Upload
others
View
10
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
SUPPLEMENTAL DATA REPORT NO.1
DYNAMIC LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS
NORTH ANNA POWER STATION COL PROJECT
REV. 0OCTOBER, 2007
MACTEC PROJECT NO. 6468-06-1472
DCN NACOL 253
MACTEC Engineering and Consulting MACTEC Project 6468-06-1472North Anna Power Station COL Supplemental Data Report No.1, Rev. 0 October 2007
SUPPLEMENTAL DATA REPORT No.1, Rev. 0DYNAMIC LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report is a supplement to the MACTEC Geotechnical Data Report issued as Rev. 0 onJanuary 23, 2007. The Resonant Column/Torsional Shear laboratory testing was not completewhen the Geotechnical Data Report Rev. 0 was issued. It was agreed by all parties that the testresults would be issued as a supplemental report, not as a revision to the Geotechnical DataReport. The information in this supplemental data report is submitted for entry into the projectdocument system and release for use.
2.0 SCOPE OF WORK
The attached test results were obtained from a laboratory study performed at Fugro Consultants(Fugro) laboratory in Houston, Texas. The dynamic properties of 3 intact soil samples from theNorth Anna site were evaluated. Combined resonant column and torsional shear (RCTS)equipment was used to perform the measurements. The dynamic characteristics evaluated withthe RCTS equipment are the shear modulus (G), and the material damping ratio in shear (D).Dynamic testing of each specimen involved the evaluation of G and D over a range of isotropicconfining pressures. Five isotropic confining pressures were used for each specimen, rangingfrom below to above the estimated in-situ mean effective stress.
Remaining material in the undisturbed sample tubes was used by Fugro to perform particle sizedistribution tests (ASTM D 422-63 (2002) and ASTM D 6913-04).
3.0 METHODOLOGY
3.1 Locations
Samples for testing were obtained from Borings B-901(1 sample) and B-911A (2samples), both located within the Power Block area. The samples were undisturbedsamples obtained using techniques of ASTM D 1587 -00. The undisturbed tubes wereplaced upright in protective boxes and transferred under chain of custody from the NorthAnna site to Fugro's laboratory following methods of ASTM D 4220-95 (2000) forGroup C samples. The samples were received by Fugro personnel and set aside in climatecontrolled storage.
The samples to be tested were listed on a laboratory testing assignment issued by Bechtel.Twelve samples were assigned for testing. Bechtel later reduced the number of samplesfor testing to 4. Three samples were tested successfully; the testing on the fourth samplewas problematic due to material changes in the sample, and Bechtel determined thattesting on that sample was not to be completed.
3.2 Subcontractors
The RCTS testing was done by Fugro under subcontract to MACTEC. Dr. Ken Stokoe ofthe University of Texas Austin reviewed and approved the test reports prior to their issueby Fugro.
NACOL253
MACTEC Engineering and Consulting MACTEC Project 6468-06-1472North Anna Power Station COL Supplemental Data Report No.1, Rev. 0 October 2007
3.3 Technical Procedures
3.3.1 . RCTS Tests
The RCTS testing was performed in accordance with "Test Procedures and CalibrationDocumentation Associated with the RCTS and URC Tests at the University of Texas atAustin, Geotechnical Engineering Report GR06-4, DCN: UTSD RCTS GR06-4 REV 0,dated April 25, 2006." A copy of the procedure is maintained in MACTEC project QAfiles.
3.3.2 Particle Size Distribution Tests
Brief descriptions of the particle size distribution tests assigned by Bechtel, performed byFugro and contained in this Supplemental Report are given in the paragraphs below.
3.3.2.1 Particle Size Analysis
3.3.2.1.1 Sieve Analysis (ASTM D 6913-04) - The dried soil sampleis separated into a series of fractions using a standard set ofnested sieves. The sieving operation is conducted by meansof a lateral and vertical motion of the nest of sieves,accompanied by jarring action to keep the sample movingcontinuously over the surface of the sieves. The weightsretained on each of the set of nested sieves are used tocalculate the percent of the sample passing each sieve size.
3.3.2.1.2 Combined sieve and hydrometer Analysis (ASTM D 42263(2002» - The sieve analysis is performed as describedabove. The portion of the soil sample passing the No. 200(75 f..Lm) sieve is soaked in water and dispersed using adispersing agent. The solution is placed in a cylinder andstirred, and the density of the solution is monitored over timewith a hydrometer to observe the settling out of suspendedsoil particles. Diameters corresponding to the readings ofthe hydrometer are then calculated using Stoke's law.
4.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE
4.1 Procurement
Fugro was procured for the work in accordance with the procedures in section QS-7 ofthe MACTEC Quality Assurance Project Document (QAPD).
Page 2 of3 NACOL253
MACTEC Engineering and Consulting MACTEC Project 6468-06-1472North Anna Power Station COL Supplemental Data Report No.1, Rev. 0 October 2007
4.2 Personnel
Fugro personnel were qualified and operated under the Fugro Quality Assurance plan.Qualifications for the RCTS reviewer, Dr. Ken Stokoe were reviewed and accepted byMACTEC in accordance with MACTEC Quality Assurance Procedure QAP 20-1 asincluded in the MACTEC QAPD. Qualifications information is maintained in MACTECQA files.
4.3 Equipment Calibration
Equipment in the Fugro laboratory was calibrated in accordance with the Fugro QualityAssurance Program. Copies of the calibration records furnished by Fugro are maintainedin MACTEC QA files.
4.4 Surveillances
MACTEC QA personnel conducted surveillances of the Fugro laboratory during thecourse of the RCTS testing. Records of the surveillances are maintained in MACTECQA files.
5.0 RESULTS
The test results report from Fugro was reviewed and accepted by MACTEC. The report isattached.
Page 3 of3 NACOL253
A MACTEC
DOCUMENTATION OF TECHNICAL REVIEWSUBCONTRACTOR WORK PRODUCT
Project Name: North Anna COL
Project Number: 6468-06-1472
Project Manager: Steve Criscenzo
Project Principal: Al Tice
The test results described below have been prepared by the named subcontractor retained inaccordance with the MACTEC QAPD. The test results have been technically reviewed by Dr.Ken Stokoe of the University of Texas Austin by agreement between Fugro and MACTEC.Comments on the work or report, if any, have been satisfactorily addressed by the subcontractor.The attached test results are approved in accordance with section QS-7 of MACTEC' s QAPD
The information and data contained in the attached test results are hereby released by MACTECfor project use.
REPORT: RCTS Test Results for B-901-UD-I, B-91IA-UDI and B-91IA-PBI - Fugro reportdated August 10, 2007 supplemented by revised tables and test reports dated September 27, 2007.
SUBCONTRACTOR: Fugro Consultants, Inc.
DATE OF ACCEPTANCE: 9-28-07
TECHNICAL REVIEWER: Dr. Ken Stokoe
PROJECT PRINCIPAL
DCN NACOL - 253
~ MACTEC:BO J Atlanlic A"eIlUl":. Raleig.h. NC 276114
FUGRO CONSULTANTS, INC.
August 10, 2007
Mr. Michael P. Sufnarski, P.E.Principal Engineer/Project ManagerMACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc.2801 Yorkmont Road ICharlotte, NC 28208
RE: Three (3) RCTS Reports For The North Anna Project
Dear Mr. Sufnarski:
6100 Hillcroft (77081)P.O. Box 740010
Houston, Texas 77274Tel: 713-369-5400
Fax: 713-369-5518
Fugro has completed three (3) RCTS tests for the North Anna project. The finalreports and the associated RCTS Test Approval by Dr. Kenneth Stokoe havebeen attached.
Please let us know if you have questions. Thanks.
Very truly yours,
Fugro Consultants, Inc.
Jiewu Meng, PhD, P.E.Project Engineer
Cc: Dr. Kenneth Stokoe
Enclosures
1!~:.YLaboratory Department Manager
...t:J:A A member of the Fugro group of companies with offices throughout the world.
-W------------
FUGRO CONSULTANTS, INC.
September 27, 2007
Mr. J. Allan Tice, P. E.Senior Principal Engineer/Assistant Vice PresidentMACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc.3301 Atlantic AvenueRaleigh, NC 27604
6100 Hillcroft (77081)P.O. Box 740010
Houston, Texas 77274Tel: 713-369-5400
Fax: 713-369-5518
RE: Revised Tables, Particle Size Distribution Curves, and ClarificationLetter of Transmittal August 10, 2007 for the North Anna Project
Dear Mr. Tice:
Per your request, Fugro has enclosed the above referenced items for thefollowing specimens for the North Anna Project:
1. B901-UD1
2. B911A-UD1
3. B911A-PB1
Please let us know if you have questions. Thanks.
Very truly yours,
Fugro Consultants, Inc.
Jiewu Meng, PhD, P.E.Project Engineer
Enclosures
Bill DeGroff, P.E.Laboratory Department Manager
..t:J:A A member of the Fugro group of companies with offices throughout the world.
-W------------
RCTS TEST APROVAL
PROJECT SITE/NAME I~N--..:o_rt_h_Ann----:a-=------ _
Test ID
RCTS#ARCTS#BRCTS#CRCTS#
Sample ID
B901-UD1B911A-UD1B911A-PB1~
Depth B.S.(Ft)9.511.721.7
The RCTS tests for the site referenced above were tested, and a report was prepared, byFugro Consultants, Inc.
I have reviewed the data and associated results listed above and found them to bereasonable.
Dr. Kenneth Stokoe
FUGRO CONSULTANTS, INC.
September 27, 2007
Mr. J. Allan Tice, P. E.Senior Principal Engineer/Assistant Vice PresidentMACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc.3301 Atlantic AvenueRaleigh, NC 27604
6100 Hillcroft (77081)P.O. Box 740010
Houston, Texas 77274Tel: 713-369-5400
Fax: 713-369-5518
RE: Clarification of Three {3} RCTS Reports, Transmitted August 10,2007, For The North Anna {NA} Project
Dear Mr. Tice:
Fugro has incorporated, as needed, Dr. Kenneth Stokoe's comments into thefinal reports, which were transmitted on August 10, 2007, of three (3) RCTS testsfor the North Anna project.
Please let us know if you have questions. Thanks.
Very truly yours,
Fugro Consultants, Inc.
Jiewu Meng, PhD, P.E.Project Engineer
Bill DeGroff, P.E.Laboratory Department Manager
~ A member of the Fugro group of companies with offices throughout the world.
-'6¢i-----------------
1"£;1-(x,1)-
cQ
APPENDIX A
Specimen NA B901-UD1
Borehole B901Sample UD1
Depth =9.5 ft ( 2.9 m)
Total Unit Weight =120.5 Ib/ft3
Water Content =17.9 DID
Estimated In-Situ Ko =0.5Estimated In-Situ Mean Effective
Stress =4.3 psi
FUGRO JOB #: 0401-1662Testing Station: Re5
NOTE: Visual classification, if not specifically statedotherwise, was practiced in determining the soil types.
4000Silty SAND - NA B901-UD1 .1.1 psiTest Station: RC-5
Shearing Strain: <0.001 % 1IIil2.2 psi
A- 4.3 psi.... 150en ~ 8.7 psi r-.lll::
30000
>< =eeu )I( 17.4 psi :i>E 3
C> "'C
en ;:::;::s l:
c.:s CD
"'C en0 )I(~ )I( )I()I()I( :::r
)I( 100 CD~ 2000
I»eu .,(]) 3:J:en 0
c.(])
~l:
"'C ~~:s I@ I@ ~ l:
~en
c. I@ G)
E A A A- AA A- 3e:r: A- I»
A- .?<3= 1000 500 IIIil IIIil IIIil IIIil ,1IIil1llil IIIil 3:
...J • • • • •• • ""CI»
o1 10 100
o1000
Duration of Confinement, t, minutes
Figure A.1 Variation in Low-Amplitude Shear Modulus withMagnitude and Duration of Isotropic Confining Pressure fromResonant Column Tests
15
t:
Eco~ 100:::C)t:a.EC'lSC
C'lS'i:SC'lS:EQ)
-g 5:!:a.E~3=o
..J
o1
Silty SAND - NA B901-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
Shearing Strain: <0.001 %
10 100
• 1.1 psi
11II2.2 psi
A 4.3 psi
~ 8.7 psi
::K 17.4 psi
1000
Duration of Confinement, t, minutes
Figure A.2 Variation in Low-Amplitude Material Damping Ratio withMagnitude and Duration of Isotropic Confining Pressure fromResonant Column Tests
1.0Silty SAND - NA B901-UD1 • 1.1 psiTest Station: RC-5
Shearing Strain: <0.001 % lIiIII2.2 psi
A 4.3 psi
~ 8.7 psi
)I( 17.4 psi0.8
0+:lnsa::'00>'0(I)-nsE+:ltJ)w I I I IIII I0.6 )I( )I( )I( )I( )I()I( )I( )I(
0.4
1 10 100 1000
Duration of Confinement, t, minutes
Figure A.3 Variation in Estimated Void Ratio with Magnitude andDuration of Isotropic Confining Pressure from Resonant ColumnTests
10000
•••••
Silty SAND - NA 8901-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
Shearing Strain: <0.001 %
(.) Time=60 min at each pressure(I)
~t/)
>~(.)o(I)
>(I)
>C'CI3: 1000...
C'CI(I).cen(I)
"C::J~
c.E
<J:3=o
...I
100
1 10 100
Isotropic Confining Pressure, 0'0' psi
Figure A.4 Variation in Low-Amplitude Shear Wave Velocity withIsotropic Confining Pressure from Resonant Column Tests
10000
Silty SAND - NA B901-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
Shearing Strain: <0.001 %
Time=60 min at each pressure-~><euEC)
ur::::s •::::s
"C0 •:E... 1000 •eu •Q)
.s::::enQ)"C
::::s:!:c.E~3=0
..J
100
•
1 10
Isotropic Confining Pressure, (fo, psi
100
Figure A.5 Variation in Low-Amplitude Shear Modulus with IsotropicConfining Pressure from Resonant Column Tests
100Silty SAND - NA B901-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
Shearing Strain: <0.001 %
~ Time=60 min at each pressure0
s:::::
Ec0
':j:iC'lS
0::C)s:::::
CoEC'lSc 10C'lS'i:SC'lS:EQ)'0:::s:!::CoE
e:t:3: • •0
...J • ••
1
1 10
Isotropic Confining Pressure, 0'0' psi
100
Figure A.6 Variation in Low-Amplitude Material Damping Ratio withIsotropic Confining Pressure from Resonant Column Tests
1.0
Silty SAND - NA B901-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
Shearing Strain: <0.001 %
Time=60 min at each pressure
0.80~col:r:"C0>"CJBcoE~tn
W • • •0.6 • •
0.4
1 10
Isotropic Confining Pressure, 0'0' psi
100
Figure A.7 Variation in Estimated Void Ratio with Isotropic ConfiningPressure from Resonant Column Tests
4000Silty SAND - NA B901-UD1 A 4.3 psiTest Station: RC-5
Time> 60 min at each pressure )K 17.4 psi
1503000
'I- en~
:::T(I)
><S».,
ctI s:E 0C) )K )K )K )K )K )K
)K )KC.
III 100 =-~ 2000 )K l:
~til
'C )K G)0 3:!:... )K S»
ctI .?<CI) s:.cen )K 'C
A A A A AS»
AA 501000 A
)K
A)K
A
A
o1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01
o1.E+00
Shearing Strain, y, %
Figure A.8 Comparison of the Variation in Shear Modulus withShearing Strain and Isotropic Confining Pressure from the ResonantColumn Tests
1.2
1.0 )I( )I( )I(~ )I(~ )I(~ )I(~)I(~
)I(~
>< )I(eu ~
EC) )I(- 0.8C) ~
tn )I(::::s::::s
"C ~0:e: 0.6 )I(I-euCI)J:en ~
"C )I(CI)
.!:::! .&.eu 0.4 )I(
EI-0 Silty SAND - NA B901-UD1z
Test Station: RC-5
0.2 Time> 60 min at each pressure
.&. 4.3 psi
)I( 17.4 psi
0.0
1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00
Shearing Strain, y, %
Figure A.9 Comparison of the Variation in Normalized ShearModulus with Shearing Strain and Isotropic Confining Pressure fromthe Resonant Column Tests
15Silty SAND - NA B901-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
Time> 60 min at each pressure
A 4.3 psi
)I( 17.4 psi
~0
6 10
0+:i
C'IS0::C)s::::c.EC'IScC'IS
"i:Q)- 5C'IS
::E
o1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00
Shearing Strain, y, %
Figure A.1 0 Comparison of the Variation in Material Damping Ratiowith Shearing Strain and Isotropic Confining Pressure from theResonant Column Tests
4000
3000
....In~
><C'llE
C)
In2000:s
:s"C0:E...C'll(1).cen
1000
Silty SAND - NA B901-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
Time> 60 min at each pressure
• RC (60 Hz - 93 Hz)
11III TS 1st Cycle (0.5 Hz)
A TS 10th Cycle (0.5 Hz)
•11III
150
en:sCI)su.,s:oc.
