-
GR-85-11
EVALUATION OF USBR CYCLIC SIMPLESHEAR AND CYCLIC TRIAXIAL
APPARATUS
FOR TESTING DYNAMIC PROPERTIES
by
Jack Rosenfield
Geotechnical BranchDivision of Research and laboratory
Services
Engineering and Research CenterDenver, Colorado
December 1985
IIUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR * BUREAU OF
RECLAMATION
-
As the Nation's principal conservation agency, the Department of
theInterior has responsibility for most of our nationally owned
publiclands and natural resources. This includes fostering the
wisest use ofour land and water resources, protecting our fish and
wildlife, preser-ving the environmental and cultural values of our
national parks andhistorical places, and providing for the
enjoyment of life through out-door recreation. The Department
assesses our energy and mineralresources and works to assure that
their development is in the bestinterests of all our people. The
Department also has a major respon-sibility for American Indian
reservation communities and for peoplewho live in Island
Territories under U.S. Administration.
The research covered by this report was funded under the Bu-reau
of Reclamation PRESS (Program Related Engineering andScientific
Studies) allocation No. E-6, "Soil Performance DuringSeismic
Activity."
The information contained in this report regarding commercial
prod-ucts or firms may not be used for advertising or promotional
pur-poses and is not to be construed as an endorsement of any
productor firm by the Bureau of Reclamation.
-
CONTENTS
Glossary of
symbols....................................................................................................................
Introduction ., """""""""""""" , ,.........
Conclusions .,... ., .., . ,.. .................
Equipment .........Cyclic simple shear
apparatus...................................................................................................Cyclic
triaxial
apparatus............................................................................................................
Stress conditions .Cyclicsimple shear
test...........................................................................................................Cyclic
triaxial
test....................................................................................................................
State of stress and
strain.............................................................................................................Cyclic
simple shear test ,.........Cyclic triaxial
test....................................................................................................................
Comparison of results of cyclic simple shear and cyclic triaxial
properties testing.............................
Current practice .....
Bibliography ........
FIGURES
Figure
12345
Approximate strain range of laboratory tests used to obtain
dynamic response..................Conceptual in situ conditions due
to earthquake
loading....................................................Characteristic
soil elements in typical in situ loading
conditions..........................................Cyclic loading
simple shear
test.......................................................................................Cyclic
loading triaxial compression test ,
iii
Page
iv
1
2
224
446
779
9
9
10
15567
-
a
0
E
Hz
Ko
as
ac
a dcj2
ad
av
a/'
a/;
a;
'hv
'msx
GLOSSARY OF SYMBOLS
principal stress axis rotation
damping Ratio
Young's modulus
hertz
coefficient of earth pressure at rest
ambient consolidation stress
consolidation stress in triaxial test apparatus
cyclic deviator stress
effective overburden stress
vertical stress
effective major principal stress
effective major principal stress at failure
effective minor principal stress
shear stress (on horizontal and vertical planes)
maximum shear stress
iv
-
Resonan T Column
Cyclic Simple Shear
I
Cyclic Triaxial
INTRODUCTION
A variety of laboratory test apparatus have been developed to
replicate the stresses in soil sub-
jected to earthquakes. Of these, the most common are the cyclic
simple shear, the resonant
column, and the cyclic triaxial devices. The resonant column
test is used to obtain dynamic re-
sponse properties in the 10-5to 10-2percent strain range. The
cyclic simple shear and the cyclic
triaxial tests are used to obtain dynamic response properties in
the 10-2 to 5.0 percent strain
range, as shown on figure 1.
The purpose of this study was to examine and evaluate the use of
the cyclic simple shear and
the cyclic triaxial tests to obtain dynamic response
properties.
The Engineering and Research Center geotechnical laboratory has
both the cyclic simple shear
apparatus and cyclic triaxial equipment. However, the cyclic
simple shear device needs modification
to become a state-of-the-art apparatus. Therefore, shear modulus
and damping ratio has routinely
been determined by use of the cyclic triaxial equipment.
To evaluate the cyclic simple shear and the cyclic triaxial
tests, it is important to consider the
complexity and system compliance of the testing apparatus, the
sample preparation procedure,
and the ability of the equipment to simulate in situ stress
conditions.
/0-5 /0-4 /0-3 /0-2 10-1 /00 10
SHEAR STRAIN, Percent
Figure 1. - Approximate strain range of laboratory tests used to
obtain dynamic response. From [20. 21].
1
-
CONCLUSIONS
The USBR (Bureau of Reclamation) cyclic simple shear apparatus
should not be modified. This
apparatus needs several modifications to make it a
state-of-the-art testing apparatus. Some of
the most important of these modifications involve adding a
confining chamber, reducing "free
play" in the apparatus, and strengthening the frame for reduced
system compliance. Because the
cyclic triaxial apparatus produces data adequate for the 10-2 to
5.0 percent strain ranges (fig. 1),
it is impractical to modify or to continue using the cyclic
simple shear device.
The USBR now uses only the cyclic triaxial apparatus for
evaluating dynamic properties. These
test results have provided adequate information for analyses.
Because previous investigations have
indicated that modulus and damping data obtained from either
cyclic simple shear or cyclic triaxial
test methods are acceptable, the USBR should continue to use
cyclic triaxial testing to obtain
modulus and damping values in the 10-2 to 5.0 percent strain
range.
EQUIPMENT
Cyclic Simple Shear Apparatus
The cyclic simple shear apparatus was developed to evaluate the
shear modulus of soil under
stress conditions that attempted to replicate those believed to
occur during an earthquake. During
a test, shear strains are applied to the specimen, and the shear
modulus is calculated from the
ratio of shear stress to shear strain.
The Swedish direct shear apparatus [1]* was one of the first
simple shear devices. A cylindrical
sample was confined by a rubber membrane, and a series of thin,
evenly spaced rings were placed
over the specimen to uniformly distribute the lateral
deformations over the height and cross section
of the test specimen.
Later, in 1953, Roscoe [2] developed a modified simple shear
apparatus that accepted square
specimens. Instead of using a rubber membrane to confine the
specimen, he used a solid box.
His modifications were intended to eliminate the "edge effects"
of the standard shear box then
available. More recently, Ansell et al. [3] simplified the end
plate mountings by eliminating the
external hinges.
.Numbers in brackets refer to entries in the bibliography.
2
-
The original NGI (Norwegian Geotechnical Institute) apparatus
[4], developed in 1965, was a direct,
simple shear apparatus developed for testing Norwegian quick
clay. The 8-cm-diameter by 1-cm-
high sample was confined by a wire-reinforced rubber membrane
around its circumference, which
allowed vertical deformations and horizontal displacements with
no change in diameter. A cap and
a base completed the confining components.
The apparatus most commonly used today is of the NGI-type. The
original NGI apparatus was
modified to accept different specimen sizes to investigate the
effects of various specimen diameter-
to-height ratios on test results. Modifications by Dyvik et al.
[5] permitted application of cyclic
stress-controlled tests with square wave loading at a frequency
of 0.25 Hz. The specimen, confined
by a membrane, was located in the load frame and secured by the
bottom plate. The cap was
attached to a specimen carriage to allow application of vertical
and horizontal forces. (Details of
the stress conditions applied to the specimen are discussed
later.) An MTS Systems Corp. closed-
loop servohydraulic system allowed stress- or strain-controlled
testing in a variety of waveforms
and frequencies.
The BAW (Bundesantalt fUr Wasserbow - Federal Institute for
Waterways Engineering) cyclic
simple shear apparatus was developed in 1979, in an attempt to
eliminate the effects of the rubber
membrane [6]. Instead of using a rubber membrane or rigid side
plates, an automatic measuring
and regulating system was used.
The cyclic simple shear apparatus developed at the Nanjing
Hydraulic Research Institute [7] uses
a rubber membrane and a stack of steel rings attached to the end
plates by tapered sleeves. The
vertical and horizontal loads are applied pneumatically.
The cyclic simple shear apparatus used by the USBR was developed
by M.S. Silver. The test
apparatus uses a wire-wound membrane to confine the soil
specimen. The test can be performed
using either a stress- or strain-controlled loading sequence. It
is normally conducted at a frequency
of 0.5 Hz with continuous monitoring of load and deformation.
The current apparatus has a good
deal of equipment "free play," poor system compliance, and no
method of applying or varying a
confined stress.
In general, the complexity of the simple shear apparatus and the
intricacy of specimen preparation
and testing procedures are the major disadvantages of this type
of testing. Use of a membrane
to confine the specimen requires skill and experience to ensure
that a good seal exists along the
edges of the membrane, that the membrane does not draw away from
the sides of the machine,
3
-
and that membrane bursting is avoided without using a membrane
so thick as to contribute toshear resistance [8].
Cyclic Triaxial Apparatus
The cyclic triaxial test method has been widely used to evaluate
soil liquefaction and the dynamic
shear modulus and damping ratio. This is primarily due to the
availability and familiarity with the
triaxial test procedure and equipment.
The cyclic triaxial test consists of a cylindrical specimen
subjected to a confining stress and
repeatedly loaded by a series of axial compression and extension
loads while the vertical defor-
mation is monitored. The axial load can be either strain- or
stress-controlled.
The configuration of the test specimen in the cyclic triaxial
test is standard; however, there are
many methods of loading and controlling'the equipment. Much of
the equipment now used to test
for properties of the soil uses strain-controlled devices.
However, a servosystem usually applies
cycles of controlled load. Pore pressure, vertical load, and
vertical deformation are recorded as a
function of the number of cycles of the load. Some of the common
load-control systems are
pneumatic, hydraulic, electro-hydraulic, and
pneumatic-hydraulic.
The USBR cyclic triaxial test apparatUs uses a pneumatically
actuated loading system that produces
a sine wave loading. The test specimen is typically subjected to
a loading pattern in the form of
a O.5-Hz sine wave after consolidation. The load and deformation
are continuously monitored.
STRESS CONDITIONS
Cyclic Simple Shear Test
The stress conditions desired in the cyclic simple shear
apparatus are intended to simulate those
that a soil element is subjected to in situ. Many researchers
have analyzed actual stress conditions
applied by the various cyclic simple shear apparatus using
numerical methods and by instrumen-
tation.
The loading conditions and resulting stresses that occur in situ
are shown on figures 2 and 3.
During an earthquake, the forces resulting from upward
propagation of shear motions result in the
sequence of stress applications for a horizontal ground surface
shown on figure 2. For in situ
4
-
,(To
,(To (T'0
,KOOO
,KO (TO
(0) (b) (c)
Figure 2. - Conceptual in situ conditions due to earthquake
loading: (a) before earthquake. (b) and (c) shear stress reversal
duringearthquake.
7/1/\.\Y/~/)~> /
,CT,
,(T3
(0 ) (b)
Figure 3. - Characteristic soil elements in typical in situ
loading conditions: principal stress directions during
consolidation andfailure.
conditions in which the ground surface is sloping, the
orientation of the principal stress directions
is rotated, as shown on figure 3.
The cyclic simple shear test simulates in situ loading
conditions (fig. 2) more closely than the cyclic
triaxial test. For both the field loading condition (fig. 2) and
the cyclic simple shear test laboratory
loading condition (fig. 4), the soil element is subjected to an
effective overburden stress, ao'. The
specimen is restrained from lateral deformation by the sides of
the shear box or by a wire-reinforced
membrane; thus, a lateral pressure equal to Koao'develops, as
shown on figure 4 condition 1. To
simulate the application of shear stresses imposed by an
earthquake loading, an application of a
horizontal and vertical shear stress, 'Z'hv,results in condition
2 shown on figure 4. Because of the
initial stress conditions, the maximum shear stress imposed on
the soil element is 'Z'max,
5
-
CONDITION I,
0-0
,KOOO
I ,"Kdo-o CTO
I i1 1I 1I II
III I, IICONDITION 211 I,
0-0 I 1I I r moJC1
,KOCTO
,"
Figure 4. - Cyclic loading simple shear test: Condition 1 -
stress conditions due to consolidation; Condition 2 - stress
conditionsdue to shear stress application.
where:
'Cmax2= 'Ch} + [Go' (1 - Ko)
2 rOrientation of the principal stress directions rotates
through a small angle of less than 40" on each
side of the vertical.
The cyclic simple shear test attempts to simulate the above
stress conditions. The ability of the
cyclic simple shear apparatus to replicate those conditions
depends on the state of stress, state
of strain, and system compliance.
Cyclic Triaxial Test
In the cyclic triaxial test, shown on figure 5, soil is
consolidated under an ambient stress, Ga, to
simulate a soil element under a horizontal ground surface. Then,
to simulate earthquake conditions,
a cyclic load is applied by increasing the axial stress, Gdc/2,
and simultaneously reducing the lateral
stress an equal amount. This results in an unchanged normal
stress on a 45" plane in the sample.
6
-
CToCONDITION I
CTO
CToIII
0-:CT.r dea 2 CONDITION 2
CTozCldc
2
CT0: ---I1La 2
CTo:+~a 2
Figure 5. - Cyclic loading triaxial compression test: Condition
1 - stress conditions due to consolidation; Condition 2 -
stressconditions due to application of a cyclic deviator
stress.
The direction of shear stress on this 45° plane is reversed when
the above axial and lateral stresses
are reversed. Conditions on the 45° plane simulate those on the
horizontal plane for the in situ
condition.
The cyclic triaxial test is commonly performed with the lateral
stress held constant, while the axial
stress is cycled by :!: adc; the same effective stress
conditions are produced for saturated soil
samples. Only under true isotropic stress conditions (Ko= 1)does
this relationshiphold true. Under
anisotropic stress conditions (Ko -+ 1), the desired symmetrical
changes in shear stress required
to simulate those in the field for a horizontal ground surface
do not occur on any plane. Thus, the
cyclic triaxial test can simulate field conditions for a
horizontal ground surface only under isotropic
stress conditions, and only while rotating the direction of
principal stresses through a 45° angle.
STATE OF STRESS AND STRAIN
Cyclic Si'mple Shear Test
For the cyclic simple shear test apparatus to simulate in situ
conditions, ambient and shear stresses
must be applied. Simulation of the ambient or consolidation
stress is possible with an apparatus
7
-
that has a confining chamber around the soil specimen; the USBR
apparatus does not have this
ability. Seed et al. [9] have shown that the value of Ko greatly
affects the stress required to cause
failure. This stress increases with increasing values of Ko and,
thus, necessitates careful control
of Ko.
Application of a uniform shear stress is much more difficult.
The uniformity depends on the stress
transfer mechanism between the cap and base and the specimen
[9].
For proper simulation of shear stresses occurring in situ, the
soil specimen must be subjected to
complementary shear stresses at the vertical boundaries of the
specimen. Because these stresses
cannot be applied in the simple shear apparatus, the effects are
minimized by using a large diameter-
to-height ratio for the specimens. Kovacs [10] conducted a
detailed investigation of the effect of
sample configuration in simple shear testing. Based on tests of
a mixture of kaolinite and bentonite,
he found that a sample diameter-to-height ratio of at least 6: 1
was necessary to reduce or eliminate
boundary effects. Assuming that soil behaves as an
elastic-plastic material, Prevost et al. [11]
determined the effects of partial boundary slippage between the
soil and loading platen interface.
Shear and normal stresses developed in the soil specimen are
greatly affected by these slippages.
Dyvik et al. [5] measured the lateral stresses that developed in
the soil specimen by using calibrated,
wire-reinforced membranes in tests on three types of clay. The
membranes measured the average
lateral stress within the soil specimen by monitoring the
electrical resistance of the reinforcing
wire, which changed as a result of the elongation. The
calibrated membranes successfully meas-
ured the lateral stresses that developed. These measurements
compared favorably with those
from other indirect and experimental determinations of Ko, using
the measured values of Ko allowed
by definition of the complete Mohr's circle state of stress,
stress paths, and lateral stress ratios.
By using the measured values of Ko, results of the cyclic simple
shear test can be compared with
those obtained in other testing apparatus, such as the cyclic
triaxial apparatus.
Shen et al. [12, 13] performed a finite element analysis to
determine stress and strain states within
a soil specimen restrained by a wire-reinforced rubber membrane
and tested in the NGI simple
shear apparatus. They assumed soil to be a linear,
elastic-isotropic cylindrical solid and concluded
that shear stress or strain distribution developed in the NGI
simple shear apparatus was far from
uniform. The applied strain was not equal to the actual strain
in the soil specimen. This nonuni-
formity is the result of the creation of an external moment from
application of a uniform horizontal
displacement and a vertical loading to the soil specimen. Large
horizontal displacements develop
at the soil-platen interface. Shen et al. concluded that the
state of shear strain in the soil specimen
8
-
is nonuniform and asymmetric. This results in an error ranging
from 5 to 15 percent in shear
modulus measurements. This range is on the conservative side
because the measured shear
modulus is always lower than the actual shear modulus of the
soil.
Cyclic Triaxial Test
Stress and strain conditions in the triaxial test are reasonably
well known [14, 15, 16, 17]. The
dynamic properties, Young's modulus, E, and damping ratio, 0,
are measured by strain-controlled
tests. Several authors have cited limitations of the cyclic
triaxial test for testing soil properties
[14, 17, 18]. Some of these limitations are (1) shear strain
measurements of 10-2percent or less
are difficult to obtain; (2) the extension and compression
cycles may produce different results
affecting the hysteresis loop and, therefore, modulus values;
(3) void ratio redistribution occurs
during testing because of the cyclic loading; and (4) the
specimen configuration induces stress
concentrations at the top and bottom specimen contact
surfaces.
COMPARISON OF RESULTS OF CYCLIC SIMPLE SHEARAND CYCLIC TRIAXIAL
PROPERTIES TESTING
Several studies have compared the testing of dynamic properties
by the cyclic simple shear and
by the cyclic triaxial apparatus. The dynamic properties
measured by both tests are affected by
shear strain amplitude, density (unit weight), and confining
pressure.
Generally, shear modulus values resulting from a simple shear
test are lower than those from a
cyclic triaxial test at any strain amplitude, for a given
pressure of ae = av. But, the vertical stress
applied in the simple shear test is not a good index of
confinement of the sample. Similarly, damping
ratio values obtained from cyclic triaxial tests are slightly
lower than those from simple shear tests
[19,20,21,22].
Some investigators have developed correlations between cyclic
triaxial and cyclic simple shear
test results. When the correlation equations have been used, the
damping ratio values agree
reasonably well, as do the modulus values [21, 22].
CURRENT PRACTICE
The current method for determining the shear modulus and damping
ratios for soil varies throughout
the geotechnical community. Use of the cyclic simple shear
apparatus is not widespread; it is
9
-
limited to some Government organizations, a few universities,
and a small number of private
consultants. This apparatus is generally used for research
activities.
Most production-oriented geotechnical laboratories test dynamic
properties using the cyclic triaxial
apparatus. This is primarily due to the availability of the
triaxial equipment and the amount of
experience with its test procedures. Shear modulus and damping
ratio values obtained using
properly instrumented cyclic triaxial equipment are adequate for
most geotechnical applications.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
[1] Kjellman, W., "Testing the Shear Strength of Clay in
Sweden," Geotechnique, vol. 2, pp. 225-235,June 1950.
[2] Roscoe, K.H., "An Apparatus for the Application of Simple
Shear," Proceedings of the Third Inter-national Conference on Soil
Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, vol. 1, Sessions 1-4, pp.
186-191,Switzerland, August 1953.
[3] Ansell, P., and S.F. Brown, "A Cyclic Simple Shear Apparatus
for Dry Granular Materials," GeotechnicalTesting Journal, GTJODJ,
vol. 1, No.2, pp. 82-92, June 1978.
[4] Bjerrum, L., and A. Landva, "Direct Simple-Shear Tests on a
Norwegian Quick Clay," Geotechnique,vol. 16, No.1, pp. 1-20, March
1966.
[5] Dyvik, R.. and T.F. Zimmie, "Lateral Stress Measurements
During Static and Cyclic Simple ShearTesting," Norwegian
Geotechnicallnst., 8 pp., Oslo, Norway, 1983.
[6] Franke, E., M. Kiebusch, and B. Schuppener, "A New Direct
Simple Shear Device," Geotechnical TestingJournal, GTJODJ, vol. 2,
No.4, pp. 190-199, December 1979.
[7] Wei, R.L., T.L. Guo, and Y.M. Zuo, "Pore Pressure in Silty
Sand Under Cyclic Shear," Proceedings,International Conference on
Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil
Dynamics,vol. 1, pp. 59-64, University of Missouri, Rolla, MO,
1981.
[8] Pickering, D.J., "Drained Liquefaction Testing in Simple
Shear," Journal of the Soil Mechanics andFoundations Division,
ASCE, vol. 99, SM12, pp. 1179-1184, December 1973.
[9] Seed, H.B.. and W.H. Peacock, "Test Procedures for Measuring
Soil Liquefaction Characteristics,"Journal of the Soil Mechanics
and Foundations Division, ASCE, vol. 97, No. SM8, pp.
1099-1119,August 1971.
[10] Kovacs, W.D., "Effect of Sample Configuration in Simple
Shear Testing," Behavior of Earth and EarthStructures Subjected to
Earthquakes and Other Dynamic Loads, vol. 1, pp. 82-86, Roorkee,
India, March1973.
[11] Prevost, J.H., and K. Hoeg, "Reanalysis of Simple Shear
Soil Testing," Canadian Geotechnical Journal,vol. 13, pp. 1-12,
1976.
[12] Shen, C.K., K. Sadigh, and L.R. Herrmann, "An Analysis of
NGI Simple Shear Apparatus for Cyclic SoilTesting," Dynamic
Geotechnical Testing, ASTM STP 654, American Society for Testing
and Materials,pp. 148-162, 1978.
