Journal of the Earthquake Engineering Society of Korea (한국지진공학회논문집)

Earthquake Engineering Society of Korea (한국지진공학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Appropriate Input Earthquake Motion for the Verification of Seismic Response Analysis by Geotechnical Dynamic Centrifuge Test

동적원심모형 시험을 이용한 부지응답해석 검증시 입력 지진의 결정

  • Lee, Jin-Sun (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Wonkwang University)
  • 이진선 (원광대학교 토목환경공학과)
  • Received : 2013.06.11
  • Accepted : 2013.07.16
  • Published : 2013.09.02
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In order to verify the reliability of numerical site response analysis program, both soil free-field and base rock input motions should be provided. Beside the field earthquake motion records, the most effective testing method for obtaining the above motions is the dynamic geotechnical centrifuge test. However, need is to verify if the motion recorded at the base of the soil model container in the centrifuge facility is the true base rock input motion or not. In this paper, the appropriate input motion measurement method for the verification of seismic response analysis is examined by dynamic geotechnical centrifuge test and using three-dimensional finite difference analysis results. From the results, it appears that the ESB (equivalent shear beam) model container distorts downward the propagating wave with larger magnitude of centrifugal acceleration and base rock input motion. Thus, the distortion makes the measurement of the base rock outcrop motion difficult which is essential for extracting the base rock incident motion. However, the base rock outcrop motion generated by using deconvolution method is free from the distortion effect of centrifugal acceleration.

Keywords

References

  1. Kanai K. Relation between the nature of surface layer and the amplitude of earthquake motions. Bulletin, Tokyo Earthquake Research Institute. 1951;30:31-37.
  2. Rosset JM, Whitman RV. Theoretical background for amplification studies. Research Report No. R69-15, Soils Publication No. 231. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Cambridge; c1969; p.21-43.
  3. Lysmer J, Seed HB, Schnabel PB. Influence of base-rock characteristics on ground response. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America. 1971;61(5):1213-1232.
  4. Duke CM, Leeds DJ. Site characteristics of southern california strong-motion earthquake stations. Special Publication 38. Report No. 62-55(Reprinted). Dept. of Engineering. University of California. Los Angles; c1972; p.4-17.
  5. Schnabel PB, Lysmer J, Seed HB. SHAKE, A computer program for earthquake response analysis of horizontally layered sites. Report No. EERC 72-12. EERI. UC Berkeley; c1972; p.3-4.
  6. Idriss IM, Sun JI. User's manual for SHAKE91, Center for Geotechnical Modeling. Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering. University of California. Davis. California; c1992; p.1-2.
  7. Vucetic M, Dobry R. Effect of Soil Plasticity on Cyclic Response. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering. ASCE. 1991;111GT(1):89-107.
  8. Idriss IM. Assessment of site response analysis procedures. Report No. NIST GCR 95-667. NIST; c1995; p.16-17.
  9. Mejia LH, Dawson EM. Earthquake deconvolution for FLAC. Proceedings of 4th International FLAC Symposium on Numerical Modeling in Geomechanics. Madrid. Spain. ISBN 0-9767577-0-2; c2006; p.4-10.
  10. Lee SH, Choo YW, Kim DS. Performance of an equivalent shear beam (ESB) model container for dynamic geotechnical centrifuge tests. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering. 2013;44:102-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2012.09.008
  11. Ilankatharan M, Kutter BL. Modeling input motion boundary conditions for simulations of geotechnical shaking table tests. Earthquake Spectra. 2010;26(2):349-369. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.3383214
  12. Joyner WB, Chen ATF. Calculation of Nonlinear Ground Response in Earthquakes. Bulletin of Seismological Society of America. 1975; 65(5):1315-1336.
  13. Kim DS, Lee SH, Choo YW, Rames D. Self-balanced earthquake simulator on centrifuge and dynamic performance verification. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering. 2013;17(4):651-661. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-013-1591-3
  14. Kuhlemeyer RL, Lysmer J. Finite element method accuracy for wave propagation problems. Journal of Soil Mech. & Foundations. Div. ASCE. 1973;99SM(5):421-427.
  15. Lysmer J, Kuhlemeyer RL. Finite dynamic model for infinite media, Journal of Engineering Mechanics. 1969;95EM(4):859-877.
  16. Hardin BO, Drnevich VP. Shear modulus and damping in soils: design equation and curves, Journal of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering Division. ASCE. 1972;98(7):667-691.
  17. Ishihara K. Soil Behaviour in Earthquake Geotechnics, Oxford University Press Inc. New York. ISBN 0-19-856224-1; c1995; p.36-37.