1985 residual strength of clays in landslides skempton ge350101

7/21/2019 1985 Residual Strength of Clays in Landslides Skempton GE350101

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/1985-residual-strength-of-clays-in-landslides-skempton-ge350101 1/16

S-ON, A. W. (198.5). G&technique 35, No. 1. 3-18

Residual strength of clays in landslides, folded strata

and the laboratory*

The post-peak drop in drained shear strength of an

overconsolidated clay may be considered as taking

place in two stages. First, at relatively small displace-

ments, the strength decreases to the ‘fully softened’ or

‘critical state’ value, owing to an increase in water

content (dilatancy). Second, after much larger dis-

placements, the strength falls to the residual value,

owing to reorientation of platy clay minerals parallelto the direction of shearing. If the clay fraction is less

than about 25 the second stage scarcely comes into

operation; the clay behaves much like a sand or silt

with angles of residual shearing resistance typically

greater than 20”. Conversely, when the clay fraction is

about SO , residual strength is controlled almost en-

tirely by sliding friction of the clay minerals, and

further increase in clay fraction has little effect. The

angles of residual shearing resistance of the three most

commonly occurring clay minerals are approximately

15” for kaolinite, 10” for illite or clay mica and 5” for

montmorillonite. When the clay fraction lies between

25 and 50 there is a ‘transitional’ type of be-

haviour, residual strength being dependent on the

percentage of clay particles as well as on their nature.

The post-peak drop in strength of a normally-

consolidated clay is due only to particle reorientation.

Measurements of strength on natural shear surfaces

agree, within practical limits of variation, with values

derived from back analysis of reactivated landslides.

This ‘field residual’ strength can be recovered by mul-

tiple reversal shear box tests on cut-plane samples, but

in high clay fraction materials it is typically somewhat

higher than the strength measured in ring shear tests.

Residual strength is little affected by variation in the

slow rates of displacement encountered in reactivated

landslides and in the usual laboratory tests, but atrates faster than about lOOmm/min qualitative

changes take place in the pattern of behaviour. A

substantial gain in strength is followed, with increasing

displacement, by a fall to a minimum value. In clays

and low clay fraction silts this minimum is not less

than the ‘slow’ or ‘static’ residual, but in clayey silts(with clay fractions around 15-25 according to

tests currently in progress) the minimum can be as low

as one-half of the static value.

On peut admettre que la chute qui suit la valeur de pit

dans la resistance au cisaillement dans l’etat drain&d’une a&e surconsolidee a lieu en deux &apes. Tout

* Special lecture given to the British Geotechnical

Society, at the Institution of Civil Engineers, on 6June 1984.

t Imperial College of Science and Technology.

A. W. SKEMIlONt

d’abord, pour des d&placements relativement petits, la

resistance decroit jusqu’a la valeur correspondant a

I’Ctat critique, a cause d’une augmentation de la

teneur en eau (dilatance). Puis, apres des

deplacements beaucoup plus considtrables, la

resistance tombe a la valeur residuehe, a cause de la

reorientation des mineraux d’argile en forme de feuil-

lets paralleles a la direction du cisaillement. Si lafraction d’argile est inftrieure a environ de 25 la

deuxieme &ape apparait rarement et I’argile se com-

Porte a peu prts comme du sable ou du limon avec des

angles de resistance rtsiduelle au cisaillement typique-

ment suptrieurs B 20”. Inversement, avec une fraction

d’argile d’environ 50 la resistance rtsiduelle est

rtgie presqu’entierement par le frottement glissant des

mintraux argileux et une augmentation ulterieure de

la fraction d’argile n’a que trts peu d’effet. Les angles

de resistance rtsiduelle au cisaillement des trois

mineraux argileux les plus souvent trouves sont ap-

proximativement 15” pour la kaolinite, 10” pour l’illite

ou I’argile mica&e et 5” pour le montmorillonite.

Lorsque la fraction d’argile est comprise entre 25 et

50 il y a un type pour ainsi dire transitoire de

comportement, puisque la resistance residuelle depend

du pourcentage de particules d’argile aussi bien que de

leur nature. La chute de resistance qui suit la valeur de

pit est due exclusivement 9 la reorientation des par-

ticules. Dans les limites pratiques de variation les

mesures de la resistance effect&es sur des surfacesnaturelles de cisaillement s’accordent avec les valeurs

obtenues a partir de l’analyse a posteriori de glisse-

ments de terrains reactives. Cette resistance residuelle

in situ peut &tre retrouvee par des essais de bone de

cisaillement alternatifs multiples effect&s sur des

Cchantillons a plans coupes; mais dans des mattriauxayant une grande fraction d’argile elle est typiquement

un peu superieure a la resistance mesurte a l’aide

d’appareils de cisaillement circulaire par torsion. La

resistance rdsiduelle n’est que legbrement affect&e par

des variations dans les vitesses lentes de dtplacement

qu’on trouve dans les glissements de terrains reactives

et dans les essais habituels de laboratoire, mais a des

vitesses superieures a environ lOOmm/min des

changements qualitatifs ont lieu dans la forme ducomportement. Un gain appreciable de resistance est

suivi, au fur et a mesure que le d&placement aug-mente, par une chute a la valeur minimale. Dans les

argiles et les limons a basse fraction d’argile ce

minimum n’est pas inferieur a la valeur residuelle

lente ou statique, mais dans les limons argileux, avecdes fractions d’argile d’environ 15-25 selon des

essais en cours actuellement Ie minimum peut etre

aussi bas que la moitie de la valeur statique.

3



S-ON

Residual z N-C peak

Low (e g. < 20%) clay fraction

INIRODUCIION

In the Rankine Lecture of 1964 the Authordrew attention to the nature and engineeringsignificance of residual strength. Much has beenlearnt during the past 20 years, and the presentlecture is an attempt to summarize our know-

ledge of this subject.Residual strength is the minimum constant

value attained (at slow rates of shearing) at largedisplacements. The displacements necessary to

cause a drop in strength to the residual value areusually far greater than those corresponding tothe development of peak strength and the fullysoftened (critical state) strength in over-

consolidated clays. Consequently, residualstrength is generally not relevant to first-timeslides and other stability problems in previously

unsheared clays and clay fills, but the strength ofa clay will be at or close to the residual on slipsurfaces in old landslides or soliflucted slopes, in

bedding shears in folded strata, in sheared jointsor faults and after an embankment failue.Therefore, whenever such pre-existing shearsurfaces occur the residual strength must beknown, as it will exert a controlling influence onengineering design.

DEVELOPMENT OF RESIDUAL STRENGTH

The post-peak drop in drained strength of anintact overconsolidated clay may be consideredas being due, firstly, to an increase in water

content (dilatancy) and, secondly, to reorienta-tion of clay particles parallel to the direction ofshearing. At the end of the first stage the ‘fullysoftened’ or ‘critical state’ strength is reached.At larger displacements, when reorientation is

complete, the strength falls to and remains con-stant at the residual value (Fig. l(a)).

In normally consolidated clays, which consoli-

date when sheared (to displacements a littlebeyond the peak) the post-peak drop in strengthis due entirely to particle reorientation.

The effects of particle reorientation are felt, toany appreciable extent, only in clays containing

platy clay minerals and having a clay fraction(percentage by weight of particles smaller than0.002 mm) exceeding about 20-25 . Silt andsandy clays with lower clay fractions exhibit

nearly the classical ‘critical state’ type of be-

haviour in which, even at large displacements,the strength is scarcely less than the normallyconsolidated peak value, and the post-peak dropin strength of overconsolidated material of thiskind is due almost entirely to water content

increase (Fig. l(b)).The change from ‘sand’ to ‘clay’ type of be-

haviour is clearly demonstrated by a series ofring shear tests on sand-bentonite mixtures (Fig.2). As will be seen later, the same pattern isfound in natural clays.

There is ample evidence from the field, as wellas the laboratory, for an increased water contentin sheared overconsolidated clays. London Clay,for example, has a water content of about 34 atand near slip surfaces, compared with 30 inneighbouring unsheared material (Skempton,1964). A still larger increase has recently beenobserved in the heavily overconsolidated Siwalik

strata at the Kalabagh Dam site where watercontents in tectonically sheared claystone arearound 23 in contrast with values of about 15 inunsheared material having the same clay frac-tion of anoroximatelv 60 .



RFSIDUAL STFtF NGTH OF CLAYS 5

Orientation of platy clay minerals in shear

zones and on slip surfaces has been observedunder the microscope in samples from the field,

as at Walton’s Wood (Fig. 3, from Skempton &Petley, 1967a) and several other landslides

(Morgenstern & Tchalenko, 1967), and also inlaboratory shear tests (Lupini, Skinner & Vau-

ghan, 1981).

Plasticity index PI

critical state)

Eu zo- -----e-o

EC

Clay fraction CF. %

_J

100

Normally consolidated at o’ = 350 kPa

PVCF = 1.55

Fig. 2. Ring shear tests on sand-bentonite mixtures

(after Lupini, Skinner & Vaughan, 1981)

A

I 1

0 Clay pellet

,\”. organicncluslon

Z Partlcle orlentatlon

Fig. 3. Fabric of shear zone and slip surface at Waf-

ton’s Wood

Displacements at va r ious stag es of shearing

Peak strengths are attained at small strainscorresponding to displacements of the order1 mm in shear box or ring shear tests on over-

consolidated clays, and after rather more move-

ment for normally consolidated clays: see Table1. Water content changes (softening in over-consolidated and consolidation in normally con-

solidated clays) seem to be essentially completeat displacements generally smaller than 10 mm;

often about 5 mm is sufficient (Petley, 1966).Ring shear tests at normal effective pressures

up to about 600 kPa indicate that displacements

usually exceeding 100 mm, and in some casesexceeding 500 mm, are necessary before thestrength of an intact clay falls to a final steadyresidual value, represented by an angle of shear-ing resistance & However, strengths approach-

ing close to this final value, for example to astrength represented by &+ l”, are reached atdisplacements ranging from about 20 to 50

of those required for the full drop to the residual

(see Fig. 4 and data given by Lupini, 1980).At higher pressures it would be expected that

particle orientation, and therefore the fall toresidual strength, is completed at smaller dis-

placements. This idea receives support fromtests on a clay shale by Sinclair & Brooker(1967). With cr’ = 100 kPa the strength was still

falling after displacements of 6Omm, but whencr’ = 2000 kPa the residual was reached at about

25 mm.

Less information is available on the strength

characteristics of structural discontinuities inclays, such as joints and bedding planes, which

have not been sheared in nature. Tests on joint

surfaces in the S. Barbara Clay (of Pliocene age,near Florence) show a reduced peak strengthcompared with that of the intact clay, and theresidual is attained at displacements of 30-40 mm (Fig. 5). In tests on London Clay jointsurfaces all the cohesion had been lost and theangle of shearing resistance was within 3” of the

residual after 8 mm displacement (Skempton &

Table 1. Typical displacements at various stages of

shear in clays having CF>30

Stage Displacement: mm

GC N-C

Peak 0.5-3 3-6

Rate of volume changeapproximately zero 4-10At &,+1” 30-200Residual 6, 100-500

Intact clays, with a’<600 kPa.



