Journal of Terramechanics 107 (2023) 47–59

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Terramechanics
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jterra

Review on soil shear strength with loam sand soil results using direct
shear test
Alaa El Hariri a,⇑, Ahmed Elawad Eltayeb Ahmed a, Péter Kiss b
a
Mechanical Engineering Doctoral School – Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, 2100 Gödöllo}, Páter K. 1., Hungary
b
Institute of Technology, Departament of Vehicle Technology - Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, 2100 Gödöllo}, Páter K. u. 1., Hungary

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This article aims to give a background about the soil shear strength and its measurement methods based
Received 19 January 2023 on scientific articles and the work of researchers. A brief introduction is given about terramechanics
Accepted 9 March 2023 science and the loads acting at the interaction zone between the tractive element (wheel/track) and
Available online 22 March 2023
the terrain. The most important loads exciting the terrain from the machine’s tractive element are the
normal and the tangential loads. The tangential load will shear the terrain/soil and might lead to slippage,
Keywords: thus it is important to study the shear strength of the soil. In the review the soil terrain behaviour as an
Soil shear strength
elastic and a plastic region is discussed. The conventional methods for measuring the soil strength used
Vehicle-terrain interaction
Direct shear test
by scientists in terramechanics studies are reviewed. The influence of moisture content on soil strength is
Triaxial test also taken into consideration. New ideas created by terramechanics scientists that emulate a real wheel/-
Shear vane test track - terrain interaction case for measuring the soil shear strength and are not civil or geotechnical engi-
Coulomb equation neering methods are mentioned. Finally, the shear strength results of loam sand soil obtained using the
Soil moisture content direct shear test conducted at the Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences (MATE) are
presented.
Ó 2023 ISTVS. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
2. Literature background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
3. Modelling of the terrain behaviour . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
3.1. Evaluation of the terrain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
3.1.1. Terrain as an elastic region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
3.1.2. Terrain as a plastic region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
3.2. Evaluating the terrain using the critical state soil mechanics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
4. Soil moisture content . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
5. Soil shear strength measuring methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
5.1. Measuring terrain strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
5.2. Bevameter technique (shearing plate) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
5.3. Measuring soil shear strength using civil/ geotechnical engineering methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
6. Designs for measuring shear strength emulating the wheel/track soil interaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
7. Loam sand soil shear strength at different moisture contents using direct shear test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
8. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Declaration of Competing Interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (A. El Hariri).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jterra.2023.03.003
0022-4898/Ó 2023 ISTVS. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
A. El Hariri, A. Elawad Eltayeb Ahmed and Péter Kiss Journal of Terramechanics 107 (2023) 47–59

1. Introduction user chain aiming to improve the vehicle’s stability, design, perfor-
mance, handling, riding, and safety.Terramechanics concept was
Studies related to terramechanics are grabbing the interest of first settled by (Bekker, 1956) through his book ‘‘Theory of land
many researches from different fields to deal with terramechanics locomotion” (Taghavifar and Mardani, 2017). Vehicle’s perfor-
studies especially when it comes to the performance of vehicles mance is described by its acceleration, deceleration, and tractive
(wheeled and tracked) on different terrains. The performance of parameters such as drawbar pull and net traction when moving
the machines moving on the terrain is affected by the terrain itself, on unprepared terrain (with irregularities and cleats) (Taghavifar
so studying the behaviour of different terrains under the machines and Mardani, 2017). Regardless of the fast technological improve-
will serve in enhancing the driving and the vehicle performance by ments, studies related to the movement of off-road vehicles on ter-
improving the effective traction, decreasing the slippage, and limit rains did not receive a valuable consideration until the middle of
or avoid the sinkage of the wheel upon moving on a soft terrain. the twentieth century (Wanjii et al., 1997). Bekker and other scien-
The study data of the terrain behaviour will help in the enhance- tists guided terramechanics engineers to the right path for study-
ment of the vehicle drive on these terrains through adjusting the ing system’s traction, afterwards a model was developed to
design of the vehicle parts and systems as the suspension system, predict thrust, motion resistance, and net traction or drawbar pull
tyre’s material, differential, powertrain etc. on soil terrains, but the complexity in dealing with measuring the
The power provided by the vehicle’s engine ends at the wheels soil properties and the insufficient knowledge in soil mechanics
as an output tractive power aiming to move the vehicle. This power ended with non-precise (empirical or semi-empirical) equations
is faced by rolling resistances, and if the wheels are not able to (Bekker, 1956, 1960). When it comes to the machine’s performance
overcome these resistances the vehicle will be immoblized. The over a terrain, this performance is faced by the limitations that the
normal load on the terrain results from the weight of the vehicle terrain imposes on the machine’s traction device (wheels and
as a major part and also from the normal dynamic excitation loads tracks) (Wanjii et al., 1997). Studying the soil conditions and prop-
(vibrations). The shearing load at the contact zone is a tangential erties will enhance the performance of the vehicle over the soil,
load resulting from the wheel torque shearing the soil. If the load since matching the tyre inflation and the dynamic loads to the soil
bearing capacity of the soil is not able to face the normal applied conditions will increase the tractive efficiency (Lyne et al., 1987).
load the wheel will sink, and if it fails to resist the shearing load Vehicle’s manufacturers worked and are working on finding trac-
the wheel starts to slip, so the wheel performance is related to tive equations relating soil to the vehicle’s traction device (wheel
how the terrain will resist (reaction loads) the applied excitation or track). Deere and Company Technical Center developed series
loads (normal, tangential, lateral). On soft terrains the normal load of traction equations relating soil conditions to tyre characteristics.
will lead to pressing the wheel downward, so it is important to The developed equations are for pneumatic tyres with tread design
study the soil pressure-sinkage relationship, also since the wheel (conventional design), and the equations have been used as models
will slip on the soil terrain it is also important to study the soil in the vehicle’s computer simulations (Kahle and Hung, 1967)
shear stress-displacement relationship. (Pershing, 1971) (Berenyi et al, 1972). The challenge for engineers
The combination of the both upper mentioned resistances (slip when it comes to designing agriculture machinery is to reduce the
and rolling resistances) will affect the vehicle’s output traction compaction of the soil resulting from the machine weight, and
power and fuel consumption. Studying the terrain behaviour will increase traction and the tillage speed, and that is achieved by
help in taking the decision go/no-go on the terrain, and might serve determining the traction properties of soil (Lade, 2005). In spite
in enhancing the designs of the vehicles or choosing the suitable of soil mechanics is a study founded since over a century, till
machine for a specific terrain. now there are no fixed rules to follow for choosing the suitable soil
Off-road, agriculture, military, and other fields have a big inter- shear strength measurement methods (Mckyes, 1985), but when it
est in such study, especially when it comes to choosing the right comes to off-road engineering the best method for finding the soil
machine to be used and to the manufacturing costs of the properties is the approach that emulates (duplicates) the field con-
machines. ditions (Karafiath and Nowatzki, 1978). Micklethwait mentioned
Measuring the shear strength of the soil will help in identifying that tractive forces acting on a vehicle are estimated using the Cou-
the accepted shear load that the soil terrain can withstand. The lomb’s equation (1776) which relates the shear strength to cohe-
methods used for measuring the mechanical properties of the soil sion, pressure and friction, and that bearing capacity is what
are: the cone penetrometer, Bevameter, and the methods used in keeps the vehicle on surface and resists the sinkage, and is esti-
civil engineering soil mechanics (but they are of limited use in ter- mated by a bearing capacity formula as the formula proposed by
ramechanics). Each of these methods provide a mechanical prop- Prandtl (1920) and Terzaghi (1954) (Micklethwait, 1944). The pos-
erty of the soil, such as the shear strength and the cone index sibility of locomotion on a given terrain is described by the ability
(resistance of soil to penetration). Methods of approach to terrame- of soil to provide resistance to the gravity loads and produce nec-
chanics are through empirical, semi-empirical, and theoretical essary thrust (Bekker, 1957).
approach. The empirical approach relies on experimental results
of both the vehicle moving and the terrain, and the outputs are cor-
related to each other. In case of dealing with different terrains and 3. Modelling of the terrain behaviour
vehicle types such as tracked vehicles, the experiments will con-
sume much effort; this step requires many experiments, but ends When studying the interaction between the machine and the
with actual results. terrain, understanding the behaviour of the terrain at the interac-
tion zone will help in determining the properties of the terrain.
Dealing with the terrain as an elastic medium has built theoretical
2. Literature background basis for studying the resulting soil compaction, but that is real in
case of dense terrains and if the applied load isn’t exceeding a limit
The interaction between machines and terrains studies are of which is the terrain bearing capacity (Wong, 2010). Considering
interest to terramechanics researchers. Off-road vehicles are the terrain as a rigid, perfectly plastic material, served in estimat-
designed to move on unprepared terrains (such as unpaved roads), ing the maximum traction of an off-road vehicle, predicting the
and such kind of vehicles are used daily in many fields. Terrame- forces acting on a bulldozer blade, and assessing the tractive forces
chanics is a significant element in the engineer-manufacturer- developed by the lugs or wheel’s grousers. This modelling can be
48
A. El Hariri, A. Elawad Eltayeb Ahmed and Péter Kiss Journal of Terramechanics 107 (2023) 47–59

applied for estimating the forces acting on the engaging element 3.1.1. Terrain as an elastic region
supported by the terrain, but cannot predict the terrain deforma- For the case of not exceeding the yielding point upon having a
tion (Wong, 2010). The soil deformation resulting from a load on load applied on the soil, the behaviour of the soil is known by
the soil terrain is non-linear, and the strain consists of both the linear/non-linear elastic material. For this case the stress distri-
regions, the elastic which is recoverable and the plastic or viscous bution in the soil medium can be estimated using the theory of
and is irrecoverable. The change in the intensity of strain resulting elasticity by simplifying the stress distribution resulting from loads
from the applied stress represents the non-linearity; the elastic in a homogeneous, isoptropic semi-infinite elastic medium using
region in the stress–strain behaviour is the recoverable deforma- the Boussinesq equation defining the radial and vertical stresses
tion of soil, and the plastic region is the irrecoverable deformation (Boussinesq, 1885) (Wong, 2010).
describing the volumetric change, while viscosity is the deforma- The stresses resulting on a point in the soil due to a point load
tion capacity developing with time (Wanjii et al., 1997). Different exerted on the surface of a semi-infinite elastic medium can be cal-
element’s combinations have been used for ending up with models culated using the following equations.
expressing the visco-elastic behaviour of soil depending on the With,
type of the research problem (Wanjii et al., 1997). Tan dealt with pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
the soil behaviour depending on rheological models using a r¼ x2 þ y2 andR ¼ z2 þ r2
Poynting-Thomson model (connecting Hookean element with a
Maxwell element) (Tan, 1957). Pan used a four-element model in 3W 3W  z 3 3W
his study, also there are other models designed by researchers to rZ ¼ h i ¼
r2 2 2 2pR2 R
 ¼  cos 3 h ð1Þ
2pR2
5

deal with various types of stress–strain relationships (Pan, 1986) 2p 1 þ z z

(Oida, 1986). Karafiath and his colleagues used the continuum
mechanics and soil plasticity theory in modeling the soil-wheel 3W
interactions (Karafiath, 1970, 1978). (Perumpral et al., 1971), rr ¼  cosh ð2Þ
2pR2
(Yong et al., 1976), (Yong et al., 1978), and (Raper et al., 1990)
relied on the finite element method in the prediction systems of
mobility and soil compaction.Wanjii et al. used a visco-elastic soil
model based on the three-element Maxwell model for evaluating Where:
the normal stress distribution under the wheel, and for the evalu- W is the applied load,
ation of the tangential shear stress distribution a rigid wheel-soil R is the distance between the origin where the load is applied
interface model was used (Wanjii et al., 1997). When studying and the point (where stresses are calculated),
the interaction between the vehicle and the terrain, the visco- r is the distance between the point and the z axis where the
elastic problems should be taken into considereation. load is applied (distance orthogonal to z axis),
Sitkei has shown that the soil can be modelled as a viscoelastic h is the angle between R and the z axis,
medium, thus when dealing with soil calculations, rheological z is the sinkage of the point,
approach may be used (Sitkei, 1972b, 1997). The performance of rZ vertical stress,
the vehicle enters a critical stage when moving on a very soft rr radial stress.
ground where the sinkage, slippage and motion resistance should
be given an account. Dealing with a vehicle on a very soft terrain This model doesn’t take into consideration the elastic behaviour
is much different than having the vehicle operate on the top of a of the soil and its characteristics. The stress in this model is as
soil surface without having deformation in the terrain. The tyre function of distance from the point where the external load is
tractive coefficient value ranges from 0.85 when moving on a applied and the value of the applied load, also this model is limited
paved surface to a coefficient less than 0.4 on soft terrains to distances where elastic behaviour is applicable, and upon cross-
(Liljedahl et al., 1979). ing this distance the model becomes invalid (Wong, 1989). Sum-
ming some discrete point loads (differential from the surface
area) using the superposition effect will result in the load applied
on the surface (Wong, 2010) (Taghavifar and Mardani, 2017).
3.1. Evaluation of the terrain So, replacing W in the equation by dW ¼ p0 dA for finding drz .

Evaluating the terrain settles the basic laws to assess the vehi- Where:
cle’s mobility and its performance on the terrain. The majority of dW: applied load on discrete point,
the laws that are used in scientific and engineering disciplines p0 : applied pressure from the load,
are constructed based on idealizations and simplifications. These dA: area of discrete point.
physical laws and principles must always be exploited for improv-
ing mobility on the terrains. Baladi prepared a report for the ninth 3p0 drdh
drz ¼ h ð3Þ
conference of ISTVS (International Society for Terrain-Vehicle Sys-  2 i52
tems) about the mechanical soil responses, the terrain data types, 2p 1 þ zr z2
and the methods used for finding the data (Baladi, 1987). Tanaka
described the behaviour of paddy fields using rheological models Double integration with respect to r and h
of soil (Tanaka, 1984). Taylor and Gill worked on a review about Z r0 Z 2p Z r0
3p0 3p0 drdh rdr
the compaction of soil (intentional and incidental) in different rz ¼ h  2 i52
¼ 3p0 h r2 i52
ð4Þ
2p
fields (agricultural, forestry, and military) (Taylor and Gill, 1984). 0 0
2p 1 þ zr z2 0
1þ z
z2
The turning resistance of soil on a vehicle was considered by
Dudzinski through a review (Dudzinski, 1984). Sigiyama and The pressure bulbs (shown in Fig. 1) are lines of different stress
Kondo reported a paper on terrain evaluation (Sugiyama et al., values, each of them describes (embeds) the points receiving the
1984). These are examples showing the importance of the terrain same level of stress in the medium.
data and the measuring methods (data acquisition methods) Since the soil conditions such as moisture content influence the
dependent on the application. calculations, Fröhlich (1934) introduced a moisture concentration
49
A. El Hariri, A. Elawad Eltayeb Ahmed and Péter Kiss Journal of Terramechanics 107 (2023) 47–59

Fig. 1. Pressure bulbs under the wheel of a vehicle in a semi-infinite elastic medium.

Fig. 2. Mohr-Coulomb failure criterion.

factor mðdepends on the terrainÞ to the Boussinesq equation Using the cohesion (C) and the internal friction angle (U)
(Sohne, 1958) (Wong, 1989) (Boussinesq, 1885): obtained from the Mohr coulomb envelope, the bearing capacity,
maximum thrust, and the maximum drag of a tracked or wheeled
Wm mW
rz ¼  ðcosm hÞ ¼  ðcosmþ2 hÞ ð5Þ vehicle system can be calculated.
2pR2 2pz2 Assuming the pressure acting on the area (patch) is uniform,
then the maximum traction (thrust) is calculated using the follow-
Wm   mW
rr ¼  cosm2 h ¼  ðcosm hÞ ð6Þ ing equation (Wong, 2010).
2pR2 2pR2
F ¼ sA ¼ ðC þ rtanUÞA ¼ CA þ WtanU ð8Þ

3.1.2. Terrain as a plastic region

The Mohr coulomb failure criterion is implemented in the plas-
ticity region defining the failure of the terrain. The criterion Where:
expresses the failure point of the soil by relating shear strength A is the contact area between tyre/track and the soil,
to the cohesion and internal friction angle of the soil taking into W is the normal load and equal to the product of the contact
consideration the normal stress applied through the Equation (7). pressure and the contact area.
The Coulomb equation is built based on a linear envelope that
leads to the critical combination of both the shear strength s and It is worth to mention the places where the slippage is occur-
the applied normal stress r, causing failure on some plane ring when having a vehicle moving on the soil. Slippage occurs at
(Coulomb 1776). three different locations, a small potion of the slippage occur in
the tyre since it is made of rubber compounds (despite containing
s ¼ C þ r tan U ð7Þ
metals), the second slip is at the interaction zone and is the main
s is the shear strength, C is the cohesion, r is the normal stress slippage portion, and the third slippage occur inside the soil - in
applied on the sheared surface, and U is the internal friction angle the layer beneath the tyre - due to the slippage of the soil particles
of the material. over each other.
The envelope (just one line) passing tangentially at the circum- It is important to take into consideration that some of the soils
ferences of the stress Mohr circles shown in the Fig. 2 is used to are cohesionless (neglected cohesion vlaue) as for dry sand, and
find the cohesion (intercept with shear strength axis), and the also there are types that are of neglected internal friction angle
angle of internal shearing resistance (internal friction angle), which U such as saturated clay. Uffelmann has improved that for clay
is the angle between the envelope line and the horizontal (dashed soils the vehicle performance can be represented in terms of cohe-
line) (Coulomb 1776). sion, and Reece has shown that it is also possible to express the
50
A. El Hariri, A. Elawad Eltayeb Ahmed and Péter Kiss Journal of Terramechanics 107 (2023) 47–59

vehicle performance on frictional soil (at least in dense state) the cone resistance (cone index) value (Mulqueen et al., 1977). As
(Osman, 1964) (Uffelmann, 1961) (Reece, 1964). the moisture increases in clay soils the shear strength decreases
due to the weak bonding between the particles leading to the
3.2. Evaluating the terrain using the critical state soil mechanics decrease in cohesion with water absorption, and for sandy soils
the shear strength increases with the decrease in moisture, due
Critical state soil mechanics was developed by Roscoe and his to the increase in the internal friction (Salman and Kiss, 2018). Pil-
associates at Cambridge university as a step aiming to solve the linger et al. mentioned in their article that soil deformation result-
limitations that the models resulting from treating the terrains as ing from the passage of a vehicle depends on the physical
elastic or rigid mediums aren’t able to solve (Roscoe et al., 1958) composition of soil, dampness (water content), density, and the
(Schofield and Wroth, 1968) (Kurtay and Reece, 1970). initial compression state, and also mentioned that with the
Classical soil mechanics theories are applied to solve problems increase of moisture content the soil becomes more compact
having the soil in dense state, but in case of problems having the (Pillinger et al., 2018).
soil in loose state it is dealt with it empirically. Critical state soil
mechanics deals with the soil behaviour in whole states range, 5. Soil shear strength measuring methods
by establishing a relationship between the specific volume V,
spherical pressure P, and the deviatoric stress R of the soil. The Giving a brief history about the methods in the article for mea-
specific volume is equal to 1-e (e is the void ratio of the soil; ratio suring the soil shear strength is mentioned before going into
of the volume of voids to the solid’s volume) (Wong, 2010). details about these methods in the coming subsections.
P and R are calculated using the following equations: The Bevameter is an instrument pioneered by Bekker (1956,
r1 þ r2 þ r3 1960, 1969), and the aim behind this idea is to emulate the real ter-
P¼ pffiffiffi ð9Þ ramechanics case of an off-road vehicle (Wong, 2010).
3
It is not clear or known exactly when the direct shear test
1 1 method was introduced, but its resulting design is due to Krey,
R ¼ pffiffiffi ½ðr1  r2 Þ2 þ ðr2  r3 Þ2 þ ðr3  r1 Þ2 2 ð10Þ Terzaghi and Casagrande (Szabo, 1994). Direct shear test was first
3
used by Coulomb in 1776 (Lamb and Whitman 1969), its usage was
where r1 , r2 , and r3 are principal stresses acting on a cubic ele- and still for finding the strength parameters used in studying the
ment of the soil. slope stability, retaining wall, and the bearing capacity (Nakao
When using critical soil mechanics in case studying, the soil is and Fityus, 2008).
assumed to be homogeneous and isotropic. In off-road cases the The development of the vane test dates back to Olsson vane
vehicle is subjected to a variety of natural terrains, such as snow borer in the 1910 s. The modern form of the shear vane was devel-
and organic terrains (tundra, muskeg), and these terrains under oped in the late 1940 s by some people as Carlson (1948) and
most circumstances cannot be treated as homogeneous and isotro- Skempton (1948) (Mahmoud, 1988).
pic. Thus, critical state soil mechanics has so far found few practical The first triaxial cell was developed by Karman (1910) since
applications for studying in field vehicle–terrain interaction more than hundred years ago for investigating the behaviour of
(Wong, 2010). brittle rocks. Many people were inspired to rock engineering and
geophysical science as a result of his work (Vasarhelyi et al.,
2012). Even though there are methods that were discovered in dif-
4. Soil moisture content
ferent fields (geotechnical, civil, . . .) a long period ago, but till now
terramechanics science is still relying on these methods for mea-
The moisture content present in soil influences its properties,
suring the shear strength of soil aiming to enhance the perfor-
thus resulting in different soil behaviour. Komandi mentioned in
mance of machines on soils through improving the interaction.
his article that both shear strength and bearing capacity depend
on the physical state of the soil. The moisture content and the void
ratio are factors influencing the mechanical properties of the soil, 5.1. Measuring terrain strength
and that is through influencing the cohesion and the internal fric-
tion angle. Low moisture content means high soil friction, and the For characterizing the terrain through identifying its properties,
high moisture content decreases the soil friction. For loam soils, the tests used are divided into two types: tests used for identifying
cohesion decreases with the increase in the moisture content, the terrain composition property and the others used for measur-
and inversely the cohesion in sandy and clay soils increases with ing the mechanical properties (Lambe, 1964; Bishop and Heknel,
increasing the moisture (Komandi, 1992). Increasing the void ratio 1964; Yong and Warkentin, 1975). The mechanical properties of
decreases the cohesion and friction for all soils (Komandi, 1992). near surface-materials are measured by the following tests: cone
Shoop mentioned that the moisture content is the most influencing penetrometer, Bevameter (plate penetration test, shear test), direct
soil condition on the soil strength (Shoop, 1993). The Traction shear test (shearing machine used) and triaxial test (Baladi, 1987).
increases or remains constant with the increase in moisture con- In order to assess the vehicle’s mobility, relations describing the
tent until reaching the liquid limit, and beyond the liquid limit terrain response to the vehicle must be recorded (Murakami,
the traction decreases rapidly, and this is applicable to all tyre con- 1991), so for analyzing the terrain response to the vehicle’s excita-
tact pressures after the liquid limit, but before the liquid limit the tion loads, empirical, analytical, and numerical approaches have
contact pressure influences the traction (Shoop, 1993). At moisture been used (Bekker, 1956; Sela and Ehrlich, 1972; Baladi and
content more than the liquid limit, the traction becomes insensi- Meier, 1987). The cone penetrometer and the Bevameter tech-
tive to contact pressure (Shoop, 1993). Ayers and Harrison ended niques are used for measuring the terrain mechanical properties
their reports with results showing that the internal friction angle when studying the mobility of a vehicle on the terrain (Wong,
increases with water content till reaching liquid limit and after- 2010). Mathe used an empirical model built by (Hernanz et al.,
wards the value drops (Ayers, 1987) (Harrison, 1966). Other 2000) which depends on the cone penetration method in deter-
researchers have mentioned the influence of moisture on cohesion mining the rolling losses during vehicle towing (Mathe and Kiss,
(Komandi, 1992) (Zydron and Zgoda, 2012) (Dafalla, 2013). Mulqu- 2015). Selecting the particular method is related to the purpose
een et al. have shown that the change in water content influences of the measurement for studying the mobility case. Incase of using
51
A. El Hariri, A. Elawad Eltayeb Ahmed and Péter Kiss Journal of Terramechanics 107 (2023) 47–59

the method for the sake of developing and designing new products ratory, and the most advantage behind measuring in field is that
in the off-road technology, then the method is different than the soil is undisturbed. The soil sampling process disturbs the soil
one used in military operations for taking the go/no-go decision upon removing the samples from the field, thus infield measure-
(Wong, 2010). ments serve in the undisturbance of soil. In field measurement is
e necessary to solve vprob. less expensive and faster when compared to non-infield methods.
(Wong, 2010).
5.2. Bevameter technique (shearing plate) The cohesion and internal friction angle (shearing resistance)
are shear strength parameters. These two parameters have formed
The Bevameter technique is used for measuring the terrain the base for civil engineering soil mechanics since Coulomb’s work
mechanical properties under loading conditions that emulate the (1776). Recently these two parameters are used in vehicle and
loading conditions resulting from the mobility of an off-road vehi- implement mechanics studies on soil terrains (Osman, 1964). The
cle on a terrain, and this technique was developed by Bekker as a studies related to soil-implement mechanics have shown that the
solution for ending up with suitable terrain properties when it cohesion, internal friction angle, and density are the parameters
comes to off-road case of study (Wong, 2010). The interaction that the analysis of forces and failure modes depends on (Payne,
between the terrain and the vehicle results in normal and shear 1956) (Osman, 1964). Eventhough measuring the cohesion and
loads on the terrain, so for emulating the normal and the tangential the internal friction angle is the most important, but it is of high
loads on the terrain, Bekker developed the original Bevameter difficulty (Osman, 1964). There are different methods used for
technique, and it embeds two separate tests: the shear and normal measuring these soil parameters, but there is a lack in the informa-
tests. The first test is the plate penetration test, a plate which is of tion published comparing the results obtained using different
suitable size (close or similar) to the contact area of the running methods, and the reason behind that might be due to the difficulty
gear (tyre or track contact area with the terrain), is pressed using in obtaining reliable set of values from a single method (Osman,
hydraulic force and as a result of the test the pressure-sinkage rela- 1964).
tionship of the terrain will be measured. The pressure-sinkage rela- The shear strength of soil is determined using direct and indi-
tionship will help in predicting the normal pressure distribution on rect methods. The direct methods apply direct shearing on the soil
the interface between the vehicle and the terrain. The shear test surface, such as the translation and the rotational shearing, while
and is the shearing of a plate (might be with grousers) on the ter- the indirect methods do not exert direct shearing on the surface,
rain surface, and simulates the shearing of the tyre/track to the ter- such as the compression and the penetration tests (Damian and
rain (Wong, 2010). Studying the soil displacement as function of Dudzinski, 2021).
the shear stress will help in correlating the shear stress and the dis- Among the methods used by civil/geotechnical engineers for
placement to each other through models, as the equation proposed measuring the shear strength there are:
by Janosi and Hanamoto for tracked vehicles on non cohesive soils
(Janosi and Hanamoto, 1961). a- Translational shear box (direct method - translational
The shear stress-displacement under an applied normal load shearing)
provides the required input for predicting the (1) shear stress dis-
This method consists of two halves, one of them (the upper half)
tribution at the vehicle-terrain interface, (2) the multipass perfor-
is free to slide over the lower half. The box where the soil is filled in
mance of the running gear and (3) the additional vehicle sinkage
is settled in brass container holding the lower half static (fixed),
resulting from slipping, and also provides information about the
and the top half move in the longitudinal direction at constant rate
terrain behaviour under repitative shearing and normal loads.
applied using geared jack (there are other designs). The upper part
Bevameter is an instrument that can be used for in-situ measure-
(top) deflects till reaching the maximum, having a normal load
ment, so used in the field. It consists of the normal and the shear
applied on the sample (consolidation load; can be changed). The
testing parts, the normal test will help in measuring the bearing
shear force applied on the upper half is measured using calibrated
capacity of the soil terrain and the shear test will end up with
proving ring, and having the shear load divided by the area of the
the terrain’s shear strength. An annular ring is used as shearing
shearing part, the shear stress is obtained and the maximum shear
device mounted at the end of the shaft, and is rotated at constant
velocity. The torque and displacement measured values are used
for calculating the shear strength. The Bevameter plate pressing
test without shearing is known by the bearing capacity device
(plate penetrometer), and this test processed by forcing a plate
(different sizes) into the soil. The penetration force and the sinkage
are recorded and used for measuring the terrain bearing capacity
(Wong, 2010). The Bevameter composed of the two tests (plate
pressing and shearing) will end up with the cohesion, angle of
internal friction, sinkage moduli (k, kc, ku) and sinkage exponent
(n) (Meyer et al., 1977).

5.3. Measuring soil shear strength using civil/ geotechnical engineering

methods

Civil engineering deals with studying the soil parameters such

as shear strength, shear modulus, density, void ratio, etc. In most
cases of studying the soil properties, samples are taken from field
inorder to be studied in laboratories. Different machines are used
in the laboraties for ending up with the soil properties. The shear
strength of the soil is measured using different methods in the lab-
oratory, such as using triaxial or direct shear test. Measuring the
terrain properties in field is much more accurate than in the labo- Fig. 3. Vane inserted in soil and the areas surrounding the vane.

52
A. El Hariri, A. Elawad Eltayeb Ahmed and Péter Kiss Journal of Terramechanics 107 (2023) 47–59

stress is the shear strength value of the tested soil. Plotting the height and the shaft diameter both fixed (d = 1.5 cm and
shear strength against the normal load - shear strength results at H = 5 cm) in all the experiments, a polynomial function relation-
different normal loads - will lead to finding the internal friction ship results from the equation M above relating the soil failure tor-
angle which is the slope of the plotting known by Coulomb line que to the diameter of the vane.
(angle of curve with the horizontal), and the cohesion value which Finally relying on the above assumptions and taking into con-
is the intercept of the Coulomb line with the shear strength axis (y- siderations different vanes used, a relationship between the failure
intercept) (Osman, 1964). torque (M) and the diameter of the vane (D) was derived. The
regression analysis shows that the relationship is of a coefficient
b- In-situ shear vane test (direct method - rotational shearing) of determination above 0.999. Thus, the diameter of vane (D) can
be used in finding the torque leading to the soil failure resistance.
The in-situ shear vane test is an experiment that requires The simplified following equation is:
inserting a vane into the soil (borehole) and rotating the inserted
vane at slow and constant strain rate (constant angular velocity, M ¼ aDb ð16Þ
V r ). Fig. 3 shows how the vane is inserted and rotated in the soil.
Where a and b are parameters having d and H fixed, and are
The surface, upper area, and the lower area of the vane (shown
obtained with different shear strength values.
in the figure) interact with the soil, thus shearing it. The torque
a and b are affected by the shear strength, and since the soil
applied to the vane will be resisted by the soil till the soil fails (fail-
shear strength is influenced by density and moisture content as
ure resistance is the maximum torque applied by the vanes)
reported by (Zhang et al., 2001), this means that a and b are influ-
(Changbin et al., 2018).
enced by the soil conditions (Changbin et al., 2018).
The maximum applied torque resisted by soil till failure (soil
The shear strength obtained using the shear vane couldn’t be
failure) is obtained by the algebraic equation sum of the torque
broken down to cohesive and frictional components, and thus used
values at lateral, upper, and lower areas of the vane.
for clay soils (Osman, 1964).
The torque applied by the shear vane is equal:

M ¼ Ms þ Me1 þ Me2 ð11Þ c- Triaxial compression test

The triaxial test is one of the most widely used geotechnical lab-
oratory tests to determine the strength and stiffness of rocks for
Where: using the results in engineering designs, and this test closely corre-
Ms is the torque applied at the surface between the vane and sponds to insitu state of stress (Deepak and Ivan, 2017). Wong
the soil, mentioned in his book that the triaxial apparatus and the transla-
Me1 is the torque applied at the upper part of the vane, tional shear box are commonly used in soil mechanics studies
Me2 is the torque applied at the lower part of the vane. related to civil engineering (Wong, 2010).
In the triaxial test a constant hydraulic pressure and known by
p
Ms ¼ pDHr0 R ¼ D 2 H r0 ð12Þ the confining pressure is applied to the cylindrical surface of the
2 specimen, and at the same time an axial compressing load is
Z applied on the specimen (at its ends). Having the confining pres-
R
2 0  3  1
Me1 ¼ 2prdr:r0 :r ¼ r p R  r31 ¼ r0 pðD3  d3 Þ ð13Þ sure applied on the cylindrical surface and of constant value (fixed
r1 3 12 value), the axial load is increased till the failure of the specimen.
The oil used for applying the confining pressure is separated from
Z R
1 0 3 the soil specimen by a rubber membrane.
Me2 ¼ 2prdr:r0 :r ¼ r pD ð14Þ The specimen test is carried out in a high pressure cell, shown in
0 12
Fig. 4. Tests are made on different samples (same tested geomate-
Where D, R and H are the diameter, radius, and height of the rial), but with an increase in the applied confining pressure in each
sheared cylinder, and are similar to the geometry of the vane (diam- test. These tests will lead to drawing the Mohr circles (each Mohr
eter, radius, and height), circle passing through major and minor principle stresses on the x-
D and r 1 are the diameter and the radius of the shaft, axis), and the envelope passing tangential at the circle’s circumfer-
r0 (in Equations (12),13,14) is the shear yield stress (undrained ences will end up with the internal friction angle and the cohesion.
shear strength). The shear strength is obtained using these two properties by the
Assuming that the soil used is homogenous and isotropic, thus Mohr-Coulomb Eq. (7) (Bell, 2007).
the yield stress of the soil is same along all the directions. The shear Where rðin Equation 7Þ is the major principal stress, and is the
strength is evenly distributed in the lateral area and is equal at the sum of the applied axial stress and the confining stress.
upper and lower areas of the vane. Thus, the resulting torque equa-
tion is:
  6. Designs for measuring shear strength emulating the
p
M¼ r0 2D3 þ 6D2 H  d3 ð15Þ wheel/track soil interaction
12
The shear strength is calculated using the Eq. (15) based on the The soil shear strength is obtained either from laboratory tests
vane geometry and the measured torque incase of vane shear or field tests, but different results appear from different test
apparatus. Eq. (15) indicates that the soil and parameters of vane usages, and these differences are resulting from the different stress
geometry directly influence the torque. conditions in the different tests (Wroth, 1984), and because of
When dealing with the same soil type (same properties), the interpreting the results differently (Atkinson et al., 1990). In vehi-
shear strength can be assumed to be the same incase of using cle mobility studies, the soil strength has been measured using
another shear vane (different vane diameter having same height many methods (Shoop, 1993). Soil samples that are cored were
and same shaft diameter) for measuring the soil shear strength. tested using triaxial compression aiming to study the soil condition
Assuming that the shear strength (r0 ) is of a value 1 kPa and having for mobility (Chamberlain et al., 1988) (Blaisdell et al, 1987). Shear
vanes of different diameters (3, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 10 cm) with the strength results were obtained using different tests (vane shear
53
A. El Hariri, A. Elawad Eltayeb Ahmed and Péter Kiss Journal of Terramechanics 107 (2023) 47–59

Fig. 4. Triaxial test (front view).

and direct shear), and it appeared that each test gives considerably ratory of the department of off-road machine and vehicle engineer-
different result (Kogure et al., 1988). The direct shear test emulates ing at Wroclaw University of Science and Technology. Their device
most closely the mechanism under a tyre on soil terrain, thus in is able to measure a wide range of shearing speeds starting from a
1950 a field instrument was invented and is known by Bevameter low speed 1 mm/min that is used in civil engineering to speed cor-
(Bekker, 1969). The Bevameter was designed to load the soil till responding to shearing speed between the wheel/track and the soil
failure in a behaviour similar to that resulting from a vehicle, so and equal to 5 m/sec, and thus dynamic soil strengthening. There
relying on this method the measured properties would be reliable are other factors that were taken into consideration in this device
to depend on in studying vehicle performance (Shoop, 1993). The and these factors are the scale effect, the wall effect and the shear
shear strength depends on many factors, such as the soil density kinematics. When it comes to the scale effect the size of the instru-
and its degree of saturation, it should also be taken into consider- ment used for measuring the strength properties influence the out-
ation the inhomogeneity and anisotropy of the soil (Dudzinski put result (Dudzinski et al., 2019). The small size instrument (hand
et al., 2019). held) allows for fast and easy measurement, but the results are dis-
The failure mode and shear strength of a uniform soil sample persed, and that makes interpreting the results much difficult
depends on the stress distribution. Since the soil is a material that (Kolk et al., 1988). The large instruments provide much more pre-
behaves in a complicated way and the need for understanding how cise results, but such instruments require longer preparation and
the soil behaves when dealing with mobility study case, it is much measuring time, and also its cost is higher. Large instruments serve
simple to study the mobility problem by duplicating the soil load- in decreasing the scale effect of the measurement, since the size of
ing conditions resulting from a vehicle over the soil terrain, thus the measuring instrument influence the measured parameters, and
simplifying the terrain behaviour equations (Shoop, 1993). Even this occurs when measuring both, the shear strength and the load
if not perfectly, the Bevameter technique solved this problem, bearing capacity (Dudzinski et al., 2019). There are many results
some researchers worked on using instruments that emulate sim- obtained by researchers that confirm the influence of the instru-
ilarly the wheel of the vehicle on the terrain, thus duplicating the ment size on the measured properties (Zhou et al., 2009) (Chew
loading conditions exactly as CRREL Instrumented vehicle (CIV) et al., 2011) (Hu et al., 2011). A second factor influencing the mea-
(more about this test in Shoop, 1993), and then the strength sured results is the wall effect when measuring in soil bins. The
parameters results obtained from the technique mobility test will wall effect changes the measured parameters, due to the transfer
be implemented for studying the performance of other vehicles. of some loads through the walls of the bin, and this effect was con-
The cohesion and the internal friction angle are soil properties cho- sidered by researchers (Song and Malla, 2010) (Agui et al., 2013).
sen for characterizing the soil strength, and there are two reasons When designing a container the stresses at the walls should be
behind that: first, they are determined using simple and well considered using Steinbrenner’s theory (Das, 1999).
known tests and analysis techniques taking into consideration that Shear kinematics is also a factor influencing the measured
the Mohr failure envelope is linear or partially linear, and the sec- parameters. The anisotropy of the soil leads to different parameters
ond reason is that these two parameters have physical meaning in different loading directions. Selecting the direction of loading
(physical structure of soil) reflecting the internal friction (depends relative to the direction of consolidation influences the shear
on the normal stress) of the soil and its material cohesion (Shoop, strength (Kogure et al., 1988). Many infield shear tests lead to what
1993). is known by the bulldozing effect (ex, shear grouser) (Bekker,
Dudzinski et al. published an article about their direct shear 1956), and it is the push of soil layer at the front of the measuring
machine. The device has been patented and then built in the labo- instrument, leading to pushing forces at the lugs. So, when choos-

54
A. El Hariri, A. Elawad Eltayeb Ahmed and Péter Kiss Journal of Terramechanics 107 (2023) 47–59

ing a measuring instrument it is important to choose the instru- are shown in Fig. 5 and the used moisture anylzer is shown in
ment with no bulldozing effect and generating only shearing Fig. 6.
action. The soil sample in each direct shear test is fixed to 115 g for cal-
Dudzinski et al. in their device they have met the requirements culating the density of the soil at each moisture content. Starting
of a precise measuring instrument allowing for easy measurements the with soil at ambient conditions, a 115 g soil sample was
using different wide shearing speeds, ranging from 1 mm/min to a weighed using a balance and placed in the direct shear box of
few m/s, also of a shearing surface of at least 300 cm2 to avoid the the direct shear test.
scale-effect, and of linear shear kinematics generating only shear- A 30 kg (approximately 1.1 bar; equal to real tyre pressure
ing motion to avoid bulldozing. applied on the terrain) consolidation load is applied on the 115 g
Relying on the Steinbrenner’s theory the soil bin (to be used) is sample in the direct shear box, and after 5 min, the consolidation
of dimensions 45  45  70 cm (height  length  width) to load is discharged, then the pressing plate where the consolidation
reduce the stresses at walls to 15% of normal load generated by
the device (Dudzinski et al., 2019).

7. Loam sand soil shear strength at different moisture contents

using direct shear test

A practical test was carried out at MATE in Hungary aiming to

find the shear strength of the loam sand soil at different moisture
contents having fixed consolidation load (normal load) using the
direct shear test (ELE 26–2112/01) available in the laboratory.
The direct shear test machine used is shown in Fig. 8.
The soil resource is a field that belongs to the university and its
type is loam sand soil of texture 90.50 % sand (0.05–2 mm; parti-
cle’s diameter range), 3.20 % silt (0.002–0.05 mm), and 6.30 % clay
(less than0.002 mm).
Having the soil ready in the laboratory at ambient conditions,
the soil was sieved twice before being tested. The soil was placed
in small boxes aiming to increase the moisture content of the soil
in the boxes gradually in an increment way.
So, initially filling all the boxes with sieved soil at ambient con-
ditions, and then adding water to the soil in the boxes leaving the
first box at ambient conditions (no water added to it; moisture due
to humidity).
Having the soil at different moisture contents ready in the
boxes (covered with plastic cover to prevent the decrease in mois-
ture), the moisture was measured using the moisture analyzer, that
works based on the principle of drying. The soil amount placed in
the moisture analyzer is dried using heating plates. The analyzer
records initially the mass of the placed soil (with moisture) and
finally the mass of the dried soil. The dry soil mass is subtracted
from the wet soil mass (initial mass) and divided by the initial
mass of the soil (moisture content relative to the wet soil), then
multiplied by 100. Based on this equation the moisture analyzer
Fig. 6. Soil moisture analyzer (HE53 230 V).
calculates the moisture in the soil. Soil samples prepared in boxes

Fig. 5. Soil prepared in boxes; soil at ambient conditions (a), and the soil moistured (b).

55
A. El Hariri, A. Elawad Eltayeb Ahmed and Péter Kiss Journal of Terramechanics 107 (2023) 47–59

Fig. 7. The measured depth (a), and the direct shear box total height (b).

Fig 8. Direct shear test machine (ELE 26–2112/01).

Fig. 9. Loam sand soil density as function of moisture content.

load was applied is removed, and using a caliper measure the measured and also measuring the total height in the direct shear
depth (distance between the upper surface of the direct shear box, the soil sample thickness will be calculated by subtracting
box and the upper surface of the soil) (Fig. 7). Having the depth the depth from the total height. The thickness of the soil sample

56
A. El Hariri, A. Elawad Eltayeb Ahmed and Péter Kiss Journal of Terramechanics 107 (2023) 47–59

multiplied by the area of the direct in the shear box will result in content to 1.93 %, and beyond this moisture value the shear
the volume of the soil sample. strength decreases up till reaching a stable point where the shear
Having the soil volume obtained, the density will be calculated strength remains approximately equal with the increase in the
by dividing the mass over the volume of the soil sample. After mea- moisture content (from 7 to 14 %), and then starts to decrease
suring the depth using the caliper for finding the volume, return beyond 14 % moisture content as at the values 14, 15.9 and
back the pressing plate and apply again the 30 kg consolidation 18.12 %.
load, and then run the direct shear test machine having the shear Upon repeating the measurement on the same type of soil con-
speed set to 9 mm/min (max speed in the machine). taining moisture close to the above values and having the same
The 5 min soil compaction before running the machine was consolidation load applied, the results obtained are not similar to
because the soil is disturbed, and in real terramechanics case the the results in Fig. 10 (the absolute difference of the shear strength
vehicle is moving on undisturbed soil, so compacting the soil results is  12 kPa). It is recognized that the soil shear strength
before testing it (taking into account that the decrease or increase results are changing as function of moisture content in a similar
in the compaction period will influence the shear strength). trajectory. The shear strength increases, then decreases and after-
The same process was repeated on different soil samples at dif- wards remains constant in a moisture content range, and beyond
ferent moisture contents, except for the last 2 samples of 15.9 % a high moisture content value it starts decreasing. The measure-
and 18.12 % moisture content, they were not compacted for ments done confirm what Osman (1964) mentioned, that the lack
5 min, since the moisture is very high, so avoiding the squeezing in the shear strength results published might be due to the diffi-
of the soil and loosing its moisture. In each of these two tests culty in obtaining reliable set of values from a single method.
(15.9 % and 18.12 %) the soil was placed in the direct shear box
and then compacted just by placing the pressing plate on it with-
out force applied, then directly remove the plate and measure 8. Conclusion
the depth for finding the density. Upon finishing from measuring
the depth, return back the pressing plate and apply the 30 kg con- Measuring the terrain physical properties and the mechanical
solidation mass on it, then directly run the machine. The shear properties is a major step for studying the behaviour of a terrain.
force and the displacement of the soil are measured by the sensors The load bearing capacity and the shear strength of soil are influ-
installed on the machine, and recorded by the software. Dividing enced by the moisture content present in the soil. Even though
the shear force by the direct shear box area will result in the shear there are different methods (standard and prototypes) used for
stress. measuring the soil shear strength, each method (machine or
Fig. 9 shows the obtained density of the loam sand soil at differ- instrument) ends up with different shear strength result, and as
ent moisture contents. The results show that the density of the mentioned in the literature review that the direct shear test is a
loam sand soil upon being compacted with same load increases test that closely emulates the shearing of the wheel or track on
with the increase in the moisture content. Connecting the density the ground.
points ends with straight line of a regression analysis value 0.9329. The shear strength measurement methods used in the text are
The density is approximately increasing linearly upon having the used by geotechnical and civil engineers for measuring the shear
same compaction load for the same compaction time (except for strength of soil terrain, except for the Bevameter which is terrame-
the last two moisture value; there was no compaction), and having chanics method. When studying the performance of a vehicle over
the moisture (soil in boxes) increasing gradually in an increment a terrain, the most important step is to understand how the terrain
way. The moisture values in percent (%) are 0.8, 1.71, 1.93, 2.64, responds to the normal, tangential, and lateral excitations resulting
3.45, 4.16, 5.63, 6.24, 6.8, 7.35, 8.7, 9.88, 10.69, 11.84, 13.1, 14, from the wheel/track on the terrain. The response of the terrain is
15.9, 18.12. studied through knowing its physical properties such as the den-
Starting with the shear strength 87.79 kPa soil at 0.8 % moisture sity and moisture content, inaddition to its mechanical propeties
content, the shear strength increases with increasing the moisture as the shear strength. Relating soil physical properties and its shear
strength to the tractive load (the traction) resulting from the rota-

Fig. 10. The shear strength of loam sand soil at different moisture contents.

