Search

found 118 results

Images for Soil liquefaction; more images...

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

The Canterbury Earthquake Sequence 2010-2011 (CES) induced widespread liquefaction in many parts of Christchurch city. Liquefaction was more commonly observed in the eastern suburbs and along the Avon River where the soils were characterised by thick sandy deposits with a shallow water table. On the other hand, suburbs to the north, west and south of the CBD (e.g. Riccarton, Papanui) exhibited less severe to no liquefaction. These soils were more commonly characterised by inter-layered liquefiable and non-liquefiable deposits. As part of a related large-scale study of the performance of Christchurch soils during the CES, detailed borehole data including CPT, Vs and Vp have been collected for 55 sites in Christchurch. For this subset of Christchurch sites, predictions of liquefaction triggering using the simplified method (Boulanger & Idriss, 2014) indicated that liquefaction was over-predicted for 94% of sites that did not manifest liquefaction during the CES, and under-predicted for 50% of sites that did manifest liquefaction. The focus of this study was to investigate these discrepancies between prediction and observation. To assess if these discrepancies were due to soil-layer interaction and to determine the effect that soil stratification has on the develop-ment of liquefaction and the system response of soil deposits.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

The Canterbury Earthquake Sequence (CES) of 2010-2011 caused widespread liquefaction in many parts of Christchurch. Observations from the CES highlight some sites were liquefaction was predicted by the simplified method but did not manifest. There are a number of reasons why the simplified method may over-predict liquefaction, one of these is the dynamic interaction between soil layers within a stratified deposit. Soil layer interaction occurs through two key mechanisms; modification of the ground motion due to seismic waves passing through deep liquefied layers, and the effect of pore water seepage from an area of high excess pore water pressure to the surrounding soil. In this way, soil layer interaction can significantly alter the liquefaction behaviour and surface manifestation of soils subject to seismic loading. This research aimed to develop an understanding of how soil layer interaction, in particular ground motion modification, affects the development of excess pore water pressures and liquefaction manifestation in a soil deposit subject to seismic loading. A 1-D soil column time history Effective Stress Analysis (ESA) was conducted to give an in depth assessment of the development of pore pressures in a number of soil deposits. For this analysis, ground motions, soil profiles and model parameters were required for the ESA. Deconvolution of ground motions recorded at the surface during the CES was used to develop some acceleration time histories to input at the base of the soil-column model. An analysis of 55 sites around Christchurch, where detailed site investigations have been carried out, was then conducted to identify some simplified soil profiles and soil characteristics. From this analysis, four soil profiles representative of different levels of liquefaction manifestation were developed. These were; two thick uniform and vertically continuous sandy deposits that were representative of sites were liquefaction manifested in both the Mw 7.1 September 2010 and the Mw 6.3 February 2011 earthquakes, and two vertically discontinuous profiles with interlayered liquefiable and non-liquefiable layers representative of sites that did not manifest liquefaction in either the September 2010 or the February 2011 events. Model parameters were then developed for these four representative soil profiles through calibration of the constitutive model in element test simulations. Simulations were run for each of the four profiles subject to three levels of loading intensity. The results were analysed for the effect of soil layer interaction. These were then compared to a simplified triggering analysis for the same four profiles to determine where the simplified method was accurate in predicting soil liquefaction (for the continuous sandy deposits) and were it was less accurate (the vertically discontinuous deposits where soil layer interaction was a factor).

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Recurrent liquefaction in Christchurch during the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence created a wealth of shallow subsurface intrusions with geometries and orientations governed by (1) strong ground motion severity and duration, and (2) intrinsic site characteristics including liquefaction susceptibility, lateral spreading severity, geomorphic setting, host sediment heterogeneity, and anthropogenic soil modifications. We present a suite of case studies that demonstrate how each of these characteristics influenced the geologic expressions of contemporary liquefaction in the shallow subsurface. We compare contemporary features with paleo-features to show how geologic investigations of recurrent liquefaction can provide novel insights into the shaking characteristics of modern and paleo-earthquakes, the influence of geomorphology on liquefaction vulnerability, and the possible controls of anthropogenic activity on the geologic record. We conclude that (a) sites of paleo-liquefaction in the last 1000-2000 years corresponded with most severe liquefaction during the Canterbury earthquake sequence, (b) less vulnerable sites that only liquefied in the strongest and most proximal contemporary earthquakes are unlikely to have liquefied in the last 1000-2000 years or more, (c) proximal strong earthquakes with large vertical accelerations favoured sill formation at some locations, (d) contemporary liquefaction was more severe than paleoliquefaction at all study sites, and (e) stratigraphic records of successive dike formation were more complete at sites with severe lateral spreading, (f) anthropogenic fill suppressed surface liquefaction features and altered subsurface liquefaction architecture.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Grass growing through liquefaction silt in Avondale. The photographer comments, "Although this grass seems to be growing on the liquefaction created by the earthquakes in Christchurch, New Zealand, they are actually only growing through it. Nothing seems to grow even though seeds will sprout almost anywhere else. The seeds are growing in the soil which got covered up by the liquefaction. If liquefaction gets mixed with even a little soil then nature can get a foothold".

Research papers, The University of Auckland Library

Soil Liquefaction during Recent Large-Scale Earthquakes contains selected papers presented at the New Zealand – Japan Workshop on Soil Liquefaction during Recent Large-Scale Earthquakes (Auckland, New Zealand, 2-3 December 2013). The 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquakes in New Zealand and the 2011 off the Pacific Coast of Tohoku Earthquake in Japan have caused significant damage to many residential houses due to varying degrees of soil liquefaction over a very wide extent of urban areas unseen in past destructive earthquakes. While soil liquefaction occurred in naturally-sedimented soil formations in Christchurch, most of the areas which liquefied in Tokyo Bay area were reclaimed soil and artificial fill deposits, thus providing researchers with a wide range of soil deposits to characterize soil and site response to large-scale earthquake shaking. Although these earthquakes in New Zealand and Japan caused extensive damage to life and property, they also serve as an opportunity to understand better the response of soil and building foundations to such large-scale earthquake shaking. With the wealth of information obtained in the aftermath of both earthquakes, information-sharing and knowledge-exchange are vital in arriving at liquefaction-proof urban areas in both countries. Data regarding the observed damage to residential houses as well as the lessons learnt are essential for the rebuilding efforts in the coming years and in mitigating buildings located in regions with high liquefaction potential. As part of the MBIE-JSPS collaborative research programme, the Geomechanics Group of the University of Auckland and the Geotechnical Engineering Laboratory of the University of Tokyo co-hosted the workshop to bring together researchers to review the findings and observations from recent large-scale earthquakes related to soil liquefaction and discuss possible measures to mitigate future damage. http://librarysearch.auckland.ac.nz/UOA2_A:Combined_Local:uoa_alma21151785130002091

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Earthquake-triggered soil liquefaction caused extensive damage and heavy economic losses in Christchurch during the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquakes. The most severe manifestations of liquefaction were associated with the presence of natural deposits of clean sands and silty sands of fluvial origin. However, liquefaction resistance of fines-containing sands is commonly inferred from empirical relationships based on clean sands (i.e. sands with less than 5% fines). Hence, existing evaluation methods have poor accuracy when applied to silty sands. Also, existing methods do not quantify appropriately the influence on liquefaction resistance of soil fabric and structure, which are unique to a specific depositional environment. This study looks at the influence of fines content, soil fabric (i.e. arrangement of soil particles) and structure (e.g. layering, segregation) on the undrained cyclic behaviour and liquefaction resistance of fines-containing sandy soils from Christchurch using Direct Simple Shear (DSS) tests on soil specimens reconstituted in the laboratory with the water sedimentation technique. The poster describes experimental procedures and presents early test results on two sands retrieved at two different sites in Christchurch.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Earthquake-triggered soil liquefaction caused extensive damage and heavy economic losses in Christchurch during the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquakes. The most severe manifestations of liquefaction were associated with the presence of natural deposits of clean sands and silty sands of fluvial origin. However, liquefaction resistance of fines-containing sands is commonly inferred from empirical relationships based on clean sands (i.e. sands with less than 5% fines). Hence, existing evaluation methods have poor accuracy when applied to silty sands. The liquefaction behaviour of Christchurch fines-containing (silty) sands is investigated through a series of Direct Simple Shear (DSS) tests. This type of test better resembles earthquake loading conditions in soil deposits compared to cyclic triaxial tests. Soil specimens are reconstituted in the laboratory with the water sedimentation technique. This preparation method yields soil fabrics similar to those encountered in fluvial soil deposits, which are common in the Christchurch area. Test results provide preliminary indications on how void ratio, relative density, preparation method and fines content influence the cyclic liquefaction behaviour of sand-silt mixtures depending on the properties of host sand and silt.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

This study uses 44 high quality liquefaction case histories taken from 22 locations affected by the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence to evaluate four commonly used CPT-VS correlations (i.e., Robertson, 2009; Hegazy and Mayne, 2006; Andrus et al., 2007; McGann et al., 2015b). Co-located CPT soundings and VS profiles, developed from surface wave testing, were obtained at 22 locations and case histories were developed for the Mw 7.1, 4 September 2010 Darfield and Mw 6.2, 22 February 2011 Christchurch earthquakes. The CPT soundings are used to generate VS profiles using each of four CPT-VS correlations. These correlated VS profiles are used to estimate the factor of safety against liquefaction using the Kayen et al. (2013) VS-based simplified liquefaction evaluation procedure. An error index is used to quantify the predictive capabilities of these correlations in relation to the observations of liquefaction (or the lack thereof). Additionally, the error indices from the CPT-correlated VS profiles are compared to those obtained using: (1) the Kayen et al. (2013) procedure with surface wave-derived VS profiles, and (2) the Idriss and Boulanger (2008) CPT-based liquefaction evaluation procedure. Based on the error indices, the evaluation procedures based on direct measurements of either CPT or VS provided more accurate liquefaction triggering estimates than those obtained from any of the CPT-VS correlations. However, the performance of the CPT-VS correlations varied, with the Robertson (2009) and Hegazy and Mayne (2006) correlations performing relatively poorly for the Christchurch soils and the Andrus et al. (2007) and McGann et al. (2015b) correlations performing better. The McGann et al. (2015b) correlation had the lowest error indices of the CPT-VS correlations tested, however, none of the CPT-VS correlations provided accurate enough VS predictions to be used for the evaluation of liquefaction triggering using the VS-based liquefaction evaluation procedures.

Research papers, The University of Auckland Library

Many large-scale earthquakes all over the world have highlighted the impact of soil liquefaction to the built environment, but the scale of liquefaction-induced damage experienced in Christchurch and surrounding areas following the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence (CES) was unparalleled, especially in terms of impact to an urban area. The short time interval between the large earthquakes presented a very rare occasion to examine liquefaction mechanism in natural deposits. The re-liquefaction experienced by the city highlighted the high liquefaction susceptibility of soil deposits in Christchurch, and presented a very challenging problem not only to the local residents but to the geotechnical engineering profession. This paper summarises the lessons learned from CES, and the impacts of the observations made to the current practice of liquefaction assessment and mitigation.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Results from cyclic undrained direct simple shear tests on reconstituted specimens of two sands from Christchurch are compared against the liquefaction resistance inferred from CPT-based empirical liquefaction triggering methods. Limitations in existing empirical triggering relationships to capture important effects related to processes which originated test soils are highlighted and discussed.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

As a consequence of the 2010 – 2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence, Christchurch experienced widespread liquefaction, vertical settlement and lateral spreading. These geological processes caused extensive damage to both housing and infrastructure, and increased the need for geotechnical investigation substantially. Cone Penetration Testing (CPT) has become the most common method for liquefaction assessment in Christchurch, and issues have been identified with the soil behaviour type, liquefaction potential and vertical settlement estimates, particularly in the north-western suburbs of Christchurch where soils consist mostly of silts, clayey silts and silty clays. The CPT soil behaviour type often appears to over-estimate the fines content within a soil, while the liquefaction potential and vertical settlement are often calculated higher than those measured after the Canterbury earthquake sequence. To investigate these issues, laboratory work was carried out on three adjacent CPT/borehole pairs from the Groynes Park subdivision in northern Christchurch. Boreholes were logged according to NZGS standards, separated into stratigraphic layers, and laboratory tests were conducted on representative samples. Comparison of these results with the CPT soil behaviour types provided valuable information, where 62% of soils on average were specified by the CPT at the Groynes Park subdivision as finer than what was actually present, 20% of soils on average were specified as coarser than what was actually present, and only 18% of soils on average were correctly classified by the CPT. Hence the CPT soil behaviour type is not accurately describing the stratigraphic profile at the Groynes Park subdivision, and it is understood that this is also the case in much of northwest Christchurch where similar soils are found. The computer software CLiq, by GeoLogismiki, uses assessment parameter constants which are able to be adjusted with each CPT file, in an attempt to make each more accurate. These parameter changes can in some cases substantially alter the results for liquefaction analysis. The sensitivity of the overall assessment method, raising and lowering the water table, lowering the soil behaviour type index, Ic, liquefaction cutoff value, the layer detection option, and the weighting factor option, were analysed by comparison with a set of ‘base settings’. The investigation confirmed that liquefaction analysis results can be very sensitive to the parameters selected, and demonstrated the dependency of the soil behaviour type on the soil behaviour type index, as the tested assessment parameters made very little to no changes to the soil behaviour type plots. The soil behaviour type index, Ic, developed by Robertson and Wride (1998) has been used to define a soil’s behaviour type, which is defined according to a set of numerical boundaries. In addition to this, the liquefaction cutoff point is defined as Ic > 2.6, whereby it is assumed that any soils with an Ic value above this will not liquefy due to clay-like tendencies (Robertson and Wride, 1998). The method has been identified in this thesis as being potentially unsuitable for some areas of Christchurch as it was developed for mostly sandy soils. An alternative methodology involving adjustment of the Robertson and Wride (1998) soil behaviour type boundaries is proposed as follows:  Ic < 1.31 – Gravelly sand to dense sand  1.31 < Ic < 1.90 – Sands: clean sand to silty sand  1.90 < Ic < 2.50 – Sand mixtures: silty sand to sandy silt  2.50 < Ic < 3.20 – Silt mixtures: clayey silt to silty clay  3.20 < Ic < 3.60 – Clays: silty clay to clay  Ic > 3.60 – Organics soils: peats. When the soil behaviour type boundary changes were applied to 15 test sites throughout Christchurch, 67% showed an improved change of soil behaviour type, while the remaining 33% remained unchanged, because they consisted almost entirely of sand. Within these boundary changes, the liquefaction cutoff point was moved from Ic > 2.6 to Ic > 2.5 and altered the liquefaction potential and vertical settlement to more realistic ii values. This confirmed that the overall soil behaviour type boundary changes appear to solve both the soil behaviour type issues and reduce the overestimation of liquefaction potential and vertical settlement. This thesis acts as a starting point towards researching the issues discussed. In particular, future work which would be useful includes investigation of the CLiq assessment parameter adjustments, and those which would be most suitable for use in clay-rich soils such as those in Christchurch. In particular consideration of how the water table can be better assessed when perched layers of water exist, with the limitation that only one elevation can be entered into CLiq. Additionally, a useful investigation would be a comparison of the known liquefaction and settlements from the Canterbury earthquake sequence with the liquefaction and settlement potentials calculated in CLiq for equivalent shaking conditions. This would enable the difference between the two to be accurately defined, and a suitable adjustment applied. Finally, inconsistencies between the Laser-Sizer and Hydrometer should be investigated, as the Laser-Sizer under-estimated the fines content by up to one third of the Hydrometer values.

Articles, UC QuakeStudies

The Christchurch liquefaction study was initiated to better determine liquefaction susceptibility in Christchurch city. It aimed to improve on earlier liquefaction susceptibility maps, which were based on soil type and distribution, by incorporating soil strength data into liquefaction analysis. This stage of the study included collating available geological and geotechnical data from Environment Canterbury and Christchurch City Council into a database, modelling liquefaction hazard and ground damage and presenting these as maps. The report contains many recommendations, which were taken up in subsequent stages of the study. (Note that the results of Stage 1 of the Christchurch liquefaction study were provided to Environment Canterbury as a letter rather than a report. This was a summary of work completed to 30 June 2001, including a review of geological and geotechnical data available within Environment Canterbury and Christchurch City Council records.) See Object Overview for background and usage information.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Workers operate a drilling rig, sampling soil as part of EQC's geotechnical investigation of TC3 land. The photographer comments, "The work of getting 'soil' samples from all the areas marked as green/blue zones in Christchurch. These areas may be susceptible to liquefaction if a major earthquake occurs. The soil samples were a failure as all they found was sand".

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

A series of undrained cyclic direct simple shear (DSS) tests on specimens of sandy silty soils are used to evaluate the effects of fines content, fabric and layered structure on the liquefaction response of sandy soils containing non-plastic fines. Test soils originate from shallow deposits in Christchurch, New Zealand, where severe and damaging manifestations of liquefaction occurred during the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquakes. A procedure for reconstituting specimens by water sedimentation is employed. This specimen preparation technique involves first pluviation of soil through a water column, and then application of gentle vibrations to the mould (tapping) to prepare specimens with different initial densities. This procedure is applied to prepare uniform specimens, and layered specimens with a silt layer atop a sand layer. Cyclic DSS tests are performed on water-sedimented specimens of two sands, a silt, and sand-silt mixtures with different fines contents. Through this testing program, effects of density, time of vibration during preparation, fines content, and layered structure on cyclic behaviour and liquefaction resistance are investigated. Additional information necessary to characterise soil behaviour is provided by particle size distribution analyses, index void ratio testing, and Scanning Electronic Microscope imaging. The results of cyclic DSS tests show that, for all tested soils, specimens vibrated for longer period of time have lower void ratios, higher relative density, and greater liquefaction resistance. One of the tested sands undergoes significant increase in relative density and liquefaction resistance following prolonged vibration. The other sand exhibits lower increase in relative density and in liquefaction resistance when vibrated for the same period of time. Liquefaction resistance of sand-silt mixtures prepared using this latter sand shows a correlation with relative density irrespective of fines content. In general, however, magnitudes of changes in liquefaction resistance for given variations in vibration time, relative density, or void ratio vary depending on soils under consideration. Characterization based on maximum and minimum void ratios indicates that tested soils develop different structures as fines are added to their respective host sands. These structures influence initial specimen density, strains during consolidation, cyclic liquefaction resistance, and undrained cyclic response of each soil. The different structures are the outcome of differences in particle size distributions, average particle sizes, and particle shapes of the two host sands and of the different relationships between these properties and those of the silt. Fines content alone does not provide an effective characterization of the effects of these factors. Monotonic DSS tests are also performed on specimens prepared by water sedimentation, and on specimens prepared by moist tamping, to identify the critical state lines of tested soils. These critical state lines provide the basis for an alternative interpretation of cyclic DSS tests results within the critical state framework. It is shown that test results imply general consistency between observed cyclic and monotonic DSS soil response. The effects of specimen layering are scrutinised by comparing DSS test results for uniform and layered specimens of the same soils. In this case, only a limited number of tests is performed, and the range of densities considered for the layered specimens is also limited. Caution is therefore required in interpretation of their results. The liquefaction resistance of layered specimens appears to be influenced by the bottom sand layer, irrespective of the global fines content of the specimen. The presence of a layered structure does not result in significant differences in terms of liquefaction response with respect to uniform sand specimens. Cyclic triaxial data for Christchurch sandy silty soils available from previous studies are used to comparatively examine the behaviour observed in the tests of this study. The cyclic DSS liquefaction resistance of water-sedimented specimens is consistent with cyclic triaxial tests on undisturbed specimens performed by other investigators. The two data sets result in similar liquefaction triggering relationships for these soils. However, stress-strain response characteristics for the two types of specimens are different, and undisturbed triaxial specimen exhibit a slower rate of increase in shear strains compared to water-sedimented DSS specimens. This could be due to the greater influence of fabric of the undisturbed specimens.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

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.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Results from a series of 1D seismic effective stress analyses of natural soil deposits from Christchurch are summarized. The analysed soil columns include sites whose performance during the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquakes varied significantly, from no liquefaction manifestation at the ground surface to very severe liquefaction, in which case a large area of the site was covered by thick soil ejecta. Key soil profile characteristics and response mechanisms affecting the severity of surface liquefaction manifestation and subsequent damage are explored. The influence of shaking intensity on the triggering and contribution of these mechanisms is also discussed. Careful examination of the results highlights the importance of considering the deposit as a whole, i.e. a system of layers, including interactions between layers in the dynamic response and through pore water pressure redistribution and water flow.