See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/270532964

Flow Potential of Sandy Soils with Different Grain Compositions.

Article · January 2000

DOI: 10.3208/sandf.40.4_103

CITATIONS READS

32 68

2 authors, including:

Misko Cubrinovski
University of Canterbury
175 PUBLICATIONS   2,229 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Liquefaction potential and cyclic deformation of NZ gravelly soils View project

Next Generation Liquefaction View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Misko Cubrinovski on 11 January 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

FLOW POTENTIAL OF SANDY SOILS

Misko Cubrinovski1 and Kenji Ishihara2

ABSTRACT

The flow deformation or strain softening of saturated sand in undrained shear is discussed in this paper.
When evaluating flow of field deposits, the prime issue to be addressed is whether a given soil at its in situ
state has a potential to develop flow or not. This paper presents a rational method for such assessment to be
made and highlights the effects of grain-size distribution and fines content on the flow potential of sandy
soils. On the basis of existing laboratory test results on sandy soils, a flow potential formulation was
developed within the framework of the state concept. To facilitate the flow assessment of field deposits, the
formulation is also presented in terms of the SPT resistance. It is shown that sands with a large (emax -
emin)-value have high flow potential indicating that fines-containing sands are more susceptible to flow than
clean sands.

INTRODUCTION

Undrained behaviour of sandy soils under monotonic shearing can generally be characterized by three
types of response, as outlined in Figure 1. Very loose sand shows fully contractive behaviour where
following the peak stress the sand strain softens until the steady state is reached at large strains. This strain-
softening phase of the response resembles a flow-type behaviour and therefore it is commonly referred to as
flow or flow deformation. If the density of the sand is somewhat higher, then the strain softening is followed
by strain hardening in which the sand recovers its strength and restores stability. In this case, the flow takes
place over a limited range from the peak stress to the point of phase transformation where dilative behaviour
is initiated. This type of response is also known as the flow with limited deformation or limited flow.
Finally, in the case of medium dense and dense sands, a strain-hardening response is observed and ever
increasing shear stress is needed to induce shear strain and eventually attain the steady state of deformation.
During earthquakes, flow-type behaviour may be triggered by seismic forces resulting in flow slides or
movement of large masses of soils due to lateral spreading. As illustrated in Figure 1, the flow is always
associated with excessive ground deformation, and flow-induced displacements can easily exceed several
meters even in the case of limited flow. Thus, when evaluating liquefaction and undrained response of sandy
soils, it would be important to assess whether a given in situ deposit or earth structure has a potential to
develop flow deformation or not. The objective of the present study is to provide rational criteria for
preliminary assessment of the flow potential of field deposits.
Recent laboratory studies have shown that the flow potential is influenced by fines content and grain-size
distribution of sandy soils.
In addition, it has been (a) (b)
recognized that the majority
σ1− σ 3
σ1− σ 3

of documented case
2

histories of flow failures

Shear stress,
Shear stress,

and lateral spreads in past

No-flow
earthquakes involve sands Limited flow
No-flow
Limited
flow
with fines rather than clean
sands. For these reasons,
particular attention is given Flow
Flow
in the following to the
influence of gradation and Shear strain, ε − ε
1 3
M ean effective stress, p '
fines content on the flow
potential.
Figure 1: Types of undrained deformation of sandy soils:
(a) effective stress paths; (b) stress-strain curves

1 Kiso-Jiban Consultants Co. Ltd., 1-11-5 Kudan-kita, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 102-8220, Japan.
2 Department of Civil Engineering, Science University of Tokyo, 2641 Yamazaki, Noda, Chiba 278, Japan.
FLOW CHARACTERIZATION BASED ON STATE CONCEPT

The undrained behaviour of a given sand changes within the three types of response outlined in Figure 1
and shows different degrees of strain softening and strain hardening depending upon the density of the sand
and confining stress level at the initial state. It is possible,
therefore, to make a distinction between density-stress states
which are associated with strain-softening behaviour (flow FLOW

Void ratio, e
deformation) and those entirely exhibiting strain-hardening Flow
behaviour in undrained shear. In this context, Ishihara (1993) Initial dividing line
Limit ed flow
defined a so-called initial dividing line (ID-line) to mark the
boundary between flow and no-flow conditions in the e-p'
No-flow
diagram (void ratio-mean effective stress diagram), as
illustrated in Figure 2. As indicated in this figure, samples NO-FLOW
lying above the ID-line are contractive and exhibit flow-type
behaviour while all of the density-stress combinations lying
bellow the ID-line show strain-hardening behaviour. If an Mean effective stress, p'
initial state is located on the initial dividing line, then the
effective stress path prior to reaching the phase Figure 2: Flow characterization in the
transformation state would be flat indicating a transitional e-p' plane
behaviour between strain softening and strain hardening.
The experimental evidence of sand behaviour indicates, however, that the flow of sand is affected by
other factors than density and normal stress including sand fabric, initial shear stress and mode of shear
deformation (Ishihara 1993; Vaid and Sivathayalan, 1996). Thus, depending upon the initial stresses,
packing conditions and mode of deformation, several boundary lines or rather a boundary zone separating
the flow and no-flow states may be identified to exist for a given sand. For this reason, a preferred method
for evaluating the flow potential of sand would be to obtain actual data by conducting an appropriate series
of laboratory tests on high-quality undisturbed samples. For preliminary flow assessment however, an
alternative approach would be to make use of the fact that the projection of the steady state line in the e-p'
plane is relatively close to the initial dividing line, and therefore, it could be used approximately to identify
whether the sand behaviour upon monotonic undrained shearing is of strain-softening or strain-hardening
type. With this in mind, a flow characterization based on the steady state line is attempted in the following.
It is important to emphasize however, that whenever in this study the steady state line is used as a boundary
between flow and no-flow conditions, it is only considered as the first approximation to the initial dividing
line.

STEADY STATE LINES OF SANDY SOILS

The position and slope of the steady state line of sandy soils are known to vary widely in the e-p' plot.
Several studies have indicated that this variation in the steady state properties is chiefly due to differences in
the grain-size characteristics, fines content and grain shape of sands. An attempt to quantify the effects of
gradation and grain shape on the position and slope of the steady state line in the e-p' plot has been
undertaken in a recent study by the authors (Cubrinovski and Ishihara, 2000) where published data on 52
sandy soils have been compiled and analyzed. With few exceptions, the investigated steady state lines have
been obtained from triaxial compression tests on reconstituted samples of clean sands and sands with non-
plastic fines content of less than 20 %. The outcome of the aforementioned study is presented in the
following in a summary form.

Evaluating Grading Properties of Sandy Soils

When evaluating comparatively grading properties of various sandy soils, one encounters difficulties in
identifying an appropriate measure that is indicative of the overall grading characteristics of a given soil. In
this regard, the conventional parameters readily available from gradation curves, such as the mean grain size
D50 , uniformity coefficient UC and fines content FC , are deficient in a sense that each of them describes
only a single grading feature. With this in mind, the void ratio range (emax -emin) may be suggested
alternatively as one of the measures for identifying the grain-size characteristics of sandy soils, where (emax
-emin) represents the difference in the void ratio between the loosest and densest packing states achieved in
standard laboratory procedures. Even though it is an indirect measure of the gradation, it was found in a
previous study (Cubrinovski and Ishihara, 1999) that the void ratio range reflects the
overall grain-size composition of sandy soils. The Table 1: Typical values of the void ratio range
main features of the void ratio range may be Soil Type FC PG emax - emin
summarized as follows: (a) in general, (emax -emin)
Silty soils 40-80 <5 > 0.70
has values in the range between 0.25 and 0.65 for
sands with less than 30 % fines; (b) the value of Silty sands 20-30 <5 0.60-0.70
(emax -emin) gradually increases with decreasing -- " -- 10-20 <5 0.50-0.60
mean grain size or increasing fines content, and -- " -- 5-10 <5 0.45-0.55
(c) for a given mean grain size, (emax -emin) is larger Clean sands <5 <5 0.25-0.50
for sands containing more fines. These facts are Gravelly sands < 10 15-35 0.25-0.40
summarized in a concise form in Table 1 where a Gravels <5 50-85 0.20-0.30
simple classification of cohesionless soils based on
the (emax -emin) -value is given. Fines: D < 0.075 mm; Gravel: D ≥ 2.0 mm.

Position of the Steady State Line

For each of the investigated soils, the distance of the steady state line from the maximum void ratio (emax
-eo) was identified in the e-p' diagram, as illustrated in Figure 3. Next, the relative density Dro
corresponding to the void ratio eo was calculated and the data of all soils were arranged in the Dro versus
(emax -emin) plot, as shown in Figure 4. Note that eo denotes the threshold value of the void ratio above which
sand exhibits zero steady state strength. In other words, when sand has an initial state at void ratios above eo,
the flow would be associated with a complete loss of strength and reduction of the mean effective stress to
zero. This type of response is also referred to in the literature as static liquefaction.
It can be seen in Figure 4 that the relative density
Dro steadily increases with the (emax -emin)-value 1
indicating that the steady state line gradually shifts
emax
downwards in the Dr - p' plot as the value of the void 0.9 Eq.2 emax- e o UR-line
ratio range increases. Thus, for void ratio range of eo
Void ratio, e

0.25-0.35 which is typical of coarse clean sands, the

0.8
steady state line is located at a relative density of -
10 % to 15 % indicating that these soils could exhibit
Steady state line (Eq. 2)
flow only if they are at very loose states. On the other 0.7
hand, sands with 20 to 30 % fines, for which (emax -
emin) is around 0.60-0.70, have a steady state line at a 0.6
emin
relative density as high as 50-60 %. This clearly
demonstrates that the flow potential increases with
0 50 100 150 200
increasing fines content. The correlation between Dro
and (emax -emin) may be approximated as Mean normal stress, p' (kPa)

(1)
Figure 3: Characteristic lines in the e-p' plot
Dr0 = - 40 + 140 (emax - emin)
x 100 (%)

Slope of the Steady State Line Clean Sands and Sands with Fines
It has been customary to approximate Clean sands (F < 5 %)
the steady state line with a straight line in 100
C
Sands with fines (F C = 5 - 36 %)
the e-log p' plot such as
min
o
-e
-e

?
max

es = e1 - λ log p’ , 10 ≤ p’ ≤ 200 kPa

max

(2) D = - 40 + 140 (e -e )
e

ro max min
e

50
Relative density , D =

?
where es and p' are the void ratio and
ro

D +12 %
confining stress of the steady state line, ro

e1 is the void ratio at p' = 1 kPa and λ is

0
the slope of the line. To examine the
influence of grain shape on the slope of ?
the steady state line, the slope λ was 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
read off from e-log p' plots of the steady e
max
-e
min
state line of the investigated soils and
Figure 4: Position of the steady state line of sandy soils
 0.25 ,

λ
Clean sands (F < 5 %)
thereafter the data were arranged in the λ versus (emax ,
C
Sands with fines (F = 5-36 %)
C

Slope of the steady state line,

-emin) plot, as shown in Figure 5. Here, two separate 0.2
relationships are shown for round-grained and angular Angular sands
sands, where round-grained sands are defined as those 0.15
λa = 2 λr
having predominantly round and subround grains
whereas angular sands are those mainly composed of 0.1
angular and subangular grains. It is apparent that the
slope of the steady state line of round-grained sands is λr
0.05
gentle, and λ generally takes values smaller than
0.05. On the other hand, angular sands have much Round-grained sands
0
steeper steady state lines, with the slope λ being
twice as large as that of the round-grained sands. For 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
both grain shapes, there is a clear tendency in λ to e -e
max min
increase with (emax -emin) which can be approximated Figure 5: Slope of the steady state line
as

λ = λr = - 0.01 + 0.125 (emax - emin) , for round-grained sands (3)

and
λ = λa = 2λr = - 0.02 + 0.25 (emax - emin) , for angular sands (4)

Effect of Fines Content on Flow Potential

Once the position and slope of the steady state line have been formulated as above, it is possible to
establish a generalized expression for the relative density at the steady state line where (emax -emin) would be
the only soil-property variable. Thus, using simple mathematical manipulations, the expression of Eq. (2) can
be easily transformed into the following form
0.01 − λ ( 1 − log p ′ )
Drs = D r0 + (5)
( emax − emin )
where Drs is the relative density at the steady state line, and Dro and λ are measures for the position and slope
of the line respectively. Note that in Eq. (5), Drs and Dro are expressed as a ratio, not a percentage. Details
of the derivation of Eq. (5) may be found in Cubrinovski and Ishihara (2000).
Introducing (emax -emin) = 0.35 in Eq. (5) as well as the
expressions for Dro and λr (Eqs. 1 and 3, respectively), the -20 Round-grained sands
relative density at the steady state line was calculated and emax
0
thereafter plotted in the Dr-p' diagram as shown in Figure 6.
(%)

