An approach for the application of energy-based liquefaction procedure using field case history data

Yıl 2020, Cilt: 163 Sayı: 163, 99 - 114, 15.12.2020

Prof. Dr. Kamil Kayabalı , Levent Selçuk , Turgay Beyaz

https://doi.org/10.19111/bulletinofmre.677626

Öz

This paper presents an overview to the applicability of the “energy-based liquefaction approach” with regards to the new developments in the subject. The method involves comparing the strain energy for the soil liquefaction (capacity) with the strain energy imparted to the soil layer during an earthquake (demand). The performance of the method was evaluated by using a large database of SPT-based liquefaction case history. The energy-based method and the more commonly used stressbased method were compared in their capability to assess liquefaction potential under the same damaging historic earthquakes and geotechnical site conditions. In the procedure, the predictive strain energy equations were used to estimate the capacity energy values. These empirical equations have been developed based on the initial effective soil parameters. As for the energy of any given strong ground motion, it was computed from a velocity-time history of the ground motion and the unit mass of soil through utilization of kinetic energy concepts. The proposed energy-based method has effective way in evaluating the liquefaction potential based on the seismological parameters, contrary to the stress-based approach, where only peak ground acceleration (PGA) is considered.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Soil liquefaction, Energybased liquefaction method, Field case histories, Earthquake

Kaynakça

• Alavi, A. H., Gandomi, A. H. 2012. Energy-based numerical models for assessment of soil liquefaction: Geoscience Frontiers 3(4), 541-555.
• Alavi, A. H., Ameri, M., Gandomi, A. H., Mirzahosseini, M.R. 2011. Formulation of flow number of asphalt mixes using a hybrid computational method Construction and Building Materials 25, pp. 1338-1355.
• Ambraseys, N. N. 1988. Engineering seismology, Journal of Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 17, 1, 1-105.
• Baziar, M. H., Jafarian, Y. 2007. Assessment of liquefaction triggering using strain energy concept and ANN model, capacity energy: Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 27, 1056–1072.
• Boulanger, R. W., Idriss, I. M. 2012. Probabilistic standard penetration test-based liquefaction-triggering procedure. J Geotech. Geoenviron. 138, 1185–1195.
• Bradley, B. A. 2012. Recorded ground motions from the 22 February Christchurch earthquake. In Second Int. Conf. on Performance-Based Design in Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering Taormina, Italy, 28–30 May, pp. 2–13.
• Castro, G. 1995. Empirical methods in liquefaction evaluation, Primer Ciclo d Conferencias Internationales, Leonardo Zeevaert, Universidad National Autonoma de Mexico, Mexico City.
• Chen, Y.R., Hsieh, S.C., Chen, J.W., Shih, C.C. 2005.Energy-based probabilistic evaluation of soil liquefaction. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 25 (1), 55-68.
• Çetin, K.O., Seed, R.B., Der Kiureghian, A., Tokimatsu, K., Harder, L.F., Kayen, R.E. 2000. SPT-Based probabilistic and deterministic assessment of seismic soil liquefaction initiation hazard, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Report No. PEER-2000/05.
• Çetin, K. O., Seed, R. B., Moss, R. E. S., Der Kiureghian,A. K., Tokimatsu, K., Harder, L. F., Kayen, R. E. 2000. Field Performance Case Histories for SPT- Based Evaluation of Soil Liquefaction Triggering Hazard, Geotechnical Engineering Research Report No. UCB/GT-2000/09, Geotechnical Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering, University of California at Berkeley.
• Çetin, K.O., Seed, R.B., Der-Kiureghian, A., Tokimatsu, K., Harder, Jr. L.F., Kayen, R.E., Moss, R.E.S. 2004. Standard penetration test-based probabilistic and deterministic assessment of seismic soil liquefaction potential: Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering ASCE 130(12),1314–1340.
• Çetin, K.O., Seed, R. B., Kayen, R. E,. Moss, R. E. S., Tolga Bilge, H., Ilgac, M., Chowdhury, K. 2016. Summary of SPT Based Field Case History Data. Report No: METU / GTENG 08/16-01, 703p.
• Davis, R. O., Berrill, J. B. 1982. Energy Dissipation And Seismic Liquefaction in Sands, Earthquake Engineering And Structural Dynamics 10, 5948
• Davis, R. O., Berrill, J. B. 2001. Pore pressure and dissipated energy in earthquakes-Field verification: Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering ASCE, 127(3), 269-274.
• DeAlba, P. S., Seed, H. B., Chan, C. K. 1976. Sand liquefaction in large-scale simple shear tests: Journal of Geotechnical Engineering Division ASCE, 102(GT9): 909–927.
• Dief, H. M., Figueroa, J. L. 2001. Liquefaction assessment by the energy method through centrifuge modeling. In: Zeng, X.W. (Ed.), Proceedings of the NSF International Workshop on Earthquake Simulation in Geotechnical Engineering. CWRU, Cleveland, OH.
• Dobry, R., Ladd, R., Yokel, F., Chung, R., Powell. D. 1982. Prediction of pore water pressure buildup and liquefaction of sands during earthquakes by the cyclic strain method: National Bureau of Standards Building Science Series, US Dept of Commerce, 138 p.
• Elgamal, A.W., Dobry, R., Adalier, K. 1989. Small-scale Shaking Table Tests of Saturated Layered Sand- Silt Deposits, 2nd U.S-Japan Workshop on Soil Liquefaction, Buffalo N.Y., NCEER Rep. No. 890032, 233-245.
• Fear, C. E., McRoberts, E. C. 1995. Report on liquefaction potential and catalogue of case records. Internal Research Report, Geotechnical Engineering Library, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, 338.
• Figueroa, J.L., Saada, A.S., Liang, L., Dahisaria, M.N. 1994. Evaluation of soil liquefaction by energy principles: Journal of Geotechnical Engineering ASCE, 120(9): 1554–1569.
• Finn, W.D.L., Emery JJ, Gupta, Y.P. 1971. Liquefaction of Large Samples of Saturated Sand on a Shaking Table, Proceedings of the 1st Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering 97-110.
• Green, R.A. 2001. Energy-based evaluation and remediation of liquefiable soils: PhD dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
• Gutenberg, B., Richter, C.F. 1956. Magnitude and energy of earthquakes. Annali di Geofisica 9;1-15.
• Hatanaka, M., Uchida, A. 1996. Empirical Correlation between Penetration Resistance and Internal Friction Angle of Sandy Soils: Soils and Foundations, 36(4): 1-9.
