16 vues

Transféré par Paul Pinedo Vilcahuamán

fyi

- Link 180
- Plastic deformation of transparent crystals
- Metal Forming Book
- Background to En13445-3 Rules_Issue01
- Constitutive Model of Unsaturated Structured Soils Under Cyclic
- Investigation of the Behaviour for Reinforced Concrete Beam Using Non Linear Three Dimensional Finite Elements
- Refer Ance
- Jackson & Salim-Web Crushing en 1992
- WCEE2012_0128
- Strength
- DesignofminiplateforWeldingStrain Assesment
- Membrane Action in Isotropic Patch Loaded Unrestrained Slabs_eyre2006
- 6 x Draft 6252013
- 3_Zhang2016
- E05ST28-Dabaon
- iit ams
- Calculation Note for Jig Insert Pipe Module_Rev B
- (Chaaban & Muzze,1991)-Finite Element Analysis of Residual Stresses in Threaded End Closures
- 68c0c2e3a185d7eaa141eccf72022ed33b43
- IMECS2009_pp1649-1654

Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 13

of sand. In P. Dakoulas, M. Yegian & R.D. Holtz (Eds.), Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and

Soil Dynamics III, ASCE Geotechnical Special Publication No. 75, Vol. 1, Proceedings of a

Specialty Conference (pp. 766-777). Seattle: ASCE.

LIQUEFACTION BEHAVIOUR OF SAND

Abstract

response of sands in a relatively uncomplicated manner. The model, UBCSAND, is

based on the characteristic behaviour of the soil skeleton as observed in laboratory

element tests. The model has several key features, including a hyperbolic relationship

between stress ratio and plastic shear strain, a flow rule for estimating plastic

volumetric strain from plastic shear strain, and the ability to handle anisotropy.

The simple framework which describes the observed soil response and forms the basis

for the model is presented. Monotonic and cyclic results are computed using the

model and shown to be in good agreement with laboratory element tests. The model

is also applied to the Wildlife Site in California and the predictions compared with

field measurements from the 1987 Superstition Hills Earthquake.

1. Introduction

The controlling philosophy behind this model is one of simplicity, an avoidance of

unnecessary complexity. It is believed that a model which captures the characteristic

behaviour of granular soil can be a valuable tool in evaluating and understanding its

performance under static and cyclic loading. Although some complexity is

unavoidable in achieving this goal, this relatively simple model is shown to reasonably

represent the soil response as observed in element tests.

1

Graduate Student, Department of Civil Engineering, University of British Columbia, 2324 Main

Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia V6T1Z4, Canada.

2

Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, University of British Columbia, 2324 Main Mall,

Vancouver, British Columbia V6T1Z4, Canada.

2. Description of Constitutive Model

an assumed hyperbolic relation between stress ratio and plastic shear strain. The

model represents the behavior of the soil skeleton, with the effect of any pore fluid

introduced through its volumetric stiffness. As a plasticity model it includes such

features as a yield surface, a flow rule, and a definition for loading, unloading, and

hardening. Applications of this model to problems involving monotonic loading have

been previously presented, and these references provide additional detail, equations,

and derivations (Puebla et al., 1997; Byrne et al., 1995).

The yield surface is described by a line of constant stress ratio. Stress ratio, defined

as the maximum shear stress divided by the mean normal effective stress, can also be

expressed as the sine of a mobilized friction angle. Since the yield surface is related to

a friction angle, this permits comparison to the classic Mohr-Coulomb definition of

failure. This is demonstrated in Figure 1, where a stress state at yield has a Mohr’s

circle tangent to the developed friction angle, φd.

The primary difference between this model and the Mohr-Coulomb definition is the

mobilized friction angle is made a function of the loading history. For example, the

initial stress ratio of an isotropically consolidated element will equal zero. As any

increase in stress ratio will cause yielding, the initial yield surface must correspond to

a friction angle of zero. If this element is loaded in monotonic drained compression,

there will be a steady increase in stress ratio corresponding to a radially increasing

yield surface. The yield surface will rise until the peak friction angle φf is achieved.

This is shown schematically on Figure 2. The rate at which the yield surface moves

upward is a function of the hyperbolic hardening relation.

Drained Stress Path φf

Shear Stress, q

Failure Envelope

Shear Stress,

(φ d )c

at φ f

Yield Surfaces

Yield Surface

(φ d )b

at φ d

q (φ d )a

p

Effective Normal Stress, σ' Mean Effective Stress, p

FIGURE 1 Mohr’s Circle FIGURE 2 Stress Path versus

at Yielding Stress State Radially Increasing Yield Surface

The model implicitly assumes a second yield surface, extending from the mobilized

stress ratio line down to the q=0 axis. For the sake of simplicity, this surface was

assumed to exist at relatively high confining pressures so that it is not encountered

under typical undrained stress paths. This is not unreasonable for liquefiable sands,

since their tendency to generate pore pressure will generally lead to stress paths away

from this surface. This assumption means that certain stress paths, such as those with

constant stress ratio, will never cause plastic shear or volumetric strains. Future

refinements, or complications, of the model may include this behaviour.

The stress-strain behaviour of granular soils has long been approximated with a

hyperbolic shape (Duncan and Chang, 1970; Matsuoka and Nakai, 1977). A

formulation similar to that of Duncan and Chang is used in this model, with one

fundamental difference: the hyperbola is revised to represent stress ratio versus

plastic shear strain.

The hyperbolic relation is used as the yield surface hardener in the following manner.

When an increment of plastic shear strain occurs, a corresponding increase in stress

ratio is computed using the plastic shear modulus (Figure 3a). This modulus is found

from the hyperbolic curve, the current stress ratio, and the peak friction angle (Puebla

et al., 1997). The yield surface is then rotated by ∆φ as shown in Figure 3b.

The hyperbolic shape has typically been applied to the total response, but both elastic

and plastic behaviour occur during loading. The elastic portion of this model is based

on classic linear theory, with the stiffness constants derived from small strain

observations. In accordance with elastic theory, elastic strain increments occur in the

same direction as the stress increments. The plastic portion of the response is

governed by the hyperbolic relationship, with the plastic shear strain increment

occurring in the direction of the principal shear stress. Summing the elastic and

plastic components gives a combined response which is slightly modified from a

sin(φ d +∆φ)

φ d+∆φ

= sin

p

sin(φ d ) G

Shear Stress,

φd

1

Stress Ratio,

p p

∆sinφ = ∆γ × G

(a) (b)

FIGURE 3 Rotation of Yield Surface with Increasing Stress Ratio

(a) Hyperbolic Hardening Relationship (b) Yield Surface Rotation in Stress Space

hyperbolic shape. The amount of difference is a function of the relative stiffness of

each component, and whether the strain increments are coincident or not. In many

cases the elastic response will be much stiffer than the plastic behaviour and have

relatively little impact on the shape of the shear stress-strain response.

decrease in mean effective confining stress is correctly recognized as a loading

increment even if the shear stress remains constant. This is demonstrated in Figure 4.

When loading is based solely on shear stress, changes in mean effective stress do not

contribute to the plastic response. This effect is particularly important when modeling

the onset of liquefaction due to significant changes in pore pressure.

Using stress ratio to define loading also allows for the strain softening effect seen

during undrained loading. Even though the shear stress may peak and then drop as

the effective stress decreases, the stress ratio is observed to continuously increase.

While the hyperbolic relation governs the amount of plastic shear strain, the flow rule

predicts the corresponding volumetric strain. This is critical to the simulation of

liquefaction behaviour, as it is the plastic volumetric strain that generates pore

pressure. The flow rule used in UBCSAND is based on three observations:

1. there is a unique stress ratio, defined by the constant volume friction angle φcv,

for which plastic shear strains do not cause plastic volumetric strains;

2. stress states which lie below sinφcv exhibit contractive behaviour, while stress

states above sinφcv lead to a dilative response; and,

3. the amount of contraction or dilation depends on the difference between the

current stress ratio and the stress ratio at φcv.

