美国和中国液化评估程序间的比较(英文)
|
摘要
土壤液化在美国和中国的地震区域频繁发生,然而,两国在评估液化的风险方面方法有所不同。文章比较了两国采用的普遍工程做法和先进的分析方法,并在方法的兼容性、方法的分歧和从这些方法中学到什么这三方面进行总结,尤其是如何处理细屑/粘土粒带来的影响。两国常用的"干净"沙的液化触发曲线基本一致,但是用粘土粒含量作为控制变量的方法可能会导致不保守的结果,因此不推荐使用。标准灌入试验(SPT)是两国都经常使用的研究方法,可直接比较。圆锥贯入试验(CPT)在美国使用普遍,近来在中国也有广泛使用,文章以1976年唐山地震得到的液化案例讨论和说明了应用CPT的优点。
Liquefaction is a common occurrence in seismic areas in the United States and China,however these countries use different methods to evaluate the potential for liquefaction.This paper compares the standard-of-practice and state-of-the-art analysis methods in both countries to determine the similarities and differences.Results are presented on method compatibility,method disagreement,and what can be learned.Of particular importance is how the influence of fines content and/or clay fraction is treated.It is shown that "clean" sand triggering curves are in general agreement between the two countries but when sandy soils contain fines the use of clay fraction as a controlling variable is not recommended because it may result in unconservative results.The Standard Penetration Test(SPT) is routinely used in both countries and a direct comparison of methods can be made.The Cone Penetration Test(CPT) commonly used in the United States,has recently found more widespread use in China.The benefits of the CPT are discussed and illustrated in a liquefaction case history recently reacquired from the 1976 Tangshan Earthquake.
Liquefaction is a common occurrence in seismic areas in the United States and China,however these countries use different methods to evaluate the potential for liquefaction.This paper compares the standard-of-practice and state-of-the-art analysis methods in both countries to determine the similarities and differences.Results are presented on method compatibility,method disagreement,and what can be learned.Of particular importance is how the influence of fines content and/or clay fraction is treated.It is shown that "clean" sand triggering curves are in general agreement between the two countries but when sandy soils contain fines the use of clay fraction as a controlling variable is not recommended because it may result in unconservative results.The Standard Penetration Test(SPT) is routinely used in both countries and a direct comparison of methods can be made.The Cone Penetration Test(CPT) commonly used in the United States,has recently found more widespread use in China.The benefits of the CPT are discussed and illustrated in a liquefaction case history recently reacquired from the 1976 Tangshan Earthquake.
引文
[1]Boulanger R W,Idriss I M.Liquefaction Susceptibility Criteriafor Silts and Clays[J].Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenviron-mental Engineering,2006,132(11):1413-1426.
[2]Bray J D,Sancio R B.Assessment of the Liquefaction of Suscep-tibility of Fine-Grained Soils[J].Journal of Geotechnical andGeoenvironmental Engineering,2006,132(9):1165-1177.
[3]Cetin KO,Seed R B,Der Kiureghian A,etal.SPT-Based Proba-bilistic and Deterministic Assessment of Seismic Soil Liquefac-tion Potential[J].Journal of Geotechnical and GeoenvironmentalEngineering,2004,130(12):1142-1146.
[4]Chen G.,Hu Q,Liu X.Some comments on methodologies for esti-mating liquefaction of sandy soils[J].Earthquake Engineering andEngineering Vibration(China),2002,22(1):141-151.
[5]Chen G.,Li F.Probabilistic Estimation of Sand Liqufaction Basedon Neural Network Model of Radial Basis Function[J].ChineseJournal of Geotechnical Engineering,2006,28(3):301-305.
[6]Chen G,Zhang K,Xie J.Research on Reliability of LiquefactionPrediction[J].Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibra-tion(China),1991,11(6):85-96.
[7]Chu D B,Stewart J P,Boulanger R W,et al.Cyclic Softening ofLow-Plasticity Clay and Its Effect on Seismic Foundation Per-formance[J].Journal of Geotechnical and GeoenvironmentalEngineering,2008,134(11):1595-1608.
[8]CNS.The National Standard GB50011-2001,Code for Seismic De-sign of Buildings[S].Beijing:China Building Industry Press,2001.
[9]Idriss I M,Boulanger R W.Semi-empirical procedures for evalu-ating liquefaction potential during earthquakes[J].Journal ofSoil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering,2006,26:115-130.
[10]Lui S Y,Puppala AJ,Cai G J,et al.Acomparative study of in-ternational CPTUand China double bridge CPTtests[C].2ndInternational Symposium on Cone Penetration Testing,CPT 10,010,May 9-11.
[11]Lunne T,Robertson P K,Powell J J M.Cone Penetratino Tes-ting in Geotechnical Practice[M].NewYork:Blackie Academ-ic&Professional,1997.
[12]Moss R E S,Seed R B,Kayen R E,et al.Probabilistic SeismicSoil Liquefaction Triggering Using the CPT[J].Journal ofGeotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering,2006,132(8):137-143.
[13]Moss R E S,Kayen R E,Tong L Y,et al.Reinvestigation ofLiquefaction and Nonliquefaction Case Histories from the 1976Tangshan Earthquake[R].PEER Report No.2009/102,2011.
[14]Moss R E S,Kayen R E,Tong L-Y,etal.Retesting of Liquefac-tion/Non-Liquefaction Case Histories from the 1976 TangshanEarthquake[J].Journal of Geotechnical and GeoenvironmentalEngineering,April(in-press),2011.
