Determination of Relative Density of Sand Below Groundwater Table

Osterberg, JO; Varaksin, Serge

doi:10.1520/stp37883s

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Various workers have presented data concerning the in situ density of subaqueous hydraulic fills, including Hanzawa and Matsuda (1977), Hall (1962), Basore and Boitano (1969), Osterberg and Varaksin (1973), Steurerman and Murphy (1 957), Whitman (1970), Johnson et al (1972), and de Groot et al (1988) (Beaufort Sea experience excluded). For a general review of the use of hydraulic fills, the reader is referred to Morgenstern and Kupper (1988).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of placement method on the in situ density of hydraulic sand fills

Sladen¹,

Hewitt²

1989

Can. Geotech. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The range of densities achievable by hydraulic placement of sand straddles the boundary between values giving acceptable potential performance and those giving unacceptable potential performance. This has led to concerns over the safety of structures using hydraulic fills, such as the artificial drilling islands in the Canadian Beaufort Sea. Liquefaction failures of hydraulically placed sand have occurred at four or more of these islands. Until recently, the factors affecting in situ density were little understood. Data obtained from several artificial islands are presented and these are used to demonstrate the overwhelming influence of method of placement on in situ density. The possible reasons for this influence and the implications for design are discussed. Recommendations are made for research that, together with conclusions drawn in the paper, should allow hydraulic fills to be used with more confidence in the future.Le domaine de variation des densites qui peuvent &tre atteintes par mise en place hydraulique du sable chevauche la limite entre une performance potentielle acceptable et une inacceptable. Ceci a cause certaines inquiktudes quant a la securite des structures utilisant des remblais hydrauliques, telles que les iles artificielles dans la mer canadienne de Beaufort. Des ruptures par liquefaction du sable mis en place par la methode hydraulique se sont produites dans au moins quatre de ces iles. Jusqu'a recemment, les facteurs affectant la densite in situ Ctaient peu compris. Les donnies obtenues sur plusieurs de ces iles artificielles sont presentees et elles sont utiliskes pour dimontrer l'influence prkpondkrante de la mithode de mise en place sur la densite en place. Les causes possibles de cette influence et les implications pour la conception sont discutees. L'on y fait des recommandations de recherches qui, combinkes avec les conclusions tirees de cet article, devraient permettre dans le futur l'utilisation des remblais hydrauliques avec plus de confiance.Mots clis : sable, remblai hydraulique, liqukfaction, essai de penktration au c8ne.[Traduit par la revue]Can. Geotech. J. 26, 453-466 (1989)

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of placement method on the in situ density of hydraulic sand fills

Sladen¹,

Hewitt²

1989

Can. Geotech. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the discussion on the results of Osterberg and Varaksin (1973), Holtz notes that everyone should recognise that the SPT is a relatively crude test and no one should expect to determine the relative density of sands to the nearest 1% or anything like that, and further adds that he and Gibbs developed a set of correlations to take into account the effect of overburden pressures, and that they never indicated that the sets of curves developed at that time were necessarily applicable to all cohesionless soils under all conditions. More importantly, he clarifies that they had always laid stress on relative density trends indicated by SPT values rather than the specific individual values.…”

Section: Correlation Of Relative Density With Field Testsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…In addition to the limitations that ASTM (2006a, 2006b) has in place for the application of relative density, the Bureau of Reclamation also limits the use of its chart to sands containing less than 10% fines and no gravels. Osterberg and Varaksin (1973) extracted frozen soil samples from Lake Michigan and compared them with what was estimated by Gibbs and Holtz. Predictions were quite different from reality and it was concluded that relative densities obtained from SPT using the Gibbs and Holtz chart had no relationship to the actual relative densities.…”

Section: Correlation Of Relative Density With Field Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relative density correlations are not reliable criteria

Hamidi

Varaksin²,

Nikraz³

2013

Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Ground Impr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The concept of relative density was developed with the intention of appropriately defining looseness and denseness of sand or sand–gravel soils in a meaningful way; however, there are sufficient amounts of research and case studies to demonstrate the unreliability of this concept due to its large inherent errors. Nevertheless, this parameter found its way early on as a ground improvement acceptance criterion based on the same philosophy that led to its formation. As there was general agreement among engineers that, in any case, direct testing of relative density in actual deep ground improvement projects was difficult, time consuming and costly, direct methods of relative density measurement were abandoned in favour of correlation to other field tests. At first glance, this may have seemed to work out quite well as the conceptual unreliability of relative density did not come into play, but a deeper look could reveal that the proposed correlations are also as unreliable as the concept itself. This paper will discuss the reasons why relative density correlations should not be used as ground improvement acceptance criteria, and alternative reliable criteria will be proposed.

show abstract

“…This layout may have resulted in disturbance of the soil due to volume expansion in the phase change between water and ice. A similar all-around freezing technique was later attempted by Osterberg and Varaksin (1973) who concluded the samples had been disturbed by the expansion of ice in the pore volume. Yoshimi et al (1978) use radial one-dimensional freezing employing a single freeze pipe and subsequently pulled a frozen column of soil from the ground.…”

Section: Ground Freezingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Liquefaction subsurface investigation for Milford Dam

Stark

Lewis²,

Castro

et al. 2011

Can. Geotech. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) completed a liquefaction potential analysis as part of the seismic evaluation of Milford Dam in 1986. This paper uses data from the 1986 study to compare fines content data from in situ frozen and standard penetration test (SPT) samples that suggest fines content can be overestimated by 1-10% by SPT samples in stratified sand deposits. This result may have implications for liquefaction assessments because split-spoon samples may overestimate the actual fines content, resulting in a liquefiable deposit being classified as nonliquefiable. In addition, the paper evaluates the effectiveness of ground freezing on maintaining in situ soil structure and aging of the foundation sands at Milford Dam.Résumé : Le Corps du génie de l'armée américaine (USACE) a réalisé une analyse du potentiel de liquéfaction dans le cadre d'une évaluation sismique du barrage de Milford en 1986. La présente étude utilise les données recueillies lors de l'é-tude de 1986 afin de comparer le contenu en particules fines d'échantillons in situ gelés ainsi que d'échantillons provenant d'essais de pénétration standard (EPS). Ces données suggèrent que le contenu en particules fines peut être surestimé de 1 à 10 % pour les échantillons d'EPS prélevés dans des dépôts de sable stratifié. Ce résultat peut avoir des implications dans l'évaluation de la liquéfaction puisque les échantillons de cuillère fendue peuvent surestimer le contenu en particules fines et ainsi le dépôt liquéfiable est classé comme non-liquéfiable. De plus, cet article évalue l'efficacité de conserver le sol gelé pour maintenir la structure in situ du sol et pour le vieillissement des sables de fondation au barrage de Milford.Mots-clés : mécanique des sols, liquéfaction, résistance au cisaillement, essai de pénétration du cône, essai de pénétration standard, stabilité sismique.[Traduit par la Rédaction]

show abstract

Determination of Relative Density of Sand Below Groundwater Table

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

Influence of placement method on the in situ density of hydraulic sand fills

Influence of placement method on the in situ density of hydraulic sand fills

Relative density correlations are not reliable criteria

Liquefaction subsurface investigation for Milford Dam

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About