Liquefaction of sand in simple shear condition

Yasuyo Hosono
Graduate student, Tokyo Metropolitan University, Tokyo, Japan

Mitsutoshi Yoshimine
Associate Professor, Tokyo Metropolitan University, Tokyo, Japan

ABSTRACT: The authors have been researching the effects of stress and strain conditions on the undrained shear behavior of sand, and it was found that triaxial test have some problems for evaluating liquefaction characteristics of ground because of its singular stress conditions. This study attempts to determine the factors affecting liquefaction strength of sand, including initial shear stress and anisotropic consolidation, under simple shear conditions using a hollow cylindrical torsional shear apparatus. The observed undrained behavior of sand by simple shear tests was different from that of triaxial tests. Although simple shear test is more suitable for evaluating ground response, it is complex and difficult to carry out. Thus we attempted to propose a methodology for predicting proper liquefaction strength of sandy ground by conventional triaxial tests without simple shear apparatus. 1 INTRODUCTION Previously the authors compared undrained behaviors of sand in triaxial compression and triaxial extension tests under monotonic loading conditions, and found that the two responses were completely different from each other (Yoshimine et al. 1998, Yoshimine & Hosono 2000, 2001, Yoshimine et al. 1999). Figures 1 and 2 are the examples of the triaxial test results. It was observed that the undrained shear behavior of sands was dilative and highly stiff in triaxial compression tests, whereas considerably large excess pore water pressure was developed and the behavior was much softer in triaxial extension tests under monotonic loading conditions for the same materials. Especially if static shear stress existed in extension side, strong brittleness was observed during undrained deformation as shown in Figure 2. The behavior in simple shear conditions, that may more similar to the insitu ground conditions, was the intermediate of those of triaxial compression and triaxial extension conditions (Fig. 3). Cyclic strength of sandy soils has been generally evaluated by means of undrained cyclic triaxial test in which triaxial compression and extension are repeatedly applied on the specimen. These stress conditions repeated in cyclic triaxial tests are the two extremes in terms of the direction of maximum principal stress and the magnitude of intermediate principal stress. This cyclic stress condition is far different from that of real ground during earthquake excitation, and therefore, the test results might have several problems to use for evaluating the precise liquefaction resistance of insitu ground. Simple shear condition is the most representative strain condition of insitu ground during earthquake. Although some researchers such as Vaid & Sivathayalan (1996) and Riemer & Seed (1997) have already studied the relations between the liquefaction resistances of sands evaluated from triaxial tests and simple shear tests, their specimens had different shapes, dimensions and lateral boundary conditions, i.e. cylindrical specimens those have height larger than diameter with flexible boundary in triaxial tests, and flat disk-shaped specimens with rigid boundary in simple shear tests either NGI type or Cambridge type devices. These differences of shape, dimensions and boundary conditions of specimens may affect the test results and this made the exact comparison difficult and complex. In addition, applying precise undrained and constant volume conditions are difficult in these simple shear apparatus because of the shorter height of the specimen and the rigid boundary confinement. Further more, measurements of stress components on the rigid sidewalls are impossible. Taking advantage of using hollow cylindrical specimens is a good solution to overcome these problems. In the simple shear process of hollow cylindrical specimen, the height is fixed, and the saturated specimen and inner hollow space (inner confining cell) are kept undrained. These settings make the height, outer diameter and inner diameter of the specimen constant and make only the torsional de-

Deviator stress ratio,

formation possible; hence accurate undrained simple shear condition can be achieved (Pradhan et al. 1988, Yoshimine et al. 1998, 1999). If axial compression and extension are applied to the hollow cylindrical specimen with constant outer and inner lateral confining pressure, ordinal triaxial compression and extension tests are possible on the same specimen. This makes fair comparison of the undrained shear behaviors possible under different stress and strain conditions. Another advantage of using hollow cylindrical specimen is that it has flexible lateral boundary conditions thus all of the stress and strain components on the specimen can be measured, and details of the stress condition such as rotation of principal stress and changing of intermediate principal stress during simple shear deformation can be observed. Furthermore, the effects of stress ratio at initial anisotropic consolidation can be closely examined by simple shear tests on hollow cylinder specimens. It should be noted that, in triaxial tests, it is impossible to research the effects of initial shear loading and anisotropic consolidation separately. In the following sections, by taking these advantages of the simple shear testing on hollow cylindrical specimens, it will be attempted to make clear the effects of stress conditions, including initial shear loading and anisotropic consolidation, on the undrained cyclic deformation and liquefaction strength characteristics of sand. 2 TESTED MATERIAL AND METHOD OF SIMPLE SHEAR TEST The tested material was Toyoura sand, which has a mean particle diameter D50= 0.19mm, a minimum
700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0

2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5

Undrained triaxial tests on Toyoura sand, Dr = 39~42%, Monotonic loading

e=0.828 e=0.826 e=0.824

q / pini' = ( #v $!#h ) / pini'

e=0.827

0 -0.5

e=0.823

e=0.819 e=0.824 e=0.825 e=0.818

-3

Axial strain, %a (%)

-2

-1

2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0 -0.5 0

Undrained triaxial tests on Toyoura sand, Dr = 39~42%, Monotonic loading

$0.2

+0.2 qini / pini' = 0

qini / pini' = +0.2 0 $0.2 qini / pini' = $0.3 $0.45 $0.6

Effective confining stress ratio, p' / pini'

0.5

1.0

1.5

Vertical effective normal stress, #v' (kPa)

Triaxial compression

Figure 2. Undrained triaxial compression and extension tests with initial static shear (Yoshimine & Hosono, 2000, 2001)

Triaxial extension

Toyoura sand e = 0.799 - 0.819

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 Hrizontal effective normal stress, #h' (kPa)

Figure 1. Stress path from undrained triaxial compression and extension tests on Toyoura sand (Yoshimine & Hosono, 2000)

void ratio emin= 0.597 and a maximum void ratio emax= 0.977. This sand is a poorly graded clean sand as indicated by the gradation curve in Figure 4. The dry deposition method (Yoshimine et al. 1998) was used for the constitution of the loose samples that had relative density of around 40% (39!"!44%). The hollow cylindrical specimen used in this study had a height of 20cm, an outer diameter of 10cm, and an inner diameter of 6cm. Dry sand was deposited in 8 layers. Firstly, a hollow cylindrical paper funnel was inserted between the inner and outer molds and filled with dry sand. Then, the funnel was lifted up slowly and the dry sand was very loosely deposited in layers of around 25mm in thickness. Tapping by wooden hammer was applied to the outer mold after each layer was deposited to

300 Deviator stress, q = #1 - #3 (kPa) 250 200 150 100 50 0 Triaxial extension Dr = 36% 0 2 4 6 8 10 Shear strain, ' = %1 $!%3 (%) 12 14 Toyoura sand Dry deposition (a) Triaxial compression Dr = 33% Simple shear Dr = 36%

100 90 Summation persentage (%) 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 Grain size (mm) 10

Toyoura sands
&s = 2.643 g/cm3 D10 = 0.16 D30 = 0.18 D50 = 0.19 D60 = 0.20 Uc = 1.25 Uc' = 1.25

300 Deviator stress, q = #1 - #3 (kPa) 250 200 Triaxial compression Dr = 33%

Figure 4. Grain size distribution of Toyoura sand

plied to the specimens during consolidation. The ratio of torsional static shear stress to the vertical efSimple shear fective stress was " = !ini/#vini' = 0 to 0.4. Dr = 36% 150 After waiting about one hour to complete consolidation, the specimens were subjected to cyclic 100 torsional shear load with constant amplitude under (b) Triaxial undrained simple shear condition with constant extension Toyoura sand Dr = 36% 50 height and volume of specimen, and constant volDry deposition ume of inner confining cell, as afore mentioned. Ini0 tial liquefaction was defined by either excess pore 0 50 100 150 200 presser ratio of 1.0 or residual torsional strain of 5% Effective mean stress, p' (kPa) that was achieved earlier than another, and the number of cycles causing initial liquefaction was reFigure 3. Undrained behavior of Toyoura sand in triaxial comcorded. pression, extension and simple shear tests (Yoshimine et al., 1999b) The testing conditions for all of the simple shear tests were summarized in Table 1. The density of the material after consolidation denoted in this figure bring the sample to the expected and uniform denwas measured with an accuracy of 0.001 by the sity. same method described by Verdugo and Ishihara After saturation, with a Skempton's B value (1996). Stress and strain components on hollow cygreater than 0.96, the sample was anisotropically lindrical specimen were measured and calculated consolidated to an initial stress ratio of K0 = #h'/#v' = based on the considerations by Hight et al. (1983) 0.5_taking into account of the typical insitu ground and Yoshimine et al. (1998). condition with static earth pressure at rest. Initial static torsional shear stress (!s = !ini) was also apTable1. List of undrained cyclic simple shear tests Test No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Void ratio e 0.828 0.810 0.832 0.816 0.819 0.828 0.826 0.823 0.823 Relative density Dr (%) 39 44 38 42 42 39 40 41 41 Initial consolidation state before cyclic loading #v' (kPa) 200 200 200 200 200 100 100 100 100 #h' (kPa) 100 100 100 100 100 50 50 50 50 K0=#h'/#v' 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 ( (kPa)! 0 0 0 40 40 40 30 30 20 Static shear stress ratio )!*!(!+#'vini 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.40 0.30 0.30 0.30 Cyclic stress Number of ratio cycles causing liquefaction, N (d (kPa) 0.13 125 0.18 14 0.20 7 0.18 80 0.20 20 0.38 30 0.35 3 0.30 15 0.03 12

3 TESTS RESULTS

3.1 Results of triaxial tests For the purpose of studying the effects of the stress and strain conditions, we conducted a series of undrained cyclic triaxial tests on Toyoura sand in which initial static shear load in both triaxial compression and extension directions was applied on the specimens. The sample preparation method and the testing procedure were almost the same as those of simple shear tests described above. The test results are shown in Figures 5 and 6. Cyclic stress ratio, (d / p'ini is plotted versus number of cycles causing initial liquefaction, N in these figures. The initial static shear stress is defined by (s = (ini = (#v $#h)/2 and this value is less than zero when initial shear is induced by triaxial extension. In the case of looser sand (Dr = 39 " 42%) denoted in Figure 4, it is clear that the evaluated liquefaction strength by triaxial tests were heavily affected by the direction of initial static stress. Liquefaction resistance for N = 20 with initial compression stress ratio of 0.4 be0.5

(ini / p'ini = + 0.4

Cyclic triaxial tests on tyoura sand, Dr = 39 ! 42 %

N = 0.5 : peak shear in monotonic loading

came about 3 times larger if compared with the resistance without shear stress. On contrary the strength was reduced as lower as 1/10 when the same initial stress ratio was induced into the direction of triaxial extension. From these data we can conclude that when initial shear stress was acted on the specimen in a direction of compression, the ratio K) of liquefaction strength under static stress to that of without static stress is increased. Besides when initial shear stress was acted in the direction of extension, the ratio K) is noticeably decreased much lower than 1.0. In the case of denser sand (Dr = 39 " 42%), the effect of initial static shear stress had somewhat different trend (Fig. 6). When initial shear stress was acted in a direction of compression, the strength for liquefaction was increased in the same manner as looser sand. When initial shear stress ratios ) = (ini/p'ini less than $0.2 were acted in a direction of extension, the strength was smaller than the case of no initial static stress, but the strength became larger for higher initial stress levels. Initial stress larger than cyclic stress amplitude made it impossible to achieve zero effective stress state and stiffened the sample. This is the reason of the recovery of the liquefaction resistance. 3.2 Results of simple shear test Firstly examples of time histories of the direction of maximum principal stress and intermediate principal stress coefficient during undrained cyclic simple shear are shown in Figures 7 and 8, because these
40 #z,!-kPa. !)#!(deg) b-value 20 0

Cyclic stress ratio , (d / p'ini

0.4

(ini / p'ini = + 0.3

0.3

(ini / p'ini = + 0.2 (ini / p'ini = + 0.1 (ini / p'ini = $ 0.1

$ 0.15 $ 0.3 10 100 1000

0.2

(ini / p'ini = 0

0.1

0.0

$ 0.4 1

Number of cycles causing initial liquefaction , N

-20 -40 40

Figure 5. Cyclic shear stress ratio versus of number of cycles causing liquefaction in triaxial tests on looser sand
Cyclic triaxial tests on toyoura sand, Dr = 61 ! 64 %

0.5

Cyclic stress ratio , (d / p'ini

(ini / p'ini = $ 0.3 0.4 (ini / p'ini = 0 0.3

(ini / p'ini = + 0.3

20 0

(ini / p'ini = $ 0.4 (ini / p'ini = + 0.2

-20 -40

0.2 (ini / p'ini = $ 0.1 0.1

(ini / p'ini = + 0.1

(ini / p'ini = $ 0.2

0.0 1 10 100 1000

0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 -0.2 -0.4 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Time (seconds) 140 160

Number of cycles causing initial liquefaction , N

Figure 6. Cyclic shear stress ratio versus of number of cycles causing liquefaction in triaxial tests on denser sand

Figure 7. Typical result of cyclic simple shear test without initial static shear stress () = 0)

80 #z,!-kPa. 60 40 20 0 50 40 !)#!(deg) 30 20 10 0 1.0 b-value 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 100 200 300 400 Time (seconds) 500

and b-values were spiky at the moment of unloading in a cycle, fixed values of about )#=400 and b=0.25 were attained at around the peaks of shear stress at each cycle where resistance of the material was mobilized after large shear deformation occurred. Thus it may be said that the same stress condition that is characterized by the parameters )#!= 400 and b = 0.25 to 0.3 was mobilized at larger undrained deformation during cyclic shear loadings irrespective to the magnitude of initial static shear stress levels. The same values of stress parameters were observed in monotonic loading conditions in simple shear tests of the previous studies (Yoshimine et al. 1998, 1999a) as shown in Figures 9 and 10. It should be noticed that the shear deformation tends to accumulate into the direction of initial static shear loading in the same manner as the results from triaxial testing. Larger static shear stress produced larger residual deformation, smaller excess pore water pressure and less tendency of reaching zero effective stress condition. If the static shear stress was larger than the single amplitude of cyclic stress, no reversal of shear stress occurred during cyclic load80 Shear stress, !# (kPa) z,
. 804 e=0

Figure 8. Typical result of cyclic simple shear test with initial static shear stress () = 0.2)

stress parameters have been shown to have strong effects on the undrained shear behavior of sands (Yoshimine et al. 1998, Uthayakumar and Vaid 1998, Nakata et al. 1998). Such an accurate measurement of stress conditions is one of the most prominent features of this series of simple shear tests as emphasized in the former sections. These figures compares two tests from anisotropic consolidation without any static shear stress (" = 0) and from initial static shear stress ratio of " = 0.4. Figure 7 shows the simple shear test results with constant cyclic shear stress amplitude without initial shear stress. The time histories of the torsional shear stress (d = #z,, the direction of maximum principal stress from the vertical )#, and the intermediate principal stress coefficient b = (#2$#3)/(#1$#3) were plotted in the figure. If there is no static torsional shear stress, the direction of #1 was vertical ()#=0) and the magnitude of #2 was equal to #3 (b =0) at the initial anisotropic consolidation that is exactly the same as triaxial compression state. Then the amplitude of )# was increasing with accumulation of number of cycles, and it became about /400 at initial liquefaction and the following larger deformation. The b-value was also increased from 0 and settled around 0.3 when liquefaction was achieved. On the other hand, Figure 8 shows the cyclic simple shear test results with initial shear stress of 40kPa that is corresponding to static stress ratio of " = !ini/#v' = 0.40, angle of principal stress of )#=290, and b-value of 0.24. When cyclic excitation started, both )#-value was gradually increased. Although )#

60 40 20

e=

0.

6 81
e 1 .84 0 =

(a)

e=

4 0.84

e=

Direction of !#1 , )# (deg)

0 0 60 45 30 15 0 0 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0

0.88

3 e = 0.86 e = 0.876

10

12

14

e = 0.804 - 0.876 e = 0.888

(b)
2

b = (#2 - #3) / (#1 - #3)

Simple shear Toyoura sand

#v'ini=100kPa #h'ini=100kPa

10

12

14

(c)

e = 0.804 - 0.876

e = 0.888 4 6 8 10 Sher strain, !' (%) z,

12

14

Figure 9. Undrained shear behavior of Toyoura sand in monotonic simple shear condition (K0=#h'/#v' = 1.0 at initial state) (Yoshimine et al., 1999a)

Cyclic stress ratio , (d / #'v ini

ing and this made the behavior stiffer and deformation was possible only into the direction of initial static loading. These are the same characteristics reported by Vaid et al. (1989) and Hyodo et al. (1994b). All of the cyclic simple shear tests are summarized and the cyclic stress amplitude was plotted versus number of cycles for liquefaction on Figure 11. In this figure, the axis of ordinate is cyclic stress ratio against initial vertical stress, and the axis of abscissa is number of cycles causing initial liquefaction. It can be seen that the resistance for liquefaction increased by application of initial static stress. When static stress ratios of )=0.2, )=0.3, and!)=0.4 were acted on the specimens, the strength for liquefaction were 1.4 times, 1.9 times and 2.5 times of the strength without static stress, respectively, for loose sand with relative density of around 40% in simple shear condition. Data from undrained cyclic triaxial tests were also plotted on the same figure. The liquefaction strength evaluated by triaxial tests was slightly larger than that of from simple shear tests.
80 Shear stress, !#z, (kPa) 60 40
e=

4 THE EFFECTS OF INITIAL STATIC STRESS ON LIQUEFACTION

4.1 Comparison of the effects of initial static shear stress from simple shear test and triaxial test In order to compare the effects of initial static shear stress on undrained cyclic behavior of sand measured by simple shear test and triaxial test, we arranged the plots of strength correction factor for static load, K", against the static stress ratio, ", in Figures 12, 13 and 14. Correction parameter K" is the ratio of liquefaction strength !d(") with initial stress ratio of ) to the strength !d(0) without initial stress, i.e. K" = !d(")/!d(0), where !d(0) and !d(") are the cyclic shear stress amplitude that caused initial liquefaction at 20 cycles of cyclic loading.
0.4
) = (ini Cyclic Shear Tests on Tyoura sands , / #'ini = 0.4 Dr = 39 ! 42

) = (ini / #'ini = 0.2

0.3
) = (ini / #'ini = 0.3 ) = (ini / #'ini = 0 Simple Shear Tests

e=

0.

5 83

(a)

0.2

58 0.8

0.1

Triaxal Tests K0 = 1.0 , ) = 0

20 0 60 0 45 30 15 0 0 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0

e = 0. 880

0.0 1 10 100 1000

Number of cycles causing initial liquefaction , N

10 12 14
Figure 11. Cyclic shear stress ratio versus of number of cycles causing liquefaction in simple shear tests ()!= 0 "!0.4) and triaxial tests ()!= 0)

Direction of !#1 , )# (deg)

e = 0.835

(b)
e = 0.858

Cyclic strength correction factor , K)

e = 0.880

Dr = 39 ! 42 %
Hosono and Yoshimine(2001) Triaxial (K0 = 1.0) q > 0 (TC)

b = (#2 - #3) / (#1 - #3)

Simple shear Toyoura sand

#v'ini=200kPa #h'ini=100kPa
e = 0.835

10

12

14

(c)

This study , Simple Shear Tests (K0 = 0.5)

1
Hosono and Yoshimine(2001) Triaxial (K0 = 1.0) q < 0 (TE)

e = 0.858 e = 0.880 2 4 6 8 10 Sher strain, !'z, (%) 12 14

0 0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

Initial static stress ratio , )

Figure 12. Comparison of the effect of initial static shear stress ratio on the cyclic strength evaluated by simple shear test and tiaxial test

Figure 10. Undrained shear behavior of Toyoura sand in monotonic simple shear condition (K0=#h'/#v' = 0.5 at initial state) (Yoshimine et al 1999a)

Figure 12 compares the effects of initial static shear stress on liquefaction resistance evaluated by cyclic simple shear tests described in subsection 3.2 and cyclic triaxial tests explained in subsection 3.1. If tested in triaxial conditions, K"-value was largely increased with "-value when the static stress was applied into compression, whereas it is considerably decreased when the static stress was applied into extension side, and the effect of "-value is definitely opposite depending on the direction of initial stress. The K"-value evaluated from simple shear conditions is plotted at the intermediate between the two extreme cases from triaxial tests. The increment of liquefaction resistance became larger for larger initial shear stress but the increment was smaller if it is compared with the test results from triaxial tests with initial static stress in triaxial compression direction. These test results indicate large influence of mechanical anisotropy of sand deposit on its liquefaction resistance measured by triaxial tests.
3.0

Figures 13 and 14 show test results by other researchers for loose sands (Dr = 20 " 45%) and denser sands (Dr = 40 " 64%), respectively. These figure suggest that the cyclic strength correction factor K" evaluated by triaxial tests is increasing against initial static stress ratio ) when a-value is not so large. However, if tested by ring torsional apparatus that might provide simple shear condition, K" is shightly decreasing with increasing )-value. It is clear that, in the case of triaxial tests, the initial static stress induce into the direction of triaxial compression resulted in the trend of increasing K"value, and static stress induced into the direction of triaxial extension resulted in the opposite trend as shown in Figure 12. Although the direction of initial static load in the triaxial tests by other researchers is not explicitly mentioned in their descriptions, it is sure that static load of triaxial compression was adopted in the previous studies plotted in Figures 13 and 14. 4.2 Prediction of strength for liquefaction in simple shear condition by means of triaxial tests It is desirable to evaluate liquefaction resistance of sand deposits subjected to initial shear stress due to sloping of the ground or loading by foundation of structures, by means of conventional triaxial apparatus rather than complex simple shear devices. Nevertheless it is possible that the liquefaction resistance is highly overestimated if it is evaluated by means of undrained cyclic triaxial tests with static stress in compression as discussed in the previous sections. From Figure 12 we may estimate the liquefaction resistance of sands under simple shear condition that is more similar to the real ground conditions. When static stress ratio of )!= 0.2, 0.3 and 0.4 were acted, the correction factors K" for simple shear condition were 75%, 74% and 85% of the factors evaluated by cyclic triaxial tests with initial compression stress. This reduction factors may be used to predict liquefaction resistance of ground by means of conventional triaxial cyclic tests. It should be noted that the correlation could be a function of density and degree of anisotropy of the sheared material. If the material is completely isotropic and the behaviors in triaxial compression and extension are the same, there is no reason to use the reduction factors. This aspect should be studied further in the future. 5 CONCLUSIONS In this paper we carefully examined the liquefaction characteristics of Toyoura sand in simple shear conditions. The effects of initial shear stress were mainly studied and the following conclusions were obtained.

Cyclic strength correction factor,K)

Dr = 20 ! 45 %
Vaid and Chern(1983) Triaxial Szerdy(1985) Triaxial

2.0

Yoshimi and Oh-oka(1975) Ring Torsion

Hyodo et.al.(1994) Triaxial

0.0 0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

Initial static stress ratio,)

Figure 13. Effect of initial static shear stress ratio on the cyclic strength of loose sands from previous studies

4.0

Cyclic strength correction factor , K)

Szerdy (1985) Triaxial Vaid and Chern (1983) Triaxial 3.0

Lee and Seed (1976) Triaxial Szerdy (1985) Triaxial

2.0

Seed et. al. (1973) Triaxial

1.0

0.0

DR Vaid and Finn (1979) Simple Shear Hosono and Yoshimine, Hosono and Yoshimine, Triaxial, DD Triaxial, DD Dr = 40 ! 64 % ) =!(ini / p'ini 2 0 (TE) ) =!(ini / p'ini 1 0 (TC) 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

Initial static stress ratio , )

Figure 14. Effect of initial static shear stress ratio on the cyclic strength of medium dense sands

1. By means of simple shear tests using hollow cylindrical specimen the stress conditions during undrained cyclic simple shear deformation, such as the angle of principal stress )# and intermediate principal stress coefficient b, could be precisely observed. 2. When the material was not so loose and the initial static stress levels were larger compared with the amplitude of cyclic stress loading, the residual stain was accumulated in one direction as the static stress, and the liquefaction resistance was increased. 3. The results of cyclic simple shear tests indicated that liquefaction resistance was larger when larger static stress was applied for the anisotropically consolidated loose sand under K0=0.5 with relative density of around 40%. 4. The cyclic liquefaction resistance in simple shear conditions were much larger than that from triaxial tests with initial extension stress, but it was smaller than the resistance evaluated from triaxial tests with initial compression stress. 5. The ratio of the increment of liquefaction strength due to static shear stress in simple shear conditions were shown to be about 75% to 85% of the ratio evaluated by triaxial tests with static stress in the direction of compression. Simple and reasonable prediction of liquefaction phenomena in insitu ground subjected to initial shear loading may be possible by using this kind of relations from triaxial tests only. The reduction factors may be different depending on the density and degree of anisotropy of the material. Further research is needed on this issue. REFERRENCES
Hight, D.W., Gens, A. & Symes, M.J. 1983. The development of a new hollow cylinder apparatus for investigating the effects of principal stress rotation in soils. Gotechnique 33 (4) : 355-383. Hyodo, M., Tanimizu, H., Yasufuku, N. & Murata,H. 1994a. Undrained Cyclic And Monotonic Triaxial Behaviour Of Saturated Loose Sand. Soil And Foundations 34 (1) : 19-31. Hyodo, M., Yamamoto, Y. & Sugiyama, M. 1994b. Undrained cyclic shear behaviour of normally consolidated clay subjected to initial static shear stress. Soil And Foundations 34 (4) : 1-11. Lee, K.L. & Seed, H.B. 1967. Dynamic strength of anisotropically consolidated sand. J. Soil Mewch. and Found. Div. ASCE. 93(5) : 169-190. Nakata, Y., Hyodo, M., Murata. S. & Yasufuku, N. 1998. Flow deformation of sands subjected to principal stresses rotation. Soils and Foundations 38(2) : 115-128. Pradhan, B.S., Tatsuoka, F. & Horii, N. 1988. Simple shear testing on sand in a torsional shear apparatus. Soils and Foundations 28 (2) : 95-112. Riemer, M.F. & Seed, H.B. 1997. Factors affecting apparant position of steady-state line, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering 123 (3) : 281-288.

Rollins,K.M. & Seed,H. B. 1990. Influence Of Buildings On Potential Liquefaction Damage. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering 116 (2) : 165-185. Seed, H.B., Lee, K.L., Idriss, I.M. & Makdisi, F. 1973. Analysis of the slides in San Fernando dams during the earthquake of Feb. 9, 1971. Report No. EERC : 73-2 Earthquake Engeg. Res. Ctr., Univ. of California. Berkeley. Calif. Szerdy,F. 1985. Flow slide failure associated with low level vibrations. dissertation. Presented to the University of California. at Berkeley, Calif., In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Uthayakumar, M. & Vaid, Y.P. 1998. Static liquefaction of sands under multiaxial loading. Canadian Geotechnical Journal 32(2) : 273-283. Vaid, Y.P., & Chern, J.C. 1983. Effect of static shear on resistance to liquefaction. Soils sand Foundations 23(1) : 47-60. Vaid, Y.P., Chung, E.K.F. & Kuerbis, R.H. 1989. Preshearing and undrained response of sand. Soils sand Foundations 29(4) : 49-61. Vaid, Y.P. & Finn, W.D.L. 1979. Static shear and liquefaction potential. J. Geotech. Dive., ASCE. 105(10) : 1233-1246. Vaid, Y.P. & Sivathayalan, S. 1996. Static and cyclic liquefaction potential of Fraser Delta sand in simple shear and triaxial tests. Canadian Giotechnical Journal 33 (2): 281-289. Verdugo, R. & Ishihara, K. 1996. The steady state of sandy soils. Soils and Foundations 36 (2) : 81-92. Yoshimi, Y.K., & Oh-Oka, H. 1975. Influence of degree of shear stress reversal on the liquefaction potential of saturated sand. Soils and Foundations 15(3) : 27-40. Yoshimine, M., zay, R., Sezen, A. & Ansal, A. 1999a. Undrained plane strain shear tests on saturated sand using a hollow cylinder torsional shear apparatus. Soils and Foundations 39 (2) : 131-136. Yoshimine, M. & Hosono, Y. 2000. Effect of anisotropy of sand on results of undrained triaxial test, Memoirs of Graduate School of Engineering, Tokyo Metropolitan University 50 : 158-169. Yoshimine, M. & Hosono, Y. 2001. Effects of anisotropy of sand on the liquefaction resistance evaluated by triaxial tests. The Second Japan-Philippine Workshop on Safety and Stability of Infrastructure against Environmental Impacts, Diliman, Manila, Philippines, 133-142. Yoshimine, M. & Ishihara, K. 1998. Flow potential of sand during liquefaction, Soils and Foundations 38 (3) : 187196. Yoshimine, M., Ishihara, K. & Vargas, W. 1998. Effects of principal stress direction and intermediate principal stress on undrained shear behavior of sand, Soils and Foundations 38 (3) : 177-186. Yoshimine, M., Robertson, P.K. and Wride C.E. 1999b. Undrained shear strength of clean sands to trigger flow liquefaction, Canadian Geotechnical Journal 36 (5): 891-906.