Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 9 – uploaded by S. Thevanayagam

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
FIGURE 8 S,, versus percent compaction for host sand with different fines contents.

Figure 8 S,, versus percent compaction for host sand with different fines contents.

Related Figures (11)

TABLE 1 Index and Mechanical Characteristics (a) ASTM D1557 or JSSMFE ; (b) Reported as ASTM method without specification Number (considered to be ASTM D2049) ; (c) Other method (or not known) (d) Details of these references are available elsewhere (JJ); n/a: not available,
TABLE 1 Index and Mechanical Characteristics (a) ASTM D1557 or JSSMFE ; (b) Reported as ASTM method without specification Number (considered to be ASTM D2049) ; (c) Other method (or not known) (d) Details of these references are available elsewhere (JJ); n/a: not available,
FIGURE 1 Undrained stress-strain behavior of sands: (a) steady state; (b) undrained shear behavior. Other important factors included in the study were fines content and friction angle. The fines content varied from 0 to 70 percent. The fines involved in the sands included in the study in general were non- plastic except for the Lagunillas sandy silt. The friction angle, how- ever, varied from about 28 to 37 degrees. The effects of friction angle, fines content, and D, are discussed in the following sections.
FIGURE 1 Undrained stress-strain behavior of sands: (a) steady state; (b) undrained shear behavior. Other important factors included in the study were fines content and friction angle. The fines content varied from 0 to 70 percent. The fines involved in the sands included in the study in general were non- plastic except for the Lagunillas sandy silt. The friction angle, how- ever, varied from about 28 to 37 degrees. The effects of friction angle, fines content, and D, are discussed in the following sections.
FIGURE 2 Laboratory triaxial S,,, data: (a) S,,, versus e; (b) S,; versus D,. The specimens were prepared by the dry air pulluviation method and were saturated by using back pressure until a Skempton’s B parameter (B-value) greater than 0.98 was reached. All specimens were isotropically consolidated to an effective confining stress of 100 kPa (2,000 Ib/ft). A strain-controlled (strain rate, 0.6 per- cent/min) monotonic undrained TC test was done on typical 100- When plotted together with data for the other sands included in the study (Figure 6), the data for the host sand (2 percent fines) fell in the corresponding band for relatively clean sands [Figure 3(a)]. The data for 10 percent GSF and 10 percent KSF (each containing
FIGURE 2 Laboratory triaxial S,,, data: (a) S,,, versus e; (b) S,; versus D,. The specimens were prepared by the dry air pulluviation method and were saturated by using back pressure until a Skempton’s B parameter (B-value) greater than 0.98 was reached. All specimens were isotropically consolidated to an effective confining stress of 100 kPa (2,000 Ib/ft). A strain-controlled (strain rate, 0.6 per- cent/min) monotonic undrained TC test was done on typical 100- When plotted together with data for the other sands included in the study (Figure 6), the data for the host sand (2 percent fines) fell in the corresponding band for relatively clean sands [Figure 3(a)]. The data for 10 percent GSF and 10 percent KSF (each containing
TABLE 2_ Test Data for Sand Tested with Different Fines Contents
TABLE 2_ Test Data for Sand Tested with Different Fines Contents
FIGURE3 _§S,, versus D, data: (a) relatively clean sands, (b) silty sands and silt, and (c) combined plot.
FIGURE3 _§S,, versus D, data: (a) relatively clean sands, (b) silty sands and silt, and (c) combined plot.
FIGURE 4 S,, versus D, data for relatively clean sands: @min Was determined by (a2) ASTM D1557 or JSSMEFE or (b) ASTM D2049.
FIGURE 4 S,, versus D, data for relatively clean sands: @min Was determined by (a2) ASTM D1557 or JSSMEFE or (b) ASTM D2049.
FIGURE 5 Gradation curves for host sand with different fines content.
FIGURE 5 Gradation curves for host sand with different fines content.
FIGURE 6 _ Stress-strain behavior for host sand with different fines contents.
FIGURE 6 _ Stress-strain behavior for host sand with different fines contents.
FIGURE7 S,, versus D, for host sand with different fines contents.
FIGURE7 S,, versus D, for host sand with different fines contents.
FIGURE 9_ S,, versus percent compaction data: (a) relatively clean sands, (b) silty sands and silt. Fines content, D,, and friction angle play important roles affecting Ss, but the fines content is found to be the major factor affecting S,,,. When the S,, data for sands are grouped into (a) relatively clean sands (<12 percent fines), (b) silty sands (12 to 50 percent fines), and (c) silts or sandy silts (>50 percent fines), at the same D,, rela- tively clean sands had the highest S,,. For clean sands S,,, increases as the friction angle increases. However, when fines are added the strength is primarily affected by the fines content. Silts had the low-
FIGURE 9_ S,, versus percent compaction data: (a) relatively clean sands, (b) silty sands and silt. Fines content, D,, and friction angle play important roles affecting Ss, but the fines content is found to be the major factor affecting S,,,. When the S,, data for sands are grouped into (a) relatively clean sands (<12 percent fines), (b) silty sands (12 to 50 percent fines), and (c) silts or sandy silts (>50 percent fines), at the same D,, rela- tively clean sands had the highest S,,. For clean sands S,,, increases as the friction angle increases. However, when fines are added the strength is primarily affected by the fines content. Silts had the low-
Related topics:
EngineeringCivil EngineeringComputer Science
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved