This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
The Cam Clay model and most models subsequently developed within the critical state framework are normally formulated to represent the behaviour of soils reconstituted in the laboratory, where the soil structure, if present, is standardised by the sample preparation method. However, as seen from both laboratory and in situ tests, soil behaviour may depend significantly on its structure. The structures of soils found in situ vary greatly, depending on their formation processes and their mechanical, electro-chemical and biological histories. The authors have proposed a relatively simple predictive model, known as the Structured Cam Clay (SCC) model, for solving practical geotechnical problems. In this paper a review of the performance of the Structured Cam Clay model is presented. The paper contains the following four parts. (1) A summary is made of the generalisation of the critical state framework into a new four dimensional space, consisting of the current stress state, stress history, the current voids ratio, and the current soil structure. The key assumption of the theoretical derivation is that both the hardening and destructuring of natural clays are dependent on plastic volumetric deformation. (2) The main concepts and the formulation of the Structure Cam Clay model are introduced within the generalized framework and an explicit stress-strain matrix is obtained for SCC. (3) The capacity of the model for describing laboratory single element tests is evaluated and the main features of the model are summarised. (4) Techniques for refining the Structured Cam Clay model are also discussed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Carter et al. (2005) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: