Export file:


  • RIS(for EndNote,Reference Manager,ProCite)
  • BibTex
  • Text


  • Citation Only
  • Citation and Abstract

Engineering properties of low to medium overconsolidation ratio offshore clays

1 Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, MA, 01003 USA
2 Norwegian Geotechnical Institute, N-0806 Oslo, Norway
3 Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd., Mumbai, India
4 Benthic USA LLC, Houston, TX 77043 USA
5 Equinor, 4033 Stavanger, Norway

Special Issues: Characterization and Engineering Properties of Natural Soils used for geotesting

This paper presents a summary of the geotechnical engineering properties of low to medium overconsolidation ratio offshore inorganic clays derived from a high quality database. These properties, such as preconsolidation stress and undrained shear strength, are required for design of most offshore infrastructure and for assessment of offshore geohazards. The database was developed through a series of Joint Industry Projects using results from offshore site investigations performed worldwide. The key feature of the database is that it only contains results obtained using good to excellent quality samples that were tested using advanced laboratory procedures such as constant rate of strain consolidation and consolidated undrained triaxial and direct simple shear. A secondary objective of the paper was to examine common empirical correlations between index tests (e.g., water content, Atterberg limits) and soil design parameters using the new database. Such empirical correlations between simple and inexpensive index tests and more costly advanced laboratory tests can serve a valuable purpose in offshore infrastructure design. This is particularly the case for preliminary design at early stages of projects where little information is known about soil properties, for small projects with limited site characterization budgets, and international projects at locations where advanced laboratory tests performed to international standards are not available. The paper describes development of the database and presents summary results and plots for undrained shear strength, in situ stress state, and consolidation and flow parameters. Results from the empirical correlations investigated are presented and the paper concludes with recommendations on use of the data and correlations in practice. The recommendations are limited to clays of low to medium overconsolidation ratio and are not applicable to highly overconsolidated and desiccated clays. While the database primarily consists of offshore clays, the correlations presented should also be applicable to terrestrial clays.
  Article Metrics

Keywords clay; empirical correlations; laboratory; preconsolidation stress; undrained shear strength

Citation: Don J. DeGroot, Tom Lunne, Ravindra Ghanekar, Siren Knudsen, Cody D. Jones, Tor Inge Yetginer-Tjelta. Engineering properties of low to medium overconsolidation ratio offshore clays. AIMS Geosciences, 2019, 5(3): 535-567. doi: 10.3934/geosci.2019.3.535


  • 1. DeGroot DJ, Knudsen S, Lunne T (1999) Correlations Among p'c, su, and Index Properties of Offshore Clays. Proceedings of the International Conference on Offshore and Nearshore Geotechnical Engineering, Panvel, India, 173–178.
  • 2. Lunne T, Andersen KH (2007) Soft clay shear strength parameters for deepwater geotechnical design. In Proceedings of the 6th International Offshore Site Investigation and Geotechnics Conference: Confronting New Challenges and Sharing Knowledge, London. Society for Underwater Technology, London, 151–176.
  • 3. DeGroot DJ, Lunne T, Tjelta TI (2010) Recommended best practice for geotechnical site charaterisation of offshore cohesive sediments. Invited Keynote Paper. Proceedings of the 2nd Int. Sym. on Frontiers in Offshore Geotechnics, Perth, Western Australia, 33–57.
  • 4. NAVFAC (1986) Soil Mechanics DM7.1. Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Alexandria, 355.
  • 5. Kleven A, Lacasse S, Andersen KH (1986) Foundation engineering criteria for gravity platforms, Soil Parameters for Offshore Foundation Design. Part II, NGI Report 40013-34.
  • 6. Kulhawy FH, Mayne PW (1990) Manual on Estimating Soil Properties for Foundation Design, Final Report, Report No. EL-6800, Research Project 1493–6, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, 308.
  • 7. Terzaghi K, Peck RB, Mesri G (1996) Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice. John Wiley and Sons, New York, 549.
  • 8. Leroueil S, Hight DW (2002) Mechanical behaviour and properties of natural soils and soft rocks. Characterisation and Engineering Properties of Natural Soils, Singapore. Tan TS, Phoon KK, Hight DW, et al. (eds.), Balkema, 1: 29–254.
  • 9. Hight DW, Leroueil S (2003) Characterisation of soils for engineering purposes. Characterisation and Engineering Properties of Natural Soils, Tan TS, Phoon KK, Hight DW, et al. (eds.), Balkema, 1: 255–360.
  • 10. Mitchell JK, Soga K (2005) Fundamentals of Soil Behavior, 3rd ed.,Wiley, 577.
  • 11. Karlsrud K, Hernandez-Martinez FG (2013) Strength and deformation properties of Norwegian clays from laboratory tests on high-quality block samples. Can Geotech J 50: 1273–1293.    
  • 12. Holtz RD, Kovacs WD, Sheahan TC (2011) An Introduction to Geotechnical Engineering. 2nd Edition, Pearson, New Jersey.
  • 13. Skempton AW (1970) The consolidation of clays by gravitational compaction. Q J Geol Soc 125: 373–412.
  • 14. Stas CV, Kulhawy FH (1984) Critical Evaluation of Design Methods for Foundations Under Axial Uplift and Compression Loading. Report EL-3771, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, 198.
  • 15. Wroth CP (1979) Correlations of some engineering properties of soils. Proceedings 2nd International Conference on Behaviour of Offshore Structures, London, 1: 121–32.
  • 16. Leroueil S, Tavenas F, Bihan JPL (1983) Proprietes caracteristiques des argiles de l'est du Canada. Can Geotech J 20: 681–705.    
  • 17. Janbu N (1985) Soil models in offshore engineering. Géotechnique 35: 241–281.    
  • 18. Wroth CP, Wood DM (1978) The correlation of index properties with some basic engineering properties of soils. Can Geotech J 15: 137–145.    
  • 19. Bjerrum L (1954) Geotechnical Properties of Norwegian Marine Clays. Géotechnique 4: 49–69.    
  • 20. Skempton AW (1957) Discussion: Further data on the c/p ratio in normally consolidated clays. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers 7: 305–307.    
  • 21. Bjerrum L, Simons NE (1960) Comparison of shear strength characteristics of normally consolidated clays. Proc. ASCE Research Conf. on the Shear Strength of Cohesive Soils, Boulder, 711–726.
  • 22. Ladd CC (1991) Stability evaluation during staged construction (22nd Terzaghi Lecture). J Geotech Eng 117: 540–615.    
  • 23. Mesri G (1975) Discussion of New design procedure for stability of soft clays. J Geotech Eng 101: 409–412.
  • 24. Mesri G (1989) A reevaluation of (su)mob = 0.22σ'p using laboratory shear tests. Can Geotech J 26: 162–164.
  • 25. Larsson R (1980) Undrained shear strength in stability calculation of embankments and foundations on soft clays. Can Geotech J 17: 591–602.    
  • 26. Nagaraj TS, Miura N (2001) Soft Clay Behaviour. A.A. Balkema Publishers, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
  • 27. Burland JB (1990) On the compressibility and shear strength of natural clays. Géotechnique 40: 329–378    
  • 28. Burland JB, Rampello S, Georgiannou VN, et al. (1996) A laboratory study of the strength of four stiff clays. Géotechnique 46: 491–514.    
  • 29. Chandler RJ (2000) Clay sediments in depositional basins: the geotechnical cycle. Q J Eng Geol Hydrogeol 33: 7–39.    
  • 30. Nagaraj TS, Murthy BRS (1983) Rationalization of Skempton's compressibility equation. Géotechnique 33: 433–443.    
  • 31. Nagaraj TW, Srinivasa Murthy BR (1986) A critical reappraisal of compression index equations. Géotechnique 36: 27–32.    
  • 32. Cotecchia F, Chandler RJ (2000) A general framework for the mechanical behaviour of clays. Géotechnique 50: 431–448.    
  • 33. Soga K, Mitchell JK (1996) Rate-dependent deformation of structured natural clays. Measuring and Modelling Time Dependent Soil Behaviour, GSP No. 61, ASCE, 243–257.
  • 34. Shibuya S (2000) Assessing Structure of Aged Natural Sedimentary Clays. Soils Found 40: 1–16.
  • 35. Bjerrum L (1973) Problems of soil mechanics and construction on soft clays. Proceedings 8th Int. Conf. Soil Mech. and Found. Eng., Moscow, 3: 111–159.
  • 36. Ladd CC, Foott R (1974) New design procedure for stability of soft clays. J Geotech Eng Div 100: 763–786.
