Hydro-Mechanical Properties of an Unsaturated Frictional Material

More documents

Recommendations

Info

7.17 Unsaturated hydraulic conductivity versus volumetric water content resulting from modified pressure plate apparatus (loose and dense specimen, steady state test) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159 7.18 3D plots of oedometer test results for dense (left) and loose (right) specimen . 160 7.19 Compression and swelling index versus suction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161 7.20 Calculated parameter ˆm and stiffness modulus for dry specimens with different void ratios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 7.21 Comparison of experimental results and predicted results (loose specimen) . . 163 7.22 Comparison of experimental results and predicted results (dense specimen) . . 164 7.23 Experimental results of collapse potential test including results of compression index- Method 1 (loose specimen) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 7.24 Prediction of yield stress using Casagrande’s (left) and Janbu’s (right) method (loose specimen) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167 8.1 Experimental data (initial drainage, 1 st drainage, 2 nd drainage) from drainage transient state column tests used for model building (loose specimen) . . . . . . 173 8.2 Results from data transformation using experimental results (initial drainage, 1 st drainage, 2 nd drainage) from drainage transient state column tests (loose specimen) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174 8.3 Experimental drainage results from several depth and new SWCC model best fit (loose specimen, transient state sand column test) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175 8.4 Experimental imbibition results (1 st imbibition, 2 nd imbibition) and new SWCC model best fit (loose specimen, transient state sand column test) . . . . 176 8.5 Experimental imbibition results (1 st imbibition, 2 nd imbibition) and new hysteresis SWCC model best fit (loose specimen, transient state sand column test) 178 8.6 Model validation results from 1 st drainage process (loose specimen, TDR/T70 mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179 8.7 Model validation results from 2 nd drainage process (loose specimen, TDR/T160 mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180 8.8 Model validation results from 1 st imbibition process (loose specimen) . . . . . . 181 8.9 Model validation results from 2 nd imbibition process (loose specimen) . . . . . 182 8.10 Model validation results from main drainage and main imbibition curve derived from steady state tests in the modified pressure plate apparatus (loose and dense specimen) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183 8.11 Model validation results from scanning imbibition curves derived from steady state tests in the modified pressure plate apparatus (loose specimen-left, dense specimen-right) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183 9.1 Hysteresis and phase entrapment properties of the soil-water characteristic curve186
9.2 Domain and boundary conditions (left) and water outflow and inflow (right) in the numerical simulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187 9.3 Comparison of pore-water pressure measurements and simulation including hysteresis model from Parker and Lenhard (1987) - transient state test . . . . 189 9.4 Comparison of saturation versus time measurements and simulation including hysteresis model from Parker and Lenhard (1987) - transient state test . . . . 190 9.5 Comparison of suction-water content measurements and simulation including hysteresis model from Parker and Lenhard (1987) - transient state test . . . . 191 9.6 Comparison of pore-water pressure measurements and simulation including hysteresis model from Parker and Lenhard (1987) - steady state test . . . . . . 192 9.7 Comparison of saturation versus time measurements and simulation including hysteresis model from Parker and Lenhard (1987) - steady state test . . . . . . 193 9.8 Comparison of suction-water content measurements and simulation including hysteresis model from Parker and Lenhard (1987) - steady state test . . . . . . 194 10.1 Mechanism of failure below rough footing (Gussmann 1986, reprint with per- mission from P. Gussmann) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197 10.2 Mechanism of failure below smooth footing (Gussmann 1986, reprint with per- mission from P. Gussmann) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198 10.3 Bearing capacity equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198 10.4 Model strip footing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199 10.5 Failure below strip footing following Rankine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199 10.6 Mechanism of failure below footing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201 10.7 Experimental results of bearing capacity tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201 10.8 Comparison of experimental and predicted results of bearing capacity . . . . . 203 B.1 Experimental results and best fit (Fredlund and Xing 1994) for drainage and imbibition process from modified pressure plate apparatus (loose specimen, steady state test) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218 B.2 Experimental results and best fit (Fredlund and Xing 1994) for drainage and imbibition process from modified pressure plate apparatus (dense specimen, steady state test) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219 B.3 Experimental results and best fit (Fredlund and Xing 1994) for drainage and imbibition process from sand column test II (loose specimen, steady state test) 220 B.4 Experimental results and best fit (Fredlund and Xing 1994) for drainage and imbibition process from sand column test II (dense specimen, steady state test) 221 B.5 Experimental results and best fit (Fredlund and Xing 1994) for drainage and imbibition process from sand column test I (loose specimen, transient state test - 100 ml/min) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222
Page 1: Hydro-Mechanical Properties of Part
Page 5: Acknowledgement The present dissert
