Strength of Undisturbed versus Reconstituted Silt and Silty Sand Specimens
Publication: Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering
Volume 126, Issue 7
Abstract
The differences in undrained stress-strain-strength behavior between “undisturbed” and reconstituted silt and silty sand specimens tested at the same void ratio and initial stress state may be dramatic. In all tests reported herein the undisturbed specimens showed dilative and ductile behavior, whereas in all but a very few cases the accompanying reconstituted specimens at the same (or lower) density showed contraction, much lower undrained strength, and brittle behavior. The test series included samples from a natural fluvial silt deposit as well as from silty sand hydraulically placed in a tailings dam. When reconstituting specimens for laboratory testing, it is not sufficient to only satisfy the criteria of correct density and grain size distribution, but somehow the same fabric also must be reproduced. Otherwise, deformation and stability analyses based on the results of reconstituted specimens, or on in situ tests calibrated against such results, may be misleading. Most of the reconstituted specimens tested herein were prepared by moist tamping, but other methods were also used and the results compared. The reconstitution of silty sand specimens by water pluviation seems to be the most promising preparation method.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Casagrande, A. ( 1936). “Characteristics of cohesionless soils affecting the stability of slopes and earthfills.” J. Boston Soc. of Civ. Engrs., 23(1), 13–32.
2.
Dyvik, R., and Madshus, C. (1985). “Laboratory measurements of Gmax using bender elements.” Proc., Spec. Session on Adv. in the Art of Testing Soils, ASCE, New York, 186–196.
3.
Finn, W. D. L. (1996). “Seismic design and evaluation of tailings dams: State-of-the-art.” Proc., Int. Symp. on Seismic and Envir. Aspects of Dam Des., Vol. I, Chilean Geotechnical Society, Santiago, Chile, 7–34.
4.
Highter, W. H., and Tobin, R. F. (1980). “Flow slides and the undrained brittleness index of some mine tailings.” Engrg. Geol., 16, 71–82.
5.
Ishihara, K. (1993). “Liquefaction and flow failure during earthquakes.” Géotechnique, London, 43(3), 351–415.
6.
Kuerbis, R., and Vaid, Y. P. (1988). “Sand sample preparation—the slurry deposition method.” Soils and Found., Tokyo, 28(4), 107–118.
7.
Ladd, R. (1978). “Preparing test specimens using undercompaction.” Geotech. Testing J., 1(1), 16–23.
8.
Lade, P. V. (1992). “Static instability and liquefaction of loose fine sandy slopes.”J. Geotech. Engrg., ASCE, 118(1), 51–71.
9.
Potts, D. M., Koavacevic, N., and Vaughan, P. R. (1997). “Delayed collapse of cut slopes in stiff clay.” Géotechnique, London, 47(5), 953–982.
10.
Sasitharan, S., Robertson, P. K., Sego, D. C., and Morgenstern, N. R. (1994). “State-boundary surface for very loose sand and its practical implications.” Can. Geotech. J., Ottawa, 31, 321–334.
11.
Seed, H. B. (1987). “Design problems in soil liquefaction.”J. Geotech. Engrg., ASCE, 113(8), 827–845.
12.
Seed, H. B., and De Alba, P. ( 1986). Use of SPT and CPT tests for evaluating the liquefaction resistance of sands, Geotech. Spec. Publ. No. 6, ASCE, New York, 281–302.
13.
Stoutjesdijk, T. P., de Groot, M. B., and Lindenberg, J. (1998). “Flow slide prediction method: Influence of slope geometry.” Can. Geotech. J., Ottawa, 35, 43–54.
14.
Terzaghi, K., Peck, R. B., and Mesri, G. (1996). Soil mechanics in engineering practice, 3rd Ed., Article 20.9, Wiley, New York, 193–208.
15.
Thevanayagam, S. (1998). Effect of fines and confining stress on undrained shear strength of silty sands.”J. Geotech. and Geoenvir. Engrg., ASCE, 124(6), 479–491.
16.
Vaid, Y. P., Chung, E. K. F., and Kuerbis, R. H. (1990). “Stress path and steady state.” Can. Geotech. J., Ottawa, 27, 1–7.
17.
Vaid, Y. P., and Negussey, D. ( 1988). “Preparation of reconstituted sand specimens.” Advanced triaxial testing of soil and rock, STP 977, ASTM, West Conshohocken, Pa., 405–417.
18.
Vaid, Y. P., Sivathayalan, S., and Stedman, D. (1999). “Influence of specimen-reconstituting method on the undrained response of sand.” Geotech. Testing J., 22(3), 187–195.
19.
Werno, M., Dembski, B., Juszkiewicz-Bednarczyk, B., Mlynarek, Z., and Tschuscke, W. (1993). “Tailing dam Zelazny Most environmental hazard.” Proc., 3rd Int. Conf. on Case Histories in Geotech. Engrg., University of Missouri-Rolla, Rolla, Mo., Vol. 1, 469–472.
20.
Zackrisson, P. (1997). “Effects of passing trains on the stability of railroad embankment foundations.” Proc., 14th Int. Conf. on Soil Mech. and Found. Engrg., Vol. 2, Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 1057–1062.
21.
Zlatovic, S., and Ishihara, K. (1997). “Normalized behaviour of very loose non-plastic soils: Effects of fabric.” Soils and Found., Tokyo, 37(4), 47–56.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering
Volume 126 • Issue 7 • July 2000
Pages: 606 - 617
History
Received: Sep 1, 1998
Published online: Jul 1, 2000
Published in print: Jul 2000
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.