archives of civil and mechanical engineering 14 (2014) 327–334

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/acme

Original Research Article

Comparison of sandy soil shear strength parameters

obtained by various construction direct shear
apparatuses

J. Amšiejus, N. Dirgėlienėn, A. Norkus, Š. Skuodis

Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Saulėtekio al.11, LT-10223 Vilnius, Lithuania

art i cle i nfo ab st rac t

Article history: An analysis of test results performed by common type of direct shear apparatuses shows
Received 13 October 2012 that normal stress on the shear plane of soil sample is not equal to vertical component of
Accepted 10 November 2013 distributed external load applied to the top of soil sample. Performed measurements
Available online 2 December 2013 cleared that only 65–85% of total vertical load is transmitted to the sample shear plane.

Keywords: Thus, determining of the soil shear strength depends on shear apparatus construction, i.e.

Direct shear test on actual magnitude of vertical load transmitted to the shear plane. The paper presents an

Movable lower shear ring of sample analysis of shear strength parameters of sand determined by two different construction of

Constant volume direct shear apparatuses with movable lower shear ring. The soil shear strength para-

Soil shear strength parameters meters by employing direct shear apparatus SPF-2 have been obtained under constant

Angle of internal friction
vertical load and measuring the vertical load at different positions, namely: at the bottom
and that of at the top of soil sample, respectively. The soil strength parameters by
employing the universal shear testing device ADS 1/3 were determined under two
conditions, namely: by maintaining constant soil volume and that of for constant vertical
load, respectively. In both cases the vertical load was measured at the top of soil sample.
& 2013 Politechnika Wroc"awska. Published by Elsevier Urban & Partner Sp. z o.o. All rights
reserved.

1. Introduction Direct shear test is simple and relatively cheap method

At present the direct shear and triaxial tests are the most
common laboratory tests for determining soil shear strength
parameters. Direct shear test is the most widely applied
method in Lithuania. Direct shear and triaxial tests are
widely applied in other countries [1,2]. An angle of internal
friction φ (1) and a cohesion c (kPa) are the shear strength
parameters of the Mohr – Coulomb strength criterion, gen-
erally being identified by the above listed methods.
for determining the soil shear strength parameters. The
construction of apparatus is not complicated, the test is fast
to perform, the output data can be relatively easily processed
to obtain the necessary parameters. Therefore the direct
shear apparatuses are widely applied in an engineering
practice and for research aims [5,11,16,20]. Despite an attrac-
tion of the method, the obtained experience and recognized
factors leading to many inaccuracies (as e.g. discrepancy to
introduced assumptions, boundary conditions, etc.) raise a

n
Corresponding author. Tel.: þ370 52745220.
E-mail addresses: Jonas.Amsiejus@vgtu.lt (J. Amšiejus), Neringa.Dirgeliene@vgtu.lt (N. Dirgėlienė),
Arnoldas.Norkus@vgtu.lt (A. Norkus), Sarunas.Skuodis@vgtu.lt (Š. Skuodis).

