Bull Eng Geol Environ
DOI 10.1007/s10064-015-0835-5
ORIGINAL PAPER
Effect of length-to-diameter ratio on the unconfined compressive
strength of cohesive soil specimens
Hakan Güneyli1 • Tolga Rüşen1
Received: 9 July 2014 / Accepted: 6 December 2015
Ó Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015
Abstract In this work, the influence of the length-to-di-
ameter ratio (L/D) on the unconfined compressive strength
(UCS) of cohesive soil specimens was assessed. An L/
D ratio of between 2 and 3 is generally recommended by
accepted scientific and technical authorities. Nevertheless,
published reports on the effect of specimen shape on soil
strength are scarce. Therefore, we determined the effect of
specimen shape on the UCS values of four clay soils by
testing compacted cylindrical specimens with L/D ratios
ranging from 0.5 to 3. The test results indicated that the
UCS value decreases significantly with increasing L/D ra-
tio. This decrease becomes particularly steep when the L/
D ratio exceeds 1, but then becomes less steep when the L/
D ratio is between 1.25 and 2.5. In addition, the failure
pattern generally changes from ductile to brittle and the
failure mechanism develops in quite complex and obscure
ways when the L/D ratio is C2.75. Based on an analysis of
the results, correction formulae with strong statistical
relationships were determined for the soils tested in this
study. Nonetheless, further investigation is needed to check
the validity of the equations derived for these soils.
Keywords Length-to-diameter ratio  Unconfined
compression test  Failure pattern
& Hakan Güneyli
hguneyli@cukurova.edu.tr
Tolga Rüşen
tolgarusen@hotmail.com
1
Department of Geological Engineering, Çukurova University,
01330 Balcalı, Adana, Turkey
Introduction
The unconfined compressive strength (qu), which accu-
rately describes the undrained conditions of fine-grained
(cohesive and semicohesive) foundations, is widely used in
almost all geotechnical engineering applications, such as
buildings, bridges, dams, and embankments. Two soil
parameters, the undrained shear strength (Su) and cohesion
(Cu) on a failure plane in a ground can be obtained from the
average value of qu/2. The undrained shear strength (Su) of
a cohesive soil is commonly determined using an uncon-
fined compression test (UCT). The primary results of
unconfined compressive strength tests are the values of the
unconfined compressive strength (qu) and cohesion (Cu),
while unconfined compressive strength (UCS) test results
provide the values of the relative consistency and sensi-
tivity of the cohesive soil.
The unconfined compression test is the simplest, easi-
est, and least expensive test for investigating the shear
strengths of cohesive and semicohesive soils in terms of
the total stress in either the undisturbed or remolded and
compacted state, i.e., it is not applicable to cohesionless
or coarse-grained soils. This test can be applied to soils at
construction sites where the rate of construction is very
fast and the pore water does not have enough time to
drain. In other words, the test (a modified version of the
triaxial compression test) is used to calculate the uncon-
solidated undrained shear strength under unconfined
conditions.
One of the most important requirements when deter-
mining soil shear strength parameters is to create samples
that comply with the requirements of appropriate standards.
The required size of a cohesive soil specimen used in an
unconfined compression test has been specified by a
number of authorities:
123
 H. Güneyli, T. Rüşen

