Equivalent Number[DD2]

download Equivalent Number[DD2]

of 38

Transcript of Equivalent Number[DD2]

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    1/38

    10/9/20

    EQUIVALENTNUMBER&MITIGATELIQUIFACTION

    Disusun Oleh:

    DAMRIZAL DAMOERIN

    Referensi:

    . , ,, ,Co., Inc., 1984

    2. Prakash, Soil Dynamics, McGraw Hill, 1981.

    3. Nayak, N. V., Foundation Design Manual, Dhanpat Rai & Sons,Publishers, Delhi, 1982.

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    2/38

    10/9/20

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    3/38

    10/9/20

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    4/38

    10/9/20

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    5/38

    10/9/20

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    6/38

    10/9/20

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    7/38

    10/9/20

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    8/38

    10/9/20

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    9/38

    10/9/20

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    10/38

    10/9/20

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    11/38

    10/9/20

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    12/38

    10/9/20

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    13/38

    10/9/20

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    14/38

    10/9/20

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    15/38

    10/9/20

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    16/38

    10/9/20

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    17/38

    10/9/20

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    18/38

    10/9/20

    Valera and Donovan (1977) stated that the methods of evaluation of liquefaction potential can be classified into categories:

    (1). Methods where both the cyclic shear stresses induced within a soil deposit and the signifi cant number of stresses cycles and their

    distribution with time are computed using simplified procedures

    (2). Methods where the cyclic sresses induced within a soil deposit are computed by means of ground response analysis.

    (3). Empirical methods based on field performance data.

    Methods (1):

    The maximum shear stress at a depth h:

    max = m x a max = [( x h ) / (g)] x (amax)

    max : maximum shear stress

    : unit weight of soil

    h : depth below ground surface

    g : acceleration due to gravity

    a max : maximum ground surface acceleration

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    19/38

    10/9/20

    max : maximum shear stress

    : unit weight of soil

    h : depth below ground surfaceg : acceleration due to gravity

    a max : maximum ground surface acceleration

    The soil column is not a rigid body:

    max(modified) = x x g x a maxCd : st ress reduction factor

    ( 1.0: at the ground surface; 0.5: at about 100 ft below ground surface )

    It has been shown that the maximum shear stress determined from the shear stress-time history during an earthquake can be converted into an

    equivalent number of significant stress cycles.

    According to Seed and Idriss (191):

    ` av = 0.65 x max(modified) = 0.65 x Cd x [( x h ) / (g)] x (amax)

    The 0.65 factor assumes that the equivalent uniform shear stresses,

    av , is 65 % of the absolute maximum earthquake induced shear stress.

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    20/38

    10/9/20

    2

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    21/38

    10/9/20

    2

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    22/38

    10/9/20

    2

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    23/38

    10/9/20

    2

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    24/38

    10/9/20

    2

    Ug=excess pore waterpressure generatedby cyclic shear

    stress

    Tv=initialconsolidationpressure

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    25/38

    10/9/20

    2

    (a): Ns/Ni=1

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    26/38

    10/9/20

    2

    (b): Ns/Ni =2

    : Ns/Ni =3

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    27/38

    10/9/20

    2

    (d): Ns/Ni =4

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    28/38

    10/9/20

    2

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    29/38

    10/9/20

    2

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    30/38

    10/9/20

    3

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    31/38

    10/9/20

    3

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    32/38

    10/9/20

    3

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    33/38

    10/9/20

    3

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    34/38

    10/9/20

    3

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    35/38

    10/9/20

    3

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    36/38

    10/9/20

    3

    Relative Density Dr vs. SPT N

    (Holtz and Gibbs, 1957)

    Relative Density and Frict ionAngle of Sand vs. SPT N

    Nvalue Density D (%) (blows/ft) description

    0to44to10

    10to3030to50

    >50

    VerylooseLoose

    Medium

    Dense

    Verydense

    0to1515to3535to6565to85

    85to100

    41

    (Terzaghi and Peck, 1967)

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    37/38

    10/9/20

    3

  • 7/30/2019 Equivalent Number[DD2]

    38/38

    10/9/20