Survey on Frazer River Sand in Richmond, British Columbia, Canada

1

2

Fraser River Sand(FRS)

Thursday, April 9th 2015

Hasan J.M RakibulMuhammad SafdarMuhammad Umar

Civil and Environmental Engineering

3

Contents of Presentation

1. Geological History of Fraser River Sand

2. Basic Properties

3. Monotonic/Static Shearing Response

4. Cyclic Shearing Response

5. Field CPT and Vs Data

6. Conclusions

7. References

Fraser River Sand

4

1. Geological History of Fraser River Sand

Fraser River Sand

5

Geological History of FRS:

Fraser River Sand

Reference: Google Map

6


Fraser River Sand

Reference: Google Map

7


Fraser River Sand

(Clague et al., 1983)

8


(Clague et al., 1983)

9

2. Basic Properties of Fraser River Sand

Fraser River Sand

10

Basic Properties of FRS:

Fraser River Sand

Average grain size distribution of the Fraser River sand (Safdar and Sadrekarimi, 2015)

SEM images of Fraser River sand particles at 400 and 100 magnifications (Safdar and Sadrekarimi, 2015)

11

Basic Properties of FRS:

Fraser River Sand

The Fraser River sand has;

Specific gravity of sand particles (GS) = 2.69 (ASTM-D-854)

Maximum Void Ratio (emax) = 0.96 (ASTM-D-4253)

Minimum void ratios (emin) = 0.63 (ASTM-D-4254)

D10 = 0.17D30 = 0.19D50 = 0.24D60 = 0.26Cu = 1.56

The particles are generally sub-angular to angular based on scanning electron microscopic (SEM) images in the previous slide and they are composed of 55% orthoclase feldspar, 35% quartz, and 10% muscovite based on X-ray diffraction analysis conducted by (Safdar and Sadrekarimi, 2015).

12

3. Monotonic/Static Shearing Response of Fraser River Sand

Fraser River Sand

13

Monotonic/Static Shearing Response of FRS

Fraser River Sand

The UDFR sand tests exhibited a strain-softening response to their ultimate steady states of low stress values at large strains while DFR tests shows strain hardening response.

Results of consolidated drained triaxial tests (a)Stress–strain curves. (b) Volume change

Results of consolidated undrained triaxial tests (a) Stress–strain curves. (b) Pore pressure variation

(Chillarige et al., 1997)

Laboratory Triaxial Compression Tests

14


Fraser River Sand

Monotonic stress-path and stress–strain response of loose air-pluviated sand

(Wijewickreme et al., 2005)

Stress path and stress–strain response from a constant-volume, monotonic, strain-controlled DSS test on air-pluviated Fraser River sand consolidated to a vertical stress (σ′vc ) of 100 kPa (Drc = 40%)

15


Fraser River Sand

Under this static loading, the specimen deformed with a slight strain softening response, which was then followed by a strain hardening response.

This behaviour is essentially similar to the response described as “limited liquefaction” or “quasi steady state” type by Vaid et al. (2001) on the basis of observations mainly from cyclic undrained tests conducted on water-pluviated sands.

16

4. Cyclic Shearing Response of Fraser River Sand

Fraser River Sand

17

Cyclic Shearing Response of FRS:

Fraser River Sand

(Wijewickreme et al., 2005)

18

Cyclic Shearing Response of FRS:

Fraser River Sand

CSR versus number of loading cycles required to reach γcyc = 3.75% from constant-volume cyclic ring shear and cyclic direct simple shear tests on Fraser River sand specimens (Safdar and Sadrekarimi, 2015)

(Safdar and Sadrekarimi, 2015)(Wijewickreme et al., 2005)

19

5. Field CPT and Vs data for FRS

Fraser River Sand

20

Field CPT Data for FRS:

Fraser River Sand

Profile CPT1 in the Fraser River delta.

Depth increment = 0.05 m;

Maximum depth = 30.0 m.

