SOIL LIQUEFACTION:

PHENOMENON,
HAZARDS ,
REMEDIATION

Dr. Farhat Javed

Associate Prof. Military College of Engg, Risalpur
 AIM

HIGLIGHT THE IMPORTANCE OF

LIQUEFACTION IN ENGINEERING
PRACTICE
 SEQUENCE OF
PRESENTATION
Introduction

Liquefaction phenomenon

Hazards Associated with Liquefaction

Evaluation of Liquefaction Potential

Remediation
 During an earthquake seismic waves
travel vertically and rapid loading of
soil occurs under undrained conditions
i.e., pore water has no time to move
out. In saturated soils the seismic
energy causes an increase in pore water
pressures and consequently the
effective stresses decrease. This results
in loss of shear strength of soil and soil
starts to behave as a fluid. This fluid is
no longer able to sustain the load of
structure and the structure settles. This
phenomenon is known as liquefaction.
The Phenomenon is associated with:
soft
young
water-saturated
uniformly graded
fine grained sands and silts
During liquefaction these soils behave as
viscous fluids rather than solids .
This can be better demonstrated by a video
clip in which a glass container with
saturated sand is resting on a vibrating
table.
 STRUCTURE

GLASS
CONTAINER
SATURATED
SAND
The phenomenon of liquefaction
can be well understood by
considering shear strength of
soils. Soils fail under externally
applied shear forces and the shear
strength of soil is governed by the
effective or inter-granular stresses
expressed as:
Effective stress = (total stress -
pore water pressure)
= - u
Shear strength of soil is given
as :

= c+ tan
It can be seen that a cohesionless
soil such as sand will not posses
any shear strength when the
effective stresses approach zero
and it will transform into a
liquid state.
Assemblage of Contact forces between particles
particles give rise to normal stresses that are
responsible for shear strength.

This box
represents
magnitude of
pore water
pressure
 During dynamic loading there is an increase in water
pressure which reduces the contact forces between the
individual soil particles, thereby softening and weakening
the soil deposit.

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
When liquefaction occurs, the strength of the soil
decreases and, the ability of a soil deposit to suppo
foundations for buildings and bridges is reduced .
overturned apartment complex buildings in Niigata
1964.
 Liquefied soil also exerts higher pressure on retaining walls,which can
cause them to tilt or slide. This movement can cause settlement of the
retained soil and destruction of structures on the ground surface

Kobe
1995
 Retaining wall damage and lateral spreading, 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.
 Lateral spreading caused the foundations of the Showa bridge in
Nigata ,Japan to move laterally so much that the simply supported spans
became unseated and collapsed
 Liquefaction-induced soil movements can push foundations out of place
to the point where bridge spans loose support or are compressed to the
point of buckling
1964 Alaskan earthquake.
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
1957 Lake Merced slide
modest movements during liquefaction produce tension
cracks such as those on the banks of the Motagua River
following the 1976 Guatemala Earthquake.
 Damaged quay walls and port facilities on Rokko Island.
Quay walls have been pushed outward by 2 to 3 meters with
3 to 4 meters deep depressed areas called grabens forming
behind the walls, Kobe 1995.
 1999 Chi-Chi (Taiwan) earthquake
over 2,400 people were killed, and 11,000 were injured
1999 Chi-Chi (Taiwan) earthquake
1999 Chi-Chi (Taiwan) earthquake
1999 Chi-Chi (Taiwan) earthquake
1999 Chi-Chi (Taiwan) earthquake
1999 Chi-Chi (Taiwan) earthquake
1906 sanfransisco USA earthquake
 Road damaged by lateral spread,
near Pajaro River, 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake
Liquefaction failure of shefield dam (1925, california USA)
Liquefaction failure of Tanks at Nigata, Japan)
 Chi-Chi earthquake .
Among the 467 foundation damage cases reported, 67 cases (14%
were caused by earthquake-induced liquefaction.
Evaluation of
Liquefaction
Potential
 The evaluation of liquefaction
potential of soils at any site
requires parameters pertaining
to:
cyclic loads due to an
earthquake
and
soil properties which describe
the soil resistance under those
loads.
 Normal Field Conditions
Where
v = effective vertical
stress

K0= at-rest earth

pressure coefficient

K0v = effective
horizontal stress
During
Earthquake
Two tests can be used to
simulate field stress
conditions

Cyclic direct shear

test
Cyclic triaxial test

Cyclic Direct Shear Test

Cyclic Triaxial Test
 Relation between
cyclic direct shear and
(h/v) cyclic
direct sheartriaxial
= Cr (1/2test
x d/3 )
triaxial

where; h = horizontal shear stress

(h/v) = cyclic stress ratio CSR
v = vertical stress
d = deviator stress
3 = effective confining pressure
Cr = Correction faactor obtained from
figure given on next slide
 If relative density in lab is different
from field then the equation is
modified as follows:

(avg/v)= Cr(1/2 x d/3)triaxial at RD1 x

RD2/RD1

Where RD1 is relative density in

lab and RD2 is relative density in
field
Generally cyclic triaxial test is conducted at various
cyclic stress ratios CSR = (1/2 x d/3) on
undisturbed or remolded specimen till
liquefaction occurs, and corresponding number of
stress cycles is determined. A graph is plotted
between CSR and number of stress cycles.
This graph can be used to read out
CSR corresponding to any number of
stress cycles and this value is used in
following relationship to determine
shear resistance that will be
mobilized at any depth.

(avg/v)= Cr(1/2 x d/3)triaxial at RD1 x

RD2/RD1
If cyclic tiaxial testing can not be conducted then this
Graph can be used to determine CSR from Mean grain
Size D 50
Results of Standard Penetration
Test can also be used to determine
CSR from this curve.
Subsequently shear resistance of
soil against cyclic loading can be
determined by:

= CSR x v

Where,

v is effective vertical stress

DETERMINATION OF
SHEAR STRESSES
INDUCED BY CERTAIN
EARTHQUAKE IN THE
FIELD BY SIMPLIFIED
PROCEDURE
Since soil prism is assumed to be a rigid
body therefore a correction factor rD
must be applied as soil is not rigid.

= rD ( h amax )/g
Where,
= shear stress induced during an
earthquake
= unit weight of soil.
amax = maximum acceleration due to
earthquake
g = acceleration due to gravity
h = height of soil prism
rD = stress reduction factor , a function
of depth of point being analyzed. It
can be obtained from next slide
 For an actual earthquake event
Acceleration v/s time
relationship (accelerogram) looks
like
During an earthquake the
induced cyclic shear
stresses vary with time. On
the contrary in the
laboratory shear test the
specimen is subjected to a
uniform cyclic shear stress.
To incorporate this effect
a multiplication factor of
0.65 has been suggested.
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
 This Table can be used to determine
equivalent number of stress cycles for
an earthquake of certain magnitude.
The effect of non uniform stress cycles is
incorporated by determining equivalent
number of stress cycles for an earthquake
and shear stresses induced during an
earthquake are computed by the following
equation:

= 0.65 rD ( h amax )/g

Where,
= shear stress induced during an earthquake
= unit weight of soil.
amax = maximum acceleration due to earthquake
g = acceleration due to gravity
h = height of soil prism
rD = stress reduction factor , a function of
depth of point being analyzed. It can be obtained
from next slide
Maps like these
Can be used to
Determine max
Ground
acceleration
After determining the cyclic
shear stresses induced by an
earthquake
and
the shear resistance mobilized at
the point under consideration, a
graph is plotted between depth
and the stresses determined
above.
If induced cyclic shear
stresses are more than
shear resistance
mobilized, liquefaction
will occur.
RESEARCH ON
KAMRA SAND
Soil Stratification developed after SPT
and Boring
 Compacted Earth Fill

SAND LAYER
0.5 m

SILT LAYER
Sampling being done in Test
Pit
 RELATIVE DENSITY DETERMINATION AT
CMTL WAPDA LAHORE

Vibrating Table for relative Mould for relative

density density

Lab Relative Density =53

%
Relative Density From SPT
correlations =52.8 %
EVALUATION OF LIQUEFACTION
SEISMICITY OF KAMRA CITY
PHA at
Kamra =
0.24 g
Sr. No Fault Distance Magnitude
Name From of earthquake
From equation
Length Kamra logL=1.02M 5.77
(km) (km)
1 Khairabad
Fault 370 3 8.2
It is concluded that an
earthquake of Magnitude 7 can
occur at Kamra with peak
horizontal acceleration of 0.24 g
Evaluation of Liquefaction potential

Standard Penetration Test (SPT)

Cyclic Triaxial Test.
Hypothesis If water table rises and sand gets saturated then
liquefaction will occur under magnitude 7 earthquake
 Evaluation Of Liquefaction On the basis
of SPT

Shear stress Shear

mobilized in Resistance
Depth
Point
(m)
field
avg (KN/m ) 2
r (KN / m )
2 Remarks

= 0.65 rD ( h = CSR x v
A 1.50 amax )/g
4.17 3.24
avg > r
(Liquefaction will occur)

avg > r
B 1.75 4.89 3.24
(Liquefaction will occur)

avg > r
C 2.00 5.58 4.13
(Liquefaction will occur)
 ANALYSIS ON THE BASIS OF
CYCLIC TRIAXIAL TEST.

