Professional Documents
Culture Documents
59-65
Geotec., Const. Mat. & Env., ISSN: 2186-2982(P), 2186-2990(O), Japan
ABSTRACT: Soil liquefaction is one of the most important and complex seismic geotechnical and engineering
topics. Most experimental methods in the study of liquefaction have been based on deterministic analysis, and
parameters, such as soil resistance and earthquake loads, have been considered without dispersion and fault.
Statistical analysis, particularly reliability analysis, is a new and comprehensive approach used to solve and
evaluate problems, as well as entering of uncertainties in calculations. In this study, information on 50
boreholes were obtained using a database of Standard Penetration Test (STP), and diverse experimental
procedures, such as NCEER2001, Idriss and Boulanger, Highway bridge of Japan, OCDI and reliability
approach, were used in the evaluation of soil liquefaction in Rasht and finally, the results were compared with
each other. By comparing the different methods, it was observed that these methods do not correspond with
clay soils and their results were different from each other. Also, safety factor of greater or lesser than one is
the mean of safety and occurrence of liquefaction, therefore, reliability analysis was used to ensure the
probability of liquefaction. Finally, two empirical relationships based on the probability of liquefaction (PL)
and safety factor (FS) were proposed from which the liquefaction potential can be calculated directly. Soil
liquefaction risk can be assessed by the proposed relationship between (PL) and (FS) based on deterministic
approaches.
59
International Journal of GEOMATE, Jan., 2017, Vol. 12, Issue 29, pp. 59-65
N 65 =
(
N 0.019 v' 65 ) (1)
( )
0.0041 v' 65 + 1.0
Table 1 Summary of data and calculation of liquefaction in the studied area (boreholes 1)
R
Aeq FS FS FS CR CR CR CSR CSR CS De
Pl N65 FC N Soil o
3 2 1 R3 R2 R1 3 2 R1 pth
w
0.8 0.9 0.9
28 0.23 437 39.3 0.32 0.2 0.21 0.39 0.38 0.4 3 15 SP 2 1
1 5 5
0.8 1.3 0.1
12 1.17 431 42.1 0.32 0.26 0.26 0.38 0.34 0.4 3 18 SP 4 2
3 5 9
- 0.7 1.1 1.1 0.3
45 425 31.8 0.28 0.19 0.24 0.37 0.3 9 15 SP 6 3
0.07 7 4 2 9
2.4 0.3
3 1.42 401 33.6 1.1 2 0.38 0.3 0.42 0.34 0.22 37 19 SM 10 4
0 7
1.1 0.6 0.3
65 0.11 352 33.3 1.6 0.52 0.29 0.11 0.32 0.16 80 18 CH 14 5
3 1 2
1.4 4.0 0.7 0.2
48 0.14 323 35.4 0.46 0.32 0.13 0.31 0.13 65 22 ML 16 6
9 3 9 9
- 1.4 2.6 2.2 0.2
88 295 20.2 0.43 0.18 0.34 0.3 0.11 85 16 CH 18 7
0.56 6 9 4 7
If the probability density functions (PDF) and The geotechnical information required for
the cumulative probability function (CPF) of (Z) are assessment of liquefaction involves groundwater
defined as (fz (Z)) and (Fz (z)), respectively, the level, soil bulk density, depth of soil layers, soil type,
liquefaction probability (PL) then equal the (SPT) number, the percentage of fines (sieve 200)
probability of ( Z 0 ). If the mean values and as variable input parameters.
standard deviations of (R) and (S) are ( R ) , ( S ),
The application reliability index values were
calculated from boreholes to different depths based
( R ), ( S ) according to the first order and second on the flowchart designed and the probability of
moment method, the mean, standard deviation and liquefaction was then evaluated in these depths.
coefficient of variance of the (Z), by using the 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
following Eq[16]:
Due to the variety and heterogeneity of
existing deposits in Rasht city on the surface and at
Z = Z = R2 S 2 (3)
Z R + S different depths, the best way to evaluate the
characteristics of liquefaction in the city is by data
The reliability index ( ) is defined as the inverse collection. For this purpose, conducted reports and
geotechnical studies in Rasht city on construction
of the coefficient of variation ( z ), and is used in
projects, such as private buildings, administrative
calculating the reliability of the results of and bridges, were collected and the required data
liquefaction assessment. It is assumed that (R) and were extracted. The present information resources
(S) are independent variables with a normal were developed using a database of the Standard
distribution to display the process of the reliability Penetration Test (SPT) related to 500 data with 50
analysis. According to this assumption, the boreholes, which were conducted by the Consultant
performance function (Z) can be in a normal Engineers Company of Iran soil, Moshaver Asas
distribution of ( Z ( z , z2 ) ). By placing the Gostar Khak and Pay, and Advisor of Gill Design
(PDF) of (Z), for (PL): and Control in different areas of Rasht City. In this
study, plan acceleration was selected (3.0 g) based
PL = ( ) = 1 ( ) (4) on Iran 2800 Regulation (Third Edition), and the
Richter magnitude of the earthquake was
In the aforementioned Eq., (PL) represents determined as 7. After analyzing the geotechnical
failure probability, ( z ) represents the standard data of Rasht city, 2 boreholes were selected for
deviation, ( z ) represents the mean value, ( ) discussion from the different segments of Rasht city
based on engineering judgment. To compare the
represents the reliability index and ( () )
results of the liquefaction potential assessment with
represents the cumulative probability. A computer different approaches, the maximum liquefaction
program was written in the MATLAB environment depth obtained from the different methods were
to assess the liquefaction potential based on compared with each other. Based on the above
reliability for approximately 500 records in the description and considering the safety factor of less
study area. The seismic information, mean, and than or equal to 1 for NCEER2001, High bridge of
coefficient of variation associated with effective Japan, and Idriss and Boulanger approaches as a
parameters were introduced to the program as fixed measure of liquefaction, the results of the field
input parameters to assess liquefaction and the operations, the charts and the comparison of the
parameters relevant to the genetic algorithm. results of the liquefaction potential assessment in
the selected boreholes are shown in Figures 3 to 6.
61
International Journal of GEOMATE, Jan., 2017, Vol. 12, Issue 29, pp. 59-65
Table 2 Summary of information and calculations of liquefaction in the studied area (boreholes 2)
R
Aeq CR CR CR CSR CSR CSR Soi De
Pl N65 FS3 FS2 FS1 FC N o
R3 R2 R1 3 2 1 l pth
w
58 0.01 435 28.6 0.68 0.73 0.69 0.26 0.15 0.15 0.40 0.37 0.40 3 11 SP 2.5 1
19 0.84 426 36.6 1.03 1.59 1.85 0.38 0.28 0.41 0.39 0.31 0.39 42 15 SP 5.5 2
35 0.43 415 36.6 0.89 1.62 1.14 0.32 0.32 0.24 0.38 0.26 0.38 3 19 SP 8 3
27 0.46 401 44.5 1.49 2.99 1.27 0.52 0.62 0.22 0.37 0.25 0.37 63 25 CH 10 4
39 0.32 352 26.4 0.82 1.78 0.93 0.26 0.16 0.16 0.32 0.16 0.32 3 18 SP 14 5
19 0.84 396 21.9 0.90 2.69 1.39 0.27 0.18 0.21 0.27 0.11 0.27 22 14 SP 18 6
62
International Journal of GEOMATE, Jan., 2017, Vol. 12, Issue 29, pp. 59-65
6. CONCLUSION
64
International Journal of GEOMATE, Jan., 2017, Vol. 12, Issue 29, pp. 59-65
assessing liquefaction potential seems to be more during earthquakes," Soil Dynamics and
reasonable and conservative in achieving more Earthquake Engineering, vol. 26, pp. 115-130,
definite liquefaction potential. 2006.
