Preferences help
enabled [disable] Abstract
Number of results
2018 | 97 | 168-184
Article title

Centrifuge modeling approach on seismic loading analysis of brick: A Geo-technical study

Title variants
Languages of publication
Models for geotechnical centrifuge testing are usually made from re-formed soil, allowing for comparisons with naturally occurring soil deposits. However, there is a fundamental omission in this process because natural soil is deposited in layers creating a unique structure. Nonlinear dynamics of clay material deposit is an essential part in changing the attributes of ground movements when subjected to solid seismic loading, particularly when diverse intensification conduct of speeding up and relocation are considered. The paper portrays a review of axis shaking table tests and numerical recreations to explore the offshore clay deposits subjected to seismic loadings. These perceptions are accurately reenacted by DEEPSOIL with appropriate soil models and parameters reviewed from noteworthy centrifuge modeling researches. At that point precise 1-D site reaction investigations are performed on both time and recurrence spaces. The outcomes uncover that for profound delicate clay is subjected to expansive quakes, noteworthy increasing speed lessening may happen close to the highest point of store because of soil nonlinearity and even neighborhood shear disappointment; nonetheless, huge enhancement of removal at low frequencies are normal in any case the forces of base movements, which proposes that for dislodging touchy seaward establishments and structures, such intensified low-recurrence relocation reaction will assume an essential part in seismic outline. This research shows centrifuge as a tool for creating a layered sample important for modelling true soil behaviour (such as permeability) which is not identical in all directions. Currently, there are limited methods for creating layered soil samples.
Physical description
  • [1] Kutter B.L., ‘Dynamic Centrifuge Modeling of Geotechnical Structures’, Transportation Research Record 1336, TRB, National Research Council, pp. 24-30, Washington, D.C., 1992.
  • [2] Garnier J., Gaudin C., Springman S.M., Culligan P.J., Goodings D., Konig D., et al., 2007. Catalogue of scaling laws and similitude questions in centrifuge modelling. International Journal of Physical Modelling in Geotechnics, 7: 1–24.
  • [3] Kutter, B. L., Carey, T. J., Hashimoto, T., Zeghal, M., Abdoun, T., Kokkali, P., ... & Hung, W. Y. (2017). LEAP-GWU-2015 experiment specifications, results, and comparisons. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering.
  • [4] Manzari, M. T., El Ghoraiby, M., Kutter, B. L., Zeghal, M., Abdoun, T., Arduino, P., ... & Ghofrani, A. (2017). Liquefaction experiment and analysis projects (LEAP): Summary of observations from the planning phase. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering.
  • [5] Hakhamaneshi, M., & Kutter, B. L. (2016). Effect of Footing Shape and Embedment on the Settlement, Recentering, and Energy Dissipation of Shallow Footings Subjected to Rocking. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 142(12), 04016070.
  • [6] Dobry, R., El-Sekelly, W., & Abdoun, T. (2018). Calibration of non-linear effective stress code for seismic analysis of excess pore pressures and liquefaction in the free field. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 107, 374-389.
  • [7] Ghayoomi, M., Dashti, S., McCartney, J. S., 2013. Performance of a transparent Flexible Shear Beam container for geotechnical centrifuge modeling of dynamic problems. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 53, 230-239.
  • [8] Beaty, M. H. (2018). Application of UBCSAND to the LEAP centrifuge experiments. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 104, 143-153.
  • [9] Jahanitabar, A. A., & Bargi, K. (2018). Time-dependent seismic fragility curves for aging jacket-type offshore platforms subjected to earthquake ground motions. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 14(2), 192-202.
  • [10] Yilmaz, M., Ertin, A., Er, S., & Tugrul, A. (2018). Numerical Modelling of Steep Slopes in Open Rock Quarries. Journal of the Geological Society of India, 91(2), 232-238.
  • [11] Berk, C., Yahagi, Y., Dhuey, S., Cabrini, S., & Schmidt, H. (2017). Controlling the influence of elastic eigenmodes on nanomagnet dynamics through pattern geometry. Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials, 426, 239-244.
  • [12] Bahrampouri, M., Rodriguez-Marek, A., & Bommer, J. J. (2018). Mapping the uncertainty in modulus reduction and damping curves onto the uncertainty of site amplification functions. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering.
  • [13] Khosravifar, A., & Nasr, J. (2018). Modified design procedures for bridge pile foundations subjected to liquefaction-induced lateral spreading. DFI Journal-The Journal of the Deep Foundations Institute, 1-14.
  • [14] Boulanger, R. W., Ziotopoulou, K., 2013. Formulation of a sand plasticity plane-strain model for earthquake engineering applications. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 53, 254-267.
  • [15] Deng, L., Kutter, B. L., Kunnath, S. K., 2014. Seismic design of rocking shallow foundations: displacement-based methodology. Journal of Bridge Engineering, ASCE, 19(11), 1-11.
  • [16] Giannopoulos, G. A., & Munro, J. F. (2018). The Case for Transport Research Cooperation with China, Japan, Korea—Rationale for This Book and Summary of Its Findings. In Publicly Funded Transport Research in the PR China, Japan, and Korea (pp. 1-29). Springer, Cham.
  • [17] Ng, Y. C., Hadley, C., & Suroor, H. (2018, March). Malikai Project-Design of TLP Foundation Pile at Geologically Challenging Area, Offshore Malaysia. In Offshore Technology Conference Asia. Offshore Technology Conference.
  • [18] Frank J. Puskar, Albert P. Ku and Richard W. Litton, 2013. Recent trends in the analysis and design of offshore platforms in seismic regions. Offshore Technology Conference held in Houston, Texas, USA, 6–9 May 2013. OTC 24187.
  • [19] Afacan, K. B., Brandenberg, S. J., Stewart, J. P., 2013. Centrifuge modeling studies of site response in soft clay over wide strain range. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, 140(2), 04013003.
  • [20] Yamashita, K., Shigeno, Y., Hamada, J., & Chang, D. W. (2018). Seismic response analysis of piled raft with grid-form deep mixing walls under strong earthquakes with performance-based design concerns. Soils and Foundations.
  • [21] McLean, D. L., Macreadie, P., White, D. J., Thomson, P. G., Fowler, A., Gates, A. R., ... & Booth, D. J. (2018, March). Understanding the Global Scientific Value of Industry ROV Data, to Quantify Marine Ecology and Guide Offshore Decommissioning Strategies. In Offshore Technology Conference Asia. Offshore Technology Conference.
  • [22] Hashash, Y. M., Dashti, S., Romero, M. I., Ghayoomi, M., Musgrove, M., 2015. Evaluation of 1-D seismic site response modeling of sand using centrifuge experiments. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 78, 19-31.
  • [23] Groholski, D. R., Hashash, Y. M. A., Musgrove, M., Harmon, J., Kim, B., 2015. Evaluation of 1-D non-linear site response analysis using a general quadratic/hyperbolic strength-controlled constitutive model. In 6th International Conference on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering, 1-4 November 2015, Christchurch, New Zealand.
  • [24] Manzari, M. T., El Ghoraiby, M., Kutter, B. L., Zeghal, M., Abdoun, T., Arduino, P., ... & Ghofrani, A. (2017). Liquefaction experiment and analysis projects (LEAP): Summary of observations from the planning phase. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering.
  • [25] Ladd, C. C., Foott, R., 1974. New design procedure for stability of soft clays: 10F, 3T, 39R. J. GEOTECH. ENGNG. DIV. V100, N. GT7, JULY, 1974, P763–786. In International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics Abstracts (Vol. 11, No. 11, p. A220). Pergamon.
  • [26] Kwok, A. O., Stewart, J. P., Hashash, Y. M., Matasovic, N., Pyke, R., Wang, Z., Yang, Z., 2007. Use of exact solutions of wave propagation problems to guide implementation of nonlinear seismic ground response analysis procedures. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, 133(11), 1385-1398.
  • [27] Ghosh, B., Peiris, N., Lubkowski, Z., 2007. Assessment of seismic risk for the design of offshore structures in liquefiable soil. 4th International Conference on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering, June 25-28, 2007, Paper No. 1432.
  • [28] Elgamal, A., Lai, T., Yang, Z., and He, L., 2001. Dynamic soil properties, seismic downhole arrays and applications in practice. Proc., 4th Int. Conf. on Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics, International Society of Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering (ISSMGE), London.
  • [29] Dobry, R., Iai, S., 2000. Recent developments in the understanding of earthquake site response and associated seismic code implementation. International Society for Rock Mechanics. ISRM International Symposium, 19-24 November, Melbourne, Australia.
  • [30] Dobry, R., Vucetic, M., 1987. Dynamic properties and seismic response of soft clay deposits. Proc. Int. Symp. on Geotechnical Engineering of Soft Soils, 2, Mexico City, 51-87.
  • [31] Dong Soon Park, Tadahiro Kishida, (2018). Shear Modulus Reduction and Damping Ratio Curves for Earth Core Materials of Dams. Canadian Geotechnical Journal,
  • [32] Brennan, A. J., Thusyanthan, N. I., Madabhushi, S. P., 2005. Evaluation of shear modulus and damping in dynamic centrifuge tests. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, 131(12), 1488-1497.
  • [33] Hardin, B. O., Blandford, G. E., 1989. Elasticity of particulate materials. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, 115(6), 788-805.
  • [34] Kramer, S. L. (2018). Past, Present, and Future Developments in Liquefaction Hazard Analysis. In Developments in Earthquake Geotechnics (pp. 51-60). Springer, Cham.
Document Type
Publication order reference
YADDA identifier
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.