100 =.cIn
G)
3su1<s:"'0su
50
o1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01
o1.E+00
Shearing Strain, ¥, %
Figure A.11 Comparison of the Variation in Shear Modulus withShearing Strain at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of 4.3 psi fromthe Combined RCTS Tests
1.2
III!.
•
1.0 • m...._.
~~
><nsE
C) 0.8-C)
t/)~
~
"C0:!: 0.6...ns(1)J:en"C(1)
.!:::!ns 0.4E...0z
0.2
•III!.•
Silty SAND - NA B901-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
Time> 60 min at each pressure
• RC (60 Hz - 93 Hz)
l1li TS 1st Cycle (0.5 Hz)
~ TS 10th Cycle (0.5 Hz)
'.
I.•
0.0
1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00
Shearing Strain, y, %
Figure A.12 Comparison of the Variation in Normalized ShearModulus with Shearing Strain at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of4.3 psi from the Combined RCTS Tests
15
Silty SAND - NA B901-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
Time> 60 min at each pressure
5
?ft.6 10
o~eu0:::C)s::::CoEeuceu'i:.seu:E
• RC (60 Hz - 93 Hz)
11III TS 1st Cycle (0.5 Hz)
b. TS 10th Cycle (0.5 Hz)
•
• • • •• .. f
•• • It
Il!l
i
•
o1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00
Shearing Strain, y, %
Figure A.13 Comparison of the Variation in Material Damping Ratiowith Shearing Strain at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of 4.3 psifrom the Combined RCTS Tests
4000Silty SAND - NA B901-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
• Shearing Strain =0.001 %
lIIII Shearing Strain =0.01 %150
3000
.... en~
:::r(I)
><II).,
ctI s:E 0C) c.
100 l:en l:::::s 2000 en::::s
"C G)0 3:!E II)... ,?<ctICI> s:.cen ""C
• II)
• • • 501000 •lIIII
lIIII lIIII lIIII lIIII
o0.01 0.1 1 10 100
o1000
Loading Frequency, f, Hz
Figure A.14 Comparison of the Variation in Shear Modulus withLoading Frequency at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of 4.3 psifrom the Combined RCTS Tests
15Silty SAND - NA B901-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
• Shearing Strain =0.001 %
11II Shearing Strain =0.01 %
~010c
0+:ico0:::C)r::::c.Ecocco.~
(1)- 5co11II
11II11II
11II~
•• • ••
0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
Loading Frequency, f, Hz
Figure A.15 Comparison of the Variation in Material Damping Ratiowith Loading Frequency at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of 4.3psi from the Combined RCTS Tests
4000Silty SAND - NA B901-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
Time> 60 min at each pressure
• RC (77 Hz - 123 Hz)
III TS 1st Cycle (0.5 Hz) 1503000
~ TS 10th Cycle (0.5 Hz)
.... (/)t/) ::r
.lIl:: (I)
><$I)""I
eu 3:E 0C> • • • • • • • a-t/) • 100 =-::::J 2000 A • s::::
11II II t/)::::J III
"C II·G')
0 3:E $I)... • .?<eu IICI) 3:.s::::en 1\ "tJ
$I)
1000 • 50
•
o1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01
o1.E+00
Shearing Strain, y, %
Figure A.16 Comparison of the Variation in Shear Modulus withShearing Strain at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of 17.4 psi fromthe Combined RCTS Tests
1.2 ,--------------------...............
1.0 • • • • • , I11III
..&.~
.&.
>< .I11III
co .&.E(!) •- 0.8(!) I11III
(fJ.&.
:::s •:::s I11III
"C -.0:!:
.&.
a.. 0.6 •coQ)J:en"C •Q)
.~
co 0.4 •E Silty SAND - NA B901-UD1a..0 Test Station: RC-5z
Time> 60 min at each pressure
0.2 • RC (77 Hz - 123 Hz)
I11III TS 1st Cycle (0.5 Hz)
.&. TS 10th Cycle (0.5 Hz)
0.0
1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00
Shearing Strain, y, %
Figure A.17 Comparison of the Variation in Normalized ShearModulus with Shearing Strain at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of17.4 psi from the Combined RCTS Tests
15
Silty SAND - NA B901-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
Time> 60 min at each pressure
~0
ci 10
0+:leu0::C)s:::c.EeuCeu.t:.s 5eu:E
• RC (77 Hz - 123 Hz)
II1II TS 1st Cycle (0.5 Hz)
.4. TS 10th Cycle (0.5 Hz)
•
.. .it
I ••••
• •
o1.E-05
• ••
1.E-04
• ••
1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00
Shearing Strain, y, %
Figure A.18 Comparison of the Variation in Material Damping Ratiowith Shearing Strain at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of 17.4 psifrom the Combined RCTS Tests
4000Silty SAND - NA B901-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
• Shearing Strain =0.001 %
IiIIII Shearing Strain =0.01 % 1503000
.... en~
:::rCD
><$I)..,
C'lS s:E 0
(!) • a.100 t:
l/) t:::::J 2000 • • • • til::::J •"C G)0 3:E $I).. IiIIII IiIIII .?<C'lS IiIIII IiIIIIG) s:J:en ""C
$I)
1000 50
o0.01 0.1 1 10 100
o1000
Loading Frequency, f, Hz
Figure A.19 Comparison of the Variation in Shear Modulus withLoading Frequency at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of 17.4 psifrom the Combined RCTS Tests
15
Silty SAND - NA B901-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
• Shearing Strain = 0.001 %
II Shearing Strain = 0.01 %
~010c
0~ns0:::C)ca.EnsCns'i:CD+" 5ns:!:
11IIII
11IIII11IIII
11IIII 11IIII
11IIII
•• • • •
•0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
Loading Frequency, f, Hz
Figure A.20 Comparison of the Variation in Material Damping Ratiowith Loading Frequency at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of 17.4psi from the Combined RCTS Tests
Table A.1 Variation in Low-Amplitude Shear Wave Velocity, Low-Amplitude Shear Modulus, Low-AmplitudeMaterial Damping Ratio and Estimated Void Ratio with Isotropic Confining Pressure from RC Testsof Specimen NA B901-UD1
Low-Amplitude Shear Low-Amplitude Low-Amplitude EstimatedIsotropic Confining Pressure, 0"0
Modulus, GmaxShear Wave Material Damping VoidVelocity, Vs Ratio, Dmin Ratio, e
(psi) (psf) (kPa) (ksf) (MPa) (fps) (%)1.1 158 8 919 44 495 2.45 0.6162.2 317 15 990 48 514 2.44 0.6154.3 619 30 1226 59 571 2.14 0.6128.7 1253 60 1574 76 646 1.92 0.60517.4 2506 120 2140 103 750 1.63 0.594
Table A.2 Variation in Shear Modulus and Material Damping Ratio with Shearing Strain from RC Tests ofSpecimen NA B901-UD1; Isoptropic Confining Pressure, cro= 4.3 psi (0.6 ksf =30 kPa)
Peak ShearNormalized + Material
Shear AverageShearing Modulus, Modulus, Shearing DampingStrain, % G, ksf G/Gmax
Strain, % RatioX, D, %
6.70E-05 1248 1.00 6.70E-05 2.221.32E-04 1248 1.00 1.32E-04 2.212.66E-04 1242 0.99 2.66E-04 2.345.24E-04 1233 0.99 5.24E-04 2.391.06E-03 1211 0.97 1.05E-03 2.632.03E-03 1167 0.93 2.01 E-03 2.793.66E-03 1094 0.88 3.57E-03 3.236.90E-03 972 0.78 6.74E-03 3.831.38E-02 816 0.65 1.29E-02 4.943.05E-02 635 0.51 2.73E-02 6.295.42E-02 522 0.42 4.67E-02 7.84
+ Average Shearing Strain from the First Three Cycles of the Free Vibration Decay Curvex Average Damping Ratio from the First Three Cycles of the Free Vibration Decay Curve
Table A.3 Variation in Shear Modulus, Normalized Shear Modulus and Material Damping Ratio with ShearingStrain from TS Tests of Specimen NA B901-UD1; Isotropic Confining Pressure, 0"0= 4.3 psi (0.6 ksf= 30 kPa)
First Cycle Tenth CyclePeak Shear Normalized Material Peak Shear Normalized Material
Shearing Modulus, Shear Modulus, Damping Shearing Modulus, Shear Modulus, DampingStrain, % G, ksf G/Gmax Ratio, D, % Strain, % G, ksf G/Gmax Ratio, D, %
1.05E-04 1103 1.00 1.73 1.03E-04 1083 1.00 1.931.81 E-04 1103 1.00 1.70 2.01 E-04 1083 1.00 1.773.76E-04 1103 1.00 1.72 3.58E-04 1083 1.00 1.528.76E-04 1050 0.95 1.75 8.74E-04 1056 0.97 1.931.79E-03 1026 0.93 2.44 1.78E-03 1031 0.95 2.423.87E-03 945 0.86 2.55 3.94E-03 927 0.86 2.719.86E-03 740 0.67 4.83 9.82E-03 743 0.69 4.752.46E-02 593 0.54 6.51 2.51 E-02 580 0.54 6.703.96E-02 501 0.45 8.63 4.09E-02 485 0.45 9.10
Table A.4 Variation in Shear Modulus and Material Damping Ratio with Shearing Strain from RC Testsof Specimen NA B901-UD1; Isoptropic Confining Pressure, cro= 17.4 psi ( 2.5 ksf =120 kPa)
Peak ShearNormalized + Material
Shear Average DampingShearing Modulus,
Modulus, ShearingRatioX
, D,Strain, % G, ksfG/Gmax
Strain, %%
1.30E-05 2200 1.00 1.30E-05 1.612.70E-05 2200 1.00 2.70E-05 1.645.20E-05 2200 1.00 5.20E-05 1.771.03E-04 2200 1.00 1.03E-04 1.891.98E-04 2189 1.00 1.98E-04 2.063.92E-04 2183 0.99 3.92E-04 2.217.93E-04 2155 0.98 7.93E-04 2.401.51 E-03 2094 0.95 1.49E-03 2.592.81 E-03 1987 0.90 2.74E-03 2.865.17E-03 1819 0.83 4.81 E-03 3.209.78E-03 1592 0.72 9.42E-03 3.442.03E-02 1313 0.60 1.89E-02 3.934.44E-02 1015 0.46 3.96E-02 5.187.14E-02 875 0.40 6.10E-02 6.77+ Average Shearing Strain from the First Three Cycles of the Free Vibration Decay Curvex Average Damping Ratio from the First Three Cycles of the Free Vibration Decay Curve
Table A.5 Variation in Shear Modulus, Normalized Shear Modulus and Material Damping Ratiowith Shearing Strain from TS Tests of Specimen NA B901-UD1; Isotropic ConfiningPressure, 0"0=17.40 psi (2.5 ksf = 120 kPa)
First Cycle Tenth CyclePeak Shear Normalized Material Peak Shear Normalized Material
Shearing Modulus, Shear Damping Shearing Modulus, Shear DampingStrain, % G, ksf Modulus, Ratio, D, Strain, % G, ksf Modulus, Ratio, D, %4.04E-04 1959 1.00 0.99 3.91 E-04 2028 1.00 0.909.01 E-04 1965 1.00 1.00 9.05E-04 1956 0.96 1.281.87E-03 1886 0.96 1.41 1.87E-03 1887 0.93 1.653.99E-03 1764 0.90 2.30 4.03E-03 1749 0.86 2.369.28E-03 1519 0.77 4.09 9.26E-03 1523 0.75 3.951.75E-02 1340 0.68 4.75 1.76E-02 1333 0.66 4.922.14E-02 1283 0.65 5.27 2.14E-02 1283 0.63 5.39
II II II II II - I I IIt\.~
r-...
"\\
\\
\"I
t--ltI--..
N I-e-l\a.
• -I-.N'-.r.N --; •
0.1GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
100
80
lIQw$: 60>co0:::wzLi:I-as 40()0:::Wn.
20
o100
3
U.S. STANDARD SIEVESIZES IN INCHES1.5 3/4 3/8
10
4
U. S. STANDARD SIEVENUMBERS
10 20 40 100 200
HYDROMETERANALYSIS
0.01100
0.001
GRAVEL
Coarse Fine
SYMBOL BORING DEPTH, FT
• B-901-UD1 9.5 5.73
Medium
158.30
SAND
0.1766
Fine
0.53
SILT or CLAY
CLASSIFICATION
Silty Fine Sand, tan
'lJs:-lm
GRAIN SIZE CURVE
TEST METHOD ASTM D422-63 (2002)
------------------------------======--
APPENDIX B
Specimen NA B911A-UD1
Borehole B911ASample UD1
Depth =11.7 ft ( 3.6 m)
Total Unit Weight =121.9 Ib/ft3
Water Content =16.6 o~
Estimated In-Situ Ko =0.5Estimated In-Situ Mean Effective
Stress =5.6 psi
FUGRO JOB #: 0401-1662Testing Station: Re5
--@------------------------
NOTE: Visual classification, if not specifically statedotherwise, was practiced in determining the soil types.
6000SAND - NA B911A-UD1 • 1.4 psiTest Station: RC-5
Shearing Strain: <0.001 % 11III2.8 psi
.& 5.6 psi-en it 11.2 psi I~ 0
>< :Ens ~ 22.5 psi :i>E 200 3
C) 4000 "C
en ;:::;::::s s::::
Co:::s CD
"C en0:E :::r
CD... Sl)
ns ...CI) :s:.s::en ~ ~~~ ~
0~ Co
CI) s::::"C s:::::::s~
enCo 2000
100 G)E it
it it it it it 3« Sl)I .?<3=0
.& .&.&.& .& :s:-I .& .& ""C
& Sl)
11III 11III 11III 11III11III11III 11III11III• • ••• ••
•
o1 10 100
o1000
Duration of Confinement, t, minutes
Figure 8.1 Variation in Low-Amplitude Shear Modulus withMagnitude and Duration of Isotropic Confining Pressure fromResonant Column Tests
15
SAND - NA B911A-UD1 • 1.4 psi
Test Station: RC-5 Ii 2.8 psiShearing Strain: <0.001 %
I. 5.6 psi~0
s:::: ~ 11.2 psi
E )I( 22.5 psic0+:i 10ca0:::C)s::::a.EcaCca'i:(1)-ca
:i!E(1)"C 5::::J •~ •a. 18 t •• , IE 11III
~ )I( t ~ II~~ •::.)1( )I(
0...J
o1 10 100 1000
Duration of Confinement, t, minutes
Figure 8.2 Variation in Low-Amplitude Material Damping Ratio withMagnitude and Duration of Isotropic Confining Pressure fromResonant Column Tests
1.2
1.0
o+:i
C'lS0::"Co~ 0.8S
C'lSE
+:ienW
SAND - NA B911A-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
Shearing Strain: <0.001 %
.1.4 psi
II 2.8 psi
.t. 5.6 psi
~ 11.2 psi
)I( 22.5 psi
0.6
0.4
1
I
10
I IIII !
