b39.

Clay behaviour and the selection of design parameters

Comportement des argiles et choix des parametres de calcul

F. TAVENAS, Profesor of Civil Engineering, Laval University, Quebec, and

S. LEROUEIL, Eng., Terratech Ltd, Montreal
f:
t~t
fi
*fi
1:
:'t
~:
r'W
:i
ili The classical approach to the: design of geotechnical stru.cturE!s in clays is fragmented into a series
l of oversimplified, separate problems, and leaves much to be desired. In an at~empt to improve the
f.,.
present practice_, this paper first shows that -all aspects of the mechanical behaviour of natural
~
t clays are strictly related to the app_lied effective stress path, and ar"e influenced by the possibie
~- effects of time and destruct~ration. They can best be expressed by reference to the limit state con-
~ cept. The consequences are evidenced for three practical cases: static cone penetration test, fric-
,D "I tion piles and embankment foundations.- The restllting general guidelines for the selection of design
parameters are given. · Jo

i
~ INTRODUCTION of the present pre.dictions is not necessarily the
r
~ The understanding Of clay behaViour has evol-
incorrect measurement of the soil's characteris- ·
~ ved progressiVely over the.years with the succes tics-but rather the use of improper assumptions
I sive development of various laboratory or in situ on the actual nature of the clay response. It is
j test equipments and techniques. As a result of the purpose of this paper to present an overview
f of the integrated description of the behaviour of
£ this historical process, the present-practice of
f predicting clay behaviour is fractionned into a natural clays, as resulting from the·application
J variety of well defined classes of probleme,each of the limit state concept, to establish the prin
- --correspond-ing-to-a-pa-~t-icul-ar-t-ype-of-t-est---.---In.--~~=-~=o-~~=~=c~=,,=~cc.,;;=~cc;c"--=;.==e="--=-~---'-c.--
ciples· which must be followed when· developing a -
_________,,_,
this context the design of a geotechriical struc- method of analysis of this-behaviour in situ, and
to show by_"means of a few examples th.iit the key
ture Consists, first in the de~ermination of _the to a good prediction is th~, proper identification
various claases of problems relevant to the· heh.!_ .,.
of response phenomena. '-k''
viour of that structure, then in the measurement
of the design parameters by means Of the labora- FUNDAMENTAL ASPECTS OF THE BEHAVIOUR OF NATllRAL
tory or in situ testing metho_ds a_ssociated with- CLAYS
each class of problem, and f:+D-al_iy in the sep~r.!.
te an&.lysis of each·problem. The concept of limit state, initially devel- r
oped by Roscoe et al (1958,196_8) for remo.lded
Such a fragmented approach, and the way it is clays, has been shown to apply· also to natural · ·
applied at present, are associated with serious clays by Mitchell (1970) and Tavenas & Leroueil
.ATED weaknesses. First, it ignores the continuous na- (1977). Its· application allaws a clear ideritifi-
ture of soil's resp_o_nse.·phenomena B11d the ~Ii.ter- cation of.the parameters goVerning the mechanical
relation between all aspects of the behav~efur of behaviour of natural clays, and leads to an inte-
clays. Further, by forcing the so-il' s response to grated descr'iption of all aspects of this beha-
fit into the well defined conditions of the.selec viour.
ted testing equipment and method, it has imposed-
the use of oversimplified assumptions concerning stress~path dependence of ·the·strength. The shear
Lds.
the exact nature of this r·esponse. Finally, this strength of an intact, overconsolidated natural
approach has frequently restilted.in limiting the clay cannot generally be expressed by a Coulomb
1llow- improvement of design p.rocesses to the search for crit~rion. Rather, as shown by TavenaS & Leroqeil
a better quantitative evaluation of the soil's (1977), the envelope of the shear strengths of a
11.inant
Asym. parameters relevant to the various.classes of pro clay in such a cond_ition may be considered as a
6:7 blems, instead of trying to develop first a - portion of its limit stat.e curve. The limit state
12 better qualitative understanding of the soil's curve of a natural clay is.more or less ellipti-
behaviour in situ. ' cal and ·centered on the Ko line in the stress
1,554 space,t2s shown.in Fig.l. This curve, reflects
With the accumulation of well documented case both the anisotropy and the effective stress de-
1 , 271 histories, the shortcomings of the present me- pendence of the strength ·of the clay. The general
thods of analysis of geotechnical structures in validity of this shape of limit state curves has
clay deposits have be~om.e evident. Recent devel- been confitmed by the analysis of published data
1,468 opments in the measurement of soil's properties
1,408 (Leroueil & Tavenas,1977); the average character
as well as in the numerical methods of analysis istics of all available limit state curves are -
have nOt led to a significant improvement of presented in Fig.l. A major.consequence of the
1,299 this situation. On the other hand, newly acquired curved shape of this envelope is that the
information on the behaviour of clay.masses sug- str8;D.gth of an intact, overconsolidated clay ~8
gests that the major reasori for the poor quality

