Professional Documents
Culture Documents
PHENOMENON,
HAZARDS ,
REMEDIATION
AIM
HIGLIGHT THE IMPORTANCE OF
LIQUEFACTION IN ENGINEERING
PRACTICE
SEQUENCE OF
PRESENTATION
Introduction
Liquefaction phenomenon
Hazards Associated with Liquefaction
Evaluation of Liquefaction Potential
Remediation
STRUCTURE
GLASS
CONTAINER
SATURATED
SAND
= - u
c+
tan
Assemblage of
particles
Increase in pore
pressure due to
dynamic loading
HAZARDS ASSOCIATED
WITH LIQUEFACTION
PHENOMENON
Historical Evidences
1964 Nigata (Japan)
1964 Great Alaskan earthquake
Seismically induced soil
liquefaction produced
spectacular and devastating
effect in both of these events,
thrusting the issue forcefully to
the attention of engineers and
researchers
Kobe
1995
Increased water pressure can also trigger landslides and cause the
collapse of dams. Lower San Fernando dam suffered an underwater slide
during the San Fernando earthquake, 1971.
Sand boils and ground fissures were observed at various sites in Niigata.
The strong ground motions that led to collapse of the Hanshin Express way also caused
severe liquefaction damage to port and wharf facilities as can be seen below.
1995 Kobe
earthquake, Japan
Lateral spreading caused 1.2-2 meter drop of paved surface and local flooding, Kobe
1995.
Alaska earthquake,
USA,1964
Chi-Chi earthquake
Evaluation of
Liquefaction
Potential
v = effective vertical
stress
K0v = effective
horizontal stress
During
Earthquake
Relation between
cyclic direct shear and
(h/v) cyclic
= Cr (1/2test
x d/3 )
direct sheartriaxial
triaxial
at RD1
at RD1
Where,
DETERMINATION OF
SHEAR STRESSES
INDUCED BY CERTAIN
EARTHQUAKE IN THE
FIELD BY SIMPLIFIED
PROCEDURE
Where,
= rD ( h amax )/g
=
earthquake
=
amax
=
earthquake
g
=
h
=
rD
=
of depth
can be obtained
Seed et al have
recommended a weighted
procedure to derive the
number of uniform stress
cycles Neq (at an amplitude
of 65% of the peak cyclic
shear stresses i.e. cyc=0.65
max) from recorded strong
ground motion
Where,
=
amax =
g
=
h
=
RESEARCH ON
KAMRA SAND
SAND LAYER
0.5 m
SILT LAYER
EVALUATION OF LIQUEFACTION
PHA at
Kamra =
0.24 g
Sr. No
Fault
Name
Khairabad
Fault
Distance
From
Length Kamra
(km)
(km)
370
Magnitude
of earthquake
From equation
logL=1.02M 5.77
8.2
It is concluded that an
earthquake of Magnitude 7 can
occur at Kamra with peak
horizontal acceleration of 0.24 g
Point
Depth
(m)
1.50
1.75
2.00
Shear stress
mobilized in
field
Shear
Resistance
avg (KN/m )
2
= 0.65 rD ( h
amax )/g
4.17
4.89
5.58
r (KN / m )
2
= CSR x v
Remarks
3.24
avg > r
3.24
avg > r
4.13
avg > r
0.57
0.255
Shear
stress
mobilized
in field
Depth
(m) avg
(KN/m2)
= 0.65 rD ( h
amax )/g
1.50
4.17
Shear
resistance
by
Triaxial
r (KN / m2 )
Remarks
(avg/v)=Cr(1/2 x d/3)triaxial
4.08
at RD1
x RD2/RD1
avg > r
(Liquefaction will
occur)
1.75
4.89
4.46
avg > r
(Liquefaction will
occur)
2.00
5.58
5.20
avg > r
It
REMEDIATION
HOW CAN LIQUIFACTION HAZARDS BE
REDUCED?
Avoid
Liquefaction Susceptible
Soils
Build Liquefaction Resistant
Structures
Improve the Soil
historical
Criteria
Geological
Criteria
Compositional
Criteria
State Criteria
Relative density, Dr
Increasing confining pressure
Build Liquefaction
Resistant Structures
Resistant Structures
A stiff foundation
Build
mat isLiquefaction
a good type
of shallow
foundation, which
can transfer loads
from locally liquefied
zones to adjacent
stronger ground.
Resistant Structures
Vibroflotation
Vibroflotation
Dynamic Compaction
Stone Columns
Generally, the stone column ground improvement method is used to treat
soils where fines content exceeds that acceptable for vibrocompaction
Compaction Piles
Compaction Grouting
Compaction
Drainage techniques
Drainage techniques
Verification of
A number of methods can be used to verify
Improvement
the effectiveness
of soil improvement. In-situ
Verification of
Improvement