Evaluation of cyclic resistance of providence silts using mini-cone penetration and standard penetration tests.

Details

• Creators:
  Baxter, Christopher D. P.
• Corporate Creators:
  University of Rhode Island
• Corporate Contributors:
  Rhode Island. Dept. of Transportation. Office of Civil Rights
• Subject/TRT Terms:
  • Cone penetrometers
  • Liquefaction
  • Soil penetration test
  • Silts
  • Soil tests
  • Soil penetration test
  • Soil liquefaction--Rhode Island
  • Silt--Rhode Island--Testing
  • Soils--Testing--Rhode Island--Soils--Testing
• Publication/ Report Number:
  FHWA-RIDOT-RTD-10-1
• Resource Type:
  Tech Report
• Geographical Coverage:
  Rhode Island
• Edition:
  Final.
• Corporate Publisher:
  Rhode Island. Dept. of Transportation
• Abstract:
  Most areas of coastal Rhode Island are underlain by thick layers of non-plastic silt and it is important to ; know if the existing standard-of-practice liquefaction potential evaluations (e.g. Robertson and Wride (1998) or ; Seed et al. (1985)) are accurate. The objective of this research was to critically evaluate the applicability of CPT ; and SPT based approaches to Providence silts. This was accomplished through a laboratory testing program ; involving the URI mini-cone calibration chamber and cyclic triaxial tests to develop a new relationship between ; cyclic resistance ratio and tip resistance for Providence silt. The new relationship was compared to the standard-ofpractice ; liquefaction potential evaluation methods from the literature. There was good agreement between the ; approaches which shows that the existing field-based CPT methods are applicable to Rhode Island silts. This is ; consistent with previous RIDOT funded research on the liquefaction potential evaluation of silts in Rhode Island ; (Bradshaw et al. 2007; 2007a; Baxter et al. 2008). ; An attempt was also made to evaluate SPT-based approaches in silt using the mini-cone and laboratory ; cyclic data. A qc/N60 correlation was evaluated from two loose silt sites in Rhode Island where SPT and CPTs ; were performed adjacent to each other. The agreement between blow counts and tip resistance was very poor, most ; likely due to the small number of tests and small range of in situ densities. Because of the poor agreement, it was ; not possible to directly evaluate the SPT-based liquefaction evaluation approaches in the study.
  More +
• Format:
  PDF
• Funding:
  SPR-229-2292
• Download URL:
  https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/23895/dot_23895_DS1.pdf
• File Type:
  [PDF - 3.73 MB]
• Collection(s):
  US Transportation Collection
• Main Document Checksum:
  urn:sha-512:894657c5a3ffbd03849b534350290da373ce1aab47c2f368009f1ee0f26811490e640996ded398c6ae2df3f3b26b1945cc0141b4fdccf0816b596672e6db4b4a