International Journal of Civil Engineering

, Volume 16, Issue 4, pp 383–393 | Cite as

Mechanical Properties of Artificial Structured Soils Under a Conventional Drained Loading–Unloading–Reloading Stress Path

Research Paper

Abstract

Triaxial tests were performed on artificially structured soils, including initially isotropic and initially stress-induced anisotropic soils, and remolded samples under consolidation drained conditions at confining pressures of 50, 100, 200 and 400 kPa to investigate their volumetric contraction behaviors upon axial unloading. The values of axial strain at which unloading begins are set as 3, 6, 9 and 12% to apply the axial unloading–reloading stress path. Factors, including confining pressure, axial strain at which unloading starts, structure and anisotropy, are investigated to analyze their influences on the behaviors of volumetric contraction due to axial unloading. The results demonstrate that: (1) for the three types of tested samples, including initially isotropic, initially stress-induced anisotropic and remolded samples, the volumetric strains are contractive during the process of axial unloading in unloading–reloading stress cycles under all of the confining pressures; (2) the higher the confining pressure and axial strain at which axial unloading starts, the greater the volumetric contraction due to axial unloading is; (3) in comparison with initially isotropic structured soils, initially stress-induced anisotropic samples have smaller volumetric contraction because of axial unloading at low confining pressure; and (4) stress-induced anisotropy can increase volumetric contraction due to axial unloading, but it has very weak influences on artificially structured soils at low confining pressure.

Keywords

Volumetric contraction due to axial unloading Artificially structured soils Anisotropy Axial unloading–reloading stress path Triaxial compression 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors appreciate the financial support from the CAS Pioneer Hundred Talents Program (Liu Enlong) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) (Grant Nos. 51009103 and 51579167).

The financial support is from the National Natural Science Foundations of China (NSFC). This study is also funded by Open Fund Research at the State Key Laboratory of Hydraulics and Mountain River Engineering (No. SKHL1508).

References

  1. 1.
    Schofield AN, Worth CP (1968) Critical state soil mechanics. MacGraw-Hill, LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pu JL, Li GX, Sun YS (1985) A three dimensional elasto-plastic model for sands. In: Proceedings of 11th international conference on soil mechanics and foundation engineering. San Franciso, vol 1, pp 621–624Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shamoto Y, Zhang JM, Goto S (1997) Mechanism of large post-liquefaction deformation in saturated sand. Soils Found 37(2):71–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lade PV, Duncan JM (1976) Stress-path dependent behavior of cohesionless soil. J Geotech Eng 101(1):51–68Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jiao DQ, Chen YJ (1994) Anisotropy and volume-contraction of soil due to axial unloading in CD test. Chin J Geotech Eng 16(7):9–16 (in Chinese) Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Li GX, Guo RP (2000) Volume-contraction in unloading of shear tests and reversible dilation of soils. Chin J Geotech Eng 22(2):158–161 (in Chinese) Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mitchell JK (1976) Fundamentals of soil behavior. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Burland JB (1990) On the compressibility and shear strength of natural clays. Géotechnique 40:329–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Leroueil S, Vaughan PR (1990) The important and congruent effects of structure in natural soils and weak rocks. Géotechnique 40:467–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lo KY, Morin JP (1972) Strength anisotropy and time effects of two sensitive clays. Can Geotech J 9:261–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sangrey D (1972) On the causes of natural cementation in sensitive soils. Can Geotech J 9:117–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Baracos A, Graham J, Domaschuk L (1980) Yielding and rupture in a Lacustrine clay. Can Geotech J 17:559–573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Diaz-Rodriguez JA, Leroueil S, Aleman JD (1992) Yielding of Mexico city and other natural clays. J Geotech Eng 118:981–995CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Callisto L, Calabresi G (1998) Mechanical behaviour of a natural soft clay. Géotechnique 48:495–513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shen ZJ (1998) Engineering properties of soft soils and design of soft ground. Chin J Geotech Eng 20:100–111 (In Chinese) Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Smith PR, Jardine RJ, Hight DW (1992) On the yielding of Bothkennar clay. Géotechnique 42:257–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Graham J, Houlsby GT (1983) Anisotropic elasticity of a natural clay. Géotechnique 33:165–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schmertmann JH (1991) The mechanical aging of soils. J Geotech Eng 117:1288–1330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cotecchia F, Chandler RJ (2002) A general framework for the mechanical behaviour of clays. Géotechnique 50:431–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dudoignon P, Pantet A, Carra L, Velde B (2001) Macro-micro measurement of particle arrangement in sheared kaolinitic matrices. Géotechnique 51:493–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Callisto L, Gajo A, Wood DM (2002) Simulation of triaxial and true triaxial tests on natural and reconstituted Pisa clay. Géotechnique 52:649–666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rocchi G, Vaciago G, Fontana M, Prat MD (2013) Understanding sampling disturbance and behavior of structured clays through constitutive modeling. Soils Found 53:315–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Malanraki V, Toll DG (2001) Triaxial tests on weakly bonded soil with changes in stress path. J Geotech Geoenv Eng 127:282–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bressani LA (1990) Experimental properties of bonded soils. Ph.D. thesis, University of LondonGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Maccarini M (1987) Laboratory studies of a weakly bonded artificial soil. Ph.D. thesis, University of LondonGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kavvads M, Amorosi A (2000) A constitutive model for structured soils. Géotechnique 50:263–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Liu MD, Carter JP (2002) A structured cam-clay model. Can Geotech J 39:1313–1332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Belokas G, Kavvadas M (2010) An anisotropic model for structured soils. Comput Geotech 37:737–747CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Liu W, Shi M, Miao L, Xu L, Zhang D (2013) Constitutive modelling of the destructuration and anisotropy of natural soft clay. Comput Geotech 51:24–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Rouainia M, Wood DM (2000) A kinematic hardening constitutive model for natural clays with loss of structure. Géotechnique 50:153–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Baudet B, Stallebrass S (2004) A constitutive model for structured clays. Géotechnique 54:269–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Goorani M, Hamidi A (2015) A generalized plasticity constitutive model for sand-gravel mixtures. Int J Civil Eng 13(2):133–145Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Yildiz A, Uysal F (2016) Modelling of anisotropy and consolidation effect on behavior of sunshine embankment: Australia. Int J Civil Eng 14(2):83–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Soltani-Jigheh H (2016) Compressibility and shearing behavior of clayey soil reinforced by plastic waste. Int J Civil Eng 14(7):479–489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wheeler SJ, Näätänen A, Karstunen M, Lojander M (2003) An anisotropic elastoplastic model for soft clays. Can Geotech J 40:403–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Suebsuk J, Horpibulsuk S, Liu MD (2011) A critical sate model for overconsolidated structured clays. Comput Geotech 38:648–658CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Huang M, Liu Y, Sheng D (2011) Simulation of yielding and stress–strain behavior of shanghai soft clay. Comput Geotech 38:341–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Yin ZY, Chang CS, Hicher PY, Karstunen M (2009) Micromechanical analysis of kinematic hardening in natural clay. Int J Plast 25:1413–1435CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Gao Z, Zhao J (2012) Constitutive modelling of artificially cemented sand by considering fabric anisotropy. Comput Geotech 41:57–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Iran University of Science and Technology 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Enlong Liu
    • 1
    • 2
  • Shanyong Wang
    • 3
  • Cheng Zhou
    • 1
  • Qing Nie
    • 1
  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Hydraulics and Mountain Engineering, College of Water Resource and Hydropower EngineeringSichuan UniversityChengduPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.State Key Laboratory of Frozen Soil Engineering, Northwest Institute of Eco-Environment and ResourcesChinese Academy of SciencesLanzhouChina
  3. 3.ARC Centre of Excellence for Geotechnical Science and EngineeringThe University of NewcastleCallaghanAustralia

Personalised recommendations