1. ASTM D2166-00 (ASTM 2002a) specifies that the test indicated that the soil specimen size does not affect the
specimen should be a right circular cylinder with a shear strength under triaxial compression conditions.
minimum diameter of 1.300 and a height-to-diameter Therefore, given the results of previous investigations, the
ratio of 2–2.5 effects of size on soil shear strength are unclear. Moreover,
2. BSI 1377-7 (BSI 1990) recommends that the test as seen above, only a few published works on the effect of
specimen should have a diameter of between 35 and specimen size on soil strength are available.
100 mm and a length-to-diameter ratio of 2 However, during the process of taking soil samples from
3. JIS A 1216 (Japanese Standards Association 1993) the ground, transferring them to the laboratory, and
requires that the cylindrical test specimen’s diameter preparing them for testing, the samples are often subjected
and length are 35 and 80 mm, respectively to disturbance. In addition, it is difficult to prepare test
4. TS 1900-2 (Turkish Standards Institution 2006) rec- samples due to the presence of latent cracks and fissures or
ommends that the cylindrical test specimen should inhomogeneity. Thus, a soil test sample with an L/D ratio
have a diameter of 50 mm preferably (38 mm if that complies with the standards is very difficult to achieve
necessary), and a height-to-diameter ratio of 2 due to the factors mentioned above. Therefore, non-stan-
5. Das (2002) suggests that the cylindrical test specimen dard-sized samples are often used in practice. Although a
should have a diameter of 1.400 and a length-to- number of studies on the effect of the L/D ratio on rock
diameter ratio of 2–3 shear strength have been performed (Obert et al. 1946;
John 1972; Turk and Dearman 1986; Hawkins 1998; Mogi
As seen above, although some of the values of soil
1966, 2007; ASTM 1994; Kahraman and Alber 2006; Ünlü
specimen size and L/D ratio recommended by the author-
and Yilmaz 2008), there is no published report of a cor-
ities are similar to the corresponding values recommended
responding investigation for soils.
by other authorities, there is no clear consensus in the lit-
Therefore, in the study reported in the present paper, we
erature and among the standards.
investigated the influence of specimen shape on the results
It is often difficult to obtain a sufficient number of soil
of unconfined compression tests of different cylindrical soil
specimens of adequate length due to problems such as
samples with different L/D ratios in the laboratory. We also
fissures, latent cracks, and inhomogeneity. In addition to
developed some predictive models (equations) for the UCS
these issues, soil disturbance during drilling, sampling,
based on the L/D ratios of cylindrical soil samples. Four
transportation, and storage or during preparation for testing
different soils which are a kaolinite clay, two illitic soils
can lead to a test sample of insufficient size. Furthermore,
and a smectitic soil, all of which were homogeneous, were
cracks and ruptures at various scales may occur when
selected for this investigation. For each soil type, tube
extracting a soil sample with a relatively low water content
samples with eleven different L/D ratios were prepared and
from the sampler tube. For these reasons, there are some
tested for their UCS values.
serious practical difficulties associated with the process of
soil sampling. Therefore, the situation in which only soil
samples that are shorter than specified in the standards are
Properties of materials
available for UCS tests is often encountered in soil engi-
neering applications.
Four clay soils with different characteristics were selected
Unlike in rock engineering, research into the effects of
for investigation in this study: kaolinite used in the ceramic
specimen size or the ratio of length to diameter on soil
industry; Handere clay (from the Adana region in south
shear strength is scarce. Kamei and Tokida (1991) stated
Turkey), which is predominantly montmorillonite;
that there is no effect of specimen size on the strength and
Almanpınarı clay (from the Osmaniye region in southern
deformation properties in an unconfined compression test
Turkey), which is predominantly illite; and Sam-Tekin clay
when L/D = 2.0 and the diameter is greater than 20 mm,
(from the Gaziantep region in southeast Turkey), which is
while qu and the secant modulus (E50) increase greatly
predominantly illite. The soils, except for the kaolinite,
when the diameter (D) is decreased to \10 mm. Aktaş
were collected within 1 m of the ground surface, and all of
(1991) carried out a series of unconsolidated–undrained
them were inorganic clay soils. The physical properties of
triaxial tests on Sam-Tekin clay with a plasticity index (Ip)
the soils, including their particle size distributions, con-
of 33 in order to investigate the effect of sample diameter
sistency limits, and specific gravities, were determined in
on shear strength. In tests of soil specimens with the same
accordance with ASTM D 422-63 (ASTM 2002c), ASTM
length to diameter ratio (L/D = 2.0) but different diameters
D 4318-00 (ASTM 2002d), and ASTM D854-02 (ASTM
(36 and 50 mm), increasing the diameter was found to
2002f), respectively. The soils were classified in accor-
decrease the undrained friction angle (/u) and E50 and to
dance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS)
reduce Cu by a negligible amount. Matsui et al. (1994)
described in ASTM D 2487 (ASTM 2002b) and with the

123
Effect of length-to-diameter ratio on UCS of cohesive soil specimens

AASHTO soil classification system. Compaction parame-
ters of the soils were determined by following the proce-
dure described in ASTM D 698-00a (ASTM 2002e). The
particle size distribution curves of the soils are shown in
Fig. 1. A summary of the index properties (and compaction
parameters) of the soils used in this study is presented in
Table 1.
Determination of the compaction characteristics
of the soils
Standard Proctor compaction tests according to ASTM D
698-00a (ASTM 2002e) were performed on each of the four
soils to determine compaction curves. Maximum dry den-
sities (MDD) and optimum moisture contents (OMC) of the

Fig. 1 Graph of the particle 100

size distribution curves of the
soils used in this study 90

80
Percentage passing (%)

70

60

50

40

30
Handere Clay
20
Almanpınarı Clay

10 Sam-Tekin Clay
Kaolinite
0
10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001
Particle size (mm)

Table 1 Index properties,

Parameter Soil name
classifications, and compaction
parameters of the soils tested Handere clay Almanpınarı clay Sam-Tekin clay Kaolinite

LL (%) 43 45 59 41
PI (%) 22 22 33 21
Specific gravity, Gs 2.74 2.74 2.75 2.67
Fines content (%) 99 88 95 51
Sand size (%), 1 12 5 49
4.75–0.075 mm
(%)
Silt size (%), 62 33 40 33
0.075–0.002 mm
(%)
Clay size (%), 37 55 55 16
\0.002 mm
Activity 0.5 0.42 0.61 0.93
Initial void ratio 0.662 0.589 0.820 0.689
(e0)
Classification
USCS CL-CH CL-CH CH CL-CH
AASHTO A 7-6 A 7-6 A6 A 7-6
Group name Inorganic clays of Inorganic clays of Inorganic clays Inorganic clays of
medium plasticity medium plasticity of high medium plasticity
plasticity
Standard Proctor compaction
MDD (kN/m3) 16.2 16.8 16.8 17.2
OMC (%) 19.3 19.1 26 21.4

123

Fig. 2 Graph of standard 17.5
Proctor compaction curves of
the soils used in this study
17.0
16.5
Dry density (kN/m3)
16.0
15.5
15.0
14.5
14.0
10
soils were achieved by applying an energy level of
600 kN m/m3, equal to the standard compactive effort rec-
ommended by ASTM D 698-00a (ASTM 2002e). A rigid
mold made of stainless steel and measuring 101.7 mm in
diameter and 115.8 mm in height was used in the tests for all
soils. Each sample was compacted in three equal layers
inside the mold by dropping a 24.4-N rammer a distance of
305 mm. Twenty-five blows were then applied to each layer
according to method B of ASTM D 698-00a (ASTM 2002e).
The compaction curves of the four soils displayed in
Fig. 2 were obtained by plotting the dry densities of the
compacted samples with reference to their water contents.
All four soils had bell-shaped compaction curves, among
which those of the Sam-Tekin clay and kaolinite were flatter
than those of the Almanpınarı and Handere clays. From
Fig. 2, it is clear that the values of MDD and OMC range
between 16.2 and 17.2 kN/m3 and 19.1–26 %, respectively.
Sample preparation
Compacted soil samples were used in the UCS tests in
order to provide homogeneity, and elimination defects
could not be determined visually before or after the tests.
The clay samples for unconfined compression testing were
prepared with the optimum moisture content (OMC) in
order to eliminate the effects of factors such as the moisture
content (w), void ratio (e), and natural density (cn) on the
UCS. Once sampled, each soil sample was first oven-dried
at 60 °C. The oven-dried soils were compacted using a
standard Proctor mold at the OMC and MDD (as obtained
from the compaction curves). After compaction, a thin-
walled stainless steel sampling tube with an inner diameter
123
H. Güneyli, T. Rüşen
Handere Clay
Almanpınarı Clay
Sam-Tekin Clay
Kaolenite
12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34
Moisture content(%)
of 48 mm, a length of 19 cm, and a wall thickness of
1.5 mm was driven into the soil in the standard Proctor
mold with a hydraulic jack. The soil was immediately
extruded from the sampling tube using another hydraulic
jack and its ends were cut to make it the desired length.
Side friction, which can damage soil samples during
intrusion and extrusion, was minimized by lightly lubri-
cating the inner surface of the sampling tube. The weights
of the samples were measured to an accuracy of about
0.01 g and then wrapped in plastic foil to avoid significant
variations in water content. The samples isolated in this
way were kept under ambient conditions at 24 ± 2 °C for
seven days in order to ensure moisture uniformity.
Cylindrical soil samples with 11 different length-to-di-
ameter (L/D) ratios (from 0.5:1 to 3:1) were prepared from
Handere clay, Almanpınarı clay, Sam-Tekin clay, and
kaolinite in the manner explained above (see Fig. 3). The
lengths of the cylindrical specimens of each soil type
ranged from 24 to 144 mm. In each case, the diameter was
48 mm. The range of L/D values tested started from 0.5, in
case the undisturbed samples obtained were much smaller
than the sample sizes specified by the standards.
Unconfined compression tests
Unconfined compression tests constituted the main part of
this research. The test program was designed to evaluate the
influence of the L/D ratio on the unconfined compressive
strengths of cohesive soils. The specimens were tested under
strain-controlled conditions at a constant loading rate,
according to the requirements of ASTM D 2166-00 (ASTM
2002a).
Effect of length-to-diameter ratio on UCS of cohesive soil specimens

Fig. 3 Photograph of the

specimens used in the UCS tests
(from left to right: Handere clay,
Almanpınarı clay, kaolinite, and
Sam-Tekin clay)