• Hendron, A.J. 1990. The role of precedent, Soil Mechanics and Rock Mechanics in Geotechnical Engineering practice, Proceedings of H. Bolton Seed Memorial Symposium, Edt. J. M. Duncan, 2,83- 110.
• Hsu, C., Vucetic, M. 2004. Volumetric threshold shear strain for cyclic settlement, Journal of Geotechnical and Geo environmental Engineering 130, 1, pp. 58-70.
• Idriss, I. M., Boulanger, R. W. 2004. Semi-empirical procedures for evaluating liquefaction potential during earthquakes, in Proceedings, 11th International Conference on Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, and 3rd International Conference on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering D. Doolin et al., eds., Stallion Press,1, pp. 32–56.
• Idriss, I.M., Boulanger, R.W. 2006. Semi-empirical procedures for evaluating liquefaction potential duringearthquakes, Journal of Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 26, 115-130.
• Idriss, I. M., Boulanger, R. W. 2008. Soil liquefaction during earthquakes. Monograph MNO-12, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, CA, 261 pp.
• Idriss, I. M., Boulanger, R. W. 2010. SPT-Based Liquefaction Triggering Procedures. Center for Geotechnical Modeling Report NO. UCD/CGM-10/02, CA, 259p.
• Ishihara, K., Yasuda, S. 1975. Sand liquefaction in hollow cylinder torsion under irregular excitation. Soils Found 15 (1), 45–59.
• Jafarian, Y., Towhata, I., Baziar, M.H., Noorzad, A., Bahmanpour, A. 2012. Strain energy based evaluation of liquefaction and residual pore water pressure in sands using cyclic torsional shear experiments: Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 35, 13-28.
• Jamiolkowski, M., Baldi, G., Bellotti, R., Ghionna V., Pasqualini, E. 1985. Penetration resistance andliquefaction of sands, Proceedings of 11th Int. Conf. Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering San Francisco, 3, 1891-1896.
• Kokusho, T. 2013. Liquefaction potential evaluations: Energy-based method versus stress-based method. Can. Geotech J. 50,1088-1099.
• Kokusho, T. 2017. Liquefaction potential evaluations by energy-based method and stress based method for various ground motions: Supplement. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 95: 40–47.
• Kokusho, T., Mimori, Y. 2015. Liquefaction potential evaluations by energy-based method and stress- based method for various ground motions. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 75: 130–146.
• Kokusho, T., Mimori, Y., Kaneko, Y. 2015. Energy- Based Liquefaction Potential Evaluation and its Application to a Case History. 6th International Conference on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering 1-4 November, Christchurch, New Zealand.
• Kusumawardani, R., Nugroho, U., Hanggoro Tri Cahyo, A., Lashari. 2015. Cyclic Shear Strain Threshold on Clean Sand due to Cyclic Loading. International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology 4(9); 8401-407.
• Kunnath, S.K., Erduran, E., Chai, Y.H., Yashinsky, M. 2008. Effect of near-fault vertical ground motions on seismic response of highway overcrossings. J.Bridge Eng. 13, 282–290.
• Law, K.T., Cao, Y.L., He, G.N. 1990. An energy approach for assessing seismic liquefaction potential: Canadian Geotechnical Journal 27, 320–329.
• Ladd, R.S., Dobry, R., Yokel, F.Y., Chung, R.M. 1989. Pore water pressure buildup in clean sands because of cyclic straining. ASTM Geotechnical Testing Journal 12 (1), 2208-2228.
• Lee, R.L., Franklin, M.J., Bradley, B.A. 2013. Characteristics of vertical ground motions in the Canterbury earthquakes. In New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering Annual Conf. (NZSEE2013). Wellington, New Zealand: University of Canterbury.
• Liang, L. 1995. Development of an energy method for evaluating the liquefaction potential of a soil deposit: PhD dissertation, Department of Civil Engineering, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH.
• Liao, S.C., Veneziano, D., Whitman, R.V. 1988. Regression models for evaluating liquefaction probability, Journal of Geotechnical EngineeringASCE, 114, 4, 389-411.
• Martin, G. R. 1975. Fundamentals of Liquefaction Under Cyclic Loading, J. Geotech., Div. ASCE, 101:5, 423-438.
• Moss, R.E.S., Seed, R.B., Kayen, R.E., Stewart, J.P., Der Kiureghian, A., Cetin, K.O. 2006. CPT-based probabilistic and deterministic assessment of in situ seismic soil liquefaction potential. J Geotech Geoenviron 132, 1032–1051.
• NRC. 1985. Liquefaction of Soils During Earthquakes, National Research Council, National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 240 pp. NCEER. 1997. Proceedings of the NCEER Workshop on Evaluating Liquefaction Resistance of Soils, Edited by Youd TL and Idriss IM, Technical Report No. NCEER-97-0022.
• Oka, F., Yashima, A., Shibata, T., Kato, M., Uzuoka, R. 1994. FEM–FDM coupled liquefaction analysis of a porous soil using an elastic–plastic model Appl Sci Res, 52; 209-245.
