DYNAMIC PROPERTIES OF PIEDMONT RESIDUAL SOILS

By Roy H. Borden,t Member, ASCE, Lisheng Shao,2 Associate Member, ASCE, and
Ayushman GUpta,3 Associate Member, ASCE

ABSTRACT: Piedmont residual soils were formed by in-situ weathering of igneous and metamorphic rocks. In
this research project, their dynamic properties (shear modulus and damping) were investigated by performing a
combination of resonant column and torsional shear tests. These properties were evaluated with respect to
confining pressure, shear strain amplitude, particle size distribution, cyclic frequency, and number of cycles and
compared to results obtained from other studies reported in the literature. Totally 32 specimens of residual soils
were tested. These residual soils were classified as MH, ML, SM-ML, and SM, according to the Unified Soil
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSITY OF NEW ORLEANS on 02/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Classification System. The normalized shear modulus and damping values were found to be in the same range
as reported by other authors for transported sands, silts, and clays. With increase in the shear strain amplitude,
the normalized shear modulus decreased and damping increased at a rate faster than that for clays but slower
than that exhibited by sands. An analytical model was established to predict the shear modulus and the damping
ratio as a function of confining pressure and shear strain amplitude for four types of Piedmont residual soils.

INTRODUCTION transportation. These are the products of chemical decompo-

The dynamic properties of soils are required to analyze their
behavior under cyclic loading. These dynamic properties es-
sentially are the shear modulus and material damping ratio of
the soils. Hardin and Black (1968) have suggested that a large
number of factors contribute to the shear modulus and damp-
ing of soils. Among these, the major influencing factors are
the soil type, void ratio, effective confining pressure, shear
strain amplitude, and number of cycles. Degree of saturation
has been reported as an important influencing parameter only
for modulus of cohesive soils (Hardin and Drnevich 1972).
Most of the published literature concentrates on sands and
clays. Seed and Idriss (1970) have summarized the available
data on dynamic shear moduli and damping ratios for sands
and saturated clays. Dynamic properties of silts have been re-
ported by Hardin and Drnevich (1972) and Stokoe et al.
(1980).
The present paper investigates the dynamic properties of
piedmont residual soils. Piedmont residual soils were formed
by in-situ weathering of igneous and metamorphic rocks. Their
engineering properties differ from those of transported sands,
silts, and clays. Therefore, the empirical correlation, design
parameters, and mathematical models applicable to conven-
tional soils should not be assumed valid for these soils. The
dynamic properties of piedmont residual soils on the basis of
soil type (which mainly classified as MH, ML, SM-ML, or
SM) and comparison of these properties with the published
data on sands and clays are reported in this paper. Using Sto-
koe's device, the influence of confining pressure, shear strain
amplitude, cyclic frequency, and number of loading cycles
were evaluated by resonant column and torsional shear tests
on specimens trimmed from Shelby tube samples.
Sowers and Richardson (1983) have detailed the character-
istics of piedmont residual soils. These soils are deeply and
irregularly weathered crystalline rocks without appreciable
sition of various complex aluminum silicate minerals of the
original rock. Residual soils retain the mineral segregation,
mineral alignment, and structural defects of the parent rocks.
These are reflected in their nonhomogeneity, anisotropy, and
surfaces of weakness. Piedmont residual soils are stronger than
their high void ratios imply. The common soil classification
systems, Unified Soil Classification System (USeS) and
American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials (AASHTO), have limited application to residual soils
because of mica content, incomplete weathering and soil tex-
ture. For residual soils, the particle size distribution is more
directly related to engineering behavior than to the Atterberg
limits.
Typical weathering profiles are shown in Fig. 1 (Sowers and
Richardson 1983). The upper zone is completely weathered
with well developed pedologic horizons. The intermediate
zone, saprolite has soil texture but retains the relict structure
of original rock. The partially weathered zone has alternate
seams of saprolite and less weathered rock, and below this is
the unaltered or slightly weathered rock. The weathering is
most advanced at the ground surface and decreases with in-
creasing depth. The boundaries of three zones are not well
defined and the transition from one to the other is usually
gradual. Saprolite is of most concern in the design of foun-
dations on residual soils. Typically, saprolites are micaceous
sandy silts and silty sands (ML and SM). All the samples
tested in this research were obtained from saprolite at depths
ranging from 0.9 m to 5.3 m. All the specimens tested except
IV-30F and IV-31F were obtained above the ground water ta-
ble.

'Prof., Dept. of Civ. Engrg., North Carolina State Univ., Raleigh, NC

27695.
2Res. Assoc., Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Nonh Carolina State Univ., Ra-
leigh, NC.
3Geotech. Engr., Ardaman & Associates, Inc., Box 593003, Orlando,
FL 32859-3003.
Note. Discussion open until March I, 1997. Separate discussions
should be submitted for the individual papers in this symposium. To
extend the closing date one month, a written request must be filed with
the ASCE Manager of Journals. The manuscript for this paper was sub-
~vil.:
ROCK
mitted for review and possible publication on June 7, 1995. This paper ZONES
is part of the Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 122, No. 10,
October, 1996. ©ASCE, ISSN 0733-9410/96/0010-0813-0821/$4.00 + FIG. 1. Weathering Profile of Crystalline Rocks In Humid Tem-
$.50 per page. Paper No. 10876. perature Region (Sowers and Richardson 1983)

JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING / OCTOBER 1996/813

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1996.122:813-821.

 TABLE 1. Specimen Identification and Location, Basic Properties, Depth, Maximum Shear Modulus, and Minimum Damping Ratio of
All Specimens Tested
Soil
type Sp. Depth w/c 80 S Sand Silt Clay lJ'~ Gma• Dm1n
(USCS) No. (m) (%) (ini) G. (%) LL PL PI (%) (%) (%) (kPa) (MPa) (%)
(1 ) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11 ) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16)
MH IV-27E 1.8-2.4 50.3 1.78 2.74 77.6 78 56 22 5.8 84.2 10 25 29.55 0.98
IV-28E 1.8-2.4 36.6 1.48 2.74 67.7 78 56 22 5.8 84.2 10 25 29.27 0.87
50 34.03 1.20
100 40.48 1.30
IV-32G 3.4-4.0 50.9 1.48 2.86 98.7 59 45 14 8.9 86.1 5 50 20.11 1.51
I-3B 0.9-1.5 39.2 1.25 2.81 88 57 43 14 10.3 61.7 28 25 15.13 4.50
50 21.04 5.60
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSITY OF NEW ORLEANS on 02/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

100 25.36 4.90

I-4B 0.9-1.5 40.7 1.31 2.81 87 57 43 14 10.3 61.7 28 25 13.69 5.40
50 21.50 4.70
100 27.51 4.70
I-5B 0.9-1.5 41.9 1.35 2.81 87 57 43 14 10.3 61.7 28 25 15.94 4.50
50 20.33 4.10
100 30.49 4.00
IV-26E 1.0-1.6 34.8 1.42 2.76 67.5 52 46 6 15.7 75.3 9 25 36.17 3.29
III-IOD 0.9-1.5 33.1 1.43 2.85 65.9 75 48 27 16.4 53.6 30 100 53.23 1.49
IV-29E 1.2-1.8 35.6 1.43 2.72 67.7 56 43 13 19.5 72.5 8 25 35.35 1.35
50 42.72 1.20
100 52.17 1.30
50 44.03 1.16
III-9D 0.9-1.5 33.5 1.41 2.79 66.0 75 46 29 22.6 47.4 30 50 70.53 2.41
III-llD 0.9-1.5 38.9 1.64 2.79 66.2 92 61 31 27.7 44.3 28 25 32.47 3.72
50 46.76 2.38
100 62.51 2.03
ML III-25E 0.9-1.5 15.3 0.86 2.74 48.8 35 30 5 22.3 69.7 8 50 59.18 1.40
100 73.07 1.66
I1I-23E 1.8-2.4 19.5 0.93 2.75 57.5 33 - NP 29.1 69.9 I 50 46.47 2.06
100 60.29 2.08
I1I-20E 2.3-2.7 26.8 1.14 2.67 63.0 34 - NP 30.2 67.8 2 50 45.61 1.77
100 61.51 1.77
III-2IE 1.5 -2.1 23.6 1.17 2.66 53.6 35 - NP 32.9 65.1 2 25 29.46 1.88
50 39.25 1.82
100 50.72 1.96
III-24E 1.2-1.8 22.8 1.24 2.72 50.2 36 - NP 35 61.9 3.1 25 30.10 1.85
50 39.79 1.77
100 54.54 2.26
III-22E 1.2-1.8 18.4 1.16 2.69 42.7 37 - NP 36.2 62.8 I 25 35.29 1.64
II-6C 2.7-3.4 37.8 1.50 2.69 68 44 34 10 42 44 14 25 38.21 2.10
50 47.35 1.50
100 61.27 1.60
II-7C 2.7-3.4 36.8 1.42 2.69 70 44 34 10 42 44 14 25 30.19 2.22
50 38.37 1.90
100 46.37 1.36
II-8C 2.7-3.4 29.6 1.18 2.69 67 44 34 10 42 44 14 100 43.79 1.20
SM-ML I1I-15D 0.9-1.5 26.2 1.01 2.69 69.8 - - NP 35.6 40.4 24 25 63.71 1.27
50 76.36 1.91
100 88.85 2.75
25 65.55 2.67
I1I-l7D 0.9-1.5 29.6 1.14 2.71 70.6 - - NP 36 44 20 50 68.31 2.26
III-I6D 0.9-1.5 29.6 1.12 2.75 72.9 - - NP 43.6 41.4 15 100 97.62 2.50
III-18E 1.2-1.8 23.9 1.32 2.75 49.7 29 - NP 46.8 48.2 5 25 33.38 1.96
50 42.76 2.12
100 57.17 1.97
III-19E 1.2-1.8 22.9 1.24 2.75 50.6 29 - NP 46.8 48.2 5 25 34.52 1.62
I-IA 0.8-1.3 24.6 0.89 2.74 75 48 40 8 52 25 23 25 43.42 3.90
50 67.15 3.40
100 89.41 4.00
I-2A 0.8-1.3 30.5 1.00 2.74 84 48 40 8 52 25 23 25 43.01 4.50
50 66.69 3.70
100 85.85 3.40
SM III-12D 1.5-2.1 14.8 0.79 2.60 48.4 - - NP 69.6 19.4 11 50 99.35 1.68
100 127.90 1.59
III-I 3D 1.5-2.1 12.6 0.84 2.60 39.1 - - NP 74.3 19.7 6 25 63.95 1.80
50 82.78 1.77
100 105.87 1.74
III-14D 2.1-2.7 15.0 0.87 2.60 45.0 - - NP 70.6 18.4 II 100 98.05 1.74
50 83.57 1.44
IV-30F 4.0-4.6 16.6 0.49 2.81 96.1 - - NP 80.4 18.1 1.5 50 33.73 2.96
100 51.91 3.22
IV-3IF 4.7-5.3 24.7 0.72 2.79 96.6 - - NP 84.7 9.8 0.2 50 36.23 2.33
100 55.86 2.32
Note: NP = Nonplastic; RC = Resonant frequency (resonant column test); Sand = Sand size particles, 0.074-4.75 mm (#4-200); Silt = SIlt sIze partIcles.
0.074-0.002 mm; and Clay = Clay size particles, < 0.002 mm.

814/ JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING / OCTOBER 1996

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1996.122:813-821.

 TABLE 2 Details of Parameters Investigated In Each Phase of Testing
Confining Shear strain
Phase Specimen pressure amplitude Frequency Number of
number number Type of tests (kPa) (%) (Hz) cycles
(1 ) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
I I-IA to 1-5B RCT 25,50, 100 0.001-0.1 LRF
II II-6C to II-8C RCT 25,50, 100 0.001-0.1 LRF -
II II-6C to II-8C TST 25,50, 100 0.001-0.1 0.2 100
III 111-90 to 11I-25E RCT 25, 50, 100 <0.001 LRF -
III 111-90 to 11I-25E TST 25,50,100 0.001-0.1 1 l000-0.2E6
IV IV-26E to IV-32G RCT 25,50, 100 <0.001 LRF -
IV IV-26E to IV-32G TST 25,50, 100 0.001-0.1 1 & 10 l000-1.0E6
Note: RCT = Resonant Column Test; TST = TorSIonal Shear Test; LRF = Lowest Resonant Frequency, and 111-90 -- Phase Ill, 9th SpecImen, SIte
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSITY OF NEW ORLEANS on 02/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

O.

EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION 1. It is possible to develop shear strains lower than 0.001

Testing Program
Piedmont residual soil samples were collected from seven
different sites (A to G) in North Carolina. The Shelby tube
samples from these sites were supplied by the North Carolina
Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Geotechnical Unit. A
total of 32 specimens of residual soils were tested. These re-
sidual soils classified as MH, ML, SM-ML, and SM. The
depth, basic properties, and percentage of sand, silt, and clay
content in each of the specimens tested are presented in Ta-
ble 1.
The influencing parameters that were investigated were con-
fining pressure, shear strain amplitude, cyclic frequency, and
the number of cycles. Specimens were tested at three confining
pressures, 25, 50, and 100 kPa. These pressures corresponded
with those at the depths from which specimens were obtained.
Shear strain amplitudes were varied from 0.001% to over
0.1 %, which are typical for construction related vibrations and
earthquakes. During torsional shear tests, the frequencies used
were 0.2, I, and 10 Hz. 100-1,000,000 cycles were applied
to different specimens, though most of the specimens were
subjected to 1,000 cycles of each shear strain amplitude.
The experimental program was caried out in four phases (I
to IV). In phase I, resonant column tests were conducted on
fi ve specimens (1-1 to 1-5). In phase II, both resonant column
and torsional shear tests were conducted on three specimens
(11-6 to 11-8). In both phases, each specimen was confined at
approximately 25, 50, and 100 kPa (0.5, 1, and 2 ksf) and
tested over a range of shear strains from less than 0.001 % to
greater than 0.1 %. 100 cycles at 0.2 Hz were applied during
the torsional shear tests in phase II. Torsional shear tests were
performed on 24 residual soil specimens (III-9 to IV-32) dur-
ing phases III and IV. In these two phases, specimens were
tested at 25,50 and 100 kPa over a range of shear strains from
0.001 % to 0.1 % at a frequency of 1 Hz (except for specimens
IV-27E, IV-28E, and IV-32G which were tested at a frequency
of 10 Hz). 1,000 cycles of each shear strain amplitude were
applied to the specimens tested in these two phases. In order
to study the influence of number of cycles, some of the spec-
imens were subjected to 200,000 to 1,000,000 cycles of high-
est shear strain applied. In phase IV, change in radial dimen-
sions of the specimens was also measured along with change
in height. The details of various parameters in each phase are
summarized in Table 2.
Test Equipment
Stokoe's torsional simple shear-resonant column device was
used to carry out the dynamic testing. This testing device com-
bines the features of resonant column and torsional shear test
equipment. Some of the pertinent capabilities of this device
are the following:
JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING / OCTOBER 1996/815
to slightly greater than 0.1 percent (depending on spec-
imen stiffness).
2. It can operate in a low frequency «2 Hz) cyclic torsional
shear mode as well as in a high frequency (> 10 Hz)
resonant column mode.
3. A large range of confining pressures may be applied.
This torsional shear-resonant column device is built in a
fixed-free configuration-the lower end of the specimen is
rigidly fixed to the base of the device while the top end is
allowed to vibrate in torsion.
Tests Conducted
Resonant Column Test
Resonant column analysis uses theories of elasticity and vis-
coelasticity to determine the shear modulus and damping prop-
erties of either a solid or hollow cylindrical soil specimens.
Resonant column tests may be performed at shear strain am-
plitudes of 10-4 to greater than 0.1 percent.
The basic principle of the resonant column tests is to excite
a cylindrical specimen of soil in its fundamental mode of tor-
sional vibration. Once the fundamental mode of vibration is
established, resonant frequency and amplitude of vibration are
measured. Using these along with system constants and spec-
imen properties, shear modulus and shear strain amplitude of
the soil are determined. Material (viscous) damping in shear
is determined from the record of free-vibration decay curve
which is obtained by shutting off the driving power at reso-
nance.
A computerized system supplies sinusoidal voltage to the
coils in the coil-magnet drive mechanism attached to the top
of specimen (Fig. 2). This results in torsional oscillation of
the drive system and the specimen top. The accelerometer on
the drive system generates a voltage from which the shear
strain amplitude is determined. The lowest resonant frequency
is determined by making a sweep of frequencies for the max-
imum accelerometer output starting at about 30 Hz. To obtain
material damping ratio, the transient decay curve is recorded
by a computer data acquisition system. The change in vertical
height of the specimen is measured by a LVDT and the spec-
imen volume is estimated assuming hydrostatic strain. How-
ever, in phase IV, the Stokoe's device was modified to enable
the measurement of change in diameter of the specimen (at
midheight) during dynamic testing and these data were then
used to evaluate the specimen volume.
Torsional Shear Test
Like the resonant column analysis, torsional shear analysis
also uses theories of elasticity and viscoelasticity to determine
the shear modulus and damping properties of either solid or

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1996.122:813-821.

 DC Power
_ Supply
--1 Proximitor
-
Conditioners
DC Power
Supply
Signal Conditioner
&Am Iifier
Computerized
Wave Generator
& Control System
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSITY OF NEW ORLEANS on 02/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
FIG. 2. Schematic of Resonant Columnrrorslonal Shear Instrumentation
hollow cylindrical soil specimens. Torsional shear tests may
be performed at shear strain amplitudes of 10- 4 to greater than
0.1 percent. In contrast to resonant column tests, torsional
shear tests are generally conducted at low frequencies. Further,
this test is valuable for it allows the study of influence of the
number of loading cycles on the specimen.
In torsional shear tests, the soil specimen was twisted at a
low frequency by applying a sinusoidal voltage to the coil-
magnet drive system (Fig. 2). Proximitor probes were used to
monitor the motion of top of the specimen. The resulting
torque-twist curve (hysteretic loop) was recorded using a com-
puter and a x-y plotter. The shear stress (in terms of input
voltage) and the shear strain (in terms of output voltage) were
evaluated using this loop. Shear modulus of the soil was de-
termined from the slope of the straight line joining the end
points of hysteretic loop. Hysteretic damping ratio was cal-
culated by measuring the area of this loop which represents
the amount of energy absorbed during a loading cycle. Isen-
hower (1979) provides a detailed description of both these
tests.
Experimental Procedure
The samples were extruded from Shelby tubes and trimmed
to required height (usually 142 mm to 150 mm) ensuring that
there is no rocking or tilting of the specimen in the upright
position.
During resonant column testing in phase I, the initial con-
fining pressure of 25 kPa was applied and LVDT readings
were made until the specimen was fully consolidated. Then,
resonant column tests were conducted at shear strain ampli-
tudes smaller than 0.001 % to greater than 0.1 %. For constancy,
drainage lines were closed during testing, although several
control tests on the unsaturated specimen showed no difference
in response between tests conducted with drainage lines
opened or closed. However, drainage lines were opened for
about 5 min of rest time before applying next higher shear
strain amplitude. After reaching the highest shear strain de-
sired, the confining pressure was increased to 50 kPa and then
to 100 kPa and the procedure was repeated. To evaluate the
effect of OCR, two specimens, IV-29E and III-lSD, were
tested at 25 kPa and 50 kPa, respectively, after testing after
the 100 kPa pressure.
The combined torsional shear-resonant column tests in
phase II were conducted in a similar manner to the resonant
column tests in phase I. The same confining pressures and
shear strain amplitudes were chosen for the specimens tested.
816/ JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING / OCTOBER 1996
J. Geotech. Engrg. 1996.122:813-821.
Operational
Amplifier
Charge
Amplifier
Drainage
The only difference was that at each shear strain amplitude, a
torsional shear test was performed first and then resonant col-
umn test was conducted at approximately the same shearing
strain.
During phases III and IV, after the specimens were fully
consolidated, a low amplitude «0.001%) resonant column test
was performed on the specimen to determine the specimen's
maximum shear modulus. This modulus value was then used
to estimate the torque (i.e., input voltage to the driving system)
required to twist the specimen at the various levels of selected
shear strain amplitudes. Thus, torsional shear tests were con-
ducted at desired shear strains. A typical strain amplitude
measurement sequence was 0.001, 0.0025, 0.005, 0.01, 0.025,
0.05, and 0.1 percent. After the testing at any confining pres-
sure, the pressure was doubled (25, 50, and 100 kPa) and the
specimen was consolidated overnight (approximately 15 h). It
was thus assumed that the specimen was not permanently al-
tered and hence further testing of the specimen could be per-
formed with essentially no effect of the past cycling at lower
shear strain amplitude and lower confining pressure. This as-
sumption was verified to be correct for the specimens tested
in this research project. This recovery of shear modulus and
damping ratio with time after high strain amplitude testing has
been reported by Hardin and Drnevich (1972) and Stokoe et
al. (1980).
RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
Shear Modulus Values for Piedmont Residual Soils
The low-amplitude or maximum shear modulus (Gm ..), at
different confining pressures, of all the specimens tested is
presented in Table 1 and in Fig. 3 on the basis of soil type.
In all four phases, this low-amplitude shear modulus (G m . .)
was obtained by resonant column testing at shear strains less
than 0.001 %. At the resonant frequency, the AC output of the
accelerometer was usually less than 60 mV. For each soil type
in Table 1, the results are presented in the increasing order of
percent sand content. The average of all the G m . . data at each
confining pressure was determined for each soil type (Table
3). The average curve shown in Fig. 3 (solid line) is the best
fit curve for these average Gma< at each confining pressure. The
object function of these average curves relating maximum
shear modulus, Gmax (MPa) to effective confining pressure
(o-c) is
(1)
where a and n are constants presented in Table 3 for each soil
 type. Fig. 4 shows these average curves (as per the above
model) for piedmont residual soils on the basis of soil type.
The average value of G max is presented in Table 3.
It can be observed that confining pressure has a significant
influence on the maximum shear modulus and that Gmax in-
creases with confining pressure (Fig. 4). However, for most of
the specimens, G max vai..ed with confining pressure to a power
less than the 0.5, commonly reported for sands (Seed and
Idriss 1970). The exponent ranged from 0.35 to 0.4, with
higher values being associated with the more percent of sands.
It was also observed that upon unloading, Gmax was slightly
higher at the same confining pressure (specimens IV-29E and
III-15D). Specimens IV-30F and IV-31F were obtained from
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSITY OF NEW ORLEANS on 02/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
moduli at higher shear strain amplitudes were normalized with
respect to Gmax (measured at'Y < 0.001 %) for respective spec-
imens. Fig. 5 shows the decrease in this normalized shear
modulus with increase in the shear strain amplitude at the three
confining pressures on the basis of soil type. All the values of
normalized shear moduli fall into a narrow band. Thus, if Gmax
is estimated or measured in field, shear modulus at any higher
shear strain amplitude can be reasonably estimated. The
threshold strain (shear strain below which G is almost equal
to G max ) for these residual soils was calculated to be in the
150

depths below the ground water table and exhibited much lower

-
125 8M
shear moduli [Fig. 3(d)]. This suggests that degree of satura-
tion has a significant influence on shear modulus of these soils.
(U 100

-
For unsaturated clayey or silty soils, the suction (or the neg- CL
ative pore water pressure) has a notable effect on the stiffness :E
of specimens. 75
In all four phases of the present study, shear moduli at var- ~
ious shear strain amplitudes were obtained. The value of shear E 50
modulus obtained by each torsional shear test was reported as (!)
the average for all the cycles of applied loading (100 cycles
for phase II and 1,000 cycles for phases III and IV). Shear 25

150 MH 150 OL......<....................I......l.-'-..............I....-I................-J........................-L-.........-'-J....J

ML
125 125 o 25 50 75 100 125

100 100
CONFINING PRESSURE (kPa)
1.15xAVq. FIG. 4. Comparison of Gmox for Four Types of Piedmont Resld-
75 * 75

-
1.4xAVG ualSolis

CO
a..
50
?!---=I
----;-
... __ -i-
50
~
-- "... 1 ........- - . . , - - - - - - . . . ,

- ., ..
25 25 ...... 0.85xAVG .,""'j)
~ ... - 0.6xAVG ~ ""'1'
~J .h
0 E 0.8 ... \ '
0
~ 0 25 50 75 100 125 0 25 50 75 100 125 § 0.8 :Ji::. • • I'

E 150
SM-ML
150
8M
(J)
=> 0.4
, 25 kPa ' "'..
,t., . ",4Jt'
";Y".~
o
0".
C) -J .. 50 kPa .t'" 0'.
125 125 * 15

e 7
0.2
1.3xAVG.-- ... o ' 100kPa
100 100 * : :::E a I:.!l~M~I-l-,-~..........~..........~...J fMl
75 "'* 75 ~ 1 " ' - - - ' .r-
. .- - - - - - ,
jt/
_-r ~ ~·t·:
~
50 50 0.8 •

'f:.,.
......... .,,--;7xAVG
25 25 BELOWGWT ClUJ 0.6 '
N ,,~~.
0 0 ~ 0.4 ' ' ..
0 25 50 75 100 125 0 25 50 75 100 125 :::E .~
gs 0.2
CONFINING PRESSURE (kPa) Z a [~M_MI [SM
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 0.0001 0.001 0.Q1 0.1
FIG. 3. Modeling of Gmox as Function of Confining Pressure SHEAR STRAIN AMPLITUDE (%)
FIG. 5. Normalized Shear Modulus versus Shear Strain Ampli-
TABLE 3. Average Gmox as Function of Confining Pressure for tude at Three Confining Pressures for All Specimens Tested
Each Soli Type Tested
ex (J"~ Average Gmox 1.2
Soil type
(1 )
MH
(MPa)
(2)
42.65
(3)
0.34
n (kPa)
(4)
25
(MPa)
(5)
25.95
1.0
0.8
- .~
8
• •
SPECIMEN
IV28-E
010Hz
• 25 kPa

• 50 kPa

MH
MH
42.65
42.65
0.34
0.34
50
100
35.67
41.68
~
E 0.6
\. . • 100 kPa

ML
ML
56.39
56.39
0.39 25 32.65 ~ 0.4
~
It
SPECIMEN
c 26 kPa
0.39 50 45.15 o 50 kPa
IV28-E
ML 56.39 0.39 100 56.45 0.2 01Hz
SM-ML 83.70 0.41 25 47.27 .. 100 kPa
SM-ML 83.70 0.41 50 64.25 0.0
SM-ML 83.70 0.41 100 83.78 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1
SM 115.63 0.40 25 63.95 SHEAR STRAIN AMPLITUDE (%)
SM 115.63 0.40 50 88.57
SM 115.63 0.40 100 110.61 FIG. 6. Normalized Shear Modulus versus Shear Strain Ampli-
tude for Specimens Tested at Different Frequencies

JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING / OCTOBER 1996/817

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1996.122:813-821.

 range of 0.001 to 0.002%. It was observed that at the same
shear strain amplitude, the nonnalized shear moduli for soils
classified as SM were lower than those classified as MH. This
suggests that with increasing the shear strain amplitude, the
nonnalized shear moduli of sandy soils decay at a faster rate
than finer grained soils.
To study the influence of cyclic frequency, a higher fre-
quency of 10 Hz was used for some of the specimens tested
in phase IV. Specimens IV-28E and IV-29E were collected
from the same site and have similar basic properties. Specimen
IV-28E was tested at 10 Hz whereas specimen IV-29E was
tested at 1 Hz. Fig. 6 shows the nonnalized shear modulus
results at the three confining pressures for specimens IV-28E
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSITY OF NEW ORLEANS on 02/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
characteristics for analysis purposes. The two methods used
were best fit curve and best-fit line. It must be emphasized that
for both the models, least-square method was employed and
that the curves represent nonnalized shear modulus (on a lin-
ear scale) plotted against shear strain amplitude (in percent)
on a logarithmic scale. The object function for the best fit
curves is
G 1
(2)
Gmax = [1 + a(-ytr
and that for best fit lines is

G
(solid symbols) and IV-29E (empty symbols). From these re- - = 1 for -y ::s TSS (3a)
Gmax
sults, it seems that frequency (in the range tested) has no in-
fluence on the nonnalized shear modulus of piedmont residual
soils. Further, the behavior of all the specimens tested at 10 ~
G
= 1- k log (~)
TSS
for -y > TSS (3b)
max
Hz was similar to that of the specimens tested at 1 Hz.
The hysteretic loops recorded during torsional shear tests in where 'Y = shear strain amplitude in percent. The values of the
phases II, III, and IV were used to study the influence of num- constants a, b, C, k, m, and square of coefficient of regression
ber of cycles on the shear modulus of these residual soils. Fig.
7(a) shows the typical results obtained for specimen II-8e at TABLE 4. Details of Test Conditions for Results Shown In Fig.
a confining pressure of approximately 100 kPa (2 ksf) and a 7(b)
cyclic frequency of 0.2 Hz. Similar results were obtained for Shear strain Number of
other tests. Some of the specimens were subjected to 200,000 Specimen <T~ amplitude Frequency cycles
to 1,000,000 cycles of high amplitude torsional loading. The Soil type number (kPa) (%) (Hz) (million)
change in shear modulus with number of cycles for these spec- (1 ) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
imens is shown in Fig. 7(b). The details of the test conditions MH IV-27E 25 0.091 10 I
for the results reported in Fig. 7(b) are presented in Table 4. MH IV-28E 100 0.088 10 I
MH IV-32G 50 0.097 10 I
From these results, it seems that the number of cycles has little ML I1I-22E 25 0.093 I 0.2
or no influence on the measured shear modulus. SM-ML I1I-170 50 0.054 I 0.4
The data presented in Fig. 5 were modeled using two meth- SM-ML I1I-19E 25 0.082 1 0.2
ods to generate curves (at the three confining pressures for
each soil type) which may be used in the selection of soil TABLE 5. Values of Constants Used In (2) and (3)-Best-Flt
Line
'iU 50 (J'~ TSS·
A

R 2
a..
~40
(!)
- ~~
- Soil type
(1 )
(kPa)
(2)
k
(3)
(%)
(4)
(%)
(5)

.0.0011 MH 25 0.38 0.0029 94.2

MH
en 30 .0.0028
MH
50
100
0.38
0.36
0.0033
0.0038
93.5
90.8
:3::J ~

...
.0.0055
.0.0117
ML 25 0.34 0.0017 93.0
ML 50 0.36 0.0017 91.9
020 00.0294 ML
o 00.0488 8M-ML
100
25
0.31
0.37
0.0018
0.0014
90.3
96.7
:i to 0.0977 8M-ML 50 0.40 0.0017 94.7
0:::10 SHEAR STRAIN 8M-ML 100 0.38 0.0021 91.3
L5 AMPLITUDE (%) 8M 25 0.34 0.0006 99.3
J: 0 :la) 8M 50 0.34 0.0009 94.2
en 1 10 100 1000 8M 100 0.32 0.0010 94.9
"Threshold shear strain.
NUMBER OF CYCLES
'iU 50 r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,
a.. • MHIIV-27E • MHIIV-28E • MHIIV-32G TABLE 6. Values of Constants Used In (2) and (3)-Best-Flt
~40 • MUlII-22 lJ SM-MUlII-17D 0 SM-MUIII-19E Curve
(!) A

(J'~ R 2

~
..J
30 f'---_.-e-El-ElEm----.............
Soil type
(1 )
(kPa)
(2)
a
(3) (4)
b c
(5)
(%)
(6)
::J
C 20 ... MH
MH
25
50
733
120
1.43
1.19
0.28
0.40
97.1
97.0
o MH 100 101 1.17 0.37 94.5

~ 10 r~~~~~~~~Cl ML
ML
25
50
11,269
14,695
1.76
1.73
0.18
0.17
94.6
95.4
L5 ~
ML 100 9,495 1.65 0.14 94.0
J: o L...(b) 8M-ML 25 530 1.23 0.35 97.8
en 1E+O 1E+1 1E+2 1E+3 1E+4 1E+5 1E+6 8M-ML 50 235 1.14 0.42 96.4
8M-ML 100 54 0.97 0.54 95.2
NUMBER OF CYCLES 8M 25 7,634 1.47 0.24 99.9
8M 50 5,010 1.43 0.22 97.8
FIG. 7. (a) Shear Modulus versus Number of Cycles for Spee- 8M 100 617 1.12 0.25 98.0
Imen II-BC; (b) Influence of Number of Cycles on Shear Modulus

818/ JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING / OCTOBER 1996

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1996.122:813-821.

 20
MH ML
~0.8 25 kPa 15
, 25kPa
1.5xAV~,
Cl
aO.6 25 kPa
10
en 0.4 ' 50 kPa ......
:::> ':l!.
~
....J 1*.
0 5
is 0.2
o
~OULLl""""""-'~-'-~"""""~"""" ~
Cl 20
0
0::: 1 r-_~'-------,
Z
iti a: SM-ML 1.5xAVG .',
8M 1.3xAVGi
~0.8

fa 0.6
:::i: 15
(§ .
,;.'
••.."1"" •
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSITY OF NEW ORLEANS on 02/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

N 10 .......
...... ...
~0.4 .."..-:-:: . *: .
5
0::: 0.2 ~.,,,":". i~·""'O'5xAVG
o · :•• u ...... ····!-· ... .
ZOt>m!l;:Lllu.....~....L..~.......~.......J 0
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 0.0001 0.001 0.Q1 0.1 1 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1
SHEAR STRAIN AMPLITUDE (%) SHEAR STRAIN AMPLITUDE (%)
FIG, 8. Continues Function Relating Normalized Shear Modu- FIG. 10, Damping Ratio versus Shear Strain Amplitude at
lus to Shear Strain Amplitude Three Confining Pressures for All Specimens Tested

soil type. Hysteretic damping ratios (obtained by torsional

~ 0.8 shear tests) reported here are those obtained for the first few
E cycles of loading. The damping ratios increased with increase
§ 0.6 in shear strain amplitude. The influence of shear strain ampli-
g 0.4 tude on damping ratio is more pronounced than it is on shear
modulus. The threshold shear strain for damping ratios on
--I
:::> 0.2 these residual soils was in the same range as that found for
o
o
~ Ollll.!..L............~........~.......L~.......... the shear modulus. For all the test data in Fig. 10, the dashed
0::: 1 ,.---.....--------, lines show the approximate upper bound and lower bound,
iti:::c 0.8
whereas the solid line represents the average relationship.
(/)
The torsional shear test results were used to study the influ-
oUJ 0.6 ence of number of cycles on the damping values of these soils.
N Fig. 11(a) shows the typical results obtained for specimen 11-
::J 0.4 8C. Similar results were obtained for all the tests conducted
«
~ 0.2
in phase 11. The change in damping ratio values for the spec-
o imens subjected to large number of cycles is shown in Fig.
Z 0 LloU'u;;L:l""'-'~........~.......L~~
I1(b). The details of the test conditions for the results reported
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 0.0001 0.001 0.Q1 0.1
in Fig. 11(b) are presented in Table 4. From these results, the
SHEAR STRAIN AMPLITUDE (%)
number of cycles do not seem to have a significant influence
FIG, 9. Linear Function Relating Normalized Shear Modulus to on the damping ratio values of piedmont residual soils.
Shear Strain Amplitude
Relationship between Normalized Shear Modulus and
(R 2 ) are presented in Tables 5 and 6. The value of threshold Damping Ratio
shear strain (TSS) as obtained from the best fit line model is
The normalized shear modulus and damping ratio versus
also presented in Table 5. This TSS represents the maximum
shear strain amplitude plots are shown in Fig. 8 and Fig. 10,
shear strain amplitude up to which the normalized shear mod-
respectively. Comparing these two figures, the damping ratio
ulus is equal to 1.
data are seen to be more scattered than that of normalized
Figs. 8 and 9 show the curves obtained for best fit curve
shear modulus. An interesting relationship between the nor-
and best fit line respectively. From these results, it can be
malized shear modulus and the damping ratio can be presented
observed that these models represent the data reasonably well.
by plotting these two values in one figure. All the data points
Further, in general, the normalized shear modulus curves shift
fall in a narrow band as shown in Fig. 12, and the best fit
to the right as confining pressure increases with the shape of
curve, obtained by the least square method, can be expressed
these curves remaining almost the same. Similar results have

r
as
been reported by Stokoe et al. (1980) for offshore soils (clayey

silts and silty clays).
Damping Values for Piedmont Residual Soils
The minimum damping ratio of each of the specimens tested
in the present study is presented in Table 1. These values were
obtained by resonant column tests at shear strain amplitudes
less than 0.001 %. It was observed that the influence of con-
fining pressure on damping ratio is less pronounced than it is
on shear modulus.
Fig. 10 shows the damping ratios obtained at various shear
strain amplitudes for all the specimens tested on the basis of
JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING / OCTOBER 1996/819
(G~ax -
D(%) = 20.4 1 + 3.1 (4)
It was observed that the confining pressure does not have an
affect on the damping ratio and normalized shear modulus
relationship. Also, the four types of residual soil tested, MH,
ML, SM-ML, and SM have almost the same best fit curves.
Therefore, (4) may be used to estimate the damping ratio from
the normalized shear modulus at any given shear strain am-
plitude. The relationship between the normalized shear mod-
ulus and shear strain amplitude are well defined by Seed
(1970), Hardin and Drnevich (1972) for sands and clay, and

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1996.122:813-821.

 --
20 1.2 r-------S::t-:ok-oe---:-:et~a~1 (~19:::8~0).---.,
SHEAR STRAIN
'#. AMPLITUDE (% 11io--~_
o 15 .0.0011
i= .0.0028 ~ 0.8
~ 10 (a)
.. 0.0055
(!)
z
a.
~~

- ~
.0.0117
00.0294
00.0488
0.09n
-
c3 0.6
( !) 0.4
~ 5
. ....---.. A

- .......
~~

0.2
o 0L...-.......................J'---t......................L--........................L.--l-....................
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSITY OF NEW ORLEANS on 02/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

1 10
NUMBER OF CYCLES
100 1000
- 20 ....-------=S:-eed---.-:-ld~rIa;:-:s:------,
(1970) (sands)

--
20 . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - _ _ _ , '#.
-15 AU Tests In
'#. • MHIIV-27E • MH/IV-28E .. MHlIV-32G o This Study
• MUIII-22 0 SM-MUlII-17D 0 SM-MUIII-19 I- Seed-ldrlsa (1970)
o 15
i= ~ 10 (Saturated Clays)

~ 10
(!)
z
c:::
t====j~~~~~~
~ 5 la--'liIIIi~~h.II~-
z
c:::
~ 5 0t::=i:::.......................J............................J.........................ll-.-..........-..........l
(b)
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1
0L..-............L...................J'--'-'...........w............1ol.l.IIIl...........-""'ll-................
SHEAR STRAIN AMPLITUDE (%)
1E+0 1E+11E+2 1E+3 1E+4 1E+51E+6
NUMBER OF CYCLES FIG. 13. Comparison of Results Obtained In Present Study
with Other Studies In Literature
FIG. 11. (a) Damping Ratio versus Number of Cycles for Spec-

-
Imen I1-8Cj (b) Influence of Large Number of Cycles on Damping 25 .....----=----:-~--::-::=----___,
Ratio

25 ~20
-
C20
0
+20
o
~ 15

~ 15 ~ 10
a:
~ 10 <c::E 5
Seed-Idrlss (1970)
a.
::E 5
o L...........LsaL.:lL:C.,;":Iay)&:.:.-L...l....u=i:.:i:.:L..:l.::.'=~~........,,J
c< o 0.2 1
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 FIG. 14. Comparison of NCSU Model with Other Experiment
Results In Literature
GIG max
FIG. 12. Damping Ratio as Function of Normalized Shear Mod- koe and Lodde and Isenhower conducted tests on San Fran-
ulus
cisco Bay mud, and Stokoe et al. reported these median curves
for tests conducted on offshore marine soils (clayey silts to
residual soils in the present research. It is usually difficult to silty clays). It can be observed that the normalized shear mod-
establish a model to express the relations between the damping ulus and damping of piedmont residual soils are in the same
ratio and shear strain amplitude directly, because the data range as reported by other authors. Fig. 14 shows the rela-
points are scattered. It appears that the relationship between tionship between normalized shear modulus and damping ratio
normalized shear modulus and damping ratio can be conven- obtained from our research and that reported in the literature.
iently used as a bridge to calculate damping from the model In general, these results suggest that the dynamic behavior of
of normalized shear modulus. these residual soils is intermediate of that exhibited by sands
and clays-the normalized shear modulus decreases and
COMPARISON WITH OTHER STUDIES damping ratio increases at a rate faster than that for clays but
The results of all tests performed in the present study are slower than that exhibited by sands.
plotted in Fig. 13. For comparison purposes, results from Seed
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
and Idriss (1970), Stokoe and Lodde (1978), Isenhower
(1979), and Stokoe et al. (1980) have also been included. Seed Dynamic properties (shear modulus and damping) of pied-
and Idriss presented results for sands and saturated clays, Sto- mont residual soils were investigated by performing resonant
820/ JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING / OCTOBER 1996

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1996.122:813-821.

 column and torsional shear tests using a Stokoe device. These
properties were evaluated with respect to confining pressure,
shear strain amplitude, cyclic frequency, and number of cycles
and compared to other studies in the literature. The conclu-
sions from this investigation are as follows.
The low amplitude shear modulus increased with confining
pressure. In most cases, this maximum shear modulus varied
to a power less than 0.5 with respect to confining pressure. As
confining pressure increased, the normalized shear modulus
decayed at a slower rate with increase in shear strain amplitude
(curves shifted to the right). The influence of confining pres-
sure on damping was observed to be less pronounced than on
shear modulus.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSITY OF NEW ORLEANS on 02/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
The shear modulus decreased with increase in shear strain
amplitude. The threshold shear strain was observed to be in
the range of 0.001 to 0.002%. The results also suggest that the
normalized shear modulus of coarse grained soils decays at a
faster rate with increase in shear strain amplitude. Damping
ratio values increased with shear strain amplitude and the in-
fluence of shear strain amplitude was observed to be more
pronounced on damping than on shear modulus. The threshold
shear strain was around 0.0005 to 0.001 %. Cyclic frequency
had no influence on normalized shear modulus of piedmont
residual soils.
To study the influence of number of cycles, several speci-
mens were subjected up to 1,000,000 cycles. Number of cycles
were observed to have no significant influence on shear mod-
ulus and damping ratio of these residual soils. The normalized
JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING 1 OCTOBER 1996/821
J. Geotech. Engrg. 1996.122:813-821.
shear modulus and damping of piedmont residual soils were
in the same range as reported by other authors for different
soils. In general, the normalized shear modulus decreased and
damping increased at a rate faster than that for clays but slower
than that exhibited by sands.
APPENDIX. REFERENCES
Hardin, B. 0., and Black, W. L. (1968). "Vibration modulus of normally
consolidated clay." J. Soil Mech. and Found. DiY., ASCE, 94(SM2),
353-368.
Hardin, B. 0., and Drnevich, V. P. (1972a). "Shear modulus and damping
in soils: design equations and curves." J. Soil Mech. and Found. Diy.,
ASCE, 98(7), 667-692.
Hardin, B. 0., and Drnevich, V. P. (1972b). "Shear modulus and damping
in soils: measurement and parameter effects." J. Soil Mech. and Found.
Diy., ASCE, 98(6), 603-624.
Isenhower, W. M. (1979). "Torsional simple shearlresonant column prop-
erties of San Francisco Bay mud," Geotechnical Engineering Thesis
GT80-I, Geotech. Engrg. Ctr., Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Univ. of Texas at
Austin, Austin, Tex.
Seed, H. B., and Idriss. I. M. (1970). "Soil moduli and damping factors
for dynamic response analyses." Rep. No. EERC 70-10, Univ. of Cal-
ifornia, Berkeley, Calif.
Sowers, G. F., and Richardson, T. L. (1983). "Residual soils of piedmont
and Blue Ridge." Transp. Res. Record 919, Transp. Res. Board, Wash-
ington, D.C.
Stokoe, K. H. II, Isenhower, W. M., and Hsu, J. R. (1980). "Dynamic
properties of offshore silty samples." OTC 3771. Offshore Techno!.
Con[., OTC, Houston, Tex.
Stokoe, K. H. II, and Lodde, P. F. (1978). "Dynamic response of San
Francisco Bay mud." Proc.• Earthquake Engrg. and Soil Dynamics
Con!, ASCE, New York, N.Y., Vol. II, 940-959.