Source: GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

1 Introduction

1.1 BRANCHES OF MECHANICS

‘‘Mechanics’’ may be defined as that part of physical science that treats of the
action of forces on masses. There are many branches of mechanics, each appli-
cable to a particular kind of mass or classification of matter. Mechanics pertaining
to astronomical bodies is called celestial mechanics. The mechanics of gases is
called pneumatics; of water, hydraulics; of solid bodies in motion, dynamics; of
solid bodies at rest, statics; of heat-energy transfer, thermodynamics; and so on.
Similarly, the branch of mechanics that deals with the action of forces on soil
masses is called soil mechanics, and on rocks, rock mechanics.

1.2 BRANCHES OF GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

The practice of engineering that involves application of the principles of soil

mechanics is called soil engineering. Similarly, the practice of engineering that
involves application of the principles of rock mechanics may be called rock
engineering. Because rock mechanics for the most part grew out of soil mechanics,
a close relationship exists between these engineering disciplines, which now are
collectively referred to as geotechnical engineering.

Foundation engineering is the application of geotechnical engineering for the

design of foundations for structures including buildings, walls, and embankments;
the total load supported by a foundation obviously must not exceed the
supporting capacity of the underlying soil. Less obvious, but also of critical
importance, is that settlement of the completed structure must not be excessive
or uneven.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com) 1

Copyright © 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
 Introduction

2 Geotechnical Engineering

Geotechnical engineering also is involved in highway engineering and in

engineering for dams.

A more recent application of geotechnical engineering is geoenviron-

mental engineering, which involves assessment, prevention, and mitigation of
ground and surface water pollution from landfills, lagoons, and hazardous
waste sites.

1.3 WHY SOIL IS DIFFERENT

It is important to recognize that soils are different from all other construction
materials. A list of top 11 differences is as follows, ranging from the obvious to the
esoteric. An understanding and utilization of these characteristics occupy a major
portion of this book, and of geotechnical engineering.
1. Soil is cheap—usually—and therefore is our most abundant construc-
tion material. Railway and highway embankments comprise the longest
man-made structures in the world, and earth dams are the largest, many
exceeding the bulk of the Great Pyramid. The interior of the Great Wall
is soil.
2. The weight of the soil itself is a major factor in design, in some instances
being so large that it cannot even support itself, so we have a landslide.
Virtually every structure ultimately derives its support from soil or from
rock; those that don’t either fly, float, or fall over.
3. Soils are extremely variable, ranging from a harsh jumble of angular rock
fragments on a steep mountain slope to massive billows of sand in dunes,
to gentle ripples of sand on a beach, to free-standing hills of loessial silt,
to soft, viscous gumbo that can mire a tank.
4. Whereas most construction materials are specified and manufactured to a
given purpose, soils are simply there, to be either used or avoided depending
on the good or bad qualities they may possess. A geotechnical engineer should
have a sufficient understanding of geology and soil science to reliably identify,
test, and evaluate the relevant soil properties and property variations at a site.
For example, many soils become stiffer and stronger with increasing depth
because of compression under the weight of the overburden. This property
is utilized by building foundations on piles that transfer load downward to
stiffer soils or strata.
5. Soils are not homogeneous solids, but are composed of mixtures of discrete
particles that are in contact and surround jagged, spider-like voids that are
filled with varying amounts of water and air. The properties of soils depend in
part on packing of the particles, which is why soils often are compacted
prior to being used to support pavements or foundations.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

Copyright © 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
 Introduction

Introduction 3

Figure 1.1
Soils are
particulate and
respond to
external load by
developing
friction at the grain
contacts. As a
result the K ratio of
horizontal to
vertical stress is
quite variable, and
depends on the
stress history and
loading conditions.

6. When soil particles are disturbed they can exhibit a kind of mob behavior,
jamming into each other like elbows on a New York subway. This can either
markedly increase or decrease the soil strength. A decrease in strength
explains why landslides continue to move until they find a more level
geometry. Soils can be tricky.
7. Horizontal pressure from soil is an important consideration for design of
retaining walls, but also is highly variable. Whereas the K ratio of horizontal
to vertical stress in a liquid is 1.0, and for a rigid solid is 0, in soils the ratio
depends on the resistance of particles to sliding. This is illustrated in Fig. 1.1.
K for soils typically varies from 0.2 to 0.5, but can be much higher if high
horizontal stress is inherited from overburden that has been removed by
erosion.
8. Horizontal pressure depends on whether a soil is pushing or is being pushed.
For example, soil piled against a retaining wall usually will exert much less
pressure than if it is being pushed by a bulldozer. The reason for this is
illustrated by changing directions of the friction arrows in the lower part
of Fig. 1.1—whichever stress is higher, vertical or horizontal, determines
the directions of the friction arrows and the K ratio. A bulldozer that is
designed on the basis of the wrong K will have a built-in anchor. Soils can
be very tricky.
9. An unsaturated soil derives part of its strength from the pull or suction
of capillary water—the same pull that draws water up into a fine straw
as shown at the right in Fig. 1.2. Then when the soil becomes saturated it
loses this part of its strength. Some wind-blown loess soils that have never been
saturated therefore collapse under their own weight if they become saturated.
10. Compressing a saturated soil causes stress to be carried in part by
grain-to-grain contact and in part by pressure from the pore water, as

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

Copyright © 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
 Introduction

4 Geotechnical Engineering

Figure 1.2
Pressure in
pore water can
be positive
or negative,
respectively
decreasing or
increasing
frictional strength.

shown at the left in Fig. 1.2. As pore water pressure increases, friction
between the grains decreases and the soil becomes weaker. Measurement and
control of pore water pressure therefore can be a major factor influencing
construction.
11. Certain soil clay minerals blow up like an accordion when wet with water,
and can exert enough pressure to lift pavements, floors, and foundations, and
push in walls. This may come as a surprise, but the cost of repairs of damages
caused by expansive clays exceeds that from landslides and earthquakes,
and runs to billions of dollars per year.

This list is not complete, partly because geotechnical engineering is relatively

new and the era of discovery is not over. Soils are complex materials, and tests are
required to identify, evaluate, and effectively use them. Curtailing an investigation
to save money up front will increase overall cost as the design then must be overly
conservative to allow for any unrecognized problems. A competent geotechnical
investigation is essential if problems are to be avoided, and it is axiomatic that
the investigation that is not conducted prior to construction probably will
be conducted later, when repairs are needed or the matter goes to court. The
problems depicted in Fig. 1.3 went to court.

1.4 SITE INVESTIGATION

1.4.1 Site Geology

The first step in a site investigation is to identify the geological conditions, which
can profoundly influence the plan and methods of the investigation. For example,
borings performed on a hill whose flanks reveal a persistent rock outcrop will be
far different from those performed in a river floodplain where rock may be tens or
hundreds of meters deep. A preliminary assessment is made through recognition
of surface features, reference to geological and agricultural soil maps, and records
from prior borings in the vicinity.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

Copyright © 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
 Introduction

Introduction 5

Figure 1.3
This could have
been avoided.
Fill soil was
identified by
drilling, so part of
the house was
supported on piles.
What was not
recognized was
that the fill was on
top of an old
landslide that was
reactivated by
weight of the fill.

1.4.2 Site Walkabout

A site visit by a geotechnical engineer may be somewhat bewildering to spectators
as the engineer pokes around in adjacent hillsides or ravines, or even goes across the
street or around the corner to observe existing structures. Such a seemingly casual
inspection of nearby areas can provide important clues to site conditions and geo-
logy. For example, soil or rock layers exposed in a nearby ravine may be the same as
those underlying the site—but don’t count on it without other confirmation.

Often the most important clues to landslides or expansive clays are signs of
distress in existing structures. Such clues can be as subtle as a pavement heaved
up in the middle, or a scarp or step that may be devoid of vegetation or may
support a line of younger trees extending laterally across a hillside. A series of
shallow depressions can warn of the existence of subterranean caverns, or a mine
or tunnel. Such observations can be extremely important because the causes can
be missed by routine pattern boring; borings can reveal only what is encountered
by drilling, not what is in between. Regardless of how many holes are bored,
soil conditions between the borings are interpolated based on circumstantial
evidence, a knowledge of the local geology, and general observations.

1.4.3 Drilling Program

The purpose of exploration drilling is to identify, sample, and test the soils.
Drilling programs sometimes are laid out without a preliminary site visit but only
if the engineer is familiar with and experienced in the area. Sometimes an initial
investigation is made to select or evaluate different possible building sites and give
information relative to design and construction. A design not only must be safe,
it must be ‘‘buildable’’ within the economic and time constraints of a project.
Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)
Copyright © 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
 Introduction

6 Geotechnical Engineering

1.5 SOIL TESTS

Testing is required to evaluate soils at a particular site, and normally are con-
ducted as part of the boring program. Relatively undisturbed samples are taken
for laboratory testing, and in recent years there has been a rapid increase in the
use of rapid tests that are performed in situ in order to save time and money.

The footprint and complexity of a structure help to define appropriate depths and
patterns of borings, and the tests that should be performed. Statistical methods
are used to evaluate the results, and show that the more variable the soil, the more
data are required for an accurate characterization of its properties. It also is
important to define and identify different soils at a site in order to evaluate the
properties of each instead of mixing apples and random dog turds.

One challenge for geotechnical engineers is to not only convince clients and their
representatives of the need for a proper investigation, but also to heed the results.
For example, when a pile foundation was recommended for an elaborate marble-
faced building, the architect objected that he was not going to approve putting
money into the ground ‘‘where it would not show.’’ An argument was made that
without an adequate foundation the consequences indeed would show, and the
building was put on piles.

1.6 SOIL WATER

Architects or structural engineers who are not accustomed to dealing with the
vagaries and inconsistencies of nature may regard soil as perverse and lacking in
manners. What other material is so variable and so dependent on its environment?
Even a change in the elevation of the groundwater table can have adverse effects.
An important clue that may be overlooked is the soil color, gray indicating
seasonal wet conditions.

1.7 SOIL VARIABILITY AND THE ‘‘FACTOR OF SAFETY’’

Factor of safety is defined as a ratio between a design value and a failure value.
For example, if a rope breaks under load X, the allowable load must be
reduced by a factor of safety or the rope will break. Factors of safety in
geotechnical engineering tend to be generous, often 3 to 5, to ensure that
everything remains on the safe side. The more variable the soil, the less able one
is to accurately define its average or most critical properties, and the higher
the factor of safety. Thus ‘‘factor of safety’’ therefore in part is a ‘‘factor of
ignorance,’’ although it seldom is stated in this way, at least to a client. The less
Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)
Copyright © 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
 Introduction

Introduction 7

variable the soil and the more comprehensive the investigation, the lower can be
the factor of safety.

Increasing a factor of safety by as little as 0.5 can add substantially to cost, so it

often is advantageous to try and trim the factor of safety by having more soil tests
and improving statistical reliability of the results. Thus, an inexpensive test that is
performed many times may be more accurate and create more confidence than an
expensive and more sophisticated test that can be performed only a few times for
the same amount of money.

The factor of safety also may be lower where occasional failures are acceptable.
An example is highways, where periodic repairs of weak spots is more cost-
effective than overdesign of an entire project. On the other hand, an earth dam
whose failure would endanger thousands of lives obviously requires a more
reliable and conservative investigation and factor of safety.

1.8 ANCIENT APPLICATIONS OF GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

The first human uses of soil and rock as engineering materials is lost in antiquity.
Neanderthal or his predecessors may have been the first to recognize the
advantage of structural engineering as they used a log to bridge a stream, but most
effort probably was focused on simply staying alive. As glaciers receded, climatic
changes raised lake levels, so people of the early Iron Age supported their lakeside
dwellings on piles. Paved highways existed in Egypt several thousand years B.C.E.,
and were used by the pyramid builders for transportation of the construction
materials. Remnants of underground cisterns, drains, tunnels, and aqueducts, and
many other structures involving soil, have been unearthed at the sites of early
Middle Eastern civilizations. Ancient engineers encountered and solved many
practical problems in soil engineering, based on experience and trial and error.

Some primitive structures reveal an unexpected level of sophistication. Early stone

arches as well as Inuit (Eskimo) igloos follow the ideal shape of a catenary similar
to the St. Louis Arch, so sides do not sustain any bending moment, compared
with the circular arches and domes of classical European architecture that
required lateral support from columns and flying buttresses. There is a Darwinian
factor in engineering, survival of the fittest.

1.9 EARLY LITERATURE ON SOIL ENGINEERING

In 1687, a French military engineer named Vauban set forth empirical rules and
formulas for the design and construction of revetments to withstand lateral soil
pressures, and nearly 200 years later, Wheeler, in his Manual of Civil Engineering,
recommended the rules of Vauban for U.S. Military Cadets.
Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)
Copyright © 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
 Introduction

8 Geotechnical Engineering

In 1691 Bullet, of the French Royal Academy of Architecture, presented the first
theory of lateral earth pressures based on the principles of mechanics. It was he
who introduced the concept of a ‘‘sliding wedge’’ of soil against a retaining wall.
He assumed that the slip angle was 458, which later was shown to be an
oversimplification.

