Behavior of Dilative Sand Interfaces in a Geotribology Framework
Publication: Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering
Volume 128, Issue 1
Abstract
Frictional resistance along the exterior of an embedded structure or structural element develops through relative displacement at the interface. An understanding of how surface topography influences interface strength and deformation behavior is required to develop comprehensive interface models for soil-structure analyses, to develop interface design methods and for producing enhanced construction materials. This paper presents the results of an investigation to quantify the influence of surface topography on shear stress and volume change behavior of dilative granular material interface systems. The root spacing, asperity spacing, asperity height, and asperity angle of machined, idealized surfaces are systematically varied. Direct interface shear test results using Ottawa 20/30 sand and glass microbeads show that maximum interface efficiency for these materials is achieved for a asperity spacing to median grain diameter ratio between 1.0 and 3.0, and an asperity height to median grain diameter ratio greater than 0.9. An asperity angle of 50 degrees or greater yields maximum efficiency for any given asperity spacing or height. The results suggest that interface behavior is governed by predictable geometric and mechanical relationships that are applicable to more complex manufactured surfaces.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
ASTM. (1992). “Standard test method for determining the coefficient of soil and geosynthetic or geosynthetic and geosynthetic friction by the direct shear method.” D 5321-92, West Conshohocken, Pa.
Barton, N., and Choubey, V. (1977). “The shear strength of rock joints in theory and practice.” Rock Mechanics, Springer, Verlag, Vol. 10(1–2), 1–54.
Bolton, M. D.(1986). “The strength and dilatancy of sands.” Geotechnique, 36(1), 65–78.
Day, R. A., and Potts, D. M.(1998). “The effect of interface properties on retaining wall behavior.” Int. J. Numerical Analytical Methods Geomech., 22, 1021–1033.
Desai, C. S. (1981). “Behavior of interfaces between structural and geologic media.” Proc., Int. Conf. Recent Adv. Geotech. Earthquake Eng., Univ. of Missouri at Rolla, St. Louis, Mo., 619–638.
Dieterich, J. H. (1999). “State dependence of frictional contacts: Micromechanical observations and role in earthquake Processes.” Proc., Tribology 300th Anniversary Amontons’ Law, Materials Research Society Workshop, San Jose, Calif., 55–58.
Dove, J. E., and Frost, J. D.(1999). “Peak friction behavior of smooth geomembrane–Particle interfaces.” J. Geotech. Eng., 125(7), 544–555.
Dove, J. E., Frost, J. D., Han, J., and Bachus, R. C. (1997). “The influence of geomembrane surface roughness on interface strength.” Proc., Geosynthetics ’97, North American Geosynthetics Society, Long Beach, Calif., 863–876.
Dove, J. E., and Harpring, J. C. (1999). “Geometric and spatial parameters for analysis of geomembrane/soil interface behavior.” Proc., Geosynthetics ’99, International Fabrics Association International, Boston, Mass. 1, 575–588.
Ebling, R. M., Peters, J. F., and Mosher, R. L.(1997). “The role of nonlinear deformation analyses in the design of a reinforced soil berm at Red River U-frame lock No. 1.” Int. J. Numerical Analytical Methods Geomech., 21, 753–787.
Gomez, J. E., Filz, G. M., and Ebling, R. M. (2000). “Development of an improved numerical model for concrete to soil interfaces in soil-structure interaction analyses.” Information Technology Laboratory Technical Rep. ITL-99-1, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research and Development Center, August, 222.
Hryciw, R. D., and Irsyam, M.(1993). “Behavior of sand particles around rigid ribbed inclusions during shear.” Soils Found., Jpn. Soc. Soil Mech. Found. Eng., 33(3), 1–13.
Irsyam, M., and Hryciw, R. D.(1991). “Friction and passive resistance in soil reinforced by plane ribbed inclusions.” Geotechnique, 41(4), 485–498.
International Organization for Standardization (ISO). (1997). “Geometrical product specification (GPS)-surface texture: Profile method—terms, definitions, and surface texture parameters.” Standard 4287, Geneva.
Jewell, R. A., and Wroth, C. P.(1987). “Direct shear tests on reinforced sand.” Geotechnique, 37(1), 53–68.
Kishida, H., and Uesugi, M.(1987). “Tests of the interface between sand and steel in the simple shear apparatus.” Geotechnique, 37(1), 45–52.
Koerner, R. M. (1990). “Designing with geosynthetics.” Prentice Hall, Inc., Engelwood Cliffs, N.J. 652.
Paikowsky, S. G., Player, C. P., and Connors, P. J.(1995). “A dual interface apparatus for testing unrestricted friction of soil along solid surfaces.” Geotech. Test. J., 18(2), 168–193.
Patton, F. D. (1966). “Multiple modes of shear failure in rock.” Proc., 1st Congress Int. Soc. Rock Mechanics, Lisbon, 1, 509–513.
Reeves, M. J.(1985). “Rock fracture roughness and frictional strength.” Int. J. Rock Mech. Mineral Sci. Geomech. Abstracts, 22(6), 429–442.
Rowe, P. W.(1969). “The relation between the shear strength of sands in triaxial compression, plane shear and direct shear.” Geotechnique, 19(1), 75–86.
Scarpelli, G., and Wood, D. M. (1982). “Experimental observations of shear band patterns in direct shear tests.” Rep. CUED/D-SOILS/TR 124, Engineering Dept., Cambridge Univ., Cambridge, UK, 12.
Yoshimi, Y., and Kishida, T.(1982). “A ring torsion apparatus for evaluating friction between soil and metal surfaces.” Geotech. Test. J., 4, 145–152.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
Copyright © 2002 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Dec 7, 1999
Accepted: Jun 24, 2001
Published online: Jan 1, 2002
Published in print: Jan 2002
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.