| Literature DB >> 35591499 |
Yangsheng Ye1, Degou Cai1, Shuang Tian2,3, Hongye Yan1, Xianzhang Ling2,3, Liang Tang2,3, Yike Wu2,3.
Abstract
In the era of high-speed trains, it is very important to ensure the safety and stability of rail tracks under adverse conditions including seasonal freezing and thawing. Freeze-thaw cycles (FTCs) affecting the engineering performance of coarse-grained soil (CGS) is one of the major reasons for track deterioration. The reported results of a number of static freeze-thaw triaxial tests on the shear behaviour of CGS are analysed herein. It was observed that confining pressure (σ3) and FTCs have a significant influence on the shear behaviour of CGS. In this paper, an empirical mathematical model has been proposed to capture the dilatancy of CGS subjected to FTCs during shearing. The empirical constants a, b, and c proposed in the model are a function of σ3 and FTCs. The results of the model have been compared with the laboratory experiments and are found to be in good agreement.Entities:
Keywords: coarse-grained soil; dilatancy; empirical equations; freeze–thaw cycles
Year: 2022 PMID: 35591499 PMCID: PMC9101496 DOI: 10.3390/ma15093167
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.748
Figure 1The schematic construction of the Harbin-Qiqihar high-speed railway in Northeast China.
Figure 2Dependence of deviatoric stress and volumetric strain on axial strain of tested CGS corresponding to different numbers of FTCs (modified after Ling et al. [18]): (a) σ3 = 30 kPa, (b) σ3 = 60 kPa, and (c) σ3 = 90 kPa.
Empirical Constants, a, b, and c.
| Confining Pressure, | FTC, |
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 30 | 1 | −0.5822 | 1.8480 | 1.1303 | 0.825 |
| 3 | −1.3870 | 3.9102 | −0.2301 | 0.808 | |
| 6 | −2.4030 | 6.1883 | −1.5292 | 0.869 | |
| 10 | −4.5342 | 11.0304 | −4.3194 | 0.909 | |
| 60 | 1 | −0.3523 | 1.3240 | 1.2973 | 0.856 |
| 3 | −0.6427 | 1.8171 | 1.0671 | 0.543 | |
| 6 | −2.0180 | 4.8403 | −0.6425 | 0.823 | |
| 10 | −3.3690 | 7.6584 | −2.1612 | 0.845 | |
| 90 | 1 | −0.2907 | 1.1040 | 1.4135 | 0.539 |
| 3 | −0.3732 | 1.2260 | 1.3086 | 0.875 | |
| 6 | −1.0870 | 2.6253 | 0.5784 | 0.786 | |
| 10 | −2.4421 | 5.3794 | −0.8606 | 0.899 |
Figure 3Relationship between the stress ratio and dilatancy ratio of CGS corresponding to different numbers of FTCs and confining pressures: (a) σ3 = 30 kPa, (b) σ3 = 60 kPa, and (c) σ3 = 90 kPa.
Regression coefficients for model parameters.
| Fitting Equations | Regression Coefficients | Values |
|---|---|---|
|
|
| −3.2310 |
|
| −0.0122 | |
|
|
| 8.5480 |
|
| −0.0132 | |
|
|
| 8.0590 |
|
| 0.0031 | |
|
|
| 0.2898 |
|
| 0.2024 | |
|
|
| 0.3517 |
|
| 0.1745 | |
|
|
| 1.2390 |
|
| −0.0451 |
Figure 4Fitting curves of (a) empirical constant a; (b) empirical constant b; and (c) empirical constant d.
Figure 5Comparison between predicted and experimental values of stress ratio and dilatancy ratio.
Values of the parameters of the prediction model.
| Source of Experimental Data | Material | FTC | Confining Pressure, |
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Liu et al. [ | Tailing soil | NFT = 1 | 100 | −2.892 | 4.440 | 0.324 | 0.816 |
| Ishikawa and Miura [ | Volcanic coarse-grained soil | NFT = 1 | 49 | −4.017 | 6.409 | −0.998 | 0.889 |
| He et al. [ | Sandy soil | Frozen | 1000 | −5.514 | 11.710 | −4.246 | 0.633 |
| Ling et al. [ | Coarse-grained soil | NFT = 1 | 60 | −3.408 | 7.797 | −2.339 | 0.845 |