Liquefaction Hazard Assessment of Ramgarh Tal Pariyojna

www.globaljournal.
asia
GJESR RESEARCH PAPER VOL. 1 [ISSUE 10] NOVEMBER, 2014
ISSN:- 2349283X
LIQUEFACTION HAZARD ASSESSMENT OF RAMGARH

TAL PARIYOJNA
1Abhishek
Kumar Tiwari
Department of Civil Engineering,
Madan Mohan Malviya University of
Technology, Gorakhpur, India
Email: abhicivilengg07@gmail.com
2Dr.S.M
Ali Jawaid
Department of Civil Engineering,
Madan Mohan Malviya University of
Technology, Gorakhpur, India
Email: smaj@rediffmail.com
ABSTRACT: Determination of liquefaction potential due to earthquake is complex geotechnical problem.

Many factors including soil parameters and seismic characteristics influence this phenomenon. The
devastating damage of liquefaction induced ground failures in the Alaska 1964 and Niigata 1964
earthquakes serve as a clear reminder of such events. Liquefaction is one of the ground failures in
potential earth science hazard. Since Gorakhpur falls in the area with high seismic probability, there is
need for the assessment of liquefaction potential, so the study area is Ramgarh Tal Pariyojna to
recognize the conditions that exist in a soil deposit before an earthquake in order to identify liquefaction.
Results of an extensive analysis for determination of liquefaction hazard analysis of Ramgarh Tal
Pariyojna of Gorakhpur city at different locations is addressed here. The simplified procedure suggested
by seed & Idriss (1971) on the basis of field performance data is used for determination of liquefaction
potential and also to present a liquefaction hazard map using SPT data collected from the various sites at
different locations of Ramgarh Tal Pariyojna. From the analysis it is observed that the areas with river
channel deposit are the most hazardous area for liquefaction. From the study it is also concluded that if
acceleration level is increased then more area will be affected due to liquefaction. In this study we
concluded that if earthquake more than or equal to 6.5 ritcher scale occurs in Gorakhpur region, it will be
extensively damaged due to liquefaction. The percentage of silt and poorly graded sand is high in the area
under Ramgarh Tal Pariyojna indicating that there is a great chance of soil liquefaction. Here
liquefaction potential analysis is done to determine the factor of safety at different depth. The structure
constructed should be liquefaction resistant i.e., designing the foundation elements to resist the effects of
liquefaction if at all it is necessary to construct the structure on liquefiable soil because of favourable
location, space restriction and other reasons.
Keywords: Liquefaction, microzonation, standard penetration test, Seismic Hazard
1. INTRODUCTION
Gorakhpur lies between Latitude 26 13 N and
2729N and long.8305E and 8356E.the
district occupies the north-eastern corner of the
state along with the state of Deoria, & comprises
a large stretch of country lying to the north of
river Ghaghra, the deep stream of which forms
its boundary with district Azamgarh. In the
earthquake zonal map of India the district lies in
zone IV liable to moderate damage by
earthquakes. Although no major earthquake
occurred close to it, the tract being not far from
the
Great
Himalayan
Boundary
fault,
experiences the effects of moderate to great
earthquake occurring there. The seismic
intensity may not exceed VIII on the Modified
Mercalli 1931. As India experiencing lots of
seismic threats and Liquefaction is one of the
major types for ground failure. Liquefaction is a
soil behaviour phenomenon in which a
saturated soil losses a substantial amount of
strength due to high excess pore-water pressure

generated by and accumulated during strong
earthquake ground shaking. Large numbers of
liquefaction studies were conducted in all the
earthquake prone areas of the world. After the
2001 Bhuj earthquake, attracted the great
attention of liquefaction studies.
Soil liquefaction has been a major cause of
damage to soil structure, lifelines and building
foundation. Zoning for liquefaction, therefore,
has been an important goal for seismic hazard
mitigation.
Gorakhpur region is potentially prone to
damaging earthquakes, as it is located in an
active seismic zone IV. Because of the haphazard
urbanization and increasing population in the
Gorakhpur region now, it has become very
essential to carry out studies on different
aspects of the earthquake hazard leading to long
term earthquake vulnerability reduction
Virtu and Foi..
17

program. This situation has created the
necessity for carrying out a detailed seismic
hazard assessment of the city and an awareness
building measures to the people of Gorakhpur
regarding the earthquake safety.
So seeing the fact the study area is RAMGARH
TAL PARIYOJNA, Gorakhpur, Ramgarh Tal, and
a natural lake, which is situated to the southeast
of Gorakhpur in Uttar Pradesh and covers an
area of about 723 hectare. The catchment area
around the lake is approximately 1632 acres,
out of which, 1235 acres land is under
Gorakhpur Development authority (GDA).
Liquefaction is one of the main effects of an
earthquake that is responsible to structural
failure and damage to roads, pipelines and
infrastructures. In Gorakhpur region in spite of
weak subsurface condition, many tall buildings
have been built and the number is constantly
rising. Most of these buildings (Except
commercial, governmental and organizational
buildings) have been constructed without
adequate research on the subsurface sediment
conditions and hence may run a high risk that
they are not properly designed to withstand the
particular accelerations at the site. Looking at
this situation, the study on subsurface geology is
very important, as it helps for the study of
seismic hazard and hence for the earthquake
vulnerability reduction program. For the study
of subsurface geology, the generation of a
geological database is important which can be
done by the collection of borehole data. One
other potential source of useful information for
subsurface
information,
geophysical
measurements, are completely lacking for
Gorakhpur region. The work is done to analyse
the liquefaction potential of Ramgarh Tal
Pariyojna in Gorakhpur city using SPT data
collected from the various sites of Pariyojna by
simplified procedure of Seed & Idriss (1982).
The geological, geotechnical, and seismological
details of an area have to be studied which
forms important parameters and information to
analyse Liquefaction potential of this region.
The main objectives of this work is to1. Estimate the liquefaction resistance of soils
using SPT data.
2. Estimate the maximum or equivalent cyclic
shear stress likely to be induced in a soil deposit
during an earthquake;
ISSN:- 2349283X
3. Estimate the liquefaction potential.

4. Prepare liquefaction hazard zonation map.
LIQUEFACTION AND ITS MECHANISM
Soil liquefaction has been a major cause of
damage to soil structure, lifelines and building
foundation. Zoning for liquefaction, therefore,
has been an important goal for seismic hazard
mitigation. Soil liquefaction occurs in loose,
saturated cohesionless soil units (sands and
silts) and sensitive clays when a sudden loss of
strength and loss of stiffness is experienced,
sometimes resulting in large, permanent
displacements of the ground. Even thin lenses of
loose saturated silts and sands may cause an
overlying sloping soil mass to slide laterally
along the liquefied layer during earthquakes.
Liquefaction beneath and in the vicinity of a
waste containment unit can result in localized
bearing capacity failures, lateral spreading, and
excessive settlement that can have severe
consequences upon the integrity of waste
containment systems. Liquefaction-associated
lateral spreading and flow failures can also
affect the global stability of a waste containment
facility.
There is need to understand the mechanism of
soil liquefaction, where it occurs and why it
occurs so often during earthquake. Liquefaction
of soil is a process by which sediments below
the water table lose their shear strength and
behave more as viscous liquid than as a solid.
The water in the soil voids exerts pressure upon
the soil particles. If the pressure is low enough,
the soil stays stable. However, once the water
pressure exceeds a certain level, it forces the soil
particles to move relative to each other, thus
causing the strength of the soil to decrease and
failure of the soil. So when the earthquake
occurs the shear waves passes through
saturated soil layers and causes the granular soil
structure to deform and weak part of soil begins
to collapse.
Then collapse soil starts filling the lower layer
and forces the pore water pressure in this to
increase layer. If increased water pressure
cannot be released, it will continue to build up
and after a certain limit effective stress of the
soil becomes zero .If situation aroused then the
soil layer losses its shear strength and it cannot
certain the total weight of the soil layer above,
Virtu and Foi..
18
ISSN:- 2349283X
thus the upper layer soils are ready to move

down and behaves as a viscous liquid, if then it
is said to be soil liquefaction occurred.
produces unacceptably large permanent

deformation during earthquake shaking, which
is also known as lateral spreading. It can occur
on very gently sloping ground or on virtually flat
ground adjacent to bodies of water.
Flow liquefaction occurs much less frequently
than cyclic mobility but its effects are usually far
more severe. Besides these two types, Ground
oscillation, loss of bearing strength and sand
boils are common phenomena of Liquefaction.
Fig-1. Mechanism of Liquefaction (courtesy:

http://www.cee.ehime-u.ac.jp)
Geology of Gorakhpur
The district of Gorakhpur lies between Lat.
2613N and 2729N and Long. 8305E and
8356E. The district occupies the north-eastern
corner of the state along with the district of
Deoria, and comprises a large stretch of country
lying to the north of the river Rapti, the deep
stream of which forms its southern boundary
with the Azamgarh district. On the west, the
boundary marches along Basti and on the east
adjoins Deoria and the Chhoti Gandak Nadi and
further south the Jharna Nala forms the dividing
line. To the north lies Nepal. Gorakhpur has also
a lake Ramgarh Tal Lake, which is 18 km bigger.
It is bigger than Dal Lake of Kashmir which is of
15.5 km Ramgarh Tal. It's vast and provides
home to various types of fishes. Geography it is
located on the bank of river Rapti and Rohani, a
Ganges tributary originating in Nepal that
sometimes causes severe floods. The Rapti is
interconnected through many other small rivers
following meandering courses across the
Gangetic
Plain.
The
district
presents
characteristics distinct from natural features of
the western districts of Uttar Pradesh. This
difference is due primarily to the relative
proximity of the Himalayas, the outermost
foothills of which are only a few kilometres from
the northern borders. The peak of Dhaulagiri,
some 8,230 meters above sea-level, is visible
under favourable climatic conditions as far
south as Gorakhpur itself. The district geology is
primarily river born alluvium. Few mineral
products are mined in Gorakhpur, with the most
common
being
a
nodular
limestone
conglomerate known as kankar, brick, and
saltpetre. The last occurs principally in the south
and south-east and is manufactured in a crude
state in considerable quantities most of it being
exported to markets of Bihar. In the Bans gaon
Liquefaction occurs in saturated soils, in which

the space between individual particles is
completely filled with water. Its effects are most
commonly observed in low-lying areas near
bodies of water such as rivers, lakes, bays, and
oceans (ABAG's Report, "Real dirt on
Liquefaction, 2001).
Liquefaction occurs in Cohesionless sand
deposited in alluvial environment. Areas of high
liquefaction potentials are alluvial floodplains,
deltaic deposits, estuaries deposit, colluvial and
aeolian deposit, artificial fill etc. Areas of
medium liquefaction potentials are alluvial fans,
channel deposits, and beaches. Areas of coarse
deposits and rock debris do not undergo
liquefaction. The susceptibility to liquefaction
depends on the density of the sand and intensity
of ground motion (amplitude and duration).
According to Kramer (1996), two types of
liquefaction exist.
Flow Liquefaction:
It occurs when the shear stress required for
static equilibrium of a soil mass (The static
shear stress) is greater than the shear strength
of the soil in its liquefied state. When
liquefaction occurs in such case the strength of
the soil decreases and the ability of soil deposit
to support for the structure is reduced.
Flow liquefaction failures are characterized by
the sudden nature of their origin, the speed with
which they develop and the large distance cover
over which the liquefied materials often move.
Cyclic mobility:
It occurs when the static shear stress is less than
the shear strength of the liquefied soil. It
Virtu and Foi..
19

tehsil kankar is most abundant and quarries are
seen at many places. It is also extracted from
some places in Mahrajganj tehsil. Lime is
obtained by burning kankar. Brick clay is
abundant everywhere and bricks are made all
over the district. The soil in the district is light
sandy or dense clay of yellowish brown colour.
The sand found in the rivers is medium to coarse
grained, greyish white to brownish in colour and
is suitable for construction. The high seismic
activity occurred in Nepal, the Gorakhpur lies in
the border of Nepal. This impasses a very high
risk of an earthquake disaster in Gorakhpur
resulting into great damage. To determine the
potential hazard due to an earthquake
ISSN:- 2349283X
appropriate
site
characterization
and
determination of the soil properties are
essential in order to suitably design a structure.
Ramgarh Tal, a natural lake, is situated to the
southeast of Gorakhpur in Uttar Pradesh and
covers an area of about 723 ha. The catchment
area around the lake is approximately 1632
acres, out of which, 1235 acres land is under
Gorakhpur Development authority (GDA).As we
know that Gorakhpur is under seismic zone the
need of liquefaction analysis requires the
characterization of soil profile. So my work is to
analyse the liquefaction potential of an area and
the liquefaction potential map.
Fig-2. Map of Ramgarh Tal Pariyojna

GENERATION OF SUBSURFACE DATA AND
DATA ACQUISITION
Collection and organisation of the data
The effective management of borehole data is
crucial for many applications in the geosciences;
among which is earthquake microzonation
(Houlding, 1994). Collection and organization of
data-extensive borehole data is collected from
various locations of Ramgarh Tal pariyojna and
seventeen borehole data were collected at
different sites shown in fig 3.1 for liquefaction
zonation. The collected geotechnical data is in
different formats depending upon the source of
organization and the particular project. Data is
then synthesized and was brought to common
platform needed for the geotechnical
characterization and liquefaction study. The
data is given in appendix.
Data acquisition
Data acquisition is one of the most difficult parts
of a research work. It is time consuming and
more personal relations are required, in order to
contact people in institutions that might have
relevant data.
Data management
All the data managed in a same platform so as to
easily accessible. Data used to analyse
liquefaction potential of a soil, Microsoft Excel
2000 and Microsoft Access were used to store
the borehole data. Initially the data were
entered in the Excel sheets. After the data
acquisition was completed, all the boreholes
were grouped according to their types and
source as shown in the tables given in appendix.
The deep bore holes are used to study the
geological evaluation of the site. Three tables are
Virtu and Foi..
20

generated - One containing attributes such as:
Borehole_id, location, depth range, geological
information, Soil type, thickness of the layers,
SPT N, corrected N-value and SPT curve. The
second and third type of tables includes the
geotechnical information with the following
attributes: Borehole-id, Location, Depth range,
particle size distribution, consistency limit, soil
classification, Moisture content, Bulk Density,
Unit weight, and, shear characteristics.
ISSN:- 2349283X
Table: 02. SUMMARY OF MECHANICAL

GRADING AND CONSISTANCY LIMIT
Site: Proposed GDA Staff Quarter Building,
Siddhartha Enclave, Gorakhpur
Bore Hole No-01
APPENDIX-1
Table: 01.BORELOG CHART AND SPT CURVE
Bore Hole No-01
Table: 03. SUMMARY OF LABORATORY
RESULTS
Bore Hole No-01
Fig-3. Map of Ramgarh Tal pariyojna representing Location of Bore Holes
Virtu and Foi..
21

LITREATURE REVIEW
A liquefaction analysis should, at a minimum,
address the following:
Developing a detailed understanding of site
conditions, the soil stratigraphy, material
properties and their variability, and the
areal extent of potential critical layers.
Developing
simplified
cross-sections
amenable to analysis. SPT procedures are
widely used in practice to characterize the
soil (field data are easier to obtain on loose
cohesion less soils than trying to obtain and
test undisturbed samples). The data needs
to be corrected as necessary, for example,
using the normalized SPT blow count
[(N1)60] or the normalized CPT. The total
vertical stress (vo) and effective vertical
stress (vo') in each stratum also need to be
evaluated. This should take into account the
changes in overburden stress across the
lateral extent of each critical layer, and the
temporal high phreatic and piezometric
surfaces,
Calculation of the force required to liquefy
the critical zones, based on the
characteristics of the critical zone(s) (e.g.,
fines content, normalized standardized blow
count, overburden stresses, level of
saturation),
Calculation of the design earthquakes effect
on each potentially liquefiable layer should
be performed using the site-specific in situ
soil data and an understanding of the
earthquake magnitude potential for the
facility, and
Computing the factor of safety against
liquefaction
for
each
liquefaction
susceptible critical
Field Methods
The use of insitu testing is the dominant
approach in common engineering practice for
quantitative
assessment
of
liquefaction
potential. Calculation of two variables is
required for evaluation of liquefaction
resistance of soils (Seed et al, 2001; Youd et al,
2001).They is as follows
1. The seismic demand on a soil layer
expressed in terms of CSR and
2. The capacity of the soil to resist liquefaction
expressed in terms of CRR.
ISSN:- 2349283X
The models proposed by Seed & Idriss methods

are extensively used for predicting liquefaction
potential using field data.
Seed & Idriss method
After the disastrous earthquakes in Alaska and
in Niigata, Japan in 1964, Professors Seed and
Idriss (1971), developed and published a
methodology termed the simplified procedure
for evaluating liquefaction resistance of soils.
Seed and Idriss (1971) developed and published
the basic simplified procedure. That
procedure has been modified and improved
periodically since that time, primarily through
landmark papers by Seed (1979), Seed and
Idriss (1982), and Seed et al. (1985). In 1985,
Whitman (1985) convened a workshop on
behalf of the National Research Council (NRC),
USA in which 36 experts and observers
thoroughly reviewed the state-of-knowledge
and the state-of-the-art for assessing
liquefaction hazard. That workshop produced a
report (NRC 1985) that has become a widely
used standard and reference for liquefaction
hazard assessment. Liquefaction is defined as
the transformation of a granular material from a
solid to a liquefied state as a consequence of
increased pore-water pressure and reduced
effective stress (Marcuson 1978). Increased
pore-water pressure is induced by the tendency
of granular materials to compact when
subjected to cyclic shear deformations. The
change of state occurs most readily in loose to
moderately dense granular soils with poor
drainage, such as silty sands or sands and
gravels capped by or containing seams of
impermeable sediment. As liquefaction occurs,
the soil stratum softens, allowing large cyclic
deformations to occur. In loose materials, the
softening is also accompanied by a loss of shear
strength that may lead to large shear
deformations or even flow failure under
moderate to high shear stresses, such as beneath
a foundation or sloping ground. In moderately
dense to dense materials, liquefaction leads to
transient softening and increased cyclic shear
strains, but a tendency to dilate during shear
inhibits major strength loss and large ground
deformations. A condition of cyclic mobility or
cyclic liquefaction may develop following
liquefaction of moderately dense granular
Virtu and Foi..
22

materials. Beneath gently sloping to flat ground,
liquefaction may lead to ground oscillation or
lateral spread as a consequence of either flow
deformation or cyclic mobility. Loose soils also
compact
during
liquefaction
and
reconsolidation, leading to ground settlement.
Sand boils may also erupt as excess pore water
pressures dissipate.
CYCLIC STRESS RATIO (CSR) AND
CYCLICRESISTANCE RATIO (CRR)
Calculation, or estimation, of two variables is
required for evaluation of liquefaction
resistance of soils: (1) the seismic demand on a
soil layer, expressed in terms of CSR; and (2) the
capacity of the soil to resist liquefaction,
expressed in terms of CRR.
EVALUATION OF CSR
Seed and Idriss (1971) formulated the following
equation for calculation of the cyclic stress ratio:
ISSN:- 2349283X
Blake (1996) approximated the mean curve

plotted in Fig. 2.6 by the following equation:
(3)
Where z= depth beneath ground surface in
meters. Eq. (3) yields essentially the same
values for rd as (2), but is easier to program and
may be used in routine engineering practice.
CSR = (av /vo) = 0.65(amax /g) (vo /'vo)rd (1)

Where amax = peak horizontal acceleration at the
ground surface generated by the earthquake; g =
acceleration of gravity; vo and 'vo are total and
effective
vertical
overburden
stresses,
respectively; and rd= stress reduction
coefficient. For routine practice and noncritical
projects, the following equations may be used to
estimate average values of rd (Liao and Whitman
1986b):
rd= 1.0 -0.00765z for z 9.15 m
(2a)
rd= 1.174 -0.0267z for 9.15 m <z 23 m
(2b)
Where z= depth below ground surface in meters.
Some investigators have suggested additional
equations for estimating rd at greater depths
(Robertson and Wride 1998), but evaluation of
liquefaction at these greater depths is beyond
the depths where the simplified procedure is
verified and where routine applications should
be applied. Mean values of rd calculated from (2)
are plotted in Fig. 4, along with the mean and
range of values proposed by Seed and Idriss
(1971). With past practice, rd values determined
from (2) are suitable for use in routine
engineering practice. Factor rd calculated from
(2) are the mean of a wide range of possible rd,
and that the range of rd increases with depth
(Golesorkhi 1989).For ease of computation,
FIG-4. rd versus Depth Curves Developed by

Seed and Idriss(1971) with Added MeanValue Lines Plotted from Eq. (2)
EVALUATION OF LIQUEFACTION RESISTANCE
(CRR)
A plausible method for evaluating CRR is to
retrieve and test undisturbed soil specimens in
the laboratory. Unfortunately, in situ stress
states generally cannot be reestablished in the
laboratory, and specimens of granular soils
retrieved with typical drilling and sampling
techniques are too disturbed to yield meaningful
results. Only through specialized sampling
techniques, such as ground freezing, can
sufficiently undisturbed specimens be obtained.
Criteria for evaluation of liquefaction
resistance based on the SPT
Criteria for evaluation of liquefaction resistance
based on the SPT have been rather robust over
the years. Those criteria are largely embodied in
the CSR versus (N1)60 plots reproduced in Fig. 5,
(N1)60 is the SPT blow count normalized to an
overburden pressure of approximately 100 kPa
(1 ton/sqft) and a hammer energy ratio or
hammer efficiency of 60%. Fig. 2.7 is a graph of
Virtu and Foi..
23

calculated CSR and corresponding (N1)60 data
from sites where liquefaction effects were or
were not observed following past earthquakes
with magnitudes of approximately 7.5. CRR
curves on this graph were conservatively
positioned to separate regions with data
indicative of liquefaction from regions with data
indicative of nonliquefaction. Curves were
developed for granular soils with the fines
contents of 5% or less, 15%, and 35% as shown
on the plot. The CRR curve for fines
contents<5% is the basic penetration criterion
for the simplified procedure and is referred to
hereafter as the SPT clean sand base curve.
The CRR curves in Fig. 2 are valid only for
magnitude 7.5 earthquakes. Scaling factors to
adjust CRR curves to other magnitudes are
addressed in a later section of this report.
ISSN:- 2349283X
Rauch (1998), approximated the clean-sand

base curve plotted in Fig.5, by the following
equation:
(4)
This equation is valid for (N1)60< 30. For
(N1)6030, clean granular soils are too dense to
liquefy and are classed as nonliquefiable. This
equation may be used in spreadsheets and other
analytical techniques to approximate the cleansand base curve for routine engineering
calculations.
FIG-5. SPT Clean-Sand Base Curve for Magnitude 7.5 Earthquakes with Data from Liquefaction
Case Histories (Modified from Seed et al. 1985)
Influence of Fines Content
In the original development, Seed et al. (1985)
noted an apparent increase of CRR with increased
fines content. Whether this increase is caused by
an increase of liquefaction resistance or a
decrease of penetration resistance is not clear.
Based on the empirical data available, Seed et al.
developed CRR curves for various fines contents
reproduced in Fig. 5.
The following equations were developed by Seed
and Idriss (1971) with the assistance of R. B. Seed
for correction of (N1)60 to an equivalent clean
sand value, (N1)60cs:
(N1)60cs= + (N1)60
(5)
= 0 for FC 5%
(6a)
= exp [1.76 2 (190/FC)] for 5% < FC < 35%

(6b)
= 5.0 for FC 35%
(6c)
= 1.0 for FC 5%
(7a)
1.5 = [0.99 1 (FC /1,000)] for 5% < FC < 35%
(7b)
= 1.2 for FC 35%
(7c)
Virtu and Foi..
24
ISSN:- 2349283X
Where and = coefficients determined from the

following relationships:
These equations may be used for routine
liquefaction resistance calculations. A backcalculated curve for a fines content of 35% is
essentially congruent with the 35% curve plotted
in Fig. 5. The back-calculated curve for fines
contents of 15%plots to the right of the original
15% curve.
Other Corrections
Several factors in addition to fines content and
grain characteristics influence SPT results, as
noted in. Eq. (8) incorporates these corrections
(N1)60 = Nm CN CE CB CR CS
(8)
Where:Nm= measured standard penetration resistance;
CN=factor to normalize Nm to a common reference
effective overburden stress;
CE= correction for hammer energy ratio (ER);
CB= correction factor for borehole diameter;
CR= correction factor for rod length; and
CS= correction for samplers with or without liners.
Because SPT N-values increase with increasing
effective overburden stress, an overburden stress
correction factor is applied (Seed and Idriss
1982). This factor is commonly calculated from
the following equation (Liao and Whitman
1986a):
CN= (P /'VO)
(9)
Where:CN normalizes Nm to an effective overburden
pressure of 'vo approximately 100 kPa (1 atm) Pa.
CN should not exceed a value of 1.7
The effective overburden pressure 'vo applied in
equation (8) should be the overburden pressure
at the time of drilling and testing. Although a
higher ground-water level might be used for
conservatism in the liquefaction resistance
calculations, the CN factor must be based on the
stresses present at the time of the testing.
FIG-6. CN Curves for Various Sands Based on

Field and Laboratory Test Data along with
Suggested CN Curve Determined from Eqs. (9)
and (10) (Modified from Castro 1995)
Skempton (1986) suggested and Robertson and
Wride (1998) updated correction factors for rod
lengths <10 m, borehole diameters outside the
recommended interval (65125mm), and
sampling tubes without liners. Range for these
correction factors is listed in Table 2.3 For
liquefaction resistance calculations and rod
lengths <3 m, a CR of 0.75 should be applied as
was done by Seed et al. (1985) in formulating the
simplified procedure.
STANDARD PENETRATION TEST (SPT)
The standard penetration test (SPT) is an
empirical dynamic penetration test developed in
USA in the 1920s and was usually carried out in
50 to 100 mm diameter wash borings. The test is
most commonly used in situ test especially for
cohesionless soils, which cannot be easily
sampled. The test is extremely used for
determining the relative density, bearing capacity
and the angle of shearing resistance of the
cohesionless soil. The test is performed using a
split barrel sample tube of 50 mm external
diameter, 35 mm internal diameter and about 65
mm in length as specified in BS 1377.
In this process, a hammer of 63.5 kg weight with a
free fall height of 750 mm is used to drive the
sampler. Initially the sampler is driven 150 mm
into the sand to seat the sampler and by-pass any
disturbed sand at the bottom of the borehole. The
number of blows required to drive the sampler a
further 300 mm is then recorded. This number is
Virtu and Foi..
25

called the Standard penetration resistance (N)
value. If 50 blows are reached before a
penetration of 30 cm no further blows should be
recorded. If the test is to be carried out in gravelly
soils, the driving shoe is replaced by the 600 cone.
SPT test is very specific tool for the liquefaction
hazard analysis. It also has the unique feature of
supplying samples for soil classification purpose.
Usually SPT is conducted at every 1 m depth or at
the change of stratum.
The N-values are extensively used in determining
the bearing capacity and predicting the settlement
of cohesionless soil and are described by a
number of authors (Meyerhof, 1956; Terzaghi and
Peck, 1967). It has wide application in
determining the liquefaction susceptibility of a
place.
There are a number of factors involved in the SPT,
which can affect the blow count, mainly related to
poor testing practice. The standard penetration
number is corrected for dilatancy effect and
overburden effect (Craig, 1986)
(i) Dilatancy correction
Silty fine sands and fine sands below the water
table develop pore pressure, which is not easily
dissipated. The pore pressure affects the
resistance of the soil and hence the penetration
number (N). Terzaghi and peck (1967)
recommend the following correction in the case of
silty fine sands when the observed value of N
exceeds 15.
1
N'= 15 + (N -15)
2
ISSN:- 2349283X
hammer being referred to as the rod energy ratio,

which varies between 45% and 78% for the
operating procedures used in several countries. It
has been recommended that a standard rod
energy ratio of 60% should be adopted and that
all measured N values should be normalized by
simple proportion of energy ratios, to this
standard: the normalized values are denoted
(N1)60.
Standard penetration resistance depends not only
on relative density but also on the effective
stresses at the depth of measurements. Effective
stresses can be represented to a first
approximation by effective overburden pressure.
This dependence was first demonstrated in the
laboratory by Gibbs and Holtz and was later
confirmed in the field. Sand at the same relative
density would thus give different value of
standard penetration resistance at different
depths. Several proposals have been made for the
correction of measured N values. The corrected
value (N1) is related to the measured value (N) by
the factor CN, where
N1 = CN N
(11)
CN = Correction factor and can be obtained from
the graph prepared by Liao and Whitman, (1986).
Also
CN=
(12)
SPT correction factor, CN
(10) (Craig, 1988)
Where:N Corrected SPT value

N Observed SPT value.
If NR 15,
Nc =NR
(ii)Overburden Pressure
Skempton summarized the evidence regarding
the influence of test procedure on the value of
standard penetration resistance (Craig, 1986).
Measured N value should be corrected to allow for
the different methods of releasing the hammer,
the type of anvil and the total length of boring
rods. Only the energy delivered to the sampler is
applied in penetrating the sand, the ratio of the
delivered energy to the free fall energy of the
Fig -7: SPT overburden correction factor after

Liao and Whiteman (1986)
Virtu and Foi..
26
ISSN:- 2349283X
(N1)60 is the standard penetration resistance

normalized to a rod energy ratio of 60% and an
effective overburden pressure of 100 kN/m2.
MAGNITUDE SCALING FACTORS (MSFs)
The clean-sand base or CRR curves in Fig. 5, only
to magnitude 7.5 earthquakes. To adjust the
clean-sand curves to magnitudes smaller or larger
than 7.5, Seed and Idriss (1982) introduced
correction factors termed magnitude scaling
factors (MSFs). These factors are used to scale
the CRR base curves upward or downward on
CRR versus (N1)60, qc1N, or Vs1 plots.
Conversely, magnitude weighting factors, which
are the inverse of magnitude scaling factors, may
be applied to correct CSR for magnitude. Either
correcting CRR via magnitude scaling factors, or
correcting CSR via magnitude weighting factors,
leads to the same final result.
To illustrate the influence of magnitude scaling
factors on calculated hazard, the equation for
factor of safety (FS) against liquefaction is written
in terms of CRR, CSR, and MSF as follows:
FS = (CRR7.5/CSR) MSF
(13)
Where CSR = calculated cyclic stress ratio

generated by the earthquake shaking; and CRR7.5
= cyclic resistance ratio for magnitude 7.5
earthquakes. CRR7.5 is determined from Fig. 2 7
for SPT data, MSF= Magnitude Scaling Factor.
In 2001 Youd and Idriss recommend the
following equation for obtaining MSF
MSF=102.24/Mw2.56,
Where,
Mw=
Magnitude of earthquake
When the design ground motion is conservative,
earthquake-related
permanent
ground
deformation is generally small if FS 1.
Liquefaction Hazard Assessment /Liquefaction
potential Analysis
If potential exists for liquefaction at a facility,
additional subsurface investigation may be
necessary. Once all testing is complete, a factor of
safety against liquefaction is then calculated for
each critical layer that may liquefy.
Fig-8, Flow chart for Liquefaction Hazard

Assessment
As mentioned that our first aim is to analyse
liquefaction potential of soil and to prepare
liquefaction susceptibility map of Ramgarh Tal
pariyojna using borehole data. Liquefaction
phenomena have been recorded in many parts of
the world, where ground shaking is frequent and
soils consist of loose fine sand where the water
table is shallow. Liquefaction of saturated loose
sands and silty sands induce flow slides,
differential settlement, and subsidence, leading
damage to buildings and infrastructure and
eventually to loss of life.
Determination of liquefaction potential due to
earthquake is complex geotechnical problem.
Many factors including soil parameters and
seismic
characteristics
influence
this
phenomenon To assess the liquefaction hazard in
an area, it is important to examine the
geotechnical characteristics like grain size
distribution, percentage of silt, water table ,water
table depth,D50 value and SPT N value. The
percentage of silt and poorly graded sand is high
in the area under Ramgarh Tal Pariyojna
indicating that there is a great chance of soil
liquefaction. Here liquefaction potential analysis
is done to determine the factor of safety at
different depth. The liquefaction potential of
Ramgarh Tal Pariyojna in Gorakhpur city using
SPT data collected from the various sites of
pariyojna is estimated by simplified procedure of
Seed & Idriss (1982).
The methodology used to estimate the
liquefaction potential is given as example for one
borehole Excel spread sheet used to calculate the
Virtu and Foi..
27

Factor of Safety with depth and enclosed in tables
ISSN:- 2349283X
shown below.
Table: 04. LIQUIFACTION ASSESSMENT OF PROPOSED GDA STAFF QUARTER BUILDING,

SIDDHARTHA ENCLAVE, GORAKHPUR
(BORE HOLE-1)
RESULTS AND ITS DISCUSSIONS

Result of liquefaction is shown with depth for of
each site of bore holes and graph shows factor of
safety vs. depth.
Factor of Safety (FS)

0
0 .2
0 .4
0 .6
0 .8
1 .2
1 .4
1 .6
Depth (m)
Bore hole Number 1 (BH1)

The analysis of SPT results at Bore hole number
1(BH1) shows that the strata between depths
13.65-15.05 m are Non-Liquefiable, and the strata
between 1.65-12.5 m are liable to liquefy under
earthquake shaking corresponding to peak
horizontal ground acceleration of 0.33g.
10
12
14
16
Depth vs Factor of Safety
Fig-9. Depth vs. Factor of Safety (Bore Hole-1)
Virtu and Foi..
28
ISSN:- 2349283X
Factor of Safety
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
depthbh1 vs. FS bh1

2
depthbh2 vs. FS bh2

depthbh3 vs. FS bh3
depthbh4 vs. FS bh4
depthbh5 vs. FS bh5

depthbh6 vs. FS bh6
Depth (m)
depthbh7 vs. FS bh7

depthbh8 vs. FS bh8
depthbh9 vs. FS bh9
depthbh10 vs. FS bh10

10

12

14
16
Depth vs Factor of Safety
Fig-10. Depth vs Factor of safety of all borehole
Fig-11- Depth wise liquefaction of each bore hole
Virtu and Foi..
29
ISSN:- 2349283X
Fig-12. - Liquefaction Hazard map of Ramgarh Tal Pariyojna

CONCLUSION
Based on the study for assessment of liquefaction
potential for Ramgarh Tal Pariyojna, it is
concluded that soil of study area is susceptible to
liquefaction extra care should be taken against
liquefaction during construction upon this type of
soil. The Study area being a reclaimed area has a
top layer of loose fine sand followed by soft to
medium or loose sandy silt or clayey silt is also
susceptible to liquefaction.
In this study we concluded that if earthquake
more than or equal to 6.5 ritcher scale occurs in
Gorakhpur region, it will be extensively damaged
due to liquefaction.
In the fig 19, we have bore hole position

wise combined data of all the studied
boreholes and depth wise zone of
liquefaction, and zone of no liquefaction.
Observation of combined graph shows
liquefaction potential for each borehole
and depth upto which soil may liquefy
during an earthquake, for the design of
any structure in the considered area, if
liquefaction is to be considered then an
average depth of 6m can be taken for the
analysis
purposes.
An
average
Virtu and Foi..
liquefaction is observed upto the depth

6m.
In fig 18. combined graph is drawn

between factor of safety and depth of
borehole in which all soils below factor of
safety -1 is susceptible to liquefaction and
should be considered for mitigation
before building a structure on it.
The percentage of silt and poorly graded

sand is high in the area under Ramgarh
Tal Pariyojna indicating that there is a
great chance of soil liquefaction. Here
liquefaction potential analysis is done to
determine the factor of safety at different
depth.
Construction on liquefaction susceptible
soils is to be avoided. It is required to
characterize the soil at a particular
building site according to the various
criterias available to determine the
liquefaction potential of the soil in a site.
The structure constructed should be
liquefaction resistant i.e., designing the
foundation elements to resist the effects
of liquefaction if at all it is necessary to
construct the structure on liquefiable soil
30
because of favourable location, space

restriction and other reasons.
This involves mitigation of the
liquefaction hazards by improving the
strength,
density
and
drainage
characteristics of the soil. This can be
done using variety of soil improvement
techniques.
REFERENCES
1.
ABAG (2001). Bay area Liquefaction Hazard

The
REAL
Dirt
on
Liquefaction.
(http://www.abag.ca.gov/bayarea/eqmaps/li
quefac/liquefac.html,)
2. ABAG (2001). Collection and analysis of
Liquefaction data from the Northridge and
Loma Prieta Earthquakes Appendix C
3. Andrus, R. D. and Stokoe, K. H.( 1997)
Liquefaction Resistance of Roils from Shear
Wave Velocity. In Proceedings of NCEER
Workshop on Evaluation of Liquefaction
Resistance of Soils, , pp. 89128..
4. Craig, R.F. (1986). Soil Mechanics (4th
edition). Van Nostrand Reinhold co.ltd. (UK).
5. IS: 1893-2002, Criteria for Earthquake
Resistant Design of Structures.
6. Iwasaki, T., Tokida, K., Tatsuoka, F., Watanabe,
S.,Yasuda, and Sato, H. (1982), Microzonation
for soil Liquefaction Potential Using
Simplified Methods. In Proceedings of Third
International Conference on Microzonation,
Seattle, , vol. 3,pp. 13101330.
7. Youd T. L and I. M. Idriss, Editors, (1997).
National Centre for Earthquake Engineering
Research (NCEER), Proceedings of the NCEER
Resistance of Soils,., Technical Report NCEER97-022
8. Rao, K. S. (2003), Seismic Microzonation of
Delhi region. In Proceedings of 12th Asian
Regional Conference, Singapore, , vol. 1, pp.
327330.
9. Rao, K. S. (2001) and Mohanty, W. K.,
Microzonation of Delhi region: An approach.
J. Indian Build. Congr., 8, 102114.
10. Rao, K. S. (2001), Liquefaction Studies for
seismic Microzonation of Delhi region. In
Indian Geotechnical Conference, vol. 2, pp.
4451.
ISSN:- 2349283X
11. Rao, K. S., Stability and rehabilitation aspects

of earth dams damaged during the Bhuj
earthquake, India. Proc. Forensic Geotech.
Engg., 2003, 1, 151158.
12. Seed, H. B. and Idriss, I. M., (1971) Simplified
Procedure for Evaluating Soil Liquefaction
Potential. J. Soil Mech. Found. Div., , 97, 1249
1273.
13. Seed, H. B., (1979) Soil Liquefaction and
Cyclic Mobility Evaluation for Level Ground
During Earthquakes. J. Geotech. Eng. Div., ,
105, 210255.
14. Seed, H.B., and Idriss, I.M., and Arango, I.
(1983). Evaluation of liquefaction potential
Using Field Performance data. ASCE Journal of
Geotechnical Engineering,
109(3),
458482.
15. Seed, H.B. (1997),Soil Liquefaction and Cyclic
Mobility Evaluation Level Ground During
Earthquake, J. of Geotech Engrg Div, ASCE,
22(3), pp. 298-307.
16. Seed H.B., Tokimatsu, K., L.F. and Chung, R.M.
(1985). The Influence of SPT Procedures in
soil Liquefaction Resistance Evaluations, J. of
Geotech Engrg Div, ASCE,
111(20),
pp.
1425-1445.
17. Whitman, R.V., 1971. Resistance of Soil to
Liquefaction and Settlement. Soils Found 11
(4), 5968.
18. Youd, T. L. and Perkins, D. M, (2004) Mapping
Liquefaction
Induced
Ground
Failure
Potential. J. Geotech. Eng. Div. ASCE, 1978,
104, 433446. DST Report, Geo-Scientific
Studies in and around Delhi, , p. 74.
19. Youd, T.L. and Idriss, (2001).Liquefaction
Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from
1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF
Resistance of Soils, J. of Geotech& Geo- env.,
ASCE 127(4) pp.297
20. Youd, T. L., 1991. Mapping of Earthquake
Induced Liquefaction for Seismic Zonation.
Proc. Fourth Int. Int. Conf. Seismic Zonation 1,
pp. 111-147
21. Youd, T.L.,(1984a).Recurrence of Liquefaction
at the same site, Proceedings, 8th World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vol.
3, pp. 2313-238.
Virtu and Foi..
31

Youd, T. L., and Perkins, D.M. (1978). Mapping
Liquefaction-Induced
GroundFailure Potential,
ISSN:- 2349283X
Proc. ASCE Civil Eng., v.104, n0. GT4, p. 433-446.
Virtu and Foi..
32

Liquefaction Hazard Assessment of Ramgarh Tal Pariyojna

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

Liquefaction Hazard Assessment of Ramgarh Tal Pariyojna

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

www.globaljournal.

GJESR RESEARCH PAPER VOL. 1 [ISSUE 10] NOVEMBER, 2014