A flow rule which satisfies these observations has been derived from energy principles

ηB

(φ d)B

= q/p

ηA B

Shear Stress, q

qA = qB B (φ d)A A

Stress Ratio,

A

∆p ∆γ p

pB pA

Mean Effective Stress, p Plastic Shear Strain, γ p

(a) (b)

FIGURE 4 Effect of Change in Mean Effective Stress

(a) Stress Path (b) Stress Ratio versus Shear Strain

(Puebla et al., 1997). It is similar to derivations already proposed in the literature

(Rowe, 1962; Schofield and Wroth, 1968; and Matsuoka and Nakai, 1977). The

resulting equation is non-associative, and has a simple form:

where ∆εvp = plastic volumetric strain increment (contraction positive) , ∆γp = plastic

shear strain increment, φcv = constant volume friction angle, φd = developed friction

angle, and ψ = dilation angle. The flow rule is shown schematically in Figure 5.

Since the model is based on the skeleton behaviour of the soil matrix, undrained

conditions are easily included through the stiffness of the pore fluid. With this

stiffness, plastic volumetric strains lead to changes in pore pressure and effective

stress. The constitutive model responds to these changes in effective stress and their

effect on the skeleton. Conditions of partial drainage can be modeled by performing a

combined mechanical-flow analysis.

One feature needed for cyclic loading is a definition for loading and unloading. All

load increments are assumed linear elastic unless the current stress state is on the yield

surface and the load increment is in an outward direction from that surface. This is a

simplifying assumption, since some curvature is seen in unload-reload loops from

element tests. Since the model assumes linear elastic behaviour for these loops,

hysteretic damping will not occur. The anticipated damping is approximated by

adding a small viscous component to the analysis.

A second requirement is a general definition for stress reversal. This effort has been

φ d > φ cv

Plastic Strain Vectors

Dilative

p

φ d = φ cv

Plastic Shear Strain,

Shear Stress, q

Plastic Potentials

Contractive

Slope = -sinψ

φ d < φ cv

Yield Surfaces

p

Mean Effective Stress, p Plastic Volumetric Strain, εv

simplified by defining two shear stress indicators: τxy and (σy - σx). These indicators

create a stress space with four quadrants. A stress reversal is assumed to occur

whenever the stress state changes quadrants. For example, a triaxial test with the

principal axes aligned with x and y results in a stress path along the τxy = 0 axis. A

stress reversal is predicted when the test moves between compression and extension.

Since load reversals typically occur during cyclic loading, it is not always appropriate

to leave the yield surface at the highest stress ratio that was previously attained.

Consider a loading path where the stress ratio is increased to a certain value η1, then

the loading direction is reversed until a stress ratio η2 is achieved in the opposite

direction, where η2 < η1. If the loading is again reversed, it is likely that yielding will

begin at some stress ratio less than the previous maximum, η1.

To account for this, the yield surface hardener was defined to include both isotropic

and kinematic properties. This is shown in a simplified manner on Figure 6, which

depicts a stress reversal for an initial load cycle. If the stress state is in the upper

quadrant, as shown on Figure 6, and the stress ratio drops but no stress reversal

occurs (point 1 to point 2), then the yield surface in the upper quadrant remains at its

peak value (shown as “old yield surface”). Once a stress reversal occurs and yielding

begins in the lower quadrant, the new yield surface will be pushed downwards (point

3). The old yield surface in the upper quadrant is dragged downward at the same rate

the new yield surface is pushed forward in the lower quadrant. If the stresses were to

reverse again (point 3 to point 1), plastic loading would not occur until the previous

yield surface was contacted in its new position (point 4).

Another aspect which must be considered is the increase in stiffness and reduction in

volumetric strains that are observed with each load cycle during drained testing

(Martin et al., 1975). This behaviour is represented through a simple relationship

1

Stress Path (Unloading)

Shear Stress

θ

4

2

0

θ

Stress Path (Loading)

Effective Stress

FIGURE 6 Effect of Stress Reversal on Yield Surface

between accumulated plastic volumetric strain and plastic shear modulus, which has

been calibrated to test results. The plastic shear modulus is increased as a function of

the total plastic volumetric strain, which in turn reduces the rate of volumetric strain.

2.6 Anisotropy

Anisotropy is included by making the plastic shear modulus a function of the principal

stress direction. For example, a softened modulus can be used when the major

principal stress direction is horizontal, as in an extension test. The modulus is varied

between the extension and compression directions to match observed behaviour.

undrained monotonic tests performed on loose sand. The analyses were performed

using the finite difference program FLAC (Cundall, 1995). FLAC uses an explicit

solution technique, maintaining dynamic equilibrium at every timestep.

The laboratory tests were performed on samples of Syncrude sand obtained near Fort

McMurray, Alberta (Vaid et al., 1995). Triaxial compression, extension, and simple

shear tests were completed. A brief comparison of the test results and simulations are

shown in Figure 7. The analyses were not performed independently, as each test was

modeled using the same material parameters (Puebla et al., 1997). Very good

agreement was achieved between the laboratory tests and the simulations. The model

(kPa)

80

Horiz. Shear Stress, xy (kPa)

40

Pore Pressure, u (kPa)

3

60

- 1

20

Deviator Stress,

40

0

20

Extension

-20 0

-5 0 5 0 1 2

Axial Strain, ε1 (%) Shear Strain, γ xy (%)

Model Simulation Model Simulation

Laboratory Results (TxC) Laboratory Pore Pressure

Laboratory Results (TxE) Laboratory Shear Stress

(a) (b)

FIGURE 7 Monotonic Response and Simulation of Syncrude Sand

(a) Undrained Triaxial Extension and Compression (b) Undrained Simple Shear

adequately represents the observed behaviour, including the effects of anisotropy,

strain softening, and pore pressure generation.

A total of 10 model parameters are required for these simulations. The variables

primarily define the elastic moduli, strength, and hyperbolic properties of the material.

A detailed description of these parameters is given by Puebla et al. (1997).

A similar comparison was made to laboratory results from cyclic simple shear tests

(Finn, 1985). The tests were performed on samples of Ottawa Sand having a relative

density of approximately 45%. Both drained and undrained tests were performed,

each having an initial vertical effective stress of 200 kPa. Undrained behaviour was

imposed in the laboratory by running a constant volume test with dry sand. The

undrained response in the numerical model was simulated in the same manner. This

technique essentially assumes an infinite stiffness for the pore fluid. Results are

summarized in Figure 8.

The same model parameters were used for both the drained and undrained loading.

The general character of the these simulations is in good agreement with the

observations, although there are some differences in specific details (e.g., the shape of

the cycles versus volumetric strain curve, the area of the drained stress-strain loops).

Some of the difference is due to limitations in the laboratory testing: the effect of

friction within the test equipment is clearly apparent in Figure 8[e]. The simulations

should improve with further refinement of the model and additional calibration of the

input parameters.

5. Wildlife Site

A preliminary application of the model was made to the observed field behaviour at

the Wildlife site. This site, located within the Imperial Valley Wildfowl Management

Area near the southern border of California, has been well instrumented and studied

by the United States Geological Survey (Bennett et al., 1984). Sand boils have been

noted at the site following several earthquakes, including the 1981 Westmorland

event. Instrumentation was installed by USGS to record and study any future events.

Such an occurrence took place during the Superstition Hills earthquake of 1987. This

earthquake had a moment magnitude of 6.6 and an epicentral distance of about 31 km

(Zeghal and Elgamal, 1994). Evidence of liquefaction was found at the site and in the

instrument recordings.

The stratigraphy of the site was characterized by the USGS, and is summarized in

Table 1 for the depths of interest. Unit B was identified as liquefiable and was likely

60 Simulation Simulation

(kPa) Test Results 0.5 Test Results

40

0.4

20

xy

Horiz. Shear Stress,

0.3

0

-20 0.2

-40 0.1

[a] [b]

-60 0

-0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2

Shear Strain, γ xy (%) Shear Strain, γ xy (%)

1.5

Volumetric Strain (%)

[c]

1

Simulation

Test Data

0.5

0

0 5 10 15 20 25

Number of Cycles

40 40

Simulation Test Results

30 30

(kPa)

(kPa)

20 20

xy

xy

10 10

Horiz. Shear Stress,

0 0

-10 -10

-20 -20

-40 -40

-0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2

Shear Strain, γ xy (%) Shear Strain, γ xy (%)

[a], [b], [c] Drained [d], [e] Undrained

TABLE 1 Soil Stratigraphy at Wildlife Site

Unit Depth (m) Brief Description

A 0-2.5 Very loose micaceous sandy silt, silt, and clayey silt

B1 2.5-3.5 Very loose to loose sandy silt

B2 3.5-6.8 Loose to medium dense silty sand to very fine sand

C1 6.8-7.5 Medium to stiff clayey silt

C2 7.5-12 Medium to very stiff silty clay

responsible for the observed sand boils. Portions of Unit A might also liquefy. The

installed instrumentation included a surface accelerometer, a downhole accelerometer

at a depth of 7.5 meters, and a suite of 6 piezometers (2 located within the depth

range of unit B1, 3 within unit B2, and 1 at a depth of about 12 meters).

A finite difference model was developed to perform the simulation. The model

consisted of a 1-dimensional column of 7.5 meter depth. The recorded downhole

motion was applied to the model base. The north-south component was used as this

direction experienced the higher peak acceleration. Material parameters were

selected to be consistent with the blowcount values. A brief description of the model

is given in Table 2. Results of the simulation are shown in Figure 9.

Approximate # of Elements

Unit Depth (m) (N1)60 in Unit

A 0-2.5 4

B1 2.5-3.5 4-6 2

B2 3.5-6.8 10 - 12 6

C1 6.8-7.5 1

The comparison between the observed and simulated response provides a mixed

appraisal of the model. The relative displacement plot indicates that liquefaction was

predicted to occur at approximately the same time as was recorded. The velocity

estimates prior to liquefaction are also quite close to the recorded values. However,

the post liquefaction behaviour is substantially different than observed, especially in

the amplitude of the motion. Although the fundamental response of the model prior

to liquefaction appears to be reasonable, further refinement is needed before it can be

confidently applied to complex loading situations.

0.2

From USGS Recordings

Relative Displac. (m)

0.1

-0.1

Simulation

-0.2

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Time (sec)

0.4

From USGS Recording

Surface Velocity (m/s)

0.3

0.2

0.1

0

-0.1

Simulation

-0.2

-0.3

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Time (sec)

FIGURE 9 Comparison of Simulated and Recorded Response at Wildlife Site

6. Conclusions

An effective stress constitutive model was presented that can be used to simulate the

liquefaction behaviour of sand. The framework of the model was described, and

shown to be relatively simple and fundamental. The model has been applied to

situations of monotonic loading with good results. The current extension to cyclic

loading also shows promise, although further development is needed to capture the

intricacies of observed field behaviour.

7. Acknowledgments

provided some of the analyses, assisted with several figures, and has been

instrumental in implementing the constitutive model.

8. References

Bennett, M.J., McLaughlin, P.V., Sarmiento, J.S., and Youd, T.L. (1984).

Geotechnical Investigation of Liquefaction Sites, Imperial Valley, California. Open-

File Report 84-252, U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, California.

Byrne, P.M., Debasis, R., Campanella, R.G., and Hughes, J. (1995). Predicting

Liquefaction Response of Granular Soils from Self-Boring Pressuremeter Tests.

ASCE National Convention, San Diego, Oct. 23-27, ASCE, 56(GSP): 122-135.

Cundall, P.A. (1995). FLAC Manual Version 3.3. ITASCA Consulting Group, Inc.,

Thrasher Square East, 708 South Third Street, Suite 310, Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Duncan, J.M. and Chang, C.Y. (1970). Nonlinear Analysis of Stress and Strain in

Soils. Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE,

96(SM5):1629-1653.

Finn, W.D.L. (1985). Aspects of Constant Volume Cyclic Simple Shear. Advances

in the Art of Testing Soils Under Cyclic Conditions, ASCE Technical Publication,

October 1985, pp. 74-98.

Martin, G.R., Finn, W.D.L., and Seed, H.B. (1975). Fundamentals of Liquefaction

under Cyclic Loading. Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE,

Vol. 101, No. GT5, May.

Matsuoka, H., and Nakai, T. (1977). Stress-Strain Relationship of Soil Based on the

SMP. Proceedings, Specialty Session 9, 9th International Conference on Soil

Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, pp. 153-162.

Puebla, H., Byrne, P.M., and Phillips, R. (1997). “Analysis of CANLEX Liquefaction

Embankments: Prototype and Centrifuge Models.” Canadian Geotechnical Journal,

Vol. 34, No. 5, pp. 641-657..

Assembly of Particles in Contact. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London,

Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Series A, 269:500-57.

Schofield, A., and Wroth, P. (1968). Critical State Soil Mechanics. McGraw-Hill

Publishing Company Limited, England.

Liquefaction Potential of Reconstituted Syncrude Sand. Proceedings, 48th Canadian

Geotechnical Conference, Vancouver, B.C., Sept. 25-27, 1995, Vol. 1, pp. 319-329.

Records. Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol. 120, No.

6, June.

Key Words (10)

constitutive model

dilation

elastoplastic

hyperbolic

liquefaction

plasticity

strain softening

stress ratio

UBCSAND

Wildlife site

- Link 180Transféré parOmar Najm
- Plastic deformation of transparent crystalsTransféré parBernard SCHAEFFER
- Metal Forming BookTransféré parعلاءإدريس
- Background to En13445-3 Rules_Issue01Transféré parராபர்ட் ஆன்றோ ரெனி
- Constitutive Model of Unsaturated Structured Soils Under CyclicTransféré parAdrian Liviu Bugea
- Investigation of the Behaviour for Reinforced Concrete Beam Using Non Linear Three Dimensional Finite ElementsTransféré parIJMER
- Refer AnceTransféré parJagdish Dhanuskar
- Jackson & Salim-Web Crushing en 1992Transféré parRm1262
- WCEE2012_0128Transféré parGuadalupe Cuitiño
- DesignofminiplateforWeldingStrain AssesmentTransféré parsextosoporte
- Membrane Action in Isotropic Patch Loaded Unrestrained Slabs_eyre2006Transféré parMelkamu Demewez
- 6 x Draft 6252013Transféré parMikel Lopez
- StrengthTransféré parraja369nare
- 3_Zhang2016Transféré parSPDJFHAKHDFJ
- E05ST28-DabaonTransféré parJaniS.Wangsadiria
- iit amsTransféré parVenkata Sai Kumar Nunna
- Calculation Note for Jig Insert Pipe Module_Rev BTransféré parmaniaxpdf
- (Chaaban & Muzze,1991)-Finite Element Analysis of Residual Stresses in Threaded End ClosuresTransféré parchristos032
- 68c0c2e3a185d7eaa141eccf72022ed33b43Transféré pardavid
- IMECS2009_pp1649-1654Transféré parAbdulkadir Ali Bage
- plast2Transféré parmokgok
- Basic Barcelona Model_Géotechnique40 AlonsoTransféré parYorch Firstone
- linlamTransféré parppyim2012
- A Modified Approach for Simulating Complex Compound Structures Within Early Design StepsTransféré parAmir Iskandar
- khan2012 part1Transféré parAshwin Kulkarni
- Loading ComputationsTransféré parRayeYagami
- 3rd lecTransféré parSalman Khan
- MT_Alloys-NL87-3-16Transféré paranil
- 2013 Nzwesbrb Pclin GuideTransféré parj_dominguez_v6990
- Wood in Compression and BendingTransféré parAn D Ro