Table 2 Average UCS values

L/D ratio Sam-Tekin clay Kaolinite Handere clay Almanpınarı clay
(in kPa) along with their
standard deviations for the soil 0.50 3466.3 ± 67 2286.6 ± 87 1994.7 ± 74 4262.3 ± 182
specimens tested
0.75 3286.5 ± 65 1947.9 ± 101 1760.6 ± 60 3957.3 ± 171
1.00 3011 ± 68 1694.9 ± 96 1222.2 ± 99 3847.5 ± 176
1.25 2581.4 ± 149 1672.4 ± 97 1148 ± 113 3314.2 ± 243
1.50 2494.2 ± 167 1523 ± 122 1050.9 ± 124 3104.5 ± 251
1.75 2279.1 ± 180 1414.8 ± 123 986 ± 132 2928.9 ± 212
2.00 2198 ± 216 1332.7 ± 126 913 ± 142 2619 ± 224
2.25 2182.6 ± 211 1240.5 ± 145 883.6 ± 170 2508.5 ± 264
2.50 2077 ± 225 1088.2 ± 144 876.1 ± 157 2422.9 ± 291
2.75 2009.7 ± 266 692.8 ± 208 778.6 ± 218 1866.2 ± 446
3.00 1876 ± 297 633 ± 229 740.4 ± 267 1863 ± 479

Strain rate is one of the most important influences on
soil strength (Mitchell 1976). In order to determine the
strain rate values that will produce failure or 15 % strain in
a 15-min test in accordance with ASTM D 2166-00 (ASTM
2002a), a series of UCS tests were performed on soil
specimens with eleven different L/D ratios for each soil.
These pilot tests allowed the appropriate strain rates for
achieving one of the two conditions mentioned above to be
selected for the four soils and different L/D ratios. For all
of the soils, strain rates of 0.5, 1, and 1.5 mm/min were
chosen for L/D ratios of between 0.5 and 1, 1.25–2, and
1.25–3, respectively.
In general, the unconfined compressive strength of a
compacted soil tends to increase as the strain rate during
loading is increased. However, to see a significant variation
in the UCS, the strain rate must be increased at least tenfold
(Hampton 1958; Kulhawy and Mayne 1990; Kim et al.
2012). In this study, since the range of strain rate values
selected was much smaller than this, the effect of the strain
rate on the unconfined compressive strength was assumed
to be negligible or very slight. Therefore, the strain rate
was not included as a variable in the calculations and the
equations.
Results and discussion
Strength properties
Average UCS values along with their standard deviations
for the different soil L/D ratios tested in this study are given
in Table 2 and presented graphically in Fig. 4. A signifi-
cant decrease in UCS with increasing L/D ratio was
observed for all soil types. This decrease in UCS was
steepest for L/D ratios between 0.5 and 1.25 and shallowest
for L/D ratios between 2 and 2.5.
The average UCS values and their standard deviations
are plotted against the corresponding L/D ratios of the
compacted samples of each soil in Fig. 4. The standard
deviations of the UCS values can be seen to increase

123
 H. Güneyli, T. Rüşen

2500 5000

4500
2000
4000

3500
1500
UCS (kPa)

3000

UCS (kPa)
1000 2500

2000
500
1500
Handere Clay Almanpınarı Clay
0 1000
0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.00 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.00
L/D L/D

4000 2500

3500
2000

3000
1500
UCS (kPa)

UCS (kPa)
2500
1000
2000

500
1500
Sam-Tekin Clay Kaolinite
1000 0
0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.00 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.00
L/D L/D

Fig. 4 Graphs showing the relationship between UCS and L/D ratio for the soils tested in this study, as well as the standard deviation in the UCS
for each L/D ratio

substantially with increasing L/D ratio for all soils. This
increase in the standard deviation of the UCS value was
most pronounced in the range 2.5 B L/D B 3. This may be
due to corresponding increases in pore heterogeneity, and
the complexity of the failure mechanism as the soil spec-
imen increases in length. This situation indicates that the
reliability of the UCS test results in this L/D range is sig-
nificantly reduced.
The trends in the UCS with increasing L/D ratio
observed for the four soil types are also displayed and
compared in Fig. 5. The data for each soil type were fitted
using least squares regression. The best fit line and the
correlation coefficient (R) were determined in each
regression. The correlation coefficient was classified as
strong, medium, or weak for R C 0.8, 0.8 \ R \ 0.2, or
R B 0.2, respectively (Smith 1986). Strong correlations
(R values of 0.989, 0.959, 0.979, and 0.889) were found
between the average UCS value and the L/D ratio for each
soil (Fig. 5).
Ratios of the UCS to various standard UCS values
(UCS/UCS2 or UCS/UCS2.5 or UCS/UCS3) are plotted
against L/D ratio in Figs. 6, 7, and 8. Here, UCS2, UCS2.5,
and UCS3 are the UCS values obtained with an L/D ratio of
2, 2.5, and 3, respectively (specimens are often required to
have these L/D ratios in various standards and recom-
mendations). Linear regression lines were fitted to the
resulting data for the four soils; thus, the general correction
formulae for L/D ratios of 2, 2.5, and 3 are given by
UCSð2; 2:5 and 3Þ ¼ UCS=½a  bðL=DÞ;
where UCS(2, 2.5 and 3) is the ‘‘corrected’’ unconfined
compressive strength (kPa), which represents the strength
of a soil specimen with a particular L/D ratio (i.e., the L/
D required by the standard of interest), and UCS is the
measured unconfined compressive strength (kPa) of a
specimen sample with 0.5 B L/D B 3. L is the length of
the cylindrical sample (mm), D is the diameter of the
cylindrical sample (mm), and a and b are coefficients. For
each of the soils tested in this study, the resulting regres-
sion equations and values of a and b for L/D ratios of 2,
2.5, and 3 are listed in Table 3 and shown in Figs. 6, 7, and
8.
The graphs in Figs. 6, 7, and 8 indicate significant
negative relationships between UCS/UCS(2, 2.5 and 3) and L/

123
Effect of length-to-diameter ratio on UCS of cohesive soil specimens

4500
Handere Clay
R² = 0.9793
4000 Almanpınarı Clay
Sam-Tekin Clay
3500 Kaolinite
R² = 0.9188
3000
UCS (kPa)

2500

R² = 0.9588
2000

R² = 0.7914
1500

1000

500

0
0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.00 3.25

L/D

Fig. 5 Graph showing the results of least squares regression between average UCS value and L/D ratio for the four soils

Fig. 6 Graph showing the 2.5

relationship between the UCS/
UCS2 ratio and the L/D ratio for
each soil type R² = 0.827
2.0

1.5
UCS/UCS2

1.0

Handere Clay

0.5 Almanpınarı Clay

Sam-Tekin Clay
Kaolinite
UCS2= UCS/[1.828-0.39(L/D)]
0.0
0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.00 3.25
L/D

D. In addition, there is a strong (for L/D = 2 and 2.5) or
moderately strong (for L/D = 3) linear trend. The moder-
ately strong (rather than strong) correlation coefficient may
be due to the high standard deviation values observed at an
L/D ratio of 3 for all of the soils.
The correlation coefficients for Eqs. 1, 2, and 3 are
0.912, 0.918, and 0.747, respectively. These coefficients
suggest that the equations derived from the test results can
be reliably applied to test results for soil specimens of a
non-standard size.
Although strong statistical relationships between UCS
and L/D were obtained, further research is necessary to
check the validity of these results and the equations derived
for other soils with different physicomechanical properties.
In addition, the relationship between elastic properties and
L/D needs further research.

123
 H. Güneyli, T. Rüşen

Fig. 7 Graph showing the 2.5

relationship between the UCS/
UCS2.5 ratio and the L/D ratio
for each soil type R² = 0.843
2.0

UCS/UCS2.5
1.5

1.0

Handere Clay
0.5 Almanpınarı Clay
Sam-Tekin Clay
Kaolinite UCS2.5=UCS/[2.013-0.43(L/D)]
0.0
0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.00 3.25

L/D

Fig. 8 Graph showing the 4.0

relationship between the UCS/
R² = 0.566
UCS3 ratio and the L/D ratio for
each soil type 3.5

3.0
UCS/UCS3

2.5

2.0

1.5

Handere Clay
1.0
Almanpınarı Clay
Sam-Tekin Clay
0.5
Kaolinite UCS3= UCS/[2.722-0.59(L/D)]
0.0
0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.00 3.25
L/D

Table 3 Results of regression

Regression equation R Equation number
of the ratios UCS/UCS(2, 2.5, 3)
UCSðstandardL=DratioÞ ¼ UCSðmeasuredÞ =½a  bðL=DÞ
against L/D ratio
UCS2 ¼ UCS=½1:83  0:39ðL=DÞ 0.909 (strong) 1
UCS2:5 ¼ UCS=½2:01  0:43ðL=DÞ 0.918 (strong) 2
UCS3 ¼ UCS=½2:72  0:59ðL=DÞ 0.752 (moderately strong) 3

Failure pattern
It was observed during and after the UCS tests that dif-
ferent failure characteristics developed in specimens of
differing lengths but the same diameter.
The failure pattern for shorter clay specimens (0.5 B L/
D B 1.00) typically contains barreling and multi-shear
(mostly conjugate) planes. Mainly barreling and shear
planes usually develop together in this range. On the other
hand, plane network type failure is dominant when

