Professional Documents
Culture Documents
K. Rangaswamy
Lecturer, Department of Civil Engineering, NIT, Calicut–673 601, India.
E-mail: ranga@nitc.ac.in
A. Boominathan
Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, IIT Madras, Chennai–600 036, India.
E-mail: boomi@iitm.ac.in
K. Rajagopal
Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, IIT Madras, Chennai–600 036, India.
E-mail:gopalkr@iitm.ac.in
ABSTRACT: The liquefaction resistance of fine sand and silty soil consisting of 50% non-plastic fines was investigated in
the present study. Soil specimens were prepared at 40% relative density and consolidated under the pressure of 100 kPa. A
series of cyclic triaxial tests was performed on the consolidated soil specimens under CSRs varying from 0.075 to 0.2. The
pore pressure generation and development of axial strain responses during load cycles has been monitored. The pore pressure
build-up in sand and silty soil is rapid in the first and last few load cycles while gradually increases during the intermediate
load cycles. The pore pressure build-up is rapid in case of silty soil and slows in case of clean sand. The addition of silt in
sand causes an increase of axial deformation. The test results indicated that the liquefaction resistance of silty soil is much
lower than that of the fine sand.
70
30
2. EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM 20
536
Comparative Study on Liquefaction Resistance of Sand and Silty Soil
According to Indian standard classification system, the soils 2.3 Test Equipment
are classified as poorly graded uniform soils. Maximum and
Laboratory tests were performed using a servo-pneumatic
minimum void ratios for sand and sand-silt mixture were
cyclic triaxial testing device (manufactured by Wykheham
determined as per ASTM-4254-91 and ASTM-4253-93
Farrance International Ltd, United Kingdom), which is fully
respectively. Each of the above tests was run three times and
automated and software controlled for both operation and
average values of void ratios were used in this study. The
data acquisition. The loading system consists of a 100 kN
index properties of the sand and silty soil are shown in
load frame and ± 5 kN double acting actuator capable of
Table 1.
generating loading frequencies up to 70 Hz. A special type of
submersible load cell of capacity ±5 kN is fitted inside the
Table 1: Index Properties of Soils triaxial cell to measure the applied axial load. An external
Index Soils tested displacement transducer of ±25 mm capacity was used for
properties Sand 50% fines measurement of axial displacements. The cell water pressure,
pore water pressure and back water pressures were measured
Gs 2.69 2.71
through 1000 kPa capacity diaphgram type electronic
D50 (mm) 0.112 0.075 pressure transducers. A 100cc volume change transducer was
Cu 1.543 2.428 used to monitor the volume changes in the sample. An
Cc 0.891 1.420 internal LVDT fixed on the actuator (± 15 mm) was used to
emax 0.975 1.014 detect the peak to peak deformations during cyclic loading.
The data was collected and stored through data acquisition
emin 0.675 0.569 software.
537
Comparative Study on Liquefaction Resistance of Sand and Silty Soil
same initial relative density and effective confining pressure, 1.0 2.0
Δu=σc'
soil specimens were subjected to different values of cyclic 0.9 Pore pressure buildup 1.5
1.0
stress ratios, (CSR = ± σdc/2σ′c) in the range of 0.075 and 0.2 0.8 Axial strain variation
0.5
Axial strain,%
with a particular CSR was continued for at least 5–10 cycles 0.6
50% fines
-0.5
0.5 -1.0
after triggering the initial liquefaction to arrive both the Dro=40%
-1.5
0.4
initial liquefaction and limited strain failure of 2.5% and 5% 0.3
-2.0
DA. Initial liquefaction was identified when the excess pore 0.2
-2.5
σc'=100 kPa
pressure, Δu is equal to the applied effective confining
-3.0
0.1 -3.5
CSR=0.125
pressure during cycling loading. Double amplitude (DA) 0.0 -4.0
axial strain is defined as the total strain that occurs between 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
any two adjacent peak compressive and tensile strains. Number of cycles, N
During the cyclic loading, continuous records of the excess Fig. 2: Typical Cyclic Response of Silty Soil (FC=50%)
pore water pressure, (Δu), cyclic axial strain, (εc), and the
cyclic deviator stress (± σdc) were recorded automatically 3.2 Effect of Silt Content on Cyclic Response
using the integrated software. The effect of silt content (FC=50%) on the seismic
liquefaction behavior of sand in terms of cyclic response is
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION shown in Figure 3. The comparison in pore pressure buildup
of sand and silty soil with 50% fines is shown in Figure 3a. It
Stress controlled cyclic triaxial tests were performed on sand
indicates that the pore pressure with load cycles is rapidly
and silty soil specimens to study the liquefaction during
developed in case of silty soil when compared to clean sand.
earthquakes. The influence of silt content on pore pressure
In 50% fines soil, initial liquefaction (Δu/σc′ = 100%) is
generation and development of axial strain responses during
triggered at 18 cycles of loading, but in clean sand the
load cycles has been investigated.