Page 8 and 9: 3.2 Steps of Model Building . . . .
Page 10 and 11: 11 Summary and Outlook 205 11.1 Gen
Page 12 and 13: 2.16 Influence of Brooks and Corey
Page 14 and 15: 6.2 Experimental results of soil-wa
Page 18 and 19: B.6 Experimental results and best f
Page 20 and 21: 8.3 Constitutive parameters for the
Page 22 and 23: E ref ur Oedometer reference stiffn
Page 24: ρ Density (g/cm 3 ) ρd ρs Dry de
Page 28 and 29: 2 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION Figure 1.
Page 30 and 31: 4 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION - Model b
Page 32 and 33: 6 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
Page 34 and 35: 8 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART condu
Page 36 and 37: 10 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART soil
Page 38 and 39: 12 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART the
Page 40 and 41: 14 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART Figu
Page 42 and 43: 16 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART - Su
Page 44 and 45: 18 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART - Re
Page 46 and 47: 20 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART Volu
Page 48 and 49: 22 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART Drai
Page 50 and 51: 24 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART wher
Page 52 and 53: 26 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART drai
Page 54 and 55: 28 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART Tabl
Page 56 and 57: 30 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART Tabl
Page 58 and 59: 32 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART by W
Page 60 and 61: 34 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART proc
Page 62 and 63: 36 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART - Im
Page 64 and 65: 38 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART auth
Page 66 and 67:
40 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART 2.5.
Page 68 and 69:
42 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART Volu
Page 70 and 71:
44 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART Volu
Page 72 and 73:
46 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART fitt
Page 74 and 75:
48 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART Satu
Page 76 and 77:
50 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART when
Page 78 and 79:
52 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART Degr
Page 80 and 81:
54 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART 1. T
Page 82 and 83:
56 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART 0.2
Page 84 and 85:
58 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART meth
Page 86 and 87:
60 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART When
Page 88 and 89:
62 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART Vert
Page 90 and 91:
64 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART a) S
Page 92 and 93:
66 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART - Ja
Page 94 and 95:
68 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE ART
Page 96 and 97:
70 CHAPTER 3. INTRODUCTION TO PROCE
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
76 CHAPTER 4. EXPERIMENTAL SETUPS s
Page 104 and 105:
78 CHAPTER 4. EXPERIMENTAL SETUPS 1
Page 106 and 107:
80 CHAPTER 4. EXPERIMENTAL SETUPS D
Page 108 and 109:
82 CHAPTER 4. EXPERIMENTAL SETUPS d
Page 110 and 111:
84 CHAPTER 4. EXPERIMENTAL SETUPS b
Page 112 and 113:
86 CHAPTER 4. EXPERIMENTAL SETUPS t
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
90 CHAPTER 4. EXPERIMENTAL SETUPS D
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
94 CHAPTER 4. EXPERIMENTAL SETUPS T
Page 122 and 123:
96 CHAPTER 5. MATERIAL USED AND EXP
Page 124 and 125:
98 CHAPTER 5. MATERIAL USED AND EXP
Page 126 and 127:
100 CHAPTER 5. MATERIAL USED AND EX
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
116 CHAPTER 6. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
136 CHAPTER 7. ANALYSIS AND INTERPR
Page 164 and 165:
138 Observed values (-) Observed va
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
164 Stiffness modulus (kPa) Stiffne
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
172CHAPTER 8. NEW SWCC MODEL FOR SA
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
186 CHAPTER 9. NUMERICAL SIMULATION
Page 214 and 215:
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
Page 222 and 223:
CHAPTER 10. BEARING CAPACITY OF A S
Page 224 and 225:
Page 226 and 227:
Page 228 and 229:
Page 230 and 231:
204 CHAPTER 10. BEARING CAPACITY OF
Page 232 and 233:
206 CHAPTER 11. SUMMARY AND OUTLOOK
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240 and 241:
214 APPENDIX A. DETAILS ZOU’S MOD
Page 242 and 243:
216 APPENDIX A. DETAILS ZOU’S MOD
Page 244 and 245:
218 APPENDIX B. SOIL-WATER CHARACTE
Page 246 and 247:
Page 248 and 249:
Page 250 and 251:
Page 252 and 253:
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
230 APPENDIX C. COLLAPSE POTENTIAL
Page 258 and 259:
232 Vertical strain (-) Vertical st
Page 260 and 261:
234 APPENDIX E. NEW SWCC MODEL - DE
Page 262 and 263:
Page 264 and 265:
Page 266 and 267:
240 40 50 30 APPENDIX E. NEW SWCC M
Page 268 and 269:
242 Observed Values Number of obser
Page 270 and 271:
244 BIBLIOGRAPHY Aubertin, M., Mbon
Page 272 and 273:
246 BIBLIOGRAPHY Campbell, J. D. (1
Page 274 and 275:
248 BIBLIOGRAPHY Davis, J. L. & Ann
Page 276 and 277:
250 BIBLIOGRAPHY Ferré, P. A. & To
Page 278 and 279:
252 BIBLIOGRAPHY Grozic, J. L. H.,
Page 280 and 281:
254 BIBLIOGRAPHY Janbu, N. (1969),
Page 282 and 283:
256 BIBLIOGRAPHY Lawton, E. C., Fra
Page 284 and 285:
258 BIBLIOGRAPHY Mualem, Y. (1977),
Page 286 and 287:
260 BIBLIOGRAPHY Phene, C. J., Hoff
Page 288 and 289:
262 BIBLIOGRAPHY Rojas, J. C., Sali
Page 290 and 291:
264 BIBLIOGRAPHY Stoimenova, E., Da
Page 292 and 293:
266 BIBLIOGRAPHY Vanapalli, S. K. &
Page 294 and 295:
268 BIBLIOGRAPHY Unsaturated Geotec
Page 296 and 297:
Schriftenreihe des Lehrstuhls für
Page 298:
Herausgeber: Th. Triantafyllidis 32
show all

Hydro-Mechanical Properties of an Unsaturated Frictional Material

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?