Talk:Triaxial shear test

Expansion
Please add explanation of CD, CU, and UU triaxial tests plus other missing information —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sand777 (talk • contribs) 19:17, September 20, 2006

Rename this page
The test is commonly known as "Triaxial test". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robert Hack (talk • contribs) 18:12, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Reference incorrect
Reference ASTM WK3821 (2011): New Test Method for Consolidated Drained Triaxial Compression Test for Soils (under development) is dated 2011, but at the bottom of the page it's 2003... both of the years cannot be true. Edwardando (talk) 15:04, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Improved triaxial apparatus


In Aalborg Univerisy, capabilities of the Danish triaxial apparatus are being investigated. We are researching cyclic / transient loaded sand behavior during isotropic yielding in effort to improve offshore wind turbine foundation design standards.

The apparatus has a lot of previously unseen and unharnessed potential. For instance - it can liquefy a specimen to a large amplitude and keep testing into drained cycles post-liquefaction. Thus both loss and recovery of soil stiffness can be observed. This is the cutting edge of triaxial testing, I will be writing more about it as further publications work get released. I had been advised not to disclose too much before peer reviewed journals publish the findings.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by TomasSab (talk • contribs) 14:36, 7 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Please come up with a better name than "new and improved" for this apparatus. Also, Wikipedia prefers reliable sources for this sort of thing, so it may be best to wait until you have peer-reviewed journal articles to use as references. Argyriou (talk) 21:37, 7 October 2016 (UTC)


 * The references used ARE from peer-reviewed journal articles. The "new triaxial" and the "improved triaxial" are both legitimate apparatuses from the 70's and 80's. They both use principles discussed in publications from the 60's. All published in peer-reviewed journals.


 * Despite being similar, the "new" and "improved" apparatuses have noticeable differences, such as positioning of the load cell, deformation transducers and pore pressure / volume change measuring methods, drainage, filter positioning... all factors combined - it is important to distinguish between the two.


 * The "new" triaxial apparatus (by Jakobsen) was later improved by Ibsen in the 90's and named "the Danish triaxial apparatus". The Danish triaxial is described in numerous peer-reviewed publications as well. L.B.Ibsen used the Danish apparatus to observe the stable state line (TSSL), during cyclic loaded stabilisation of undrained specimens. Since then TSSL became a cyclic loaded sand parameter occasionally used in cyclic loaded sand models. Ibsen also showed undrained yield strength of sand is predictable and governed by pore water pressure - Only once pore water cavitates, does undrained sand yield into plasticity.


 * Now (year 2015 and forward) capabilities of "the Danish triaxial" are being tested further. We have managed to apply unprecedented loading scenarios which have already been published in international - peer-reviewed conferences (ISOPE). The research is still producing new observations, new testing capabilities are being discovered, and we are working on models capturing the new found properties of sand. Papers describing the ongoing work are already being reviewed for publication - and significance of their in not mentioned in the text yet. Not Until published in peer reviewed journals.
 * I am aware how bizarre the names "new" and "improved" may appear to native english speaker. But those are the names original authors assigned to their creations (Vardoulakis - Grece, Jakobsen - Denmark). I provide references to their original work. And I use their chosen names as a sign of respect to the original authors.

P.S. I need help uploading illustration of the apparatus in action and so forth. How do I add this picture to the text: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/102515617/InitSample3.png ?
 * You cannot. Only images that you own the copyright can be uploaded by yourself. That normally means you have to be the person who pressed the shutter. If you have such an image then upload at c:Commons:Upload Ron h jones (Talk) 22:23, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I'll also add that I find the image very blurry, and if there's something to be seen comparing the three panels, I'm not seeing it. File:Danish triaxial shear test apparatus, in action.jpg looks better to me. Huon (talk) 23:05, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you. This is slightly bizarre of a limitation, as taking high resolution pictures of a computer screen using a phone camera could potentially overcome the limitation. None the less. Note taken regarding the picture quality. You are correct. The picture is blurry... I'm sentimentally attached to it, apparently that affected my judgment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TomasSab (talk • contribs) 20:03, 9 October 2016 (UTC)