Design p'arameters in geoteahniaal engineering. BGS, London, 1979, Vol. 1 281

DESIGN METHODS AND ANALYSIS

a fµnction of the effective stress path followed
up to failure. Each possible stress path.in labo
ratory l?r in sit~-t~sts, in_ foundations or in anY
other geotechnical works, in· ·dra;Lned or undrained
conditions, reaches the ,l.1in1.t state curve at a
· specific point, and therefore Corresponds to a
specific value of the clay strength. Tavenas and
Leroueil (1977) have also shown that the limit ·
st_ate curve$ at different d~pths in a- clay depo-
sit are fixed in the stress space by the local va
lues of the preconsolidation pressure crp and are-
proportional to ap as shown in Fig.2. Consequen-
tly, all limit state conditions can be normalized
with respect to ap: the strength cu measured in a
given test i.e. along a specific effective stress a clay. submitt
path corresponds to a unique value of eu/ap in a limit state, . i
given .clay ljeposit. This ratio -~epends _essential However, recert
ly. on the effective stress path ·of_ the consider"'ed ual, ·stress-ab:
test and in fact· represents the shape.of the.li- conso1iciatiad- -·C
mit state surface of this ciay, This p'r:i.nciple
can be generalized to the limit state conditions As shown. by
strain_.relatio
observed. in any pa~r of tests and gives the ratio
nale for the constant 4c/cu or 4clPL ratios gerter' triaxiat:s}ieax
hype:Cbolic fun
ally obtained in clay deposits when carrying out-
modulus, G0 . is
in situ vane~ static cone or pressuremeter tests.
solidatiOn: pre
Stress path dependence of stress~strain proper-
~ • In the original Cam clay theories (Roscoe
& Burl_and,1968),. the Stress strain behaviour of

Cumox

"'·,.0.,
,0

................. f'

. TYPICAL PARAMETERS OF THE ·UMJT STATE CURVES

Fig.3 Intert
!"!? _of c_(oys Up/uj 1,;umc_x;;,.D
Ip
tested fimlts I overage limits I overage
18 7-45 1.2-2.1 I 1.6 0.19-0.381. 0.30 ·.

Fig.~ Typical shape of the limit ~tate curve of natural clays •

.60 , - - - - - ' - _ ; _ ~ . . . . , ; - ' - - - , - - - - - ~ - - - - ~ - - ~

O St-Albon,3.0m
1:,, St-Albon,4.5 m

e St-Albon,5.7 m

~
. 0
40

:~IN
20

Fig.2 Limit state curves at three differeht depths in the St-Albari. deposit.

282
 i b39: TAVENAS AND LEROUEIL

ive stress
I I a clay submitted to effective stresses within :I.ts fective stress. As shown in Fig. 3, the initial
,u/crp in a limit state, is suppoSed to be ela~tic and linear tangent modulus_ c:; 0 observed in CIU tests ·vij.ries
essential However, recent Studies have shown that the act .... wi_th p' following a relationship with the same
consider"ed ual stress-strain response of an intact, oVer- form as the lim,it s.tate q=f(p'). The str_ess pat·h
f the li- consolidated clay is more complex. dependence of the _.4efo_rmat,io:n. behaviour of ov~r-
inciple consolidated clB.ys is"further evidenced by t;he
ollditions As shown py Leroueil et a~ (1979), the stress strain energy measurements reported b}T Tavenas et
the ratio strain . relationship of an intact., naturS.1 Clay in al (1979,a). The accumulated total strain ener-
,tios gen.er triaxial shear tests is best approximated by an gies. observed along vaiiotiS st:tesS ·paths on a
rying out- hyperbolic function in which the initial shear Champlain sea clay are shoWD. in Fig. 4. _the iocii
ter tests. modulus, G0 .is a function, not o:nly of the precoB_ of stress conditions produc·ing equal stiain ene.!.
solidation pressure, but also of the applied ef- gies··assume shapes siniilar to that of the limit
proper-
s (Roscoe
viour of
ji O.B--'---.....--'--'--'--~-"----,------=o120
{
,,
I·
100
~
1.
)i 80
i
I
ii;

f ,,
f ',·,
iN'
,_;g._
40

II 20

i 0
----'----------4c-_:__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _~___co_<L~---'O.,)c2L_ _ _~0:,'.4+__ __''0",.o6-'~"-~0".'.B"__ _~_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _____i,i,:f
N Picrp
I-f Fig. 3 Interrelation between normalized limit state and shear moduli in a natu~al clay.
i 1.:;·

f~
!; 100-----~-----~-----,-~-----,
i
i r !i,'

t
f
if;
I
'
t
I
f
'i
t t~i~~ limit state conditions
f _,...- effective stress pofh

"t,
~
k - 1.0
strain energy
1kNm1m3 )

!l' -100L--'-----L-----'-L-~---''------'
0 80 160 240 320
t
j;
P',kPo

t Fig,4 Interrelation between limit ·state and strain energy in the St-Louis clay.
t
t 283
J'
 DESIGN METHODS AND ANALYSIS

state· c1.,1rve ·of the "clay. ThiS indicates that the functions of ap.
Tavenas et.al (1979.a) have ev! intact st~Albi
that the ·shea:
combined volumetric a:nd shear deformation beha- denced a•linear .relationship between the limit
viour is a ·funct:l.On Of' bo'th- the effective stress strain energy and the preconsolidation pressure. sensitive to
path and the_ distancE! _'of t_he _applied effective It can thus be conclud_ed that the entire ·stress drained. ·shear
stress to the limit• sta_te _c;ondition on this strain behaviour of~ n~tural clay. can be norm.a~ fects were pr,
stresS pa.th .. lized. with respect to ap.
Therefore, the shape · tion in desig.
with- strong 1
Confjtaciqently ~ _the. defQrmation.. b$aviour of a of the limit state surface, the preconsolidation
determined on
natural _overc0nsOli_d_ate4 ci_ay cannot . be expres- pressure and the effect·ive s_t±esS ·path which were
shown to_ d_etermine_.the __ strength Of a naturS:l clay corresponding
sed by a· s_impl8 app;Licad.on of the theory of _elas and are thus
tiCity. ~ther the. volumetr_i,c &J:Ld shear strai1.1s - also govern· itS. deformation behaviour, .
the field Con
are functions of the orientation of the effective Time dependence of strengths and, strains. The- time
stress path in the stress space~ and of the dis- or strain rate dependence of the undrained shear The YLIGHT
tance of the initial and final effective stress strength of clays is well established. On the from the comb
conditions to the limit state along this stress other .hand, the time or strain rate dependence of and of Bjerru
path. Leroueil et al (1979) have noted that the . stress strain characteristics has been paid less in -the consol
shear modulus G and the bulk modulus· K are both attention. Ye_t, the results of CIU tests on the i977), provid
description o
state curve c
strol_n· rot_~._percent,hour its preconsol
,o-3 time effects
.• 10-2 10- 1 2
10
1.4 (Bjerrum·,t96i
ii
..
1t.;.?
~
~

1.2
the ·entire 1:1
this principl
et al (1978),
,. ." •
~ 1;
,:
E
d

~
1.0 state condit:l
shown in Fig,
0 0.8 the strain r,
i
~
E
~
mit state ·cUJ
• ¾ 0.6 LerOueil & Ti
~
~
..
L
0,-
dependence ol
sC:P.4 t--++++
g' complete des1
-------------1:--go~~ ' - - - -
~ 02 :
~ ._ · us1.1ol range· of _field
+--+-+++Hti+--~
usual range of
allow·s a des1
ce of defonn,
~ loading conditions in situ tests
0 of. f:ntact cl_,
shown by -Tav,
Fig.5 Effects of stra~n_, rate on shear -~tre_ngtp._ and sl;tef!,r_ mod'!,llus - St-AlbB;n clay. shear creep
within the ··_l
tions of. the
20 creep stress

.
~
0
15

_,N 10
~
-b.
'
1 5

00

I.I
• 0
• b
~ 1.0 □

•
C
d
-J .,,.._ • •
-.,~ 0.9
•
0.8 '--~,f-~,f-•H•-!•"7l-lac!•'---¼,-=-,-•'a-l•"•~7=-e=:9:'---,';,-.--'a-l,-;,tt;!;'
4
J ~3 ~
f I fime,fflin

Fig.6 Time dependence of the limit state of an intact clay. Fig, 7 Inte

284
 ·DE_SIGN METHODS AND ANALYSIS

ture, then the strengths mobilized in that struc-
ture at failure bEiar no relationship to the shear
strength characteristics measured in the intact
clay. Also, the normalized strength parameters
-r/ap of -an itit_act clay cannot be determined
by consolidating laboratory specimens to a'lhn in
excess of_ ap and ~eb~unding to aic as suggested
in the .SHANSEP me:thod proposed by- Ladd & Foott
(1974). Inde(!d, such technique produces 11 destru_£
tured 11 clay Samples arid thus li!ads to the measti!.
ement of the cor1esl)Ondingly ri!dUCed normalized
strength parameters.
Fig.9 shows th~ strong effect's of dest:Iuctur!!_
tion:·· on the shear mOdulus of the St-Alban clay.
The Values of Go have been reduced to 30 to ·so%
of the moduli Of 'the _intact claY and the Go- i,_ r~ _
lationship is now li~ear, i.e~ more or less simi-
lar to the shape of the new limit state curve
(Fig,8). Similar reductions have been observed ~Y
Leroueil_ et al (1979) . for the bulk modulUs ·K
which assumed values of K=35 op
in the intact
clay and of K=lO to 2o·ap in the destr\lctured
clay, Again here, important consequences on the
design and behaviour of-geotechnical structures
must be established, Since any modification of_
the clay structure results in significant changeS
of its stress strain properties, extreme care
must be exercised to avoid such modifications du
ring sampling or testing; this practically r~le9
Out· the SHANSEP approach to deformation analy~.e~=~
. Other factors, Many other factors may affect t4_e
stress-strain behaviour of natural clays but th~j _/Jf{;

0.7
lii'nit state curve of Intact Cloy 9
~~
~~E~~:m:~~~~!:,.1.'.,·:.r.f.;.·.t.!.1.:.
in important volumes of the clay mass. Yet the . _ ·
effect of such rotation is systematically ign_orea,'/_-'.f~1¾-·=
1
.:.:
~-;:~,~-

I -$' in th~ pres ent dady prfacht~ce~ Abs a mhatterb of fact·/iif~\~

y~•tt.
.