Coulomb in 1773 applied the principle of maxima and minima to the sliding-
wedge theory to determine the most critical wedge angle, and showed that it
depends in part on internal frictional properties of the soil. His formulas, while
now recognized as simplifications, still are in use today and are the basis for many
computer programs. It therefore is important to know the assumptions and
limitations of a computer program prior to committing it to use.

Another important contribution by Coulomb was to recognize the concept that

shearing resistance of soil involves two separate components, cohesion and
friction. An empirical formula embodying these components now is almost
universally accepted and used in geotechnical engineering practice, and is referred
to as the Coulomb equation.

Coulomb’s interest and insight into soil problems were inspired by his profession
as a military engineer. After retiring as a result of ill health he invented the torsion
balance while seeking a prize for inventing a frictionless navigational compass.
He did not win the prize, but found a better use for his instrument by measuring
the faint attractive and repulsive forces caused by electrical charges. He at first
assumed that the attractions were inversely proportional to the separation
distance, but his experiments then established that they relate to the square of the
distance. Couomb’s inverse square law governs not only electrostatic attractions,
but also gravitational forces and, ironically, navigation of orbiting satellites.

1.10 NINETEENTH-CENTURY DEVELOPMENTS

In 1856 Rankine, in his treatise ‘‘On the Stability of Loose Earth,’’ employed the
concept of soil internal friction to retaining wall problems. His analysis gave a
quasi-hydrostatic distribution of pressure that agreed with Coulomb’s analysis
based on a sliding wedge, but by application of the theory of conjugate stresses
Rankine concluded that the resultant pressure on a wall acts parallel to the surface
of the backfill instead of horizontally. The contributions of Rankine and
Coulomb are regarded as classic and have served engineers well over the years, but
are now known to be simplifications that are not precisely realized in engineering
practice. For example, both theories predict that the resultant of pressure on a
retaining wall acts at one-third of the height of the wall, whereas measurements
indicate that it is higher because of partial support of the soil by wall friction and
arching action. The consequent increase in overturning moment is covered by the
factor of safety.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

Copyright © 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
 Introduction

Introduction 9

Also in 1856, two other concepts were introduced that play an important role in
soil engineering. These are Darcy’s Law defining gravitational flow of water
through porous media such as soils, and Stokes’ Law describing the equilibrium
velocity of solid particles settling in liquids. Stokes’ Law is used for measurement
of fine soil particle sizes from their settlement rates.

Another important contribution in the field of soil pressures is that of

Sir Benjamin Baker in 1881. Baker observed that the slip surface for a bank
failure is not planar as indicated by the Rankine and Coulomb analyses, but
incorporates vertically oriented cracks at the upper end. Decades earlier, in 1846,
the internal structure of landslides was investigated in the field by Alexandre
Collin, whose detailed cross-sections showed a curved instead of a flat slip
surface. Collin’s work unfortunately escaped the attention or was ignored by later
workers, who perhaps were more taken with the classical theory, and was
rediscovered only in recent years.

In 1871, Otto Mohr devised a simple graphical means for presentation and
analysis of stress data, and ‘‘Mohr’s circle’’ has become an invaluable tool for
the modern geotechnical engineer. Mohr later confirmed and generalized the
Coulomb failure criterion by relating to experimental findings, and Coulomb’s
earlier description of components of shearing strength sometimes is referred to as
the ‘‘Mohr-Coulomb failure envelope.’’

Another nineteenth-century contribution that was destined to become extremely

useful in modern soil engineering was the solution by a mathematician,
Boussinesq (pronounced Boo-sin-esk). By use of elastic analysis, in 1885 he
showed that stresses from a point load on the surface of soil should dissipate in
three-dimensional space much like ripples from a stone thrown in water. Although
soil is far from being an ideal elastic material, pressure measurements indicate that
the Boussinesq solution is appropriate for determining pressures from founda-
tions and for computing lateral pressures on retaining walls from loads applied at
the surface of the soil backfill.

1.11 SOIL MOISTURE STUDIES

Early in the twentieth century soil scientists employed by the U.S. Depart-
ment of Agriculture were active in the study of the mechanics of soil moisture.
Among these was Briggs, who suggested a classification of soil moisture.
Concurrently Buckingham proposed the concept of capillary potential and
conductivity, which has led to a better understanding of the forces responsible for
the retention and movement of capillary water in soils. Haines and Fisher
developed an important concept of soil cohesion resulting from capillary forces
or suction of water in soils that tends to pull soil grains together and increase
friction.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

Copyright © 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
 Introduction

10 Geotechnical Engineering

In 1911 a Swedish scientist, Atterberg, by observing the properties of soils being

molded in the hands, suggested two simple tests to determine upper and lower
limiting moisture contents through which a soil exhibits the properties of a plastic
solid. These tests for the ‘‘liquid limit’’ and ‘‘plastic limit,’’ respectively, now form
the basis for most engineering classification systems of soils.

1.12 MARSTON’S EXPERIMENTS

In the early 1900s at Iowa State College (now University), Anson Marston began
full-scale studies of soil loads on pipes in ditches. He later extended the studies to
include soil loads on culverts under soil embankments, which can result in a many-
fold increase in vertical pressure on the pipe. Marston’s work was extended by
Spangler to include the response of flexible culvert pipes to these kinds of loads.

Marston’s research perhaps is most notable because he introduced full-scale

experimentation, and then attempted to explain the results from theoretical
considerations. Then, perhaps most importantly, he presented the results in a
simplified form that could be readily understood and used by practicing engineers.

1.13 TERZAGHI’S CONTRIBUTIONS

As a professor at Robert College in Turkey, Karl Terzaghi investigated a variety

of soil problems and proposed the term ‘‘Erdbaumechanik’’ (soil mechanics) in
1925. For this and subsequent contributions Terzaghi is considered the ‘‘father of
modern soil mechanics.’’

Terzaghi’s innovative concepts derive in part from his educational background

in both mechanical engineering and geology. His classical and widely used theory
to explain the time-rate of consolidation of saturated soils is an adaptation of
heat flow theory of thermodynamics. Terzaghi also proposed a theory for friction
in soils that is used in mechanical engineering for friction in bearings.

An important part of Terzaghi’s work was to verify his theories experimentally.

He devised and constructed the first consolidometer, a device that now is
commonplace in soil mechanics laboratories.

Again utilizing his background in mechanical engineering, Terzaghi proposed a

widely used theory for foundation bearing capacity that is an adaptation of
Prandtl’s theory for a metal punch. He then reduced complicated mathematical
relationships to a form that is readily understood and used by engineers. The
relation between a diversified background and creativity is the topic of a book
by Arthur Koestler (1964), who defined it as a ‘‘juxtaposition of conflicting
matrices.’’

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

Copyright © 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
 Introduction

Introduction 11

Terzaghi also conducted full-scale studies of pressures on retaining walls in order

to test the Coulomb and Rankine theories, and dared to suggest that they might
be oversimplified by ignoring an influence from soil arching.

What Is the Classical Approach?

The research methods of Marston, Terzaghi, and many others may be regarded
as the ‘‘classical approach’’ in geotechnical engineering research. This involves:
(1) field observation by a trained eye, (2) development of a theory to try and
explain the observations, (3) experimentation to test and if necessary modify the
theory, and (4) simplifications to put the new-found knowledge into practice.
A fifth element is to maintain a positive outlook and never give up. Research
that omits one or more of these steps may be fatally flawed. For example, it
recently has become commonplace to publish computer-based analyses without
experimental verifications in unintended support of the adage, ‘‘garbage in,
garbage out.’’

In 1943, Terzaghi summarized classical soil mechanics theories in a book

appropriately titled Theoretical Soil Mechanics, which still is in print. In 1948 he
collaborated with a former student, Ralph Peck, to stress practical applications in
another important book, Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice, which remains in
print in revised editions.

1.14 SOIL AS A CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL

In 1906 C. M. Strahan, a county engineer in Georgia, began a systematic study of

the distribution of particle sizes in gravel-road surfaces in relation to road quality
and performance. Strahan’s conclusions from these correlative studies provided
the basis for later research in granular soil stabilization that now plays an
important role in the design and construction of highways and airport runways.

A contribution of outstanding importance based purely on experimentation is

that of Proctor, who in 1933 defined modern principles of soil compaction by
showing a relationship between compaction energy, moisture content, and density
of a compacted soil. Proctor’s test and its derivatives now are standards used in
construction of virtually all soil structures including earth embankments, levees,
earth dams, and subgrades for foundations or pavements.

1.15 SOIL CLASSIFICATION

In the 1920s, Terzaghi and Hogentogler introduced a scheme for soil classifi-
cation that became the basis for the ‘‘AASHTO classification’’ used in highway
work. In the 1940s, Arthur Casagrande of Harvard University introduced

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

Copyright © 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
 Introduction

12 Geotechnical Engineering

a soil classification for use by the U.S. Army in World War II, later named
the ‘‘Unified Classification,’’ and now used by most foundation engineers.
Casagrande also made improvements in laboratory tests, including a mechanical
device to measure the liquid limit that is based on a cog-wheel invention by
Leonardo da Vinci. This device is now standard equipment in all soil mechanics
laboratories.

1.16 LANDSLIDES

Field investigations, soil sampling, and testing gained new impetus and respect
after a series of landslides was investigated by a committee appointed by the
Swedish Royal Board of State Railways and chaired by Wolmar Fellenius.
The results, published in 1922, included a simple method of analysis that remains
the basis for a variety of modern computerized methods for evaluation of slope
stability. In 1948, a textbook by MIT professor Donald W. Taylor contained
considerable original material for the analysis of slope stability, with charts
that were developed with the aid of his graduate students.

Starting in the l950s, contributions towards a better understanding of clays,

soil compressibility, and landslides came from Norway and the Norwegian
Geotechnical Institute, led by Laurits Bjerrum and N. Janbu. In England,
A. W. Bishop and A. W. Skempton respectively presented a new slope stability
model and a theory explaining how slope failures in clays may be delayed
for many decades. Purdue University pioneered the use of computers to solve
slope stability problems, publishing a computer program that is widely used and
is the basis for later copyrighted programs.

Engineering geologists use a different but more general approach to landslides

by using their occurrences as a basis for landslide susceptibility maps that are
particularly useful in planning. The geotechnical engineer should be aware of the
availability of these maps in order to perform an intelligent investigation of
a specific site.

1.17 FOUNDATIONS

As previously mentioned, while many bearing capacity theories have been

proposed and used, the theory that forms the basis for most modern investiga-
tions is that of Terzaghi. In Canada, G. G. Meyerhoff extended and modified
Terzaghi’s bearing capacity theory, and at Duke University, A. Vesic suggested
modifications based on model studies with sands. In the 1960s, T. W. Lambe of
MIT introduced a new approach to the prediction of settlement called the ‘‘stress
path method.’’ One difficulty was the inability to accurately measure lateral
soil stresses in the field, and the 1970s saw the introduction of new methods

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

Copyright © 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
 Introduction

Introduction 13

including self-boring ‘‘pressuremeters’’ in France and in England, and more

recently the ‘‘Ko Stepped Blade’’ in the U.S. As demonstrated by Terzaghi with
his consolidometer, new instrumentation can lead to new discoveries.

The problem of sample disturbance was addressed by John Schmertmann in

connection with settlement preditions, and by C. C. Ladd in connection with shear
strength testing. An approach that is gaining favor is to test the soil in situ, with
a variety of electronically instrumented cone-tipped penetration devices such as
the ‘‘piezocone,’’ which also monitors pore water pressure. The spade-shaped
‘‘Dilatometer’’ developed in Italy by Marchetti is used to measure modulus and
predict settlement. The ‘‘Borehole Shear Test’’ developed in the U.S. measures
drained or effective stress shear strength in situ, thereby avoiding disturbances
from sampling.

Two important textbook references that emphasize a scientific approach to geo-

technical engineering include Soil Mechanics by T. W. Lambe and R. V. Whitman,
and Fundamentals of Soil Behavior by J. K. Mitchell.

1.18 SOIL DYNAMICS AND COMPUTER MODELING

Certain behaviors of soils in earthquakes, such as the development of quicksand

or sand ‘‘liquefaction,’’ contribute much of the damage to buildings. Studies of
soil dynamics in relation to earthquake damage were pioneered by H. Bolton Seed
and his associates at the University of California, Berkeley, and later by
T. L. Youd. Influences of machine vibrations were studied by D. D. Barkan in
Russia, and more recently by F. E. Richart at the University of Michigan.

Pile driving also involves soil dynamics, and procedures have been developed
based on computer modeling of soil reactions during pile driving, a concept
introduced in 1957 by a practicing foundation engineer, E. A. L. Smith.

The computer revolution also led to computer modeling of complex

soil mechanics problems by finite element analysis. This requires mathematical
modeling of soil strength and volume change behavior, which is difficult as these
tend to be discontinuous functions. Emphasis has been directed toward refined
laboratory testing to define idealized ‘‘constitutive equations’’ to describe
soil behavior under widely varying stress environments, a problem that may be
open-ended without some guiding theory.

As pile driving has gone out of favor in populated areas, alternatives have been
introduced including drilled-and-filled concrete shafts. Major advances in design
were made by Lyman Reece and Michael O’Neill in Texas, who developed design
procedures based on full-scale load tests. A more recent and rapidly growing
method involves replacing the concrete with aggregate that is rammed in place

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

Copyright © 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
 Introduction

14 Geotechnical Engineering

(Rammed Aggregate PiersTM) in order to increase lateral stress and strength of the
surrounding soil.

