Abstract
In the present study, pond ash from Panki thermal power plant, India (seismic zone III), has been reinforced with geogrid layers and the influence of reinforcement on dynamic shear modulus, material dam** ratio, degradation index and resistance to liquefaction of pond ash samples has been investigated. The static and dynamic properties of ash samples without and with geogrid reinforcement have been determined by laboratory experiments. Further, these properties have been used in the dynamic response analysis of the two-dimensional domain of the Panki pond ash deposit that is pond ash column reinforced without and with geogrid. The OpenSees (Open System for earthquake engineering simulation) software is used to perform the analysis. Three moderate magnitude earthquakes (Chamba, Chamoli and Uttarkashi) of Himalayan origin have been considered to study the variations of acceleration, displacement and excess pore water pressure ratio with time for different layers of pond ash columns without and with geogrid reinforcement. Cyclic triaxial experiments show that due to the provision of geogrid reinforcement, the dynamic shear modulus increases about 13% to 81.6% and the liquefaction resistance increases about 91–162%. The dynamic response analysis shows that for geogrid-reinforced pond ash column, the peak ground acceleration (PGA) value decreases about 32–33%, 17–22% and 13.5–18% and the peak ground displacement (PGD) value decreases about 23.5–39%, 18.5–20% and 13–17% as compared to unreinforced pond ash column for Chamba, Chamoli and Uttarkashi earthquakes, respectively.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Abbreviations
- 2D:
-
Two-dimensional
- c´:
-
Cohesion
- Cc :
-
Coefficient of curvature
- Cu :
-
Coefficient of uniformity
- CU :
-
Consolidated undrained
- D10 :
-
Size than 10% of the particles are finer
- D30 :
-
Size than 30% of the particles are finer
- D60 :
-
Size than 60% of the particles are finer
- D:
-
Material dam** ratio
- DOF:
-
Degree of freedom
- Esec :
-
Secant Young’s modulus
- EPPR :
-
Excess pore pressure ratio
- Gsec :
-
Dynamic shear modulus
- G1 and Gn :
-
Dynamic shear modulus of 1st and nth cycle
- K:
-
Bulk modulus
- k:
-
Coefficient of permeability
- NL :
-
Number of loading cycles
- OpeenSees :
-
Open System for Earthquake Engineering Simulation.
- PGA:
-
Peak ground acceleration
- PGD:
-
Peak ground displacement
- ε :
-
Axial strain
- δ:
-
Degradation index or shear degradation
- γ and β:
-
Newmark parameters
- γd max :
-
Maximum dry unit weight
- μ :
-
Poisson’s ratio
- ɸ:
-
Angle of internal friction
- σd :
-
Deviatoric stress
References
Altun SE, Göktepe AB, Lav MA (2008) Liquefaction resistance of sand reinforced with geosynthetics. Geosynth Int 15(5):322–332. https://doi.org/10.1680/gein.2008.15.5.322
ASTM D 3999-91 (2003) Standard test method for determination of the modulus and dam** properties of soils using the cyclic triaxial test apparatus. American Society of Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA USA.
ASTM D 4767-11 (2020) Standard test method for consolidated undrained triaxial compression test for cohesive soils. American Society of Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA USA.
ASTM D 5311-92 (2004) Standard test method for load controlled cyclic triaxial strength of soil. American Society of Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA USA.
ASTM D 698-12 (2021) Standard test methods for laboratory compaction characteristics of soil using standard effort. American Society of Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA USA
Bagchi S, Raghukanth STG (2019) Seismic response of the central part of Indo-Gangetic plain. J Earthquake Eng 23(2):183–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2017.1323044
Bera AK, Ghosh A, Ghosh A (2009) Shear strength response of reinforced pond ash. Constr Build Mater 23:2386–2393. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2008.10.008
Boominathan A, Hari S (2002) Liquefaction strength of fly ash reinforced with randomly distributed fibers. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 22(9–12):1027–1033. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0267-7261(02)00127-6
Byrne PM, Park SS, Beaty M, Sharp M, Gonzalez L, Abdoun T (2004) Numerical modeling of liquefaction and comparison with centrifuge tests. Canadian Geotech Jurnal 41(2):193–211. https://doi.org/10.1139/t03-088
CEA (Central Electricity Authority) (2019) Fly ash generation at coal/lignite based thermal power stations and its utilization in the country. New Delhi, India, CEA.
