Advertisement

Identification of Possible Liquefaction Zones Across Guwahati and Targets for Future Ground Improvement Ascertaining no Further Liquefaction of Such Zones

  • Safik Khan
  • Abhishek KumarEmail author
Original Paper
  • 21 Downloads

Abstract

Liquefaction is associated with the loss of shear strength of soil, causing considerable damages. The Northeast Indian region has experienced many major (M ≥ 7.0) to great earthquakes (EQs) such as 1869 Cachar EQ and 1897 Shillong EQ. As a consequence, Guwahati city had faced large scale damage and significant induced effects such as liquefaction during past EQs. At present, Guwahati is the largest business hub of the northeast India. Further, Guwahati is also amongst the list of cities, Government of India has shortlisted to be developed as “smart city”. For these reasons, the city attracts lots of infrastructural growth in the times to come. In the present work, the liquefaction potential of Guwahati subsoil is evaluated. For the purpose, seismic scenarios experiences during 1869 Cachar EQ (Mw = 7.5), 1897 Shillong EQ (Mw = 8.1), average horizontal seismic coefficient given by IS 1893 (Part 1): 2016 (seismic zone V) and maximum amplified peak ground acceleration (PGA) values obtained based on site-specific subsoil data are considered separately. In-situ subsoil properties are obtained from 244 boreholes (BHs) till 30 m depth and maps showing possible liquefiable zones across Guwahati are developed. In addition, maps showing target SPT-N value (\(N^{improved}\)), to be obtained at above liquefiable zones after ground improvement, ensuring no further liquefaction, are also developed. Thus, the present study collectively identify zones which may undergo liquefaction during future EQs and further, how much improvement in the subsoil strength properties are required so that the above found liquefaction can be avoided, is also estimated. Obtained results and proposed values will provide very useful information to field engineers regarding where and how much ground improvement is required for avoiding future liquefaction. In addition, the present study is very helpful for city planning and microzonation studies.

Keywords

Subsoil Liquefaction Guwahati Ground improvement Scenario earthquakes 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Authors would like to thank start-up project titled ‘‘Seismic site classification of Guwahati city and development of design response spectra considering detailed in situ geotechnical and geophysical studies’’ from IIT Guwahati for necessary motivation and financial support for this work. Further, authors are thankful to Guwahati Metropolitan Development Authority (GMDA) for sharing necessary borehole reports and for permitting MASW tests across Guwahati without which present work would not have been possible.

Funding

Funding was provided by Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati Grant No. Start-up grant.

References

  1. Ambraseys NN (1988) Engineering seismology: part I. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 17(1):1–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ayothiraman R, Raghukanth SR, Sreelatha S (2012) Evaluation of liquefaction potential of Guwahati: gateway city to Northeastern India. Nat Hazards 63(2):449–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Banerjee S, Kumar A (2017) Determination of S and Coda wave attenuation in selected regions of lower and Northern Assam within North Eastern India. Indian Geotech J.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40098-017-0259-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baro O, Kumar A (2017) Seismic Source Characterization for the Shillong Plateau in Northeast India. J Seismol 21(5):1229–1249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baro O, Kumar A, Ismail-Zadeh Alik (2018) Seismic hazard assessment of the Shillong Plateau, India. Geomat Nat Hazards Risk 9(1):841–861CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bhatia SC, Kumar MR, Gupta HK (1999) A probabilistic seismic hazard map of India and adjoining regions. Ann Geophys 42(6):1153–1164Google Scholar
  7. Bilham R (2004) Earthquakes in India and the Himalaya: tectonics, geodesy and history. Ann Geophys 47(2–3):839–858Google Scholar
  8. Bilham R, England P (2001) Plateau ‘pop-up’ in the great 1897 Assam earthquake. Nature 410(6830):806CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bolton Seed H, Tokimatsu K, Harder LF, Chung RM (1985) Influence of SPT procedures in soil liquefaction resistance evaluations. J Geotech Eng 111(12):1425–1445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Boulanger RW, Idriss IM (2004) Evaluating the potential for liquefaction or cyclic failure of silts and clays. Center for Geotechnical Modeling, Davis, p 131Google Scholar
  11. Boulanger RW, Idriss IM (2006) Liquefaction susceptibility criteria for silts and clays. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 132(11):1413–1426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bray JD, Sancio RB (2006) Assessment of the liquefaction susceptibility of fine-grained soils. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 132(9):1165–1177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. BSSC (2003) NEHRP recommended provision for seismic regulation for new buildings and other structures (FEMA 450). Part 1: Provisions, building safety seismic council for the federal emergency management agency, 2003, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  14. Castelli F, Grasso S, Lentini V, Massimino MR (2016) In-Situ measurement for evaluating liquefaction potential under cyclic loading. In: Proceedings of international workshop on metrology for geotechnics, Banavento, pp 79–84Google Scholar
  15. Cavallaro A, Grasso S, Maugeri M, Motta E (2012a) Site characterization by in situ and laboratory tests of the sea bed in the Genova Harbour (Italy). In: Proceedings of 4th international conference on geotechnical and geophysical site characterization, ISC’4-ISBN; 978-0-412-66069-3, T1-TS4, PernambucoGoogle Scholar
  16. Cavallaro A, Grasso M, Motta E (2012b) An innovative low-cost SDMT Marine investigation for the evaluation of the liquefaction potential in the Genova Harbour (Italy). In: Proceedings of 4th internationa conference on geotechnical and geophysical site characterization, ISC’4-ISBN; 978-0-412-66069-3, T2-TS3, PernambucoGoogle Scholar
  17. Cavallaro A, Capilleri PP, Grasso S (2018) Site characterization by dynamic in situ and laboratory tests for liquefaction potential evaluation during Emilia Romagna earthquake. Geosciences 8:242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Chameau JL, Clough GW, Reyna F, Frost JD (1991) Liquefaction response of San Francisco bayshore fills. Bull Seismol Soc Am 81(5):1998–2018Google Scholar
  19. Egan JA, Wang ZL (1991) February. liquefaction-related ground deformation and effects on facilities at Treasure Island, San Francisco, during the 17 October 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Japan–US workshop on earthquake resistant design of lifeline facilities and countermeasures for soil liquefaction. Technical Report NCEER-91–0001, pp 57–76Google Scholar
  20. Geological Survey of India, Dasgupta S, Narula PL, Acharyya SK, Banerjee J (2000) Seismotectonic atlas of India and its environs. Geological Survey of India, KolkataGoogle Scholar
  21. Idriss IM (1999) An update to the Seed-Idriss simplified procedure for evaluating liquefaction potential. In: Proceedings of TRB worshop on new approaches to liquefaction, Pubbl. n. FHWA-RD-99-165. Federal Highway AdministationGoogle Scholar
  22. Idriss IM, Boulanger RW (2010) SPT-based liquefaction triggering procedures. Rep UCD/CGM-10 2:4–13Google Scholar
  23. Idriss IM, Boulanger RW (2014) CPT and SPT based liquefaction triggering procedures. Centre Geotech Modell. Report no UCD/CGM-14/01Google Scholar
  24. Iwasaki T (1986) Soil liquefaction studies in Japan: state-of-the-art. Soil Dy Earthq Eng 5(1):2–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Iwasaki T, Tokida KI, Tatsuoka F, Watanabe S, Yasuda S, Sato H (1982 June) Microzonation for soil liquefaction potential using simplified methods. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on microzonation, Seattle, vol 3, pp 1310–1330Google Scholar
  26. Khattri KN (1987) Great earthquakes, seismicity gaps and potential for earthquake disaster along the Himalaya plate boundary. Tectonophysics 138(1):79–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kokusho T, Kojima T (2002) Mechanism for postliquefaction water film generation in layered sand. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 128(2):129–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kramer SL (1996) Geotechncial Earthquake Engineering, Pearson EducationGoogle Scholar
  29. Krishnan MS (1968) Geology of India and Burma. Higginbothams, MadrasGoogle Scholar
  30. Kumar A, Srinivas BV (2017) Easy to use empirical correlations for liquefaction and no liquefaction conditions. Geotech Geol Eng 35(4):1383–1407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kumar A, Baro O, Narayan LM (2014) Estimation of surface PGA and determination of target value for no liquefaction at Guwahati city. In: Proceedings of Geo-Innovations, October 30–31, Indian Institute of Science, BangaloreGoogle Scholar
  32. Kumar A, Harinarayan NH, Verma V, Anand S, Borah U, Bania M (2018) Seismic Site Classification and empirical correlation between standard penetration test N value and shear wave velocity for guwahati based on thorough subsoil investigation data. Pure Appl Geophys 175(8):2721–2738CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kutter BL, Fiegel GL (1991) Mechanism of sand boil formation in layered soils as observed in centrifuge tests. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Japan-US workshop on earthquake resistant design of lifeline facilities and countermeasures for soil liquefaction. Technical Report NCEER-91, vol 1, pp 279–292Google Scholar
  34. Lawson AC, Reid HF (1908) The California earthquake of April 18, 1906: report of the state earthquake investigation commission (No. 87). Carnegie institution of Washington, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  35. Lee D-H, Ku C-S, Juang CH (2001) Soil liquefaction and ground settlement in Chi–Chi Taiwan, earthquake. In: International conferences on recent advances in geotechnical earthquake engineering and soil dynamics, p 27Google Scholar
  36. Liao SS, Whitman RV (1986) Overburden correction factors for SPT in sand. J Geotech Eng 112(3):373–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Maugeri M, Grasso S (2013) Liquefaction potential evaluation at Catania Harbour, Italy. In: Brebbia CA, Hernández S (eds) Earthquake resistant engineering structures IX. WIT transactions on the built environment, vol 132. WIT Press, Southampton, pp 69–82Google Scholar
  38. McCulloch DS, Bonilla MG (1970) Effects of the earthquake of March 27, 1964, on the Alaska Railroad. US Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  39. Molnar P, Fitch TJ, Wu FT (1973) Fault plane solutions of shallow earthquakes and contemporary tectonics in Asia. Earth Planet Sci Lett 19(2):101–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Monaco P, de Magistris Santucci, Grasso S, Marchetti S, Maugeri M, Totani G (2011) Analysis of the liquefaction phenomena in the Village of Vittorito (L’Aquila). Bull Earthq Eng 9:231–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Murthy MVN (1970 December). Tectonic and mafic igneous activity in northeast India in relation to upper mantle. In: Proceedings of the second symposium on Upper Mantle Project, NGRI, Hyderabad, pp. 287–304Google Scholar
  42. Nandy DR (2001) Geodynamics of Northeastern India and the adjoining region. ACB publications, KolkataGoogle Scholar
  43. National Research Council (US). Committee on earthquake engineering and national research council (US). Committee on earthquake engineering research (1985) Liquefaction of soils during earthquakes. National Academies, vol 1Google Scholar
  44. Ni J, Barazangi M (1984) Seismotectonics of the Himalayan collision zone: geometry of the underthrusting Indian plate beneath the Himalaya. J Geophys Res Solid Earth 89(B2):1147–1163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ni JF, Guzman-Speziale M, Bevis M, Holt WE, Wallace TC, Seager WR (1989) Accretionary tectonics of Burma and the three-dimensional geometry of the Burma subduction zone. Geology 17(1):68–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. O’Rourke TD, Gowdy TE, Stewart HE, Pease JW (1991) February. ‘Lifeline Performance and Ground Deformation in the Marina During 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake. In: Third Japan–US Workshop on earthquake resistant design of lifeline facilities and countermeasures for soil liquefaction. San Francisco, pp 129–146Google Scholar
  47. Oldham T (1882) The Cachar earthquake of 10th January 1869. Geological Survey of India, KolkataGoogle Scholar
  48. Oldham RD (1899) Report of the great earthquake of 12th June, 1897. Office of the Geological survey, KolkataGoogle Scholar
  49. O’Rourke TD, Hamada M (1992) Large ground deformations and their effects on lifeline facilities: 1971 San Fernando earthquake. In: Case studies liquefaction and lifeline performance during past earthquakes: United states case studies. US National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research (NCEER), pp 1–85Google Scholar
  50. Raghukanth SR, Dash SK (2010a) Deterministic seismic scenarios for North East India. J Seismol 14(2):143–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Raghukanth SR, Dash SK (2010b) Evaluation of seismic soil-liquefaction at Guwahati city. Environ Earth Sci 61(2):355–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Rajendran CP, Rajendran K, Duarah BP, Baruah S, Earnest A (2006) Reply to comment by R. Bilham on “Interpreting the style of faulting and paleoseismicity associated with the 1897 Shillong, northeast India, earthquake: implications for regional tectonism”. Tectonics.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2005TC001902 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Robertson PK, Wride CE (1998) Evaluating cyclic liquefaction potential using the cone penetration test. Can Geotech J 35(3):442–459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Ross GA, Seed HB, Migliaccio RR (1973) Performance of highway bridges foundation. In: The great Alaska earthquake of 1964, vol 6. Engineering, National Academy of Science, Washington, pp 190–240.Google Scholar
  55. Saito A, Taghawa K, Tamura T, Oishi H, Nagayama H, Shimaoka H (1987) A countermeasure for sand liquefaction: gravel drain method. Technical Rep. No. 51, Nippon Kokan K.K., TokyoGoogle Scholar
  56. Seed HB (1975) Representation of irregular stress time histories by equivalent uniform stress series in liquefaction analyses. Earthquake Engineering Research Center, OaklandGoogle Scholar
  57. Seed HB, Mori K, Chan CK (1977) Influence of seismic history on liquefaction of sands. J Geotech Eng Div, ASCE 102(GT4):246–270Google Scholar
  58. Seed HB, Idriss IM (1971) Simplified procedure for evaluating soil liquefaction potential. J Soil Mech Found Div 97(9):1249–1273Google Scholar
  59. Seed HB (1979) Liquefaction and cyclic mobility evaluation for level ground during earthquakes. J Geotech Eng Div 105(2):201–255Google Scholar
  60. Seed HB, Booker JR (1977) Stabilization of potentially liquefiable sand deposits using gravel drains. J Geotech Eng Div 103(7):757–768Google Scholar
  61. Seed HB, Idriss IM (1982) On the importance of dissipation effects in evaluating pore pressure changes due to cyclic loading. Soil Mech Transient Cyclic Loads, pp 53–70Google Scholar
  62. Seed HB, Idriss IM, Arango I (1983) Evaluation of liquefaction potential using field performance data. J Geotech Eng 109(3):458–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Seed HB, Tokimatsu K, Harder LF, Chung RM (1984) The influence ofSPT procedures in soil liquefaction resistance evaluations, Report No. UBC/EERC-84/15. Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  64. Seed RB, Cetin KO, Moss RES, Kammerer AM, Wu J, Pestana JM, Riemer MF, Sancio RB, Bray JD, Kayen RE, Faris A (2003) Recent advances in soil liquefaction engineering: A unified and consistent framework, keynote presentation. In: 26th Annual ASCE Los Angeles Geotechnical Spring Seminar, Long BeachGoogle Scholar
  65. Sharma B, Hazarika PJ (2013) Assessment of liquefaction potential of Guwahati city: a case study. Geotech Geol Eng 31(5):1437–1452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Soga K (1998 January). Soil liquefaction effects observed in the Kobe earthquakes of 1995. In: Proceedings of the institution of civil engineers: geotechnical engineering, vol 131, no. 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Sonmez H (2003) Modification of the liquefaction potential index and liquefaction susceptibility mapping for a liquefaction-prone area (Inegol, Turkey). Environ Geol 44(7):862–871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Thevanayagam S, Jia W (2003) Electro-osmotic grouting for liquefaction mitigation in silty soils. In: Johnsen LF et al (ed) ASCE Geotechnical special technical publication, vol 120, pp 1507–1517Google Scholar
  69. Thingbaijam KKS, Nath SK, Yadav A, Raj A, Walling MY, Mohanty WK (2008) Recent seismicity in northeast India and its adjoining region. J Seismol 12(1):107–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Tokimatsu K, Kojima H, Kuwayama S, Abe A, Midorikawa S (1994) Liquefaction-induced damage to buildings in 1990 Luzon earthquake. J Geotech Eng 120(2):290–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Toprak S, Holzer TL (2003) Liquefaction potential index: field assessment. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 129(4):315–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Tsuchida H (1970) Prediction and countermeasure against the liquefaction in sand deposits. In: Abstract of the seminar in the port and harbor research institute, pp 31–333Google Scholar
  73. Whitman RV (1985) On liquefaction. In: Proceedings of the eleventh International conference on soil mechanics and foundation engineeringGoogle Scholar
  74. Yoshida N (1990) Damage to foundation piles and deformation pattern of ground due to liquefaction-induced permanent ground deformations. In: Proceedings 3rd Japan-US workshop on earthquake resistant design of lifeline facilities and countermeasures for soil liquefaction, pp 147–161Google Scholar
  75. Youd TL, Noble SK (1997) Magnitude scaling factors. No. Technical Report NCEER-97Google Scholar
  76. Youd TL, Idriss IM, Andrus RD, Arango I, Castro G, Christian JT, Dobry R, Finn WL, Harder LF Jr, Hynes ME, Ishihara K (2003) Closure to “Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils” by TL Youd, IM Idriss, Ronald D. Andrus, Ignacio Arango, Gonzalo Castro, John T. Christian, Richardo Dobry, WD Liam Finn, Leslie F. Harder Jr., Mary Ellen Hynes, Kenji Ishihara, Joseph P. Koester, Sam SC Liao, William F. Marcuson III, Geoffrey R. Martin, James K. Mitchell, Yoshiharu Moriwaki, Maurice S. Power, Peter K. Robertson, Raymond B. Seed, and Kenneth H. Stokoe II. J Geotech Eoenviron Eng 129(3):284–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringIndian Institute of TechnologyGuwahatiIndia

Personalised recommendations