r

C-/

M ISCELLANEOUS PAPER S-76-9

CENTRIFUGE MODEL TESTING OF SOILS:

A LITERATURE REVIEW
by

Mosaid M. A l-H ussaini

Soils and Pavements Laboratory

U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station
P. O. Box 631, Vicksburg, Miss. 39180

June 1976
Final Report

Approved For Public Release; Distribution Unlimited

Prepared for In-House Laboratory Independent Research Program,

TA
Assistant Secretary of the Army (R£ hD)
7
.W34m Washington, D. C. 2 0 3 I0
S-76-9
1976 Under Project 4 A 0 6 II0 IA 9 ID
 f

library

0EC2O76
D«nv«r„ O atoaA ii

M ,

Destroy this report when no longer needed. Do not return

it to the originator.

Ai

L
 BUREAU OF RECLAMATION DENVER LIBRARY
^ v f > 92051296
\Q
\r. / c\ □ 5*2
I Cq \
Unclassified
READ INSTRUCTIONS
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE BEFORE COMPLETING FORM
L ^ R E P O R T NUM BER 2. G O V T A C C E S S IO N NO . 3. R E C IP IE N T ’ S C A T A L O G N U M B E R

Miscellaneous ^aper S-76-9

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. T I T L E (a n d S u b title ) / 5. T Y P E O F R E P O R T A P E R IO D C O V E R E D

i CENTRIFUGE MODEL TESTING OF SOILS: A LITERATURE^ ^Final report

REVIEW ............. ................................................ — — -—
6. P E R F O R M IN G O R G . R E P O R T N U M B E R

7. A U T H O R fa ) 8. C O N T R A C T O R G R A N T N U M B E R fa )

Mo said M. Al-Hussaini

9. P E R F O R M IN G O R G A N IZ A T IO N N A M E A N D A D D R E S S 10. P R O G R A M E L E M E N T , P R O J E C T , TA S K
A R E A ft WORK U N IT N U M B E R S
^U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station
Soils and Pavements Laboratory Project 1+A061101A91D
P. 0. Box 631, Vicksburg, Miss. 39180
11. C O N T R O L L IN G O F F IC E N A M E A N D A D D R E S S ISf. REPORT D A TE

In-House Laboratory Independent Research Program, /June 1976/

Assistant Secretary of the Army (R&D) 13. NUM BER O F PAGES

Washington, D. C. 20310 38
14. M O N IT O R IN G A G E N C Y N A M E & A D D R E S S ^ / d iffe re n t from C o n tro llin g O ffic e ) 15. S E C U R IT Y C LA S S , (o f th is report)

Unclassified
15a. D E C L A S S I FI C A T IO N /D O W N G R A D IN G
SCHEDULE

16. D IS T R IB U T IO N S T A T E M E N T ( o f th ie R e p o rt)

Approved for public release; distribution -unlimited.

17. D IS T R IB U T IO N S T A T E M E N T ( o f the a b s tra c t en tered in B lo c k 20, I f d iffe re n t from R eport)

18. S U P P LE M E N TA R Y NOTES

19 . K E Y WORDS (C o n tin u e on re verse sid e i f n ec e s s a ry and id e n tify by b lo ck num ber)

Centrifuges
Models
Soil mechanics

2QV A B S T R A C T (C o n tin u e am re v e rs e sidle f t naseeaeary and. id e n tify by b lo c k num ber)

Centrifugal model testing, pioneered by the U. S. Bureau of Mines,

developed in the USSR, and advanced in both England and Japan, has been used
to provide a realistic approach for solving complex soil mechanics problems.
The basic concept of this testing technique is to create a scale model similar
in every respect to a prototype and to subject the model to an acceleration
such that the increase in self-weight stresses is equivalent to those at

FO R M
DD t JAN 73 1473 E D IT IO N O F f N O V 6 5 IS O B S O L E T E
Unclassified
S E C U R IT Y C L A S S IF IC A T IO N O F T H IS P A G E (IWren D a ta E n tered )
 __________ Unclassified___________ ,
S E C U R IT Y C LA SSIFIC A TIO N O F TH IS PA G E Q W ifi D ata Entered)

20. ABSTRACT (Continued)

corresponding points in the prototype- With this method, the investigator

can observe, in a short period of time, a sequence of events that is anal­
ogous to that occurring in the prototype over a long period of time.
Published work concerning the theoretical and practical application
of the centrifugal model testing was reviewed and documented. Various
devices and techniques used in centrifuge model testing were studied. The
feasibility of a centrifugal testing facility at the U. S. Army Engineer
Waterways Experiment Station (WES) was examined. Major advantages and
limitations of the modelling technique were also discussed in this study.
Based on the review of literature and the large number of centrifugal
testing facilities being used around the world, soil modelling using the
centrifuge is technically attractive and appears to have great potential
for solving geotechnical problems that cannot be solved adequately by con­
ventional means. WES offers an ideal environment for the establishment of
such a facility.

Unclassified
S E C U R IT Y C L A S S IF IC A T IO N O F T H IS P A G E fW h e n D a ta E n te re d )
 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WATERWAYS EXPERIMENT STATION. CORPS OF ENGINEERS

P. O. BOX 631
VICKSBURG. MISSISSIPPI 39180

IN R E P L Y R E F E R T O : WESAR 21 July 1976

Errata Sheet

No. 1

CENTRIFUGE MODEL TESTING OF SOILS:

A LITERATURE REVIEW

Miscellaneous Paper No. S-76-9

June 197 6

v l. Page 20, line one should read:

...has a U.3-m radius...

Page 2 k , line eight should read:

...has been modified in France for geotechnical use,..

Page 2k 9 line nine should read:

....was constructed in Denmark.
P
 PREFACE

The investigation reported herein was funded by Department of the

Army Project kA06ll01A91D, "In-House Laboratory Independent Research
Program" (ILIR), sponsored by the Assistant Secretary of the Army (R&D).
The study was conducted during the period September 197^ through
December 1975 at the U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station
(WES) by Dr. M. M. Al-Hussaini of the Soils and Pavements Laboratory
(S&PL), WES, under the general direction of Mr. C. L. McAnear, Chief,
Soil Mechanics Division, and Mr. J. P. Sale, Chief, S&PL.
Director of WES during this study and the preparation of this
report was COL G. H. Hilt, CE. Technical Director was Mr. F. R. Brown.

1
 CONTENTS
Page
P R E F A C E ................................ 1
CONVERSION FACTORS, U. S. CUSTOMARY TO METRIC (Si)
UNITS OF M E A S U R E M E N T .......................................... 3
PART I : INTRODUCTION................ 1+
B a c k g r o u n d ................................................ 1*
Purpose of the Study ....................................... 5
PART II: THEORETICAL CONSIDERATION OF CENTRIFUGAL MODEL
TESTING ................................................ 6
Components of Rotational Acceleration in Plane ............ 6
Acceleration Field .......................... 7
Fundamental Principles of Centrifugal Modelling ............ 8
PART III: CENTRIFUGE MODEL TESTING ............................ 10
Centrifuge Model Testing in the U. S .......................... 10
Centrifuge Model Testing in E n g l a n d .......................... ll*
Centrifuge Model Testing in the U S S R ........................ 20
Centrifuge Model Testing in Japan . ........................... 21
Centrifuge Model Testing in Europe ........................ 2k
Concluding Remarks ........ 2k
PART IV: ADVANTAGES AND LIMITATIONS OF CENTRIFUGAL
MODEL T E S T I N G ............................................ 26
Advantages of Centrifuge Model Testing .................... 26
Limitations of Centrifugal Model Testing .................. 26
PART V: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.......................... 32
Conclusions.................................................. 32
Recomendations ............................................ 32
R E F E R E N C E S ........................................................ 33
TABLE 1
APPENDIX A: CONDITIONS OF SIMILARITY IN SOIL MECHANICS .......... A1
APPENDIX B: NOTATION ............................................ B1

2
 CONVERSION FACTORS, U. S. CUSTOMARY TO METRIC (Si)
UNITS OF MEASUREMENT

U. S. customary units of measurement used in this report can be con­

verted to metric (SI) units as follows:

________Multiply_______ ____ By __________To Obtain_____ _

inches 25 .k millimetres
feet 0 .30U8 metres
pounds (mass) 0.U535924 kilograms
Fahrenheit degrees 5/9 Celsius degrees or Kelvins*
tons (2000 lb, mass) 907.18 U7 kilograms
degrees (angle) 0.017^5329 radians
inches of mercury (60°F) 3376.85 pascals
horsepower (electric) 7 U6 watts

* To obtain Celsius (C) temperature readings from Fahrenheit (F) read­

ings, use the following formula: C = (5/9)(F - 32). To obtain Kel­
vin (K) readings, use: K = (5/9)(F - 32) + 273 .1 5 .

3
 CENTRIFUGE MODEL TESTING OF SOILS: A LITERATURE REVIEW

PART I: INTRODUCTION

Background

1. The use of theoretical models is a well-known technique in

soil mechanics and foundation engineering. In general, model tests have
involved the behavior of idealized materials with well-known properties
so that the model is treated as a structure in its own right, rather
than as a scaled version of a particular full-size soil structure. Such
models permit qualitative as well as quantitative examination of soil
behavior and also allow investigation of the performance of the particu­
lar form of structure which may reveal any peculiar behavior applicable
to full-scale structures.
2. The bulk of soil model testing may be divided into two cate­
gories. The first model test category includes those in which the soil
mass is subjected to boundary forces much higher than gravity-induced
self-weight forces. Retaining walls, footings, and piles are examples
of this category. In this type of problem, the self weights are quite
small and have little influence on the stresses and displacements in
the soil mass. The second category includes model tests in which the
boundary forces are negligible in comparison with self-weight forces.
A typical example of this category is the problem of slope stability of
earth masses under static and dynamic forces. If such problems are in­
vestigated by small-scale models, the self weight must be increased by
artificial means to a level that will generate realistic stresses and
displacements. This is difficult and has restrained model testing for
such problems. Probably the simplest method of increasing the self
weight of the soil mass is to increase its acceleration over that of
gravity, which can be accomplished by the centrifuge.
3. There are a number of complex engineering problems that are
not amenable to exact mathematical solution. These types of problems

k
are well known in hydraulics, aerodynamics, and structures; in these
fields, modelling is an essential technique for predicting the behavior
of a full-scale prototype. However, very few models can be made to
exactly represent the prototype; consequently, the deviation between the
model and its prototype must be considered in the interpretation of
model test results.

Purpose of the Study

it. The purpose of this study was twofold: first, literature

concerning the theoretical and practical application of centrifugal
model testing in geotechnical problems was reviewed and documented;
secondly, various devices and techniques used in centrifugal model test­
ing were examined with emphasis on their advantages and limitations.
The ultimate objective was to determine whether a need exists for de­
velopment of a centrifugal testing facility at the U. S. Army Engineer
Waterways Experiment Station (WES) and if construction of a suitable
facility is feasible.

5
 PART II: THEORETICAL CONSIDERATION OF CENTRIFUGAL
MODEL TESTING

5. In the centrifuge, the applied forces are similar in many

respects to gravitational forces and hoth are related to the curvature
of space-time geometry. However, the acceleration field is radial in
the centrifuge, while, in a prototype environment, it is practically
parallel to the earth's gravitational, field.

Components of Rotational Acceleration in Plane

6. Consider point A with radius r* and angular displacement

0 rotating around the center 0 as shown in Figure 1. The cartesian

Figure 1. Components of acceleration

of point rotating in plane

coordinates x and y of point A in terms of r and 0 are

x = r cos 0 (1)
and
y = r sin 0 (2)

* For convenience, all unusual symbols used in this report are listed
and defined in the Notation (Appendix B).

6
The velocity of point A in the x and y directions can he obtained
by differentiating Equations 1 and 2 with respect to time t ; thus,

x = f cos 9 - r0 sin 0 (3)

y = f sin 0 + r0 cos 0 (h)

where the dot represents differentiation with respect to time. Multi­

plying Equations 3 and 4 by cos 0 and sin 0 or by sin 0 and
cos 0 , respectively, and after rearranging terms, expressions for
the radial and tangential velocities can be obtained as

f = y sin 0 + x cos 0 (5)

2r0 = y cos 0 - x sin 0 (6)

The acceleration of point A in the x and y directions can be ob-

tained by differentiating Equations 3 and U with respect to time; thus,

.... • *2
x = r cos 0 - 2r0 sin 0 - r0 - r0 cos 0 (7)

.... • .. *p
y = r sin 0 + 2r0 cos 0 + r0 cos 0 - r0 sin 0 (8)

If X and y are resolved in the radial and tangential directions, the

radial and tangential accelerations become, respectively:

.. .. ^
y sin 0 + x cos 0 = r - r0 (9)

•• *• • ••
y cos 0 - x sin 0 = 2r0 + r0 (10)

Acceleration Field

7. If point A is replaced by a mass of soil representing a

model, then each soil particle, depending on its location from the center

7
of rotation, will experience both radial and tangential accelerations
that can be calculated by Equations 9 and 10, respectively. Conse­
quently, the centrifugal acceleration within a three-dimensional object
is variable. The transient radial acceleration r and tangential ac­
celeration r6 have a significant value only when there is a sudden
change in rotational velocity. However, for steady rotation, both 0
and r are equal to zero. The term 2r0 (Corioli's acceleration) is
the result of a change in the frame of reference during rotation. The
magnitude of the Corioli's acceleration is dependent on the value of
r , which represents the relative movement of individual particles with
respect to the total mass. If the Corioli's acceleration 2r0 is very
•o
small compared with the radial acceleration r0 , there will be no
distortion of motion of particles travelling in the plane of rotation.
However, if the initial speed of travel of particles is much greater
than the velocity of the model itself, as in the case of explosion or
projectile penetration, then the Corioli's acceleration will not affect
the events that may occur within the model. From the practical point of
view, the only acceleration requiring consideration in increasing the
self weight of particles in steady rotation is the radial acceleration
t ^

Fundamental Principles of Centrifugal Modelling

8. The idea of soil modelling using the centrifuge is simple and

basically deduced from accepted standards of soil mechanics calculations.
For example, in determining the magnitude of vertical stress at a
certain point, the depth of overburden at that point is multiplied by
the self weight of the soil. Also, when it is required to determine
the.time for a significant stage of primary consolidation using con­
solidation test data, the accepted procedure is to assume that the ratio
of the elapsed time to the square of thickness of the consolidated layer
is the same in the soil specimen (model) as in the field (prototype).
Based on these accepted standard principles, two laws of mechanical
similarity between the centrifuge model and its prototype emerge.

8
These two laws of similarity may be stated as follows:
If soils with identical friction, cohesion, and density are
formed into two geometrically similar bodies, one a proto­
type of full scale and one a model of l/N scale, and if
the l/N scale model is accelerated so that the self
weight increases by N times, the stresses at correspond­
ing points are then similar if they are similar on the
boundaries.
b. Once the excess pore water pressure distribution has been
made to correspond in model and prototype, all subsequent
primary flow processes of pore water are correctly modelled
after time tm in the model that is less than time tp in
the prototype in the ratio of the square of the scale
factor N , i.e., t / t = l/N^ .

9. These modelling laws are valid for a variety of soil mechanics

and foundation problems. The derivation and the principles of similarity
invoked to justify the centrifugal modelling technique are presented in
Appendix A.

9
 PART III: CENTRIFUGE MODEL TESTING

10. Fundamentally, a centrifuge is used in soil mechanics problems

because it offers the only satisfactory means whereby a small-scale
model can be subjected to self-weight stress levels comparable to
those existing in a full-scale soil structure. This fact was recognized
as early as 1936 when Pokrovsky and Fedorov"*" summarized the work of four
laboratories in the Soviet Union where centrifuges were used. While
giving the minimum possible information about their work, they stated
that problems under investigation were (a) the stability of slopes,
(b) pressure distribution beneath foundations, (c) pressure distribution
around buried pipes, and (d) settlement of foundations. The paper by
Pokrovsky and Fedorov marked the beginning of soil modelling using the
centrifugal technique.

Centrifuge Model Testing in the U. S.

11. The principle of centrifugal modelling was first adopted in

2
the United States in 1931 by Bucky to study the failure of mining struc­
tures. He tested model beams made of various materials by increasing
their self weight while rotating at increasing speeds in the centrifuge.
Bucky concluded that:
If in the model the pull of gravity on each part
can be increased in the same proportion as the
linear scale is decreased, then the unit stress
at similar points in the model and prototype will
be the same, and the displacement or deflection
of any point in the model will represent to
scale the displacement of the corresponding point
in the prototype.2
3
12. In a later study, Bucky and his coworkers showed, by com­
bining centrifuge modelling with the photoelastic method of stress
analysis, that the principle of similarity between the model and pro­
totype exists within and beyond the elastic range of the material.
Their centrifugal testing apparatus and photoelastic equipment are
shown in Figure 2. The centrifuge consisted of a rotating box mounted
inside a cylindrical case. The box contained a bakelite beam model

10
 Figure 2. Combined centrifugal and photoelastic
equipment used by Bucky et al. (Reference 3)

0.29U in.* wide, 1.13 in. deep, and 5*5 in. long, and was rotated by a
motor, the speed of which was measured by a voltmeter. The behavior of
the model was observed through a port in the cylindrical case where a
mirror or camera could be placed. A photoelastic record was made by*
subjecting the model to stroboscopic mercury light of short duration at
the moment when the model was positioned between the stroboscope and the
camera. The use of the centrifugal modelling technique reduces the
number of the unsolvable problems in geotechnical engineering.
13. Since 19359 no centrifuge model testing was reported in the
1|
literature until 1952 when Panek introduced a major improvement of
Bucky*s basic centrifuge by incorporating the use of strain gages to
determine the strain field in the rotating model. This new centrifuge
was designed to test a 90-lb model at rotational speeds up to 2000 rpm.
The centrifuge designed by Panek (Figure 3) consisted of a rotor, model
holder and balancing counterweight, housing tank, and accessory equip­
ments. The rotor consisted of an aluminum alloy box k in. wide, 28 in.
deep, and k ft long, mounted at the middle on a l+-in.-diam steel shaft.
To one end of the rotor, a model holder which could accommodate models
of various sizes was attached, while a counterweight was connected at

* A table of factors for converting U. S. customary units of measure­

ment to metric (Si) units is presented on page 3.

11
 Figure 3. Internal view of Panek test apparatus showing
rotor and slip rings (Reference U)

the opposite end to balance the weight of the model during rotation.
The housing tank consisted of a closed, cylindrical steel container
5 ft in diameter and could he subjected to a vacuum of 26 in. of mercury
to reduce air drag and thereby minimize driving power during rotation.
The housing tank was equipped with observation ports to enable photo­
elastic measurements whenever desired. The centrifuge was driven by a
V belt connected to a 10-hp motor, the speed of which could be varied
manually from 100 to 2000 rpm.
1^. A stroboscopic light triggered by a contact device located on
the upper end of the shaft illuminated the model every time it was di­
rectly opposite the observation port. Strain was measured by strain gages
placed at different locations on the model. These strain gages were con­
nected to a portable strain indicator through slip rings and a switching
unit that scanned the gages manually. Centrifugal testing conducted on
simple models of slabs and beams made of Indiana limestone showed that

12
the measured stress distribution agreed with the theoretical distribu­
tion, and that the modelling procedure could be expanded to solve more
difficult mining problems where no available theoretical solution exists.
15- In recent study, Sharma^ developed a procedure for deter­
mining the strength properties c and 0 for cohesionless and co­
hesive soils and asphaltic mixes when subjected to varying acceleration
fields. A special centrifuge testing device was designed and con­
structed at Purdue University for this purpose. The device, shown in
Figure !+, consisted of a 4-ft-diam rotor held at the middle on a steel

shaft, with a specimen container attached at one end of the rotor and
a balancing counterweight at the other end. The specimen container
and the counterweight were pinned to the end of the rotor and hence
hung in the direction of the resultant of the gravity and centrifugal
forces. The centrifuge was driven by a 2-hp motor to maximum speeds of
300 rpm. The centrifuge was provided with two compressed-gas tanks and
a worm gear assembly to conduct triaxial compression and hollow cylinder

13
tests while the centrifuge was in flight. All signals from the model
were fed directly to a teletype computer through slip rings. Results of
the tests showed that the strength parameters c and 0 were slightly
decreased for an asphalt mix and cohesive soil as acceleration increased.
However, the cohesionless soil showed a slight initial increase in shear
strength with increasing acceleration.