Chattaraj R, Sengupta A (2017) Dynamic properties of fly ash. J Mater Civ Eng 29(1):04016190. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0001712
Chowdhury S, Patra NR (2021) Experimental and numerical investigation on undrained behavior of geogrid reinforced pond ash. Indian Geotech J 51(6):1182–1194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40098-021-00540-9
Chowdhury S, Patra NR (2022) Undrained response of geocell confined pond ash samples under static and cyclic loading. Geosynth Int 29(3):229–240. https://doi.org/10.1680/jgein.21.00006
Das SK, Yudhbir (2005) Geotechnical characterization of some Indian fly ashes. J Mater Civ Eng 17(5):544–552. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2005)17:5(544)
Dey AK, Gandhi SR, (2008) Evaluation of liquefaction potential of Pond ash. Proceddings of the 2nd international conference on geotechnical engineering for disaster mitigation and Rehabilitation. Nan**g, China, pp 315-320. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-79846-0_31.
DiGioria AM, Nuzzo WL (1972) Fly ash as structural fill. J Power Div (ASCE) 98(1):77–92. https://doi.org/10.1061/JPWEAM.0000712
Elgamal A, Yang Z, Parra E, Ragheb A (2003) Modeling of cyclic mobility in saturated cohesionless soils. Int J Plast 19(6):883–905. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-6419(02)00010-4
Fenves GL, Mckenna F, Mazzani S (2007) OpenSees computational simulation services in NEESit. University of California, Berkeley: Version 1.
Govindaraju L, Bhattacharya S (2012) Site-specific earthquake response study for hazard assessment in Kolkata city, India. Nat Hazards 61(3):943–965. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-011-9940-3
Haeri SM, Noorzad R, Oskoorouchi AM (2000) Effect of geotextile reinforcement on the mechanical behavior of sand. Geotext Geomembr 18(6):385–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-1144(00)00005-4
Holzer TL, Hanks TC, Youd TL (1989) Dynamics of liquefaction during the 1987 Superstition Hills, California, earthquake. Science 244(4900):56–59. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.244.4900.56
Idriss IM, Dobry R, Singh RD (1978) Nonlinear behavior of soft clays during cyclic loading. J Geotech Eng Div ASCE 104(12):1427–1447. https://doi.org/10.1061/AJGEB6.0000727
IS: 1893 (Part 1) (2016) Criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi India.
IS: 2720 (Part VII) (1980) Method of test for soils for determination of water content dry density relation using light weight compaction. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi India.
IS: 2720 (Part XII) (1981) Method of test for soils for determination of shear strength parameters of soil from consolidated undrained triaxial compression test with measurement of pore water pressure. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi India.
IS: 2720 (Part XVII) (1986) Methods of test for soils for laboratory determination of permeability. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi India.
Jakka RS, Ramana GV, Datta M (2010a) Shear behaviour of loose and compacted pond ash. Geotech Geol Eng 28:763–778. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10706-010-9337-1
Jakka RS, Datta M, Ramana GV (2010b) Liquefaction behavior of loose and compacted pond ash. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 30(7):580–590. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2010.01.015
Jakka RS, Ramana GV, Datta M (2011) Seismic slope stability of embankments constructed with pond ash. Geotech Geol Eng 29:821–835. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-011-9419-8
Jishnu RB, Naik SP, Patra NR, Malik JN (2013) Ground response analysis of Kanpur soil along Indo-Gangetic Plains. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 51:47–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2013.04.001
Karnam Prabhakara BK, Guda PV, Balunaini U (2020) Interface shear stress properties of geogrids with mixtures of fly ash and granulated rubber. J Mater Civ Eng 32:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0003496
Khanna A, Mohanty S (2017) 2D ground response analysis of pond ash deposits. Geotechnical Frontiers (ASCE), pp 387–396. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784480434.042.
