No description available.

Characterization of the seismic hazard and ground-failure hazard of a site using traditional empirical lateral spread displacement models requires consideration of uncertainties in seismic loading, site conditions, and model prediction. Researchers have developed performance-based design methods to simultaneously account for these sources of uncertainty through the incorporation of a probabilistic analytical framework. While these methods can effectively handle the various sources of uncertainty associated with empirical lateral spread displacement prediction, they can be difficult for engineers to perform in a practical manner without the use of specialized numerical tools. To make the benefits of a performance-based approach accessible to a broader audience of geotechnical engineers, a simplified performance-based procedure is introduced in this paper. This map-based procedure utilizes a reference soil profile to provide hazard-targeted reference displacements across a geographic area. Equations are provided for engineers to correct those reference displacements for site-specific soil conditions and surface geometry to produce site-specific, hazard-targeted estimates of lateral spread displacement. The simplified performance-based procedure is validated through a comparative study assessing probabilistic lateral spread displacements across several cities in the United States. Results show that the simplified procedure closely approximates the results from the full performance-based model for all sites. Comparison with deterministic analyses are presented, and the place for both in engineering practice are discussed.

Correct understanding of passive force behavior is particularly key to lateral evaluations of bridges because plastic deformation of soil backfill is vital to dissipation of earthquake energy and thermally-induced stresses in abutments. Only recently have studies investigated the effects of skew on passive force. Numerical modeling and a handful of skewed abutment tests performed in sand backfill have found reduced passive force with increasing skew, but previous to this study no skewed tests had been performed in gravel or Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil (GRS) backfills. The goal of this study was to better understand passive force behavior in non-skewed and skewed abutments with gravel and GRS backfills. Prior to this study, passive pressures in a GRS integrated approach had not been investigated. Gravel backfills also lack extensive passive force tests.Large-scale testing was performed with non-skewed and 30° skewed abutment configurations. Two tests were performed at each skew angle, one with unconfined gravel backfill and one with GRS backfill, for a total of four tests. The test abutment backwall was 11 ft (3.35 m) wide, non-skewed, and 5.5 ft (1.68 m) high and loaded laterally into the backfill. However, due to actuator loading constraints, all tests except the non-skewed unconfined gravel test were performed to a backfill height of 3.5 ft (1.07 m). The passive force results for the unconfined gravel test was scaled to a 3.5 ft (1.07 m) height for comparison.Test results in both sets of backfills confirmed previous findings that there is significant reduction in passive force with skewed abutment configurations. The reduction factor was 0.58 for the gravel backfill and 0.63 for the GRS backfill, compared to the predicted reduction factor of 0.53 for a 30° skew. These results are within the scatter of previous skewed testing, but could indicate that slightly higher reduction factors may be applicable for gravel backfills. Both backfills exhibited greater passive strength than sand backfills due to increased internal friction angle and unit weight. The GRS backfill had reduced initial stiffness and only reached 79% to 87% of the passive force developed by the unreinforced gravel backfill. This reduction was considered to be a result of reduced interface friction due to the geotextile. Additionally, the GRS behaved more linearly than unreinforced soil. This backfill elasticity is favorable in the GRS-Integrated Bridge System (GRS-IBS) abutment configuration because it allows thermal movement without developing excessive induced stresses in the bridge superstructure.

Seismically-induced liquefaction has been the cause of significant damage to infrastructure and is a serious concern in current civil engineering practice. Several methods are available for assessing the risk of liquefaction at a given site, each with its own strengths and limitations. One probabilistic method has been shown to provide more consistent estimates of liquefaction risk and can be tailored to the specific needs of a given project through hazard-targeted (i.e. based on return periods or likelihoods) results. This type of liquefaction assessment is typically called “performance-based,” after the Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research (PEER) Center's performance-based earthquake engineering framework. Unfortunately, performance-based liquefaction assessment is not easily performed and can be difficult for practicing engineers to use on routine projects. Previous research has shown that performance-based methods of liquefaction assessment can be simplified into an approximation procedure. This simplification has successfully been completed for the Cetin et al. (2004) empirical, probabilistic standard penetration test -based liquefaction triggering model. Until now, such a simplification has not been performed for another popular liquefaction triggering model developed by Boulanger and Idriss (2012). As some engineers either wish to use or are required to use the Boulanger and Idriss (2012) model in their liquefaction assessments, there is a need for a simplified performance-based method based on this model to supplement that based on the Cetin et al. (2004) model. This thesis provides the derivation of a simplified performance-based procedure for the assessment of liquefaction triggering using the Boulanger and Idriss (2012) model. A validation study is performed in which 10 cities across the United States are analyzed using both the simplified procedure and the full performance-based procedure. A comparison of the results from these two analyses shows that the simplified procedure provides a reasonable approximation of the full performance-based procedure. This thesis also describes the development of liquefaction loading maps for six states and a spreadsheet that performs the necessary correction calculations for the simplified method.

Lateral spread is a seismic hazard associated with soil liquefaction in which permanent deformations are developed within the soil profile due to cyclic mobility. Lateral spread has historically been one of the largest causes of earthquake-related damage to infrastructure. One of the infrastructure components most at risk from lateral spread is that of deep foundations. Because performance-based engineering is increasingly becoming adopted in earthquake engineering practice, it would be beneficial for engineers and researchers to have a performance-based methodology for computing pile performance during a lateral spread event. This study utilizes the probabilistic performance-based framework developed by the Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center to develop a methodology for computing probabilistic estimates of kinematic pile response. The methodology combines procedures familiar to most practicing engineers such as probabilistic seismic hazard analysis, empirical compution of lateral spread displacement, and kinematic pile response using p-y soil spring models (i.e. LPILE). The performance-based kinematic pile response model is applied to a series of lateral spread case histories from the earthquake that struck the Limon province of Costa Rica on April 22, 1991. The M7.6 earthquake killed 53 people, injured another 193 people, and disrupted an estimated 30-percent of the highway pavement and railways in the region due to fissures, scarps, and soil settlements resulting from liquefaction. Significant lateral spread was observed at bridge sites throughout the eastern part of Costa Rica near Limon, and the observed structural damage ranged from moderate to severe. This study identified five such bridges where damage due to lateral spread was observed following the earthquake. A geotechnical investigation is performed at each of these five bridges in an attempt to back-analyze the soil conditions leading to the liquefaction and lateral spread observed during the 1991 earthquake, and each of the five resulting case histories is developed and summarized. The results of this study should make a valuable contribution to the field of earthquake hazard reduction because they will introduce a procedure which will allow engineers and owners to objectively evaluate the performance of their deep foundation systems exposed to kinematic lateral spread loads corresponding to a given level of risk.

This research consists of full-scale shake table tests to investigate liquefaction of sandy soils. Consideration of the potential and consequences of liquefaction is critical to the performance of any structure built in locations of high seismicity underlain by saturated granular materials as it is the leading cause of damage associated with ground failure. In certain cases the financial losses associated with liquefaction can significantly impact the financial future of an entire region. Most liquefaction triggering studies are performed in the field where liquefaction has been previously observed, or in tabletop laboratory testing. The study detailed herein is a controlled laboratory test performed at full scale to allow for the measurement of field-scale index testing before and after cyclic loading. Testing was performed at the Parson’s geotechnical and Earthquake Laboratory at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo on the 1-dimensional shake table with a mounted flexible walled testing apparatus. The testing apparatus, originally constructed for soil-structure interaction experiments utilizing soft clay was retrofitted for the purpose of studying liquefaction. This research works towards comparing large-scale simple-shear liquefaction testing to small-scale simple-shear liquefaction testing of a #2/16 Monterey sand specimen. The bucket top was modified in order to apply a vertical load to the soil skeleton to replicate overburden soil conditions. Access ports were fitted into the bucket top for instrument cable access and to allow cone penetration testing before and after cyclic loading. A shear-wave generator was created to propagate shear waves into the sample for embedded accelerometers to measure small strain stiffness of the sample. Pore-pressure transducers were embedded in the soil sample to capture excess pore water pressure produced during liquefaction. Displacement transducers were attached to the bucket in order to measure shear strains during cyclic testing and to measure post-liquefaction volumetric deformations. The results of this investigation provide an empirical basis to the behavior of excess pore water production, void re-distribution, shear wave velocity, shear strain and cone penetrometer tip resistance of #2/16 Monterey sand before, during, and after liquefaction in a controlled laboratory environment at full-scale.

This dissertation discusses the potential for using a conventional main lateral-force resisting system, combined with the reserve strength in the gravity framing, and or auxiliary collapse-inhibiting mechanisms deployed throughout the building, or enhanced shear tab connections, to provide adequate serviceability performance and collapse safety for seismic and wind hazards in the central and eastern United States. While the proposed concept is likely applicable to building structures of all materials, the focus of this study is on structural steel-frame buildings using either non-ductile moment frames with fully-restrained flange welded connections not specifically detailed for seismic resistance, or ductile moment frames with reduced beam section connections designed for moderate seismic demands. The research shows that collapse prevention systems were effective at reducing the conditional probability of seismic collapse during Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) level ground motions, and at lowering the seismic and wind collapse risk of a building with moment frames not specifically detailed for seismic resistance. Reserve lateral strength in gravity framing, including the shear tab connections was a significant factor. The pattern of collapse prevention component failure depended on the type of loading, archetype building, and type of collapse prevention system, but most story collapse mechanisms formed in the lower stories of the building. Collapse prevention devices usually did not change the story failure mechanism of the building. Collapse prevention systems with energy dissipation devices contributed to a significant reduction in both repair cost and downtime. Resilience contour plots showed that reserve lateral strength in the gravity framing was effective at reducing recovery time, but less effective at reducing the associated economic losses. A conventional lateral force resisting system or a collapse prevention system with a highly ductile moment frame would be required for regions of higher seismicity or exposed to high hurricane wind speeds, but buildings with collapse prevention systems were adequate for many regions in the central and eastern United States. / Ph. D.

