Professional Documents
Culture Documents
SungWooMoonandTaeseoKu*
*AssistantProfessor
Dept.ofCivil&EnvironmentalEngrg.
NationalUniversityofSingapore
1
OUTLINE
1. ShearWaveVelocity(VS)inGeotechnicalEngineering
2. PreviousEmpiricalCorrelationStudiesUsingVS
3. UnitWeightvs.StressnormalizedVS
4. UndrainedShearStrengthvs.VS
5. Summary&Conclusion
2
VS IN GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
Shearwavevelocity(VS)
Secondfastestwave&Directionalandpolarized
Dependsonsitespecificeffectivestressstateinsoils
Vs =C(c)n wherec=confiningstress,Candn=materialconstant
Mostfundamentalwavetogeotechnicalengineering(e.g.
grounddeformationprediction)
G0 =(t/g)Vs2
InsituVs measurementsareusedforevaluatingsitespecific
soilparametersandliquefactionresistance(SoilDynamics)
3
CONTINUOUS VS PROFILING
AutoSeis
Ku, Mayne, et al. 2013 (CGJ, GTJ)
Verticallypropagating&horizontally Automaticseismicsource
polarizingshearwavevelocity(VsVH) :continuoustriggering
x x CPT DMT
Seismicsource
:triggeringat
R1 givendepth R1 Receiver1
Z2 Z1 t1 t1
Alternatingsequence:
CPT+DHT
R2 R2
t2 t2 Continuous
R12 = z12 + x2
R22 = z22 + x2 measurements
:Vs,qt,fs,u2
Vs = R / t
Receiver2 Nonstoppingcone
Singleseismicreceiver
advancement
Pseudo-interval True-interval Continuous-interval
seismic system seismic system seismic system
CONTINUOUS Vs PROFILING
AutoSeis
Ku, Mayne, et al. 2013 (CGJ, GTJ)
0
10
20
30
40
m
0 100 200 300 ms
UNDERGROUND MAPPING via MASW
Shear wave velocity profile via surface wave test
for detecting Bukit Timah granite (NUS)
Shear wave velocity, VS (m/s)
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
0
5
10
15 Possible Vs
20
Depth, z (m)
25 Grade
Legends 30 Grade
Fill 35
Residual soil 40
Grade 45
Grade 50
Average Min. Max. Center Ave.
Objective:Toestablishoptimizedgeotechnicalsite
characterizationprogramsforundergroundmapping
andlayerdetection(e.g.,bedrocklayerdetection). RSKSTATSGeoconsult Ltd
NUSGeoCharacterization Group 6
K0 EVALUATION via PAIRED VS MODES
VS AgeexpressionsforK0
Anovelapproachis
madebasedonthe
Lateralstresscoefficient(K)
simplifiedindividual
stressmodelfor
inherentisotropicsoil
8
VsHH
K 0 (1 ax f ) bx
VsVH
modifierterms:
ax =0.6,bx =0.4
f=(VsVH/VsHH)[log(t) 3];
t=soilageinyears
Ku and Mayne 2013, 2015 (JGGE) VsHH/VsVH
7
CORRELATION: VS vs. t & VS vs. su
Shearwavevelocity(VS)
Stronglydependsonvoidratio insoils
Vs =a(e0)b wheree0 =voidratio,aandb=materialconstant
Soilunitweight(t ord)
Directlyrelatedtovoidratio insoils
t =(Gs+e0) w/(1+e0)whereGs =specificgravity,w =unitweightofwater
Undrainedshearstrength(su)
Voidratio isoneofthemostimportantparametersthataffectstheshear
strengthofaporousmedia
Athy 1930;Hamilton1976;Bartetzko andKopf2007;Ohetal.2016
VS basedcorrelationsfort &su
8
EMPIRICAL CORRELATIONS
Soilunitweight(t ord)
Empirical relationships References
9
EMPIRICAL CORRELATIONS
Undrainedshearstrength(su)
Empirical relationship Based Reference
log / log / /18 /0.475 Dickenson (1994)
log log / 0.90 /0.63 Perret (1996)
log log / /8.64 /1.24 Perret (1996)
log log / /23 /0.475 Ashford et al. (1996)
ln / 1.4 ln / 0.87 Blake (1996)
log / log / /19.4 /0.36 Yun et al. (2006)
.
/ /7.93 Levesques et al. (2007)
Likitlersuang and Kyaw
log / log / /187 /0.372
(2010)
Likitlersuang and Kyaw
log / log / /228 /0.510
(2010)
.
5 10 / Kulkarni et al. (2010)
. .
100 / % % , , Kulkarni et al. (2010)
0.001 / 0.016 / 60.8 Long et al. (2013)
where, Pa = atmospheric pressure and z = depth (z), undrained shear strength, = clay content, w = moisture
content, OCR = overconsolidation ratio. 10
COMPILED DATABASE FOR t
Applieddatabase
Range of
No. of No. of
Soil Type Symbol
Site Data t Vsn
PI e Vs1 (m/s)
(kN/m3) (m/s)
Source:dataobtainedfromMayneetal.(2009)
11
VALIDATION OF COMPILED DATA
Analyticalrelationshipbetweent ande
Trendbetweentotalunitweight( )andvoidratio(e)
12
TREND BETWEEN t AND DEPTH
Hyperbolicmodelfort asafunctionofdepth(z)
,
1
, =maximumin
situtotalunitweight
z =depth;
, and =fitting
parameters
Hyperbolicmodel
Zekkos etal.(2006)
NAVAC:DesignmanualbyUSNavy,NavalFacilitiesEngineeringCommand
13
COMPILED VS TREND FOR t
ApparentrelationshipbetweenVS andv0 ore
VS vs.v0 VS vs.e
14
COMPILED VS TREND FOR t
SitespecificrelationshipbetweenVS andv0 ore
(a) (b)
VS vs.v0 VS vs.e
/1
DatafromLarssonandMulabdic(1991)
15
MODEL PARAMETERS FOR CORRELATION
Relationshipbetweenmodelparameters
(a) (b)
/1
16
t vs. VS1 & t vs. VSn
Regressionstudybetweent andstressnormalizedVS
Moon and Ku 2016 (CGJ)
R2 =0.726 R2 =0.768
S.E.Y.=0.074 S.E.Y.=0.069
(a) (b)
.
/ / / / / /
17
su vs. VS & OCR, PI EFFECTS
Regressionstudybetweensu andVS
EffectofOCR EffectofPI
700 700
Undrained Shear Strength, su (kPa)
200 200
100 100
OCR = 1 (a) PI=5 (b)
0 0
30 300 30 300
Shear Wave Velocity, Vs (m/s) Shear Wave Velocity, Vs (m/s)
18
VSSTRESS RELATIONSHIP: ANISOTROPY
EffectofVSanisotropy:VSstressrelationship
(a)OCR<2 (b)OCR>2
1,000 1,000
VsHH (m/s) = 30.09('v0)0.358 VsHH (m/s) = 34.45('v0)0.426
R2 = 0.817 R2 = 0.700
100 100
Shearwavevelocitytrendswitheffectiveoverburdenstress(a)OCR<2,and(b)OCR>2
19
suVS RELATIONSHIP: ANISOTROPY
EffectofVSanisotropy:su vs.VS
(a)OCR<2 (b)OCR>2
500 500
su (kPa) = 0.151(VsHV )1.114
Undrained Shear Strength, su (kPa)
50 50
su (kPa) = 0.029(VsHH)1.431
su (kPa) = 0.123(VsHH)1.166 R2 = 0.918
R2 = 0.522
VH VH
su (kPa) = 0.104(VsVH)1.211 HV su (kPa) = 0.115(VsHV )1.215 HV
R2 = 0.832 R2 = 0.865
HH HH
5 5
10 100 1,000 50 500
Shear Wave Velocity, Vs (m/s) Shear Wave Velocity, Vs (m/s)
Undrainedshearstrengthtrendswithshearwavevelocity(a)OCR<2,and(b)OCR>2
20
SUMMARY
4. VS can offer firstorder approximation for su, but anisotropy modes need
to be considered.
21
Thank You
22