6 SKEMlTON

Sample 188L n = 525 kPa (p, = 900 kPa)

LL = 62 PL = 26 CF = 47

Rate of dlsplacemenl 0.01 mm/mln

b 0.3

2 Residual r/u = 0 152 -

o-2@r = 8 6”

---__. - ____--_--_

---•

01q, = 10.6” Q = 9.6”

200 300

Displacement. mm

Fig. 4. Kahbagh ring shear test, August 1983

S.Barbara Clay

w = 51 LL = 76 PL = 43 CF = 37

I I

10 20 30 40

Displacement mm

20

15:

10..

5a

0

He. 5. Reversal shear box tests on intact day and on joint surfaces (from

CGebresi & Maafredini, 1973)

Petley, 1967a). A still sharper reduction in

strength was found in the shaly Lower OxfordClay tested parallel to bedding, though probablynot precisely on a bedding plane. Here the angle

of shearing resistance fell to within 2” of the

residual after displacements of only 4 mm andalmost to the residual itself at little more thanl(r2Omm (Burland, Longworth & Moore,1977). All the tests mentioned in this paragraphwere made at pressures not exceeding 600 kPa.They indicate the ‘brittleness’ of natural frac-tures in clays.

FIELD RESIDUAL STRENGTH

When tests are satisfactorily carried out onsamples containing a fully developed slip orshear surface the residual strength is recoveredat virtually zero displacement, since all watercontent changes and particle orientation effectshave already been brought about by the shear-ing movements in nature. The strength on suchshear surfaces is here defined as the ‘field re-

sidual’ value. In principle it should be the sameas the strength calculated from back analysis of

a landslide in which movement has been reacti-vated along a pre-existing slip surface and, as weshall see, this identity has in fact been estab-

lished within practical limits of accuracy.Examples of ‘slip surface tests’ are shown inFig. 6 (Skempton & Petley, 1967b). The testswere made in the shear box apparatus, care

being taken to locate the slip surface as exactlyas possible in the plane of the box and toarrange the sample so that shearing follows thenatural direction of movement. It will be noted

that in second runs of the tests, after reversingthe travel of the box, the strengths return closelyto the first-run values. The ‘trough’ in the early

stages of the second runs is characteristic ofreversal shear box tests, although it may belargely r wholly eliminated by unloading thesample during the backward travel, an improve-ment in technique introduced later than the dateof these particular tests.



RESIDUAL STRENGTH OF CLAYS 7

Before proceeding to examine case recordsrelating to the determination of field residual

strengths, two points must be mentioned. First,

in normal laboratory practice, tests to measureresidual strength are made at slow rates of dis-

placement not exceeding about 0.01 rnm/min toavoid the possibility of generating unknown

pore pressures. However, it is demonstratedlater in this lecture that over the entire range of

rates of movement recorded in reactivated land-slides residual strength is unlikely to vary by

more than *S from the value correspondingto the usual laboratory testing rates. A directcomparison can therefore be made betweenlaboratory and back analysis strengths.

The second point concerns stability analysis.Ideally the reactivated landslide should have a

factor of safety of 1.0, i.e. it should be movingslowly on a pre-existing slip surface, and theshape of the slip surface and the relevantpiezometric levels should be known. It is thenpossible to calculate the average normal effec-

tive stress and the average shear stress acting onthe slip surface from a two-dimensional analysis,using the method of Morgenstern & Price

(1965) or Sarma (1973). Finally, a correction isapplied to allow for the strength developed onthe sides of the actual three-dimensional slide.This amounts to a reduction in shear stress given

by the factor

1 KDIB

where D and B are the average depth and widthof the sliding mass, and K is an earth pressurecoefficient. In the cases considered here K is

taken as 0.5 and the correction is typically about

5 .

Pll WE1

60 LL 75 PL = 29 CF = 58

- First run -- Second run

mB 0.002 mmlmln

‘-‘40-TA

sr=

31.0Sr = 24.8

E \d kPa

” -- 172

I 103

6 20 sr = 15-2

69

I 4

0 2 4 6 8

Dlsplacemenr mm

I I

0 2 4 6 6

Displacement mm

Fig. 6. Slip surface tests on Atherlield Clay from Fig. 7. Slip surface test at Walton’s Wood landslide,

Sevenoaks Weald escarpment, 1 6 September 1962

Walton’s Wood landslide

The history of field residual strength begins in

September 1962 when the first successful slip

surface test was made on a sample from Wal-ton’s Wood (Fig. 7) and found to give an angleof shearing resistance in reasonably good agree-ment with a conventional back analysis of this

old but still active landslide. Moreover, thestrength lay far below the peak and the fully

softened values for intact samples. Further testsand more refined stability analysis gave results

(Fig. 8) proving, within the limits of accuracyexpected from field work, that slip surface testsand back analysis yielded the same strength.

During this investigation, also, particle orien-tation on the slip surface was observed in thinsections under the polarizing microscope, and in

addition the residual strength was recovered(approximately) by multiple reversal shear box

tests on intact clay.A detailed description of this case record is

available (Early & Skempton, 1972), prelimi-

nary accounts having been given by Skempton(1964) and by Skempton & Petley (1967a).Clear evidence existed that the landslide had

undergone large displacements in the past, andduring 3 years preceding investigations it movedabout 1 m. The slip surfaces were in colluvialclay derived from Upper Carboniferous mud-stone, with kaolin&e as the predominant claymineral.

