Cracking in drying soils I

.
PETERH. MORRIS
University of Queensland, St. Lucia, Queensland 4072, Australia
J . GRAHAM
University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Man., Canada R3T 2N2
AND
DAVIDJ. WILLIAMS
University of Queensland, St. Lucia, Queensland 4072, Australia
Received April 25, 1991
Accepted December 3, 1991
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by Queens University on 09/19/13

Cracking in soils that are undergoing drying is controlled by soil suctions and by soil properties such as compression
modulus, Poisson's ratio, shear strength, tensile strength, and specific surface energy. The paper reviews the occurrence
and morphology of cracks in dry-climate regions of Australia and Canada. After reviewing the behaviour of unsaturated
soils and the mechanics of cracking, solutions are developed based on ( i ) elasticity theory, ( i i ) the transition between
tensile and shear failure, and (iii) linear elastic fracture mechanics. The solutions are compared and related to crack
depths observed in the field.
Key words: clay, cracks, crust, shear strength, soil suction, tensile strength, unsaturated soil, weathering.

La fissuration dans les sols subissant une dessiccation est contr81Ce par la succion et par les propriCtCs du sol telles
que le module de compression, le rapport de Poisson, la rksistance au cisaillement, la rCsistance en tension, et 1'Cnergie
de la surface spkcifique. L'article passe en revue la distribution et la morphologie de fissures dans les rCgions B climat
sec de 1'Australie et du Canada. Aprks avoir pass6 en revue le comportement des sols non saturts et la mCcanique de
fissuration, des solutions ont CtC dCveloppCes sur la base de ( i ) la thCorie d'ClasticitC, ( i i ) la transition entre la rupture
en tension et en cisaillement, et (iii) la mCcanique de fissuration Clastique 1inCaire. Les solutions sont comparCes et
For personal use only.

relikes aux profondeurs des fissures observCes sur le terrain.

Mots ~16s: argile, fissures, croQte,resistance au cisaillement, succion du sol, rCsistance en tension, sol non saturC,
alteration.
[Traduit par la rkdaction]
Can. Geotech. J. 29, 263-277 (1992)

Introduction arise from osmotic effects related to soil chemistry. How-

Clay soils tend to crack when they dry. However, the
precise mechanism of cracking is imperfectly understood.
Factors that influence cracking are known qualitatively, but
it is not clear how to predict the depth of cracking and the
spacing of cracks.
In the early stages of drying from a horizontal surface
of soft, initially saturated soil, decreases in water content
are largely accommodated by reorganization of the soil par-
ticles into successively closer arrangements. This involves
shear straining, since the loss of water is largely one-
dimensional towards the drying surface, where it is removed
by evaporation. Experiments have shown (Croney and
Coleman 1954) that the void spaces between the particles
do not remain indefinitely filled with water, and successively
larger proportions of air gradually enter the void spaces.
Surface-tension effects at air-water-soil contacts inside the
soil generate negative pressures (or matrix suctions) below
atmospheric pressure in the remaining pore water. These
matrix suctions (measured by the difference (u, - u,)
between the pore-air pressure and the pore-water pressure;
see Appendix 1) produce two counteracting effects. One,
at a selected point, the soil tends to contract more or less
isotropically, assuming at this stage that the pore water
remains interconnected and the pore air is discontinuous.
This shrinkage produces vertical cracks below horizontal
drying surfaces. Two, the soil gains strength and provides
increased resistance to crack formation. Suctions can also
Printed in Canada / Imprime au Canada
ever, matrix suction dominates below the immediate surface
of a soil deposit, and most workers assume that it drives
shrinkage and cracking processes during drying. Most of the
subsequent discussion will relate to the effects of matrix
suction.
Cracks affect a soil's compressibility, its time rate of con-
solidation, its strength, and the rate at which water can
reenter. Thus, much geotechnical construction is affected
directly or indirectly by the presence of cracks in a soil mass.
A soil with cracks is more compressible than an intact ver-
sion of the same soil at the same water content. However,
wetting and drying cycles lead to increasing overconsolida-
tion towards the surface, and this reduces the compressibility.
The transition with depth from overconsolidated states close
to the surface to normally consolidated states below the
water table is relatively smooth.
A cracked soil has much higher hydraulic conductivity
than the same soil at the same water content but in an intact
state. Thus consolidation can be expected to proceed much
more quickly. However, this effect can be masked (or indeed
reversed) by low hydraulic conductivity in regions of desic-
cated soil between cracks (Blake et al. 1973) and in the zone
of shrinkage ahead of the crack tips. Erosion products can
easily seal crack openings, cutting off flow paths along
cracks.
Groundwater drawdown on drying is dominated by the
upward flow of water t o the ground surface where it is
 CAN. GEOTECH. J. VOL. 29, 1992

TABLE
1. Typical values associated with cracking natural soils
in Australia and Canada

Depth of seasonal Depth of

Suction suction change cracks
Location ratioa (m) (m)

Australia
Adelaide 1.2 4.0 1.8-2.0
Melbourne 1.2 2.0 2.0-3.0
Sydney 1.5 1.5
Hunter Valley 1.5 2.0 0.5
Brisbane 1.2 1.5 0.5
Wodonga 1.5 3.0
Canada
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by Queens University on 09/19/13

Winnipeg - 3 .O 6.0
NOTE:Table adapted from Australian Standard 2870.1-1988:
Residential slabs and footings; with additional Canadian data.
'Ratio of suctions when most wet and most dry.

removed by evaporation. Groundwater recharge occurs (in

part) by water filling the cracks. In this case, recharge is con-
trolled by wetting-up from the base of the crack where the
voids ratio, and hence the hydraulic conductivity, is higher
than closer to the ground surface. Whereas drying is essen-
tially a one-dimensional (vertical) process, wetting-up is
three-dimensional, particularly when it is remembered that
the horizontal hydraulic conductivity is usually larger than
the vertical hydraulic conductivity.
For personal use only.

