5th Intl Conf on Geotechnical & Geophysical Site Characterisation

Empirical Estimation of Soil Unit Weight

and Undrained Shear Strength
from Shear Wave Velocity Measurements

SungWooMoonandTaeseoKu*
*AssistantProfessor
Dept.ofCivil&EnvironmentalEngrg.
NationalUniversityofSingapore

1
 OUTLINE

1. ShearWaveVelocity(VS)inGeotechnicalEngineering

2. PreviousEmpiricalCorrelationStudiesUsingVS

3. UnitWeightvs.StressnormalizedVS

4. UndrainedShearStrengthvs.VS

5. Summary&Conclusion

2
VS IN GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

Shearwavevelocity(VS)
Secondfastestwave&Directionalandpolarized
Dependsonsitespecificeffectivestressstateinsoils
Vs =C(c)n wherec=confiningstress,Candn=materialconstant
Mostfundamentalwavetogeotechnicalengineering(e.g.
grounddeformationprediction)
G0 =(t/g)Vs2
InsituVs measurementsareusedforevaluatingsitespecific
soilparametersandliquefactionresistance(SoilDynamics)

3
 CONTINUOUS VS PROFILING
AutoSeis
Ku, Mayne, et al. 2013 (CGJ, GTJ)

Verticallypropagating&horizontally Automaticseismicsource
polarizingshearwavevelocity(VsVH) :continuoustriggering

x x CPT DMT
Seismicsource
:triggeringat
R1 givendepth R1 Receiver1
Z2 Z1 t1 t1
Alternatingsequence:
CPT+DHT
R2 R2
t2 t2 Continuous
R12 = z12 + x2
R22 = z22 + x2 measurements
:Vs,qt,fs,u2
Vs = R / t
Receiver2 Nonstoppingcone
Singleseismicreceiver
advancement
Pseudo-interval True-interval Continuous-interval
seismic system seismic system seismic system
 CONTINUOUS Vs PROFILING
AutoSeis
Ku, Mayne, et al. 2013 (CGJ, GTJ)
0

10

20

30

40

m
0 100 200 300 ms
 UNDERGROUND MAPPING via MASW
Shear wave velocity profile via surface wave test
for detecting Bukit Timah granite (NUS)
Shear wave velocity, VS (m/s)
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
0
5
10
15 Possible Vs
20

Depth, z (m)
25 Grade
Legends 30 Grade

Fill 35
Residual soil 40
Grade 45

Grade 50
Average Min. Max. Center Ave.

Underground mapping via refraction test

Objective:Toestablishoptimizedgeotechnicalsite
characterizationprogramsforundergroundmapping
andlayerdetection(e.g.,bedrocklayerdetection). RSKSTATSGeoconsult Ltd

NUSGeoCharacterization Group 6
K0 EVALUATION via PAIRED VS MODES

VS AgeexpressionsforK0
Anovelapproachis
madebasedonthe

Lateralstresscoefficient(K)
simplifiedindividual
stressmodelfor
inherentisotropicsoil
8
VsHH
K 0 (1 ax f ) bx
VsVH
modifierterms:
ax =0.6,bx =0.4
f=(VsVH/VsHH)[log(t) 3];
t=soilageinyears
Ku and Mayne 2013, 2015 (JGGE) VsHH/VsVH
7
CORRELATION: VS vs. t & VS vs. su

Shearwavevelocity(VS)
Stronglydependsonvoidratio insoils
Vs =a(e0)b wheree0 =voidratio,aandb=materialconstant

Soilunitweight(t ord)
Directlyrelatedtovoidratio insoils
t =(Gs+e0) w/(1+e0)whereGs =specificgravity,w =unitweightofwater

Undrainedshearstrength(su)
Voidratio isoneofthemostimportantparametersthataffectstheshear
strengthofaporousmedia
Athy 1930;Hamilton1976;Bartetzko andKopf2007;Ohetal.2016

VS basedcorrelationsfort &su
8
 EMPIRICAL CORRELATIONS
Soilunitweight(t ord)
Empirical relationships References

t (kN/m3) = 6.87(Vs m/s)0.227/( v0 kPa)0.057 Burns & Mayne (1996)

t (kN/m3) = 8.32log(Vs m/s) - 1.61log(z m) Mayne (2001)

/ 0.0629 , / 8.75
Kim et al. (2001)
where, , / / /
t (kN/m3) = 4.17ln(Vs1 m/s) 4.03
. Mayne (2007)
where, , / / /
/ 3.2 / .
Tezcan et al. (2009)
compression wave velocity
/ / 0.002 /
Tezcan et al. (2009)
reference unit weight
t (kN/m3) = 30.4PI-0.174 Mayne & Peuchen (2013)

9
 EMPIRICAL CORRELATIONS
Undrainedshearstrength(su)
Empirical relationship Based Reference
log / log / /18 /0.475 Dickenson (1994)
log log / 0.90 /0.63 Perret (1996)
log log / /8.64 /1.24 Perret (1996)
log log / /23 /0.475 Ashford et al. (1996)
ln / 1.4 ln / 0.87 Blake (1996)
log / log / /19.4 /0.36 Yun et al. (2006)
.
/ /7.93 Levesques et al. (2007)
Likitlersuang and Kyaw
log / log / /187 /0.372
(2010)
Likitlersuang and Kyaw
log / log / /228 /0.510
(2010)
.
5 10 / Kulkarni et al. (2010)
. .
100 / % % , , Kulkarni et al. (2010)
0.001 / 0.016 / 60.8 Long et al. (2013)
where, Pa = atmospheric pressure and z = depth (z), undrained shear strength, = clay content, w = moisture
content, OCR = overconsolidation ratio. 10
 COMPILED DATABASE FOR t
Applieddatabase
Range of
No. of No. of
Soil Type Symbol
Site Data t Vsn
PI e Vs1 (m/s)
(kN/m3) (m/s)

