Accès libre

Influence of Soil Fabrics and Stress State on the Undrained Instability of Overconsolidated Binary Granular Assemblies

À propos de cet article

Citez

Figure 1

Determination of the instability line (Yamamuro and Lade, 1997).
Determination of the instability line (Yamamuro and Lade, 1997).

Figure 2

(a) Photograph and (b) SEM image of Chlef sand (Algeria).
(a) Photograph and (b) SEM image of Chlef sand (Algeria).

Figure 3

Grain size distribution curves of tested soils.
Grain size distribution curves of tested soils.

Figure 4

Void ratios index of tested soils. (a) Void ratio index versus fines content and (b) maximum void ratio versus minimum void ratio.
Void ratios index of tested soils. (a) Void ratio index versus fines content and (b) maximum void ratio versus minimum void ratio.

Figure 5

Schematic illustration of sample preparation; (a) wet deposition and (b) dry funnel pluviation.
Schematic illustration of sample preparation; (a) wet deposition and (b) dry funnel pluviation.

Figure 6

View of (a) dry funnel pluviated and (b) wet deposited samples after shearing.
View of (a) dry funnel pluviated and (b) wet deposited samples after shearing.

Figure 7

Undrained monotonic response of dry funnel pluviated sand–silt mixtures (Fc = 0%, OCR = 1, Dr = 52 %): (a) deviator stress versus axial strain, (b) excess pore water pressure versus axial strain and (c) stress path diagram.
Undrained monotonic response of dry funnel pluviated sand–silt mixtures (Fc = 0%, OCR = 1, Dr = 52 %): (a) deviator stress versus axial strain, (b) excess pore water pressure versus axial strain and (c) stress path diagram.

Figure 8

Undrained monotonic response of dry funnel pluviated sand–silt mixtures (Fc = 40%, OCR = 1, Dr = 52%): (a) deviator stress versus axial strain, (b) excess pore water pressure versus axial strain and (c) stress path diagram.
Undrained monotonic response of dry funnel pluviated sand–silt mixtures (Fc = 40%, OCR = 1, Dr = 52%): (a) deviator stress versus axial strain, (b) excess pore water pressure versus axial strain and (c) stress path diagram.

Figure 9

Undrained monotonic response of dry funnel pluviated sand–silt mixtures (Fc = 0%, OCR = 2, Dr = 52%): (a) deviator stress versus axial strain, (b) excess pore water pressure versus axial strain and (c) stress path diagram.
Undrained monotonic response of dry funnel pluviated sand–silt mixtures (Fc = 0%, OCR = 2, Dr = 52%): (a) deviator stress versus axial strain, (b) excess pore water pressure versus axial strain and (c) stress path diagram.

Figure 10

Undrained monotonic response of dry funnel pluviated sand–silt mixtures (Fc = 40%, OCR = 2, Dr = 52%): (a) deviator stress versus axial strain, (b) excess pore water pressure versus axial strain and (c) stress path diagram.
Undrained monotonic response of dry funnel pluviated sand–silt mixtures (Fc = 40%, OCR = 2, Dr = 52%): (a) deviator stress versus axial strain, (b) excess pore water pressure versus axial strain and (c) stress path diagram.

Figure 11

Undrained monotonic response of wet deposited sand–silt mixtures (Fc = 0%, OCR = 1, Dr = 52%): (a) deviator stress versus axial strain, (b) excess pore water pressure versus axial strain and (c) stress path diagram.
Undrained monotonic response of wet deposited sand–silt mixtures (Fc = 0%, OCR = 1, Dr = 52%): (a) deviator stress versus axial strain, (b) excess pore water pressure versus axial strain and (c) stress path diagram.

Figure 12

Undrained monotonic response of wet deposited sand–silt mixtures (Fc = 40%, OCR = 1, Dr = 52%): (a) deviator stress versus axial strain, (b) excess pore water pressure versus axial strain and (c) stress path diagram.
Undrained monotonic response of wet deposited sand–silt mixtures (Fc = 40%, OCR = 1, Dr = 52%): (a) deviator stress versus axial strain, (b) excess pore water pressure versus axial strain and (c) stress path diagram.

