Acta Geophysica

, Volume 66, Issue 1, pp 21–38 | Cite as

Comparison of SPT and V s-based liquefaction analyses: a case study in Erciş (Van, Turkey)

  • İsmail AkkayaEmail author
  • Ali Özvan
  • Mutluhan Akin
  • Müge K. Akin
  • Uğur Övün
Research Article - Applied Geophysics


Liquefaction which is one of the most destructive ground deformations occurs during an earthquake in saturated or partially saturated silty and sandy soils, which may cause serious damages such as settlement and tilting of structures due to shear strength loss of soils. Standard (SPT) and cone (CPT) penetration tests as well as the shear wave velocity (V s)-based methods are commonly used for the determination of liquefaction potential. In this research, it was aimed to compare the SPT and V s-based liquefaction analysis methods by generating different earthquake scenarios. Accordingly, the Erciş residential area, which was mostly affected by the 2011 Van earthquake (M w = 7.1), was chosen as the model site. Erciş (Van, Turkey) and its surroundings settle on an alluvial plain which consists of silty and sandy layers with shallow groundwater level. Moreover, Çaldıran, Erciş–Kocapınar and Van Fault Zones are the major seismic sources of the region which have a significant potential of producing large magnitude earthquakes. After liquefaction assessments, the liquefaction potential in the western part of the region and in the coastal regions nearby the Lake Van is found to be higher than the other locations. Thus, it can be stated that the soil tightness and groundwater level dominantly control the liquefaction potential. In addition, the lateral spreading and sand boiling spots observed after the 23rd October 2011 Van earthquake overlap the scenario boundaries predicted in this study. Eventually, the use of V s-based liquefaction analysis in collaboration with the SPT results is quite advantageous to assess the rate of liquefaction in a specific area.


Liquefaction SPT Shear wave velocity (VsLPI LSI Erciş 



This research has been funded by Van Yüzüncü Yıl University the Scientific and Technical Research Council of Turkey (Project No 2014-HIZ-MIM167 and 2015-FBE-YL271). The authors would also like to thank the reviewers for their constructive comments, which enhance the quality of the paper.


  1. ABYYHY (1997). Afet Bölgelerinde Yapılacak Yapılar Hakkında Yönetmelik, Aydınoğlu, M. M., Bayındırlık ve İskan Bakanlığı (in Turkish)Google Scholar
  2. Akın, M, Akın MK, Akkaya İ, Özvan A, Şengül MA (2015a) Erciş (Van) Yerleşim Alanındaki Zeminlerin Sıvılaşma Potansiyelinin Değerlendirilmesi, No: 2014-HIZ-MİM167 Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Bilimsel Araştırma Projeleri Başkanlığı, 46 s (in Turkish)Google Scholar
  3. Akın KM, Kramer SL, Topal T (2011) Empirical correlations of shear wave velocity (V s) and penetration resistance (SPT-N) for different soils in an earthquake-prone area (Erbaa-Turkey). Eng Geol 119(1–2):1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Akın M, Özvan A, Akın M, Topal T (2013) Evaluation of liquefaction in Karasu River floodplain after the October 23, 2011, Van (Turkey) earthquake. Nat Hazards 69:1551–1575CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Akın M, Akın MK, Akkaya İ, Özvan A, Şengül MA (2015b) Erciş (Van) yerleşim alanındaki zeminlerin sıvılaşma potansiyelinin değerlendirilmesi, Ulusal Mühendislik Jeolojisi Sempozyumu, 3-5 Eylül 2015, KTÜ, Trabzon. s 208-215(in Turkish)Google Scholar
  6. Ambraseys NN (2001) Reassessment of earthquakes 1900–1999 in the Eastern Mediterranean and Middle East. Geophys J Int 145:471–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Andrus RD, Stokoe KH II (2000) Liquefaction resistance of soils from shear-wave velocity. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng (ASCE) 126:1015–1025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Andrus RD and Stokoe II KH (1997) Liquefaction Resistance Based on Shear Wave Velocity. In: NCEER Workshop on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance Of Soils, Technical Report NCEER-97-0022, T.L.Youd and I.M. Idriss (Eds.), Held (1996), Salt Lake City, UT, Buffalo, NY, pp 89–128Google Scholar
  9. Aydan Ö, Ulusay R, Kumsar H, Konagai K (2012) Site investigation and engineering evaluation of the Van earthquakes of October 23 and November 9, 2011. Japan Society of Civil EngineersGoogle Scholar
  10. Aydan Ö, Ulusay R, Kumsar H (2013) Seismic, ground motion and geotechnical characteristics of the 2011 Van-Ercis¸ and Van-Edremit earthquakes of Turkey, and assessment of geotechnical damages. Bull Eng Geol Environ. Google Scholar
  11. Bozcu M, Uyanık O, Çakmak O, Türker AE (2007) Geotechnical properties of Esen I HEPP Project Field. Süleyman Demirel University. J Nat Appl Sci 11(1):75–83Google Scholar
  12. Bozkurt E (2001) Neotectonics of Turkey-a synthesis. Geodin Acta 14:3–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cetin KO, Seed RB, Der Kiureghian A, Tokimatsu K, Harder LF, Kayen RE, Moss RES (2004) Standard penetration test-based probabilistic and deterministic assessment of seismic soil liquefaction potential. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 130(12):1314–1340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dadashpour M, Echeverria-Ciaurri D, Kleppe J, Landro M (2009) Porosity and permeability estimation by integration of production and time-lapse near and far offset seismic data. J Geophys Eng 6:325–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dikmen U (2009) Statistical correlations of shear wave velocity and penetration resistance for soils. J Geophys Eng 6:61–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dikmen Ü, Arısoy MÖ, Akkaya İ (2010a) Offset and linear spread geometry in MASW method. J Geophy Eng 7:211–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dikmen Ü, Başokur AT, Akkaya İ, Arısoy MÖ (2010b) Yüzey dalgalarının çok-kanallı analizi yönteminde uygun atış mesafesinin seçimi. Yerbilimleri 31(1):23–32 (in Turkish) Google Scholar
  18. Dobry R, Powell DJ, Yokel FY, Ladd RS (1981a) Geotechnical aspect. Liquefaction potential of saturated sand—the stiffness method. In: Proceeding of the Seventh World Conference on Earthquake Engineering Istanbul, TurkeyGoogle Scholar
  19. Dobry R, Stokoe KHII, Ladd RS, Youd TL (1981b) Liquefaction susceptibility from S-Wave Velocity. In: Proceedings, In Situ Tests to Evaluate Liquefaction Susceptibility, ASCE National Convertion, held 1981, St. Louis, MOGoogle Scholar
  20. Dobry R, Ladd RS, Yokel FY, Chung RM, Powell D (1982) Prediction of pore water pressure buildup and liquefaction of sands during earthquakes by the cyclic strain method. Building Science Series 138, National Bureau of Standards, US, p 182Google Scholar
  21. Duman ES, Ikizler SB (2014) Assessment of liquefaction potential of Erzincan Province and its vicinity, Turkey. Nat Hazards 73:1863–1887CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Foti S (2000) Multistation Methods for Geotechnical Characterization using Surface Waves, Ph.D. Diss., Politecnico di Torino, p 230, MilanoGoogle Scholar
  23. Golesorkhi R (1989) Factors Influencing the Computational Determination of Earthquake-Induced Shear Stresses in Sandy Soils, Ph.D. thesis, University of California at Berkeley, p 395Google Scholar
  24. Graizer V, Kalkan E (2015) Update of the Graizer-Kalkan ground-motion prediction equations for shallow crustal continental earthquakes. USGS Open-File Rep 2015–1009:79Google Scholar
  25. Hardin BO, Drnevich VP (1972) Shear modulus and damping in soils: measurement and parameter effects. J Soil Mech Found Div ASCE. 98(6):603–624Google Scholar
  26. Hasançebi N, Ulusay R (2007) Empirical correlations between shear wave velocity and penetration resistance for ground shaking assessments. Bull Eng Geol Env 66:203–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Idriss IM (1999) An update to the Seed-Idriss simplified procedure for evaluating liquefaction potential. In: Proceedings, TRB Workshop on New Approaches to Liquefaction, Publication No. FHWARD-99-165, Federal Highway Administration, JanuaryGoogle Scholar
  28. Idriss IM, Boulanger RW (2006) Semi-empirical procedures for evaluating liquefaction potential during earthquakes. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 26:115–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Idriss IM, Boulanger RW (2008) Soil liquefaction during earthquakes. Monograph MNO-12, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, p 261Google Scholar
  30. Idriss IM and Boulanger RW (2010) SPT-based Liquefaction Triggering Procedures, Report No. UCD/CGM-10/02, department of Civil & Environmental Engineering College of Engineering University of California, pp 259Google Scholar
  31. Ishihara K (1996) Soil behaviour in earthquake geotechnics. The Oxford Engineering Science Series, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  32. Iwasaki T, Tokida K, Tatsuko F and Yasuda S (1978) A practical method for assessing soil liquefaction potential based on case studies at various site in Japan. In: 2nd International Conference on Microzonation, San Francisco, pp 885–896Google Scholar
  33. Iwasaki T, Tokida K, Tatsuoka F, Watanabe S, Yasuda S, Sato H (1982) Microzonation for soil liquefaction potential using simplified methods. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on microzonation, Seattle, vol 3, pp 1310–1330Google Scholar
  34. Juang CH, Yuan H, Lee DH, Lin PS (2003) Simplified cone penetration test based method for evaluating liquefaction resistance of soils. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 129(1):66–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kadirioğlu FT, Kartal RF (2016) The new empirical magnitude conversion relations using an improved earthquake catalogue for Turkey and its near vicinity (1900–2012). Turk J of Earth Sc 25:300–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Karastathis VK, Karmis PN, Draskatos G, Stavrakakis G (2002) Geophysical methods contributing to the testing of concrete dams. Application at the Marathon Dam. J Appl Geophys 50:247–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kayen RE, Mitchell JK, Seed RB, Lodge A, Nishio S and Coutinho R (1992) Evaluation of SPT-,CPT-, and shear wave-based methods for liquefaction potential assessment using Loma Prieta data, Fourth Japan-U.S. In: Workshop on Earthquake Resistant Design of Lifeline Facilities and Countermeasures for Soil Liquefaction, Honolulu, Hawaii, Proceedings, Technical Rep. NCEER-92-0019, M. Hamada and T. D. O’Rourke, eds., National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, Buffalo, NY, 1, pp 177–204Google Scholar
  38. Koçyiğit A (2013) New field and seismic data about the intraplate strike-slip deformation in Van region, East Anatolian plateau, E Turkey. J Asian Earth Sci 62:586–605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Koçyiğit A, Yılmaz A, Adamia S, Kuloshvili S (2001) Neotectonics of East Anotolian Plateau transition from thrusting to strike-slip faulting. Geodin Acta 14:177–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. KOERI (2011) Probabilistic assessment of the seismic hazard for the Lake Van basin, October, 23 2011. Accessed 23 Dec 2011
  41. Kramer SL (1996) Geotechnical earthquake engineering. Prentice-Hall International Series in Civil Engineering and Engineering Mechanics, p 653Google Scholar
  42. Liao SSC, Whitman RV (1986) Overburden correction factors for SPT in sands. J Geotech Eng (ASCE) 112:337–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. MTA (2007) Van İlinin Yer Bilim Verileri, Ankara, s. 69 (in Turkish)Google Scholar
  44. Oyan V, Keskin M, Lebedev VA, Chugaev AV, Sharkov EV (2016) Magmatic evolution of the Early Pliocene Etrüsk stratovolcano, Eastern Anatolia collision zone, Turkey. Lithos 256–257:88–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Özdemir Y, Güleç N (2014) Geological and geochemical evolution of the quaternary Süphan stratovolcano, eastern Anatolia, Turkey: evidence for the lithosphere-asthenosphere interaction in postcollisional volcanism. J Petrol 55:37–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Özdemir Y, Karaoğlu Ö, Tolluoğlu AÜ, Guleç N (2006) Volcanostratigraphy and petrogenesis of the Nemrutstratovolcano (East Anatolian Plateau): the most recent post-collisional volcanism in Turkey. Chem Geol 226:189–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Özdemir Y, Akkaya İ, Oyan V, Kelfoun K (2016) A Debris avalanche at Süphan Stratovolcano (Turkey) and implications for hazard evaluation. Bull Volcanol 78(9).
  48. Özvan A, Şengül MA, Tapan M (2008) Van Gölü havzası Neojen çökellerinin jeoteknik özelliklerine bir bakış: erciş yerleşkesi. Geosound 52:297–310 (in Turkish) Google Scholar
  49. Park CB, Miller RD, Xia J (1999) Multichannel analysis of surface waves. Geophysics 64(3):800–808CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Pekkan E, Tun M, Guney Y, Mutlu S (2015) Integrated seismic risk analysis using simple weighting method: the case of residential Eskişehir, Turkey. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 15:1123–1133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Robertson PK and Wride CE (1997) Cyclic Liquefaction and Evaluation Based on the SPT and CPT, NCEER Workshop on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils (NCEER-97-0022)Google Scholar
  52. Robertson PK, Wride CE (1998) Evaluating cyclic liquefaction potential using the cone penetration test. Can Geotech J 35(3):442–459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Şaroğlu F, Yilmaz Y (1986) Doğu Anadolu’da Neotektonik Dönemdeki Jeolojik Evrim ve Havza Modelleri. MTA Dergisi 107:73–94 (Ankara (in Turkish)) Google Scholar
  54. Seed RB and Harder LF (1990) SPT-based analysis of cyclic pore pressure generation and undrained residual strength. In: Froc., HB. Seed Memorial Symp., Hi-Tech Publishing Ltd., vol 2, pp 351–376Google Scholar
  55. Seed HB, Idriss IM (1971) Simplified procedure for evaluating soil liquefaction potential. J Soil Mech Found Div 97:1249–1273Google Scholar
  56. Seed HB, Idriss IM (1982) Ground motions and soil liquefaction during earthquakes. Earthquake Engineering Resarch Institute, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  57. Seed HB, Idriss IM, Arango I (1983) Evaluation of liquefaction potential using field performance data. J Geotech Eng ASCE 109:458–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Selçuk AS (2016) Evaluation of the relative tectonic activity in the eastern Lake Van basin, East Turkey. Geomorphology 270:9–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Şengör AMC, Kidd WSF (1979) Post-collisional tectonics of the Turkish-Iranian plateau and a comparison with Tibet. Tectonophys. 55:361–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Şengör AMC, Yılmaz Y (1981) Tethyan evolution of Turkey: a plate tectonic approach. Tectonophysics 75:181–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Sonmez H (2003) Modification of the liquefaction potential index and liquefaction susceptibility mapping for a liquefactionprone area (Inegol, Turkey). Environ Geol 44:862–871. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sonmez H, Gokceoglu C (2005) A liquefaction severity index suggested for engineering practice. Environ Geol 48:81–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Soupios PM, Papazachos CB, Vargemezis G, Fikos I (2005) Application of Modern Seismic Methods for Geotechnical Site Characterization. In: Πρακτικά του International Workshop in Geoenvironment and Geotechnics 12-14 September 2005, Milos island, Greece, ISBN 960-88153-7-1, σ_λ, pp 163–170Google Scholar
  64. Tezcan SS, Keceli A, Ozdemir Z (2006) Allowable bearing capacity of shallow foundations based on shear wave velocity. J Geotech Geol Eng 24:203–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Tokimatsu K, Uchida A (1990) Correlation between liquefaction resistance and shear wave velocity. Soils Found 30(2):33–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Tokimatsu K, Yoshimi Y (1983) Empirical Correlation of Soil Liquefaction Based on SPT N-Value and Fine Content. Soils Found 23(4):56–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Uyanik O (2010) Compressional and shear-wave velocity measurements in unconsolidated top-soil and comparison of the results. Int J Phys Sci 5(7):1034–1039Google Scholar
