International Journal of Civil & Environmental Engineering IJCEE-IJENS Vol: 20 No: 01 15

Determination of the Undrained Shear Strength

by the Fall Cone Method in Marine Soils
Clemente, C. W.1A, Faro, V. P.1, and Moncada, M. P. H.2
1 Federal University Of Paraná, Brazil
2 Federal Fluminense University, Brazil
A Corresponding author: camilawclemente@gmail.com

Abstract— The undrained shear strength occurs when the soil
is quickly loaded without pore pressure dissipation. This
parameter is measured by field and laboratory tests. Frequently,
field tests present undrained shear strength quicker and in a larger
amount than laboratory tests, even though there is an application
of empirical formulation in some of these values. The present
research aims to determine the undrained shear strength by the
Fall Cone test, which was developed in Sweden by John Olsson
between 1914 and 1922. To assess the applicability of the Fall
Cone, the undrained shear strength was determined by additional
tests, some of which are unconsolidated undrained triaxial and
laboratory vane test. The materials of the research were 16
Brazilian soil samples with varying geotechnical properties and
offshore sampling. The Fall Cone test is agreeable with traditional
tests, besides being a simplistic and quick method. To conclude,
the equipment can be considered as an option to complement and
assist undrained shear strength evaluations from soft soils.
Index Term— Undrained shear strength. Fall Cone test.
Offshore samples. Triaxial tests.
I. INTRODUCTION
The presence of soft clays deposits along the Brazilian coast
encourages their study since the determination of the
characteristics of this type of soil is fundamental for the lease
of industrial and urban infrastructure [4]. For the determination
of geotechnical parameters in soft soils some situations should
be considered, such as natural variability of the field,
acquisition of experimental data, stability and settlement
analysis, as well as strength, deformability, and hydraulic
conductivity parameters [15]. Baixada Fluminense and Baixada
Santista are some of the deposits studied for project and
research purposes [2].
At the laboratory to estimate undrained shear strength the
following tests can be used: unconsolidated undrained triaxial,
unconfined compression, fall cone and mini vane test. Fall cone
and mini vane test have advantages such as simplicity, response
speed and low cost in which the measurements of undrained
shear strength are obtained, allowing a greater number of tests
in a given sample when compared with the classic tests.
Between 1914 and 1922, John Olsson, member of the
Geotechnical Commission of the Swedish Railways developed
a device to determine the consistency of clays [3]. The Swedish
fall cone was created to obtain in a simple and fast way the
values of liquid limit and undrained shear strength, which has
encouraged many countries, such as Canada, Sweden, and
England, to adopt it as standardized equipment [14].
One of the practical advantages of Fall cone is that the test
can be performed in a few minutes, obtaining the result of shear
strength through a simple formulation and allowing quick
identification of clay for indices and physical properties [3]. In
the laboratory vane test, the influence of time can interfere with
the results in two distinct ways, first in the delay between the
insertion of the vane and the beginning of the rotation, and the
speed of rotation [11]. The unconsolidated undrained triaxial
test (UU) is defined as quick because there is no drainage in the
course of the test and has no stage of consolidation, therefore
the time factor depends mainly on the selected shear rate.
The present work aims to estimate undrained shear strength
by the Fall Cone test and evaluate its applicability in Brazilian
soils samples for undisturbed and remolded conditions. At the
remolded condition, there were realized tests in different
recipients to verify the interference of the dimensions at the
results. Afterwards, a comparative evaluation of undrained
shear strength results was made to verify if the obtained results
were consistent when compared to classic tests and
formulations
II. MATERIALS AND METHODS
The Fall cone test was developed to perform the Atterberg
limits (liquid limit and plastic limit), sensitivity of clays and
undrained shear strength for undisturbed and remolded
samples. To undisturbed samples, the results depend on the
quality of sample. Due to possible effects of anisotropy and
saturation degree, undrained shear strength can vary, and this
encountered value is not a Su representative of field [1].
The Fall cone test consists of measuring the penetration that
a cone under precise conditions of weight and angle penetrates
vertically into a previously prepared soil sample. Only the tip
of cone touches the horizontal surface of a sample and the cone
is released under its own weight [7]. Then, the cone penetration
is measured. The test is considered undrained because the cone
penetration happens quickly and there is no time to dissipate the
pore water pressure [12].
The procedure used to perform the test was ISO 17892-6 –

203001-7575-IJCEE-IJENS © February 2020 IJENS

IJENS
 International Journal of Civil & Environmental Engineering IJCEE-IJENS Vol: 20 No: 01 16