Figure 13

Undrained monotonic response of wet deposited sand–silt mixtures (Fc = 0%, OCR = 2, Dr = 52%): (a) deviator stress versus axial strain, (b) excess pore water pressure versus axial strain and (c) stress path diagram.
Undrained monotonic response of wet deposited sand–silt mixtures (Fc = 0%, OCR = 2, Dr = 52%): (a) deviator stress versus axial strain, (b) excess pore water pressure versus axial strain and (c) stress path diagram.

Figure 14

Undrained monotonic response of wet deposited sand–silt mixtures (Fc = 40%, OCR = 2, Dr = 52%): (a) deviator stress versus axial strain, (b) excess pore water pressure versus axial strain and (c) stress path diagram.
Undrained monotonic response of wet deposited sand–silt mixtures (Fc = 40%, OCR = 2, Dr = 52%): (a) deviator stress versus axial strain, (b) excess pore water pressure versus axial strain and (c) stress path diagram.

Figure 15

Instability and steady-state lines of Chlef sand–silt mixtures = (Dr = 52%): (a) Fc = 0%, (b) Fc = 20% and(c) Fc = 40%.
Instability and steady-state lines of Chlef sand–silt mixtures = (Dr = 52%): (a) Fc = 0%, (b) Fc = 20% and(c) Fc = 40%.

Figure 16

Instability friction angles versus fines content of sand–silt mixtures (Dr = 52%): (a) OCR = 1 and (b) OCR = 2.
Instability friction angles versus fines content of sand–silt mixtures (Dr = 52%): (a) OCR = 1 and (b) OCR = 2.

Figure 17

DFP instability friction angle versus WD friction angle of Chlef sand–silt mixtures (Dr = 52%).
DFP instability friction angle versus WD friction angle of Chlef sand–silt mixtures (Dr = 52%).

Figure 18

Overconsolidated instability friction angle versus normally consolidated friction angle of sand–silt mixtures (Dr = 52%).
Overconsolidated instability friction angle versus normally consolidated friction angle of sand–silt mixtures (Dr = 52%).

Figure 19

Instability friction angle of sand–silt mixtures versus instability friction angle of sand (Dr = 52%).
Instability friction angle of sand–silt mixtures versus instability friction angle of sand (Dr = 52%).

Figure 20

Instability shear strength of sand–silt mixtures versus fines content (Dr = 52%): (a) P’c = 100 kPa;(b) P’c = 200 kPa; (c) P’c = 300 kPa.
Instability shear strength of sand–silt mixtures versus fines content (Dr = 52%): (a) P’c = 100 kPa;(b) P’c = 200 kPa; (c) P’c = 300 kPa.

Figure 21

Instability shear strength versus the instability friction angle of sand-silt mixtures (Dr = 52%): (a) OCR = 1, DFP; (b) OCR = 2, DFP; (c) OCR = 1, WD; (d) OCR = 2, WD.
Instability shear strength versus the instability friction angle of sand-silt mixtures (Dr = 52%): (a) OCR = 1, DFP; (b) OCR = 2, DFP; (c) OCR = 1, WD; (d) OCR = 2, WD.

Figure 22

Mobilised friction angles versus fines content of sand–silt mixtures (Dr = 52%): (a) OCR = 1 and (b) OCR = 2.
Mobilised friction angles versus fines content of sand–silt mixtures (Dr = 52%): (a) OCR = 1 and (b) OCR = 2.

Figure 23

Mobilised friction angles versus instability friction angle of Chlef sand–silt mixtures.
Mobilised friction angles versus instability friction angle of Chlef sand–silt mixtures.

Figure 24

Instability friction angles versus global void ratio: (a) OCR = 1 and (b) OCR = 2.
Instability friction angles versus global void ratio: (a) OCR = 1 and (b) OCR = 2.

