1995
DOI: 10.3208/sandf1972.35.115
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Response of a Dense Sand Deposit During 1993 Kushiro-Oki Earthquake

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
70
0

Year Published

1998
1998
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8
1
1

Relationship

3
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 111 publications
(75 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
2
70
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Downhole array recordings obtained in seismically active areas in the recent years (e.g., Japan, Taiwan, California, and Greece) have significantly contributed to the advancement of understanding on the critical mechanisms that govern the seismic response of near-surface geological formations, thus being a valuable complement to existing in situ and laboratory techniques. Among others, borehole measurements provided direct in situ evidence of nonlinearity (e.g., Seed and Idriss, 1970;Wen et al, 1994;Zeghal and Elgamal, 1994;Iai et al, 1995;Sato et al, 1996;Aguirre and Irikura, 1997;Satoh et al, 2001); they have invited a reevaluation of the use of surface-rock recordings as input motion to soil columns (e.g., Satoh et al, 1995;Steidl et al, 1996;Boore and Joyner, 1997), and they have provided basic information about scaling and alluvium sites are located at the surface (e.g., Borcherdt, 1970;Hartzell, 1992;Margheriti et al, 1994;Field and Jacob, 1995;Kato et al, 1995;Field, 1996;Hartzell et al, 1996;Su et al, 1996;Bonilla et al, 1997).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Downhole array recordings obtained in seismically active areas in the recent years (e.g., Japan, Taiwan, California, and Greece) have significantly contributed to the advancement of understanding on the critical mechanisms that govern the seismic response of near-surface geological formations, thus being a valuable complement to existing in situ and laboratory techniques. Among others, borehole measurements provided direct in situ evidence of nonlinearity (e.g., Seed and Idriss, 1970;Wen et al, 1994;Zeghal and Elgamal, 1994;Iai et al, 1995;Sato et al, 1996;Aguirre and Irikura, 1997;Satoh et al, 2001); they have invited a reevaluation of the use of surface-rock recordings as input motion to soil columns (e.g., Satoh et al, 1995;Steidl et al, 1996;Boore and Joyner, 1997), and they have provided basic information about scaling and alluvium sites are located at the surface (e.g., Borcherdt, 1970;Hartzell, 1992;Margheriti et al, 1994;Field and Jacob, 1995;Kato et al, 1995;Field, 1996;Hartzell et al, 1996;Su et al, 1996;Bonilla et al, 1997).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The earthquake magnitude was 7.8(M w ) and the site experienced peak ground accelerations of approximately 0.47g (Iai et al, 1995). The soil profile consisted of loose to medium hydraulic sand fill underlain by dense gravelly sand deposits.…”
Section: Performance Of Stone Columns During Earthquakesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Conversely, Kushiro Port is composed of dense sands and shows, in the accelerometer located at ground level, large acceleration spikes that are even higher than their counterpart at depth. Iai et al, (1995), Archuleta (1998), andBonilla et al, (2005) showed that the appearance of large acceleration peak values riding a low frequency carrier are an indicator of soil nonlinearity known as cyclic mobility. Laboratory studies show that the physical mechanism that produces such phenomenon is the dilatant nature of cohesionless soils, which introduces the partial recovery of the shear strength under cyclic loads.…”
Section: Nonlinear Soil Behaviormentioning
confidence: 99%