FLOW
For purpose of comparison, the steady state line for (emax - 20
Relative density, Dr

emin) = 0.60 was also calculated and plotted in Figure 6. emax - e min = 0.35
Note that (emax -emin) = 0.35 is a representative value for 40 FLOW
clean sands while the (emax -emin)-value of 0.60 is typical of
60
sands with 20 to 30 % fines. In view of the assumption that emax - e min = 0.60
only initial states that lie above the steady state line can 80
exhibit flow-type behaviour, it is obvious that the flow
potential increases with increasing fines, even though the 100 emin
relative density increases. Whereas clean sands exhibit 0 50 100 150 200
strain softening only at relative densities lower than 9-24 % Mean normal stress, p' (kPa)
(p' = 0-200 kPa), flow deformation of sands with 20-30 %
fines can occur even at relative densities as high as 44-60 %. Figure 6: Flow potential for soils with
Thus, summary of the experimental evidence from more different (emax -emin)-values
than 50 sandy soils clearly indicates that fines-containing
sands are more vulnerable to flow than clean sands. Similar results from a series of tests on two host-sands
have been reported by Lade and Yamamuro (1997). They found, for example, that Dro increased from 18 %
to approximately 60 % as the fines content of Nevada sand increased from 0 % to 50 % respectively.
FLOW POTENTIAL OF IN-SITU DEPOSITS

In order to accommodate the presented flow formulation for application to field deposits, it would be
useful to express the steady state line in terms of an in-situ parameter, such as the SPT blow count, instead of
the relative density. For that purpose, the following empirical correlation between the SPT blow count and
relative density will be used (Cubrinovski and Ishihara, 1999):
SPT blow count, N
2 1/ 2 0 5 10 15
9 Dr  σ v '
=
1.7  98 
N (6) 0
( emax − emin ) Round-grained sands
emax- e min= 0.60
K o = 0.5

(kPa)
FLOW = Strain-softening
The key feature of this correlation is that it accounts for the effects 50 NO-FLOW = Strain-hardening
of grain-size composition and presence of fines on the N-Dr

Effective overburden stress, σv '

relation. Now, by introducing the expression for the relative UR-line
density Drs at the steady state line in Eq. (6), the SPT blow count
100
along the steady state line can be given as ID-line

0.01 − λ ( 1 − log p ′ ) 
1/ 2  2
9  σ v '  Flow with
NS =  Dr0 +
1.7  98  ( emax − emin ) 
 (7) 150 zero residual FLOW NO-FLOW
(emax − emin )  strength

This relationship can be used to make a distinction between flow 200

and no-flow conditions in the N -σ'v plot in the same way as the
steady state line was used in the Dr-p' diagram. For example, 0 5 10 15
Figure 7 shows the boundary between flow and no-flow conditions
in the N-σ'v plot (denoted as ID-line) for round-grained soils with a Figure 7: Flow characterization
void ratio range of 0.60. This line was calculated by Eq. (7) for an
assumed Ko- value of 0.5. The area to the right of the ID-line in based on the SPT blow count
Figure 7 corresponds to the area below the steady state line in the
e-p' or Dr-p' diagram, and therefore it indicates N-σ'v conditions associated with strain-hardening behaviour.
On the other hand, the shaded area to the left of the ID-line marks the N-σ'v combinations that have a
potential for strain softening or flow-type deformation.
It should be mentioned that in the same fashion as the steady state line was used for differentiating
between flow and no-flow conditions, we can use the UR-line shown in Figure 3 for identifying initial
conditions under which sand will have a potential to exhibit flow with zero residual strength. Since the
relative density of the UR-line is equal to Dro, the SPT
resistance along the UR-line, NUR can be easily obtained by SPT blow count, N
substituting Dr with Dro in Eq. (6). In this way, we can 0 5 10 15 20

distinguish three zones in the N-σ'v diagram which correspond 0

(b)
Angular sands
to: (a) no-flow or strain-hardening behaviour, (b) flow
K = 0.5
deformation or strain-softening behaviour, and (c) flow with K = 1.0
o

o
zero residual strength or extreme strain-softening response.
(kPa)

Boundaries between flow and no-flow conditions for angular 50

sands with different void ratio ranges are displayed in Figure 8.

Effective overburden stress, σ v '

These criteria were derived using Eq. (7) by assuming values for 0.30
the void ratio range of 0.3, 0.4, 0.5 and 0.6, and Ko-values of 0.5 100 0.50
and 1.0. It may be seen in this figure that the range of N-σ'v 0.40

combinations susceptible to flow enlarges steadily as the (emax emax - e min= 0.60
-emin) -value increases. In other words, the required N-value
for flow deformation to occur is lower for clean sands than for 150

sands with fines. Similar criteria for round-grained soils may be FLOW NO-FLOW
found in Cubrinovski and Ishihara (2000) where also
comparison of the proposed boundaries with case-history based 200
criteria is given.
Equivalent criteria to those of Figure 8 for evaluating the 0 5 10 15 20
potential for flow with zero residual strength
Figure 8: SPT boundaries differentiating
between flow and no-flow conditions
 are presented in Figure 9. Apparently, these boundaries are at much lower SPT blow counts as compared to
the boundaries of Figure 8. The fact that only sand deposits with very low N-values are susceptible to
extreme strain softening indicate that conditions for flow with zero residual strength are not often
encountered in the field. Figure 9 also suggests that soils with void ratio ranges of less than 0.35, such as
clean gravels and coarse sands, are practically safe against flow with zero residual strength.
SPT blow count, N
DISCUSSION
0 5 10

The undrained flow deformation is a complex phenomenon 0 Round-grained and

that requires a set of preconditions to be satisfied including angular sands
triggering mechanism, driving force and kinematic admissibility. UR-line

(kPa)
Aside of these factors however, the first issue that has to be
50
addressed in the process of flow assessment is whether the in situ

Effective overburden stress, σv '

state of the soil under consideration allows for flow deformation
to develop or not. The present study focuses solely on this aspect
of the flow phenomenon and aims in particular at providing 100
0.30
rational means for evaluating the influence of fines content and
0.40
grain-size composition on the flow potential.
As demonstrated earlier, the susceptibility to flow gradually 0.50 emax - e min
150
increases with increasing void ratio range of soils due to a 0.60
Flow with
downward shift of the steady state line relative to the limiting zero residual
void ratios (Fig. 4). Data of recent experimental studies indicate strength

that the downward shift of the steady state line ceases once the 200
fines content reaches around 20-30 %, and thereafter the trend
reverses or the steady state line starts to shift upwards if the fines 0 5 10

content exceeds 30 %. In view of this, and also considering the

characteristics of the examined soils, it seems appropriate to limit Figure 9: Potential for flow with
the application of the proposed flow formulation to sands with zero residual strength
less than 30 % non-plastic fines and (emax -emin) ≤ 0.65.
The framework presented in this study is based on the assumption that a single line in the e-p' plane
marks the boundary between flow and no-flow conditions. It is important to recognize that such boundary is
only feasible within an idealized conceptual model, and that factors other than density and confining stress
such as initial shear stress, sand fabric and stress path have also an important influence on the undrained
flow of sands. However, the number of test results presented to date is inadequate for a thorough
examination of these factors on the procedure established in this study, and therefore further research is
needed to quantify these effects for field deposits of sandy soils.

CONCLUSIONS
Experimental data on the undrained behaviour of sandy soils indicate that the flow potential is
significantly affected by the grain composition and presence of fines in sand. The potential for undrained
flow is found to increase with increasing void ratio range of sandy soils. Thus, sands with fines have a
wider range of density-stress states susceptible to flow than clean sands. The flow with zero residual
strength is limited to deposits with a very low SPT blow count indicating that such conditions are not often
encountered in the field.

REFERENCES
Cubrinovski, M. and Ishihara, K. (1999). "Empirical correlation between SPT N-value and relative density for
sandy soils". Soils and Foundations, Vol. 39, No. 5, pp. 61-71.
Cubrinovski, M. and Ishihara, K. (2000). "Flow potential of sandy soils with different grain compositions". Soils
and Foundations, Vol. 40, No. 4.
Ishihara, K. (1993). "Liquefaction and flow failure during earthquakes". 33rd Rankine lecture, Geotechnique 43,
No. 3, pp. 351-415.
Lade, P.V. and Yamamuro, J.A. (1997). "Effects of nonplastic fines on static liquefaction of sands". Canadian
Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 34, pp. 918-928.
Vaid, Y.P. and Sivathayalan, S. (1996). "Static and cyclic liquefaction potential of Fraser Delta sand in simple
shear and triaxial tests". Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 33, pp. 281-289.

View publication stats