Liquefaction: Behavior Evidence, Prediction, and Prevention Richard P. Ray, Ph.D, P.E.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
Advertisements

1 MAJOR FINDINGS OF THE PROJECT AND THEIR POSSIBLE INCLUSION IN EUROPEAN STANDARD -Major findings -Major findings suitable for inclusion in European Standard.
Oasys SIREN.
Educational Resource Library
Prepared by J. P. Singh & Associates in association with Mohamed Ashour, Ph.D., PE West Virginia University Tech and Gary Norris Ph.D., PE University of.
AN INNOVATIVE METHOD TO EVALUATE DEGREE OF COMPACTION OF RIVER EMBANKMENTS USING CPT BARBARA COSANTI N. SQUEGLIA D.C.F. LO PRESTI University of Pisa –
JP Singh and Associates in association with Mohamed Ashour, Ph.D., P.E. Gary Norris, Ph.D., P.E. March 2004 COMPUTER PROGRAM S-SHAFT FOR LATERALLY LOADED.
The standard penetration test (SPT) is an in-situ dynamic penetration test designed to provide information on the geotechnical.
Development of an In-Situ Test for Direct Evaluation of the Liquefaction Resistance of Soils K. H. Stokoe, II, E. M. Rathje and B.R. Cox University of.
LRFD Design of Shallow Foundations
Investigation of Consolidation Promoting Effect by Field and Model Test for Vacuum Consolidation Method Nagasaki University H.Mihara Y.Tanabasi Y.Jiang.
Course : S0705 – Soil Mechanic
Pore-Pressure Generation During CPT Probe Advancement By Michael Fitzgerald.
Direct Evaluation of Effectiveness of Prefabricated Vertical Drains in Liquefiable Sand Wen-Jong Chang, National Chi Nan University Ellen M. Rathje, University.
Chapter (1) Geotechnical Properties of Soil
The Liquefaction Resistance and Maximum Shear Modulus of Frozen Samples Yao-Chung Chen Department of Construction Engineering National Taiwan University.
Lessons Learned and Need for NEES Instrumented Liquefaction Sites T. Leslie Youd Brigham Young University.
Soil void ratioSoil densitySoil permeabilityGeological history of siteGround water levelNature of the.
PEER 2002 PEER Annual Meeting Performance of Improved Ground u Elizabeth A. Hausler and Nicholas Sitar.
In Situ Testing CPT & SPT.
Geotechnical Site Characterization by Cone Penetration Testing
Application of CPT data for evaluation of ground liquefaction in Chi-Chi Earthquake, Taiwan D.H. Lee 1, C.S. Ku 2, C.S. Chen 1, C.H. Juang 3 &J.H. Wu 3.
Basic design of stilts based on the CPT Julio R. Valdes Geo-Innovations Research Group Civil Engineering SDSU.
Time-dependent increase in CPT tip resistance following explosive compaction. Time-dependent increase in V s following explosive compaction, as measured.
“LIQUEFACTION” Prepared By: Husni M. Awwad Talal Z. Zammar
Liquefaction Resistance of Geologically Aged Sand Deposits David Saftner University of Minnesota Duluth.
LIQUEFACATION OF SILTS AND SILT-CLAY MIXTURES US TAIWAN WORKSHOP ON LIQUEFACTION November-2003 Vijay K. Puri Professor Southern Illinois University Carbondale,
Insitu Testing Methods Breakout Session Research Collaboration Field Testing Research Needs Ken Stokoe, Breakout Moderator.
Liquefaction: Behavior Evidence, Prediction, and Prevention.
PEER Jonathan P. Stewart University of California, Los Angeles May 22, 2002 Geotechnical Uncertainties for PBEE.