  68. Uyanık O (2002) Kayma Dalga Hızına Baglı Potansiyel Sıvılasma Analiz Yöntemi, Doktora Tezi, DEÜ. Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İzmir, 200 s (in Turkish)Google Scholar
  69. Uyanık O (2006) Sıvılaşır yada Sıvılaşmaz Zeminlerin Yinelemeli Gerilme Oranına Bir Seçenek, DEÜ Mühendislik Fakültesi Fen ve Mühendislik Dergisi Cilt:8. Sayı 2:79–91 (in Turkish) Google Scholar
  70. Uyanık O (2011) The porosity of saturated shallow sediments from seismic compressional and shear wave velocities. J Appl Geophys 73(1):16–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Uyanık O, Taktak AG (2009) Kayma Dalga Hızı ve Etkin Titresim Periyodundan Sıvılasma Çözümlemesi için Yeni Bir Yöntem. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi 13(1):74–81 (in Turkish) Google Scholar
  72. Uyanık O, Ulugergerli EU (2008) Quality control of compacted grounds using seismic velocities. Near Surface Geophys 6(5):299–306Google Scholar
  73. Uyanık O, Ekinci B, Uyanık NA (2013a) Liquefaction analysis from seismic velocities and determination of lagoon limits Kumluca/Antalya example. J Appl Geophys 95:90–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Uyanık O, Türker E, İsmailov T (2006) Sığ Sismik Mikro-Bölgeleme ve Burdur/Türkiye Örneği. Ekologiya ve Su Teserrufatı 1(8):9–15 (in Turkish) Google Scholar
  75. Uyanık AN, Uyanık O, Akkurt İ (2013b) Micro-zoning of the natural radioactivity levels and seismic velocities of potential residential areas in volcanic fields: the case of Isparta (Turkey). J Appl Geophys 98:191–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Watson DF, Philip GM (1985) A refinement of inverse distance weighted interpolation. Geoprocessing 2:315–327Google Scholar
  77. Yi F (2010) Procedure to evaluate liquefaction-induced lateral spreading based on shear wave velocity. In: Fifth International Conference on Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamic, San Diego, California, USAGoogle Scholar
  78. Youd TL, Idriss IM, Andrus RD, Arango I, Castro G, Christian JT, Dobry R, Finn WDL, Harder Jr LF, Hynes ME, Ishihara K, Koester JP, Liao SSC, Marcuson III WF, Martin GR, Mitchell JK, Moriwaki Y, Power MS, Robertson PK, Seed RB, Stokoe II KH (1997) Summary Report, NCEER Workshop on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils, Technical Report NCEER-97-0022, T.L. Youd and I.M. Idriss, (Eds.), Buffalo, NY, 1-40Google Scholar
  79. Youd TL, Idriss IM, Andrus RD, Arango I, Castro G, Christian JT, Dobry R, Finn WDL, Harder LF Jr, Hynes ME, Ishihara K, Koester JP, Liao SSC, Marcusan WF III, Martin GR, Mitchell JK, Moriwaki Y, Power MS, Robertson PK, Seed RB, Stokoe KH II (2001) Liquefaction resistance of soils: summary report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 127:10CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute of Geophysics, Polish Academy of Sciences & Polish Academy of Sciences 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • İsmail Akkaya
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ali Özvan
    • 2
  • Mutluhan Akin
    • 3
  • Müge K. Akin
    • 4
  • Uğur Övün
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Geophysical Engineering, Engineering FacultyVan Yüzüncü Yıl UniversityVanTurkey
  2. 2.Department of Geological EngineeringVan Yüzüncü Yıl UniversityVanTurkey
  3. 3.Department of Geological EngineeringNevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli UniversityNevşehirTurkey
  4. 4.Department of Civil EngineeringAbdullah Gül UniversityKayseriTurkey

Personalised recommendations