Abstract
Drained residual shear strength measured by multiple reversal direct shear or ring shear tests has been successfully used for over four decades for stability analyses of reactivated landslides in stiff clays and clay shales; A body of literature has accumulated in recent decades, claiming that “healing” or “strength regain” is realized in time on preexisting slip surfaces already at residual condition. In other words, the shear stress required to reactivate a landslide is claimed to be larger than the drained residual shear strength determined using laboratory tests. This article presents (1) a comparison of secant residual friction angle determined from laboratory tests and secant mobilized friction angle back-calculated for reactivated landslides; (2) explanations that field evidence used to claim “healing” can be attributed to alternative factors, and the laboratory evidence on “strength regain” upon reshearing is the result of either the testing apparatus or testing procedure, or is inapplicable to stiff clays and shales; and (3) laboratory aging test results, which show no “strength regain” on preexisting shear surfaces at residual condition.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
