4.4 Article

The relation between the state indices and the characteristic features of undrained behaviour of silty sand

期刊

SOILS AND FOUNDATIONS
卷 59, 期 4, 页码 801-813

出版社

JAPANESE GEOTECHNICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1016/j.sandf.2019.05.001

关键词

Silty sand; Critical state; State indices; Instability; Liquefaction

资金

  1. University of South Australia (UniSA), Australia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The characteristic features of a series of isotropically and K-0-consolidated undrained triaxial compression behaviour of a silty sand were investigated for a range of initial void ratio (e) and mean effective confining stress (p'). The silty sand used in this study contained about 10% natural fines. The critical state line (CSL) of K-0-consolidated specimens, K0U was slightly lower than the CSL for isotropically consolidated specimens, CIU. The respective CSLs for K0U and CIU were used to define state indices, such as state parameter (psi), state index (I-s), state pressure index (I-p) and modified state parameter (psi(m)), within critical state soil mechanics (CSSM) framework. It was found that each state index exhibit a unique relation with liquefaction potential, irrespective of consolidation type, however different relationships were observed between state indices and the stress ratio at the triggering of liquefaction, eta(IS) is or the liquefaction resistance, q(IS). The correlation of characteristic features of undrained shearing (i.e., liquefaction potential, eta(IS) is and q(IS)) and drained shearing (maximum rate of volume change, (d epsilon(v)/d epsilon(a))(max)) with state indices were compared statistically in terms of root mean square deviations (RMSD). All characteristic features of undrained shearing generally showed the best correlation with I-p in term of RMSDs, however psi showed comparatively wider scatter for the specimens showing flow and limited flow behaviour. (C) 2019 Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of The Japanese Geotechnical Society.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据