Sample Report
Transcription
Sample Report
Sample Report Edited by BK & CW 12/28/04 Sample Report EFFECTS OF VOID REDISTRIBUTION ON LIQUEFACTION FLOW OF LAYERED SOIL Submitted to US-Japan Cooperative Research in Urban Earthquake Disaster Mitigation Principal Investigators: Bruce L. Kutter and Ross W. Boulanger University of California at Davis Principal Collaborator from Japan: Takeji Kokusho, Chuo University COVER SHEET FOR PROPOSAL TO THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION PROGRAM ANNOUNCEMENT/SOLICITATION NO./CLOSING DATE/if not in response to a program announcement/solicitation enter NSF 00-2 NSF9836 FOR NSF USE ONLY NSF PROPOSAL NUMBER 10/01/99 FOR CONSIDERATION BY NSF ORGANIZATION UNIT(S) 0070111 (Indicate the most specific unit known, i.e. program, division, etc.) CMS - Division of Civil and Mechanical Systems DATE RECEIVED NUMBER OF COPIES DIVISION ASSIGNED FUND CODE DUNS# (Data Universal Numbering System) FILE LOCATION 047120084 EMPLOYER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (EIN) OR TAXPAYER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (TIN) IS THIS PROPOSAL BEING SUBMITTED TO ANOTHER FEDERAL AGENCY? YES NO IF YES, LIST ACRONYMS(S) SHOW PREVIOUS AWARD NO. IF THIS IS A RENEWAL AN ACCOMPLISHMENT-BASED RENEWAL 946036494 NAME OF ORGANIZATION TO WHICH AWARD SHOULD BE MADE ADDRESS OF AWARDEE ORGANIZATION, INCLUDING 9 DIGIT ZIP CODE University of California-Davis OVCR/Sponsored Programs Davis, CA. 956168671 University of California-Davis AWARDEE ORGANIZATION CODE (IF KNOWN) 0013136000 NAME OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION, IF DIFFERENT FROM ABOVE ADDRESS OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION, IF DIFFERENT, INCLUDING 9 DIGIT ZIP CODE PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE (IF KNOWN) IS AWARDEE ORGANIZATION (Check All That Apply) (See GPG II.D.1 For Definitions) FOR-PROFIT ORGANIZATION TITLE OF PROPOSED PROJECT REQUESTED AMOUNT 441,631 $ SMALL BUSINESS MINORITY BUSINESS WOMAN-OWNED BUSINESS Effects of Void Redistribution on Liquefaction Flow of Layered Soils PROPOSED DURATION (1-60 MONTHS) 36 REQUESTED STARTING DATE SHOW RELATED PREPROPOSAL NO., IF APPLICABLE 07/01/00 months CHECK APPROPRIATE BOX(ES) IF THIS PROPOSAL INCLUDES ANY OF THE ITEMS LISTED BELOW BEGINNING INVESTIGATOR (GPG 1.A.3) VERTEBRATE ANIMALS (GPG II.D.12) IACUC App. Date DISCLOSURE OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES (GPG II.D.1) HUMAN SUBJECTS (GPG II.D.12) PROPRIETARY & PRIVILEGED INFORMATION (GPG II.D.10) Exemption Subsection NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (GPG II.D.10) INTERNATIONAL COOPERATIVE ACTIVITIES: COUNTRY/COUNTRIES or IRB App. Date HISTORIC PLACES (GPG II.D.10) SMALL GRANT FOR EXPLOR. RESEARCH (SGER) (GPG II.D.12) FACILITATION FOR SCIENTISTS/ENGINEERS WITH DISABILITIES (GPG V.G.) RESEARCH OPPORTUNITY AWARD (GPG V.H) PI/PD DEPARTMENT PI/PD POSTAL ADDRESS One Shields Avenue, 116 Everson Hall Civil & Environmental Engr PI/PD FAX NUMBER Davis, CA 956168671 United States 530-752-7872 NAMES (TYPED) High Degree Yr of Degree Telephone Number Electronic Mail Address PhD 1983 530-752-8099 [email protected] PhD 1990 530-752-2947 [email protected] PI/PD NAME Bruce L Kutter CO-PI/PD Ross W Boulanger CO-PI/PD CO-PI/PD CO-PI/PD NSF Form 1207 (10/99) Page 1 of 2 EFFECTS OF VOID REDISTRIBUTION ON LIQUEFACTION FLOW OF LAYERED SOILS PROJECT SUMMARY The assessment the post-liquefaction shear resistance behavior of soil is widely recognized as a controlling factor in many large remediation projects throughout the country and world. Decisions on whether to proceed with costly ground improvement projects to mitigate liquefaction hazards often hinge on highly uncertain estimations of post-liquefaction shear resistance of the soil. The objective of this research project is to better understand the sources of uncertainty. One likely source of uncertainty is the lack of procedures to evaluate the effects of void redistribution on the post-liquefaction shear strength. Void redistribution may be associated with accumulation of earthquake induced pore pressures near interfaces between permeable and impermeable soil and by particle intermixing. A program of dynamic centrifuge modeling tests and laboratory triaxial tests are proposed, in collaboration with a proposed program of 1-g shaking table tests conducted by Professor Kokusho at Chuo University, Japan, to study this problem. The centrifuge tests, to be conducted on the 9 m centrifuge at UC Davis will include models with multiple layers of contrasting permeability. In prior research Kokusho has observed flow failures and the formation of water interlayers beneath impermeable layers even in steeply sloping ground. Water interlayers, an extreme form of void redistribution raise serious questions regarding validity of typical stability calculations. Collaboration with Professor Kokusho will greatly enhance the benefits of this research by allowing comparisons between shaking table and centrifuge tests over a range of testing conditions. Unless flow failures can be recreated in both centrifuge and 1-g physical models, the degree to which either modeling method reproduces an actual liquefaction flow mechanism will remain in question. A unique feature of this research proposal is to bring together a Board of Consultants, composed of recognized US and Japanese experts in soil liquefaction, that would collaborate in the design of the centrifuge experiments and in the back-analysis of the model results using the same methods used for interpreting case histories. It is hoped that this collaborative interchange will benefit the profession by bringing different views and interpretations to bear on the same set of experimental data and help in dissemination of information and knowledge. The proposed work includes funding to support, train, and provide valuable experience to graduate and undergraduate students. The MESA, MORE, and WIE programs at UC Davis have agreed to help us recruit from a diverse pool of applicants for the undergraduate positions. The opportunities for students to design, conduct and analyze the large scale experiments and to meet renowned experts from the US and Japan will be an extremely valuable. TABLE OF CONTENTS For font size and page formatting specifications, see GPG section II.C. Section Total No. of Pages in Section Page No.* (Optional)* Cover Sheet (NSF Form 1207) (Submit Page 2 with original proposal only) A Project Summary (not to exceed 1 page) 1 B Table of Contents (NSF Form 1359) 1 C Project Description (plus Results from Prior NSF Support) (not to exceed 15 pages) (Exceed only if allowed by a specific program announcement/solicitation or if approved in advance by the appropriate NSF Assistant Director or designee) 17 D References Cited 2 E Biographical Sketches F Budget (Not to exceed 2 pages each) 6 8 (NSF Form 1030, plus up to 3 pages of budget justification) 4 G Current and Pending Support H Facilities, Equipment and Other Resources (NSF Form 1363) 1 I Special Information/Supplementary Documentation 0 J Appendix (List below. ) (Include only if allowed by a specific program announcement/ solicitation or if approved in advance by the appropriate NSF Assistant Director or designee) (NSF Form 1239) Appendix Items: *Proposers may select any numbering mechanism for the proposal. The entire proposal however, must be paginated. Complete both columns only if the proposal is numbered consecutively. NSF Form 1359 (10/99) EFFECTS OF VOID REDISTRIBUTION ON LIQUEFACTION FLOW OF LAYERED SOIL Submitted to US-Japan Cooperative Research in Urban Earthquake Disaster Mitigation Principal Investigators: Bruce L. Kutter and Ross W. Boulanger University of California at Davis Principal Collaborator from Japan: Takeji Kokusho, Chuo University BACKGROUND AND STATE OF KNOWLEDGE The uncertainty in assessing the post-liquefaction shear resistance behavior of soil is widely recognized as a controlling factor in many large remediation projects throughout the country and world. Decisions on whether to proceed with costly ground improvement projects to mitigate liquefaction hazards often hinge on uncertain estimates of postliquefaction shear resistance of the soil. The objective of this research project is to investigate the role of void redistribution, which may be associated with impeded drainage or particle intermixing, on the post-liquefaction shear resistance behavior of sand. A program of dynamic centrifuge modeling tests and laboratory triaxial tests are proposed, in collaboration with a proposed program of 1-g shaking table tests at Chuo University, Japan, to study this problem. Background information and the state of knowledge related to this problem are discussed below. Evaluating potential instability in liquefying soils, or estimating the residual shear strength (Sr) of a liquefied soil, is a difficult task. Recent experimental studies have contributed to an improved understanding of factors affecting Sr, and helped to reduce large differences between Sr values back-calculated from case histories and Sr values obtained from laboratory testing of field samples (with appropriate corrections for disturbance per the steady state approach). Laboratory testing by several investigators has shown that Sr, or the shear resistance over a large range of strains, is affected by stress path (extension vs. simple shear vs. compression), fabric, consolidation stress, fines content, and strain level. For example, Vaid et al. (1995) showed a factor of 5 difference in the deviator stress at 8% shear strain for a sand tested along different stress paths in a hollow cylinder testing device. A basic question remains, however, whether or not laboratory testing fully captures the mechanisms of instability that act in situ. In this regard, void redistribution due to earthquake loading has been identified as potentially having an important influence on the in situ residual shear strength, or steady state strength, of saturated sands (e.g., NRC 1985). The process of void redistribution within a globally undrained sand mass was termed Mechanism B by NRC (1985), and a potential situation where it might occur was illustrated by the schematic in Figure 1. Of related interest is Mechanism C (NRC 1985) where the outward flow of pore water due to Figure 1. Mechanism B by NRC (1985) Example of potential void redistribution within a globally undrained sand layer. Figure 2. Mechanism C by NRC (1985) – Example of potential failure by spreading of excess pore pressures with global volume changes. excess pore pressures in a sand mass, such as illustrated in Figure 2, could spread into overlying soils and/or cause a loosening of the upper portion of the sand. In this case, the sand is neither globally nor locally undrained, since there is drainage from the sand. Terzaghi and Peck (1967) pointed out the potential importance of redistribution of pore pressures in horizontal seams of permeable soil on the stability of a slope, as shown in Figure 3. The higher permeability sand seam would allow high consolidation-induced pore pressures in the clay stratum below the embankment to be redistributed towards the toe of the embankment. The resulting additional increase in pore pressures (and hence piezometric line as shown in their figure) in the sand seam beneath the toe would reduce the shear strength along the seam and reduce the stability of the embankment. A similar mechanism could occur if layers of high permeability transfer earthquake-induced excess pore pressures from a distance to shear zones in a slope. The potential significance of in situ void redistribution, particularly with regard to mechanism B (Fig. 1), remains controversial (e.g., Seed 1986, McRoberts & Sladen 1992, Castro 1995). Void redistribution was first observed to occur within laboratory sand specimens (Casagrande & Rendon 1978, Gilbert 1984). Casagrande (1980) subsequently suggested that void (or water content) redistribution was a phenomenon Figure 3. Effect of horizontal layering on slope instability in presence of consolidation-induced pore pressure. (Terzaghi and Peck, 1967) associated with cyclic laboratory tests and may not reflect in situ behavior. More extensive void redistribution resulting in the formation of water inter-layers between stratified soil layers was observed in shaking table models by Liu & Qiao (1984). Arulanandan et al. (1993) reported redistribution of densities within a globally-undrained sand layer, confined by clay layers, within a model embankment tested in a centrifuge, but there are several limitations in the interpretation of these results as noted by Castro (1995). Centrifuge tests of gentle slopes by Fiegel & Kutter (1994) showed that the presence of a lower permeability soil layer affected the distribution of deformations with the slope; A concentration of deformations developed at the interface of a liquefying sand layer and an overlying silt layer, whereas deformations were more uniformly distributed in homogenous slopes of sand. More recently, the introduction of thin silt layers into otherwise homogenous sand models on a shaking table, was shown by Kokusho (1999) and Kokusho et al. (1998) to lead to the formation of water interlayers or void redistribution, both during and after shaking. Kokusho’s dramatic video recordings of failure mechanisms show that large delayed flow failures occur when silt layering is present. Without silt layers, the deformations stop at the end of shaking. One of Kokusho’s experiments, shown in Figure 4, involved an arc of silt within the slope. Shaking was perpendicular to the slope so inertial forces did not drive slope deformations. Soil above the silt continued to deform after the end of shaking, while soil below the silt arc did not (Figure 5). Video recordings showed that a water interlayer formed along a limited portion of the silt arc. The postshaking deformation above the silt arc was roughly equal to the shaking-induced deformations. A second test was performed for the identical homogenous slope of sand but without any silt arc. In this test, the deformations ceased at the end of shaking as shown in Figure 6. The shaking table results in Figures 5 and 6 illustrate that impeded drainage can have a major role in timing and mechanism of liquefaction-induced deformations. Kokusho’s observation of water interlayers in steeply sloping ground has significant implications; it is an extreme form of void redistribution. The occurrence of water interlayers in the shaking table test may be biased by low effective stress levels and transverse direction of shaking. If these interlayers could also be observed in centrifuge model tests, the possibility of their occurrence in the field will be further substantiated. Disagreement in the profession regarding the potential for void redistribution in the field and its implications for design would seem to have two main aspects. First, field observations only reflect the consequences of any void redistribution, and hence its occurrence or nonoccurrence can only be inferred rather than conclusively demonstrated. Secondly, physical mechanisms for void redistribution as derived from soil mechanics principles are not well developed, and the unanswered theoretical questions can lead to doubts as to the significance of such a mechanism. Boulanger (1998) described a quantitative mechanism for void redistribution in sand following earthquake shaking for the simplest case of an infinite slope. The analysis results suggest that void redistribution is not just an artifact of laboratory testing, but rather may be more pronounced in the field due to the in situ gradients of stress and pore pressure that are not recreated in laboratory element tests (e.g, triaxial, simple shear). The implication is that the in situ Sr of liquefied soil depends on the in situ boundary and Figure 4. Shaking Table Test with a Silt Arc to Study Effect of Water Film (Kokusho 1999) Figure 5. Deformation of Points Above Silt Arc Continued After Shaking (Kokusho 1999) Figure 6. Deformation of Points in the Homogenous Slope Without a Silt Arc Stopped After Shaking (Kokusho 1999) loading conditions (stratigraphy, permeabilities, earthquake characteristics, stress path) as well as on the pre-earthquake soil properties and state. A NSF-sponsored workshop entitled “Post-Liquefaction Shear Strength of Granular Soils”, was held at the University of Illinois, in April 1997. In his keynote lecture at the workshop, Martin (1997) stated “It has been observed in past earthquakes that, in some instances, large slope displacements have been initiated sometime after the earthquake ground shaking ceased. This suggests that pore pressure redistribution may be affecting the overall shearing resistance of the soil mass.” In his keynote lecture, Castro (1997) discusses the possibility of void redistribution, and states that “The [redistribution] issue is far from clear.” Castro also points out that if there is redistribution, the redistribution “will in no way be reflected in the results of SPT or CPT index tests.” In another keynote lecture at the workshop, Byrne and Beaty (1977) point out that granular material is generally nonhomogeneous comprising loose, dense, fine and coarse zones. They introduce the idea that intermixing of a coarse uniform soil with a fine uniform soil will produce a mixture with greatly reduced residual strength which can result in a flow failure. Such intermixing of particles could be viewed as another form of void redistribution. Byrne and Beaty (1997) cite a case history where this mixing caused a flow failure at a mine in Zambia, and they posed the question: “Was mixing a factor at the Lower San Fernando Dam?” From the three keynote lectures discussed above, basic questions about the importance of nonhomogeneities and layering are raised. The applicability of centrifuge testing to estimate the shear strength of liquefied soil, the evaluation of the effects of drainage and mixing during flow, the re-evaluation of field case histories and the augmentation of case histories of flow slides using physical models were all cited in the workshop summary and recommendations. Our proposal is to investigate influences of layering and inhomogeneity on void redistribution associated with flow slide phenomena. The back-calculation of shear resistance from case histories can not distinguish between mechanisms. For example, a significant issue is how to distinguish between deformations that are due to cyclically-induced stresses that never exceed the soil’s full undrained shear resistance, versus deformations due to cyclic stresses temporarily exceeding the soils full undrained shear resistance. In many cases, herein referred to as “lateral spreads” deformations are caused by seismically induced cyclic loads superimposed on gravity loads. In other cases, herein referred to as “flow failures”, large deformations occurred after shaking under the influence of monotonic gravity loads. Both cases may be potential affected by void redistribution (whether through impeded drainage or particle intermixing). The appropriate “strengths” to use for the prediction of deformations cause by lateral spreads and for assessment of flow failures are likely to be completely different. These complications are illustrated by the shaking table results of Kokusho (1999) shown in Figures 4 to 6. Significant differences in displacements occurred between the two models, with the only difference being the presence of a thin silt interlayer (the rest of the sand slope was at the same initial density). If Sr values for the sand were backcalculated based on the observed deformations, as has been largely done for past case histories, then the Sr values would be different for these two models. This illustrates how the back-calculated Sr from case histories are more likely a macro response (as recognized by Seed 1986). OBJECTIVES AND SIGNIFICANCE One of the objectives of this research project is to better understand the factors that affect the uncertainty in the post-liquefaction shear resistance of soil. The emphasis will be on understanding the mechanisms and significance of void redistribution on the development of liquefaction-induced deformations, including its effects on the backcalculation of apparent (or residual) shear resistance using the same procedures that have been used to interpret case histories. The apparent or residual shear resistance of liquefied soil (Sr) back-calculated from observed deformation is a macro-response that may strongly depend on numerous factors like drainage boundary conditions. These complications may limit the conditions where Sr may reasonably be correlated to initial conditions as represented by SPT and CPT penetration resistances alone. Current design procedures used in practice do not explicitly acknowledge that pore pressure or void redistribution can strongly affect the apparent “residual” strength of liquefied soil. Methods derived from laboratory element tests, such as the steady state approach using field samples or suggested normalized strengths (Sr/σv′) derived from tests on reconstituted specimens, implicitly ignore the effects of pore pressure or void redistribution. These approaches may prove to be unconservative under certain adverse drainage or layering conditions. When it comes to back-calculation of Sr from case histories, the question is whether or not the lowest Sr values already reflect adverse void redistribution effects or not. Identifying these limitations in current design procedures can lead to better designs that mitigate the effects of impeded drainage in a rational way. Collaboration with Professor Kokusho will greatly enhance the benefits of this research by allowing comparisons between shaking table and centrifuge tests over a range of testing conditions. Kokusho (1999) has already completed a series of tests investigating the role of impeded drainage, some of which have not yet been published, and is submitting a proposal to perform additional shaking table studies over a broader range of conditions. A letter from Professor Kokusho describing his intent to collaborate on these studies is attached. The mechanisms associated with void redistribution [or water film formation (Kokusho 1999)] should be identifiable in both shaking table (1-g) and centrifuge modeling studies. Unless the mechanisms can be recreated in both methods of physical modeling, the degree to which either modeling method reproduces an actual field mechanism will remain in question. It would be reasonably questioned whether the limitations of scaling (at 1-g or in a centrifuge) were affecting the magnitude of the observed effects of void redistribution. Questions regarding scaling effects would include not only the scale of any loosening zone (or bifurcating interface) but also the rate of pore pressure migration which would affect the rate of void redistribution or water film formation. Thus, there is a strong benefit to a coordinated modeling effort using 1-g and centrifuge models to increase confidence that the physical models are capturing a mechanism that can develop in the field. Most numerical modeling methods for capturing liquefaction-induced deformations do not attempt to accurately capture the effects of pore pressure redistribution and the potential for water film interlayer formation or loosening of thin zones of sand near impeded drainage boundaries. Again, the first step is to identify the mechanisms and the range of conditions where their effects are important. The need to numerically model these behaviors with refined constitutive models or numerical schemes will be clarified by the proposed experiments. Another objective of this research proposal is to bring together a Board of Consultants, composed of recognized experts in soil liquefaction, who would collaborate in the design of the centrifuge experiments and in the back-analysis of the model results using the same methods used for interpreting case histories. It is hoped that this collaborative interchange will benefit the profession by bringing different views and interpretations to bear on the same set of experimental data. BROADER IMPLICATIONS Engineering undergraduates will be employed throughout this project to provide an integrated educational and research experience. Both PI’s have consistently involved undergraduates in geotechnical research projects; this past year alone they have employed Amy Smith, Sam Shiotani, and Pongphan Chauvapun, and have guided other undergraduates through independent research studies. For the proposed work we plan to hire two undergraduate students to work part time throughout the duration of the project. One of these students will be an advanced undergraduate that has completed undergraduate courses in geotechnical and earthquake engineering. This undergraduate will be expected to fully contribute to the project as a “researcher”. The second undergraduate will be recruited as a starting freshman Civil Engineering Major to assist the graduate students and to learn what is involved in research and to begin considering pursuit of education beyond a Bachelors Degree. We will directly contact the MESA Engineering Program (MEP), Mentorships and Opportunities for Research in Engineering Program (MORE) and the Center for Women in Engineering at UC Davis to connect with traditionally underrepresented groups of students for these positions. The MESA program at Davis has already agreed to refer promising freshman to us for this endeavor. Doctoral and Masters students will be employed under this project. Research on the large centrifuge provides a broad background and training to graduate students, preparing them for practice or research careers. They learn experimental techniques for soils, advanced instrumentation and control systems, large data set management skills, and visualization techniques in addition to their primary research on the geotechnical aspects of their research topic. Participation of underrepresented groups has been a consistent goal of the PI’s. At present, they together support six female students (5 graduate and 1 undergraduate: Berna Sunman, Tara Hutchinson, Christina Curras, Maria Hollister, Key Rosebrook, and Amy Nelson). Other supported students are ethnically and internationally diverse. The large centrifuge facilities at the Center for Geotechnical Modeling are used in laboratory sessions for three courses: the freshman course on Introduction to Civil and Environmental Engineering (ECI-3) and the upper division courses Soil Mechanics (ECI171L) and Data Acquisition, Visualization and Control (ECI-121). These visiting sessions are often planned to coincide with ongoing experiments and thus may coincide with some of the tests proposed herein. The instrumentation facilities and control systems are used in the ECI-121 laboratory session. All centrifuge test results will be documented in data reports, including all raw electronic test data. The Center for Geotechnical Modeling has openly distributed data reports for tests over the past three years, and provided this data over the internet or on disk to numerous other researchers. Data reports are fully contained documents that allow other researchers to analyze the data. Data reports and their availability are described at http://cgm.engr.ucdavis.edu/. An eventual goal of the Center is to be able to transmit live video of the test preparation, testing, and test dissection over a network, such as envisioned through the NEES program. For the present project copies of video of flow failures will be posted on the internet after the experiments. The basic physics involved in post-liquefaction behavior include a complex system of two-phase coupled mechanical/hydraulic behavior that may include localized bifurcation and water interlayer formation. Understanding these basic physical mechanisms has the broadest implications for the scientific and technological advancement of engineering procedures used to design structures subject to such behavior. WORK PLAN The research will involve the following major tasks: 1. Model tests on the centrifuge. 2. Comparison with model tests on 1-g shaking table. 3. Back-calculation of the relevant strength by different proposed procedures, and evaluation of post-shaking deformations or other observations that indicate that pore pressure redistribution is or is not significant for each model. 4. Triaxial testing in compression and extension to measure the undrained stressstrain behavior of the soil. 5. Integration of results and summary of findings including reconciling backcalculated strengths with laboratory test results. A unique feature of this proposal is the establishment of a Board of Consultants that will: 1. Carefully review the planned centrifuge experiments before the tests to ensure that sufficient data will be retrieved to enable accurate back-calculation of the relevant strength by existing procedures. 2. To check the back-calculation procedures to ensure proper implementation of different methods of evaluating the post-liquefaction shear strength. 3. To review the plan for conducting laboratory triaxial compression and extension testing. 4. Compare the strengths of liquefied soil calculated and measured by the various tests and procedures. The following individuals have been contacted and have already agreed to serve on this Board: Takeji Kokusho, Chuo University Gonzalo Castro, GEI Consultants Ricardo Dobry, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Steven Kramer, University of Washington Professor Kokusho will be a key collaborator in coordinating experimental studies between the proposed 1-g shaking table studies at Chuo University and the centrifuge studies proposed herein. Contingent upon Professor Kokusho’s input and available funding, we plan to add at least one additional Japanese researcher to the Board of Consultants. Getting other influential researchers and engineers together to discuss the test results and analysis will have the added benefit of helping to build a consensus on the controversial topic of the “strength” of liquefied soil. SCHEDULE The research will be carried out in three phases: I. Planning and conducting the first four centrifuge experiments, studying existing and new data generated by Professor Kokusho, and planning of triaxial tests. II. Back calculations from centrifuge tests and shaking table tests, conducting two additional centrifuge tests, and conducting triaxial tests. III. Summary, comparison, analysis and reporting. PHASE I. Duration 18 months. The first meeting of the Board of Consultants, the PI’s, and research students will be about three months after the project is funded, before the centrifuge tests are conducted. At this meeting a detailed plan for centrifuge testing will be presented by the PI’s and the Board will provide criticism and advice. The members of the Board will each be asked to make a presentation on how they think the experiments should be instrumented and to make a detailed description of the desired back analysis procedures. The advice of the Board will be incorporated in the experimental plan, and the centrifuge model tests will be conducted. The first four tests will be conducted using the large shaker on the large centrifuge, at a centrifugal acceleration of 40 g. In these tests, it is anticipated that at least 2 flow failures will be produced. The details of the experiments are described later in this proposal. The data from each of these experiments will be published in separate data reports and distributed to the Board and made available to the public via pdf files at http://cgm.engr.ucdavis.edu/. PHASE II. (12 months) Phase II will begin with the second meeting of the Board of Consultants, the PI’s and research students. Centrifuge results and preliminary back analysis of the experiments (to determine the appropriate post-liquefaction shear strength) will also be reported to the Board. In addition, the plan for laboratory element testing will be presented and discussed. The Board will critique and review the planned and completed centrifuge tests, proposed laboratory element testing and the preliminary back analysis procedures. Element tests will be conducted to investigate the peak strength, and monotonic strength of the soil using triaxial compression and extension testing. The intention is to determine the location of the steady state line in e-lnp′ space and determine the effect of these stress paths on the stress-strain response. It is anticipated that the results and the preliminary back analysis will raise some questions as well as answers. In Phase II, two more centrifuge tests will be planned and conducted at either UC Davis or another centrifuge depending on the advice of the Board of Consultants. The potential benefits of performing tests at another centrifuge could be, for example, to evaluate the repeatability of any observed phenomena at a higher centrifugal acceleration on a smaller centrifuge. During Phase II, back analysis of the results will be carried out in detail according to the recommendations of the Board. PHASE III. Duration: 6 months The results of all element tests, centrifuge tests, and back analyses will be summarized and compared and presented in a draft final report, which will be distributed to the Board of Consultants for their review and comments. One last meeting of the Board will be held near the end of PHASE III to help establish a consensus on the topic of void redistribution on flow failures. If the project is as successful as we anticipate, it may be appropriate to expand the final Board meeting into a small workshop to include more practicing engineers and researchers. CENTRIFUGE AND LABORATORY TEST PROGRAM The details of the centrifuge and laboratory testing program may change in response to the recommendations of the Board of Consultants, as described in the above. Figure 7 shows three different centrifuge model configurations that will be the basis of the proposal put to the Board for discussion at the first meeting. Proposed Centrifuge Tests A total of six centrifuge tests are proposed. One pair of of centrifuge tests will provide direct comparison against a pair of shaking table tests to be performed at Chuo University under a pending proposal by Professor Kokusho. The design of these two tests will be finalized upon funding of our individual proposals, but is expected to be a variation on the tests described above (Figures 4-6). One test will likely incorporate horizontal silt interlayers Figure 7(a) and another test will be homogenous fine sand throughout. The sand will be placed at a relative density of about 40% using dry pluviation and vacuum saturation. About 75 instruments will be used to monitor each experiment (about 30 accelerometers, 30 pore pressure transducers and 15 displacement transducers). silt layer (a) silt layer fine sand embankment (b) silt layer silt layer fine sand embankment gravel layer (c) finely stratified-hydraulic fill embankment Figure 7. Schematic plans for 6 model tests; Two variations will be tested for each of the three configurations. We will use Nevada sand, which is the same sand used in VELACS and most of our past model studies. The silt will be nonplastic. A mixture of water and methyl cellulose will be used for the pore fluid, thereby providing improved scaling of the consolidation behavior. It is expected that the tests will be performed in our rigid container with polycarbonate walls that allow observation of slope deformations using side-mounted cameras. All tests will be performed at a centrifugal acceleration of about 40 g. Shaking motions for these models will be along the long-axis of the model and hence coincide with the dip of the slope. Therefore, the inertial loads associated with shaking will contribute to slope deformations, which is one aspect that will be different from the tests performed by Kokusho (see Figure 4 – shaking is along the strike of the slope). The proposed shaking will consist of a very short duration motion, perhaps just a single cycle of shaking. If no failure occurs in a few seconds, a larger pulse will be applied, and a few seconds later an even larger pulse will be applied until a failure occurs. If a flow failure still does not occur, a longer duration earthquake will be applied. All of these shakes will follow each other within a few seconds, to minimize the strengthening of the soil due to consolidation between shaking events. Another pair of tests (Figure 7(b)) will be designed to combine the deleterious effects of discontinuous layers of more permeable soil in addition to silt layers. The overall geometry and sand properties of the models shown in 7(b) will be very similar to those depicted in 7(a) to provide cross-comparisons. Large pore pressures will be generated by earthquake shaking of these models. The gravel layer across the model below the level of the toe of the slope is expected to rapidly conduct pore water from a region of high overburden (high excess pore pressure) toward the toe of the slope. This is analogous to the effect of the permeable layer in the problem (Figure 3) posed by Terzaghi and Peck (1967). Arrows in figure 7(b) indicate the expected flow of water into the gravel under deep backfill and exit of water near the toe of the slope. It is suggested in Figure 7(b) that silt layers could also be used to restrict the dissipation of pore pressure, but the value of the additional complexity of the silt layers will be discussed with the Board of Consultants. The last pair of centrifuge tests are tentatively planned to represent an embankment constructed with hydraulic silty sand fill. The most well documented example of an earthquake-induced flow failure is probably the collapse of the Lower San Fernando Dam in 1971. This failure produced very large deformations that were obviously driven by gravity loads acting on a soil mass weakened by an earthquake; the flow occurred 20 to 30 seconds after the shaking stopped (Seed et al. 1989). In some respects, the proposed centrifuge tests will attempt to represent conditions similar to those in the Lower San Fernando Dam. A model embankment will be constructed of uniform, hydraulically placed slurry of silty sand. The slurry will be placed in thin lifts, and will be expected to naturally segregate to produce a layered structure similar to that obtained during construction of the San Fernando Dam. The model will be constructed with as slow a sedimentation rate as possible to produce the loosest possible structure. The proposed shaking sequence will be similar to that described for the other sets of tests. The finely stratified hydraulic fill will (1) allow high pore pressures from the core to flow toward the slope face, (2) produce interfaces where water interlayers may form, and (3) provide a large interface surface area for intermixing of stratified deposits. Triaxial Testing Program A series of triaxial tests will be performed on specimens of Nevada sand. The data obtained will augment an existing database including cyclic, monotonic, drained, undrained, simple shear, triaxial, torsional hollow cylinder tests at a variety of densities (Chen 1995 & Arulmoli et al. 1992) as well as other ongoing work that we are aware of. A limited program of laboratory testing is proposed to obtain data from specimens reconstituted in the same manner and at the same relative density as used in the centrifuge tests. Isotropically-consolidated undrained tests will be performed at three different confining stresses representing the range of stresses produced in the models. Both compression and extension tests will be performed. A series of cyclic triaxial tests will be performed at the intermediate value of confining stress used in the monotonic loading tests described above. Select tests will also be repeated using specimens prepared at slightly higher and slightly lower relative densities. These test results will allow consideration of how uncertainties in model density might affect the results of centrifuge and laboratory tests. REFERENCES CITED Arulanandan, K., H. B. Seed, C. Yogachandran, K. Muraleetharan, & R. B. Seed 1993. Centrifuge study on volume changes and dynamic stability of earth dams. J. Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE 119(11):1717-1731. Arulmoli, K., K.K. Muraleetharan, M.M. Hossain, and L.S. Fruth 1992. VELACS Verification of Liquefaction Analyses by Centrifuge Studies Laboratory Testing Program Soil Data Report, Prepared for NSF, Earth Technology Proj. No. 90-0562, March. Arulnathan, R., Boulanger, R. W., and Riemer, M. 1998. Analysis of bender element tests, Geotechnical Testing Journal, GTJODJ, ASTM, 21(2): 120-131. Arulnathan, R., Boulanger, R. W., Kutter, B. L., and Sluis, B. 1999. A new tool for Vs measurements in model tests, Geotechnical Testing Journal, GTJODJ, ASTM, submitted in June 1999. Arulnathan, R. 1999. Dynamic properties and site response characteristics of organic fine-grained soils, Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Davis. Boulanger, R. W., Arulnathan, R., Harder, L. F., Jr., Torres, R. A., and Driller, M. W. 1998, Dynamic properties of Sherman Island peat, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, 124(1): 12-20. Boulanger, R.W., R. B. Seed, & C. K. Chan 1991. Liquefaction behavior of saturated sands under uni-directional and bi-directional monotonic and cyclic simple shear loading. Report UCB/GT-90-08, Univ. of California, Berkeley, 521 pp. Boulanger, R. W. and S. P. Truman 1996. Void redistribution in sand under postearthquake loading. Canadian Geotechnical J., 33:829-833. Byrne, P.M. and M. Beaty 1997. Post-Liquefaction Shear Strength of Granular Soils: Theoretical/Conceptual Issues. Shear Strength of Liquefied Soils. (Stark, Olson, Kramer and Youd, eds.) Proceedings of April 17-18 Workshop at Urbana, Illinois. Casagrande, A. 1980. Discussion. J. Geotechnical Engineering Div., ASCE 105(6):725727. Casagrande, A. 1984. Reflections on some unfinished tasks. First Nabor Carrillo Lecture of the Mexican Society for Soil Mechanics presented at the 6th National Meeting of the Society in November, 1972, and published in 1984. Casagrande, A. & F. Rendon 1978. Gyratory shear apparatus design, testing procedures, Technical Report S-78-15, Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Castro, G. 1995. Discussion. J. Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE 121(7):572-273. Castro, G. 1997. Post-Liquefaction Shear Strength from Case Histories. Shear Strength of Liquefied Soils. (Stark, Olson, Kramer and Youd, eds.) Proceedings of April 17-18 Workshop at Urbana, Illinois. Chen, Y.-R. 1995. Behavior of a Fine Sand in Triaxial, Torsional and Rotational Shear Tests, PhD Thesis, Department of Civil and Environmental Engr., University of California, Davis. Fiegel, G. L. and B. L. Kutter 1994. Liquefaction-induced lateral spreading of mildly sloping ground. J. Geotechnical Engrg, ASCE 120(12):2236-2243. Gilbert, P.A. 1984. Investigation of density variation in triaxial test specimens of cohesionless soil subjected to cyclic and monotonic loading, Report No. GL-84-10, Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. Howard, R.W.A, B.L. Kutter, and R. Siddharthan 1998. Seismic Deformation of Reinforced Soil Centrifuge Models, Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics III, Geotechnical Special Publication No. 75, ASCE, Vol. 1, pp.446-457. Ishihara, K. & H. Nagase 1980. Closure to Ishihara & Yamazaki (1980), Soils and Foundations, JSSMFE, 20(1). Kokusho, T. 1999, Formation of water film in liquefied sand its effect on lateral spread, ASCE J. Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 125 No. 10, pp. 817826. Kokusho, T., Watanabe, K., and Sawano, T. 1998. Effect of water film on lateral flow failure of liquefied sand. 11th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Balkema, Rotterdam, 1-8. Kutter, B.L. and A. Balakrishnan 1998. Dynamic model test data from electronics to knowledge, Centrifuge 98, Kimura, Kusakabe, Takemura (eds.), Balkema, Rotterdam, Volume 2, in press. Kulasingam, R., Boulanger, R. W., and Idriss, I. M. 1999. Evaluation of CPT liquefaction analysis methods against inclinometer data from Moss Landing.” Proceedings, 7th US-Japan Workshop, MCEER (in press). Liu, Huishan & Taiping Qiao 1984. Liquefaction potential of saturated sand deposits underlying foundation of structure. Proc. Eighth World Conf. Earthquake Engineering, Vol. III, San Francisco. Martin, G.R. 1997. Post-Liquefaction Shear Strength from Laboratory and Field Tests. Shear Strength of Liquefied Soils. (Stark, Olson, Kramer and Youd, eds.) Proceedings of April 17-18 Workshop at Urbana, Illinois. McRoberts, E. C. & J. A. Sladen 1992. Observations on static and cyclic sandliquefaction methodologies. Canadian Geot. J., 29(4):650-665. NRC, National Research Council 1985. Liquefaction of soils during earthquakes. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C. Romero, S. 1998. The behavior of silt as clay content is increased, Masters thesis, University of California, Davis, 108 pp. Seed, H.B. 1986. Design problems in soil liquefaction. J. Geotechnical Engrg., ASCE, 113(8):827-845. Seed, H.B., R.B. Seed, L.F. Harder & H.-L. Jong 1989. Re-Evaluation of the Lower San Fernando Dam, Report 2, prepared for Dept of Army, US Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC, contract No. DACW39-85-C-0048, September, 265p. Siddharthan, R.V., Ganeshwara, V., and Kutter, B.L. 1999. Development of a Seismic Deformation Model for Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) Walls, , Proc., 8th Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering, pp. 353-359. Terzaghi, K. and R.B. Peck,. 1967. Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice. Wiley and Sons, New York. BUDGET JUSTIFICATION One month of summer support per year is requested for the Principal Investigator (Bruce Kutter), one-half month per year for the co-PI (Ross Boulanger), and one month per year is requested for the UC Davis Centrifuge Facility Manager (Dan Wilson). The PI will be responsible for overall project coordination of meetings, laboratory and centrifuge tests. The co-PI, will play an advisory role for all phases of the project and will be in charge of planning and conducting the triaxial tests. The facility manager will help in details of meetings with the Board of Consultants and in day to day supervision of the graduate and undergraduate students while they are conducting the centrifuge tests. The budget includes one month of support per year for a technician (Dennis O’Brien) who will help in small machining tasks, and to train new students in the use of equipment, machines, and forklift. Department technical support funds will be used to get Computer Support and from a Department Development Engineer (regarding Apparatus machining or design). One graduate student (Ph.D. candidate), with help from two undergraduate students will conduct the six centrifuge model tests and the triaxial tests. Based upon our experience, one full time graduate student (50% academic year, 100% summer) with help of the technicians and undergraduate student assistants can in one year conduct two or three large scale centrifuge model tests. This includes planning the experiments, constructing the models, dissecting the models, keeping photographic records and logbook, preparation of a complete data reports for each test, and preparing a conference paper. In addition, the student should be able to co-author at least one conference or journal article in each year. For the graduate student, we include fees and tuition expenses. Consumables includes photography, tons of soil for the models, methyl cellulose to adjust pore fluid viscosity and a few new instruments to replace those lost to attrition. Travel includes the cost of meetings of the Board of Consultants (one from Japan, one from the West Coast, two from the East Coast) at UC Davis. In the first year we have a somewhat larger travel budget which will allow the PI’s to travel to Japan to observe the shaking table tests by Prof. Kokusho and coordinate the research. We plan to meet with Prof. Kokusho at least once per year either in the US or Japan. We plan to schedule some of these meetings around international conferences to economize. Centrifuge time is charged at $8000 per test, which is based upon our established rate of $800/day and our experience that each test will occupy the centrifuge, instruments, and/or model containers for ten days per test. FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT, AND OTHER RESOURCES Work will be performed at the centrifuge site of the Center for Geotechnical Modeling at UC Davis. The Center operates a small (1-m radius) and a large (9-m radius) geotechnical centrifuge, both of which are equipped with servo-hydraulic shakers for simulating earthquake type motions. Prof. Bruce Kutter, the current Director of the Center, was involved in bringing the large centrifuge to UC Davis and has helped develop the UC Davis facility from the beginning. Mr. Tom Kohnke, the Center's head technician, has over eight years of experience working with and developing the geotechnical centrifuges at UC Davis. Dr. Dan Wilson, the Center's facility manager, has over eight years experience with centrifuge modeling, both in performing research experiments and in developing equipment for use on the centrifuges at UC Davis. The UC Davis centrifuge has the largest radius and by far the largest model containers (1.7 x 0.7 x 0.7 m3 inside volume) available on any centrifuge shaker in the US. Two new centrifuges in Japan have comparable dimensions. The shaker on the UC Davis centrifuge has a servo-hydraulic actuator capable of producing base motions that simulate realistic earthquakes, sine sweeps, or single small spikes of acceleration. Peak base accelerations as high as 40 g, velocities up to 0.8 m/s, and peak to peak displacements of 25 mm can and have been produced by the shaker. For a 40 g centrifuge tests, these motions correspond to prototype earthquake base motions with 1 g acceleration, 0.8 m/s, and 1 m displacement. More details regarding the centrifuge facilities may be found at http://cgm.engr.ucdavis.edu. The Center facilities include a large soil mixer, a large consolidation press, three model containers for the large centrifuge and several containers for the small centrifuge. Also a bank of about 100 instruments (accelerometers, pore pressure transducers, displacement transducers, etc.) is available for users of the Center’s facilities. The centrifuge facilities at UC Davis are available to researchers outside UC Davis for independent or collaborative research (see http://cgm.engr.ucdavis.edu). Most of the data generated using the centrifuge is made available to interested researchers on the web, CD or Zip disk. In addition to conventional equipment such as direct shear, consolidation, compaction equipment, the Department of Civil Engineering Soil Mechanics laboratories include computer controlled triaxial and torsional hollow cylinder apparatus, equipment and electronics for measurement of shear wave velocities using bender elements, and graduate student computer laboratories. The Center has access to an active fully functional machine shop run by the College of Engineering, and the professional staff of Facility Services, who can assist in development and design of mechanical and electrical apparatus that might be required for this project.