Continue to Site

Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

Register Log in
  • Congratulations KootK on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

Vane Shear Testing

Status
Not open for further replies.
howardoark

howardoark

Geotechnical
Nov 9, 2005
91
My client is building a levee over a fairly thin (6 to 10 feet) strata of normally-consolidated very soft clay. The work is being done in stages. Settlements and excess pore pressures are being monitored in the soft clay. To move to the second stage of levee construction the contractor was required to do vane shear testing in the soft clays and show the undrained shear strength had risen to a required level. We did the testing last November and every point failed the criterion, one location was off by 41%. This surprised me as SHANSEP indicates that all of the locations should have gained shear strength well in excess of the required shear strength even neglecting the initial undrained shear strength. Settlement had stopped by last November and there were no excess pore pressures. We went out yesterday, same vane shear contractor, same equipment, same operators, and the undrained shear strength had doubled. I am at a loss to explain that. I don't think they could have lowered the groundwater table by 8 feet without someone noticing. I don't think 4 months of aging could explain it (but that's just a feeling).

Anyone have any ideas?
 
Replies continue below

Recommended for you

Sort by date Sort by votes
I mean, you can make the values change 50% by rotating the vane really fast
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Agree with GG, my first would be user error with vanes. Just take an undisturbed sample and to a UU to confirm
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Thanks for getting back to me.

All of the tests were within spec for the vane rotation. The fastest one actually failed the worst. The ones that passed were all pretty much dead on 6 degrees a minute. The ones that failed were down around 3 degrees a minute.

I'll know what to look for next year.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
On another note; if you took a 3mx3m cube sample of soil, and used a small 19mm vane to test it several hundred times on different sides and gradually peeling off a few hundred mm of the cube at a time, how many different values would you expect to get, what would the standard deviation be?

I'd be surprised if the variation was less then +- 50%. Even +- 100% wouldn't surprise me.

It is surprising that the faster one had the lowest value - everything else held equal higher loading rate = higher Su; but then, it's possible that one was just done in a soft spot.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I wouldnt go that far tbh GG1. I actually think a HSV test is often better than a UU test. The UUs we get can be terrible for sample disturbance. In the right material and HSV is a very good test.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
For vanes you turn it to fast there is the potential for viscosity effects in clay, you turn it to slow there is a chance for partial drainage in varved or silty deposits. You could also do lab tests for shear or measure the moisture content change or push a CPT and see if the interpreted Su changed to meet your criteria.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

geotechguy1
  • Locked
  • Question
Base shear depth of influence
Replies
0
Views
285
geotechguy1
geotechguy1
Eng_Girl
  • Locked
  • Question
UCS to Shear Strength
Replies
4
Views
333
geotechguy1
geotechguy1
James.GEO
  • Locked
  • Question
Testing of angle of friction on very coarse-grained aggregates (UK)
Replies
6
Views
301
EireChch
EireChch
learning2geotech
  • Locked
  • Question
In-situ Soil Infiltration Testing
Replies
2
Views
79
geotechguy1
geotechguy1
Trillers
  • Locked
  • Question
Shear Resistance of Rebar in Compacted Soil
Replies
3
Views
237
Trillers
Trillers

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor

Back
Top Bottom