M4 landsli des near Swindon

Two quite large landslides were reactivated bycuttings excavated for the M4 motorway, nearSwindon, in the winter 1969-70. A section

through the slide at Burderop Wood is shown inFig. 9. The other slide, half a mile away, nearHodson village, had identical geological condi-

tions and closely resembled Burderop slide in

Sample 126/l 0

d = 59 kPa

w = 27



8 SKFtMFION

Colluwum from Carbontferous mudstone

LL = 57 PL = 27 CF = 70

SIIP surface tests . Back analysis

Normal effective stress (T’. kPa

Fig. 8. Walton’s Wood landslide: field residual strength

Distance m

0 50 100 150 200 250r

NNW ssw

x slip surface- 200

I Pwometer

600 - - Top of Gault Upper - 180

1 Plerometrlc levelPrOfIle ,n March ,970

Greensand

Q GWL Slope indlcalor

E= 500. Slip observed

an excavationZE for remedlal works

pm

100 0I

100 200

1 - 80300 400 500 600 700 800 900

Distance ft

Fig 9 Burderop Wood landslide

other respects. The material involved was col-

luvium derived from Gault Clay with a few smallfragments of Greensand and pellets of un-

worked Gault.During remedial works in 1970, block sam-

ples were taken for slip surface tests from threelocations at Burderop. At another positionnearby, organic matter of a woody nature wasfound just below the slip surface. This gave aradiocarbon age of 12 600 years, showing thatthe landslide had originally taken place in a lateperiod of the last (Devensian) glaciation whensevere periglacial climatic conditions prevailed

in central and southern England.The slip surface tests were carried out at

Portsmouth Polytechnic by the Author’s formerresearch assistant Dr D. J. Petley and are de-tailed in an unpublished report (Skempton,

1971). They gave good results with an unusuallysmall scatter (Fig. 10).

At both sites the slip surfaces were welldefined by slip indicators, inclinometers and vis-

ual observation, and groundwater levels(checked by piezometric readings) were knownwhile movements still continued. Back analyses

of the two slides (Skempton, 1972) differed byabout 0.7” in the angle of shearing resistanceand the slip surface tests gave an angle not morethan about 1” above the average back analysisvalue.

Bury HillRegrading of the slope at the Bury Hill site

led to a reactivation in 1960 of a landslide whichhad previously moved between about 1938 and1955 in a thick mantle of soliflucted Etruria




Gault Clay

LL = 64 PL = 29 CF = 47

Burderop

Hodson Iback analysis

0 Shp surface tests

Normal effectwe stress d: kPa

Fig. 10. Field residual strengths or M4 laadslides near Swindon 1970-71

Table 2. Field residual strength of some English clays

Site

Walton’s Wood

J ackfield >

Bury Hill

Various

M4, near SwindonSevenoaks bypass

various

Stratum

Upper Carboniferous

Etnria Marl

Upper Lias

GaultAthetfield

London Clay

Water

in sheal

ZO”e

29

21

30

29

3635

34

Index properties

(average values)

60

64

6475

80

Marl. Investigations made in 1968 (Hutchinson,Somerville & Petley, 1973) enabled the slipsurface and piezometric levels to be determined,and four sets of slip surface tests were carried

out. The results showed some scatter, but threeof the four samples gave reasonably consistentstrengths corresponding to an angle of shearingresistance of about 13-6” at the average normal

effective pressure of 97 kPa acting on the slipsurface. This result has to be compared with12.0” as the best estimate from back analysis,

but there are difficulties in figuring the piezo-metric levels at the time of the 1960 failure, andthe material is variable. The difference, of about12 , is therefore considered not to be of greatsignificance. In Table 2, summarizing data onfield residual strength, the angle of residualshearing resistance deduced from this case re-cord is taken as 12.5” at 100 kPa with a curva-ture of the envelope as given by the slip surface

tests.

London Clay

The first line relating field residual strengthand normal effective pressure for London Clay

PL

27

28

2929

29

CF

70

36

52

52

4758

55

PIICF

0.4

0.6

0.6

0.7

0.80.8

0.9

150 kPa

= tan ’ (s/u)at the following

cr’ values: deg

12.8

12.1

9.9

11.1

11.8

was based on slip surface tests from sites atGuildford and Dedham, and on a single back

analysis of a reactivated landslide in a railwaycutting at Sudbury Hill (Skempton & Petley,1967a). However, at the small average pressurein this slip (30 kPa) a considerable percentagedifference existed between back analysis and thetest results.

Nine years later Hutchinson & Gostelow(1976) presented data from analysis of slips in

an abandoned London Clay cliff at Hadleigh

which confirmed the Sudbury Hill result andextended the range of back analysis to 50 kPa.An improved field residual envelope could thenbe drawn, much as in Fig. 11, but still with onlythe few low pressure Guildford slip surface testsaffording a (poor) comparison with back analysisstrengths. However, the situation greatly im-proved in 1978 when Bromhead published anal-yses of several rather deep-seated slips at Herne

Bay, with normal effective pressures of lOO-150 kPa (Bromhead, 1978). As will be seen,these new results strongly support the best-fitline drawn through the slip surface test points

and despite the scatter (to be expected with tests



10 SKEMITON

loo-

London Clay LL = 80 PL = 29 CF = 55

o GuIldford

Tests D Dedhamon

Back. Sudbury HalI

v WalthamstowSllP

analysis Hadleigh

surface0 Warden Point . Herne Bay

M Wraysbury

100 150 200

Normal ef fectw stress u’ kPa

Fig. 11. Field residual strength for London Clay

from different sites) there can be little doubtthat the tests and back analysis are measuringessentially the same strength.

Summary of the comparisons

A statistical summary of the comparisons be-

tween back analysis and slip surface test resultsis given in Table 3. This shows that while thereis a tendency for the tests to give slightly higherstrengths, on average by about 0.5” in the angle

of shearing resistance, the difference is withinthe limits of variation. Thus the conclusion is

reached that back analysis of reactivated land-slides and slip surface tests (at the relevanteffective pressure) both give the field residual

strength.It also follows from the statistics in Table 3

that, even in the almost ideal conditions of these

case records, where pore pressures are knownwith reasonable certainty and problems such asthe effects of progressive failure are absent,

stability analysis and laboratory tests cannot be

expected to yield results with an accuracy betterthan about &lo .

Table 3. Comparison between back analysis of reac-

tivated landslides and slip surface test results (14 case

recolds)

Parameter Angle of A&l&:shearing

resistance:

deg

Mean 4 from analysis 12.8

Mean 4 from tests 13.4Mean A+ +0.6 +4.5

Standard deviation in A+ Zt1.2 *9Maximum A+ +2.5 +17.5Minimum A& -2.2 -17

Other clays

Granted the above conclusion, it is possible to

collect values of field residual strength fromseveral other investigations. Three will be men-tioned here; a unique set of results from theSiwalik claystones is separately discussed.

One of the earliest examples of back analysis

of a reactivated landslide, at Jackfield, was pub-lished by Henkel & Skempton in 1955, beforethe subject of residual strength was understood.However, the analysis is sound and provides

data on a clay having a smaller clay fraction thanis common in landslide studies.

Slip surface tests on Atherfield Clay from

Sevenoaks Weald escarpment have been shownin Fig. 6. They are three of a total of seven suchtests measuring field residual strength at pres-sures from 70 kPa to 400 kPa.

The third clay in this context is the Upper

Lias, for which Chandler (1982) gives valuableinformation on stability analysis and other de-tails from eight different sites, covering pres-

sures from 12 kPa to 120 kPa.

Results for these and the four clays previouslydiscussed are summarized in Table 2.

Curvature of envelope

For most clays the relation between residual

strength and normal effective pressure is non-linear. The strength s at any given pressure u’ isconveniently expressed by the secant angle ofshearing resistance 4 where

tan 4 = s/u’

Values of 4 for (r’ = 50 kPa, 100 kPa and150 kPa are given in Table 2.

When comparing one clay with another it isbest to fix on a ‘standard’ pressure, such as100 kPa. Thus the value of & at u’ = 100 kPa




A London Clay

0 Llas

I

each point

6 an average

OGaullotzor3

analyses

A@ = @ ,nrl d,, (mean A* = 1.5”)

Fig. 12. Difference between ring shear and field residual strength

can be taken as a characteristic parameter of a

clay.Curvature of the envelope can be expressed

by the ratio of tan 4 at a pressure (T’ to the‘standard’ tan 4 at 100 kPa. Mean values of thisratio for the clays listed in Table 2 are as

follows:

u’: kPa 25 50 100 150

tan +/tan6 loo 1.12 1.07 1.00 0.96

However, there are considerable variations inthe degree of curvature between one clay and

another.For design purposes it is often useful to take a

‘best-fit’ linear envelope over the range of pres-sures involved, in the form

s=c+a’tanb

COMPARISON OF FIELD RESIDUAL AND

RING SHEAR TESTS

Ring shear tests in the machine described byBishop, Green, Garga, Andresen & Brown

(1971) tend to give residual strengths, for highclay fraction materials, which are somewhatlower than the field values. Typically the differ-

ence is 1” or 2” in the angle of shearing resis-tance, as shown in Fig. 12 where comparisons

are made with back analysis results. Chandler(1984) summarizes the data for Lias and Lon-don Clay, and a ring shear test on Gault fromthe M4 landslide at Burderop is quoted by Lu-pini (1980). At Bury Hill a ring shear result layas much below the back analysis strengths as theslip surfaces tests lay above but, as previously

mentioned, the clay at this site is variable.Various suggestions can be made in explana-

tion, mostly based on the idea that shearing inthe ring test is more concentrated or intensethan in landslides, but the question is still unre-

solved, especially since Bromhead & Curtis

(1983) indicate that with a different ring shearmachine agreement with field residual strength

is obtained in London Clay, despite the fact thatthis machine and Bishop’s give almost identi-cal results on two samples of Gault Clay fromFolkestone Warren (Bromhead, 1979).

RELATION BETWEEN RESIDUAL STRENGTHAND CLAY FRACTION

It is clearly a matter of great interest to obtain

a relationship between residual strength and clayfraction for a natural material covering a wide

range of particle size but having essentially thesame clay mineralogy throughout. This is nowclose to being achieved by tests on Siwalik clay-stones and siltstones in Pakistan.

iwaliks

Investigations at Mangla and a neighbouringsite at Jari, and currently in progress at the

proposed Kalabagh Dam on the Indus, providedata from within mutually similar suites of ma-terials. At these locations rather thick beds ofsandstone alternate with finer-grained beds of

claystone and siltstone, ranging from the top ofthe Middle Siwaliks (late Pliocene) at Kalabaghinto the Upper Siwaliks (early Pleistocene) at

Mangla and Jari. The strata are heavily over-

consolidated freshwater deposits and, owing totectonic folding, most of the claystones containbedding shears while thrust joints (many of themsheared) characterize the siltstones.

Illite and kaolinite are the dominant clay min-erals, with subordinate montmorillonite, and thePI/CF ratios vary between 0.5 and 0.8 with aslight tendency for lower values at Kalabagh

than at Mangla and Jari. Typically there is acalcite content of about 5 .

After many attempts to obtain satisfactoryshear surface samples from these hard materials,seven sets of shear box tests were successfully



12 SKEWETON

carried out at the Mangla laboratory in 19667. Results for a high clay fraction bedding

shear are shown in Figs 13 and 14. One testshows a small peak, as the shear surface couldnot be aligned perfectly with the plane of the

box, but a steady minimum strength is attainedafter only 5 mm displacement. In the two othertests the shear surface (field residual) strength is

Sample 64144

LL = 68 PL = 28 CF = 58

0 200 400 600 800

o’ kPa

@&Sample 64138 S’hear surf ce

Fig. 13. Jari Dam: left abutment, shear zone A

:

Sample 6144

LL = 68 PL = 28 CF = 58

150 - ~,rst run ---Second run

0.0025 mmlmr

u’ = 830

i,oo_/yK-T+

4 6 8 10

Dtsplacement: mm

Fig. 14. Shear surface tests on Jari Dam, shear zone Fig. 15. Shear surface tests on Jari Valley no. 3, thrust

A, January 1 6 shear joint, November 1965

recovered from the start, as was the case withmost of the other samples.

Tests on a thrust shear joint in siltstone areshown in Fig. 15. The displacement on this jointwas quite small. Nevertheless the tests indicate

that the residual strength has already been de-veloped in nature, presumably to be accounted

for by the low clay fraction (compare with Fig.l(b)) and also by the high pressure acting whenthe joint was sheared.

Values of & (at o’ = 400 kPa) from theseseven samples are plotted in Fig. 16. They re-veal a relationship evidently corresponding tothe ‘transitional’ and ‘sliding shear’ zones of the

sand-bentonite tests of Fig. 2.However, it is possible to add further points

and to extend the graph into the ‘sand’ or ‘rol-

ling shear’ zone by including results of cut-planemultiple reversal shear box tests made at theKalabagh laboratory. The cut plane acts ratherlike an unsheared joint, and five or six reversalsusually produce a steady minimum strength (Fig.

17).The close correspondence between cut-plane

and shear surface tests, demonstrated in Fig. 16,provides evidence that the cut-plane tests give agood measure of the field residual strength andjustifies the use of such tests in delineating the

picture, presented here for the first time, show-ing the relation between residual strength andclay fraction in a natural sedimentary deposit.

300 I n’ = 831 s3--

f / /----

---

= 292

I

Sample 76109

LL = 40 PL = 21 CF = 23

- Frst run ---Second run

2 4 6 8 10

Displacement mm



FCESILXJAL STRENGTH OF CLAYS 13

C&O3 < 10%

PliCF = 0.5 - 0.8

. Mangla Shear surface

testsJan 3

q Kalabagh. cut-plane tests

Values of o,, at on’ = 400 kPa

40-

t-- SlItstone -

. Claystone -

E30- -0-1D

\

B \

‘,,,,,,,, Bedding/,+,,,shears

20 -\

1rom

field

records

OL 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Clay fraction (after pretreatment)

Fg. 16. Field residuals for Sialik claystone and siltstone, April 1984

300

: W =Sample1 LL 135949 PL = est 9 83CF = 42

d, = 10.6”

S, = 75 kPa o; = 400 kPa

I I I I I

0 2 4 6 a 10

Dlsplacemenl. mm

Fig. 17. Reversal shear box test on a cut-plane sample at Kalabagh, October

1983

Variations with clay mineralogy

The clay minerals can have little effect on

residual strength when the clay fraction is lessthan 20 , as the strength is then controlledlargely by the sand and silt particles. Conversely,with clay fractions exceeding 50 , residual

strength depends almost entirely on sliding fric-tion of the clay particles and therefore dependson their character.

Thus the siltstone in Fig. 16 with 13 clay

fraction has a strength equal to that of sand. At

the other end of the scale, clays such as the Liasand Atherfield having PI/CF ratios similar tothose of the Siwalik claystones have much thesame residual strength (Fig. 18), but the kaolini-tic clay from Walton’s Wood (PI/CF = 0.4) has asomewhat greater residual, despite its high clay

fraction, and lies in Fig. 18 not much below thepoint for kaolin itself (Lupini, 1980). In sharpcontrast, if the PI/CF ratio exceeds about 1.5, asin some clay shales reported from the USA(Townsend & Gilbert, 1973) the residual angle



14 SKEMPTON

PIICF

40

t

Values of I ,, + Walton’s Wood

I

0.4

at nn’ x 100 kPa x JackfIeld(Upper Carbon- 0.6

. Bury HIIIIferous)

0.6

o Siwallk

0 LIZIS

o Swmdon (Gault)

0 Sevenoaks (Atherfleld)

a London Clay

0.7

0.7

0.8

0.8

0.9

Approximate bounds

for PVCF = 0.550.9

Aj_,- -+-- Kaolin 0.4

--o--- Benlomte 1’6

\

I I I 1 ,

0 20 40 60 60 100

Clay fraction %

Fig. 18. Field residual and ring shear tests on sands, kaolin and bentonite

o Kaolm ’ = 350 kPa CF = 82

. London Clay >’ = 40-140 CF = 60

(each point ave?age of 8 tests)

Usual range of slow

laboratory tests

Tii

g 0.8 I 1E 0~0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 mm/rmn

2 L iv, 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 cm/day

0.7 I I ,1 10 100 1000 10 000 cm/year

Fig. 19. Variation in residual strength of clays at slow rates of displacement

of shearing resistance falls below 7”, to valuescomparable with that of bentonite in which theclay mineral is montmorillonite.

Finally there is the special case where theparticles smaller than 0.002mm are non-platyclay minerals, such as halloysite, or rock flourconsisting of very finely divided quartz etc. Theangles of residual shearing resistance of suchsoils bear little if any relation to the content ofclay-size particles and are usually greater than

25” (Kenney, 1967; Wesley, 1977).

RATE EFFECIXRates of displacement on pre-existing shear

surfaces can vary by many orders of magnitudefrom exceedingly slow movements in some reac-tivated landslides to very fast displacements in-

duced by earthquakes. A knowledge of theeffects produced by different rates of shearing istherefore a significant part of residual strengthstudies.

Slow rates

Tests on two clays over a range of speedsfrom about 100 times slower to 100 times fasterthan the usual (slow) laboratory test rate areplotted in Fig. 19 (data from Petley, 1966 andLupini, 1980). On average, the change instrength is rather less than 2.5 per log cycle. It

therefore follows that variations in strengthwithin the usual range of slow laboratory tests

(say 0.002-0.01 mm/min) are negligible.In the field, from observations on reactivated

landslides and mud-flows, it is known (Skemp-




Table 4. Variations ia residual strength of days at

slow rates of displacement

~

Laboratory, typical 0.005 = 7 mm/day .

ton Hutchinson, 1969) that the highest daily

rate of movement is of the order 50 cm/day andthe lowest average rate is about 2cm/year,which probably corresponds to a daily rate of

not less than 5 cm/year. If the strength at atypical laboratory rate of 0+00.5 mm/min is takenas standard, the variations over this entire range

lie between -3 and +5 , as set out in Table4.

