Several building codes, such as the National Building Code of Canada, recommend that an effective stress ground response analysis be performed if a liquefiable stratum is identified within a soil profile. Although, constitutive models for total stress ground response analysis have been well verified against earthquake recordings, existing models for effective stress ground response analysis have yet to be thoroughly validated. This article investigates the predictions of five pore pressure models derived for effective stress ground response analysis. First, a dataset of five downhole arrays and two centrifuge experiments in which a potential of liquefaction was identified is presented. The profiles and ground-motion recordings are selected to represent a broad range of soil properties, ground-motion intensities, and excess-pore pressure generation levels. The differences between predictions of the effective stress models against commonly used 1D ground response total stress equivalent-linear and nonlinear analyses are evaluated. The predicted and measured motions are compared in terms of spectral response and amplification factor. The pore pressure response of all models is evaluated as a function of shear strain and found to agree well with published correlations representing the expected behavior of liquefiable soils. Although, the models show the ability to capture liquefaction triggering, the results indicate that for the selected dataset, total stress simulations were found to be, at least, as precise and accurate as the effective stress simulations. Therefore, simplified models for effective stress ground analysis should be used with caution by practicing engineers to predict surface spectra but can be used confidently to assess the potential for liquefaction triggering.
Peak ground acceleration (PGA), peak ground velocity (PGV), and spectral acceleration are among the most widely used metrics to represent seismic hazard characteristics in practice. Several simplified seismic design procedures to evaluate liquefaction triggering, slope stability, or structural response have also proposed other ground motion parameters (GMPs) to represent a ground motion’s intensity, duration, and frequency content. To account for soil effects, these parameters can be obtained from the results of one-dimensional (1D) ground response analyses. Few studies have systematically evaluated the prediction of these additional parameters from the results of ground response analyses. This study presents an exhaustive review of the accuracy and precision of the prediction of 19 common GMPs from the results of 1D ground response analyses using vertical seismic arrays and centrifuge tests. Total stress nonlinear analyses are conducted using the software DEEPSOIL along with equivalent-linear analysis. A reference dataset composed of 10 sites and 306 ground motion recordings representing varying conditions of seismic excitation is employed. The findings of this study showed that while the models produced a reasonable approximation of spectral accelerations, a general tendency toward the over-prediction of most parameters was revealed. The results identified that the mean period ( Tm) yielded the lowest bias, and other parameters, such as the predominant spectral period ( To), PGA, and PGV, also offered some improvements over the other parameters included in this study.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.