[9] R. W. Boulanger and I. Idriss, "Probabilistic
5. In this research, it was determined that a
Standard Penetration TestBased Liquefaction
confidence coefficient greater or lesser than 1 does Triggering Procedure," Journal of Geotechnical
not mean safety and/ or liquefaction in cadence for and Geoenvironmental Engineering, vol. 138,
liquefaction, hence, in order to ensure liquefaction pp. 1185-1195, 2012.
probability, reliability-based method analysis [10] T. Youd, I. Idriss, R. D. Andrus, I. Arango, G.
should be used. Castro, J. T. Christian, et al., "Liquefaction
6. Regarding the proposed relationship between resistance of soils: summary report from the
(PL) and (FS), the liquefaction probability of soil 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF
workshops on evaluation of liquefaction
layers can be obtained using the deterministic
resistance of soils," Journal of geotechnical and
methods. This is a big advantage for geotechnical geoenvironmental engineering, vol. 127, pp.
engineers who make use of common methods based 817-833, 2001.
on confidence coefficient for liquefaction potential [11] T. The Technical Committee for earthquake
assessment. geotechnical engineering, ISSMGE., Manual
for Zonation on Seismic Geotechnical Hazards
7. REFERENCES (Revised Version): Japanese Geotechnical
Society, 1999.
[1] H. B. Seed and I. M. Idriss, "Simplified [12] T. Iwasaki, "Soil liquefaction studies in Japan:
procedure for evaluating soil liquefaction state-of-the-art," Soil Dynamics and Earthquake
potential," Journal of Soil mechanics & Engineering, vol. 5, pp. 2-68, 1986.
Foundations Div, 1971. [13] K. Tokimatsu and H. B. Seed, "Evaluation of
[2] K. O. Cetin, R. B. Seed, A. Der Kiureghian, K. settlements in sands due to earthquake shaking,"
Tokimatsu, L. F. Harder Jr, R. E. Kayen, et al., Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, vol. 113,
"Standard penetration test-based probabilistic pp. 861-878, 1987.
and deterministic assessment of seismic soil [14] C. H. Juang, S. Y. Fang, and E. H. Khor, "First-
liquefaction potential," Journal of Geotechnical order reliability method for probabilistic
and Geoenvironmental Engineering, vol. 130, liquefaction triggering analysis using CPT,"
pp. 1314-1340, 2004. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental
[3] C. H. Juang, T. Jiang, and R. D. Andrus, Engineering, vol. 132, pp. 337-350, 2006.
"Assessing probability-based methods for [15]J. T. Christian and G. B. Baecher, "Sources of
liquefaction potential evaluation," Journal of uncertainty in liquefaction triggering
Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental procedures," Georisk: Assessment and
Engineering, vol. 128, pp. 580-589, 2002. Management of Risk for Engineered Systems
and Geohazards, pp 1-8, 2015.
[4] C. H. Juang, D. V. Rosowsky, and W. H. Tang, [16] L. M. Wotherspoon, R. P. Orense, R. A. Green,
"Reliability-based method for assessing B. A. Bradley, B. R. Cox, and C. M. Wood,
liquefaction potential of soils," Journal of "Assessment of liquefaction evaluation
Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental procedures and severity index frameworks at
Engineering, vol. 125, pp. 684-689, 1999. Christchurch strong motion stations," Soil
[5] H. Bahrainy, "Urban planning and design in a Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, vol. 79,
seismic-prone region (the case of Rasht in pp. 335-346, 2015.
Northern Iran)," Journal of urban planning and
development, vol. 124, pp. 148-181, 1998.
[6] S. Dezhkam, B. J. Amiri, A. A. Darvishsefat, International Journal of GEOMATE, Jan., 2017,
and Y. Sakieh, "Simulating the urban growth Vol. 12, Issue 29, pp. 59-65.
dimensions and scenario prediction through MS No. 160105 received on Jan. 05, 2016 and
sleuth model: A case study of Rasht County, reviewed under GEOMATE publication policies.
Guilan, Iran," GeoJournal, vol. 79, pp 604-591, Copyright 2016, Int. J. of GEOMATE. All rights
2014. reserved, including the making of copies unless
[7] L. Samadi and B. Mehrabi, "Shallow subsurface permission is obtained from the copyright
geology and Vs characteristics of sedimentary proprietors. Pertinent discussion including
units throughout Rasht City, Iran," 2009. authors closure, if any, will be published in Dec.
[8] I. Idriss and R. Boulanger, "Semi-empirical 2017 if the discussion is received by June 2017.
procedures for evaluating liquefaction potential Corresponding Author: Mehran Naghizaderokni
65