首页> 外文会议>Geo-Congress >An Alternative Performance-Based Liquefaction Initiation Procedure for the Standard Penetration Test
【24h】

An Alternative Performance-Based Liquefaction Initiation Procedure for the Standard Penetration Test

机译:标准渗透测试的基于性能的替代液化引发程序

获取原文

摘要

For slopes and embankments, the potential of liquefaction initiation and its associated effects are important hazards that must be considered, particularly in areas of high seismicity. Engineers are beginning to evaluate these hazards using performance-based design methods in order to consider risk in a logical, consistent, and objective manner. Kramer and Mayfield (2007) introduced a performance-based procedure for evaluating liquefaction initiation with the Standard Penetration Test (SPT). However, the Kramer and Mayfield procedure incorporates the probabilistic liquefaction triggering model developed by Cetin et al. (2004), which has come under question by a few researchers beginning in 2010 for inconsistencies in its liquefaction case history database (Idriss and Boulanger 2010; Boulanger and Idriss 2011). Using the framework developed by Kramer and Mayfield, an alternative performance-based liquefaction initiation procedure for the SPT is presented that utilizes the probabilistic liquefaction triggering model of Boulanger and Idriss (2012) instead of Cetin et al. (2004). The substitution simplifies the performance-based procedure somewhat by eliminating the need for average shear wave velocity measurement in the upper 12-meters of soil (V_(S,12m)). A preliminary comparison between the two methods is presented.
机译:对于斜坡和路堤,液化引发的可能性及其相关影响是必须考虑的重要危险,特别是在高地震活动性地区。工程师开始使用基于性能的设计方法来评估这些危害,以便以逻辑,一致和客观的方式考虑风险。 Kramer和Mayfield(2007)引入了基于性能的程序,用于使用标准渗透测试(SPT)评估液化引发。但是,Kramer和Mayfield程序结合了Cetin等人开发的概率液化触发模型。 (2004年),由于其液化案例历史数据库中的不一致,一些研究人员于2010年开始对其提出质疑(Idriss和Boulanger,2010年; Boulanger和Idriss,2011年)。使用Kramer和Mayfield开发的框架,提出了一种替代的基于性能的SPT液化引发程序,该程序利用Boulanger和Idriss(2012)的概率液化触发模型,而不是Cetin等人。 (2004)。通过消除对上部12米土壤(V_(S,12m))中的平均剪切波速度测量的需要,该替换在某种程度上简化了基于性能的过程。两种方法之间进行了初步比较。

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