Advertisement

Acta Geotechnica

, Volume 14, Issue 2, pp 559–574 | Cite as

Factors influencing the accuracy of the photogrammetry-based deformation measurement method

  • Lin LiEmail author
  • Xiong Zhang
Research Paper
  • 159 Downloads

Abstract

Triaxial test has been widely used to investigate the stress–strain relationship of unsaturated soils. During triaxial testing, soil volume is an essential parameter to be measured. For an unsaturated soil, due to the presence of air phase, accurate volume/deformation measurement during triaxial testing was a great challenge for researchers. Recently, a photogrammetry-based method has been developed to measure the soil volume/deformation during triaxial testing. Preliminary triaxial test results indicate the new method is simple, accurate, and cost- and time-effective. However, some concerns regarding its measurement accuracy and applicability, which are critical for the dissemination of the photogrammetry-based method, have been raised by other researchers. These concerns were addressed in details in this study. The factors concerning the deformation measurement accuracy were systematically evaluated through a series of triaxial tests on an aluminum cylinder with different confining media and chamber pressures. A sensitivity analysis was carried out to investigate the impact of the system parameters on the volume measurement accuracy of the photogrammetry-based method. In addition, a triaxial test on a saturated sand specimen was conducted to evaluate the influences of mesh density, mesh pattern, and interpolation technique on the volume change measurement accuracy. Finally, some suggestions were provided to improve the accuracy of the photogrammetry-based measurement method.

Keywords

Optical ray tracing Photogrammetry-based method Triangular mesh Triaxial test Unsaturated soil Volume change 

Notes

References

  1. 1.
    AASHTO (2008) Mechanistic-empirical pavement design guide: a manual of practice. Washington, D.CGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alshibli KA, Sture S, Costes NC, Lankton ML, Batiste SN, Swanson RA (2000) Assessment of localized deformations in sand using X-ray computed tomography. Geotech Test J 23(3):274–299Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    ASTM Designation: ASTM D7181 (2011) Standard test method for consolidated drained triaxial compression test for soils, Annual Book of ASTM StandardsGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bhandari AR, Powrie W, Harkness RM (2012) A digital image-based deformation measurement system for triaxial tests. Geotech Test J 35(2):209–226Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bishop AW, Donald IB (1961) The experimental study of partly saturated soil in the triaxial apparatus. In: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on soils mechanic, Paris, vol 1, pp 13–21Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Blatz JA, Graham J (2003) Elastic-plastic modeling of unsaturated soil using results from a new triaxial test with controlled suction. Géotechnique 53(1):113–122Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Clayton CRI, Khatrush SA, Bica AVD, Siddique A (1989) The use of Hall effect semiconductors in geotechnical instrumentation. Geotech Test J 12(1):69–76Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Desrues J, Viggiani G (2004) Strain localization in sand: an overview of the experimental results obtained in Grenoble using stereophotogrammetry. Int J Numer Anal Method Geomech 28(4):279–321Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Edlén B (1966) The refractive index of air. Metrologia 2(2):71Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gachet P, Geiser F, Laloui L, Vulliet L (2007) Automated Digital image processing for volume change measurement in triaxial cells. Geotech Test J 30(2):98–103Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Helm JD, McNeill SR, Sutton MA (1996) Improved 3D image correlation for surface displacement measurement. Opt Eng (Bellingham) 35(7):1911–1920Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Li L, Zhang X (2015) A new triaxial testing system for unsaturated soil characterization. Geotech Test J 38(6):823–839Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Li L, Zhang X (2015) Modified unconfined compression testing system to characterize stress–strain behavior of unsaturated soils at low confining stresses. Transp Res Record J Transp Res Board 2510:54–64Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Li L, Zhang X, Chen G, Lytton R (2015) Measuring unsaturated soil deformations during triaxial testing using a photogrammetry-based method. Can Geotech J 53(3):472–489Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lin H, Penumadu D (2006) Strain localization in combined axialtorsional testing on kaolin clay. J Eng Mech 132(5):555–564Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Laloui L, Pe´ron H, Geiser F, Rifa’i A, Vulliet L (2006) Advances in volume measurement in unsaturated triaxial tests. Soils Found 46(3):341–349Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Macari EJ, Parker JK, Costes NC (1997) Measurement of volume changes in triaxial tests using digital imaging techniques. Geotech Test J 20(1):103–109Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ng CWW, Zhan LT, Cui YJ (2002) A new simple system for measuring volume changes in unsaturated soils. Can Geotech J 39(3):757–764Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Owens JC (1967) Optical refractive index of air: dependence on pressure, temperature and composition. Appl Opt 6(1):51–59MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Richard A, Coffman E, Salazar S, Barnes A (2015) Development of an internal camera-based volume determination system for triaxial testing. Geotech Test J 38(4):549–555Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Romero E, Facio JA, Lloret A, Gens A, Alonso EE (1997) A new suction and temperature controlled triaxial apparatus. In: Proceedings of the 14th international conference on soil mechanics and foundation engineering, Hamburg, vol 1, pp 185–188Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Salazar SE, Coffman RA (2015) Consideration of internal board camera optics for triaxial testing applications. Geotech Test J 38(1):40–49Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Salazar SE, Coffman RA (2015b) Discussion of “A photogrammetry-based method to measure total and local volume changes of unsaturated soils during triaxial testing” by Zhang et al. ( https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-014-0346-8). Acta Geotech 10(5):693–696
  24. 24.
    Waxler RM, Weir CE (1963) Effect of pressure and temperature on the refractive indices of benzene, carbon tetrachloride and water. J Res Nat Bur Stand 67:163–171Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wheeler SJ (1988) The undrained shear strength of soils containing large gas bubbles. Géotechnique 38(3):399–413Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    White D, Take W, Bolton M (2003) Measuring soil deformation in geotechnical models using digital images and PIV analysis. In: Proceedings of 10th international conference on computer methods and advances in geomechanics, Tuscon, Ariz., Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, pp 997–1002Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zhang X, Li L, Chen G, Lytton R (2015) A photogrammetry-based method to measure total and local volume changes of unsaturated soils during triaxial testing. Acta Geotech 10(1):55–82Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zhang X, Li L, Chen G, Lytton R (2015b) Reply to “Discussion of ‘A photogrammetry-based method to measure total and local volume changes of unsaturated soils during triaxial testing’by Zhang et al. ( https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-014-0346-8)” by Salazar and Coffman ( https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-015-0380-1). Acta Geotech 10(5):697–702

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringUniversity of Alaska AnchorageAnchorageUSA
  2. 2.Department of Civil Architecture, and Environmental EngineeringMissouri University of Science and TechnologyRollaUSA

Personalised recommendations