57
A. El Hariri, A. Elawad Eltayeb Ahmed and Péter Kiss Journal of Terramechanics 107 (2023) 47–59

tion of the tractive element (wheel/track) will serve in ending with Bell, F.G., 2007. Engineering Geology, Rock properties and their assessment,
Butterworth-Heinemann is an imprint of Elsevier, (second edition).
traction equations that are beneficial in studying the traction per-
Berenyi, T., Pershing, R.L., Romig, B.E., 1972. Vehicle Mission Simulation. SAE
formance of a vehicle, and also relating the vehicle normal applied Mississippi Valley Section Meeting.
load at the interaction zone to the bearing capacity of the terrain Bishop, A.W., Heknel, D.J., 1964. The measurement of soil properties in the triaxial
will help in ending up with equations leading to measuring the test. Edward Arnold, London.
Blaisdell, G.L, Chamberlain, E.L., Mellor, M., 1987. Evaluation of the cold regions
expected sinkage of the wheel/track in the terrain. aspects of mobility and hardening of the mobile test bed at Malmstrom Air
Among the machines and instruments used for measuring the Force Base, Final report for U.S. Air Force, Ballistic Missile Office.
soil shear strength there are, the direct shear test, in-situ shear Boussinesq, J., 1885. Application des potentials a l’etude de l’equilibre et due
mouvement des solides elastique. Gauthier-Villars, Paris.
vane, and the triaxial test. The direct shear test is a simple test, Carlson, L. 1948. Detennination in situ of the shear strength of undisturbed clay
since it doesn’t require big efforts and costs for carrying out this by means of a rotating auger. Proc. 2nd Int. Cont.S.M. and F.E.,Vol. 1,pp. 265-
test, where the shear load and the displacement records are mea- 270.
Chamberlain, E.J., Mellor, M., Abele, G., 1988. Frozen ground strength
sured by sensors during the machine shear displacement test. characterization and grouser cutter design for hardening transition and
When sampling the soil or having it ready in the laboratory to be mobility over snow-covered terrain for the mobile test bed, draft report to U.
tested (direct shear test or triaxial test), the soil will be disturbed, S. Air Force, Ballistic Missile Office.
Changbin, H., Yong, Y., Decheng, W., Hongjian, W., 2018. Estimating soil failure due
since it is removed from the field, and that might not lead to pre- to torsion via vane shear test by varying vane diameter and soil properties. Soil
cise results from the tested samples (results might be with distur- and Tillage research 177, 68–78.
bance errors). In-addition to choosing the method for measuring Chew, S., Bharati, K., Chua, K., Lim, J., 2011. Effect of large diameter sample testing
for offshore site investigation. Housing Development Board, Singapore.
the soil shear strength, it should also be clear that the consolida-
Coulomb, C.A., 1776.. Sur une application des regles maximis et minimis a quelques
tion stress influences the shear strength value, so in vehicle mobil- problems de statique, relatives a l’architecture. Acad Sci Paris Mem Math Phys
ity case the soil shear strength result will be influenced by the 7, 343–382.
applied normal stress, thus the obtained shear strength values in Dafalla, M.A., 2013. Effects of clay and moisture content on direct shear tests for
clay-sand mixtures. Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. 1–8.
the above test are just applicable in case of having a wheel normal Damian, S., Dudzinski, P.A., 2021. Soil shear strength determination methods – State
pressure equal to the consolidation pressure used in this test. of the art. Soil and Tillage research 208, 104881.
Finally, even though repeating the direct shear test isn’t ending Das, B., 1999. Shallow foundations: bearing capacity and settlement. CRC Press.
Deepak, A.M., Ivan, J., 2017. Laboratory triaxial testing – from historical outlooks to
up with precisely the same shear strength results, but that doesn’t technical aspects. Procedia Engineering 191, 342–351.
mean that the obained results cannot be used or relied on. When Dudzinski, P.A., 1984. Steering: state-of-the-art report. J. Terramechanics 21, 215–
using the cone penetrometer and the shear vane test more than 235.
Dudzinski, P.A., Damian, S., 2019. Method for predicting dynamic shear strength in
one measurement is carried out in the tested area and the average soils – part II:validation of the new criterion using an innovative test device. J.
of the obtained values is used. Thus, when measuring the shear Terramechanics 86, 39–46.
strength using other methods and not ending up with the same Fröhlich, O.K., 1934. Druckverteilung im Baugrunde, Mit Besonderer
Berücksichtigung der Plastischen Erscheinungen. Julius Springer, Wien.
results upon repetition it is preferred to use the average of the Harrison, W.L., Chang Jr., B.S., 1966. Soil strength prediction by use of soil analogs.
obtained results. Proc. Hist. Environ. Sci. Ann. Tech. Mtg, San diego, CA, pp. 577–581.
Hernanz, l.J., Peixoto, H., Cerisola, C., Sánchez-girón, V., An empirical model to
predict soil bulk density profiles in field conditions using penetration
Declaration of Competing Interest
resistance, moisture content and soil depth, J. Terramechanics. 37 (4), 167–
184, 2000.
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan- Hu, W., Dano, C., Hicher, P.Y., Le Touzo, J.Y., Derkx, F., Marliot, E., 2011. Effect of
sample size on the behavior of granular material. Geotech. Testing J. 34 (3), 1–
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
12.
to influence the work reported in this paper. Janosi, Z., Hanamoto, B., 1961. The analytical determination of drawbar pull as a
function of slip for tracked vehicles in deformable soils. In: The 1st International
Acknowledgement Conference on the Mechanics of Soil-Vehicle Systems. Edizioni Minerva Tecnica,
Torino, p. 22.
Kahle, G.W., and Hung, H. M., 1967. Economic assessment of turbine powered
This work was created within the framework of the ‘‘National industrial vehicles, SAE Trans. 75 Paper 66-6-5.
Laboratory of Cooperative National Laboratories” project of the Karafiath, L.L., 1970. Analysis of stress distribution beneath wheels by the theory of
plasticity with respect to Lunar locomotion. Proc. ISTVS-TRW Off-Road Mobility
‘‘Establishment and Complex Development of National Laborato- Syrup, Los Angeles, CA.
ries” program funded by the National Research, Development and Karafiath, L.L. and Nowatzki, E.A., 1978. Soil mechanics for off-road vehicle
Innovation Office with identification number 2022-2.1.1-NL- engineering, Trans. Tech Publ., Clausthal, Germany, 515 pp.
Karman, T., 1910. Mito }l függ az anyag igénybevétele? (What influences the strength
2022-00012. of the material?). Magyar Mérnök- és építész-Egylet Közlönye 10, 212–226. in
Hungarian.
References Kogure, K., Yamaguchi, H., Ohira, Y., 1988. Comparison of strength and soil thrust
characteristics among different soil shear tests. J. Terramechanics 25 (3), 201–
221.
Agui, H.J., Bucek, M., Degennaro, A., Wilkinson, R.A. 2013. Lunar excavation
Kolk, H., Hoope, J., Ims, B., 1988. Evaluation of offshore in-situ vane test results, vane
experiments in simulant soil test beds: revisiting the surveyor geotechnical
shear str. test. Soils: field lab stud, 339–353.
data, J. Aerosp. Eng, 26, 117–133, special issue: In-Situ Resource Utilization.
Komandi, G., 1992. On the mechanical properties of soil as they affect traction. J.
Atkinson, J.H., Lau, W.H.W. 1990. Measurement of soil strength in simple shear
Terramechanics 29 (4/5), 373–380.
tests, Geotechnical Engineering Research Centre, The City University, London
Kurtay, T., Reece, A.R., 1970. Plasticity theory and critical state soil mechanics. J.
EC1V 0HB, U.K.
Terramechanics 7 (3 & 4), 23–56.
Ayers, P.D., 1987. Moisture and density effects on soil shear strength parameters for
Lade, P., 2005. Overview of Constitutive Models for Soils, ASCE Geotechnical Special
coarse grained soils. Trans. Am. Soc. Agric. Engrs 30 (5), 1282–1287.
Publication No. 128, Soil Constitutive Models: Evaluation, Selection and
Baladi, G.Y., 1987. Terrain evaluation for off-road mobility. J. Terramechanics 24,
Calibration, pp. 1–34.
127–157.
Lamb, T.W., Whitman, R.V., 1969. Soil Mechanics. John Wiley and Sons, NewYork.
Baladi, G.Y., Meier, R.W. 1987. General soil model for calculating tractive forces
Lambe, W., 1964. Soil testing for engineers, New York.
between the terrain and a given vehicle, Proc. 9th Int. Conf. ISTVS, Barcelona. pp.
Liljedahl, J.B., Carlenton, W.M., Turnquist, P.K., Smith, D.W., 1979. Tractors and their
826 833.
power unit. John Wiley & Sons, New York, pp. 237–239.
Bekker, M.G., 1956. Theory of land locomotion, The University of Michigan Press.
Lyne, P.W.L., Burt, E.C., 1987. Real time optimization of tractive efficiency. ASAE
Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Paper No. 87–1624.
Bekker, M.G., May 1957. Latest Development in Off-the Road Locomotion. Journal of
Mahmoud, M., 1988. Vane testing in soft clays, Report of British Geotechnical
the Franklin Institute 263 (5), 411–423.
Society’s informal discussion held at the Institution of Civil Engineers. Olsso.
Bekker, M.G., 1960. Off the Road Locomotion. The University of Michigan Press,
Mathe, L., Kiss, P., 2015. Determination of rolling losses of a towed vehicle, In:
Michigan.
Proceedings of the 13th ISTVS European Conference, Rome, October 21–23.
Bekker, M.G., 1969. Introduction to terrain-vehicle systems. University of Michigan
Mckyes, E., 1985. Soil Cutting and Tillage. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
Press, Ann Arbor, Mi, p. 846 pp,.