Bearing Capacity Theory
What is compaction? A simple ground improvement technique, where the soil is densified through external compactive effort. + water = Compactive effort.
ECGD 4122 – Foundation Engineering
Liquefaction Analysis For a Single Piled Foundation By Dr. Lu Chihwei Moh and Associates, Inc. Date: 11/3/2003.
1 Interpretation and Visualization of Model Test Data for Slope Failure in Liquefying Soil Bruce L. Kutter Erik J. Malvick R. Kulasingam Ross Boulanger.
Structural Engineering and Earthquake Simulation Laboratory Experimental and Micromechanical Computational Study of Pile Foundations Subjected to Liquefaction-Induced.
A Study on Liquefaction Evaluation Using Shear Wave Velocity for Gravelly Sand Deposits Ping-Sien Lin, National Chung-Hsing University Fu-Sheng Chen, China.
Amit Prashant Associate Professor Dept. of Civil Engineering Indian Institute of Technology Gadhinagar, India 5th Tongji-UBC Symposium on Earthquake Engineering,
Additional Design Considerations 2011 PDCA Professor Pile Institute Patrick Hannigan GRL Engineers, Inc.
EESC Influence of Local Soil Conditions on Ground Response and Damage Pattern Due to Earthquake By Dr. Abdul Samad Khan.
Steps in Foundation Engineering Understand project and site Develop design criteria Identify possible foundation alternatives Conduct soil investigation.
Structural Engineering and Earthquake Simulation Laboratory SG-1: Lateral Spreading – Observations & Analysis Raghudeep B. & Thevanayagam S. 20 Aug 2007:
A Deterministic Bank-Stability and Toe-Erosion Model (BSTEM Version 5.4) Andrew Simon, Robert Thomas, Andrea Curini and Natasha Bankhead USDA-ARS National.
Definition of Fines and Liquefaction Resistance of Maoluo River Sand
Pertemuan 10 Penurunan Pondasi Dangkal
BEARING CAPACITY OF SOIL Session 3 – 4
Ground Motions and Liquefaction – The Loading Part of the Equation
Correlating, V s, q c and Cyclic Resistance of a Silty Sand through Laboratory Calibration Tests An-Bin Huang, Yao-Tao Huang, and Yu-Chen Kuo Department.
SOIL MECHANICS AND FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-II (CE 311)
Geotechnical Eng. Software PEYSANJ Started at 1997 with Bearing Capacity Module Current version with more than 5 modules Database (Access / SQL Server)User.
SITE INVESTIGATION ARUN MUCHHALA ENGINEERING COLLEGE-DHARI
Pile Foundation Reason for Piles Types of Piles
Liquefaction Mitigation using GeoComposite Vertical Drains
Mapping of lateral spread Displacement hazard, Weber County, Utah
Mapping of Liquefaction hazard for Salt lake and Weber Counties, Utah
The Engineering of Foundations
FE: Geotechnical Engineering
U.S.-Taiwan Workshop on Soil Liquefaction
QuakeCoRE Project Update
Pavement Design Al-Balqa’ Applied University
MAIERATO, ITALY LANDSLIDE (2010)
Liquefaction Soil Dynamics.
WHAT IS LIQUEFACTION.
Christopher R. McGann, Ph.D. Student University of Washington
Introduction to Soil Dynamics
MAE Penetrator Equations 04/07/2008.
Experiment # 7 Direct Shear ASTM D3080/98 Soil Mechanics Lab CE 350.
lectures Notes on: Soil Mechanics
Table 8. The different focus of teaching contents
Presentation transcript:

Liquefaction: Behavior Evidence, Prediction, and Prevention Richard P. Ray, Ph.D, P.E.

Today’s Menu What is Liquefaction ?What is Liquefaction ? How is it expressed ?How is it expressed ? Can we estimate liquefaction potential ?Can we estimate liquefaction potential ? Can we prevent it from happening or reduce its impact ?Can we prevent it from happening or reduce its impact ?

What is it Worm’s eye view - Physical BehaviorWorm’s eye view - Physical Behavior Professor’s eye view - Laboratory and Analytical ApproachProfessor’s eye view - Laboratory and Analytical Approach

abc Worm’s eye view

Triaxial Test on Sand

Triaxial Test on Saturated Sand

Expression of Liquefaction Sand boils and flows – free-fieldSand boils and flows – free-field Landslides – static lateral stressLandslides – static lateral stress Foundation Failures – surface loadingsFoundation Failures – surface loadings

Evaluating Liquefaction Potential Empirical Methods SPT, CPT Empirical Methods SPT, CPT Stress or Strain-Based Simplified Stress or Strain-Based Simplified Effective Stress Time History Models Effective Stress Time History Models Probabilistic Methods Probabilistic Methods

Evaluating Liquefaction Potential Stress Based Strain Based Seed & Idriss One Dimensional Response Analysis One Dimensional Response Analysis Laboratory Stress Cyclic Testing Laboratory Stress Cyclic Testing Dobry et al One Dimensional Response Analysis One Dimensional Response Analysis Laboratory Strain Cyclic Testing Laboratory Strain Cyclic Testing Compare Earthquake Load to Soil Resistance

Seed & Idriss Simplified Method FS=Resistance/Load Resistance =  res = fn( SPT Blow Count, Earthquake Mag, Percent Fines) Load =  cyc = fn(Earthquake Accel, Vertical Stress)

Load Equation, Seed & Idriss Simplified Method Divide profile into segments (~2ft.)Divide profile into segments (~2ft.) Compute  v, r d for each segmentCompute  v, r d for each segment Compute  cyc for each segmentCompute  cyc for each segment

Stress Reduction Factor (r d )

Seed & Idriss Load Profile,  cyc

Resistance Equation, Seed & Idriss Simplified Method Use same depth segments (~2ft.) Use same depth segments (~2ft.) Compute  ’ v for each segment Compute  ’ v for each segment Compute CSR for each segment Compute CSR for each segment Compute  res for each segment Compute  res for each segment

Resistance Equation, Seed & Idriss Simplified Method CSR = Cyclic Stress Ratio  res /  ’ v CSR = Cyclic Stress Ratio  res /  ’ v CSR based on SPT N 1 60 values CSR based on SPT N 1 60 values CSR influenced by Percent Fines CSR influenced by Percent Fines Therefore Must correct N blow countsMust correct N blow counts Must account for Percent FinesMust account for Percent Fines

Empirical CSR Based on Blow Count, N 1 60

Load-Resistance and F.S. Profiles

Resistance Equation, Seed & Idriss Simplified Method (Alternatives) CSR = Cyclic Stress Ratio  res /  ’ v CSR = Cyclic Stress Ratio  res /  ’ v CSR based on CPT =>SPT N 1 60, or CSR based on CPT =>SPT N 1 60, or CSR based on Vs => SPT N 1 60 CSR based on Vs => SPT N 1 60

Loading Conditions, Dobry et al Simplified Strain Method Divide profile into segments (~2ft.) Divide profile into segments (~2ft.) Compute  v, r d for each segment Compute  v, r d for each segment Compute  cyc for each segment (iterative procedure) Compute  cyc for each segment (iterative procedure)

Liquefaction Resistance, Dobry et al. Simplified Strain Method Perform strain-controlled laboratory tests at several stages of  cyc-lab to measure number of cycles to liquefaction N (l,  ) At  cyc =  cyc-lab compare N eq to N (l,  )At  cyc =  cyc-lab compare N eq to N (l,  ) If N eq > N (l,  ) liquefaction possibleIf N eq > N (l,  ) liquefaction possible If N eq < N (l,  ) liquefaction not possibleIf N eq < N (l,  ) liquefaction not possible

Settlement During Liquefaction, Dobry et al-Castro Method Uses correlation of  cyc to  vol for dry and saturated sands (SP, SP-SC, SC) Uses correlation of  cyc to  vol for dry and saturated sands (SP, SP-SC, SC) For every profile segment use  cyc to find  vol For every profile segment use  cyc to find  vol Multiply  vol times segment height to get segment settlement contribution Multiply  vol times segment height to get segment settlement contribution Add all segment contributions for settlement estimate at surface. Add all segment contributions for settlement estimate at surface.

Settlement Correlation - Castro

Alternative Methods for Liquefaction Potential Estimation Empirical Approach, Cone Resistance Empirical Approach, Cone Resistance Empirical Approach, Shear Wave Velocity Empirical Approach, Shear Wave Velocity MOC 1-D Analysis MOC 1-D Analysis

Empirical Approach, Cone Resistance

Empirical Approach, Shear Wave Velocity

MOC 1-D Analysis

MOC 1-D Analysis Output

Prevention/Control Soil modification Reduced Loads Drainage (pore pressure relief)