Influence of Damping Forms on the Behavior of Sand Under Dynamic Compaction

  • Yuqi LiEmail author
  • Jun Chen
  • Jiejun Zhu
Conference paper


Based on Mohr-Coulomb theory, a centrifuge test of dry sand was simulated using FLAC3D. The local and Rayleigh damping were applied respectively to numerical model. The result shows that the ground settlement around tamping pit under local damping is smaller than that under Rayleigh damping. There is little difference between the maximum vertical stresses of the first impact under local damping and Rayleigh damping. The maximum vertical stresses both appear at 1–2 m depth under the tamping pit. However, the calculation efficiency under local damping is higher than that under Rayleigh damping. The dissipation of energy grows apparently as the depth of foundation is augmented. The study on the simulation of different damping forms in FLAC3D is helpful to further research about dynamic compaction.


Dynamic compaction Mohr–Coulomb theory FLAC3D Local damping Rayleigh damping 


  1. 1.
    Menard, L., Broise, Y.: Theoretical and practical aspects of dynamic consolidation. Geotechnique 25(1), 3–18 (1975)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Davies, M.C.R., Merrifield, C.M.: A study of low-energy dynamic compaction: field trials and centrifuge modeling. Geotechnique 50(6), 675–681 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Feng, S.J., Shui, W.H., Gao, L.Y., et al.: Field evaluation of dynamic compaction on granular deposits. J. Perform. Constructed Facil. 25(3), 241–249 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gu, Q., Lee, F.H.: Ground response to dynamic compaction of dry sand. Geotechnique 52(7), 481–493 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Borg, J.P., Vogler, T.J.: Rapid compaction of granular material: characterizing two- and three-dimensional mesoscale simulations. Shock Waves 23(2), 153–176 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ghosh, P., Kumar, R.: Seismic interaction of two closely spaced horizontal square and rectangular ground anchors in layered soil. Int. J. Geotech. Eng. 11(1), 1–10 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mendonca, A., Lopes, M.L.: Role of the damping ratio of reinforcement on the behaviour of geogrids-reinforced systems. Geotech. Geol. Eng. 29(3), 375–388 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Takada, N., Oshima, A.: Comparison between field and centrifuge model tests of heavy test. In: Proceedings of the International Conference Centrifuge, vol. 94, pp. 337–342. CRC Press, Singapore (1994)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhu, J.J.: Numerical Simulation Study on Dynamic Compaction of Dry Sand. Shanghai University, Shanghai (2017). (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Qian, J.H., Shuai, F.S.: Application of boundary element method in dynamic compaction. China Sci. 3, 329–336 (1987). (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wu, M.B., Wang, Z.Q.: Numerical analysis of the mechanism of dynamic compaction. Geotech. Invest. Surveying 3, 1–5 (1989). (in Chinese)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Shanghai UniversityShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations