A comparison of different methods for the estimation of NBCC 2005 seismic hazard site classification: A case study from the Toronto-York Spadina Subway extension project
S. Sol, C. Phillips, D L. Walters, H. Bidhendi
In the proceedings of: GEO2011: 64th Canadian Geotechnical Conference, 14th Pan-American Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, 5th Pan-American Conference on Teaching and Learning of Geotechnical EngineeringSession: Other General
ABSTRACT: With recent changes to the National Building Code of Canada (NBCC) in 2005 there has been an increasing demand for site classification based on dynamic shear wave velocity measurements of soil and rock. There are three seismic methods typically used for the NBCC seismic site classification; multichannel analysis of surface waves, vertical seismic profiling, and crosshole seismic testing. Typically only one of these methods is done at a site. The decision is usually based on site conditions, borehole accessibility, and cost considerations. In this paper we present a comparison of the three seismic methods and standard penetration tests completed at two sites to support the Toronto-York Spadina Subway Extension. The comparison of the four methods provides insight into the limitations and applicability of the different methods for NBCC seismic site classification.
RÉSUMÉ: Avec les changements récents du Code de Construction National du Canada (NBCC) de 2005, il y a eu une demande croissante pour la classification de site fondée sur les mesures dynamiques des vitesses des ondes de cisaillements du sol et des roches. Il y a trois méthodes sismiques typiquement utilisé pour la classification des sites sismiques d™après le NBCC; l'analyse modale des ondes de surface, le profil sismique vertical, et les mesures de diagraphies sismiques de trou à trou. Typiquement seulement une de ces méthodes est effectuée à un site. La décision est d'ordinaire fondée sur les conditions du site, l™accès au trou de forage, et les considérations de coût. Dans ce papier nous présentons une comparaison des trois méthodes sismiques et des essais de pénétration standard réalisés à deux sites pour le Projet d'Extension de la ligne de métro de Toronto-York Spadina. La comparaison de ces trois méthodes permet d™entrevoir les limitations et la validité d'application de ces méthodes différentes pour la classification de site sismique d™après le NBCC.
Please include this code when submitting a data update: GEO2011_855
Access this article:
Canadian Geotechnical Society members can access to this article, along with all other Canadian Geotechnical Conference proceedings, in the Member Area. Conference proceedings are also available in many libraries.
Cite this article:
S. Sol; C. Phillips; D L. Walters; H. Bidhendi
(2011) A comparison of different methods for the estimation of NBCC 2005 seismic hazard site classification: A case study from the Toronto-York Spadina Subway extension project in GEO2011. Ottawa, Ontario: Canadian Geotechnical Society.
@article{GEO11Paper855,
author = S. Sol; C. Phillips; D L. Walters; H. Bidhendi
,
title = A comparison of different methods for the estimation of NBCC 2005 seismic hazard site classification: A case study from the Toronto-York Spadina Subway extension project ,
year = 2011
}
title = A comparison of different methods for the estimation of NBCC 2005 seismic hazard site classification: A case study from the Toronto-York Spadina Subway extension project ,
year = 2011
}