Professional Documents
Culture Documents
There are basically two methods available for evaluating the cyclic liq-
uefaction potential to a deposit of saturated sand subjected to earth-
quake shaking:
458
These are usually considered quite different approaches, since the first
method is based on empirical correlations of some in situ characteristic
and observed performance, while the second method is based entirely
on an analysis of stress or strain conditions and the use of laboratory
testing procedures.
In fact, however, because of the manner in which field performance
data are often expressed, the two methods involve the same basic ap-
proach and differ only in the manner in which the field liquefaction
characteristics of a deposit are determined.
Thus, for instance, it has been found that a convenient parameter for
expressing the cyclic liquefaction characteristics of a sand under level
ground conditions is the cyclic stress ratio, i.e., the ratio of the average
cyclic shear stress jh developed on horizontal surfaces of the sand as a
result of the cyclic or earthquake loading to the initial vertical effective
stress v'0 acting on the sand layer before the cyclic stresses were applied.
This parameter has the advantage of taking into account the depth of
the soil layer involved, the depth of the water table, and the intensity
of earthquake shaking or other cyclic loading phenomena.
The cyclic stress ratio developed in the field due to earthquake shaking
can readily be computed from an equation of the form (27): i!
459
(2) the use of rotary drilling methods and a drill hole continuously filled
with drilling mud.
If this approach is adopted, much of the variability can be eliminated
by adopting standard test conditions and applying correlations for oth-
ers. Thus, in the present report, the loss of driving energy, which results
from using a short length of rods, is corrected by multiplying the mea-
sured N values in the depth range 0 ft-10 ft (0 m-3.05 m) by a factor of
0.75, and other aspects of the test are standardized by using data from
tests performed under the following conditions: (1) The use of a rope
and drum system, with two turns of the rope around the drum, to lift
the falling weight; (2) drilling mud to support the sides of the hole; (3)
a relatively small diameter hole, approx 4 in. in diam; and (4) penetra-
tion resistance measured over the range 6 in.-18 in. (152 mm-457 mm)
penetration into the ground.
While it is recognized that these conditions do not represent the stan-
dard prescribed in the ideal test procedure, they represent conditions
widely used for many years, both in North America and in other coun-
tries throughout the world, and they have been used in establishing
much of the field data available for liquefaction correlations. Thus, their
adoption for the purposes of this report is justified for this reason alone.
Where test conditions deviate from those iisted, appropriate corrections
to the measured results should be made before using the correlation
charts presented herein.
It was not until the Alaska and Niigata earthquakes of 1964 that geo-
technical engineers took serious interest in the general phenomenon of
earthquake-induced liquefaction or cyclic mobility or the conditions re-
sponsible for causing them to occur in the field. Following the Niigata
earthquake, a number of Japanese engineers (12,13,19) studied the areas
in Niigata where liquefaction had and had not occurred and developed
criteria, based primarily on the standard penetration resistance of the
sand deposits, for differentiating between liquefiable and nonliquefiable
conditions in that city. The results of these studies for Niigata are shown
in Fig. 1. It should be recognized, however, that these results are not
likely to be applicable to other areas where shaking intensities may be
stronger or water tables may be at different depths than that in the Nii-
gata area.
Subsequently, a more comprehensive collection of site conditions at
various locations where some evidence of liquefaction or no liquefaction
was known to have taken place was presented by Seed and Peacock (30)
and used as a basis to determine the relationship between field values
of cyclic stress ratio ^/(T'O (in which ih = the average horizontal shear
stress induced by an earthquake; and u'0 = the initial effective overbur-
den pressure on the soil layer involved), and the relative density of the
sand, as determined from the standard penetration resistance and its
461
\ !
\
>
Heavy damage
and liquefaction
To-*
I N.
10 20 30 40
Standard Penetration Resistance, N - blows/foot
correlation with relative density proposed by Gibbs and Holtz (9). This
collection of field cases, shown in Fig. 2, has subsequently been used
by others, often supplemented by a few additional site studies (3,4) to
determine other correlations between liquefaction-producing parameters
and penetration resistance. The most recently published form of this field
data collection is shown in Fig. 3(a) (after Seed, Mori, and Chan (29)).
Values of stress ratio known to be associated with some evidence of
• •
*
O
frljo.
«
© q.
>
• ©
« 0
G
ill " o O
• • ^ *
FIG. 2.—Relationship between (Thv)„J<j'0 and Relative Density for Known Cases
of Liquefaction and Nonllquefaction
462
—
a /
;f §
e
» / -
® /
J ©
- s • y -
o
"0 °/ •
o 0.1
• f
1 1' l I i i i
20 30
Ni - blows per foot
(")
05 -
1.0
ft.
** 1.5 -
ons
*"
Pressure
- -
ro
1"
o 35
/
1u
» an
/
s" 1
45
1 l
(W
FIG. 3.—(a) Correlation between Stress Ratio Causing Liquefaction in the Field
and Penetration Resistance of Sand; (b) Relationship between C, and Effective
Overburden Pressure
463
qc-volues by CPT-
(Dr = 40to 8 0 %
0.4 & -
*/
#y
- /
J!
/ — - Relationship proposed by —
Seedetal.{B75)-no Chinese data
® Relationship proposed in
1974 Chinese code based
on Chinese data
i i i
10 20 30
Modified Penetration Resistance, N( - blows/ft
also compared with the lower bound line for sites showing evidence of
some degree of cyclic mobility or liquefaction shown in Fig. 3(a). It may
be seen that there is apparently a very high degree of agreement be-
tween the critical boundary determined in this way with that shown in
Fig. 3(a). It is significant and remarkable that such a great similarity both
in procedures and criteria should have evolved in countries with so little
technical communication at the time the individual plots were developed.
Data from the Haicheng and Tangshan Earthquakes in China.—More
recent data for nine sites known to have liquefied and five for which
there was no apparent liquefaction in the Haicheng (1974) and Tangshan
(1976) earthquakes in China (Magnitudes 7.3 and 7.8, respectively) have
been presented by Xie (36). These data, reduced to the form shown in
Fig. 3 with the aid of the Trifunac and Brady correlation between inten-
sity and peak ground acceleration are shown in Fig. 6, together with the
boundary line from Fig. 3(a).
Data from the Guatemala Earthquake of 1976.—During the Guate-
mala earthquake of 1976 (Magnitude 7.6) extensive liquefaction occurred
in the area of La Playa on the edge of Lake Amatitlan. A detailed report
of field and laboratory studies of the soil conditions in the area affected,
in the adjacent area where no liquefaction occurred, and just beyond the
boundary of the liquefaction zone has been presented by Seed, et al.
(26). The correlation between induced stress ratio Tave/ff^ and the nor-
malized SPT values for the different zones are shown in Fig. 7 where
they are again compared with the boundary line separating sites known
to have liquefied or not liquefied taken from Fig. 3(a).
Data from the Argentina Earthquake of 1977.—In November, 1977, a
major earthquake with Magnitude 7.4 occurred in San Juan Province,
Argentina, and relationships between induced stress ratio determined
from ground acceleration and standard penetration test data for 11 sites
where liquefaction occurred and nine sites where liquefaction did not
occur have been presented by Idriss (10). Penetration data for the liq-
uefied sites was taken in adjacent areas where liquefaction was not ap-
parent. The results of these studies are presented in Fig. 8.
Data from Miyagiken-Oki Earthquake, Japan of 1978.—An abundant
series of new data points, obtained primarily as a result of studies fol-
lowing the Miyagiken-Oki earthquake in Japan in June, 1978 (Magnitude
7.4), were presented by Tokimatsu and Yoshimi (32). The data are pre-
sented in a slightly different form from that used in the plots shown in
Figs. 3-8, but they can readily be converted to the same form on the
basis of the information provided in the report.
For sands with a mean grain diameter, D50 > 0.25 mm, the corrected
data from this study are shown in Fig. 9 where they are compared with
the boundary line determined in Fig. 3. It may be seen that there is
generally good agreement although some sites where liquefaction ap-
parently did not occur are found to plot above the boundary line. It is
appropriate that this may occur since sites where liquefaction is not re-
ported cannot be considered with the same degree of confidence as sites
where evidence of liquefaction is clearly apparent. This is due to the fact
466
0 10 20 30
Modified Penetration Resistance, N| -blows/ft
FIG. 6.—Comparison of Empirical Chart for Predicting Liquefaction with Data from
Haicheng and Tangshan Earthquakes
1 1 I
Conditions cousin 3 liquefaction Guatemala Eq,,
o Conditions with no apparent liquefaction 1976 ,
o
/
o
•XZ
*-' /
ex
s.
w
V
0.4 /
\L
a. V
8
</i £
a)
£ «
£
t V 0.3 Liquefac ion f
£
Di
s °
%O I-
O
1
V•£
- -
®
1 i
0 10 20 30 40
Modified Penetrdtion Resistance, N| - blows/ft.
FIG. 7.—Comparison of Empirical Chart for Predicting Liquefaction with Data from
Guatemala Earthquake, 1976
467
0 10 20 30 40
Modified Penetration Resistance, N|-biows/ft.
FIG. 8.—Comparison of Empirical Chart for Predicting Liquefaction with Data from
Argentina Earthquake, 1977
@ Liquefaction
© No apparent liquefoction
t 0.4
b-
p
I 0.2
ft O.I
10 20 30
Modified Penetration Resistance, Ni -blows/ft.
FIG. 9.-~Correlation between Field Liquefaction Behavior of Sands (D50 > 0.25
mm) under Level Ground Conditions and Standard Penetration Resistance
468
ground surface, but its effects were not evidenced at the ground surface.
Viewed in this light, the data points shown in Fig. 9 may be considered
good confirmatory evidence of the position of the boundary line shown
for sandy sites and Magnitude 7-1/2 earthquakes.
The reliable field data from Fig. 3, together with the supplementary
data shown in Figs. 5-9, are plotted together in Fig. 10 where they pro-
vide a significantly greater data base from which to determine a bound-
ary line (or zone) separating sites known to have liquefied from sites
which have apparently not liquefied in a series of earthquakes, all of
which have magnitudes of about 7-1/2. The data for Niigata and Lake
Amatitlan are known to be at the boundary for such a line, and the
Chinese code results are also intended to define limiting conditions. Thus,
a revised position for the boundary line for sands can now be estab-
lished. Fortunately, this boundary is very close to that shown in Fig. 3,
but it is supported by a significantly greater data base and, thus, can be
drawn with a far greater degree of confidence than heretofore.
*/
sr
Si 0 . 1
0
0
9 0
9
e 0 0
0
9 o G
_ e 9
9 G /
_
e 0 fO
9 00 / £ oo
o
G 0
O /
GT 0
O &> o o
e
e 0 O /OOO 0 0
0 08 9 0 0
0 0 9 O / O
90 t a GB-Z °
- 9 S 0 % BQ J.6P .... . 0 0 o -
9 0o 0rJT'*~ Niigaio 0 G
a ft Z ° oo
00 o
0 • O/ A> G 0 0
0 G o
0 ©j&to 9o o o
if 0 0 OD
. 8 BBO O 0
OG^I ?OGDO G O 0u 0 0
03G
O 0
1 1 1
0 10 20 30 40
Modified Penetration Resistance, N. -blows/ft.
FIG. 10.—Correlation between Field Liquefaction Behavior of Sands (D5I1 > 0.25
mm) under Level Ground Conditions and Standard Penetration Resistance (All
Data)
I I 1
0 Site with liquefaction E
1
o Site with no apparent liquefaction !2
I AT/
3/
e
00 /// /
//
0 / o
00/
0 0 0
° /// 0 o
/ G
.8 o
© OO ©3/ 0 / O ,
0 0OO / O O OO
//
0 0 / 0
0
o so o
%/
/
00/
o
0 0
/ o
/
•'
/ / ° -
o ©co'0 y
J*L «* o
/
/ • /z/ o o
o o ^
_
•
I I 1
0 10 20 30
Modified Penetration Resistance, N| - blows/ft.