10
-
[13] Shen, C.K., L.R. Herrmann, and K. Sadigh, "Analysis of
Cyclic Simple Shear Test Data," ASCE Geo-technical Engineering
Speciality Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics,
vol. 2, pp.864-874, Pasadena, CA, June 1978.
[14] Thiers, G.R., and H.B. Seed, "Cyclic Stress-Strain
Characteristics of Clay," Journal of the Soil Mechanicsand
Foundations Division, ASCE, vol. 94, No. SM2, pp. 555-569, March
1968.
[15] Kovacs, W.D., H.B. Seed, and C.K. Chan, "Dynamic Moduli and
Damping Ratios for a Soft Clay,"Journal of the Soil Mechanics and
Foundations Division, ASCE, vol. 97, No. SM., pp. 59-75.8,
January1970.
[16] Peacock, W.H., and H.B. Seed, "Sand Liquefaction Under
Cyclic Loading Simple Shear Conditions:'Journal of the Soil
Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE, vol. 94, No. SM, pp.
689-708, May1968.
[17] Finn, W.D.L., "Liquefaction Potential: Developments Since
1976:'
[18] Martin, G.R., W.D.L. Finn, and H.B. Seed, "Fundamentals of
Liquefaction Under Cyclic Loading:' Journalof the Geotechnical
Engineering Division, ASCE, vol. 101, No. GT5, pp. 423-438, May
1975.
[19] Kokusho, T., "Cyclic Triaxial Test of Dynamic Soil
Properties for Wide Strain Range," Japanese Societyof Soil
Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, vol. 20, No.2, June 1980.
[20] Budhu, M., "On Comparing Simple Shear and Triaxial Test
Results:' ASCE Journal of the GeotechnicalEngineering Division,
vol. 110, No. 12, December 1984.
[21] Park, T.K., and M.L. Silver, "Dynamic Triaxial and Simple
Shear Behavior of Sand:' ASCE Journal ofthe Geotechnical
Engineering Division, vol. 101, No. GT6, June 1975.
[22] Saada, A.S., G. Fries, and C. Ker, "An Evaluation of
Laboratory Testing Techniques in Soil Mechanics:'Japanese Society
of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, vol. 23, No.2, June
1983.
11
-
/ColorImageDict > /JPEG2000ColorACSImageDict >
/JPEG2000ColorImageDict > /AntiAliasGrayImages false
/CropGrayImages true /GrayImageMinResolution 300
/GrayImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleGrayImages true
/GrayImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /GrayImageResolution 300
/GrayImageDepth -1 /GrayImageMinDownsampleDepth 2
/GrayImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeGrayImages true
/GrayImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterGrayImages true
/GrayImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /GrayACSImageDict >
/GrayImageDict > /JPEG2000GrayACSImageDict >
/JPEG2000GrayImageDict > /AntiAliasMonoImages false
/CropMonoImages true /MonoImageMinResolution 1200
/MonoImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleMonoImages true
/MonoImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /MonoImageResolution 1200
/MonoImageDepth -1 /MonoImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000
/EncodeMonoImages true /MonoImageFilter /CCITTFaxEncode
/MonoImageDict > /AllowPSXObjects false /CheckCompliance [ /None
] /PDFX1aCheck false /PDFX3Check false /PDFXCompliantPDFOnly false
/PDFXNoTrimBoxError true /PDFXTrimBoxToMediaBoxOffset [ 0.00000
0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXSetBleedBoxToMediaBox true
/PDFXBleedBoxToTrimBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ]
/PDFXOutputIntentProfile () /PDFXOutputConditionIdentifier ()
/PDFXOutputCondition () /PDFXRegistryName () /PDFXTrapped
/False
/CreateJDFFile false /Description > /Namespace [ (Adobe)
(Common) (1.0) ] /OtherNamespaces [ > /FormElements false
/GenerateStructure false /IncludeBookmarks false /IncludeHyperlinks
false /IncludeInteractive false /IncludeLayers false
/IncludeProfiles false /MultimediaHandling /UseObjectSettings
/Namespace [ (Adobe) (CreativeSuite) (2.0) ]
/PDFXOutputIntentProfileSelector /DocumentCMYK /PreserveEditing
true /UntaggedCMYKHandling /LeaveUntagged /UntaggedRGBHandling
/UseDocumentProfile /UseDocumentBleed false >> ]>>
setdistillerparams> setpagedevice