International Benchmark on Numerical Simulations for 1D, Nonlinear Site Response (PRENOLIN): Verification Phase Based on Canonical Cases

File Description SizeFormat 
2016_Régnier_et_al.pdfPublished version1.49 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Title: International Benchmark on Numerical Simulations for 1D, Nonlinear Site Response (PRENOLIN): Verification Phase Based on Canonical Cases
Authors: Régnier, J
Bonilla, LF
Bard, PY
Bertrand, E
Hollender, F
Kawase, H
Sicilia, D
Arduino, P
Amorosi, A
Asimaki, D
Boldini, D
Chen, L
Chiaradonna, A
DeMartin, F
Ebrille, M
Elgamal, A
Falcone, G
Foerster, E
Foti, S
Garini, E
Gazetas, G
Gélis, C
Ghofrani, A
Giannakou, A
Gingery, JR
Glinsky, N
Harmon, J
Hashash, Y
Iai, S
Jeremić, B
Kramer, S
Kontoe, S
Kristek, J
Lanzo, G
Lernia, AD
Lopez‐Caballero, F
Marot, M
McAllister, G
Diego Mercerat, E
Moczo, P
Montoya‐Noguera, S
Musgrove, M
Nieto‐Ferro, A
Pagliaroli, A
Pisanò, F
Richterova, A
Sajana, S
Santisi d'Avila, MP
Shi, J
Silvestri, F
Taiebat, M
Tropeano, G
Verrucci, L
Watanabe, K
Item Type: Journal Article
Abstract: PREdiction of NOn-LINear soil behavior (PRENOLIN) is an interna- tional benchmark aiming to test multiple numerical simulation codes that are capable of predicting nonlinear seismic site response with various constitutive models. One of the objectives of this project is the assessment of the uncertainties associated with nonlinear simulation of 1D site effects. A first verification phase (i.e., comparison between numerical codes on simple idealistic cases) will be followed by a validation phase, comparing the predictions of such numerical estimations with actual strong- motion recordings obtained at well-known sites. The benchmark presently involves 21 teams and 23 different computational codes. We present here the main results of the verification phase dealing with simple cases. Three different idealized soil profiles were tested over a wide range of shear strains with different input motions and different boundary conditions at the sediment/bedrock inter- face. A first iteration focusing on the elastic and viscoelastic cases was proved to be useful to ensure a common understanding and to identify numerical issues before pursu- ing the nonlinear modeling. Besides minor mistakes in the implementation of input parameters and output units, the initial discrepancies between the numerical results can be attributed to (1) different understanding of the expression “ input motion ” in dif- ferent communities, and (2) different implementations of material damping and possible numerical energy dissipation. The second round of computations thus allowed a con- vergence of all teams to the Haskell – Thomson analytical solution in elastic and visco- elastic cases. For nonlinear computations, we investigate the epistemic uncertainties related only to wave propagation modeling using different nonlinear constitutive mod- els. Such epistemic uncertainties are shown to increase with the strain level and to reach values around 0.2 (log 10 scale) for a peak ground acceleration of 5 m = s 2 at the base of the soil column, which may be reduced by almost 50% when the various constitutive models used the same shear strength and damping implementation.
Issue Date: 26-Sep-2016
Date of Acceptance: 19-May-2016
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/42232
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1785/0120150284
ISSN: 0037-1106
Publisher: Seismological Society of America
Start Page: 2112
End Page: 2135
Journal / Book Title: Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
Volume: 106
Issue: 5
Copyright Statement: © 2016 Seismological Society of America
Keywords: Geochemistry & Geophysics
0404 Geophysics
0905 Civil Engineering
Publication Status: Published
Appears in Collections:Faculty of Engineering
Civil and Environmental Engineering



Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Creative Commonsx