PB197-869

\11 \\\11\ 1\\\1\\\\1\UI\\\1\1\\\\\\1\

REPORT NO.
EERC 70-10
EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING RESEARCH CENTER
DECEMBER 1970

SOIL MODULI AND DAMPING FACTORS

FOR DYNAMIC RESPONSE ANALYSES
by
H. BOLTON SEED

I. M. IDRISS

Report 10

SW-AJA
A Joint Venture of Shannon & Wilson, Inc.

and Agbabian-Jacobsen Associates

under Subcontract No. 3354 to

Union Carbide Corporation, Nuclear Division

Oak Ridge Notional Laboratory

/ ,~-
REPRODUCED BY
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
t-~ATIONAL TECHNICAL
INFORMATION SERVICE
SPRINGFIELD, VA 22161

COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA· Berkeley, California

 SOIL MODULI AND DAMPING FACTORS FOR DYNAMIC RESPONSE ANALYSES
by
l
H. Bolton Seed and I. M. Idriss

1. Introduction

Much progress has been made in recent years in the development of

analytical procedures for evaluating the response of soil deposits under

seismic loading conditions. Successful application of such procedures for

determining ground response in specific cases, however, is essentially

dependent on the incorporation of representative soil properties in the

analyses. Thus considerable effort has also been directed toward the

determination of soil properties for use in these analytical procedures.

In cases of ground response involving no residual soil displacements,

the response is determined mainly by the shear modulus and damping char-

acteristics of the soil under symmetrical cyclic loading conditions.

Because most soils have curvilinear stress-strain relationships as shown

in Fig. 1, the shear modulus is usually expressed as the secant modulus

determined by the extreme points on the hysteresis loop while the damping

factor is proportional to the area inside the hysteresis loop. It is

readily apparent that each of these properties will depend on the magnitude

of the strain for which the hysteresis loop is determined (see Fig. 1) and

thus both shear moduli and damping factors must be determined as functions

of the induced strain in a soil specimen or soil deposit.

Iprofessor of Civil Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, Calif.

2Assistant Research Engineer, University of California, Berkeley, Calif.

!
 Stress

--------+----+#~-!--+-----~--~, Strain

Fig. r HYSTERETIC STRESS-STRAIN RELATIONSHIPS AT

DIFFERENT STRAIN AMPLITUDES. /tLr
 2.

It is the purpose of this report to summarize available data on the

dynamic shear moduli and damping factors for soils under loading conditions

similar to those illustrated in Fig. 1 and to present the results in a form

which will provide a useful guide in the selection of soil characteristics

for analysis purposes. Since most of the data available to date have been

developed for sands and saturated clays, the report will deal primarily with

these two types of materials, though limited data for gravelly soils and

peats is also included.

2. Methods of Determining Shear Moduli and

Damping Characteristics

A wide variety of procedures, including laboratory and field tests

have been used to determine both shear moduli and damping characteristics.

The main procedures may be summarized as follows:

(a) Direct determination of stress-strain relationships

Hysteretic stress-strain relationships of the type shown

in Fig. 1 may be determined in the laboratory by means of triaxial

compression tests, simple shear tests or torsional shear tests

conducted under cyclic loading conditions. In general these

procedures are useful for measuring moduli and damping factors

under moderate to relatively high strains.

(b) Forced vibration tests

Forced vibration tests, involving the determination of

resonant frequencies and measurement of response at other

frequencies have been used to determine both moduli and damping

factors. Test conditions in the laboratory have included the

application of longitudinal vibrations and torsional vibrations

 3.

to cylindrical samples or shear vibrations to layers of soil

placed on a shaking table; in the field, shear vibrations of

dams have been induced by large shaking machines but it is

difficult to interpret the results of field tests to determine

damping factors. In general these procedures are useful for

determining properties at relatively low to moderate strain

levels.

(c) Free vibration tests

Free vibration tests,in which measurements are made of

the decay in response of a soil sample or soil deposit, have

been used to measure both moduli and damping factors for soils.

Methods of excitation are essentially similar to those used

for forced vibration tests, but the procedures can be used

for measurement of soil characteristics at relatively low

to moderately high strain levels.

(d) Field measurement of wave velocities

Field tests have been used to measure the velocity of

propagation of compression waves, shear waves, and Rayleigh

waves from which values of soil modulus can readily be deter-

mined for low strain conditions. These procedures have not

provided values of damping factors however.

(e) Analysis of ground response during earthquakes

In a few cases where motions have been determined at

different depths in a soil profile during earthquakes,

computations have been made to determine the effective moduli

and damping factors controlling the response of the deposit.

Details of the different test procedures are described elsewhere (Shannon

 Table 1. Test Procedures for Measuring Moduli and Damping Characteristics

General Procedure Test Condition Approximate Strain Range Properties Determined

-2
Determination of Triaxial compression 10 -2 to 5% Modulus; damping
hysteretic stress- Simple Shear 10 to 5% Modulus; damping
strain relationships Torsional shear 10- 2 to 5% Modulus; damping

-4 -2
Longitudinal vibrations 10_ 4 to 10_ 2 % Modulus; damping
Torsional vibrations 10_ 4 to 10_ 2 % Modulus; damping
Forced vibration
Shear vibrations - lab 10 to 10 % Modulus; damping
Shear vibrations - field Modulus

Longitudinal vibrations 10- 3 to 1% Modulus; damping

Torsional vibrations 10- 3 to 1% Modulus; damping
Free vibration tests
Shear vibrations - lab 10- 3 to 1% Modulus; damping
Shear vibrations - field 10- 3 to 1% Modulus

-4
Compression waves ~ 5 x 10 % Modulus
Field wave velocity -4
Shear waves ~ 5 x 10_ 4 % Modulus
measurements
Rayleigh waves ~ 5 x 10 % Modulus

Measurement of motions
Field seismic
\>.J at different levels Modulus; damping
\
response
in deposit
~
 4.

and Wilson, 1970) but a summary of the procedures and the approximate

ranges of strain within which they have been used is presented in

Table 1.

3. Previous Study by Hardin and Drnevich

A comprehensive survey of the factors affecting the shear moduli

and damping factors of soils and expressions for determining these

properties have recently been presented by Hardin and Drnevich (1970).

In this study it was suggested that the primary factors affecting moduli

and damping factors are:

Strain amplitude, Y

Effective mean principal stress, 0'

m
Void ratio, e

Number of cycles of loading, N

Degree of saturation for cohesive soils, S

and that less important factors include:

Octahedral shear stress

Overconsolidation ratio, OCR

Effective stress strength parameters, c' and ~'

Time effects

Relationships were presented to determine the values of maximum shear

modulus (at essentially zero strain) and the variations of modulus

values with strain for all soils. The expression for evaluating the

maximum shear modulus is:

G = 14760 x (2.973 - e)2 (OCR)a (a')!

max 1 + e m

where G = maximum shear modulus in psf,

max
 5.

e = void ratio
OCR = overconsolidation ratio

a = a parameter that depends on the plasticity index of the

soil, and

0'
m = mean principal effective stress in psf.
The value of a can be obtained from the following table:

PI a

0 0
20 0.18
40 0.30
60 0.41
80 0.48
>100 0.50

The modulus value, G, at a strain level, y, is then evaluated from

the relationship:

G
max
G = 1 + y/y (2)
r

T
max
where Yr = G
(3a)
max

+ K
o' - K0 2} 1/2
T
max -{C 2
0
v
sin<p'+ c'cos<p)2 _ (1
2 o~) (3b)

K
o
= coefficient of lateral stress at rest,

0'
v
= vertical effective stress, and

c' ,<P' = static strength parameters in terms of effective

stress.

Similar relationships were also presented for evaluating the damping

ratio. The damping ratio, A, at a strain level, y, is given by:

 6.

Amax . y/y r
A =
l+y/y (4)
r

where A is the maximum damping ratio corresponding to very large strains.

max
For clean sands, A (in percent) is evaluated by:
max

A D -, 1.5 10glO N (Sa)

max

where D = 33 percent for clean dry sands or D = 28 percent for clean saturated

sands, and N = number of cycles. For saturated cohesive soils, A

max
is given

by:

1 1
A 31 - (3+0, 03£) (0' ) 2' + 1. 5 {2' - 1. 5 log N (Sb)
max m

where f frequency of applied cyclic load in cycles per second, and

0' = mean principal effective stress in kg/cm 2 ,

m

The significance of the factors involved in these relationships is

discussed in the following section.

4, Shear Modulus Values for Sands

All investigations have shown that modulus values for sands are strongly

influenced by the confining pressure, the strain amplitude and the void ratio

(or relative density) but not significantly by variations in grain size

characteristics, It has been found that in general, the shear modulus and

confining pressure are related by the equation

1
G 100 K (o~) 2 (6)
2

so that the influence of void ratio and strain amplitude can be expressed

through their influence on the parameter K ,

2
 7.

The influence of other factors on K , may be illustrated by the

2
results in Fig. 2 which were computed using the relationships suggested

by Hardin and Drnevich. Plots are presented to show the influence of ¢',

effective vertical stress (0 I), K , and void ratio on the computed

v 0

relationships between K and strain amplitude. It may be seen that:

2
_3
(a) At very low strains (y < 10 percent), K depends only on
2
the void ratio, e.
_3 _1
(b) At intermediate strains (10 < y < 10 percent) the variation

of K with strain is only slightly influenced by the vertical

2
stress, and very slightly by variations in ¢' and K.
o
The

values of K are still influenced strongly by the void ratio

2
however.
-1
(c) At very high strains (y > 10 percent), the values of K are
2
slightly influenced by the vertical stress but they are

essentially independent of K ,
o
¢' and e.

Thus for practical purposes, values of K may be considered to be determined

2
mainly by the void ratio or relative density and the strain amplitude of the

motions.

A number of investigators, using different laboratory testing procedures,

have presented data on the relationships between these factors. The test

conditions used in these investigations are summarized in Table 2 and the

results are presented in Fig. 3, for samples having a relative density of

about 75 percent, and in Fig. 4 for samples having a relative density of

about 40%. Average relationships between K and strain for these two relative
2
density conditions are shown in Figs. 3 and 4, and they are compared in Fig.

5. Values of K at other relative densities can be estimated by interpolation,

2
as shown in Fig. 5.
 70 70,
G = 1000 Kz{0-':')"2 G = 1000 K2(crna" 1
0;; =1000 pst - )
Ko= 0.5
60I 60 e = 0.5
-
--.:: KO = 0.5
~~, e = 0.5 -~~, .' = 30°
50I ~ 50I , ,
I, I '\ 1\ '\
40 ~ 0 40
K2 \\'=40 K2
\ \(ov' =10,OOOpsf
30 30
• '=30~\ cry - 2000 PSf~ \ •
20I 20)
"
\ \ ,
10I
~ 10I
(0) Effect of Angle ot Friction, .' ~~ (b) Effect of Effective \A3rtical Stress, o-J
~.
o I . I o I I I ~
4
~ 10-~
.
10- 4 10-2 10-1
10-5 10- 10-' 10-2 10·' 10- 3
Shear StraIn - percent Shear Strain - percent

70 .---- 70 I

G = 1000 K2(o-m')'''Z G = 1000 K2(o"n:)"1

60I e= 05 o-y =1000 psf - 60) try =1000 pst
Ko=0.5 Ko =0.5
-
.' = 30° ~-t .' = 30°
50I
e= 0.7
---~ 50) ~ ..
-------- --------. -, ~,.' r a = I.
40 " '\ 40
~
... ...
K2 e-0.9 ~ K2
1------- ,, l~yKa=2.
~----- 1---- ...'
30 l\ 30
-~ .... ~,
...
Ko= 0.5)~
~, f')
20I
~ '~\ 20
.'•
'~~ ~,
10I '\~ 10I ~ "
'I (c) Effect of Void Ratio, e (d) Effect of Ko
if' , I
K'~ ~
\
o I.
10-3 10 -
~ oIO-~ I .
10- 4 10-3 10- 2 10- 1
10 10 10
\ Shear Strain - percent Shear Strain - percent
I~
Fig.2 INFLUENCE OF VARIOUS FACTORS ON THE SHEAR MODULI OF SANDS.
(based on Hardin and Drnevich expressions)
 Table 2. Summary of Laboratory InvestigationR of Shear Moduli and Damping Ratios for Sandy Soils.

Ran~e of Strain Range of Confining

Type of Test Soil Tested Reference
Pressure
Shear Axial
_3
Sand <5xlO % 600 to 7200 psf Richart, Hall and Lysmer (1962)
Forced Vibration: " " 450 to 7500 Hardin and Richart (1963)
Longitudinal " " 600 to 7400 Hall and Richart (1963)
Vibration " " 600 to 7200 Hardin (1965)
Sand, silty sand 1000 to 3500 Donovan (1968, 1969)
and clayey Rand "
_2
Sand <10 % 600 to 7200 Richart, Hall and Lysmer (1962)
Forced Vibration: " " 600 to 7400 Hall and Richart (1963)
Torsional Vibrations " " 450 to 7500 Hardin and Richart (1963)
Solid Sample " " 600 to 7200 Hardin (1965)
" " 600 to 8500 Drnevich, Hall and Richart (1966)
--
Forced Vibration _3 _2
Sand 10 to 6xlO % 600 to 8500 Drnevich, Hall and Richart (1966)
Torsional Vibration
" " 500 to 1800 Hardin and Drnevich (1970)
Hollow Sample

Free Vibration: _3 _4
Cylindrical Sample Sand 10 to 10 % 400 to 6400 Kishida and Takano (1970)

Sand and gravel, - 3 - 3

c.o 2xlO to 5xlO % 400 to 1800 Weissman and Hart (1961)
slIt and sand
Triaxial CompreRsion Sand, silty sand 3
5xlO- to 0.1% 1000 to 3500 Donovan (1968, 1969)
and clayey Rand 1
Sand 10- to 1% 3000 to 3400 MatRuRhita, Kishida and Kyo (1967)
_2
Sand 3xlO to 0.5% 2000 Seed (1968)
,.-J Simple Shear
" 1O- 2 to 0.5% 500 to 4000 Silver and Seed (1969)
 100r------~------____r------__,_-----____,

G = 1000 K2(o-~)1/2ps f

90 EJ Weissman and Hart (1961)

8 Richart, Hall and Lysmer (1962)
o
80~ ---+- -+. Drnevich, Hall and Richart (1966)
Seed (1968)
A Silver and Seed (1969)
• Hardin and Drnevich (1970)

70
8
60
8 o
8 o
K2 50
8
88
o
o
40r-------t-------------:!'!r-------+-----------!

30

201--------+--------+---------30~ .........:.....-...-----______1

10

Ol....- ....L...- .......L... -..L. ----I

10- 4 10- 2
Shear Strain-percent

Fig. 3 SHEAR MODULI OF SANDS AT RELATIVE DENSITY OF ABOUT 75 0/0.

1.0
 80. i i i I

G = 1000 K2(o-~)"2 psf

70 ... Richart. Hall and Lysmer (1962
• Drnevich, Hall and Richart (1966)
• Donovan (1968)
• Donovan (1969)
601 I I o Silver and Seed (1969)

50 •
4
K2 1 ~ 4 ~ ... •
40 ~·A Aft... ·~ ~ ... ~

301- I • .......... I
• •
• ••
I I ... 1· .....
20 ....
I I
• •
• 0

lOl- I I 0

I , .
I
o·10- 4
10- 3 10- 2 10- 1
Shear Strain - percent
t: Fig.4 SHEAR MODULI OF SANDS AT RELATIVE DENSITY OF ABOUT 40%.
 80. i I I I

70,... - Dr:::::: 90%

G = 1000 K2(0"~)1t2 psf

601~~

50

K2
401

I Dr::::::30%~
30.-

20 ---- I >- - - -

10

0, I I
10 4 I 1
10- 3 I~ 10-
_---*'--=::::
,...
N
~
Fig.5 SHEAR MODULI OF SANDS AT DIFFERENT RELATIVE DENSITIES.
 8.

It may be seen that for relatively dense samples, the values of K

2
determined at very low strains for laboratory test specimens are typically

in the range of 50 to 75. The results of a number of determinations of

shear moduli for sands at very low strain levels by means of in-situ shear

wave velocity measurements are summarized in Table 3; the six investigations

for dense to extremely dense sands (excluding clayey and partly cemented

sands) give values for K ranging from 44 to 86. Thus there appears to
2
be good general agreement between the results of laboratory and in-situ

investigations.

For purposes of comparison, representative values of the relationship

between K and strain at different void ratios determined by the Hardin-

2
Drnevich relationship for an effective vertical stress of 3000 psf, K =
o
0.5 and ¢' = 36° are plotted in Fig. 6.

The good agreement between the results in Figs. 5 and 6 indicates

that reasonable values for the shear moduli of sands may be obtained

either by use of the curves in Fig. 5 or by use of the Hardin-Drnevich

equations. Where field data is obtained in terms of the standard penetration

resistance, the data in Fig. 5 is likely to be more convenient but for other

purposes, direct computation from equations 1, 2 and 3 may be desirable.

It may be noted that if each of the relationships shown in Figs. 5 and

6 is replotted to show the variation with shear strain of the ratio of

_1+
shear modulus at strain y to shear modulus at a shear strain of 10

percent, the results fall within the relatively narrow band shown in

Fig. 7. Thus a close approximation to the modulus vs shear strain

relationship for any sand can be obtained by determining the modulus at

a very low strain level, say by wave propagation methods in the field,

and then reducing this value for other strain levels in accordance with

the results indicated by the average (dashed) line in Fig. 7.

1.3
 'Ie
Table 3. Shear Moduli of Sands Based on In-Situ
Shear Wave Velocity Measurements

Depth
Soil Location K
ft. 2

Loose moist sand Minnesota 10 34

Dense dry sand Washington 10 44
Dense saturated sand So. California 50 58
Dense saturated sand Georgia 200 60
Dense saturated silty sand Georgia 60 65
Dense saturated sand So. California 300 72
Extremely dense silty sand So. California 125 86
Dense dry sand (slightly cemented) Washington 65 166
Moist clayey sand Georgia 30 119

*Shear modulus, G = 1
1000 K (Om')2psf
2

14
 80· • I I I

20, I I :-.....'..." " , I I

10

I I
•
I
o·10----~
4 10-3 10-2 10-1
Shear Strain - percent

Fig.6 SHEAR MODULI OF SAN OS AT DIFFERENT VOID RATIOS.

~ (based an Hardin - Drnevich expressions)
 1.0, i H"':5L.J7OIbD)}S,,;__ I I 1

>--c AJ
.~ •~ 0.81 .." rr , tV
CIl'¢ "<'lO
o a..
:; 0
~8. I ' n ,rn-,..

__
>.. 0.61 I I I
U

!!! I 'jkjJ
n, rn- "
~_ ~
'5 '5_
Range of values for data
.- , rr),.
o 0
"0"0 0.41 --+-1--
shown in Figs 5 and 6 I

y / / /
..rr,,...//l\..1
1 ) rA· I
~o ~0 -+1--
-------+,----~~~~
'- '-
o 0

Q,) Q,) I '4J11//,...".. 1

~ ti 0.21 I I

O. I .....J.. •
<s-
-- 10~-~4-----~'_-
10- 3 10- 2 10- 1
Shear Strain, Y - percent

Fig.7 VARIATION OF SHEAR MODULUS WITH SHEAR STRAIN FOR SANDS.

 9.

5. Damping Ratios for Sands

From their study of factors influencing the damping ratios of sands,

Hardin and Drnevich concluded that shear strain, effective mean principal

stress (or a ' and K ), void ratio and number of cycles were very important,
v 0

while octahedral shear stress, angle of friction and degree of saturation had

lesser effects. As in the case of moduli, the effects of variations in grain

size characteristics were considered to be relatively insignificant.

Computations of the effects of the above factors on the relationship

between damping ratio and shear strain amplitude, as determined by the

Hardin-Drnevich relationships are shown in Fig. 8. It is apparent that

the effects of ~', K , void ratio and degree of saturation are relatively
o
minor, and it can readily be seen from the equation for maximum damping

ratio

Amax ~ 30 - 1. 5 log iON

that if values of A are determined for about N =5 cycles, values for other

numbers of cycles in the range of interest (say 5 to 30) will not be sig-

nificantly different.

Thus the main factor affecting the relationship between damping ratio

and shear strain is the vertical confining pressure a '. The influence of
v
this factor, as determined by two studies is shown in Fig. 9. For pressures

less than about 500 psf, the effect of pressure changes may be significant

but excluding these very low pressures, which represent conditions in the

top few feet of soils, the effect of variations in pressure is very small

compared with the effect of shear strain, and an average damping ratio vs

shear strain relationship determined for an effective vertical stress of

1.7
 30 -, , 30 I I

(0) Effect of Angle of Friction, .' (b) Effect of Void Ratio, e

.-- Saturated clean sand ......:'ZII"I
25 Saturated clean sand 25 f -
'E
-
.:-
cQ) uy' = 1000 psf
Ko = 0.5 /- "
O~' Q)
u
av' =1000 psf
Ko = 0.5
~~
,;/'
~,
~20 >-- 8.20
, t-- 0
a. e = 0.5
.Q
,
o II o
.' = 30
g,,1,
,,,'/
(; 15 0: 15
(JI
0:
c IA:,"''---e =0.9
(JI 'i5..
c /'
·'=~i/ E 10
,'/
-~,
!
'i5..IO 0 o
E lI'"-.' = 40 a " / .............e =0.7
o
a /: e=0.5~ ,t'
5 5
~
p/ L#'l "
"-"/
~
o - o ..
10-5 10- 4 10- 3 10- 2 10-1 10- 5 10- 4 10- 3 10- 2 10-1
Shear Strain - percent Shear Strain - percent

35 35
I I I
(c) Effect of Ko (d) Effect of Saturation
30)I-- Saturated clean sand 301 - av' =1000 psf .'
.-
cry' =1000 psf Ko = 0.5 ~,/
1:: 25 ~ e = 0.5 ~ 25 - e = 0.5 I'
0 0
u
----- -... ,/
e .' = 30 • I, Q) .' = 30 V
~20
I
,, r a.
I 20 //
---
.Q .2 Dry clean sand-
(;
1<0= 0.5-,;;-
0: 15 ,
,<~ ~ )'/
(JI 15
(JI
c ,{f'-Ko= 1.0 c
'i5.. a. ,~(saturated
E ,'~ I J clean sand
o 10 ~ 10
a , V"-Ko = 2.0
5) 'h~ 5i
~y
,.,'"
-- V .-' / ?
~- .. o
o ---
10- 5 10- 4 10- 3 10- 2 10- 1 10- 5 10- 4 10·' 10- 2 10- 1
Shear Shoi n - percent Shear Strain - percent

Fig.8 INFLUENCE OF VARIOUS FACTORS ON THE DAMPING RATIOS FOR SANDS.

....'ZJ
(based on Hordin and Drnevich expressions)
 30.....------,-------.-------,.-------,------~

e = 0.5
ep = 30°
Ko= 0.5
-
c
~20
~ oy' =1000 pst ----,--- ---..
-
I

.Q
Iav' = 3000 pst
&
01
c
! o-J =10,000 pst
'0.
e101-------1---------------j1F--------r-----;f'--------J-------j
Cl

ol - ---.l.-....=-::::;;~::;:::::.;~~=--------L:::___-----L_-_----.J
10- 5 10- 4 10- 3 10-2 10- 1
Shear Strai n - percent

Fig,9a INFLUENCE OF CONFINING PRESSURE ON DAMPING RATIO OF SATURATED SAND,

(based on Hardin and Drnevich expressions)

30,.......------....-----....----------,--------,-----~

-
C
Ql
~ 201-------1-------t----.-.r--t-+-----j'-----j"-----1--------i
Ql
,
0. ov'~ 50 psf - after
o Arai and Umehara (1966) av' = 500
pst} after
~ av' = 2000 pst
Silver
, and Seed
01
C
"'---ov = 4000pst (969)
Co

oE 1 0 1 - - - - - - - + - - - - -.......-=--~~~+------+--------l
Cl

OL.......::;----------L..-:;------...l.......;~-------I.--;---------l...--------l
4
10- 10-3 10- 2 10- 1 10
Shear Strain - percen t

Fig.9b INFLUENCE OF CON FINING PRESSURE ON DAMPING RATIO OF DRY SAND.

19
 10.

2000 to 3000 psf would appear to be adequate for many practical purposes.

Considering the potential scatter of test data for damping ratios, even

those obtained by the same investigator using the same test procedure, the

adoption of such an average relationship may be even more justified.

A l~st of previous investigations of damping ratios of sands is

presented in Table 2, and the results of these studies are summarized in

Fig. 10. Approximate upper and lower bound relationships are shown by

dashed l~nes and a representative average relationship for all of the

test data is shown by the solid line. This average relationship is

likely to provide values of damping ratio with sufficient accuracy for

many practical purposes.

The curves in Fig. 10 also provide a basis for evaluating the relation-

ship between damping ratio and strain for particular sands for which limited

test data is available. If the value of damping ratio at a strain level of

0·1 to 0.5 percent is determined, the probable damping ratios at other

strains can be closely approximated by drawing a line through the known

data point parallel to the curves shown in Fig. 10.

6. Shear Modulus Values for Saturated Clays

Accurate determination of the shear moduli of saturated clays is

enormously complicated by the large effects of strain amplitude and

sample disturbance on modulus values. In-situ measurements eliminate

the problems raised by sample disturbance,but to date no techniques have

been developed for inducing large controlled strain amplitudes in natural

deposits and thus moduli can only be determined at very small strain levels.

In the laboratory, on the other hand, samples may be tested under a wide

range of strains but for test specimens from natural deposits, the moduli

20
 28, i I I .......

6 Weissman and Hart (1961) (J

• Hardin (1965) "(J

24 o Drnevich, Hall and Richart (1966)1
f /SJ----/--"""7' 1
8 Matsushita, Kishida and Kyo(967) / /
• Silver and Seed (1969) /
20 • Donovan (1969) /

C
• Hardin and Drnevich (1970) / /
Q) /
-
U
v Ki shida and Takano (1970) /
/
~ /
Q)
a.
, 16
". /
/

0 I I I //~
0
- // • ~ /" I
a:: /
C' / /
c
a.
12 /
r
~
/.
-..... /

/
E /
.
0
Cl
81 I .r I ...
.,. • r // I I

4 I I "V _ 9r.7~""'" .,. A ... ' - ~ I I

• - --
•
-~--
4
o·10--- -
10- 3 ii-" . .._-•
10- 2 10- 1
She ar Strain - percent

~ Fig.IO DAMPING RATIOS FOR SANDS.

 11.

determined will inevitably be influenced by the effects of sample

dis turbance.

The joint influence of these effects is illustrated by the data

presented in Figs. 11 and 12. Fig. 11 shows values of shear moduli for

San Francisco Bay mud at a depth of about 25 ft determined by in-situ

shear wave velocity measurements by Aisiks and Tarshansky (1968) and values

determined by cyclic loading simple shear tests on undisturbed samples by Thiers

(1965). Projecting the laboratory test data to the strain level corres-

ponding to the field test conditions, it may be seen that the laboratory

test values are only about 40 percent of those for the in-situ clay. This

result is not surprising in the light of previous studies of the influence

of disturbance on the moduli of natural clays (Ladd, 1964) and it emphasizes

the magnitude of the correction which may have to be made for this effect.

The influence of strain amplitude on shear modulus is also apparent

from the data in Fig. 11, the values at strains of about 0.5 percent

being only about 12 percent of those corresponding to strains of the

order of 10-~ or 10- 4 percent.

Fig. 12 shows similar data for Union Bay clay. In this case values

of shear moduli for in-situ conditions were determined from seismic wave

velocity measurements and from observations of the response of the clay

during an earthquake; modulus values for undisturbed samples were deter-

mined by resonant frequency tests and cyclic loading tests in the laboratory.

Again the in-situ moduli are two or three times greater than the laboratory

test values at comparable strains, and the modulus decreases enormously with

increasing strain amplitude.

In addition to the effects of strain amplitude and disturbance, the

shear moduli of different clays will clearly depend on their relative

 700 r------,--------r--------.---------,.,--------.
I

Modulus vo!ue obtained from

6001-------+------1 /-/
shear wave velocity measurements
1

at a depth of 30 feet in normally

i consolidated Son Froncisco Bay mud
(from Aisiks and Torshansky. 1968)

5001-------+-------+-----+--------+----------1

-U)
.::t:

U)
I
400

::::J
::::J
"0
0
:!E
L-
0 300
Q)
~
Cf)

Modulus values measured

.......by Thiers (1965) for Bay mud
200r------t-------+'"-=-----.:,------+ su= 350 psf; e = 2.4
, -

"
"~
100 -
Modulus volues colculoted using Hordin ond
Drnevich (1970) equations for Bay mud at a
~ ~
/

depth of 30 feet <OVI =1200 psf; Ko=0.5;

""'35°; C"D; e'2.4;DCR·1l ~
7
~t
OL....-:::------J.........,:------~-----..L._..::,...__----....L..-:-----~
10-5 10- 4 10-3 10- 2 10- 1
Shear Strai n - percent

Fig.11 SHEAR MODULUS DETERMINATIONS FOR SAN FRANCISCO BAY MUD.

23
 1200..---------r-- - - - r -- - - - - - , . . . : - - - . . . . , . . . . . . . . , - - - - - - .
j
1

~ Average modulus from seismic wove velocity measurements

by Shannon and Wilson (1967) I
I I

10001-------+------f-------+-------+-----~

o--r~ Madu Ius from analysis of ground response

(Seed and Idriss, 1970)
8001---------+------+------+-------+-------1

-
en
~

en
::::I

.go
600l-------+--------;-.-,..l--;----.----;--+.-----.------;-----l--------j
8---8 Modulus from analysis of ground response
~ (Tsai and Hausner, 1970)
~
o
Q)
.c
CJ)

I
~----_____1f-------+__,---+ Moduli computed using Hardin and
400 / Drnevich equations (CTJ =1070 psf;
Ko =0.5; e = 1.6; c'=0, ep'=300, OCR=I)

r-----+--~_ I I
• ~ I Test data for undisturbed
I ~I samples (Shannon and Wilsan,1967)
200l-----------+------+----~-____j_---C..-----r-------'---___l

f'-~
o L.- .l..-- ...L..-
I··~
...L..- ...J..I'-...
_ _- ~

10- 4 10-3 10-2 10- 1 10

Shear Strain - percent

Fig.12 SHEAR MODULUS DETERMINATIONS FOR UNION BAY CLAY AT

DE PTH OF ABOU T 80 FT.

24
 12.

strengths and stiffnesses, Hardin and Drnevich express these effects in terms

of the effective mean principal stress, void ratio, overconsolidation ratio

and effective stress strength parameters, but the resulting relationships do

not always provide reasonable evaluations of shear moduli for in-situ

conditions, as evidenced by the results shown in Figs. 11 and 12.

However in view of the facts that (1) stiffness increases in general with

soil strength, (2) for static load conditions, the ratio E/s u for saturated

clays does not vary widely from one soil to another, and (3) test data at very

low strain levels indicates an approximately linear relationship between the

shear modulus and shear strength for a number of clays (Wilson and Dietrich,

1960), it seems reasonable to expect that variations in clay characteristics

might be taken into account with a reasonable degree of accuracy by normalizing

the shear modulus, G, with respect to the undrained shear strength, su' and

expressing the relationship G/s u as a function of shear strain.

Test data obtained by a number of investigators and expressed in this form

are summarized in Table 4 and plotted in Fig. 13. For test data obtained in

laboratory tests under unconsolidated-undrained test conditions, the measured

moduli were multiplied by a factor of 2.5 to make an approximate allowance for

sample disturbance. Clearly the effects of disturbance will vary from one

study to another but in the absence of detailed information on sampling and

testing conditions it was considered that a factor of 2.5 would represent a

reasonable average correction factor for these effects. For in-situ and

laboratory consolidated-undrained test conditions, no correction was applied

to the test results.

While there is considerable scatter in the data, most of the test results

fall within the dashed lines in Fig. 13; that is, within ±50% of the average

values shown by the solid line in the figure, Thus the average values are

likely to provide reasonable estimates of the in-situ moduli for many clays.
 Table 4. Summary of Invest.igations of Shear Moduli and Damping Rat.ios for Saturated Clays.

Range of Strain
Data
Range of Shear
Type of Test SoJI TeRted Correction Reference
Shear Axia 1 Strength
Factor*
Strain Strain

Field shear wave velocity <10- 3 %

S.F. !Jay mud 200 to 500 psf l.0 Aisiks and Tarshansky (1968)
measurementR
Field compression wave <10- 3 %
Union Bay clay l.0 Shannon and Wilson (1967)
velocity measurements
-
Lab. Free Vibration Tests: Elkhorn Slough 2 Parmalee et al. (1964) ;
]xlO- to 2% 300 to 1100 psf 2.5
Longitudinal Vibrations sil ty clay IdriRR (1966)
1---. - ._-
Lab. Free Vibration Tests: S.F. Bay mud 2
2x10- to 0.5% 300 psf 2.5 Kovacs (1968)
Shear Vibrations Kaolinite/Bentonite 5xlO-?to 2% 44 to 85 psf 2.5 KovaCR (l96B)
mixture

Lab. Forced Vibration TeRts: Cambridge clay =2.5xlO- 3 % 1080 ps[ 2.5 Wilson and Dietr ieh (1960)
Longitudinal Vibrations MiRRissippi gravels =2.5xlO- 3 % ~20 psf 2.5 Wilson and Dietrich (1960)
.
Lab. Forced Vibration Tests: Birch Hay clay ·'2.5xlO- J % 1000 to 2420 psf 2.5 Wilson and Dietrich (1960)
Torsional Vibrations Montana clay =2.5xlO- 3 % 6000 psf 2.5 WilRon and Dietrich (1960)
_. ---
Lab. Forced Vibration Tests: Whidbey Hay clay =2.5xlO- J % 230 to lROO Jlsf 1.5** Wilson and Illetrich (1960)
Torsional Vibrations Silty clay 0.125% ROO to 1500 psf l.0 Zeevaert (1967)
(consol. samples) Edgar Plastic Kaolin -'2.5x10- 3 % 1400 to 1800 psf 1.0 lIardln and Black (1968)

Ardmore clay 0.1 to 0.5% - - Taylor and Menzies (196 J)

Ardmore clay 0.5 to 1% - - Taylor and lIugheR (1965)
Lab. Triaxial Camp. Tests Union !Jay clay 3xlO- 3 to O. J% 200 to 880 psf 2.5 Shannon and Wilson (1967)
Silty clay 10- 2 to 0.1% - - Donovan (1969)
Webb Mark IV clay 0.2 to 1% - - Taylor and Hacchus (1969)

~rizek and Franklin (1967)

Lab. Torsional Shear Tests Georgia Kaolinite 3xlO-?to 0.2% - - liard in and Drnevich (1970)

S.F. Bay mud 0.2 to 4% JOO to 400 psf 2.5 Thiers (1965), Thiers & Seed (196B)
Kaolinite/Bentonite
Lab. Simple Shear TeRtR 0.1 to 2.5% 44 to 85 psf 2.5 Kovacs
mixture
S.F. Bay mud 0.1 to 3% JOO psf 2.5 Kovacs
. - .

*Applied to modulus values to allow for sample disturbance.

**Sample disturbed slightly after consolidation.

~
~~
 30,000 I I

• Wilson and Dietrich (1960)

x Thiers (1965)
8 Idriss (1966)
.- - - - --. -
10,000I + Zeevaert (1967)
• Shannon and Wilson (1967)
Jlll. Shannon and Wilson (1967)
Q '\:7 Thiers and Seed (1968)
__ 8 -- - - - - -
3000 o Kovacs (1968)
I//~ I///Ii. ~ - - 0... o Hardin and Black (1968)
"'7--
t----IAisiks and Tarshansky (1968)
....--....
~ .... ... ... TIIllISeed and Idriss (1970)
1000 ~ ...... -
--- --- ~ ... ~Tsai and Housner (1970)
• --~ ~
G ............ ........
su
. --- - ....... ... 1. " 8 8
~ ........ ~
A88 I"--..~ , / !
... .... ...
I
300
~ ... ..,x
0 .
o...... .......... ~ ,~ .....'\7....
o b~~ .
"
• )+ ....,~~ .~) ...-'\:.7_ 8
I
100 ..:..
~::i.
...
........ 0
.......
-......;
e' . .
~ ....
~ .... .... 0 ~0
.... , 0
.... x
... ....
30 ± .... ....

10
10- 4 10- 3 10- 2 10- 1 10
Sheor Strain - percent
ij Fig.13 IN - SITU SHEAR MODULI FOR SATURATED CLAYS.
 13.

Alternat~vely the data in Fig. 13 might be used to assess the influence

of strain amplitude on the shear modulus of natural clays, by expressing the

ordinates in terms of the ratio of shear modulus at shear strain y to shear

modulus at a shear strain of 3 x 10- 4 percent. This ratio for the average

values shown in Fig. 13, is plotted as a function of shear strain in Fig.

14- Reasonable escimates of the shear modulus of a clay at any strain

amplitude can be obtained by determining the in-situ value at strains of

the order of 3 x 10-~ percent by means of shear wave velocity measurements

and applying the reduction factors shown in Fig. 14 to determine values

at other shear strains,

7. Damping Values for Saturated Clays

Test data for damping ratios for saturated clays are so limited and

the results vary to such an extent that it is difficult to determine the

ma~n factors influencing the damping ratios of these soils. A list

of previous investigations of damping ratios for saturated clays is

presented in Table 3 and the results of these studies are summarized in

Fig. 15. Approximate upper and lower bound relationships between damping

ratio and shear strain are shown by the dashed lines and a representative

average relationship for all of the test data is shown by the solid line.

This average relationship may well provide values of damping ratio with

sufficient accuracy for many practical purposes.

The curves in Fig. 15 also provide a basis for evaluating the

relationship between damping ratio and strain for any particular clay.

If the value of damping ratio at a strain level of 0.1 to 0.5 percent

is determined, the probable damping ratios at other strains can be

estimated by drawing a line through the known data point parallel to

the curves shown in Fig. 15.

 o
0:
0
l.L
Z
-
<t
0:
I-
I (f)
0:
<t
w
I
(f)
I

-I
-c
Q)
I-
-
~
(f)
o u
(f)>-
V \-
Q)
a.
::)<t
.....J.....J
I ::)u
0
>-.. 00
c
.-
- ~w
l-
e\- O:<t
N
-
(f)
<to:
W::)
':.'
..
/ o
I
\- II-
(f)<t
e

V
Q)
~
1.L.(f)
(f) 0
I
, Z
;
0
-
I

,/ It)
I-
U
::)
0

i/
i o
I W
0:
.....J
<t
U
-CL
>-

( I-
<;t-
O"
ii:
C\J o en <.D ~ C\J
a a d a
lU aJJad i7_ 0I )l£ ~..< JO~ snlnpOLN JDa4S
..< U!OJIS Joa4S 10 snlnpOLN JOa4S
29
 40
I
~ Taylor and Menzies (1963)
o Taylor and Hughes Cl965)
35 f--- -
Idriss (1966)
4• Krizek and Franklin (1967)
0 Thiers and Seed (1968) ....
Kovacs (1968) /
.... ....
",
~
30
..
8 Donovan (1969)
Taylor and Bacchus (1969)
....
0
+ Taylor and Bacchus (1969)
c • Hardin and Drnevi ch (1970> /"
-
Q)
u
... 25 -- /
/
/// /
Q)
/
a. / .
I
II) -¢e/
o
,-
. /// r:l
"0 20 ~ -I
• I
0:: 1
~
0' o/
C ~ I
• 1
a. /
,-..%
E 15
o /.
~/.~
~.
.. ~
0.<: /0
o I
/8 It. <f''' +
/8. ~ I

;¥ t 0 /1 +
10 - ---- --
,/ A/
~ .. /
t:." •••• A. . . . . /,1
", "" 0.. . . /
.... ..... } ./
~
5 ~. .. - ",'"

.... ......
~ - ~-

o
1--------- --
10- 4 10- 3- 10-2 10- 1 10
Shear Strain - percent

~
o Fig.15 DAMPING RATIOS FOR SATURATED CLAYS.
 14.

Further studies are required of the factors influencing the damping ratios

of saturated clays to permit more detailed assessments of this characteristic

for analysis purposes.

8. Shear Moduli and Damping Ratios for Gravelly Soils

Probably because of the large diameter of test specimens required, there

do not appear to have been any laboratory investigations of the shear moduli

and damping ratios for gravelly soils. The results of a limited number of

moduli determinations for these type of soil,based on in-situ shear wave

velocity measurements,are summarized in Table 5, from which it may be seen

that at small strain levels, modulus values are between 1.25 and 2.5 times

greater than those for dense sands.

At higher strains, it seems likely that moduli for gravelly soils will

decrease in a manner similar to that for sands. Thus by applying the moduli

reduction factors shown in Fig. 7 to the data in Table 5, variations in

shear moduli with strain might be estimated as shown in Fig. 16, Additional

data on modulus values and damping ratios for gravelly soils is badly needed;

however approximate values for use in some types of response analyses can be

estimated by the procedure shown in Fig 16 and the assumption that damping

is approximately the same as for sandy materials.

9. Shear Moduli and Damping Ratios for Peats

The results of several investigations which have provided data on the

shear moduli and damping ratios for peats are summarized in Fig. 17. Shear

moduli are shown as the ratio of Gis , with values determined by in-situ
u
seismic wave velocity measurements, evaluation of ground response to earth-

quake excitation, and laboratory investigations. As in the case of clays,

moduli determined by laboratory unconsolidated-undrained tests were multiplied

31
 o

Table 5. Shear Moduli * of Gravelly Soils Based on In-Situ

Shear Wave Velocity Measurements

Depth
Soil Location K
ft. 2

Sand. gravel. and cobbles with 90

Caracas 200
little clay
Dense sand and gravel Washington 150 122
Sand. gravel and cobbles with 123
Caracas 255
little clay
Dense sand and sandy gravel So. California 175 188

*Shear modulus G = 1000 K2 (Om')21 psf

32
220
I 1/2 •
G =1000 K2(o-~) psf

200
L ~ Dense sand and sandy gravel
(Southern Colilornio)
- -- --
180
~-

-- ..... .....
..... ,,
,,
160 "-
,
""
140
"",
L o e n s e sand and grovel
(Washington)
" \
\
\
120
1---- - _ ..

--- .... ........

.... ...
..... .....
\
\
\
\
, \

_ _ _
.L ~

_ _ _
Sand, gravel and
cobbles with little clay
(Caracas)
,,
,
\
,
\

- --- ... \

-- -- ....
1', \

80 ... ..... ", , \

,
... .....
", , \

----........
\
' ... , , \
60
/ ,, ""
------"Ir-
\
,
LOense sand, ~ "- ""
Dr~ 90% (Fig.5)
" "- "- "" "
40
.......... " ... ""...
""
~< '
... ,
r--
,' " ,
20 .... '.... ' ....

~-
...........
............................
....... ......
.... ...
10- 2
Shear Strain - percent

Fig. 16 MODULI DETERMINATIONS FOR GRAVELLY SOILS.

33
 20
+-
c:
Q)
(J
~
Q)
a. .,
I

-
0
0
a::
C'l
10

c:
a. ,:
E
0
Cl
0 i
10- 4 10-3 10-2 10- 1 10
Shear Strain - percent
200

i.,1m
• Zeevaert (1967)
Shannon and Wilson (1967)
Seismic survey, Shannon and Wilson (1967)

150 I--~",,",",,~t------+------" Ground

(1970)
response analysis, Seed and Idriss

G
1001-------+---.......- - - - - - - + - - - - - - - - - - + - - - - - - - 1
su

50 I-----------I-------+-------+-~"""'=:_---+_----____l

• ••
Ol-- .-L---:-- ~-------l.___:__------l...--------J

10- 4 10- 3 10-2 10- 1 10

Shear Strain - percent

Fig. 17 MODULI At-D DAMPING DETERMINATIONS FOR PEATS.

 15.

by a factor of 2.5 before being plotted in Fig. 17. While the nature of

peaty soils is likely to vary considerably from one location to another,

the data in Fig. 17 may provide some indication of the dynamic characteristics

of this type of soil.

10. Conclusion

In the preceding pages an attempt has been made to_ summarize'.i~~a- con-

venient form, the available data concerning the shear moduli and damping

ratios for soils. Clearly more data on these dynamic characteristics is

required, particularly for. silts, clays and gravelly soils. However it

is hoped that the data presented will serve as a useful guide in the

selection of soil properties for dynamic response analyses and that other

engineers might be encouraged to make available any additional data which

would supplement that presented above.

Acknowledgement

The authors gratefully acknowledge the cooperation of many engineers

who contributed data for use in this report; appreciation is due particularly

to the Bechtel Corporation and Shannon and Wilson Inc. who provided previously

unpublished field data and to I. Arango who assisted in the data reduction.

35
 REFERENCES

Aisiks, E. G, and Tarshansky, 1. W. (1968), "Soil Studies for Seismic

Design of San Francisco Transbay Tube," Proceedings, Symposium on
Earthquake and Vibration Effects on the Behavior of Soils and
Foundations, ASTM, San Francisco.

Arai, H, and Umehara, Y, (1966), "Vibration of Dry Sand Layers",

Proceedings, Japan Earthquake Engineering Symposium, Tokyo.

Donovan, N. C. (1968) personal communication

Donovan, N. C- (1969) - Research Brief - Soil Dynamics Specialty Session,

7th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering,
Mexico City.

Drnevich, V. P., Hall, J. R" Jr. and Richart, F. E., Jr., (1966) "Large
Amplitude Vibration Effects on the Shear Modulus of Sand," Univ. of
Michigan Report to Waterways Experiment Station, Corps of Engineers,
U. S_ Army, Contract DA-22-079-eng-340, Oct. 1966.

Hall, J. R- and Richart, F. E. (1963) "Effect of Vibration Amplitude

on ~.Jave Velocities in Granular ~aterials," Proceedings, 2nd Pan American
Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Brazil.

Hardin, B, O. and Richart, F. E., Jr., (1963), "Elastic Wave Velocities

in Granular Soils," Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations
Division, ASCE, Vol. 89, No. SM1, Feb. 1963, pp. 33-65,

Hardin, B. 0., (1965), "The Nature of Damping in Sands," Journal of the

Soils Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE, Vol. 91, No. SMl, Jan.
1965, pp, 63-67.

Hardin, B. O. and Black, W. L. (1968) "Vibration of Normally Consolidated

Clay," Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE,
Vol. 94, No. SM2, March.

Hardin, B. O. and Drnevich, V. P. (1970) "Shear Modulus and Damping in

Soils: I, Measurement and Parameter Effects, II. Design Equations
and Curves," Technical Reports UKY 27-70-CE 2 and 3, College of Engineering,
University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, July.

Idriss, I. M, (1966), "The Response of Earth-Banks During Earthquakes,"

Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.

Kishida, H, and Takano, A. (1970) "The Damping in the Dry Sand," Proceedings
of the 3rd Japan Earthquake Engineering Symposium, Tokyo, Japan.

Kovacs, W. D. (1968) "An Experimental Study of the Response of Clay

Embankments to Base Excitation,'· Ph. D. Dissertation, University of
California, Berkeley.
Krizek, R. J. and Franklin, A. G. (1967) "Energy Dissipation in a Soft
Clay," Proceedings, Symposium on Wave Propagation and Dynamic Properties
of Earth Materials, Albuquerque, New Mexico.

Ladd, Charles C., "Stress-Strain Modulus of Clay in Undrained Shear,"

Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE, Vol. 90
No. SM5, September, 1964.

Matsushita, K., Kishida, H. and Kyo, K., "Experiments on Damping of

Sands", Transactions of the Architectural Institute of Japan, Summaries
of Technical Papers (Annual Meeting of AIJ, 1967), p. 166.

Parmelee, R. A., Penzien, J., Scheffey, C. F., Seed, H. B. and Thiers,

G. R., (1964), "Seismic Effects on Structures Supported on Piles Extending
Through Deep Sensitive Clays," Report No. 64-2, Institute of Engineering
Research, Univ. of California, Berkeley, California.

Richart, F. E., Jro, Hall, J. R., Jr., and Lysmer, J., (962) "Study of
the Propagation and Dissipation of 'Elastic' Wave Energy in Granular
Soils," University of Florida Report to Waterways Experiment Station,
Corps of Engrs., U. S. Army, Contract DA-22-070-eng-314, Sept. 1962.

Seed, H. B. (1968) Unpublished test results.

Seed, H, B. and Idriss, 1. H. (1970) "Analysis of Ground Motions at Union

Bay, Seattle, during Earthquakes and Distant Nuclear Blasts," Bulletin
Seismological Society of America, Vol. 60, No.1, February.

Shannon and Wilson (1967) Personal communications re soil investigation

at Union Bay.

Shannon and Wilson (970), "Soil Behaviour under Earthquake Loading

Conditions" - State of the Art Report prepared for Union Carbide Corporation,
Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

Silver, M. L. and Seed, H. B. (1969), "The Behavior of Sands under Seismic

Loading Conditions," Report No. EERC 69-16, University of California,
Berkeley.

Taylor, R. J. and Menzies, B. K. (1963) "Damping Characteristics of

Dynamically Loaded Clay," Proceedings, 4th Australian-New Zealand
Conference on Soil Hechanics.

Taylor, P. and Hughes, J., (1965) "Dynamic Properties of Foundation

Sub-soils as Determined from Laboratory Tests," Proceedings, 3rd World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, New Zealand, Vol. 1, pp. 196-211.

Taylor, R. J. and Bacchus, D. R. (1969) "Dynamic Cyclic Strain Test on a

Clay," Proceedings 7th International Conference on Soil Hechanics and
Foundation Engineering, Vol. I, Mexico City.

37
Thiers, G. R. (1965) "The Behavior of Saturated Clay under Seismic
Loading Conditions.'· Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California,
Berkeley.

Thiers, G. R. and Seed, H. B., (1968) "Cyclic Stress-Strain Characteristics

of Clay," Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE, Vol.
94, No. SM2, March 1968, pp. 555-569.

Tsai, N. C. and Housner, G. W. (1970) "Calculation of a Surface Motion of

a Layered Half-Space," Bulletin, Seismological Society of America, Vol.
60, No.5, October.

Weissman, G. F. and Hart, R. R., (1961) "The Damping Capacity of Some

Granular Soils," Symposium on Soil Dynamics, ASTM Special Technical
Publication No. 305, June 1961, pp. 45-54.

Wilson, S. D. and Dietrich, R. J. (1960) "Effect of Consolidation Pressure

on Elastic and Strength Properties of Clay," Proceedings of the Research
Conference on Shear Strength of Cohesive Soils, American Society of
Civil Engineers, Boulder, Colorado.

,.38
 EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING RESEARCH CENTER REPORTS

EERC 67-1 Feasibility Study Large-Scale Earthquake Simulator Facility",

by J. Penzien, J. G. Bouwkamp, R. W. Clough, Dixon Rea -
September 1967. (PB 187. 905)

EERC 68-1 Unassigned.

EERC 68-2 "Inelastic Behavior of Beam-to-Column Subassenblages Under

Repeated Loading", by V. Bertero, April 1968. (PB 184 888)

EERC 68-3 "A Graphical Method for Solving the Wave Reflection-Refraction
Problem", by H. D. McNiven and Y. Mengi - April 1968. (PB 187 943)

EERC 68-4 "Dynamic Properties of McKinley School Buildings", by D. Rea,

J. G. Bouwkamp, R. W. Clough - November 1968 (PB 187 202)

EERC 68-5 "Characteristics of Rock Motions During Earthquakes", by H. B.

Seed, I. M. Idriss, F. W. Kiefer - September 1968. (PB 188 388)

EERC 69-1 "Earthquake Engineering Research at Berkeley", January 1969.

(PB 187 906)

EERC 69-2 "Nonlinear Seismic Response of Earth Structures", by M. Dibaj

and J. Penzien - January 1969. (PB 187 904)

EERC 69-3 "Probabilistic Study of the Behavior of Structures During

Earthquakes", by P. Ruiz and J. Penzien - March 1969. (PB 187 886)

EERC 69-4 "Numerical Solution of Boundary Value Problems in Structural

Mechanics by Reduction to an Initial Value Formulation", by
Nestor Distefano and Jaime Schujman - March 1969. (PB 187 942)

EERC 69-5 "Dynamic Programming and the Solution of the Biharmonic Equation",
by Nestor Distefano - March 1969. (PB 187 941)

EERC 69-6 "Stochastic Analysis of Offshore Tower Structures", by Anil Kumar

Malhotra and Joseph Penzien - May 1969. (PB 187 903)

EERC 69-7 "Rock Motion Accelerograms for High Magnitude Earthquakes", by

H. B. Seed and I, M. Idriss - May 1969. (PB 187 940)

EERC 69-8 "Structural Dynamics Testing Facilities at the University of

California, Berkeley", by R. M. Stephen, J. G. Bouwkamp, R. W.
Clough, J. Penzien - August 1969. (PB 189 Ill)

Numbers in parentheses are Accession Numbers assigned to USDC.

EERC 69-9 "Seismic Response of Soil Deposits Underlain by Sloping Rock
Boundaries", by Houshang Dezfulian and H. Bolton Seed -
Augus t 1969. (PB 189 114)

EERC 69-10 "Dynamic Stress Analysis of Axisymmetric Structures Under

Arbi trary Loading", by Sukumar Ghosh and E, L. \'l1ilson,
September 1969. (PB 189 026)

EERC 69-11 "Seismic Behavior of Hultistory Frames Designed by Different

Philosophies", by James C. Anderson and V. Bertero - October
1969. (PB 190 662)

EERC 69-12 "Stiffness Degradation of Reinforced Concrete Structures

Subjected to Reversed Actions", by V. Bertero, B. Bresler,
Huey Hing Liao - December 1969.
"

EERC 69-13 "Response of Non-Uniform Soil Deposits to Traveling Seismic

\.Javes", by H. Dezfulian and H. B. Seed - December 1969.
(PB 191 023)

EERC 69-14 "Damping CapaCl.ty of a ~1odel Steel Structure", by Dixon Rea,

R. w. Clough and J, G. Bouwkamp - December 1969. (PB 190 663)

EERC 69-15 "Influence of Local Soil Conditions on Building Damage

Potential During Earthquakes", by H. Bolton Seed and 1. H.
Idriss - December 1969. (PB 191 036)

EERC 69-16 "The Behavior of Sands Under Seismic Loading Conditions", by

Marshall L. Silver and H. Bolton Seed - December 1969.

EERC 70-1 "Earthquake R.esponse of Concrete Gravity Dams", by A. K. Chopra

- January 1970 (AD 709 640)

EERC 70-2 "Relationships bet"leen Soil Conditions and Building Damage in

the Caracas Earthquake of July 29, 1967", by H. Bolton Seed
I. M. Idriss and H. Duzfulian - February 1970.

EERC 70-3 "Cyclical Loading of Full Size Steel Connections", by E. P.

Popov and R. H. Stephen - July 1970.

EERC 70-4 "Seismic Analysis of the Charaima Building, Caraballeda,

'lenezuela", by Subcommittee of the SEAOi\'C Research Committee,
V. V. Bertero, Paul F. Fratessa, Stephen A. Mahin, Joseph H.
Sextion, Alexander C. Scordelis, Edward L. Wilson, Loring A.
Wyllie, H. Bolton Seed, Joseph Penzien, Chairman - August
1970.

EERC 70-5 "A Computer Program for Earthquake Analysis of Dams" by Anil
K. Chopra - September 1970.
EERC 70-6 "The Propagation of Love Waves Across Non-Horizontally
Layered Structures," by John Lysmer and Lawrence A. Drake -
October 1970.

EERC 70-7 "Influence of Base Rock Characteristics on Ground Response,"

by John Lysmer, H. Bolton Seed and Per B. Schnabel -
November 1970.

EERC 70-8 "Applicability of Laboratory Test Procedures for Measuring

Soil Liquefaction Characteristics Under Cyclic Loading,"
by H. Bolton Seed and W. H. Peacock - November 1970.

EERC 70-9 "A Simplified Procedure for Evaluating Soil Liquefaction

Potential," by H. Bolton Seed and I. M. Idriss -
November 1970.

EERC 70-10 "Soil Moduli and Damping Factors For Dynamic Response
Analyses," by H. Bolton Seed and 1. M. Idriss - December 1970.