YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    Progressive Response and Dynamic Behavior of Loose Gravel–Sand Mixtures

    Source: Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering:;2025:;Volume ( 151 ):;issue: 001::page 04024150-1
    Author:
    Siwadol Dejphumee
    ,
    Inthuorn Sasanakul
    DOI: 10.1061/JGGEFK.GTENG-12466
    Publisher: American Society of Civil Engineers
    Abstract: Previous studies investigating dynamic responses of gravelly soil were limited to high-strain conditions, in which a high level of pore-water pressure is developed, leading to a significant reduction in shear strength and subsequent liquefaction. This paper presents a series of dynamic centrifuge modeling tests performed on loose gravel–sand mixtures to evaluate progressive response under various shear strains. The centrifuge models simulated a uniform soil profile of gravel–sand mixtures with gravel contents of 20%, 40%, 65%, 80%, and 100% that were subjected to incrementally increasing shaking amplitudes from 0.01 to 0.40  g. Due to the influence of composition on the void ratio of the specimens, the results were analyzed in terms of their dominant behaviors (i.e., sandlike, gravellike, or transition soil). Although the soils had comparable initial relative densities, the sandlike soils had the lowest void ratio, and the void ratio increased when the gravel content was greater than 65%. Resonant column testing results indicated that the soils had comparable dynamic properties because of their loose condition. The results showed that dynamic shaking generates comparable shear strains ranging from 0.03% to 3.8% in all models, but the accumulation of pore pressure leads to upward flow in sandlike soils, whereas transient pore-pressure behavior leads to oscillatory flow in gravellike soils. Differences in the stress–strain response and the effects of the number of shaking cycles were observed in different soil mixtures depending upon the level of excess pore pressure. At low shaking amplitude and low excess pore pressure, stiffness degradation was observed while the stress–strain loop was symmetric. At high shaking amplitude and high excess pore pressure, significant stiffness degradation was observed followed by shear-induced dilation resulting in an asymmetrical stress–strain loop. This study clarifies the differences in the dynamic responses and behaviors of sandlike, gravellike, and transition soil over a wide range of strains.
    • Download: (6.018Mb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Get RIS
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      Progressive Response and Dynamic Behavior of Loose Gravel–Sand Mixtures

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4303767
    Collections
    • Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering

    Show full item record

    contributor authorSiwadol Dejphumee
    contributor authorInthuorn Sasanakul
    date accessioned2025-04-20T09:58:47Z
    date available2025-04-20T09:58:47Z
    date copyright11/6/2024 12:00:00 AM
    date issued2025
    identifier otherJGGEFK.GTENG-12466.pdf
    identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4303767
    description abstractPrevious studies investigating dynamic responses of gravelly soil were limited to high-strain conditions, in which a high level of pore-water pressure is developed, leading to a significant reduction in shear strength and subsequent liquefaction. This paper presents a series of dynamic centrifuge modeling tests performed on loose gravel–sand mixtures to evaluate progressive response under various shear strains. The centrifuge models simulated a uniform soil profile of gravel–sand mixtures with gravel contents of 20%, 40%, 65%, 80%, and 100% that were subjected to incrementally increasing shaking amplitudes from 0.01 to 0.40  g. Due to the influence of composition on the void ratio of the specimens, the results were analyzed in terms of their dominant behaviors (i.e., sandlike, gravellike, or transition soil). Although the soils had comparable initial relative densities, the sandlike soils had the lowest void ratio, and the void ratio increased when the gravel content was greater than 65%. Resonant column testing results indicated that the soils had comparable dynamic properties because of their loose condition. The results showed that dynamic shaking generates comparable shear strains ranging from 0.03% to 3.8% in all models, but the accumulation of pore pressure leads to upward flow in sandlike soils, whereas transient pore-pressure behavior leads to oscillatory flow in gravellike soils. Differences in the stress–strain response and the effects of the number of shaking cycles were observed in different soil mixtures depending upon the level of excess pore pressure. At low shaking amplitude and low excess pore pressure, stiffness degradation was observed while the stress–strain loop was symmetric. At high shaking amplitude and high excess pore pressure, significant stiffness degradation was observed followed by shear-induced dilation resulting in an asymmetrical stress–strain loop. This study clarifies the differences in the dynamic responses and behaviors of sandlike, gravellike, and transition soil over a wide range of strains.
    publisherAmerican Society of Civil Engineers
    titleProgressive Response and Dynamic Behavior of Loose Gravel–Sand Mixtures
    typeJournal Article
    journal volume151
    journal issue1
    journal titleJournal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering
    identifier doi10.1061/JGGEFK.GTENG-12466
    journal fristpage04024150-1
    journal lastpage04024150-17
    page17
    treeJournal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering:;2025:;Volume ( 151 ):;issue: 001
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian