LEAP-GWU-2015 experiment specifications, results, and comparisons

LEAP-GWU-2015: Centrifuge and numerical modelling of slope liquefaction at the University of Cambridge

“…Once the model was completed, it was saturated under vacuum using 40 cSt methyl cellulose fluid to satisfy the dynamic scaling laws (Schofield, 1981) such that the rate of excess pore pressure generation due to earthquake loading scales in the same way as the rate of dissipation in the post seismic period. More details of this are given by Kutter et al (2016).…”

“…Servo-hydraulic actuators theoretically have numerous benefits over previously used mechanical actuators, such as allowing for complex earthquake motions to be more accurately recreated, (Madabhushi et al, 2012). Kutter et al (2016) presents a comparison between the specified and achieved base motions in terms of the recorded time history and spectral acceleration. It was observed that the accelerations generated by the Servo-hydraulic actuator in these tests featured unspecified high frequency components though the resulting displacement very closely matched the specified input motion.…”

“…The target motions were prescribed for all the centrifuge centres a priori. These were sinusoidal ramp motions as described by Kutter et al (2016). The peak amplitudes were prescribed for Motions #1 and #2 as 0.015 g and 0.15 g respectively.…”

“…6b). In the LEAP project, very small nondestructive earthquakes were additionally specified to allow for characterization of the soil following the destructive earthquakes (Kutter et al, 2016). In such a case, the transit accelerations may be larger than the ground motion, as shown in Fig.…”

“…The full specifications of the slope test are reported by Kutter et al (2016) in the companion paper. The five required ground motions, of which three were small non-destructive ground motions and two were large magnitude ground motions, are also detailed.…”