Intact Clay 61 698 0-250 0.40-6.75 11.2-22.7 35-406 39-438

Fissured Clay 3 21 12-55 0.43-0.84 18.8-21.3 178-313 187-306

Calcareous
3 18 0-11 0.95-1.38 16.2-19.7 186-400 182-535
Clay
Silts 8 32 0-15 0.64-1.43 16.7-20.2 122-319 142-215

Sands 35 200 0-11 0.43-2.15 14.9-22.2 106-621 88-728

Gravels 7 43 - 0.27-0.70 19.6-22.5 120-366 263-280

Clay Till 3 16 0-11 0.19-0.56 20.1-24.0 188-611 242-645

Source:dataobtainedfromMayneetal.(2009)
11
 VALIDATION OF COMPILED DATA
Analyticalrelationshipbetweent ande

Trendbetweentotalunitweight( )andvoidratio(e)
12
 TREND BETWEEN t AND DEPTH
Hyperbolicmodelfort asafunctionofdepth(z)

,
1

, =maximumin
situtotalunitweight
z =depth;
, and =fitting
parameters

Hyperbolicmodel
Zekkos etal.(2006)

NAVAC:DesignmanualbyUSNavy,NavalFacilitiesEngineeringCommand
13
 COMPILED VS TREND FOR t
ApparentrelationshipbetweenVS andv0 ore

VS vs.v0 VS vs.e

14
 COMPILED VS TREND FOR t
SitespecificrelationshipbetweenVS andv0 ore

(a) (b)

VS vs.v0 VS vs.e

/1

DatafromLarssonandMulabdic(1991)
15
MODEL PARAMETERS FOR CORRELATION
Relationshipbetweenmodelparameters

(a) (b)

/1
16
 t vs. VS1 & t vs. VSn
Regressionstudybetweent andstressnormalizedVS
Moon and Ku 2016 (CGJ)

R2 =0.726 R2 =0.768
S.E.Y.=0.074 S.E.Y.=0.069

(a) (b)

.
/ / / / / /

17
 su vs. VS & OCR, PI EFFECTS
Regressionstudybetweensu andVS

EffectofOCR EffectofPI
700 700
Undrained Shear Strength, su (kPa)

Undrained Shear Strength, su (kPa)

VsVH VsVH
su (kPa) = 0.102(VsVH)1.197(OCR)0.147 su (kPa) = 0.006(VsVH)1.552(PI)0.343
600 600
n = 329, R2 = 0.811, S.E.Y. = 0.134 OCR = 50 n = 303, R2 = 0.818, S.E.Y. = 0.137
PI=100
500 R2 =0.811 500 R2 =0.818
S.E.Y.=0.134 su (kPa) = 0.075(VsVH)1.288 S.E.Y.=0.137
400 400 su (kPa) = 0.075(VsVH)1.288
OCR = 10
300 300 PI=30

200 200

100 100
OCR = 1 (a) PI=5 (b)
0 0
30 300 30 300
Shear Wave Velocity, Vs (m/s) Shear Wave Velocity, Vs (m/s)

Applied downhole type VS - VSVH

18
 VSSTRESS RELATIONSHIP: ANISOTROPY
EffectofVSanisotropy:VSstressrelationship

(a)OCR<2 (b)OCR>2
1,000 1,000
VsHH (m/s) = 30.09('v0)0.358 VsHH (m/s) = 34.45('v0)0.426

Shear Wave Velocity, Vs (m/s)

Shear Wave Velocity, Vs (m/s)

R2 = 0.817 R2 = 0.700

100 100

VsHV (m/s) = 27.62('v0)0.356 VsVH (m/s) = 24.64('v0)0.435

R2 = 0.658 R2 = 0.618
VH VsHV (m/s) = 25.30('v0)0.457 VH
VsVH (m/s) = 8.39('v0)0.592 HV
HV R2 = 0.719
R2 = 0.792
HH HH
10 10
10 100 1,000 10 100 1,000
Effective Overburden Stress, 'v0 (KPa) Effective Overburden Stress, 'v0 (KPa)

Shearwavevelocitytrendswitheffectiveoverburdenstress(a)OCR<2,and(b)OCR>2

19
 suVS RELATIONSHIP: ANISOTROPY
EffectofVSanisotropy:su vs.VS

(a)OCR<2 (b)OCR>2
500 500
su (kPa) = 0.151(VsHV )1.114
Undrained Shear Strength, su (kPa)

Undrained Shear Strength, su (kPa)

su (kPa) = 0.078(VsVH)1.315
R2 = 0.848 R2 = 0.818

50 50
su (kPa) = 0.029(VsHH)1.431
su (kPa) = 0.123(VsHH)1.166 R2 = 0.918
R2 = 0.522
VH VH
su (kPa) = 0.104(VsVH)1.211 HV su (kPa) = 0.115(VsHV )1.215 HV
R2 = 0.832 R2 = 0.865
HH HH
5 5
10 100 1,000 50 500
Shear Wave Velocity, Vs (m/s) Shear Wave Velocity, Vs (m/s)

Undrainedshearstrengthtrendswithshearwavevelocity(a)OCR<2,and(b)OCR>2

20
 SUMMARY

1. The insitu measurement of shear wave velocity (VS) is an important

component for the assessment of geotechnical engineering problems.

2. VSbased empirical correlation models: VS vs. t & VS vs. su

3. Sitespecific stressnormalized VS can provide better prediction for t

with minimizing the effect of confinement

4. VS can offer firstorder approximation for su, but anisotropy modes need
to be considered.

21
Thank You

22