首页> 外文会议>International conference on case histories in geotechnical engineering >An Analysis of Liquefaction-Induced Free-Field Ground Settlement Using 1,000+ Case Histories: Observations vs. State-of-Practice Predictions
【24h】

An Analysis of Liquefaction-Induced Free-Field Ground Settlement Using 1,000+ Case Histories: Observations vs. State-of-Practice Predictions

机译:使用1000多个案例历史分析液化诱发的自由场地面沉降:观察与实践状态预测

获取原文

摘要

Liquefaction-induced free-field settlements can be attributed to several mechanisms, including volumetric reconsolidation strain, ground loss due to ejecta, and vertical components of lateral spreads and flow slides. In practice, the volumetric-strain settlement is typically predicted using one of several semi-empirical methods, but there is no consensus of which, if any, is most accurate. Moreover, no method has been proposed to predict the magnitude of settlement owed to ejecta, even though this component could be larger than any other. The lack of a complete and trusted model for predicting free-field settlement is due, in part, to the scarcity of case-history data needed to apportion and model its individual components. However, the 2010-2011 Canterbury, New Zealand, earthquake sequence (CES) resulted in a liquefaction dataset of unprecedented size and quality, presenting a unique opportunity to assess and advance liquefaction analytics. Accordingly, this study compiles and analyzes 1,013 high-quality settlement case-histories from the CES, such that the contributing components of settlement can be reasonably accounted for and quantified. Presented herein are preliminary findings of this effort, summarized as follows: (1) popular CPT-based models for predicting volumetric-strain settlement exhibit strong bias, such that smaller total settlements (<~6 cm) are underpredicted while larger total settlements (>~6 cm) are significantly overpredicted; (2) these poor predictions cannot be explained by the uncertainty of CPT proxies of relative density, which are central to predictions of volumetric strain; (3) introduction of a depth-weighting function lessens the prediction bias, showing promise for future study; and (4) prediction-performance is related to the observed volume of liquefaction ejecta, illustrating the need to account for and model this mechanism of settlement. Collectively, the findings suggest popular methods for predicting free-field settlement have significant room for improvement.
机译:液化引起的自由场沉降可归因于多种机制,包括体积固结应变,由于喷射而造成的地面损失以及横向扩散和滑坡的垂直分量。在实践中,通常使用几种半经验方法之一来预测体积应变的沉降,但尚无共识(如果有的话)是最准确的。此外,即使该分量可能比任何其他分量都大,也没有提出任何方法来预测由于喷射所引起的沉降量。缺乏用于预测自由油田沉降的完整且可信赖的模型,部分原因是缺乏对案例的历史数据进行分摊和建模所需的案例历史数据。但是,2010年至2011年新西兰坎特伯雷地震序列(CES)导致液化数据集具有空前的规模和质量,为评估和推进液化分析提供了独特的机会。因此,本研究汇编并分析了CES的1,013个高质量的定居案例历史记录,从而可以合理地解释和量化定居的重要组成部分。本文介绍的是这项工作的初步发现,总结如下:(1)用于预测体积应变沉降的基于CPT的流行模型表现出强烈的偏差,使得较小的总沉降(<〜6 cm)被低估,而较大的总沉降(>约6厘米)被严重高估了; (2)这些差的预测不能用相对密度的CPT代理的不确定性来解释,而CPT代理的相对密度是预测体积应变的关键; (3)引入深度加权函数可减轻预测偏差,显示出对未来研究的希望; (4)预测性能与观察到的液化喷射量有关,说明需要考虑和模拟这种沉降机理。总的来说,这些发现表明,流行的预测自由场沉降的方法有很大的改进空间。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号