论文部分内容阅读
场地液化实时监测和报警是减轻液化灾害的新途径,其核心技术是建立依据强震记录对液化场地进行反演识别的方法。采用统一样本,其中尽可能多地包含软土场地地震动记录,按场地类别对目前国内外现有的Suzuki法、Miyajima法、KY法和SY法等4种主要液化识别方法的可靠性进行了对比分析,提出评价结果及改进建议。分析表明:对全部样本,SY法、Suzuki法、KY法和Miyajima法识别成功率依次为98%、85%、77%和52%;Suzuki法、KY法和Miyajima法的成功率受场地类别影响显著,随场地变软而明显降低,对D类场地识别成功率均在55%以下;Suzuki法、Miyajima法和KY法均采用与绝对周期相关的参数作为判别指标,而软土与液化场地上存在明显交叉,极易导致误判;SY法选取地震动参数的相对变化作为识别指标,即使对D类场地成功率也达到92%,但其方法中仍有若干细节需要进一步探讨和改进。
Real-time site liquefaction monitoring and alerting is a new way to reduce liquefaction disasters. Its core technology is to establish a method to identify liquefied sites based on strong earthquake records. The uniform samples are used to include as much as possible the ground motion records of soft soil sites. The reliability of the four main liquefaction identification methods such as the Suzuki method, the Miyajima method, the KY method and the SY method, which are currently available at home and abroad, Comparative analysis, put forward the evaluation results and suggestions for improvement. The analysis showed that the success rates of SY, Suzuki, KY and Miyajima were 98%, 85%, 77% and 52% respectively for all the samples. The success rates of Suzuki method, KY method and Miyajima method were affected by the site type Significantly, with the field soft and significantly reduced, the success rate of the recognition of Class D sites are below 55%; Suzuki method, Miyajima method and KY method are used to determine the absolute cycle parameters as indicators, and soft soil and liquefied fields There is obvious crossover, which can easily lead to misjudgment. According to the SY method, the relative change of ground motion parameters is taken as the identification index. Even if the success rate of D site is up to 92%, there are still some details in the method that need further exploration and improvement.