Soil Cement Tensile Strength and Modulus as a Function of Unconfined Compressive Strength

"In the past, the designers of DSM have analyzed various failure modes and then specified a minimum unconfined compressive strength (UCS) for the soil-cement. The specified minimum UCS reflected the compressive stress in the soil-cement under design loads and an appropriate factor of safety. With the increased use of finite element analysis for the design of DSM applications where allowable strain as well as stress are considered, there is a growing trend for designers to specify a modulus and occasionally a tensile strength for the soil-cement in addition to the UCS. This paper compares the relationship of modulus and tensile strength to UCS for soil-cement from a recent DSM project with unique testing requirements. These results are compared to published data. The case is made that designers should utilize published relationships to characterize the required strength and stiffness by a single acceptance criterion: UCS.INTRODUCTIONAs the use of DSM has increased in popularity so has the use of service state deformation analysis in lieu of more traditional failure mode analysis. Most DSM designers are interested in the appropriate modulus values and occasionally tensile strength values of soil-cement as well as simply the unconfined compressive strength (UCS) of soil-cement.Although there are numerous published correlations between the UCS, tensile strength and modulus of soil-cement, some DSM project specifications are produced which have acceptance values for tensile strength, modulus, and UCS. If this specification of multiple strength properties is consistent with the nature of soil-cement, then there is really no harm except for the expenditure of client money on unnecessary testing. If however the multiple strength properties specified are inconsistent with the material properties of soil-cement, then the specifications can create the expectation that the DSM contractor can somehow create a custom soil-cement with tensile strengths and modulus characteristics which are unachievable.This paper presents a brief summary of a project in Burnaby, B.C. which specified minimum values for the tensile strength, modulus, and UCS of the soil-cement. A comparison of those test results to published correlations between the UCS and the tensile strength is presented. Additionally, a comparison of modulus derived from two different methods of testing is presented along with a comparison to published correlations between UCS and modulus for soil-cement."