Simple shear testing is a widely used method in geotechnical engineering for evaluating soil liquefaction susceptibility, deformation characteristics, and shear strength under controlled loading conditions. This study presents a bibliometric analysis of research trends in simple shear testing based on 367 publications indexed in the Scopus database between 2000 and 2024, analyzed using VOS-viewer. It appears that the current research output on this topic has greatly increased lately. The number of research articles reached a peak in 2024 with a total of 42 research articles. The most frequently cited journals on this topic are Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, with a total of 48 research articles (1173 citations); the Journal of Geotechnical and Geo-environmental Engineering, with a total of 34 research articles (772 citations); and the Canadian Geotechnical Journal, with a total of 10 research articles (250 citations). This indicates substantial research interest in earthquake engineering and soil mechanics. The output shows that there is a major emphasis on research done in the USA, with a total of 104 research articles (1215 citations). The highest average citations per document belong interestingly to the research done by Taiwanese, with a total of 36.73 citations. Similarly, it appears that there is a good impact on soil liquefaction studies. The research findings show that confining pressure, strain rates, and volume ratio affect the shear strength of the soil. Advances in boundary control and shear testing techniques have improved the reliability of experimental results. The study underscores the growing need for more sophisticated numerical modeling techniques and field verification to bridge the gap between laboratory findings and real geotechnical applications. These findings contribute to improving soil characterization methods, which enable safer and more efficient geotechnical designs for infrastructure development.
Baarimah et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: