Advertisement

Field Investigation of Maximum Dynamic Shear Modulus of Clay Deposit Using Seismic Piezocone

  • Zhaoyu Wang
  • Nan Zhang
  • Guojun Cai
  • Qi Li
  • Jiajia Wang
Research paper
  • 31 Downloads

Abstract

The maximum dynamic shear modulus (Gmax) of soils is a fundamental parameter used in the evaluation of soil dynamic behavior and seismic design in geotechnical engineering. In this study, seismic piezocone (SCPTU) and resonant column (RCT) test methods were adopted for measuring soil shear wave velocity (Vs) in Jiangsu Province of China. Then, the relationship between the Gmax and SCPTU test parameters was established based on the test data of shear wave velocity. The results show that using the correlation between the cone resistance (qt) and void ratio (e) or pore pressure parameter (Bq) to evaluate Gmax was better than using the single-cone tip resistance parameters. The Gmax of the soft soil can be determined more accurately using the cone tip resistance and pore pressure parameters measured by the SCPTU test method, and corrected based on the laboratory test data. The evaluation of Gmax based on the RCT test results was not satisfactory due to the soil disturbance induced during sampling and testing processes.

Keywords

Seismic piezocone Resonant column Soft clay Maximum dynamic shear modulus 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was financially supported by the Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province (Grant No. BK20161311), Joint Technology Transfer Center of Yancheng Vocational Institute of Industry Technology, Yancheng Polytechnic College (Grant No. YGKF-201705), Six Major Talent Peak in Jiangsu Province in China (Grant No. 2015-JZ-011), and Innovation of Science and Technology of Institution of Higher Education in Jiangsu Province (Grant No. 2017-51). The authors are also grateful to Dr. Xinbao Yu and Dr. Cheng Lu for their constructive comments on this paper.

References

  1. 1.
    Chen GX, Zhu DH, He QZ (2003) Development and property test of GZZ-1 free vibration column test system. Earthq Eng Eng Vib 23(1):111–114.  https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1000-1301.2003.01.018 Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tavenas F, Leroueil S (1987) State-of-the-art on laboratory and in-situ stress-strain-time behavior of soft clays. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Geotechnical Engineering of Soft Soils. Mexico City, pp 13–14Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mayne P (2000) Enhanced geotechnical site characterization by seismic piezocone penetration tests. In: Fourth International Geotechnical Conference, Cairo University, pp 95–120Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mayne PW, Rix GJ (1995) Correlations between shear wave velocity and cone tip resistance in natural clays. Soils Found 35(2):107–110.  https://doi.org/10.3208/sandf1972.35.2_107 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lin J, Cai GJ, Liu S, Puppala AJ, Zou H (2017) Correlations between electrical resistivity and geotechnical parameters for Jiangsu marine clay using spearman’s coefficient test. Int J Civil Eng 15(3):419–429.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s4099 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zhang M, Tong L (2017) Determination of hydraulic conductivity using a modified cylindrical-half-spherical piezocone model. Int J Civil Eng.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40999-017-0154-2 Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Li XP, Cai GJ, Liu S, Puppala AJ, Zheng JH, Jiang T (2017) Undrained shear strength and pore pressure changes due to prestress concrete pile installation in soft clay. Int J Civil Eng.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40999-017-0200-0 Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ku T, Mayne PW, Cargill E (2013) Continuous-interval shear wave velocity profiling by auto-source and seismic piezocone tests. Can Geotech J 50(4):382–390.  https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2012-0278 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hosseini SMM, Hajimohammadi AA, Hajimohammadi AR (2010) The validity assesment of laboratory shear modolus using in-situ seismic piezocone test results. Int J Civil Eng 8(2):134–142Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Abu-Farsakh MY (2007) Possible evaluation of overconsolidation ratio of clayey soils from piezocone penetration tests. Geo-Denver, GSP 162 Problematic Soils and Rocks and In Situ Characterization, Denver, ColoradoGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wang ZY, Mei GX (2012) Dynamic properties of rubber cement stabilized soil based on resonant column tests. Mar Georesour Geotechnol 30(4):333–346.  https://doi.org/10.1080/1064119X.2011.631693 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Demers D (2001) Contribution au développement de l’usage du piézocône dans les sols argileux. Dissertation, Université LavalGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Demers D, Leroueil S (2002) Evaluation of preconsolidation pressure and the overconsolidation ratio from piezocone tests of clay deposits in Quebec. Can Geotech J 39(2):174–192.  https://doi.org/10.1139/t01-071 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mayne PW, Robertson PK, Lunne T (1998) Clay stress history evaluated from seismic piezocone. Geotech Site Charact 2:1113–1118Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schmertmann JH (1978) Guidelines for Cone Penetration Test, United States Department of Transportation. Report FHWA TS-78-209Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Long M, Donohue S (2010) Characterization of Norwegian marine clays with combined shear wave velocity and piezocone cone penetration test (CPTU) data. Can Geotech J 47(7):709–718.  https://doi.org/10.1139/T09-133 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cai GJ, Puppala AJ, Liu S (2014) Characterization on the correlation between shear wave velocity and piezocone tip resistance of Jiangsu clays. Eng Geol 171:96–103.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2013.12.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mayne PW, Rix GJ (1993) G max-qc relationships for clays. Geotech Test J 16(1):54–60.  https://doi.org/10.1520/GTJ10267J CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hegazy YA, Mayne PW (1995) Statistical correlation between vs and cone penetration data for different soil types. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Cone Penetration Testing, CPT'95, Linkoping, Sweden, pp 173–178Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cai GJ, Liu SY, Tong LY (2010) Field evaluation of deformation characteristics of a lacustrine clay deposit using seismic piezocone tests. Eng Geol 116(3):251–260.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2010.09.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Skempton AW (1954) The pore pressure coefficients A and B. Geotechnique 4(4):143–147.  https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.1954.4.4.143 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Simonini P, Cola S (2000) Use of piezocone to predict maximum stiffness of Venetian soils. J Geotech Geoenvironmental Eng 126(4):378–382.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2000)126:4(378) CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Iran University of Science and Technology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zhaoyu Wang
    • 1
  • Nan Zhang
    • 2
  • Guojun Cai
    • 3
  • Qi Li
    • 1
  • Jiajia Wang
    • 1
  1. 1.College of Civil EngineeringYancheng Institute of TechnologyYanchengChina
  2. 2.Department of Civil EngineeringThe University of Texas at ArlingtonArlingtonUSA
  3. 3.Institute of Geotechnical EngineeringSoutheast UniversityNanjingChina

Personalised recommendations