Figure 25

Instability friction angles versus intergranular void ratio: (a) OCR = 1 and (b) OCR = 2.
Instability friction angles versus intergranular void ratio: (a) OCR = 1 and (b) OCR = 2.

Index properties of Chlef sand-silt mixtures.

PropertiesSand-silt mixtures
Fc (%)2040
Gs2.6552.658
D10(mm)0.0230.003
D50(mm)0.4880.236
Cu (.)27.24120.51
Cc(.)3.9973.300
emax(.)0.6970.759
emin(.)0.4580.505

Coefficients a, b and R2 for equation (3).

OCR12
a108.81206.48
b–2.03–4.40
R20.960.99

Coefficients a, b and R2 for equation (2).

MethodsDFPWD
OCR1212
a44.0847.4431.7236.19
b–0.21–0.200.110.03
R20.800.990.930.83

Index properties of sand and silt under study.

PropertiesMaterials Chlef sandSilt
Gs2.6522.667
Dmax(mm)2.0000.08
D10 (mm)0.266-
D50 (mm)0.5960.023
Cu (.)2.634
Cc (.)0.999
emax(.)0.7951.563
emin(.)0.6320.991
WL(%)-31.72
Wp (%)-26.71
Ip (%)-5.12
USCSSPML
Grain ShapeRoundedRounded

Coefficients a, b and R2 for equation (5).

P’c (kPa)100200300
MethodDFPWDDFPWDDFPWD
OCR121212121212
a55.483.234.251.0132.5174.278.0122.1207.3297.3125.9208.3
b–0.17–0.660.050.097–1.25–1.040.090.19–1.99–2.010.130.16
R20.990.860.980.870.920.820.950.990.780.840.990.98

Coefficients a, b and R2 for equation (4).

MethodDFPWD
a10.5723.17
b0.820.41
R20.890.99

Summary of monotonic triaxial tests of silty sand.

Test NoDr (%)Fc (%)MethodOCRP’c (kPa)ηϕ’ins(°)ϕ’s(°)qins(kPa)P’ins(kPa)
110055.5656.11
212001.0145.2825.61136.77138.14
3DFP300219.7221.92
410086.3494.97
522001.1047.7327.701 79.88197.87
60300307,45338,19
710034.2620.90
812000.6131.3816.0778.2447.72
9WD300125.9676.83
1010051.4637.36
1122000.7236.0118.75122.0188.58
12300208.06151.05
1310051.4839.12
1412000.6537.4719.8598.8975.15
15DFP3 001 42.67108.43
1610023.5163.6458.93
1722 000.9342.82142.05131.54
1820300236.87219.34
195210035.0224.16
2012000.6934.6018.0279.3154.72
21WD300128.1988.45
2210052.1140.12
2322000.7737.5919.95126.1697.14
24300211.95163.20
2510048.5836.43
2612000.7536.8719.4786.7865.08
27DFP300139.97104.98
2810059.7849.01
2922000.8339.5821.14138.05113.20
3040300227.03186.16
3110036.3326.16
3212000.7235.7518.7581.8958.96
33300131.0594.36
34WD10055.3442.94
3522000.7837.8320.12129.75100.68
36300214.43166.40

Coefficients a, b and R2 for equation (7).

MethodsDFPWD
OCR1212
a24.7127.3916.2718.92
b– 0.15– 0.160.0 6 70.03
R20.800.970.940.84

Coefficients a, b and R2 for equation (6).

MethodDFPWD
OCR1212
P’c (kPa)100200300100200300100200300100200300
a24.01110.8216.876.2478.36186.720.8855.1892.37–3.1510.1895.39
b0.705.749.643.375.3410.230.420.731.061.513.663.12
R20.880.970.990.930.900.920.830.770.890.520.880.93
eISSN:
2083-831X
Langue:
Anglais
Périodicité:
4 fois par an
Sujets de la revue:
Geosciences, other, Materials Sciences, Composites, Porous Materials, Physics, Mechanics and Fluid Dynamics