In-situ Tests
The StandardPenetrationTest (SPT), the ConePressureTip test (CPT), grain size distribution
can be used to estimate mechanical parametr used in mathematical soil models #SptDr
Relative Density vs Number of Blows Count (Absolute/Relative)
Correlation has been introduced between Number of Blows Count in SPT, the Relative
Density and overburden pressure , Meyerhof 1957 (units must be KPa)
the constants , leading to approximate relationship
Generally speaking the blow count is function of the overburden pressure and of the relative
density, so the use of the normalized (blow count at the depth with \sigma_{v}^{'}
allowing to compare values obtained at different depths) leads to the definition of the
following coefficient as a function of the grain size distribution
Ref. 3 propose the following expression for :
Relative Density vs Cone Tip Pressure
The cone tip pressure expressed by:
can be correlated to the relative density and to the lateral effective pressure
Jamiolkowsky
Lancelotta
The following parameters are relevant to normal consolidated quartzly sand
Liquefaction Potential
Liquafaction Potential are more extensivly treated HERE
Permeability
For Hydraulic Conductivity a stand alone topic ha been created click here to browse the topic
Shear Modulus
The Shear Modulus can be used to characterize the soil stiffness. It can be correlated to the
above mentioned in situ tests: SPT or CPT, or to the soil parameter and history stress level
SPT Correlation
From reference 8 , SPT value normalized to standard energy and 100 kPa overburden
pressure
which in the following is set as
From reference 9
where is normalized only for the energy content.
CPT Correlation
For sand 11
and for clay 10
where is the void ratio
Undrained Cohesion and "qc" Correlation
Undrained cohesion and tip load in CPT can be correlated using various theory as reported in
( 2 Cap 7.9 )
Soil Parameter
The general formulae for sandy soil can be expressed as:
The tabulated values of the parameters present in the above formula can be found in 2
(pag 346). The value is expressed as a function of the anisotropic initial stress state (the stress
is expressed for each cartesian plane) that can be too complex to determine. a simpler relation
is expressed as follows:
In the above relationship th eshear modulus is expressed as a function of the mean tension:
In presence of clay, due to influence of the cohesion the previous value has to be multiplied
by:
where PI is the Plasticity Index
Reference
[1] Meyerhof, G.G. 1957. Discussion on Research on determining the density of sands by
penetration testing. Proc. 4th Int. Conf. on Soil Mech. and Found. Engrg., Vol. 1: 110.
[2] Renato Lancelotta, Geotecnica Zanichelli 1987
[3] M. CUBRINOVSKI, K. ISHIHARA, "Correlation between penetration resistance and
relative density of sandy soils"
[4] ROBERT E. K., JAMES K. M., Arias Intensity Assessment of Liquefaction Test Sites on
the East Side of San Francisco Bay Affected by the Loma Prieta, California, Earthquake of
17 October 1989”, http://walrus.wr.usgs.gov/geotech/arias/
[5] M.S. Nataraja, H. S. Gill, . Ocean Waves-Induced Liquefaction Analysis. Journal of
Geotechnical Engineering, April 1983 Vol. 109 No4.
[6] R. B. Seed, K. O. Cetin, et alii, RECENT ADVANCES IN SOIL LIQUEFACTION
ENGINEERING:A UNIFIED AND CONSISTENT FRAMEWORK, 26th Annual ASCE Los
Angeles Geotechnical Spring Seminar, Keynote Presentation, H.M.S. Queen Mary, Long
Beach, California, April 30, 2003.
[7] Justine Odong, Evaluation of Empirical Formulae for Determination of Hydraulic
Conductivity based on Grain-Size Analysis, Journal of American Science, 3(3), 2007,
[8] Ohta, Y. and N. Goto, 1976, “Estimation of S-Wave Velocity in terms of Characteristic
Indices of Soil”, Butsuri-Tanki, Vol. 29, No. 4, pp. 34-41.
[9] Imai, T. and K. Tonouchi, 1982, “Correlation of N-value with S-Wave Velocity and
Shear Modulus”, Proceedings, 2nd European Symposium on Penetration Testing,
Amsterdam, pp. 57-72.
[10] Mayne, P. W. and G. J. Rix, 1993, “Gmax-qc relationship for Clays”, Geotechnical
Testing Journal, ASTM, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 54-60.
[11] Rix, G. J. and K. H. Stokoe, 1991, “Correlation of Initial Tangent Modulus and Cone
Penetration Resistance”, Calibration Chamber Testing, International Symposium on
Calibration Chamber Testing, A. B. Huang, ed., Elsevier Publishing, New York, pp. 351-362.
-- RobertoBernetti - 16 Feb 2010
Edit | Attach | Print version | History: r13 < r12 < r11 < r10 < r9 | Backlinks | Raw
View | Raw edit | More topic actions
Topic revision: r13 - 13 Mar 2011 - 08:56:34 - RobertoBernetti
Soil friction angle
Geotechdata.info - Updated 14.12.2013
Soil friction angle is a shear strength parameter of soils. Its definition is derived from the
Mohr-Coulomb failure criterion and it is used to describe the friction shear resistance of soils
together with the normal effective stress.
In the stress plane of Shear stress-effective normal stress, the soil friction angle is the angle of
inclination with respect to the horizontal axis of the Mohr-Coulomb shear resistance line.
Typical values of soil friction angle for different soils according to USCS
Some typical values of soil friction angle are given below for different USCS soil types at
normally consolidated condition unless otherwise stated. These values should be used only as
guidline for geotechnical problems; however, specific conition of each engineering problem
often needs to be considered for an appropriate choice of geotechnical parameters.
Soil friction angle
[°]
Description USCS Reference
Specific
min max
value
Well graded gravel, sandy gravel, with little
GW 33 40 [1],[2],
or no fines
Poorly graded gravel, sandy gravel, with little
GP 32 44 [1],
or no fines
(GW,
Sandy gravels - Loose 35 [3 cited in 6]
GP)
(GW,
Sandy gravels - Dense 50 [3 cited in 6]
GP)
Silty gravels, silty sandy gravels GM 30 40 [1],
Clayey gravels, clayey sandy gravels GC 28 35 [1],
Well graded sands, gravelly sands, with little
SW 33 43 [1],
or no fines
Well-graded clean sand, gravelly sands -
SW - - 38 [3 cited in 6]
Compacted
Well-graded sand, angular grains - Loose (SW) 33 [3 cited in 6]
Well-graded sand, angular grains - Dense (SW) 45 [3 cited in 6]
Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, with
SP 30 39 [1], [2],
little or no fines
Poorly-garded clean sand - Compacted SP - - 37 [3 cited in 6]
Uniform sand, round grains - Loose (SP) 27 [3 cited in 6]
Uniform sand, round grains - Dense (SP) 34 [3 cited in 6]
Sand SW, SP 37 38 [7],
Loose sand (SW, SP) 29 30 [5 cited in 6]
Medium sand (SW, SP) 30 36 [5 cited in 6]
Dense sand (SW, SP) 36 41 [5 cited in 6]
Silty sands SM 32 35 [1],
Silty clays, sand-silt mix - Compacted SM - - 34 [3 cited in 6]
Silty sand - Loose SM 27 33 [3 cited in 6]
Silty sand - Dense SM 30 34 [3 cited in 6]
Clayey sands SC 30 40 [1],
Calyey sands, sandy-clay mix - compacted SC 31 [3 cited in 6]
Loamy sand, sandy clay Loam SM, SC 31 34 [7],
Inorganic silts, silty or clayey fine sands,
ML 27 41 [1],
with slight plasticity
Inorganic silt - Loose ML 27 30 [3 cited in 6]
Inorganic silt - Dense ML 30 35 [3 cited in 6]
Inorganic clays, silty clays, sandy clays of
CL 27 35 [1],
low plasticity
Clays of low plasticity - compacted CL 28 [3 cited in 6]
Organic silts and organic silty clays of low
OL 22 32 [1],
plasticity
Inorganic silts of high plasticity MH 23 33 [1],
Clayey silts - compacted MH 25 [3 cited in 6]
Silts and clayey silts - compacted ML 32 [3 cited in 6]
Inorganic clays of high plasticity CH 17 31 [1],
Clays of high plasticity - compacted CH 19 [3 cited in 6]
Organic clays of high plasticity OH 17 35 [1],
ML, OL,
Loam 28 32 [7],
MH, OH
ML, OL,
Silt Loam 25 32 [7],
MH, OH
ML, OL,
Clay Loam, Silty Clay Loam CL, MH, 18 32 [7],
OH, CH
OL, CL,
Silty clay 18 32 [7],
OH, CH
CL, CH,
Clay 18 28 [7],
OH, OL
Peat and other highly organic soils Pt 0 10 [2],
Correlation between SPT-N value, friction angle, and
relative density
Correlation between SPT-N value and friction angle and Relative density (Meyerhoff
1956)
SPT N3 Relative Density Friction angle
Soi packing
[Blows/0.3 m - 1 ft] [%] [°]
<4 Very loose < 20 < 30
4 -10 Loose 20 - 40 30 - 35
10 - 30 Compact 40 - 60 35 - 40
30 - 50 Dense 60 - 80 40 - 45
> 50 Very Dense > 80 > 45
REFERENCES
1. Swiss Standard SN 670 010b, Characteristic Coefficients of soils, Association of
Swiss Road and Traffic Engineers
2. JON W. KOLOSKI, SIGMUND D. SCHWARZ, and DONALD W. TUBBS,
Geotechnical Properties of Geologic Materials, Engineering Geology in Washington,
Volume 1, Washington Division of Geology and Earth Resources Bulletin 78, 1989,
Link
3. Carter, M. and Bentley, S. (1991). Correlations of soil properties. Penetech Press
Publishers, London.
4. Meyerhof, G. (1956). Penetration tests and bearing capacity of cohesionless soils. J
Soils Mechanics and Foundation Division ASCE, 82(SM1).
5. Peck, R., Hanson,W., and Thornburn, T. (1974). Foundation Engineering Handbook.
Wiley, London.
6. Obrzud R. & Truty, A.THE HARDENING SOIL MODEL - A PRACTICAL
GUIDEBOOK Z Soil.PC 100701 report, revised 31.01.2012
7. Minnesota Department of Transportation, Pavement Design, 2007
Citation :
Geotechdata.info, Angle of Friction, http://geotechdata.info/parameter/angle-of-friction.html
(as of September 14.12.2013).
