Organized by

SURVEYOFINDIAAPRIL1898

Indian Society of Earthquake Technology

&
Department of Earthquake Engineering, IIT Roorkee

DESIGNING FOR LIQUEFACTION

Pesented by:
PROF MAHESH TANDON
Managing Director

Mr. Navneet Gupta

Principal Consultant

TANDON CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD.

Mr. Harsimran S. Garewal

Senior Design Engineer

INTRODUCTION
Evaluation of soil liquefaction potential in geotechnical
engineering is impoprtant for the safety integrity and
serviceability of structures.
This paper is meant for practicing design engineers
who are involved in the analysis of a fairly complex
phenomenon.
Depth of liquefaction is required by theStructural
Designer to arrive at vertical loads, shear forces and
Bending moments in the deep foundation system.

Contd..

The paper concentrates on the application of the most

widely accepted Simplified Methodology (YOUD et al,
2001) without overly worrying about finer points of its
theoretical basis.
The Presentation highlights some of the missing links
which should be addressed by the Codes of Practice
that include liquefaction analysis.

THE PHENOMENON
The shear strength of cohesionless soil,, depends mainly on
the angle of internal friction and the effective stress acting on
the soil grains and can be expressed as

= tan (1)
= - u ....(2)
Where = shear strength, = effective normal stress, = total
normal stress, u = pore pressure, = angle of internal friction
During Earthquake the duration of the cyclic stress application
is so short compared to the time required for water to drain, that
excess pore pressure progressively builds up. When the pore
pressure equals the total stress, thereby reducing the effective
stress to zero, the soil will experience a sudden loss of strength
and stiffness.

FALLOUT of LIQUEFACTION
V
Requirementofdeep
pile
Increaseinpilenumbers
ordiameter
Requirementofaddl
reinforcement

PIER
PILECAP

Liquefiable
Zoneoffers
nolateral
norvertical
resistance.

3DMODELofBRIDGEPIER
ANDFOUNDATION

NonLiquefiable
Zoneoffers
bothlateraland
vertical
resistance.

CODAL PROVISIONS
IS 1893:PART-1 2002
Submerged Loose Sand and classification SP with
N < 15 in Seismic zone III,IV V
N < 10 in Seismic zone II
-May Liquefy
Foundation in such strata should be avoided unless
appropriate method of compaction or stabilization are
adopted.
Alt. the foundation should be taken deeper below
liquefiable layers.
Specialist literature may be referred to determine
liquefaction potential of site

CODAL PROVISIONS IRC: 6 -2014

SimilartoIS1893

Loose Sand and Poorly graded sand with little or no

fines may cause liquefaction
Foundation in such strata should be avoided unless
appropriate method of compaction or stabilization
are adopted.
Alt. the foundation should be taken deeper below
liquefiable layers.
Reference should be made to specialist literature
for analysis of liquefaction potential.

RDSO GUIDELINES FOR SEISMIC

DESIGN OF RAILWAY BRIDGES--2015
Liquefaction analysis procedure is given (based on
YOUDs paper).
However no clarity about the following
PGA : MCE or DBE ? ---------- INTENSITY
Earthquake Magnitude ? ------- LOCAL/NEAR FIELD
Design Load combinations and factors to be used
for design (MCE / DBE or both ? )

EVALUATION OF LIQUEFACTION
POTENTIAL
Estimationoftwoparametersarerequiredtoevaluate
liquefactionpotential
(1)CSR: Cyclic Stress Ratio Demand on soil layers
expressed in term of CSR

(2)CRR: Cyclic Resistance Ratio Capacity of soil to

resist liquefaction
FOS= CRR/CSR > 1

EVALUATION OF CYCLIC STRESS

RATIO (CSR)
CSR = 0.65 (amax/g) (v / v) rd

Seed&Idris1971

rd

= Stress Reduction Factor which depends on depth

below ground level

amax/g = (Ratio of Peak Horizontal Ground acceleration/

acceleration due to gravity). For Zone IV, for
instance, MCE=0.24, and DBE = 0.12, IS 1893
v / v = (Total vertical Stress/Effective vertical Stress) should
be evaluated for all potentially liquefiable layers
within the

LOAD COMBINATIONS GIVEN IN RDSO

CRITICALLOADCASEFOR
STRUCTURALDESIGNOF
PILE_reducedverticalload

CRITICALLOADCASE
FORVERTICALLOAD
ONPILE_high vertical
load

DESIGNOPTION1

(amax/g)
=
Z/2
I

CorrespondingtoDBE
asloadcombination
availableintheIndian
Codesareonlyfor
DBE

(Sa/g ) x Z/2 x I = 1 x 0.12 x 1.5 = 0.18

corrected as per intention of RDSO
= zone factor = 0.12 ( for zone IV)
= Importance Factor = 1.5 or appropriate

DESIGNOPTION2

(amax/g)
=0.24ie,MCE.ForDESIGNLOADS,LOADFACTORS
andLOADCOMBINATIONS.MAKENEW
PROVISIONSALTOGETHERFORLIQUEFACTION

RESPONSE SPECTRA
DAMPING 5%

TYPE I (ROCK OR HARD SOIL) N > 30

TYPE II (MEDIUM SOIL)
TYPE III (SOFT SOIL) N < 10

PERIOD (secs.)

