FACULTY OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

Report 1: Non-Linear Shear Strength Envelope

Name of Student : Wan Mohd Azri Bin

Wan Mohd
Matrix Zubir
Number : 2009919835
Course : Msc in Civil Engineering
(Geotechnique)

Name of Lecturer : Assoc. Prof. Dr. Mohd
Jamaludin Md Noor
 This report consist two Case Study which are 5
type of Malaysian Soils were used to evaluate
shear strength of soil.
The objective of this report;
o To make the real shear strength of soil using Curvi-Linear
Envelope;
o To interpret the shear strength according to Curvi-Linear
Envelope ;
o To make comparison between Linear Envelope and
Curvi-Linear Envelope.
JABATAN KERJA RAYA FACULTY OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

Client : Pengarah,
Cawangan Pengajian Tinggi,
Ibu Pejabat JKR Malaysia,
Peti Surat 10-2, 1001,
Jalan Sultan Ismail,

50250 Kuala Lumpur.

Taman Ilmu IKRAM, Jalan Serdang-Kajang,

43000 Kajang, Selangor Darul Ehsan.
Tel: (603) 8738 3388 Fax: (603) 8926 6289
Website: http://www.ikram.com.my
Type of Soil:
Brown Sandy SILT
(MZ 1 0 ~ 3m)
Type of Soil:
Brown Sandy SILT
(MZ 1 0 ~ 3m)
Type of Soil:
Red Sandy SILT
(MZ 2 3 ~ 6m)
Type of Soil:
Red Sandy SILT
(MZ 2 3 ~ 6m)
Type of Soil:
Light Grey Motted Red Sandy SILT
(UD 1 0 ~ 3m)
Type of Soil:
Light Grey Motted Red Sandy SILT
(UD 1 0 ~ 3m)
UEM GROUP BERHAD FACULTY OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

Client: UEM Builders Berhad,

7th Floor Menara 2,
Faber Towers Jalan Desa Bahagia,
Taman Desa, Off Jalan Klang Lama,
58100 Kuala Lumpur.

No. 3, Jln P/8, Seksyen 13, 43000, Bandar Baru Bangi, Selangor,
Tel: (603) 8925 9370 Fax: (603) 8925 9373
Website: http://www.csl.com.my
Type of Soil:
Dark Grey Silty Clay(UP 2 4.5 ~ 5.5m)
Type of Soil:
Dark Grey Silty Clay(UP 2 4.5 ~ 5.5m)
Type of Soil:
Grey Silty Clay(UP 4 10.5 ~ 11.55m)
Type of Soil:
Grey Silty Clay(UP4 10.5 ~ 11.5m)

 Researcher Year What They Have Done Remarks
Extrapolate Linear Shear Strength Not real behaviour of
envelope which is as = c' + ' tan ' shear strength of soil
to cut the axis to give cohesion produced due to do not
Terzaghi 1936 intercept so it's over-estimate the shear replicate actual behaviour
strength. at low stress level and at
suction nearing
saturation.
The shear strength envelope for sand is Only Limited for cohesion
A.W. Bishop 1966 non-linear on the low range. less soil and not apply for
all type of soils.
Most soil are curve-linear especially on Using Curve-Linear when
the low range of normal stress. When the low range in normal
the soil was partially saturated the inter- stress and not for high
particles exist because of the surface range.
tension forces derived from water
meniscus(the curved upper surface)
sticking between the soil particles. But if
Milan Maksimovic 1989 the attractive force from any other origin
is negligible so then the soil would not
has any cohesion in term of effective
stress, c'=0. Hence, non-linear envelope
were introduced due to low stress range
must curved down to zero at zero
effective stress.
 Researcher Year What They Have Done Remarks
Apply Nonlinear shear strength Effect of nonlinearity
which relative to net normal shear strength
H.Rahardjo and D.G. stress and matrix suction. relationship with safety
1991
Fredlund Introduce extended shear factor is significant
strength methods. when there is a large
change in b angle.
The shear strength envelope for Used nonlinear failure
many types of soil and rock are envelope to make a
Jiang, Yamagami and
2003 nonlinear. Nonlinear envelope is safe design of slopes.
Baker
much shallow than obtained
from linear Mohr criterion.
The Failure envelope of most Apply a real behaviour
soils are curved especially on strength of soil.
the low range of normal stress. Applicable for clay in
Effective Cohesive strength of normally consolidated
R. Baker 2004 most soils is close to zero. The and preconsolidated.
types of soil verified by
nonlinear which were London
clay, Dune sand, Soft marine
clay and Sandstone.
 Researcher Year What They Have Done
The cohesion was zero when the
attractive force from any other
Md. Noor origin were negligible.Any
2006
Anderson existence of cohesion must be
proved by laboratory test.
Used nonlinearity failure
envelope. Modified power
strength function to introduce
O.K. Nusier, I.M. Tensile Strength and Atmosphere c and to n(power
Almond and R.A. 2008 Pressure.
Jaradat
Linear and Nonlinear strength
functions fitted to laboratory test
to derive failure envelope of
compacted Silty-Sand. The
Seely and derived nonlinear failure
2008
Trandafir envelope also predict lower
Remarks
Apply a real behaviour
strength of soil using
Curve-Linear Envelope.
The right understanding
rainfall induced shallow
landslide.
Applicable for Fine
Cohesive and Coarse
Cohesionless soil. Replace
function) and A(Multiplier,
/). New slope stability
under research to include
modified power strength
function.
Limited to compacted soils.
 Researcher Year What They Have Done Remarks

