I recently had a CU triaxial series run on a sample of lean clay with pore pressure monitoring and back pressure saturation. When I look at the results, they varied significantly depending on how the results were presented. Three tests were run for the series, at confining pressures of 1/2, 1 and 2 tsf. When the failure criterion was "maximum stress ratio", the effective friction angle was 32.6 degrees. When "maximum pore pressure" was used, it was 31.1 degrees. When "percent axial strain" was used, it was 31.8 degrees, but when "maximum deviator stress" was used it was only 18.9 degrees. Now I'm not sure which values would be appropriate for the effective stress analysis. Also, what could cause such a variation? Thanks
Red Flag Submitted
Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts. The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.
Reply To This Thread
Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.
This ebook covers tips for creating and managing workflows, security best practices and protection of intellectual property, Cloud vs. on-premise software solutions, CAD file management, compliance, and more. Download Now
A/E firms have a great opportunity to lead the world into the future, but the industryâ€™s greatest assetâ€”real-time dataâ€”is sitting wasted in clunky, archaic ERP platforms. Learn how real-time, fully interactive dashboards in a modern ERP allow you to unlock data that will shape the future of the world. Download Now