Abstract
This paper discusses the results of an experimental programme designed to investigate the deviatoric behaviour of peats. The results are obtained from triaxial experiments carried out on reconstituted peat samples. The interpretation of the experimental results follows a hierarchical approach in an attempt to derive the ingredients that an elastic–plastic model for peats should contain, including the yield locus, the hardening mechanism and the flow rule. The results obtained from stress tests along different loading directions show that purely volumetric hardening is not adequate to describe the deviatoric response of peat and that a deviatoric strain-dependent component should be included. The plastic deformation mechanism also depends on the previous stress history experienced by the sample. Stress and strain path dependence of the interaction mechanisms between the peat matrix and the fibres is discussed as a possible physical reason for the observed behaviour. This work offers a relevant set of data and information to guide the rational development and the calibration of constitutive laws able to model the deviatoric behaviour of peats.
Highlights
Introduction and motivationDesign and assessment procedures of geotechnical infrastructure increasingly rely on constitutive models capable of describing the crucial aspects of soil behaviour
The deviatoric behaviour of peats is challenging, due to contradictory results and knowledge gaps remaining in the interpretation and the modelling of field and laboratory tests
The compression indexes agree with previous research on fibrous peat where a ratio j=k = 0.1–0.3 is often reported [48, 33]
Summary
Introduction and motivationDesign and assessment procedures of geotechnical infrastructure increasingly rely on constitutive models capable of describing the crucial aspects of soil behaviour. The deviatoric behaviour of peats is challenging, due to contradictory results and knowledge gaps remaining in the interpretation and the modelling of field and laboratory tests. Most of the contributions in the literature tackle the simulation of experimental data from laboratory tests or field tests by introducing minor changes in well-known constitutive models originally developed for other soils. It is worth mentioning the first contribution due to Yamaguchi et al [48], who coupled a Modified Cam clay model [42] with an experimentally based stress–dilatancy relationship. Starting from the model by Mas ́ın [31], the authors introduced an experimentally based boundary surface and the corresponding asymptotic strain rate directions
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
