MOTC-IOT-94-H1DB006 (1/2) 95 3

Transcription

1 MOTC-IOT-94-H1DB006 (1/2) 95 3

2 MOTC-IOT-94-H1DB006 (1/2) 95 3

3

4 GPN

5 (1/2) ISBN H1DB 機密等級 : 密 機密 極機密 絕對機密 ( 解密條件 : 年月日解密, 公布後解密, 附件抽存後解密, 工作完成或會議終了時解密, 另行檢討後辦理解密 ) 普通 I

6 PUBLICATION ABSTRACTS OF RESEARCH PROJECTS INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS TITLE: Design Procedures of Transportation Infrastructures on the Soft Soil Foundation in the Southwestern Ocean Area of Taiwan (1/2) ISBN(OR ISSN) ISBN (pbk) GOVERNMENT PUBLICATIONS NUMBER DIVISION: Harbor & Marine Technology Center DIVISION DIRECTOR: Chiu Yung-Fang PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Lai Jui-Ying PHONE: (04) FAX: (04) IOT SERIAL NUMBER PROJECT NUMBER 94-H1DB006 PROJECT PERIOD FROM March 2005 TO December 2005 RESEARCH AGENCY: SINOTECH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LTD. PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Tseng, Yi-Ping PROJECT STAFF: Lin, P.S., Chen, J.W., Chang, D.W., Yang, Z.Y., Chang, M.S., Ke, T.C., Wu, J.C., Nieh, K.Y. ADDRESS: 17F, 27-7, Chung Cheng E. Rd, Tamsui, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C. PHONE: KEY WORDS: Soft ground, transportation infrastructure, southwestern area of Taiwan ABSTRACT: Civil engineers usually concern the soft soil in the southwestern area of Taiwan. However, the distribution of soft soil is not systematically recorded. There are no any literatures or reports on this subject. Therefore, the first goal of this project is to develop and analyze the geological boring data of this area. The results can be then applied to the planning and design of transportation infrastructures. On the other hand, the uncertainty of soft soil properties is also not verified. There are no codes or regulations for the soil improvement, foundation retrofit, and soft soil design. The associated design is usually based on engineering judgment. Therefore, the second goal of this project is to develop the design procedures for the transportation infrastructures located in soft soil areas. It is expected that this study can help engineers get some experiences. In the first year of the project, the distribut ion of soft ground is preliminarily determined based on numerous SPT-N values of borehole data in the southwestern area of Taiwan. The damage mechanism of road embankment and pile foundation is drawn from the collected field cases in this area. The ground improvement methods and the design principles to avoid the damage of embankment and pile foundation in soft ground were then proposed. DATE OF PUBLICATION March 2006 NUMBER OF PAGES 370 PRICE 500 CLASSIFICATION RESTRICTED CONFIDENTIAL SECRET TOP SECRET UNCLASSIFIED The views expressed in this publication are not necessarily those of the Ministry of Transportation and Communications. II

7 (1/2) III

8 IV

9 Kamon & Bergado N (qu C φ) N V

10 SPT-N N N VS ( A1) k+947 ( A2) ( A3) ( A4) K+740~133K+770 ( A5) ( A6) ( B1) ( B2) ( B3) VI

11 8.2.4 ( B4) Showa VII

12 VIII

13 A B C D IX

14 N N SPT-N EPS X

15 (1990) DE (1996) DE K (max) Showa Showa B.1... B-1 B.2... B-18~20 XI

16 (a) (b) (a) (b) (<0.0625mm) XII

17 Iz SPT-N a ( ) b ( ) a ( ) b ( ) c ( ) (N min ) (N eq ) a ( ) b ( ) a ( ) b ( ) a ( ) b ( ) (32k+030) k k EPS EPS C C207 (90-91 ) (91-92 ) XIII

18 FLAC FLAC FLAC a b c d a a c d a b c d a b c XIV

19 9.15d ( ) ( ) A A-3 A A-3 A A-6 A A-6 A A-9 A A-9 A A-12 A A-12 A.5.1a (1/2)... A-16 A.5.1b (2/2)... A-17 A A-18 A.6.1a (1/2)... A-20 XV

20 A.6.1b (2/2)... A-21 A A-21 A A-23 A A-23 B.1... B-17 XVI

21 8.1 A K+500 ( ) cm RC RC PE EPS ~ ~ ~ XVII

22

23

24 ( ) 1.5 ( ) 1. (94 ) (1) (2) (3) 1-3

25 (4) 2. (95 ) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) 1-4

26 2.1 (soft soil) ( 2001) 2-1

27 (1) (2) (3) (4)

28 (soft clay) (loose sand)

29

30

31 35% ~ 45% ( 50% ) (1) T 4H = (2-1) C T H C (2) C T 4H = = 4Σ C Hi Ci (2-2) H Hi Ci 2-6

32 2. (1) ( ) (2) Kanai (1962) (a) 6 (b) (3) (PGA S ) ( ) 2-7

33 2.6.5 (deamplification) ( ) ( 1977) ( 1979) ( 1990) 1.25~ AASHTO (AASHTO 1983) ATC3-06 Seed et al.(1974) lg (scaling factor) 2-8

34 PGA 0.4g (CALTRANS 1990) ARS SHAKE PGA S 2-9

35 ,961 (Miocene) ~ 3.1 (III) (II) (I) (1986) 2000 m 3-1

36 3.2 ( ) (1) (2) (3) (4) 2000 m (5) 3-2

37 3.1 ( ( 2000)) 3-3

38 3.2 ( 2000) 3-4

39 m ( 3.3 ) 3-5

40 ( (2005)) 3-6

41 3.4 ( ) 3-7

42 3.4 ( 1997) 3.5(a)

43 (b) 3-9

44 3.5(a) ( 1997) 3-10

45 3.5(b) 3-11

46 3.5 ( 1696~1704 ) A ( ) A (1) 3.6 (2) ( ) 3-12

47

48 ~7 4-1

49 48 ( 4.1) 4.1 ( 2000b) 4-2

50 ( ) ( ) 1~3 ( 4.1 1) ( 4.1 4) ( 4.1 6) ( ) 4-3

51 ( 2000 b) 4-4

52 4.2 ( 2000 b)

53 ( ) m 4-6

54 200 m ( 1963) 4.3(a) 4.3(b) ( 4.4 ) Bonilla (a) ( 1996) 4-7

55 4.3(b) ( 1996) 4.4 ( 1996) 4-8

56 ( )

57 4.6 (1) (2) (3)

58 (4) 1904 (5)

59

60 ( ) 4.8 ( 1995) 4-13

61 ( 1995) 4-14

62 (1997) ±3 m ( 1997) (20m ) SPT-N

63

64 ( ) Sun, 1964, 1971,

65 (1) m 1/800 1/1000 (2) 4-18

66 (A) 700 m (B) 1000 m ( 950 m) U (3) 4-19

67 m m ( 1964) (1971) 1 m 2.8 m 3 m 2 cm 2 m (1922) 1 m ( ) 2 m ( ) 5 m ( ) (1988) 1~3 m 1 m 2~7 m 7~10 m 4-20

68 7 m (1) (1) N 4~26 (2) N 5~8 (3) N 26~60 (2) 16 m 35 m (1) N 8~30 (2) N 15~35 (3) N 30~60 (4) N 10~14 (5) N 50 (3) 20 m 2~3 m (1) N 1~7 (2) N 3~16 (3) N 2~13 (4) N 2~10 (5) 4-21

69 N 15~22 (6) N 4~12 (4) 1 m (1) N 1~10 (2) N 3~6 (3) N 22~60 1.5~4.0 m (SM) (ML) ( 1969) 2,

70 60% 40% 10% 10% (,2001)

71 1. 6 (1) 60 m -30 m -30 m (2) 15% 20%~30% 20% m 3. (1) 10~20 m N 5~

72 (2) 20%~30% 30% 55% 20% , /

73 / % % /

74 ,200, (1) 100 m 5% ( ) 4-27

75 4.13 ( 1988) A. B. 4-28

76 C. (2) 1,000 m (3) m 30% 30% % ( ) ( 1993) (1) 101 (2) (3) 4-29

77 (4)

78 4.14 (<0.0625mm) ( 1998) 4-31

79 4.15 ( 1998) 4-32

80 30%

81 ( 1983)

82 5.1 T W Gs q u C u φ Dr Cv K Tdmax W opt CBR 5.3 m v (1) (2) (1) (2) 5-3

83 5-4 Terzaghi (1) 10% ( N>50 ) (2) 4 4 (3) 3 (4)

84

85 ~ (Auger Boring) (Percussion ~ ~ Drilling) (Wash ~ ~ ~ Boring) (Rotary Drilling) (Continuous Sampling)

86 N (Osterberg) 5 N 50 N<4 3. N<4 4. N<4 5. N>20 6. Denison 5 N 50 4<N<20 7. (Twisted Sampler) 0<N<20 95% 8. Bishop 0<N< <N<20 (Rotary Foil Sampler) ( ) 5-7

87 (Area Ratio) 17% ( Bishop ) N SPT-N % 50% 30% 2. SPT Terzaghi 1948 SPT N SPT-N SPT-N N<10 N<4 5-8

88 5.4 N Terzaghi 1948 SPT-N N Terzaghi 1948 SPT-N Holtz 1981 LI Liquidity Index LI (i)li 0 Wn PL (ii) 0 LI 1 (iii)li 1 4. Ramiah 1984 Ic Consitency Index

89 5.6 Ramiah 1984 Ic 0 0 Ic Ic Ic Ic 1 Ic 1 5. CPT 1994 Meyerhof 1956 qc t/m 2 qc q c t/m Meyerhof 1956 q c t/m

90 6. Meyerhof 1956 Meyerhof Meyerhof 1956 o Terzaghi 1948 qu Terzaghi 1948 Kg/cm Craig 1978 Su

91 5.11 Craig 1978 KN/m kgf/cm 2 N 4 N N (1) 84 3m 0.2kgf/cm 2 (2)

92 ( 1985) Kamon & Bergado ( 5.14) N 4 N

93 N qu qc 5-14 A t/m t/m2 B - 2~4 2.5~ ~25.0 C - 4~8 5.0~ ~ % % % m m m - 10m A B - - 2~5-2.0~5.0 C N

94 5.7.3 ( 5.13) (2001) MPa -1 Kpa Kpa Kpa N Kamon & Bergado SPT N (CPT) 5.14 ( 5.12) 1. N Mpa 10 (peat) 2. N 4 N 4 50 % N 10 30% 5 m N 2 10 m N

95 5.14 (Kamon & Bergado,1991) A. < 2 B. 2~4 A. < 4 B. < 4 C. < 10 > 2m 0 > 5m < 2 > 10m < 4 < q u (Mpa) < ~0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 q c (Mpa) < ~0.25 < w (%) > 100 > 50 > 30 ( 6 ) SPT-N N ( 7 ) ( ) ( ) N 1 N N N<4 ( soft clay ) N<10( loose sand ) ( ) 7 N 5-16

96 5.8 SPT N N (q u C φ) N 1. Meyerhof (1956) N φ φ = D r ( 5% ) (5-1) N<4 Dr < 20% φ < N φ φ = 15 N + 15 (5-2) 3. (1977) N q u q u = ( 1 ~ 1 )N (kg/cm 2 ) (5-3) (1980) N q u q u = N (5-4) (N<10) q u = N (5-5) q u = N (5-6) q u ~ ( 1 ~ 1 ) N (5-7)

97 5. (1977) N q u N < 2 q u <0.25 (kg/cm 2 ) C<0.12 (kg/cm 2 ) (5-8) N=2~4 q u =0.25~0.5 (kg/cm 2 ) C=0.12~0.25 (kg/cm 2 ) (5-9) 6. Terzaghi- Peck(1948) N q u N < 2 q u <2.5 (T/m 2 ) (5-10) N=2~4 q u =2.5~5 (T/m 2 ) (5-11) N N S i (De Beer & Martins, 1957) 1. S P + P 0 i i = P0 H i log (5-12) N P0 2. ( ) S P + P 0 i i = P0 H i log (5-13) N P0 (5-12) (5-13) P 0 (T/m 2 ) H i (m) P i (T/m 2 ) 5-18

98 6.1 Fox Pro ( Excel ) (Well-data) (tag_key) (project) (hole_no) (offer_comp) (borin_comp) (test_comp) (borin_date) 6-1

99 (locat_desc) TM X (pos_x) TM Y (pos_y) Z (pos_z) (pizometer) (pizo_depth) (h_angle) (h_diameter) (h_depth) (gw_level1) (gw_date1) (gw_level2) (gw_date2) (gw_level3) (gw_date3) (gw_level4) (gw_date4) (gw_level5) (gw_date5) (gw_level6) (gw_date6) 89LCJ (89) 89 LCJ ( ) (tag_key) (Depth) (desc) (class) (smpl_rate) (rqd) (n_value) (smpl_no) (gravel ) (sand ) (silt ) (clay ) (water_cont) (ll) (pl) (unt_weight) (s_gravity) (void_ratio) 10% (d10) 50% (d50) (other_test)

100 6.1 TYP LPS CJW CDW YZY CMS KTC NKY WJC 6.2 tag_key project hole_no offer_comp borin_comp test_comp borin_date locat_desc pos_x pos_y pos_z pizometer pizo_depth 6-3 h_angle h_diameter h_depth gw_level1 gw_date1 gw_level2 gw_date2 gw_level3 gw_date3 gw_level4 gw_date4 gw_level5 gw_date5 6.3 tag_key depth desc class smpl_rate rqd n_value smpl_no gravel sand silt clay water_cont ll pl unt_weight s_gravity void_ratio d10 d50 other_test 6-3

101 6.4 Tag_key Project Hole_no Offer_comp Borin_comp Test_comp Borin_date Locat_desc Pos_x Pos_y 90CMH /11/ CMH /11/ CMH /7/ CMH /9/ CMH CMH CMH CMH CMH CMH /9/ /11/ /9/ /9/ /9/ /9/ Pos_z Pizometer Pizo_depth H_angle H_diameter H_depth Gw_level1 Gw_date1 Gw_level2 Gw_date2 Gw_level3 Gw_date3 Gw_level4 Gw_date4 Gw_level5 Gw_date

102 Tag_key Depth Desc Class Smpl_rate Rqd N_value Smpl_no Gravel Sand Silt Clay 90CMH ~2.5m; CL 2 S CMH ~2.5m; 90CMH ~3.7m; SM 5 S CMH ~3.7m; 90CMH ~5.6m; CL 2 S CMH ~5.6m; 90CMH ~6.7m; SM 11 S CMH ~6.7m; 90CMH ~7.5m; SM 5 S CMH ~9m; CL-ML 7 S CMH Water_cont Ll Pl Unt_weight S_gravity Void_ratio D10 d30 D50 D60 Other_test

103 ( ) / /

104

105 ( 0 0) Gravel % Sand % Silt % Clay % 100 % 2. D60 > D50> D30 >D10 3.USCS ( ) (1) FC < 50 % Sand % < (100-FC %)/2 G (2) FC < 50 % Sand % (100-FC %)/2 S (3) 50 % LL 50 *H (4) 50 % LL < 50 *L (1) (2) > < 7. (1) N (2) (3) D50 D50( ) 6-8

106 (4) γ t ( 1.9t/m3 ) (5) USCS (6) 2.50 < 2.80( ) (7) 1.20(t/m3) γ t 2.30 (t/m 3 )( ) N (N ) ( ) 4. 20m (N ) ( ) 3. ( )

107 ~

108

109

110

111 6.3.5 (SM) (ML) (CL) (ML)

112

113

114 6.4 SPT-N SPT-N SPT-N A SPT-N (N min ) SPT-N (N min ) (Z min ) ( min ) B SPT-N (N eq ) (N eq ) Mitchell & Gardner (1975) (E) SPT-N E = cn (6-1) c n (q B) S e = n n zi I zq = i= 1 ziε i i= 1 (6-2) E i I z 2B (6-2) 2B zi I zq S e = (6-3) E z= 0 i 6-17

115 (6-1) (6-3) 2B zi I zq S e = (6-4) cn z= 0 S e i S e 2B zi I zq z= 0 = (6-5) cn eq (6-4~6-5) 2B zi I z z= 0 N eq = (6-6) 2B zi I z N z= 0 i Schmertmann (1970) I z 6.9 ( I z z=0, 0.5B, 2B 0, 0.6, 0 z=0.5b) SPT-N N eqs 0.6 I z 0.5B 2B z 6.9 I z (Schmertmann 1970) 6-18

116 2 1 (I z1, I z2 ) 2 B = ( B + z) I z1 2 and = B B z I z 2 + (6-7) SPT-N (N eq1, N eq2 ) 30m B=10m ( 2B=20m) m SPT-N (N min, Z min, min ) (4, 2.5m, 5m) SPT-N 6.7 SPT-N z=5m~13m N eqs > N eq1, N B=20 z(m) I z 6.10 SPT-N 6-19

117 6.7 SPT-N Schmertmann's 2:1 square 2:1 strip i zi(m) zi(m) N i I z I z z i I z z i /N i I z1 I z z i I z z i /N i I z2 I z z i I z z i /N i Equivalent SPT-N N = 9.6 N = 5.69 N = eqs eq1 eq2 6.5 (Geographic Information Systems, GIS) Arc View MapInfo Surfer GIS 6-20

118 N N N ( N=4 N=10 ) ( ) 3 N N (1) SPT-N N ( N min ) (2) N 20m ( ) SPT-N N eq ( (6-6)) N N N Surfer (kringing) N 2. SPT-N N min ( CL CH MH ML) ( SM SC SW SP) 7-1

119 3. (1) N min SPT-N (N min ) N min (2) N min SPT-N N 4 N m 1m SPT-N ( 50cm ) N ( ) (2) (3) N eq a 7.1b 7-2

120 ( ) 7-3

121 7.1a 7-4

122 7.1b 7-5

123 a (1) ( N min ) (2) N 10 (3) N 4 2 N N 2. ( ) N 4 N 4 7.2b 7-6

124 3. ( 7.2c) N min 10 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) a d ( ) N e 7-7

125 7.2a N 7-8

126 7.2b N 7-9

127 7.2c N 7-10

128 7.2d

129 7.2e N 7-12

130 m 4m 7.4 ( ) 4~8m 2m 2. 4m ( 7.4 ) 4m 8m (1) (2) ( ) ( ) 7-13

131

132

133 7.3.3 N N 4 N 10 N 4 N 4~10 (4 N 10) N 10(10 N) ( ) 7.5 N 4 ( m) N 4 4 N 10 A N<4( ) (4~8m) (4~8m) (4~8m) (4~8m) (2~8m) (4~8m) (2~4m) (2~4m) (2~4m) (2~4m) (4~8m) (4~8m) (4~8m) (>8m) (>2m) (4~8m) (>4m) (>4m) (4~8m) (4~8m) (2~4m) (4~8m) (4~8m) (4~8m) (2~4m) (2~4m) (2~4m) (2~4m) (2~4m) (2~4m) (2~4m) (4~8n) (1~2m) (<2m) (<1m) (2~4m) (0~2m) (2~4m) (4~8m) (4~8m) (4~8m) (2~4m) (2~8m) (4~8m) (4~8m) (2~4m) (4~8m) (4~8m) (4~8m) (4~8m) (4~8m) (4~8m) (4~8m) (2~4m) 7-16

134 7-17 B 4 N<10( ) (0m) (0~1m) (0~1m) (1~2m) (2~4m) (1~4m) (0~2m) (0~1m) (1~2m) (2~4m) (1~2m) (2~4m) (4~8m) (4~8m) (4~8m) (2~4m) (2~4m) (4~8m) (2~4m) (1~2m) (1~2m) (4~8m) (4~8m) (4~8m ) (4~8m) (4~8m) (4~8m) (>4m) (>4m) (4~8m) (2~4m) (2~8m) (2~4m) (2~4m) (2~4m) (1~2m) (0~1m) (0~2m) (0~1m) (<1m) (<1m) (1~2m) (2~4m) (2~4m) (2~4m) (1~2m) (<1m) (2~4m) (2~4m) (1~2m) (4~8m) (4~8m) (2~4m) (2~4m) (4~8m) (4~8m) (4~8m) (4~8m) (4~8m) (4~8m) (4~8m) (2~4m) (2~4m) (2~4m) (0~8m) (2~4m) (4~8m) (2~4m) (<4m) (2~4m) (0~2m) (0~2m) (2~4m) (0~2m) (0~2m) (<1m) (<4m) (2~4m) (1~2m) (<1m) (2~4m) (<1m) (2~4m) (1~4m) (0~4m) (2~4m) (<1m) (2~4m) (1~4m) (2~4m)

135

136 7.3.4 N 6.4 (N eq ) 20m N Schmertmann (1970) Iz N N N 4~10 N 4 (N eq ) ( N min ) N min 7-19

137 7.6 N (N eq ) 7-20

138 7.4 VS. (1) N N 10 N 4 7.7a 7.7b (A) (N 10) (N<4) N min (B) (N 4) ( ) 7-21

139 7.7a N 7-22

140 7.7b N 7-23

141 (2) 7.8a 7.8b ( ) (3) VS. 7.9a 7.9b 7-24

142 7.8a 7-25

143 7.8b 7-26

144 7.9a 7-27

145 7.9b 7-28

146 N (1977) N qu q u = ( 1 ~ 1 )N 8 2 ( kg/cm 2 ) (7-1) qu=n/ N ( 1994) N K h K h =0.502N 0.37 ( kg/cm 3 ) (7-2)

147

148

149 ( A1~A6) ( B1~B4) ( A1) ~8 m 30~40 20~30cm ( ) k+030~300 ( 8.1) m 80cm ( 10cm) 60 cm 8-1

150 (32k+030) 8-2

151 k+947 ( A2) 86 13k+947 ( ( ) 2003) 40~50cm 100m ~ k

152 k

153 8.1 A

154 8.1.3 ( A3) ( 2001) ( A4) 168 0K+800~1K ( ) ) K +200~116 K+900 ( 8.4 ) K+500 ( ) 8-6

155 K+740~133K+770 ( A5) K+740~133K+770 ( ) ( EPS) ( ( 1999)) 30m 3m 1.5m 25 kg/m 3 EPS ( 0.7kgf/cm 2 ) 10 cm RC H EPS Mido-risokki LP %( 0.1mm) 5~10m EPS 8.1 EPS (NO.3~9 ) (NO.10~13 ) EL EPS (NO.6 7) EPS 5mm 11mm EPS 8-7

156

157 8.6 RC PE EPS 8-9

158

159 ( A6) ( ) M 2. (A) - (B) 3. (A) 200M (B) 8-11

160 6cm (1) 1~ (2) 6~ (3) 50 PC (4) 5~8 PC 8.9 (5)

161 8.2 10M 10M (1) 2M (2) -25M ( SPT-N >30) -80M (SPT-N >100) D mm Cu Cd FC 30 80% (1999) -1.8M -13.5M (SM) (ML) SPT-N M -7.5M 8-13

162 cm cm 3. 3/ cm cm / cm cm / / cm cm cm 3. 3/ cm cm 3. 3/1000 4A

163 8.7 1~ ~4 8-15

164 8.9 5~

165 1. L ( ) ( 8.8 ) (1) (2) ( )

166 (b) 8.8 ( 2000) 8-18

167 1 4A 1. ( 1) ( 5) 3. ( 1 5)

168 ( B1) 1. C270 ( 8.10 ) 8.11 ( ) ( 90 ~ 91 ) 7 cm ~ cm 8.10 C

169

170 2. (1) ( 70m ) ( ) 4 (1) (70~300m) 1/1,000 1/1, ~93 (1) ~ ( ) 4 (2) ~ / /1,500 1/1,000 1/1,

171 (1) (93 ) (2) 2491 ( 10 % ) (3) (4) (92 ) (5) (93 ) ( 98 ) 8-23

172 (6) ( B2) 39 (391K~430K) ( 31 ) ( ( 1999)) 423K+241~430K+529 RC ~

173 t=1.95t/m 3 C C =0.2~ K+641~429K K+641~421K ~40 421K+641~425K K+641~429K ~ K+641~429K+641 ( 8.11) RC 8-25

174 ( B3)

175 8.13 ( 2000) ( 2000) 8-27

176 ( 2000)

177 (1) (2) (3)

178 (Tokimatsu, 1999) 8-30

179 8.2.4 ( B4) (2000) 34 ( 8.19) 0~200 8~176 11~314 ( 0.9~2.5 ) ( 1~1.6 ) 100 ( 1~3 ) 100 4~8 1.5~

180 8.19 ( 2000)

181 A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A (80cm) EPS B1 B2 B3 A6 B cm

182 (1) (2)

183

184 9.1 Boussinesq Newmark(1942) Osterberg(1957) q B 1 + B2 B1 σ = 0 ( )( α1 + α 2) ( α 2) π B2 B2 (9-1) q o = γ H (H ) B 1 B 2 α 1 α

185 ( )

186 9.1 (Bjerrum,1963) 1/600 1/500 ( ) 1/300 ( ) 1/250 1/150 1/150 ( ) 1/ ( ) ( 9.1) 9-4

187 Skempton q u = 5.14 C u (9-2) q u C u 9.1 (Kamon & Bergado, 1991) (a) (b) (c)

188 9.2 ( ( )

189

190

191

192

193 Adalier (1998) 4.5 m 6 m ( ) 9-11

194

195 FLAC-2D (Two-dimensional explicit finite difference method) FLAC (Govern equation) (Explicit finite difference equation) (Dynamic 9-13

196 relaxation) (Steady state) FLAC-2D (Time step) FLAC ( 9.7 ) ( ) FLAC ( )

197 FLAC 9-15

198 (a) (b) (c) 9.8 FLAC Mohr-Coulomb E G

199 9.3 SPT-N c φ (m) (KN/m 3 ) (kpa) degree 10 SM 4~ Gravel SM Gravel φ c MPa K,MPa G, MPa *10 6 Kg/m

200 FLAC 9.11a~ 9.11d 9.11a 9.11b ( ) 9.11c 9.11d ( X Y ) ( 9.11c) ( 9.11d) JOB TITLE : 1 FLAC (Version 4.00) (*10^1) LEGEND 30-Sep-05 22:06 step E+00 <x< 1.567E E+01 <y< 9.971E Grid plot 0 5E Itasca Consulting Group, Inc. Minneapolis, Minnesota USA (*10^2) 9.10 FLAC 9-18

201 JOB TITLE : The vertical stress contours after construction (Mpa) FLAC (Version 4.00) (*10^1) LEGEND 3-Oct-05 18:45 step E+00 <x< 1.484E E+01 <y< 9.225E+01 YY-stress contours -6.00E E E E E E E+00 Contour interval= 1.00E Itasca Consulting Group, Inc. Minneapolis, Minnesota USA (*10^2) 9.11a JOB TITLE : The horizontal stress contours after construction (Mpa) FLAC (Version 4.00) (*10^1) LEGEND 3-Oct-05 18:45 step E+00 <x< 1.484E E+01 <y< 9.225E+01 XX-stress contours -7.00E E E E E E E E Contour interval= 1.00E Itasca Consulting Group, Inc. Minneapolis, Minnesota USA (*10^2) 9.11b 9-19

202 JOB TITLE : The vertical displacement contours after construction (M) FLAC (Version 4.00) (*10^2) LEGEND 3-Oct-05 18:45 step E+01 <x< 1.649E E+01 <y< 1.079E+02 Y-displacement contours -1.25E E E E E E E E E E+03 Contour interval= 2.50E Itasca Consulting Group, Inc. Minneapolis, Minnesota USA (*10^2) c JOB TITLE : The horizontal displacement contours after construction (M) FLAC (Version 4.00) (*10^2) LEGEND 3-Oct-05 18:45 step E+01 <x< 1.649E E+01 <y< 1.079E+02 X-velocity contours -2.00E E E E E E E E E+01 Contour interval= 5.00E Itasca Consulting Group, Inc. Minneapolis, Minnesota USA (*10^2) d 9-20

203 2. 30 ( 9.12) 9.13a 9.13b 9.13c 9.13d 9.11c 9.11d JOB TITLE : 1 FLAC (Version 4.00) LEGEND 3-Oct-05 18:45 step HISTORY PLOT Y-axis : X velocity ( 5, 1) X-axis : Dynamic time Itasca Consulting Group, Inc. Minneapolis, Minnesota USA

204 JOB TITLE : The vertical stress contours after earthquake (Mpa) FLAC (Version 4.00) (*10^1) LEGEND 3-Oct-05 18:45 step E+00 <x< 1.488E E+01 <y< 9.254E+01 YY-stress contours -6.00E E E E E E E+00 Contour interval= 1.00E Itasca Consulting Group, Inc. Minneapolis, Minnesota USA (*10^2) 9.13a JOB TITLE : The horizontal stress contours after earthquake (Mpa) FLAC (Version 4.00) (*10^1) LEGEND 3-Oct-05 18:45 step E+00 <x< 1.488E E+01 <y< 9.254E+01 XX-stress contours -7.00E E E E E E E E Contour interval= 1.00E Itasca Consulting Group, Inc. Minneapolis, Minnesota USA (*10^2) 9.13b 9-22

205 JOB TITLE : The vertical displacement contours after earthquake (M) (*10^2) FLAC (Version 4.00) LEGEND Oct-05 18:45 step E+01 <x< 1.649E E+01 <y< 1.078E Y-displacement contours -5.00E E E E E E E E E Contour interval= 1.00E Itasca Consulting Group, Inc. Minneapolis, Minnesota USA (*10^2) 9.13c JOB TITLE : The horizontal displacement contours after earthquake (M) (*10^2) FLAC (Version 4.00) LEGEND 3-Oct-05 18:45 step E+01 <x< 1.649E E+01 <y< 1.078E X-displacement contours -5.00E E E E E Contour interval= 2.50E Itasca Consulting Group, Inc. Minneapolis, Minnesota USA (*10^2) 9.13d 9-23

206 9.8.3 Mohr-Coulomb SPT-N c φ (m) (KN/m 3 ) (kpa) degree 10 GM Gravel GW Gravel φ c MPa K,MPa G, MPa *10 6 Kg/m

207 a 9.14d 9.14a 9.14b ( ) 9.14c 9.14d ( X Y ) ( 9.14c) ( 9.14d) 9-25

208 JOB TITLE : The vertical stress contours after construction (Mpa) FLAC (Version 4.00) (*10^1) LEGEND 2-Nov-05 20:25 step E+00 <x< 1.484E E+01 <y< 9.225E+01 YY-stress contours -6.00E E E E E E E+00 Contour interval= 1.00E Itasca Consulting Group, Inc. Minneapolis, Minnesota USA (*10^2) 9.14a JOB TITLE : The horizontal stress contours after construction (Mpa) FLAC (Version 4.00) (*10^1) LEGEND 2-Nov-05 20:25 step E+00 <x< 1.484E E+01 <y< 9.225E+01 XX-stress contours -6.00E E E E E E-01 Contour interval= 1.00E Itasca Consulting Group, Inc. Minneapolis, Minnesota USA (*10^2) 9.14b 9-26

209 JOB TITLE : The vertical displacement contours after construction (M) FLAC (Version 4.00) (*10^2) LEGEND 2-Nov-05 20:25 step E+01 <x< 1.649E E+01 <y< 1.079E+02 Y-displacement contours -1.50E E E E E E E E-01 Contour interval= 5.00E Itasca Consulting Group, Inc. Minneapolis, Minnesota USA (*10^2) c JOB TITLE : The horizontal displacement contours after construction (M) FLAC (Version 4.00) (*10^2) LEGEND 2-Nov-05 20:25 step E+01 <x< 1.649E E+01 <y< 1.079E+02 X-displacement contours -2.00E E E E E-01 Contour interval= 1.00E Itasca Consulting Group, Inc. Minneapolis, Minnesota USA (*10^2) d 9-27

210 2. 30 ( 9.12) 9.15a 9.15b 9.15c 9.15d 9.14c 9.14d

211 JOB TITLE : The vertical stress contours after earthquake (Mpa) FLAC (Version 4.00) (*10^1) LEGEND 2-Nov-05 20:27 step E+00 <x< 1.484E E+01 <y< 9.225E+01 YY-stress contours -6.00E E E E E E E+00 Contour interval= 1.00E Itasca Consulting Group, Inc. Minneapolis, Minnesota USA (*10^2) 9.15a JOB TITLE : The horizontal stress contours after earthquake (Mpa) FLAC (Version 4.00) (*10^1) LEGEND 2-Nov-05 20:27 step E+00 <x< 1.484E E+01 <y< 9.225E+01 XX-stress contours -6.00E E E E E E-01 Contour interval= 1.00E Itasca Consulting Group, Inc. Minneapolis, Minnesota USA (*10^2) 9.15b 9-29

212 JOB TITLE : The vertical displacement contours after earthquake (M) (*10^2) FLAC (Version 4.00) LEGEND Nov-05 20:27 step E+01 <x< 1.649E E+01 <y< 1.079E Y-displacement contours -1.50E E E E E E E Contour interval= 5.00E Itasca Consulting Group, Inc. Minneapolis, Minnesota USA (*10^2) 9.15c JOB TITLE : The horizontal displacement contours after earthquake (M) (*10^2) FLAC (Version 4.00) LEGEND 2-Nov-05 20:27 step E+01 <x< 1.649E E+01 <y< 1.079E X-displacement contours -2.00E E E E E E-01 Contour interval= 1.00E Itasca Consulting Group, Inc. Minneapolis, Minnesota USA (*10^2) 9.15d 9-30

213

214 10.1 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (liquefaction) (lateral spread)

215 (f s ) (q b ) (tf/m 2 ) f s N/3(15) N/3(15) N/515) 1.5 q b 30 N 7.5 N 25 N 25 N (1997) PC 10.2 ±25% PC

216 10.2 f s q b N/3 N/3 30N1800tf/m 2 7.5N 0.2N10tf/m 2 0.5N 30N 300tf/m 2 20tf/m 2 (N40) (N30) 0.3N+3 15tf/m 2 0.5N 30N 7N 20tf/m tf/m 2 350tf/m 2 0.2N 10tf/m 2 30N 1500tf/m 2 10N 750tf/m 2 N/5 30N AASHTO f smax 19.2tf/m N(N75) 431tf/m 2 (N 75) 0.2N 0.1N 40N 12N N 4 N 1 N (1) (2) 10-3

217 (3) (negative skin friction)( 1987) (1) (2) (3) 10-4

218 a b c d) SPT-N SPT-N ( APILE ) (Pile Load Test, PLT) (Pile Driving Formula) (Pile Driving Analyzer, PDA) ( ABAQUS PLAXIS SAGE-Crisp ) LPILE 10-5

219 p-y GROUP Terzaghi and Peck (1967) (2001) (Winkle s foundation) (Beam on elastic foundation) (Reese and Van Impe, 2001) p-y LPILE (structural stress method) (limit equilibrium method) 10-6

220 (2000) 100 (pulse-like) 34 ( 10.1) ~200 8~176 11~314 ( 0.9~2.5 ) ( 1~1.6 ) 100 ( 1~3 ) 100 4~8 1.5~

221 ( 2000) 10-8

222 10.3 ( 2000) / (m) (m) (m) (cm) (cm) 28 10~ ~1.2 /9~30 18~270 8~ /29, / / / /2 75cm 2. Chang and Wen (2001), Chang and Lin (2003) ( a 2005b) (1986) 10-9

223 ( 10.2) (1). (2). (3). ( ) 10.2 ( Tokimatsu and Asaka, 1998) 10-10

224 1996 a. 5 m 100 m b. 5 m Tokimatsu and Asaka(1998) ( ) 10-11

225 1. (1998) (2002) (2004) ( ) Seed (1985) Tokimatsu and Yoshimi (1993) (1998) Idriss et al. (1978) Iwasaki et al. (1982) Ueng et al. (2002) (2005) 10.4 (1990) D F Z (m) D F L < L F F 1.0 < L L 0 Z < Z 20 1/3 0 Z 10 1/3 10 < Z 20 2/3 0 Z 10 2/3 10 < Z (1996) DE D E F L Z (m) R < R 0 Z /6 F L 1/ 3 10 < Z 20 1/3 1/3 0 Z 10 1/3 2/3 1/ 3 < F L 2 / 3 10 < Z 20 2/3 2/3 0 Z 10 2/3 1 2 / 3 < F L < Z R E E 10-12

226 2. (Wang et al., 1998; Boulanger et al., 1999; Lok et al., 1998; Anamdarajah, 2001) (BDWF) Prevost model (Prevost, 1985) Bounding Surface model (Dafalias and Herrmann., 1980) (1997) Martin et al. (1975), Finn et al. (1977), Finn (1982), Finn and Thavaraj (2001) Kim (2003) (1). u = ε vd 1 n + E K r p w (10.1) u E K w n p K w >> E r E r vd r ε vd u = ε (10.2) ( ε vd ) ( ε vd ) ε vd[0] 2 3 vd[ i 1] ε vd[ i] = C1( γ C2ε vd[ i 1] ) + (10.3) γ + C4ε vd[ i 1] C ε 10-13

227 n vd[ n] = ε vd[] i i= 1 ε (10.4) ε vd[i ] ε vd[i ] i C1 C 2 C 3 C 4 ( D r ) Dr = 45% C = C = C = C = ( D r ) ( ε vd ) D = R( ε vd ) 45 r (10.5) 2 R (100 D r ) (45 < D < 80) (10.6) = r E r E r ' 1 m ( σ v ) ' ( σ v0 mk2 = ) n m (10.7) ' σ k m n v0 Dr = 45% k = m = n = (2). 2 u t = E r k u ε vd ( ) + Er (10.8) z r z t w k r w ' ( σ m ) ( G m ) σ ' m ' σ v + 2σ h = (10.9) 3 ' σ = σ u ( u = u + u) (10.10) v v u u o o 10-14

228 Delfosse-Ribay et al. (2004) - Gmax G m = (10.11) C γ [ A + B γ ( )] G max A B C 10.6 ) max ( γ 10 4 % G G ' ' 1/ 2 max g( σ m ) = 1000K 2(max) ( σ m ) (10.12) (10.13) = ~ Seed and Idriss (1970) (10.12) G (2.973 e) 1+ e 2 ' ' 1/ 2 max g( σ m ) = ( σ m ) = ~Hardin and Drnevich (1972) (10.13) 10.6 ( Delfosse-Ribay et al., 2004 Rollins et al., 1998) A B C Sand Sand+silicate grout Sand+micro-fine cement grout Sand+mineral grout Gravel Seed and Idriss (1970) K 2(max)

229 10.7 K 2(max) ( Seed and Idriss, 1970) ( ) K 2(max) (Youd et al., 2001) K 2(max) K (10.14) 1/ 3 2 (max) 20( N1) N = C 1 N N (10.15) C N P = (10.16) σ a ' v ' C N σ v Pa ( 100 kpa ) ( G m ) : ( ) ( ) 3. (2000) (a) (b). Tokimatsu and Asaka (1998) 10-16

230 ( ) ( ) f(z) (Chang, 1937;, 2000; Reese and Van Impe, 2001) EI d 4 y/dz 4 = k h D (f(z)-y) (10.17) EI y z k h D N L/H = (25-100)D o / H (10.18) D(x)/ D o = 0.5 5x/L (10.19) f(z) = D(x) z<z w f(z) = D(x) (1-(z-z w )/H) z>z w (10.20) L D o H x z z w Ishihara and Cubrinovski (1998) 10-17

231 Youd (1993, 1997) 4. Tokimatsu (1999, 2003) ( P E ) P E = P P = Q F (10.21) EP EA P P Q F EP EA Mononob-Okabe Zhang et al. (1998) Mononobe-Okabe ( M-O ) ( ) (1). P EA 1 2 = K EAγ H (1 kv ) (10.22) 2 2 cos ( φ θ ψ ) K EA = (10.23) 2 2 sin( δ + φ)sin( φ β ψ ) cosψ cos θ cos( δ + θ + ψ ) 1 + cos( δ + θ + ψ )cos( β θ ) (2). P EP 1 2 = K EPγ H (1 kv ) (10.24) 2 2 cos ( φ + θ ψ ) K EP = (10.25) 2 2 sin( δ + φ)sin( φ + β ψ ) cosψ cos θ cos( δ θ + ψ ) 1 cos( δ θ + ψ )cos( β θ ) ψ = tan 1 [ k /(1 k )] (10.26) h v 10-18

232 k h = ah / g k v = av / g a h av g β φ θ δ 10.3 ( Zhang et al., 1998) 10.4 ( Zhang et al., 1998) 10-19

233 Zhang et al. (1998) ( 10.5) M-O (1). K EA 2 2cos ( φ β i) = 2 2 cos ( φ β i)(1 + R) + cosi cos β cos( δ mob + β + i)(1 R) I E.1 (10.27) 1 δ mob = (1 R) δ a 2 R = max 1, r a 0.5 (10.28) ( a = ah, a = ) (10.29) I E.1 = 1 + sin( φ + δ )sin( ) mob φ α i cos( δ mob + β + i)cos( β α) 2 (10.30) (2). K EP 2 1 cos ( φ i) = 1+ ( R 1) 1 2 cosi cos( δ mob + i) I E.2 (10.31) 1 δ mob = ( R 1) δ p 2 (10.32) R = min 3,3 r p 0.5 (10.33) I E.2 = 1 sin( φ + δ )sin( ) mob φ + α i cos( δ mob β + i)cos( β α) 2 (10.34) i = tan 1 [ k h /(1 k )] k v = ah g k v = av / g a h a v h / g α φ β δ a, p a p 10-20

234 r H R -1 3 M-O Abdoun and Dobry (2002) (2001) 10.5 ( Zhang et al., 1998) 10-21

235 10.4 Showa 0.2 Vertical component EW component NS component Ti ( ) SMAC-A 1964 Showa V SMAC-A 10-22

236 Showa Showa 10.7 Hamada Bhattacharya ( 0.93m) 600kN-m

237 Pa 6 m 10 m 25 m 9 m a b 10.8 Showa Bridge

238 10.8 Showa m 16.5 kn/m 3 32 o 46.75MN/m m 18.5 kn/m 3 34 o 100 MN/m kn 10.9 Showa mm 591mm 25 m kn-m kn-m 1000 kn-m /m 1000 kn-m 10-25

239 (NJRA, 1996) ~ (a) 0.9 m (0.93 m) (b) 8~10m (c) Bhattacharya et al P cr P cr 2 π = L 2 eff EI 2. L eff 3. r min 4. L eff / r min 5. P 6. σ P A σ f 10-26

240 SHOWA-bridge Vu = 160 kn Nonliquefiable layer 6 8 Nonliquefiable layer Depth (m) Liquefiable layer Depth (m) Liquefiable layer Nonliquefiable layer Nonliquefiable layer this study (Free Head) this study (Fixed Head) SHOWA-bridge this study (Fixed Head) this study (Free Head) Displacement (cm) Shear (kn) this study 4 this study Nonliquefiable layer 6 8 Nonliquefiable layer Depth (m) Liquefiable layer Depth (m) Liquefiable layer Nonliquefiable layer Nonliquefiable layer SHOWA-bridge Moment (kn-m) SHOWA-bridge Moment (kn-m) ( ) ( ) 10-27

241 kn Bhattacharya et al., kN 10.5 (2004) (2005)

242 (1) (2) (1) (2) (3) (4) 11-1

243 11.1 (1) (2) 20 m SPT-N CPT-q c

244 (,2004) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 1. (a) (b) (c) (d) (e)

245 3. (1) ( ) (2) ( B)

246 EPS EPS (Expandable Poly Styrolene) 1%~2% EPS / ASTM EPS

247 (1) (2) 11.3 N 10 ( 2004) (1) (2) 11-6

248 (3) ( 11.1) (1993) (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) 11.1 ( (1993)) 11-7

249

250 (Slip Layer) 6 l mm (Bitumen Coating) 90% (1) (2) (3) 11-9

251 (1987) NF 10% ( 11.2) (1) (2) 11-10

252 (3) 11.2 ( (1993)) (1) ( ) (2) (Preliminary Load Test) (Proof Load Test) 11-11

253 11-12

254 (1) (2) 12-1

255 12.1 ( 1988[ (2000)] ) 12-2

256 (1) (2) (3) (4) 12.2 Okamura 2001 (2002) (1) (2) 12.2 ( (1993)) 12-3

257 12.3 (1) (2) (1) (2) (3) (4) ( 12.3) 12-4

258 12.3 ( 2000) 12-5

259 (1) (2) (3) ( (1993)) (1) (a) (b)

260 (c) (2) (a) (b)

261

262 (Load Cell) (L.V.D.T) 2. (Strain Gage) 3. (REBAR Strain Gauge) (1) (2) 4. (Piezometer)

263 6. ABS plastic (Title) x y (Pressure Cell) (Strut)

264 14. (Total Pressure Gauge) 15. (Crack Gauge) (1) (2)

265 C.P.T. S.P.T. L.L.T

266 (IC ) ( ) ( ) ( )

267

268 , (GPS) PVC, (TDR ) ( ) ( ) RC ( ) RC

269 13.1 ( 2004) ( 1988) 0.5~10 mm/day >10 mm/day >50 mm/day 5~10 /day 10~50 /day 0.5~1 mm/day 2~3 mm/day ( ) 10~20 mm/h (50mm) >20 mm/h (100mm)

270 13.5 (Sensor unit) (Monitoring unit) (Communication unit) (Control unit) (DC12V) (Modem) (Modem)

271 (1) (2) 1~ (1) (2) 13-10

272 (3) 4. (1) (2) 5. (1) (2)

273 ( ) (1) (2) (3) 2. (1) (2) 3. (1) (2) 13-12

274

275 (1) (SPT)N N (2) q u q c w LL PI q c LL PI ( ) (3) q u K h N N 2. (1) 14-1

276 N min 10 4 ( ) ( ) (2) 10m 4m N min 10 N min 4 (3) 4~8m ( ) 2m 3. (1) (a) (b) (2)

277 14-3 (1) (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (2) (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (A) (B) (C) (D) (3) (a) (b) (c) ( ) ( ) (1) (2)

278 2. (1) ( ) (2) EPS (3) (4) 14-4

279 V (1979) b (1999) 10. (1988) a b (1992) 16. (1997) 15-1

280 17. ( ) (2003) 86 13K (1975) (2004) N 30. (2001) 31. (2000) 15-2

281 ( )

282 (2002) EPS (2004) (2001)

283 (1999) EPS (1985) 70. (2003) (1997) PC

284 77. (1997) AASHTO (1983), Guide Specifications for Seismic Design of Highway Bridges. 85. Abdoun, T., and Dobry, R. (2002), Evaluation of Pile Foundation Response to Lateral Spreading, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 22, No. 9, pp Adalier, K., Elgamal, A.W., and Martin, G.R. (1998), Remediation of Embankment Liquefiable Foundation by Densification, Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics III, Proceedings of a Specialty Conference, Geotechnical Special Publication No. 75, Seattle, Washington, ASCE, pp Anamdarajah, A. (2001), Nonlinear Analyses of the Earthquake Behavior of a Single Pile Founded on Liquefiable Sand, Procds., 10th International Conference on Computer Methods and Advances in Geomechanics, Tucson, Arizona, USA., pp Bergado, D.T., Anderson, L.R., Miura, N. and Balasubramaniam, A.S. (1996), Soft Ground Improvement in Lowland and other Environments, ASCE Press, New York. 89. Bhattacharya, S., Madabhshi, S.P.G., and Bolton, M.D. (2002), Pile Instability during Earthquake Liquefaction, ASCE Engineering 15-6