Sa/g = 1 , For peak ground acceleration

(horizontal)

CSR = 0.65 (amax/g) (v / v) rd

v / v

= Total Stress / Effective Stress = Varies

from approx. 2 to 1 depending upon
Water Table considered for
calculations
Effective Stress = Total Stress Pore Water Pressure
rd =stressreductioncoefficient
withdepth
rd = 1.0 0.00765z for z 9.15 m
rd = 1.174 0.0267z for 9.15 m < z 23 m

NOTE:DISTINCTIONREQDBETWEENWATER
TABLEDURINGSPTTESTSANDDURINGSERVICECONDITIONS

EVALUATION OF CYCLIC RESISTANCE

RATIO (CRR)
- Specimen of granular soil retrieved with typical sampling
techniques are too disturbed to give meaningful results
- Field test are used for evaluation of liquefaction potential
- Standard penetration test (SPT ) : Preferred as most
popular in India
Optional route
- Cone penetration test ( CPT )
- Shear wave velocity (Vs)

EVALUATION OF STANDARDIZED SPT

(N60)

(N60)- is the standard penetration test for hammer

of efficiency 60%.
N60 = NxC60

Where,
N = Observed field SPT value
C60 = CHTCHwCSSCRL CBD

CHT = Energy ratio

CHw = Hammer wt.
CSS = sampling method
CRL = Rod length
CBD = Bore Hole diameter

Fivecorrectionfactorsdependoneqpt

Normalized standardized SPT blow count (N1)60- is

normalized to effective overburden pressure of 98 kpa.

(N1)60 = CN N60= N CNC60 = N CNCHTCHwCSSCRL CBD

CN = Correction due to overburden pressure
Total 6 Nos of correction are applied on observed N to arrive at (N1)60
No reliable data for these corrections for SPT equipments used in India
(as per IS 2131-1981) though RDSO Guidelines have recommended
values for same. These should be used till indigenous research
available. If equipment used as per ASTM D1586 no correction needed
except for CN

13.3 In loose sands or poorly graded

sands with little or no fines,
vibrations due to earthquake may
cause liquefaction or excessive total
and differential settlements. In
Zones IV and V, the founding of
bridges on such sands should be
avoided unless appropriate methods
of compaction or stabilization are
adopted. Liquefaction analysis
procedure is given in Appendix G.
Foundation should be taken to
sufficient depth below the layers of
soil which are susceptible to
liquefaction.

Appendix (G) Simplified Procedure for Evaluation of

Liquefaction Potential
(Clause 13.3)

ASTM D1586 STANDARD EQUIPMENT

SPTTESTING
Withrope&pulley

ASTM D1586

SPLITSPOONSAMPLER

CORRECTIONS FOR NON STANDARD

EQUIPMENT

Corrections to SPT Based on

International Practice

N60 = NxC60

Commonly
used in
India.
RDSO has
suggested
value of
0.75.

Values in
RDSO same

Evaluation of CRR7.5
.

Above equation is
applicable for (N1) 60 < 30 .
For (N1) 60 > 30 clean
granular soils are too
dense to liquefy.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CRR7.5 &
(N1) 60 FOR SAND FOR Mw 7.5
EARTHQUAKE- INFLUNCE LINES

Note:Use(N1)60cs insteadof(N1)60
foradjustmentforfinesPTO

Adjustment to Influence Lines for Fines

Content
-%

by weight passing through IS standard sieve no. 75

micron.

Equivalent clean sand value

=0forFC 5%
=exp [1.76 (190/FC2)]for5%<FC<35%
=5.0forFC 35%
=1.0forFC 5%
=[0.99+(FC1.5/1,000)]for5%<FC<35%
=1.2forFC 35%

Evaluation of CRR from CRR7.5

Km = Earthquake magnitude correction

K = Overburden correction ~1.0
K = Sloping ground correction ~1.0

EARTHQUAKE MAGNITUDE
CORRECTION Km
What value of
Mw should be
considered ?

1.4 if Mw= 7.0

1.7 if Mw= 6.5

No correction for
magnitude 7.5

Fig2:EpicentersofPostEarthquakes
(fromIS1893)

Fig3:EarthquakeHazardMapsDeveloped
byBMTPC

EXAMPLECALCULATIONSUSINGSPREADSHEETS

(i)

(iI)

SENSITIVITYANALYSISOFEXAMPLE
FORTWOPARAMETERS
Vary amax (keeping MW= 7.0)
INPUT
amax

DEPTHOFLIQUEFACTION

0.18

noliquefaction

0.20

4.5m

0.24

13.5m

0.28

22.5m

Vary Earthquake Magnitude, Keeping amax/g = 0.24

INPUT
Mw

kM

DEPTHOF
LIQUEFACTION

5.5

2.5

Noliquefaction

6.0

2.2

Noliquefaction

6.5

1.7

4.5m

7.0

1.4

13.5m

INPUT DATA

Contd

INPUT DATA
(Contd)

BORE HOLE DATA WITH

CALCULATIONS
Water Table for Design =
Water Table during SPT =

3m below Ground Level

5M below Ground Level

Contd

BORE HOLE DATA WITH

CALCULATIONS

Thanks