P.P., Pore pressure. 1 bar = 100 kPa

(Christian et al., 1997)

21


Fraser River Sand

Profile CPT2 in the Fraser River delta.

Depth increment = 0.05 m;

Maximum depth = 30.95 m.

P.P., pore pressure. 1 bar = 100 kPa

(Christian et al., 1997)

22


Fraser River Sand

CPT Interpretation - Soil Type

P. K. RobertsonCPT in Geotechnical

Practice Santiago, Chile July, 2014

23


Fraser River Sand

CPT Interpretation - Soil Type

P. K. RobertsonCPT in Geotechnical

Practice Santiago, Chile July, 2014

24

Lab and Field Vs data for FRS:

Fraser River Sand

(Chillarige et al., 1997)

Assessment of liquefaction

potential from shear wave

velocity measurements

Fear and Robertson (1994) suggested that Vs1 = 160

m/s can be used as the approximate dividing line for

contractive and dilatant behavior at large strains for

most quartz sands

25

6. Conclusions

Fraser River Sand

26

6. Conclusions

Fraser River Sand

• The Fraser River delta is a young, rapidly sedimented basin that occupies a significant area of the Lower Mainland of British Columbia.

• Fraser River sand has been extensively used in large quantities for fill marine shipping terminals and warehouses, bridges and roads, rail yard and rail lines, the Vancouver International Airport, maintenance yards, and recreational facilities.

• Advanced laboratory tests, Field cone-penetration tests and shear-wave velocity analyses suggest that much of the delta is susceptible to cyclic liquefaction within the top 10 to 20 m.

• Further details of each topic is mentioned in literature survey report.

7. References

Fraser River Sand 27

28

7. References

Fraser River Sand

ASTM Standard D854, “Standard test methods for specific gravity of soil solids by water pycnometer” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, www.astm.org, 2014

ASTM D-4253, “Standard test methods for maximum index density and unit weight of soils using a vibratory”ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, www.astm.org, 2014

ASTM D-4254, “Standard test methods for minimum index density and unit weight of and calculation of relative density”ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, www.astm.org, 2014

Chillarige, A.V., Morgenstern, N.R., Robertson, P.K., and Christian, H.A. “Liquefaction and seabed instability in the Fraser River delta” Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 34: 520–533, 1997

Chillarige, A.V., Morgenstern, N.R., Robertson, P.K., and Christian, H.A. “Evaluation of the in situ state of Fraser River sand” Canadian Geotechnical Journal 34: 510–519, 1997

Christian, H.A., Woeller, D.J., Robertson, P.K., and Courtney, R.C. “Site investigations to evaluate flow liquefaction slides at Sand Heads, Fraser River delta” Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 34: 384–397, 1997

Robertson, P. K., “CPT Interpretation - Soil Type CPT in Geotechnical Practice” Santiago, Chile July, 2014 Clague, J. J., John L. Luternauer and Richard J. Hebd. “Sedimentary environments and postglacial history of the

Fraser Delta and lower Fraser Valley, British Columbia” Canadian Journal of Earth Science, 20, 1314-1326, 1983 Manmatharajan, V.“Initial Stress State and Stress History Effects on Liquefaction Susceptibility of Sands” Master of

Applied Science Thesis submitted at Carleton University Ottawa, Ontario, 2011 Safdar, M. and Sadrekarimi, A. “Cyclic Shear Response of Fraser River Sand using Cyclic Ring Shear” XV

PanAmerican Conference on Soil Mechanics and GeotechnicalEngineering Buenos Aires Conference November 15 to 18, 2015 (under review)

Vaid, Y.P., and Sivathayalan, S. “Static and Cyclic Liquefaction Potential of Fraser Delta Sand in Simple Shear and Triaxial Tests”, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 33(2):281-289, 1996

Wijewickreme, D. Sriskandakumar, S. and Byrne, P.“Cyclic loading response of loose air-pluviated Fraser River sand for validation of numerical models simulating centrifuge tests” Canadian Geotechnical Journal 42:2, 550-561, 2005

29Fraser River Sand