Used Nonlinear to assess seismic The significant for

slope stability due to consider not considerable Range
Tandafir and overestimate of acceleration and Low Stress.
2008
Popescu take the range of low normal
stresses.

Applied Curve-Surface envelope Produce Real Shear

shear strength model designed by Strength. Able to do
Equation 1, 2, 3 and 4 was able to Back Analyze. It
replicate the actual soil shear proves that Shear
behaviour with respect to net stress Strength decreased
Md. Noor M.J. and and suction. New Slope Stability when clay absorb
2010 equation were applied in Curve- water.
B.A. Hadi
Surface envelope.

No. Type of Soil Linear Envelope Curve-Linear
Envelope
1. Brown Sandy SILT C=3 kN/m2 C=0, min= 35,
= 35 Tt=60 kN/m2,
(-Uw)t= 80 kN/m2

2. Red Sandy SILT C=5 kN/m2 C=0, min= 31,

= 32 Tt=72 kN/m2,
(-Uw)t= 110 kN/m2

3. Light Grey Motted C=5 kN/m2 C=0, min= 30,

= 31 Tt=110 kN/m2,
Red Sandy SILT (-Uw)t= 170 kN/m2

4. Dark Grey Silty Clay C=2 kN/m2 C=0, min= 18,

ok. = 19 Tt=280 kN/m2,
(-Uw)t= 70 kN/m2

5. Grey Silty Clay C=5 kN/m2 C=0, min= 17,

= 17 Tt=28 kN/m2,
(-Uw)t= 70 kN/m2
 In this Case Study, it proved that the soil was a
Curve-Linear Envelope based on the previous
Discussion.
The Real Behaviour Shear Strength can apply to
New Slope Stability Method.
The Significant of the Range Low Stress were very
influenced especially in Shallow Slope.
The Linear Envelope did not consider the Range
Low Stress and it just extrapolate the range so its
become intercept line. As the yield result, shear
strength have cohesion so Overestimate Shear
Strength occurred.

 Bishop, A.W. and Henkel, D.J.,1976, The Measurement
of Soil Properties in The Triaxial Test, Amold, london.
Head, K.H., 1992, Manual of Soil Laboratory Testing,
Volume 3, Effective Stress Test.
BSI, 1990, BS 1377: Methods of Test Soils For Civil
Engineering Purpose, British Standard Institution.
Rahardjo,H. and Fredlund,D.G.,1991, Use of Linear
and Nonlinear Shear Strength versus Matrix Suction
Relations in Slope Stability Analyses, Balkema.
Jiang, Yamagami and Baker, 2003, Three Dimensional
Slope Analysis Based on Nonlinear Failure Envelope,
Japan.
 Baker, R.,2004, Nonlinear Mohr Envelope Based
on Triaxial Data, ASCE.
Trandafir, A.C. and Seely, D.D.B.,2008, Nonlinear
Failure Envelope of Nonplastic Compacted Silty-
Sand, London, UK.
Nusier, O.K. and Jaradat, R.A.,2008, Nonlinearity
of Shear Strength and Stress-Strength Behaviour
and Induced Stress Prediction.
Md. Noor, M.J.,2010, The Role of Curved-Surface
Envelope Mohr-Coulomb model in Governing
Shallow Infiltartion induced Slope Failure, EJGE.