YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    Comparison of State-of-the-Art Approaches Used to Account for Spatial Variability in 1D Ground Response Analyses

    Source: Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering:;2022:;Volume ( 148 ):;issue: 005::page 04022019
    Author:
    Mohamad M. Hallal
    ,
    Brady R. Cox
    ,
    Joseph P. Vantasel
    DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002774
    Publisher: ASCE
    Abstract: A significant amount of seismic site response research over the past decade has focused on our abilities to replicate recorded ground motions at borehole array sites, where both the input (rock) and output (surface) ground motions are known. When viewed in aggregate, these studies have found that approximately 50% of borehole array sites are poorly modeled using one-dimensional (1D) ground response analyses (GRAs) based on a single shear wave velocity (Vs) profile, with individual studies reporting values between approximately 30%–80%. While there is no doubt that some sites are indeed too variable to be modeled using 1D GRAs, it is possible that simple 1D analyses could still be effectively used at many sites if spatial variability is accounted for via a rational, site-specific approach. In this study, we investigate five alternative approaches that can be used to account for spatial variability in 1D GRAs: (1) Vs randomization, (2) shear wave travel time randomization, (3) utilization of Vs suites derived from surface wave testing covering a large area, (4) incorporation of a pseudo-3D Vs model derived from a horizontal-to-vertical spectral ratio geostatistical approach, and (5) damping modifications. These approaches are investigated at two US borehole array sites (the Treasure Island and Delaney Park Downhole Arrays) so that the GRA results can be compared with recorded small-strain ground motions. Spatial variability is accounted for by generating approximately 250 Vs profiles for each approach, except for damping modifications, wherein only a single Vs profile is used, but with increased damping to account for wave scattering originating from spatial discontinuities. Through qualitative and quantitative comparisons, we assess the relative and absolute effectiveness of each approach, highlight their limitations, and propose potential improvements that can help overcome these limitations in practice.
    • Download: (4.744Mb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Get RIS
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      Comparison of State-of-the-Art Approaches Used to Account for Spatial Variability in 1D Ground Response Analyses

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4283607
    Collections
    • Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering

    Show full item record

    contributor authorMohamad M. Hallal
    contributor authorBrady R. Cox
    contributor authorJoseph P. Vantasel
    date accessioned2022-05-07T21:20:31Z
    date available2022-05-07T21:20:31Z
    date issued2022-02-24
    identifier other(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002774.pdf
    identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4283607
    description abstractA significant amount of seismic site response research over the past decade has focused on our abilities to replicate recorded ground motions at borehole array sites, where both the input (rock) and output (surface) ground motions are known. When viewed in aggregate, these studies have found that approximately 50% of borehole array sites are poorly modeled using one-dimensional (1D) ground response analyses (GRAs) based on a single shear wave velocity (Vs) profile, with individual studies reporting values between approximately 30%–80%. While there is no doubt that some sites are indeed too variable to be modeled using 1D GRAs, it is possible that simple 1D analyses could still be effectively used at many sites if spatial variability is accounted for via a rational, site-specific approach. In this study, we investigate five alternative approaches that can be used to account for spatial variability in 1D GRAs: (1) Vs randomization, (2) shear wave travel time randomization, (3) utilization of Vs suites derived from surface wave testing covering a large area, (4) incorporation of a pseudo-3D Vs model derived from a horizontal-to-vertical spectral ratio geostatistical approach, and (5) damping modifications. These approaches are investigated at two US borehole array sites (the Treasure Island and Delaney Park Downhole Arrays) so that the GRA results can be compared with recorded small-strain ground motions. Spatial variability is accounted for by generating approximately 250 Vs profiles for each approach, except for damping modifications, wherein only a single Vs profile is used, but with increased damping to account for wave scattering originating from spatial discontinuities. Through qualitative and quantitative comparisons, we assess the relative and absolute effectiveness of each approach, highlight their limitations, and propose potential improvements that can help overcome these limitations in practice.
    publisherASCE
    titleComparison of State-of-the-Art Approaches Used to Account for Spatial Variability in 1D Ground Response Analyses
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume148
    journal issue5
    journal titleJournal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering
    identifier doi10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002774
    journal fristpage04022019
    journal lastpage04022019-23
    page23
    treeJournal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering:;2022:;Volume ( 148 ):;issue: 005
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian