Article Sidebar

Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 558 Download : 157

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

In this present study an initiative has been taken to find out the modification in the seismic energy along distance its travel because of the soil heterogeneity. Soil heterogeneity is considered here in one dimensional analysis and analyses were performed using software DEEPSOIL. Both equivalent linear and nonlinear analyses were performed on homogenous and heterogeneous soil models: uniform loose sand, uniform soft clay and layered soil deposit of sandwiched clay layer between loose sandy soils. The performances of these soil models are compared here in terms of peak ground acceleration (PGA) value, and seismic energy migration in terms of Arias Intensity (AI) evolution along the depth inside the soil deposit. It is observed from the analysis that, less seismic energy and PGA is developed in the heterogeneous soil than that in homogeneous soil. This is because during earthquake more softening is taking place in the layered soil than that in uniform soil. Further in this paper the requirement of nonlinear analysis over the equivalent linear analysis is also presented.

Keywords

Equivalent linear analysis soil heterogeneity nonlinear analysis seismic energy migration.

Article Details

Authors retain the copyright without restrictions for their published content in this journal. IJSRTM is a SHERPA ROMEO Green Journal. 

Publishing License

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of  Creative Commons License

How to Cite
Das, A., & Chakrabortty, P. (2016). ONE-DIMENSIONAL SEISMIC ENERGY TRANSMISSION ALONG HETEROGENEOUS LAYERED SOIL. International Journal of Students’ Research in Technology & Management, 4(3), 49-55. https://doi.org/10.18510/ijsrtm.2016.432

References

  1. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Big-earthquake-coming-warn-MHA-experts/articleshow/50460633.cms.
  2. L. Govindaraju, and S. Bhattacharya, “Site-specific earthquake response study for hazard assessment in Kolkata city, India.” Nat Hazards, 2012, 61:943–965
  3. S. S. Kumar, A. M. Krishna, and A. Dey, “Nonlinear site-specific ground response analysis: case study of Amingaon, Guwahati.” 15th Symposium of Earthquake Engineering (15SEE-2014), Roorkee, India.
  4. Z. Karimi, and S. Dashti, “Numerical and centrifuge modeling of seismic soil–foundation–structure interaction on liquefiable ground.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 2016, 142(1): 04015061.
  5. P. Chakrabortty, and R. Popescu, “Numerical simulation of centrifuge tests on homogeneous and heterogeneous soil models.” Computers And Geotechnics, Volume 41, April 2012, pp. 95–105.
  6. M. Vucetic, and R. Dobry, “Degradation of marine clays under cyclic loading”. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 1988, 114(2): 133-149.
  7. O. Chang-Yu, Deep Excavation: Theory and Practice, ISBN 9780415403306, Taylor & Francis Group, London, UK, 2006.
  8. M. Vucetic, (1989). “Normalized behavior of clay under irregular cyclic loading.” Canadian Geotech Journal Vol 27.
  9. Y. Hashash, and D. Park, “Nonlinear one dimensional seismic ground motion propagation in the Mississippi embayment.” Engineering Geology 62, 2001, pp. 185-206.
  10. N. Matasovic, and M. Vucetic, “Cyclic characterization of liquefiable sands.” Journal Of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 119, No. 11,November, 1993, pp.1805-1822.
  11. K. L. Kwong, C. K. Lau, C. F. Lee, C. W. W. Ng, P. L. R. Pang, J. H. Yin, and Z. Q. Yue, Soft Soil Engineering, ISBN 9789026518669, Swets & Zeitlinger B. V., Lisse, The Netherlands, 2001.
  12. M. Idriss, and H. B. Seed, "Seismic response of horizontal soil layers." Journal Of The Soil Mechanics And Foundations Division, 1968, ASCE, Vol. 94, No. 4, pp. 1003-1031.
  13. S.L. Kramer, Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, Prentice Hall, New Jersey (NJ), 1996.
  14. Y.M.A. Hashash, M.I. Musgrove, J.A. Harmon, D.R. Groholski, C.A. Phillips, and D. Park, “DEEPSOIL 6.0, User Manual” 114p, 2015.
  15. P. Stewart, and A. O. L. Kwok, “Nonlinear seismic ground response analysis: code usage protocols and verification against vertical array data.” Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Dynamics IV, ASCE Geotechnical Special Publication No. 181, 2008.
  16. T. Travasarou, J. Bray, and N. Abrahamson, “Empirical attenuation relationship for arias intensity.” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, April, 2002.
  17. P. Chakrabortty, R. Popescu, and R. Phillips, “Liquefaction of heterogeneous sand: centrifuge study.” Geotechnical Testing Journal, Vol. 33, No. 4, 2010.
  18. Y. M. A. Hashash, S. Dashti, M. Romero, M. Ghayoomi, and M. Musgrove, “Evaluation of 1-d seismic site response modeling of sand using centrifuge experiments.” Journal of Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 78 (2015), pp. 19–31.
  19. Y. E. Lieping, M. A. Qianli, and M. Zhiwei, “Numerical and comparative study of earthquake intensity indices in seismic analysis.” The Structural Design of Tall And Special Buildings. (DOI: 10.1002/Tal.693).
  20. M. Vucetic, and R. Vucetic, “Effect of soil plasticity on cyclic response.” J. Geotech. Engineering., 1991, 117(1): 89-107.
  21. P. Stewart, K. Afshari, and Y. M. A. Hashash, “Pacific earthquake engineering research center guidelines for performing hazard-consistent one-dimensional ground response analysis for ground motion prediction.” Peer Report 2014/16, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center Headquarters, University Of California At Berkeley, October 2014.
  22. S. S. Kumar, and A. Dey, “1D ground response analysis to identify liquefiable substrata: case study from guwahati city.” Ukieri Workshop on Seismic Requalification of Pile Supported Structures (SRPSS), 7-9 January 2015, Guwahati.
  23. S. S. Kumar, A. M. Krishna, and A. Dey, “Parameters influencing dynamic soil properties: review treatise.” National Conference on Recent Advances in Civil Engineering; November 15-16th, 2013.
  24. B. Darendeli, “Development of a new family of normalized modulus reduction and material damping curves.” Phd Thesis, Department Of Civil, Architectural And Environmental Engineering, The University Of Texas, Austin, Texas, 2001.
  25. C. Phillips, and Y. M. A. Hashash, “Damping formulation for nonlinear 1D site response analyses.” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 29 (2009), pp. 1143–1158.
  26. F. Menq, “Dynamic properties of sandy and gravelly soils.” Phd Thesis, Department of Civil, Architectural and Environmental Engineering, The University of Texas, Austin, Texas,2003.
  27. Sugito, “Frequency-dependent equivalent strain for equi-linearized technique.” Proceedings Of The First International Conference On Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering,Vol. 1, A. A. Balkena, Rotterdam, Netherlands, 1994, pp. 655-660.
  28. J. Zhang, R. D. Andrus, and C. H. Juang, “Normalized shear modulus and material damping ratio relationships.” Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering 2005; 131(4):453–60.
  29. H. Chappidi, and G. V. Ramana, “Dynamic soil properties for microzonation of Delhi, India.” J. Earth Syst. Sci. 117, S2, November 2008, pp. 719–730.
  30. R. D. Borcherdt, and M. Eeri, “Estimate of site-dependent response spectra for design (methodology and justification).”Earthquake Spectra, Vol 10, No 4, 1994.
  31. H. Baziar, R. Dobry, and A. W. M. Elgamal, “Engineering evaluation of permanent ground deformations due to seismically induced liquefaction.” NCEER-92-2007,1992.