Soil Mechanics the tower to tilt; more than 5 m out of plumb

with the 54 m height

Week 1: Historical Perspective - closed in 1990 because of fear
Soil - stabilized by excavating soil from under the
north side of the tower (about 70 metric tones
 latin word “solium” of earth were removed in 41 separate
 in agronomy, upper layer of the earth extractions)
 in geology, earth’s crust - tilt of tower eased and now leans 5 degrees
 in geotechnical engineering, top soil which consist
of large quantity of organic matter; not suitable as Time span extending from 1700 to 1927 can be divided
construction materials/foundation into 4 major periods:
 uncemented aggregate of mineral grains and 1. preclassical (1700-1776 AD); concentrated on
decayed organic matter with liquid and gas in the studies relating to natural slope and unit weights of
empty spaces between solid particles various types of soils, as well as semiempirical
Soil Mechanics earth pressure theories
 Henri Gautier (1660-1737 AD)
 coined by Dr. Karl Terzaghi in 1925 when his book - French royal engineer
“Erdbaumechanic” was published in Germany - studied natural slopes (angle of repose) of soil
 application of laws of mechanics and hydraulics to in 1717
engineering problems dealing with sediments and - natural slope of clean dry sand and ordinary
other unconsolidated accumulations of solid earth were 31° and 45°, respectively
particles produced by the mechanical and chemical - unit weight of clean dry sand and ordinary earth
disintegration of rocks were recommended to be 18.1 kN/m3 and 13.4
 branch of science that deals with the study of kN/m3 (85 lb/ft3)
physical properties of soil and behavior of soil  Bernard Forest de Belidor (1671-1761)
masses subjected to various types of forces - published a textbook for military and civil
engineers in France
Soils Engineering
- proposed a theory for lateral earth pressure
 application of principles of soil mechanics to follow up to Gautier’s
practical problems - specified a soil classification system
 Francois Gadroy (1705-1759)
Geotechnical Engineering - French engineer
 subdiscipline of civil engineering that involves - reported first laboratory model test results on a
natural materials found close to the surface of the 76-mm-high retaining wall built with sand
earth backfill in 1746
 JJ Mayniel (1808)
Geotechnical Engineering Prior to the 18th Century - summarized the study of Gadroy
 Jean Rodolphe Perronet (1708-1794)
 understanding began early in the 18th century
- French engineer
 recorded history tells us that ancient civilizations
- studied slope stability (1769) and distinguished
flourished along the banks of rivers, such as:
between intact ground and fills
- Nile (Egypt)
2. classical soil mechanics-phase I (1776-1856
- Tigris and Euphrates (Mesopotamia)
AD); calculating lateral earth pressure on retaining
- Huang Ho (Yellow River, China)
walls were based on an arbitrarily based failure
- Indus (India)
surface in soil
 During Chan dynasty in China, many dykes were
 Charles Augustin Coulomb (1736-1806)
built for irrigation purposes
- French scientist
 Ancient Greek civilization used isolated pad
- used the principles of calculus for maxima,
footings and strip-and-raft foundations for building
minima to determine true position of sliding
structures
surface in soil behind a retaining wall
 2700 BC, several pyramids were built in Egypt for
- used laws of friction and cohesion for solid
Pharaohs and their consorts
bodies
 With the arrival of Buddhism in China during
 Gaspard Clair Marie Riche de Prony (1755-
Eastern Han dynasty in 68 AD, thousands of
1839)
pagodas were built
- French civil engineer
 Leaning Tower of Pisa in Italy
- Included Coulomb’s theory in his book,
- construction began in 1173 AD
“Nouvelle Architecture Hydraulique (Vol .1) in
- structure weighs about 15700 metric tons;
1790
supported by a circular base having a diameter
 Jacques Frederic Francais (1775-1833),
of 20 m
Claude Louis Marie Henri Navier (1785-1836)
- tower has tilted in the past to the E, N, W, and
- studied special cases of Coulomb’s work in
finally, S
1820 related to inclined backfills and backfills
- investigations showed that a weak clay layer
supporting surcharge
existed at a depth of about 11 m below the
 Jean Victor Poncelet (1788-1867)
ground surface compression of which caused
- army engineer, professor of mechanics
 - extended Coulomb’s theory by providing - investigated the cause of failure of the 17-m-
graphical method for determining magnitude of high earth dam at Charmes, France on October
lateral earth pressure on vertical and inclined 1909
retaining walls with arbitrarily broken polygonal - conducted undrained double-shear tests on
ground surfaces in 1840 clay specimens (0.77 m2 in area, 200 mm thick)
- first to use the symbol “f” for soil friction angle; under constant vertical stress to determine
provided first ultimate bearing-capacity theory their shear strength parameters
for shallow foundations - times for failure of these specimens were
 Alexandre Collin (1808-1890) between 10-20 minutes
- engineer  Arthur Langley Bell (1874-1956)
- provided details for deep slips in clay slopes, - civil engineer from England
cutting, and embankments - worked on design and construction of outer
- theorized that in all cases the failure takes seawall at Rosyth Dockyard
place when the mobilized cohesion exceeds - developed relationships for lateral pressure
the existing cohesion of soil and resistance in clay as well as bearing
- observed that the actual failure surfaces could capacity of shallow foundations in clay
be approximated as arcs of cycloids - used shear-box tests to measure undrained
 William John Macquorn Rankine (1820-1872) shear strength of undisturbed clay specimens
- end of phase I is generally marked by the year  Wolmar Fellenius (1876-1957)
1857 of first publication by Rankine - engineer from Sweden
- provided notable theory on earth pressure and - developed stability analysis of saturated clay
equilibrium of earth masses slopes with the assumption that the critical
- Rankine’s theory is simplification of Coulomb’s surface of sliding is the arc of circle
theory - papers published in 1918 and 1926
3. classical soil mechanics-phase II (1856-1910  Karl Terzaghi (1883-1963)
AD); experimental results from laboratory tests on - developed the theory of consolidation for clays
sand appeared in the literature - spanned a 5-year period from 1919-1924; 5
 Henri Philibert Gaspard Darcy (1803-1858) different clay soils were used; LL of those soils
- French engineer ranged between 36 and 67, and PL was in the
- published a study on permeability of sand range of 18-38
filters (1856) - consolidation theory was published in
- defined the term coefficient of permeability of Erdbaumechanik in 1925
soil
 George Howard Darwin (1845-1912) Geotechnical Engineering after 1927; publication of
- professor of astronomy Erdbaumechanik auf Bodenphysikalisher Grundlage
- conducted lab tests to determine overturning gave birth to a new era in development of soil
moment on a hinged wall retaining sand in mechanics
loose and dense states of compaction  Karl Terzaghi (1883-1963)
 Joseph Valentin Boussinesq (1842-1929) - father of modern soil mechanics
- developed the theory of stress distribution - after end of WW1, he accepted lectureship at
under loaded bearing areas in a homogenous, the American Robert College in Istanbul (1918-
semi-infinite, elastic, and isotropic medium in 1925) and began his research work on the
1885 behavior of soils and settlement of clays and on
 Osborne Reynolds (1842-1912) failure due to piping in sand under dams
- demonstrated the phenomenon of dilatancy in - accepted a visiting lectureship at
sand (1887) Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1925-
 John Clibborn (1847-1938), John Stuart 1929) and became recognized as the leader of
Beresford (1845-1925) soil mechanics
- both studied the flow of water through sand bed  Ralph Peck
and uplift pressure - wrote “few people during Terzaghi’s lifetime
4. modern soil mechanics (1910-1927 AD); results would have disagreed that he was not only the
of research conducted on clays were published guiding spirit in soil mechanics, but that he was
 Albert Mauritz Atterberg (1846-1916) the clearing house for research and
- Swedish chemist, soil scientist applications throughout the world; within the
- defined clay-size fractions as the percentage next few years, he would be engaged on
by weight of particles smaller than 2 microns in projects on every continent save Australia and
size Antarctica”
- realized the important role of clay particles in a
soil and plasticity End of an Era
- explained consistency of cohesive soils by
 Ralph B. Peck (1912-2008)
defining liquid, plastic, and shrinkage limits
- godfather of soil mechanics
- defined plasticity index as difference between
- responsible for succession of celebrated
liquid limit and plastic limit
tunnelling and earth dam projects that pushed
 Jean Fontard (1884-1962)
the boundaries of what was believed to be
- French engineer
possible
 - took courses from Arthur Casagrande at - clay (mostly flake-shaped microscopic and
Harvard University in “soil mechanics” (1938- submicroscopic particles of mica; develop
1939) plasticity when mixed with limited amount of
- worked as an assistant to Karl Terzaghi (1939- water)
1943)
- Times of United Kingdom wrote, “Ralph B.
Peck was an American civil engineer who
invented a controversial construction technique
that would be used on some of the modern
engineering wonders of the world, including
Channel Tunnel
- authored more than 250 highly distinguished
technical publications Mechanical Analysis of Soil
Week 1: Origin of Soil Part 1  determination of size range of particles
 mineral grains that form the solid phase of soil presents in a soil, expressed as % of total dry
aggregate are a product of rock weathering weight
 rocks can be divided into 3 basic types:  2 methods to find particle-size distribution of
1. igneous rock soil
- formed by solidification of magma (intrusive 1. sieve analysis (particle size > 0.075 mm in
and extrusive) diameter)
- types formed by cooling of magma depend on 2. hydrometer analysis (particle size < 0.075 mm
factors: composition of magma and rate of in diameter)
cooling Week 2: Origin of Soil Part 2
2. sedimentary rock
- compacted by overburden pressure and  residual/sedentary soil (soil stays at place of its
cemented by agents like iron oxide, calcite, formation just above parent rock)
dolomite, and quartz and by groundwater  transported soil (deposited at place away from
(detrital sedimentary rocks) origin)
- detrital rocks have clastic texture
Week 2: Grain Size
- chemical sedimentary rock, formed by
chemical processes 1. sieve analysis (thru set of sieves)
- may be subjected to metamorphism
3. metamorphic rock
- metamorphism, process of changing the
composition and texture of rocks by heat and
pressure
Weathering

 process of breaking down rocks by mechanical

(change without chemical composition) and
chemical processes (change with chemical
reaction)
 transportation of weathering products by ice,
water, wind, and gravity
 residual soils, formed by weathered products at
their place of origin  particle-size distribution curve, graph with
 fine-grained soil to angular rock fragments, percent finer as the ordinate and sieve opening
increases with depth size as abscissa (logarithmic scale)
- glacial soils (glaciers) 2. hydrometer analysis (principle of
- alluvial soils (running water and along streams) sedimentation of soil grains in water)
- lacustrine soils (quiet lakes)
Particle-Size Distribution Curve
- marine soils (seas)
- aeolian soils (wind) 1. effective size (D10), good measure to estimate
- colluvial soils (gravity) hydraulic conductivity and drainage thru soil
𝐷𝐷
Soil-particle size 2. uniformity coefficient (𝐶𝐶𝑢𝑢 = 60 )
𝐷𝐷10
2
𝐷𝐷30
 soils generally are called gravel, sand, silt, or 3. coefficient of gradation (𝐶𝐶𝑐𝑐 = )
𝐷𝐷60 ×𝐷𝐷10
clay 𝐷𝐷75
- gravel (occasional particles of quartz, feldspar, 4. sorting coefficient (𝑆𝑆0 = �
𝐷𝐷25
and other minerals)
- sand (mostly quart and feldspar) Grading of Soil
- silt (microscopic soil fractions of very fine
 distribution of particles of different sizes in a
quartz grains and some flake-shaped particles)
soil mass
 - for coarse-grained soils, e is gen. smaller than
for fine-grained soil
2. porosity (n); ratio of volume of voids to total
volume, expressed as percentage (percentage
voids)
3. degree of saturation (s); ratio of volume of
water to voids, expressed as percentage
- 0 = dry
- 100% = fully saturated
4. percentage of air voids (na); ratio of volume of
air to total volume
5. air content (ac); ratio of volume of air to voids
Weight Relationship (Definitions)

1. curve I (soil grains are same size; poorly 1. moisture content (w); ratio of weight of water to
graded soil) solids in a given volume of soil, expressed as
2. curve II (distributed over a wide range; well- percentage
graded soil) - w of fine-grained soils > coarse-grained soils
- Cu < 4 (gravel) and 6 (sands) 2. unit weight (y); weight of soil per unit volume
- CC of 1 and 3 (gravel and sands)
Volume-Mass Relationship
- flat S-curve, particles of diff. sizes in good
proportion 1. bulk mass density/wet mass density (p); total
3. curve III (have 2 or more uniformly graded mass (M) per unit total volume (V)
fractions; gap-graded soil) 2. dry mass density (pd); mass of solids (Ms) per
unit total volume (V)
Uses of Particle Size Distribution Curve
3. saturated mass density (psat); bulk mass
1. classification of coarse-grained soil density of soil when fully saturated
2. coefficient of permeability of coarse-grained 4. submerged mass density (p’); soil exists below
soil depends to a large extent on the size of water; it is in submerged condition; submerged
particles mass per unit of total volume
3. know susceptibility of soil to frost action 5. mass density of solids (ps); ratio of mass of
4. curve is required for design of drainage filters solids to volume of solids
5. provides index to shear strength of soil
Volume-Weight Relationship in Terms of Unit
6. compressibility can be judged
Weights (Definitions)
7. used in soil stabilization and pavement design
8. may indicate mode of deposition of soil 1. bulk unit weight/wet unit weight (y); total weight
9. may indicate age of soil deposit per unit total volume
2. dry unit weight (yd); weight of solids per unit
Particle Shape
total volume
 divided into 3 major categories: 3. saturated unit weight (ysat); bulk unit weight
1. bulky particles (mostly by mechanical when fully saturated
weathering of rocks and minerals; angular, 4. submerged unit weight (y’); submerged weight
subangular, subrounded, and rounded) per unit of total volume
5. unit weight of soil solids (ys); ratio of weight of
solids to volume of solids
Relationship among Unit Weight, Void Ratio,
Moisture Content, and Specific Gravity
Relationships among Unit Weight, Porosity, and
Moisture Content
Various Unit Weight Relationships
Relative Density
 indicate in situ denseness or looseness of
2. flaky particles (have very low sphericity, usually granular soil
0.01 or less; predominantly clay minerals)  in-place soils seldom have relative densities <
3. needle-shaped particles (less common; coral 20-30%
deposits and attapulgite clays)  compacting a granular soil to a relative density
Week 3: Physical Properties of Soil Part 1 than about 85% is difficult

Weight-Volume Relationship (Definitions) Week 4: Physical Properties of Soil Part 2

1. void ratio (e); ratio of volume of voids to solids, Plasticity and Structure of Soil
expressed as decimal Consistency Limits
 degree of firmness of fine-grained soil
 generally expressed in terms of very soft, soft, very
stiff, and hard
 consistency, ability of soil to undergo
unrecoverable deformation without cracking or
crumbing
 using Casagrande’s device
Albert Atterberg
 using fall cone method
 Swedish scientist
 develop a method to describe consistency of
fine-grained soils with varying moisture
contents

