2008
DOI: 10.1061/(asce)1090-0241(2008)134:10(1448)
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Reliability Analysis and Updating of Excavation-Induced Ground Settlement for Building Serviceability Assessment

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
45
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 96 publications
(45 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
45
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It is expected that the uncertainty impact is more profound for the parameter that has a predominant effect on the computed excavation responses. For excavation in clays, Hsiao et al (2008) reported that with good workmanship, the soil strength ( ' uc v s σ ) and stiffness ( ' i v E σ ) of clays had the most influence on the excavationinduced wall and ground deformations. Thus, in this paper these two soil parameters are considered as an example to demonstrate the propagation of uncertainty through the FEM approach.…”
Section: Adopted Fem Solution and Variable Input Parametersmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…It is expected that the uncertainty impact is more profound for the parameter that has a predominant effect on the computed excavation responses. For excavation in clays, Hsiao et al (2008) reported that with good workmanship, the soil strength ( ' uc v s σ ) and stiffness ( ' i v E σ ) of clays had the most influence on the excavationinduced wall and ground deformations. Thus, in this paper these two soil parameters are considered as an example to demonstrate the propagation of uncertainty through the FEM approach.…”
Section: Adopted Fem Solution and Variable Input Parametersmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this regard, the variation of soil stiffness and strength at TNEC site was obtained through small strain triaxial tests by Kung (2003). These data are shown in Table 1 s σ is equal to 0.3 as suggested by Hsiao et al (2008). These values of computed mean and standard deviation are used in steps 1, 2, and 3 of the aforementioned simplified procedure.…”
Section: Overview Of the Case History And Input Parametersmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Mainly included in the discussion are (1) methods for model uncertainty evaluation and model calibration which have been recently summarized by Dithinde et al [11] and (2) an overview of existing work of model uncertainty characterization for different geotechnical models in the literature (e.g., shallow and deep foundations [12][13][14][15][16][17] and retaining structures [18][19][20][21]). The objective of this study is to evaluate the model uncertainty of the default FHWA simplified nail load equation using the lower and upper bound nail load data reported by Wentworth [6] and Banerjee et al [7,8].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Inverse problem resolution is not new since numerous authors have studied it previously [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16]. Many of those studies [6,[8][9][10][11]14] address the back analysis as an optimization problem (i.e.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many of those studies [6,[8][9][10][11]14] address the back analysis as an optimization problem (i.e. obtaining the set of parameters which minimize an objective function).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%