Cpt-Based Liquefaction Resistance of Clean and Silty Sands: a Drainage Conditions Based Approach
Loading...
Date
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Open Access Color
HYBRID
Green Open Access
No
OpenAIRE Downloads
OpenAIRE Views
Publicly Funded
No
Abstract
The cone penetration test-based simplified liquefaction triggering evaluations are largely based on linking liquefaction manifestations in the field to cone penetration resistance. These relationships are interpreted in such a way that for given penetration resistance, the liquefaction resistance increases as non-plastic fines content (FC) increases. However, several studies have indicated discrepancies in this relationship. Hence, there is a lag in rational scientific understanding of this observation. In this study, an experimental research program was undertaken to investigate the CPT-based liquefaction assessment by considering the effects of drainage conditions on the relationship between CPT resistance and liquefaction resistance. First, clean sand and silty sands having 5, 15, and 35% FC were tested at different relative densities by stress-controlled cyclic direct simple shear (CDSS) tests to investigate cyclic resistance of silty sand with varying amounts of non-plastic fines. Then, a set of tests involving piezocone penetration (CPTu), seismic CPTu (SCPTu), and direct push permeability (DPPT) were undertaken in a large-scale box filled with the same soils used in the CDSS tests. The large-scale test results quantified the effect of drainage conditions (coefficient of consolidation) on cone penetration resistance. Finally, by combining the CDSS and CPTu test results, an alternative CPT-based liquefaction resistance relationship was proposed by considering the effects of drainage conditions.
Description
Keywords
Coefficient of consolidation, Cone penetration test, Cyclic simple shear test, Relative density
Fields of Science
0211 other engineering and technologies, 02 engineering and technology
Citation
WoS Q
Scopus Q

OpenCitations Citation Count
6
Volume
20
Issue
15
Start Page
7957
End Page
7980
PlumX Metrics
Citations
CrossRef : 2
Scopus : 8
Captures
Mendeley Readers : 10
Google Scholar™


