Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Grain Shape Effects on the Liquefaction Response of Geotextile-Reinforced Sands

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Using low-cost polymeric geosynthetics has proven to be a sustainable solution for a wide range of geotechnical problems, including liquefaction and associated disasters. The grain shape of sand governs the sand-geosynthetic interactions and its macro-level mechanical behavior and is the key to understanding and obtaining performance-based designs for reinforced soil structures. This paper investigates the micromechanics behind the effects of grain shape on the liquefaction response of unreinforced and reinforced sand through strain-controlled consolidated, truly undrained cyclic simple shear tests on granular materials with the same grain size and different grain shapes varying from completely rounded to angular. A layer of nonwoven geotextile was used in tests on reinforced sand. Grain shape is characterized through microscopic image analysis carried out in MATLAB. A series of densification tests and interface shear tests are performed to complement the cyclic simple shear tests in understanding the mechanism of liquefaction. With the increase in particle angularity by 77 and 123 times, the liquefaction resistance of the reinforced sand in terms of the number of cycles increased by about 200% and 270%, respectively. Results showed that the rate of densification is significantly affected by the particle shape and inclusion of geotextile, with maximum retardation of 24% for angular particles. An increase in the angularity of the particles has two advantages for providing liquefaction resistance to the particles: first, by increasing interlocking to achieve a stable configuration, and second, by improving interface friction to prevent particle movement and mobilization of pore water pressure.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

Data is available in the form of excel spreadsheets and are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

  1. Finn WDL, Pickering DJ, Bransby PL (1971) Sand liquefaction in triaxial and simple shear tests. J Soil Mech Found Div 97(4):639–659. https://doi.org/10.1061/JSFEAQ.0001579

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Castro G (1975) Liquefaction and cyclic mobility of saturated sands. J Geotech Eng Div 101(6):551–569. https://doi.org/10.1061/AJGEB6.0000173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Ishihara K, Tatsuoka F, Yasuda S (1975) Undrained deformation and liquefaction of sand under cyclic stresses. Soils Found 15(1):29–44. https://doi.org/10.3208/sandf1972.15.29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Kramer SL (1996) Geotechnical earthquake engineering. Pearson Education India

    Google Scholar 

  5. Yoshimine M, Ishihara K (1998) Flow potential of sand during liquefaction. Soils Found 38(3):189–198. https://doi.org/10.3208/sandf.38.3_189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. De Alba PA, Chan CK, Seed HB (1976) Sand liquefaction in large-scale simple shear tests. J Geotech Eng Div 102(9):909–927. https://doi.org/10.1061/AJGEB6.0000322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ansell P, Brown SF (1978) A cyclic simple shear apparatus for dry granular materials. Geotech Test J 1(2):82–92. https://doi.org/10.1520/GTJ10375J

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Shaw P, Brown SF (1986) Cyclic simple shear testing of granular materials. Geotech Test J 9(4):213–220. https://doi.org/10.1520/GTJ10632J

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Amer MI, Kovacs WD, Aggour MS (1987) Cyclic simple shear size effects. J Geotech Eng 113(7):693–707. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1987)113:7(693)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Dyvik R, Berre T, Lacasse S, Raadim B (1987) Comparison of truly undrained and constant volume direct simple shear tests. Geotechnique 37(1):3–10. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.1987.37.1.3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Vaid YP, Sivathayalan S (1996) Static and cyclic liquefaction potential of Fraser Delta sand in simple shear and triaxial tests. Can Geotech J 33(2):281–289. https://doi.org/10.1139/t96-007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Thirugnanasampanther S (2016) Cyclic behaviour and dynamic properties of soils under simple shear loading. Doctoral dissertation, Carleton University