Analysis on the basis of triaxial was based on the method

proposed by SEED AND IDRIS
Shear resistance was computed from the following formula

((avg/v)= Cr(1/2 x d/3)triaxial at RD1 x

RD2/RD1 Cr(1/2 x d / 3 )triaxial x RD2/RD1

h = Cr(1/2 x d / 3 ) x v x RD2/RD1
0.57
0.255
 Analysis By Cyclic Triaxial Test
Shear Shear
stress resistance
mobilized by
point in field
Depth Triaxial
Remarks
(m) avg r (KN / m2 )
(KN/m2)
(avg/v)=Cr(1/2 x d/3)triaxial x RD2/RD1
= 0.65 rD ( h at RD1

amax )/g
A 1.50 4.17 4.08 avg > r
(Liquefaction will
occur)
B 1.75 4.89 4.46 avg > r
(Liquefaction will
occur)
C 2.00 5.58 5.20 avg > r
It is concluded on the basis
of these results that the sand
will liquefy under the event of
an earthquake of Magnitude
7.
 REMEDIATION

HOW CAN LIQUIFACTION HAZARDS BE

REDUCED?
 Avoid Liquefaction Susceptible
Soils
Build Liquefaction Resistant
Structures
Improve the Soil
Avoid Liquefaction Susceptible
Soils
 historical Criteria
Soils that have liquefied in the past can liquefy
again in future earthquakes.
Geological Criteria
Saturated soil deposits that have been
created by sedimentation in rivers and lakes
deposition of debris or eroded material or
deposits formed by wind action can be very
liquefaction susceptible.
Man-made soil deposits, particularly those
created by the process of hydraulic filling
 Compositional Criteria
D10 sizes ranging from 0.05 to 1.0 mm
AND
a coefficient of uniformity ranging from 2 to 10.
Uniformly graded soil deposits
Angularity of particles

Silty soils are susceptible to liquefaction if they

satisfy the criteria given below.

Fraction finer than 0.005 mm< 15%

Liquid Limit, LL < 35%
Natural water content > 0.9 LL
Liquidity Index < 0.75
 State Criteria

Relative density, Dr

Increasing confining pressure

HOW CAN LIQUIFACTION HAZARDS BE
REDUCED?

Build Liquefaction
Resistant Structures
It is important that all
Build Liquefaction
foundation elements Resistant Structures
in a shallow
foundation are tied
together to make the
foundation move or
settle uniformly, thus
decreasing the
amount of shear
forces induced in the
structural elements
resting upon the
foundation.
A stiff foundation
Build
mat isLiquefaction
a good type Resistant Structures
of shallow
foundation, which
can transfer loads
from locally liquefied
zones to adjacent
stronger ground.
 Buried utilities, such as
Build Liquefaction Resistant Structures
sewage and water pipes,
should have ductile
connections to the
structure to
accommodate the large
movements and
settlements that can
occur due to liquefaction.
The pipes in the photo
connected the two
buildings in a straight
line before the
earthquake
Build Liquefaction Resistant Structures
HOW CAN LIQUIFACTION HAZARDS BE
REDUCED?

Improve the Soil

Vibroflotation
Vibroflotation
Improve the Soil

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 grouting is a ground treatment
technique that involves injection of a thick-
consistency soil-cement grout under
pressure into the soil mass, consolidating,
and thereby densifying surrounding soils in-
place. The injected grout mass occupies
void space created by pressure-
densification. Pump pressure, as transmitted
through low-mobility grout, produces
compaction by displacing soil at depth until
resisted by the weight of overlying soils.

Improve the Soil

Drainage techniques

Improve the Soil

Drainage techniques

Improve the Soil

 Verification of
A number of methods can be used to verify
Improvement

the effectiveness of soil improvement. In-situ

techniques are popular because of the
limitations of many laboratory techniques.
Usually, in-situ test are performed to evaluate
the liquefaction potential of a soil deposit
before the improvement was attempted. With
the knowledge of the existing ground
Verification of
characteristics, one can then specify a
necessary level of improvement in terms of
Improvement
insitu test parameters.
?
?