Interim

E EV VA AL LU UA AT TI IN NG G L LI IQ QU UE EF FA AC CT TI IO ON N
P PO OT TE EN NT TI IA AL L D DU UR RI IN NG G E EA AR RT TH HQ QU UA AK KE ES S

INTERIM PROJECT REPORT 2008-2009
SUBMITTED BY

CIGO G.A.
MAHENDRA P.A.
MANISHA T RAJAN
PRASIDHA T.G.
SIJO P JOSE
SREEHARI SOMAN T.

GUIDED BY
DR SYED JALALUDEEN SHAH
(senior lecturer in civil engineering)
Department of Civil Engineering Project20082009
2 IES College of Engineering, Chittilappilly

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We woul d l ike t o t ake t his opportuni ty to t hank t he al might y for hel ping us i n
compl et i ng t he int eri m proj ect report .
Our sincere t hanks t o t he Head of t he Depart ment , DR. M. K. VEERANKUTTY
for his valuabl e advi ce and support which hel ped us in doi ng t he project wi t h
ut most dedi cat i on and presence of mi nd.
We woul d al so li ke t o record our deep sense of grati t ude t o our project gui de
DR. SYED JALALUDEEN SHAH (Senior l ecturer in Ci vi l Engi neering). For
hi s i mmense support and guidance ext ended t o us during each and every st age
of our proj ect .
It i s our pl easure and pri vi l ege to give due regards and appreci at i on t o t he
members of t he st age and our cl assmat es for di vi ng us maxi mum
encouragement during t he entire course of conducti ng t he proj ect .


ABSTRACT

This report presents application of the results of studies conducted to develop improved,
probabilistically based correlations for the use of Standard penetration test (SPT) data for
evaluation of resistance to "triggering" or initiation of cyclic liquefaction for Thrissur area.
The relationships presented herein have a number of significant advantages over previous
probabilistic and deterministic relationships currently available. In the current methods in use
until recently, Cyclic Shear Stress Ratio is evaluated either by means of (a) direct, case
specific site response analyses, or (b) new stress reduction co efficient (r
d
) correlations
developed as a part of these studies.
In the new method being used here, which is based on the Standard Penetration Test;
Previously available field case history data have been re evaluated, taking advantage of
recent developments/ insights regarding (a) factors affecting "correction" of SPT data
for energy, equipment, procedure, and rod length effects, and (b) factors affecting
evaluation of insitu equivalent uniform cyclic stress ratio (CSR), including source
mechanism effects, local site effects, etc.
In the new r
d
correlations developed for the SPT based method, improved and unbiased
"simplified" estimates of insitu CSR are estimated as a function of depth, magnitude,
shaking intensity, and site stiffness. Overburden effects K
was implemented. With this

greatly enhanced database of better quality, higher standards are set for acceptability of case
history data.
The resulting new correlations provide a significantly improved basis for evaluation of
liquefaction resistance, and also resolve a number of previously difficult issues including (a)
"corrections" for fines content, and (b) magnitude correlated duration weighting factors
(for magnitudes other than M
W
= 7.5). The new correlations eliminate prior bias, and have
greatly reduced uncertainty (or variance) as compared to previous, similar relationships.
Using the new correlations liquefaction potential evaluation has been carried at two different
locations in Thrissur at various depths for earth quake magnitudes of 7.5 and 2.5.


CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION


CHAPTER-1
1.1 INTRODUCTION
Liquefaction is a physical process that takes place during certain earthquakes leading to
ground failure. As a consequence of liquefaction, soft, young, water-saturated, well sorted,
fine grain sands and silts behave as viscous fluids rather than solids. Liquefaction takes place
when seismic shear waves pass through a saturated granular soil layer, distorting its granular
structure, and causing some of its pore spaces to collapse. The collapse of the granular
structure increases pore space water pressure, and decreases the soil's shear strength. If pore
space water pressure increases to the point where the soil's shear strength can no longer
support the weight of the overlying soil, buildings, roads, houses, etc., then the soil will flow
like a liquid and cause extensive surface damage.

1.2 WHY DOES LIQUEFACTION OCCUR?
To understand liquefaction, it is important to recognize the conditions that exist in a soil
deposit before an earthquake. A soil deposit consists of an assemblage of individual soil
particles. If we look closely at these particles, we can see that each particle is in contact with a
number of neighboring particles. The weight of the overlying soil particles produce contact
forces between the particles; these forces hold individual particles in place and give the soil its
strength.
Liquefaction occurs when the structure of loose, saturated sand breaks down due to some
rapidly applied loading. As the structure breaks down, the loosely-packed individual soil
particles attempt to move into a denser configuration. In an earthquake, however, there is not
enough time for the water in the pores of the soil to be squeezed out. Instead, the water is
"trapped" and prevents the soil particles from moving closer together. This is accompanied by
an increase in water pressure which reduces the contact forces between the individual soil
particles, thereby softening and weakening the soil deposit.
Contact forces are small because of the high water pressure. In an extreme case, the pore
water pressure may become so high that many of the soil particles lose contact with each
other. In such cases, the soil will have very little strength, and will behave more like a liquid
than a solid; hence, the name "liquefaction".

Fig.1Soilgrainsduringliquefaction

Soil grains in a soil deposit. The height of the
blue column to the right represents the level
ofporewaterpressureinthesoil.
Thelengthofthearrowsrepresentsthesize
ofthecontactforcesbetweenindividualsoil
grains. The contact forces are large when
theporewaterpressureislow.
1.3 EVALUATION OF LIQUEFACTION HAZARDS

Both flow liquefaction and cyclic mobility can produce damage at a particular site, and a
complete evaluation of liquefaction hazards requires that the potential for each be addressed.
When faced with such a problem, the geotechnical earthquake engineer can systematically
evaluate potential liquefaction hazards by addressing the following questions:
1. Is the soil susceptible to liquefaction...?
2. If the soil is susceptible will liquefaction be triggered...?
3. If liquefaction is triggered, will damage occur?
If the answer to the first question is no, the liquefaction hazard evaluation can be terminated
with the conclusion that liquefaction hazard do not exist. If the answer is yes, the next
question will be addressed. In some cases it may be more efficient to reverse the order of the
second and third questions, particularly when damage appears unlikely. If the answers to all
three are yes, a problem exists; if the anticipated level of damage is unacceptable, the site
must be abandoned or improved or on-site structures strengthened. These questions pertain to
the three most critical aspects of liquefaction hazard evaluation: susceptibility, initiation, and
effects. All three must be considered in a comprehensive evaluation of liquefaction hazards.

1.4 LIQUEFACTION SUSCEPTIBILITY
Not all soils are susceptible to liquefaction; consequently, the first step in a liquefaction
hazard evaluation is usually the evaluation of liquefaction susceptibility. If the soil at a
particular site is not susceptible, liquefaction hazard do not exist and the liquefaction hazard
evaluation can be ended. If the soil is susceptible, however, the matters of liquefaction
initiation and effects must be addressed. There are several criteria by which liquefaction
susceptibility can be judged, and some are different for flow liquefaction and cyclic mobility.
These include historical, geologic, compositional, and state criteria.

1.5 INITIATION OF LIQUEFACTION
The generation of excess pore pressure is the key to initiation of liquefaction. Without
changes in the pore pressure, hence changes in effective stress, neither flow liquefaction nor
cyclic mobility can occur. The different phenomenon can, however, required different levels
of pore pressure to occur.
The fact that soil deposit is susceptible to liquefaction does not mean that liquefaction will
necessarily occur in a given earthquake. Its occurrence requires a disturbance that is strong
enough to initiate, or trigger, it. Evaluation of the nature of that disturbance is one of the most
critical parts of that liquefaction hazard evaluation. Any discussion of the initiation of the
liquefaction must specify which liquefaction related phenomenon is being considered.
Although cyclic mobility is an earthquake related phenomenon, flow liquefaction can be
initiated in a variety of ways. Flow slides triggered by monotonic loading (static liquefaction)
have been observed in natural soil deposits, manmade fills and mine tailing piles. Flow
liquefaction has also been triggered by non seismic sources of vibration, such as pile driving,
train traffic, geophysical explorations and blasting. Perhaps somewhat ironically, the study of
static liquefaction over the past 10 to 15 years has contributed greatly to improved
understanding of seismically induced liquefaction by identifying the effective stress
conditions at which liquefaction phenomenon are initiated. Understanding the initiation
requires identification of the state of the soil well liquefaction is triggered.

1.6 TYPICAL EFFECTS OF LIQUEFACTION
a. Loss of bearing strength: The ground can liquefy and lose its ability to support.
b. Lateral spreading: The ground can slide down very gentle slopes or toward stream banks
riding on a buried liquefied layer.
c. Sand boils: Sand-laden water can be ejected from a buried liquefied layer and erupt at the
surface to form sand volcanoes; the surrounding ground often fractures and settles.
d. Flow failures: Earth moves down steep slope with large displacement and much internal
disruption of material.
e. Ground oscillation: The surface layer, riding on a buried liquefied layer, is thrown back
and forth by the shaking and can be severely deformed.
f. Floatation: Light structures that are buried in the ground (like pipelines, sewers and nearly
empty fuel tanks) can float to the surface when they are surrounded by liquefied soil.
g. Settlement: When liquefied ground re-consolidates following an earthquake, the ground
surface may settle or subside as shaking decreases and the underlying liquefied soil becomes
denser.


CHAPTER 2
PROCEDURE TO EVALUATE
LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL


CHAPTER 2

PROCEDURE TO EVALUATE THE LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL OF
SOIL DUE TO EARTHQUAKE

2.1 Introduction
Semi-empirical procedures for evaluating the liquefaction potential of saturated cohesion less
soils during earthquakes are reexamined and revised relations for use in practice are
recommended .The stress reduction factor r
d
, earthquake magnitude scaling factor for cyclic
stress ratios (MSF), overburden correction factor for cyclic stress ratios (K
), and the over

burden normalization factor for penetration resistances (C
N
) are discussed and recently
modified relations are presented. These modified relations are used in re-evaluations of the
SPT case history data bases. Based on these re-evaluations, revised SPT based liquefaction
correlations are recommended for use in practice. In addition, shear wave velocity based
procedures and approaches used to evaluate the cyclic loading behavior of plastic fine-grained
soils are discussed.
CSR
M=7.5
= u.6S j
o
VO
a
max
oi
vo
[
r
d
MSF
1
K
o

(CSR)
M=7.5
= Cyclic Stress Ratio at earthquake magnitude 7.5

vo
= Total vertical stress
'
vo
= Effective vertical stress at depth Z
a
max
= Maximum horizontal acceleration
r
d
= Stress reduction coefficient
K
o
= Over burden correction factor

Step 1: Evaluation of total vertical stress (
VO
)
Total vertical stress (
VO
)

= * h
= Density of soil
h = thickness of layer

Step 2: Evaluation of effective vertical stress ('

VO
)
Effective vertical stress ('
VO
)

=
VO
- ( h
w
*
w
)

VO
= Total stress

w
= density of water
h
w
= depth of water in that layer

Step 3: Evaluation of stress reduction coefficient (r
d
)
ln (r
d
) = (z) + (z) M
(Z) = -1.u12 -1.126sin j
Z
11.73
+ S.1SS[
(Z) = u.1u6 +u.118sin j
Z
11.28
+S.142[
Z = Depth of soil layer

Step 4:Evaluation of magnitude scaling factor (MSF) for Earthquake of magnitude 7.5
NSF =
CSR
N
CSR
7.S
M=Earthquakemagnitude
Magnitude Scaling factor MSF=6.9 exp[
-M
4
- u.uS8 1.8
Step 5: Overburden correction factor (K
)
K
c
= 1 - C
o
Inj
oi
VO
P
a
[ 1.u
C
c
=
1
18.9-2.55(N
1
)
60

C
c
= Coefficient developed by Idriss and Boulanger
(N
1
)
60
= Modified standard penetration number
j
oi
VO
P
a
[ = Effective vertical pressure in terms of 1atmosphere
1P
a
= 1u1Kpa

Step 6: Comparing the calculated CSR value with the plot between CSR and modified
standard penetration test (SPT) N value given by Idriss and Boulanger (2004), the possibility
of liquefaction can be estimated. If the calculated CSR value is higher (or in other words falls
on the side the curve corresponding to liquefied soils) than the CSR values for the
corresponding N values from the curves corresponding to respective fineness contents,

liquefaction is likely to get triggered.
2.2 CURVES FITTED WITH MS-EXCEL FOR VARIOUS VALUES OF

FINES CONTENT (FC)
In the reference Idriss and Boulanger (2004) various curves have been proposed for CSR-SPT
relation for different fine contents of soil. In order to make use of these curves in the
computer program to be developed in this project, these curves have been fitted in
mathematical equations using MS-Excel. The curves fitted are presented here. (Fig -1)

Equations for the above fitted curves
For Fc=5% to Fc=15%
y = 1E-08x
6
- 8E-07x
5
+ 3E-05x
4
- 0.000x
3
+ 0.003x
2
- 0.004x + 0.087
R = 1
For Fc=15% to Fc=35%
y = 2E-08x
6
- 2E-06x
5
+ 6E-05x
4
- 0.000x
3
+ 0.007x
2
- 0.016x + 0.079
R = 0.999
Figure 1 Graph showing curves fitted using MS-Excel
C
y
c
l
i
c
s
h
e
a
r
s
t
r
e
s
s
r
a
t
i
o
(
C
S
R
)
Modifiedstandardpenetration (N
1
)
60
FC5%
FC=35%
FC35%
5%to15%
%to35%
For Fc35%
y = 9E-07x
5
- 4E-05x
4
+ 0.000x
3
- 0.002x
2
+ 0.010x + 0.086
R = 0.999
For Fc=35%
y = 1E-08x
6
- 6E-07x
5
+ 2E-05x
4
- 0.000x
3
+ 0.001x
2
+ 0.004x + 0.088
R = 1
For Fc5%
y = -5E-09x
6
+ 5E-07x
5
- 2E-05x
4
+ 0.000x
3
- 0.002x
2
+ 0.015x + 0.047
R = 0.999


CHAPTER 3

ASSESSMENT OF
LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL AT
THRISSUR


CHAPTER 3

EVALUATION OF LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL FOR SOILS IN
THRISSUR

Using the methods as given previously, liquefaction potential is evaluated
for the following two sites with the soil and other properties as mentioned

SITE: - 1, Sakthan Thampuran Nagar, Thrissur
DEPTH (m) SOIL TYPE THICKNESS N-VALUE DENSITY(KN/m
3
)
2.50 Sandy Clay 2.50 8 18.20
3.30 Clay 0.80 3 16.70
5.00 Sandy clay 1.70 5 18.20

1.1.0 SITE: - 1, Earthquake Magnitude = 7.5, Depth = 2.5m.
Soil type : Sandy Clay
Depth at which layer starts below ground level : G.L
Thickness of layer : 2.50m
Granular part content : 20%
SPT N Value : 8
Unit weight : 18.20 KN/m
3
Depth of water table : 1.20m Below G.L.
Earthquake Magnitude : 7.5
Maximum horizontal ground acceleration : 0.51 g

1.1.1 Evaluation of total vertical stress (

VO
)

VO
= * h = 18.20 * 2.5
= 45.50 KN/m
2
1.1.2 Evaluation of effective vertical stress ('
VO
)
'
VO
=
VO
- ( h
w
*
w
)
= 45.50 - (2.5-1.2) * 9.81 = 32.747 KN/m
2

1.1.3 Evaluation of stress reduction coefficient (r
d
)
ln (r
d
) = (z) + (z) M
(Z) = -1.u12 -1.126sin j
Z
11.73
+S.1SS[
(Z) = -1.u12 -1.126sin j
2.5
11.73
+S.1SS[
= -1.1169
(Z) = u.1u6 +u.118sin j
Z
11.28
+S.142[
(Z) = u.1u6 + u.118sinj
2.5
11.28
+ S.142[
= 0.1170
M = 7.5
ln (r
d
) = (z) + (z) M
= -1.1169 + 0.1170 * 7.5
= -0.23917 r
d
= 0.78728
1.1.4 Evaluation of magnitude scaling factor (MSF) for Earthquake of magnitude 7.5
NSF =
CSR
M
CSR
.S
=
CSR
.S
CSR
.S
=1.0
1.1.5 Overburden correction factor (K
)
K
c
= 1 - C
o
Inj
oi
VO
P
a
[ 1.u
C
c
=
1
18.9-2.55(N
1
)
60

=
1
18.9-2.558
= 0.08556
K
c
= 1 - u.u8SS6 In j
32.747
101
[
= 1.u96,
= 1.096 > 1.0
K
= 1.0
1.1.6 Cyclic shear stress ratio (CSR)

CSR
M=7.5
= u.6S j
o
VO
a
max
oi
vo
[
r
d
MSF
1
K
o

CSR
M=7.5
= u.6S j
45.50-0.51
32.747
[
0.78728
1
1
1
= 0.3626
1.1.7 Evaluation of CSR to initiate the liquefaction obtained by derived graph
ForFc=20%usingcurve15%Fc35%
Y (C.S.R) = 2E-08x
6
- 2E-06x
5
+ 6E-05x
4
- 0.000x
3
+ 0.007x
2
- 0.016x + 0.079
Sub N = 8; i.e. x=8 in above equation
Y (C.S.R) = 2E-08*8
6
- 2E-06x
5
+ 6E-05x
4
- 0.000x
3
+ 0.007x
2
- 0.016x + 0.079
= 0.1232
Since 0.1232 < 0.3626, Liquefaction will occur.

Soil type : clay
Depth at which layer starts below ground level : 2.50m
SPT N value : 3
3
Depth of water table : 1.20m below GL
Earthquake magnitude : 7.5

VO
)

VO
= * h +
1
* h
1

= 18.20 * 2.5 + 16.70*(3.3-2.5)
= 58.86 KN/m
2
VO
)
'
VO
=
VO
- ( h
w
*
w
)
= 58.86 - (3.3-1.2) * 9.81
= 38.259 KN/m
2

d
)
ln (r
d
) = (z) + (z) M
(Z) = -1.u12 -1.126sin j
Z
11.73
+S.1SS[
(Z) = -1.u12 -1.126sin j
3.3
11.73
+S.1SS[= -1.1182
(Z) = u.1u6 +u.118sin j
Z
11.28
+ S.142[
(Z) = u.1u6 + u.118sinj
3.3
11.28
+ S.142[ = 0.1172
M = 7.5
ln (r
d
) = (z) + (z) M
= -1.1182 + 0.1172 * 7.5
= -0.239, r
d =
0.7874
NSF =
CSR
M
CSR
.S
=
CSR
.S
CSR
.S
=1.0
)
K
c
= 1 - C
o
Inj
oi
VO
P
a
[ 1.u
C
c
=
1
18.9-2.55(N
1
)
60

=
1
18.9-2.553
= 0.06905
K
c
= 1 - u.u69uSInj
S8.2S9
101
[ = 1.u67
= 1.067 > 1.0, K
= 1.0
CSR
M=7.5
= u.6S j
o
VO
a
max
oi
vo
[
r
d
MSF
1
K
o

CSR
M=7.5
= u.6S j
58.86-0.51
38.259
[
0.7874
1
1
1
= 0.4016
1.2.7 Evaluation of CSR to initiate the liquefaction obtained by derived graph:
For Fc = 10% using curve 5% Fc 15%
Y (C.S.R) = 1E-08x
6
- 8E-07x
5
+ 3E-05x
4
- 0.000x
3
+ 0.003x
2
- 0.004x + 0.087
N = 3; i.e. x=3 in the above equation
Y (C.S.R) = 1E-08*3
6
- 8E-07*3
5
+ 3E-05*3
4
- 0.000*3
3
+ 0.003*3
2
- 0.004*3 + 0.087
= 0.075
Since 0.075<0.4016, Liquefaction will occur.