Centrifuge Model Testing in England

16. The earliest geotechnical application of centrifuge modelling

in Britain was conducted by Avgherinos and Schofield at Cambridge
University to investigate the validity of the relevant modelling laws
and to model a rapid drawdown failure of a slope in kaolin. Two centri­
fuges were used in the study; the first centrifuge (MKI) was small and
used for preliminary studies, and the second (MKIl) was much larger and
was used for actual modelling of soil structures.
17* The Cambridge MKI centrifugal facility, shown in Figure 5,

a. Test facility b. Model package during test

Figure 5* Cambridge MKI centrifuge testing facility

consisted of a disc rotor, machined from 0.5-in. mild steel plate, ro­
tated in a vertical plane by a 3-hp electric motor with continuous speed
control. The model was counterbalanced with a similar dummy package,
and the whole disc rotor was placed inside a gravel-filled arch in case
any part detached while the centrifuge was in motion. The effective
radius of the ceptrifuge was 0.3 m and the maximum speed was 500 rpm,
which generated a radial acceleration up to 300 g's. The measuring system
was minimal since experiments performed on this facility were conducted
on small models about 2.5 cm high, and the investigators were only con­
cerned with developing techniques rather than generating test results.
18. The Cambridge MKII centrifugal facility (Figure 6) consisted

of a rotor of 2.7-m radius with two mild steel package boxes containing
soil models attached to the ends of the rotor. Each test package, shown
in Figure 6b, was about 70 cm long, 2b cm high, and 15 cm wide, and
acted as a counterweight to balance the other package. Each package
was equipped with three transducers which measured the developed pore
pressure during the test. The centrifuge was driven by an electric
motor that could generate rotational speeds up to 180 rpm which in turn
generated average radial accelerations in the soil model up to 100 g's.
Pore pressure was monitored either electronically by transducers and
transmitted to a readout system through slip rings or by level

15
standpipes connected to the model through hypodermic tubes which could
be recorded on photographs similar to that for the MKI centrifuge shown
in Figure 5b. A grid of reflective balls which formed a well-defined
bright point when photographed was used to determine the displacement
distribution of the model during the test. It has been pointed out by
Avgherinos and Schofield^ that knowledge of such a strain field can be
used to estimate the factor of safety of an unfailed slope.
19. The Cambridge MKII centrifuge and the associated devices were
7
later used by Endicott who continued the study of drawdown failures of
O
kaolin slopes. The same centrifuge facility was also used by Beasly
who applied the concept of centrifugal modelling to study the failure of
embankments built on soft clays. He obtained a good agreement between
the behavior of full-scale structures and corresponding models, espe­
cially for embankments built on layers of normally consolidated or
slightly overconsolidated clays. A similar study was made by Bassett^
who modelled a composite section of an embankment 5 m high resting on
soft compressible alluvial material. Comparison of the centrifuge model
and the corresponding prototype settlements indicated a close agreement
in their performance. The centrifugal model study at Cambridge Univer­
sity was conducted on a relatively thin section of soil placed between
lubricated parallel surfaces, and was directed toward detailed examina­
tion of plane-strain problems, rather than three-dimensional problems.
20. The first large centrifuge specifically designed for testing
three-dimensional soil models in England was constructed in 1969 by
Schofield"*-1"* at the University of Manchester Institute of Science and
Technology (UMIST). The centrifuge, as described by Lyndon*"^" and shown
in Figure 7, consisted of a rectangular mild-steel rotor U.3 m long,
1.2 m wide, and 1.0 m deep revolving on an upper and lower bearing around
a central axis inside a 5.2-m-diam pit 2.0 m deep. The top bearing of
the rotor is located by cruciform frame onto which steel segments were
bolted to completely cover the pit and the rotor. The driving unit
consisted of a 200-hp electric motor which pumped oil under high pres­
sures to a hydraulic motor mounted on the shaft which, in turn, drove
the rotor through flexible couplings. The speed of the rotor was

16
7 - 1/4
'-

Figure 7- General arrangement of UMIST centrifuge

servo-controlled "by a pilot motor which regulated the oil flow to the
high-pressure pump as commanded by a control unit that compared the
speed of the centrifuge with the required speed. The centrifuge was
designed with an effective radius of 1.5 m capable of rotating up to
285 rpm. The maximum acceleration of the UMIST centrifuge was 130 g !s,
and the maximum weight of soil model that can be tested at the top
speed of the centrifuge was 750 kg.
21. The UMIST centrifuge was equipped with the following instru­
mentations for gathering test data: (a) high-speed flash camera

17
triggered by a microswitch; (b) closed-circuit television camera mounted
on the rotor arm for continuous viewing of model events and connected
to a video tape recorder; (c) solid-state pressure transducers of high
sensitivity for monitoring pore pressure development in the model;
(d) linear displacement transducers with magnetic core for monitoring
surface displacements of the model; and (e) a total of 32 slip rings,
each capable of carrying 5 amps, to transmit signals from the model to
the readout system.
22. The UMIST centrifuge has been used in modelling various
practical problems as well as advancing centrifugal modelling techniques.
The bulk of the work was conducted by research students as part of their
graduate work. Alfred Lyndon‘S investigated three prototype problems:
(a) the short-term failure of an excavation in London clay; (b) the
foundation settlement of soft soil due to placement of proposed coal
stack at Immingham; and (c) the landslide at Ladalen near Oslo, Norway,
in 195b. Although it is not possible to model precisely the stress
history of these sites, Lyndon claimed that the events observed in the
tests had a strong superficial resemblance to the reported events them-
12
selves. The same centrifuge was used by English to model the sta­
bility of buried flexible pipes under static and moving loads. Charles
13
Hird modelled the Thames River estuary and studied the stability of
flood banks when they were subjected to excessive pore pressure caused
by tidal conditions. Various shapes and sizes of model slurry trenches
l4
were also investigated by Bolton and his coworkers using the UMIST
centrifugal, testing facility.
23. While small-scale models subjected to high gravitational
field are suitable for basic research on uniform soil, representation
of realistic prototype behavior requires a large model. This principle
has been advocated by Rowe1^ who built, in the Simon Engineering Labora­
tory (SEL) at the University of Manchester, a centrifuge machine which
can accept a 2-ton soil model 1 m wide, 2 m long, and 0.6 m high with
maximum variation in the radial acceleration between the top and
bottom of the model +10 percent. The centrifuge (Figure 8) had an ef­
fective rotor arm radius of 3.2 m; the rotor arm is driven through

18
 Figure 8. Model assembly on SEL centrifuge arm

reducing gears by an electric motor to top speeds of 170 rpm. This top
speed can generate an average radial acceleration of 200 g's with
maximum variation of +10 percent at the top and bottom of the model.
The SEL centrifuge possesses essentially the same accessories as the
UMIST centrifuge, and has been used to model such practical problems
as reservoirs, flood relief channels, sheet pile walls, anchorage
methods, diaphragm walls, and earth pressures within a cellular mono­
lith. This centrifuge facility has also been used to study the be­
havior of oil drilling platforms in the North Sea.
2k. Smith and Hobbs used the SEL centrifuge facility in con­
junction with the finite element method to model and predict the be­
havior of two dams. Because of size limitations, only a portion of
each dam was subjected to centrifugal testing, a procedure which they
claim does not greatly influence the result.
25. Another centrifugal testing machine has just been con­
structed at Cambridge University. This centrifuge, as mentioned by

19
 */. 3 h ' l
Bassett,* has a JrQ-m radius which makes it the largest centrifuge facil­
ity in the United Kingdom to test larger models at relatively lower
acceleration.

Centrifuge Model Testing in the USSR

26 . After the previously mentioned paper by Pokrovsky and

Fedorov 1 in 1936, very little of the Soviet work in the area of centrif­
ugal modelling was published. Since the signing of the Test Ban Treaty
in 1965, more of the Soviet geotechnical work has become available
through publication in International Symposia and Conferences.
27. In 1961, Goldstein et al. presented a theoretical method
for determining the rate of mining subsidence resulting from material
creep and other effects. They indicated the use of the centrifugal
modelling technique to verify their theory. With the exception of a
sketch of the centrifugal facility (Figure 9), they did not provide any

-MM------------ f---------------- ««<

Figure 9* Centrifugal apparatus for

large-scale model investigations

technical data regarding the facility used. The same centrifuge machine
l8
was used by Goldstein et al. to study the stability of rock slopes.
Their model consisted of an equivalent material made of plaster of paris
mixed with sand at different ratios to simulate the strength and the
fracture pattern of the field material. Goldstein, Misumsky, and

* Bassett, R. H . , personal communication to Al-Hussaini, M . , 1975.

20
Lapidus claimed that the similarity between the model and prototype
is consistent with the theoretical formulations; however, no technical
data with regard to their laboratory experiments were given. In a
19
later study, Ter-Stepanian and Goldstein used the same centrifugal
machine to model the progressive failure of landslides and slopes of
soft clays.
28. In 1973 at the Moscow International Conference on Soil
20
Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Polshin et al. presented a sum­
mary of their extensive use of a centrifuge to study the deformation and
settlement of sand, clay, and peat used for railway embankments and
other construction. In the same investigation, they used the centrif­
ugal technique to study the bearing capacity for models of shallow
and deep footings and compared the results with field performance. The
centrifugal machine used in their study (Figure 10) had a 2-m radius
and was driven by an electric motor to maximum acceleration of 100 g fs.
The machine was equipped with a swinging container capable of testing a
UOfCm cubical specimen of soil (see Figures 10 and 11), displacement
transducers for deformation measurement, and a television camera.
Polshin et al. stated that, at present in the Soviet Union, there are
a few dozen operating centrifugal test machines employed to simulate
engineering problems such as the determination of deformation and stabil­
ity of bases (foundation soils), fills, retaining walls, underground
21
openings and workings, dams, etc. The Soviet engineers also used cen­
trifuge modelling to investigate cracking in rockfill dams.

Centrifuge Model Testing in Japan

29. At the time when the British researchers were developing

their centrifugal testing capabilities, there were similar developments
22
in Japan as early as 1965- In 19&9* Mikasa, Takada, and Yamada ex­
amined the stability of the Kisen-Yama rockfill dam using the centrif­
ugal modelling technique. The centrifugal machine consisted of two
parallel arms, 1.0-m radius, that were rotated in the horizontal plane
by an electric motor capable of accelerating the soil model to 280 g ’s.

21
 W ir ^ N O T E: D IM E N S IO N S IN CM

Figure 10, Scheme of a Centrifugal Machine: 1-Carriage;

2-Electrical engine, with capacity of 100 kWt; 3-Horizontal
shaft; U-Reducer; 5-Vertical shaft; 6-Lower hearing;
7-Rocker; 8-Current collector; 9-Television camera system

1^..

Figure 11. (a) Scheme of the

foundation model position in
carriage arrangement, (b)
Charging device: 1-Model,
2-Soil, 3-Bracket, U-Displace-
ment gauge, 5-Charging device,
6+11 engine, reducer, guide
screw, moving load weight,
sensor (transducer), holders,
12-bracket of charging device,
13~pin (finger)
The most outstanding feature of this machine (Figure 12) was its ability
to incline the model during rotation within +16.7 deg, thereby enabling
the investigator to change the effective slope of the bank without chang­
ing the model shape. The centrifuge was also equipped with facilities
for inducing rapid drawdown by controlling the water level in the model
container during rotation. The stability of Kisen-Yama dam was checked
against earthquake, by inclining the model container, and rapid drawdown
of water level in the reservoir.
23
30. In a later study, Mikasa and Takada studied the signifi­
cance of similarity laws with regard to centrifugal model testing and
proved their validity for the bearing capacity and the stress distri­
bution in sand beneath strip footings. They have investigated self­
weight consolidation of soft clay and showed a good agreement with the
23
consolidation theory. Mikasa and Takada also studied the slide fail­
ure of slopes and the failure of sheet piles in cohesive material. In

23
all these examples, they showed the similarity laws to be valid and that
the behavior of these models was in good agreement with the accepted
theories.

Centrifugal Model Testing in Europe

31. There is apparently no published data which indicate the use

of centrifugal models for civil engineering purposes in Europe. However

smaller radius was constructed in ■Nui WCCJ“.

Concluding Remarks

32. The previous discussion was a review of some of the centrif­

ugal machines used in conducting soil testing; a summary of these
devices is presented in Table 1. All centrifuges, with the exception
of the Cambridge MKI model, have a vertical axis of rotation, with the
soil model placed in a rigid container attached to the end of the rotor.
Centrifugal machines built in the Soviet Union or Japan were equipped
with a swinging container, whereas those built in Britain feature a
fixed container. The advantage of the swinging container is that the
resultant force due to the radial acceleration and earth gravity is
always parallel to the normal axis of the model. In the fixed container
the resultant may deviate from the normal direction of the model; how­
ever, the error can be ignored whenever the centrifugal acceleration
exceeds 50 g ’s. The fixed container is limited in that the model must
be placed on one side, rather than the upright position as in the case
of the swinging container, which may result in soil disturbance or even
collapse of the unsupported soil prior to testing. Such conditions may
not be serious in cases similar to those studied at Cambridge which
were modelled plane-strain problems. However, difficulties may arise
in modelling three-dimensional problems as was the situation with the
University of Manchester centrifuges. The fixed container may be
advantageous only when it is desired to measure deformation within the
cross section of the model using the Cambridge approach, where horizon­
tal planes on which polished beads were located prior to testing remain
horizontal during rotation.
33. Early centrifuges were used as research tools to develop
techniques or to verify laws of similitude by studying basic problems
such as self-weight consolidation, bearing capacity, and stability of
homogeneous slopes. The measuring devices were often crude and limited
to a stroboscope, which cannot record transient phenomena, and to
burettes, which required appreciable volume of pore fluid for measuring
pressure. However, recent centrifugal machines built to test large
models that simulate actual field problems are provided with sophis­
ticated closed-circuit television for observing events and video tape
recording for later observation. Newly constructed centrifuges are
equipped with electrical readout systems for measuring pore pressure
with sensitive pressure transducers, as well as linear differential
transducers for precise measurement of model surface deformation. These
new advances in centrifugal modelling techniques are very important as
another research tool for investigating self-weight effects which cannot
be investigated by conventional means, as well as a fresh approach for
the solution of complex practical problems.

25
 PART IV: ADVANTAGES AND LIMITATIONS OF CENTRIFUGAL
MODEL TESTING

3U. Centrifugal model testing, like other soil testing techniques,

has many advantages hut also some inherent limitations. The most sig­
nificant advantages and limitations will he discussed in this part of
the report.

Advantages of Centrifuge Model Testing

35. It has heen stated earlier in, this report that the funda­
mental reason for using a centrifuge in a soil mechanics problem is that
it offers the only means hy which a small-scale physical model can he
subjected to self-weight stress levels with both strain and boundary
conditions that are compatible with those existing within a full-scale
field structure. In centrifuge testing, correct modelling of variables
such as compression, yield, transient flow of pore fluid, and complex
stress-strain relationships including anisotropy can be achieved. The
superposition of loads and the change in water level can be easily ad­
justed during centrifugal testing, thereby providing a better insight
into prototype behavior in a very short period of time. The problem of
cracking of dams can be easily modelled by this technique. Dynamic
problems such as liquefaction due to earthquake or blast shocks can
also be modelled in the centrifuge.
36. It is not surprising that centrifugal model testing is being
increasingly used in modelling the behavior of soil structures. The
potential versatility of the technique is illustrated by the wide vari­
ety of applications which were discussed previously in this report.

Limitations of Centrifugal Model Testing

37. Since the objective of the centrifugal model testing is to

predict the behavior of a full-scale prototype, it is desirable to
know the limitations of the testing technique so that a realistic

26
 interpretation of the data, with necessary corrections, can be made.
The centrifugal modelling technique suffers from several limitations;
those which are of major significance will be discussed. Other restric-
26
tions on centrifugal modelling of soils were summarized by Bishop.
Variation of acceleration field
38. Because the acceleration field in the centrifuge is radial
and not parallel as earth gravity, the stress field in the model may
not be compatible with that in the prototype. The error can be reduced
by increasing the radius of the centrifuge so that the maximum tan­
gential dimension of the model subtends a minimum possible angle at the
center of rotation. Figure 13a shows the outline of a typical model in
a radial acceleration field; its equivalent but transformed outlines in
a parallel acceleration field are depicted in Figure 13b. The result is
a distortion in the stress field which may become insignificant when
the model occupies a relatively small part of the centrifuge accelera-
tion field. It has been suggested by Avgherinos and Schofield that
if the model height is kept less than one-tenth of the radius
r (H < 0.1 r), the error in acceleration will be less than +_5 percent.
m q
Bassett indicated that when the angle subtended by the model is less
than 15 deg the angular divergence at the extremities is +7 percent.
39* If it is desired to model a typical prototype dam in a paral­
lel acceleration field (Figure 13c), then the model should be distorted
as shown in Figure 13d which is the transformed shape of the model in
the radial field. This model configuration is not acceptable since any
vertical deformation in the model will generate circumferential strain
not related to the strain field in the prototype. A compromise between
the distortion caused by the radial acceleration shown in Figure 13b
and the difficult model shape shown in Figure 13d involves curving the
upper surface of the model while keeping the lower part flat, as shown
in Figure 13e. It might be noted that curved models from undisturbed
soil specimens could be made either by bending flat layers (which is
not acceptable) or by cutting curved layers from a block specimen if
disturbance of the anisotropy of the soil is not a problem. Attention
should also be given to the curved surfaces of static groundwater in

27
r
 I I I H

b. PARALLEL ACCELERATION

1 1 1 1 1 / i \

i \ i

Figure 13. The radial field effect on

a model slope

the centrifuge, especially when the model consists of flat surfaces.

This limitation could he easily managed by increasing the radius of the
centrifuge.
Ho. In the case of narrow models (i.e. plane-strain problems), the
distortion could be eliminated completely if it is practicable to rotate
the model as shown in Figure lH. For this model the radial acceleration
field is always parallel and normal to the cross section of the model.

28
Stress history
kl. It is important in centrifugal testing to insure not only
that the stress at each point in the model is identical with that at the
corresponding point in the prototype, hut also that stress and strain
cycles and overconsolidation pressure are similar and correctly modelled.
As a general rule, this is not an easy task and it may he impossible to
model complex ground conditions. However, for soils of moderate uni­
formity, it is possible to maintain similarity by obtaining a sample
from the site which shares the stress history of all the soil intended
to be modelled. It is certainly possible to generate any desired stress
profile within the centrifuge; therefore, it is possible to arrive at
any distribution of overconsolidation by the application and removal of
centrifugal surcharge loads. This procedure may not be compatible with
stress changes in the prototype during construction sequence; never­
theless, stresses in the model will definitely correspond with those in
the prototype at the end of construction. Endicott^ suggested that if
there is no significant drainage during the construction period, then
the model, as in the case of placing the entire bank over the foundation
in the centrifuge, should be an acceptable representation of the proto­
type. In the case of granular material, it is only necessary to place
the material in the centrifuge at the required density and allow the
stresses to develop.

29
Time effect
h2 . There are two ways in which time may affect the similarity
between the prototype and the corresponding model in centrifugal testing.
One type of time effect is the time the model spends in unsteady state
while it is accelerating to and decelerating from its intended speed.
The result is the creation of stress history in the model which has no
counterpart in the prototype. The second effect of time is related to
the rate of loading, which has a significant effect on the shear
strength especially for clay soils. Typically, the strain rate in
the centrifuge is on the order of 1,000 to 10,000 times faster than that
in the prototype; thus the effect of strain rate on strength should be
taken in consideration when it is desired to simulate problems such as
embankment construction sequence or drawdown. While the rate of com­
pression for saturated soil during primary consolidation is accelerated
by the square of the linear scale of the model, creep and secondary
consolidation may not take place in the model at any faster rate than
that in the prototype.
Size effect
1+3. Size effect is especially important when an attempt is made
to model soils that have a macroscopic structure which influences the
strength of soil. With regard to centrifugal model testing, macroscopic
features must be sufficiently small in the model to permit stresses and
deformations compatible with those occurring in the full-scale prototype.
Special attention should be given to heavily overconsolidated soils
whose behavior is significantly influenced by the presence of macro­
fissures and progressive failure. However, for normally consolidated
or slightly overconsolidated clays, the size effect can be ignored. It
22
has been shown by Mikasa, Takada, and Yamada that rockfill material of
the prototype can be simulated in the model by pulverizing, sieving,
and mixing the rockfill material such that the grain-size distribution
is similar to the original material, but the grain size is reduced by
the model scale. It was also indicated that for sand or silty soils,
size effect presented no significant problems.

30
Other effects
hk. There are other effects of secondary importance which are
either inherent in soil testing in general or they cannot be made to
conform with centrifugal modelling laws. Side friction and boundary
conditions are problems which are inherent in any soil testing method
and must be considered in centrifugal model testing. Chemical processes,
such as soil stabilization, and other processes may have a significant
effect on soil behavior, but these effects are independent of model
scale and cannot be simulated by accelerated time scale.

31
 PART V: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Conclusions

1+5. Based on the review of literature, it appears that modelling

soils by the centrifuge technique is technically attractive, and present
technology can overcome limitations in the testing facility and bring
about a high degree of refinement in the measuring technique. The large
number of centrifugal model testing facilities in the USSR, England,
and Japan have shown a good correlation between soil models and corre­
sponding prototype behavior in both pure research and in generating
solutions for complex practical problems. Centrifugal model testing
should not be viewed as a substitute for but rather as a complement to
conventional means of soil testing and analysis. A combination of
centrifuge model testing, numerical analysis such as finite element or
finite difference, in addition to large-scale field test will signifi­
cantly enhance the design of safer and more economical earth structures.

Recommendations

1+6. Based on the apparent potential of centrifuge models for

solving geotechnical problems and the fact that WES has displayed an
active interest in centrifugal model testing, it is proposed that a
geotechnical centrifuge testing facility be established at WES to serve
the Corps of Engineers, other governmental agencies, and universities
in the United States. WES has traditionally performed research, and de­
signed and monitored projects for various governmental agencies. In
addition to its permanent geotechnical staff, WES maintains excellent
support personnel and facilities represented by the computer center,
library distribution service, machine shop, and field exploration group.

32
 REFERENCES

1. Pokrovsky, G. I. and Fedorov, I. S., "Studies of Soil Pressure

and Soil Deformations by Means of a Céntrifuge," Proceedings,
First International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering, Vol 1, 1936, pp 70-75.
2. Bucky, P. B., "Rise of Models for the Study of Mining Problems,"
Technical Publication No 425, Feb 1931, American Institute of
Mining and Metallurgical Engineering, New York.
3. Bucky, P. B., Solakian, A. G., and Baldin, L. S., "Centrifugal
Method of Testing Models; Photo-Elastic Apparatus Combined with
a Centrifuge to Secure Direct Measurement of Stresses," Civil
Engineering, Vol 5, No. 5, May 1935, pp 287-290.
U. Panek, L. A., "Centrifugal Testing Apparatus for Mine-Structure
Stress Analysis," Report of Investigations No. 4 8 8 3 , Jim 1952,
U. S. Bureau of Mines, Washington, D.C.
5. Sharma, H. D . , "Effect of Acceleration on Material Properties,"
Interim Report No. 24, Sep 1973, Joint Highway Research Project,
Purdue University and Indiana State Highway Commission, Lafayette,
Indiana.
6. Avgherinos, P. J. and Schofield, A. N., "Drawdown Failure of
Centrifuged Models," Proceedings, Seventh International Conference
on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, 1969, pp 497-503.
7. Endicott, L. J . , Centrifugal Testing of Soil Models, Ph. D. Disser­
tation, 1970, Cambridge University, Cambridge, England.
8. Beasly, D. H. Centrifugal Modelling of Soft Clay Strata Subject
to Embankment Loading, Ph. D. Dissertation, 1973, Cambridge
University, Cambridge, England.
9. Bassett, R. H. "Centrifugal Model Tests of Embankments on Soft
Alluvial Foundations," Proceedings, Eighth International Conference
on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Yol 2.2, 1973, pp 4-5.
10. Schofield, A. N., "Laboratory Landslides," UMIST Magazine, Advance,
No. 7, Oct 1969.
11. Lyndon, A., Centrifugal Model Test of a Natural Clay Slope Failure,
Ph. D. Dissertation, 1972, University of Manchester Institute of
Science and Technology, Manchester, England.
12. English, R. J., Centrifugal Model Testing of Buried Flexible
Structures, Ph. D. Thesis, 1973, University of Manchester Institute
of Science and Technology, Manchester, England.
13. Hird, C. C., Centrifugal Model Tests of Flood Embankment, Ph. D.
Dissertation, 1974, University of Manchester Institute of Science
and Technology, Manchester, England.
14. Bolton, M. D. et al., "Ground Displacements in Centrifugal Models,"

