“…Liquefaction is a catastrophic phenomenon in geotechnical engineering and occurs mostly in loose sands, sandy silts and tailings. Under undrained cyclic loading, soil element tests show that fibre reinforcement increases the liquefaction resistance of sand, demonstrated by the increasing number of load cycles required to cause liquefaction [8][9][10]. Shaking table tests on fibre reinforced sand give a similar conclusion, showing that fibre inclusions decrease the peak excess pore water pressure during shaking and delay the occurrence of softening and liquefaction [11].…”
Synthetic fibres may be used to reinforce soils. Fibre reinforcement may, for example, improve the mechanical behaviour of very loose sand which is usually susceptible to static liquefaction. In this study, two types of polypropylene fibres are mixed into sand to explore the effect of fibre reinforcement on drained volumetric behaviour and undrained static liquefaction. Drained and undrained stress-controlled triaxial compression tests are conducted on both unreinforced and fibre reinforced samples which are in very loose states. It is observed that, under drained compression, both unreinforced and fibre reinforced samples show volumetric contraction. In undrained compression the excess pore water pressure eventually becomes almost equal to the initial confining stress in all samples. This represents a state of liquefaction in unreinforced samples, and they become fluidised indicating the effective stress has become zero. However, in reinforced samples, the fluidised condition is absent, indicating that a conventional type of liquefaction has not occurred. It is concluded that static liquefaction in very loose sand can be prevented by fibre reinforcement, as the induced tensile stress in fibres makes the effective stress (that is the stress carried by the soil skeleton) remain above zero even when the excess pore water pressure is equal to the confining stress.
“…Liquefaction is a catastrophic phenomenon in geotechnical engineering and occurs mostly in loose sands, sandy silts and tailings. Under undrained cyclic loading, soil element tests show that fibre reinforcement increases the liquefaction resistance of sand, demonstrated by the increasing number of load cycles required to cause liquefaction [8][9][10]. Shaking table tests on fibre reinforced sand give a similar conclusion, showing that fibre inclusions decrease the peak excess pore water pressure during shaking and delay the occurrence of softening and liquefaction [11].…”
Synthetic fibres may be used to reinforce soils. Fibre reinforcement may, for example, improve the mechanical behaviour of very loose sand which is usually susceptible to static liquefaction. In this study, two types of polypropylene fibres are mixed into sand to explore the effect of fibre reinforcement on drained volumetric behaviour and undrained static liquefaction. Drained and undrained stress-controlled triaxial compression tests are conducted on both unreinforced and fibre reinforced samples which are in very loose states. It is observed that, under drained compression, both unreinforced and fibre reinforced samples show volumetric contraction. In undrained compression the excess pore water pressure eventually becomes almost equal to the initial confining stress in all samples. This represents a state of liquefaction in unreinforced samples, and they become fluidised indicating the effective stress has become zero. However, in reinforced samples, the fluidised condition is absent, indicating that a conventional type of liquefaction has not occurred. It is concluded that static liquefaction in very loose sand can be prevented by fibre reinforcement, as the induced tensile stress in fibres makes the effective stress (that is the stress carried by the soil skeleton) remain above zero even when the excess pore water pressure is equal to the confining stress.
“…If Figures 4-6 were interpreted amongst themselves, the relative density was found the dominating factor among other variables such as ber length and ber ratio. It was seen that the maximum CSR values were obtained for specimens with 12 mm bers and compacted to a relative density of 70%, resulting in the maximum resistance to liquefaction cycles [19,20].…”
Section: E Ect Of Relative Densitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Specimens with a relative density of 70% were prepared, and empirical equations to determine peak and residual strength based on cement content, ber content, and con ning pressure were proposed in Consoli et al [4] and Consoli et al [14]. e resistance to liquefaction in ber-reinforced soils increased the number of cycles required to cause liquefaction under undrained loading conditions [15][16][17][18][19][20]. Cyclic triaxial test results have indicated that the shear modulus of reinforced soil is not only under the control of shear strain, but also under the control of many factors such as ber content, loading repetition, and con ning pressure [21].…”
is study focuses on the performance of fibers, improving the resistance to liquefaction in loose sands, medium sands, and dense sands in Izmir, Turkey. A systematic testing schedule consisting of cyclic triaxial tests was held under stress-controlled and undrained conditions on saturated sand specimens with and without fiber reinforcements. e major parameters having effects on the dynamic behavior such as fiber content, fiber length, and relative density on the liquefaction behavior and the excess pore water pressure developments of specimens with and without fibers were investigated. If the fiber content or the fiber length was increased in the specimens, higher number of loading cycles was needed in order to experience the liquefaction of sands. e reinforcement effect in medium-dense specimens was found to be apparently distinctive compared to loose specimens. e curves of pore water pressures and shear strains were achieved for the fiber-reinforced sands. e boundaries of pore water pressure curves presented in the literature on the clean sands were utilized in comparison with the pore water pressure curves of fiberreinforced sands of this study. As a conclusion, the results presented in this study are useful to develop insight into the behavior of clean and fiber-reinforced sands under seismic loading conditions. Based on the test results, it was found that the number of loading cycles had a strong impact on the excess pore pressure generation.
“…Their results showed that resistance of sand deposits liquefaction could be considerably increased with geosynthetic reinforcement [28]. Besides conventional reinforcing techniques such as geogrid and geotextile reinforced earth, using randomly distributed fibers as reinforcement material has gained more popularity because of more acceptable performance [2,29].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Results indicated that reinforced samples did not exhibit initial liquefaction as compared to unreinforced samples, although resistance against liquefaction increased with the inclusion of fibers [27]. Eskisar et al [29] found that there is a direct relationship between the loading cycles number and the generation of excess PWP in reinforced sand. Krishnaswamy and Thomas Isaac [5] performed triaxial tests to assess the liquefaction potential of reinforced sand by geotextile, including coir fibers and woven and nonwoven types.…”
In her master thesis, she worked on 27 "Investigation of Liquefaction of Babolsar Sand Mixed with Plastic Waste" 28 at Babol Noshirvani University of Technology under the supervision of Prof. 29 Reza Noorzad. 30 After graduation, she started working at Baran Geotechnics as an R&D manager on 2017. Her current research interests includes, but not limited to, Experimental Investigation of Soil Behavior under Dynamic Loads, Soil Improvement, Seismic Geotechnical and Embankment Dams.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.