Science China Technological Sciences

, Volume 59, Issue 2, pp 214–224 | Cite as

Stress-dilatancy of Zipingpu gravel in triaxial compression tests

Article
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

Experimental investigations of the dilatancy and particle breakage of gravelly material from the Zipingpu concrete-faced rockfill dam, which was subjected to high-intensity seismic load during the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake, were conducted through a series of large-scale drained triaxial compression tests. A hyperbolic relation between the input plastic work and the degree of particle breakage was found for Zipingpu gravel, independent of the initial void ratio and confining pressures. The stress-dilatancy for Zipingpu gravel was analyzed and compared with data from two rounded alluvial and three angular quarried gravelly and rockfill materials in the literature. A nearly linear relationship between the dilatancy D p and the stress ratio η was found at medium-to-large stress ratios before the peak stress ratio. The slope of the stress-dilatancy line before peak had slight dependence on the void ratio and confining pressure of the gravel. After peak, the stress-dilatancy relation shifts down compared with that before peak for the gravel specimen. The phase-transformation stress ratio decreased with increased confining pressure, with the exception of sub-rounded gravel with little particle breakage. A nearly linear relationship was found between the phase-transformation stress ratio M f and the state parameter ψ for the Zipingpu gravel, regardless of the void ratio and confining pressure of the specimens.

