Liquefaction effects on structures

doi:10.1201/b16744-9

Cited by 9 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the liquefaction triggering framework used herein, the amplitude and duration of cyclic loading are respectively represented by a max and MSF, where MSF is a function of M w , amongst other factors. However, the relationship between M w and MSF is uncertain for small magnitude events, and furthermore, many proposed MSFs do not account for potentially-significant variables (e.g., soil type, tectonic setting, and rupture-distance and -directivity) (e.g., Green and Terri, 2005;Green et al, 2008;Green and Lee, 2010;Carter et al, 2014). Thus, the discrepancy between curves developed directly from liquefaction field observations and those back-calculated could be tied to the selected MSF.…”

Section: Discussion and Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Development of magnitude-bound relations for paleoliquefaction analyses: New Zealand case study

Maurer

Green

Quigley

et al. 2015

Engineering Geology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tMagnitude-bound relations are often used to estimate paleoearthquake magnitudes from paleoliquefaction data. This study proposes New Zealand-based magnitude-bound curves that are developed using (a) liquefaction field observations and (b) a newly proposed back-calculation approach that combines the simplified liquefaction evaluation procedure with a regionally appropriate ground motion prediction equation. For (b) both deterministic and probabilistic frameworks are proposed. The magnitude bound curves back-calculated using either the deterministic or probabilistic frameworks are advantageous in that they can be used to predict the spatial distribution of liquefaction in regions where historical liquefaction field observations are limited or poorly documented, and because soil-and site-specific conditions can be incorporated into magnitude-bound analyses. Moreover, curves developed using the probabilistic framework allow for the range of possible causative earthquake magnitudes to be better understood and quantified. To demonstrate the use of the proposed relations, paleoliquefaction features discovered in eastern Christchurch (NZ) are analyzed. The 1869~M w 4.8 Christchurch earthquake and/or 1717~M w 8.1 Alpine Fault earthquake are found to be the most likely candidates amongst known historical and paleoearthquakes for triggering liquefaction over the permissible time range (ca. 1660 to 1905 A.D.). This study demonstrates the potential of the proposed magnitude-bound curves to provide insight in to past, present, and future hazards, proving their utility even in cases of limited evidence. The approach of developing and applying magnitude bound curves proposed herein is not limited to parts of New Zealand, but rather, can be applied worldwide.

show abstract

Section: Discussion and Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Development of magnitude-bound relations for paleoliquefaction analyses: New Zealand case study

Maurer

Green

Quigley

et al. 2015

Engineering Geology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Additional studies are needed for further improving the models used to represent magnitude scaling effects in liquefaction triggering analyses, as these are important for extending the liquefaction triggering analyses to situations involving either small or large earthquake magnitudes. Improvements may come from refining the functional dependency on soil type (e.g., FC, fines plasticity, state) and failure criterion (see Cetin and Bilge 2012), or from improvements to the weighting function for irregular loading or the inclusion of function dependency on factors such as distance to the fault, directivity, site conditions, or depth in a soil profile (see Liu et al 2001, Green and Terri 2005, Carter et al 2013. For critical projects, future studies may also demonstrate the utility of site-specific adjustments, such as may be possible with advanced laboratory testing of undisturbed field samples to determine the soil parameter b in combination with detailed seismic hazard analyses to better define the loading.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Magnitude scaling factors in liquefaction triggering procedures

Boulanger

Idriss

2015

Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A revised magnitude scaling factor (MSF) relationship for CPT-based and SPT-based liquefaction triggering analyses is presented in this paper. The revised MSF relationship incorporates functional dependency on the soil characteristics [represented by clean sand equivalent penetration resistances in the present form] as well as on earthquake magnitude. The revisions in MSF are based on the examination of cyclic testing results for a broad range of soil types and densities, analyses of strong ground motion records to develop relationships for the equivalent number of loading cycles for different soil properties, and the synthesis of those results into an MSF relationship suitable for implementation in practice. A separate study (Boulanger and Idriss 2014) showed that use of the revised MSF relationship in CPT-based and SPT-based liquefaction triggering procedures is well-supported by the case history databases. Other factors known to fundamentally influence the MSF are discussed.

show abstract

“…They attributed their recommendation to the fact that the R u may exceed the unity prior to the end of shaking in major earthquakes; therefore the subsequent motions do not contribute in computing N eq (Carter et al 2013). However, cases where R u exceeds the unity are out of the scope of the current study.…”

Section: Pore Pressure Build-up Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of pore pressure build-up as damage metric in computation of equivalent number of uniform strain cycles

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The build-up of earthquake-induced excess pore-water pressure may be viewed as analogous to the cumulative damage of saturated granular materials caused by cyclic loading, and consequently as a damage metric when converting an irregular earthquake loading to an equivalent number of uniform cycles, Neq. In this paper, a comprehensive series of strain-controlled tests have been conducted using the new combined triaxial simple shear (TxSS) apparatus developed at Institute de Recherche d’Hydro-Quebec (IREQ) in collaboration with the geotechnical group at the Université de Sherbrooke to verify the hypothesis of adopting the pore-water pressure ratio, Ru, as a damage metric when converting earthquakes to an equivalently damaging number of uniform strain cycles. Different reconstituted saturated samples of Baie-Saint-Paul, Carignon, and Quebec sands have been tested under undrained conditions up to liquefaction. The experimental results from this study have been utilized to develop an empirical expression to compute Neqγ from both the number of cycles required to trigger liquefaction, Nliq, and the material parameter, r. The parameter r had been experimentally calibrated a priori from a separate set of tests using uniform strain cycles following the theoretical framework outlined by Green and Lee in 2006. The present results reveal that the measured pore-water pressure ratio, Ru, is in agreement with predicted cumulative damage using the Richart and Newmark (R–N) hypothesis. However, the Palmgren–Miner (P–M) hypothesis underestimates the cumulative damage (i.e., the generated pore-water pressure) during cyclic loading.

show abstract

Liquefaction effects on structures

Cited by 9 publications

References 11 publications

Development of magnitude-bound relations for paleoliquefaction analyses: New Zealand case study

Development of magnitude-bound relations for paleoliquefaction analyses: New Zealand case study

Magnitude scaling factors in liquefaction triggering procedures

Use of pore pressure build-up as damage metric in computation of equivalent number of uniform strain cycles

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About