Krishnaswamy NR, Thomas Isaac N (1995) Liquefaction analysis of saturated reinforced granular soils. J Geotech Eng (ASCE) 121(9):645–651. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1995)121:9(645)
Kumar A, Anbazhagan P, Sitharam TG (2013) Seismic hazard analysis of Lucknow considering local and active seismic gaps. Nat Hazards 69(1):327–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-013-0712-0
Li Z, Wu Z, Chen J, Lu X, Pei L, Chen C (2021) Effect of correlated random fields on nonlinear dynamic responses of gravity dam. Nat Hazards 106(1):79–96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-020-04451-5
Lysmer J, Kuhlemeyer RL (1969) Finite dynamic model for infinite media. J Eng Mech Div (ASCE) 95(4):859–877. https://doi.org/10.1061/JMCEA3.0001144
Madhyannapu RS, Madhav MR, Puppala AJ, Ghosh A (2008) Compressibility characteristics of sedimented fly ash beds. J Mater Civ Eng 20(6):401–409. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2008)20:6(401)
Mazzoni S, McKenna F, Scott MH, Fenves GL (2006) OpenSees command language manual. Pacific Earthquake Eng Res 264:137–58
Mogili S, Mohammed AG, Mudavath H, Gonavaram KK (2020) Mechanical strength characteristics of fiber-reinforced pond ash for pavement application. Innovative Infrastruct Solut 5(3):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-020-00313-y
Mohanty S, Patra NR (2014) Cyclic behavior and liquefaction potential of Indian pond ash located in seismic zones III and IV. J Mater Civ Eng 26(7):1–5. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000964
Mohanty S, Patra NR (2015) Geotechnical characterization of Panki and Panipat pond ash in India. Int J Geo-Eng 6:1–18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40703-015-0013-4
Mohanty S, Patra NR (2016a) Dynamic response analysis of Talcher pond ash embankment in India. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 84:238–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2016.01.021
Mohanty S, Patra NR (2016b) Liquefaction and earthquake response analysis of Panipat pond ash embankment in India. J Earthquake Tsunami 10(04):1650009. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1793431116500093
Naik SP, Patra NR, Malik JN (2014) Spatial distribution of shear wave velocity for late quaternary alluvial soil of Kanpur city, Northern India. Geotech Geol Eng 32(1):131–149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-013-9698-3
Naik SP, Kundu A, Patra NR, Bandopadhaya S, Reddy GR (2022) Earthquake response analysis of soils from rudrapur and khatima sites adjacent to Himalayan Frontal Thrust (HFT) using field and laboratory-derived dynamic soil properties. J Earthquake Eng 26(2):949–979. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2019.1695691
Newcomb DE, Birgisson B (1999) Measuring in situ mechanical properties of pavement subgrade soils. National Academy press, Washington, D.C.
Pandey B, Jakka RS, Kumar A (2016) Influence of local site conditions on strong ground motion characteristics at Tarai region of Uttarakhand, India. Nat Hazards 81(2):1073–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-015-2120-0
Pandian NS (2004) Fly ash characterization with reference to geotechnical applications. J Indian Inst Sci 84:189–216
Pant A, Datta M, Ramana GV (2019a) Bottom ash as a backfill material in reinforced soil structures. Geotext Geomembr 47:514–521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geotexmem.2019.01.018
Pant A, Ramana GV, Datta M, Gupta SK (2019b) Coal combustion residue as structural fill material for reinforced soil structures. J Clean Prod 232:417–426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.354
Parhi PS, Balunaini U, Sravanam SM, Mauriya VK (2020) Site characterization of existing and abandoned coal ash ponds using shear wave velocity from multichannel analysis of surface waves. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 146(11):04020115. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002366
Parra E (1996) Numerical modeling of liquefaction and lateral ground deformation including cyclic mobility and dilative behavior of soil systems. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Civil Engineering, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York.
