Site Response in a Layered Liquefiable Deposit: Evaluation of Different Numerical Tools and Methodologies with Centrifuge Experimental Results

Ramirez, Jenny; Barrero, Andrés R.; Chen, Long; Dashti, Shideh; Ghofrani, Alborz; Taiebat, Mahdi; Arduino, Pedro

doi:10.1061/(asce)gt.1943-5606.0001947

Cited by 149 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The simulations in this section however provide some evidences that these shortcomings do not prevent the model from successfully capturing the overall r u and settlement response during the shaking process. In combination with similar findings for numerical predictions of centrifuge tests under UD shearing reported by Tasiopoulou et al [45] and Ramirez et al [40] for the same constitutive model, it appears that SANISAND model can provide a reasonable estimate of the shear-induced volumetric response of level ground sand deposits during shaking for several scenarios including different intensities of the base input motions, a number of shearing patterns in UD and BD shaking, and a range of soil D r . These were possible by using a single set of model parameters per sand, determined using conventional UD laboratory shear tests.…”

Section: Numerical Simulationssupporting

confidence: 83%

“…While this latter observation differs with the findings of Bhaumik et al [11] and Nie et al [16], the increase percentage falls within the range of 50%-200% determined in their element-scale studies and resembles the 100% increase observed by Pyke et al [1] in their shake table tests. Nevertheless, recent experimental and numerical observations determined in Bhaumik et al [69] and in Ramirez et al [40] suggest that assessing the seismic response of large-scale sand systems based only on one type of element-level tests may lead to comparison inconsistencies similar to those observed here.…”

Section: Effect On Settlement Of Dry Depositssupporting

confidence: 50%

“…Model implementation and testing in FLAC 3D was completed by Barrero [38]. This implementation has been already employed and compared against another one in a different numerical platform [39] in the comprehensive study by Ramirez et al [40]. The verification of the model implementation is not repeated here.…”

Section: Constitutive Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…SANISAND has been proven successful in reproducing the monotonic and pre-liquefaction cyclic response of sands for a wide range of pressures and densities under UD shearing in both element and centrifuge testing [e.g., 33,40,[43][44][45]. Regarding BD cyclic shearing, Yang et al [31] presented a detailed evaluation of the model against a large database of BD cyclic shear tests conducted on Monterey No.…”

Section: Constitutive Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Impact of bidirectional seismic shearing on the volumetric response of sand deposits

Reyes

Adinata

Taiebat

2019

Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Numerical simulation results of dry and saturated sand deposits subjected to both unidirectional and bidirectional seismic shearing were carried out and compared to quantify the increase of shear-induced volumetric response during shaking. The engineering demand parameters quantifying such response during the shaking events were considered to be the surface settlement for the dry deposits, and the depth-averaged peak excess pore water pressure and thickness of the liquefied layer for the saturated deposits. The numerical simulations made use of a three-dimensional continuum, coupled, dynamic, finite-difference platform and an anisotropic bounding surface plasticity constitutive model. Results of a series of centrifuge tests on saturated level ground sand deposits subjected to bidirectional shearing were used to validate the model capabilities for capturing the volumetric response of sand deposits. Over 1000 simulations were carried out in this study on homogeneous sand deposits with different densities and subjected to ground motions applied as uni-and bidirectional shearing. The dry models exhibited an 80% increase of surface settlement and in the saturated models depthaveraged peak excess pore water pressure ratios were up to 60% higher. Moreover, for the loose to medium dense 30 m-deep uniform deposits, the liquefied sand layers were in average 5-6 m thicker. These outcomes highlight the need to account for bidirectional seismic shearing when predicting the shear-induced volumetric response of sand deposits and related damaging phenomena such as liquefaction or seismic-induced settlement, among others. Furthermore, the simulation results shown the necessity for defining optimal ground motion intensity measures to characterize and scale ground motions for bidirectional shearing.

show abstract

Section: Numerical Simulationssupporting

confidence: 83%

Section: Effect On Settlement Of Dry Depositssupporting

confidence: 50%

Section: Constitutive Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Constitutive Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Impact of bidirectional seismic shearing on the volumetric response of sand deposits

Reyes

Adinata

Taiebat

2019

Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The rest of the parameters can be calibrated using either trial and error or optimization techniques. Since the authors had experience working with Ottawa F65 sand from the previous LEAP 2015 exercise (Ghofrani and Arduino 2018), as well as few other projects, e.g., Ramirez et al (2018), some of the same parameters used in previous calibration efforts were used for this study. Although it would have been ideal to calibrate the model for all of the characteristics revealed by the lab results at hand, due to intrinsic characteristics of the constitutive model, some specific objectives could not be achieved.…”

Section: Parametersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prediction of LEAP-UCD-2017 Centrifuge Test Results Using Two Advanced Plasticity Sand Models

Chen

Ghofrani

Arduino

2019

Model Tests and Numerical Simulations of Liquefaction and Lateral Spreading

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In accordance with the Liquefaction Experiments and Analysis Projects (LEAP)-UCD-2017 guidelines, two stress-dependent bounding surface constitutive models, Manzari-Dafalias and PM4Sand, were calibrated for Class-B prediction of centrifuge experiments of a sloped ground surface model of uniformly deposited Ottawa F-65 sand. Different calibration techniques and objectives were chosen for each material model. It was shown that both models were capable of simulating the behavior of cohesionless soils under liquefaction.

show abstract

Site‐specific liquefaction fragility analysis: Cloud, stripe, and incremental approaches

Bullock

Liel

Dashti

2021

Earthq Engng Struct Dyn

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article adapts a handful of procedures from performance‐based earthquake engineering for use in estimating the probability of liquefaction triggering. The resulting approach, defined as liquefaction fragility analysis (LFA), produces site‐specific fragility functions for liquefaction. These fragility functions incorporate site‐specific, system‐level effects not captured by existing, broader methods, but require more detailed knowledge of both the subsurface conditions and the seismic hazard at the site. LFA accounts for system‐level effects such as pore pressure migration, dynamic layer‐to‐layer interaction, and partial saturation to the extent that these phenomena can be captured in the constitutive models used in nonlinear site response analyses. Multiple approaches for selecting ground motions for LFA are discussed and illustrated using a case study of a site in Los Angeles, California. The computational expense of using LFA for probabilistic estimate of future liquefaction seismic performance is also discussed.

show abstract

Site Response in a Layered Liquefiable Deposit: Evaluation of Different Numerical Tools and Methodologies with Centrifuge Experimental Results

Cited by 149 publications

References 40 publications

Impact of bidirectional seismic shearing on the volumetric response of sand deposits

Impact of bidirectional seismic shearing on the volumetric response of sand deposits

Prediction of LEAP-UCD-2017 Centrifuge Test Results Using Two Advanced Plasticity Sand Models

Site‐specific liquefaction fragility analysis: Cloud, stripe, and incremental approaches

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About