Atterberg Limits  semilogarithmic graph, plotted with w vs. cone

penetration d
 limits of water content used to define soil
 compressibility on the basis of liquid limit
behavior
 soil behaves more like solid at very low w
 when w is very high, soil and water may flow
like liquid
 behavior of soil can be divided into 4 basic
states:
- solid
Plastic Limit (PL) and Plasticity Index
- semisolid
- plastic Plastic Limit (PL)
- liquid
 w, in %, at which soil crumbles when rolled into
threads of 3.2 mm in diameter
 lower limit of the plastic stage of soil
 mixture is deformed to any shape under minor
pressure

Plastic Index (PI)

 difference between liquid limit and plastic limit of

soil
 important in classifying fine-grained soils
 fundamental to Casagrande plasticity chart
 the greater the difference between liquid and
plastic limits, the greater the plasticity of soil
 cohesionless soil (zero plasticity index; non-plastic)
Atterberg’s Consistency Limits  fat clays (high plasticity index; highly plastic)
 reports to the nearest whole number, omitting
 shrinkage limit (w, in %, transition from solid to percent designation
semisolid)  non-plastic (NP), if LL/PL could not be determined
 plastic limit (w, transition from semisolid to or if PL ≥ LL
plastic state)
 liquid limit (w from plastic to liquid state)
 may be used to obtain gen. info about a soil
and its strength, compressibility, and
permeability properties; empirical correlations
for some engineering properties; and soil
classification
Liquid Limit (LL)
 w, in %, required to close a distance of 12.5
mm (0.5 in)
 flow curve, relationship between moisture
content and log N is approximated as a straight
line
 N = 25, from flow curve, gives liquid limit of soil
 flow index (IF); slope of flow line

Shrinkage Limit (SL)

 w, in %, at which volume of soil mass ceases to  when CI > 100% (soil is relatively strong; semi-solid
change state)
 when CI is negative value, w > LL
 LI + CI = 100%

Activity

 slope of line correlating PI and % finer than 2 mm

 for identifying swelling potential of clay soils
 predict dominant clay type/mineral in soil sample
 high activity = large volume change when wetted
and large shrinkage when dried

Plasticity Chart

Liquidity Index and Consistency Index

 PI = 0.73 (LL 20); A-line separates inorganic clays
Liquidity Index (LI) from inorganic silts
 Inorganic clay values lie above A-line
 relative consistency of a cohesive soil in natural  Inorganic silts lie below A-line
state (water-plasticity ratio)  Organic clay plot in same region as inorganic silts
of high compressibility which is below A-line and LL
> 50
 Organic silts plot below A-line and with LL of 30-50
 PI = 0.9 (LL-8); U-line (upper limit of the
 indicates nearness of its water content to its LL relationship of the PI to LL) lies above the A-line
 when soil is at its LL, its LI is 100% and behaves
like liquid
 when soil is at its PL, its LL is 0
 negative values of LI indicate w < PL (soil is in a
hard state)
 LI < 0, soils that are heavily over consolidated may
have a natural w < PL
 LI > 1, w > LI; soil when remolded can be
transformed into a viscous form to flow like liquid

Consistency Index (CI)

 consistency/firmness of soil Uses of Consistency Limit

 nearness of water content of soil to its PL
 for remolded soils; do not give complete info about
in-situ soils
 index properties:
1. LL and PL depend upon the type and amount of
 when CI = 0, soil is at LL (extremely soft and has clay in soil
negligible shear strength)
 when w = PL then CI = 100% (firm)
2. PI is a measure of amount of clay in soil and - the clay particles are very close to each other,
fineness of particles the positively charged edges can be attracted
3. As soil particle decreases, LL and PL increases to negatively charged faces of particles
4. LL < 20% is generally sand
5. Sandy soil as non-plastic (NP) Clay
6. PL increases if organic matter is added, without
any significant increase in LL (soils with high  possess high void ratios
organic content have low PI)  when a soil has 50% or more particles with sizes of
7. LL is an indicator of the compressibility of soil 0.002 mm or less
(compressibility of soil increases with an increase
in LL) Week 6: Soil Classification Part 1
8. Shrinkage index is directly proportional to % of CF
9. Toughness index is a measure of shearing strength Soil Classification System
of soil at PL
10. As LL increases, dry strength and toughness  arrangement of different soils with similar
decreases, whereas compressibility and properties into groups & subgroups based on their
permeability increases application
11. As PI increases, dry strength and toughness  should be based mainly on mechanical properties:
increases, whereas permeability decreases permeability, stiffness, strength
 establish a set of conditions which will allow useful
Soil Structure comparisons to be made between different soils
 most are based on simple index properties such as
 geometric arrangement of soil particles with particle size distribution & plasticity
respect to one another
 factors affect structure: Textural Classification
- shape
- size  texture, surface appearance of soil
- mineralogical composition of soil particles
- nature and composition of soil water
 soils can be placed into 2 groups: cohesionless
and cohesive
 cohesionless soil
- 2 major categories: single grained (stable
position, wide range of void ratio) and
honeycombed (ranging from 0.02 mm to 0.002
mm; fine sand and silt form small arches with
chains of particles; have large void ratios and
can carry an ordinary static load but breaks
down under heavy load)

Week 4: Plasticity and Structure of Soil

 ASTM D4318 (Standard Test Methods for Liquid

Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soil)
 shrinkage ratio (SR); ratio of volume change of soil
as a % of dry volume to the change in w

Classification by Engineering Behavior

 AASHTO (American Association of State Highway

and Transportation Officials) Classification
System; used mostly by state and country highway
departments
- originally developed by Hogentogler and
 cohesive soils Terzaghi (1929) as Public Roads Classification
- caused by van der Waals forces System
 - the present AASHTO (1978) system is based
in 1945

 USDA (Unified Soil Classification System);