Keywords

dilatancy gravel phase-transformation stress ratio triaxial compression state parameter particle breakage 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Duncan J M, Chang C. Nonlinear analysis of stress and strain in soils. J Soil Mech Found ASCE, 1970, 96: 1629–1653Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Varadarajan A, Sharma K G, Venkatachalam K, et al. Testing and modeling two rockfill materials. J Geotech Geoenviron, 2003, 129: 206–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Salim W, Indraratna B. A new elastoplastic constitutive model for coarse granular aggregates incorporating particle breakage. Can Geotech J, 2004, 41: 657–671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Varadarajan A, Sharma K G, Abbas S M, et al. Constitutive model for rockfill materials and determination of material constants. Int J Geomech, 2006, 6: 226–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Xiao Y, Liu H, Zhu J, et al. A 3D bounding surface model for rockfill materials. Sci China Tech Sci, 2011, 54: 2904–2915CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Liu H, Zou D. Associated generalized plasticity framework for modeling gravelly soils considering particle breakage. J Eng Mech, 2013, 139: 606–615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Xiao Y, Liu H, Chen Y, et al. Bounding surface plasticity model incorporating the state pressure index for rockfill materials. J Eng Mech, 2014, 140: 4014087CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Xiao Y, Liu H, Chen Y, et al. State-dependent constitutive model for rockfill materials. Int J Geomech, 2014, 15: 4014075Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Liu H, Zou D, Liu J. Constitutive modeling of dense gravelly soils subjected to cyclic loading. Int J Numer Anal Met, 2014, 38: 1503–1518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sun Y, Xiao Y, Ju W. Bounding surface model for ballast with additional attention on the evolution of particle size distribution. Sci China Tech Sci, 2014, 57: 1352–1360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Xiao Y, Liu H, Chen Y, et al. Bounding surface model for rockfill materials dependent on density and pressure under triaxial stress conditions. J Eng Mech, 2013, 140: 4014002Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rowe P W. The stress-dilatancy relation for static equilibrium of an assembly of particles in contact. In: Proceedings of the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences. The Royal Society, London, 1962. 500–527Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Roscoe K H. Mechanical Behaviour of an Idealized “wet” clay. In: Proc. 3rd Eur. Conf. Soil Mech, Wiesbaden, 1963. 47–54Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Roscoe K H, Burland J B. On the Generalized Stress-Strain Behaviour of Wet Clay. Engineering Plasticity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1968. 535–609Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Matsuoka H. Stress-strain relationships of sands based on the mobilized plane. Soils Found, 1974, 14: 47–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nova R, Wood D M. A constitutive model for sand in triaxial compression. Int J Numer Anal Met, 1979, 3: 255–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lagioia R, Puzrin A M, Potts D M. A new versatile expression for yield and plastic potential surfaces. Comput Geotech, 1996, 19: 171–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Been K, Jefferies M G. A state parameter for sands. Geotechnique, 1985, 35: 99–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Been K, Jefferies M G, Hachey J. The critical state of sands. Geotechnique, 1991, 41: 365–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Manzari M T, Dafalias Y F. A critical state two-surface plasticity model for sands. Geotechnique, 1997, 47: 255–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wan R G, Guo P J. A simple constitutive model for granular soils: modified stress-dilatancy approach. Comput Geotech, 1998, 22: 109–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Marsal R J. Large scale testing of rockfill materials. J Soil Mech Found ASCE, 1967, 93: 27–43Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Marachi N D. Strength and deformation characteristics of rockfill materials. Dissertation of Doctor Degree. Berkeley: University of California, 1969Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Marachi N, Chan C K, Seed H B. Evaluation of properties of rockfill materials. J Soil Mech Found ASCE, 1972, 98: 95–114Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hardin B O. Crushing of soil particles. J Geotech Eng, 1985, 111: 1177–1192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Indraratna B, Wijewardena L, Balasubramaniam A S. Large-scale triaxial testing of grey wacke rockfill. Geotechnique, 1993, 43: 37–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Yasuda N, Matsumoto N. Comparisons of deformation characteristics of rockfill materials using monotonic and cyclic loading laboratory tests and in situ tests. Can Geotech J, 1994, 31: 162–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Maqbool S, Koseki J. Large-scale triaxial tests to study effects of compaction energy and large cyclic loading history on shear behavior of gravel. Soils Found, 2010, 50: 633–644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Xu M, Song E, Chen J. A large triaxial investigation of the stress-path-dependent behavior of compacted rockfill. Acta Geotech, 2012, 7: 167–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lenart S, Koseki J, Miyashita Y, et al. Large-scale triaxial tests of dense gravel material at low confining pressures. Soils Found, 2014, 54: 45–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Xiao Y, Liu H, Desai C S. New method for improvement of rockfill material with polyurethane foam adhesive. J Geotech Geoenviron, 2015, 141: 2814003Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Alonso E E, Iturralde E F O, Romero E E. Dilatancy of coarse granular aggregates. Exp Unsaturated Soil Mech, 2007, 112: 119–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Xiao Y, Liu H, Zhu J, et al. Dilatancy equation of rockfill material under the true triaxial stress condition. Sci China Tech Sci, 2011, 55: 175–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Chinese Standards. SL264-2001 Specifications for Rock Tests in Water Conservancy and Hydroelectric Power Engineering. Beijing: China Hydraulic Press, 1999Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Chinese Standards. SL237-1999 Specification of Soil Test. Beijing: China Hydraulic Press, 1999Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Nicholson P G, Seed R B, Anwar H A. Elimination of membrane compliance in undrained triaxial testing. I. Measurement and evaluation. Can Geotech J, 1993, 30: 727–738CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    ASTM. Consolidated drained triaxial compression test for soils- D7181. West Conshohocken, PA, 2011Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Lade P V, Yamamuro J A, Bopp P A. Significance of particle crushing in granular materials. J Geotech Eng, 1996, 122: 309–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Richart F E, Hall J R, Woods R D. Vibrations of Soils and Foundations. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc. 1970Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kokusho T. Cyclic triaxial test of dynamic soil properties for wide strain range. Soils Found, 1980, 20: 45–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Shimizu M. Effect of overconsolidation on dilatancy of a cohesive soil. Soils Found, 1982, 22: 121–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Coop M R. The mechanics of uncemented carbonate sands. Geotechnique, 1990, 40: 607–626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Negussey D, Vaid Y P. Stress dilatancy of sand at small stress ratio states. Soils Found, 1990, 30: 155–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Been K, Jefferies M. Stress dilatancy in very loose sand. Can Geotech J, 2004, 41: 972–989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Bobei D C, Lo S R, Wanatowski D, et al. Modified state parameter for characterizing static liquefaction of sand with fines. Can Geotech J, 2009, 46: 281–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Zytynski M, Randolph M F, Nova R, et al. On modelling the unloading- reloading behaviour of soils. Int J Numer Anal Met, 1978, 2: 87–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Bandini V, Coop M R. The influence of particle breakage on the location of the critical state line of sands. Soils Found, 2011, 51: 591–600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Consoli N C, Cruz R C, Da Fonseca A V, et al. Influence of cement- voids ratio on stress-dilatancy behavior of artificially cemented sand. J Geotech Geoenviron, 2011, 138: 100–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Li X S, Dafalias Y F. Dilatancy for cohesionless soils. Geotechnique, 2000, 50: 449–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Yang J, Li X S. State-dependent strength of sands from the perspective of unified modeling. J Geotech Geoenviron, 2004, 130: 186–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Lee K L, Seed H B. Drained strength characteristics of sands. J Soil Mech Found ASCE, 1967, 93: 117–141Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Guo P, Su X. Shear strength, interparticle locking, and dilatancy of granular materials. Can Geotech J, 2007, 44: 579–591CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Seed H B, Wong R T, Idriss I M, et al. Moduli and damping factors for dynamic analyses of cohesionless soils. J Geotech Eng, 1986, 110: 1016–1032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Shibuya S, Tatsuoka F, Supot T, et al. Elastic deformation properties of geomaterials. Soils Found, 1992, 32: 26–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Daouadji A, Hicher P Y. An enhanced constitutive model for crushable granular materials. Int J Numer Anal Met, 2010, 34: 555–580MATHGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Ghafghazi M, Shuttle D A, Dejong J T. Particle breakage and the critical state of sand. Soils Found, 2014, 54: 451–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Kikumoto M, Wood D M, Russell A. Particle crushing and deformation behaviour. Soils Found, 2010, 50: 547–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Liu H, Zou D. Closure to “associated generalized plasticity framework for modeling gravelly soils considering particle breakage” by Huabei Liu and Degao Zou. J Eng Mech, 2014, 140: 606–615Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Liu J, Liu H, Zou D, et al. Particle breakage and the critical state of sand: By Ghafghazi M, Shuttle D a, DeJong J T. Soils Found, 2014, 54: 451–461. Soils Found, 2015, 55: 220–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Liu H. Unified sand modeling using associated or non-associated flow rule. Mech Res Commun, 2013, 50: 63–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Jefferies M G. Nor-Sand: A simle critical state model for sand. Geotechnique, 1993, 43: 91–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Pradhan T, Tatsuoka F, Sato Y. Experimental stress-dilatancy relations of sand subjected to cyclic loading. Soils Found, 1989, 29: 45–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Science China Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • JingMao Liu
    • 1
    • 2
  • DeGao Zou
    • 1
    • 2
  • XianJing Kong
    • 1
    • 2
  • HuaBei Liu
    • 3
  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Coastal and Offshore EngineeringDalian University of TechnologyDalianChina
  2. 2.Institute of Earthquake Engineering, School of Hydraulic EngineeringDalian University of TechnologyDalianChina
  3. 3.School of Civil Engineering and MechanicsHuazhong University of Science and TechnologyWuhanChina

Personalised recommendations