Dynamic Response of a Low Plasticity Silt Deposit: Comparison of In-situ and Laboratory Responses

IF 3 3区 工程技术 Q2 ENGINEERING, GEOLOGICAL
Ali Dadashiserej, Amalesh Jana, Zhongze Xu, Armin W. Stuedlein, T. Matthew Evans, Kenneth H. Stokoe II, Brady R. Cox
{"title":"Dynamic Response of a Low Plasticity Silt Deposit: Comparison of In-situ and Laboratory Responses","authors":"Ali Dadashiserej, Amalesh Jana, Zhongze Xu, Armin W. Stuedlein, T. Matthew Evans, Kenneth H. Stokoe II, Brady R. Cox","doi":"10.1139/cgj-2022-0579","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study compares the in-situ dynamic response of a low plasticity silt deposit subjected to multidirectional loading from vibroseis shaking and controlled blasting to a suite of element-scale, cyclic laboratory test specimens. The agreement between excess pore pressures and simple shear strain relationships over a wide range in strains is remarkable. Slightly larger excess pore pressures observed in-situ are attributed to three-dimensional loading and pore pressure migration/ redistribution in the shallower portions of the deposit. Noted differences in shear modulus, G, are attributed to strain rate effects, spatial variability in the in-situ stiffness, and hydraulic boundary conditions. The variation in in-situ G/Gmax follows the trend from torsional shear specimens up to 0.4% shear strain; larger strains in the silt deposit imposed by controlled blasting yielded a stiffer response than that from cyclic torsional shear and direct simple shear specimens due in part to field drainage for deeper portions of the deposit. The in-situ cyclic resistance ratio for the deeper portion of the deposit in which plane body waves could be assumed and for the selected excess pore pressure ratio criterion was larger than that of stress-controlled CDSS test specimens, despite the detrimental effect of multidirectional shaking in the field. The effect of strain history, spatial variability, and drainage boundary conditions to drive differences between the in-situ and laboratory test specimens is identified.","PeriodicalId":9382,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Geotechnical Journal","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Geotechnical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2022-0579","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, GEOLOGICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study compares the in-situ dynamic response of a low plasticity silt deposit subjected to multidirectional loading from vibroseis shaking and controlled blasting to a suite of element-scale, cyclic laboratory test specimens. The agreement between excess pore pressures and simple shear strain relationships over a wide range in strains is remarkable. Slightly larger excess pore pressures observed in-situ are attributed to three-dimensional loading and pore pressure migration/ redistribution in the shallower portions of the deposit. Noted differences in shear modulus, G, are attributed to strain rate effects, spatial variability in the in-situ stiffness, and hydraulic boundary conditions. The variation in in-situ G/Gmax follows the trend from torsional shear specimens up to 0.4% shear strain; larger strains in the silt deposit imposed by controlled blasting yielded a stiffer response than that from cyclic torsional shear and direct simple shear specimens due in part to field drainage for deeper portions of the deposit. The in-situ cyclic resistance ratio for the deeper portion of the deposit in which plane body waves could be assumed and for the selected excess pore pressure ratio criterion was larger than that of stress-controlled CDSS test specimens, despite the detrimental effect of multidirectional shaking in the field. The effect of strain history, spatial variability, and drainage boundary conditions to drive differences between the in-situ and laboratory test specimens is identified.
低塑性泥沙沉积物的动力响应:现场和实验室响应的比较
本研究比较了低塑性淤泥质沉积物在可控震源振动和控制爆破多向加载下的原位动力响应与一套单元尺度的循环实验室试验样品。超孔隙压力和简单剪切应变关系在大范围应变范围内的一致性是显著的。现场观察到的略大的超孔隙压力归因于三维加载和矿床浅部孔隙压力的迁移/再分配。剪切模量G的显著差异归因于应变率效应、原位刚度的空间变异性和水力边界条件。原位G/Gmax的变化遵循扭转剪切试样至0.4%剪切应变时的变化趋势;控制爆破对泥沙沉积物施加的较大应变比循环扭剪和直接单剪试样产生的响应更硬,部分原因是沉积物较深部分的现场排水。考虑到现场多向震动的不利影响,沉积深部可设平面波区域和所选取的超孔隙压力比准则的原位循环阻力比均大于应力控制的CDSS试件。确定了应变历史、空间变异性和排水边界条件对原位和实验室试样差异的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Canadian Geotechnical Journal
Canadian Geotechnical Journal 地学-地球科学综合
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
5.60%
发文量
163
审稿时长
7.5 months
期刊介绍: The Canadian Geotechnical Journal features articles, notes, reviews, and discussions related to new developments in geotechnical and geoenvironmental engineering, and applied sciences. The topics of papers written by researchers and engineers/scientists active in industry include soil and rock mechanics, material properties and fundamental behaviour, site characterization, foundations, excavations, tunnels, dams and embankments, slopes, landslides, geological and rock engineering, ground improvement, hydrogeology and contaminant hydrogeology, geochemistry, waste management, geosynthetics, offshore engineering, ice, frozen ground and northern engineering, risk and reliability applications, and physical and numerical modelling. Contributions that have practical relevance are preferred, including case records. Purely theoretical contributions are not generally published unless they are on a topic of special interest (like unsaturated soil mechanics or cold regions geotechnics) or they have direct practical value.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信