I’ve been working on a foundation project in a coastal area and the soil conditions are quite challenging. I’m particularly focused on assessing the effective stress and shear strength parameters, but I’m noticing some discrepancies in our lab test results compared to field observations. Has anyone here tackled similar issues? I’d love to hear your experiences or suggestions, especially regarding any specific tests or methods that helped improve accuracy.
I’ve dealt with similar discrepancies; sometimes, re-evaluating the moisture content can highlight issues with shear strength. It might also help to compare your lab samples’ disturbance level to field cores. Have you thought about using in-situ testing methods like SPT or CPT for a more accurate picture?
It might be worth looking into the consolidation history of your site, especially in coastal areas where saltwater can impact soil behavior over time. I once found that revisiting the sample collection method helped clarify some similar discrepancies with shear strength values. Have you considered checking the history of soil treatment in that area?
It sounds like moisture variations could be throwing off your effective stress readings. In my last project, I had to adjust the saturation levels during lab tests to match field conditions better. Have you thought about doing a comparative analysis on moisture content between your lab samples and field conditions? @hill14 might have some useful insights on that too.
It sounds like you’re in a tough spot with those soil conditions. I’d recommend checking if the field observations are impacted by any changes in tides or humidity — coastal areas can be a real rollercoaster! Have you thought about doing a few more in-situ tests to get a clearer picture?