A Framework for Probabilistic Assessment of Liquefaction Manifestation
Publication: Geo-Congress 2024
ABSTRACT
As part of the next generation liquefaction (NGL) project, we are developing probabilistic triggering and manifestation models using laboratory data and cone penetration test (CPT) case histories in the NGL database. The case histories are used to develop probabilistic models for surface manifestation conditional on susceptibility, liquefaction triggering, soil properties, stratigraphic details, and other features. Susceptibility is interpreted as a sole function of soil composition and is expressed as a probabilistic function of soil behavior type index, Ic, obtained from CPT. A triggering model is derived based on laboratory tests on high-quality specimens from literature; this model captures mean responses and uncertainty reflective of data dispersion and is considered as a Bayesian prior that will subsequently be updated by field observation data. A manifestation model is then regressed from field case histories where surface manifestation was or was not observed, information on soil conditions that enables identification of layers likely to liquefy, and ground shaking conditions. We describe the approach applied to develop our manifestation model; for a given layer this model considers layer depth, thickness, CPT tip resistance, and Ic. The result of this process is a logistic function in which manifestation probability decreases with increasing depth, decreasing thickness, increasing tip resistance, and increasing Ic. Profile manifestation is then derived by aggregating individual layer manifestation probabilities.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this chapter.
REFERENCES
Boulanger, R. W., and I. M. Idriss. (2016). “CPT-Based Liquefaction Triggering Procedure.” Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 142(2).
Boulanger, R. W., and I. M. Idriss. (2012). “Probabilistic Standard Penetration Test-based Liquefaction-Triggering Procedure.” Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering. Vol. 138, No. 10. pp. 1,185–1,195.
Brandenberg, S. J., et al. (2020) “Next-Generation Liquefaction Database.” Earthquake Spectra. Vol. 36, No. 2. pp. 939–959.
Byrd, R. H., P. Lu, J. Nocedal, and C. Zhu. (1995). “A Limited Memory Algorithm for Bound Constrained Optimization.” SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing. Vol. 16, No. 5. pp. 1,190–1,208. doi: https://doi.org/10.1137/0916069.
Carlton, B., K. Ulmer, T. Nguyen, and Q. Parker. (2022). Next Generation Liquefaction (NGL) - Supporting Studies: Overburden and Initial Shear Stress. DesignSafe-CI. https://doi.org/10.17603/ds2-c9fr-x257.
Cetin, K. O., R. B. Seed, A. Der Kiureghian, K. Tokimatsu, L. F. Harder, R. E. Kayen, and R. E. S. Moss. (2004). “Standard Penetration Test-Based Probabilistic and Deterministic Assessment of Seismic Soil Liquefaction Potential.” Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering. Vol. 130, No. 12. pp. 1,314–1,340.
Cetin, K. O., R. B. Seed, R. E. Kayen, R. E. S. Moss, H. T. Bilge, M. Ilgac, and K. Chowdhury. (2018). “SPT-Based Probabilistic and Deterministic Assessment of Seismic Soil Liquefaction Triggering Hazard. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering. Vol. 115. pp. 698–709. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.09.012>(Accessed date 27 August 2022).
Chu, D. B., J. P. Stewart, R. W. Boulanger, and P.-S. Lin (2008). Cyclic softening of low plasticity clay and its effect on seismic foundation performance, J. Geotech. & Geoenv. Engrg., 134 (11), 1595–1608.
Cubrinovski, M., A. Rhodes, N. Ntritsos, and S. van Ballegooy. (2019). “System Response of Liquefiable Deposits.” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering. Vol. 124. pp. 212–229.
Hudson, K. S., K. J. Ulmer, P. Zimmaro, S. L. Kramer, J. P. Stewart, and S. J. Brandenberg (2023). Unsupervised Machine Learning for Detecting Soil Layer Boundaries from Cone Penetration Test Data, Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.3961.
Hutabarat, D., and J. D. Bray. (2021). “Effective Stress Analysis of Liquefiable Sites to Estimate the Severity of Sediment Ejecta. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering. Vol. 147, No. 5. doi: <https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002503>(Accessed date 27 August 2022).
Hutabarat, D., and J. D. Bray. (2022). “Estimating the Severity of Liquefaction Ejecta Using the Cone Penetration Test. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering. Vol. 148, No. 3. doi: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002744 (Accessed date 30 August 2022).
Idriss, I. M., and R. W. Boulanger. (2008). Soil Liquefaction During Earthquakes. D. Becker, editor. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute.
Kramer, S. L., S. S. Sideras, and M. W. Greenfield. (2016). “The Timing of Liquefaction and Its Utility in Liquefaction Hazard Evaluation.” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering. Vol. 91. pp. 133–146.
Maurer, B. W., S. van Ballegooy, L. M. Wotherspoon, and R. A. Green. (2017) “Assessing Liquefaction Susceptibility Using the CPT Soil Behavior Type Index.” 3rd International Conference on Performance-based Design in Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering. Vancouver.
Moss, R. E. S., R. B. Seed, R. E. Kayen, J. P. Stewart, A. Der Kiureghian, and K. O. Cetin. (2006). “CPT-based Probabilistic and Deterministic Assessment of In Situ Seismic Soil Liquefaction Potential.” Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering. Vol. 132, No. 8. pp. 1,032–1,051.
Stewart, J. P., et al. (2016). PEER-NGL project: Open source global database and model development for the next-generation of liquefaction assessment procedures, Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng., 91, 317–328.
Tokimatsu, K., S. Tamura, H. Suzuki, and K. Katsumata. (2012). “Building Damage Associated with Geotechnical Problems in the 2011 Tohoku Pacific Earthquake.” Soils and Foundations. Vol. 52, No.5. pp. 956–74.
Ulmer, K. J., et al. (2023a). Next-Generation Liquefaction Database, Version 2. Next-Generation Liquefaction Consortium. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21222/C23P70.
Ulmer, K. J., B. Carlton, T. Nguyen, and Q. Parker. (2023b). “An Expanded Data Set of Overburden (Kσ) and Initial Static Shear Stress (Kα) Correction Factors from Published Cyclic Laboratory Tests for Liquefaction Triggering Analyses.” In Geo-Congress 2023, pp. 197–206.
Ulmer, K. J., K. Hudson, S. J. Brandenberg, P. Zimmaro, R. Pretell, B. Carlton, S. L. Kramer, and J. P. Stewart. (2023c) Task 7b: Draft Final Report Documenting Probabilistic Liquefaction Models. August 2023.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
History
Published online: Feb 22, 2024
ASCE Technical Topics:
- Case studies
- Engineering fundamentals
- Geomechanics
- Geotechnical engineering
- Geotechnical investigation
- Hydraulic engineering
- Hydraulic properties
- Laboratory tests
- Mathematics
- Methodology (by type)
- Penetration tests
- Probability
- Research methods (by type)
- Soil dynamics
- Soil liquefaction
- Soil mechanics
- Soil properties
- Surface properties
- Tests (by type)
- Water and water resources
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.