Technical Papers
Dec 22, 2021

Limitations of Surface Liquefaction Manifestation Severity Index Models Used in Conjunction with Simplified Stress-Based Triggering Models

Publication: Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering
Volume 148, Issue 3

Abstract

The severity of surface manifestation of liquefaction is commonly used as a proxy for liquefaction damage potential. As a result, manifestation severity index (MSI) models are more commonly being used in conjunction with simplified stress-based triggering models to predict liquefaction damage potential. This paper assesses the limitations of three existing MSI models and a fourth MSI model that is developed herein. The different models have differing attributes that account for factors influencing the severity of surficial liquefaction manifestations, with the newly proposed model accounting more factors than the others. The efficacies of these MSI models are evaluated using well-documented liquefaction case histories from Canterbury, New Zealand, with the deposits primarily comprising clean to nonplastic silty sands. It is found that the MSI models that explicitly account for the contractive/dilative tendencies of soil did not perform as well as the models that do not account for this tendency, opposite of what would be expected based on the mechanics of liquefaction manifestation. The likely reason for this is the double-counting of the dilative tendencies of medium-dense to dense soils by these MSI models because the liquefaction triggering model, to some extent, inherently accounts for such effects. This implies that development of mechanistically more rigorous MSI models that are used in conjunction with simplified triggering models will not necessarily result in improved liquefaction damage potential predictions and may result in less accurate predictions. This provides the impetus for the development of a new framework that clearly and distinctly separates triggering and manifestation.

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.

Data Availability Statement

The Canterbury data set is available in digital format through the NEHRI DesignSafe Data Depot at https://doi.org/10.17603/ds2-tygh-ht91. Alternatively, the subsurface data and aerial photographs are publically available through the New Zealand Geotechnical Database (NZGD 2020) website.

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by National Science Foundation (NSF) Grant Nos. CMMI-1751216, CMMI-1825189, and CMMI-1937984, as well as Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER) Grant No. 1132-NCTRBM and US Geological Survey award G18AP-00006. This support is gratefully acknowledged, as well as access to the NZGD. However, any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of NSF, PEER, USGS, or the NZGD.

References

Baise, L. G., R. B. Higgins, and C. M. Brankman. 2006. “Liquefaction hazard mapping-statistical and spatial characterization of susceptible units.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 132 (6): 705–715. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2006)132:6(705).
Beyzaei, C. Z., J. D. Bray, S. van Ballegooy, M. Cubrinovski, and S. Bastin. 2018. “Depositional environment effects on observed liquefaction performance in silt swamps during the Canterbury earthquake sequence.” Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 107 (Apr): 303–321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.01.035.
Boulanger, R. W., and I. M. Idriss. 2014. CPT and SPT based liquefaction triggering procedures. Davis, CA: Univ. of California at Davis, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering.
Boulanger, R. W., and I. M. Idriss. 2016. “CPT-based liquefaction triggering procedure.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 142 (2): 04015065. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001388.
Bradley, B. A. 2013a. “A New Zealand-specific pseudo-spectral acceleration ground-motion prediction equation for active shallow crustal earthquakes based on foreign models.” Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 103 (3): 1801–1822. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120120021.
Bradley, B. A. 2013b. “Site-specific and spatially-distributed ground motion intensity estimation in the 2010-2011 Christchurch earthquakes.” Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 48 (May): 35–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2013.01.027.
Cetin, K. O., R. B. Seed, R. E. Kayen, R. E. S. Moss, H. T. Bilge, M. Ilage, and K. Chowdhury. 2018. “SPT-based probabilistic and deterministic assessment of seismic soil liquefaction triggering hazard.” Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 115 (Dec): 698–709. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.09.012.
Chung, J.-W., and J. D. Rogers. 2011. “Simplified method for spatial evaluation of liquefaction potential in the St. Louis area.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 137 (5): 505–515. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000450.
Cramer, C. H., G. J. Rix, and K. Tucker. 2008. “Probabilistic liquefaction hazard maps for Memphis, Tennessee.” Seismol. Res. Lett. 79 (3): 416–423. https://doi.org/10.1785/gssrl.79.3.416.
Cubrinovski, M., A. Rhodes, N. Ntritsos, and S. Van Ballegooy. 2019. “System response of liquefiable deposits.” Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 124 (Sep): 212–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.05.013.
Dixit, J., D. M. Dewaikar, and R. S. Jangid. 2012. “Assessment of liquefaction potential index for Mumbai City.” Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 12 (9): 2759–2768. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-12-2759-2012.
Dobry, R. 1989. “Some basic aspects of soil liquefaction during earthquakes.” Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 558 (1): 172–182. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1989.tb22567.x.
Fawcett, T. 2005. “An introduction to ROC analysis.” Pattern Recognit. Lett. 27 (8): 861–874. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patrec.2005.10.010.
Geyin, M., B. W. Maurer, B. A. Bradley, R. A. Green, and S. van Ballegooy. 2021. “CPT-based liquefaction case histories compiled from three earthquakes in Canterbury, New Zealand.” Earthquake Spectra37 (4): 2920–2945. https://doi.org/10.1177/8755293021996367.
Goda, K., and H. P. Hong. 2008. “Spatial correlation of peak ground motions and response spectra.” Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 98 (1): 354–365. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120070078.
Green, R. A., J. J. Bommer, A. Rodriguez-Marek, B. Maurer, P. Stafford, B. Edwards, P. P. Kruiver, G. de Lange, and J. van Elk. 2019. “Addressing limitations in existing ‘simplified’ liquefaction triggering evaluation procedures: Application to induced seismicity in the Groningen gas field.” Bull. Earthquake Eng. 17 (8): 4539–4557. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-018-0489-3.
Green, R. A., M. Cubrinovski, B. Cox, C. Wood, L. Wotherspoon, B. Bradley, and B. W. Maurer. 2014. “Select liquefaction case histories from the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence.” Earthquake Spectra 30 (1): 131–153. https://doi.org/10.1193/030713EQS066M.
Green, R. A., B. W. Maurer, and S. van Ballegooy. 2018. “The influence of the non-liquefied crust on the severity of surficial liquefaction manifestations: Case history from the 2016 Valentine’s Day earthquake in New Zealand.” In Proc., Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics V (GEESD V), Liquefaction Triggering, Consequences, and Mitigation, edited by S. J. Brandenberg and M. T. Manzari, 21–32. Reston, VA: ASCE.
Green, R. A., S. Upadhyaya, C. M. Wood, B. W. Maurer, B. R. Cox, L. Wotherspoon, B. A. Bradley, and M. Cubrinovski. 2017. “Relative efficacy of CPT- versus Vs-based simplified liquefaction evaluation procedures.” In Proc., 19th Intern. Conf. on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering. London: International Society of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering.
Green, R. A., C. Wood, B. Cox, M. Cubrinovski, L. Wotherspoon, B. Bradley, T. Algie, J. Allen, A. Bradshaw, and G. Rix. 2011. “Use of DCP and SASW tests to evaluate liquefaction potential: Predictions vs. observations during the recent New Zealand earthquakes.” Seismol. Res. Lett. 82 (6): 927–938. https://doi.org/10.1785/gssrl.82.6.927.
Hayati, H., and R. D. Andrus. 2008. “Liquefaction potential map of Charleston, South Carolina based on the 1986 earthquake.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 134 (6): 815–828. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2008)134:6(815).
Holzer, T. L. 2008. “Probabilistic liquefaction hazard mapping.” Geotechnical earthquake engineering and soil dynamics IV: ASCE geotechnical special publication 181, edited by D. Zeng, M. T. Manzari, and D. R. Hiltunen.
Holzer, T. L., M. J. Bennett, T. E. Noce, A. C. Padovani, and J. C. Tinsley III. 2006. “Liquefaction hazard mapping with LPI in the greater Oakland, California, area.” Earthquake Spectra 22 (3): 693–708. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.2218591.
Holzer, T. L., T. E. Noce, and M. J. Bennett. 2009. “Scenario liquefaction hazard maps of Santa Clara Valley, northern California.” Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 99 (1): 367–381. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120080227.
Ishihara, K. 1985. “Stability of natural deposits during earthquakes.” In Proc., 11th Int. Conf. on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, 321–376. London: International Society of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering.
Ishihara, K., and K. Ogawa. 1978. “Liquefaction susceptibility map of downtown Tokyo.” In Proc., 2nd Int. Conf. on Microzonation, 897–910. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
Ishihara, K., and M. Yoshimine. 1992. “Evaluation of settlements in sand deposits following liquefaction during earthquakes.” Soils Found. 32 (1): 173–188. https://doi.org/10.3208/sandf1972.32.173.
Iwasaki, T., F. Tatsuoka, K. Tokida, and S. Yasuda. 1978. “A practical method for assessing soil liquefaction potential based on case studies at various sites in Japan.” In Proc., 2nd Int. Conf. on Microzonation, 885–896. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
Kovacs, W. D., and L. A. Salomone. 1984. Field evaluation of SPT energy, equipment, and methods in Japan compared with the SPT in the United States. Gaithersburg, MD: National Bureau of Standards.
Maurer, B. W., R. A. Green, M. Cubrinovski, and B. Bradley. 2015a. “Assessment of CPT-based methods for liquefaction evaluation in a liquefaction potential index framework.” Géotechnique 65 (5): 328–336. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.SIP.15.P.007.
Maurer, B. W., R. A. Green, M. Cubrinovski, and B. Bradley. 2015b. “Calibrating the Liquefaction Severity Number (LSN) for varying misprediction economies: A case study in Christchurch, New Zealand.” In Proc., 6th Int. Conf. on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
Maurer, B. W., R. A. Green, M. Cubrinovski, and B. Bradley. 2015c. “Fines-content effects on liquefaction hazard evaluation for infrastructure during the 2010-2011 Canterbury, New Zealand earthquake sequence.” Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 76 (Sep): 58–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2014.10.028.
Maurer, B. W., R. A. Green, M. Cubrinovski, and B. A. Bradley. 2014. “Evaluation of the liquefaction potential index for assessing liquefaction hazard in Christchurch, New Zealand.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 140 (7): 04014032. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001117.
Maurer, B. W., R. A. Green, and O. S. Taylor. 2015d. “Moving towards an improved index for assessing liquefaction hazard: Lessons from historical data.” Soils Found. 55 (4): 778–787. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2015.06.010.
Maurer, B. W., R. A. Green, S. van Ballegooy, B. A. Bradley, and S. Upadhyaya. 2017a. “Performance comparison of probabilistic and deterministic liquefaction triggering models for hazard assessment in 23 global earthquakes.” Geo-Risk 2017: Reliability-Based Design and Code Developments, edited by J. Huang, G. A. Fenton, L. Zhang, and D. V. Griffiths, 31–42. Reston, VA: ASCE.
Maurer, B. W., R. A. Green, S. van Ballegooy, and L. Wotherspoon. 2017b. “Assessing liquefaction susceptibility using the CPT soil behavior type index.” In Proc., 3rd Int. Conf. on Performance-Based Design in Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering (PBDIII). London: International Society of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering.
Maurer, B. W., R. A. Green, S. van Ballegooy, and L. Wotherspoon. 2019. “Development of region-specific soil behavior type index correlations for evaluating liquefaction hazard in Christchurch, New Zealand.” Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 117 (Feb): 96–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.04.059.
NZGD (New Zealand Geotechnical Database). 2020. “New Zealand geotechnical database.” Accessed January 1, 2020. https://www.nzgd.org.nz/.
Oommen, T., L. G. Baise, and R. Vogel. 2010. “Validation and application of empirical liquefaction models.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 136 (12): 1618–1633. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000395.
Papathanassiou, G. 2008. “LPI-based approach for calibrating the severity of liquefaction-induced failures and for assessing the probability of liquefaction surface evidence.” Eng. Geol. 96 (1–2): 94–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2007.10.005.
Papathanassiou, G., S. Pavlides, and A. Ganas. 2005. “The 2003 Lefkada earthquake: Field observation and preliminary microzonation map based on liquefaction potential index for the town of Lefkada.” Eng. Geol. 82 (1): 12–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2005.08.006.
Robertson, P. K., and C. E. Wride. 1998. “Evaluating cyclic liquefaction potential using cone penetration test.” Can. Geotech. J. 35 (3): 442–459. https://doi.org/10.1139/t98-017.
Sana, H., and S. K. Nath. 2016. “Liquefaction potential analysis of the Kashmire Valley alluvium, NW Himalaya.” Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 85 (Jun): 11–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2016.03.009.
Sönmez, H. 2003. “Modification of the liquefaction potential index and liquefaction severity mapping for a liquefaction-prone area (Inegol, Turkey).” Eng. Geol. 44 (7): 862–871.
Tonkin and Taylor. 2013. “Liquefaction vulnerability study.” Accessed October 22, 2020. https://www.eqc.govt.nz/sites/public_files/documents/liquefaction-vulnerability-study-final.pdf.
Ulmer, K. J., R. A. Green, and A. Rodriguez-Marek. 2020. “A consistent correlation between Vs, SPT, and CPT metrics for use in liquefaction evaluation procedures.” Geo-Congress 2020: Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Special Topics, edited by J. P. Hambleton, R. Makhnenko, and A. S. Budge, 132–140. Reston, VA: ASCE.
Upadhyaya, S. 2019. “Development of an improved and internally-consistent framework for evaluating liquefaction damage potential.” Doctoral dissertation, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Virginia Tech.
Upadhyaya, S., R. A. Green, A. Rodriguez-Marek, B. W. Maurer, L. Wotherspoon, B. A. Bradley, and M. Cubrinovski. 2019. “Influence of corrections to recorded peak ground accelerations due to liquefaction on predicted liquefaction response during the Mw 6.2, February 2011 Christchurch earthquake.” In Proc., 13th Australia New Zealand Conf. on Geomechanics 2019. St. Ives, Australia: Australian Geomechanics Society.
Upadhyaya, S., B. W. Maurer, R. A. Green, and A. Rodriguez-Marek. 2018. “Effect of non-liquefiable high fines-content, high plasticity soils on liquefaction potential index (LPI) performance.” In Geotechnical earthquake engineering and soil dynamics V: Liquefaction triggering, consequences, and mitigation, edited by S. J. Brandenberg and M. T. Manzari, 191–198. Reston, VA: ASCE.
Upadhyaya, S., B. W. Maurer, R. A. Green, and A. Rodriguez-Marek. 2021. “Selecting optimal factor of safety and probability of liquefaction triggering thresholds for engineering projects based on misprediction costs.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 147 (6): 04021026. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002511.
van Ballegooy, S., S. C. Cox, C. Thurlow, H. K. Rutter, T. Reynolds, G. Harrington, J. Fraser, and T. Smith. 2014a. Median water table elevation in Christchurch and surrounding area after the 4 September 2010 Darfield earthquake: Version 2. Lower Hutt, New Zealand: GNS Science.
van Ballegooy, S., R. A. Green, J. Lees, F. Wentz, and B. W. Maurer. 2015. “Assessment of various CPT based liquefaction severity index frameworks relative to the Ishihara (1985) H1-H2 boundary curves.” Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 79 (Part B): 347–364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2015.08.015.
van Ballegooy, S., P. Malan, V. Lacrosse, M. E. Jacka, M. Cubrinovski, J. D. Bray, T. D. O’Rourke, S. A. Crawford, and H. Cowan. 2014b. “Assessment of liquefaction-induced land damage for residential Christchurch.” Earthquake Spectra 30 (1): 31–55. https://doi.org/10.1193/031813EQS070M.
van Ballegooy, S., P. J. Malan, M. E. Jacka, V. I. M. F. Lacrosse, J. R. Leeves, J. E. Lyth, and H. Cowan. 2012. “Methods for characterising effects of liquefaction in terms of damage severity.” In Proc., 15th World Conf. on Earthquake Engineering (15 WCEE). Tokyo: International Association of Earthquake Engineering.
Wotherspoon, L. M., R. P. Orense, B. A. Bradley, B. R. Cox, C. Wood, and R. A. Green. 2014. Geotechnical characterisation of Christchurch strong motion stations.. Wellington, New Zealand: New Zealand Earthquake Commission.
Wotherspoon, L. M., R. P. Orense, R. A. Green, B. A. Bradley, B. R. Cox, and C. M. Wood. 2015. “Assessment of liquefaction evaluation procedures and severity index frameworks at Christchurch strong motion stations.” Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 79 (Part B): 335–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2015.03.022.
Yalcin, A., C. Gokceoglu, and H. Sönmez. 2008. “Liquefaction severity map for Aksaray city center (central Anatolia, Turkey).” Natural Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 8 (4): 641–649. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-8-641-2008.
Youd, T. L., and C. T. Garris. 1995. “Liquefaction-induced ground surface disruption.” J. Geotech. Eng. 121 (11): 805–809.
Zhang, G., P. K. Robertson, and R. W. I. Brachman. 2002. “Estimating liquefaction-induced ground settlements from CPT for level ground.” Can. Geotech. J. 39 (5): 1168–1180. https://doi.org/10.1139/t02-047.
Zhu, J., L. G. Baise, and E. M. Thompson. 2017. “An updated geospatial liquefaction model for global application.” Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 107 (3): 1365–1385. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120160198.
Zou, K. H. 2007. “Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) literature research.” Accessed March 10, 2016. http://www.spl.harvard.edu/archive/spl-pre2007/pages/ppl/zou/roc.html.

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering
Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering
Volume 148Issue 3March 2022

History

Received: Apr 13, 2021
Accepted: Sep 28, 2021
Published online: Dec 22, 2021
Published in print: Mar 1, 2022
Discussion open until: May 22, 2022

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

Sneha Upadhyaya, S.M.ASCE [email protected]
Graduate Student, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061. Email: [email protected]
Professor, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061 (corresponding author). ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5648-2331. Email: [email protected]
Brett W. Maurer, M.ASCE [email protected]
Assistant Professor, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Univ. of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195. Email: [email protected]
Professor, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8384-4721. Email: [email protected]
Sjoerd van Ballegooy [email protected]
Technical Director, Geotechnical, Tonkin + Taylor Ltd., 105 Carlton Gore Rd., Newmarket, Auckland 1023, New Zealand. Email: [email protected]

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.

Cited by

  • True Liquefaction Triggering Curve, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 10.1061/JGGEFK.GTENG-11126, 149, 3, (2023).
  • On the In Situ Cyclic Resistance of Natural Sand and Silt Deposits, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 10.1061/JGGEFK.GTENG-10784, 149, 4, (2023).
  • Assessing the Limitations of Liquefaction Manifestation Severity Index Prediction Models, Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Performance Based Design in Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering (Beijing 2022), 10.1007/978-3-031-11898-2_133, (1508-1515), (2022).

View Options

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Copy the content Link

Share with email

Email a colleague

Share