An in-house code for studying the response of soil deposits in Mumbai city using 2-D equivalent linear and 1-D nonlinear approach

References

• Abel, J. and Shephard, M.S., 1979. An algorithm for multipoint constraints in finite element analysis. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 14 (3), 464–467. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/()1097-0207
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Athanasopoulos, G.A., 1995. Empirical correlations Vso–NSPT for soils of Greece: a comparative study of reliability. In: Proceedings of 7th international conference on soil dynamics and earthquake engineering, Computation Mechanics Publications, Southampton, Boston, 19–25
   Google Scholar
• Chopra, A.K., 2001. Dynamics of structures. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Clough, R.W. and Penzien, J., 1993. Dynamics of structures. New York: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Coleman, J., Colleti, J., and Tessari, A., 2016. Large scale laminar box test plan. INL/EXT-16-39479, Structural Analysis, Idaho National Laboratory.
   Google Scholar
• Cook, R., Malkus, D.S., and Plesha, M.E., 1989. Concepts and applications of finite element analysis. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Dessai, A.G. and Bertrand, H., 1995. The panvel flexure along the Western Indian continental margin: an extensional fault structure related to deccan magmatism. Tectonophysics, 24 (1), 165–178. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0040-1951(94)00077-M
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanumanthrao, C. and Ramana, G.V., 2008. Dynamicsoil properties for microzonation of Delhi. India. Journal of Earth System Science, 117 (S2), 719–730. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-008-0066-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hashash, Y.M.A., et al, 2012. DEEPSOIL 5.1 User Manual and Tutorial.
   Google Scholar
• Hashash, Y.M.A. and Park, D., 2002. Viscous damping formulation and high frequency motion propagation in non-linear site response analysis. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 22, 611–624. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0267-7261(02)00042-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hwang, H.H.M. and Lee, C.N., 1990. Parametric study of site response analysis. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 10 (6), 282–290. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0267-7261(91)90045-2
   Google Scholar
• Imai, T. and Yoshimura, Y., 1970. Elastic wave velocity and soil properties in soft soil. Tsuchito- Kiso, 18 (1), 17–22. [in Japanese].
   Google Scholar
• IS:1893 (Part 1), 2002. Indian standard criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures part1—general provisions and buildings (fifth revision). New Delhi: Bureau of Indian Standards.
   Google Scholar
• Itasca, 2005. User’s guide for FLAC version 5.0. Nagpur, India: Itasca India Consulting.
   Google Scholar
• Jaiswal, K. and Sinha, R., 2007. Probabilistic seismic hazard estimation for peninsular India. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 97 (1B), 318–330. doi:https://doi.org/10.1785/0120050127
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jinan, Z., 1987. Correlation between seismic wave velocity and the number of blow of SPT and depth. Selected Papers from the Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering ASCE, 9, 92–100.
   Google Scholar
• Kaklamanos, J., et al., 2013. Critical parameters affecting bias and variability in site-response analyses using KiK-net downhole array data. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 103 (3), 1733–1749. doi:https://doi.org/10.1785/0120120166
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, B., et al., 2016. Relative differences between nonlinear and equivalent-linear 1-D site response analyses. Earthquake Spectra, 32 (3), 1845–1865. doi:https://doi.org/10.1193/051215EQS068M
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kramer, S.L., 2005. Geotechnical earthquake engineering. Upper Saddle River: Prentice hall, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Kramer, S.L. and Paulsen, S.B., 2004. Practical use of geotechnical site response models. international workshop on uncertainties in nonlinear soil properties and their impact on modelling dynamic soil response. UC Berkeley, USA: PEER.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhlemeyer, R.L. and Lysmer, J., 1973. Finite element method accuracy for wave propagation problems. Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division ASCE, 99 (SM5), 421–427.
   Google Scholar
• Maheshwari, R.U., Boominathan, A., and Dodagoudar, G.R., 2010. Use of surface waves in statistical correlations of shear wave velocity and penetration resistance of Chennai soils. Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, 28, 119–137. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-009-9285-9
   Google Scholar
• Masing, G.1926. Eigenspannungeu und verfertigung beim Messing(C). Proceedings of the 2nd International Congress on Applied Mechanics, Zurich.
   Google Scholar
• Miura, K., Koyamada, K., and Iiba, M., 2001. Response spectrum method for evaluating nonlinear amplification of surface strata. Journal of Structural and Construction Engineering Transaction of Architectural Institute of Japan, 539, 57–62. doi:https://doi.org/10.3130/aijs.66.57_1
   Google Scholar
• Nandy, D.R., 1995. Neotectonism and seismic hazards in India. Indian Journal of Geosciences, 67, 34–48.
   Google Scholar
• NEES, 2009. Ottawa F55 Sand. https://nees.org/warehouse/specimen/project/122/experiment/4791.
   Google Scholar
• Newmark, N.M., 1959. A method of computation for structural dynamics. Journal of the Engineering Mechanics Division ASCE 85(EM3) Proc. Paper, 2094, 67–94.
   Google Scholar
• Newmark, N.M., 1965. Effects of earthquakes on dams and embankments. Geotechnique, 15 (2), 139–159. doi:https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.1965.15.2.139
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ohsaki, Y. and Iwasaki, R., 1973. On dynamic shear moduli and Poisson’s ratio of soil deposits. Soils Found, 13 (4), 61–73. doi:https://doi.org/10.3208/sandf1972.13.4_61
   Google Scholar
• Pyke, R., 1979. Nonlinear soil models for irregular cyclic loadings. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, 105, 715–726.
   Google Scholar
• Rayleigh, J.W.S. and Lindsay, R.B., 1945. The theory of sound. New York: Dover Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Schnabel, P.B., Lysmer, J., and Seed, H.B., 1972. SHAKE—A computer program for earthquake response analysis of horizontally layered sites. EERC report Earthquake engineering.
   Google Scholar
• Seed, H.B. and Idriss, I.M., 1970. Soil moduli and damping factors for dynamic response analysis.EERC 70-10. Berkeley: University of California.
   Google Scholar
• Silva, W.J., et al., 2000. Reassessment of site coefficient and near-fault factors for building code provisions. El Cerrito, CA: Pacific engineering and analysis.
   Google Scholar
• Spears, B., 2016. NLSSI high frequency response study.INL/MIS-16-39106, Structural Analysis, Idaho National Laboratory.
   Google Scholar
• Spears, B. and Coleman, J., 2015. Calibrating nonlinear soil material properties for seismic analysis using soil material properties intended for linear analysis. SMIRT 23. Manchester, UK: IASMiRT.
   Google Scholar
• Stewart, J.P., et al., 2008. Benchmarking of nonlinear geotechnical ground response analysis procedures. Berkeley: Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center.
   Google Scholar
• Sykora, D.E. and Stokoe, K.H., 1983. Correlations of in-situ measurements in sands of shear wave velocity. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 20 (1), 125–136.
   Google Scholar
• Thevanayagam, S., Shenthan, T., and Kanagalingam, T., 2003. Role of intergranular contacts on mechanisms causing liquefaction & slope failures in silty sands. University at Buffalo, State University of New York, Department of Civil, Structural, and Environmental Engineering.
   Google Scholar
• Vucetic, M., 1990. Normalized behavior of clay under irregular cyclic loading. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 27, 29–46. doi:https://doi.org/10.1139/t90-004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vucetic, M. and Dobry, R., 1991. Effect of soil plasticity on cyclic response. International Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 117 (1), 87–107. doi:https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1991)117:1(89)
   Google Scholar
• Xiaojun, L. and Zheneng, L., 1993. Dynamic skeleton curve of soil stress strain relation under irregular cyclic loading. Earthquake Research in China, 7 (4), 469–477.
   Google Scholar
• Zalachoris, G. and Rathje, E., 2015.Comparisons of one-dimensional site response analysis and borehole array observations: quantification of bias and variability. 6th International Conference on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering, Christchurch, NZ.
   Google Scholar
• Zienkiewicz, O.C., et al., 1990. Static and dynamic behaviour of soils: a rational approach to quantitative solutions: i. fully saturated problems. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, A429, 285–309.
   Google Scholar