Cracking usually means that groundwater recharge can

take place more rapidly than drawdown, and this has con-
siderable impact, for example, where there is potential for
slope instability. The shear strength of clays along the direc-
tion of cracks is often markedly less than the intact strength
(Stapledon 1970). In a general sense, the shear strength avail-
able in a cracked soil depends on the relationship between
the orientation of the crack and the orientation of the major
principal stress direction (Thorne 1984).
Cracking has received considerable attention in the liter-
ature of soil science and agriculture (for example, Ritchie
et al. 1972; Blake et al. 1973; Chen et al. 1980). However,
the treatment is largely behavioural and qualitative. The
geotechnical literature on cracking is not extensive, though
notable contributions have been made by Fredlund and
Morgenstern (1976), Frydman (1967), Ravina (1983), Bagge
(1985), and Ringesten (1988).
Our interest in soils undergoing drying arose from studies
of how desiccation affects the rehabilitation of tailing ponds
at open-pit coal mines in Queensland, Australia. We begin
by reviewing the factors that influence the occurrence of
cracked soils in Australia and Canada and the morphology
of crack development. Subsequent sections develop solutions
for cracking in unsaturated soils using (i) elastic theory,
(ii) linear elastic fracture mechanics, and (iii) a rupture anal-
ysis based on the transition between tensile and shear failure.
Occurrence and morphology of cracks in clays and fine
mine tailings
The onset of cracking depends on the mineralogy of the
soil, climatic conditions such as temperature and rainfall,
and surface vegetation cover. At a selected strength level,
plastic clays contain more water than lean clays. They there-
fore experience larger volumetric contractions on drying.
FIG. 1. Cracking in coal mine tailings, pit 21, New Hope Col-
liery, Bundamba District, West Moreton Coalfields, Queensland,
Australia.
They also have a larger effective cohesion c' and larger ten-
sile strength t (Baker 1981). This leads to wider, deeper
cracks in plastic clays than in lean clays.
High temperatures alone do not produce wide, deep cracks
if the high temperatures occur during wet seasons. Wide,
deep cracking is associated with plastic soils and high tem-
peratures during dry seasons when the water table drops to
considerable depth in the soil profile. Such conditions are
regularly found over large parts of Australia and in the
Canadian Interior Plains. Reinforcement by roots provides
additional tensile resistance and reduces cracking. For exarn-
ple, cracks tend to concentrate between rows of corn rather
than close to the plants themselves (Ravina 1983) and on
pathways parallel to the edge of neighbouring grassy areas.
The presence and depth of shrinkage-induced cracking is
difficult to observe accurately because of disturbance and
stress-release effects during exploratory excavation. Shrinkage
cracks are generally vertical (or subvertical), although a few
are horizontal. They extend almost to the depth of seasonal
moisture change in the ground. Slickensided joints may also
be present. These are generally subhorizontal and may
extend to considerable depth. The presence of slickensiding
indicates shear displacements (D. Cameron, personal com-
munication). The displacements may be caused by increased
 MORRIS ET AL.
(a)
WATER CONTENT
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by Queens University on 09/19/13
3'-
MELBOURNE W
FIG. 2. (a) Variation of water content with depth. Curve 1, equilibrium water content under a surface covering; curve 2, dry season;
curve 3, wet season (after Kraynski, in Chen 1975). ( b )Typical seasonal soil suction variations with depth (after Cameron and Walsh 1984).
horizontal pressures that follow rewetting in active clays
after infilling has washed into previously open cracks. Alter-
natively they may result from differential shrinkage because
the soil is nonuniform or the vegetation cover is variable
For personal use only.
(Stapledon 1970). They may also result from tectonic effects.
Table 1 shows some typical values associated with crack-
ing soils in Australia and Canada. Shrinkage cracks can
extend almost to the depth of seasonal moisture change in
the ground. However, this will not be the case where an
upwards supply of salt-rich groundwater produces high salt
concentrations in the evaporative zone close to the ground
surface. Deposition of salts in the interparticle contact zones
produces enhanced tensile strength and greater resistance to
cracking. This condition is seen in Adelaide where it limits
crack depths to about 1.8-2.0 m (P. Peter, personal
communication).
Observations of cracks in Australian coal mine tailings
deposits in the Hunter Valley coalfields in New South Wales
and in the West Moreton (Fig. 1) and Bowen Basin coalfields
in Queensland reveal crack depths of typically 0.5 m, com-
pared with a water table depth of about 1-1.5 m. The crack
depth increases with distance from the east coast of Australia
as the annual rainfall diminishes. Rarely, cracks have been
observed to the full depth of the deposits, about 4 m. These
have been associated with tailings deposits resting on, and
contained by, freely draining sand- and gravel-sized coarse
reject from the mine. Initially, cracks form at about 1 m
spacings, with secondary cracks forming within the 1 m
blocks. Cracks intersect at close to 90'.
In the Lake Agassiz clays near Winnipeg, desiccation
cracks frequently extend to about 6 m depth, and less fre-
quently to the full depth of the deposit, from about 8-15 m
(Graham and Shields 1985). The 6 m depth corresponds to
the depth of atmospheric weathering and a colour change
from brown near the surface to grey-blue at depth. Since
the current climate produces seasonal moisture changes only
to about 3-4 m depth (Hamilton 1969), the cracks to 6 m
depth correspond to warmer and drier climatic conditions
during the hypsothermal period 9000-4500 years ago follow-
(b)
SUCTION (ua -uW), PF
SYDNEY W ADELAIDE NE
W = WET SEASON -TOTAL SUCTION
-- - -
D = DRY SEASON MATRIX SUCTION
ing the draining of proglacial Lake Agassiz. Inclined fissures
and slickensiding are also found in these deposits. However,
at least some of these are due to icebergs scouring the lake-
bottom deposits (Clark et al. 1988). Close to the ground sur-
face, the clay is very closely fissured (with spacings as close
as 2-5 mm), with a nuggety structure produced by seasonal
freeze-thaw cycles (Graham and Au 1985).
Moisture content and suction distributions
The preceding section suggests relationships between crack
depths, water table levels, water contents, and suction pro-
files which will be explored in following sections.
Water content distributions with depth
Figure 2a (after Kraynski, in Chen 1975) shows the equi-
librium water content profile expected under a surface cover-
ing (curve 1). The variation of water content with depth cor-
responding to dry-season conditions is shown as curve 2 and
wet-season conditions as curve 3. Seasonal fluctuations are
restricted to a depth H, that is typically 1-2 m beneath nor-
mal ground cover in eastern Australia, about 0.5-1.0 m
below the unvegetated surface of AustraIian coal tailings,
and about 3 m in Manitoba, Canada. These fluctuations are
usually insufficient to allow full equilibrium to be reached
at any given depth. Because the stress-strain behaviour of
clays is nonreversible, the measured water contents are
usually dry of complete equilibrium, even after climatic
cycles lasting perhaps 7-8 years which are encountered in
the Canadian Interior Plains (Hamilton 1969). For similar
reasons, the depth H, of seasonal changes in water content
is usually less than the depth Hd to the permanent water
table. Since cracking is associated with these seasonal
changes, it corresponds more closely with H, than with Hd.
Suction distributions with depth
If climatic conditions stayed constant long enough for full
equilibrium conditions and a constant water table to be
reached in the soil profile, the matrix suction would decrease
linearly with depth from maximum suction at the ground
 CAN. GEOTECH. J. VOL. 29,
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by Queens University on 09/19/13
