New Approach to Determine Composite Shear Wave Velocity of Improved Ground Sites
Publication: Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering
Volume 146, Issue 10
Abstract
This paper evaluates the current state of practice to determine the average shear wave velocity of improved ground sites and proposes an alternative method that adequately captures the reinforcement effects of ground improvement elements. To estimate the actual stiffness of improved grounds and to develop benchmark data, continuum finite-element models of improved grounds with various area replacement and stiffness ratios are analyzed. The study shows that the common approach, i.e., the area replacement ratio weighted average shear wave velocity, significantly overestimates the improved ground average velocity. This may lead to an incorrect determination of a code-based site class, spectral accelerations, and seismic structural loads. The proposed alternative approach is shown to be capable of providing a reasonable estimate of the actual stiffness of improved grounds.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Data Availability Statement
All data and models that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
References
AASHTO. 2012. AASHTO LRFD bridge design specifications. Washington, DC: AASHTO.
ASCE. 2016. Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures. Reston, VA: ASCE.
CEN (European Committee for Standardization). 2004. Design of structures for earthquake resistance. Part 1—General rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings. Brussels, Belgium: CEN.
CIMNE (International Center for Numerical Methods in Engineering). 2013. GID the personal pre/postprocessor user’s manual. Barcelona, Spain: CIMINE.
Geopier. 2016. Seismic site classification improvement using Geopier soil reinforcement. Davidson, NC: Geopier Foundation.
ICC (International Code Council). 2018. 2018 International building code. Country Club Hills, IL: ICC.
McKenna F., and G. Fenves. 2001. The OpenSees command language manual: Version 1.2. Berkeley, CA: Univ. of California.
Papadimitriou, A., G. Bouckovalas, A. Vytiniotis, and G. Bakas. 2006. “Equivalence between 2D and 3D numerical simulations of the seismic response of improved sites.” In Proc., 6th European Conf. on Numerical Methods in Geotechnical Engineering, 809–815. London: Taylor & Francis.
Plaxis BV. 2019. PLAXIS 2D connect edition V20. Delft, Netherlands: Plaxis BV.
Rayamajhi, D., T. S. A. Nguyen, S. A. Ashford, R. W. Boulanger, J. Lu, A. Elgamal, and L. Shao. 2014. “Numerical study of shear stress distribution for discrete columns in liquefiable soils.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 140 (3): 04013034. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000970.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering
Volume 146 • Issue 10 • October 2020
Copyright
© 2020 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Oct 29, 2019
Accepted: May 19, 2020
Published online: Jul 24, 2020
Published in print: Oct 1, 2020
Discussion open until: Dec 24, 2020
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.