Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
079]
KEYWORDS:
strength
dams;
particle
crushing/crushability;
shear
BACKGROUND
The construction of large civil works involving coarsegrained materials, such as rockfill dams (Fig. 1), is increasing
worldwide (ICOLD, 2002). Traditionally, rockfill materials
have seldom been tested for shear resistance, because of the
size of the apparatus required, and the corresponding costs
and delays for testing, even for small-sized rockfill. For
example, for a 0250 mm rockfill, a representative cylindrical probe for a triaxial test should measure about 1.5 m in
diameter by 3 m high, and weigh more than 10 t. However,
the trend towards larger works, such as higher rockfill dams
with steeper slopes, should be associated with improved
knowledge of these materials for stability assessment, and
particularly knowledge of their shear resistance. Significant
incidents have recently marked the commissioning of various
large rockfill dams (CBDB-ICOLD, 2007), attributed to
excessive unforeseen deformations required to mobilise the
resisting forces necessary for static equilibrium, under normal service conditions.
Concern is rising within the profession to return to more
rational approaches in their design, and particularly engineering approaches through structural analysis and relevant
material testing, as should be done for any large civil
engineering structure. This concern also underlines a growing need for progress in the knowledge and rational mastery
of the behaviour of rockfill and large embankment works,
and is shared by other sectors of construction, such as large
Fig. 1. Typical rockfills used in dam construction
Manuscript received 5 August 2010; revised manuscript accepted 13
April 2011.
Discussion on this paper is welcomed by the editor.
Coyne et Bellier Consulting Engineers, Gennevilliers, France.
Research Institute in Civil and Mechanical Engineering, Ecole
Centrale de Nantes, University of Nantes, France.
Coarse grained
Medium grained
Fine grained
Material
Dmax : mm (inches)
152 (6)
51 (2)
12
Height:
mm
915 (36)
305 (12)
71 (2.8)
2286
762
178
Table 1. Key features of large triaxial apparatus of Marsal and Marachi et al.
Sample features
References
Marsal (1967, 1972)
Marachi et al. (1969, 1972)
Diameter: mm
Height: mm
Axial load: kN
1130
915
2500
2286
180
152
2.5
5
15 000
18 000
Bearing failure
at contact point
Force, f : kN
0
Fixed platen
Platen displacement
50
20
10
5
2
1
Oolitic limestone
Leighton Buzzard sand
Carboniferous limestone
05
02
5
10
20 30
Average particle size: mm
50
100
Large specimen
Small specimen
Small cracks
Large
cracks
F
(a)
(b)
Fig. 4. Schematisation of origin of size effect: (a) close-up of freshly cut rock surface, showing flaws, cracks and pore
cavities; (b) within a given mineral matrix, the large specimen will tend statistically to include larger flaws or cracks
affecting its crushing resistance than the smaller specimen
001
100
50
0005
001
16
3
4
in
dia
.
60
in
1 2 in
sp
ec
im
en
s
sp
ec
im
en
s
80
12
28
Percent finer
3
8
3 in
6 in
12 in
24 in
sp
ec
im
en
s
gra
da
t io
n
0005
30
Fie
ld
50
dia
.
100
36
200
dia
.
100
40
20
005
01
05
Particle size: in
(a)
10
10
6 in
12 in
10
en
s
1 2 in
im
im
ec
ec
sp
sp
3 in
24 in
36
12
ia.
ia.
ia.
d
28
Percent finer
60
in
en
s
80
3
4
in
im
ec
16
sp
30
en
s
100
200
40
20
005
01
05
Particle size: in
(b)
10
50
30
16
3
8
in
3
4
in
1 2 in
3 in
6 in
sp
ec
im
en
100
200
36
d
pe
cim
eld
an
dia
.s
Fi
12
40
ia.
en
s
en
s
pe
cim
dia
.s
60
2
8
Percent finer
80
20
0005
001
005
01
Particle size: in
(c)
05
10
Fig. 5. Rockfill grain size distributions for different specimen diameters of three materials
tested by Marachi et al. (1969): (a) Pyramid Dam material; (b) crushed basalt; (c) Oroville
Dam material (1 in 25.4 mm)
Hicher (1997), Daouadji et al. (2001), Deluzarche & Cambou (2006) and Lade & Bopp (2005) also studied the breakage of particles in granular media, which was found to be a
source of size effects in crushable granular materials.
54
54
50
50
46
46
42
42
38
38
Specimen dia.: in
36
12
28
50
46
42
e0 045
38
e0 074
34
34
0
25
50
(a)
25
Particle breakage factor, B: %
(b)
50
34
10
20
(c)
Fig. 6. Internal friction angle against grain breakage factor for different specimen sizes of three materials tested by Marachi et
al. (1969): (a) Pyramid Dam material; (b) crushed basalt; (c) Oroville Dam material (1 in 25.4 mm)
10
20
10
m5
10
08
Ps(V0)
06
18
04
02
0
04
1
10
Average grain size, d: mm
(1)
06
08
Stress
10
0
12
14
3
3
or m
m
2
1 X
f
l n= p
V n, p< N n= p
ij
(4)
(6a)
or
(3)
Given that the mean stress inside the grain is proportional to the applied force f during loading, divided by the
mean section of the grain, which itself is statistically proportional to the square of its diameter, then merging the two
approaches gives a simple means to set, for a given material,
a representative Weibull distribution. From equations (1), (2)
and (3) the following relation is derived
2
1 X
f i n= p l j n= p
V n, p< N
(6b)
B
fn/p
ln/p
p
A
Passing: %
Material A
Material B
Particle size
DA
DB
DB
l B n= p l A n= p
DA
3
DB
VB VA
DA
(7)
1 X
f
l A n= p
VA n, p< N A n= p
(9b)
A
DA
Equation (10) sets the relation between the macroscopic
stress state tensors to be applied to granular media A and B
in order to obtain the same probability of grain breakage
during mechanical loading, and thus statistically the same
amount of grain breakage during motion. This relation is
called the size effect relation for macroscopic stresses
regarding grain breakage (in geometrically similar granular
media).
DB
DA
d B p d A p
lA
a
teri
Ma
(A)
/m
rial B
Mate
x(D
)
/D A
B
(B)
nB
nA
n
100
POLS
(11)
40
0
01
1
Particle size: mm
(a)
400
300
1
3
(14)
: kPa
(13)
60
20
MOLS
80
Percentage passing: %
200
2
100
250
500
750
1000
1250
: kPa
(b)
1 Experimental shear strength envelope for MOLS material
2 Experimental shear strength envelope for POLS material
3 Shear strength for POLS material extrapolated from MOLS
material by using size effect rule
Fig. 12. (a) Parallel gradations for materials MOLS and POLS;
(b) comparison of experimental and predicted shear strength
envelopes (redrawn from data presented by Lee, 1992)
1 65
f 4:51d
(16)
(17)
(18)
3
3:75
2
(19)
A n 1:30 n0 91
100
Specimen diameter
Gradation 1: 113 cm
Gradation 2: 20 cm
60
Gradation 2
20
Gradation 1
10
Particle size: mm
(a)
100
1:10 0n 91
The comparison between the shear strength envelope
obtained from the experimental results and the computed
one (equation (21)) is shown in Fig. 13(b), and displays
quite a good fit.
Analysis of results from Marachi et al. (1969)
As described earlier, three different sets of similar granular materials were investigated, first prepared with parallel
gradations, as displayed in Fig. 5, and subsequently tested in
triaxial apparatuses with the same initial compactness within
each set.
The three source materials were
No statistical data on crushing tests of particles are available, so no direct determination of the Weibull parameter m
is possible. However, measurements of the global breakage
factor B% by systematic comparison of gradations measured
before and after testing allows the Weibull parameters to be
evaluated for each set of materials. Indeed, the size effect
relation first sets a correspondence between the stress states
associated with the same grain breakage amount within
similar materials. Thus, for similar materials A and B, the
data for breakage factor B% against confining stress should
correspond with the same similarity as the failure envelopes.
So the parameters m can be fitted by adjusting the similarity
factors on the breakage factor data, and then applying them
to the correspondence between the shear strength envelopes.
The results of this fit on breakage factor data are displayed in Fig. 14(a), with m values of 8.3, 9 and 7 for the
three materials. The application of these adjusted similarity
ratios to the internal friction data (Fig. 14(b)) is particularly
good: the predicted shear strength envelopes for rockfill
(Dmax 150 mm), reconstituted from shear strength envelopes measured on gravel (Dmax 12 mm), correspond well
with the experimental data.
40
0
01
Silicified conglomerate
from EI Infiernillo Dam
80
Percentage passing: %
(20)
2
Gradation 2 (test results)
0
0
2
3
Normal stress, n: MPa
(b)
10
55
60
45
40
20
Specimen dia.: in
360
120
28
Specimen dia.: in
360
120
28
40
40
Crushed basalt
20
35
55
Crushed basalt
45
35
55
Oroville Dam material
0
20
45
200
400
600
800
200
400
600
800
Fig. 14. For the three materials tested by Marachi et al. (1969): (a) adjusting size effect factors on grain breakage data against
confining pressure; (b) application of size effect factors on internal friction data against confining pressure (1 in 25.4 mm;
1 lbf/in2 6.89 kPa)
20
15
A
C
B1
10
9
8
7
6
5
A Sandstone
B1 Slate
B2 Slate
C Basalt
Marachi
et al. (1972)
Marsal (1972)
B2
2
10
30
100
300
1000
3000
10 000
11
15
A
10
9
8
7
6
5
150 mm
38 mm
B1
B2
B2
2
10
30
100
300
1000
3000
10 000
12
A bn
G(D)
G(D0)
D0
n
(b)
D
(a)
H0
H
G(D0)
G(D)
0
Reference prototype
Extrapolated project
(c)
Fig. 16. Combined impacts of size effects and other key parameters on rockfill embankment safety factors: (a) granulometry; (b) shear
strength; (c) size H and slope of the works
NOTATION
A, b material parameters in De Mello failure criterion
DA , DB characteristic lengths or sizes for granular materials A and
B respectively (e.g. maximum grain size Dmax , mean grain
size D50 , or other given length)
d average diameter of a set of particles
f average crushing resistance (force) measured on a set of
particles
f ( n= p) contact force (vector) exerted by particle n on particle p
fA , dA fixed crushing force exerted on a set of particles of given
diameter
f f A g set of contact forces (vectors) within granular material A
l( n= p) branch vector joining centres of particles in contact, from
particle n towards particle p
m material parameter in Weibull statistical distribution
Ps probability of survival
V volume
, experimental material parameters in Marsal crushing
strength formula
stress
, ij macroscopic stress tensor and its components
A , nA shear stress and normal stress at failure in granular
material A
REFERENCES
Barton, N. & Kjaernsli, B. (1981). Shear strength of rockfills.
J. Geotech. Engng ASCE 107, No. 7, 873891.
13