100 1000
Duration of Confinement, t, minutes
Figure 8.3 Variation in Estimated Void Ratio with Magnitude andDuration of Isotropic Confining Pressure from Resonant ColumnTests
10000
••
•••
SAND - NA 8911A-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
Shearing Strain: <0.001 %
() Time=60 min at each pressureQ)
~
~
~()
oQ)
>Q)
>ca3: 1000r.caQ)
.s:::U)Q)
"C:J~
c.E
<J:3=o
..J
100
1 10 100
Isotropic Confining Pressure, 0'0' psi
Figure 8.4 Variation in Low-Amplitude Shear Wave Velocity withIsotropic Confining Pressure from Resonant Column Tests
10000
SAND - NA B911A-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
Shearing Strain: <0.001 %
Time=60 min at each pressure....~
><euE
C>tn •::::s::::s •"C0:!: •... 1000eu •(1)J:en(1)
"C::::s:!:c.E~3=0
...J
100
•
1 10
Isotropic Confining Pressure, 0'0' psi
100
Figure 8.5 Variation in Low-Amplitude Shear Modulus with IsotropicConfining Pressure from Resonant Column Tests
10
•••
••
SAND - NA B911A-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
Shearing Strain: <0.001 %
'#. Time=60 min at each pressure
s::Ec6+:lnl
0:::C)s::c.EnlCnl'i:~nl:ECI)
"C::J:!:C.E
1o..J
1
1 10 100
Isotropic Confining Pressure, 0'0' psi
Figure 8.6 Variation in Low-Amplitude Material Damping Ratio withIsotropic Confining Pressure from Resonant Column Tests
1.2
SAND - NA 8911A-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
Shearing Strain: <0.001 %
Time=60 min at each pressure
1.0
o+::(}."Co~ 0.8.eeuE+::t/)w
0.6 -
0.4
1
• • • •
10
•
100
Isotropic Confining Pressure, 0'0' psi
Figure 8.7 Variation in Estimated Void Ratio with Isotropic ConfiningPressure from Resonant Column Tests
6000
~ 4000.lII::
><euEC)
ur::::l::::l"Co:E...euCI>
~ 2000
SAND - NA B911A-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
Time> 60 min at each pressure
45.6 psi
~ 22.5 psi
200 en:::r(I)ll)..,s:oCol:l:III
G')
3ll)
.?<100 s:
"Cll)
o1.E-06 1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01
Shearing Strain, y, %
o1.E+00
Figure B.8 Comparison of the Variation in Shear Modulus withShearing Strain and Isotropic Confining Pressure from the ResonantColumn Tests
1.2
1.0 )K )K4.~~~~~~
~
>< )K~nsE
C> )K- 0.8C> ~
tn;j
)K;j
'0~0
~ 0.6ns(1) )K.cen'0 ~(1)
.~ns 0.4 lE"'-
SAND - NA B911A-UD10zTest Station: RC-5
0.2Time> 60 min at each pressure
~ 5.6 psi
)K 22.5 psi
0.0
1.E-06 1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00
Shearing Strain, y, %
Figure B.9 Comparison of the Variation in Normalized ShearModulus with Shearing Strain and Isotropic Confining Pressure fromthe Resonant Column Tests
15SAND - NA B911A-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
Time> 60 min at each pressure
~ 5.6 psi
:t( 22.5 psi
~0
ci 10
0+:0ns0:::C)I:a.EnsC'iii-i:Q)- 5ns:!:
Shearing Strains in RC Test werecorrected to the average of the first 3free-vibration cycles
o1.E-06 1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00
Shearing Strain, y, %
Figure 8_10 Comparison of the Variation in Material Damping Ratiowith Shearing Strain and Isotropic Confining Pressure from theResonant Column Tests
6000
SAND - NA B911A-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
Time >60 min at each pressure
~ 4000
><euE
C)
tn:::s:::s
"Co:El-eu(I)
~ 2000
+ RC (62 Hz - 100 Hz)
mTS 1st Cycle (0.5 Hz)
& TS 10th Cycle (0.5 Hz)
+ + + + + + + ++..... , 'III +III +
III
200 en:::r(l)D)..,3:oc.cCtn
G)
3~
100 3:""0D)
++
o1.E-06 1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02
Shearing Strain, y, %
o1.E-01 1.E+00
Figure 8.11 Comparison of the Variation in Shear Modulus withShearing Strain at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of 5.6 psi fromthe Combined RCTS Tests
1.2
1.0 • • .... .- II IIIIll• • IIIIll
>< •ctl &.EC) 0.8- •C) IIIIll
In:::s &.:::s
't:I0 •:E 0.6...ctl(1)J:en't:I •(1)
.~
ctl 0.4 SAND - NA B911A-UD1 •E... Test Station: RC-50z Time >60 min at each pressure
0.2 • RC (62 Hz - 100 Hz)
IIIIll TS 1st Cycle (0.5 Hz)
'" TS 10th Cycle (0.5 Hz)
0.01.E-06 1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00
Shearing Strain, y, %
Figure 8.12 Comparison of the Variation in Normalized ShearModulus with Shearing Strain at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of5.6 psi from the Combined RCTS Tests
15
?fi!.ci 10
o;
~C)cc.EeuCeu'i:.seu 5:E
SAND - NA B911A-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
Time >60 min at each pressure
• RC (62 Hz -100 Hz)
IlIIi TS 1st Cycle (0.5 Hz)
&. TS 10th Cycle (0.5 Hz)
•• ••• • • • •
•
•
•
•
o1.E-06 1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00
Shearing Strain, y, %
Figure 8.13 Comparison of the Variation in Material Damping Ratiowith Shearing Strain at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of 5.6 psifrom the Combined RCTS Tests
6000SAND - NA 8911A-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
• Shearing Strain = 0.001 %
IIIi Shearing Strain =0.01 %
'Ui 4000~
><n:lE
C)
Ii::::s::::s
"Co
:iEIn:l(1)
ti 2000
o0.01
•
0.1
• •
1
• •
10
•
100
200 (J):::r(I)A).,s:oCol:l:enG)
3A)
.?<100 ~
A)
o1000
Loading Frequency, f, Hz
Figure 8.14 Comparison of the Variation in Shear Modulus withLoading Frequency at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of 5.6 psifrom the Combined RCTS Tests
15SAND - NA B911A-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
• Shearing Strain =0.001 %
IiII Shearing Strain =0.01 %
~010ci
6'~ns0:::C)s:::0-EnsCns IiII'i: IiII IiII(1) IiII- 5ns:i:
•
o0.01
•
0.1
••
1
• •
10 100 1000
Loading Frequency, f, Hz
Figure 8.15 Comparison of the Variation in Material Damping Ratiowith Loading Frequency at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of 5.6psi from the Combined RCTS Tests
6000SAND - NA B911A-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
Time >60 min at each pressure
• RC (86 Hz - 136 Hz)
11III TS 1st Cycle (0.5 Hz)
~ TS 10th Cycle (0.5 Hz)
] 4000
><CISE
C)
en::J::J
"Co:!:"CISQ)
~ 2000
• • • • • • • • •
•
200 (J)
:r(I)D).,:s:oc.s::::s::::enG)
3D)
)<
100 :s:"'0D)
o1.E-06 1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01
Shearing Strain, y, %
o1.E+00
Figure 8.16 Comparison of the Variation in Shear Modulus withShearing Strain at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of 22.5 psi fromthe Combined RCTS Tests
1.2 --.-----------------------,
1.0
><euE
§ 0.8
ur~
~
"Co
:iiEL- 0.6euC!).cen"CC!)
.~
eu 0.4EL-oZ
0.2
• • • • III • •
II
•
SAND - NA B911A-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
Time >60 min at each pressure
• RC (86 Hz - 136 Hz)
II TS 1st Cycle (0.5 Hz)
A TS 10th Cycle (0.5 Hz)
•
•
•
o.0 -!--'--l.....J...L.J...l.Ll.j--i-.!-W...J..J.J.Jt-..l......J...J.-.J...W.J..lt--.L-J....J...W.J,..Uf--L.-J....w...J..l.l.l.j---l-...l-L.J...J...UJ.j
1.E-06 1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00
Shearing Strain, y, %
Figure 8.17 Comparison of the Variation in Normalized ShearModulus with Shearing Strain at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of22.5 psi from the Combined RCTS Tests
15
SAND - NA B911A-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
Time >60 min at each pressure
';fl.C 10
• RC (86 Hz - 136 Hz)
II TS 1st Cycle (0.5 Hz)
A TS 10th Cycle (0.5 Hz)
•
5
• ••• • • • • • •
•
•
•t
..I
.l I I.
o1.E-06 1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00
Shearing Strain, y, %
Figure 8.18 Comparison of the Variation in Material Damping Ratiowith Shearing Strain at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of 22.5 psifrom the Combined RCTS Tests
6000SAND - NA B911A-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
• Shearing Strain =0.001 %
III Shearing Strain = 0.01 %
'; 4000200 en
::::T~ CD
><l»""I
co s:E 0C) c-ur C
::::J Ctil
::::J"C G)0 • 3:E l»l- • • .?<co • •(1) • 100 s:.c
2000tn ""CIII III IIIIR III l»
IIIIR
o0.01 0.1 1 10 100
o1000
Loading Frequency, f, Hz
Figure 8.19 Comparison of the Variation in Shear Modulus withLoading Frequency at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of 22.5 psifrom the Combined RCTS Tests
15
SAND - NA B911A-UD1
Test Station: RC-5
• Shearing Strain =0.001 %
iIIII Shearing Strain =0.01 %
~010ci
0'~
C'CI0::tnCc.EC'CIC
iIIIIC'CI'i:CI)- 5C'CI
:EiIIII iIIII iIIII
iIIII iIIII
•
•• •• •
0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
Loading Frequency, f, Hz
Figure 8.20 Comparison of the Variation in Material Damping Ratiowith Loading Frequency at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of22.5 psi from the Combined RCTS Tests
Table B.1 Variation in Low-Amplitude Shear Wave Velocity, Low-Amplitude Shear Modulus, Low-AmplitudeMaterial Damping Ratio and Estimated Void Ratio with Isotropic Confining Pressure from RC Testsof Specimen NA B911-UD1
Low-Amplitude ShearLow-Amplitude Low-Amplitude Estimated
Isotropic Confining Pressure, cro Modulus, GmaxShear Wave Material Damping VoidVelocity, Vs Ratio, Dmin Ratio, e
(psi) (psf) (kPa) (ksf) (MPa) (fps) (%)1.4 202 10 917 44 491 3.84 0.5782.8 403 19 1071 51 530 3.99 0.5755.6 806 39 1389 67 603 3.53 0.56811.2 1613 77 1890 91 701 3.49 0.55622.5 3240 155 2608 125 820 3.20 0.544
Table B.2 Variation in Shear Modulus and Material Damping Ratio with Shearing Strain from RC Tests ofSpecimen NA B911A-UD1; Isoptropic Confining Pressure, °0 = 5.6 psi (0.8 ksf = 39 kPa)
Peak ShearNormalized + Material
Shear AverageShearing Modulus, Modulus, Shearing DampingStrain, % G, ksf
G/G maxStrain, % RatioX
, D, %
1.50E-05 1422 1.00 1.50E-05 3.512.80E-05 1422 1.00 2.80E-05 3.515.70E-05 1422 1.00 5.70E-05 3.551.14E-04 1422 1.00 1.14E-04 3.592.29E-04 1422 1.00 2.29E-04 3.554.56E-04 1415 1.00 4.56E-04 3.849.44E-04 1396 0.98 9.44E-04 3.881.86E-03 1357 0.95 1.44E-03 4.043.65E-03 1268 0.89 2.78E-03 4.537.18E-03 1124 0.79 5.13E-03 5.741.49E-02 920 0.65 9.57E-03 7.893.51 E-02 678 0.48 1.99E-02 10.846.00E-02 555 0.39 3.29E-02 12.35
+ Average Shearing Strain from the First Three Cycles of the Free Vibration Decay Curvex Average Damping Ratio from the First Three Cycles of the Free Vibration Decay Curve
Table B.3 Variation in Shear Modulus, Normalized Shear Modulus and Material Damping Ratio with ShearingStrain from TS Tests of Specimen NA B911A-UD1; Isotropic Confining Pressure, 0"0= 5.6 psi (0.8ksf = 39 kPa)
First Cycle Tenth CyclePeak Shear Normalized Material Peak Shear Normalized Material
Shearing Modulus, Shear Modulus, Damping Shearing Modulus, Shear Modulus, DampingStrain, % G, ksf G/Gmax Ratio, 0, % Strain, % G, ksf G/Gmax Ratio, 0, %
1.12E-04 1076 1.00 0.78 9.87E-05 1130 1.00 1.021.99E-04 1076 1.00 1.20 1.87E-04 1130 1.00 0.923.72E-04 1076 1.00 1.12 3.65E-04 1130 1.00 0.949.17E-04 1076 1.00 1.83 8.99E-04 1130 1.00 2.101.97E-03 1076 1.00 2.60 2.00E-03 1084 0.96 2.784.35E-03 994 0.92 3.14 4.41 E-03 982 0.87 3.371.05E-02 823 0.77 5.23 1.07E-02 806 0.71 5.34
Table BA Variation in Shear Modulus and Material Damping Ratio with Shearing Strain from RC Testsof Specimen NA B911A-UD1; Isoptropic Confining Pressure, 0"0= 22.5 psi ( 3.2 ksf =155 kPa)
Peak ShearNormalized + Material
Shear Average DampingShearing Modulus, Modulus, Shearing
RatioX, D,Strain, % G, ksf G/Gmax
Strain, %%
6.00E-06 2670 1.00 6.00E-06 3.091.20E-05 2670 1.00 1.20E-05 3.062AOE-05 2670 1.00 2AOE-05 3.244.80E-05 2670 1.00 4.80E-05 3.279.50E-05 2670 1.00 9.50E-05 3.271.91 E-04 2670 1.00 1.91 E-04 3.243.80E-04 2663 1.00 3.80E-04 3.277.81 E-04 2636 0.99 7.81 E-04 30411.53E-03 2555 0.96 1.23E-03 3.592.93E-03 2423 0.91 2.32E-03 3.735.58E-03 2204 0.83 4.21 E-03 4.721.13E-02 1860 0.70 7.94E-03 6.132A8E-02 1465 0.55 1.57E-02 8.526.29E-02 1077 0040 3.55E-02 11040+ Average Shearing Strain from the First Three Cycles of the Free Vibration Decay Curve
x Average Damping Ratio from the First Three Cycles of the Free Vibration Decay Curve
Table 8.5 Variation in Shear Modulus, Normalized Shear Modulus and Material Damping Ratiowith Shearing Strain from TS Tests of Specimen NA 8911A-UD1 ; Isotropic ConfiningPressure, 0"0=22.5 psi (3.2 ksf = 155 kPa)
First Cycle Tenth CyclePeak Shear Normalized Material Peak Shear Normalized Material
Shearing Modulus, Shear Damping Shearing Modulus, Shear DampingStrain, % G, ksf Modulus, Ratio, D, Strain, % G, ksf Modulus, Ratio, D, %9.36E-05 2230 1.00 --- 9.88E-05 2211 1.00 1.171.86E-04 2230 1.00 1.25 1.81 E-04 2211 1.00 1.093.52E-04 2230 1.00 1.13 3.60E-04 2211 1.00 0.989.60E-04 2230 1.00 1.22 9.52E-04 2211 1.00 1.501.96E-03 2209 0.99 1.46 1.96E-03 2208 1.00 2.004.13E-03 2096 0.94 2.15 4.18E-03 2073 0.94 2.219.36E-03 1850 0.83 3.73 9.33E-03 1856 0.84 3.671.33E-02 1783 0.80 4.12 1.34E-02 1770 0.80 4.281.92E-02 1644 0.74 4.85 1.93E-02 1638 0.74 5.04
II II II II IT ---. I I II
"f\
\.,\\
"\'.
i' ...~~
·1'14
100
80
lI<.9WS 60>-co0::WZu:::l-rQ 40<.)0::wa.
20
3
U.S. STANDARD SIEVESIZES IN INCHES1.5 3/4 3/8 4
U. S. STANDARD SIEVENUMBERS
10 20 40 100 200
HYDROMETERANALYSIS
;:0CD
"00;:+
z0 <:>
0.;>.0,
--"(J)(J)N
20
-0m;:00m
40z-I00»;:0(flm;:0
60 OJ-<~mQI-I
80
o100 10 0.1
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS0.01
1000.001
GRAVEL
Coarse Fine
SYMBOL BORING DEPTH. FT
• B-911A-UD1 11.7
MediumSAND
~
0.215
Fine
.Q~
0.66
SILT or CLAY
CLASSIFICATION
Sand, tan
\Js;:-Im
GRAIN SIZE CURVE
TEST METHOD ASTM 0422-63 (2002)
APPENDIX C
Specimen NA B911A-PB1
Borehole B911ASample PB1
Depth =21.7 ft ( 6.6 m)
Total Unit Weight =124.2 Ib/ft3
Water Content =15.1 0/0Estimated In-Situ Ko =0.5
Estimated In-Situ Mean EffectiveStress =11.4 psi
FUGRO JOB #: 0401-1662Testing Station: Re5
NOTE: Visual classification, ifnot specifically statedotherwise, was practiced in determining the soil types.
6000SAND -NA B911A-PB1 .2.9 psiTest Station: RC-5
Shearing Strain: <0.001 %II 5.7 psi
A 11.4 psi
.... ~ 22.8 psien r~ 0><~ )I( 45.6 psi ~nl »E 200 3
C) 4000 "C
en ;:::;:~
cc.
~ (I)"C en0~
:::r)I( )I()I( )I( )I( (I)
L. )I( s:unl ..,G) s:.c
CJ) 0c.
G) C"C C~
:!::: enc. 2000 fj]l ~ ~~ ~ 100 G')E
~
3~ s:u~
1<0 s:-I
A A AA A "'tI~
~A s:u
II II IiIIl II IiIIl 1111 IiIIl
• • • ••• ••
0 0
1 10 100 1000
Duration of Confinement, t, minutes
Figure C.1 Variation in Low-Amplitude Shear Modulus withMagnitude and Duration of Isotropic Confining Pressure fromResonant Column Tests
5
20
cE 15co
+:ica0::C)ca.EcaC 10ca'i:~ca:E(1)
'0~
:t::a.E
1o..J
SAND -NA 8911A-P81
Test Station: RC-5
Shearing Strain: <0.001 %
•
• 2.9 psi
II 5.7 psi
A 11.4 psi
Iij 22.8 psi
::':45.6 psi
o1
I I
10
, Ilii
100 1000
Duration of Confinement, t, minutes
Figure C.2 Variation in Low-Amplitude Material Damping Ratio withMagnitude and Duration of Isotropic Confining Pressure fromResonant Column Tests
1.0SAND -NA B911A-PB1 • 2.9 psiTest Station: RC-5
Shearing Strain: <0.001 % IIIlI 5.7 psi
A 11.4 psi
0.8 ~ 22.8 psi
): 45.6 psi
0..C'll
0:::"00> 0.6"0Q)-C'llE a • • •••• •..t/) A A A .& .&.&.& .&W
@Jl ~ ~ @Jl ~ ~~ ~
): ): ): ): ):):): ):
0.4
0.2
1 10 100 1000
Duration of Confinement, t, minutes
Figure C.3 Variation in Estimated Void Ratio with Magnitude andDuration of Isotropic Confining Pressure from Resonant ColumnTests
10000
••
•••
SAND -NA B911A-PB1
Test Station: RC-5
Shearing Strain: <0.001 %
(.) Time=60 min at each pressure(J)
~!j~(.)o(J)
>(J)
>~ 1000lns(J)
.s::en(J)
"C::s~
c.E
1...J
100
1 10 100
Isotropic Confining Pressure, 0'0' psi
Figure C.4 Variation in Low-Amplitude Shear Wave Velocity withIsotropic Confining Pressure from Resonant Column Tests
10000
SAND -NA B911A-PB1
Test Station: RC-5
Shearing Strain: <0.001 %
Time=60 min at each pressure....til
.lIl:::
><C'lSE
C)
til::::s::::s
"C •0:EL. 1000C'lSQ) •J:enQ) •"C::::s:!:c.E~3=0
...J
100
•
•
1 10
Isotropic Confining Pressure, 0'0' psi
100
Figure C.S Variation in Low-Amplitude Shear Modulus with IsotropicConfining Pressure from Resonant Column Tests
100SAND -NA B911A-PB1
Test Station: RC-5
Shearing Strain: <0.001 %
Time=60 min at each pressure~0
c:Ec0
+:iC'lS
0::C)c:a.EC'lSC 10
C'lS.i:
SC'lS:E(J)"C:::J:!:a.E~;:0
...J
1
1
• • •
10
• •
100
Isotropic Confining Pressure, 0'0' psi
Figure C.G Variation in Low-Amplitude Material Damping Ratio withIsotropic Confining Pressure from Resonant Column Tests
1.0
SAND -NA 8911A-P81
Test Station: RC-5
Shearing Strain: <0.001 %
Time=60 min at each pressure
0.8
0+:ieu
0:::"C0> 0.6"CSeuE •+:i •tn •W • •
0.4
0.21 10
Isotropic Confining Pressure, (jo, psi
100
Figure C.7 Variation in Estimated Void Ratio with Isotropic ConfiningPressure from Resonant Column Tests
6000SAND -NA B911A-PB1
Test Station: RC-5
Time> 60 min at each pressure
A 11.4 psi
:t( 45.6 psi
'Ui 4000.llI::
><~
raE
C>In::::s::::s
"Co:ElraQ)
~ 2000
200 (J):::TCDl».,:s:oa.l:l:enG)
3l».?<
100 :s:"Cl»
o1.E-05
o1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00 1.E+01
Shearing Strain, y, %
Figure C.B Comparison of the Variation in Shear Modulus withShearing Strain and Isotropic Confining Pressure from the ResonantColumn Tests
1.2
1.0 ;(;(.il(~.il(~
~~
><~eu
EC)
0.8&.- ;(
C)
tn~ &.
~
"C0:E 0.6...euQ)
.s::::en"C ,j(Q)
.!:::! ;(
eu 0.4E &....
SAND -NA 8911A-P810zTest Station: RC-5
0.2Time> 60 min at each pressure
&. 11.4 psi
;( 45.6 psi
0.0
1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00 1.E+01
Shearing Strain, y, %
Figure C.9 Comparison of the Variation in Normalized ShearModulus with Shearing Strain and Isotropic Confining Pressure fromthe Resonant Column Tests
20SAND -NA B911A-PB1
Test Station: RC-5
Time> 60 min at each pressure
15
~0
C~
0~co0::C)s:::: 10CoEcocco'i:(1)-co
:i!E
5
Shearing Strains in RC Test werecorrected to the average of the first 3free-vibration cycles
~ 11.4 psi
)K 45.6 psi
o1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00 1.E+01
Shearing Strain, y, %
Figure C.10 Comparison of the Variation in Material Damping Ratiowith Shearing Strain and Isotropic Confining Pressure from theResonant Column Tests
6000
SAND -NA B911A-PB1
Test Station: RC-5
Time >60 min at each pressure
~ 4000
><nsE
C)
tn:::s:::s
"Co:ElnsCI)
c75 2000
• RC (36 Hz - 61 Hz)
IlIlI TS 1st Cycle (0.5 Hz)
j, TS 10th Cycle (0.5 Hz)
••••••.~ ~ ~ ..II •
II •II •
II •
200 en:::s(I)p)..,:s:oa.r::::r::::tn
G)
3p)
.?<100 :s:
-0p)
o1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01
Shearing Strain, y, %
o1.E+00 1.E+01
Figure C.11 Comparison of the Variation in Shear Modulus withShearing Strain at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of 11.4 psi fromthe Combined RCTS Tests
1.2
1.0 • • • GIl III• •><n:sE~ 0.8
In::s::s
"'Co:E... 0.6n:s(1)
.cen"'C(1)
.!:::!
E0.4...oz
•, .
,.SAND -NA B911A-PB1
Test Station: RC-5 •
Time >60 min at each pressure
0.2 • RC (36 Hz - 61 Hz)
IIIIi TS 1st Cycle (0.5 Hz)
~ TS 10th Cycle (0.5 Hz)
0.0
1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00 1.E+01
Shearing Strain, y, %
Figure C.12 Comparison of the Variation in Normalized ShearModulus with Shearing Strain at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of11.4 psi from the Combined RCTS Tests
20
15
~o
co:;:;
C'lS0:::C)
.5: 10c.EC'lScC'lS'i:.s
C'lS:!E
5
SAND -NA B911A-PB1
Test Station: RC-5
Time >60 min at each pressure
• RC (36 Hz - 61 Hz)
II TS 1st Cycle (0.5 Hz)
&. TS 10th Cycle (0.5 Hz)
I
•
•I••
• ·11
• • • •• I
IlIIll
0
1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01
Shearing Strain, y, %
1.E+00 1.E+01
Figure C.13 Comparison of the Variation in Material Damping Ratiowith Shearing Strain at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of 11.4 psifrom the Combined RCTS Tests
6000SAND -NA B911A-PB1
Test Station: RC-5
• Shearing Strain =0.001 %
11IIII Shearing Strain =0.01 %
'Ui 4000200 en
:::T~ (1)
><D).,
C'l:I :s:E 0C) c.
s::(/) s:::::s (/):::s'0 G)0 3:!E D)... .?<C'l:IQ)
100 :s:.s::2000en ""D
D)
o0.01
•II
0.1
• •11IIII II
1
•
10
•11IIII
100
o1000
Loading Frequency, f, Hz
Figure C.14 Comparison of the Variation in Shear Modulus withLoading Frequency at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of 11.4 psifrom the Combined RCTS Tests
20SAND -NA B911A-PB1
Test Station: RC-5
• Shearing Strain =0.001 %
II!i1 Shearing Strain = 0.01 %
15
5
II!i1 II!i1 II!i1II!i1
o0.01
•0.1
•••1 10
•
100 1000
Loading Frequency, f, Hz
Figure C.15 Comparison of the Variation in Material Damping Ratiowith Loading Frequency at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of 11.4psi from the Combined RCTS Tests
6000SAND -NA B911A-PB1
Test Station: RC-5
Time >60 min at each pressure
• RC (60 Hz - 93 Hz)
IIIlI TS 1st Cycle (0.5 Hz)
" TS 10th Cycle (0.5 Hz)
~ 4000
><ctIE
C)
(/)::s::s"0o~L.ctIQ)
t5 2000
• • • • • • • • ••
II
Iii •~ .
•
200 en:::r(1)S».,s:oc.cc(/)
G)
3S».?<
100 s:""0S»
o1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01
Shearing Strain, y, %
o1.E+00 1.E+01
Figure C.16 Comparison of the Variation in Shear Modulus withShearing Strain at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of 45.6 psi fromthe Combined RCTS Tests
1.2 .--------------------.......
