Eine Plattform für die Wissenschaft: Bauingenieurwesen, Architektur und Urbanistik
Eine Plattform für die Wissenschaft: Bauingenieurwesen, Architektur und Urbanistik
Practical Considerations Regarding the Probability of Liquefaction in Engineering Design
Engineering practitioners have widely adopted probabilistic methods for estimating liquefaction triggering hazards. Unfortunately, incorrect application of these methods has become commonly accepted in the United States and throughout many parts of the world. In this paper, we describe two specific incorrect applications of probabilistic liquefaction triggering prediction models that are commonly used in engineering practice: (1) improper parametric uncertainty characterization when using the models, and (2) the application of a conservative factor of safety thresholds to deterministic cyclic resistance ratio boundaries. These two practices and their implications are discussed, and illustrative examples and figures are presented. We also discuss the apparent inconsistencies in what constitutes an acceptable risk for liquefaction hazards and other significant geotechnical hazards, such as slope stability. We demonstrate the need to collectively consider the likelihoods of all aspects of liquefaction hazard problems—susceptibility, initiation, and effects—when calculating and considering liquefaction risk. Finally, we point to the concept and framework of performance-based earthquake engineering as a logical and objective path forward for dealing with the challenges raised in this study.
Practical Considerations Regarding the Probability of Liquefaction in Engineering Design
Engineering practitioners have widely adopted probabilistic methods for estimating liquefaction triggering hazards. Unfortunately, incorrect application of these methods has become commonly accepted in the United States and throughout many parts of the world. In this paper, we describe two specific incorrect applications of probabilistic liquefaction triggering prediction models that are commonly used in engineering practice: (1) improper parametric uncertainty characterization when using the models, and (2) the application of a conservative factor of safety thresholds to deterministic cyclic resistance ratio boundaries. These two practices and their implications are discussed, and illustrative examples and figures are presented. We also discuss the apparent inconsistencies in what constitutes an acceptable risk for liquefaction hazards and other significant geotechnical hazards, such as slope stability. We demonstrate the need to collectively consider the likelihoods of all aspects of liquefaction hazard problems—susceptibility, initiation, and effects—when calculating and considering liquefaction risk. Finally, we point to the concept and framework of performance-based earthquake engineering as a logical and objective path forward for dealing with the challenges raised in this study.
Practical Considerations Regarding the Probability of Liquefaction in Engineering Design
Franke, Kevin W. (Autor:in) / Olson, Scott M. (Autor:in)
25.05.2021
Aufsatz (Zeitschrift)
Elektronische Ressource
Unbekannt
Design Considerations for Liquefaction
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 1994
Practical Considerations in the Use of Liquefaction Susceptibility Criteria
| Online Contents | 2015
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 1995
Probability of liquefaction and reliability design for ground improvement
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 1998
Practical Considerations Regarding Results From Static and Dynamic Load Testing of Bridges
| DOAJ | 2019