0% found this document useful (0 votes)
49 views5 pagesP Esf Efectivos (Bishop)
geotecnia 2
Uploaded by
Jeison Camilo Cordoba CubillosCopyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
49 views5 pagesP Esf Efectivos (Bishop)
geotecnia 2
Uploaded by
Jeison Camilo Cordoba CubillosCopyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
/ 5
The Principle of Effective Stress
Alan W. Bishop, st
‘The princile of ettective stress ig given, together
witha
‘ade, Tending to the hypotneia hat th aren of com
fice does not induance Yap eftecive strana A erica of
3 ceoula is reviewed, which eondtms tis Aypetten
Pag apnlition of te” principle (aigeuseed for the
practic ease Of a two" phase fuid in the Dore apace
Introduction
Most of the principles and methods now used in
Soil Mechanics have roots which extend some way
back into the history of the subject. Their develop-
ment to a position of importance to the civil engi-
neer depends, however, on three requirements, These
are:
(1) Laboratory methods to measure the relevant
soil properties accurately and easily.
(2) Theories to relate the laboratory measurements
to the conditions met with in the actual full
scale problems, and suitable design methods
based on these theories.
(3) Field measurements to compare the predicted
behaviour with actual performance.
With these three requirements in mind, we may
re-examine the principle of effective stress, and, in
passing, look briefly at its historical development.
The Principle of Ejfective Stress
It is now being more widely recognised that the
principle of effective stress provides not only a satis-
factory basis for understanding the deformation and
strength characteristics of soil, but also a basis for
practical design metitods. This isin itself a relatively
recent development, as it is only within the last few
years that the three requirements referred to above
hhave been satisfied, from the point of view of
engineering practice, for all types of so
The two simplest implications of the principle of
effective stress are:
(1) that volume change and deformation in soils
depend not on the total stress applied, but on the
difference between the total stress and the pressure
‘An excurpt from « leture delivered to the Norwegian Geo-
tectical Soeioty in September ais °° a
D.Sc Ph. Dy A.M, LCE,
set up in the fluid in the pore space. This leads to the
expression
‘where @ denotes the total normal stress
u denotes the pore pressure
a js termed the effective stress.
(2) that shear strength depends, not on the total
normal stress on the plane considered, but on the
effective stress. This may be expressed by the
equation
wae to'tane’ ®
where ¢, denotes the shear strength
o the effective stress on the plane
considered
¢ the apparent cohesion
’ ‘the angle of shearing resistance.
The most obvious practical illustration of the vol-
ume change aspect of the principle of effective stress
is the continued settlement of a foundation under
constant load, due to the gradual dissipation of the
ial excess pore pressures. Less obvious, however
but of considerable importance, are the regional
settlements, which have resulted from ground water
lowering in compressible soils, either due to pumping
for water supply, as in London (Wilson and Grace,
1942) and in Mexico City (Zeevaert, 1953); or due
to engineering operations, as in Oslo (Holmsen, 1953).
‘The settlements of shallow foundations in the sum-
mer, due to the negative pore pressures set up by
drying or by the suction of plant roots, is a further
example.
‘The shear strength aspect of the principle of effec-
tive stress is appreciated most easily by comparing
the results of undrained tests on a saturated soil
with those of drained tests. In the undrained test
no increase in strength results from an increase in
total normal stress, an increase in pore pressure of
equal magnitude being the only result. In the
rained test this pore pressure is allowed to dissipate, crease in shear strength.
Practical examples of the dependence of shear
strength on effective stress are less self-evident than
illustrations of deformation. However, the increase
in strength of soft clay foundations of earth dams
due to pore pressure dissipation has been measured
on several occasions (Cooling and Golder, 1942;
Bishop, 1948; Skempton and Bishop, 1955); and the
gain in strength with depth of normally-consoli-
dated clay strata is another well established fact
(Skempton, 1948; Bjerrum, 1954).
Historically, the recognition of the importance of
pore pressures may be considered to go back at least
to 1886 when Osborne Reynolds demonstrated how
a rubber bag full of saturated sand was subject to
large negative pore pressures when distorted. Deacon
and Hawkesley had pointed out, in connection with
the Vyrnwy Dam, that it was the pressure set up
under a dam by the blocking of an almost impercept-
ible flow of water, that was a major factor in stabi-
lity (Deacon, 1896). Uplift pressures within masonry
dams were recognised by Levy (1895). The action
of water pressure within a fine grain soil appears,
however, to have first been fully appreciated by
Terzaghi (1923) and formed the basis of his theory
of consolidation, which dealt with the volume change
aspect of effective stress.