0.61---+---<f--~
YI 4 ~
..l O

·i\
not a sing 1 e stu y o t is pro 1 e@. as een.. ;,\,_&:~'(
carried out on intact clays; This could prove as ~_.'X'tlf:
the most serious shortcoming of the present ·st11.t"Efi~~--
L__l ~ /i \ of soil mechanics, since limited studies on n9+;_ · :·'.!~1t
-~- o.5 · - _ .,..?'1.. I_/ - \~ mally consolidated. clays or on sands have clea,;r-,-· ?_;~)~t
;;--
~
..,..-''l /2_ lL
- ; =tj- --~~
\ ly indicated that the response Qf soils could b~ ;:)-'J1%\tro

I
0.41---+-~,_-i,r~ _ entirely mo4i£.ied-by stress axes rotation -}~j}

-----~-~-~-:-:-~ll--!~-~:-,'.~\.cl;-i~;-:-,::•_1-~=:=~-"'~~-:'i,,.=~-.-~=•-:_•~::-,-;-,-~-"-:=::,:c'..,7c,_·.!-I.,
o_A t .6•16' --~~~~i~i~~~~
(~..- ✓r cribed herein. It first 'appears necessary to em- :;:::~
0 phasize that acceptab~e:··pt'edictions of clay be~!!,:)½;?lf
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.:5 06 0.7 0.8 viour can be achieved only if the various factorz,=t:.;;~X
P/0-p, or P/,...,VCV
governing this behaviour are identified, properl:>7-:f~?
characterized and accounted for in the methods ofi_.§,iifi
Fig,8 Effect of destructuration on the limit analysis. From the desc_ription of clay behavio'tir· __ <{»'~-
state curve of the St-Alban clay. presented above, some basic requirements for ,~he, :-:'!f_$i;~'.;_t
development of satisfactory design methods can b~--:'.:1t.i~-
120 , - - - - - , - - - - - - - - - , - - - - - , - - - - - - - , establi~hed. . ~.-~>¥!·'
/ 1. Since all aspects of the behaviour of clays--::p~f
are governed by the applied effective stresses, f}\i)t
first fundamental requirement is- the knowledge, · .:::ctli;
at least qualitatively, of the true effective '::tz!;
intact cloy stress paths pertinent to the considered problem.:.::}~
BO f-------,;)l'q,---+--'---f---~/;;,j This requirement is certainly difficult to meet ·•iifr~
in practice since effective stresses are diffi- :f~1
/ < cUlt to measure reliably in situ. In the past, })Jt--'ef:
.
•A'
/'-l-~~---1 the difficulty has been eliminated by making as- alt
swnptions on the type Of effective stress paths ~~f~
,,,,,✓
. prevailing in situ. Unfortunately, these ass ump- {fl
.k, tions were generally based on little physical evi• :/$,ii
40 1-----.ve...-,,,,~✓-• k-,.-.-,,-,-,,-,-..+,-,-,,-,---< dence and essentially aimed at making-the soil'S:j~
behaviour .fit the stress conditions of one of the ":~1
,,,._A' available test equipments. In view of the determ!, ·'.~,I
20 7 ning significance of effective stresses on the b~ \:1'~
haviour of clays, such a simplistic approach is -_t~
not acceptable, and it is the first priority of ii
O O~---OJ..2_ _ _ _0.-:-'-4----:Q:':6:-----0-;!,.B the geotechnic_al engineer to determine, at least \}$!1
qualitatively, the true effective stress condi- .=,\J;si
P/o-j, . tions prevailing in situ in various geotechnical _:Ji!
Fig.9 Effect of destructuration on the shear strtictures. · .:'.;~
modulus of the St-A.lban clay, .# tii
286

