高级搜索
  • 全国中文核心期刊
  • 中国科技核心期刊
  • 美国工程索引（EI）收录期刊
  • Scopus数据库收录期刊

适于不同深度土层液化的剪切波速判别公式

孙锐, 袁晓铭

孙锐, 袁晓铭. 适于不同深度土层液化的剪切波速判别公式[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2019, 41(3): 439-447. DOI: 10.11779/CJGE201903005
引用本文: 孙锐, 袁晓铭. 适于不同深度土层液化的剪切波速判别公式[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2019, 41(3): 439-447. DOI: 10.11779/CJGE201903005
shu
SUN Rui, YUAN Xiao-ming. Depth-consistent vs-based approach for soil liquefaction evaluation[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2019, 41(3): 439-447. DOI: 10.11779/CJGE201903005
Citation: SUN Rui, YUAN Xiao-ming. Depth-consistent vs-based approach for soil liquefaction evaluation[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2019, 41(3): 439-447. DOI: 10.11779/CJGE201903005
shu

适于不同深度土层液化的剪切波速判别公式  English Version

  • 中国地震局工程力学研究所地震工程与工程振动重点实验室,黑龙江 哈尔滨 150080

基金项目: 中国地震局工程力学研究所基本科研业务费专项项目（2017B09）
详细信息
    作者简介:

    孙 锐(1972- ),女,研究员,博士,主要从事岩土地震工程研究。E-mail: iemsr@163.com。

    通讯作者:

    袁晓铭，E-mail：yxmiem@163.com

Depth-consistent vs-based approach for soil liquefaction evaluation

  • Key Laboratory of Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, Institute of Engineering Mechanics, China Earthquake Administration, Harbin 150080, China

摘要

    摘要
  • 摘要: 剪切波速测试是工程上常用的现场技术,正逐步成为液化判别方法的基本指标之一。利用早期的Andrus数据库对中国《岩土工程勘察规范》方法和Andrus方法进行检验,发现了二者存在的问题。提出了双曲线形式的剪切波速判别模型和公式。采用新的Kayen数据库对三者进行了对比检验,并讨论了提高判别精度的可能性和方式。结果表明：中国现行的《岩土工程勘察规范》中剪切波速判别液化方法,无论对浅层还是深层土,判别结果均严重保守,甚至会把十分密实的砂土判成液化,十分不合理;国际上应用广泛的Andrus方法对浅层土判别结果过于保守,对深层土判别成功率可以接受,但其临界剪切波速曲线在深处存在回弯的不合理现象;所提出的双曲线液化判别模型和公式,能够深浅兼顾,无论对浅层还是深层土都能给出较好的判别结果,克服了中国规范方法和Andrus方法的弊端,且形式简单便于工程应用;采用剪切波速进行液化判别时,应采取多次测试,以降低数据离散性,提高判别的准确性。
    Abstract: The shear wave velocity tests have been commonly used as an engineering field testing technique, and are gradually becoming a basic index for soil liquefaction evaluation. The shortcoming of the Andrus' method and Chinese code method has been found by using the database from Andrus, and the new hyperbolic model and formula Vs-based for estimating liquefaction potential of liquefiable layer are proposed. The reliability of the above three methods is verified through the data newly collected by Kayen, and the possibility and approach of improving the discrimination accuracy are discussed. The results indicate that the Chinese code method is significantly conservative for both shallow soil layer and deep soil layer and will predict the dense sand as liquefiable. The Andrus' method is conservative for shallow soil layer, and an irrational phenomenon of back bending occurs in the deep soil layer. The proposed hyperbolic model can provide good results for both shallow soil layer and deep soil layer and solve the deficiency of Chinese code method and Andrus' method. When the in-situ shear-wave velocity tests are used to predict soil liquefaction for a specific site, multiple tests should be taken to reduce data discreteness.
    • HTML全文
    • 参考文献(23)
  • [1] 袁晓铭, 曹振中, 孙锐, 等. 汶川8.0级地震液化特征初步研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报,2009, 28(6): 1288-1296.
    (YUAN Xiao-ming, CAO Zhen-zhong, SUN Rui, et al.Preliminary research on liquefaction characteristics of Wenchuan 8.0 Earthquake[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2009, 28(6): 1288-1296. (in Chinese))
    [2] 李兆焱, 袁晓铭. 2016年台湾高雄地震场地效应及砂土液化破坏概述[J]. 世界地震工程, 2016, 36(3): 1-7.
    (LI Zhao-yan, YUAN Xiao-ming.Seismic damage summarize of site effect and soil liquefaction in 2016 Kaohsiung earthquake[J]. World Earthquake Engineering, 2016, 36(3): 1-7. (in Chinese))
    [3] 黄雨, 于淼. BHATTACHARYA Subhamoy.2011 年日本东北地区太平洋近海地震地基液化灾害综述[J]. 岩土工程学报,2013, 35(5): 834-840.
    (HUANG Yu, YU Miao, BHATTACHARYA Subhamoy.Review on liquefaction- induced damages of soils and foundations during 2011 of the Pacific Coast of Tohoku Earthquake (Japan)[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2013, 35(5): 834-840. (in Chinese))
    [4] GB 50011—2010建筑抗震设计规范[S]. 2010.
    (GB 50011—2010 Code for seismic design of buildings[S]. 2010. (in Chinese))
    [5] GB 50021—2001岩土工程勘察规范[S]. 2009.
    (GB 50021—2001 Code for investigation of geotechnical engineering[S]. 2009. (in Chinese))
    [6] GB50487—2008水利水电工程土质勘察规范[S]. 2008.
    (GB50487—2008 Code for engineering geological investigation of water resources and hydropower[S]. 2008. (in Chinese))
    [7] 曹振中, 刘荟达, 袁晓铭. 基于动力触探的砾性土液化判别方法通用性研究[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2016, 38(1): 163-169.
    (CAO Zhen-zhong, LIU Hui-da, YUAN Xiao-ming.Reliability of Chinese dynamic penetration test for liquefaction evaluation of gravelly soils[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2016, 38(1): 163-169. (in Chinese))
    [8] 汪闻韶. 剪切波速在评估地基饱和砂层地震液化可能性中的应用[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2001, 23(6): 655-658.
    (WANG Wen-shao.Utilization of shear wave velocity in assessment of liquefaction potential of saturated sand under level groung during earthquakes[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2001, 23(6): 655-658. (in Chinese))
    [9] 柯翰, 陈云敏. 改进的判别砂土液化势的剪切波速法[J]. 地震学报, 2000, 22(6): 637-644.
    (KE Han, CHEN Yun-ming.An improved method for evaluating liquefaction potential by the velocity of shear-waves[J]. ACTA Seismologica Sinica, 2000, 22(6): 637-644. (in Chinese))
    [10] 周燕国, 陈云敏, 柯翰. 砂土液化势剪切波速简化判别法的改进[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2005, 24(13): 2369-2375.
    (ZHOU Yan-guo, CHEN Yun-min, KE Han.Improvement of simplified procedure for liquefaction potential evaluation of sands by shear wave velocity[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2005, 24(13): 2369-2375. (in Chinese))
    [11] 石兆吉, 郁寿松, 丰万玲. 土壤液化势的剪切波速判别法[J]. 岩土工程学报, 1993, 15(1):74-80.
    (SHI Zhao-ji, YU Shou-song, FENG Wan-ling.Evaluating soil liquefaction potential by the velocity of shear-waves[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 1993, 15(1): 74-80. (in Chinese))
    [12] 王德咏, 罗先启, 吴雪萍. 剪切波速与标准贯入击数N值的关系研究[J]. 路基工程, 2010(3): 29-31.
    (WANG De-yong, LUO Xian-qi, WU Xue-ping.Study on the relationship between shear wave velocity and standard penetration compaction number N[J]. Subgrade Engineering, 2010(3): 29-31. (in Chinese))
    [13] 邱志刚, 薄景山, 罗琦峰. 土壤剪切波速与标贯击数关系的统计分析[J]. 自然灾害学报, 2012, 21(2): 102-107.
    (QIU Zhi-gang, BO Jing-shan, LUO Qi-feng.Statistical analysis of relationship between shear wave velocity and standard penetration test blow count[J]. Journal of Natural Disasters, 2012, 21(2):102-107. (in Chinese))
    [14] ANDRUS R D, STOKOE II K H. Liquefaction resistance of soils from shear-wave velocity[J]. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenviromental Engineering, ASCE, 2000, 126(11): 1015-1025.
    [15] 陈龙伟, 袁晓铭, 孙锐. 2011 年新西兰Mw 6.3地震液化及岩土震害述评[J]. 世界地震工程, 2013, 29(3): 1-9.
    (CHEN Long-wei, YUAN Xiao-ming, SUN Rui.Review of liquefaction phenomena and geotechnical damage in the 2011 New Zealand Mw6.3 earthquake[J]. World Earthquake Engineering, 2013, 29(3): 1-9. (in Chinese))
    [16] GB 18306—2015 中国地震动参数区划图[S]. 2016.
    (GB 18306—2015 Seismic ground motion parameters zonation map of China[S]. 2016. (in Chinese))
    [17] 汪云龙, 袁晓铭, 陈龙伟. 基于弯曲元技术的无黏性土剪切波速与相对密度联合测试方法[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2016, 35(增刊1): 3418-3423.
    (WANG Yun-long, YUAN Xiao-ming, CHEN Long-wei.A measurement method for the relationship between shear wave velocity and relative density of cohesionless soils using Bender Elements technique[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2016, 35(S1): 3418-3423. (in Chinese))
    [18] 刘红帅, 郑桐, 齐文浩, 等. 常规土类剪切波速与埋深的关系分析[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2010, 32(7): 1142-1149.
    (LIU Hong-shuai, ZHENG Tong, QI Wen-hao, et al.Relationship between shear wave velocity and depth of conventional soils[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2010, 32(7): 1142-1149. (in Chinese))
    [19] 孔孟云, 陈国兴, 李小军, 等. 以剪切波速与地表峰值加速度为依据的地震液化确定性及概率判别法[J]. 岩土力学, 2015, 36(5): 1239-1252.
    (KONG Meng-yun, CHEN Guo-xing, LI Xiao-jun, et al.Shear wave velocity and peak ground acceleration based deterministic and probabilistic assessment of seismic soil liquefaction potential[J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2015, 36(5): 1239-1252. (in Chinese))
    [20] KAYEN R, MOSS R E S, THOMPSON E M. Shear-wave velocity-based probabilistic and deterministic assessment of seismic soil liquefaction potential[J]. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2013, 139(3): 407-419.
    [21] SEED H B, TOKIMATSU K, HARDER L F, et al.The influence of SPT procedures in soil liquefaction resistance evaluations[J]. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering. 1985, 111(12): 1425-1445.
    [22] 孙锐, 赵倩玉, 袁晓铭. 液化判别的双曲线模型[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2014, 36(11): 2061-2068.
    (SUN Rui, ZHAO Qian-yu, YUAN Xiao-ming.Hyperbolic model for estimating liquefaction potential of sand[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2014, 36(11): 2061-2068. (in Chinese))
    [23] 陈卓识. 现场剪切波速测试误差及其对地震动影响研究[D]. 哈尔滨: 中国地震局工程力学研究所, 2015.
    (CHEN Zhuo-shi.The study of situ shear wave velocity test error and its effects on ground motion[D]. Harbin: Institute of Engineering Mechanics, China Earthquake Administration, 2015. (in Chinese))
    • 相关文章
    • 施引文献(6)

