Smart questions
Smart answers
Smart people
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Member Login

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips now!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!

Join Eng-Tips
*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

LINK TO THIS FORUM!

Add Stickiness To Your Site By Linking To This Professionally Managed Technical Forum.
Just copy and paste the
code below into your site.

Partner With Us!

"Best Of Breed" Forums Add Stickiness To Your Site
Partner Button
(Download This Button Today!)

Feedback

"...this web site is a 'Godsend' for me. If I have a programming problem that I'm unable to solve, I'll get a sensible reply in no time. It's really great!..."

Geography

Where in the world do Eng-Tips members come from?

Ultimate lateral force for P-Y Curve for clay

Antrox (Structural)
12 Sep 12 3:25
Hi there,
Could you explain why in the criteria to obtain the ultimate lateral bearing capacity for soft clay for API p-y curve a effective unit weight and not a total unit weight is needed?
Indeed, the criteria is:
pu=3*Cu+gamma*z+J*Cu*z/D
where:
Cu = undrained shear strength
gamma=effective unit weight

Those terms seem to run in a contradiction.
What do you think about?
Thank you
GeoPaveTraffic (Geotechnical)
12 Sep 12 15:14
I'll start by saying I'm not familure with the equation you posted.

However, I assume that effective unit weight is used since water pressure would potentially act on all sides of the foundation element and only the boyant (effective) unit weight of the soil can be counted on to resist the net lateral force.

Think of it this way: If the foundation were above the water table the effective unit weight = the total unit weight. As the water table rises, the water pressure starts to act on all sides of the foundation. At the same time the effective unit weight of the soil drops.

I assume that the source of your contradiction is the use of undrained strength and effective unit weight. There are many occations where the strength of the clay may be undrained regaurdelss of whether the soil is above or below the water table.

Hope this helps.

Mike Lambert

Antrox (Structural)
13 Sep 12 10:39
Thank you for your reply.
On your second point, I agree with you. A clay might be saturated due to the suction by capillarity.
I have some doubts about your first point. The undrained shear strength is defined in the total stress approach. Accordingly , the submerged unit weight should be used and the pressure of the water should not be considered.
In the similar case of a surface foundation founded on the seafloor, in the "short term condition" the pressure of water (the archimede force) should not be taken into account.
Am I wrong?
fattdad (Geotechnical)
17 Sep 12 12:48
ask yourself whether to use total or effective strength parameters in evaluating the horizontal stresses acting on a retaining wall. Hopefully, you'll get the answer, "Both!" In a phi=0 (total stress approach), you have nothing to use but total unit weight and undrained shear strength. I would not use any value for Cp in total strength analyses.

For effective strength analyses, I'd use the effective friction angle, ignore cohesion and take a value of phi/10 for Cp.

Somewhere in this mix though you'd need to look at deformations. There's no substitute for a p-y relationship!

f-d

¡papá gordo ain’t no madre flaca!

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!

Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close