58
A. El Hariri, A. Elawad Eltayeb Ahmed and Péter Kiss Journal of Terramechanics 107 (2023) 47–59

Meyer, M.P., Ehrlich, I.R., Sloss, D., Murphy, N.R., Wismer, R.D., Czako, T., 1977. Sohne, W., 1958. Fundamentals of pressure distribution and soil compaction under
International society for terrain-vehicle systems standards. J. Terramechanics tractor tyres and 290. Agricultural Engineering 39, 276–281.
14, 153–182. Song, G., Malla, R., 2010. Earth and space 2010 – engineering, science, construction
Micklethwait, E.W.E., 1944. Soil Mechanics in Relation to Fighting Vehicles. British and operations in challenging environments, proceedings, 12th ASCE Aerospace
School of Tank Technology, Military College of Science. Div. Internat. conf. on Engineering, Construction and Operations in Challenging
Mulqueen, J., Stafford, J.V., Tanner, D.W., 1977. Evaluation of penetrometers for Environments.
measuring soil strength. J. Terramechanics 14, 137–151. Sugiyama, N., Kondo, H., 1984. Basic study in the turning resistance of track, In:
Murakami, H., 1991. Terrain evaluation-II. J. Terramechanics 28 (2/3), 123–135. Proc. 8th Int. Conference of ISTVS, Cambridge.
Nakao, T., Fityus, S., 2008. Direct shear testing of a marginal material using a large Szabo, I., 1994. Up-to-date means of shear strength tests comparison between
shear box. Geotechnical Testing Journal 31 (5). simple shear, Department of Hydrogeology and Engineering Geology, University
Oida, A., 1986. Soil Rheology in Terramechanics, Journal of the Japanese Society of of Miskolc, 1994. Periodica Polytechnica Ser. Civil Eng. 38 (1), 109–126.
Agricultural. Machinery 41 (3), 369–373. Taghavifar, H., Mardani, A., 2017. Off-road vehicle dynamics, Studies in systems,
Osman, M.S., 1964. The measurement of soil shear strength. J. Terramechanics 1 (3), decision and control 70. Springer International Publishing Switzerland.
54–60. Tan, T.K., 1957. Three-dimensional theory of the consolidation and flow of clay
Pan, J., 1986. The general rheological model of paddy soil in south China. J. layers. Scientia Sinica 6, 1.
Terramechanics 23 (2), 58–59. Tanaka, T., 1984. Operation in paddy fields: state-of-the-art report. J.
Payne, P.C.J., 1956. The relationship between the mechanical properties of soil and Terramechanics 21, 153–179.
the performance of simple cultivation implements, Jou. Agric. Engr. Research 1. Taylor, J.H., Gill, W.R., 1984. Soil compaction: state-of-the-art report. J.
Pershing, R.L., 1971. Simulating Tractive Performance. SAE Paper 710525. Terramechanics 21, 195–213.
Perumpral, J.V., Liljedahl, J.B., Perloff, W.H., 1971. A numerical method for predicting Terzaghi, K., 1954. Theoretical Soil Mechanics. John Wiley & Sons Inc, New York.
the stress distribution and soil deformation under a tractor wheel. J. Uffelman, F.L. 1961. The performance of rigid cylindrical wheels on clay soils, In:
Terramechanics 8 (1), 9–22. Proc. 1st Int. Conf, Soil Vehicle Mechanics, Turin.
Pillinger, G., Kiss, P., Géczy, A., Hudoba, Z., 2018. Determination of soil density by Vasarhelyi, B., Van, P., Deak, F., 2012. Hundred years after the first triaxial test,
cone index data. J. Terramechanics 77, 69–74. Periodica Polytechnica. Civil Engineering.
Prandtl, L., 1920. Uber die Harte Plastischer Korper. Nachrichten von der Konilichen Wanjii, S., Hiroma T., Ota Y., and Kataoka T., 1997. Prediction of wheel performance
Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Gottingen, Mathematisch-Physikalische by analysis of normal and tangential stress distributions under the wheel-soil
Klasse au dem Jahre, Berlin, pp. 74-85. interface, J. Terramechanics, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 165 186.
Raper, R.L., Johnson, C.E., Bailey, A.C., 1990. Coupling normal and sheaing stresses to Wong, J.Y., 1989. Terramechanics and off-road vehicles. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
use in finite element analysis of soil compaction. ASAE paper no, 90–1086. Wong, J.Y. 2010. Terramechanics and off-road vehicle engineering, terrain
Reece, A.R., 1964. Problems of soil vehicle mechanics. OTAC, Land Locomotion behaviour, off-road vehicle performance and design, second edition, Ottawa-
Laboratory, U.S. Army. Canada.
Roscoe, K.H., Schofield, A.N., Wroth, C.P., 1958. On yielding of soils. Geotechnique 8 Wroth, C.P., 1984. The interpretation of in-situ soil tests. Geotechnique 34, 449–
(1), 22–53. 489.
Salman, N.D., Kiss, P., 2018. Survey: Effect of bulk density and moisture content of Yong, R.N., Fattah, E.A., 1976. Prediction of wheel-soil interaction and performance
soil on the penetration resistance and penetration depth, Mechanical using the finite element method. J. Terramechanics 13 (4), 227–240.
Engineering Letters: R and D. Research and Development 17, 109. Yong, R.N., Warkentin, B.P., 1975. Soil properties and behaviour. Elsevier,
Schofield, A.N., Wroth, C.P., 1968. Critical state soil mechanics. McGraw- Hill, Amsterdam.
London. Yong, R.N., Fattah, E.A., Boosinsuk, R., 1978. Analysis and prediction of tyre-soil
Sela, A.D., Ehrlich, I.R., 1972. Load support capability of flat plates of various shapes interaction and performance using finite elements. J. Terramechanics 15 (1),
in soils. J. Terramechanics 8, 39–69. 43–63.
Shoop, S.A., 1993. Thawing soil strength measurements for predicting vehicle Zhang, B., Zhao, Q.G., Horn, R., Baumgartl, T., 2001. Shear strength of surface soil as
performance. J. Terramechanics 30 (6), 405–418. affected by soil bulk density and soil water content. Soil Tillage Res. 59 (3), 97–
Sitkei, G., 1972b. Die viskoelastischen Eigenschaften von Ackerböden und deren 106.
Einfluss auf die Boden-Rad Wechselwirkung, Proceedings of the 4th. Int. Conf. of Zhou, Q., Shen, H., Helenbrook, B., et al., 2009. Scale dependence of direct shear
the ISTVS, Stockholm. tests. Chinese Sci. Bull. 54, 4337–4348.
Sitkei, G., 1997. Non-linear viscoelastic-plastic model describing compaction Zydron, T., Zgoda, J., 2012. The influence of moisture content on shear strength of
processes, Proc. of 2nd IFAC/IMACS Conf., pp. 105–112. soils from the Carpathians. Acta Sci. Pol. 11 (2), 75–84.
Skempton, A.W., 1948. Vane tests in the alluvial plain of the River Forth near
Grangemouth. Geotechnique 1, 111–124.

59