FIG. 3. Model of behaviour of unsaturated soil compression ( a ) , and shear strength (b) (after Fredlund 1979).
surface to zero suction (atmospheric pressure) at the water
table (Appendix 2). However, this condition is rarely reached
in practice and it is more common to observe a transient
nonlinear decay of matrix suction from a peak at the surface
to zero at the water table. Superimposed on this are tran-
For personal use only.
sient solute suctions that depend on the salt concentration
in the pore water. Within the depth of cracking, changes
in matrix suction occur much more rapidly than changes in
soil chemistry and solute suction. As mentioned earlier,
matrix suction has a greater effect on cracking than solute
suction within the usual time frame of engineering interest.
Figure 2b shows wet- and dry-season suction profiles mea-
sured in southern Australia (after Cameron and Walsh
1984). (The unit p F is defined as log,, (suction head in centi-
metres of water).) The depth of shrinkage cracks typically
coincides approximately with the depth of seasonal changes
in water content and suction. The (perched) water table is
at, or more likely below, this depth. The profiles of total
suction (the sum of matrix suction and solute (osmotic) suc-
tion) in Fig. 2b have an approximately constant suction of
about p F 4 (about 1000 kPa) at depth due to solute suction.
The solute suction reaches a peak below the water table due
to the greater salt concentration produced there by downward
leaching from above. It can reach p F 4.2 or pF4.6 near trees.
Suggested matrix suction profiles are shown as broken lines
in Fig. 2b. They tend to p F = - cx, at the water table, cor-
responding to zero suction on the logarithmic p F scale, and
join the total suction profiles towards the surface, where
matrix suction dominates over solute suction.
Compressibility and strength behaviour of
unsaturated soil
Desaturation of soils gives rise to high suction pressures.
Ignoring solute suction, Fredlund and Morgenstern (1976)
showed that unsaturated soil behaviour can be expressed in
terms of the state variables: (i) total stress relative to the
pore-air pressure (a - u,), (ii) matrix suction (u, - u,),
and (iii) voids ratio e (or specific volume V = 1 + e). Com-
pression can then be caused by changes in total stress, by
1992
changes in matrix suction, or by any combination of the two
(Fig. 3a). In soils that are experiencing desaturation, ques-
tions arise about the validity of the effective stress concept
and about the ability of Fredlund's state variables to link
the pore-air and pore-water pressures in the soil. However,
at present, no better approach has been proposed.
Fredlund (1979) showed that the shear strength of
unsaturated soils can be expressed as
[l] rf = C' + (a - u,) t a n + ' + (u, - u,) t a n + b
where the effective cohesion c' in this equation is indepen-
dent of pressure and is often small, +' describes how the
strength increases with total pressure, and + b describes how
the strength increases with matrix suction. The relationship
expressed by [I] is shown in Fig. 3b. (Alonso et al. 1987
showed that [I] is perhaps oversimplified, but no additional
complexity will be introduced here.) Saturated behaviour is
given by the plane PQRS with u, - u, = 0,that is, u, =
u,. For a given matrix suction, the apparent cohesion
intercept cap, where the failure surface intersects the
T,(u, - u,)-plane is given by
[2] cap, = c' + (u, - u,) t a n + b
Cracking can be assumed to occur when the horizontal
stress at the tip of a crack becomes more tensile than the
tensile strength of the soil. Little has been published in the
geotechnical literature about the tensile strength of soils.
Figure 4a (from Lee and Ingles 1968) shows how the com-
mon criteria for shear failure in a compressive stress field
must be modified when the stresses are tensile. Note from
Fig. 4a that the absolute value of the tensile strength t is
significantly less than cap, cot +' . (With the sign conven-
tion usual in geotechnical engineering, t is numerically
negative.) Taking t = - aTcap, cot +' , Bagge (1985) sug-
gested that a T lay between about 0.5 and 0.7. However,
from Fig. 4a, t = - capp/2,so a T = 0.5 tan 6' (Frydman
1967; Baker 1981). In unsaturated soils, the relevant cohe-
sion term is the apparent cohesion c,,, (eq. [2]) that
includes the contribution from matrix suction. Thus, the ten-
sile strength of an unsaturated soil can be written
 MORRIS ET AL.
t rn
0.5 r (c) WINNIPEG CLAY
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by Queens University on 09/19/13
FIG. 4. Strength envelopes indicating tensile strength after (a) Lee and Ingles (1968), (b) Bishop and Garga (1969), (c) Graham
and Au (1985), and (d) Morris (1990).
For personal use only.
[3] t = 0.5[c1 + (u, - u,) tan rpb] cot 4'
Soils such as slurries and mine tailings drying from very
wet conditions have low effective cohesions c' of the order
2-5 kPa. In this case it is conservative to set c' = 0, so
[3al t = -aT(ua - u,) tan rpbcot 4'
That is,
These relationships will be used in subsequent sections.
Other examples of tensile strength are shown in the
remaining diagrams in Fig. 4. Figure 4b shows triaxial test
measurements of the tensile strength of London clay pre-
sented by Bishop and Garga (1969). The low-stress strength
envelope (and by implication the tensile strength) of
Winnipeg clay is shown in Fig. 4c (Graham and Au 1985).
Figure 4d presents direct shear tests on coal mine tailings
from New Hope Colliery in the Bowen Basin coalfields in
Queensland, Australia (Morris 1990). Here again, although
the tensile strength was not measured directly, it is clearly
significant.
Qualitative discussion of crack propagation
Matrix suctions (u, - u,) in uncracked soils produce
compressive stresses (a - u,) between the particles. This
remains true provided the uncracked soil compresses only
one-dimensionally due to evaporation from the ground sur-
face. (In this case, elastic theory requires that the horizontal
stresses due to suction are reduced by a factor of (1 - 2v)/
(1 - v).) However, preexisting cracks in the soil, even if
small, can produce local tensile stresses at the crack tips,
providing that deformations are constrained.
4 (b) LONDON CLAY '
ZECONSTITUTED
r
300 ld) COAL TAILINGS
DESICCATED
100
Soils are particulate. Consequently, microcracks in the
sense defined by Griffith (1924) can be identified with the
intergranular voids and hence with conventional measures
of particle size. Macrocracks are produced by the growth
of these microcracks under tensile loading at the crack tips.
Griffith (1924) showed that for an internal crack of length
2A, the uniform tensile stress transverse to the crack that
is required to cause the crack to propagate is proportional
to A -'.'. In soils, this means that in clay with small particle
sizes, the tensile stress required to propagate a crack is larger
than that required in silt or sand with larger particle sizes.
The simple capillary model suggests that the suction is
inversely proportional to the radius of the capillaries and
hence to the particle size. Thus matrix suctions can be larger
in soils with smaller particle size and approximately propor-
tional to A - I . Comparison of these two relationships for
(i) tensile stress and (ii) matrix suction in terms of the crack
length A shows that macrocracks due to soil suctions are
more readily produced in fine-grained than in coarse-grained
materials.
Soils generally dry downwards from the surface, where
matrix suctions are generally largest and self-weight stresses
are zero. The microcracking that is present throughout
bodies of soil in the form of interparticle voids is of course
also present at the soil surface. Thus, conditions for crack
growth are most favourable at the surface of the soil.
Microcracks in the form of voids are initially distributed
randomly over the soil surface. As desiccation proceeds, they
begin to propagate downwards into the soil under the
influence of matrix suctions in a direction perpendicular to
that of the maximum tensile stress (Meguid 1980). The ten-
sile stress at the tip of any given crack is reduced by the pres-
ence of adjacent cracks. Longer cracks are least affected by
 268 CAN. GEOTECH. J. VOL. 29, 1992

this interaction, since the'tensile stress (proportional to

A -0.5) required to propagate them is less than that required
to propagate shorter cracks. The reduction in tensile stress
at the tips of shorter cracks is also greater than that at the
tips of longer cracks. Consequently, the growth of smaller
cracks is retarded and eventually suppressed by the growth
of adjacent larger cracks. Cracking thus becomes concen-
trated at a series of relatively large cracks. In a roughly
uniform horizontal stress field beneath level ground, the
large cracks are roughly uniformly spaced in any given direc-
tion. Their initial orientation in plan is random.
As drying proceeds and the matrix suctions increase, dom-
inant cracks tend to grow in both plan length and depth.
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by Queens University on 09/19/13

Their depth is ultimately constrained by the increasing

stresses due to the self-weight of the soil. Their length in
plan is limited by intersection with other cracks. Although
the orientation of cracks is random, they all intersect at
approach angles closely approximating 90". Examples are
shown in Figs. 1 and 5a-5c. Figure 5a comes not from a
soil but from a Chinese ceramic dating from the T'ang
dynasty (Fleming 1973). Figure 5b shows a similar pattern
obtained by drying coal mine tailings slurry slowly in air in
the laboratory. Similar patterns were also observed on a
natural drying surface in Winnipeg clay (Fig. 5c).
These crack patterns can be easily explained in terms of
the crack propagation criterion given above. The direction
of the maximum tensile stress in the soil at the tip of a prop-
For personal use only.

agating crack adjacent to an existing open crack must be

parallel to the plane of the crack, since the perpendicular
tensile stress has been relieved by the cracking. The direction
of propagation of the approaching crack is thus progressively
turned towards the existing crack until they finally intersect
at close to 90".
As matrix suctions increase further, the blocks between
existing cracks tend to break into smaller pieces. The sec-
ondary cracks that cause this breakup propagate from about
the middle of the longer sides of existing blocks of uncracked
soil. They start at the ground surface and propagate down-
wards and sideways into previously uncracked soil. The
initial direction of propagation, which tends to be main-
tained well into the middle of the block, is initially perpen-
dicular to the existing crack (Figs. 5a-5c).
This subdivision of existing blocks is governed by the most
favourable conditions for crack initiation and propagation
according to the tensile stress criterion given earlier. Initially,
the tensile stresses are highest at the middle of the longest
side of an existing block of soil formed by earlier cracking.
The stresses are increased throughout the block by increasing
suctions. The restraint necessary for crack propagation is
provided by the underlying soil which is subjected to lower
suctions and hence smaller suction-induced strains. Self-
weight stresses are minimum (zero) and suctions are maxi-
mum at the upper surface of the block, that is, at the ground
surface. The block also tends to lose water from the sides
of the crack, so suctions are maximized at corners formed
by intersecting cracks. (At first sight this might suggest that
cracking should propagate from the upper corners of the
block where drying is greatest. However, these areas are the
least restrained of the whole block, and stresses approach
the isotropic condition defined by the suctions. Hence no
cracking occurs.)
As desiccation proceeds, a block can be further subdivided
by repeated occurrences of the same process. Subdivision
 MORRIS ET AL. 269

to flake off from the surface. Here, differential drying with

depth and horizontal distance from the face of a vertical
crack results in a vertical tensile stress within the clay. Con-
sequently, horizontal cracks propagate inwards from the
initial vertical cracks and lead to separation of desiccated
layers from the upper surface of the clay.

Crack propagation: theoretical

The following section outlines solutions that have been
derived for the relationship between the depth of cracks,
the properties of the soil, and the given suction profile. Three
different solutions are presented. The first is based on linear
elasticity, the second on a fracture mechanics approach, and
the third on strength relationships.
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by Queens University on 09/19/13

Solutions using linear elasticity

In an elastic soil with matrix suction (u, - u,) the hori-
zontal strain E, resulting from applied stresses ux , a,, and
a, is

where E is a compression modulus for changes in total stress

relative to the pore-air pressure (a - u,), H is an elastic
modulus for changes in matrix suction (u, - u,), and v is
Poisson's ratio. Here, the x-direction is horizontal and
perpendicular to the crack, the y-direction is parallel to the
crack, and the z-direction is vertical. Similarly, the volumetric
For personal use only.

strain E, is
SUCTION S ( k P 8 )
FIG. 6. Depth of cracking for constant suction So in profile.

stops when the decreasing size of the block in plan (and where
hence the increasing relative depth of cracking) overcomes
the restraining stresses at the base of the block and matrix
suctions attain equilibrium with the atmosphere; that is,
when the maximum suction consistent with the ambient con- For linear elasticity, C, and Ca (the volumetric compliances
ditions is reached. with respect to (total stress - pore air pressure) and suc-
After long periods of dry hot weather, blocks 300-400 mm tion, respectively) are constants. Also, for isotropic elasticity
square in plan, with depths approaching several metres, are and isotropic loading (with ax = a, = a,; E, = E, = E,),
seen in coal mine tailings ponds in the West Moreton coal- Fredlund and Morgenstern (1976) have shown that C, =
fields of Queensland. Blocks of similar size are seen in the 3(1 - 2v)/E and C, = 3/H. Thus C, has the form of a
plastic Lake Agassiz clays at Winnipeg, Manitoba, where compliance (the inverse of a bulk modulus) expressed in
cracks have been observed in trial pits to depths of 6 m. At terms of total stress and C, is a compliance related to suc-
the ground surface, crack openings may approach 50 mm. tion stresses.
Wider, longer cracks are controlled by the patterns of sur- If isotropic elasticity remains applicable, even though the
face vegetation (Ravina 1983). Cracks may extend to lengths straining is forced to be one-dimensional, a, = a, # a,; E ,
of 5-10 m. = 6,. This condition corresponds to drying from a horizon-
As in metals, cracks propagating vertically and horizon- tal surface before cracking starts. In this case
tally in soils can be stopped by weak interfaces (Lawn and
Wilshaw 1975). This happens, for example, at the interface
between fine and coarse layers typical of varved clays or and
mine tailings. Ahead of the tip of a crack propagating ver-
tically downwards, there is a zone with a vertical tensile stress
component that is sufficient to cause tensile failure at any
weak, horizontal interface lying ahead of the crack. The Hence
resulting transverse (horizontal) crack stops propagation of
the initial vertical crack by reducing the horizontal tensile
stress at the tip. Since the stresses perpendicular to the new This expression for (a, - ua) can be substituted into E, to
horizontal crack are usually compressive, this crack rarely produce the relationship
propagates far.
This mechanism is different from that occurring in hori-
zontally layered clays and slurries, where thin sheets tend
 CAN. GEOTECH. J. VOL. 29, 1992
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by Queens University on 09/19/13
SUCTION So AT SURFACE
FIG.7. Crack depths for suctions decreasing linearly from So at the surface to zero at the ground water table. (a) W = 4 m. (b) W
10 m. S = So(l - z c / W ) ;v = 0.35.
I I I I I
S-S0(l-zclW)
t-constant
- V-0.35 - the crack tip is not influential in establishing the ratio E/H.
For personal use only.
1. - When cracking is just about to initiate, (ax - u,) = t. The
'.
-
W-lorn So -100 kPa
'TENSILE STRENGTH t (kPa)
FIG. 8. Crack depths as a function of tensile strength t for suc-
tions decreasing linearly from So at the surface t o zero at the
ground water table. S = So(l - zc)/W,v = 0.35; t = constant.
Thus Ct = (1 - 2v)(1 + v)/[E(l - v)] and C, = (1 + v)/
[(l - v)W (see also Fredlund and Morgenstern 1976).
The mechanism leading to cracking involves decreasing
horizontal stresses. It is known that soil close to the surface
behaves more isotropically than soil at greater depth
(Graham 1979; Mahar and O'Neill 1983). Thus, solutions
based on linear isotropic elasticity may be acceptable and
deserve examination.
If we assume that the degree of saturation will remain high
close to the tip of a propagating crack, and that the soil will
behave similarly whether it is subjected to externally applied
stress changes A(o - u,) or to internally applied suctions
A(u, - u,), then it is reasonable to assume Ct = C,. The
SUCTION So AT SURFACE
=
ratio E/H then becomes equal to (1 - 2v) for both isotropic
and one-dimensional straining. That is, the stress state at
If cracking is to be avoided, the tensile horizontal stress
(ax - uJ must not exceed the tensile strength t of the soil.
one-dimensional case is a reasonable approximation to the
strain conditions just before cracking. Thus from [7]
If atmospheric pressure u, is taken as zero, then a, - u,
= yz. Remember also that E/H = (1 - 2v). Assume first
that the suction S = (u, - u,) is constant = So, and that
t is constant. The depth of cracking zc is then given by
[lo] zc = ASo + Bt
where A = (1 - 2v)/vy, and B = (1 - v)/vy. Figure 6
shows values of zc from this equation for typical values of
v, y, So , W, and t. For certain combinations of S and t,
cracking cannot initiate. That is, the decrease in the hori-
zontal stress produced by (u, - u,) is insufficient to over-
come the tensile strength of the soil.
For saturated soil below the water table, u, = u,. Hence
from [9] and [3a]
v
[ll] t=- (az - u,) = - 0 . 5 ( 0 ) t a n ~ $ ~= 0
1 - v
For all reasonable values of u (and for the obvious case
where a, - u, = O), [ l l ] shows that vertical cracking can-
not occur below the water table.
Assume next that the matrix suction decreases linearly
from So at the surface to zero at a groundwater level with
depth W (see also Fig. 2 and Appendix 2). That is, at any
depth z, the matrix suction u, - u, = So(l - z/W).
When these substitutions are made in [9]

I I I I
- -
VALUES OF So (kPa)
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by Queens University on 09/19/13
DEPTH TO GWL (m)
FIG. 9. Crack depths for linearly decreasing suctions, with tensile strengths depending on the suctions. Values shown for different
values of S and 4 ' . S = So(l - z,)/W; bb = 4' - S o ; t = t ( u , - u,); q-= 0.5 tan +'. GWL, groundwater level.
This can then be solved for the depth of cracking zc for rea-
sonable values of v, r , So, W, and t:
For personal use only.
where C = (1 - v)/(l - 2v), and D = vy/(l - 2v). Values
for this expression are shown in Figs. 7 and 8.
The solution can now be extended so that t is no longer
an independent variable but is expressed by [3b] as a function
of the local matrix suction at the crack tip t = t(u, - u,).
When the suction again decreases linearly from the ground
surface
Thus [9] can be rewritten
= -aT S,(I - 55) tan cpb cot 4'
The depth of cracking then becomes
where
"7
E=
1 - 2v - (1 - v)aT tan 4 b cot 4
Values of zc from [16] are given in Figs. 9 and 10. These
results are based on the assumptions that c' is zero (discussed
earlier) and that 4 b = 4' - 5O, a broad interpretation of
data presented by Fredlund et al. (1978).
The solutions that have just been described assume that
one-dimensional conditions apply. This allows the develop-
ment of [7] for (a, - u,), which comes from the analysis
of a semi-infinite elastic half-space before cracking has
initiated but neglects the effects of surface irregularities,
nonhomogeneities, etc. When cracking occurs, the tensile
MORRIS ET AL.
I
1 VALUES OF ~lrd 1
SURFACE SUCTION SO (kPa)
stress that previously held the crack faces together is relieved,
and the cracks will propagate until equilibrium conditions
are restored. Stress conditions are no longer simply one-
dimensional, especially close to the tips of propagating
cracks. Refinement of the preceding analysis is therefore
needed.
Solutions using linear elastic fracture mechanics (LEFM)
Cracks in soils propagate by opening along their own axes
and are often planar over significant distances relative to
the depth of the crack. In terms of the three fundamental
modes recognized in fracture mechanics, this means that they
are mode I cracks. (The other two types, modes I1 and I11
involve, respectively, shearing and tearing parallel to the
crack axis (Meguid 1980).)
Irwin (1957) showed that the stress distribution in the
vicinity of a crack tip is largely independent of applied loads
and specimen geometry. He subsequently developed a series
of linear elastic stress field solutions (see Meguid 1980). For
example, for mode I cracking, the horizontal stress in the
direction perpendicular to the crack is
[17] % = (2") -0.5K1
[COS f (1 + sin f sin T)]
where r is the distance from the crack tip at an inclination
0 to the axis of the crack, and KI is the stress intensity fac-
tor for mode I.
We now have two expressions (eqs. [9] and [17]) for the
horizontal stress near the tip of a propagating crack. Equa-
tion [9] is an expression for the horizontal stress in an
uncracked soil mass: [17] comes from linear elastic fracture
mechanics. If it is then assumed that these two expressions
can be equated at a general depth z (assuming u, = atmo-
spheric pressure = 0), KI can be determined in an elastic
soil experiencing self-weight stresses and matrix suctions.
In a separate paper currently being prepared, the authors
will show how Bueckner's Principle (Bueckner 1958) can be
used to find KI, the sum of three separate stress intensity
factors ~ fK:, , and K: corresponding to three-component
stress distributions whose solutions are well known in frac-
ture mechanics (Hartranft and Sih 1973). When added
together, the stress intensity factors define the horizontal
 272 CAN. GEOTECH. J. VOL. 29, 1992

I I I

So=lOO kPa, VALUES OF 4 VALUES OF 4'

7 7
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by Queens University on 09/19/13

DEPTH TO GWL (rn) SURFACE SUCTION So (kPa)

FIG. 10. Crack depths for linearly decreasing suctions, with tensile strengths depending on the suctions. Values shown for different
values of 4 ' and v. S = So(l - z,)/W; d b = 4 ' - 5 O ; t = t(ua - u,); aT = 0.5 tan 4'. GWL, groundwater level.

VALUES OF So (kPa) VALUES OF So (kPa)

10 1
For personal use only.

