几种地震液化判别方法的对比
摘要:地震液化判别是地震地质灾害评价的重要环节，不同的判别方法有时会得出不同的结论。对几种主要判别方法进行梳理，通过具体工程测试数据，分别应用标准贯入法、NCEER法、静力触探法及剪切波速法进行判别，分析各种方法的结论，得出用剪切波速法进行液化判别存在明显的缺陷，对于浅层的粉土较为冒进，对于深层的砂土又过于保守。标准贯入法、NCEER法、静力触探法得出的结论基本一致，但对于细颗粒含量较高的砂土，NCEER法与其他方法存在明显的差别。
Abstract:Seismic soil liquefaction potential evaluation is an important part in seismic geological disasters assessment.Different methods of seismic soil liquefaction potential evaluation lead to different conclusions.Several main methods are sorted out.Through specific engineering test data,evaluations are applied based on these methods,including standard penetration test method,NCEER method,static cone penetration test method and shear wave velocity method,and the conclusions of various methods are analyzed.It is concluded that there are obvious defects in liquefaction potential evaluation applied by shear wave velocity method.For the shallow silt,it is more risky with this method,and for the deep sand,it is too conservative.The results of the other methods,including standard penetration test method,NCEER method and static cone penetration test method,are basically consistent.However,there are obvious differences between the NCEER method and other methods for sandy soil with high content of fine grains.
中文标题：
几种地震液化判别方法的对比
Comparison of Several Discrimination Criteria for Seismic Soil Liquefaction
作者：
郝兵1,任志善2,李从昀1
Hao Bing1,Ren Zhishan2,Li Congyun1
作者简介:郝兵，男，1980年生，吉林梅河口人，高级工程师，主要从事岩土工程勘察设计。E-mail：81132636@qq.com
通讯地址：
1. 北京电力经济技术研究院有限公司, 北京 100107; 2. 国网经济技术研究院有限公司, 北京 100209
1.BeijingElectricPowerEconomicResearchInstituteCo.,Ltd.,Beijing100107,China; 2.StateGridEconomicandTechnologicalResearchInstituteCo.,Ltd.,Beijing100209,China
中图分类号:TU195.2
doi:10.3969/j.issn.1007-2993.2019.05.007
出版物：岩土工程技术
收稿日期:2019-05-14
网络出版日期:2021-07-06
关键词:地震液化,判别,NCEER法
Key words:seismic soil liquefaction,potential evaluation,NCEER method
文档包含图片数量：图片(0)张
文档包含表格数量：表格(0)个
参考文献：
基金项目：
- 文件大小:
- 3.48 MB
- 下载次数:
- 60
-
高速下载
|