  13. Naik SP, Choudhury B, Garg A (2021) Laboratory investigations of liquefaction mitigation of ganga sand using stable carbon material: a case study. Int J Geosynth Gr Eng 7(4):1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40891-021-00333-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Altun S, Göktepe AB, Lav MA (2008) Liquefaction resistance of sand reinforced with geosynthetics. Geosynth Int 15(5):322–332. https://doi.org/10.1680/gein.2008.15.5.322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Huang Y, Wen Z (2015) Recent developments of soil improvement methods for seismic liquefaction mitigation. Nat Hazards 76(3):1927–1938. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-014-1558-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Bao X, Jin Z, Cui H et al (2020) Static liquefaction behavior of short discrete carbon fiber reinforced silty sand. Geosynth Int 27(6):606–619. https://doi.org/10.1680/jgein.20.00021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Bahadori H, Motamedi H, Hasheminezhad A, Motamed R (2020) Shaking table tests on shallow foundations over geocomposite and geogrid-reinforced liquefiable soils. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 128:105896. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2019.105896

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Hazarika H, Pasha SMK, Ishibashi I et al (2020) Tire-chip reinforced foundation as liquefaction countermeasure for residential buildings. Soils Found 60(2):315–326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2019.12.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Dutta S, Nanda RP (2022) Waste rubber–soil mat for protection of structures from earthquake-induced liquefaction. Int J Geosynth Gr Eng 8(5):1–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40891-022-00397-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Zhang X, Russell AR (2021) Liquefaction potential and effective stress of fiber-reinforced sand during undrained cyclic loading. J Geotech Geoenvironmental Eng 147(7):04021042. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002530

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Rasouli H, Fatahi B (2022) Liquefaction and post-liquefaction resistance of sand reinforced with recycled geofibre. Geotext Geomembranes 50(1):69–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geotexmem.2021.09.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Jain A, Mittal S, Shukla SK (2023) Use of polyethylene terephthalate fibres for mitigating the liquefaction-induced failures. Geotext Geomembranes 51(1):245–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geotexmem.2022.11.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Krishnaswamy NR, Thomas Isaac N (1994) Liquefaction potential of reinforced sand. Geotext Geomembranes 13(1):23–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/0266-1144(94)90055-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Nong ZZ, Park SS, Lee DE (2021) Comparison of sand liquefaction in cyclic triaxial and simple shear tests. Soils Found 61(4):1071–1085. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2021.05.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Mao X, Fahey M (2003) Behaviour of calcareous soils in undrained cyclic simple shear. Géotechnique 53(8):715–727. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.2003.53.8.715

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Cho G-C, Dodds J, Santamarina JC (2007) Closure to “Particle shape effects on packing density, stiffness, and strength: natural and crushed sands” by Gye-Chun Cho, Jake Dodds, and J. Carlos Santamarina. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 133(11):1474. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2007)133:11(1474)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Yang J, Wei LM (2012) Collapse of loose sand with the addition of fines: the role of particle shape. Géotechnique 62(12):1111–1125. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.11.P.062

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Vangla P, Gali ML (2016) Effect of particle size of sand and surface asperities of reinforcement on their interface shear behaviour. Geotext Geomembranes 44(3):254–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geotexmem.2015.11.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Yang G, Yan X, Nimbalkar S, Xu J (2019) Effect of particle shape and confining pressure on breakage and deformation of artificial rockfill. Int J Geosynth Gr Eng 5(2):1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40891-019-0164-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Latha GM, Lakkimsetti B (2022) Morphological perspectives to quantify and mitigate liquefaction in sands. Indian Geotech J 52:1244–1252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40098-022-00649-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Hyslip JP, Vallejo LE (1997) Fractal analysis of the roughness and size distribution of granular materials. Eng Geol 48(3–4):231–244. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0013-7952(97)00046-X

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Bowman ET, Soga K, Drummond W (2001) Particle shape characterisation using Fourier descriptor analysis. Geotechnique 51(6):545–554. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.2001.51.6.545

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Sozer ZB (2005) Two dimensional characterization of topographies of geomaterial particles and surfaces. Doctoral dissertation, Georgia Institute of Technology

  34. Roussillon T, Piégay H, Sivignon I et al (2009) Automatic computation of pebble roundness using digital imagery and discrete geometry. Comput Geosci 35(10):1992–2000. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2009.01.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Altuhafi F, O’sullivan C, Cavarretta I (2013) Analysis of an image-based method to quantify the size and shape of sand particles. J Geotech Geoenvironmental Eng 139(8):1290–1307. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000855