[15]Oommen T,Baise L G,Vogel R.Validation and Application ofEmpirical Liquefaction Models[J].Journal of Geotechnical andGeoenvironmental Engineering,2010,136(12):1618-1633.
[16]Robertson P K,Wride C E.Evaluating Cyclic Liquefaction Po-tential Using the Cone Penetration Test[J].Canadian Geotech-nical Journal,1998,35(3):442-459.
[17]Seed HB,Idriss I M.Simplified Procedure for Evaluating SoilLiquefaction Potential[J].Journal of the Soil Mechanics andFoundations Division,1971,ASCE,97(SM9):1249-1273.
[18]Seed R B,Cetin K O,Moss R E S,et al.Recent Advances inSoil Liquefaction Engineering:AUnified and Consistent Frame-work[R].EERC Report No.2003-06,2003.
[19]Wang W.Some findings in soil liquefaction[R].Water conser-vancy and Hydroelectric Power Scientific Research Institute,Beijing,China,1979.
[20]Youd TL,Idriss I M,Andrus R D,et al.Liquefaction Resist-ance of Soils:Summary Reportfromthe 1996 NCEER and1998NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resist-ance of Soils[J].Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmen-tal Engineering,2001,127(10):1321-1325.
[21]Zhou S G,Zhang S M.Liquefaction Investigations in TangshanDistrict[R].Ministry of Railway,China,1979.
[2]Bray J D,Sancio R B.Assessment of the Liquefaction of Suscep-tibility of Fine-Grained Soils[J].Journal of Geotechnical andGeoenvironmental Engineering,2006,132(9):1165-1177.
[3]Cetin KO,Seed R B,Der Kiureghian A,etal.SPT-Based Proba-bilistic and Deterministic Assessment of Seismic Soil Liquefac-tion Potential[J].Journal of Geotechnical and GeoenvironmentalEngineering,2004,130(12):1142-1146.
[4]Chen G.,Hu Q,Liu X.Some comments on methodologies for esti-mating liquefaction of sandy soils[J].Earthquake Engineering andEngineering Vibration(China),2002,22(1):141-151.
[5]Chen G.,Li F.Probabilistic Estimation of Sand Liqufaction Basedon Neural Network Model of Radial Basis Function[J].ChineseJournal of Geotechnical Engineering,2006,28(3):301-305.
[6]Chen G,Zhang K,Xie J.Research on Reliability of LiquefactionPrediction[J].Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibra-tion(China),1991,11(6):85-96.
[7]Chu D B,Stewart J P,Boulanger R W,et al.Cyclic Softening ofLow-Plasticity Clay and Its Effect on Seismic Foundation Per-formance[J].Journal of Geotechnical and GeoenvironmentalEngineering,2008,134(11):1595-1608.
[8]CNS.The National Standard GB50011-2001,Code for Seismic De-sign of Buildings[S].Beijing:China Building Industry Press,2001.
[9]Idriss I M,Boulanger R W.Semi-empirical procedures for evalu-ating liquefaction potential during earthquakes[J].Journal ofSoil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering,2006,26:115-130.
[10]Lui S Y,Puppala AJ,Cai G J,et al.Acomparative study of in-ternational CPTUand China double bridge CPTtests[C].2ndInternational Symposium on Cone Penetration Testing,CPT 10,010,May 9-11.
[11]Lunne T,Robertson P K,Powell J J M.Cone Penetratino Tes-ting in Geotechnical Practice[M].NewYork:Blackie Academ-ic&Professional,1997.
[12]Moss R E S,Seed R B,Kayen R E,et al.Probabilistic SeismicSoil Liquefaction Triggering Using the CPT[J].Journal ofGeotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering,2006,132(8):137-143.
[13]Moss R E S,Kayen R E,Tong L Y,et al.Reinvestigation ofLiquefaction and Nonliquefaction Case Histories from the 1976Tangshan Earthquake[R].PEER Report No.2009/102,2011.
[14]Moss R E S,Kayen R E,Tong L-Y,etal.Retesting of Liquefac-tion/Non-Liquefaction Case Histories from the 1976 TangshanEarthquake[J].Journal of Geotechnical and GeoenvironmentalEngineering,April(in-press),2011.
[15]Oommen T,Baise L G,Vogel R.Validation and Application ofEmpirical Liquefaction Models[J].Journal of Geotechnical andGeoenvironmental Engineering,2010,136(12):1618-1633.
[16]Robertson P K,Wride C E.Evaluating Cyclic Liquefaction Po-tential Using the Cone Penetration Test[J].Canadian Geotech-nical Journal,1998,35(3):442-459.
[17]Seed HB,Idriss I M.Simplified Procedure for Evaluating SoilLiquefaction Potential[J].Journal of the Soil Mechanics andFoundations Division,1971,ASCE,97(SM9):1249-1273.
[18]Seed R B,Cetin K O,Moss R E S,et al.Recent Advances inSoil Liquefaction Engineering:AUnified and Consistent Frame-work[R].EERC Report No.2003-06,2003.
[19]Wang W.Some findings in soil liquefaction[R].Water conser-vancy and Hydroelectric Power Scientific Research Institute,Beijing,China,1979.
[20]Youd TL,Idriss I M,Andrus R D,et al.Liquefaction Resist-ance of Soils:Summary Reportfromthe 1996 NCEER and1998NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resist-ance of Soils[J].Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmen-tal Engineering,2001,127(10):1321-1325.
[21]Zhou S G,Zhang S M.Liquefaction Investigations in TangshanDistrict[R].Ministry of Railway,China,1979.
版权所有：© 2023 中国地质图书馆 中国地质调查局地学文献中心