Dynamic Properties of Sherman Island Peat
Publication: Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering
Volume 124, Issue 1
Abstract
The dynamic properties of peat have been identified as major source of uncertainty in the evaluation of seismic hazards throughout the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta in northern California. This paper summarizes the results of a laboratory study of the dynamic properties of a layer of peaty organic soil underlying the south levee on Sherman Island near the western side of the delta. Conventional Shelby tube sampling procedures were able to obtain high-quality samples because of the compactness of this peat layer, located between depths of 9 and 16 m. The samples tested were very fibrous and had ash contents of 35–56%. Staged cyclic triaxial loading was used to measure the stress-strain behavior of several specimens under cyclic shear strains ranging from about 0.0005% to 10%. Other tests included piezo-ceramic bender element tests to measure the shear wave velocity of specimens within the triaxial device, and undrained monotonic triaxial compression and extension tests. The effects of loading frequency, cyclic degradation, consolidation stress history, and structural anisotropy are evaluated. The resulting modulus reduction and damping relationships for the Sherman Island peat are compared with published results for other peats, solid waste materials, and mineral soils.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Arulnathan, R., Boulanger, R. W., and Riemer, M. F. (1997). “Analysis of bender element tests.”Geotech. Testing J., ASTM.
2.
Augello, A., Bray, J. D., Abrahamson, N. A., and Seed, R. B. (1998). “Dynamic properties of solid-waste based on back-analysis of the OII landfill.”J. Geotech. and Geoenviron. Engrg., ASCE, 124(2).
3.
Boulanger, R. W., Arulnathan, R., Harder, L. F. Jr., and Torres, R. A. (1997). “Dynamic properties of Sherman Island peat,”Rep. No. UCD/CGM-97/01, Ctr. for Geotech. Modeling, Univ. of California, Davis, Calif.
4.
GeoSyntec. (1996). “Summary report of findings, seismicity, settlement, and slope stability work plan, Operating Industries, Inc., Landfill, Monterey Park, California.”Rep. No. SWP-9, GeoSyntec Consultants, Huntington Beach, Calif.
5.
Gookin, W. B., Riemer, M. F., Boulanger, R. W., and Bray, J. D. (1996). “Development of cyclic triaxial apparatus with broad frequency and strain ranges.”Transp. Res. Rec. 1548, 1–8.
6.
Graham, J., and Houlsby, G. T.(1983). “Anisotropic elasticity of a natural clay.”Geotechnique, 33(2), 165–180.
7.
Idriss, I. M., Dobry, R., and Singh, R. D.(1978). “Nonlinear behavior of soft clays during cyclic loading.”J. Geotech. Engrg. Div., ASCE, 104(12), 1427–1447.
8.
Idriss, I. M., Fiegel, G., Hudson, M. B., Mundy, P. K., and Herzog, R. (1995). “Seismic response of the Operating Industries Landfill.”Proc., Earthquake Des. and Performance of Solid Waste Landfills, Geotech. Special Pub. No. 54, ASCE, New York, N.Y., 83–118.
9.
Kramer, S. L. (1993). “Seismic response: Foundations in soft soils.”Final Res. Rep. WA-RD 264.1, Washington State Transp. Ctr., Univ. of Washington, Seattle, Wash.
10.
Kramer, S. L. (1996). “Dynamic response of peats.”Final Res. Rep. WA-RD 412.1, Washington State Transp. Ctr., Univ. of Washington, Seattle, Wash.
11.
Roger Foott Associates, Inc. (1991). “Investigation and treatment of threatened levees on Sherman Island.”Job No. 085-002, San Francisco, Calif.
12.
Seed, H. B., and Idriss, I. M.(1970). “Analyses of ground motions at Union Bay, Seattle, during earthquakes and distant nuclear blasts.”Bull. Seismological Soc. of America, 60(1), 125–136.
13.
Seismic stability evaluation of the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta levees. Phase I report: Preliminary evaluations and review of previous studies. (1992). Div. of Des. and Constr., Dept. of Water Resour., State of California.
14.
Stokoe, K. H. II, Bay, J. A., Rosenblad, B. L., Hwang, S.-K., and Twede, M. R. (1996). “In situ seismic and dynamic laboratory measurements of geotechnical materials at Queensboro Bridge and Roosevelt Island.”Geotech. Engrg. Rep. GR94-5, Civ. Engrg. Dept., Univ. of Texas at Austin.
15.
Tatsuoka, F., Teachavorasinskun, S., Dong, J., Kohata, Y., and Sata, T. (1994). “Importance of measuring local strains in cyclic triaxial tests on granular materials.”Dynamic geotechnical testing II: ASTM STP 1213, R. J. Ebelhar, V. P. Drnevich, and B. L. Kutter, eds., American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, Pa., 288–302.
16.
Tatsuoka, F., Shibuya, S., and Teachavorasinskun, S.(1991). “Discussion of `Shear modulus and cyclic undrained behavior of sands,' by Alarcon-Guzman, A., Chameau, J. L., Leonards, G. A., and Frost, J. D.,”Soils and Foundations, 31(2), 202–209.
17.
Vucetic, M., and Dobry, R.(1991). “Effect of soil plasticity on cyclic response.”J. Geotech. Engrg., ASCE, 117(1), 89–107.
18.
Zergoun, M., and Vaid, Y. P.(1994). “Effective stress response of clay to undrained cyclic loading.”Can. Geotech. J., 31, 714–727.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering
Volume 124 • Issue 1 • January 1998
Pages: 12 - 20
Copyright
Copyright © 1998 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Published online: Jan 1, 1998
Published in print: Jan 1998
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.