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Zheng J, Hryciw RD (2015) Traditional soil particle sphericity, roundness and surface roughness by computational geometry. Géotechnique 65(6):494–506. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.14.P.192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Vangla P, Roy N, Gali ML (2018) Image based shape characterization of granular materials and its effect on kinematics of particle motion. Granul Matter 20(1):1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10035-017-0776-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Pillai AG, Gali ML (2022) New perspectives on bentonite hydration and shear strength of GCL-sand interfaces based on particle shape characterizations. Int J Geosynth Gr Eng 8(2):1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40891-022-00366-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. DeGregorio VB, Ahmadi G (1990) A model for dilatation, densification, and static liquefaction of loose sands. Math Geol 22(1):1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00890294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Abichou T, Benson CH, Edil TB (2002) Micro-structure and hydraulic conductivity of simulated sand-bentonite mixtures. Clays Clay Miner 50(5):537–545. https://doi.org/10.1346/000986002320679422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Cui D, Wu W, Xiang W et al (2017) Stick-slip behaviours of dry glass beads in triaxial compression. Granul Matter 19(1):1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10035-016-0682-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. ASTM Standard D4253 (2016) Standard test methods for maximum index density and unit weight of soils using a vibratory table. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA. https://doi.org/10.1520/D4253-16E01

  43. ASTM Standard D4254 (2016) Standard test methods for minimum index density and unit weight of soils and calculation of relative density. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA. https://doi.org/10.1520/D4254-16

  44. ASTM Standard D854 (2014) Standard test methods for specific gravity of soil solids by water pycnometer. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA. https://doi.org/10.1520/D0854-14

  45. Moayed RZ, Alibolandi M (2018) Effect of geotextile reinforcement on cyclic undrained behavior of sand. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 104:395–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2017.11.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Su L, Zhou L, Zhang X, Ling X (2022) Experimental and numerical modeling on liquefaction resistance of geotextile reinforced sand. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 159:107345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2022.107345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. ASTM Standard D8296 (2019) Standard test method for consolidated undrained cyclic direct simple shear test under constant volume with load control or displacement control. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA. https://doi.org/10.1520/D8296-19

  48. Varghese RM, Gali ML (2014) Shaking table tests to investigate the influence of various factors on the liquefaction resistance of sands. Nat Hazards 73:1337–1351. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-014-1142-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Rouholamin M, Bhattacharya S, Orense RP (2017) Effect of initial relative density on the post-liquefaction behaviour of sand. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 97:25–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2017.02.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Wei X, Yang J (2019) Characterizing the effects of fines on the liquefaction resistance of silty sands. Soils Found 59(6):1800–1812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2019.08.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Ni X, Ye B, Zhang F, Feng X (2020) Influence of specimen preparation on the liquefaction behaviors of sand and its mesoscopic explanation. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 147(2):04020161. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Fardad Amini P, Noorzad R (2018) Energy-based evaluation of liquefaction of fiber-reinforced sand using cyclic triaxial testing. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 104:45–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2017.09.026

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Haeri SM, Noorzad R, Oskoorouchi AM (2000) Effect of geotextile reinforcement on the mechanical behavior of sand. Geotext Geomembranes 18(6):385–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-1144(00)00005-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Vaid YP, Fisher JM, Kuerbis RH, Negussey D (1990) Particle gradation and liquefaction. J Geotech Eng 116(4):698–703. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1990)116:4(698)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Yang J, Luo XD (2018) The critical state friction angle of granular materials: does it depend on grading? Acta Geotech 13(3):535–547. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-017-0581-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Moreira DDC, dos Santos CAS, Mesquita ALA, Moreira DC (2020) Influence of particle size distribution of iron ore fines on liquefaction during marine transportation. Powder Technol 373:301–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2020.06.052

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. ElGhoraiby MA, Park H, Manzari MT (2020) Stress-strain behavior and liquefaction strength characteristics of Ottawa F65 sand. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 138:106292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2020.106292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Khashila M, Hussien MN, Karray M, Chekired M (2021) Liquefaction resistance from cyclic simple and triaxial shearing: a comparative study. Acta Geotech 16:1735–1753. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-020-01104-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Seed HB, Lee KL (1966) Liquefaction of saturated sands during cyclic loading. J Soil Mech Found Div 92(6):105–134. https://doi.org/10.1061/JSFEAQ.0000913

