Notre Dame University (Louaize)

Faculty of Engineering
Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering

CEN 221
Soil Mechanics Lab

Technical Report:
Direct Shear Test

Prepared by: Anthony Greige

Elias Elias
Assaad Saad
Melhem Obeid
Michella Dib
Submitted to: Dr. Suzanne Sleiman

Date: 24-5-2016

GRADE DISTRIBUTION

Section

Total points

Abstract

15

Introduction

15

Experimental Methods

15

Results and Discussion

25

Conclusions

15

References

10

Appendices

Grade

Total Grade

/100

ABSTRACT
In geotechnical engineering, testing soil is a must. Testing soils make us aware of all its
properties and one of the essential ones to know the bearing capacity of the soil and calculate
shear and normal stresses, we need the friction angle and the cohesion. This property can be
tested by three different tests known as: Direct Shear Test, Unconfined Compression Test, and
Triaxial Test. This report present one experiment (direct shear test) done on Ottawa sandy
soil.
All the details will be discussed below.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract

Introduction

Experimental Methods

Results and Discussion

Conclusions

15

References

16

Appendix A

17

INTRODUCTION
Direct Shear Test is performed to determine consolidated and drained shear strength of a
sandy silty soil.
This experiment aims to calculate the angle of friction and the cohesion of a soil sample by
using the direct shear test. The shear strength of a sand specimen can be calculated by the
expression:
S= tan + c
Where s = shear strength
= effective normal stress
= angle of friction of soil
4

c = cohesion of soil = 0 (Sandy soil)

The angle of friction is expressed in function of the relative density of compaction of sand,
grain size, shape, and its distribution for a specific given soil mass.

EXPERIMENTAL METHODS
Equipment:

Direct shear test machine (controlled strain)

Balance sensitive to 0.1 g

Large porcelain evaporating dish

Tamper (for compacting sand in the direct shear box)

Spoon

Procedure:

1. First of all the shear box is to be removed from the device. The vertical and horizontal
screws are to be removed before taking out the load head. Second of all, the vertical
pins must be inserted to keep the shear boxs two halves banded together.
2. Dry sand is then to be weighed and used to fill the shear box, keeping in mind that the
top of the compacted specimen should be about 6.4 mm below the top of the shear
box. After the last step is completed, the sand specimens surface must be leveled, and
the weight of sand left in the porcelain dish determined. The difference between the
specimen that was taken initially and what remains would be the weight of sand in the
3.
4.
5.
6.

shear box.
The dimensions of the soil specimen are to be determined.
The loading head is to be rested on the soil specimen.
The shear box assembly is to be put in the direct shear machine.
A certain load is to be applied to the specimen. In thi9s case three different loads are

to be taken.
7. After having placed the load, the vertical pins that have been inserted at the beginning
of the procedure are to be removed.
8. The two halves of the box must be slightly separated by a small distance, in a way that
the soil would be left as the only connection between the two halves, after having
backed off the three vertical screws.
9. The gauges needed for the measurements are to be attached to the apparatus in order
to make the desired measurements.
10. A horizontal load is to be applied to the shear box. The rate of shear displacement
would be between 2.54 and 0.51 mm/min. For every 10 small division displacements
in the horizontal dial gauge, the vertical dial gauge is to be recorded as well as the
ring dial gauge. This operation must be continued until the proving ring dial gauge
reaches a maximum and either goes down or remains constant.
11. The Direct Shear Box including the normal load, and the horizontal displacement
gauge is represented in the following sketch:

RESULTS & DISCUSSION

Results:
The test was done for three times instead of three (as per ASTM) to optimize the shear
envelope: D= 6 cm,
Trial 1: m= 4kg,

A= D /4

= 0.002827 m2

F= (4*9.81*10)/1000= 0.3924 kN;

7

Normal stress= F/A= 138.8 kN/m2

Time (sec.)

Horizontal Disp. (mm)

Shear Force (KN)

Shear Stress (kN/m2)

0.011

0.017

6.013

0.158

0.127

44.92

10

0.341

0.244

86.31

15

0.528

0.312

110.36

20

0.723

0.351

124.16

25

0.931

0.372

131.59

30

1.142

0.384

135.83

35

1.355

0.388

137.25

40

1.568

0.382

135.13

45

1.772

0.387

136.89

50

1.977

0.367

129.82

55

2.184

0.361

127.69

60

2.392

0.353

124.87

65

2.604

0.341

120.62

70

2.817

0.332

117.44

75

3.031

0.313

110.72

80

3.243

0.305

107.89

85

3.448

0.304

107.53

90

3.649

0.298

105.41

Table 1: The Shear Stress & Horizontal Displacement for mass 4 kg

160
140
120
100

Shear Stress (kN/m2 )

80
60
40
20
0

0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

Horizontal Displacement (mm)

Graph 1: Shear Stress vs. Horizontal Displacement.

Trial 2: m= 7 kg,

F= (7*9.81*10)/1000= 0.6867 kN;

Normal stress= F/A= 242.9 kN/m2

Time (sec.)

Horizontal Disp. (mm)

Shear Force (KN)

Shear Stress (kN/m2)

0.012

0.039

13.79

0.161

0.125

44.22

10

0.360

0.172

60.84

15

0.550

0.279

98.69

20

0.740

0.374

132.29

25

0.940

0.449

158.83

30

1.184

0.498

176.16

35

1.345

0.540

191.02

40

1.558

0.555

196.32

45

1.762

0.554

195.97

50

1.966

0.554

195.97

55

2.172

0.543

192.08

60

2.38

0.532

188.19

65

2.592

0.506

178.99

70

2.802

0.497

175.8

75

3.011

0.484

171.21

80

3.227

0.475

168.02

Table 2: The Shear Stress & Horizontal Displacement for Mass 7 kg

250

200

150

Shear Stress (kN/m2 )

100

50

0.5

1.5

2.5

Horizontal Displacement (mm)

Graph 2: Shear Stress vs. Horizontal Displacement

10

3.5

Trial 3: m= 7 kg,

F= (11*9.81*10)/1000= 1.0791 kN;

Normal stress= F/A= 387.71

kN/m2

Time (sec.)

Horizontal Disp. (mm)

Shear Force (KN)

Shear Stress (kN/m2)

0.007

0.047

16.63

0.133

0.255

90.2

10

0.324

0.413

146.09

15

0.512

0.502

177.57

20

0.705

0.582

205.87

25

0.905

0.664

234.88

30

1.101

0.714

252.56

35

1.307

0.769

272.02

40

1.509

0.809

286.17

45

1.711

0.841

297.49

50

1.916

0.840

297.13

55

2.119

0.842

297.84

60

2.323

0.823

291.12

65

2.533

0.801

283.34

70

2.747

0.774

273.79

75

2.962

0.754

266.71

80

3.170

0.735

259.99

85

3.383

0.718

253.98

90

3.583

0.707

250.09

95

3.792

0.69

244.07

Table 3: The Shear Stress & Horizontal Displacement for mass 11 kg

11

350
300
250
200

Shear Stress (kN/m2 )

150
100
50
0

0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

Horizontal Displacement (mm)

Graph 3: Shear Stress vs. Horizontal Displacement

Shear Envelope:
Shear strength parameters for sand using the results of direct shear test:
A plot of the shear stress versus the normal stress for several specimens of the sand will give
us approximate value for the friction angle .
Knowing that the c=0 for sand.
So the friction angle is: =tan-1( f/ )

Experimen

Horizontal

t Number Disp. (mm)

1
1.355
2
1.558
3
2.119
Table 4: Summary of Results

Normal Stress

Maximum Shear

Friction Angle

(kN/m2)
138.8
242.9
387.71

Stress (kN/m2)
137.25
196.32
297.84

44.67o
38.94o
37.53o

Average = 40.38o

12

350
300

f(x) = 0.8x
R = 0.99

250
200

Shear Stress (kN/m2)

150
100
50
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Normal Stress (kN/m2)

Graph 4: Shear envelope / Shear Stress vs. Normal Stress

Average = tan-1 (y/x) = tan-1 (0.7971) = 38.56 o

Discussion:

The graph 1, 2, 3 showing the shear stress variation versus the horizontal displacement
shows that values of the shear increases until certain displacement. After failure, it starts

to decrease.
The graph 4 shows that when the pressure normal increases, the shear failure also

increases.
The angle of friction, is the slope of the plot of the failure shear stress versus the normal

stress. The angle of friction turned out to be =38.56

From table 4: = 1(/)= 40.38
Error evaluation: errors might have happened due to the fast reading of the number of
divisions in the proving dial gage and the ring.

13

The three vertical screws which are located on the side walls could be misplaced leading
to an unrepresentative spacing between the two halves for the particle size in between.

The direct shear is not representative as the Triaxial Shear Test since the shear failure is
induced along a horizontal plane on the contrary of natural failure.

14

CONCLUSION
To conclude, the experiment aimed to determine the angle of friction of the soil with the
direct shear test applied on this soil sample. We needed 3 different loads for which we
calculated the normal stresses and plotted them versus the failure shear stresses to come out
with the slope which is what we need, the angle of friction = 38.56 o
It is a simple test to perform, the sandy soil was found to be loose sand having an average
friction angle of 40.38o
The direct shear test is the simplest and most economical for a dry or saturated sandy soil.
Moreover, the results of such experiments are considered preliminary or may be conducted
for some research purposes, since the angle of failure was induced along the horizontal plane,
contrary to what really happens in nature. The errors in our experiment could not be taken
into consideration because the readings were accurately recorded every 5 seconds.

15

REFERENCES

Braja M. Das, 2002. SOIL MECHANICS LABORATORY MANUAL.

New York: Oxford University Press.

Braja M. Das, & Khaled Sobhan. Principles of Geotechnical Engineering. Eighth

Edition. California State University, & Florida Atlantic University

16

APPENDIX A
Trial 1:

Trial 2:

17

Trial 3:

18

19