1.0 • • • .. , 11III
~,
><C'lS •E 11III
C)0.8 •-C)
tn I::::s::::s
"C0 ~:e 0.6... •C'lS(1)J:en"C •(1)N
0.4 •C'lS
E... SAND -NA B911A-PB10zTest Station: RC-5
Time >60 min at each pressure0.2
• RC (60 Hz - 93 Hz)
ill TS 1st Cycle (0.5 Hz)
A TS 10th Cycle (0.5 Hz)
0.0
1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00 1.E+01
Shearing Strain, y, %
Figure C.17 Comparison of the Variation in Normalized ShearModulus with Shearing Strain at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of45.6 psi from the Combined RCTS Tests
20
SAND -NA B911A-PB1
Test Station: RC-5
Time >60 min at each pressure
• RC (60 Hz - 93 Hz)
15 11II TS 1st Cycle (0.5 Hz)
';fl. £ TS 10th Cycle (0.5 Hz)
co~eu
0:::C)
,: 10c.Eeuc
C\i'i:.eeu
::a!:
5
••
lIB
•• • II
•• lib• • • • •II 11II• £
0
1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01
Shearing Strain, y, %
1.E+00 1.E+01
Figure C.18 Comparison of the Variation in Material Damping Ratiowith Shearing Strain at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of 45.6 psifrom the Combined RCTS Tests
6000SAND -NA B911A-PB1
Test Station: RC-5
• Shearing Strain =0.001 %
III Shearing Strain =0.01 %
't) 4000200 en
:::r~ CD
><D)...
co s:E 0C) a.
• c(/)::::J C
::::J(/)
"0 G)0 11III 3:E • • • • D)I- .?<coCI> 100 s:J:
2000 11III 11III 11III IIIen 1JD)
o0.01 0.1 1 10 100
o1000
Loading Frequency, f, Hz
Figure C.19 Comparison of the Variation in Shear Modulus withLoading Frequency at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of 45.6 psifrom the Combined RCTS Tests
20SAND -NA 8911A-P81
Test Station: RC-5
• Shearing Strain =0.001 %
11IIII Shearing Strain =0.01 %15
co
;.;:;C'IS0::C)
.= 10c.EC'IScC'IS.i:
SC'IS
:!E
5
11IIII
11IIII
11IIII 11IIII •• • • •
0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
Loading Frequency, f, Hz
Figure C.20 Comparison of the Variation in Material Damping Ratiowith Loading Frequency at an Isotropic Confining Pressure of45.6 psi from the Combined RCTS Tests
Table C.1 Variation in Low-Amplitude Shear Wave Velocity, Low-Amplitude Shear Modulus, Low-AmplitudeMaterial Damping Ratio and Estimated Void Ratio with Isotropic Confining Pressure from RC Testsof Specimen NA B911A-PB1
Low-Amplitude ShearLow-Amplitude Low-Amplitude Estimated
Isotropic Confining Pressure, 0"0Modulus, Gmax
Shear Wave Material Damping VoidVelocity, Vs Ratio, Dmin Ratio, e
(psi) (psf) (kPa) (ksf) (MPa) (fps) (%)2.9 418 20 665 32 414 2.36 0.5245.7 821 39 876 42 474 1.96 0.51511.4 1642 79 1276 61 569 1.88 0.50122.8 3283 157 2017 97 710 1.86 0.47845.6 6566 314 3142 151 879 1.73 0.456
Table C.2 Variation in Shear Modulus and Material Damping Ratio with Shearing Strain from RC Tests ofSpecimen NA B911A-PB1; Isoptropic Confining Pressure, 0'0= 11.4 psi (1.6 ksf =79 kPa)
Peak ShearNormalized + Material
Shear AverageShearing Modulus,
Modulus, Shearing DampingStrain, % G, ksf
G/GmaxStrain, % RatioX
, D, %
1.02E-04 1300 1.00 1.02E-04 1.742.10E-04 1300 1.00 2.10E-04 1.714.11 E-04 1300 1.00 4.11 E-04 1.948,46E-04 1300 1.00 8.46E-04 1.951.621::-03 1272 0.98 1.36E-03 2.253.07E-03 1230 0.95 2.55E-03 2.595'.72E-03 1155 0.89 4.63E-03 2.951.06E-02 1067 0.82 8.36E-03 3.342.061::-02 930 0.72 1.53E-02 4.404.23E-02 776 0.60 2.87E-02 5.929.47E-02 613 0.47 5.96E-02 7.892.24E-01 468 0.36 1.25E-01 10.44
+ Average Shearing Strain from the First Three Cycles of the Free Vibration Decay Curvex Average Damping Ratio from the First Three Cycles of the Free Vibration Decay Curve
Table C.3 Variation in Shear Modulus, Normalized Shear Modulus and Material Damping Ratio with ShearingStrain from TS Tests of Specimen NA B911A-PB1; Isotropic Confining Pressure, 0'0= 11.4 psi (1.6ksf =79 kPa)
First Cycle Tenth CyclePeak Shear Normalized Material Peak Shear Normalized Material
Shearing Modulus, Shear Modulus, Damping Shearing Modulus, Shear Modulus, DampingStrain, % G, ksf G/Gmax Ratio, D, % Strain, % G, ksf G/Gmax Ratio, D, %2.05E-04 1073 1.00 0.84 1.96E-04 1089 1.00 0.973.80E-04 1073 1.00 0.87 3.75E-04 1089 1.00 0.689.71 E-04 1073 1.00 0.54 9.50E-04 1089 1.00 0.541.95E-03 1073 1.00 1.30 1.97E-03 1089 1.00 1.114.22E-03 938 0.87 2.47 4.26E-03 930 0.85 2.461.02E-02 774 0.72 3.84 1.02E-02 773 0.71 3.772.42E-02 650 0.61 5.84 2.46E-02 640 0.59 5.776.22E-02 506 0.47 7.96 6.28E-02 501 0.46 7.80
Table CA Variation in Shear Modulus and Material Damping Ratio with Shearing Strain from RC Testsof Specimen NA B911A-PB1; Isoptropic Confining Pressure, G o= 45.6 psi ( 6.6 ksf =314 kPa)
Peak ShearNormalized + Material
Shear Average DampingShearing Modulus,
Modulus, ShearingRatioX
, D,Strain, % G, ksfG/Gmax
Strain, %%
3.10E-05 3178 1.00 3.10E-05 1.886.20E-05 3178 1.00 6.20E-05 1.921.23E-04 3178 1.00 1.23E-04 1.912A7E-04 3178 1.00 2.47E-04 1.844.89E-04 3178 1.00 4.89E-04 1.959.92E-04 3137 0.99 9.92E-04 2.131.90E-03 3069 0.97 1.60E-03 2.413.56E-03 2951 0.93 2.99E-03 2.736.60E-03 2779 0.87 5.41 E-03 2.941.23E-02 2543 0.80 9.73E-03 3.374.84E-02 1887 0.59 3.39E-02 5.831.04E-01 1523 0.48 6.77E-02 7.411.65E-01 1330 0.42 1.01 E-01 8.92+ Average Shearing Strain from the First Three Cycles of the Free Vibration Decay Curve
x Average Damping Ratio from the First Three Cycles of the Free Vibration Decay Curve
Table C.5 Variation in Shear Modulus, Normalized Shear Modulus and Material Damping Ratiowith Shearing Strain from TS Tests of Specimen NA B911A-PB1 ; Isotropic ConfiningPressure, 0 0 =45.6 psi (6.6 ksf = 314 kPa)
First Cycle Tenth CyclePeak Shear Normalized Material Peak Shear Normalized Material
Shearing Modulus, Shear Damping Shearing Modulus, Shear DampingStrain, % G, ksf Modulus, Ratio, D, Strain, % G, ksf Modulus, Ratio, D, %4.07E-04 2396 1.00 0.87 4.06E-04 2409 1.00 1.039.86E-04 2396 1.00 1.33 9.75E-04 2409 1.00 1.181.99E-03 2378 0.99 1.34 2.02E-03 2342 0.97 1.054.13E-03 2283 0.95 2.24 4.16E-03 2265 0.94 2.299.22E-03 2044 0.85 2.73 9.18E-03 2051 0.85 2.712.06E-02 1825 0.76 3.89 2.08E-02 1810 0.75 3.834.94E-02 1527 0.64 5.74 4.88E-02 1547 0.64 5.54
II II II IT _____ II I I II
1Ir-,
't\"'-
l"'-\
i
•,
\
\'\
100
80
lICJWS 60>-en0::LUZu::I-d'i 40o0::LUQ. .
20
3
U.S. STANDARD SIEVESIZES IN INCHES1.5 3/4 3/8 4
U. S. STANDARD SIEVENUMBERS
10 20 40 100 200
HYDROMETERANALYSIS
;:0CD"00;::l.
z0 !"
0.j>.0~,~
(J)(J)N
20
"Um;:0(")m
40z-l(")0:t>;:0(j)m;:0
60OJ-<~mGiI-l
80
o100 10 0.1
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS0.01
1000.001
GRAVEL
Coarse Fine
SYMBOL BORING DEPTH, FT
• B-911A-PB1 21.7
Medium
SAND
.Qil!
0.2285
Fine
.Qml
0.67
SILT or CLAY
CLASSIFICATION
Sand, tan
IJs;:-lm
GRAIN SIZE CURVE
TEST METHOD ASTM D 6913.04