# Behaviour of Uniform Drava River Sand in Drained Condition--A Critical State Approach
## 2 Physical Properties of Tested Material
### Minimum and Maximum Density  
The minimum void ratio (\(e_{min}\)) and maximum void ratio (\(e_{max}\)) of tested sand are 0.627 and 0.951, respectively. The obtained values of minimum and maximum void ratio are compared with the similar uniform sands from literature and presented with Table 1. Values of minimum and maximum void ratios are determined in two ways, (i) using vibration table, according to ASTM standard [40] and (ii) using the vibration type sieve shaker. For the vibratory table technique, split mould defined with ASTM standard [40] was used. For the second method, using vibration sieve shaker, two-part mould of 150 mm in diameter, which is usually common for [PERSON]'s compaction test, was used for this purpose. The applied method here was modified based on the ASTM standard for standard test methods for maximum index density using a vibratory table [41]. The sand was loaded with the surcharge weight of 10 kg and let to vibrate for 10 min. From the simple phase relation of a soil element [42; 43] and using the ASTM standard for minimum and maximum void ratio [40], the void ratio can be expressed as a function of specific gravity and dry unit density Equation (1). The difference in void ratio using a vibratory table technique mentioned above was 0.3% which can lead to the conclusion that the modified machine such as vibration sieve shaker can be used for determination of minimum void ratio.  
\[e_{\bigodot}=\frac{G_{s}}{p_{d}\Omega}\cdot\rho_{w}-1 \tag{1}\]  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Sand Types** & \(G_{s}\) & \(C_{u}\) & \(C_{c}\) & \(D_{\mathbf{30}}\) & \(D_{\mathbf{10}}\) & \(e_{max}\) & \(e_{min}\) \\ \hline DrOS018 & 2.66 & 1.67 & 1.07 & 0.28 & 0.18 & 0.951 & 0.627 \\ Toyoura [12; 13; 14; 18] & 2.65 & 1.29–1.7 & 1–1.07 & 0.17–0.21 & \(-\)0.16 & 0.977–0.992 & 0.597–0.632 \\ Nevada [7; 19; 20] & 2.67 & 1.22–2.31 & 0.89–1.02 & 0.16–0.21 & 0.08–0.18 & 0.858–0.887 & 0.511–0.581 \\ Monterey [22; 25] & 2.65 & 1.28–1.5 & 0.99–1.0 & 0.35–0.36 & 0.26–0.3 & 0.85–0.86 & 0.55–0.56 \\ Ottawa [7; 21; 22; 23] & 2.64–2.67 & 1.18–1.73 & 0.96–1.26 & 0.17–0.7 & 0.12–0.6 & 0.67–0.83 & 0.46–0.51 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 1: Basic mechanical properties of various type of sands.  
Figure 2: Sieve analysis of DrOS018 sand compared to the similar sand types in literature: Toyoura sand: T1—[14], T2—[13], T3—[18], T4—[12]; Ottawa sand: O1—[12], O2—[22], O3—[23], O4—[7]; Nevada sand: N1—[20], N2—[19], N3—[7]; Monterey sand: M1—[22], M2—[25].  
where (\(G_{s}\)) is specific gravity of sand, (\(\rho_{d}\)) is dry density of soil and (\(\sqcap\)) stands for \"min\" or \"max\", depending on the type of density used in calculations.  
As for maximum void ratio and its minimum relative density, the value was determinate in three ways, using the same methodology. The value was determinate by pouring the sand in three different moulds: (i) fall cone cup, (ii) 38 mm in diameter triaxial sample cutter and (iii) proctor mould 101 mm in diameter. Fall cone cup and triaxial sample cutter gave similar results, with the difference in less than 0.1%. Fall cone cup resulted in the value of 0.952 and the triaxial cutter in value of 0.951. [PERSON]'s 101 mm diameter mould gave a value of maximum void ratio equal to 0.949, which is 0.2% smaller in comparison with the value obtained by triaxial cutter, which can be caused because of surcharge load. Taking the average of these three values results in the maximum value of void ratio (\(e_{\text{max}}=0.951\)).