I
 b39: TAVENAS AND LE.ROUEIL

:e curve
observed by 2. In view of their importance on: strength and tire stress strain properties of the clay. Howe-
lull.is K deformation characteristics ~f natural clays, pos ver, it ignores_ the stress path dependence of the
i intact
sible time effects must be identified. This is - stress strain behaviour of natural clays and it
:i.tctured f particularly important for structures in which results in Ne values comprised between land 12,
i the clay remains overconsolidated. 1.e. not much different from those obtained from·
.es on the
,tructures J l. Since all properties of a natural clay are the bearirig capacity theory. Thus the differences
between the theoretical and experimental values
ation of ·.~-•. tshtrongly modified whe_n its structure is destroyed
ant changes ; e pos~ibility of destructuration as a result of of Ne are not resolved.
me care :,:.-
t distorsion or consolidatiOn must be detected. If t he stat 1 c cone test is now analysed within
.cations du
ally r1,1leS
1 E
Only if, and when all ·these requirements are
met, will it be possibl~ to make a meaningful! se
the framework of the limit state theory, it must
first be realized that the effective Stress paths
n analyses. •.~.; lection and measurement of the representative - followedknin the clay around the penetrating cone
affect the ~ soil's parameters. If any of the basic require- _are not own and might well remain so in the fu-
ys but they f; ments cannot be satisfied, and in ·particular if ture. ~ndeed, during penetration, the total and
ly investi- _, the kntrue, in situ effective stress conditions are e ff ective s tresses as well as the pore pressures
ion of prin ~ not own, the analysis must be expected to be a 1 1 vary, a 1ong a variety of stress paths which
ionofa - if questionab_le. In particular in this case, the depend on the considered .location with respect.· to
tation ,, use of_ sophisticated methods of analysis such as the cone. In view of th@ stress path' dependence
generally i,: the FEM is not really warranted since they would of the stress-strain behaviour of natural clays,
Yet the be based on a p·ossibly irrelevant model of the the measured point resistance qc thus representS
lly ignored I: a7tua~ clay behaviour. The validity of these prin the integration of a variety of stress-strain
er of fact, J ciples follows logically from the description of- characteristics and a rigorous theoretical study
been. _j the fundamentals of clay behaviour presented ear of the1 problem might well prove impossible. On
d prove as ;,:- lier. It can be enhanced by the consideration of the other hand, since the point resistance is a
esent state fl a few practical cases. measure of limit state stress conditions or of
~ limit state _related deformation characteristics,
es on-nor-
ave clear- )- REVIEW OF SOME COMMON PROBLEMS it must be uniquely related to the preconsoli(fa-
s could be .~.·-,•,·. tion pressure ap.This is indeed what has been
ion ~ In many practical cases the present methods of observed in Champlain clays: Fig.IO shows that
J; analysis have been established on simplifyin~ as- the point resistance is· essentially proportionB.l
J. sumptions resulting from an unsufficient under- to ap and in the order of 4c=3 ap.
As for the
SIGNS AND ~ standing of the actual phenomena. In spme cases, qc-cu re~ationship, the limit state approach
---------'te-~--~t~h~e~n~e~c~e=•=•=a=r,y background information 1s· now ...a..v...ail__clearly indicates that cu is not unique but a
geoteChni-
f able to satisfy the basic :i:'equi'.rements for satis':' funct-ion of-liotllclielimit state surface and the
".:.'l factory designs presented eElrlier, so that a car- e ffecftivNe stress path. Consequently, a unique va
re of clay ~ rect solution of these cases can be developed. In 1ue O c .cannot possib~y exist; rather specific"
rimena des- ~ other cases, the application of the principles Ne values are applicabl~_,;,for ,correlating qc with
ary to em-
clay beha j discussed herein leads to a better understanding
ous facto"rs f, of the field behaviour and to the definition of
t the parameters governing this behaviour. Qc or 0-1) 1 kPo
d, properly
l o,----,40,-__..;eo,;....__.,;12:;.o=---_:':;.so:__ _,:;2:;soo
methods of l Interpretation of the static cone ·test. When the 0
behaviour
ts for the
J
I
use of the static cone test was introduced for
investigating clay deposits, the point resiStan-
•
hods can be f
I
ce 4c was interpreted in terms of the classical
bearing capacity theory, i.e. by writing
St-Albon {
o--
...,_
2 1----'11---1-1
ur of clays j qc=cu Nc+yD, TheQretical s·olutions for 'dei:ermi- .,__
stresses, a "
"
ning the bearing capacity factor' Ne were/based on
limit equilibrium analyses applicable to strip
St-Louis {.,_
nowledge,
fective } footings and eJD.pirically modified to acconnt for
ed problem. ? the axi-sym~tric nature of the problem. The re-
t to meet l- sulting values of Ne varied between 6 and 10 de-
re diffi- f pending on assumptions on the shape of the failu E
i
he past,
making as- '
re surface. When applied in situ, this approach-
did not lead to convincing results, since the t
.g
6 1----+--_:li:i
ess paths }. field v.alues of Ne were observed to be scattered
; between 5 and up to 70.
se assump-
hysical evi i.~.- As a result of further research, the static co 8 ,__ _ _,___ _ _J__ _
- the soil '8 ~- ne penetration was shown to amount to the expan--
one of the !, sion of a cavity whose shape is• intermediate to a
the determi r sp~ere and a ·cylinder (Roy et al, 1974). The ex-
s on the bI r pansion of cavities lends itself to theoretical
proach is t.:-.·. studies, provided the clay is assumed to have a
iority of ~ unique.stress strain behaviour, independent of
, at least f the applied stress path. The solution proposed by
;; condi- 1' Ladanyi (1967) on the basis of the stress. strain
properties obtained from CIU tests, is typical of 12 .___ _,j__ __J__ _...L,_ _ j_-'--_J
Jt~chnical '._?.:

~ this approach. Its great merit is to show that qc

f is a function not only. of cu but also of the en-
Fig.10 Interrelation between 4c and
natural clays.
op in two
...,
jt
t
.r 287
i
 DESIGN METHODS AND ANALYSIS

the shear strength "QJ.easured in each type of teBt,
·1.e. along specific effective stress
reason for the ·wide scatter in experimental Nev~
lues might be found in the variety of reference
tests used to measure c_u as well as in the varia
tions of the shape of limit state surfaces in the'
Various clays tested.
Analysis of skin friction on pileso In spite of
recent developments, the skin friction acting on
piles 1n clays at failure is still analysed in
terms of total stresses and by reference to the
undrained shear strength of the intact clay. Ho-
wever, the experience shoW's that the relationship
between the skin friction and cu is af~ected by a
very large scatter· and has therefore a limited
reliability as a design tool.
The £act that the clay: around a pile is remol-
ded during the driving process has been w~ll re-
congized but the ~onse4Uences have not been pro-
perly 'drawn. It was shown earlier that the limit
ve of the clay in this new condition·;· on the
Path&. The other hand, it bears no relation to the strength
characteristics of the intact clay. Thus, the tE_
tal stress approach to the analysis of skin fri.£
tion-must be regarded as highly empirical and
used with caution since it is based on a clay prE_
perty, o_f questionable relevance.
In recent years (Meyerhof,1976) an approach in
terms of effect.ive stresses has been opposed to
the classical total stress analysis. In view. of
the determining role of effective stresses on all
aspects of clay behaviour, this new approach
should certainly be prefered in principle. Howe-
~er, in its present state~ .it ·may not represent
a significant improvement over the total stress
analysis. Indeed in order to develop a aatiafa.£
tory effective stress solution to the problem B.£.
me fundamental. questions must first b_e answered.
The properties of the· clay which govern the magn!_
tude of the skin friction are those resulting

•
state curve of a destructured clay significantly
differs from that of the intact ~lay. The Skin
friction mobilized at failure represents a part,!
cular limit state condition in the.remolded, re-
consolidated clay surrounding the pile. Its magn!
tude is therefore related to the limit state cur-
from the destr.ucturation during pile driving and
the subsequent reconsolidation. The resulting 1!.
mit state curves depend essentially on the effe.£
tive stress conditions under which the clay is re
consolidated. These conditions are possibly rela'
ted to crp but they are unfortunately not known_ at

•r;::====r:=;====:c:::::;--,--,-7--7
2
6 Cubzoc les Ponts -A
5 m Kollx
~ □ King's Lynn _
~ A Tlckton
f------------------cEa, - - -,-oevelopment·of-o·normolly-con --l~-:J===,,:=::::jF======l===c::;t!c=!------ _________
,Q 16 solldoted stot,;i os lndicoted by /
-~ pore pr·essure obser11otions /

1•>-----+----Y- ~~---
~
E
~

0
0 8 16 24 32 40 48
S,construct!on settlement, cm

Fig.11 ·Development of construct'ion set~lements and lateral displ,acements.

y,cm y,cm

depth of normally conso•

Udoted cloy when y,. f(z l
wos observed

CUBZAC LES PONTS ST-ALBAN

1.011,<1._1-_ _.JL__ _J._ _..J.._.....J ~ - ~ ' - - ~ - - ~

Fig,12 Effects of the effective stress QOnditions on the distribution of lateral d·isp-l:a~ents with
.clep£h under embankments. ·"""

28.8
 b39: TAVENAS AND LEROUEIL

the present, due to the lack of sufficient field ob- ments during the construction of four embank-
strength servations. Not only the limit state governing ments. Initially, in the overconsolidated clay,
, the to the clay behaviour i"s ignored, ·but also the effec the lateral displacements remain small. The dra!
kin friC tive stress path along which the skin friction£; ned response of the foundation is evidenced by
1 and - I.· 1s mobilized. The present.formulation· offs sug- the fact that Ym represents at the most 30% of
clay pr.2,. i gests that-this stress path is related to o~0 , the settlement. From all available data, an ave,!_
f but this must be considered just as an hypothesis age relation Ym=0.16s was obtained; the same re-
Jr lation was also observed during the long term
proach in I At -present, in the absence of informations on
consolidation, thus confirming the drained nat_£
osed to fil: the effective stresses acting in the clay during
[t re of the initial foundation response. At a
view. of i reconsolidation and pile loading, the effective
point which corresponds to the development of a
es on all ~.J. stress approach must be considered as a better norm.ally consolidated state in the clay under
oach _fr; but still highly empirical design method. Field
the center line as determined from pore pressure
e. Howe- ·i measurements of effective stresses are an urgent
-observations (Leroueil et al,1978); the lateral
.present j necessity for the development of an improved me-
displacements start to increase more rapidly;the
stress -* thod of analysis of piles in clay.
increments of Ym become equal to the settlement
satisfac
·oblem. sO
It Lateral displacements under embankments. The pre
diction of lateral displacements in clay fOunda=-
increments, indicating a quasi Undrained distor-
sion of the clay foundation. The reason for the
nswered-:- j tions during embankments construction has always failure of class:j.cal analytical methOds to prope.E_
the magni
.lting -
j; been associated with great difficulties. Not only ly predict simultaneously the settlements and la-
.ving and
i~ the reported analyses have failed to predict pro- teral deformations is now obvious. These methods
1 perly the magnitude of the lateral displacements, being based on a continuous undrained respons·e of
,lting li
~ but even the qualitative distributiOns of the dis the clay, they ignore the true nature of the
:he effeC
:lay is 're
£.~ placement with depth.have sometimes been wrongly- field 'behaviour of clay foundations.
:ibly rel"a
!\ determined. The use of sophisticated methods cif
The development Of anormally consolidated co!!
~ numerical analysis has not improved th_e situation
known at dition in parts of clay foundations during emban~
i
l
l
.significantly. The cause of this unfortunate ai-
tuation may be found in the _use Of the hypothesis
of an undrained response of the clay foundation
ment construction also provides an explanation·
for the anomalies in the lateral displacement pr_Q_
files observed in some cases. Fig.12 presents the
i during construction. This hypothesis,-which seem
lateral displacement profiles observed at the end
j ed logical when it was first proposed, at a time"
of construction for two test embankments. Pore
~ when field evidence could hardly be-gathered to
~ pressure observations, at Cubzac-les-Pants, ind_!_
W support it, has been proven wrong now that a.lar t d th t th t· f d ti h d h d :''Ii
& ge number of· pore pressure observations is av.ail ca e a e en ire c 1ay oun a on a reac e ,,
--------"i~--~a~b~l~e"',==~~~-==-====~=====~=~==--a-norma-l-1-y-consol:-idated-stat·e.------The-correspond·ing----t-,-
i lateral displacements are distributed more or }
i: Leroueil et al (1978) com]?iling data from 30 '.l.ees according to the theory with a maximum at 'I'
; ;-- case histories have demonstrated that the found_! about 1/3 of the clay tlii,ckness, On the contrary,
I~ tion respoD.se is not continuously undrained. At at St-Alban, only the upp:e:1;:. third of the clay
!.~.-
;,r
the beginning of construction the clay is over-
consolidated and thus charact·erised by high val-
foundation had reached a',II.C)rm.ally consolidated
state. As a result of this non homogeneou~ cond!.
I ues of -Cs and cv• Consequentlyt a significant tion, a non uniform displacement pr.ofile is ere.!.
cQnsol..;i.dation can develop in the first days of ted, with small deformations in the lower, over;-
i
il'

