1982
DOI: 10.1016/0167-6636(82)90023-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Influence of fabric on liquefaction and densification potential of cohesionless sand

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
13
0

Year Published

1992
1992
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 74 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
1
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The reduced liquefaction resistance is probably due to the change of fabric by the pre-shearing histories of seismic loading. Similar observations have also been confirmed by other researchers (Nemat-Nasser & Tobita, 1982;Suzuki & Toki, 1984;Oda et al, 2001;Ye et al, , 2016.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…The reduced liquefaction resistance is probably due to the change of fabric by the pre-shearing histories of seismic loading. Similar observations have also been confirmed by other researchers (Nemat-Nasser & Tobita, 1982;Suzuki & Toki, 1984;Oda et al, 2001;Ye et al, , 2016.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…In parallel, the form of Equation (22) makes the deviatoric component f evolve only upon dilation (due to the Macauley brackets), thereby simulating conclusions from micromechanical studies depicting important changes in the sand particle contact normal orientation distribution only upon the dilative phase of monotonic shearing (e.g. Nemat-Nasser and Tobita [44]). Because of the negative sign in front of N in Equation (22), the f component evolves in the opposite sense to tensor [Cn+f], and in this way, the f : n term in the denominator of Equation (20) becomes non-zero, only upon shear reversal following a dilative shearing phase, and this is due to the change in the direction of n. In such a case, the response is characterized by larger plastic strains (due to a decrease of K p ), which under undrained conditions provides the well-known intense contraction following dilation at small p values, which may eventually lead to liquefaction or cyclic mobility.…”
Section: Plastic Modulus and Dilatancymentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Differences in soil response during the later stages of testing have been attributed to variations in the initial fabric of the sample even when the samples are created at the same densities (Jefferies and Been (2006), Nemat-Nasser and Tobita (1982), Mulilis et al (1977), Vaid and Sivathayalan (2000)). If DEM simulations are to provide meaningful insight into soil response observed in element tests, it is important for the initial state (packing density and stress level) and fabric anisotropy of the computer generated sample to closely match the physical reality.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%