1976年唐山大地震CPT液化数据库检验

1976年唐山大地震引发了范围广、灾害重的液化震害。铁道部科学研究院等单位于1977、1978年对液化场地进行了单桥静力触探测试。但单桥静力触探在数据指标方面存在缺陷,与国际标准不接轨。中国地震局工程力学研究所与东南大学等单位于2007年对上述唐山地区部分测点再次进行了孔压静力触探（CPTU）测试。本文通过对比2次静力触探数据,利用Robertson土质分类图,进行新孔压静力触探数据土类分层检验,将土类检验结果与单桥静力触探测试时钻孔柱状图进行对比,发现大部分测点土层土类均能较好对应,现场测试力学指标沿深度变化趋势较相符,仅剔除了错误点T2、T3。对所有测点选定液化层,分别建立基于单桥静力触探测试比贯入阻力p_s和基于孔压静力触探测试锥尖阻力q_c的液化数据库。利用基于静力触探测试（CPT）的我国规范液化判别方法检验了2个数据库,发现对单桥静力触探测试的数据库液化判别效果好,而对孔压静力触探测试的数据库液化判别效果较差,说明经过30年的时间,土层液化可能已发生较大改变。因此,基于孔压静力触探测试的液化数据库可靠性较低,基于该数据库对液化判别方法进行改进意义较小。     

2003年新疆巴楚地震CPT液化数据库构建

2003年2月24日新疆巴楚-伽师地区发生M_S6.8地震,出现了唐山地震、海城地震后近30年我国大陆最具规模的砂土液化现象。大量研究显示,巴楚地震液化砂土标贯击数与锥尖阻力指标偏大,采用国内外液化判别方法往往会判为非液化。利用Robertson土质分类图对巴楚地区孔压静力触探试验(CPTU)数据进行土类分层检验,基于以下原则,选定了液化点液化层与非液化点临界液化层。(1)应选取非液化点土层剖面中最易液化层,不能因液化点力学指标偏大而将非液化点临界液化层力学指标选得更大;(2)应结合q_c-h与R_f-h图,避免选取黏土为液化层;(3)巴楚地区液化层往往上覆非饱和细砂,形成透水边界,选取液化层时应舍弃存在透水边界的土层。最后,利用我国规范方法构建了巴楚地震静力触探(CPT)液化数据库,并进行了初步的判别分析。     

基于2011年新西兰地震的CPT液化特征研究

2011年2月22日,新西兰第二大城市克赖斯特彻市附近发生M_s6.3级地震,震中位于克赖斯特彻市西南10km处,震源深度为5km。地震造成了大量的人员伤亡和经济损失,重建费用估计高达40亿新西兰元,得到共识是砂土液化为震害主因。此次地震,液化震害极为严重,喷砂冒水范围广泛分布于城市内外,引起大量次生灾害,地震也为砂土液化特征研究,特别是检验和发展液化判别方法提供了大量宝贵的液化数据。本文收集整理震后132个勘察点的勘察资料,包括静力触探试验（以下简称"CPT"）数据、地表峰值加速度和地下水位等。通过对数据的研究,得到了地震液化场地加速度分布、地下水位分布和砂层埋深分布等特征。检验了我国现有的静力触探试验液化判别方法,结果表明:液化场地主要分布在PGA为0.5~0.65g附近,液化层5m以内居多,我国CPT液化判别方法对于10m以下判别存在明显的错误,同时此次地震还发现多个液化层位于20m以下,对于这个深度,国内CPT液化判别方法还未涉猎。     

基于CPTU原位测试状态参数的液化判别方法研究

砂土原位状态的性能一直以来都难以有效获取,而其体积变化特征的评价指标（状态参数）就是其中重要的一项。利用状态参数（Ψ）来代替相对密实度表征砂土的状态特性是一种新兴的趋势。考虑到砂土状态参数是关于体积变化的评价指标,在砂土地层中,随着围压的增加,砂土剪胀的趋势增加,液化阻力也增加。因此通过状态参数进行砂土液化的判别是可行的。以宿迁—新沂高速公路工程为背景,建立基于孔压静力触探（CPTU）的状态参数、周期阻力比（CRR）和标准贯入击数（N）之间的相关性模型。提出通过砂土的状态参数判别液化的两种新方法。     

Reconstruction of the CPT-based Liquefaction Database from 1976 Tangshan Earthquake

1976年唐山大地震导致了范围广、灾害严重的液化震害。地震发生后,已有学者对液化场地进行了2次静力触探测试。本文首先给出基于2次测试数据的唐山大地震CPT液化数据库,利用中国规范方法和NCEER推荐方法对数据库进行液化判别,发现针对第1次测试数据的判别成功率较高,而针对第2次测试数据的判别成功率较低。经30年的时间,绝大多数测试点的液化层强度与埋深均发生了较大变化,第2次测试时土层液化可能性已发生了较大变化,其测试数据对液化判别方法的改进意义较小。利用第2次测试的摩阻比R_f将第1次测试数据p_s分解为q_c和f_s,相比第2次测试数据,分解指标具有更高的可靠性。为此基于第1次测试分解数据构建唐山大地震CPT液化数据库,为液化判别方法改进提供数据支持。     

利用qc,D50评价砂土地震液化势研究

本文根据国内外地震液化调查资料，建立了利用双桥静力触探锥头阻力ｑｃ和平均粒径Ｄ５０判别地震液化势的半经验性方法。这种方法对评价地震液化势是颇为有效的。     

黄土及一般含细粒土体液化判别方法研究

黄土液化的判别是工程界长期存疑的问题,现场黄土含水量较低,剪切波速较高,而实验室对其饱和,饱和过程对其土体结构影响还不确定,又由于固结比对土体刚度的影响仍然没有定论,这就导致室内黄土动三轴液化试验结果与现场力学指标一直无法建立联系。另一方面,黄土从颗粒组成来说,属于细粒土范畴,细粒土液化判别方法应可为黄土液化判别提供参照,但由于实验室配制试样相对密度、土体骨架强度及细颗粒赋存形式很难控制,导致细颗粒对土体液化势影响研究饱含争议与矛盾。本文紧密结合工程和科研工作需求,设计了一系列原状黄土在均等固结与偏压固结下的动三轴弯曲元试验,以及原状黄土在动三轴内饱和过程及饱和后的剪切波速试验,并且对一个饱和黄土场地进行了现场原位测试,回顾了现有标贯液化判别方法,对含细粒土体液化判别指标进行了系统研究,改进了细粒土液化初判准则以及含细粒砂性土液化判别式,最后对CPT液化判别方法的可靠性进行了数据检验。具体工作和成果包括:(1)采用动三轴弯曲元试验系统,对兰州市多个场地原状黄土进行了均等固结与偏压固结下剪切波速测试,证实了相关固结比对土体刚度影响的试验研究结果,进一步对比均等固结与偏压固结下试样轴向变形,分析了固结比对土体刚度影响的机理。(2)采用动三轴弯曲元试验系统,首先对原状黄土饱和过程进行了剪切波速跟踪测试,并进一步对比饱和黄土与原状黄土在同一逐级加压的过程中剪切波速与轴向变形测试值,最后通过与现场饱和黄土场地水位上下黄土层实测标贯击数、剪切波速对比,分析了原状黄土遇水及饱和后的软化特征。(3)通过对比唐山、海城地震两个液化地区粉土与砂土的剪切波速与标贯击数统计关系,发现对于剪切波速相同的饱和粉土和砂土,由于粉土的触变性,粉土标贯击数显著小于砂土。结合NCEER推荐的基于SPT与VS的液化判别方法,建立了3个细粒含量下临界剪切波速与临界标贯击数的相关关系,证实了含细粒土体的触变性。(4)回顾了目前国内外有关含细粒土液化研究现状,结合1975年海城地震,1976年唐山地震,1999年土耳其Kocaeli地震和台湾集集地震液化与非液化土数据分析,详细对比了现有液化判别式和初判条件的优劣,改进了细粒土液化初判准则以及含细粒砂性土标贯液化判别式。(5)回顾了NCEER推荐的Robertson的CPT液化判别方法和Olsen的CPT液化判别方法,通过对1999年台湾集集地震液化与非液化土数据分析,并将判别结果与SPT方法判别结果进行比较,指出了CPT液化判别方法还没有达到SPT方法的准确性,但是CPT的土分类图却是其最大的优势所在。     

地震液化判别及危害性评价

饱和砂土地震液化有可能诱发极为严重的破坏,已成为土动力学领域的重要研究课题之一。对液化的判别分为初判和复判。初判指根据已有的勘测资料或简单的测试手段,初步判别土层的液化可能。对于初判可能发生地震液化的土层,则再进行复判。鉴于土层液化的影响因素较多,我国规范建议采取经验方法,即标准贯入法,静力触探法,剪切波速法。单一判别方法都有局限性和适用范围,宜用各种方法综合判别。液化危害性评价使用危害性指标,分析液化对建筑物的危害程度。评价方法主要有液化指数法,震陷值法,谱强度比法和综合法。以评价指标为依据,划分液化影响的综合等级,全面反映液化危害程度。     

地震液化判别及危害性评价

饱和砂土地震液化有可能诱发极为严重的破坏,已成为土动力学领域的重要研究课题之一。对液化的判别分为初判和复判。初判指根据已有的勘测资料或简单的测试手段,初步判别土层的液化可能。对于初判可能发生地震液化的土层,则再进行复判。鉴于土层液化的影响因素较多,我国规范建议采取经验方法,即标准贯入法,静力触探法,剪切波速法。单一判别方法都有局限性和适用范围,宜用各种方法综合判别。液化危害性评价使用危害性指标,分析液化对建筑物的危害程度。评价方法主要有液化指数法,震陷值法,谱强度比法和综合法。以评价指标为依据,划分液化影响的综合等级,全面反映液化危害程度。     

砾性土抗液化能力与其液化判别方法研究进展

从砾性土的定义出发,回顾了砾性土从被认为不会液化到其液化现象引起工程师关注的研究历程及国内外研究进展。总结了含砾量、相对密度等因素对砾性土抗液化能力影响关系的研究现状。介绍了国际上对砾性土场地液化判别的研究成果及各种主流方法的优势与不足;分析了剪切波速方法应用于砾性土场地液化判别的可行性。研究认为:砾性土的液化现象正逐渐被科学界及工程界接受;含砾量对砾性土抗液化能力的影响研究仍然存在较大矛盾,相对密度等影响砂土抗液化能力的因素同样影响砾性土抗液化能力;砂土场地应用的标准贯入、静力触探等液化判别方法不适用于砾性土场地,国际上发展了基于动力触探和贝克尔贯入试验的液化判别方法;剪切波速判别方法在砾性土场地的液化判别中具有优势和潜力,是今后研究的方向之一。     

振冲挤密加固深厚吹填珊瑚礁砂地基试验研究

针对沙特吉赞新建的围海造陆货物堆场的地基处理,基于珊瑚礁砂的疏浚工程特性,开展了用两种振冲挤密法加固该处不良级配疏松礁砂地基的有效性及确定其相应工艺参数的现场试验。先完成选定小区试验,后由SPT检验其效果,再分析确定最优振冲工艺并指导了大面积工程施工。通过比对场区地基加固前、后的CPT检测结果,用Iwasaki液化指数法对振后地基做进一步液化判断,同时采用极限法(基于CPT)和施莫法(基于SPT)对加固地基进行了沉降分析并对比两种计算结果,验证本试验研究所确定的加填料振冲方案与施工工艺合理性,加固后地基的承载及抗液化能力得到有效提高且完全能满足工后沉降控制要求。研究成果可供珊瑚礁海域的类似工程参考或借鉴。     

Spatial variability of liquefaction potential in regional mapping using CPT and SPT data

Cone penetration test (CPT) and standard penetration test (SPT) are widely used for the site specific evaluation of liquefaction potential and are getting increased use in the regional mapping of liquefaction hazard. This paper compares CPT and SPT-based liquefaction potential characterizations of regional geologic units using the liquefaction potential index (LPI) across the East Bay of the San Francisco Bay, California, USA and examines the statistical and spatial variability of LPI across and within geologic units. Overall, CPT-based LPI characterizations result in higher hazard than those derived from the SPT. This bias may result from either mis-classifications of soil type in the CPT or a bias in the CPT simplified procedure for liquefaction potential. Regional mapping based on cumulative distribution of LPI values show different results depending on which dataset is used. For both SPT and CPT-based characterizations, the geologic units in the area have broad LPI distributions that overlap between units and are not distinct from the population as a whole. Regional liquefaction classifications should therefore give a distribution, rather than a single hazard rating that does not provide for variability within the area. The CPT-based LPI values have a higher degree of spatial correlation and a lower variance over a greater distance than those estimated from SPTs. As a result, geostatistical interpolation can provide a detailed map of LPI when densely sampled CPT data are available. The statistical distribution of LPI within specific geologic units and interpolated maps of LPI can be used to understand the spatial variability of liquefaction potential.     

某长江大桥深度超过15米的砂土层液化势的综合评价

不同抗震设计规范的砂土液化判别方法或国内外其他有代表性的液化判别方法所采用的地震动参数和土性指标及其埋藏条件是不同的,因而采用这些方法对同一工程场地进行液化势预测时其评价结果通常有一些差异,甚至会得到相反的结论。为了给重大工程建设提供较为合理、可信的地基液化势预测结果,采用多种液化判别方法进行场地液化势的综合评价是比较客观的,也是必要的。本文结合某长江大桥桥基工程,采用建筑抗震设计规范的砂土液化判别方法、国内外有代表性的液化判别方法、有限元数值分析法等多种方法逐一对该工程场地砂性土层进行液化判别,并结合室内动三轴液化试验结果,对主桥墩不考虑冲刷条件和考虑一般冲刷深度5m条件时的砂性土层进行了液化势的综合评价,并将各土层的液化势分为液化、可能液化和不液化3个等级,得到了较为合理可靠的判别结果。     

A practical reliability-based method for assessing soil liquefaction potential

The current simplified methods for assessing soil liquefaction potential use a deterministic safety factor in order to judge whether liquefaction will occur or not. However, these methods are unable to determine the liquefaction probability related to a safety factor. An answer to this problem can be found by reliability analysis. This paper presents a reliability analysis method based on the popular Seed'85 liquefaction analysis method. This reliability method uses the empirical acceleration attenuation law in the Taiwan area to derive the probability density distribution function (PDF) and the statistics for the earthquake-induced cyclic shear stress ratio (CSR). The PDF and the statistics for the cyclic resistance ratio (CRR) can be deduced from some probabilistic cyclic resistance curves. These curves are produced by the regression of the liquefaction and non-liquefaction data from the Chi-Chi earthquake and others around the world, using, with minor modifications, the logistic model proposed by Liao [J. Geotech. Eng. 114 (1988) 389]. The CSR and CRR statistics are used in conjunction with the first order and second moment method, to calculate the relation between the liquefaction probability, the safety factor and the reliability index. Based on the proposed method, the liquefaction probability related to a safety factor can be easily calculated. The influence of some of the soil parameters on the liquefaction probability can be quantitatively evaluated.     

Evaluation of soil liquefaction in the Chi-Chi, Taiwan earthquake using CPT

During the 1999 Chi-Chi, Taiwan earthquake, many sand boiling phenomena were observed in central Taiwan, which caused severe ground settlement and structure damages. According to the installed accelerograms, the peak ground surface horizontal accelerations in the liquefaction-affected areas range from 774.42 to 121.3 gal. The writers carried out an extensive investigation of soil liquefaction in this earthquake. In this paper, we present results of the CPT exploration and post-earthquake liquefaction analysis. Two hundred and seventy five (275) cone penetration test data were collected from the liquefaction-affected areas, and 46 liquefaction case histories and 88 non-liquefaction case histories were derived that can be used to evaluate the accuracy of existing liquefaction evaluation models. In addition, the strength of the liquefied soils after earthquake and the implication of its liquefaction potential in the future event are discussed.     

CPT-based analysis of liquefaction and re-liquefaction following the Canterbury earthquake sequence

The Canterbury region experienced widespread damage due to liquefaction induced by seismic shaking during the 4 September 2010 earthquake and the large aftershocks that followed, notably those that occurred on 22 February, 13 June and 23 December 2011. Following the 2010 earthquake, the Earthquake Commission directed a thorough investigation of the ground profile in Christchurch, and to date, more than 7500 cone penetration tests (CPT) have been performed in the region. This paper presents the results of analyses which use a subset of the geotechnical database to evaluate the liquefaction process as well as the re-liquefaction that occurred following some of the major events in Christchurch. First, the applicability of existing CPT-based methods for evaluating liquefaction potential of Christchurch soils was investigated using three methods currently available. Next, the results of liquefaction potential evaluation were compared with the severity of observed damage, categorised in terms of the land damage grade developed from Tonkin & Taylor property inspections as well as from observed severity of liquefaction from aerial photography. For this purpose, the Liquefaction Potential Index (LPI) was used to represent the damage potential at each site. In addition, a comparison of the CPT-based strength profiles obtained before each of the major aftershocks was performed. The results suggest that the analysis of spatial and temporal variations of strength profiles gives a clear indication of the resulting liquefaction and re-liquefaction observed in Christchurch. The comparison of a limited number of CPT strength profiles before and after the earthquakes seems to indicate that no noticeable strengthening has occurred in Christchurch, making the area vulnerable to liquefaction induced land damage in future large-scale earthquakes.