Zhang J, Zhang LM, Tang WH (2009) Bayesian framework for characterizing geotechnical model uncertainty. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 135(7):932–940CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Zhang LM, Dasaka SM (2010) Uncertainties in geologic profiles versus variability in pile founding depth. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 136(11):1475–1488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Zhang J, Tang WH, Zhang LM, Huang HW (2012) Characterising geotechnical model uncertainty by hybrid Markov Chain Monte Carlo simulation. Comput Geotech 43:26–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Science and TechnologyUniversity of MacauTaipaChina

Personalised recommendations