ShearWaveVelocityProfileLaClenegaSite–SimplifiedCJR：剪切波速度剖面Laclenega网站–简化的民事司法制度改革.ppt

1、NGA Site Response Study,Joseph Sun, Tom Shantz, Zhi-Liang Wang,Project Objectives,Compare RVT based site response response calculation versus time history approach Compare RVT based amp factors (RASCALS) with time history based (SHAKE) amp factors Compare amp factor differences between equivalent-li

2、near procedure (RASCALS and SHAKE) and non-linear procedures (D-MOD2 and SUMDES),Basis of Comparison:,Two shaking levels (Mw 6.5 15 km and Mw 7.5 5 km) Three profile depths (100, 300, and 500 ft) 30 spectrum compatible ground motions were used for each shaking level. Results from one RVT run from RA

3、SCALS is compared with the average of 30 SHAKE run Non-linear analysis scope reduced to two Mw7.5 time histories analysis for two depths to demonstrate differences in difference non-linear programs,Target Spectrum (A&S strike-slip, rock),Mw=6.5 r=15 km,Mw=7.5 r=5 km,Shear Wave Velocity ProfileLa Cle

4、nega Site Simplified CJR Model,0.0001,0.001,0.01,0.1,Sand,Clay,Sand & Clay,Non-Linear Properties,Based on SHAKE91 Extend to 10% strain 2 Curves only simple Decoupled modulus and damping Non-linear models should base on matching modulus reduction curves. Damping may be different,Deep Profile 500 ft M7.5 Ground Surface Response,Deep Profile 500 ftM6.5 Ground Surface Response,Deep Profile 500 ftGround Surface Response,Med. Deep Profile 300 ftGround Surface Response,Shallow Profile 100 ftGround Surface Response,Deep Profile 500 ftAverage Spectral Ratio,Med. Deep Profi