123
Effect of length-to-diameter ratio on UCS of cohesive soil specimens
Fig. 9 General overview of the
failure patterns of Almanpınarı
clay specimens
0.5 B L/D B 0.75 (Fig. 10). Strain hardening occurs in
shorter soil specimens with L/D values between 0.5 and
1.25 because a more compact structure is obtained by such
specimens more rapidly than longer specimens during
loading until failure. This mechanism also accounts for the
dramatic increase in strength of shorter specimens (espe-
cially when L/D B 1.00) compared to longer specimens.
Clear failures are not easily visible when L/D is 0.50 or
about 1.00 due to the presence of bulging and the network
type failure mechanism.
As indicated in Figs. 9 and 10, failure in the specimens
with 1.25 B L/D B 2.5 generally involved the formation of
a pure, distinct failure plane without bulging, except in
Handere clay. In contrast to the other clay specimens,
ductile failure behavior was exhibited (to differing degrees)
by the specimens of Handere clay at almost every L/D ra-
tio. The changes in strength in this range were not as large
as those seen in the shorter specimens (with 0.5 B L/
D B 1.00).
The failure mechanism that occurs when 2.75 B L/
D B 3 is quite complex. In this case, a distinct failure
plane, multi-failure (shear) planes, localized barreling
(bulging) in any part of the specimen, or variations on any
of these can form in the specimen during UCS tests. Fur-
thermore, only bulging or drum-shaped ductile failure may
occur, without a distinct failure plane. In other words, the
specimen can fail in a variety of complex ways. This
complex deformation mechanism makes it easier for the
specimen to fail, and to do so in unexpected ways. This
behavior can be linked to particle reorientation and mois-
ture redistribution. The decrease in strength observed in
this range is greater than that observed in the range
1.25 B L/D B 2.5. In addition, the standard deviation in
the strength reaches its largest value in this range. Thus, the
unstable and unpredictable strength behavior observed for
these specimens is most probably due to this complex
failure mechanism.
The results of the UCS tests suggest that the failure
pattern generally changes from ductile to brittle with
increasing L/D (Figs. 9, 10). Brittle failure appears to be
particularly dominant in the range 1.25 B L/D B 2.5.
Brittle and ductile failure mechanisms develop together in
complex ways when L/D C 2.75.
The stress–strain curves from the UCS tests of all of the
compacted soil samples with 11 different L/D ratios are
shown in Figs. 11, 12, 13, and 14. The median values
obtained from performing UCS tests three times for each
clay sample with each L/D ratio were selected for the
stress–strain curves. It is clear from the stress–strain curves
shown in Figs. 11, 12, 13, and 14 that the peak strengths of
all the specimens tended to increase with decreasing L/D.
As can be seen in the stress–strain curves, the peak
strength differences are greatest in the range 0.50 B L/
D B 1.00. In addition, these specimens tended to reach
their peak strengths at higher strains as L/D decreased.
Especially in this L/D range, a typical ductile failure pat-
tern occurred which led to stress–strain curves in which
stress values remained near the peak stress across a large
range of strain values after this peak stress had been
reached. This indicates that reducing L/D in this range for
the specimens tested in this study results in a substantial
gain in strength and improved ductility.
In the range 1.25 B L/D B 2.50, the stress–strain curves
of the specimens generally presented an initial linear sec-
tion until the peak value was attained; there was then an
abrupt drop in stress, implying that the specimens in this
range exhibit brittle failure behavior. The specimens in
this L/D range showed a dramatically shallower increase in
strength with decreasing L/D than that seen in the range
0.50 B L/D B 1.00, mainly due to the brittle deformation
behavior associated with the development of a single fail-
ure plane.
The longest specimens (2.75 B L/D B 3.00) exhibited
complex stress–strain curves compared to those with other
123
 H. Güneyli, T. Rüşen

Fig. 10 General overview of the failure patterns of the four soil types

L/D values. The initial part of the stress–strain curve section was steeper than that of the second section. The
(until the peak was attained) included two main sections sharpest peaks and drops in the stress–strain curves were
with different slope properties—the slope of the first observed for specimens with L/D values in this range

123
Effect of length-to-diameter ratio on UCS of cohesive soil specimens

Fig. 11 Stress–strain curves for 3,000

Handere clay specimens with L/D=0.50
L/D=0.75
various length-to-diameter (L/ L/D=1.00
D) ratios L/D=1.25
2,500 L/D=1.50
L/D=1.75
L/D=2.00

Compressive Strength, σ (kPa)

L/D=2.25
2,000 L/D=2.50
L/D=2.75
L/D=3.00

1,500

1,000

500

Handere Clay
0
0 5 10 15 20
Axial strain, ε (%)

Fig. 12 Stress–strain curves of 4,500

Almanpınarı clay specimens
with various length-to-diameter
4,000
(L/D) ratios

3,500
Unconfined compressive Stress, σ (kPa)

3,000
L/D=0.50
L/D=0.75
L/D=1.00
2,500 L/D=1.25
L/D=1.50
L/D=1.75
L/D=2.00
2,000
L/D=2.25
L/D=2.50
L/D=2.75
1,500 L/D=3.00

