Assessment of various CPT based liquefaction severity index frameworks relative to the Ishihara (1985) H1–H2 boundary curves
Assessment of various CPT based liquefaction severity index frameworks relative to the Ishihara (1985) H1–H2 boundary curves
复制标题
相对于 Ishihara (1985) H1-H2 边界曲线评估各种基于 CPT 的液化严重性指数框架
DOI：
10.1016/j.soildyn.2015.08.015
复制
发表时间：
2015
影响因子：
4
通讯作者：
B. Maurer
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
S. V. Ballegooy;R. Green;J. Lees;F. Wentz;B. Maurer
本文提出的研究的目的是了解四种不同的液化严重性指数框架的预测趋势，重点是评估液化脆弱性在新西兰基督城的框架的效用。2010年9月4日至2011年12月23日期间，基督城发生了四次大地震（Mw5.9-7.1），液化引起的土地破坏很普遍。作为重建工作的一部分，到目前为止，一个主要的重点是评估/制定方法，以评估未来事件中液化引起的损害的脆弱性。本文评估的四个液化严重性指数框架是：一维体积再固结沉降（SV 1D），液化潜力指数（LPI），以及在基督城大地震后开发的两个新的液化严重性指数，即石原启发的LPI（LPIISH）和液化严重性指数（LSN）。为了评估四种严重性指数框架的预测趋势，使用Ishihara（1985）开发的H1-H2边界曲线作为比较的参考。在很大程度上，严重性指数框架与石原边界曲线的目的相同，但它们减轻了实施石原边界曲线评估基督城大部分地区高度分层土壤剖面的一些困难。进行了参数研究，其中相对简单的土壤剖面进行评价，使用所有的程序和等值线图计算SV 1D，LPI，LPIISH，和LSN值叠加到石原边界曲线。结果表明，LPI I和LSN指数与石原边界曲线具有相似的趋势，而SV 1D和LPI指数则不具有这种趋势。此外，几乎没有实地数据可用于评估LPIISHand幸存者网络指数趋势不同的情景的严重程度指数。
The objective of the study presented herein is to develop an understanding of the predictive trends of four different liquefaction severity index frameworks, with emphasis on the utility of the frameworks for assessing liquefaction vulnerability in Christchurch, New Zealand. Liquefaction induced land damage was widespread following the four major earthquakes in Christchurch (Mw5.9–7.1) between 4 September 2010 and 23 December 2011. As part of the rebuilding effort, a major focus, to date, has been on assessing/developing approaches for evaluating vulnerability to liquefaction induced damage in future events. The four liquefaction severity index frameworks that are evaluated herein are: the one-dimensional volumetric reconsolidation settlement (SV1D), the Liquefaction Potential Index (LPI), and two new liquefaction severity indices developed following the major earthquakes in Christchurch, namely the Ishihara inspired LPI (LPIISH) and the Liquefaction Severity Number (LSN). To assess the predictive trends of the four severity index frameworks, theH1–H2boundary curves developed by Ishihara (1985) are used as a reference of comparison. In large part, the severity index frameworks serve the same purpose as the Ishihara boundary curves, but they alleviate some of the difficulties in implementing the Ishihara boundary curves for assessing the highly stratified soil profiles that underlie much of Christchurch. A parametric study was performed wherein relatively simple soil profiles are evaluated using all the procedures and contour plots of calculatedSV1D, LPI, LPIISH, and LSN values were superimposed onto the Ishihara boundary curves. The results indicate that the LPIISHand LSN indices yield similar trends as the Ishihara boundary curves, whereas theSV1Dand LPI indices do not. Furthermore, little field data is available to assess the severity indices for the scenarios where the trends in the LPIISHand LSN indices differ.