Geotechnical investigation and testing – Laboratory testing of TABLE I

DIMENSIONS OF THE RECEPTACLE
soil – Part 6: Fall cone test. Each test was determined by 3
Diameter
points, each point distant from each other 25 millimeters. The Receptacle Height (mm)
(mm)
equipment is represented in the following figure.
Sampler 100 100
ISO 17892-6 55 40
Karlsson (1981) 50 25
Clemente (2015) 70 22

The samples used are undisturbed and have been collected in

a region near Baixada Fluminense. It has various geotechnical
properties and depths varying from 0.91 to 12.40 meters. To
have a good range of results in the present work, tests had
executed on 16 samples. Table II presents the properties of the
selected samples.
TABLE II
SAMPLES
Moisture Specific weight
Sample
content (%) (g/cm3)
1 48.0 1.74
2 50.4 1.64
Fig. 1. Fall cone equipment 3 53.9 1.67
4 122.2 1.36
5 88.0 1.48
The calculation of the undrained shear strength proposed by
6 74.9 1.48
Hansbo (1957) considers that the shear strength of soil in kPa is
7 90.9 1.49
proportional to the mass of cone (Q) and inversely proportional
8 79.7 1.47
to the square of the penetration, the K coefficient depends on
the cone opening angle, also shear rate and sensitivity of the 9 45.8 1.73
clays. The equation used by ISO 17892 standard acknowledges 10 44.3 1.74
0,80 and 0,27 as K values to 30° and 60° cones respectively and 11 43.9 1.75
multiplicate the formulation by the acceleration of gravity (g = 12 38.3 1.81
9.81 m/s²). 13 52.0 1.68
𝑄 Eq. 1 14 34.0 1.80
𝑆𝑢 = 𝐾. 𝑔. 15 46.3 1.74
𝑃²
16 48.6 1.72
The "cone type" parameter was evaluated to define which
cone is most applicable to Brazilian soil samples. And, also
verify a suitable correlation with the more usual tests in the The samples were identified according to the Unified Soil
practice of geotechnical engineering in the country. Three types Classification System (USCS) as C – clay and M – silt. It was
of the cone were used to determine undrained shear strength in not observed neither odor nor characteristic color of organic
undisturbed and disturbed samples: mass of 100 grams and matter and for this reason, the influence of organic content was
angle of 30º denominated Cone 1, mass of 60 grams and angle not considered in the evaluation. In the figure below, samples
of 60º denominated Cone 2 and mass of 10 grams and 60º angle were plotted on a plasticity chart.
designated as Cone 3.
Another relevant parameter for the Fall Cone's evaluation, it
is the size of the receptacle in which occurs the placement of
remolded sample because this receptacle varies according to the
standard considered. The aim has evaluated the influence of
dimension on the results of undrained shear strength. In the
present study, four types of receptacle were considered: the
sampler itself, ISO 17892-6, the container considered by
Karlsson (1981) and the cylindrical aluminum container used in
previous work by the author. The containers’ dimensions are
presented at the table below.

Fig. 2. Plasticity chart

203001-7575-IJCEE-IJENS © February 2020 IJENS

IJENS
 International Journal of Civil & Environmental Engineering IJCEE-IJENS Vol: 20 No: 01
For the undisturbed condition, the following tests were
performed: Fall Cone test, unconsolidated triaxial test (UU) and
laboratory vane test, also no other containers were considered
so that there was no remolding of the sample.
In the remolded samples only the Fall Cone test and
laboratory vane test had been executed.
III. RESULTS
The first aspect evaluated for the undisturbed condition will
be the undrained shear strength and the test penetration for the
three cone types. The undrained shear strength was calculated
by equation 1 with the application of a correction factor (μ)
according to the liquid limit performed by the Fall Cone
method. The trendline that best fits the undrained shear strength
versus penetration plots for the undisturbed condition was the
potential trend line. In the figure below is presented the results
for this condition. Considering all the results obtained, the R²
value was 0.3412, indicating an inconsistent adjustment.
However, when analyzed individually, the lines for each cone
have adequate R² values, above 0.97, showing a good
correlation between the obtained results.
Fig. 3. Undrained shear strength versus penetration (Undisturbed condition)
Comparing the results obtained with classic tests, it was
observed that the results obtained by the Cone are larger than
the results obtained by the laboratory vane test and
unconsolidated undrained triaxial test (UU). Considering the
UU test results for Cone 2 and 3, the trend lines were very close
to each other and above the ideal line. In some cases, such as
the results of Cone 2 compared to laboratory vane test results,
the undrained shear strength by the Cone becomes 50% greater
than by the laboratory vane test.
Fig. 4. Comparison between Fall cone, laboratory vane test and triaxial UU
203001-7575-IJCEE-IJENS © February 2020 IJENS
17
The laboratory vane test in their results had already presented
irregular curves in which some associated error was committed.
Therefore, it would be interesting to re-evaluate this test and
consider its variables and particularities and then, compare it
again with the Cone. For the most part, Cone 3 would not be the
most appropriate option for performing the cone tests due to the
low penetrations reached.
For the remolded condition, the first evaluation was about the
values of undrained shear strength and the penetration
measured during the Fall cone test for the three types of the cone
and the different receptacles studied. The trendline that best fits
for the undrained shear strength vs. penetration plots for the
remolded condition was the potential trend line as previously
seen in the undisturbed condition.
Fig. 5. Undrained shear strength versus penetration (Remolded condition)
As for the undisturbed condition, when analyzed by cone, the
trend lines for each cone have consistent R² values, above 0.99,
showing a good correlation between the obtained results.
Recalling that for each cone are being considered all the results
obtained by the containers studied.
The comparison between the results of the Fall Cone test and
laboratory vane test show that the obtained values by the Fall
Cone are lower than the ones obtained by the laboratory vane
test, except for the tests using Cone 3 performed at the sampler.
In certain situations, the values show good convergence and in
others, the results indicate considerable variability.
Fig. 6. Comparison between Fall cone, laboratory vane test and triaxial UU
for remolded condition
IV. DISCUSSION
For the undisturbed condition, it can be observed that each
cone generates a differentiated slope of the others, confirming
IJENS
 International Journal of Civil & Environmental Engineering IJCEE-IJENS Vol: 20 No: 01
that the penetration is inversely proportional to the undrained
shear strength as presented by Hansbo (1957). The variance
between the penetrations for the three cones for the same
sample are not constant, because of the anisotropy of the soils
and the parameters of opening angle and mass of each cone. In
the case of the tested samples, the cone that best fits were Cone
1 (100 grams) because it reached a range of 3.17 to 13.17 mm.
Cone 2 (60 grams) had a range of values from 1 to 5 millimeters
and cone 3 obtained the smallest range of values from 0.5 to 2
millimeters. If consideration of the ISO17892-6 (5 - 20 mm)
penetration range had been validated, cone 2 and 3 would not
be the most appropriate options for material characterization. It
can be said that the lower penetrations show undrained shear
strength inconsistent with reality.
Among the Cone 1 and 2 results, there is always a cone that
best fits the value found by the UU triaxial tests, due to the
consistency characteristics of the sample and the mass of the
cone used. The UU triaxial tests and Fall Cone tests show less
compatibility than expected. Lemos (2014) also compared the
results obtained through the UU triaxial test and Fall Cone, and
the overall results did not show good correspondence. The
conclusion was that if the correct consideration was given to the
sample characteristics and test methodology, it would be
possible to achieve more consistent results.
The Cone 1 (100 grams and the opening angle of 30 °) was
the best option for the remolded condition. Besides, Cone 1
agrees with the ISO17892-6 penetration range
recommendation. In Cone 2, some values fit the range provided
by the standard, but not all of them. Cone 3 is below the
minimum accepted by the standard. As for the undisturbed
condition, the smaller penetrations can be unreliable and
indicate overrated undrained shear strength values. A different
inclination of the curve is also observed for each type of cone,
confirming again that the penetration is inversely proportional
to the values of undrained shear strength [5].
In the remolded samples, the variations between the
penetrations for the three cones for the same sample are
