Remerciez-le!

Remerciez @Admin pour avoir partagé cet document gratuitement, de la manière la plus simple, en partageant sur les réseaux sociaux.

Kaklamanos et al sdee2015 2

See discussions stats and author pro ?les for this publication at http www researchgate net publication Comparison of D linear equivalent-linear and nonlinear site response models at six KiK-net validation sites ARTICLE in SOIL DYNAMICS AND EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING FEBRUARY Impact Factor DOI j soildyn CITATIONS AUTHORS INCLUDING Laurie G Baise Tufts University PUBLICATIONS CITATIONS SEE PROFILE READS Luis A Dorfmann Tufts University PUBLICATIONS CITATIONS SEE PROFILE All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate letting you access and read them immediately Available from Luis A Dorfmann Retrieved on December CSoil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering ?? Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering journal homepage www elsevier com locate soildyn Comparison of D linear equivalent-linear and nonlinear site response models at six KiK-net validation sites James Kaklamanos n Laurie G Baise Eric M Thompson Luis Dorfmann Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Tufts University Anderson Hall Medford MA USA article info Article history Received September Received in revised form September Accepted October Keywords Earthquake ground motion Seismic analysis Seismic e ?ects Nonlinear soil behavior Numerical modeling abstract Vertical seismometer arrays represent a unique interaction between observed and predicted ground motions and they are especially helpful for validating and comparing site response models In this study we perform comprehensive linear equivalent-linear and nonlinear site response analyses of ground motions recorded at six validation sites in the Kiban ??Kyoshin network KiK-net of vertical seismometer arrays in Japan These sites which span a range of geologic conditions are selected because they meet the basic assumptions of one-dimensional D wave propagation and are therefore ideal for validating and calibrating D nonlinear soil models We employ the equivalent-linear site response program SHAKE the nonlinear site response program DEEPSOIL and a nonlinear site response overlay model within the general ?nite element program Abaqus Explicit Using the results from this broad range of ground motions we quantify the uncertainties of the alternative site response models measure the strain levels at which the models break down and provide general recommendations for performing site response analyses Speci ?cally we ?nd that at peak shear strains from to linear site response models fail to accurately predict short- period ground motions equivalent-linear and nonlinear models o ?er a signi ?cant improvement at strains beyond this level with nonlinear models exhibiting a slight improvement over equivalent-linear models at strains greater than approximately Elsevier Ltd All rights reserved Introduction A fundamental step in any seismic hazard analysis is the quanti ?cation of the expected levels of ground motions for potential earthquakes Analytical site response analyses are performed by propagating an input motion through the soil pro ?le in order to predict the ground motion at the surface of a site Site response analyses can also be performed empirically by using seismic site coef ?cients such as those in the National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program NEHRP seismic provisions For analytical site response analyses the focus of this paper the state of the practice in earthquake engineering is to