FIG. 11.—Correlation between Field Liquefaction Behavior of Silty Sands (D50 <
0.15 mm) under Level Ground Conditions and Standard Penetration Resistance
(Tokimatsu and Yoshimi (33))
470
TABLE 2.—Ratios of the Ordinates of the Curve in Fig. 12, Relative to the Ordinate
Corresponding to 15 Cycles
Earthquake Number of representative
magnitude, M cycles at 0.65, Tmax L 'ave
471
% 7/ 2 8/2
6 10 15 26 100
Number of Cycles to Couse ru = 1 0 0 % and ± 5 % Strain
ratios of the ordinates of the curve in Fig. 12, relative to the ordinate
corresponding to 15 cycles. These ratios are shown directly on the plot
and summarized in Table 2. Thus, by multiplying the boundary curves
in Fig. 11 by the scaling factors shown in Col. 3 of Table 2, boundary
curves separating sites where liquefaction is likely to occur or unlikely
to occur may be determined for earthquakes with different magnitudes.
I I
I I
J> -
j_
0 10 20 30 40
Modified Penetration Resistance, N( -blows/ft.
i :—i i i i
0 600 800 D00 1200
Average Shear Wave Velocity in Top 50 ft. - fps (Approximate)
472
Both laboratory tests and field performance data have shown that the
great majority of clayey soils will not liquefy during earthquakes. How-
ever, recent studies in China (35) have shown that certain types of clayey
materials may be vulnerable to severe strength loss as a result of earth-
quake shaking. These soils appear to have the following characteristics:
Percent finer than 0.005 mm <15%
Liquid Limit <35
Water Content >0.9 x Liquid Limit
If soils with these characteristics plot above the A-line on the plasticity
chart, the best means of determining their cyclic loading characteristics
is by test. Otherwise clayey soils may be considered nonvulnerable to
liquefaction.
FIG. 14.—Rate of Pore Water Pressure Build Up in Cyclic Simple Shear Tests
(DeAlba, et al. (5))
473
While the standard penetration test (SPT) has been widely used for
many years, in many cases it may be more expedient to explore the
variability of conditions within an extensive sand deposit using the static
cone penetration test (CPT). In this test, a cone with a diameter of about
1.4 in. (35.6 mm) is pushed into the ground, and the resistance to pen-
etration of the conical tip is measured in units of kilograms per square
centimeter.
The main advantages of this procedure are that it provides data much
more rapidly than does the SPT, it provides a continuous record of pen-
etration resistance in any bore hole, and it is less vulnerable to operator
error than the SPT.
The main disadvantage of the test, from the point of view of predict-
ing the liquefaction resistance of a site, is that it has a very limited data
base to provide a correlation between soil liquefaction characteristics and
CPT values. This data base may remain meager for some time pending
the generation of new data from new earthquakes. In the meantime,
however, the test can be used in conjunction with the extensive data
base for the standard penetration test by either:
Using such relationships the data obtained from CPT test programs can
readily be converted to equivalent N values for the sand and then used
in conjunction with the charts in Figs. 10-13 to evaluate liquefaction re-
sistance. By this means, full advantage can be taken of the advantages
of the CPT test procedure and the extensive data based of the SPT cor-
relation with field liquefaction characteristics.
Alternatively, the critical boundaries separating liquefiable from non-
liquefiable conditions shown in Figs. 10, 11, and 13 could be expressed
in terms of a Static Cone Penetration Resistance corresponding to an
overburden pressure of 1 ton/sq ft (4.8 kPa), qcl, by using the relation-
ships qA - 4 to 5 Nx for clean sands and qcl ~ 3.5 to 4.5 N] for silty sands.
This would lead to plots relating values of cyclic stress ratio causing liq-
uefaction with qA values, as shown in Fig. 15.
It is interesting to note that for any sand the value of qcl can be de-
termined from the value of qc measured at any depth using the relationship
qci = qc-cN (4)
in which values of CN are read off from the curve shown in Fig. 4, which
is based on the relationship between qc, effective overburden pressure
and relative density proposed by Schmertmann (25).
In view of the need to introduce a second correlation (between SPT
and CPT), this procedure would seem to be less desirable than use of
the SPT directly as an index of liquefaction. However, in view of the
other advantages of the CPT test (more continuous and extensive rec-
ords of soil characteristics) and the fact that site-specific correlations can
be developed where appropriate, this procedure may well prove advan-
tageous in many cases.