DEPTH TO GWL (rn) DEPTH TO GWL (rn)

FIG. 11. Crack depths from linear elastic fracture mechanics (LEFM). (a)5. = 0.1 J/m2. ( b ) 5. = 1.0 J/m2. S = So(l - z,)/W;
v = 0.3 unless noted; E = 5 MPa; yd = 18 kN/m3; y,,, = 20 kN/m3. GWL, groundwater level.

stress distribution in a soil with matrix suctions above a water table. If A is the depth of the crack and z is the depth
variable, the three-component stress intensity factors can be written

where

g($) = ;r w (cos 0 + 0.06233 cos38 - 0.04016 cosS0 + 0.1203 cos70 - 0.1159 cos98 + 0.04631 cos" 8)
-[- (:
\ /

+ -n2 AWAO.'- W 1.12125 sin - 0) + 0.1572 sin 0 + 0.005626 sin 40 - 0.0002247 sin 88
- 0.01182 sin3 28 + 0.003184 sinS 20
I
 MORRIS ET AL.
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by Queens University on 09/19/13
FIG. 12. Schematic of failure envelope in tension,, showing the effect of suction on tensile strength.
Bueckner's Principle states that the stress intensity factor
for a stress-free crack, that is, one with no real loading
(except atmospheric pressure) on the crack faces, is identical
with that for the same crack loaded internally with the
stresses required to produce zero relative strains at the crack
faces under the original loading. This is equivalent to reduc-
For personal use only.
ing the problem to one of calculating the stresses at the loca-
tion of the crack in the equivalent uncracked body under
the original loading.
In a separate calculation, a critical stress intensity factor
KIccan be determined when the crack is just about to prop-
agate into a soil with compression modulus E and Poisson's
ratio v (Lawn and Wilshaw 1975):
-2rE
1191 KIc = -
1 - v2
where 3- is the specific surface energy of the soil. Lee and
r
Ingles (1968) suggested that lies between 0.1 and 1.O J/m2.
The problem of evaluating the depth z, to which cracking
will propagate therefore devolves to one of equating KI
determined from the gravitational and suction stresses in the
soil (eq. 1171) to the KIc that corresponds to the physical
properties of the soil in question (eq. [19]).
Values of z, have been calculated for E = SMPa, v =
0.3, y = 18-20 kN/m3, So = 5-100 kPa, W = 0.5-10 m,
and 3- = 0.1-1.0 J/m2. Typical results are shown in Fig. 11
for S = So(l - zc/ W), v = 0.3 unless noted otherwise,
E = 5 MPa, yd above the groundwater level = 18 kN/m3,
and y,,, below the groundwater level = 20 k ~ / m The ~ .
solution predicts slope discontinuities at the line A = W =
z,, when the crack reaches the groundwater level. The
smallest crack possible for 3- = 0.1 J/m2 and So = 6 kPa
is when W = 0.97 m. Similarly, when 3- = 1.0 J/m2 and
So = 20 kPa, the smallest crack is 0.15 m. More complete
details of the solution will be given in a future publication.
One of the interesting findings of this work is that cracks
tend to close at shallower depth below the water table than
they would in its absence, since the pore water below the
water table acts to close rather than open the crack.
It will be appreciated that the high stresses near a propa-
gating crack mean that the stress-strain behaviour of the
soil is probably not modelled well by linear elasticity. How-
ever, at the present stage of this research, and before it is
clear how to measure crack depths reliably in the field, exten-
sion of the analysis to include nonlinearity is unwarranted.
Cracking related to shear strength
Previous sections considered cracking to be associated
with elastic behaviour. An aIternative approach is to relate
cracking to a transition between tensile and shear failure.
In its simplest form, Rankine-type analysis allows the
estimation of crack depths in the active condition when the
soil at the tip of the crack is expanding laterally to close the
crack under undrained total stress conditions:
1 - sin 4'
1201 0 3 = yzc 1 sin 4'
+
- 2(ua - u,) tan 4b c o s 4 ' = 0
1 + sin 4'
(Here again the effective saturated cohesion c' has been
assumed to be zero.)
Equation [20] produces values of z, that are larger than
those in the previous section and larger than those commonly
found in practice. For example, with y = 18 kN/m3,
u, - u, = 100 kPa, 4' = 30°, and 4b = 25", z, is
calculated to be 9.0 m. This depth does not correspond well
with the observed crack depths for what is only a moderate
suction of 1 (negative) atmosphere (101.3 kPa).
Bagge (1985) suggested an alternative approach that will
be extended here into a more general stress system and
written for unsaturated soils. Figure 3b showed the
strength envelope for unsaturated soils presented by
Fredlund (1979). This has been redrawn in Fig. 12a into a
( p - u,),q,(u, - u,)-space that is more useful in soil
mechanics problems, and developed to include tension. The
parameters p (the mean stress) and q (the deviator stress)
are defined by p = (0, + 2u3)/3 and q = al - u3.
Figure 12b shows a section of Fig. 12a with constant
(u, - u,). The sections AB and BC in the figure represent
generalizations of the failure surface for failures occurring,
respectively, in tension and shear. Along AB, failure takes
place in tension with a3 - u, = t(u, - u,) and al - u,
> t. Along BC, u3 - u, > t, and failure takes place in
shear. Point B therefore represents the stress state at which
 CAN.
4 C I I I I
VALUES OF So (kPa),
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by Queens University on 09/19/13
"0 2 4 6 8
DEPTH TO GWL (m)
FIG. 13. Crack depths from solution based on transition from tensile failure to shear failure. S = S,(1 - z,)/ W ; c$~= 4 ' - 5";
t = t ( u , - u,); a, = 0.5 tan 4'. GWL, groundwater level.
the vertical stress becomes sufficiently large to inhibit fail-
ure in tension. The line BD with slope - % is the locus of
a; = yzc, with the isotropic condition being at D on the
p'-axis. Thus the geometry of AB, BC, and BD established
from the strength parameters and the suction in the soil
defines yzc at D, that is, the depth to which cracking will
For personal use only.
extend before it is inhibited by the increasing overburden
stress.
In Fig. 12b, A represents isotropic tensile failure, where
t = - 0 . 5 ~(Baker
~ 1981) and cT, is the cohesion in
Coulomb-Mohr T,U-space.In Fig. 12b, cpq is the intercept
of the shear strength envelope BC (having slope M) on the
q-axis. The cohesion parameters cpq and c, are related by
cp, = c,.6 cos +/(3 - sin 4). Point E is then at - cpq/M
and D at yzCon the (p - u,) axis. Point B is given by
p - U, = yzC/3 - U, + 2t/3, q = yzC - t.
These relations can then be solved for the same suction
and tensile strength conditions as in the previous section,
assuming again that the suction decreases linearly with
depth, S = So(l - z/W). When t is constant:
where
F = 6 cos 4 ' tan + b
3 - sin +'
Alternatively, t can be written as a function of the suction,
t = -0.5(ua - u,) tan + b cot 4 ' :
where
(3 - M1-i
G =
l8 cos '' tan'b - (3 4- 2 ~ ) tan ~ cot 4 '
a db
3 - sin 6'
Values of zc from [22] are shown in Fig. 13.
GEOTECH. J. VOL. 29, 1992
10 20 40 60 80 100
SURFACE SUCTION So (kPa)
A similar result can be obtained more directly from the
extension of a Rankine-type analysis shown in Fig. 14. Here
the vertical stress is yz,, and failure is assumed to take
place in shear when the minor principal stress attempts to
go more negative than the tensile strength t. Then
where, as before, c = So(l - zc/W) tan +b, and t =
aTSo(l - zc/W) tan rpb cot 4 ' . Substituting these expres-
sions for c and t in [23] gives
where
y(1 - sin+')
H =
tan+b[2cos+' - aT(l + sin+')cot+']
This gives results numerically equal to those in [22] and
Fig. 13 which came from considering the transition between
tensile and shear failure.
Discussion and conclusions
Results from the solutions presented in previous sections
are compared in Fig. 15. The figure shows solutions for cases
where the tensile strength t is a function of the suction
(u, - u,), which in turn is assumed to decrease linearly
from a maximum So at the ground surface to zero at the
groundwater table. Results are shown for So = 50 and
100 kPa. When the problems are specified identically, results
from the elastic solution [I61 (curve 1, Fig. 15), the tension-
shear solution in [21], and the modified-Rankine solution
in [23] (curve 2, Fig. 15) are all similar. Results from linear
elastic fracture mechanics given by [I71 and [19] predict
deeper cracks for a given combination of variables (curve 3,
Fig. 15). Initially, the higher results from the fracture
mechanics solution were unexpected. However, on further
study, a similar relation was found between predicted crack
lengths in analyses of cracking in concrete dams and dam
foundations (Li and Liang 1986).
 MORRIS ET AL. 275

(a-ua)
A
O i Yzc
c cot +' /-
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by Queens University on 09/19/13

FIG. 14. Schematic of failure condition for cracking based on

Rankine solution.

The computed crack depths reported in this paper (up to

about 3 m depth for So = 100 kPa, 4' = 30°, v = 0.3,
W = 10 m) are of the same order as those encountered in
the field (Table 1) but may be a little large. The analyses
assumed distributions of suction with depth which are either
constant or decrease linearly with depth, distributions that
corrrespond with long-term steady-state conditions. Figure 2
and Appendix 1 show that these assumptions are clearly
approximations to the distributions that occur in the ground.
I The steady-state upper bound to crack depths can rarely be
1 reached because of intermittent interruption by rainfall and
For personal use only.

infiltration. The most likely suction profiles in the field are

probably parabolic, followed by linear, followed by con-
stant distributions. In the paper, the ordering has been con-
stant followed by linear. Modelling the suctions with
distributions of the form S = So(l - z2/w2) would allow
better treatment of transient or seasonal effects.
The paper has assumed that the effective cohesion c' in
[I] and [2] can be set to zero. This condition corresponds
to normallv consolidated lean clays, whereas most heavily
cracked clays are plastic and ove;cbnsolidated. The anai-
yses model the case that stimulated this study, the drying
out of coal mine tailings from a slurry. However, the high
preconsolidation pressures seen in most natural soil profiles
clearly indicate some form of overconsolidation effect,
whether due to rewetting after desiccation, to cementation,
or to leaching. These soils would normally be expected to
have considerable cohesions (the intercept of the Hvorslev
surface with the 7-axis). The resulting tensile stengths (from
[3]) would inhibit the growth of cracks. However, if it is
remembered that wetting-up causes cracks to close but
preserves the discontinuities they bring to the structure of
the clay, then closed cracks should open just as easily as new
cracks. In materials terms, the stress concentrations around
the tips of the fissures bring the clay to its normally con-
I
solidated condition rather than to its overconsolidated one.
Examples of this are also seen in other geotechnical prac-
tice. For example, Rivard and Lu (1978) showed that the
stability of small dams on the fissured plastic clays of
a western Canada must be analyzed on the basis of their nor-
i mally consolidated strength parameters, not their overcon-
1
I solidated ones.
1 There appear to be some differences between the behav-
I iour of cracked weathered crusts formed by desiccation and
I those formed by frost action. In the former, the cracks are
1 to examine crack depths leads to stress changes around
largely vertical and they appear to become sealed relatively
i
DEPTH TO GWL (m)
FIG. 15. Comparison of predicted crack depths from various
solutions. S = So(l - za/W t = t(u, - u,). Curve 1: elasticity,
v = 0.3; curve 2: tension-to-shear transition, modified Rankine;
curve 3: fracture mechanics, E = 5 MPa, 5. = 1.0 ~ / m ' . GWL,
groundwater level.
easily with sediment eroded from the ground surface at times
of heavy rainfall. Some sense of this is given in Fig. 1. In
contrast, the crack patterns in frozen soil are cubical or
nuggety due to the thermodynamic processes during freezing
(Chamberlain and Gow 1978; Graham and Au 1985). Sub-
sequent thawing of the frozen soil takes place downwards
from the soil surface, and the escaping water flushes out
the drainage paths, keeping them open.
Frost-induced cracks extend more easily than desiccation
cracks through coarser soil layers. Thus, desiccation cracks
can only receive the escaping water associated with con-
solidation of the deposit, over a confined area at their tip.
However, a frost-induced crack will often be fed water from
a larger area of coarser soil intersecting its sides. Thus cold-
region crusts act more frequently as drainage blankets, and
warm-region crusts act as sealing covers. In all cases, the
effect of the crust is significant and cannot be neglected in
considering the response of a soil profile to engineering
activity.
The paper has presented only qualitative field evidence
to confirm the results of the analyses. Quantitative confir-
mation will require additional research. The experience of
other researchers suggests this will not be easy. Excavation
cracks, disturbance of the original stress fields, and possible
 276 CAN. GEOTECH. J.
further propagation of the cracks. The relatively close agree-
ment that has come from the three quite different, indepen-
dent analyses in the paper suggests that the predicted values
might be broadly correct.
Acknowledgements
The work described in the paper was assisted by a grant
from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council
of Canada a n d by funds provided by the Australian
Research Council. T h e reviewers provided useful advice on
areas of the paper which required further clarification.
Alonso, E.E., Gens, A., and Hight, D.W. 1987. Special problem
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by Queens University on 09/19/13
soils. General report. Proceedings, 9th European Conference on
Soil Mechanics and Foundations Engineering, Dublin, vol. 3,
pp. 1087-1 146.
Bagge, G. 1985. Tension cracks in saturated clay cuttings. Pro-
ceedings, 1lth International Conference on Soil Mechanics and
Foundations Engineering, San Francisco, vol. 2, pp. 393-395.
Baker, R. 1981. Tensile strength, tension cracks, and stability of
slopes. Soils and Foundations, 21: 1-17.
Bishop, A.W., and Garga, V.K. 1969. Drained tension tests on
London clay. GCotechnique, 19: 309-3 13.
Blake, G., Schlichting, E., and Zimmermann, U. 1973. Water
recharge in a soil with shrinkage cracks. Journal of the Soil
Science Society of America, 37: 669-672.
Bueckner, H.F. 1958. The propagation of cracks and the energy
of elastic deformation. Transactions of the American Society
For personal use only.
of Mechanical Engineers, 80E: 1225-1230.
Cameron, D.A., and Walsh, P.F. 1984. Damage to buildings on
clay soils. Bulletin 5.1, Australian Council of National Trusts,
Melbourne.
Chamberlain, E.J., and Gow, A.H. 1978. Effects of freezing and
thawing on the permeability and structures of soils. Proceedings,
International Symposium on Ground Freezing, Bochum,
Germany, vol. 1, pp. 32-44.
Chen, F.H. 1975. Foundations on expansive soils. Elsevier Scien-
tific Publishing Co., New York.
