Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Presentation

391 views

Published on

  • Login to see the comments

  • Be the first to like this

Presentation

  1. 1. Lessons Learned and Need for NEES Instrumented Liquefaction Sites T. Leslie Youd Brigham Young University
  2. 2. Purposes of Presentation <ul><li>To convince the members of this workshop that instrumented liquefaction sites are important and deserves our support </li></ul><ul><li>To urge geotechical engineers in Taiwan, Japan and the US to actively identify sites and seek opportunities place instruments to add much needed instrumental data to the liquefaction case history data base </li></ul>
  3. 3. Need for Instrumented Field Sites <ul><li>Past instrumental records provide important information on pore pressure rise and site response </li></ul><ul><li>These records provide field data for development and verification of empirical and analytical predictive procedures </li></ul><ul><li>More instrumental records are needed to better understand and model pore pressure generation, ground deformation and ground failure </li></ul>
  4. 4. Wildlife Liquefaction Array (WLA) <ul><li>WLA was instrumented by US Geological Survey in 1982 </li></ul><ul><li>Recorded two earthquakes in 1987: the Elmore Ranch (M=6.2), which did not generate significant pore pressures, and the Superstition Hills (M=6.6) which generated liquefaction at the site </li></ul><ul><li>WLA is being redeveloped and reinstrumented under the NSF Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (NEES) program </li></ul>
  5. 5. Wildlife Site Regional map showing location of Wildlife site
  6. 6. General setting and recent earthquakes that have shaken the Wildlife site (WLA) (map from Holzer et al., 1989)
  7. 7. Liquefaction Occurrences Near Wildlife Site <ul><li>Liquefaction Effects observed following six earthquakes in past 72 Years </li></ul>Wildlife site Wildlife site Year Area of effects 1930 1950 1957 1979 1981 1987
  8. 8. 1950 sand boil that erupted about 1.5 km northwest of Wildlife Site
  9. 9. <ul><li>1982 USGS Array </li></ul><ul><li>The two accelerometers are still functioning and maintained by USGS </li></ul><ul><li>The six piezometers failed sometime after 1987 earthquakes </li></ul>
  10. 10. View of Wildlife site After 1987 Superstition Hills Earthquake Sand boils in the foreground and instrument hut in the background. (USGS photo)
  11. 11. Wildlife Site Acceleration and Pore Pressure records generated during the 1987 Superstition Hills earthquake
  12. 12. <ul><li>Predicted and actual ground motions at WLA site from November 24, 1987 Superstition Hills earthquake </li></ul><ul><li>B. Pore pressure ratios versus time (after Dobry et al., 1989) </li></ul>A B Peak Accel Pore pressure ratios, r u , range from 0.4 to 0.6 R u = 1.0 End of strong ground shaking
  13. 13. Reason for continued rise of pore water pressure: Although strong ground accelerations ceased at about 23 sec, ground displacements continued to rise with maximum of 22 cm (peak to peak) at about 35 sec. Cyclic shear strain, as a consequence of ground displacement, generates increased pore water pressures. Correlation of acceleration and pore water pressure spikes was due to dilatent arrest of ground movement producing a sudden drop of pore pressure and the acceleration spike. Movement then ensued in the opposite direction. These spikes are numbered on the upper plots (Zeghal and Elgamal, 1994) WLA Site Response – 1987 Superstition Hills Eq End of strong shaking
  14. 14. <ul><li>Shear stresses were calculated from measured ground accelerations and mass of soil above liquefied layer </li></ul><ul><li>Shear strains were calculated from ground displacements, determined from double integration of acceleration records, and dividing by distance between accelerometers </li></ul><ul><li>Note initial near-vertical stress strain loops that flattened and develop banana-type loops with time </li></ul>Analysis by Zeghal and Elgamal (1994)
  15. 15. Predicted and actual acceleration time histories from the Superstition Hills earthquake, WLA site, M = 6.6 Predicted Amax = 0.31 g Actual Amax = 0.21 g
  16. 16. Predicted and actual response spectra for Superstition Hills earthquake - WLA site Short-period (>0.7 sec) spectral accelerations were attenuated Long-period (> 0.7 sec) spectral accelerations were enhanced
  17. 17. Lessons from 1987 SH Earthquake <ul><li>Pore pressures continued to rise after strong ground accelerations ceased </li></ul><ul><li>Repeated dilatent arrest of lateral ground displacement observed </li></ul><ul><li>Stress-strain properties of softening soil calculated from site response </li></ul><ul><li>Softened layer inhibited transmission of short-period (T<0.7 sec) strong motions </li></ul><ul><li>Liquefaction enhanced long-period motions (T>0.7 sec) </li></ul><ul><li>Test of viability of predictive tools </li></ul>
  18. 18. Principal Investigators T. Leslie Youd, BYU Jamison Steidl, UCSB Robert Nigbor, USC PERMANENTLY INSTRUMENTED FIELD SITES FOR STUDY OF SFSI Cooperative Agreement No. CMS-0217421 The George E. Brown Jr. Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (NEES) Phase 2 Award
  19. 19. Wildlife Liquefaction Array (WLA) <ul><li>Objectives: </li></ul><ul><li>Provide a simple, well-characterized permanently instrumented field site for study of liquefaction, ground deformation, and ground failure </li></ul><ul><li>Install new accelerometers, piezometers, inclinometers, etc., to monitor liquefaction and induced ground deformation and displacement </li></ul><ul><li>Provide teleobservation and telepresence capabilities for remote monitoring and interaction with site </li></ul>
  20. 20. Reasons for Reinstrumenting WLA <ul><li>Many new and important lessons learned from old site; more lessons yet to be learned </li></ul><ul><li>Old site has been disturbed and piezometers are no longer functional </li></ul><ul><li>New research opportunities with expanded instrumentation and greater ground deformation potential </li></ul><ul><li>Teleobservation and telepresence capabilities provide distributed research and educational opportunities </li></ul>
  21. 21. General view of wildlife area with locations of old and new sites (view looking east southeast) New Site Old Site Alamo River
  22. 22. New Site Old Site Stream erosion is cutting into bank adjacent to new site generating a free face that should facilitate ground deformation and lateral spread Alamo River
  23. 23. Map of wildlife area showing locations of 1982 and new sites
  24. 24. USGS CPT rig conducting soundings at new WLA site
  25. 25. Free face created by incised river
  26. 26. Enlarged view of new WLA site
  27. 27. clay sand Wildlife Liquefaction Array (WLA) Cross-section A-A’ Soil Behavior Types Interpreted by USGS from CPT Soundings 0 2 4 6 8 10 clay River
  28. 28. Wildlife Liquefaction Array (WLA) Cross-section B-B’ – Soil Behavior Types from CPT Soundings clay sand 0 2 4 6 8 10 River
  29. 29. Wildlife Liquefaction Array (WLA) Cross-section C-C’ – Soil Behavior Types from CPT Soundings 0 2 4 6 8 10
  30. 30. Enlarged view of new WLA site CPT 35
  31. 31. Liquefaction resistance of WLA CPT 35: M = 6.5 and various levels of peak ground acceleration (CPT procedure of Youd et al., 2001) 0
  32. 32. Enlarged view of new WLA site
  33. 33. Cross section A-A’ showing liquefaction resistance from analyses of CPT data for M = 6.5 earthquakes and Amax = 0.4 g River
  34. 34. Cross section B-B’ showing liquefaction resistance from analyses of CPT data for M = 6.5 earthquakes and Amax = 0.4 g River
  35. 35. Cross section E-E’ showing liquefaction resistance from analyses of CPT data for M = 6.5 earthquakes and Amax = 0.4 g
  36. 36. Cross section D-D’ showing liquefaction resistance from analyses of CPT data for M = 6.5 earthquakes and Amax = 0.4 g
  37. 37. 1982 Site New Site Cross section C-C’ showing liquefaction resistance from analyses of CPT data for M = 6.5 earthquakes and Amax = 0.4 g
  38. 38. Enlarged view of new WLA site
  39. 39. Expected Contributions to NEES <ul><li>Fully instrumented site to monitor ground motions, pore pressures, and ground deformation as liquefaction and lateral spread develop during future earthquakes </li></ul><ul><li>Well characterized site from which analytical and empirical tools can be developed and tested </li></ul><ul><li>Site where new field measurement tools can be tested and calibrated </li></ul>
  40. 40. More instrumented sites are needed <ul><li>To increase the likelihood of timely recording of site responses </li></ul><ul><li>To increase the number of recorded responses available </li></ul><ul><li>To increase the variety of sites and site conditions </li></ul><ul><li>To increase the variety of earthquake mechanisms and magnitudes </li></ul><ul><li>To speed the development of predictive procedures </li></ul>

×