1.19 GEOTEXTILES, GEOMEMBRANES, GEONETS

Another recent innovation in geotechnical engineering is the use of geosynthetic

materials for drains, filters, lagoon linings, or tensile reinforcement within soil.
Each use requires its own material properties, such as permeability (or imper-
meability), tensile strength, and toughness. Current uses of geosynthetics include
acting as a separator or filter under landfills or between different soil layers, and
as tensile members to improve foundation bearing capacity or stability of slopes
and retaining walls.

1.20 ON BEING A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER

As implied by the above discussions, geotechnical engineering involves a broad

knowledge base that includes soil mechanics and geology, and to a lesser degree
groundwater hydrology, soil science, mineralogy, and statistics. This complexity
precludes a ‘‘handbook approach’’ except at a technician level, and the M.S. or
M.E. normally is considered the entry-level degree for a geotechnical engineer.
One of the attractions of geotechnical engineering is that every new assignment is
essentially a research project that will require a written report, so the preferred
graduate degree is with thesis. Supporting course work includes courses in
geology, agronomic soil survey, engineering mechanics, statistics, soil physics, clay
mineralogy, and groundwater hydrology.

The demand for geotechnical engineers continues to increase as building expands

into difficult or marginal sites. In many areas an environmental as well as an
engineering assessment of a building site is required before building permits are
granted. Insurance policies normally do not cover damages from wars or ground
movements and leave it to owners and builders to try and avoid all wars and
ground movements.

Most geotechnical engineers are consulting engineers, and others are employed by
government agencies, highway departments, and universities. Doctorate degrees
are mandatory in academia, and are increasingly common at higher levels in
consulting.

Regardless of the level of academic training, the beginning consulting geotechnical

engineer often starts by performing mundane chores in the field, identifying and
describing soil samples as they come from borings. The next steps are to prescribe
and/or perform appropriate soil tests, interpret and summarize the test results,
and write reports under the direction of a senior engineer. All reports preferably

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

Copyright © 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
 Introduction

Introduction 15

will be reviewed by another geotechnical engineer. Communication skills

obviously are essential. Computers and word processing are standard and make
it easy to incorporate standardized ‘‘boiler plate’’ that can include discussions
of area geology, and disclaimers prepared with the assistance of a lawyer.

1.21 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS AND ENGINEERING GEOLOGISTS

Whereas geotechnical engineering is engineering applied to geological materials,

engineering geology is geology applied to engineering problems. The two profes-
sions often share professional activities. The difference is mainly one of emphasis.
Engineering geologists usually are trained first as scientists so they may approach
a problem systematiclly, identifying all aspects and determining their relevance
through classifications and correlations. Geotechnical engineers usually are
trained first as engineers, and may prefer to look at a problem in simplified
terms in order to solve it mathematically and arrive at an answer.

Engineers sometimes view geologists as being ready to devote a lifetime of study

to a problem when the report must go out tomorrow, and geologists may see
engineers as oversimplifying the problem to the point where important aspects
are ignored or overlooked, and not fully appreciating the consequences from
meddling with Mother Nature. Some consequences are readily predictable—
straightening a river increases its gradient and erosion potential and takes out
bridges. Sometimes where a geologist sees a river, an engineer sees a dam and
reservoir. The geologist sees a reservoir that eventually and inevitably will be
clogged with sediment. By combining the strengths from various specialties,
engineers and scientists can form an alliance that can solve problems in a timely
manner and hopefully minimize future screw-ups. Then all they have to do is
convince the politicians.

Problems
1.1. Define: (a) mechanics; (b) soil mechanics; (c) soil engineering;
(d) geotechnical engineering.
1.2. Name some applications of geotechnical engineering.
1.3. Look up C. A. Coulomb in an encyclopedia and indicate whether the writer
of that article was well informed concerning his engineering contributions.
1.4. List the names of six scientists and engineers whose contributions currently
are being used in geotechnical engineering practice, and state the nature
of each.
1.5. Who is considered the father of modern soil mechanics? Why?
1.6. Discuss features of geotechnical engineering that distinguish this field from
structural engineering.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

Copyright © 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
 Introduction

16 Geotechnical Engineering

1.7. Which approach, that of the geotechnical engineer, the engineering geologist,
or both, is most appropriate to solve the following problems:
(a) Preparing a map of landslide hazards for zoning purposes, based on
landslide occurrence in relation to rock type.
(b) Figuring out how best to stop a landslide and restore an appropriate
factor of safety.
(c) Quantifying factors involved in a foundation failure, to be used as
a basis for prorating damages in a lawsuit.
(d) Identifying potential leaky bedrock around the edge of a water storage
reservoir.
(e) Designing erosion protection for a beach.
1.8. Look up information on Three Gorges Dam on the Yellow River in
China and suggest some methods that might be used to reduce or prevent
sedimentation of the reservoir.
1.9. What difficulty might be experienced as a result of straightening a river
immediately upstream from a bridge? Why?

Selected References
Atterberg, A. (1911). ‘‘Über die physikalische Bodenuntersuchung, und Über die Plastizität
der Tone.’’ Internationale Mitteilungen für Bodenkunde 1 (Part 1): 10.
Baker, Benjamin (1981). ‘‘The Actual Lateral Pressure of Earthwork.’’ Proc. Inst. Civ.
Engrs. (London) 65 (Part 3).
Boussinesq, J. (1885). Application des Potentiels à l’Étude de l’Équilibre et du Mouvement
des Solids Élastiques. Gauthier-Villars, Paris.
Briggs, Lyman J., and McLane, John W. (1907). ‘‘The Moisture Equivalent of Soils.’’ Bull.
45, U.S. Bureau of Soils, Washington, D.C.
Buckingham, E. (1907). ‘‘Studies on the Movement of Soil Moisture.’’ Bull. 38, U.S.
Bureau of Soils, Washington, D.C.
Casagrande, Arthur (1948). ‘‘Classification and Identification of Soils.’’ Trans. Am. Soc.
Civ. Eng. 113, 901.
Collin, Alexandre (1846). Landslides in Clay. Transl. from French by W. R. Schriever.
University of Toronto Press, Toronto, 1956.
Coulomb, C. A. (1976). ‘‘Essai sur une Application des Règles de Maximis et Minimis à
Quelques Problèmes de Statique, Relatifs à l’Architecture.’’ Me´moires de
Mathe´matique & de Physique, pre´sente´s à l’Acade´mie Royale des Sciences par divers
Savans, & lus dans ses Assemble´es, 7, 1773, pp. 343–82, Paris. English transl. by
J. Heyman, Coulomb’s Memoir on Statics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
1972.
Darcy, H. (1856). ‘‘Les Fontaines Publiques de la Ville de Dijon.’’ Dijon, Paris.
Koestler, Arthur (1964). The Act of Creation. The Macmillan Co., New York.
Lambe, T. W., and Whitman, R. V. (1959). Soil Mechanics. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Marston, A., and Anderson, A. O. (1913). ‘‘The Theory of Loads on Pipes in Ditches and
Tests of Cement and Clay Drain Tile and Sewer Pipe.’’ Bull. 31 of the Iowa
Engineering Experiment Station, Ames, Iowa.
Mitchell, J. K. and Soga, K. (2005) Fundamentals of Soil Behavior, 3rd ed. John Wiley &
Sons, New York.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

Copyright © 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
 Introduction

Introduction 17

Mohr, Otto (1871,2). ‘‘Berträge zur Theorie des Erddruckes.’’ Z. Arch. u. Ing. Ver.
Hanover. 17:344, and 18:67 and 245.
Proctor, R. R. (1933). ‘‘Fundamental Principles of Soil Compaction.’’ Engineering News-
Record (Aug. 31 and Sept. 7, 21, and 28).
Rankine, W. J. M. (1857). ‘‘On the Stability of Loose Earth.’’ Phil. Trans. Royal Soc.,
London.
Stokes, C. G. (1851). ‘‘On the Effect of the Internal Friction of Fluids on the Motion of
Pendulums.’’ Trans. Cambridge Phil. Soc. 9 (Part 2): 8–106.
Strahan, C. M. (1932). ‘‘Research Work on Semi-Gravel, Topsoil and Sand-Clay, and
Other Road Materials in Georgia.’’ Bull. Univ. of Georgia 22, No. 5-a.
Taylor, D. W. (1948). Fundamentals of Soil Mechanics. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Terzaghi, Karl (1925). Erdbaumechanik auf bodenphysicalischer Grundlage. Franz Deuticke,
Leipzig and Vienna.
Terzaghi, Karl, and Peck, Ralph (1967). Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice, 2nd ed.
John Wiley & Sons, New York.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

Copyright © 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.