The shear strength aspect was recognised, firstly
in terms of the difference between undrained and
rained test results, in about 1932 by Terzaghi and
his co-workers (Terzaghi, 1932). The subsequent
work of Rendulic (1937) was of particular import-
ance, as he devised the first practical laboratory
method of measuring the pore pressure in a sa-
turaied clay. He demonstrated that, however the
values of total stress @ and pore pressure x were
varied, it was the difference «— u which controlled
both deformation and failure conditions.
Investigations into the magnitude of pore pres-
sures set up in partly saturated soils were begun by
the U. S. Bureau of Reclamation, and included both
theoretical and laboratory work (Brahtz, Brugge-
man and Zangar; 1939, Hamilton, 1939), and field
measurements (Walker and Daehn, 1948). Experi-
mental investigations into pore pressure changes in
saturated soils were also greatly advanced by the
work of Taylor (1944, 1948) at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology.”
At Imperial College theoretical and laboratory in-
vestigations into the magnitude and practical signifi-
cance of pore pressure changes have taken a central
place in our work since the Soil Mechanics section
provision of a theoretical framework from wistch
rational design methods may be developed to meet
the needs of civil engineering practice. This, in éurn
enables the necessary link to be made between labora-
tory and field investigations.
More recently the Norwegian Geotechnical Insti-
tute under the direction of Dr. Bjerrum has begun
to make important contributions in this field.
The Injluence of the Area of Contact between the Soil
Particles
In order to examine the physical basis of the prin-
ciple of effective stress it is necessary to consider the
forces acting across a surface in the soil which
approximates to a plane but passes always through
the pore space and points of contact of the soil
particles. Normal stress is then equal to the average
force perpendicular to this plane, per unit area, and
areas are considered as projected onto the plane.
Let @ denote the total normal stress on this
plane
of the average intergranular force
per unit area of the plane (often
termed the effective stress).
u the hydrostatic pressure in the
pore water,
a the effective contact area of the
soil particles per unit area of the
plane.
It then follows that
emaf + (1a) a @
Thus
a =o—(1—a) a
or
(o—u) + au o
It can therefore be seen that effective stress, de-
fined in this way, isnot exactly equal to the difference
between the total stress and the pore pressure, but is,
dependent on the contact area between the particles.
Although this area may be small, it cannot be zero,
as this would imply infinite local contact stresses
between the particles. Ife, is the average component
of the local contact stress normal to the plane, then Thus, although the direct measurement of the
magnitude of ais not possible, a lower limit is placed
on its value by the crushing strength of the particles,
at least for coarse grained soils such as sands* (Bishop
and Eldin, 1950). For clays and for concrete, in which
the influence of uplift is also of considerable practical
importance, this limit is less easy to determine and
it is necessary to resort to indirect methods of deter-
mining a.
However, an important difficulty arises in the
interpretation of the results of indirect methods, to
which I drew attention in 1950 (loc, cit.). If the
effective stress, as defined in equations 3 and 4,
controlled volume change, we could observe the
effect of several combinations of o and w on volume
change and thus evaluate a.
But if we consider the probable deformations at
the contact between two grains under fluid pressure,
NS
I ica
Fig. 1. (a) Forces af an arate: contact, (2) Bquivalent
we arrive at an alternative hypothesis about the
stress controlling volume change. If P is the average
force per contact (Fig. 1) and there are N contacts
per unit area, then the intergranular force per unit
area of the plane XX is NP and is equal to o/'.
Now if a soil particle is subjected to a pressure u
over the whole of its surface, it undergoes no distor-
tiont but a small decrease in volume. Hence itis only.
that part of the local contact stress which is in excess
of u that causes deformation of tie soil structure.
‘This excess stress is equal to P/A —u where A is
Zp — % = BS whore b is factor depending on the
typeof tase contact iopasabiy: greater was unity, and §
Pe cruahing steneth SF the grains, almost independent of
The contact, betwoon the rigid adsorbed water layers
round lay partcloa may be treated, fom Wis plat of ew,
the area of the particular contact, By summing
the corresponding components of intergranular force,
an expression is obtained for ¢,’, defined as that
part of the normal stress which controls volume
change due to deformation of the soil structure.
Thus
©
and, by substitution from equation (4)
af = (@—u) + au —au
ino’ =o—u o
‘This leads to the interesting conclusion that, al-
‘though the average intergranular force per unit area
depends on the magnitude of a, volume changes due
to deformation of the soil structure depend simply
on the stress difference — u, whatever the value
of a. It follows immediately that volume measure-
ment under different combinations of # and uw can
provide no data for evaluating a.
Recently Dr. A. S. Laughton carried out some
experimental work in the Department of Geodesy
and Geophysics at Cambridge to examine this hypo-
thesis, which is of particular importance in pre-
dicting the consolidation of ocean sediments under
very large hydrostatic pressures. His results provide
a confirmation of its validity.
‘Asset of tests were run in a special sealed oedometer
in which the magnitude of both the total stress and
the pore pressure could be controlled, This permitted
the use of combinations of ¢ and u over a very wide
range of stress (up to approximately o = 1000 kg per
sq. ¢m). One of the materials tested was lead shot,
in which plastic yield at the contact points leaves,
on unloading, facets which can be measured under
‘the microscope to give approximate values of a. The
test procedure consisted of the application of an in-
crement of total stress together with a known in-
crement of pore pressure, time being allowed for
consolidation. The volume change was noted; the
applied pore pressure was then reduced to zero
out changing the total stress, and, after the same
time interval, the volume change was again recorded.
From the results of a series of such increments
curve relating volume change to stress with zero pore
pressure can be plotted; and from this curve can be
read off the stress a which gives the same volume
change as each particular combination of ¢ and u.
‘According to the hypothesis outlined above the
stress @ is to equal to o,', and from equation (7)
we have:
oma=u ®
If, on the other hand, the average intergranular
force per unit area, o,', controls the volume change,
as is usually assumed, then @ is equal to o/, and
() we have:
from equation
and hence
@
‘The results of a test on lead shot are given in Table I.
Table 1. Consolidation Test on Lead Shot (data from
Laughton, 1953)
128 32 on
256 4 =
512 128 a
tos | 256 0.95
1 the estimate of the magnitude of a under stress involves
ag, approximation ao a can aniy’ be mtamured atte anioasingt
TuUue® ‘RO Intermediate streseca are’ ‘obtained trea separate
It is clear from Table I that equation (9), repre-
senting the intergranular stress definition of effec-
tive stress, is quite incompatible with the experi
mental results. The results are, however, consistent
with equation (8) to within the limits of experimental
accuracy. It may therefore be concluded that the
hypothesis is correct that ¢— u controls the volume
changes, whatever the contact area between the
Particles may be.
Tests on a natural sediment also gave consistent
values of (¢—a)/u = 1. Though in this case the value
of @ could not be determined directly, it may be in-
ferred from the high stresses used that a differed
significantly from zero, and hence that equation (8)
is again applicable.
‘Whether shear strength depends similarly ono—u
(and not on a) is still a matter for speculation, as
experimental data at the necessarily high stresses is
not yet available. In the case of metals the frictional
force is found to be proportional to the area of metal
to metal contact (Bowden and Tabor, 1942). This
area, like the deformation, would be controlled by
(= 0 —1), and hence it is reasonable to infer that
, would control shear strength. That the frictional
Denaviour of soils is analogous to that of metals is
less obvious, and alternative views cannot be dls-
missed at this stage. However, tests such as those
of Rendulic (1937), carried out within the relatively
small range of stresses encountered in engineering
Practice, indicate no departure from the hypothesis
that «— wis the controlling factor in shear strength.
Any remaining uncertainty is of practical importance
only at very high pressures or in materials such as
concrete in which a may have appreciable values at
low stresses.
The Problem of a Two Phase Fluid
In partly saturated soils, the fluid in the pore
space consists of both liquid and gaseous phases,
existing at different pressures due to surface tension.
The simplest case to consider is that of an almost
fully saturated soil in which a small quantity of air
or other gas exists in the form of isolated bubbles.
The principal effect of the bubbles, from the
engineering point of view, is to alter radically the
compressibility of the fluid phase; their presence
makes little difference to the ability of the fluid to
subject each soil particle to an equal all-round
pressure. This pressure is equal to that of the liquid
hase, and its magnitude would be that measured by
a piezometer inserted into the soil, The validity of
the effective stress equation is thus unaffected.
This is the case usually assumed in analysingt est
results and in performing stability analyses. AS the
ore pressures are generally only of significant magni-
tude when the degree of saturation is relatively hight
(80—100%), this is a reasonable assumption for
practical purposes. This view is supported by the fact
that no apparent inconsistencies arise in plotting
laboratory shear strength data on this basis over a
wide range of total stress and pore pressure values.
As the degree of saturation is reduced, a point
will be reached when the soil particles will cease
to be surrounded by the liquid phase, The pressure
in the liquid phase, which is lower than that in the
gaseous phase, will then act only over a reduced
area. The effective stress equation may then be
en:
oo — (ya) o)
where u, denotes pressure in gas and vapour phase.
ty Pressure in liquid phase.
a @ parameter which equals unity
for saturated soils and decreases
with decreasing degree of satura-
tion. ‘ue practical umportance or ts more general rorm
uf the effective stress equation will depend on the
range of x values normally encountered and on the
magnitude of the surface tension effect (uy — 1)
with which they are associated.
Four principal classes of problem may be con-
sidered:
(1) Full saturation. Here x = 1, and the equation
reduces to o’ =o — us, This holds true for all satura-
ted soils, whether clays, sands or gravels; and is also
true for concrete and porous rocks, at least with the
qualification made in the previous section.
(2) Soil containing a timited quantity of discon-
tinuous air bubbles. The air may exist in the form of
a large number of small bubbles, in which case the
term (tty —u,) will be significant, However,x will be
close to unity, and hence, to a close approximation,
the equation will reduce to a’ = o — up
An alternative condition may arise a the result of
compacting soil which exists in the borrow pits in a
saturated state, Here a limited number of larger air
bubbles will result, and (u,—u,) will be smaller.
‘The equation will similarly reduce to o’ = o —u,
This class of soil will include compacted earth
fills of clay, clay-gravel, moraine, chalk, etc., in
which the initial compaction or subsequent volume
changes or seepage lead to degrees of saturation of
‘80% or more, Most problems in which large positive
Pore pressures are encountered in partly saturated
soils may be expected to fall into this category.
(3) Completely dry soils. Here x = 0 and u, = 0,
and the equation reduces to the form o/ = ¢ — uy.
This expression is clearly valid for cohesionless
soils, and is supported by test results. For dry
cohesive soils, the same result would be anticipated,
though from the engineering point of view the result
is of limited importance,
(4) Soils with low degree of saturation. Here 1 > x >0
and u, > u,. In general, therefore, the full expression
must be used, i, o” = @ — tty — x (Uy — Wy).
However, the range of engineering problems in which
these conditions are encountered is very limited,
at least in temperate climates.
For sands and gravels above the water table the
value of the term x (ug ~u,) is generally not signi-
ficant compared with the value of o’, as is indicated,
for example, by the low unconfined strength of
these materials.
It is, therefore only with very fine grain soils
at low degrees of saturation that the simple effective
stress equation cannot be used. Earth fills of soil
in this condition are generally avoided owing to
the large changes in volume and shear strength
which occur on subsequent saturation, Shallow
foundations and pavements may, however, in some
cases provide examples of conditions requiring
the more complex relationship, and~a detailed
investigation of the values of x would then be
necessary.
References.
Bishop, 4. W. 9) «Some factors involved in the design
Gh a lorge earth dam in the Thames Valieys ‘Bos 2a
The” Cone soit tech 21S
Bishop, A. W. (962) eThe stability of earth dans. Ph.D.
‘Thesia’ Calversity 0° London,
Bishop, 4. W, (64) «Tho use of pore-pressure coefficients
in practices Cooteendiase fas
Bishop, 4 W. and Sldin, . (1950) «Undrsined tiasiat
fata "in saturated. sands’ an ‘taere Suonafconse (ee
‘deneral theory of shear strengths. Geotsehigue 1a!
Bishop, A, W. and Henkel, D. J, GMs%) «Pore pressure
Phangee diving ahear thes walkinibed clays” Bee aes
ine"'Gone Boll Stsch 3:38
Bierrum, £, (1964)