• Ostadan, F., Deng, N., Arango, I. 1996. Energy-based Method for Liquefaction Potential Evaluation, Phase I. Feasibility Study. U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Building and Fire Research Laboratory.
• Papazoglou, A.J., Elnashai, A.S. 1996. Analytical and field evidence of the damaging effect of vertical earthquake ground motion. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 25, 1109–1137.
• Riches, L.K. 2015. Observed earthquake damage to Christchurch city council owned retaining walls and the repair solutions developed. In Proc. of the 6th Int. Conf. in Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering, Christchurch, New Zealand, 1--4 November.
• Seed, H.B. 1979. Soil liquefaction and cyclic mobility evaluation for level ground during earthquakes, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering ASCE, 105, 2, 201-255.
• Seed, H. B., Idriss, I. M. 1967. Analysis of liquefaction: Niigata earthquake. Proc., ASCE,93(SM3), 83- 108.
• Seed, H. B., Idriss, I. M. 1971. Simplified procedure for evaluating soil liquefaction potential, J. Soil Mechanics and Foundations Div ASCE 97(SM9), 1249–273.
• Seed, H.B., Mori, K., Chan, C.K. 1975. Influence of seismic history on the liquefaction characteristics ofsands, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, Report No. EERC 75-25.
• Seed, H.B., Tokimatsu, K., Harder, L.H., Chung, R. 1984 The influence of SPT procedures in soil liquefaction resistance evaluations, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, Report No. EERC 84-15.
• Seed, H.B., Wong, R.T., Idriss, I.M., Tokimatsu, K. 1986. Moduli and damping factors for dynamic analyses of cohesionless soils: Journal of Geotechnical Engineering 112 (GT11), 1016-1032.
• Seed, R. B., Cetin, K. O., Moss, R. E. S., Kammerer, A. M., Wu, J., Pestana, J. M., Reimer, M. F. 2001. Recent advances in soil liquefaction engineering and seismic site response evaluation, Proc. 4th Int. Conf. and Symposiumon Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics Paper SPL-2.
• Shahien, M.,M. 2007. New Procedure To Estimate Liquefaction Resistance From Penetration Resistance Using Field Records. 4th International Conference on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering June 25-28.
• Shibata, T., Oka, F., Ozawa, Y. 1996. Geotechnical aspects of the January 17, 1995 Hyogoken-Nanbu earthquake: characteristics of ground deformation due to liquefaction. Soils Found. (Special Issue), 65–79.
• Silver, M.L., Seed, H.D. 1971. Volume change in sands during cyclic loading, Journal Soil Mechanics and Foundation, Div. ASCE, 97, 9, 1171 – 1182.
• Skempton, A.W. 1986. Standard penetration test procedures and the effects in sand of overburden pressure, relative density, particle size, aging, and overconsolidation: Geotechnique 21, 305-321.
• Tsaparli, V., Kontoe, S., Taborda, D.M.G., Potts, D.M. 2016. Vertical ground motion and its effects on liquefaction resistance of fully saturated sand deposits Proc R Soc A, 472 (2192), p. 21.
• Trifunac, M.D., Todorovska, M.I. 1996. Nonlinear soil response—1994 Northridge, California, earthquake. ASCE J. Geotech. Eng. 122, 725– 735.
• Tokimatsu, K., Yoshimi, Y. 1983. Empirical correlation of soil liquefaction based on SPT N-value and fines content. Soils and Foundations, 23(4), 56-74.
• Tokimatsu, K., Kuwayama, S., Tamura, S. 1991. Liquefaction potential evaluation based on Rayleigh wave investigation and its comparison with field behavior, Proc.of 2nd Int. Conf. on Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics, St. Louis, Missouri, 1:357-364.
• Yasuda, S. 1996. Geotechnical aspects of the January 17, 1995 Hyogoken-Nanbu earthquake: Effect of soil improvement on ground subsidence due to liquefaction. Soils Found. (Special Issue), 99– 107.
• Youd, T. L., Idriss, I. M., Andrus, R. D., Arango, I., Castro, G., Christian, J. T., Dobry, R., Finn, W. D.L., Harder, L. F., Hynes, M. E., Ishihara, K., Koester, J. P., Liao, S. S. C., Marcuson, W. F., Martin, G. R., Mitchell, J. K., Moriwaki, Y., Power, M. S., Robertson, P. K., Seed, R. B., Stokoe, K. H. 2001. Liquefaction resistance of soils: summary report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF workshops on evaluation of liquefaction resistance of soils, J Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Eng ASCE 127(10), 817–33.
• Vucetic, M. 1994. Cyclic Threshold Shear Strain, Journal Geotechnic Engineering 120, pp. 2208-2228.
• Zhang, G. 2001. Estimation of liquefaction-induced ground deformations by CPT and SPT-based approaches, Doctor of Philosophy Thesis in Geotechnical Engineering, University of Alberta
• Zhang, W, Goh, A.T.C., Zhang, Y., Chen, Y.M., Xiao, Y. 2015. Assessment of soil liquefaction based on capacity energy concept and multivariate adaptive regression splines: Engineering Geology 188, 29-37.