Liquefaction fragility of sewer pipes derived from the case study of Urayasu (Japan)

Abstract

The damage on supply and drainage water networks is a serious cause of economic disruption for urban systems affected by earthquakes. Among various concerns, the ruptures of sewer pipes and manholes generated by liquefaction determine a particularly severe sanitary hazard and require extensive, costly and time-consuming repairs. Quantitative risk assessment carried out with the characterisation and geographical mapping of seismic hazard, subsoil susceptibility, physical and functional vulnerability of the exposed elements, enables to estimate losses, identify weaknesses, inspire strategies to mitigate the impact of earthquakes and improve resilience. The present study deals with the physical vulnerability of sewer pipelines. Empirical fragility functions are derived from the evidences of liquefaction induced in Urayasu (Japan) by the 2011 Tohoku-Oki earthquake (Mw9.0). The spatial distribution of seismic signals, subsoil characteristics, pipes and surveyed damages are reconstructed in a GIS platform. An articulated methodology is developed to correlate variables and compensate their limited spatial correspondence, exploiting the complete coverage of the area with terrestrial settlements measured by LiDAR and their strong correlation with damage. Finally, ruptures of pipes are probabilistically quantified adopting a common liquefaction severity indicator as engineering demand parameter and measuring the efficiency of relations with statistical tests.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Adapted from (Konagai et al. 2013)

Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Adapted from (Yasuda et al. 2012)

Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18

References

  1. Alexoudi M, Pitilakis K, Souli A(2010) Fragility functions for water and wastewater system elements, Deliverable D3.5 SYNER-G Project: Systemic Seismic Vulnerability and Risk Analysis for Buildings, Lifeline Networks and Infrastructures Safety Gain. Aristotle University of Thessaloniki

  2. American Lifelines Alliance (ALA) (2001) Seismic fragility formulations for water systems Part 1 Guidelines. ASCE, Reston

    Google Scholar 

  3. American Lifelines Alliance (ALA) (2004) Wastewater systems performance assessment guideline Part 1 Guidelines. ASCE, Reston

    Google Scholar 

  4. Boulanger RW, Idriss IM (2014) CPT and SPT based liquefaction triggering procedures. Center for Geotechnical Modeling

  5. Bray JD, Dashti S (2014) Liquefaction-induced building movements. Bull Earthq Eng 12(3):1129–1156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-014-9619-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Castiglia M, Fierro T, Santucci de Magistris F (2020) Pipeline performances under earthquake-induced soil liquefaction: state of the art on real observations, model tests, and numerical simulations. Shock and Vibration (IF 1.298). https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/8874200

  7. Chiba Prefecture: Chiba Prefecture Soil Quality Environment Information Bank (2019). http://www.pref.chiba.lg.jp/suiho/chishitsu.html (in Japanese)

  8. Chilès JP, Delfiner P (2012) Geostatistics: modeling spatial uncertainty, 2nd Edition: Wiley, ISBN: 978-0-470-18315-1, p 726

  9. Cubrinovski M, Ishihara K (2002) Maximum and minimum void ratio characteristics of sands. Soils Found 42(6):65–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Cubrinovski M, Hughes MW, McCahon I (2011b) Liquefaction Resistance Index (Zoning) of Christchurch at water table depth based on liquefaction observations from the 2010–2011 earthquakes and water table depth information. December 2011. University of Canterbury

  11. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2001) Earthquake loss estimation methodology HAZUS Service Release 5: technical manual, FEMA, Washington, DC. http://www.fema.gov/hazus

  12. FEMA (2003) HAZUS-MH technical manual. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  13. Giovinazzi S, Wilson TM, Davis C, Bristow D, Gallagher M, Schofield A, Tang A (2011) Lifelines performance and management following the 22 February 2011 Christchurch earthquake, New Zealand: highlights of resilience. Bull New Zealand Soc Earthq Eng 44(4):402–417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Goto H, Hata Y, Kuwata Y, Yamamoto H, Morikawa H, Kataoka S (2013) Earthquake source and ground motion characteristics in eastern Japan during the 2011 off the pacific coast of tohoku earthquake. J JSCE 1:329–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hayes et al (2016) Tectonic summaries of magnitude 7 And greater earthquakes from 2000 To 2015. USGS Open-File Report 2016-1192

  16. Idriss IM, Boulanger RW (2014) CPT and SPT based liquefaction triggering procedures. Department of Civil and Environmental engineering, University of California at Davis

  17. Ishihara K, Yoshimine M (1992) Evaluation of settlements in sand deposits following liquefaction during earthquakes. Soils Found 32(1):173–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Iwasaki T, Tatsuoka F, Tokida K, Yasuda S (1978) A practical method for assessing soil liquefaction potential based on case studies at various sites in Japan. In: 2nd international conference on microzonation. pp 885–896

  19. Jalayer F, Cornell CA (2003) A technical framework for probability-based demand and capacity factor design (DCFD) seismic formats. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Center (PEER), 2003/08

  20. Jalayer F, Cornell CA (2009) Alternative non-linear demand estimation methods for probability-based seismic assessments. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 38(8):951–972

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. JGS (2013) JIS A 1219:2013, method for standard penetration test, Japanese Industrial Standard. Japanese Geotechnical Society

  22. Jones LM, Bernknopf R, Cox D, Goltz J, Hudnut K, Mileti D, Perry S, Ponti D, Porter K, Reichle M, Seligson H, Shoaf K, Treiman J, Wein A (2008) The shakeout scenario: U.S. geological survey open-file report 2008–1150 and California Geological Survey Preliminary Report 25. Retrieved from http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1150/

  23. Kanto Regional Development Bureau of Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (2012). http://www.ktr.mlit.go.jp/ktr_content/content/000043569.pdf (in Japanese)

  24. Kato S, Kuwata Y (2017) Spatial relationship of buried-pipeline damage and sand-boiling area due to liquefaction in kashima region. J Jpn Assoc Earthq Eng 17(3)

  25. Konagai K, Kiyota T, Suyama S, Asakura T, Shibuya K, Eto C (2013) Maps of soil subsidence for Tokyo bay shore areas liquefied in the March 11th, 2011 off the Pacific Coast of Tohoku Earthquake. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 53, 240–253. Flyovers of earthquake-hit areas

  26. Kongar I, Rossetto T, Giovinazzi S (2015) Evaluating desktop methods for assessing liquefaction-induced damage to infrastructure for the insurance sector. In: 12th international conference on applications of statistics and probability in civil engineering, ICASP12 Vancouver, Canada, July 12–15, 2015

  27. Kunugi T, Aoi S, Suzuki W, Nakamura H, Morikawa N, Fujiwara H (2012) Strong Motions of the 2011 Tohoku-oki earthquake, Research Report on the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake Disaster. National Disaster Research Report, National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No.48, pp 63–72 (in Japanese with English abstract and captions)

  28. Liu M, Giovinazzi S, Lee P (2015) Seismic fragility functions for sewerage pipelines. (ASCE), Pipelines Conference 2015, 23–26 August, Baltimore (MD), USA

  29. Matheron G (1963a) Traité de geostatistique appliquée, vol. II, Le krigeage: Memoires du Bureau de Recherches Géologiques et Miniéres. no. 24, Editions Bureau de Recherche Géologiques et Miniéres, Paris, 171

  30. Matheron G (1963b) Principles of geostatistics. Econ Geol 58:1246–1266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Miyajima M (2013) Performance of drinking water pipelines in liquefaction areas in the 2011 great east japan earthquake. Int J Lsld Environ 1(1):61–62

    Google Scholar 

  32. Modoni G, Darini G, Spacagna RL, Saroli M, Russo G, Croce P (2013) Spatial-temporal analysis of the subsidence in the city of Bologna. Geotechnical Engeneering for the Presentation of Monuments and Histories Sites, 30-31 May 2013 Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II: CRC Press, p 565–572, ISBN 9781138000551

  33. Mollaioli F, Lucchini A, Cheng Y, Monti G (2013) Intensity measures for the seismic response prediction of base-isolated buildings. Bull Earthq Eng 11(5):1841–1866

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Nagata S, Yamamoto K, Ishida H, Kusaka A (2011) Estimation of fragility curve of sewerage pipes due to seismic damaged data. Procedia Eng 14:1887–1896

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention (NIED) (2011) K-NET WWW service, Japan. http://www.k-net.bosai.go.jp/

  36. O’Rourke M, Jeon S, Toprak S, Cubrinovski M, Hughes M, Van Ballegooy S, Bouziou D (2014) Earthquake response of underground pipeline networks in christchurch, NZ. Earthq Spectra 30(1):183–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Salvatore E, Andò E, Modoni G, Viggiani G (2016) Micromechanical study of cyclically loaded sands with x-ray microtomography and digital image correlation. Procedia Eng 2016:92–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Salvatore E, Andò E, Proia R, Modoni G, Vigginai G (2018) Effect of strain localization on the response of granular materials subjected to monotonic and cyclic triaxial tests. Rivista Italiana di Geotecnica 52(2):30–43

    Google Scholar 

  39. Saroli M, Albano M, Modoni G, Moro M, Milana G, Spacagna RL, Falcucci E, Gori S, Scarascia Mugnozza G (2020) Insights into bedrock paleomorphology and dynamic soil properties of the Cassino intermontane basin (Central Italy. Eng Geol 264:105333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2019.105333

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Scawthorn C, Miyajima M, Ono Y, Kiyono J, Hamada M (2006) Lifeline aspects of the 2004 Niigata ken Chuetsu, Japan, earthquake. Earthq Spectra 22(S1):89–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Schiff AJ (1995) Northridge earthquake: lifeline performance and post-earthquake response: ASCE Publications

  42. Seed HB, Idriss IM (1971) Simplified procedure for evaluating soil liquefaction potential. J Soil Mech Found Div ASCE 97(SM9):1249–1273

    Google Scholar 

  43. Shoji G, Naba SM, Nagata S (2011) Evaluation of seismic vulnerability of sewerage pipelines based on assessment of the damage data in the 1995 Kobe earthquake. Applications of Statistics and Probability in Civil Engineering. London, ISBN 978-0-415-66986-3, 1415–1423

  44. Skempton AW (1986) Standard penetration test procedures and the effects in sands of overburden pressure, relative density, particle size, ageing and overconsolidation

  45. Spacagna R-L, De Fouquet C, Russo G (2013) Geostatistical analysis of groundwater nitrates distribution in the Plaine d’Alsace. Coupled Phenomena in Environmental Geotechnics, CRC Press (Taylor & Francis Group) (GBR), International Symposium on Coupled Phenomena in Environmental Geotechnics (CPEG), Torino 1–3 July 2013, ISBN: 9781138000605

  46. Spacagna RL, Rasulo A, Modoni G (2017) Geostatistical analysis of settlements induced by groundwater extraction. In: ICCSA 2017 17th international conference computational science and its applications, Trieste, Italy, July 3–6, 2017, Proceedings, Part IV LNCS 10407, pp 350–364, 2017 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62401-3_26

  47. Suzuki W, Aoi S, Sekiguchi H, Kunugi T (2011) Rupture process of the 2011 Tohoku-Oki mega-thrust earthquake (M9.0) inverted from strong-motion data. Geophys Res Lett 38:L00G16

  48. Technical Committee on Foundations (1992) Canadian Foundations Engineering Manual (1992), Third Edition. Canadian Geotechnical Society

  49. Toprak EN (2015) Seismic damage probabilities for segmented buried pipelines in liquefied soils. Christchurch: 6th International Conference on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering

  50. Toprak EN (2017) Pipeline damage predictions in liquefaction zones using lSN. Santiago, Chile: In: 16th World conference on earthquake, 16WCEE 2017

  51. Towhata I, Maruyama S, Kasuda K, Koseki J, Wakamatsu K, Kiku H, Kiyota T, Yasuda S, Taguchi Y, Aoyama S, Hayashida T (2014) Liquefaction in the Kanto region during the 2011 off the pacific coast of Tohoku earthquake. Soils Found 54(4):859–873

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Urayasu City Geographical Information System https://www.sonicweb-asp.jp/urayasu/map (in Japanese)

  53. van Ballegooy S, Malan P, Lacrosse V, Jacka ME, Cubrinovski M, Bray JD, O’Rourke TD, Crawford SA, Cowan H (2014) Assessment of liquefaction-induced land damage for residential christchurch. Earthquake spectra (30) No. 1: pp 31–55, February 2014

  54. Yasuda S, Ishikawa K (2014) Damage to sewage and gas facilities inflicted by the 2011 great east Japan earthquake. In: Second European conference on earthquake engineering and seismology, Istanbul Aug. 25–29

  55. Yasuda S, Harada K, Ishikawa K, Kanemaru Y (2012) Characteristics of Liquefaction in Tokyo Bay Area by the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake. Soils Found 52:793–810

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Zhang G, Robertson PK, Brachman RWI (2002) Estimating liquefaction-induced ground settlements from CPT for level ground. Can Geotech J 39:1168–1180

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The present research has been carried out thanks to the contribution of the EU funded project LIQUEFACT “Assessment and mitigation of liquefaction potential across Europe: a holistic approach to protect structures/infrastructures for improved resilience to earthquake-induced liquefaction disasters” (Project ID 700748 funded under the H2020-DRS-2015). Authors are deeply indebted to Professor Susumu Yasuda and Professor Kohji Tokimatsu for their fundamental support and cooperation.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anna Baris.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Baris, A., Spacagna, R.L., Paolella, L. et al. Liquefaction fragility of sewer pipes derived from the case study of Urayasu (Japan). Bull Earthquake Eng (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-020-00957-2

Download citation

Keywords

  • Liquefaction
  • Sewerage
  • Subsidence
  • Vulnerability
  • Validation