Scale Effect on Sample Testing in Offshore Site Investigation

Sanjay Kumar Bharati; Soon Hoe Chew

doi:10.15866/irece.v5i6.3706

Scale Effect on Sample Testing in Offshore Site Investigation

Sanjay Kumar Bharati^(1*), Soon Hoe Chew⁽²⁾

^(*) Corresponding author

Authors' affiliations

DOI: https://doi.org/10.15866/irece.v5i6.3706

Abstract

In conjunction with a large future land development at the near shore off the East coast of Singapore, it is necessary to conduct a detailed soil investigation work to understand the in-situ geotechnical behavior of the soft marine clay. Conventionally, small diameter sample of 38 mm or 50 mm for Traixial and 70 mm for Oedometer consolidation tests are used for determination of strength and consolidation properties. However, such tests may suffer from the limitations of the small sample size as a small diameter sample may not truly represent the “fabric” and “structure” of soils at the site. The in-situ soil is not as uniform or homogenous as represented by this small soil sample. Hence, a large diameter sampling and testing research project is envisaged. The results from the large diameter sample tests were compared with the conventional small diameter sample test. The results showed significant difference between the two tests. The results showed the present of sandy soil patches within the clayey soil matrix, which was clearly revealed in the failure plan of the large diameter samples after the test, but was not observed in the small diameter samples.
Copyright © 2014 Praise Worthy Prize - All rights reserved.

Keywords

Large Diameter Sampling; Large Diameter Undisturbed Soil Samples; Large Diameter Triaxial Test; Large Diameter Oedometer Test

Full Text:

PDF

References

R. J. Marsal, Large-scale testing of rockfill materials, Journal of Soil mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol. 93 (Issue 2):27–44, 1967.

N. D. Marachi, C. K. Chan, H. B. Seed and J. M. Duncan, Strength and deformation characteristics of rockfill materials, Report No. TE-69 (5), Department of Civil Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, 1969.

C. C. Ladd, Preparing test specimen using under compaction. Journal of geotechnical testing, Vol. 1: 16-23, 1978.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1520/gtj10364j

K. Been and M. G. Jefferies, A state parameter for sands, Journal of Geotechnique, Vol. 35: 99-112, 1985
http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/geot.1985.35.2.99

R. F. Scott, Failure, Journal of Geotechnique, Vol. 37 (Issue 4): 423-466, 1987.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/geot.1987.37.4.423

V. Garga, Effect of sample size on shear strength of basaltic residual soils, Canadian geotechnical journal, Vol. 25:478-487, 1988.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1139/t88-053

W. Hu, C. Dano, P. Hicher, J. Touzo, and F. Derkx, Effect of sample size on the behavior of granular materials, Journal of Geotechnical Testing, Vol. 34 (Issue 3):1-12, 2010.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1520/gtj103095

H. Hazarika, N. Igarashi and Y. Yamada, Behavior of granular and compressible geomaterial under cyclic loading, 5th Conference of earthquake geotechechnical engineering, pp: 1-12, Santiago, Chile, 2011.

E. M. Palmeira, Scale effects in direct shear tests on sand, Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, 13-18, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, August 1989.

A. B. Cerato and A. J. Lutenegger, Specimen size and scale effects of direct shear box tests of sands, Geotechnical Testing Journal, Vol. 29: 507-516, 2006.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1520/gtj100312

R. Dadkhah, M. Ghafoori, R. Ajalloccian and G. R. Lashkaripour, The Effect of scale direct shear test on the strength parameters of clayey sand in Isfahan, Iron, Journal of Applied Sciences, and Vol. 10 (Issue 18): 2027-2033, 2010.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3923/jas.2010.2027.2033

Y. M. Wang, Y. K. Chen, C. S. Wang and Z. X. Hou, Large direct shear testing of geocell reinforced soil, Advances in Transportation Geotechnics, 759-764, 2008.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1201/9780203885949.ch105

C. A. Bareither, C. H. Benson and T. B. Edil, Reproductively of direct shear tests conducted on granular backfill materials, ASTM Geotechnical Testing Journal, Vol. 31: 84-94, 2008.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1520/gtj100878

C. N. Lui, Y. H. Ho and J. W. Huang, Large scale direct shear tests of soil/PET-yam geogrid interfaces, Geotextile geomembrance. Vol. 27: 19-30, 2009.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geotexmem.2008.03.002

Q. Zhou, H. H. Shen, B. T. Helenbrook and H. W. Zhang, Scale dependence of direct shear tests, Chinese science bulletin, Vol. 54: 4337-4348, 2009.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11434-009-0516-5

P. K. Wu, K. Matsushima and F. Tatsuoka, Effects of specimen size and some other factors on the shear strength and deformation of granular soils in direct shear tests, Geotechnical testing journal, Vol. 31: 45-64, 2008.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1520/gtj100773

BS 1377, British standard method of test for civil engineering purposes, British standard institute, London, 1990.

K. H. Head, Manual of soil laboratory testing, (Whittles publishing, 1986).

Hossein Matinmanesh, Sayyed Mahdi Abtahi, Rassoul Ajalloeian and Mohammad Ali Rowshanzamir, Sandy Soil Improvement Using Acrylic Resin Grout Injection, (2011) International Review of Civil Engineering (IRECE), 2 (3), pp. 121-128.

Refbacks

There are currently no refbacks.

Username
Password
Remember me