Comparison of site-specific and empirical correlations for drained residual shear strength

Analyses of landslides, slopes and embankments often require reliable drained residual shear strength estimates for cohesive deposits involving pre-existing shear surfaces. Laboratory tests to measure residual shear strength can be costly and time consuming. Therefore, empirical correlations based o...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Géotechnique 2018-12, Vol.68 (12), p.1099-1108
Hauptverfasser: Hayden, C. P., Purchase-Sanborn, K., Dewoolkar, M.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1108
container_issue 12
container_start_page 1099
container_title Géotechnique
container_volume 68
creator Hayden, C. P.
Purchase-Sanborn, K.
Dewoolkar, M.
description Analyses of landslides, slopes and embankments often require reliable drained residual shear strength estimates for cohesive deposits involving pre-existing shear surfaces. Laboratory tests to measure residual shear strength can be costly and time consuming. Therefore, empirical correlations based on more readily available index properties such as liquid limit and clay-size fraction appear as an attractive alternative in practice. This paper presents residual strength and index properties for 25 natural samples, predominantly claystone and siltstone, collected from a single geologic setting over an approximately 0·25 km 2 site. The data show substantial variability in residual strength against any single index parameter considered in a site-specific correlation. Comparisons of these data, along with three additional data sets, generally indicated notable variability among data sets and relatively poor fit to published empirical correlations. Empirical correlations for residual strength may be useful in approximating the expected range of residual strength. However, given the significant variability in the data, both within and between data sets, empirical correlations should not entirely replace carefully performed site-specific laboratory tests measuring residual strength, when reliable values are required.
doi_str_mv 10.1680/jgeot.17.P.200
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2137882313</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2137882313</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c333t-f4a6c3048cddfa0dc09cbd6ffdb3197576417769b202cf750bbe8bdf387981ea3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNotkDtPwzAURi0EElXpymyJOeE6TmxnRBUvqRIdYGGxHD9aV2kcrtOBf0-gTN9y9B3pEHLLoGRCwf1h59NUMlluywrggiyYbFghRSMuyQKAiUI10FyTVc6xA6hF3UjgC_K5TsfRYMxpoCnQHCdf5NHbGKKlZnDUH8eI0Zqe2oToezPFNGQaElKHJg7eUfQ5utNM5L03SPOEfthN-xtyFUyf_ep_l-Tj6fF9_VJs3p5f1w-bwnLOpyLURlgOtbLOBQPOQms7J0JwHWetbKSomZSi7SqobJANdJ1XnQtcyVYxb_iS3J1_R0xfJ58nfUgnHGalrhiXSlWc8Zkqz5TFlDP6oEeMR4PfmoH-Taj_Emom9VbPCfkPAnBnRg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2137882313</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of site-specific and empirical correlations for drained residual shear strength</title><source>ICE Virtual Library Journals</source><creator>Hayden, C. P. ; Purchase-Sanborn, K. ; Dewoolkar, M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Hayden, C. P. ; Purchase-Sanborn, K. ; Dewoolkar, M.</creatorcontrib><description>Analyses of landslides, slopes and embankments often require reliable drained residual shear strength estimates for cohesive deposits involving pre-existing shear surfaces. Laboratory tests to measure residual shear strength can be costly and time consuming. Therefore, empirical correlations based on more readily available index properties such as liquid limit and clay-size fraction appear as an attractive alternative in practice. This paper presents residual strength and index properties for 25 natural samples, predominantly claystone and siltstone, collected from a single geologic setting over an approximately 0·25 km 2 site. The data show substantial variability in residual strength against any single index parameter considered in a site-specific correlation. Comparisons of these data, along with three additional data sets, generally indicated notable variability among data sets and relatively poor fit to published empirical correlations. Empirical correlations for residual strength may be useful in approximating the expected range of residual strength. However, given the significant variability in the data, both within and between data sets, empirical correlations should not entirely replace carefully performed site-specific laboratory tests measuring residual strength, when reliable values are required.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0016-8505</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1751-7656</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1680/jgeot.17.P.200</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: ICE Publishing</publisher><subject>Clay ; Data ; Datasets ; Embankments ; Empirical analysis ; Laboratories ; Laboratory tests ; Landslides ; Liquid limits ; Properties ; Residual strength ; Shear strength ; Siltstone ; Slope ; Tests ; Variability</subject><ispartof>Géotechnique, 2018-12, Vol.68 (12), p.1099-1108</ispartof><rights>2018 Thomas Telford Ltd</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c333t-f4a6c3048cddfa0dc09cbd6ffdb3197576417769b202cf750bbe8bdf387981ea3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c333t-f4a6c3048cddfa0dc09cbd6ffdb3197576417769b202cf750bbe8bdf387981ea3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-4719-7253</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hayden, C. P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Purchase-Sanborn, K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dewoolkar, M.</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of site-specific and empirical correlations for drained residual shear strength</title><title>Géotechnique</title><description>Analyses of landslides, slopes and embankments often require reliable drained residual shear strength estimates for cohesive deposits involving pre-existing shear surfaces. Laboratory tests to measure residual shear strength can be costly and time consuming. Therefore, empirical correlations based on more readily available index properties such as liquid limit and clay-size fraction appear as an attractive alternative in practice. This paper presents residual strength and index properties for 25 natural samples, predominantly claystone and siltstone, collected from a single geologic setting over an approximately 0·25 km 2 site. The data show substantial variability in residual strength against any single index parameter considered in a site-specific correlation. Comparisons of these data, along with three additional data sets, generally indicated notable variability among data sets and relatively poor fit to published empirical correlations. Empirical correlations for residual strength may be useful in approximating the expected range of residual strength. However, given the significant variability in the data, both within and between data sets, empirical correlations should not entirely replace carefully performed site-specific laboratory tests measuring residual strength, when reliable values are required.</description><subject>Clay</subject><subject>Data</subject><subject>Datasets</subject><subject>Embankments</subject><subject>Empirical analysis</subject><subject>Laboratories</subject><subject>Laboratory tests</subject><subject>Landslides</subject><subject>Liquid limits</subject><subject>Properties</subject><subject>Residual strength</subject><subject>Shear strength</subject><subject>Siltstone</subject><subject>Slope</subject><subject>Tests</subject><subject>Variability</subject><issn>0016-8505</issn><issn>1751-7656</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNotkDtPwzAURi0EElXpymyJOeE6TmxnRBUvqRIdYGGxHD9aV2kcrtOBf0-gTN9y9B3pEHLLoGRCwf1h59NUMlluywrggiyYbFghRSMuyQKAiUI10FyTVc6xA6hF3UjgC_K5TsfRYMxpoCnQHCdf5NHbGKKlZnDUH8eI0Zqe2oToezPFNGQaElKHJg7eUfQ5utNM5L03SPOEfthN-xtyFUyf_ep_l-Tj6fF9_VJs3p5f1w-bwnLOpyLURlgOtbLOBQPOQms7J0JwHWetbKSomZSi7SqobJANdJ1XnQtcyVYxb_iS3J1_R0xfJ58nfUgnHGalrhiXSlWc8Zkqz5TFlDP6oEeMR4PfmoH-Taj_Emom9VbPCfkPAnBnRg</recordid><startdate>201812</startdate><enddate>201812</enddate><creator>Hayden, C. P.</creator><creator>Purchase-Sanborn, K.</creator><creator>Dewoolkar, M.</creator><general>ICE Publishing</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TN</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>F28</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L.G</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4719-7253</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201812</creationdate><title>Comparison of site-specific and empirical correlations for drained residual shear strength</title><author>Hayden, C. P. ; Purchase-Sanborn, K. ; Dewoolkar, M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c333t-f4a6c3048cddfa0dc09cbd6ffdb3197576417769b202cf750bbe8bdf387981ea3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Clay</topic><topic>Data</topic><topic>Datasets</topic><topic>Embankments</topic><topic>Empirical analysis</topic><topic>Laboratories</topic><topic>Laboratory tests</topic><topic>Landslides</topic><topic>Liquid limits</topic><topic>Properties</topic><topic>Residual strength</topic><topic>Shear strength</topic><topic>Siltstone</topic><topic>Slope</topic><topic>Tests</topic><topic>Variability</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hayden, C. P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Purchase-Sanborn, K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dewoolkar, M.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Oceanic Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>ANTE: Abstracts in New Technology &amp; Engineering</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy &amp; Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><jtitle>Géotechnique</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hayden, C. P.</au><au>Purchase-Sanborn, K.</au><au>Dewoolkar, M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of site-specific and empirical correlations for drained residual shear strength</atitle><jtitle>Géotechnique</jtitle><date>2018-12</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>68</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>1099</spage><epage>1108</epage><pages>1099-1108</pages><issn>0016-8505</issn><eissn>1751-7656</eissn><abstract>Analyses of landslides, slopes and embankments often require reliable drained residual shear strength estimates for cohesive deposits involving pre-existing shear surfaces. Laboratory tests to measure residual shear strength can be costly and time consuming. Therefore, empirical correlations based on more readily available index properties such as liquid limit and clay-size fraction appear as an attractive alternative in practice. This paper presents residual strength and index properties for 25 natural samples, predominantly claystone and siltstone, collected from a single geologic setting over an approximately 0·25 km 2 site. The data show substantial variability in residual strength against any single index parameter considered in a site-specific correlation. Comparisons of these data, along with three additional data sets, generally indicated notable variability among data sets and relatively poor fit to published empirical correlations. Empirical correlations for residual strength may be useful in approximating the expected range of residual strength. However, given the significant variability in the data, both within and between data sets, empirical correlations should not entirely replace carefully performed site-specific laboratory tests measuring residual strength, when reliable values are required.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>ICE Publishing</pub><doi>10.1680/jgeot.17.P.200</doi><tpages>10</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4719-7253</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0016-8505
ispartof Géotechnique, 2018-12, Vol.68 (12), p.1099-1108
issn 0016-8505
1751-7656
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2137882313
source ICE Virtual Library Journals
subjects Clay
Data
Datasets
Embankments
Empirical analysis
Laboratories
Laboratory tests
Landslides
Liquid limits
Properties
Residual strength
Shear strength
Siltstone
Slope
Tests
Variability
title Comparison of site-specific and empirical correlations for drained residual shear strength
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-22T04%3A21%3A00IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20site-specific%20and%20empirical%20correlations%20for%20drained%20residual%20shear%20strength&rft.jtitle=G%C3%A9otechnique&rft.au=Hayden,%20C.%20P.&rft.date=2018-12&rft.volume=68&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=1099&rft.epage=1108&rft.pages=1099-1108&rft.issn=0016-8505&rft.eissn=1751-7656&rft_id=info:doi/10.1680/jgeot.17.P.200&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2137882313%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2137882313&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true