Void redistribution and localized shear strains in slopes during liquefaction

Malvick, E. J.; Kulasingam, R.; Kutter, B. L.; Boulanger, RW

doi:10.1201/9780203743362-90

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The maximum volumetric strain rate is meant to act as an upper limit. A more realistic, thicker water inflow zone (e.g., see the thickness of the inflow zone in the centrifuge experiments of Malvick et al (2004), albeit for sloped ground) would lead to smaller volumetric strain rates. Moreover, a fully impermeable overlying layer is unlikely; a layer of low permeability would lead to volumetric expansion at a lower rate.…”

Section: Experimental Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cyclic liquefaction resistance of sand under a constant inflow rate

Adamidis

Anastasopoulos

2024

Géotechnique

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cyclic resistance curves, derived through undrained element tests, are central to the study of liquefaction. Their use implies that water drainage is negligible during an earthquake. Nevertheless, a growing body of evidence suggests that this hypothesis is not realistic. In proximity to the interface of a liquefiable layer with an overlying lower permeability layer, upwards water flow can lead to localised, co-seismic pore volume increase. This paper aims to quantify the effects of pore volume increase on cyclic resistance curves. Cyclic triaxial experiments are presented, performed under undrained conditions and under conditions of volumetric expansion. A constant inflow rate is chosen for the sake of simplicity. Results show that even small inflow rates have a detrimental effect on cyclic resistance. A simplified methodology is developed, which can estimate cyclic resistance under constant water inflow rates, by assuming a superposition of isotropic unloading and undrained cyclic shearing. The presented results add to increasing evidence on how current liquefaction susceptibility assessments might not be conservative for layered deposits. In addition, they highlight significant aspects of soil response under partially drained conditions.

show abstract

Section: Experimental Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%