The objective of the study presented herein is to assess three commonly used CPT-based liquefaction evaluation procedures and three liquefaction severity index frameworks using data from the 2010–2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence. Specifically, post-event field observations, ground motion recordings, and results from a recently completed extensive geotechnical site investigation programme at selected strong motion stations (SMSs) in the city of Christchurch and surrounding towns are used herein. Unlike similar studies that used data from free-field sites, accelerogram characteristics at the SMS locations can be used to assess the performance of liquefaction evaluation procedures prior to their use in the computation of surficial manifestation severity indices. Results from this study indicate that for cases with evidence of liquefaction triggering in the accelerograms, the majority of liquefaction evaluation procedures yielded correct predictions, regardless of whether surficial manifestation of liquefaction was evident or not. For cases with no evidence of liquefaction in the accelerograms (and no observed surficial evidence of liquefaction triggering), the majority of liquefaction evaluation procedures predicted liquefaction was triggered. When all cases are used to assess the performance of liquefaction severity index frameworks, a poor correlation is shown between the observed severity of liquefaction surface manifestation and the calculated severity indices. However, only using those cases where the liquefaction evaluation procedures yielded correct predictions, there is an improvement in the correlation, with the Liquefaction Severity Number (LSN) being the best performing of the frameworks investigated herein. However scatter in the relationship between the observed and calculated surficial manifestation still remains for all liquefaction severity index frameworks.
In practice, several competing liquefaction evaluation procedures (LEPs) are used to compute factors of safety against soil liquefaction, often for use within a liquefaction potential index (LPI) framework to assess liquefaction hazard. At present, the influence of the selected LEP on the accuracy of LPI hazard assessment is unknown, and the need for LEP-specific calibrations of the LPI hazard scale has never been thoroughly investigated. Therefore, the aim of this study is to assess the efficacy of three CPT-based LEPs from the literature, operating within the LPI framework, for predicting the severity of liquefaction manifestation. Utilising more than 7000 liquefaction case studies from the 2010–2011 Canterbury (NZ) earthquake sequence, this study found that: (a) the relationship between liquefaction manifestation severity and computed LPI values is LEP-specific; (b) using a calibrated, LEP-specific hazard scale, the performance of the LPI models is essentially equivalent; and (c) the existing LPI framework has inherent limitations, resulting in inconsistent severity predictions against field observations for certain soil profiles, regardless of which LEP is used. It is unlikely that revisions of the LEPs will completely resolve these erroneous assessments. Rather, a revised index which more adequately accounts for the mechanics of liquefaction manifestation is needed.
Data from the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence (CES) provides an unprecedented opportunity to assess and advance the current state of practice for evaluating liquefaction triggering. Towards this end, select case histories from the CES are used herein to assess the predictive capabilities of three alternative CPT-based simplified liquefaction evaluation procedures: Robertson and Wride (1998); Moss et al. (2006); and Idriss and Boulanger (2008). Additionally, the Liquefaction Potential Index (LPI) framework for predicting the severity of surficial liquefaction manifestations is also used to assess the predictive capabilities of the liquefaction evaluation procedures. Although it is not without limitations, use of the LPI framework for this purpose circumvents the need for selecting “critical” layers and their representative properties for study sites, which inherently involves subjectivity and thus has been a point of contention among researchers. It was found that while all the assessed liquefaction triggering evaluation procedures performed well for the parameter ranges of the sites analyzed, the procedure proposed by Idriss and Boulanger (2008) yielded predictions that are more consistent with field observations than the other procedures. However, use of the Idriss and Boulanger (2008) procedure in conjunction with a Christchurch-specific correlation to estimate fines content showed a decreased performance relative to using a generic fines content correlation. As a result, the fines correction for the Idriss and Boulanger (2008) procedure needs further study.
The Canterbury region experienced widespread damage due to liquefaction induced by seismic shaking during the 4 September 2010 earthquake and the large aftershocks that followed, notably those that occurred on 22 February, 13 June and 23 December 2011. Following the 2010 earthquake, the Earthquake Commission directed a thorough investigation of the ground profile in Christchurch, and to date, more than 7500 cone penetration tests (CPT) have been performed in the region. This paper presents the results of analyses which use a subset of the geotechnical database to evaluate the liquefaction process as well as the re-liquefaction that occurred following some of the major events in Christchurch. First, the applicability of existing CPT-based methods for evaluating liquefaction potential of Christchurch soils was investigated using three methods currently available. Next, the results of liquefaction potential evaluation were compared with the severity of observed damage, categorised in terms of the land damage grade developed from Tonkin & Taylor property inspections as well as from observed severity of liquefaction from aerial photography. For this purpose, the Liquefaction Potential Index (LPI) was used to represent the damage potential at each site. In addition, a comparison of the CPT-based strength profiles obtained before each of the major aftershocks was performed. The results suggest that the analysis of spatial and temporal variations of strength profiles gives a clear indication of the resulting liquefaction and re-liquefaction observed in Christchurch. The comparison of a limited number of CPT strength profiles before and after the earthquakes seems to indicate that no noticeable strengthening has occurred in Christchurch, making the area vulnerable to liquefaction induced land damage in future large-scale earthquakes.
During the recent devastating earthquakes in Christchurch, many residential houses were damaged due to widespread liquefaction of the ground. In-situ testing is widely used as a convenient method for evaluating liquefaction potential of soils. Cone penetration test (CPT) and standard penetration test (SPT) are the two popular in situ tests which are widely used in New Zealand for site characterization. The Screw Driving Sounding (SDS) method is a relatively new operating system developed in Japan consisting of a machine that drills a rod into the ground by applying torque at seven steps of axial loading. This machine can continuously measure the required torque, load, speed of penetration and rod friction during the test, and therefore can give a clear overview of the soil profile along the depth of penetration. In this paper, based on a number of SDS tests conducted in Christchurch, a correlation was developed between tip resistance of CPT test and SDS parameters for layers consisting of different fines contents. Moreover, using the obtained correlation, a chart was proposed which relates the cyclic resistance ratio to the appropriate SDS parameter. Using the proposed chart, liquefaction potential of soil can be estimated directly using SDS data. As SDS method is simpler, faster and more economical test than CPT and SPT, it can be a reliable alternative in-situ test for soil characterization, especially in residential house constructions.
Severe liquefaction was repeatedly observed during the 2010 - 2011 C hristchurch earthquake s , particularly affecting deposits of fine sands and silty sands of recent fluvial or estuarine origin. The effects of liquefaction included major sliding of soil tow ard water bodies ( i.e. lateral spreading ) rang ing from centimetres to several metres. In this paper, a series of undrained cyclic torsional shear tests were conducted to evaluate the liquefaction and extremely large deformation properties of Christchurch b oiled sand . In these tests, the simple shear conditions were reproduced in order to apply realistic stress conditions that soil s experience in the field during horizontal seismic shaking. Several hollow cylindrical medium dense specimens ( D r = 50%) were pr epared by pluviation method, isotropically consolidated at an effective stress of 100 kPa and then cyclically sheared under undrained conditions up to 10 0% double amplitude shear strain (γ DA ) . The cyclic strength at different levels of γ DA of 7.5%, 15%, 3 0 % and 6 0%, development of extremely large post - liquefaction deformation and shear strain locali s ation properties were assessed from the analysis of the effective stress paths and stress - strain responses . To reveal possible distinctiveness, the cyclic undra ined behaviour of CHCH boiled sand was compared with that of Toyoura sand previously examined under similar testing conditions
In 2010 and 2011 Christchurch, New Zealand experienced a series of earthquakes that caused extensive damage across the city, but primarily to the Central Business District (CBD) and eastern suburbs. A major feature of the observed damage was extensive and severe soil liquefaction and associated ground damage, affecting buildings and infrastructure. The behaviour of soil during earthquake loading is a complex phenomena that can be most comprehensively analysed through advanced numerical simulations to aid engineers in the design of important buildings and critical facilities. These numerical simulations are highly dependent on the capabilities of the constitutive soil model to replicate the salient features of sand behaviour during cyclic loading, including liquefaction and cyclic mobility, such as the Stress-Density model. For robust analyses advanced soil models require extensive testing to derive engineering parameters under varying loading conditions for calibration. Prior to this research project little testing on Christchurch sands had been completed, and none from natural samples containing important features such as fabric and structure of the sand that may be influenced by the unique stress-history of the deposit. This research programme is focussed on the characterisation of Christchurch sands, as typically found in the CBD, to facilitate advanced soil modelling in both res earch and engineering practice - to simulate earthquake loading on proposed foundation design solutions including expensive ground improvement treatments. This has involved the use of a new Gel Push (GP) sampler to obtain undisturbed samples from below the ground-water table. Due to the variable nature of fluvial deposition, samples with a wide range of soil gradations, and accordingly soil index properties, were obtained from the sampling sites. The quality of the samples is comprehensively examined using available data from the ground investigation and laboratory testing. A meta-quality assessment was considered whereby a each method of evaluation contributed to the final quality index assigned to the specimen. The sampling sites were characterised with available geotechnical field-based test data, primarily the Cone Penetrometer Test (CPT), supported by borehole sampling and shear-wave velocity testing. This characterisation provides a geo- logical context to the sampling sites and samples obtained for element testing. It also facilitated the evaluation of sample quality. The sampling sites were evaluated for liquefaction hazard using the industry standard empirical procedures, and showed good correlation to observations made following the 22 February 2011 earthquake. However, the empirical method over-predicted liquefaction occurrence during the preceding 4 September 2010 event, and under-predicted for the subsequent 13 June 2011 event. The reasons for these discrepancies are discussed. The response of the GP samples to monotonic and cyclic loading was measured in the laboratory through triaxial testing at the University of Canterbury geomechanics laboratory. The undisturbed samples were compared to reconstituted specimens formed in the lab in an attempt to quantify the effect of fabric and structure in the Christchurch sands. Further testing of moist tamped re- constituted specimens (MT) was conducted to define important state parameters and state-dependent properties including the Critical State Line (CSL), and the stress-strain curve for varying state index. To account for the wide-ranging soil gradations, selected representative specimens were used to define four distinct CSL. The input parameters for the Stress-Density Model (S-D) were derived from a suite of tests performed on each representative soil, and with reference to available GP sample data. The results of testing were scrutinised by comparing the data against expected trends. The influence of fabric and structure of the GP samples was observed to result in similar cyclic strength curves at 5 % Double Amplitude (DA) strain criteria, however on close inspection of the test data, clear differences emerged. The natural samples exhibited higher compressibility during initial loading cycles, but thereafter typically exhibited steady growth of plastic strain and excess pore water pressure towards and beyond the strain criteria and initial liquefaction, and no flow was observed. By contrast the reconstituted specimens exhibited a stiffer response during initial loading cycles, but exponential growth in strains and associated excess pore water pressure beyond phase-transformation, and particularly after initial liquefaction where large strains were mobilised in subsequent cycles. These behavioural differences were not well characterised by the cyclic strength curve at 5 % DA strain level, which showed a similar strength for both GP samples and MT specimens. A preliminary calibration of the S-D model for a range of soil gradations is derived from the suite of laboratory test data. Issues encountered include the influence of natural structure on the peak-strength–state index relationship, resulting in much higher peak strengths than typically observed for sands in the literature. For the S-D model this resulted in excessive stiffness to be modelled during cyclic mobility, when the state index becomes large momentarily, causing strain development to halt. This behaviour prevented modelling the observed re- sponse of silty sands to large strains, synonymous with “liquefaction”. Efforts to reduce this effect within the current formulation are proposed as well as future research to address this issue.