J- (Based on q c /N =
4 lo 5 kg/cm 2 )
Liquefaction
No Liquefaction No Liquefaction
o OJ
0 1 1 1
0 50 100 150 200 0 50 100 150
Modified Cone Penetration Resistance, o^i kg/cm2 Modified Cone Penetration Resistance, q c( kg/cm2
U i It 90 90
for values of Ni up to about 30.
CN-N-a'0
Thus (Tave)« = — (6)
v
s= J— (13«)
leads to the result that
/l3N X 104 x 32 2\
vs = I 1 = 185 VNfps (56 VNm/s) (13b)
477
CONCLUSION
It should be noted that, in using this approach with the charts pre-
sented, the SPT should be determined in the standard method using a
rope and pulley system to lift the falling weight, as described previously.
If a free-falling weight is used or if there are other deviations from the
test procedure used in determining the Nt values used in the charts
shown, judgment must be exercised to evaluate an appropriate JVj value
for the soil before using the charts.
It may also be noted that the chart shown in Fig. 11 is based entirely
on field performance of deposits during actual earthquakes and is, thus,
based on a large number of field case studies. Its extension to silty sands
is similarly well-supported by field case data. Extension of the chart to
earthquakes with magnitudes other than M = 7-1/2 is based on a sta-
tistical analysis of many earthquake records and the characteristic shape
of a liquefaction curve determined by very large-scale cyclic simple shear
tests. As such, it is not believed that the use of the scaling factors in-
dicated by this curve will introduce any serious error in the positions of
the family of curves shown in Fig. 14.
Because this empirical approach is founded on such a large body of
field data, it is believed by the writers to provide the most useful em-
pirical approach available at the present time. However, it should be
noted that the standard penetration test cannot be performed conve-
niently at all depths (say deeper than 100 ft (30.5 m) or through large
depths of water) or in all soils (such as those containing a significant
479
APPENDIX.—REFERENCES
480
12. Kishida, H., "Damage to Reinforced Concrete Buildings in Niigata City with
Special Reference to Foundation Engineering," Soil and Foundation, Vol. VII,
No. 1, Tokyo, Japan, 1966.
13. Koizumi, Y., " C h a n g e in Density of Sand Subsoil Caused by the Niigata
Earthquake," Soil and Foundation, Vol. VIII, N o . 2, Tokyo, Japan, 1966, p p .
38-44.
14. Kovacs, W. D., Velocity Measurement of a Free-Fail Hammer, 1978.
15. Kovacs, W. D., Evans, J. C , and Griffith, A. H., "Towards a More Stan-
dardized SPT," Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Soil Me-
chanics and Foundation Engineering, Tokyo, Japan, 1977.
16. Lee, K. L., and Albeisa, A., "Earthquake Induced Settlements in Saturated
Sands," Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE, Vol. 100,
No. GT4, Proc. Paper 10496, Apr., 1974, p p . 387-406.
17. Marcuson, W. F., Ill, and Bieganousky, W. A., "Laboratory Standard Pen-
etration Tests on Fine S a n d s , " Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division,
ASCE, Vol. 103, N o . GT6, June, 1976, p p . 565-588.
18. Martin, G. R., Finn, W. D. K., and Seed, H. Bolton, "Fundamentals of Liq-
uefaction u n d e r Cyclic Loading," Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Divi-
sion, ASCE, Vol. 101, N o . GT5, May, 1975, p p . 423-438.
19. Ohsaki, Y., "Niigata Earthquakes, 1964 Building D a m a g e and Soil Condi-
tions," Soils and Foundations, Vol. VI, N o . 2, p p . 14-37.
20. Ohsaki, Y., a n d Iwasaki, R., " O n Dynamic Shear Moduli a n d Poisson's Ratio ,,
of Soil Deposits," Soils and Foundation, Vol. 13, N o . 4, Tokyo, Japan, 1973, i
p p . 61-73.
21. Palacios, A., "The Theory a n d Measurement of Energy Transfer During SPT
Test Sampling," thesis, presented to the University of Florida, at Gainesville, I. i
Fla., in 1977, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doc- 11,
tor of Philosophy. 11,
22. Peck, Ralph B., "Liquefaction Potential: Science Versus Practice," Journal of ,i
the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol. 105, N o . GT3, Mar., 1979, ,,'
p . 393. ;;;
23. Schmertmann, J. H., "Predicting the qc/N Ratio—Interpreting the Dynamics '
of the Standard Penetration Test," University of Florida, Report to the De-
partment of Transportation, Fla., Oct., 1976.
24. Schmertmann, J. H . , "Use the SPT to Measure Dynamic Properties?—Yes, ,!,!
But . . .!" Proceedings of the American Society for Testing and Materials Sympo- ]],
slum on Dynamic Field and Laboratory Testing of Soil and Rock, June 29, 1977. [ [j
25. Schmertmann, J. H., "Guidelines for Cone Penetration Test Performance a n d J ]}
Design," Report No. FHWA-TS-78-209, U.S. Department of Transportation,
Federal H i g h w a y Administration, Washington, D.C., July, 1978. 'V
26. Seed, H . Bolton, Arango, Igancio, Chan, Clarence K., Gomez-Masso, Al- 'I'1
berto, and Ascoli, Rebecca Grant, "Earthquake-Induced Liquefaction Near 'tjjj
Lake Amatitlan, Guatemala," Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division,
ASCE, Vol. 107, No. GT4, Proc. Paper 16212, Apr., 1981, p p . 501-518. ul[
27. Seed, H. Bolton, and Idriss, I. M., "Simplified Procedure for Evaluating Soil ;JI
Liquefaction Potential," Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, n,'
ASCE, Vol. 97, No. SM9, Sept., 1971, p . 1249. {jf1
28. Seed, H. B., Idriss, I. M., Makdisi, F. a n d Benerjee, N . , "Representation of Jj|i
Irregular Stress Time Histories by Equivalent Uniform Stress Series in Liq- ni
uefaction Analyses," Report No. EERC 75-29, Earthquake Engineering Re- '
search Center, University of California, Berkeley, Calif., Oct., 1975.
29. Seed, H. Bolton, Mori, Kenji, and Chan, Clarence K., "Influence of Seismic
History on the Liquefaction Characteristics of S a n d s , " Report No. EERC 75-
25, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berke- j
ley, Calif., Aug., 1975.
30. Seed, H. B., a n d Peacock, W. H., "Test Procedures for Measuring Soil Liq-
481
97, No. SM9, Proc. Paper 8354, Sept., 1971, pp. 1171-1182.
32. Tatsuoka, F., Iwasaki, T., Tokida, K., Yasuda, S., Hirose, M., Imai, T., and
Kon-no, M., "Standard Penetration Tests and Soil Liquefaction Potential
Evaluation," Soils and Foundations, Japanese Society of Soil Mechanics and
Foundation Engineering, Vol. 20, No. 4, Dec, 1980.
33. Tokimatsu, K., and Yoshimi, H., "Field Correlation of Soil Liquefaction with
SPT and Grain Size," Proceedings of the International Conference on Recent Ad-
vances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics, 1981.
34. Trifunac, M. D., and Brady, A. G., "Correlation of Peak Acceleration, Ve-
locity and Displacement with Earthquake Magnitude, Distance and Site Con-
ditions," Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics Journal.
35. Wang, Wenshao, "Some Findings in Soil Liquefaction," Water Conservancy
and Hydroelectric Power Scientific Research Institute, Beijing, China, Aug.,
1979.
36. Xie, Junfei, "Empirical Criteria for Sand Liquefaction," Proceedings of the 2nd
U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Stanford University, Aug.,
1979.
37. Youd, T. L., and Hoose, S. N., "Liquefaction Susceptibility and Geologic
Setting," Proceedings of the 6th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vol.
Ill, pp. 2189-2194.
38. Zhou, S. G., "Influence of Fines on Evaluating Liquefaction of Sand by SPT,"
Proceedings of the International Conference on Recent Advances in Geotechnical
Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics, Vol. 2, 1981, pp. 167-172.
482