33
 Proceedings, Eighth International Conference on Soil Mechanics
and Foundation Engineering, Vol 1.1, 1973, pp 65-70«
15. Rowe, P. W . , "The Relevance of Soil Fabric to Site Investigation
Practice," Geotechnique, Vol 22, No. 2, Jun 1972, pp 195-300.
16. Smith, I. M. and Hobbs, R., "Finite Element Analysis of Centrifuged
and Built-Up Slopes," Geotechnique, Vol 2 k t No. *+, 197*+, PP 531-559.
17. Goldstein, M. N., Misumsky, V. A. and Lapidus, L. S., "The Theory
of Probability and Statistics in Relation to Rheology of Soils,"
Proceedings, Fifth International Conference on Soil Mechanics
and Foundation Engineering, Vol 1, 1961, pp 123-131.
18. Goldstein, M. N. et al., "Stability Investigation of Fissured Rock
Slopes," Proceedings, First Congress of the International Society of
Rock Mechanics, Vol 2, 1966, pp 175-178.
19. Ter-Stepanian, G. I. and Goldstein, M. N., "Multi-Storied Landslides
and Strength of Soft Clay," Proceedings, Seventh International
Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol 2,
1969, pp 693-700.
20. Polshin, D. E. et al., "Centrifugal Model Testing of Foundation
Soils of Building Structures," Proceedings, Eighth International
Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol 1.3,
1973, pp 203-208.
21. Shcherbina, V. I., "Investigations of Rockfill Dam Core Cracking by
Centrifugal Modelling," Proceedings, Eighth International Conference
on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol *+.3, 1973, p 175.
22. Mikasa, M . , Takada, N . , and Yamada, K., "Centrifugal Model Test of
a Rockfill Dam," Proceedings, Seventh International Conference on
Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol 2, 1969, p 325.
23. Mikasa, M. and Takada, N . , "Significance of Centrifugal Model Test
in Soil Mechanics," Proceedings, Eighth International Conference
on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol 1.2, 1973,
pp 273-278.
2k. Bjork, R. L., Allen, R. T., and Scott, R. F., "A Research Brief on
Investigating the Vulnerability of Dams," Jun 30, 1975, California
Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California.
25. Penman, A. D. M . , "A Review of the Recent Moscow Soils Conference,"
Ground Engineering, Vol 7, No. 1, 197*+, PP 50-59-
26. Bishop, A. W . , Discussion of "Up-to-Date Methods of Investigating
the Strength and Deformability of Soils (Laboratory and Field Test­
ing of Soils for Their Strength, Deformative and Rheological Proper­
ties)," Proceedings, Eighth International Conference on Soil
Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol k . 2 , 1973, p 21.
27. Roscoe, K. E., "Soils and Model Tests," Journal of Strain Analysis,
Vol 3, No. 1, 1968, pp 57-6*+.

3*+
28 . Rocha, M . , "Similarity Conditions in Model Studies of Soil
Mechanics Problems," Pub. No. 35, 1953, Laboratory National de
Engenharia Civil, Lisbon, Portugal.

35
 Table 1
Summary of Centrifugal Testing Machines for Soils

Radius Maximum Maximum Height of

Location and Rotation Acceleration Speed Model
Reference cm g's* n?m cm Remarks

. 5 Used to test triaxial

Purdue University 120 lOU 300 1 2 .5
hollow cylinder under
acceleration field
2k — —
California Institute of Technology 200 100 —
Cambridge University (MKl) 30 300 950 2 .5 Model rotates in ver­
tical plane
6 2 JO 100 l80 18 Plane-strain model
Cambridge University (MKIl)
University of Manchester"^ (UMIST) 150 130 285 30 Three-dimensional model

University of Manchester (SEL) 320 200 170 60 Three-dimensional model

17 — — — — Swinging model container
USSR, Railway Institute
USSR. Research Institute of Bases
and Underground Structures^ 200 100 350 1*0 Swinging model container
25 250 320 3k0 Uo Swinging model container
USSR Hydroproject Institute
22 100 280 500 30 Swinging model container
Osaka City University
which inclined at
+1 6 .7 deg

* g is the acceleration of gravity.

 APPENDIX A: CONDITIONS OF SIMILARITY IN SOIL MECHANICS

1. The following outline of the conditions of similarity in soil

modelling was previously presented by Roscoe,2^* based on Rocha's2®
derivation. The derivation of similarity conditions is based on two
assumptions : first, the material used in the prototype has a unique
time-independent stress-strain relation; second, the model material has
a similar stress-strain property related to the prototype material by
the stress and strain scaling factors a and $ , respectively. It can
be shown that

V (Al)
P

2. For similarity, all stresses, including pore fluid pressure,

p
must be sealed by a , and all forces by ha; self-weight scaling re­
quires that

y (1 - n )V
-S2L--- E_Ji= h2a (A2)
Y (1 - n )V n a
sm m m
i.e.

a = hp
(1 - %> (A3)
3 (1 - V
Similarly, scaling the uplift of the solid phase requires that

(1 - n )
(A4)

Furthermore, scaling of pore fluid self weight requires that:

n
a = hp „ -£ (A5)
f n
m

* Raised numerals refer to similarly numbered items in the References

at the end of the main text.

Al
Prom Equations A3 and AU, and AU and A5, respectively, it follows that

= P, (a 6)

and

n n (AT)
P m

p = p s = Pf (A8)

Equation A5 then reduces to

a = hp (A9)

3. The effect of pore fluid migration must now be considered. An

equipotential in a flow net is given by

u - y^z = constant (A10)

The hydraulic gradient is given by:

d__ (All)
i (u - Yfz)
dL

1
p _ cx (A12)
i “ h
m

Hence, seepage forces are scaled in the ratio

= M h3 = ch2 (A13)
V. (h/
which meets the requirement (Equation A2) for similarity of forces.
Corresponding volume changes in model and prototype will be AV and
.hr

AV , where
m

AV = h 3BAV (AIM
p m
Assuming Darcy’s law to apply it follows that

(A15)

Substituting from Equation A9 gives

h2 e _ he
at pt (A16)

A3
 APPENDIX B: NOTATION

A A characteristic area
c Cohesive strength of soil
h A modelling scale
H Height
i Hydraulic gradient
k Coefficient of permeability
L A characteristic length in the direction of the hydraulic
gradient
m Model property (subscript)
n Porosity
N Scale factor
0 Center
p Prototype property (subscript)
r Radius
r0 Tangential acceleration

r Relative movement of individual particles with respect to the

total mass
r Transient radial acceleration
2r0 Coriolifs acceleration
t Time scale (prototype/model)
T A characteristic time
u Excess pore pressure
V A characteristic volume
x,y Cartesian coordinates
z Depth below static water level
a Stress scale (prototype/model)
g Strain scale (prototype/model)
Yf Density of pore fluids
y Density of solids
s
0 Angular displacement
V Permeability
p Bulk density scale (prototype/model)
Fluid density scale

B1
p Solid density scale
s
0 Angle of internal friction
to Angular rotation

B2
 In accordance with ER 70-2-3, paragraph 6c(l)(b),
dated 15 February 1973, a facsimile catalog card
in Library of Congress format is reproduced below

Al-Hussaini, Mosaid M
Centrifuge model testing of soils: a literature review,
by Mosaid M. Al-Hussaini. Vicksburg, U. S. Army Engineer
Waterways Experiment Station, 1976.
1 v. (various pagings) illus. 27 cm. (U. S. Water-
ways Experiment Station. Miscellaneous paper S-76-9)
Prepared for In—House Laboratory Independent Research
Program, Assistant Secretary of the Army (R&D), Washing­
ton, D. C., under Project 4A061101A91D.
Includes bibliography.

1. Centrifuges. 2. Models. 3. Soil mechanics.

I. U. S. Dept, of the Army. Office of the Chief of
Research and Development. (Series: U. S. Waterways
Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss. Miscellaneous paper
S-76-9)
TA7.W34m no.S-76-9