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Altuhafi FN, Coop MR, Georgiannou VN (2016) Effect of particle shape on the mechanical behavior of natural sands. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 142(12):04016071. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001569

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Kazmi D, Serati M, Williams DJ et al (2021) The potential use of crushed waste glass as a sustainable alternative to natural and manufactured sand in geotechnical applications. J Clean Prod 284:124762. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124762

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Pillai AG, Gali ML (2022) Role of particle shape on the shear strength of sand-GCL interfaces under dry and wet conditions. Geotext Geomembranes 50(2):262–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geotexmem.2021.11.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Wadell H (1932) Volume, shape, and roundness of rock particles. J Geol 40(5):443–451

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Krumbein WC, Sloss LL (1951) Stratigraphy and sedimentation. LWW 71(5):401

    Google Scholar 

  65. Lees G (1964) A new method for determining the angularity of particles. Sedimentology 3(1):2–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3091.1964.tb00271.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Afzali-Nejad A, Lashkari A, Shourijeh PT (2017) Influence of particle shape on the shear strength and dilation of sand-woven geotextile interfaces. Geotext Geomembranes 45(1):54–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geotexmem.2016.07.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Peng Z, Chen C, Wu L (2021) Numerical investigation of particle shape effect on sand shear strength. Arab J Sci Eng 46(11):10585–10595. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13369-021-05430-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Jones DRV, Dixon N (1998) Shear strength properties of geomembrane/geotextile interfaces. Geotext Geomembranes 16(1):45–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-1144(97)10022-X

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Liu F, Ying M, Yuan G et al (2021) Particle shape effects on the cyclic shear behaviour of the soil–geogrid interface. Geotext Geomembranes 49(4):991–1003. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geotexmem.2021.01.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Vangla P, Latha GM (2015) Influence of particle size on the friction and interfacial shear strength of sands of similar morphology. Int J Geosynth Gr Eng 1(1):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40891-014-0008-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Nemat-Nasser S, Takahashi K (1984) Liquefaction and fabric of sand. J Geotech Eng 110(9):1291–1306. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1984)110:9(1291)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Nemat-Nasser S, Shokooh A (1979) A unified approach to densification and liquefaction of cohesionless sand in cyclic shearing. Can Geotech J 16(4):659–678. https://doi.org/10.1139/t79-076

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Nemat-Nasser S, Tobita Y (1982) Influence of fabric on liquefaction and densification potential of cohesionless sand. Mech Mater 1(1):43–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-6636(82)90023-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Cuellar V, Bazant ZP, Krizek RJ, Silver ML (1977) Densification and hysteresis of sand under cyclic shear. J Geotech Eng Div 103(5):399–416. https://doi.org/10.1061/AJGEB6.0000420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Youd TL (1972) Compaction of sands by repeated shear straining. J Soil Mech Found Div 98(7):709–725. https://doi.org/10.1061/JSFEAQ.0001762

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Whitman RV (1971) Resistance of soil to liquefaction and settlement. Soils Found 11(4):59–68. https://doi.org/10.3208/sandf1960.11.4_59

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The work reported in this paper is funded by the SERB POWER fellowship (SPF/2021/000041) of the Department of Science and Technology (DST), India, and the Dam Rehabilitation and Improvement Project (DRIP) of the Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. The cyclic simple shear equipment utilized for conducting the tests was procured with financial assistance from DST FIST Phase 3 funding. The authors gratefully appreciate the funding organization for the help.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Science Bangalore, Bengaluru, 560012, India

    Balaji Lakkimsetti & Madhavi Latha Gali

Authors
  1. Balaji Lakkimsetti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Madhavi Latha Gali
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

BL and MLG contributed to the conceptualization and design of experiments. BL conducted all the experiments. BL and MLG analyzed and interpreted all the test results. BL wrote the original draft, and MLG contributed to editing and supervising. All authors read and approved this manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Balaji Lakkimsetti.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lakkimsetti, B., Gali, M.L. Grain Shape Effects on the Liquefaction Response of Geotextile-Reinforced Sands. Int. J. of Geosynth. and Ground Eng. 9, 15 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40891-023-00434-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40891-023-00434-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation