Earthquakes and Structures

Techno-Press (테크노프레스)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparative analysis of damping ratio determination methods based on dynamic triaxial tests

  • Song Dongsong (Key Laboratory of Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, Institute of Engineering Mechanics, China Earthquake Administration) ;
  • Liu Hongshuai (Key Laboratory of Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, Institute of Engineering Mechanics, China Earthquake Administration)
  • Received : 2022.06.20
  • Accepted : 2023.09.05
  • Published : 2023.10.25
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Various methods for determining the damping ratio have been proposed by scholars both domestically and abroad. However, no comparative analysis of different determination methods has been seen yet. In this study, typical sand (Fujian standard sand) and cohesive soils were selected as experimental objects, and undrained strain-controlled dynamic triaxial tests were conducted. The differences between existing damping ratio determination methods were theoretically compared and analyzed. The results showed that the hysteresis curve of cohesive soils had better symmetry and more closely conformed to the definition of equivalent linear viscoelasticity. For non-cohesive soils, the differences in damping ratio determined by six methods were significant. The differences decreased with increasing confining pressure and relative density, but increased gradually with increasing shear strain, especially at high shear strains, where the maximum relative error reached 200%. For cohesive soils, the differences in damping ratio determined by six methods were relatively small, with a maximum relative error of about 50%. Moreover, they were less affected by effective confining pressure and had the same changing trend under different effective confining pressures. The damping ratio determination method has a large effect on the seismic response of soils distributed by non-cohesive soils, with a maximum relative error of about 15% for the PGA and up to about 30% for the Sa. However, for soil layers distributed by cohesive soils, the damping ratio determination method has less influence on the seismic response. Therefore, it is necessary to adopt a unified damping ratio determination method for non-cohesive soils, which can effectively avoid artificial errors caused by different determination methods.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to express their gratitude for the financial support from the Scientific Fund of the Institute of Engineering Mechanics, China Earthquake Administration (2019EEEVL0202); the Science and Technology Research Project of Higher Education Institutions in Hebei Province (ZD2020157); and the Natural Science Foundation of Hebei Province (E2020201017).

References

  1. Amr, M.M, Manal, A.S. and Hussein, H.E. (2019), "Evaluation of dynamic properties of calcareous sands in Egypt at small and medium shear strain ranges", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 116, 692-708. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.09.030.
  2. ASTM D854-14 (2016), Standard Test Methods for Specific Gravity of Soil Solids by Water Pycnometer, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
  3. ASTM D2216-19 (2019), Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Determination of Water (Moisture) Content of Soil and Rock by Mass, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
  4. ASTM D2937-17e2 (2018), Standard Test Method for Density of Soil in Place by the Drive-Cylinder Method, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
  5. ASTM D3999/D3999M-11 (2013), Standard Test Methods for the Determination of the Modulus and Damping Properties of Soils Using the Cyclic Triaxial Apparatus, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
  6. ASTM D4253-16 (2019), Standard Test Methods for Maximum Index Density and Unit Weight of Soils Using a Vibratory Table, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
  7. ASTM D4254-16 (2016), Standard Test Methods for Minimum Index Density and Unit Weight of Soils and Calculation of Relative Density, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
  8. ASTM D4318-17 (2018), Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
  9. ASTM D6913-04 (2009), Standard Test Methods for Particle-Size Distribution (Gradation) of Soils Using Sieve Analysis, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
  10. Carraro, J.A.H. and Bortolotto, M.S. (2015), "Stiffness degradation and damping of carbonate and silica sands", Front. Offshore Geotech. III, 2015, 1179-1183. https://doi.org/10.1201/b18442-177.
  11. Chattaraj, R. and Sengupta, A. (2016), "Liquefaction potential and strain dependent dynamic properties of Kasai River sand", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 90, 467-475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2016.07.023.
  12. Chen, G.X. (2007), Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, Science Press, Beijing, China. (in Chinese)
  13. Chen, G.X., Zhao, D.F. and Chen, W.Y. (2019), "Excess pore-water pressure generation in cyclic undrained testing", Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 145, 04019022. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002057.
  14. Cherian, A.C. and Kumar, J. (2016), "Effects of vibration cycles on shear modulus and damping of sand using resonant column tests", J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 142, 06016015. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001545.
  15. Dammala, P.K., Kumar, S.S. and Krishna, A.M. (2019), "Dynamic soil properties and liquefaction potential of northeast indian soil for non-linear effective stress analysis", Bull. Earthq. Eng., 17, 2899-2933. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-019-00592-6.
  16. Das, B.M. and Luo, Z. (2016), Principles of Soil Dynamics, Cengage Learning, Boston, MA, USA.
  17. Dutta, T.T. and Saride, S. (2016), "Influence of shear strain on the Poisson's ratio of clean sands", Geotech. Geol. Eng., 34, 1359-1373. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-016-0047-1.
  18. Doygun, O. and Brandes, H.G. (2020), "High strain damping for sands from load-controlled cyclic tests: Correlation between stored strain energy and pore water pressure", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 134, 106134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2020.106134.
  19. Elif, O.M., Liu, J. and Niu, F. (2017), "Dynamic behavior of fiber-reinforced soil under freeze-thaw cycles", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 101, 269-284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2017.07.022.
  20. Green, R.A., Mitchell, J.K. and Polito, C.P. (2000), "An energy-based excess pore pressure generation model for cohesionless soils", Proceedings of the John Booker Memorial Symposium Sydney, New South Wales, Australia, November.
  21. Ha, P.H., Van, P.O. and Van, W.F. (2017), "Small-strain shear modulus of calcareous sand and its dependence on particle characteristics and gradation", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 100, 371-379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2017.06.016.
  22. Hardin, B.O. and Drnevich, V.P. (1972), "Shear modulus and damping in soils: Measurement and parameter effects", Soil Mech. Found. Div., 6, 603-624. https://doi.org/10.1061/JSFEAQ.0001756.
  23. Hsiao, D.H. and Phan, V.T. (2016), "Evaluation of static and dynamic properties of sand-fines mixtures through the state and equivalent state parameters", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 84, 134-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2016.02.006.
  24. Ishihara, K. (1996), Soil Behaviour in Earthquake Geotechnics, Oxford Science Publications, Oxford, UK.
  25. Jafarian, Y., Javdanian, H. and Haddad, A. (2018), "Dynamic properties of calcareous and siliceous sands under isotropic and anisotropic stress conditions", Soil. Found., 58, 172-184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2017.11.010.
  26. Jafarzadeh, F. and Sadeghi, H. (2012), "Experimental study on dynamic properties of sand with emphasis on the degree of saturation", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 32, 26-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2011.08.003.
  27. Jain, A., Mittal, S. and Shukla, S.K. (2022), "Liquefaction proneness of stratified sand-silt layers based on cyclic triaxial tests", J. Rock Mech. Geotech. Eng., 15(7), 1826-1845. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.2022.09.015.
  28. Kaya, Z., Erken, A. and Cilsalar, H. (2021), "Characterization of elastic and shear moduli of adapazari soils by dynamic triaxial tests and soil-structure interaction with site properties", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 151(1), 106966. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2021.106966.
  29. Kirar, B. and Maheshwari, B.K. (2013), "Effects of silt content on dynamic properties of Solani sand", Proceedings of the 7th International Conferences on Case Histories in Geotechnical Engineering, Chicago, IL, USA, May.
  30. Kokusho, T. (1980), "Cyclic triaxial test of dynamic soil properties for wide strain range", Soil. Found., 20(2), 45-60. https://doi.org/10.3208/sandf1972.20.2_45.
  31. Kramer, S.L. (1996), Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA.
  32. Kravchenkoa, E., Jiankun, L. and Artem, K. (2019), "Dynamic behavior of clay modified with polypropylene fiber under freeze-thaw cycles", Transp. Geotech., 21, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trgeo.2019.100282.
  33. Kumar, S.S.A., Krishna, M. and Dey, A. (2017), "Evaluation of dynamic properties of sandy soil at high cyclic strains", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 99, 157-167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2017.05.016.
  34. Li, R.S., Chen, L.W. and Yuan, X.M. (2017), "Experimental study on influences of different loading frequencies on dynamic modulus and damping ratio", Chin. J. Geotech. Eng., 39(1), 71-80. https://doi.org/10.11779/CJGE201701005.
  35. Liang, K., Chen, G.X. and He, Y. (2019), "A new method for calculation of dynamic modulus and damping ratio based on theory of correlation function", Rock Soil Mech., 40(4), 1368-1376-1386. https://doi.org/10.16285/j.rsm.2017.2411.
  36. Ling, X.Z., Zhang, F. and Li, Q.L. (2015), "Dynamic shear modulus and damping ratio of frozen compacted sand subjected to freeze-thaw cycle under multi-stage cyclic loading", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 76(2), 111-121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2015.02.007.
  37. Liu, H.S., Zheng, T. and Qi, W.H. (2010), "Relationship between shear wave velocity and depth of conventional soils", Chin. J. Geotech. Eng., 32(7), 1142-1149.
  38. Luo, F., Zhao, S.P. and Ma, M. (2016), "Research on the determination method of dynamic parameters of frozen clay", J. Glaciol. Geocryol., 38(5), 1340-1345.
  39. Ma, Q.Q., Liu, B.J. and Wu, M.Y. (2018), "Frequency domain analysis in determining damping ratio of soil under seismic load", J. Water Resour. Water Eng., 29(5), 213-217. https://doi.org/10.11705/j.issn.1672-643X.2018.05.35.
  40. Pradeep, K.D., Adapa, M.K. and Subhamoy, B. (2017), "Dynamic soil properties for seismic ground response studies in Northeastern India", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 100, 357-370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2017.06.003.
  41. Saglam, S. and Bakir, B.S. (2014), "Cyclic response of saturated silts", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 61, 164-175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2014.02.011.
  42. Sas, W., Gabrys, K. and Szymanski, A. (2017), "Experimental studies of dynamic properties of quaternary clayey soils", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 95, 29-39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2017.01.031.
  43. Seed, H.B. and Idriss, I.M. (1970), "Soil moduli and damping factors for dynamic response analyses", EERC Report No.70-10, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA.
  44. Seed, H.B. and Lee, K.L. (1966), "Liquefaction of saturated sands during cyclic loading", Soil Mech. Found. Div., 92, 105-134. https://doi.org/10.1061/JSFEAQ.0000913.
  45. Seed, H.B., Wong, R.T. and Idriss, I.M. (1986), "Moduli and damping factors for dynamic analyses of cohesionless soils", J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 112, 1016-1032. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1986)112:11(1016).
  46. Sun, J.I., Golesorki, R. and Seed, H.B. (1988), "Dynamic moduli and damping ratios for cohesive soils", EERC Report No.88-15, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA.
  47. Wichtmann, T., Navarrete, H.M.A. and Triantafyllidis, T. (2015), "On the influence of a non-cohesive fines content on small strain stiffness, modulus degradation and damping of quartz sand", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 69, 103-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2014.10.017.