Comparative Study between Two Performance-Based Liquefaction Triggering Models for the Standard Penetration Test

摘要

Simplified empirical liquefaction triggering models are commonly used throughout the world to assess the liquefaction initiation hazard. Significant differences between two popular liquefaction triggering models have precipitated a substantial amount of confusion in modern engineering practice. Past research to study these differences has generally focused on deterministic or scenario-based applications of the liquefaction models without directly accounting for uncertainties from the models or seismic loading. This paper investigates how accounting for these uncertainties through a performance-based liquefaction triggering assessment affects the differences between these two probabilistic liquefaction models. A comparative parametric study is performed in which a wide range of soil parameters, seismicity levels, and return periods is considered in assessing the disparity between the two models. This disparity is shown to vary significantly with variations in the parameters that were evaluated. Additionally, the performance-based approach is shown to reduce the disparity between the two liquefaction models between 35 and 54% on average over the conventional pseudoprobabilistic approach. The results from this study may prove useful to engineers seeking to explain observed differences between these two liquefaction models when applied in a performance-based manner.