Soil type : sandy clay
SPT N value : 5
3

VO
)

VO
= * h +
1
* h
1
+
2
* h
2

= 58.86 + 18.20 * (5 - 3.3) = 89.80 KN/m
2
VO
)
'
VO
=
VO
- ( h
w
*
w
)
= 89.80 - (5.0-1.2) * 9.81
= 52.522 KN/m
2

d
)
ln (r
d
) = (z) + (z) M
(Z) = -1.u12 -1.126sin j
Z
11.73
+S.1SS[
(Z) = -1.u12 -1.126sin j
5
11.73
+S.1SS[
= -1.1211
(Z) = u.1u6 + u.118sinj
Z
11.28
+ S.142[
(Z) = u.1u6 + u.118sinj
5
11.28
+ S.142[
= 0.1175
M = 7.5
ln (r
d
) = (z) + (z) M
= -1.1211+ 0.1175* 7.5
= -0.2399, r
d =
0.7867
NSF =
CSR
M
CSR
.S
=
CSR
.S
CSR
.S
=1.0
)
K
c
= 1 - C
o
Inj
oi
VO
P
a
[ 1.u
C
c
=
1
18.9-2.55(N
1
)
60

=
1
18.9-2.555
= 0.07577
K
c
= 1 - u.u7S77 Inj
S2.S22
101
[
= 1.u49
= 1.049 > 1.0, K
= 1.0
1.3.6 Cyclic stress ratio (CSR)
CSR
M=7.5
= u.6S j
o
VO
a
max
oi
vo
[
r
d
MSF
1
K
o

CSR
M=7.5
= u.6S j
89.80-0.51
52.522
[
0.7867
1
1
1
= 0.4459
For Fc = 20% using curve 15% Fc 35%
Y (C.S.R) = 2E-08x
6
- 2E-06x
5
+ 6E-05x
4
- 0.000x
3
+ 0.007x
2
- 0.016x + 0.079
N = 5; ie. x=5 in equation (1)
Y (C.S.R) = 2E-08*5
6
- 2E-07*5
5
+ 6E-05*5
4
- 0.000*5
3
+ 0.007*5
2
+ 0.016*5 + 0.079
= 0.08598. Since 0.08598 < 0.4459, Liquefaction will occur.

SITE 2: MASTER AVENUE ROAD THRISSUR
DEPTH (m) SOIL TYPE THICKNESS N-VALUE DENSITY(KN/m
3
)
1.90 Gravel Fill 1.90 11 20.00
3.00 Clayey Sand 1.10 4 18.20
4.00 Sandy clay 1.00 32 18.20
4.50 Stiff clay sand
with gravel
0.50 13 16.70
5.00 Sandy Clay 0.50 13 18.20
5.50 Sandy Clay 0.50 8 18.20


Soil type : gravel fill
Depth at which layer starts below ground level : GL
Thickness of layer : 1.90
SPT N value : 11
3
Depth of water table : 0.80m below g l

VO
)

VO
= * h
= 20.00 * 1.90
= 38 KN/m
2
VO
)
'
VO
=
VO
- ( h
w
*
w
)
= 38.00 - (1.90-0.8) * 9.81
= 27.21 KN/m
2

d
)
ln (r
d
) = (z) + (z) M
(Z) = -1.u12 -1.126sin j
Z
11.73
+S.1SS[
(Z) = -1.u12 -1.126sin j
1.9
11.73
+S.1SS[= -1.1159
(Z) = u.1u6 +u.118sin j
Z
11.28
+ S.142[
(Z) = u.1u6 + u.118sinj
1.9
11.28
+ S.142[ = 0.1169
M = 2.5
ln (r
d
) = (z) + (z) M
= -1.1159 + 0.1169 * 2.5
= -0.23915, r
d =
0.4388
NSF = 6.9 exp [
-N
4
- u.uS8 1.8
NSF = 6.9 exp [
-2.S
4
- u.uS8 1.8 =1.5782
)
K
c
= 1 - C
o
Inj
oi
VO
P
a
[ 1.u
C
c
=
1
18.9-2.55(N
1
)
60

=
1
18.9-2.5511
= 0.09576
K
c
= 1 - u.u9S76 Inj
27.21
101
[
= 1.12S8
= 1.1238 > 1.0, K
= 1.0
CSR
M=7.5
= u.6S j
o
VO
a
max
oi
vo
[
r
d
MSF
1
K
o

CSR
M=7.5
= u.6S j
38.00-0.09
27.21
[
0.4388
1.5782
1
1
= 0.01969
For Fc = 60% using curve Fc > 35%
y = 9E-07x
5
- 4E-05x
4
+ 0.000x
3
- 0.002x
2
+ 0.010x + 0.086
N = 11, ie. x = 11
y = 9E-07*11
5
- 4E-05*11
4
+ 0.000*11
3
- 0.002*11
2
+ 0.010*11 + 0.086
= 0.235
Since 0.235 > 0.01969, Liquefaction will not occur in this layer.

SITE: - 2, Earthquake Magnitude = 2.5, Depth = 3.00m.
Soil type : clayey sand
Depth at which layer starts below ground level : 1.90 m
Thickness of layer : 1.10 m
SPT N value : 4
3
Depth of water table : 0.80m from GL


VO
)

VO
= * h +
1
* h
1

= 1.10 * 18.20 + 38
= 58.02 KN/m
2
VO
)
'
VO
=
VO
- ( h
w
*
w
)
= 38.00 - (3.00-0.8) * 9.81
= 36.438 KN/m
2
d
)
ln (r
d
) = (z) + (z) M
(Z) = -1.u12 -1.126sin j
Z
11.73
+S.1SS[
(Z) = -1.u12 -1.126sin j
3.0
11.73
+S.1SS[
=-1.1177
(Z) = u.1u6 + u.118sinj
Z
11.28
+ S.142[
(Z) = u.1u6 + u.118sinj
3.0
11.28
+ S.142[
= 0.1171
M = 2.5
ln (r
d
) = (z) + (z) M
= -1.1177 + 0.1171 * 2.5
= -0.82495
r
d
= 0.4383
NSF = 6.9 exp [
-N
4
- u.uS8 1.8
NSF = 6.9 exp [
-2.S
4
- u.uS8 1.8
=1.5782
)
K
c
= 1 - C
o
Inj
oi
VO
P
a
[ 1.u
C
c
=
1
18.9-2.55(N
1
)
60

=
1
18.9-2.554
= 0.07246
K
c
= 1 - u.u7246 Inj
27.21
101
[
= 1.u7S9
= 1.0739 > 1.0, K
= 1.0
CSR
M=7.5
= u.6S j
o
VO
a
max
oi
vo
[
r
d
MSF
1
K
o

CSR
M=7.5
= u.6S j
58.02 -0.09
36.438
[
0.4383
1.5782
1
1
= 0.02268
For Fc = 60% using curve Fc > 35%
y = 9E-07x
5
- 4E-05x
4
+ 0.000x
3
- 0.002x
2
+ 0.010x + 0.086
y = 9E-07*4
5
- 4E-05*4
4
+ 0.000*4
3
- 0.002*4
2
+ 0.010*4 + 0.086
= 1.22

SPT N value : 32
3
VO
)

VO
= * h +
1
* h
1
+
2
* h
2

= 1.9 * 20 +1.1*18.2 + 1*18.2 = 76.22 KN/m
2

VO
)
'
VO
=
VO
- ( h
w
*
w
)
= 76.22 - (4.00-0.8) * 9.81
= 44.828 KN/m
2

d
)
ln (r
d
) = (z) + (z) M
(Z) = -1.u12 -1.126sin j
Z
11.73
+S.1SS[
(Z) = -1.u12 -1.126sin j
4.0
11.73
+S.1SS[
=-1.1194
(Z) = u.1u6 + u.118sinj
Z
11.28
+ S.142[
(Z) = u.1u6 + u.118sinj
4.0
11.28
+ S.142[
= 0.1173
M = 2.5
ln (r
d
) = (z) + (z) M
= -1.1194 + 0.1173 * 2.5
= -0.82615
r
d
= 0.4377
NSF = 6.9 exp [
-N
4
- u.uS8 1.8
NSF = 6.9 exp [
-2.S
4
- u.uS8 1.8 =1.5782

)
K
c
= 1 - C
o
Inj
oi
VO
P
a
[ 1.u
C
c
=
1
18.9-2.55(N
1
)
60

=
1
18.9-2.5532
= 0.22346
K
c
= 1 - u.22S46Inj
44.828
101
[ = 1.181S
= 1.181S > 1.0,
K
= 1.0

CSR
M=7.5
= u.6S j
o
VO
a
max
oi
vo
[
r
d
MSF
1
K
o

CSR
M=7.5
= u.6S j
76.22 -0.09
44.828
[
0.4377
1.5782
1
1
= 0.02420
For Fc = 20% using curve Fc 15% - 35%
y = 2E-08x
6
- 2E-06x
5
+ 6E-05x
4
- 0.000x
3
+ 0.007x
2
- 0.016x + 0.079
N = 32, i.e. x = 32
y = 2E-08*32
6
- 2E-06*32
5
+ 6E-05*32
4
- 0.000*32
3
+ 0.007*32
2
- 0.016*32 + 0.079
= 0.6

Soil type : stiff clay sand with gravel
Depth at which layer starts below GL : 4.00m
SPT N value : 13
3

VO
)

VO
= * h +
1
* h
1
+
2
* h
2
+
3
* h
3

= 0.50 * 16.70 + 76.22
= 84.57 KN/m
2

VO
)
'
VO
=
VO
- ( h
w
*
w
)
= 84.57 - (4.50-0.8) * 9.81
= 48.273 KN/m
2

d
)
ln (r
d
) = (z) + (z) M
(Z) = -1.u12 -1.126sin j
Z
11.73
+S.1SS[
(Z) = -1.u12 -1.126sin j
4.5
11.73
+S.1SS[=-1.1203
(Z) = u.1u6 + u.118sinj
Z
11.28
+ S.142[
(Z) = u.1u6 + u.118sinj
4.5
11.28
+ S.142[ = 0.1174
M = 2.5
ln (r
d
) = (z) + (z) M
= -1.1203 + 0.1174 * 2.5= -0.8268, r
d
= 0.4374
NSF = 6.9 exp [
-N
4
- u.uS8 1.8
NSF = 6.9 exp [
-2.S
4
- u.uS8 1.8 =1.5782
2.4.5 Overburden correction factor (K)
K
c
= 1 - C
o
Inj
oi
VO
P
a
[ 1.u
C
c
=
1
18.9-2.55(N
1
)
60

=
1
18.9-2.5513
= 0.10303
K
c
= 1 - u.1uSuSj
44.828
101
[ = 1.u761
= 1.0761 > 1.0, K
= 1.0
CSR
M=7.5
= u.6S j
o
VO
a
max
oi
vo
[
r
d
MSF
1
K
o

CSR
M=7.5
= u.6S j
84.57 -0.09
48.273
[
0.4374
1.5782
1
1
= 0.02420
For FC = 10% Using curve 5% FC 15%
Y (C.S.R) = 1E-08x
6
- 8E-07x
5
+ 3E-05x
4
- 0.000x
3
+ 0.003x
2
- 0.004x + 0.087
N =13; ie. x=13 in the above equation
Y (C.S.R) = 1E-08*13
6
- 8E-07*13
5
+ 3E-05*13
4
- 0.000*13
3
+ 0.003*13
2
- 0.004*13 + 0.087
= 0.075
Since 0.165>0.02490, Liquefaction will not occur in this layer.

Depth at which layer starts below g l : 4.50m
SPT N value : 13
3

VO
)

VO
= * h +
1
* h
1
+
2
* h
2
+
3
* h
3

= 0.50 * 18.20 + 84.57 = 93.67 KN/m
2
VO
)
'
VO
=
VO
- ( h
w
*
w
)
= 93.67 - (5.00-0.8) * 9.81
= 52.468 KN/m
2
d
)
ln (r
d
) = (z) + (z) M
(Z) = -1.u12 -1.126sin j
Z
11.73
+S.1SS[
(Z) = -1.u12 -1.126sin j
5
11.73
+S.1SS[=-1.1211
(Z) = u.1u6 + u.118sinj
Z
11.28
+ S.142[
(Z) = u.1u6 + u.118sinj
5
11.28
+ S.142[
= 0.1175
M = 2.5
ln (r
d
) = (z) + (z) M
= -1.1211 + 0.1175 * 2.5
= -0.82735,
r
d
= 0.4372
NSF = 6.9 exp [
-N
4
- u.uS8 1.8
NSF = 6.9 exp [
-2.S
4
- u.uS8 1.8
=1.5782
)
K
c
= 1 - C
o
Inj
oi
VO
P
a
[ 1.u
C
c
=
1
18.9-2.55(N
1
)
60

=
1
18.9-2.5513
= 0.10303
K
c
= 1 - u.1uSuSj
S2.468
101
[
= 1.u67S
= 1.0675 > 1.0, K
= 1.0
CSR
M=7.5
= u.6S j
o
VO
a
max
oi
vo
[
r
d
MSF
1
K
o

CSR
M=7.5
= u.6S j
93.67-0.09
52.468
[
0.4372
1.5782
1
1
= 0.02537
y = 2E-08x
6
- 2E-06x
5
+ 6E-05x
4
- 0.000x
3
+ 0.007x
2
- 0.016x + 0.079
N = 13, i.e. x = 13
y = 2E-08*13
6
- 2E-06*13
5
+ 6E-05*13
4
- 0.000*13
3
+ 0.007*13
2
- 0.016*13 + 0.079
= 0.1632
Since 0.1632> 0.02537, Liquefaction will not occur in this layer.

