DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Liquefaction Assessment Variations with Regard to the Cyclic Resistance Ratio Estimation Methods

전단저항강도비 산정 방법에 따른 액상화 평가의 변화

  • Song, Sungwan (Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Dankook University) ;
  • Kim, Hansaem (Earthquake Research Center, Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources) ;
  • Cho, Wanjei (Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Dankook University)
  • Received : 2019.11.12
  • Accepted : 2019.12.03
  • Published : 2020.01.01

Abstract

Recently, as the number of earthquakes increases in the Korean Peninsula and surrounding area, the importance of earthquake countermeasures and seismic design has been increasing. As a result, interest and concerns about liquefaction, which is one of the problems that concern the earthquake, are increasing. There are various methods that can assess the possibility of liquefaction by using geotechnical information for specific ground. However, direct comparisons of each method are not yet available. In this study, the two methods using the SPT-N value and the shear wave velocity among the methods for estimating the Cyclic Resistance Ratio (CRR) value required for the simplified liquefaction assessment method were compared. And the correction of the ground information required to use the two methods respectively was compared. As a result, more accurate evaluation results were obtained when the CRR value is calculated using the SPT-N values.

최근 한반도 및 주변 지역에 지진 발생 횟수가 증가함에 따라 지진피해 대책 및 내진설계에 대한 중요성이 대두되고 있다. 이에 지진 발생 시 우려되는 문제 중 하나인 액상화에 대한 관심과 우려의 목소리가 높아지는 실정이다. 특정 지반에 대하여 지반정보를 활용하면 액상화 발생 여부에 대한 가능성을 평가하는 것이 가능하며 이에 대한 다양한 방법이 존재한다. 그러나 각 방법에 대한 직접적인 비교는 아직 이뤄지지 않은 실정이다. 따라서 본 연구에서는 대표적인 액상화 평가방법인 간편법에 필요한 전단저항 응력비(CRR)를 산정하는 방법 중 SPT-N값과 전단파 속도를 이용한 두 가지 방법의 비교 및 이를 활용하는데 요구되는 지반정보의 보정에 대한 비교 분석을 실시하였고 SPT-N값을 활용하여 액상화 발생 여부를 평가할 경우 더 정확한 것으로 확인되었다.

Keywords

References

  1. Cetin, K. O., Seed, R. B., Kayen, R. E., Moss, R. E., Bilge, H. T., Ilgac, M. and Chowdhury, K. (2016), Summary of SPT based field case history data of CETIN (2016) database (No. METU/GTENG 08/16-01), Middle East Technical University.
  2. Seed, H. B., Tokimatsu, K., Harder, L. F. and Chung, R. M. (1984), The influence of SPT procedures on soil liquefaction resistance evaluations, Report No. UCB/EERC-84/15. Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California at Berkeley.
  3. Seed, H. B., Tokimatsu, K., Harder, L. F. and Chung, R. M. (1985), Influence of SPT procedures in soil liquefaction resistance evaluations, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 111(12), pp. 1425-1445. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1985)111:12(1425)
  4. Skempton, A. W. (1986), Standard penetration test procedures and the effects in sands of overburden pressure, relative density, particle size, ageing and overconsolidation, Geotechnique, 36(3), pp. 425-447. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.1986.36.3.425
  5. National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research (NCEER) (1997), Proceedings of the NCEER Workshop on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils, T. L. Youd and I. M. Idriss. editors, Technical Report NCEER-97-022.
  6. Youd, T. L. and Idriss, I. M. (2001), Liquefaction resistance of soils: summary report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF workshops on evaluation of liquefaction resistance of soils, Journal of geotechnical and geoenvironmental engineering, 127(4), 297-313. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2001)127:4(297)