View in EDS

Advancing the state of the art of cyclic direct simple shear Testing: Histories, current status, challenges and future trends.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Advancing the state of the art of cyclic direct simple shear Testing: Histories, current status, challenges and future trends.
Authors: Kang, Xin1 (AUTHOR) kangxin@hnu.edu.cn, Ma, Zi-Rui1 (AUTHOR) lousiem@hnu.edu.cn, Ge, Louis2 (AUTHOR) louisge@ntu.edu.tw
Source: Soil Dynamics & Earthquake Engineering (0267-7261). Dec2025, Vol. 199, pN.PAG-N.PAG. 1p.
Subjects: Soil testing, Earthquake engineering, Shear testing of soils, Shear waves, Soil liquefaction, Stress-strain curves, Strains & stresses (Mechanics), Soil mechanics
Abstract: The Cyclic Direct Simple Shear (CDSS) test, designed to simulate in-situ stress-strain behaviors during seismic loading, has become a widely used tool for assessing liquefaction potential and soil constitutive properties. Recent advancements have broadened its applications in constitutive modeling, unsaturated soil mechanics, and shear wave velocity measurement. However, the CDSS apparatus suffers from inherent limitations, including the absence of complementary shear stresses on vertical boundaries, stress and strain concentrations at platen edges, incomplete stress component measurement, potential for inaccurate soil property assessment, and assumptions required for Mohr' circle construction. These limitations, often overlooked by practitioners, can lead to unreliable results. This paper comprehensively reviews the histories, development, applications, and, critically, the limitations of CDSS testing. We examine the ongoing controversies surrounding its use, discuss future trends, and highlight both the appropriate engineering applications and the theoretical and experimental drawbacks. This review aims to provide a deeper understanding of CDSS testing and promote more informed interpretation of test results. • Traces DSS/CDSS development from 1931, highlighting key innovations and theoretical advancements. • Incomplete stress strain conditions and nonuniform strains limit the DSS/CDSS reliability, especially under large strains. • Assumptions in Mohr circle construction limit DSS's effectiveness for soil constitutive studies; DEM provides promising alternatives. • CDSS aids earthquake engineering but requires careful application for accurate response analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Soil Dynamics & Earthquake Engineering (0267-7261) is the property of Elsevier B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Engineering Source
Description
Abstract:The Cyclic Direct Simple Shear (CDSS) test, designed to simulate in-situ stress-strain behaviors during seismic loading, has become a widely used tool for assessing liquefaction potential and soil constitutive properties. Recent advancements have broadened its applications in constitutive modeling, unsaturated soil mechanics, and shear wave velocity measurement. However, the CDSS apparatus suffers from inherent limitations, including the absence of complementary shear stresses on vertical boundaries, stress and strain concentrations at platen edges, incomplete stress component measurement, potential for inaccurate soil property assessment, and assumptions required for Mohr' circle construction. These limitations, often overlooked by practitioners, can lead to unreliable results. This paper comprehensively reviews the histories, development, applications, and, critically, the limitations of CDSS testing. We examine the ongoing controversies surrounding its use, discuss future trends, and highlight both the appropriate engineering applications and the theoretical and experimental drawbacks. This review aims to provide a deeper understanding of CDSS testing and promote more informed interpretation of test results. • Traces DSS/CDSS development from 1931, highlighting key innovations and theoretical advancements. • Incomplete stress strain conditions and nonuniform strains limit the DSS/CDSS reliability, especially under large strains. • Assumptions in Mohr circle construction limit DSS's effectiveness for soil constitutive studies; DEM provides promising alternatives. • CDSS aids earthquake engineering but requires careful application for accurate response analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:02677261
DOI:10.1016/j.soildyn.2025.109705