i
the construction leading to an increase of the_
effective stress up to_ op. At this stage, the
consolidated clay, and 1.arge deformations only '
in the upper, normally consolidated soil. This
J foundation clay becomes normally consolidated; analysis proves that the lack of success of ear-
i its stiffness and its coefficient of consolida- lier pre4ictions was not due to improper measure
f tion are greatly_reduced so that/a quasi 1.lndrai- tilents of the soil's parameters, but rather to im
i. , ned response then prevails during· furthet' cons- proper assumptions arid types of calculation. -
i truction.
!l Because of the unknown effects of principal
stress axes rotations it is not possible to com-
THE SELECTION OF DESIGN PARAMETERS

J pletely determine the effective stress paths
i followed in the foundation at locations outside
t· the centerline of the embankment. Thus, a niathe-
matical analysis of lateral displacements is im-
1·. possible at present, since these displacements
.f integrate the deformations developed in the ent.!_
J re foundation;. one may find here a first reason
f,. ' for the lack of success of the analytical predic
tions. On the other hand the sequence of beha- -
i'. viours identified by analyzing the effective
J: stress paths under the centerline of embankments
f provides a basis for a qualitative analysis of
J. the deformations of foundations.
!. A..71.alysing the available field observations,
1 was wrong and that the strength parameters gover~
i Tavenas et al (1979.b) have evidenced a sequen-
tial deformation response·of clay foundations.
~nts with
',.f ·Fig.11 presents the relative variations of the
maximum lateral displacements and the settle-
t
t
_j
The few examples discussed above evidence the
absolute necessity of developing a clear under-
standing of the actual clay behaviour in a given
problem before trying to establish any type of
numerical analyses. The evolution of the under-
standing of the phenomena leading to failure of
cut slopes in London clays and the corresponding
changes in the methods of analysis (Skempton,
1977) just emphasizes this necessity: the initial
hypothesis of a rapid pore pressure equilibra- .
tion led to the conclusion of a progressive redu_£
tion with time of the effective strength parame-
ters of the London'clay; however, subsequent pore
pressure observations proved that this hypothesis
ning the first time slides where indeed constant
and equal to the critical•state parameters. The
most important· requirement is to determine, 'it
 DESIGN METHODS AND ANALYSIS
least qualitatively, \the true effective stress
paths pre'Vailing in situ. In doing so, we cannot
afford to make simplified assumptions, just for
the sake of fitting the field conditions to those
of the standard test equipments, even if such as-
sumptions look reasonable. The soil's response
and the effective stress paths must be· determined
from detailed field observations, analysed with-
out any preconceived ideas •. In view of the inte-
grated-nature of all elements of the clay beha-
viour, the model resulting from such analysis can
be considered as valid only if all aspects of the
observed soil's response are properly explained
simultaneously by t~is model. · cation simplified hypothesis on the nature of e!_
If all elements of the clay behaviour in a g!
ven problem are known, the selection of the de-
sign parameters for that problem should be ba.sed
on a simulation in the laboratory.or in situ of
these elements. However, this approach is someti
mes difficult to apply because of the limitation's
of the usual tests: effective stress paths cannot
be controled and are frequently unknown in in si
tu tests; partial drainage is difficult to repra°
duce in the laboratory; stress axes rotation cai
not be simply simulated, Thus the number of pro:-
blems for which an accurate, analytical solution
may be possible is extremely limited,
In most practical problems the detailed field
behavio~r is either unknown at present or impos-
sible to simulate in tests. The analysis of Such
problems can then be only empirical. The normali
zed nature of all aspects of natural clay beha--
------v-iou-r-with-i.n_:_the_framewo.rk--0.f_the Yl,IGHT model
can be used with advantage. It implies that the
parameters measured in a given test, i.e. along
a specific stress path, are proportional to those
mobilized in a given problem, i.e. along differ-
ent but equally well defined stress paths. Ther~
fore, empirical correlations can reliably be es-
tablished. On the other hand, the use of sophis-
ticated methods of analysis such as the FEM
appears questionabie, since these methods would
make use of parameters, measured under stress
conditions different from those prevailing in si
tu,and therefore necessarily irrelevant to the -
problem under inye~~igation. In particular as
lo:Q.g as the effects of stress axe_s· rotati9n re-
main ignored,the results of finite elemerit analy_
ses of problems where such.rotation occurs, are
bound to be incorrect and possibly misleading.
CONCLUSION
The present, fragmented approach to the analy_
sis of clay behaviour has frequently resulted in
designs of questionable reliability and economy
for geotechnical structures in clay deposits. A
critical examination of this" approach is thus jus
tified. Such examination has been made in this -
paper, on the basis of the YLIGHT model of clay
behaviour developed from Tavenas and Leroueil
(1977). The main copclusions are as follows:
1. The entire mechanical behaviour of a natu
ral clay can best be characterized by reference-
to its limit state curve, the position of which
is fixed by the local preconsolidation pressur_e
crp. All mechanical properties of natural clays
can thus be normalized with respett to crp.
290
2. Considering the shape of limit state cur-
ves in natural clays, all aspects of their stress
strain-time behaviour is necessarily a function
of the effective stress path along which this b~
haviour is observed.
3. Consequently, in order to make a meaning-
full selection of the parameters describing.the
clay behaviour pertinent to a given design pro-
blem it is an absolute necessity to first ident!
fy correctly the corresw,nding effective stress
paths in situ.
4. We cannot afford to accept without verif_!
fective stress conditions in situ. There are many
examples of the serious errors resulting from the
indiscriminate use of irrelevant assumptions. The
undrained response of clay foundation during em-
bankment cons.trtic.tion is a typical such case of a
wrong assumption resulting in years of unsucces_!
ful research.
5. At the·present stage of our knowledge on
clay beq,aviour, the necessary framework and bact.
ground information is available to establish a
soulld empirical approach to most design problems.
On the other hand too many fundamental _aspects
are still ignored or not sufficiently documented
to justify the use of sophisticated numerical m~
thods such as the FEM.
REFERENCES
Bjerrum, L, (1967). "Engineering geology of
Norweg-ian-normal-1-y-eonsol-idated-marine_clay~-----
as related to the settlements of buildings",
Geotechnique, (17),!,81-118.
Ladanyi, B. (1967). 11 Deeis'.':-:t?un.C:hing of sensit;ive
clays 11 , Proc. 3rd Pan_.Ain•- Con£. SMFE, Caracas
(1),533-546. '
Ladd, c. C,, Foott, R, (1974). "New design proce-
dure for stability of soft c.lays 11 , ASCE Journ.
GED, (100) ,GT7, 763-786. ,'
Leroueil, &., Tavenas, F. (1977). Discussion of
11
Geotec.hnical properties of two Belfast estu~
rine deposits", by Crooks & Graham, Geotechn!
que, (27) ,1,441-446.
Leroueil, S., Tavenas, F., Mieussens, C. ,
Peignaud, M. (1978). 11 Construction pore pres-
sure in clay foundations under embankments,
Part II:Generalized behaviour". Can.Geot.
Journ., (15),,!.,66-82.
Leroueil, S., Tavenas, F. (1979). Discussion of
"Strain rate behaviour- of Saint-Jean-Vianney
clay" by Vaid, Rober,;son & Campanella. In
print, Can.Geot.Journ.
Leroueil, S,, Tavenas, F., Brucy, F.,
' La Rochelle, P., Roy, M. (1979). 11Behaviour of
destructured natural clays". Submitted for P.!!.
blication, ASCE GED.
Meyerhof, G,G. (1976). 11Bearing capacity and
settlement of pile foundations". ASCE GED, (102)
GT3,197-228.
Mitchell, R,J. (1970). "On the yielding and mecha
nic.al strength of Leda clays". Can,Geot.Journ-:-
(7) ,1_,297-312.
 b39: TAVENAS AND LEROUEIL

