Undrained monotonic and cyclic behavior of sand-ground rubber mixtures
In this study the stress–strain characteristics of sand-ground rubber mixtures are investigated in the sandlike zone, at different confining pressures, using hollow cylinder specimens subjected to torsional monotonic and cyclic loading. Under monotonic loading a mixture of sand-ground rubber with 10% and 25% rubber content show more contraction behaviour than that observed in a pure sand specimen. Phase transformation point in these mixtures are located on a larger shear strain. As expected, the shear strength of specimens decreases with increase of ground rubber content. However, with increasing of effective confining pressure, the loss in shear strength of the mixture is decreased. In addition, a mixture with 25% ground rubber shows a smaller loss in shear strength compared to a mixture with 10% ground rubber mixture. Under cyclic loading mixtures with 10% and 25% ground rubber have similar liquefaction resistance, especially at confining pressures of 110 kPa and 260 kPa. Therefore, by using of the mixture with 25% ground rubber, a larger volume of scrap tires could be recycled. The addition of ground rubber to sand would affect the shear strain variation and excess pore water pressure trends, and this effect was further intensified with increasing ground rubber percentage.
KeywordsGround rubber tire crumbs liquefaction resistance hollow cylinder torsional apparatus monotonic and cyclic behaviour
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Ahmed I and Lovell C (1993), “Rubber Soils as Lightweight Geomaterials,” Transportation Research Record No. 1422. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 61–70.Google Scholar
- Bosscher PJ, Edil TB and Eldin NN (1992), “Construction and Performance of a Shredded Waste Tire Test Embankment,” Transportation Research Record No. 1345. Washington, DC, 44–52.Google Scholar
- Hazarika H, Yasuhara K, Karmokar A and Mitarai Y (2007), “Shaking Table Test on Liquefaction Prevention using Tire Chips and Sand Mixture,” Paper Presented at the Proceedings of the International Workshop on Scrap Tire Derived Geomaterials—Opportunities and Challenges, Yokosuka, Japan.Google Scholar
- Hershey RL, Waugh MD and Hanny EJ (1987), “Waste Tire Utilization,” United States Department of Energy, Office of Industrial Programs.Google Scholar
- Humphrey D and Nickels W (1994), “Tire Chips as Subgrade Insulation and Lightweight Fill,” Paper Presented at the Proceedings of the 18th Annual Meeting of the Asphalt Recycling and Reclaiming Association.Google Scholar
- Humphrey DN, Sandford TC, Cribbs, MM and Manion WP (1993), “Shear Strength and Compressibility of Tire Chips for Use as Retaining Wall Backfill,” Transportation Research Record No. 1422 National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 29–35.Google Scholar
- Kawata S, Hyodo M, Orense P, Yamada S and Hazarika H (2007), “Undrained and Drained Shear Behavior of Sand and Tire Chips Composite Material,” Paper Presented at the Proceedings of the International Workshop on Scrap Tire Derived Geomaterials—Opportunities and Challenges, Yokosuka, Japan.Google Scholar
- Parker Jr R, Stone R, Buchanan C and Steimle Jr F (1974), “How to Build Marine Artificial Reefs,” U. S. National Marine Fisheries Service, Fishery Facts No. 10. 47pp.Google Scholar
- Promputthangkoon P and Hyde A (2007), “Compressibility and Liquefaction Potential of Rubber Composite Soils,” Paper Presented at the Scrap Tire Derived Geomaterials-Opportunities and Challenges: Proceedings of the International Workshop IW-TDGM 2007 (Yokosuka, Japan, 23–24. March 2007).Google Scholar
- Roberts FL, Kandhal PS, Brown ER and Dunning RL (1989), “Investigation and Evaluation of Ground Tire Rubber in Hot Mix Asphalt,” National Center for Asphalt Technology.Google Scholar
- Tanaka Y, Sugimoto SA and ADACHI N (2004), “Liquefaction Strength of Coarse-Grained Soils as Determined by Large Torsional Test and the Membrane Penetration Effect on the Strength,” Paper Presented at the 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering.Google Scholar