development of pore pressure ratio is only about 28% (Δu/σc′
= 28%) at the same load cycles. In case of clean sand, 100%
3.1 Typical Undrained Cyclic Response pore pressure ratio is developed for long duration to about
Typical response of pore pressure buildup and axial strain 175 cycles. The response of axial strain development with
development obtained from cyclic triaxial test carried out on load cycles in 50% fines soil shown in Figure 3b is compared
silt specimen (Dro=40%, σc′=100 kPa) subjected to a cyclic with clean sands. It can be seen that axial strain with load
stress ratio of 0.125 is shown in Fig. 2. The pore pressure cycles is rapidly developed when the addition of silt content
ratio in Figure 2 is defined as the ratio of pore-pressure (FC = 50%) to the clean sand. This result occurs due to rapid
amplitude to effective consolidation pressure. It can be pore pressure buildup in silty soil. Large deformation (DA =
noticed from Figure 2 that the pore pressure buildup is rapid 2.2%) is occurred at initial liquefaction in silty soil, however
about only 0.98% DA is reaches at initial liquefaction state in
in the first and the last 4 cycles (Δu = 0.075 to 0.1σc′ per one
sand. It is interesting to note that the deformation at and
load cycle) and gradually increases during the intermediate
above initial liquefaction is progressively increased in
load cycles (Δu = 0.03σc′ per one load cycle). The specimen extension side due to addition of fines to the clean sand. It
has undergone initial liquefaction at about 18 cycles. The may be due to role of fines in altering the fabric of granular
initial liquefaction is identified when the excess pore structure under cyclic loading.
pressure, Δu, reaches the consolidation pressure level, σc′,
i.e. Δu = σc′. Similar pattern of pore pressure buildup with Stress-strain hysteresis of sand and 50% fines soil are shown
load cycles is also shown in earlier studies (Vercueil et al. in Figure 3c. It is very clear from Figure 3c that the loops of
1997; Amini & Sama 1999). cycles are close to each other and formed in thicker band
with insignificant deformation before the liquefaction. At and
Figure 2 also indicates insignificant development of axial above the state of initial liquefaction, large extensional
strain (DA = 0.1 to 0.5% only) occurs in the soil specimen up strains were developed due to loss in applied deviator stress.
to three cycles before the occurrence of initial liquefaction. The loops of cycles are widened with increase in rate of
At the state of initial liquefaction, the increase in axial strain deformation. In 50% fines soil, just followed the thicker
is propagated to 2.2% DA. However, the soil specimen band, after two loops of cycles, the extensional deformation
experiences large axial strain (DA = about 4.5%) within a is around 3.5%, but it is only 2% in case of clean sand. The
two cycles after the initial liquefaction. Sudden increase of sand sample is experienced of 8% strain at the end of 7th loop
such deformation is due to loss of strength of the soil at cycle. Effective stress paths of sand and silty soil are
initial liquefaction. Similar pattern of development in axial overlapped as shown in Figure 3d indicates that the mean
strain with load cycles is also shown in earlier studies (Ueng normal effective stress, p′= (σ1′+2σc′)/3 decreases as the pore
et al. 2004; Zhou & Chen 2005). pressure builds up. Similar types of undrained responses were
538
Comparative Study on Liquefaction Resistance of Sand and Silty Soil
0.8
50% fines
0.7 rapid pore pressure buildup when compared to clean sand.
0.6 The stress loops are very close to each other in clean sand
0.5 indicates the gradual decrease in mean normal effective
0.4 stress.
0.3 Dro=40%
0.2 σc'=100 kPa 3.3 Effect of Silt Content on Liquefaction Resistance
0.1 CSR = 0.125
0.0
The triaxial sand and silty soil specimens (Dro= 40% and
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 σc′=100 kPa), were subjected to four different values of
Number of cycles,N cyclic stress ratios to obtain liquefaction resistance curves.
2
The comparision on liquefaction resistance of sand and silt
1 (b) soil (FC=50%) is shown in Figure 4. Herein, liquefaction
0 resistance is defined as cyclic stress ratio required to causing
-1 the initial liquefaction at any given number of cycles. In
-2 general, cyclic stress ratio at 15 cycles of loading is
Axial strain, %
0.35
Number of cycles, N
0.30
35
30 0.25
Sand (c)
25 50% fines 0.20
20
Deviator stress, kPa
15 0.15
10 Dro=40%
0.10
5 σc'=100 kPa
0 0.05
-5 1 10 100 1000
-10
-15 Dro=40% Number of cycles causing initial liquefaction
-20 σc'=100 kPa
-25 Fig. 4: Comparison on Liquefaction Resistance of Sand and
-30
CSR=0.125 Silt Soil
-35
-9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2
Axial strain, %
Figure 4 shows that the cyclic stress level decreases with
increase in number of load cycles. Examining the
30
Sand (d) liquefaction resistance curves of sand and silty soil, it can be
50% fines
20 seen that the liquefaction resistance of sand reduces due to
addition of fines to the clean sand. Cyclic strength curves
Deviator stress, kPa
-10
to
-20
of cycles, i.e. Above 300 cycles, the reduction in liquefaction
-30 resistance is only about less than 5% due to addition of fines
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 content to the clean sand. It indicates that the significant
Mean normal effective stress, kPa reduction in cyclic strength is occurring at low number of
Fig. 3: Comparison on Cyclic Response of Sand and Silty cycles.
Soil: (a) Pore pressure buildup (b) Axial strain variation The decreasing trend of liquefaction resistance of sand with
(c) Stress-strain hysteresis and (d) Effective stress path the addition of fines is also reported from past research
539
Comparative Study on Liquefaction Resistance of Sand and Silty Soil
findings based on tests carried out on similar type of familiar Carraro J.A.H., Bandini P. and Salgado R. (2003).
soils including nevada & ottawa sands (carraro et al. 2003), “Liquefaction Resistance of Clean and Nonplastic Silty
tailing sand (troncoso & verdugo 1985), hostun sand Sands Based on Cone Penetration Resistance”, Jl. of
(bouferra & shahrour 2004) and toyoura sand (koseki et al. Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering,
1986). 129(11): 965–976.
Koseki J., Ishihara K. and Fujii M. (1986). “Triaxial
4. CONCLUSIONS Liquefaction Tests on Sand with Fines”, 21st Japanese
Annual Meeting on Geotechnical Engineering: 595–596.
An attempt has been made to evaluate the undrained cyclic Ladd R.S. (1978). “Preparing Test Specimens using
response and liquefaction resistance of clean sand and silty Undercompaction”, Geotechnical Testing Journal, 1(1):
soil with 50% fines. Based on cyclic triaxial test studies, the 16–23.
following major conclusions are arrived at. Polito C.P. and Martin II J.R. (2001). “Effects of Non-Plastic
Fines on the Liquefaction Resistance of Sands”, Jl.
• The pore pressure build-up in sand and silty soil is rapid
Geotech. and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 127(5):
in the first and last few load cycles and gradually
408–415.
increases during the intermediate load cycles. Samples
Seed H.B., Tokimatsu K., Harder L.F. and Chung R.M.
have experienced very small axial strains before the
(1985). “Influence of SPT Procedures in Soil Liquefaction
occurrence of initial liquefaction. Within a few cycles
Resistance Evaluations”, Jl. of Geotech. Eng., ASCE,
after the initial liquefaction, large strains have developed
111(5): 1425–1445.
in the soil samples.
Singh R., Roy D. and Jain S.K. (2005). “Analysis of Earth
• The pore pressure build-up is rapid in case of silt soil Dams affected by the Bhuj Earthquake”, Engrg. Geology:
whereas its build up is slow in case of clean sand. The 282–291.
addition of silt in sand causes an increase of axial Sitharam T.G. and Govindaraju L. (2004). “Geotechnical
deformation. With the increase in silt content, the Aspects and Ground Response Studies in Bhuj
deformation before and after initial liquefaction Earthquake, India”, Geotechnical and Geological
progressively increased in extension side. Engineering 22: 439–455.
• The cyclic stress level decreases with increase in number Troncoso J.H. and Verdugo R. (1985). “Silt content and
of load cycles. Liquefaction resistance of sand decreases Dynamic Behaviour of Tailing Sands”, 11th Proc. of Int.
due to addition of fines to the clean sand. At 15 cycles of Conference on Soil Mechanics & Foundation Engineering:
loading, the liquefaction resistance of silty soil is only 1311–1314.
about 48% of the liquefaction strength of the clean sand. Ueng T.S., Sun C.W. and Chen C.W. (2004). “Definition of
Fines and Liquefaction Resistance of Maoluo River Soil”,
Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 24: 745–750.
REFERENCES
Vercueil D., Billet P. and Cordary D. (1997). “Study of the
Amini F. and Sama K.M. (1999). “Behavior of Stratified Liquefaction Resistance of a Saturated Sand Reinforced
Sand-Silt-Gravel Composites under Seismic Liquefaction with Geosynthetics”, Soil Dyn. & Earthquake Engrg., 16:
Conditions”, Soil Dynamics & Earthquake Eng, 18, 445– 417–425.
455. Zhou Y. and Chen Y. (2005). “Influence of Seismic Cyclic
Bouferra R. and Shahrour I. (2004). “Influence of Fines on Loading History on Small Strain Shear Modulus of
the Resistance to Liquefaction of Clayey Sand”, Ground Saturated Sands”, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake
Improvement Journal, 8(1): 1–5. Engineering, 25: 341–353.
540