Propagation of Seismic Waves through Liquefied Soils

Taiebat, Mahdi; Jeremić, Boris; Kaynia, Amir M.

doi:10.1061/41022(336)26

Cited by 13 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…[36,37]), and bounding surface plasticity models (e.g. [38][39][40][41][42]). In the 3D dynamic finite element simulations described above, Cheng and Jeremic [29] used the Dafalias-Manzari [40] model and Lu et al [30] used a multi-yield surface plasticity model [37] for sand.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Finite element model for piles in liquefiable ground

Wang

Zhang

2016

Computers and Geotechnics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper develops a three dimensional finite element modelling method for piles in liquefiable ground and applies it to the analysis of seismic pile responses. A unified plasticity model for large post-liquefaction shear deformation of sand provides the basis for the effective and efficient modelling of liquefiable ground. Special attention is dedicated towards the modelling of piles and soil-pile interface to accurately reflect the behaviour of piles. A staged modelling procedure is adopted to appropriately generate the initial conditions for the soil and piles and achieve hydrostatic pore pressure prior to seismic loading. Three centrifuge shaking table tests on single piles, both with and without pile cap and superstructure, in level and inclined liquefiable ground are conducted and simulated in validation and application of the proposed method. Further studies to investigate the effects of pile cap, lateral spreading, and non-liquefiable surface layer are undertaken numerically using the validated method. The results show these aforementioned factors to be influential in the dynamic and residual response of piles in liquefiable ground.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Finite element model for piles in liquefiable ground

Wang

Zhang

2016

Computers and Geotechnics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The model in Dafalias and Manzari (2004), a critical state two-surface plasticity model, was used in this paper. This model requires fifteen material parameters and two state parameters to describe the behavior of sands and has been amply tested for simulating the behavior of granular soils subjected to monotonic and cyclic loadings (Jeremic et al, 2008;Taiebat et al, 2010;. The key advantages of the model are that (1) it is relatively simple and (2) it has a unique calibration of input parameters.…”

Section: Numerical Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Lateral response of pile foundations in liquefiable soils

Janalizadeh

Zahmatkesh

2015

Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tLiquefaction has been a main cause of damage to civil engineering structures in seismically active areas. The effects of damage of liquefaction on deep foundations are very destructive. Seismic behavior of pile foundations is widely discussed by many researchers for safer and more economic design purposes. This paper presents a pseudo-static method for analysis of piles in liquefiable soil under seismic loads. A freefield site response analysis using three-dimensional (3D) numerical modeling was performed to determine kinematic loads from lateral ground displacements and inertial loads from vibration of the superstructure. The effects of various parameters, such as soil layering, kinematic and inertial forces, boundary condition of pile head and ground slope, on pile response were studied. By comparing the numerical results with the centrifuge test results, it can be concluded that the use of the p-y curves with various degradation factors in liquefiable sand gives reasonable results.

show abstract

“…SANISAND has been proven successful in reproducing the monotonic and pre-liquefaction cyclic response of sands for a wide range of pressures and densities under UD shearing in both element and centrifuge testing [e.g., 33,40,[43][44][45]. Regarding BD cyclic shearing, Yang et al [31] presented a detailed evaluation of the model against a large database of BD cyclic shear tests conducted on Monterey No.…”

Section: Constitutive Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of bidirectional seismic shearing on the volumetric response of sand deposits

Reyes

Adinata

Taiebat

2019

Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Numerical simulation results of dry and saturated sand deposits subjected to both unidirectional and bidirectional seismic shearing were carried out and compared to quantify the increase of shear-induced volumetric response during shaking. The engineering demand parameters quantifying such response during the shaking events were considered to be the surface settlement for the dry deposits, and the depth-averaged peak excess pore water pressure and thickness of the liquefied layer for the saturated deposits. The numerical simulations made use of a three-dimensional continuum, coupled, dynamic, finite-difference platform and an anisotropic bounding surface plasticity constitutive model. Results of a series of centrifuge tests on saturated level ground sand deposits subjected to bidirectional shearing were used to validate the model capabilities for capturing the volumetric response of sand deposits. Over 1000 simulations were carried out in this study on homogeneous sand deposits with different densities and subjected to ground motions applied as uni-and bidirectional shearing. The dry models exhibited an 80% increase of surface settlement and in the saturated models depthaveraged peak excess pore water pressure ratios were up to 60% higher. Moreover, for the loose to medium dense 30 m-deep uniform deposits, the liquefied sand layers were in average 5-6 m thicker. These outcomes highlight the need to account for bidirectional seismic shearing when predicting the shear-induced volumetric response of sand deposits and related damaging phenomena such as liquefaction or seismic-induced settlement, among others. Furthermore, the simulation results shown the necessity for defining optimal ground motion intensity measures to characterize and scale ground motions for bidirectional shearing.

show abstract

Propagation of Seismic Waves through Liquefied Soils

Cited by 13 publications

References 20 publications

Finite element model for piles in liquefiable ground

Finite element model for piles in liquefiable ground

Lateral response of pile foundations in liquefiable soils

Impact of bidirectional seismic shearing on the volumetric response of sand deposits

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About