Need for dynamic soil/rock testing?
Need for dynamic soil/rock testing?
(OP)
Following all the seismic activity the world has experienced so far this year, I wanted to put the following questions out there to see what the different opinions are. If no seismic or dynamic soil properties are available, would you still design foundations/structures based on static test results (and perhaps guidelines) or would you ask for further dynamic soil testing (bearing in mind the high costs associated with some of these dynamic tests)? Assuming you work in a low seismic activity area?
We work in an area that is regarded as a low seismic area, yet the majority of engineers do not consider seismic or even vibratory aspects/properties in their designs - I find this a bit of a concern and difficult (as a geotech) to convince engineers/clients that have built many structures (without dynamic consideration)into now doing dynamic soil tests. How do you talk or convince a engineer/client into expensive dynamic testing when it has never been undertaken in previous projects?
We work in an area that is regarded as a low seismic area, yet the majority of engineers do not consider seismic or even vibratory aspects/properties in their designs - I find this a bit of a concern and difficult (as a geotech) to convince engineers/clients that have built many structures (without dynamic consideration)into now doing dynamic soil tests. How do you talk or convince a engineer/client into expensive dynamic testing when it has never been undertaken in previous projects?





RE: Need for dynamic soil/rock testing?
RE: Need for dynamic soil/rock testing?
RE: Need for dynamic soil/rock testing?
In Italy, even in high seismicity areas, dynamic soil testing is rarely carried out because of its cost. More often, dynamic properties are estimated. I know few exceptions to this rule.
Whereas, if you mean geophisical testing, that's the rule now.
If the area is really classified as low-seismicity though, many engineers will stick to the old, static analyses.
Of course seismicity may be re-evaluated, as has happened recently in the field of nuclear power plants...
RE: Need for dynamic soil/rock testing?
h
RE: Need for dynamic soil/rock testing?
also, the publicintegrity website seems to me to be a left leaning site...i'd suggest researching who funds that group to dig further in to their motives. perhaps it would be beneficial if they would look in to the commercial industry and ask why every single state in the nation does not fully implement and enforce the International Building Code requirements. that is a much, MUCH high risk to public safety.
RE: Need for dynamic soil/rock testing?
the media frenzy is maybe partly justified by the failure of the Japanese to foresee a large tsunami in one of the most tsunamigenic parts of the world.
If what is reported is true, their reliability analysis grossly underestimated the water level consequent to the tsunami wave so that the emergency generators got submerged and failed.
I don't say all American sites share the same risk level of the Japanese site, anyway such a weakness in the legendary Japanese efficiency makes me worry a lot.
America is a little better off since she has vast almost unhinabited lands. I'd be pretty much worried about the sites in California though, that doesn't need any seismic re-evaluation I think you'll agree upon that.