Chen, Y., Tarchitsky, J., Brouwer, J., et al. 1980. Scanning elec-
tron microscope observations on soil crusts and their formation.
Soil Science, 130: 49-55.
Clark, J.I., Chari, T.R., Landva, J., and Woodworth-Lynas,
C.M.T. 1988. Pipeline route selection in an iceberg-scoured
seabed. Marine Geotechnology, 8: 51-67.
Croney, D., and Coleman, J.D. 1961. Pore pressure and suction
in soil. In Pore pressure and suction in soil. Butterworth & Com-
pany Ltd., London, pp. 31-37.
Fleming, S.J. 1973. Thermoluminescence and glaze studies of a
group of T'ang Dynasty ceramics. Archaeometry, 15: 31-52.
Fredlund, D.G. 1979. Appropriate concepts and technology for
unsaturated soils. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 16: 121-139.
Fredlund, D.G., and Morgenstern, N.R. 1976. Constitutive rela-
tions for volume change in unsaturated soils. Canadian Geo-
technical Journal, 13: 261-276.
Fredlund, D.G., Morgenstern, N.R., and Widger, R.A. 1978. The
shear strength of unsaturated soils. Canadian Geotechnical Jour-
nal, 15: 313-321.
Frydman, S. 1967. Triaxial and tensile strength tests on stabilized
soil. Proceedings, 3rd Asian Regional Conference on Soil
Mechanics and Foundations Engineering, Haifa, pp. 269-275.
Graham, J. 1979. Embankment stability on anisotropic soft clays.
Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 16: 295-308.
Graham, J., and Au, V.C.S. 1985. Influence of freeze-thaw and
softening effects on stress-strain behaviour of natural plastic clay
at low stresses. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 22: 69-78.
Graham, J., and Shields, D.H. 1985. Influence of geology and geo-
logical processes on the geotechnical properties of a plastic clay.
Engineering Geology (Amsterdam), 22: 109-126.
VOL. 29, 1992
Griffith, A.A. 1924. The theory'of rupture. Proceedings, 1st Inter-
national Congress on Applied Mechanics,:.Delft, Netherlands,
pp. 55-62.
Hamilton, J.J. 1969. Effects of environment on the performance
of shallow foundations. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 6:
65-80.
Hartranft, R.J., and Sih, G.C. 1973. Alternating method applied
to edge and surface crack problems. In Mechanics of Fracture I.
Edited by G.C. Sih. Noordhoff, Leyden, chap. 4, pp. 179-238.
Irwin, G.R. 1957. Analysis of stresses and strains near the end of
a crack. Journal of Applied Mechanics, 24: 361-364.
Lawn, B.R., and Wilshaw, T.R. 1975. Fracture of brittle solids.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Lee, I.K., and Ingles, O.C. 1968. Strength and deformation of soil
and rocks. In Soil mechanics, selected topics. Edited by I.K. Lee.
Butterworths, Sydney, chap. 4, pp. 195-294.
Li, V.C., and Liang, E. 1986. Fracture processes in concrete and
fiber reinforced cementitious composites. ASCE Journal of the
Engineering Mechanics Division, 112: 566-586.
Mahar, L.J., and O'Neill, M.W. 1983. Geotechnical characteriza-
tion of desiccated clay. ASCE Journal of Geotechnical Engineer-
ing, 109: 56-71.
Meguid, S.A. 1980. Engineering Fracture Mechanics. Elsevier
Science Publishers Ltd., Barking, Essex, United Kingdom.
Morris, P.H. 1990. The engineering properties and behaviour of
coal tailings. Ph.D. thesis, University of Queensland, Brisbane,
Australia.
Ravina, I. 1983. The influence of vegetation on moisture and
volume changes. GCotechnique, 33: 151-157.
Ringesten, B. 1988. Dry crust-its formation and geotechnical
properties. Ph.D. thesis, Chalmers University of Technology,
Goteborg, Sweden.
Ritchie, J.T., Kissel, D.E., and Burnett, E. 1972. Water move-
ment in undisturbed swelling clay soil. Journal of the Soil Science
Society of America, 36: 874-879.
Rivard, P.J., and Lu, Y. 1978. Shear strength of soft fissured clays.
Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 15: 382-390.
Standards Australia 1988. Residential slabs and footings, Standard
2807.1. Standards Association of Australia, North Sydney,
N.S.W.
Stapledon, D.H. 1970. Changes and structural effects developed
in some South Australian clays, and their engineering conse-
quences. Proceedings of a Symposium on Soils and Earth Struc-
tures in Arid Climates, Adelaide, pp. 62-71.
Thorne, C.P. 1984. Strength assessment and stability analyses for
fissured clays. GCotechnique, 34: 305-322.
Appendix 1. List of symbols
half length of internal crack
coefficients describing crack d e ~ t h defined
s
in [lo], [13], [16], [%I, [22], i n d [24]
effective cohesion, apparent cohesion
intercept, slope of -failure envelope in
p,q-space
volumetric compliance with respect t o (total
stress - pore-air pressure), suction
voids ratio, specific volume V = (1 + e)
compression modulus with respect to
(u - u,), suction (u, - u,), Poisson's
ratio
depth t o permanent water table, depth of
seasonal changes in water content
stress intensity factor
mean stress (a1 + 2u3)/3, deviator stress
(01 - 03)
distance f r o m crack tip a t angle 8 to axis
of crack
 MORRIS ET AL. 277

tensile strength where Sr is the degree of saturation, and the total head h =
suction, surface suction uw/ywg+ z is the sum of the pressure and elevation heads.
pore-air pressure, pore-water pressure, The velocity head is small and can be considered zero. For
matrix suction steady-state conditions aS,/at = ae/at = 0, and in one-
depth to water table dimensional flow a2h/ax2= a2h/ay2= 0. The flow equa-
depth of cracking tion therefore reduces to
coefficient relating cohesion to tensile
strength t = - Q ~ C 'cot 4' a2h = 0
[A21 kz 7
strain, normal stress, shear stress a2
angle of shearing resistance with respect to Substituting for h and differentiating gives
( c - ua), (ua - ~ w ) a2uW
unit weight [A31 7 - 0
r specific surface energy a2
Subscripts:
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by Queens University on 09/19/13

Now write the matrix suction as S ( z ) = (ua - u,), where

horizontal, horizontal, vertical coordinate ua is constant if the pore air is continuous:
directions
dry, saturated, water a2uw -
[A41 - -
a2[ua- s(z)l -- =
surface, volumetric, failure az2 az2 az2
Integration of a2s(z)/az2= 0 gives
Appendix 2. Derivation of steady-state suction profile [A51 S ( z ) = C, + C2z
Steady-state suction profiles have been used in all the anal- where C, and c2are integration constants that can be
YSeS in the Paper where it has been assumed that the Sue- determined by substitution using the boundary conditions
tion decreases linearly from So at the ground surface to ( 1 ) (ua - u,) = 0 at z = W; and (2) (ua - u,) = soat
zero at the water table. The equation governing three- z = 0. This gives the profile for steady-state suction (the
dimensional flow of water in soils is expression used to derive [9]):
For personal use only.