Millions of lives have been lost over the years as a result of the effects of earthquakes. One of these devastating effects is slope failure, more commonly known as landslide. Over the years, seismologists and engineers have teamed up to better record data during an earthquake. As technology has advanced, the data obtained have become more refined, allowing engineers to use the data in their efforts to estimate earthquakes where they have not yet occurred. Several methods have been proposed over time to utilize the earthquake data and estimate slope displacements. A pioneer in the development of methods to estimate slope displacements, Nathan Newmark, proposed what is now called the Newmark sliding block method. This method explained in very simple ways how a mass, in this case a rigid block, would slide over an incline given that the acceleration of the block surpassed the frictional resistance created between the bottom of the block and the surface of the incline. Because many of the assumptions from this method were criticized by scientists over time, modified Newmark sliding block methods were proposed. As the original and modified Newmark sliding block methods were introduced, the need to account for the uncertainty in the way soil would behave under earthquake loading became a big challenge. Deterministic and probabilistic methods have been used to incorporate parameters that would account for some of the uncertainty in the analysis. In an attempt to use a probabilistic approach in understanding how slopes might fail, the Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center proposed a performance-based earthquake engineering framework that would allow decision-makers to use probabilistically generated information to make decisions based on acceptable risk. Previous researchers applied this framework to simplified Newmark sliding block models, but the approach is difficult for engineers to implement in practice because of the numerous probability calculations that are required. The work presented in this thesis provides a solution to the implementation of the performance-based approach by providing a simplified procedure for the performance-based determination of seismic slope displacements using the Rathje & Saygili (2009) and the Bray and Travasarou (2007) simplified Newmark sliding block models. This document also includes hazard parameter maps, which are an important part of the simplified procedure, for five states in the United States. A validation of the method is provided, as well as a comparison of the simplified method against other commonly used approaches such as deterministic and pseudo-probabilistic.

Liquefaction-induced lateral spread displacements cause severe damage to infrastructure, resulting in large economic losses in affected regions. Predicting lateral spread displacements is an important aspect in any seismic analysis and design, and many different methods have been developed to accurately estimate these displacements. However, the inherent uncertainty in predicting seismic events, including the extent of liquefaction and its effects, makes it difficult to accurately estimate lateral spread displacements. Current conventional methods of predicting lateral spread displacements do not completely account for uncertainty, unlike a performance-based earthquake engineering (PBEE) approach that accounts for the all inherent uncertainty in seismic design. The PBEE approach incorporates complex probability theory throughout all aspects of estimating liquefaction-induced lateral spread displacements. A new fully-probabilistic PBEE method, based on results from the cone penetration test (CPT), was created for estimating lateral spread displacements using two different liquefaction triggering procedures. To accommodate the complexity of all probabilistic calculations, a new seismic hazard analysis tool, CPTLiquefY, was developed. Calculated lateral spread displacements using the new fully-probabilistic method were compared to estimated displacements using conventional methods. These comparisons were performed across 20 different CPT profiles and 10 cities of varying seismicity. The results of this comparison show that the conventional procedures of estimating lateral spread displacements are sufficient for areas of low seismicity and for lower return periods. However, by not accounting for all uncertainties, the conventional methods under-predict lateral spread displacements in areas of higher seismicity. This is cause for concern as it indicates that engineers in industry using the conventional methods are likely under-designing structures to resist lateral spread displacements for larger seismic events.

Liquefaction-induced lateral spread displacements cause severe damage to infrastructure, resulting in large economic losses in affected regions. Predicting lateral spread displacements is an important aspect in any seismic analysis and design, and many different methods have been developed to accurately estimate these displacements. However, the inherent uncertainty in predicting seismic events, including the extent of liquefaction and its effects, makes it difficult to accurately estimate lateral spread displacements. Current conventional methods of predicting lateral spread displacements do not completely account for uncertainty, unlike a performance-based earthquake engineering (PBEE) approach that accounts for the all inherent uncertainty in seismic design. The PBEE approach incorporates complex probability theory throughout all aspects of estimating liquefaction-induced lateral spread displacements. A new fully-probabilistic PBEE method, based on results from the cone penetration test (CPT), was created for estimating lateral spread displacements using two different liquefaction triggering procedures. To accommodate the complexity of all probabilistic calculations, a new seismic hazard analysis tool, CPTLiquefY, was developed. Calculated lateral spread displacements using the new fully-probabilistic method were compared to estimated displacements using conventional methods. These comparisons were performed across 20 different CPT profiles and 10 cities of varying seismicity. The results of this comparison show that the conventional procedures of estimating lateral spread displacements are sufficient for areas of low seismicity and for lower return periods. However, by not accounting for all uncertainties, the conventional methods under-predict lateral spread displacements in areas of higher seismicity. This is cause for concern as it indicates that engineers in industry using the conventional methods are likely under-designing structures to resist lateral spread displacements for larger seismic events.