Search

Data from over 30 sites in 5 countries are analyzed to develop updated factors for correcting liquefaction resistance for aged sand deposits. Results of cyclic laboratory tests on relatively undisturbed and reconstituted specimens suggest an increase in the correction factors of 0.12 per log cycle of time and an average reference age of 2 days for the reconstitute specimens. Laboratory and field test results combined with cyclic resistance ratio (CRR) charts suggest an increase in the correction factors of 0.13 per log cycle of time and an average reference age of 23 years. A reference age of 23 years seems appropriate for the commonly used CRR charts derived from field liquefaction and no liquefaction case history data. Because age of natural deposits is often difficult to accurately determine, a relationship between measured to estimated shear-wave velocity ratio (MEVR) and liquefaction resistance correction factor is also derived directly from the compiled data. This new MEVR-liquefaction resistance correction factor relationship is not as sensitive to MEVR as in the relationship derived indirectly in a previous paper. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000118 CE Database subject headings: Aging; Cone penetration test; Earthquakes; Soil liquefaction; Shear waves; Velocity; Penetration tests.

Factors for correcting liquefaction resistance for aged sands using ratios of measured to estimated shear-wave velocity (MEVR) are derived in this paper. Estimated values of shear-wave velocity ([V.sub.s]) are computed for 91 penetration resistance-[V.sub.s] data pairs using previously published relationships. Linear regression is performed on values of MEVR and corresponding average age. Age of the sand layer is taken as the time between [V.sub.s] measurements and initial deposition or last critical disturbance. It is found that MEVR increases by a factor of about 0.08 per log cycle of time, and time equals about 6 years on average when MEVR equals 1 for the recommended penetration resistance-[V.sub.s] relationships. The resulting regression equation is combined with the strength gain equation reported by Hayati et al. 2008 in 'Proc., Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics IV,' to produce a MEVR versus deposit resistance correction relationship. This new corrective relationship is applied to create liquefaction resistance curves based on [V.sub.s], standard penetration test blow count, and cone tip resistance for sands of various ages (or MEVRs). Because age of natural soil deposits is usually difficult to accurately determine, MEVR appears to be a promising alternative. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)GT. 1943-5606.0000025 CE Database subject headings: Aging; Sand; Cone penetration tests; Earthquakes; In situ tests; Soil liquefaction; Wave velocity; Penetration tests.

A liquefaction potential map of the peninsula of Charleston, S.C., is presented in this paper. Liquefaction potential is expressed in terms of the liquefaction potential index developed by Iwasaki et al. and calculated using 44 cone penetration test profiles. The cone profiles are supplemented with information from the 1:24,000 scale geologic map by Weems and Lemon, several first-hand accounts of liquefaction and ground deformation that occurred during the 1886 Charleston earthquake, and liquefaction probabilities determined by Elton and Hadj-Hamou based on standard penetration tests. Nearly all of the cases of liquefaction and ground deformation occurred in the Holocene to late Pleistocene beach deposits that flank the higher-ground sediments of the Wando Formation. To match the observed field behavior, a deposit resistance correction factor of 1.8 is applied to cyclic resistance ratios calculated for the 100,000-year-old Wando Formation. No corrections are needed for the younger deposits. In additional to 1886 field behavior, the deposit resistance corrections are supported by ratios of measured to predicted shear-wave velocity. CE Database subject headings: Cone penetration tests; Earthquakes; Liquefaction; Mapping; Shear waves; Velocity; South Carolina.

Model uncertainty associated with normalized shear modulus and material damping ratio relationships developed in a previous study is discussed in terms of standard deviations in this paper. The relationships were originally developed by separating resonant column and torsional shear test results of 122 specimens into three general geologic groups (Quaternary-age soils, Tertiary-age and older soils, and residual/saprolite soils) and determining mean regressional model parameters (i.e., [alpha], [kappa], [[gamma].sub.r1], and [D.sub.min1]) for each group. Statistical variability of the regressional parameters is quantified and expressed by standard errors of prediction. The determined uncertainty of the regressional parameters is then propagated through the recommended relationships using the point-estimate method to estimate the model uncertainty of the relationships. The point-estimate method is a simple and effective method of uncertainty propagation. For uncertainty estimation, the regressional parameters are assumed to be uncorrelated for the sake of simplicity. The influence of this assumption on the model uncertainty of normalized shear modulus and material damping ratio values, as well as the sensitivity of the model uncertainty to the uncertainty of various regressional parameters, are also discussed. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2008)134:1(24) CE Database subject headings: Damping; Dynamic properties; Ground motion; Seismic analysis; Shear modulus; Uncertainty principles.

The Cooper marl in Charleston, S.C., a deep layer of clayey soils approximately 5-21 m below the ground surface, is generally recognized as nonliquefiable material. Data from field cone penetration tests and laboratory tests of samples taken from the Cooper marl are used to investigate the adequacy of index properties-based criteria for assessing liquefaction susceptibility of clayey soils. In particular, the criterion based on soil behavior type index ([I.sub.c]) and that based on Atterberg limits are examined. The results show that the Atterberg limits-based criterion adequately reflected the characteristics of the marl, whereas the [I.sub.c]-based criterion erroneously identified the marl as being liquefiable. A possible reason for the deficiency of [I.sub.c] and a modification to overcome this deficiency are presented. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2007)133:1(110) CE Database subject headings: Earthquakes; Liquefaction; Cone penetration tests; Plasticity; Soil properties; Clays.

This paper presents an assessment of existing and new probabilistic methods for liquefaction potential evaluation. Emphasis is placed on comparison of probabilities of liquefaction calculated with two different approaches, logistic regression and Bayesian mapping. Logistic regression is a well-established statistical procedure, whereas Bayesian mapping is a relatively new application of the Bayes' theorem to the evaluation of soil liquefaction. In the present study, simplified procedures for soil liquefaction evaluation, including the Seed-Idriss, Robertson-Wride, and Andrus-Stokoe methods, based on the standard penetration test, cone penetration test, and shear wave velocity measurement, respectively, are used as the basis for developing Bayesian mapping functions. The present study shows that the Bayesian mapping approach is preferred over the logistic regression approach for estimating the site-specific probability of liquefaction, although both methods yield comparable probabilities. The paper also compares the three simplified methods in the context of probability of liquefaction, and argues for the use of probability-based procedures for evaluating liquefaction potential. CE Database keywords: Liquefaction; Probabilty; In sim tests; Statistics. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE) 1090-0241(2002) 128:7(580)

A simplified procedure using shear-wave velocity measurements for evaluating the liquefaction resistance of soils is presented. The procedure was developed in cooperation with industry, researchers, and practitioners and evolved from workshops in 1996 and 1998. It follows the general format of the Seed-Idriss simplified procedure based on standard penetration test blow count and was developed using case history data from 26 earthquakes and >70 measurement sites in soils ranging from fine sand to sandy gravel with cobbles to profiles including silty clay layers. Liquefaction resistance curves were established by applying a modified relationship between the shear-wave velocity and cyclic stress ratio for the constant average cyclic shear strain suggested by R. Dobry. These curves correctly predicted moderate to high liquefaction potential for >95% of the liquefaction case histories and are shown to be consistent with the standard penetration test based curves in sandy soils. A case study is provided to illustrate application of the procedure. Additional data are needed, particularly from denser soil deposits shaken by stronger ground motions, to further validate the simplified procedure.

Following disastrous earthquakes in Alaska and in Niigata, Japan in 1964, Professors H. B. Seed and I. M. Idriss developed and published a methodology termed the 'simplified procedure' for evaluating liquefaction resistance of soils. This procedure has become a standard of practice throughout North America and much of the world. The methodology which is largely empirical, has evolved over years, primarily through summary papers by H. B. Seed and his colleagues. No general review or update of the procedure has occurred, however, since 1985, the time of the last major paper by Professor Seed and a report from a National Research Council workshop on liquefaction of soils. In 1996 a workshop sponsored by the National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research (NCEER) was convened by Professors T. L. Youd and I. M. Idriss with 20 experts to review developments over the previous 10 years. The purpose was to gain consensus on updates and augmentations to the simplified procedure. The following topics were reviewed and recommendations developed: (1) criteria based on standard penetration tests; (2) criteria based on cone penetration tests; (3) criteria based on shear-wave velocity measurements; (4) use of the Becker penetration test for gravelly soil; (4) magnitude scaling factors; (5) correction factors for overburden pressures and sloping ground; and (6) input values for earthquake magnitude and peak acceleration. Probabilistic and seismic energy analyses were reviewed but no recommendations were formulated.