ate cur-
Roscoe, K,H., Sch,ofield, A,N.) Wroth, C.P. (1958) Tavenas, F., Leroueil, s. (1977). "Effects of
ir stress
"On the yielding of soils". Geotechnique, (8), stresses and time all yielding of clays 11 • Proc.
unction .1,_,22-53, 9th ICSMFE, Tokyo, (I) ,319-326,
this b~
Roscoe, K.H,, Burland, J.B. (1968). 110n the gener Tavenas, F,, Leroueil, s., La Rochelle P., Roy,
alized stress-strain behaviour of wet clay". - M. (1978), "Creep behaviour of an ~distuocbed
neaning-
Engineering Plasticity (Ed. Heyman.& Leckie), lightly overconsolidated clay 11 , Can,Geot.Journ.
Lng. the (15) ,.:l_,402-423.
Cambridge University Press, 535-609.
5n pro-
t identi Roy, M,, Michaud, D., Tavenas, F,, Leroueil, s., Tavenas, F., Des Rosiers, J.P., Leroueil, S., La
stress La Rochelle, P, (1974). "The interpretation Rochelle, P., Roy, M, (1979,a). "The use of
of static cone penetration tests in sensitive strain energy as a yield and creep criterion
clays". Proc. ESOPT, Stockholm, (2-2), 323-330. in lightly overconso"-1.idated clays". In print,
t verifi Geo technique.
ce of ef Skempton, A.W. (1977). 11 Slope stability of cut-
are many tings in brown London clay". Pro·c. 9th ICSMFE, Tave~as, F., Mieussens, C,, Bollrges, F., (1979).
from the Tokyo, (III),261-270, ''Lateral displacements in clay foundations un
Lons. The der_em.banlonents". In print, Can.Geot,Journ. -
~ing em-
!ase of a
lSUCCeS.,!.

~dge on
lnd back
.ish a
>roblems.
1pects
:umented
:ical m~

of I
-i-clay,.__ _ _ _,___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - ~ -
lings11. i:
I
.sitive
•'
¥
Caracas

proce-
II
:E Journ.

ion of
iI r
t estua !\
otechnI fjf
t
e pres-
i
,/J.

ents, .j
ot.
l'
ion of
ianney
ii
In l,,
?
-~
1iour of t
for P.!! i
I·~-
md
lED, (102) ?
ld mecha
:,Journ-:-

29L
 DESIGN PARAMETERS
IN GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

PARAMETRES DE CONCEPTION
DANS LA GEOTECHNIQUE

:
-')

British Geotechnical Society, London, 1979