Advertisement

Geotechnical and Geological Engineering

, Volume 37, Issue 1, pp 201–216 | Cite as

Liquefaction Resistance of Sandy Soils from Undrained Cyclic Triaxial Tests

  • Valentina LentiniEmail author
  • Francesco Castelli
Original Paper
  • 117 Downloads

Abstract

Recent earthquakes frequently showed liquefaction of sandy soils. In these case one of the major challenges is the assessment of the residual strength of liquefied soil. Laboratory researches have clearly indicated that liquefaction susceptibility depend on many factors including soil grain size distribution, effective confining stresses and applied stress path in terms of cyclic shear stress amplitude. The complex cyclic shear stress path experienced by the soil during an earthquake can be reproduced in laboratory only by using sophisticated testing apparatuses. Cyclic triaxial tests have been widely used to asses soil liquefaction potential especially for coarse-grained soils, as in this study. In the framework of the design for the seismic retrofitting of the “Viadotto Ritiro” foundations along the A20 motorway connecting Messina with Palermo, a soil liquefaction study has been carried out. With this aim, a detailed geological and geotechnical characterization of the area has been performed by in situ and laboratory tests including the combined resonant column and torsional shear test and undrained cyclic triaxial tests (CTX). In particular, the paper presents the results of CTX, carried out on isotropically consolidated specimens carried out on specimens of a sandy soil to asses liquefaction strength. The results are plotted in terms of deviator stress q versus axial strain εa, cyclic stress ratio CSR and axial strain εa versus number of cycles Ncyc, effective mean stress p′ versus deviator stress q, cyclic stress ratio CSR and pore pressure ratio Ru versus number of cycles Ncyc. The results show that the cyclic resistance increases with the decrease in the initial confining stress and decreases as the silt content increases and confirme that the coarsest material has a lower tendency to liquefy.

Keywords

Liquefaction Cyclic resistance Earthquake 

References

  1. Castelli F, Lentini V (2013) Landsliding events triggered by rainfalls in the Enna area (South Italy). Proc. Second World Landslide Forum 2:39–47Google Scholar
  2. Castelli F, Lentini V (2017) Dynamic characterization of municipal solid waste by in situ and laboratory tests. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)gt.1943-5606.0001641 Google Scholar
  3. Castelli F, Lentini V, Maugeri M (2013) Stability analysis of landfills in seismic area. In: Proceedings of the geo-congress 2103, ASCE geotechnical special publication, no. 231, stability and performance of slopes and embankments, p 1226–1239Google Scholar
  4. Castelli F, Lentini V, Trifarò CA (2016a) 1D seismic analysis of earth dams: the example of the Lentini site. In: Proceedings of the VI Italian conference of researchers in geotechnical engineering-geotechnical engineering in multidisciplinary research: from microscale to regional scale, CNRIG2016. Procedia engineering, vol 158, p 356–361Google Scholar
  5. Castelli F, Castellano E, Contino F, Lentini V (2016b) A web-based GIS system for landslide risk zonation: the case of Enna area (Italy). In: Proceeding of the 12th international symposium on landslides, Napoli, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  6. Castelli F, Lentini V, Grasso S (2017a) Recent developments for the seismic risk assessment. Bull Earthq Eng.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-017-0163-1 Google Scholar
  7. Castelli F, Lentini V, Maugeri M (2017b) Dynamic characterisation of municipal solid waste by SDMT. Environ Geotech J 4(1):9–18.  https://doi.org/10.1680/envgeo.13.00121 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Castelli F, Freni G, Lentini V, Fichera A (2017c) Modelling of a debris flow event in the Enna area for hazard assessment. In: Proceedings of the 1st international conference on the material point method, MPM 2017, Delft, January 10–13, 2017. Procedia engineering, vol 175, p 287–292.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.01.026
  9. de Silva F, Sica S, Silvestri F, Aversa S (2016) Estimation of the ground shaking from the response of rigid bodies. In: Anzidei M, Pondrelli S (eds) The Amatrice seismic sequence: preliminary data and results. Ann Geophys 59(5)Google Scholar
  10. Facciorusso J, Madiai C, Vannucchi G (2016) The 2012 Emilia earthquake (Italy): geotechnical characterization and ground response analyses of the paleo-Reno river levees. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 86:71–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Flora A, Lirer S, Silvestri F (2012) Undrained cyclic resistance of undisturbed gravelly soil. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 43(12):366–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gibbs HJ, Holtz WG (1957) Research on determining the density of sands by spoon penetration testing. In: Proceeding of 4th international conference on soil mechanics and foundation engineering, vol 1. London, pp 35–39Google Scholar
  13. Grasso S, Castelli F, Massimino MR, Lentini V (2016) In situ measurements for evaluating liquefaction potential under cyclic loading. In: Proceeding of the 1st IMEKO TC-4 international workshop on metrology for geotechnics, Benevento, Italy, p 79–84Google Scholar
  14. Huang T, Huang A, Kuo Y, Tsai M (2004) A laboratory study on the undrained strength of a silty sand from Central Western Taiwan. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 24(9–10):733–743CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hyodo M, Tanimizu H, Yasufuku N, Fujii T (1991) Undrained cyclic shear strength and residual shear strain of saturated sand by cyclic triaxial tests. Soils Found 31(3):60–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ishiara K (1996) Soil behavior in earthquake geotechnics. Clarendon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  17. Kulhawy FH, Mayne PW (1990) Manual on estimating soil properties for foundation design. Electric Power Research institute, EL-6800, Research Project 1493-6Google Scholar
  18. Marsal RJ (1967) Large scale testing of rockfill materials. J Soil Mech Found Eng ASCE 93(2):27–43Google Scholar
  19. Monaco P, Totani G, Totani F, Grasso S, Maugeri M (2011) Site effects and site amplification due to the 2009 Abruzzo earthquake. In: Proceedings of the 8th international conference on earthquake resistant engineering structures, WIT transactions on the built environment, vol 120, p 29–40Google Scholar
  20. Monaco P, Totani G, Amoroso S, Totani F, Marchetti D (2013) Site characterization by seismic dilatometer (SDMT) in the city of L’Aquila. Riv Ital Geotec 3:8–22Google Scholar
  21. NTC (2008) Norme tecniche per le costruzioni-D.M. 14 Gennaio 2008Google Scholar
  22. Pino NA, Giardini D, Boschi E (2000) The December 28, 1908, Messina Straits, southern Italy, earthquake: waveform modeling of regional seismograms. J Geophys Res 105(B11):25473–25492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pino NA, Piatanesi A, Valensise G, Boschi E (2009) The 28 December 1908 Messina Straits earthquake (Mw 7.1): a great earthquake throughout a century of seismology. Seismol Res Lett 80:243–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Robertson PK, Wride CE (1998) Evaluating cyclic liquefaction potential using the cone penetration test. Can Geotech J 35(4):442–459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Santucci de Magistris F, d’Onofrio A, Evangelista L, Foti S, Maraschini M, Monaco P, Amoroso S, Totani G, Lanzo G, Pagliaroli A, Madiai C, Simoni G, Silvestri F (2013) Geotechnical characterization of the Aterno valley for site response analyses. Riv Ital Geotec 3:23–43Google Scholar
  26. Sawada S, Takeshima Y, Mikami T (2003) Effect of K0-condition on liquefaction characteristics of saturated sand. In: Taylor & Francis (eds) Deformation characteristics of geo-materials, chapter 65. Taylor & Francis, pp 511–517Google Scholar
  27. Seed HB, Lee KL (1966) Liquefaction of saturated sands during cyclic loading. J Soil Mech Found Div ASCE 92(6):105–134Google Scholar
  28. Skempton AW (1986) Standard penetration tests procedures & the effects in sands of overburden pressure, relative density, particle size, ageing and overconsolidation. Géotechnique 36(3):425–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sladen JA, D’Hollander RD, Krahn J (1985) The liquefaction of sands, a collapse surface approach. Can Geotech J 22:564–578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Toki S, Tatsukoa F, Miura S, Yoshimi Y, Yasuda S, Makihara Y (1986) Cyclic undrained triaxial strength of sand by a cooperative test program. Soils Found 26(3):117–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Vaid YP, Sivathayalan S (1996) Static and cyclic liquefaction potential of Fraser Delta sand in simple shear and triaxial tests. Can Geotech J 33(2):281–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Vaid YP, Chern J, Tumi H (1985) Confining pressure, grain angularity and liquefaction. J Geotech Eng 111(10):1229–1235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Vaid YP, Stedman JD, Sivathayalan S (2001) Confining stress and static shear stress in cyclic liquefaction. Can Geotech J 38(3):580–591CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Yoshimi Y, Tokimatsu K, Kaneko O, Makihara Y (1984) Undrained cyclic shear strength of dense Nigata sand. Soils Found 24(4):131–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Engineering and ArchitectureUniversity of Enna KoreEnnaItaly

Personalised recommendations