International Journal of Applied Science and Engineering
Published by Chaoyang University of Technology

Pei-Hsun Tsaia,* and Sheng-Huoo Nib

a Department of Construction Engineering, Chaoyang University of Technology, 168 Jifong E. Rd., Wufong District, Taichung, Taiwan
b Department of Civil Engineering, National Cheng Kung University, No.1 University Rd., Tainan, Taiwan

Download Citation: |
Download PDF


ABSTRACT

The variation of dynamic properties of soils (shear modulus and damping ratio) as a function of shearing strain is an important input for solving geotechnical problems involving dynamic loading. In this paper, the dynamic properties of cement stabilized soil were studied using resonant column test. Three types of stabilized soil were studied. They are cement stabilized soil, slag cement stabilized soil, and cement with sodium silicate stabilized soil. The amount of cement admixed, the magnitude of confining pressure, and shearing strain amplitude were the parameters considered in this study. Test results show that the maximum shear modulus of cement stabilized soil increases with increasing confining pressure, the minimum damping ratio decreases with increasing confining pressure. However, the relationship between the maximum shear modulus and the confining pressure varies with the type of additive. The shear modulus of cement stabilized soil decreases with increasing shearing strain while the damping ratio increases with increasing shearing strain. The relationship of shear modulus versus shearing strain was fitted into the Ramberg-Osgood equations using regression analysis. The results also indicate that the cement with sodium silicate stabilized soil is able to sustain larger shearing strain before stiffness degradation occurring than other types of additive.


Keywords: Cement stabilized soil; resonant column test; shears modulus; damping ratio.


Share this article with your colleagues

 


REFERENCES

  1. [1] Stokoe, K.H. II and Richart, F.E. Jr. 1973. In-Situ and Laboratory Shear Wave Velocities. Proc. 8th ICSMFE, Moscow: 403-409.

  2. [2] Iwasaki, T., Tatsuoka, F., and Takagi, Y. 1979. Shear Modulus of Sands Under Cyclic Torsional Shear Loading. Soils and Foundations, 18, 1: 39-56.

  3. [3] Kokusho, T. 1980. Cyclic Triaxial Test of Dynamic Soil Properties for Wide Strain Range. Soils and Foundations, 20, 2: 45-60.

  4. [4] Seed, H.B., Wang, R.T., Idriss, I.M., and Tokimatsu, K. 1986. Moduli and Dynamic Factors for Dynamic Analyses of Cohesionless Soils. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, 112, 11: 1016-1032.

  5. [5] Wang, G.X. and Kuwano, J. 1999. Modeling of Strain Dependency of Shear Modulus and Damping of Clayey Sand. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 18: 463-471.

  6. [6] Anderson, D.G. and Richart, F.E. 1976. Effects of Straining on Shear Modulus of Clay. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, 102, 9: 975-987.

  7. [7] Kokusho, T., Yoshida, Y., and Esashi, Y. 1982. Dynamic Properties of Soft Clays for Wide Strain Range. Soils and Foundations, 22, 4: 1-18.

  8. [8] Dobry, R. and Vucetic, M. 1987. Dynamic Properties and Seismic Response of Soft Clay Deposits. Proc. of  International Symposium     on Geotechnical Engineering of Soft Soils Mexico city: 51-87.

  9. [9] Okur, D.V. and Ansal, A. 2007. Stiffness Degradation of Natural Fine Grained Soils During Cyclic Loading. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 27: 843–854.

  10. [10] Maher, M.H., Ro, K.S., and Welsh, J.P. 1994. High Strain Dynamic Modulus and Damping of Chemically Grouted Sand. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 13: 131-138.

  11. [11] Ribay, E.D., Maigre, I.D., Cabrillac, R. and Gouvenot, D. 2004. Shear Modulus and Damping Ratio of Grouted Sand. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 24: 461-471.

  12. [12] Kamaluddin, M. and Balasubramaniam, A.S. 1995. Overconsolidated Behavior of Cement Treated Soft Clay. Proc. 10th Asian Regional Conf. on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Thailand: 407-412.

  13. [13] Uddin, K., Balasubramaniam, A.S., and Bergado, D. T. 1997. Engineering Behavior of Cement Treated Bangkok Soft Clay. Geotechnical Engineering Journal, 28, 1: 89-119.

  14. [14] Yin, J.H. and Lai, C.K.  1998. Strength and Stiffness of Hong Kong Marine Deposit Mixed with Cement. Geotechnical Engineering Journal, 29, 1: 29-44.

  15. [15] Miura, N., Horpibulsuk, S., and Nagaraj, T.S. 2001. Engineering Behavior of Cement Stabilized Clay at High Water Content. Soils and Foundations, 41, 5: 33-45.

  16. [16] Moh, Z.C. and Ou, C.D. 1979. Engineering Characteristic of Taipei Silt. Proceedings of 6th Asian Regional Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Singapore.

  17. [17] Woo, S.M. and Moh, Z.C. 1990. A General Report on Geotechnical Int. J. Appl. Sci. Eng., 20 Characteristics of Soils in the Taipei Basin. Proceedings of 10th Southeast Asian Geotechnical Conference, Taipei: 51-65.

  18. [18] Lee, C.J. and Sheu, S.F. 2007. The Stiffness Begradation and Bamping Ratio Evolution of Taipei Silty Clay Under Cyclic Straining. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 27: 730-740.


ARTICLE INFORMATION

Received: 2012-01-19
Revised: 2012-05-11
Accepted: 2012-05-22
Available Online: 2012-06-01


Cite this article:

Tsai, P.-H., Tsai, Ni, S.-H. 2012. Effects of types of additives on dynamic properties of cement stabilized soils. International Journal of Applied Science and Engineering, 10, 131–144. https://doi.org/10.6703/IJASE.2012.10(2).131

Other people also read ...

doaj logo

 

2.3
2022CiteScore
 
 
48th percentile
Powered by  Scopus
 
 

SCImago Journal & Country Rank

IJASE - Most Read Articles

IJASE - Most popular articles