4.5 Article

Assessing the penetration resistance acting on a dynamically installed anchor in normally consolidated and overconsolidated clay

Journal

CANADIAN GEOTECHNICAL JOURNAL
Volume 54, Issue 1, Pages 1-17

Publisher

CANADIAN SCIENCE PUBLISHING, NRC RESEARCH PRESS
DOI: 10.1139/cgj-2016-0111

Keywords

dynamically installed anchor; microelectric mechanical system (MEMS); soft soil; centrifuge modelling

Funding

  1. Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Geotechnical Science and Engineering
  2. Centre of Excellence by the Lloyd's Register Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Predicting the final embedment depth of a dynamically installed anchor is a key prerequisite for reliable calculation of anchor capacity. This paper investigates the embedment characteristics of dynamically installed anchors in normally consolidated and overconsolidated clay through a series of centrifuge tests involving a model anchor instrumented with a microelectric mechanical system (MEMS) accelerometer, enabling the full motion response of the anchor to be established. The data are used to assess the performance of an anchor embedment model based on strain-rate-dependent shearing resistance and fluid mechanics drag resistance. Predictions of a database of over 100 anchor installations - formed from this study and the literature - result in calculated anchor embedment depths that are within +/- 15% of the measurements. An interesting aspect, consistent across the entire database, relates to the strain rate dependence on frictional resistance relative to bearing resistance. The predictions reveal that strain rate dependency may indeed be higher for frictional resistance, although only if a soil strength lower than the fully remoulded strength is considered as the reference strength, which suggests that water may be entrained along a boundary layer at the anchor-soil interface during installation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available