Thus it appears, to a first approximation, that

all such movements can be regarded as ‘slow’

and as being related to a ‘static’ residualstrength equal (from this point of view) to valuesmeasured in the usual slow laboratory tests. Thisis the justification for making a comparison,

without any rate correction, between slowlaboratory tests and back analysis.

There is, however, an interesting corollary

since Fig. 19 also implies that small changes in

strength can cause large changes in rate ofmovement. This immediately accounts for themarked influence of seasonal variations in piezo-

metric levels and for the success of remedialworks which bring about a relatively small in-

crease in factor of safety.

Fast rates

In connection with earthquake design of theKalabagh Dam project, tests are being made atImperial College to measure the effects of fast

rates of displacement on residual strength. A

Sample 188

vv = 27 LL

sample is remoulded with water to bring it to a

plastic state and tested in the ring shear ap-paratus at pressures of 200 kPa and 500 kPa

after preconsolidation at the maximum attaina-ble pressure of 900 kPa. In all cases the water

content during the shear tests is at, or a littlebelow, the plastic limit.

The slow residual state is first established byshearing at 0.01 mm/min to displacements usu-ally of about 500mm (Fig. 4). The rate is thenincreased and maintained until approximately

steady conditions obtain. After a pause to allowany pore pressures to dissipate, the slow rate isreimposed. The rate is then increased again, to

some other high value and so on until tests havebeen made at three or four different fast ratesunder both pressures. Part of the first of this

series of tests, in which the fastest rate was400 mm/min, s shown in Fig. 20. In subsequenttests 700-800 mm/min has been achieved.

All samples so far tested at fast rates show arise in strength to a maximum, followed by adecrease to an approximately steady minimumvalue. To obtain characteristic parameters forany particular sample, 400 mmlmin is chosen as

representing the fast tests and the strengths (re-sidual, fast maximum and fast minimum) areplotted against normal pressure, in order to

obtain by interpolation the values at a standard

pressure of 400 kPa (Fig. 21).For clays the increase in strength becomes

pronounced at rates exceeding 100 mm/min(Fig. 22) when some qualitative change in be-

haviour occurs. This is probably associated withdisturbance of the originally ordered structure,

producing what may be termed ‘turbulent’shear, in contrast with sliding shear when theparticles are orientated parallel to the plane ofdisplacement. It is possible, also, that negativepore pressures are generated and, as displace-

ment continues, these are dissipated within the

g = 205 kPa (p, = 900 kPa)

62 PL = 26 CF = 47

O St

o-5

0.4

b

b

0.3

0.2

0.1

0 1

0.01 100 0 01 400 mm/mm 0.01

O-215

-___-_-.-.156 0.155

12h 0.156pause

\,

12 h pause

500 600 700 800 900

Displacement mm

Fig. 20. Kalabagh Dam ring shear test, August 1983



16 SKF.ME’rON

300-

200 -

Sample 704 Rmg shear

LL = 45 PL = 23 CF = 40

o Residual Fast X Max

400 mm/mln + M,n

6 kPa

Fig. 21. Kalabagb Dam ring shear tests, Febmary 1984

Sample 704

LL = 45 PL = 23 CF = 40

kPa

Max

Min

Slldmg

shear

Turbulent

shear

0000 10 100 400 1000

Rate of displacement: mmlmln

Fig. 22. Kalabagb Dam ring shear tests, Febmary 1984

1.4

1.2

Sample 2094 (r 490 kPa (p, = 900 kPa)

w = 24 LL = 39 PL = 27 CF = 3

-____“z, 0.52.57

0.4 -

0.2 -3 h pause

0 I , \4 h pause

I \ ,800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400

Displacement: mm

Fig. 23. Kalabagb Dam ring shear test, April 1984




Sample 91 OL

LL = 39 PL = 21 CF = 21

kPa

D = 200

g = 495\

011

I 1 J10 100 400 1000 10 000

Rate of displacement: mm/mln

Fig. 24. Kalabagh Dam ring shear tests, October 1983

body of the sample thus leading to a decrease instrength.

That some structural change has taken placein clays at ratios of 400 mm/min or more seemsapparent from the fact that on reimposing the

slow rate a peak is observed, the strength fallingto the residual only after considerable further

displacement (Fig. 20), an effect not seen aftershearing 100 mm/min or slower.

By contrast, in a low clay fraction siltstone

5

4

3

PD

0

2

1

o-

O

O-

‘o-

o-

0‘

Values of I

at (T = 400 kPa

slitstone LOWCF

20

@, deg

30 40

Fig. 25. summary of ring shear tests for Kalabagh

Dam, June 1984

(CF = 3) there is no qualitative change at rateseven as high as 800 mm/min; the strength atonce rises to a maximum and then falls sharply

towards the residual, and on restoring the slowrate the residual is almost immediately regained

(Fig. 23). These effects point to pore pressurechanges only; certainly there can be no clay

particle orientation or disordering in thissample.

As an intermediate material, a clayey siltstone

with about 25 clay fraction shows a remarka-ble drop in strength, at fast rates (400 mm/minor more), from the maximum to a minimum

equal approximately to one-half of the residual(Fig. 24). It is surely significant that this materiallies in the ‘transitional’ zone, but why it shouldshow a normal increase in strength at fast rates

followed by an abnormal decrease is not clear.However, two specimens from this sample, one

with 21 and the other with 27 clay fraction,show almost identical patterns of behaviour.

Clearly more research is needed better to

define the limits of this phenomenon and, for alltypes of soil, to measure pore pressures at fast

rates of displacement and to explore the effectsin still more rapid tests. Meanwhile the results atpresent available are summarized in Fig. 25;their significance in earthquake engineering de-

sign is obviously considerable.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Permission to quote results from the Manglaand Kalabagh laboratories has kindly been givenby the Pakistan Water and Power Authority(WAPDA). Other tests not taken from pub-lished papers were carried out as part of a



18 SKEMPT0N

general research programme at Imperial College

and in connection with investigations for Kent

County Council (Sevenoaks bypass), Sir Alexan-

der Gibb Partners (M4 landslides near Swin-

don) and WAPDA (Kalabagh Dam project).The fast ring shear tests are being made by Mr

Luis Lemos. In preparing the lecture much ben-

efit has been derived from discussions with Dr

R. J. Chandler and Dr P. R. Vaughan. All the

tracings are by Mrs Anne Langford.

REFERENCES

Bishop, A. W., Green, G. E., Garga, V. K., Andresen,A. Brown, J. D. (1971). A new ring shear

apparatus and its application to the measurement

of residual strength. G technique 21, No. 4, 273-

328.Bromhead, E. N. (1978). Large landslides in London

Clay at Herne Bay, Kent. Q. J. Engng Geol. 11

291-304.

Bromhead, E. N. (1979). A simple ring shear ap-

paratus. Ground Engng 12, 40-44.

Bromhead, E. N. Curtis, R. D. (1983). A compari-

son of alternative methods of measuring the re-

sidual strength of London Clay. Ground Engng 16

39-41.

Burland, J. B., Longworth, T. I. Moore, J. F. A.

(1977). A study of ground movement and progres-

sive failure caused by a deep excavation in Oxford

Clay. G otechnique 27, No. 4, 557-591.

Calabresi, G. Manfredini, G. (1973). Shear strength

characteristics of the jointed clay of S. Barbara.

Gdotechnique 23, No. 2, 233-244.

Chandler, R. J. (1982). Lias clay slope sections and

their implications for the prediction of limiting or

threshold slope angles. Earth Surf. Process Land-

forms 7, 427-438.

Chandler, R. J. (1984). Recent European experience

of landslides in over-consolidated clays and soft

rocks. Proc. 4th Int. Symp. Landslides, Toronto,

1,61-81.

Early, K. R. Skempton, A. W. (1972). Investiga-

tions of the landslide at Walton’s Wood, Stafford-

shire. Q. J. Engng Geol. 5 19-41.Henkel, D. J. Skempton, A. W. (1955). A landslide

at Jackfield, Shropshire, in heavily over-

consolidated clay. Giotechnique 5, 131-137.

Hutchinson, J. N. Gostelow, T. P. (1976). The

development of an abandoned cliff in London Clay

at Hadleigh, Essex. Phil Trans R. Sot . A 283,

557-604.

Hutchinson, J. N., Somerville, S. H. Petley, D. J.

(1973). A landslide in periglacially disturbed Et-

ruria Marl at Bury Hill, Staffordshire. Q. J. Engng

Geol. 6, 377-404.

Kenney, T. C. (1967). The influence of mineral com-

position on the residual strength of natural soils.

Proc. Geotechnical Conf Oslo 1. 23-129.

Lupini, J. F. (1980). The residual strength of soils. PhD

thesis, University of London.

Lupini, J. F., Skinner, A. E. Vaughan, P. R. (1981).

The drained residual strength of cohesive soils.

Ge’otechnique 31, No. 2, 181-213.

Morgenstern, N. R. Price, V. E. (1965). The

analysis of the stability of general slip surfaces.

Gdotechnique 15 o. 1, 79-93.

Morgenstern, N. R. Tchalenko, J. S. (1967). Micro-

structural characteristics on shear zones from slips

in natural clays. Proc. Georechnical Conf. Oslo 1

147-152.Petley, D. J. (1966). The shear strength of soil s at l arge

strains. PhD thesis, University of London.

Sarma, S. K. (1973). Stability analysis of embank-

ments and slopes. GCotechnique 23, No. 3, 423-

433.

Sinclair, S. R. Brooker, E. W. (1967). The shear

strength of Edmonton Shale. Proc. Geotechnical

Conf. Oslo 1 95-299.

Skempton, A. W. (1964). Long-term stability of clay

slopes. Gioorechnique 14, No. 2, 75-101.

Skempton, A. W. (1971). Report on t ests on and

adjacent to the slip surface in the Gault clay at

Burderop Wood, Wiltshire. Sir Alexander Gibb

Partners.

Skempton, A. W. (1972). Report on the investigations

and remedial w orks at Burderop Wood and Hodson

landslides on the M 4 motorw ay near Swi ndon. Sir

Alexander Gibb Partners.

Skempton, A. W. Hutchinson, J. N. (1969). Stabil-

ity of natural slopes. Proc. 7th In?. Conf. Soil Mech.

Fdn Engng, Mexico Ci ty State of the art volume,

pp. 291-340.

Skempton, A. W. Petley, D. J. (1967a). The

strength along structural discontinuities in stiff

clays. Proc. Geotechnical Conf., Oslo 2, 29-46.

Skempton, A. W. Petley, D. J. (1967b). Sevenoaks

by-pass. Shear tests on clays. Report for KentCounty Council.

Townsend, F. C. Gilbert, P. A. (1973). Tests to

measure residual strength of some clay shales.

Gkotechnique 23, No. 2, 267-271.

Weslev. L. D. (1977). Shear strength properties of

hafioysite and allophane clays in-Java, Indonesia.

Ggot echni que 27 No. 2 125-136.

1985 residual strength of clays in landslides skempton ge350101

Documents