  • 37. Ladd CC, DeGroot DJ (2003) Recommended practice for soft ground site characterization: Arthur Casagrande Lecture. Proceedings 12th Panamerican Conf. on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, Boston, MA, 3–57.
  • 38. Lacasse S, Berre T (1988) State-of-the-Art: Triaxial testing methods for soils. Advanced Triaxial Testing of Soil and Rock, ASTM STP 977: 264–289.
  • 39. Brooker EW, Ireland HO (1965) Earth pressures at rest related to stress history. Can Geotech J 2: 1–15.    
  • 40. Bjerrum L, Landva A (1966) Direct simple shear tests on Norwegian quick clay. Géotechnique 16: 1–20.    
  • 41. Dyvik R, Lacasse S, Martin R (1985) Coefficient of lateral stress from oedometer cell. Proc. 11th Int. Conf. on Soil Mech. and Foundation Eng., San Francisco, 2: 1003–1006.
  • 42. Mesri G, Hayat TM (1993) The coefficient of earth pressure at rest. Can Geotech J 30: 647–666.    
  • 43. Germaine JT, Ladd CC (1988) State-of-the-Art: Triaxial testing of saturated cohesive soils. Advanced Triaxial Testing of Soil and Rock, ASTM STP, 977: 421–459.
  • 44. Norsk S (1988) Geotechnical testing - Laboratory methods - Determination of undrained shear strength by fall-cone testing. Standard NS8015, Lysaker, Norway.
  • 45. Statens Geotekniska Institut (1946) Kortfattat compendium I geoteknik. Meddelande Nr. 1. Stockholm.
  • 46. ISO (2017) Geotechnical investigation and testing-Laboratory testing of soil-Part 6: Fall cone test. ISO Standard Number 17892-6:2017, Geneva, Switzerland.
  • 47. DeGroot DJ, Lunne T, Andersen K, et al. (2012) Laboratory measurement of the remoulded shear strength of clays with application to design of offshore infrastructure. Proc. of the 7th Int. Conf. on Offshore Site Investigations and Geotechnics, London, UK, 355–366.
  • 48. Sandbækken G, Berre T, Lacasse S (1986) Oedometer testing at the Norwegian Geotechnical Institute. Consolidation of Soils: Testing and Evaluation, ASTM STP, 892: 329–353.
  • 49. Mesri G, Lo DOK, Feng TW (1994) Settlement of embankments on soft clays. Proceedings of ASCE conference on vertical and horizontal deformations of foundations and embankments, College Station, Texas, 1: 8–56.
  • 50. ASTM (2017) Annual Book of Standards, Vol. 4.08, Soil and Rock (I): D421–D5876 and Vol. 4.09, Soil and Rock (II): D5878–latest. West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
  • 51. GOST (1984) Soils. Methods of laboratory determination of physical properties. Russian GOST Standard 5180-84.
  • 52. Norwegian Geotechnical Institute (2002) Early Soil Investigations for Fast Track Projects: Assessment of Soil Design Parameters from Index Measurements in Clays. Summary Report/Manual. Report Number 521553-3.
  • 53. Skopek J, Ter-Stepanian G (1975) Comparison of liquid limit values determined according to Casagrande and Vasiliev. Géotechnique 25: 135–136.    
  • 54. Norwegian Geotechnical Institute (2005) Specific Correlations between Index Parameters and Soil Design Parameters: Caspian Sea Soils. NGI Report No. 20021023–24.
  • 55. Lunne T, Berre T, Strandvik S (1997a) Sample disturbance effects in soft low plastic Norwegian clay. Conference on Recent Developments in Soil and Pavement Mechanics, Rio de Janeiro, June 1997, 81–102.
  • 56. Lunne T, Berre T, Andersen KH, et al. (2006) Effects of sample disturbance and consolidation procedures on measured shear strength of soft marine Norwegian clays. Can Geotech J 43: 726–750.    
  • 57. Lunne T, Andersen KH, Low HE, et al. (2011) Guidelines for offshore in situ testing and interpretation in deepwater soft clays. Can Geotech J 48: 543–556.    
  • 58. DeGroot DJ, Ladd CC (2012) Site characterization for cohesive soil deposits using combined in situ and laboratory testing. Geotechnical Engineering State of the Art and Practice: Keynote Lectures from GeoCongress 2012, Geotechnical Special Publication No. 226, Rollins K, Zekkos D, Eds., ASCE Geo-Institute, 565–608.
  • 59. Jamiolkowski M, Ladd CC, Germaine JT, et al. (1985) New developments in field and laboratory testing of soils. Proc., 11th Int. Conf. on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Eng., San Francisco, 1: 57–154.
  • 60. Mayne PW (2007) Cone Penetration Testing: A Synthesis of Highway Practice. NCHRP Synthesis 368. Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
  • 61. Lunne T, Robertson PK, Powell JJM (1997) Cone Penetration Resting In Geotechnical Practice. Spoon Press, London.
  • 62. DeGroot DJ (2014) Evaluation of soft clay properties from interpretation of CPTU data within a SHANSEP framework. Proceedings 5th International Workshop: CPTU and DMT in Soft Clays and Organic Soils. Poznan, Poland, 79–94.
  • 63. Yang SL, Lunne T, Andersen KH, et al. (2019) Undrained shear strength of marine clays based on CPTU data and SHANSEP parameters. Proc. XVII ECSMGE-2019, Iceland.
  • 64. Chandler RJ (1988) The in-situ measurement of the undrained shear strength of clays using the field vane: SOA paper. Vane Shear Strength Testing in Soils Field and Laboratory Studies, ASTM STP 1014, 13–44.


This article has been cited by

  • 1. Jean-Sebastien L’Heureux, Tom Lunne, Characterization and Engineering properties of Natural Soils used for Geotesting, AIMS Geosciences, 2020, 6, 1, 35, 10.3934/geosci.2020004

Reader Comments

your name: *   your email: *  

© 2019 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licese (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)

Download full text in PDF

Export Citation

Copyright © AIMS Press All Rights Reserved