Prevost JH (1985) A simple plasticity theory for frictional cohesionless soils. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 4(1):9–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/0261-7277(85)90030-0
Punthutaecha K, Puppala AJ, Vanapalli SK, Inyang H (2006) Volume change behaviors of expansive soils stabilized with recycled ashes and fibers. J Mater Civil Eng 18(2):295–306. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2006)18:2(295)
Puri N, Jain A, Nikitas G, Dammala PK, Bhattacharya S (2020) Dynamic soil properties and seismic ground response analysis for North Indian seismic belt subjected to the great Himalayan earthquakes. Nat Hazards 103(1):447–478. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-020-03995-w
Rahman MZ, Siddiqua S, Maksud KASM (2021) Site response analysis for deep and soft sedimentary deposits of Dhaka City, Bangladesh. Nat Hazards 106(3):2279–2305. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-021-04543-w
Ram AK, Mohanty S (2021) Experimental investigation on dynamic behavior of silt-rich fly ash using cyclic triaxial and bender element tests. Innovative Infrastruct Solut 6(4):1–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-021-00582-1
Rampello S, Cascone E, Grosso N (2009) Valuation of the seismic response of a homogeneous earth dam. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 29:782–798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2008.08.006
Samal MR, Saran S, Kumar A, Mukerjee S (2016) Dynamic behavior of geogrid reinforced pond ash. Int J Geotech Eng 10(2):114–122. https://doi.org/10.1179/1939787915Y.0000000019
Sarkar R, Abbas SM, Shahu JT (2011) Geotechnical characterization of pond ash available in national capital region-Delhi. Int J Earth Sci Eng 4:138–142
Seed HB (1979) Soil liquefaction and cyclic mobility evaluation for level ground during earthquakes. J Geotech Eng Div 105(2):201–255. https://doi.org/10.1061/AJGEB6.0000768
Singh SP, Sharan A (2014) Strength characteristics of compacted pond ash. Geomech Geoeng 9(1):9–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/17486025.2013.772661
Singh J, Singh SK (2022) Dynamic properties of spatially-varied pond ash within a coal ash pond. Int J Geomech 22(3):04021309. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0002255
Sridharan A, Pandian NS, Rajasedhar C (1996) Geotechnical characterization of pond ash. Ash pond and ash disposal systems (V.S. Raju et al., eds). Narosa Publishing House, New Delhi, India, pp 97-110.
Vijayasri T, Patra NR, Raychowdhury P (2016) Cyclic behavior and liquefaction potential of Renusagar pond ash reinforced with geotextiles. J Mater Civ Eng 28(11):21–32. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0001633
Vijayasri T, Raychowdhury P, Patra NR (2017) Seismic response analysis of Renusagar pond ash embankment in Northern India. Int J Geomech 17(6):04016141. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0000828
Vijayasri T, Raychowdhury P, Patra NR (2020) Dynamic behavior of a geotextile-reinforced pond ash embankment. J Earthquake Eng 24(11):1803–1828. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2018.1483848
Yang Z, Lu J, Elgamal A (2008) OpenSees soil models and solid-fluid fully coupled elements. OpenSees user’s manual ver 1.0, University of California, Berkeley, USA.
Yang Z (2000) Numerical modeling of earthquake site response including dilation and liquefaction. PhD Dissertation, Department of Civil Engineering and Engineering Mechanics, Columbia University, New York.
Ye B, Cheng ZR, Liu C, Zhang YD, Lu P (2017) Liquefaction resistance of sand reinforced with randomly distributed polypropylene fibres. Geosynth Int 24(6):625–636. https://doi.org/10.1680/jgein.17.00029
Yoon S, Balunaini U, Yildirim IZ, Prezzi M, Siddiki NZ (2009) Construction of an embankment with a fly and bottom ash mixture: field performance study. J Mater Civ Eng 21(6):271–278. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2009)21:6(271)
Zeghal M, Elgamal AW (1994) Analysis of site liquefaction using earthquake records. J Geotech Eng 120(6):996–1017. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1994)120:6(996)
Acknowledgements
This research was carried out at the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Kanpur, India, an autonomous institute of higher education under the Ministry of Human Resource and Development (MHRD), Government of India. The authors acknowledge the support received from IIT Kanpur.
Funding
The authors declare that no funds, grants or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Experimental program and numerical analysis were performed by SC. The first draft of the manuscript was written by SC all authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Chowdhury, S., Patra, N.R. Influence of geogrid reinforcement on dynamic characteristics and response analysis of Panki pond ash. Nat Hazards 119, 435–461 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-023-06136-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-023-06136-1