INCORPORATION OF EARTHQUAKE SOURCE, PROPAGATION PATH AND SITE UNCERTAINTIES INTO ASSESSMENT OF LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL Bob Darragh Nick Gregor Walt Silva.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Recent Experience in Turkey for Building Vulnerability and Estimating Damage Losses P. Gülkan and A. Yakut Middle East Technical University.
Advertisements

A Wavelet Analysis of Ground Motion Characteristics R. Z. Sarica M. S. Rahman.
3-D Dynamic Base Shaking Model 2-D Static BNWF Pushover Model
Loma Prieta Earthquake Mourad Amouri Nicolas Rodriguez.
Liquefaction, Landslides, and Fault Rupture Tom Holzer Research Engineering Geologist 1.
SPATIAL CORRELATION OF SPECTRAL ACCELERATIONS Paolo Bazzurro, Jaesung Park and Nimal Jayaram 1.
Earthquake Early Warning Research and Development in California, USA Hauksson E., Boese M., Heaton T., Seismological Laboratory, California Institute of.
EERI Seminar on Next Generation Attenuation Models SCEC GMSV Workshop: Summary of Other Validation Methodologies/Applications Nicolas Luco, Research Structural.
Prague, March 18, 2005Antonio Emolo1 Seismic Hazard Assessment for a Characteristic Earthquake Scenario: Integrating Probabilistic and Deterministic Approaches.
Modeling Seismic Response for Highway Bridges in the St. Louis Area for Magnitude 6.0 to 6.8 Earthquakes J. David Rogers and Deniz Karadeniz Department.
Deterministic Seismic Hazard Analysis Earliest approach taken to seismic hazard analysis Originated in nuclear power industry applications Still used for.
PEER Jonathan P. Stewart University of California, Los Angeles May 22, 2002 Geotechnical Uncertainties for PBEE.
Ground Motion Intensity Measures for Performance-Based Earthquake Engineering Hemangi Pandit Joel Conte Jon Stewart John Wallace.
Locating the source of earthquakes Focus - the place within Earth where earthquake waves originate Epicenter on an earthquake– location on the surface.
The use of risk in design: ATC 58 performance assessment procedure Craig D. Comartin.
Lisa Wald USGS Pasadena U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey USGS Earthquake Hazards Program Earthquakes 101 (EQ101)
A Genetic Algorithm Solution for the Problem of Selection and Scaling of Ground Motion Records Arzhang Alimoradi and Farzad Naeim John A. Martin & Associates.
PEER-SCEC WORKSHOP ON GROUND MOTION SIMULATION AND BUILDING RESPONSE SIMULATION with focus on long period ground motions and tall buildings PEER Nov 2,
Ground Motion Parameters Measured by triaxial accelerographs 2 orthogonal horizontal components 1 vertical component Digitized to time step of
L Braile, 1/26/2006 (revised, Sept., 2009) What is Moment Magnitude?
Earthquakes occur on faults Active Fault. Earthquakes Create Seismic Waves.
Intraplate Earthquakes
Paleoseismic and Geologic Data for Earthquake Simulations Lisa B. Grant and Miryha M. Gould.
Section 10.3 pg. 222 Earthquake Hazards.
Comparison of Recorded and Simulated Ground Motions Presented by: Emel Seyhan, PhD Student University of California, Los Angeles Collaborators: Lisa M.
Earthquake Hazard Session 1 Mr. James Daniell Risk Analysis
Class lectures available
A Study on Liquefaction Evaluation Using Shear Wave Velocity for Gravelly Sand Deposits Ping-Sien Lin, National Chung-Hsing University Fu-Sheng Chen, China.
Lisa Wald USGS Pasadena U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey USGS Earthquake Hazards Program Earthquakes 101 (EQ101)
Feasibility Level Evaluation of Seismic Stability for Remedy Selection Senda Ozkan, Tetra Tech Inc. Gary Braun, Tetra Tech Inc.
IMPLEMENTATION OF SCEC RESEARCH IN EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING ONGOING PROJECTS SCEC PROPOSAL TO NSF SCEC 2004 RFP.
FEMA/ EARTH SCIENCE ASPECTS OF HAZUS Ivan Wong Seismic Hazards Group URS Corporation Oakland, CA.
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey USGS Earthquake Hazards Program Earthquakes 101.
Earthquake Seismology Lars Ottemöller University of Bergen, Norway.
Warm Up 11/1 Which of the following is NOT a characteristic of S waves? a. They cannot be transmitted through water or air. b. They shake particles at.
Modes of Building Failure Connections between failure modes observed in shake table testing of models in building contest and earthquake damage to actual.
Probabilistic Ground Motions for Scoggins Dam, Oregon Chris Wood Seismotectonics & Geophysics Group Technical Service Center July 2012.
Large Earthquake Rapid Finite Rupture Model Products Thorne Lay (UCSC) USGS/IRIS/NSF International Workshop on the Utilization of Seismographic Networks.
NEEDS FOR PERFORMANCE-BASED GEOTECHNICAL EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING
Correlating aftershock sequences properties to earthquake physics J. Woessner S.Wiemer, S.Toda.
Natural Hazards Science: Reducing America’s Risk from Floods David Ford David Ford Consulting Engineers.
Effects of Strong Motion Processing Procedures on Time Histories, Elastic and Inelastic Spectra By Paolo Bazzurro, Brian Sjoberg,
CHYI-TYI LEE, SHANG-YU HSIEH
Evaluation of simulation results: Aftershocks in space Karen Felzer USGS Pasadena.
Earthquakes 101 (EQ101) Lisa Wald USGS Earthquake Hazards Program
Tri-State Seismic Hazard Mapping -Kentucky Plan
Ground Motions and Liquefaction – The Loading Part of the Equation
Ground-Motion Attenuation Relationships for Cascadia Subduction Zone Megathrust Earthquakes Based on a Stochastic Finite-Fault Model Nick Gregor 1, Walter.
Microzonation Study of Soil Liquefaction Potential and Damage Wei F. Lee Taiwan Construction Research Institute Ming-Hung Chen National Center for Research.
U.S.-Taiwan Workshop on Soil Liquefaction A Practical Reliability-Based Method for Assessing Soil Liquefaction Potential Jin-Hung Hwang National Central.
Probabilistic hazard analysis of earthquake-induced landslides – an example from Kuohsing, Taiwan Liao, Chi-Wen Industrial Technology Research Institute.
Earthquake Site Characterization in Metropolitan Vancouver Frederick Jackson Supervisor – Dr. Sheri Molnar.
Printout 4 slides per page, give for questions by
Site effect characterization of the Ulaanbaatar basin
Mapping of lateral spread Displacement hazard, Weber County, Utah
Mapping of Liquefaction hazard for Salt lake and Weber Counties, Utah
NGA Dataset Brian Chiou NGA Workshop #5 March 24, 2004.
British Seismology Meeting 5th – 7th April 2017, Reading, UK
Kinematic Modeling of the Denali Earthquake
Objectives:   Determine areas where liquefaction has previously occurred and also areas where liquefaction has not occurred in New Zealand from observational.
NGA-East Tentative Plan
WHAT IS LIQUEFACTION.
EARTHQUAKE EFFECTS, PATTERNS, AND RISK
Locating an earthquake
Deterministic Seismic Hazard Analysis
March 21-22, University of Washington, Seattle
Notes on the Intensity Measure Breakout Session - PEER Annual Meeting - Jan. 17, 2002   ·   Testbeds will not provide definitive answers as to the best.
Scales used to measure earthquakes
Presentation transcript:

INCORPORATION OF EARTHQUAKE SOURCE, PROPAGATION PATH AND SITE UNCERTAINTIES INTO ASSESSMENT OF LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL Bob Darragh Nick Gregor Walt Silva Pacific Engineering and Analysis El Cerrito, CA

OBJECTIVE EVALUATE QUALITATIVELY THREE METHODS FOR LIQUEFACTION (TRIGGERING) ANDRUS AND STOKOE (2000): Vs KAYEN AND MITCHELL (1997): ARIAS INTENSITY, SPT SEED AND OTHERS (2001): CSR, SPT

METHOD EQUIVALENT LINEAR SITE RESPONSE BLWN: RVT APPROACH FINITE SOURCE PARAMETRIC VARIATIONS IN MATERIAL PROPERTIES STATISTICALLY RIGOROUS ASSESSMENT OF PARAMETERS THAT CONTROL CYCLIC DEMANDS

SITE SPECIFIC ANALYSES 12 CASE STUDIES FROM 6 EARTHQUAKES LOMA PRIETA: 5 SITES 3 EARTHQUAKES: WILDLIFE LIQUEFACTION SUPERSTION HILLS (B): KORNBLOOM ROAD NORTHRIDGE: 2 SITES KOCAELI: ADAPARAZI COMPARE FACTORS OF SAFETY AND PROBABILITY OF LIQUEFACTION WITH VISUAL MANIFESTATIONS OF LIQUEFACTION 5 SITES LIQUEFIED (ALAMEDA NAVAL AIR STATION) 7 SITES DID NOT LIQUEFY (EMERYVILLE PACIFIC PARK PLAZA)

REGIONAL ANALYSES 1995 KOBE EARTHQUAKE: 654 SITES FINITE RUPTURE SIMULATIONS RUPTURE DIRECTIVITY DURATION COMPARE FACTORS OF SAFETY AND PROBABILITY OF LIQUEFACTION WITH AREAL SURVEYS OF SAND BOILS APPROPRIATE FOR LIQUEFACTION MAPPING STUDIES

Model Bias estimates computed over the 25 recording sites (fault distance range of 1 to 158 km).

Median estimates of peak acceleration values at the rock, hard, soft, and fill areas of Kobe, Nishinomiya, and Osaka.

Median estimates of Arias Intensity for the rock, hard, soft, and fill areas of Kobe, Nishinomiya, and Osaka.

Zones of surface expression of ground failure (from Iwasaki, 1997).

Median estimates of the factor of safety using the Andrus and Stokoe (2000) approach at the rock, hard, soft, and fill areas of Kobe, Nishinomiya, and Osaka.

Median estimates of the factor of safety using the Kayen and Mitchell (1997) approach at the rock, hard, soft, and fill areas of Kobe, Nishinomiya, and Osaka.

Median estimates of the factor of safety using the Seed et al. (2001) approach at the rock, hard, soft, and fill areas of Kobe, Nishinomiya, and Osaka.

CONCLUSIONS ALL 3 APPROACHES REPRESENT TOOLS TO QUANTIFY LIQUEFACTION HAZARD AT REGIONAL SCALES THE Vs BASED APPROACH WAS MORE ACCURATE THE SPT APPROACHES WORKED RATHER WELL, GENERALLY BEING CONSERVATIVE, CONSIDERING SPT DATA WERE NOT USED DIRECTLY (3 CORRELATION MODELS OF Vs AND SPT) REPORT USGS AWARD No. 02HQGR0022 INCORPORATION OF EARTHQUAKE SOURCE, PROPAGATION PATH, AND SITE UNCERTAINTIES INTO ASSESSMENT OF LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL; PHASE 1, VALIDATION Silva, Darragh and Gregor (2005), 262 pp