Abstract

Probabilistic and deterministic seismic soil liquefaction triggering methodologies are proposed in Cetin et al. [1]. This manuscript: i) presents the protocols, which need to be followed for the correct use of this methodology for forward engineering (design) assessments, ii) guides the engineers through the procedure, and iii) discusses the “tricks” alongside the protocol. An illustrative soil profile shaken by a scenario earthquake is presented, through which consistent estimations of representative SPT blow-counts along with fines content are discussed. Additionally, the estimation of CSR input parameters are illustrated. Last but not least the uncertainty estimations of these input parameters are presented along with the probability and factory of safety for the assessment of liquefaction triggering.•A simplified methodology and its use to assess liquefaction triggering hazard of a soil site under an earthquake scenario event.•The consistent and unbiased mean estimates of input parameters of SPT blow-counts(N1,60), fines content (FC), vertical effective (s'v) and total (sv) stresses, maximum ground acceleration (amax), stress reduction (or non-linear shear mass participation) factor (rd) and moment magnitude (Mw) along with their uncertainties are discussed.•Outlined methodology enables engineers to estimate the probability of- and factor of safety against- seismic soil liquefaction triggering for design problems.

Highlights

  • A new set of probabilistic and deterministic seismic soil liquefaction triggering relationships is presented in Cetin et al [1], on the back analyses of standard penetration test liquefaction triggering case histories, which are fully documented in Cetin et al [6]

  • An illustrative soil profile shaken by a scenario earthquake is used to outline the use of the proposed methodology

  • For the estimation of seismic moment magnitude (duration) scaling factor, KMw , either the closed form solution given in Eq (46) or the chart solution presented in Fig. 7 can be used

Read more

Summary

Method Article

Of Civil Engineering, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey b Dept. Of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA c California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, CA, USA d Civil-Geotechnical Engineer, GeoDestek Ltd. Sti., Ankara, Turkey e US Army Corps of Engineers, South Pacific Division Dam Safety Production Center, Sacramento, CA, USA

Method details
13 A7777775
13 Á0:0A7777775
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call