  • 期刊类型引用(4)

    1. 张钢泉，马海龙. 基于Mindlin解的自锚试桩Q-s曲线研究. 水利规划与设计. 2024(03): 111-116 . 百度学术
    2. 司漪. 基于Q-s曲线的大型LNG储罐桩板基础沉降计算方法. 化工与医药工程. 2024(03): 20-27 . 百度学术
    3. 王丽欢，郜帆，任亚宁，李楚. 软土地基预加固对桩基竖向承载特性的影响研究. 人民长江. 2023(04): 190-197 . 百度学术
    4. 李洁，罗如平，朱碧堂. 基于试桩曲线的桩筏基础沉降实用计算方法. 华东交通大学学报. 2022(05): 20-28 . 百度学术

    其他类型引用(2)

    • 资源附件(0)
计量
  • 文章访问数: 
  • HTML全文浏览量:  0
  • PDF下载量: 
  • 被引次数: 6
出版历程
  • 收稿日期:  2018-01-31
  • 发布日期:  2019-03-24

目录

摘要
HTML全文
    参考文献(23)
    相关文章
    施引文献
    资源附件(0)

    /

    返回文章
    返回
    版权所有 © 2010水利部交通部国家能源局南京水利科学研究院 苏ICP备05007122号-11公安联网备案号：32010602011255
    编辑部地址：南京市虎踞关34号《岩土工程学报》编辑部邮编：210024电话：025-85829534，85829556E-mail: ge@nhri.cn