1,000

500

Almanpınarı Clay
0
0 5 10 15 20
Axial strain, ε (%)

(Figs. 11, 12, 13, 14). Especially for Almanpınarı clay
and Sam-Tekin clay, some smaller yield traces also
occurred in the curves. This complex failure mechanism
is due to bulging or drum-shaped ductile failure with
localized shear failures before the development of one or
more main failure plane(s) (peak stress value), as
observed during UCS tests (see the discussion relating to
Fig. 10). The sharpest peaks and the most abrupt deteri-
orations in strength (i.e., the largest drops in stress over a
small range of strain values) occurred for the specimens
with L/D C 2.75.
In general terms, the stress–strain curves obtained in the
UCS tests indicate that increasing the L/D of the compacted
cylindrical specimen decreases its unconfined compression
strength and changes its deformation behavior from ductile
(for 0.50 B L/D B 1.00) to brittle (for 1.25 B L/D B 2.50)
and finally to a combination of ductile and brittle failure (L/
D C 2.70). Furthermore, the peak stresses generally occur

123
 H. Güneyli, T. Rüşen

Fig. 13 Stress–strain curves of 3,500

Sam-Tekin clay specimens with
various length-to-diameter (L/
D) ratios 3,000

Unconfined compressive Stress, σ (kPa)

2,500 L/D=0.50
L/D=0.75
L/D=1.00
L/D=1.25
2,000 L/D=1.50
L/D=1.75
L/D=2.00
L/D=2.25
1,500 L/D=2.50
L/D=2.75
L/D=3.00

1,000

500

Sam-Tekin Clay
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Axial strain, ε (%)

Fig. 14 Stress–strain curves of 2,500

kaolinite specimens with
various length-to-diameter (L/
D) ratios
2,000
Unconfined compressive Stress, σ (kPa)

1,500
L/D=0.50
L/D=0.75
L/D=1.00
L/D=1.25
L/D=1.50
L/D=1.75
1,000 L/D=2.00
L/D=2.25
L/D=2.50
L/D=2.75
L/D=3.00
500

Kaolinite
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Axial strain, ε (%)

within smaller axial strain ranges as L/D increases,
although there are some exceptions.
Conclusion
A series of laboratory tests was performed to investigate
the effect of changing the length-to-diameter ratio (L/D) on
the unconfined compression strengths of cylindrical
cohesive soil specimens. Four different clay soils were
prepared for these unconfined compressive tests, and they
were tested under similar conditions and in accordance
with the same technical standards. Based on the data and
observations presented in this paper, the following con-
clusions can be drawn:
1. According to the results of the unconfined compression
tests conducted on the compacted clay soils, the
unconfined compressive strength decreases linearly

123
Effect of length-to-diameter ratio on UCS of cohesive soil specimens
with increasing length-to-diameter (L/D) ratio. This
attenuation indicates that the L/D ratio of the cylindri-
cal specimen is an important factor to consider when
measuring the compressive strength of a soil specimen
in a UCS test.
2. The standard deviation of the unconfined compressive
strength value for a soil specimen increases consider-
ably with increasing L/D ratio. On the other hand, the
increase in the standard deviation in the range
2.75 B D/L B 3 is much greater than the increase
seen when L/D \ 2.75.
3. The failure pattern generally changes from ductile to
brittle with increasing L/D ratio. Especially in the
range 1.25 B L/D B 2.5, brittle deformation predom-
inates, as characterized by a distinct failure plane. At
larger L/D ratios, the failure mechanism is mostly
complex and chaotic. This accounts for the greater
variation in the standard deviation seen in the range L/
D C 2.75.
4. Based on the stress–strain curves and on observations
of the specimens during and after the UCS tests,
despite some exceptions, the specimens generally
tended to reach their peak strengths at a smaller axial
strain as the L/D ratio increased. In addition, the
sharpness of the peak and the drop after the peak in the
stress–strain curve increases greatly with increasing L/
D ratio, implying brittle failure behavior.
5. Equations with strong correlation coefficients were
derived to convert the UCS values obtained for
different L/D ratios to ‘‘standard’’ UCS values, which
generally correspond to those for L/D ratios of between
2 and 3. Although the formulae and the values of the
parameters a and b were determined for the four soils
studied, other soils should also be evaluated in detail to
verify and/or to modify these formulae and constants if
necessary.
Overall, this work has demonstrated that changing the
length of a cohesive soil specimen while keeping its
diameter constant has a significant effect on the strength
and failure pattern of the specimen. The correction equa-
tions derived here for non-standard-sized clay soil samples
can be used reliably in engineering practice.
References
Aktaş M (1991) Influence of specimen diameter on shear strength
parameters of clay soils (Z-805). General Directorate of State
Hydraulic Works, Ankara, p 43 (In Turkish)
ASTM (1994) Annual book of ASTM standards, volume 04.08.
American Society for Testing and Materials, West
Conshohocken
ASTM (2002a) ASTM D 2166-00: Standard test method for
unconfined compressive strength of cohesive soil. In: Annual
book of ASTM standards. American Society for Testing and
Materials, West Conshohocken, pp 1–6
ASTM (2002b) ASTM D 2487-00: Standard practice for classification
of soils for engineering purposes (unified soil classification
system). In: Annual book of ASTM standards. American Society
for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, pp 1–12
ASTM (2002c) ASTM D 422-63: Standard test method for particle-
size analysis of soils. In: Annual book of ASTM standards.
American Society for Testing and Materials, West Con-
shohocken, pp 1–8
ASTM (2002d) ASTM D 4318-00: Standard test methods for liquid
limit, plastic limit, and plasticity index of soils. In: Annual book
of ASTM standards. American Society for Testing and Materi-
als, West Conshohocken, pp 1–14
ASTM (2002e) ASTM D 698-00a: Standard test methods for
laboratory compaction characteristics of soil using standard
effort (12,400 ft-lbf/ft3(600 kN-m/m3)). In: Annual book of
ASTM standards. American Society for Testing and Materials,
West Conshohocken, pp 1–7
ASTM (2002f) ASTM D 854-02: Standard test method for specific
gravity of soil solids by water pycnometer. In: Annual book of
ASTM standards. American Society for Testing and Materials,
West Conshohocken, pp 1–7
BSI (1990) BS 1377: British Standard Methods of Test for Soils for
Civil Engineering Purposes. Part 7: Shear strength tests (total
stress) tests. British Standards Institution, London
Das BM (2002) Soil mechanics laboratory manual, 6th edn. Oxford
University Press, Oxford, p 216
Hampton D (1958) Effect of rate of strain on the strength of remolded
soil. Publication FHWA/IN/JHRP-58/17. Joint Highway
Research Project, Indiana Department of Transportation and
Purdue University, West Lafayette, p 71
Hawkins AB (1998) Aspects of rock strength. Bull Eng Geol Environ
57:17–30
Japanese Standards Association (1993) JIS A 1216: Method for
unconfined compression tests. Japanese Standards Association,
Tokyo, 1–11 (In Japanese)
John M (1972) The influence of length to diameter ratio on rock
properties in uniaxial compression: a contribution to standard-
ization in rock mechanics testing. Rep S Afr CSIR ME1083:5
Kahraman S, Alber M (2006) Estimating unconfined compressive
strength and elastic modulus of a fault breccia mixture of weak
blocks and strong matrix. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci
43–8:1277–1287
Kamei T, Tokida M (1991) Influence of specimen size on unconfined
compressive strength and deformation characteristics of cohesive
soils. Doboku Gakkai Ronbunshu 436:131–134 (In Japanese)
Kim T, Kim T, Kang G, Ge L (2012) Factors influencing crack-
induced tensile strength of compacted soil. J Mater Civ Eng
24(3):315–320
Kulhawy FH, Mayne PW (1990) Manual of estimating soil properties
for foundation design. Geotechnical Engineering Group, Cornell
University, Ithaca, p 273
Matsui T, Oda K, Nabeshima Y (1994) Development and applications
for natural deposits of minimum triaxial compression apparatus.
Tsuchi to kiso 42(11):17–22 (in Japanese)
Mitchell JK (1976) Fundamentals of soil behavior. Wiley, New York,
p 422
Mogi K (1966) Some precise measurements of fracture strength of
rocks under uniform compressive stress. Felsmech Ingenieurgeol
4:41–55
Mogi K (2007) Experimental rock mechanics. Taylor and Francis,
London, p 361
123

Obert L, Windes SL, Duvall WI (1946) Standardized tests for
determining the physical properties of mine rocks. US Bureau of
Mines Report of Investigations 3891. US Bureau of Mines,
Washington, DC
Smith GN (1986) Probability and statistics in civil engineering.
Collins, London, p 244
Turkish Standards Institution (2006) TS 1900-2: Methods of testing
soils for civil engineering purposes in the laboratory. Annual
book of ASTM standards, part 2: determination of mechanical
123
H. Güneyli, T. Rüşen
properties. In: Annual book of Turkish standards. Turkish
Standards Institution, Ankara, 27–29
Türk N, Dearman WR (1986) A correction equation on the influence
of length-to-diameter ratio on the uniaxial compressive strength
of rocks. Eng Geol 22:293–300
Ünlü T, Yılmaz O (2008) Investigation of the shape effect on the
uniaxial compressive strength of the intact rock. In: Türk, N,
Deliormanlı AH, Kıncal C (eds), 9th regional rock mechanics
symposium İzmir, Turkey, pp 121–141