1644-9665/$ - see front matter & 2013 Politechnika Wroc"awska. Published by Elsevier Urban & Partner Sp. z o.o. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acme.2013.11.004
328 archives of civil and mechanical engineering 14 (2014) 327–334
necessity for deeper analysis and subsequent improvements
to ensure the more reliable and adequate testing and data
processing methods using this technique [4,18]. The efforts
are applied to eliminate/reduce an influence of unexpected
factors, that influencing the accuracy of shear strength
parameters to be determined [3,9,15,17]. But one can face
the cases when the tools being employed to eliminate
negative above mentioned factors of applied apparatuses
induce the new additional negative factors.
The main mentioned negative factors met in practice of
determining strength parameters via the usual direct shear
apparatuses can be listed as follow: non-uniform stress and
strain distribution in sample; the vertical compressive load
applied on the top is not completely transferred to the sample;
the actual distribution of normal load on shear plane is
unknown; the testing conditions do not imitate a soil sample
behavior in ground; one cannot perform the test under the
constant volume condition [10,19,21]. The distribution of stres-
ses in sample applying the direct shear box depends on: the
way of vertical load transmission; the position of the movable
part of shear ring; the horizontal displacement of the movable
part of the ring; the shape and stiffness of the loading plate; the
clearance between the upper and the lower rings of the box [3].
Generally it is assumed that vertical load applied onto the top
of shear box specimen is completely transmitted to the soil
shear plane. Hence the frictional force mobilized between the
specimen and that of the vertical walls of the shear box is not
taken into account [12,13]. It is obvious that the above listed
reasons influence to the accuracy of determined actual soil
shear strength parameters. All the above factors finally result
that shear strength parameters to be either underestimated (for
contractant soils) or overestimated (for dilatant soils) [6,7,14,22].
The performed by authors measurements of normal stress
in the shear plane showed that it is of 65–85% magnitude of
vertical force applied on the top of the sample. The tests have
been performed by direct shear apparatus SPF-2 with movable
lower shear ring. The normal stress magnitude on the shear
plane also depends on the magnitude of horizontal displace-
ment (varying from zero till the fixed magnitude) of movable
part of shear box during the testing procedure. The testing
procedure was stopped when the following requirements have
been reached, namely: the horizontal displacement reached
6 mm, and the normal stress on the shear plane exceeded 10%
of normal stress being developed on the top of the dense
sample. The vertical load to the soil sample was applied via the
loading plate by using the special lever mechanism. When the
horizontal (lateral) force is applied, the soil in the front of an
upper ring is lifted, and in the contrary side of upper ring the
soil moves down. The tangential stresses being developed at
internal surface of upper ring front is much larger the ones
being developed at the internal surface of the contrary side of
the upper ring. The developed frictional forces between ring
and sample will be larger in the front of the upper ring.
So one can conclude, that the soil shear strength depends on
construction of the shear apparatus. Hence aiming to reduce the
influence of shear apparatus construction on experimentally
determined shear strength parameters, one should manage the
actual regularity of normal stress distribution in shear plane.
The performed investigation is assigned to an analysis of
determined shear strength parameters of sandy soil being
obtained with two different constructions of direct shear
apparatuses with movable lower shear ring. The tests with
apparatus SPF-2 have been performed under constant normal
stress and by measuring the vertical load at the top and at the
bottom of the sample, respectively. The direct shear tests
with apparatus ADS 1/3 have been performed under two
conditions: by maintaining the constant soil volume and by
measuring the vertical load at the top of soil sample, and that
of by applying the constant vertical load and by measuring
the vertical load at the top of soil sample, respectively.
2. Construction of employed direct shear
apparatuses
The shear tests with modified standard apparatus SPF-2 have
been performed at Laboratory of Department of Geotechnical
Engineering of Vilnius Gediminas Technical University. Mod-
ification of apparatus has been developed via implementing a
vertical load measuring system at shear plane. The principal
scheme of employed apparatus is given in Fig. 1.
When applying the modified direct shear apparatus SPF-2
it is possible to measure not only the vertical compressive
force applied onto the sample, but also the normal stress
transferred on the shear plane. For determining the normal
force acting on the shear plane the load transducer is placed
onto the lower ring. One can also perform the test under the
constant volume. The cut cone loading plate, that reducing
probability of contact between ring and loading plate, is
employed. The loading plate can freely tilt.
The vertical load is transmitted to the sample via a hinge
transmission applying the lever mechanism. Such method of
loading ensures constant vertical load magnitude on the top
of sample i.e. developing constant normal stress per whole
loading history. During test the normal load is measured at
the bottom of the sample. The sample is sheared by moving
with a constant velocity the lower part of the ring. Thus, the
shearing velocity is controlled and the lateral force is perma-
nently measured.
Fig. 1 – Principal scheme of modified shear box apparatus
SPF-2: 1 – soil; 2 – lower ring; 3 – upper ring; 4 – fixed
support; 5 – movable part of apparatus; 6 – bell track;
7 – lower part of apparatus; 8 – load transducers; 9 – table
of apparatus; 10 – supports; 11 – loading plate; 12 – fixator;
13 – porous stone; 14 – plate of support.
 archives of civil and mechanical engineering 14 (2014) 327–334 329

Fig. 2 – Principal scheme of universal shear testing device

ADS 1/3: 1 – filter plate; 2 – movable lower ring; 3 – fixed Fig. 3 – Grading curve of sand.
upper ring; 4 – soil; 5 – load piston; 6 – fixation of upper ring;
7 – fixed support; 8 – water jacket; 9 – plate of lower ring;
height is 3.39 cm and the diameter is 7.14 cm. The develop-
10 – movable plate of base; 11 – fixators; 12 – fixation of
ment of horizontal displacement was limited by 9 mm.
movable plate of base; 13 – skids; 14 – support of upper ring.
By processing the test data the shear strength parameters
have been calculated applying the least squares method. The
The principal scheme of universal shear testing device peak values of shear strength coincide the maximum ratio of
ADS 1/3 is given in Fig. 2. The sample is loaded by a chosen τ/s and that of the residual values coincide the minimum
vertical load via a stiff loading plate. The shearing is ratio of τ/s. Both magnitudes correspond the maximal hor-
performed by maintaining the constant sample volume, i.e. izontal displacements of lower shear ring part.
the height, not allowing the dilation or contraction of the
sample. The process is maintained via regulating the normal
stress magnitude. The normal stress is measured at the top of
5. Test results
the sample. The sample horizontal loading is realized by
pushing a movable lower ring with a constant velocity and
5.1. Analysis of experimental data obtained by SPF-2
permanently measuring the magnitude of the lateral force.
apparatus

Investigations with the apparatus SPF-2 have been performed

3. Soil properties and preparation of sample
via loading the sample by the constant vertical load on the
top of the sample and by measuring the vertical load at the
The disturbed samples have been prepared by employing the
bottom. The measurements cleared, that not all magnitude of
compacting procedure. The coarse soil, further referred as
vertical load is transmitted onto the sample shear plane.
sand is from the Moravia region quarry in Czechia. The
The soil samples have been loaded by the constant vertical
grading curve of sand is given in Fig. 3. The sand uniformity
forces of the following magnitudes: 50, 100, 150, and 200 kPa.
coefficient is 2.0, the curvature coefficient 1.12, the specific
Fig. 4 illustrates that the listed load magnitudes have been
gravity of soil particles is ρs ¼ 2.50 g/cm3, the mean of grain
not reached at shear plane at the beginning of the test, i.e.
size is 0.425 mm.
they have been reached only at the end of the test (see Fig. 4).
The samples have been prepared by compacting sand of
One can find that the shear plane is loaded only by the
10% water content via three layers. The properties of pre-
65–85% of total vertical load magnitude at the beginning of
pared samples are as follow: density ρ ¼ 1.575 g/cm3, void
the experiment. When the sample is loaded by vertical load,
ratio e ¼ 0.746.
the developed lateral pressure push the sample to internal
surface of the ring, so constraining the vertical displacement
of the sample. During shear process the soil moves vertically
4. Test method

The samples have been sheared by above described appara-

tuses under four normal loads magnitudes, namely 50, 100,
150, 200 kPa. The samples under the same load magnitude
have been sheared at least three times.
The prepared sand sample is placed into the shear ring of
SPF-2. The cylinder form sample height is 3.41 cm, diameter
is 7.14 cm. The sample is loaded by the vertical load of chosen
magnitude. When the normal displacement stabilizes, the
lateral loading is applied. The lower part of shear ring is
pushed by the constant velocity of 0.5 mm/min. The test is
considered to be finished when horizontal displacement of
the ring reaches 6 mm. Fig. 4 – Stress paths for the tests with SPF-2 obtained under
The analogous procedures were performed with the appa- constant vertical load condition and measuring vertical load
ratus ADS 1/3. The sample is of the same cylinder form, the at the bottom of the soil sample.
330 archives of civil and mechanical engineering 14 (2014) 327–334

Fig. 5 – Stress paths for the tests with SPF-2 obtained under
constant vertical load condition and measuring vertical load
at the top of soil sample.
Fig. 7 – Residual values of soil shear strength parameters
obtained with SPF-2 under constant vertical load condition
and measuring vertical load at the bottom of the soil sample.

Fig. 6 – Peak values of soil shear strength parameters

obtained with SPF-2 under constant vertical load condition Fig. 8 – Peak values of soil shear strength parameters
and measuring vertical load at the bottom of the soil sample. obtained with SPF-2 under constant vertical load condition
and measuring vertical load at the top of the soil sample.
because of the volume change. The upper shear ring tries also
to displace, but a fixator of clearance blocks its moving down.
Therefore a part of vertical load applied on the top of sample
is transmitted to the fixator of clearance. Therefore the
vertical load magnitude applied to shear plane is less the
one applied on the top of the sample, i.e. that being devel-
oped at contact of the loading plate.
The shear tests performed with the apparatus SPF-2 have
been performed by applying the constant vertical stress and
measuring the normal stress at the top of the sample. From
Fig. 5, one can find that the applied vertical load of magni-
tudes of 50, 100, 150, and 200 kPa with some inaccuracy
remained constant during all the test time. The determined
stress paths of the sample differ from those, measured on the
bottom of sample (see Fig. 4). The stresses measured at the
bottom varies during the test time. Fig. 9 – Residual values of soil shear strength parameters
Figs. 6–9 present the individual shear strength values, obtained with SPF-2 under constant vertical load condition
processed by the first test series performed with the appara- and measuring vertical load at the top of the soil sample.
tus SPF-2. The scatter of values is small, as normal stresses
have been measured at shear plane (see Figs. 6 and 7).
The second test series with the apparatus SPF-2 have been 5.2. Analysis of experimental data obtained by ADS 1/3
performed. In this case the constant vertical stress was apparatus
measured at the top of the sample. One can find that the
scatter of soil shear strength values is significant for the case The shear tests have been performed with shear apparatus
under consideration (see Figs. 8 and 9). Hence, an inaccurate ADS 1/3 by maintaining the constant volume of soil sample
of the normal stress magnitude, differing from actual induced and by measuring the vertical force on top of the sample. The
on the shear plane, was employed for calculations. load magnitudes of 100, 150, and 200 kPa have been applied
 archives of civil and mechanical engineering 14 (2014) 327–334 331

Fig. 10 – Stress paths for the tests with ADS 1/3 obtained
under constant soil volume condition and measuring Fig. 12 – Stress paths for the tests with ADS 1/3 obtained
vertical load at the top of the soil sample. under constant vertical load and measuring normal stress at
the top of the soil sample.

Fig. 11 – Variation of the clearance between upper and lower

rings recorded by four indicators.

(see Fig. 10). Aiming to keep the constant sample volume at Fig. 13 – Peak values of soil shear strength parameters
the beginning of testing, the loading primarily has been obtained with ADS 1/3 under constant soil volume condition
reduced because the contraction of the soil started. When and measuring vertical load at the top of the soil sample.
the soil sample started to dilatate during shearing, the
normal stress was increased aiming to constrain the sample
dilatation in a vertical direction.
The amount of vertical load being transmitted to shear
plane is unknown as a support of upper ring is installed in the
shear apparatus ADS 1/3. This support keeps a clearance of
fixed magnitude between the upper and the lower rings. The
support of upper ring constrains the moving down of the
upper ring but allows its lifting. Thus, the part of vertical load
is distributed to the apparatus construction.
Several tests have been performed when the clearance
between upper and lower rings was not fixed. The clearance
varied during the test. Fig. 11 illustrates a variation of the
clearance during the test, when the sample was loaded by
50 kN vertical load magnitude. The clearance influences the
shear strength magnitude.
Fig. 14 – Residual values of soil shear strength parameters
When the upper ring moves down, it leans against the
obtained with ADS 1/3 under constant soil volume condition
lower ring. In this case not total magnitude of the vertical
and measuring vertical load at the top of the soil sample.
load is transmitted to the shear plane, in contrary as it is
assumed in soil shear strength calculations. The actual load
is reduced. The moving of upper and lower rings in respect of Fig. 12 illustrates that the set load is kept constant until the
each other is influenced by developed a friction force between moment soil starts to shear.
the rings, which magnitude is hardly determined. The scatter of individual shear strength is also small when
The next test series with ADS 1/3 apparatus were test series with ADS 1/3 apparatus were performed by main-
performed by maintaining the constant vertical load and taining the constant sample volume and measuring the
by measuring the normal stress on the top of the sample. normal stress on top of the sample (see Figs. 13 and 14).
332 archives of civil and mechanical engineering 14 (2014) 327–334
Fig. 15 – Peak values of soil shear strength parameters
obtained with ADS 1/3 measuring constant vertical load
at the top of the soil sample.
Fig. 16 – Residual values of soil shear strength parameters
obtained with ADS 1/3 measuring constant vertical load at
the top of the soil sample.
The sticking of the loading plate in the ring can be considered
as eventual reason of this result.
At the second case when the constant vertical stress was
measured on top of the sample, the scatter of individual
shear strengths values is also small (see Figs. 15 and 16).
5.3. Calculation of soil shear strength parameters
The mean values of soil shear strength parameters φ0 and
c0 were calculated applying the least squares method. The
magnitudes of the above values depend on the normal stress
magnitude on shear plane. If this magnitude being employed
for calculation is not an actual one, then the magnitudes of
subsequently calculated values of the angle of internal fric-
tion and the cohesion are inaccurate.
Fig. 17 illustrates the peak values of the angle of internal
friction of soil obtained with shear apparatuses ADS 1/3
(constant volume of sample and measuring normal stress at
sample top) and SPF-2 (constant vertical loading at top and
measuring normal stress at bottom of sample). One can find
that the peak values are smaller in case of using apparatus
ADS 1/3. The residual values of the angle of internal friction
obtained by using the test data with both apparatuses are
the same.
Fig. 18 illustrates the results of the determined cohesion
by processing the test results with the above-mentioned
Fig. 17 – Values of angle of internal friction obtained with
shear apparatuses SPF-2 (constant vertical loading at top
and measuring normal stress at bottom of sample) and
ADS 1/3 (constant volume of sample and measuring normal
stress at sample top).
Fig. 18 – Values of cohesion obtained with shear
apparatuses SPF-2 (constant vertical loading at top and
measuring normal stress at bottom of sample) and ADS 1/3
(constant volume of sample and measuring normal stress at
sample top).
apparatuses. One can find the magnitudes of residual values
of cohesion obtained with the apparatus ADS 1/3 are sig-
nificantly less the ones obtained with the apparatus SPF-2.
Figs. 19 and 20 illustrate the values of the angle of internal
friction and the cohesion for the test cases with both
apparatuses, when the sand samples have been loaded by
constant vertical load and the normal stress was measured at
the top of the samples. The peak value of the angle of internal
friction was less for the apparatus SPF-2 when comparing
with one obtained with the apparatus ADS 1/3. The residual
value of the angle of internal friction is greater when applying
the test data obtained with SPF-2 apparatus (see Fig. 19). An
analysis of cohesion values that obtained by processing the
test data with above apparatuses viewed that using appara-
tus ADS 1/3 leads to greater magnitudes versus the ones
obtained with SPF-2 (see Fig. 20).
The calculated characteristics values of soil shear strength
parameters according to requirements of EC 7 [8] are pre-
sented in the Table 1.
 archives of civil and mechanical engineering 14 (2014) 327–334 333

Fig. 19 – Values of angle of internal friction obtained for

samples loaded by constant vertical load and measuring
normal stress at the top of the soil sample.
Fig. 21 – Diagram of shear strength. Bounds of confidence
interval when φ0 and c0 are treated as independent values.

Fig. 20 – Values of cohesion obtained for samples loaded by

constant vertical load and measuring normal stress at the
top of the soil sample.

Let us summarize all performed test results. Characteristic

values of the angle of internal friction φ0 k varies within the
bounds of 24.01 and 34.61. The maximum magnitude corre-
sponds the tests performed with apparatus SPF-2 in case with
implemented measuring system of vertical load at shear
plane. It differs insignificantly comparing with the one of Fig. 22 – Diagram of shear strength. Bounds of confidence
φ0 cvk ¼ 32.81 obtained with the apparatus ADS 1/3. The mini- interval when φ0 and c0 are treated as dependent values.
mum value of φ0 k ¼ 24.01 is obtained with the apparatus SPF-2
when the normal stress is measured at the top of the sample.
This case of testing also corresponds the minimum value of smaller characteristic magnitudes of φ0 k and c0 k. Figs. 21 and
the cohesion c0 k ¼ 26.3 kPa. Thus, having not estimated the 22 represent the confidence interval bounds of shear strength
actual normal stress at shear plane, one faces with the large for tests performed with the apparatus SPF-2 when the
scatter of soil strength parameters, finally resulting the constant vertical load is measured at the top of the sample.

Table 1 – Results of calculation of the characteristics values of soil shear strength parameters according to EC 7.

Methods Characteristics values of peak shear

strength parameters φ0 k,1 and c0 k, kPa

SPF – 2 apparatus, constant vertical load measured at the bottom of soil sample φ0 k ¼ 34.6 (0.691)
c0 k ¼ 7.32

ADS 1/3 apparatus, constant soil volume, vertical load measured at the top of soil sample φ0 cvk ¼ 32.8 (0.644)
c0 cvk ¼  14.3

SPF – 2 apparatus, constant vertical load measured at the top of soil sample φ0 k ¼ 24.0 (0.445)
c0 k ¼ 26.3

ADS 1/3 apparatus, constant vertical load measured at the top of soil sample φ0 k ¼ 31.9 (0.622)
c0 k ¼ 1.99
334 archives of civil and mechanical engineering 14 (2014) 327–334
Fig. 21 corresponds the case when φ0 k and c0 k are treated as
the independent values, following the requirements of the
standard EC 7. Fig. 22 corresponds the case when φ0 k and
c0 k are treated as dependent values. When the values are
dependant the bound of confidence interval (due prescribed
probability) is more narrow (see Fig. 22) when compared with
the case when values are independent (see Fig. 21).
Considering the characteristic values of the shear strength
parameters φ0 k ¼ 24.01 (0.445) and c0 k ¼  26.3 kPa correspond-
ing the first and the second cases, one can conclude that they
are out of a domain being fixed by the bounds of confidence
interval obtained for probability α ¼ 0.95. The characteristic
values of the shear strength parameters according the Eurocode
7 should be determined in the way, that the probability of worse
shear strength parameters cannot exceed 5%. This requirement
is satisfied only for the case when normal stress at shear plane
is equal to zero. Applying the larger magnitude of normal stress,
this probability reduces. Hence, the characteristic values of the
shear strength parameters calculated for above cases do not
ensure the strength getting in the domain bounded by the
confidence intervals obtained with probability α ¼ 0.95. Hence,
the characteristic values are obtained with the larger margin of
safety comparing with that being provided by the Eurocode 7.
6. Conclusions
(1) An analysis of shear tests with sandy soil shows that the
normal stress on the shear plane of soil sample is not
equal to vertical component of the stress applied to the
top of the soil sample when using direct shear apparatus
SPF-2 with movable lower shear ring.
(2) Only the 65–85% of vertical load magnitude is transmitted
on the soil shear plane when vertical load is applied to
sample top using the direct shear apparatus SPF-2.
(3) When determining the soil shear strength with the uni-
versal shear apparatus ADS 1/3, which maintains the
constant soil volume and measures the vertical load at
top of sample, it is not clear what part of the vertical load
is transmitted to the shear plane and that of to the
construction of apparatus, respectively.
(4) When applying the modified direct shear apparatus SPF-2
it is possible to measure the normal stress on the shear
plane. This constructional approach influences for deter-
mining of the actual shear strength parameters.
Acknowledgement
An equipment and infrastructure of Civil Engineering Scien-
tific Research Centre of Vilnius Gediminas Technical Univer-
sity was employed for investigations.
references
[1] J. Amšiejus, N. Dirgėlienė, A. Norkus, D. Žilionienė,
Evaluation of soil shear strength parameters via triaxial
testing by height versus diameter ratio of sample, The Baltic
Journal of Road and Bridge Engineering 2 (2) (2009) 54–60.
[2] J. Amšiejus, N. Dirgėlienė, Probabilistic assessment of soil shear
strength parameters using triaxial test results, The Baltic
Journal of Road and Bridge Engineering 2 (3) (2007) 125–131.
[3] J. Amšiejus, Determination of the design values of soil shear
strength parameters, Vilnius Gediminas Technical
University, 2000, p. 141 (in Lithuanian, Ph.D. Thesis).
[4] A. Alikonis, J. Amšiejus, V. Stragys, Improvement of shear box
apparatus and methodology of test, in: Soil Mechanics and
Geotechnical Engineering, The 12th European Conference in
June 7–10, Amsterdam, Austria, 1999, pp. 1053–1057.
[5] C.A. Bareither, C.H. Benson, T.B. Edil, Comparison of shear
strength of sand backfills measured in small-scale and large-
scale direct shear tests, Canadian Geotechnical Journal 45 (9)
(2008) 1224–1236.
[6] A.B. Cerato, A.J. Lutenegger, Specimen size and scale effects
of direct shear box tests of sands, Geotechnical Testing
Journal 29 (6) (2006) 507–516.
[7] G.T. Dounias, D.M. Potts, Numerical analysis of drained direct
and simple shear tests, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering
119 (12) (1993) 1870–1891.
[8] Eurocode 7 Geotechnical Design, Part 1: General Rules.
Brussels, 2004, p. 168.
[9] P. Guo, Modified Direct Shear Test for Anisotropic Strength of
Sand, Journal of Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental
Engineering 134 (9) (2008) 1311–1318.
[10] S. Heng, H. Ohta, T. Pipatpongsa, M. Takemoto, S. Yokota,
Constant-volume direct box-shear test on clay-seam
materials, in: Proc of the 17th Southeast Asian Geotechnical
Conference, May 10–13, Taipei, Taiwan, 2010, pp. 83–87.
[11] D.E. Jacobson, J.R. Valdes, T.M. Evans, A numerical view into
direct shear specimen size effects, Geotechnical Testing
Journal 30 (6) (2007) 512–516.
[12] V. Kostkanova, I. Herle, Measurement of Wall Friction in
Direct Shear Tests on Soft Soil, 2012 http://www.springerlink.
com/content/a424r548r6353613/fulltext.pdf.
[13] S.H. Liu, Simulating a direct shear box test by DEM, Canadian
Geotechnical Journal 43 (2) (2006) 155–168.
[14] S.H. Liu, D.A. Sun, H. Matsuoka, On the interface friction in
direct shear test, Computers and Geotechnics 32 (5) (2005)
317–325.
[15] M.L. Lings, M.S. Dietz, An improved direct shear apparatus
for sand, Geotechnique 54 (4) (2004) 245–256.
[16] S. Lobo-Guerrero, L.S. Vallejo, Discrete element method
evaluation of granular crushing under direct shear test
conditions, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental
Engineering 131 (10) (2005) 1295–1300.
[17] H. Matsuoka, S.H. Liu, D.A. Sun, A new in-situ direct shear
testing method for rockfill materials sands and clays, in: Proc
of the 15th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and
Geotechnical Engineering in August 27–31, Istanbul, Turkey,
2001, pp. 455–458.
[18] H. Matsuoka, S. Liu, Simplified direct shear box test on
granular materials and its application to rockfill materials,
Soils and Foundations 38 (4) (1998) 275–284.
[19] C. Thornton, L. Zhang, Numerical Simulations of the direct
shear test, Chemical Engineering & Technology 26 (2) (2003)
p.153–156.
[20] A. Simoni, G.T. Houlsby, The direct shear strength and
dilatancy of sand-gravel mixtures, Geotechnical and
Geological Engineering 24 (3) (2006) 523–549.
[21] N. Vervečkaitė (Dirgėlienė), J. Amšiejus, V. Stragys, Stress–
strain analysis in the soil sample during laboratory testing,
Journal of Civil Engineering and Management 13 (1) (2007)
63–70.
[22] L. Zhang, C. Thornton, A numerical examination of the direct
shear test, Geotechnique 57 (4) (2007) 343–354.