4.5 Article

Characterization of Seasonally Frozen Soils for Seismic Design of Foundations

Publisher

ASCE-AMER SOC CIVIL ENGINEERS
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001065

Keywords

Foundations; Seismic design; Soil properties; Soil-structure interaction; Cold temperature effects

Funding

  1. Alaska University Transportation Center (AUTC)
  2. Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (ADOTPF)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

An experimental investigation was performed on five widespread soil types common in the United States to characterize the effects of freezing temperatures on the unconfined compressive strength (q(u)), the modulus of elasticity (E), and strain at the unconfined compressive strength (epsilon(qu)). Soil specimens were subjected to monotonic and cyclic loading with varying strain rates at temperatures ranging from 20 to -23 degrees C (68 to -9: 4 degrees F). When compared with test results at 20 degrees C (68 degrees F), testing at-20 degrees C (24 degrees F) showed an increase in qu by a factor of 100, an average increase in E by a factor of 300, and an average decrease in epsilon q(u) by 5% strain. Increase in the soil compaction, moisture content, and applied strain rate amplified the cold temperature effects on qu. Additional testing at -20 degrees C (24 degrees F) resulted in an increase in epsilon q(u) with no change in E when the applied strain rate was increased. Cyclic experimentation produced data trends comparable to the monotonic experimentation for the mechanical properties but allowed residual deformation as a function of cold temperature to be identified. To assist with current seismic design practice, experimental trends were incorporated into a p-y curve development and the impact of observed soil response as a function of temperature is demonstrated using a series of pushover analyses on a column continued into the subsurface as a drilled shaft foundation. (C) 2014 American Society of Civil Engineers.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available