285 Mechanics Conference, Seattle, July. 90. Bhattacharya, S., Madabhushi, S.P.G., and Bolton, M.D. (2004), An Alternative Mechanism of Pile Failure in Liquefiable Deposits during Earthquakes, Geotechnique, Vol. 54, No. 3, pp Bjerrum, I., (1963) Allowable Settlement of Structures, Proceedings of European Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Weisbaden, Germany, 2, pp Bonilla, M.G., (1977), Summary of Quaternary Faulting and Elevation Changes in Taiwan, Mem. Geol. Soc. China, No. 2, pp Boulanger, R.W., Curras, C.J., Kutter, B.L., Wilson, D.W., and Abghari, A. (1999), Seismic Soil-Pile-Structure Interaction Experiments and Analyses, J. of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE. 94. Caltrans (1990). Bridge Design Specifications, Department of Transportation, California. 95. Chang, D.W., and Lin, B.S. (2003), Wave Equation Analyses on Seismic Responses of Grouped Piles, Procds., 12th Asian Regional Conf. on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, Singapore, August, pp Chang, D.W., and Wen, C.H. (2001), Direct Wave Equation Analysis on Vertically Loaded Raft-Pile, Procds., 10th International Conference on Computer Methods and Advances in Geomechanics, Tucson, Arizona, USA, pp Chang, Y.L. (1937), Discussion on Lateral Pile-Loading Tests, by Feagin, Trans., ASCE, Paper No. 1959, pp Craig, R.F. (1978), Soil Mechanics. Van Nostr and Reinhold Ltd., London. 99. Dafalias, Y.F., and Herrmann, L.R. (1980), A Boundary Surface Soil Plasticity Model, Int. Symposium on Soils under Cyclic and Transient Loading, Swansea, U.K., Vol. 1, pp Delfosse-Ribay, E., Djeran-Maigre, I., Cabrillac, R., and Gouvenot, D. (2004), Shear Modulus and Damping Ratio of Grouted Sand, Soil Dynamic and Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 24, pp

286 101. Finn, W.D.L. (1982), Soil Liquefaction Studies in the People's Republic of China, Soil Mechanics-Transient and Cyclic Loads, Ch. 22, pp , John Wiley & Sons, Ltd Finn, W.D.L., and Thavaraj, T. (2001), Practical Problems in the Seismic Analysis of Bridge Pile Foundations, Procds., 10th Int. Conf. Computer Methods and Advances in Geomechanics, Tucson, Arizona, USA, pp Finn, W.D.L., Lee, K.W., and Martin, G.R. (1977), An Effective Stress Model for Liquefaction, Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol. 103, No. SM7, pp Hamada, M. (1992), Large Ground Deformations and Their Effects on Lifelines: 1964 Niigata Earthquake, in Case Studies of Liquefaction and Lifeline Performance During Past Earthquakes, Vol. 1, Japanese Case Studies, Technical Report NCEER , NCEER, Buffalo, NY, USA Hardin, B.O., and Drnevich, V.P. (1972), Shear Modulus and Damping in Soils: 106. Holtz, R.D., and Kovacs, W.D. (1981), An Introduction to Geotechnical Engineering, Prentice-Hall Idriss, I.M., Dobry, R., and Singh, R.D. (1978), Nonlinear Behavior of Soft Clays During Cyclic Loading, Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, Vol. 104, No. GT12. pp Ishihara, K, and Cubrinovski, M. (1998), Soil-Pile Interaction in Liquefied Deposits Undergoing Lateral Spreading, Geotechnical Hazrads, edit. By Maric, Lisac, and Szavits-Nossan, Balkeman, pp Iwasaki, T., Arakawa, T., and Tokida, K. (1982), Simplified Procedures for Assessing Soil Liquefaction During Earthquakes, Conference on Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Southampton, pp Kamon, M., and Bergado, D.T. (1991), Ground Improvement Techniques, Theme Lecture No. 6, Proc. 9th Asian Regional Conference, Bangkok, Thailand, pp Kanai, K. (1962), On the Predominant Period of Earthquake 15-8

287 Motions, Bull.of ERI.,vol Kim, S.I. (2003), Liquefaction Potential in Moderate Earthquake Regions, Procds., 12th Asian Regional Conf. on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, Singapore, August, pp Koga, Taniguchi, Nakasumi, and Kurinami (1986), Shaking Table Tests on Sandy Ground Liquefaction Measures by the Deep Mixing Soil Stabilization Method, Proceedings of 41st Annual Conference of the Japanese Society of Civil Engineers, pp Lok, T., Pestana, J., Meym, P., Riemer, M., and Seed, R. (1998), Numerical Modeling and Simulation of Seismic Soil-Pile-Superstructure Interaction Experiments, Procds., 5th Caltrans Seismic Research Workshop, June, Sacramento, CA, USA Martin, G.R., Finn, W.D.L., and Seed, H.B. (1975), Fundamentals of Liquefaction under Cyclic Loading, Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol. 101, No. GT5, pp Meyerhof, G.G. (1956), Penetration Test and Bearing Capacity of Cohesionless Soil, JSMFD, ASCE, Vol. 82, SM 1, pp Mitchell, J.K., and Gardner, W.S. (1975), In Situ Measurement of Volume Change Characteristics, Proceedings, Specialty Conference, American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 2, pp Osterberg, J.O. (1957), Influence Values for Vertical Stresses in Semi-Infinite Mass due to Embankment Loading, Proceedings, 4th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, London, Vol. 1, pp Prevost, J.H. (1985), Simple Plasticity Theory for Frictional Cohesionless Soils, Soil Dynamics and Earthquke Engineering, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp Ramiah, B.K., and Chickanapa, L.S. (1984), Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Balkema-Rotterdam Reese, L.C., and Van Impe, W.F. (2001), Single Piles and Pile Groups under Lateral Loading, A.A. Balkema Rollins, K.M., Evans, M.D., Diehle, N.B., and Daily, W.D. (1998), Shear Modulus and Damping Relationships for Gravels, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 124, No. 5, pp

288 123. Schmertmann, J.H. (1970), Static Cone to Compute Static Settlement over Sand, J. Soil Mech. Found. Div., ASCE, Vol. 96, No. SM Seed, H.B., and Idriss, I.M. (1970), Soil Moduli and Damping Factors for Dynamic Response Analysis, Report No. EERC 75-29, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, California Seed, H. B., Ugas, C. and Lysmer, J. (1974). Site-Dependent Spectra for Earthquake-Resistant Design, Report No. EERC 74-12, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, California Seed, H.B., Tokimatsu, K., Harder, L.F., and Chung, R.M. (1985), Influence of SPT Procedures in Soil Liquefaction Resistance Evaluations, Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 111, No. 12, pp Terzaghi, K., and Peck, R.B. (1948), Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice, New York, John Wiley & Sons, Inc Terzaghi, K., and Peck, R.B. (1967), Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice, A Wiley International Edition Tokimatsu K., and Yoshimi Y. (1993), Empirical Correlation of Soil Liquefaction Based on SPT N-Value and Fines Content, Soil and Foundations, JSSMFE, Vol. 23, No. 4, pp Tokimatsu, K. (1999), Performance of Pile Foundations in Laterally Spreading Soils, Procds, 2nd Int. Conf. Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 3, pp Tokimatsu, K. (2003), Behavior and Design of Pile Foundations Subjected to Earthquakes, Procds., 12th Asian Regional Conf. on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, Singapore, August Tokimatsu, K., and Asaka, Y. (1998), Effects of Liquefaction-Induced Ground Displacement on Pile Performance in the 1995 Hyogoken-Nambu Earthquake, Soils and Foundations, Special Issue, No. 2, pp Ueng, T.S., Lin, M.L., Lee I.Y., Chu, C.M., and Lin J.S. (2002), Dynamic Characteristics of Soils in Yuan-Lin Liquefaction Area, Journal of the Chinese Institute of Engineers, Vol. 25, No. 5, pp