- MaterialsTransféré parmahe32mahe
- ASGESTransféré parPaul Pinedo Vilcahuamán
- 2002 Faustino Valero- Criterios Proyecto Estruc. Suelo ReforzadoTransféré parPaul Pinedo Vilcahuamán
- 1998 ASCE Seattle Beaty & Byrne - UBCSAND (1)Transféré parPaul Pinedo Vilcahuamán
- ASTM D-5321Transféré parls_bohrer
- SPT Capability to Estimate Undrained Shear Strength of Fine Grained SoilsTransféré parPatrick Vun
- 1998 ASCE Seattle Beaty & Byrne - UBCSAND (1)Transféré parPaul Pinedo Vilcahuamán
- 1998 ASCE Seattle Beaty & Byrne - UBCSANDTransféré parPaul Pinedo Vilcahuamán
- 7- Sarma & Bhave (1974)- Crit. Accn. vs...Geot24-661Transféré parPaul Pinedo Vilcahuamán
- 2009 WichtmannTransféré parPaul Pinedo Vilcahuamán
- 2001 Laboratory Properties of Mine Tailings_Qiu_SegoTransféré parPaul Pinedo Vilcahuamán
- 61212 (1)Transféré parPaul Pinedo Vilcahuamán
- Bishop 1955 Method of SlicesTransféré parbobby_luter
- 5389308Transféré parPaul Pinedo Vilcahuamán
- Topic49 UnlockedTransféré parPaul Pinedo Vilcahuamán
- Topic53 UnlockedTransféré parPaul Pinedo Vilcahuamán
- Lean Construction PaperTransféré parPaul Pinedo Vilcahuamán
- 1988 Large Scale Model Tests and Analysis of Gravel DrainsTransféré parPaul Pinedo Vilcahuamán
- Victor de Mello Lecture-J Burland-Soils and Rocks 2008Transféré parPaul Pinedo Vilcahuamán
- The Misuse of SPTs in Fine Soils and the Implications of Eurocode 7 Reid TaylorTransféré parPaul Pinedo Vilcahuamán
- Modulo Elastico Scea6747Transféré parPaul Pinedo Vilcahuamán
- Thesis-badal Kumar Kujur-10605005blast Vibration Studies in Surface MinesTransféré parChandan Kumar
- Hysteretic Damping Modelling by Nonlinear Kelvin-Voigt ModelTransféré parPaul Pinedo Vilcahuamán
- 12Ccm12de12Transféré parPaul Pinedo Vilcahuamán

- Mechanical OscillationsTransféré parMahmoud Basho
- Lectures W1Transféré parDavid Web
- Wind_LoadTransféré parNats Dizon
- Huang ML, Dyes and Pigments 77 (2008) 327-334Transféré parAlan P. Duran
- fsdfdfTransféré parLakshmi Manikanta
- Ci2010Jul011724424296629 USGS Risk Reduction USGSC 200Transféré parBhavana Valeti
- E-hole Pair GbhieherationTransféré parTushar Dhabal Das
- University Physics Volume 1-OPTransféré parMichaelChang
- AWS D1.1 GuidesTransféré parMuhammad Fakhri
- Ch05Transféré parsk112
- GROWTH AND CHARACTERIZATION OF PURE AND CLOVE DOPED KDP CRYSTALS BY SLOW EVAPORATION METHOD.Transféré parIJAR Journal
- Siesta Pseudo HowToTransféré parscribd_curios
- An Introduction to Air Density and Density Altitude CalculationsTransféré parvietross
- Problem Solving on High Unburned Carbon Losses Used Dirty Air Test and Isokinetic Coal SamplingTransféré parAnonymous a19X9GHZ
- How to Test Pipe FittingTransféré parYaneYang
- k4-Fatigue Fracture AppearancesTransféré parWibowo Chandra
- HW_01Transféré parwarlords_214
- 1175082158Stability Lecture NotesTransféré paryahooo82
- Predict Resonances of Shielded PCBsTransféré parkhanafzaal2576
- PVC Pressure FittingsTransféré parFluidra Group
- 9.2.a.CMMTransféré parAravind Sudheesan
- Absortion Tuning of the Green Fluorescent Protein ChromophoreTransféré parchama_goz
- Robert SocolowTransféré para3aris
- reciprocal method of seismic refractionsTransféré parChidozie Opara
- Ashutosh (Physics Project)Transféré parashutosh kumar
- 0267-0269 [645] Water ConductivityTransféré parNattawat Teerawattanapong
- A-frame Combine All Loads Revc(Tinggi Sket) PrintTransféré parM Khairuzaim Salihin
- V001T06A001-97-AA-134Transféré parMark Niel Gongora
- Chemistry Bonding TutorialTransféré parRon
- Lecture 4 Kinetics Enzyme and Immobilization SystemTransféré parAfdillah Djati