irregular. But for this condition, the values demonstrate a
pattern of behavior: the penetration difference between the
values of Cone 1 and 2 is of at least 1.3 times the difference
between the values of Cone 2 and 3. When evaluated the
penetrations in the different containers studied for the same
Cone and sample, the values are similar, varying around 2
millimetres for penetrations of up to 10 millimetres. For larger
penetrations, the values produce differences of up to 4
millimetres.
By comparing the results of the Cone and laboratory vane
test, mostly the values obtained for the cone are smaller than the
values for the vane test. The lines closest to the ideal were the
results obtained by the Cone 3 in the ISO container and the
sampler, and by the Cone 2 in the sampler. Cone 1 had the
lowest correlations among the evaluated ones.
V. CONCLUSION
In this experimental work, the inverse proportional relation of
the undrained shear strength and the penetration proposed by
Hansbo in 1957 was confirmed. The calculation of the
203001-7575-IJCEE-IJENS © February 2020 IJENS
18
determination of undrained shear strength by the formula of
ISO17892-6 tends to overestimate the resistance values due to
the low penetrations. Thus, it demonstrates values that are
inconsistent with reality and should be used with caution. The
lightest cones for these materials had low penetrations of the
order of 0.5 to 3.8 millimetres and throughout the scale of the
equipment, it can be considered as inaccurate values.
The mass of the Cone affects the results: the larger the mass
of the cone, the higher the penetration range reached. For the
studied materials, it was the Cone 1 that has the best fit at the
undisturbed and remolded conditions.
The height/diameter ratio (H / D) of the containers considered
in this research influences subtly the undrained shear strength
in the remolded condition due to penetration variations. The
penetration values for the same sample were close or similar but
did not indicate critical interference at the undrained shear
strength result.
It has been shown that the Cone tests are compatible with the
conventional tests as unconsolidated undrained triaxial and
laboratory vane test, depending on the selected cone. The type
of cone applied should always be considered in the assessment.
For a quick evaluation of the undrained shear strength, the Cone
test is a simple and fast method to perform. It allows a greater
number of test points in the same sample and a small amount of
material is necessary for its execution. For those reasons and
observing the differences in values for the classic tests, the use
of Cone can be a complement to the classic tests.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors are grateful to Federal University of Paraná and
Fugro In Situ Geotecnia for the encouragement and assistance
in the preparation of this paper.
REFERENCES
[1] International Organization for Standardization. ISO 17892: Geotechnical
investigation and testing - Laboratory testing of soil – Part 6: Fall cone
test. 2014.
[2] M. S. S. Almeida, M. E. S. Marques, Aterros sobre solos moles: projeto
e desempenho. 2nd ed. São Paulo: Oficina de textos; 2010.
[3] R. Garneau, J. P. LeBihan, “Estimation of some properties of Champlain
clays with the Swedish fall cone”. Can Geotech J. 1977; Vol. 14, p. 571
– 581. https://doi.org/10.1139/t77-058
[4] R. R. Hallal, F. Schnaid, C. R. R. Dias. (2002). Característica de
depósitos de argilas moles no Estado do Rio Grande do Sul”. In:
Conference proceedings – 12th Congresso Brasileiro de Mecânica dos
Solos e Engenharia Geotécnica; 2002 Out 20-24; São Paulo, Brazil. São
Paulo: Associação Brasileira de Mecânica dos Solos.
[5] S. Hansbo, “A new approach to the determination of the shear strength
of clay by the Fall-Cone test”. Stockholm: Royal Swedish Geotechnical
Institute; 1957.
[6] K. H. Head, Manual of Soil Laboratory Testing. – volume 2:
Permeability, shear strength and compressibility tests. 2nd ed. New
York: John Wiley & Sons Inc; 1994.
[7] R. Karlsson. (1961). Suggested improvements in the liquid limit test,
with reference to flow properties of remoulded clays. In: Conference
proceedings - 5th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and
Foundation Engineering; 1961 Jul 17 – 22; Paris, France. Paris: Dunod;
1961. p.171-184.
[8] R. Karlsson, “Consistency limits: a manual for the performance and
interpretation of laboratory investigations – Part 6”. Stockholm: Swedish
Council for Building Research, 1981.
[9] S. G. F. P. Lemos. “Estudo da resistência não drenada de solo de baixa
consistência por meio de ensaios de campo e laboratório” [thesis].
Vitória: Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo; 2014.
[10] S. Leroueil, J. P. LeBihan, “Liquid Limits and fall cones”. Can Geotech
J. 1996; Vol. 33, p. 793 – 798. https://doi.org/10.1139/t96-104-324
IJENS
 International Journal of Civil & Environmental Engineering IJCEE-IJENS Vol: 20 No: 01 19

[11] A. Pérez-Foguet, A. Ledesma, A. Huerta. “Analysis of the vane test

considering size and time effects”. Int J Numer Anal Met. 1999; Vol. 23.
https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9853(19990425)23:5<383::AID-
NAG977>3.0.CO;2-%23
[12] P. M. L. P. Sousa. “Limite de liquidez – correlações e comparações entre
os métodos de fall cone e da concha de Casagrande” [thesis]. Lisboa:
Universidade Nova de Lisboa; 2011.
[13] A. Sridharan, K. Prakash. “Liquid limits and fall cones: Discussion”.
Can Geotech J. 1998; vol. 35, p. 407 – 408. https://doi.org/10.1139/t98-
004
[14] H. Tanaka, H. Hirabayashi, T. Matsuoka, H. Kaneko. “Use of fall cone
test as measurement of shear strength for soft clay materials”. Soils
Found. 2012; v. 52, p. 590 – 599.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2012.07.002
[15] Baroni, M. “Comportamento geotécnico de argilas extremamente moles
da Baixada de Jacarepaguá, RJ” [thesis]. Rio de Janeiro: Universidade
Federal do Rio de Janeiro; 2016.

203001-7575-IJCEE-IJENS © February 2020 IJENS

IJENS