SPT N value : 8
3


VO
)

VO
= * h +
1
* h
1
+
2
* h
2
+
3
* h
3

= 0.50 * 18.20 + 93.67
= 102.77 KN/m
2
VO
)
'
VO
=
VO
- ( h
w
*
w
)
= 102.77 - (5.50-0.8) * 9.81
= 56.663 KN/m
2

d
)
ln (r
d
) = (z) + (z) M
(Z) = -1.u12 -1.126sin j
Z
11.73
+S.1SS[
(Z) = -1.u12 -1.126sin j
5.5
11.73
+S.1SS[
=-1.1219
(Z) = u.1u6 + u.118sinj
Z
11.28
+ S.142[
(Z) = u.1u6 + u.118sinj
5.5
11.28
+ S.142[
= 0.1176
M = 2.5
ln (r
d
) = (z) + (z) M
= -1.1219 + 0.1176 * 2.5
= -0.8279,
r
d
= 0.43697
NSF = 6.9 exp [
-N
4
- u.uS8 1.8
NSF = 6.9 exp [
-2.S
4
- u.uS8 1.8
=1.5782
)
K
c
= 1 - C
o
Inj
oi
VO
P
a
[ 1.u
C
c
=
1
18.9-2.55(N
1
)
60

=
1
18.9-2.558
= 0.08556
K
c
= 1 - u.u8SS6j
S6.66S
101
[
= 1.u49S
= 1.0495 > 1.0, K
= 1.0
CSR
M=7.5
= u.6S j
o
VO
a
max
oi
vo
[
r
d
MSF
1
K
o

CSR
M=7.5
= u.6S j
102.77 -0.09
56.663
[
0.43697
1.5782
1
1
=0.02576

y = 2E-08x
6
- 2E-06x
5
+ 6E-05x
4
- 0.000x
3
+ 0.007x
2
- 0.016x + 0.079
N = 8, i.e. x = 8
y = 2E-08*8
6
- 2E-06*8
5
+ 6E-05*8
4
- 0.000*8
3
+ 0.007*8
2
- 0.016*8+ 0.079
= 0.1232
Since 0.1232> 0.02576, Liquefaction will not occur in this layer.

CONCLUSION

Evaluation of liquefaction potential is carried out for 2 sites in Thrissur, using SPT and other
soil investigation data. The calculation was carried out for earthquakes of magnitudes 7.5 and
2.5.
From the results it is seen that liquefaction will occur at an earthquake of magnitude 7.5 or
higher, but will not occur at earthquakes of magnitude 2.5 or lesser

WORK TO BE DONE IN 8
TH
SEMESTER
To write a program, which making use of the soil and earthquake data at any location
will be able to estimate the exact values of earthquake intensity which will trigger
Liquefaction, and to carry out studies for various locations.


REFERENCES
1. Idriss I.M. and Boulanger R.W. (2004) SEMIEMPIRICAL PROCEDURES FOR EVALUATING
LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL DURING EARTHQUAKES, Proceedings of the 11
th
International
Conference on Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering and the 3
rd
International
ConferenceonEarthquakeGeotechnicalEngineering,Page3256
2. Cetin K.O., Seed R.B. and Kayen R.E. (2000) SPT Based Probabilistic and Deterministic
assessment of seismic soil liquefaction Initiation Hazard, Pacific Earthquake Engineering
ResearchReportNo.PEER2000/05.
3. YoudT.L.,Idriss I.M.,Eds.(2001)Liquefactionresistanceof soils:Summaryreportfromthe

1996NCEERand1998NCEER/NSFworkshoponevaluationofliquefactionresistanceofsoils.,
J.GeotechandGeoenvir.Engr.,NSCE,Vol.111,No.10,PP.817833.
4. Liquefaction(2007a)www.ce.washington.edu/liquefaction/html/what/what.html.
5. Liquefaction(2007b)
http://iisee.kenken.go.jp/net/yokoi/methodology/liquefaction.htm/index.htm
6. Liquefaction(2007c)http://G:/earthquake/liquefaction.ht

Interim

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Interim

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

E EV VA AL LU UA AT TI IN NG G L LI IQ QU UE EF FA AC CT TI IO ON N

was implemented. With this

1.3 EVALUATION OF LIQUEFACTION HAZARDS

), and the over

Step 2: Evaluation of effective vertical stress ('

Step 5: Overburden correction factor (K

corresponding N values from the curves corresponding to respective fineness contents,

2.2 CURVES FITTED WITH MS-EXCEL FOR VARIOUS VALUES OF

1.1.1 Evaluation of total vertical stress (

1.1.6 Cyclic shear stress ratio (CSR)

1.2.3 Evaluation of stress reduction coefficient (r

1.3.0 SITE: - 1, Earthquake Magnitude = 7.5, Depth = 5.00m.

2.1.0 SITE: - 2, Earthquake Magnitude = 2.5, Depth = 1.90m.

Depth of water table : 0.80m from GL

2.2.5 Overburden correction factor (K

2.3.2 Evaluation of effective vertical stress ('

2.3.6 Cyclic stress ratio (CSR)

2.4.3 Evaluation of stress reduction coefficient (r

2.5.0 SITE: - 2, Earthquake Magnitude = 2.5, Depth = 5.00m.

Depth of water table : 0.80m below GL

2.6.5 Overburden correction factor (K

Department of Civil Engineering Project20082009

3. YoudT.L.,Idriss I.M.,Eds.(2001)Liquefactionresistanceof soils:Summaryreportfromthe

You might also like