geotechnical engineers generally prefer this
- original form of this system was proposed by
Casagrande in 1942 fir use in airfield
construction works undertaken by Army Corps
of Engineers during WWII
- with the US Bureau of Reclamation, system
was revised in 1952
 Soil Mechanics 1. soil mass is an elastic continuum
having constant value or modulus of
Final Term elasticity
2. soil is homogeneous (identical
Week 13: Stresses due to Applied Load
properties at diff. points)
Stress Distribution in Soils 3. soil is isotropic (identical properties in
all directions)
§ geostatic stresses – includes:
4. soil mass is semi-infinite (limited on
- total stress
its top by a horizontal plane and
- effective stress
infinite in other directions)
- pore water pressure
5. soil is weightless and is free from
§ added stresses – includes:
residual stresses before application
- Bossinisque Equations
of load
- Westergaard’s Method
- Approximate Method Common examples of external loads are:
§ nature of distribution of stress must be
§ uniform strip loads (wall footing)
known to analyze problems such as
§ uniformly loaded square, rectangular, or
compressibility, bearing capacity,
circular footings (column, pier, water tank
stability, and lateral pressure
footings, etc.)
§ when a load is applied to the soil surface,
§ triangular and trapezoidal strip loads
it increases vertical stresses
(embankments)
§ increased stresses are directly under the
loaded area but extend indefinitely in all Determination of vertical stress increase at a
directions certain depth due to application of load on
§ at a point within a soil mass, stress will surface. The loading type includes:
be developed by:
- overburden § point load
- by any structures imposed on that § line load
soil mass § uniformly distributed vertical strip load
§ linearly increasing vertical loading on a
Geostatic Stress strip
§ embankment type of loading
§ geostatic stress – the stresses due to
§ uniformly loaded circular area
self-weight when the ground surface is
§ uniformly loaded rectangular area
horizontal and properties of soil do not
change along a horizontal plane; Bossinisque Equations (refer to tables)
stresses are normal to the x and y planes
and no shearing stresses Point Load
§ vertical stress – density of soil 𝑃𝑃 3𝑥𝑥 2 𝑧𝑧 𝑥𝑥 2 − 𝑦𝑦 2 𝑦𝑦 2 𝑧𝑧
∆𝜎𝜎𝑥𝑥 = � 5 − (1 − 2𝜇𝜇) � 2 + 3 2 ��
increases as depth increases due to the 2𝜋𝜋 𝐿𝐿 𝐿𝐿𝑟𝑟 (𝐿𝐿 + 𝑧𝑧) 𝐿𝐿 𝑟𝑟
weight of soil above
𝑃𝑃 2𝑥𝑥 2 𝑧𝑧 𝑦𝑦 2 − 𝑥𝑥 2 𝑥𝑥 2 𝑧𝑧
𝜎𝜎𝑣𝑣 = � 𝛾𝛾ℎ ∆𝜎𝜎𝑦𝑦 = � 5 − (1 − 2𝜇𝜇) � 2 + 3 2 ��
2𝜋𝜋 𝐿𝐿 𝐿𝐿𝑟𝑟 (𝐿𝐿 + 𝑧𝑧) 𝐿𝐿 𝑟𝑟
§ horizontal stress – depend on vertical
3𝑃𝑃 𝑧𝑧 3 3𝑃𝑃 𝑧𝑧 3
stress, type of soil and its conditions ∆𝜎𝜎𝑧𝑧 = =
𝜎𝜎𝐻𝐻 = 𝐾𝐾𝑜𝑜 𝜎𝜎𝑣𝑣 2𝜋𝜋 𝐿𝐿5 2𝜋𝜋 (𝑟𝑟 2 + 𝑧𝑧 2 )5/2

Stresses due to Applied Load 𝑟𝑟 = �𝑥𝑥 2 + 𝑦𝑦 2

§ the most important original solution was 𝐿𝐿 = �𝑥𝑥 2 + 𝑦𝑦 2 + 𝑧𝑧 2 = �𝑟𝑟 2 + 𝑧𝑧 2

given by Boussinesq (1885) for
𝜇𝜇 = 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑛𝑛′ 𝑠𝑠 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟
distribution of stress and are used to
obtain stresses in soil mass due to ∆𝜎𝜎𝑧𝑧 can be rewritten as:
externally applied loads; the ff.
𝑃𝑃
assumptions are made: ∆𝜎𝜎𝑧𝑧 = 𝐼𝐼
𝑧𝑧 2 1
 3 1
𝐼𝐼1 = 5
2𝜋𝜋
𝑟𝑟 2 2
�� � + 1�
𝑧𝑧

Vertical Line Load

2𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞
∆𝜎𝜎𝑧𝑧 =
𝜋𝜋(𝑥𝑥 2 + 𝑧𝑧 2 )2

Horizontal Line Load

2𝑞𝑞 𝑥𝑥𝑧𝑧 2
∆𝜎𝜎𝑧𝑧 =
𝜋𝜋 (𝑥𝑥 2 + 𝑧𝑧 2 )2

Vertical Stress Caused by a Vertical Strip

Load
𝐵𝐵 2
𝑞𝑞 𝑧𝑧 𝑧𝑧 𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵 �𝑥𝑥 2 − 𝑧𝑧 2 − � �� ⎫
4
∆𝜎𝜎𝑧𝑧 = {tan−1 � � + 𝜋𝜋 − tan−1 � �−� + 𝐵𝐵 2 𝑧𝑧 2
𝜋𝜋 𝐵𝐵
𝑥𝑥 − � 2 �
𝐵𝐵
𝑥𝑥 + � 2 � �𝑥𝑥 + 𝑧𝑧 − � ��
2 2 𝐵𝐵 2
2
⎬ Approximate Method
4 ⎭

Put a 𝜋𝜋 if the first part is negative. § stressed area is larger than the
corresponding dimension of loaded area
Vertical Loading on an Infinite Strip by amount equal to the depth of
𝑞𝑞 2𝑥𝑥 subsurface area
∆𝜎𝜎𝑧𝑧 = � 𝛼𝛼 − sin 2𝛿𝛿� § called 2:1 method because stressed area
2𝜋𝜋 𝐵𝐵
increases at a slope of 1: x for each 2: y
Vertical Stress due to Embankment 𝑃𝑃
𝜎𝜎𝑧𝑧 =
Loading (𝐵𝐵 + 𝑧𝑧)(𝐿𝐿 + 𝑧𝑧)
𝑞𝑞0 𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵
𝑞𝑞0 𝐵𝐵1 + 𝐵𝐵2 𝐵𝐵1 ∆𝜎𝜎 =
∆𝜎𝜎𝑧𝑧 = �� � (𝛼𝛼1 + 𝛼𝛼2 ) − (𝛼𝛼2 )� (𝐵𝐵 + 𝑧𝑧)(𝐿𝐿 + 𝑧𝑧)
𝜋𝜋 𝐵𝐵2 𝐵𝐵2
Week 16: Subsurface Exploration
𝑞𝑞0 = 𝛾𝛾ℎ
𝐵𝐵1 + 𝐵𝐵2 𝐵𝐵1 § subsurface exploration – process of
𝛼𝛼1 (𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟) = tan−1 � � − tan−1 � � identifying layers of deposits that underlie
𝑧𝑧 𝑧𝑧
a proposed structure and their physical
𝐵𝐵1 characteristics (Braja Das, 2016)
𝛼𝛼2 = tan−1 � �
𝑧𝑧 § soil exploration/soil investigation –
Simplified Form: field and lab investigations required to
obtain essential information on subsoil
∆𝜎𝜎𝑧𝑧 = 𝑞𝑞0 𝐼𝐼2 (Murthy, V., 2007)
§ subsurface explorations – obtain info
Vertical Stress below the Center of a
about subsurface conditions at the site of
Uniformly Loaded Circular Area
proposed construction for design and
⎧ ⎫ planning of structures and construction
⎛ ⎪ 1 ⎞⎪ techniques
∆𝜎𝜎𝑧𝑧 = 𝑞𝑞 1 − ⎜ 3⎟
⎨ 2 2 ⎬ Subsurface Exploration
⎪ 𝑅𝑅
�� � + 1� ⎪
⎩ ⎝ 𝑧𝑧 ⎠⎭
§ consist of determining:
Vertical Stress at Any Point below a - profile of natural soil deposits at site
Uniformly Loaded Circular Area - taking soil samples
- engineering properties of soil
∆𝜎𝜎𝑧𝑧 = 𝑞𝑞(𝐴𝐴′ + 𝐵𝐵′ )
- includes in-situ testing of soil
A and B are functions of z/R and r/R. § generally done to obtain info for the ff.
purposes:
Vertical Stress Caused by a Rectangular - select the type and depth of
Load foundation for structure
- determine bearing capacity of soil
 - probable maximum and differential - form of few borings/test pits using
settlements cone penetrometers and sounding
- establish ground water level and rods to obtain info about strength and
determine properties of water compressibility of soils
- predict lateral earth pressure against 3. detailed explorations
retaining wall and abutments - determine engineering properties of
- select suitable construction soil in diff. strata
techniques - includes an extensive boring
- predict and solve potential foundation program, sampling, and lab testing
problems - field tests (determine properties of
- ascertain the suitability of soil as a soil in natural state)
construction mat a. vane shear tests
- investigate safety of existing b. plate load tests
structures and suggest remedial c. permeability tests
measures - for complex projects (bridges, dams,
§ depends on: multi-story buildings) require it while
- type of structure to be built small projects like a residential
- variability of strata at proposed site dwelling does not
- cost of investigation and entire
Sampling in Soil
project
§ would be more advisable to invest on § soils in nature are heterogeneous with
subsurface exploration than to mixture of sand, silt, and clay in diff.
overdesign building proportions
§ aim is to get max info for designing and § disturbed samples – representative
construction at a min. cost samples which contain all constituents in
their proper proportions but structure of
Stages in Subsurface Explorations
soil is not the same as in the in-situ
1. site reconnaissance conditions; lab tests for this are:
- includes a visit to site and study maps 1. mechanical properties
and other relevant records; helps in 2. Atterberg limits
deciding future program of site 3. specific gravity
investigations (scope of work, 4. chemical analysis
methods of exploration, type of § undisturbed samples – represent the
samples for lab and in-situ testing) in-situ condition of soil (structural
- information is obtained in arrangement of particles, water content,
reconnaissance: density, and stress conditions); lab tests
a. general topography of site for this are:
b. existence of settlement cracks 1. shear strength
c. evidence of landslides, creep of 2. consolidation
slopes, and shrinkage cracks 3. in-situ density
d. stratification of soils from deep 4. water content
cuts 5. permeability
e. location of high flood marks § amount of sampling depends on:
f. depth of groundwater (wells) - time constraint
g. existence of springs and swamps - topography
h. drainage pattern - cost factors
i. vegetation existing at the site - reason for sampling
j. existence of underground water
How to collect disturbed soil samples?
mains, power conduits, etc.
2. preliminary exploration § use backhoe to create test pit
- determine depth, thickness, extent, § collect soil from bucket or using hand
and composition of each soil stratum augers to collect a sample from a
at site vertical boring
§ use drill rigs to collect disturbed § depth of 60 m or more
samples from great depths § flights act as crew conveyor to bring soil
§ split-spoon samplers, Shelby tubes, to surface
and macro core push samplers are § used in all types of soil below the water
used in conjunctions with drill rig/direct- table but not mixed with gravel, cobbles,
push rig to collect sample after the rig etc.
reaches desired depth § central stem may be hollow (preferred)
or solid
How to collect undisturbed soil samples?
Shell and Auger Method (Sand Bailer)
§ use drill rigs
§ common sampling tools include:
a. long split-spoon samplers – collect
samples in soft soil
b. piston samplers – do not work well
in gravel, sand, or lithified soil
c. pitcher barrel sampler – pushed
into the soil to collect undisturbed
sample

Engineers will disregard the disturbed

portions of sample during testing.

Exploratory Borings in the Field § heavy duty pipe with hard cutting edge
and flat valve which opens only inside
Hand Operated Augers
§ length: 1-3 m or more (depending on
weight required for cutting of soil)
§ weight: 30-60 kg or more
§ useful even in dense sandy deposits or
stiff to hard clay soils or even sandy soil
mixed with gravel

Wash Boring

§ depth of about 10 m
§ suitable for all types of soil above water
table but only in clayey soil below water
table
§ string of drill rods is used for advancing
the boring
§ diameter of holes: 10-20 cm
§ not suitable in very stiff to hard clay nor
in granular below water table
§ not practicable in dense and nor in sand
mixed with gravel even if strata lie above
water table

Power Driven Augers § drill holes only and not to make use of
disturbed washed materials for analysis
§ boring is stop, and chopping bit is
replaced by a sampler (undisturbed
sample is required)
§ sampler is pushed into soil at bottom of
hole and sample is withdrawn
§ convenient provided the soil is either
sand, silt, or clay (not for soil mixed with
gravel/boulders)
Rotary Drilling § used for drilling holes and for obtaining
rock cores
§ using either diamond studded bit
(superior but costlier) or cutting edge
consisting of chilled shot
§ core barrel may consist of single/double
tube
§ double-tube barrel gives good quality
sample of rock

Soil Exploration Report

§ rapidly rotating drilling bits attached to
§ soil samples collected from field are
bottom of drilling rods cut and grind soil
subjected to lab tests, and then a report
and advance borehole
is prepared
§ used in sand, clay, and rocks (unless
§ any soil exploration report should contain
badly fissured)
the ff. info:
§ water/drilling mud is forced down
- scope of investigation
§ boreholes with diameter: 50-203 mm
- general description of proposed
suitable
structure for which exploration has
Percussion Drilling been conducted
- geologic conditions of site
- drainage facilities at site
- details of boring
- description of subsoil conditions
- groundwater table
- details of foundation
recommendations and alternatives
- any anticipated construction
problems
- limitation of investigation
§ the ff. graphic presentations also need to
be attached:
§ used for making holes in rocks, boulders,
- site location map
and other hard strata
- location of borings
§ heavy chisel is alternatively lifted and
- boring logs
dropped in vertical hole
- laboratory test results
§ advantages: used for all types of
- other special presentations
materials even in glacial tills with
boulders
§ disadvantages: mat at bottom is
disturbed by heavy blows and impossible
to get good quality undisturbed samples,
more expensive, and difficult to detect
minor changes on properties of strata
penetrated

Core Drilling
 Foundation Engineering  soil is non-cohesive (c = 0), dry, isotropic, and
homogenous
 backfill is horizontal
Notes
 wall is vertical
Lateral Earth Pressure  wall friction is neglected
 failure is a plain strain problem
 lateral earth pressure – pressure that soil exerts
in horizontal direction (direct result of horizontal Different Types of Lateral Earth Pressure
stresses in the soil)
 at-rest earth pressure – wall may be restrained
 important parameter for the design of bridge
from moving and lateral earth pressure on the wall
abutment, different types of retaining walls, sheet
at any depth
piles and other retaining structures
 active earth pressure – wall may tilt away from the
 affects the consolidation behavior and strength of
soil that is retained and with sufficient wall tilt, a
soil
triangular soil wedge behind the wall will fail
 vertical/near-vertical slopes of soil – supported
 passive earth pressure – wall may be pushed into
by retaining walls, other similar structures
the soil that is retained and with sufficient wall
 proper design requires estimation of lateral earth
movement, a soil wedge will fail
pressure, which is a function of several factors:
1. type and amount of wall movement
2. shear strength parameters of soil
3. unit weight of soil
4. drainage conditions in backfill

Variation of Pressure

 coefficient of lateral earth pressure (k) – ratio of

horizontal effective stress to vertical effective
stress (𝜎𝜎ℎ : 𝜎𝜎𝑣𝑣 )
 usually computed using classical theories by
Coulomb (1773) and Rankine (1857)
 general wedge theory proposed by Terzaghi
(1941) is more general, improvement over earlier
theories
Coulomb (1773) Assumptions
 backfill is a dry, cohesionless, homogeneous,
isotropic soil
 backfill surface is planar and can be inclined
 back of wall can be inclined to vertical  active case – as the wall moves away from soil
 failure surface is a plane surface which passes thru backfill, active condition develops and lateral
the heel of wall pressure against the wall decreases with wall
 position and line of action of earth pressure are movement until the minimum active earth
known pressure force is reached
 sliding wedge is considered to be a rigid body and  passive case – as wall moves towards the soil
earth pressure is obtained by considering the backfill, passive condition develops and lateral
limiting equilibrium of the sliding wedge as a whole pressure against the wall increases with wall

Rankine (1857) Assumptions

 movement until maximum passive earth pressure
is achieved
 Lambe, Whitman (1969), for dense sand,
horizontal strain is about 0.05%
Classical Lateral Earth Pressure Theories
 Rankine’s Theory – no wall friction
 Coulomb’s Theory – with wall friction
 in both theories, it is required that soil mass is in a
state of plastic equilibrium (soil mass is on verge
of failure)
 failure – state of stress which satisfies the Mohr- Coulomb’s Theory of Active Pressure
Coulomb criterion
 proposed a theory for calculating the lateral earth
Rankine’s Theory of Active Pressure pressure on a retaining wall with granular soil
backfill
 if wall with a plane vertical face is backfilled with  failure is 2-dimensional
cohesionless, moves away from backfill, pressure  under active pressure, wall will move away from
is the minimum possible soil mass and failure surface would be a plane
 if wall is rough, it makes an angle (angle of wall
friction); when wall movement is sufficient, a soil
mass of weight ruptures (surface is slightly curved)
1. analysis would indicate that surface would
make an angle of 45 degrees
2. soil pressure on the wall at any depth will
decrease
3. for a frictionless wall, 𝜎𝜎ℎ = 𝑧𝑧

Coulomb’s Theory of Passive Pressure

 depth (𝒛𝒛𝒄𝒄 ) – depth of tensile crack (tensile stress in

soil will eventually cause a crack along the soil wall
 necessary amount of outward displacement:
1. 0.001H-0.004 for granular soil
2. 0.01H-0.04H for cohesive soil backfills
Rankine’s Theory of Passive Pressure
 pressure increases from value of rest condition to
the maximum value
 weight of backfill opposes the movement of wall
 under passive pressure, potential failure surface is
a plane
The forces acting on this wedge are:

1. weight of wedge (W)

2. resultant (R)
3. active force per unit length of wall (𝑃𝑃𝑎𝑎 ) if active
4. passive force per unit length of wall (𝑃𝑃𝑝𝑝) if
passive
Cantilever and Anchored Sheet Piles  anchors – minimize the depth of penetration
required by the sheet piles and reduce cross-
 cantilever sheet piles – sheet pile wall which sectional area and weight of sheet piles
derives its support solely thru interaction with the 2 Basic Methods of Designing Anchored Sheet
surrounding soil Pile Walls
1. free cantilever sheet piles – subjected to a 1. free earth support method – depth of
concentrated horizontal load at its top, no embedment is small and pile rotates at its
backfill above the dredge level and derive its bottom top (no point of inflection)
stability entirely from lateral passive resistance 2. fixed earth support method – depth of
of soil below dredge level embedment is large and bottom top is fixed
2. cantilever sheet piles – retains backfill at against rotations (inflection occurs)
higher level on side and stability is entirely from
lateral passive resistance of soil
Failure Modes of Cantilever Sheet Piles

Braced Cut
 braced cut – excavation supported by suitable
Cantilever Sheet Pile Walls bracing systems
 usually recommended for walls of moderate height Bracing consists of:
(6 m or 20 ft or less) measured above dredge line 1. sheet piles
2. wales
3. struts

Excavation support system are used to:

 minimize excavation area
 keep sides of deep excavations stable
 zone A – lateral pressure is just active pressure  ensure movements of soil will not cause damage to
from land side neighboring structures or to utilities in surrounding
 zone B – there is active pressure from land side ground
and passive pressure from water side
 zone 3 – condition is reversed (below the point of Construction Procedures
rotation)
 driving the sheeting
Anchored Sheet Piles  placing of top row of wales and struts
 excavating soil, placing rows of wales and struts
 height of backfill material behind a cantilever sheet continues
pile wall exceeds about 6 m (20 ft), tying the wall
near the top to anchor plates/walls/piles become Introduction
more economical
 during excavation, upper portion of soil mass next
to cut does not undergo sufficient lateral
deformation
 as depth of excavation increases, time lag between
excavation and placement of struts increases,
resulting in gradual increase in the lateral
deformation of wall

Pressure Variation for Design of Sheeting, Struts,

Wales
Important difference between bracings in open cuts
and retaining walls are:

retaining wall bracing

undergo progressive fail as a single unit
failure
Struts
 struts – horizontal columns subject to bending
 should have a minimum vertical spacing of about
2.75 m (9 ft) or more
 load-carrying capacity depends on their
slenderness ratio
 for wide cuts, splicing
 for braced cuts in clayey soils, depth of first strut
below ground surface < depth of tensile crack
 Foundation Engineering  Coulomb’s active pressure
sin2(𝛽𝛽 + ∅)
𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 =
Formula Sheet 2
𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠(∅ + 𝛿𝛿)𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠(∅ − 𝑎𝑎)
Soil Composition 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑛𝑛2 𝛽𝛽𝛽𝛽𝛽𝛽𝛽𝛽(𝛽𝛽 − 𝛿𝛿) �1 + � �
𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠(𝛽𝛽 − 𝛿𝛿)𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠(𝛽𝛽 + 𝑎𝑎)
𝑒𝑒
 porosity: 𝑛𝑛 =  Coulomb’s passive pressure
1+𝑒𝑒
 unit weight: 𝛾𝛾 =
𝑊𝑊 sin2(𝛽𝛽 − ∅)
𝑉𝑉 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 = 2
𝐺𝐺𝑠𝑠 𝛾𝛾𝑤𝑤
 dry unit weight: 𝛾𝛾𝑑𝑑 = 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠(∅ + 𝛿𝛿)𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠(∅ + 𝑎𝑎)
1+𝑒𝑒
(𝐺𝐺𝑠𝑠 +𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆)𝛾𝛾𝑤𝑤 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑛𝑛2 𝛽𝛽𝛽𝛽𝛽𝛽𝛽𝛽(𝛽𝛽 + 𝛿𝛿) �1 − � �
 moist unit weight: 𝛾𝛾𝑚𝑚 = 𝛾𝛾𝑑𝑑 (1 + 𝜔𝜔) = = 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠(𝛽𝛽 + 𝛿𝛿)𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠(𝛽𝛽 + 𝑎𝑎)
1+𝑒𝑒
𝐺𝐺𝑠𝑠 𝛾𝛾𝑤𝑤 (1+𝜔𝜔)
Cantilever Sheet Piles
1+𝑒𝑒
(𝐺𝐺𝑠𝑠 +𝑒𝑒)𝛾𝛾𝑤𝑤
 saturated unit weight: 𝛾𝛾𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 = Sheet Pile Wall with the Presence of Water Table
1+𝑒𝑒
 degree of saturation: 𝑆𝑆 =
𝐺𝐺𝑠𝑠 𝜔𝜔 (Cantilever Sheet Piling Penetrating Sandy Soils)
𝑒𝑒

same with density

Lateral Earth Pressure
Rankine
1. Find lateral earth pressure coefficient (k).
 normally consolidated soil (at-rest):
𝑘𝑘0 = 1 − sin ∅
 over-consolidated soil (at-rest):
𝑘𝑘0 = 1 − sin ∅ √𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂
1−sin ∅
 Rankine active pressure: 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 =
1+sin ∅
1+sin ∅
 Rankine passive pressure: 𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 =
1−sin ∅
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 1. Find lateral earth pressure coefficient (k).
2. Find soil stresses (𝜎𝜎). ( 2 /𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘) 2. Find soil stresses (𝜎𝜎1 & 2 ).
𝑚𝑚
Typical Soil Stresses 𝜎𝜎1′ = 𝛾𝛾𝐿𝐿1 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎
′
 𝜎𝜎 = 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 𝜎𝜎2 = (𝛾𝛾𝐿𝐿1 + 𝛾𝛾 ′ 𝐿𝐿2 )𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎
 𝜎𝜎 = 𝛾𝛾𝑤𝑤 𝐻𝐻 (pore water pressure) 3. Find 𝑳𝑳𝟑𝟑: 𝐿𝐿3 = (𝑧𝑧 − 𝐿𝐿) =
𝜎𝜎2′
 𝜎𝜎 = 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 (surcharge) ′
𝛾𝛾 �𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 −𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 �
1 1 1
3. Find and sum all force (𝐹𝐹/𝑃𝑃). (𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘) 4. Find P: 𝑃𝑃 = 𝜎𝜎1 𝐿𝐿1 + 𝜎𝜎1 𝐿𝐿2 + (𝜎𝜎2 − 𝜎𝜎1 )𝐿𝐿2 + 𝜎𝜎2 𝐿𝐿3
1 2 2 2
 triangular force: 𝐹𝐹 = 𝜎𝜎𝜎𝜎 5. Find location of resultant force (𝑧𝑧̅): 𝑃𝑃𝑧𝑧̅ = ∑ 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃
2
 rectangular force: 𝐹𝐹 = 𝜎𝜎𝜎𝜎 6. Find 𝝈𝝈′𝟓𝟓 : 𝜎𝜎5′ = (𝛾𝛾𝐿𝐿1 + 𝛾𝛾 ′ 𝐿𝐿2 )𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 + 𝛾𝛾 ′ 𝐿𝐿3 �𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 − 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 �
4. Find location of resultant force (𝑦𝑦�): 𝑅𝑅𝑦𝑦� = ∑ 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 7. Find areas (A).
5. Find moment (M): 𝑀𝑀 = 𝐹𝐹𝑇𝑇 𝑦𝑦� (𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 − 𝑚𝑚) 𝜎𝜎5′
𝐴𝐴1 = ′
If applies, Rankine active force after tension cracks 𝛾𝛾 �𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 − 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 �
8𝑃𝑃
𝑧𝑧 𝐻𝐻−𝑧𝑧 𝐴𝐴2 = ′
 depth of tension crack: = (𝑚𝑚) 𝛾𝛾 �𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 − 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 �
2𝐶𝐶�𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘−2𝐶𝐶�𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎
 Rankine active force per unit length of the wall 6𝑃𝑃�2𝑧𝑧̅𝛾𝛾 ′ �𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 − 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 � + 𝜎𝜎5′ �
𝐴𝐴3 =
after the tension cracks: 𝛾𝛾 ′2 �𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 − 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 �
2
1
𝐹𝐹 = �𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 − 2𝐶𝐶�𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 �(𝐻𝐻 − 𝑧𝑧) 𝑃𝑃[6𝑧𝑧̅𝜎𝜎5′ + 4𝑃𝑃]
2 𝐴𝐴4 = 2
𝛾𝛾 ′ 2 �𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 − 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 �
Coulomb 8. Find 𝑳𝑳𝟒𝟒 by trial and error.
𝐿𝐿44 + 𝐴𝐴1 𝐿𝐿34 − 𝐴𝐴2 𝐿𝐿24 − 𝐴𝐴3 𝐿𝐿4 − 𝐴𝐴4 = 0
9. Find 𝝈𝝈′𝟒𝟒 : 𝜎𝜎4′ = 𝜎𝜎5′ + 𝛾𝛾 ′ 𝐿𝐿4�𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 − 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 �
10. Find 𝝈𝝈′𝟑𝟑 : 𝜎𝜎3′ = 𝐿𝐿4 (𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 − 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 )𝛾𝛾′
𝜎𝜎3′ 𝐿𝐿4 −2𝑃𝑃
11. Find 𝑳𝑳𝟓𝟓: 𝐿𝐿5 =
𝜎𝜎3′ +𝜎𝜎4′
12. Find theoretical depth of penetration (D):
𝐷𝐷𝑡𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 = 𝐿𝐿3 + 𝐿𝐿4
𝐷𝐷𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 = 1.2𝐷𝐷𝑡𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 1.3𝐷𝐷𝑡𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒
 Maximum Bending Moment Free Cantilever Sheet Piling (Sandy Soil)
2𝑃𝑃
 tensile crack: 𝑧𝑧 ′ = �
𝛾𝛾′(𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 −𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 )
 maximum moment:
1 1
𝑀𝑀𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = 𝑃𝑃(𝑧𝑧 + 𝑧𝑧 ′ ) − � 𝛾𝛾 ′ 𝑧𝑧 ′2 �𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 − 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 �� � � 𝑧𝑧 ′
2 3
 allowable flexural stress of sheet pile material:
𝑀𝑀𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
𝑆𝑆 =
𝜎𝜎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
Sheet Pile Wall with the Absence of Water Table
(Sandy Soil)

1. Find the depth of penetration (D):

2
8𝑃𝑃 12𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 2𝑃𝑃
𝐷𝐷4 − � � 𝐷𝐷2 − � � 𝐷𝐷 − � � =0
𝛾𝛾�𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 − 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 � 𝛾𝛾�𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 − 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 � 𝛾𝛾�𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 − 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 �
𝛾𝛾�𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 −𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎�𝐷𝐷2 −2𝑃𝑃
2. Find 𝐿𝐿5 : 𝐿𝐿5 =
2𝐷𝐷�𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 −𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 �𝛾𝛾
3. Find maximum moment:
𝛾𝛾𝑧𝑧 ′3 �𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 − 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 �
𝑀𝑀𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = 𝑃𝑃(𝐿𝐿 + 𝑧𝑧 ′) −
6
2𝑃𝑃
4. Find tensile crack: 𝑧𝑧 ′ = �
𝛾𝛾 ′ �𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 −𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 �

1. Find lateral earth pressure coefficient (k). Cantilever Sheet Piling Penetrating Clay Soils
1−sin ∅
 Rankine active pressure: 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 =
1+sin ∅
1+sin ∅
 Rankine passive pressure: 𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 =
1−sin ∅
2. Find soil stresses (𝜎𝜎2−5).
𝜎𝜎2′ = 𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎
′
𝜎𝜎3 = 𝐿𝐿4 �𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 − 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 �𝛾𝛾
′
𝜎𝜎4 = 𝜎𝜎5′ + 𝛾𝛾𝐿𝐿4 �𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 − 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 �
𝜎𝜎5′ = 𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 + 𝛾𝛾𝐿𝐿3 (𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 − 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 )
𝐿𝐿𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎
3. Find 𝑳𝑳𝟑𝟑: 𝐿𝐿3 =
𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 −𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎
1 1
4. Find resultant force (P): 𝑃𝑃 = 𝜎𝜎2′ 𝐿𝐿 + 𝜎𝜎2′ 𝐿𝐿3
2 2
𝐿𝐿�2𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 +𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 �
5. Find tensile crack (𝑧𝑧̅): 𝑧𝑧̅ =
3�𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 −𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 �
6. Find 𝑳𝑳𝟒𝟒.
𝐿𝐿44 + 𝐴𝐴1 𝐿𝐿34 − 𝐴𝐴2 𝐿𝐿24 − 𝐴𝐴3 𝐿𝐿4 − 𝐴𝐴4 = 0
7. Find areas (A).
𝜎𝜎5′
𝐴𝐴1 = ′
𝛾𝛾 �𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 − 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 �
8𝑃𝑃
𝐴𝐴2 = ′
𝛾𝛾 �𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 − 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 � 1. Find lateral earth pressure coefficient (k).
6𝑃𝑃�2𝑧𝑧̅𝛾𝛾 ′ �𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 − 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 � + 𝜎𝜎5′ � 2. Find soil stresses (𝜎𝜎1 & 2 ).
𝐴𝐴3 = 2 𝜎𝜎1′ = 𝛾𝛾𝐿𝐿1 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎
𝛾𝛾 ′2 �𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 − 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 � ′
𝜎𝜎2 = (𝛾𝛾𝐿𝐿1 + 𝛾𝛾 ′ 𝐿𝐿2 )𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎
𝑃𝑃[6𝑧𝑧̅𝜎𝜎5′ + 4𝑃𝑃] 3. Find resultant force (P).
𝐴𝐴4 = 2
𝛾𝛾 ′ 2 �𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 − 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 � 1 1
𝑃𝑃 = 𝜎𝜎1 𝐿𝐿1 + 𝜎𝜎1 𝐿𝐿2 + (𝜎𝜎2 − 𝜎𝜎1 )𝐿𝐿2
2 2
4. Find location of resultant force (𝑧𝑧̅): 𝑃𝑃𝑧𝑧̅ = ∑ 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃
5. Find theoretical depth of penetration.  Locate z. (𝐿𝐿1 < 𝑧𝑧 < (𝐿𝐿1 + 𝐿𝐿2 )
𝑃𝑃(𝑃𝑃 + 12𝑐𝑐𝑧𝑧̅)
𝐷𝐷2 [4𝑐𝑐 − (𝛾𝛾𝐿𝐿1 + 𝛾𝛾 ′ 𝐿𝐿2 )] − 2𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷 − =0 𝑃𝑃1 − 𝐹𝐹 + 𝑃𝑃21 + 𝑃𝑃31 = 0
(𝛾𝛾𝐿𝐿1 + 𝛾𝛾 ′ 𝐿𝐿2 ) + 2𝑐𝑐
𝐷𝐷[4𝑐𝑐−(𝛾𝛾𝐿𝐿1 +𝛾𝛾 ′ 𝐿𝐿2 )]−𝑃𝑃
6. Find 𝑳𝑳𝟒𝟒: 𝐿𝐿4 = 1 1
4𝑐𝑐 𝜎𝜎1 𝐿𝐿1 − 𝐹𝐹 + 𝜎𝜎1 (𝑧𝑧 − 𝐿𝐿1 ) + 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 𝛾𝛾 ′ (𝑧𝑧 − 𝐿𝐿1 )2 = 0
7. Find 𝝈𝝈𝟔𝟔 and 𝝈𝝈𝟕𝟕 . 2 2
𝜎𝜎6 = 4𝑐𝑐 − (𝛾𝛾𝐿𝐿1 + 𝛾𝛾 ′ 𝐿𝐿2 )  Calculate 𝑀𝑀𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 with their respective centroid.
𝜎𝜎7 = 4𝑐𝑐 + (𝛾𝛾𝐿𝐿1 + 𝛾𝛾 ′ 𝐿𝐿2 ) 𝑀𝑀𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = � 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹
8. Find actual depth of penetration.
𝐷𝐷𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 = 1.5𝐷𝐷𝑡𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 Braced Cut
Minimum Size of Sheet Pile Section
𝑃𝑃
 tensile depth: 𝑧𝑧 ′ =
𝜎𝜎6
𝜎𝜎6 𝑧𝑧′2
 maximum moment: 𝑀𝑀𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = 𝑃𝑃(𝑧𝑧 ′ + 𝑧𝑧̅) −
2
𝑀𝑀𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
 section modulus: 𝑆𝑆 =
𝜎𝜎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎

Anchored Sheet Piles

Cohesionless Soil
1. Find active lateral earth pressure coefficient (k).
1 − sin ∅
𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 =
1 + sin ∅
2. Find force (P): 𝑃𝑃𝑎𝑎 = 0.65𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎
3. Find pressure distribution (𝜔𝜔): 𝜔𝜔 = 𝑃𝑃𝑎𝑎 𝑆𝑆
4. Find strut loads by distribution of forces.
� 𝑀𝑀 = 0; � 𝐹𝐹𝑦𝑦 = 0
5. Find maximum bending moment for pile wall
section by shear and moment diagram.
6. Find maximum bending moment for wale
𝑅𝑅𝑠𝑠 2
section based on highest strut load: 𝑀𝑀𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 =
8

Cohesive Soil
1. Find lateral earth pressure coefficient (k).
2. Find soil stresses (𝜎𝜎1 & 2 ). 1. Determine if it is a soft-medium or stiff clay.
𝜎𝜎1′ = 𝛾𝛾𝐿𝐿1 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 soft-medium 𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 0.25𝐻𝐻 + 0.75𝐻𝐻
′
𝜎𝜎2 = (𝛾𝛾𝐿𝐿1 + 𝛾𝛾 ′ 𝐿𝐿2 )𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 ≥4
𝜎𝜎
clay 𝑐𝑐
3. Find 𝑳𝑳𝟑𝟑: 𝐿𝐿3 = ′ 2 stiff clay 𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 0.25𝐻𝐻 + 0.5𝐻𝐻 + 0.25𝐻𝐻
𝛾𝛾 �𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 −𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎� <4
4. Find resultant force (P). 𝑐𝑐
1 1 1 2. Find force (P) greater of:
𝑃𝑃 = 𝜎𝜎1 𝐿𝐿1 + 𝜎𝜎1 𝐿𝐿2 + (𝜎𝜎2 − 𝜎𝜎1 )𝐿𝐿2 + 𝜎𝜎2 𝐿𝐿3
2 2 2 𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾
5. Find location of resultant force: (𝑧𝑧̅): 𝑃𝑃𝑧𝑧̅ = ∑ 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 ≥4 <4
𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐
6. Find 𝑳𝑳𝟒𝟒 by trial and error. 𝑃𝑃𝑎𝑎 = 𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 − 4𝐶𝐶 𝑃𝑃𝑎𝑎 = 0.3𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾
3𝑃𝑃[(𝐿𝐿1 + 𝐿𝐿2 + 𝐿𝐿3 ) − (𝑧𝑧̅ + 𝐼𝐼1 )]
𝐿𝐿34 + 1.5𝐿𝐿24 (𝐼𝐼2 + 𝐿𝐿2 + 𝐿𝐿3 ) − =0 𝑃𝑃𝑎𝑎 = 0.3𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾
𝛾𝛾 ′ �𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 − 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 �
3. Find pressure distribution (𝜔𝜔): 𝜔𝜔 = 𝑃𝑃𝑎𝑎 𝑆𝑆
7. Find theoretical depth of penetration.
4. Find strut loads by distribution of forces.
𝐷𝐷𝑡𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 = 𝐿𝐿3 + 𝐿𝐿4
8. Find actual depth of penetration. � 𝑀𝑀 = 0; � 𝐹𝐹𝑦𝑦 = 0
𝐷𝐷𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 = 1.3 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 1.4𝐷𝐷𝑡𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 5. Find maximum bending moment for pile wall
9. Find anchor force per unit length of wall. section by shear and moment diagram.
1 6. Find maximum bending moment for wale
𝐹𝐹 = 𝑃𝑃 − �𝛾𝛾 ′ �𝑘𝑘𝑝𝑝 − 𝑘𝑘𝑎𝑎 ��𝐿𝐿24 𝑅𝑅𝑠𝑠 2
2 section based on highest strut load: 𝑀𝑀𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 =
10. Find maximum moment. 8