Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

New horizons in practical liquefaction prediction and mitigation measures for existing structures

  • Review
  • Published:
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The paper presents some recent research advances on practical liquefaction prediction and mitigation measures for existing structures. A new simplified generalized liquefaction prediction and assessment method that is capable of considering the influence of the waveforms and durations of earthquakes has been developed. The validity of this method adopting the effective number of waves concept has been comprehensively verified using the case histories of past major earthquakes for the cases of liquefaction and no liquefaction. A unique feature of the new simplified method is its universality, allowing it to be applied to all types of liquefaction charts based on SPT N-values, CPT q-values, and shear-wave velocities. The paper also presents a new compaction grouting that can reduce the ground upheaval quantity, which has remained an issue for more than 50 years, by 80–90%. The new compaction grouting, up-and-down method, has substantially higher efficiency of upheaval/uplift control and higher efficacy as liquefaction countermeasures around existing structures.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Adopted from Fig. 1 of [18]

Fig. 2

Modified from Fig. 10 of [18]

Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Adopted from Fig. 11a of [18]

Fig. 5

Adopted from the lower panel of Fig. 12 of [18]

Fig. 6

Adopted from Fig. 13 of [18]

Fig. 7

Adopted from Fig. 14 of [18]

Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Fig. 1.3 of [19] and Fig. 2 of [20]

Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Modified from Fig. 4 of [21]

Fig. 13

Modified from Figs. 7 and 8(a) of [21] and Figs. 2.12 and 2.16(a) of [19]

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sassa S, Takagawa T (2019) Liquefied gravity flow-induced tsunami: first evidence and comparison from the 2018 Indonesia Sulawesi earthquake and tsunami disasters. Landslides 16(1):195–200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-018-1114-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Sassa S (2020) Cascading mechanisms behind the 2018 Indonesia Sulawesi earthquake and tsunami disasters: inland/coastal liquefaction, landslides and tsunami. Springer series in geomechanics and geoengineering, Keynote Paper. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46351-9_4

  3. Seed HB, Idriss IM (1971) Simplified procedure for evaluating soil liquefaction potential. J Geotech Eng ASCE 97(9):1249–1273

    Google Scholar 

  4. Seed HB, Tokimatsu K, Harder LF, Chung RM (1985) The influence of SPT procedures in soil liquefaction resistance evaluations. J Geotech Eng ASCE 111(12):1425–1445

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Tokimatsu K, Yoshimi Y (1983) Empirical correlation of soil liquefaction based on SPT N-value and fines content. Soils Found 23(4):56–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 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, Marcuson 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 Geoenv Eng ASCE 127(10):817–833

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 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 Geoenv Eng ASCE 130(12):1314–1340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Boulanger R, Wilson D, Idriss IM (2012) Examination and Reevalaution of SPT-Based Liquefaction Triggering Case Histories. J Geotech Geoenv Eng ASCE 138(8):898–909

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Boulanger RW, Idriss IM (2016) CPT-based liquefaction triggering procedure. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 142(2):04015065. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Robertson PK, Wride CE (1998) Evaluating cyclic liquefaction potential using the cone penetration test. Can Geotech J 35(3):442–459

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Moss RES, Seed RB, Kayen RE, Stewart JP, Der Kiureghian A, Cetin KO (2006) CPT-based probabilistic and deterministic assessment of in situ seismic soil liquefaction potential. J Geotech Geoenv Eng ASCE 132(8):1032–1051

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Robertson PK (2015) Comparing CPT and Vs liquefaction triggering methods. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 141(9):04015037. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001338

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Andrus RD, Stokoe KH (2000) Liquefaction resistance of soils from shear-wave velocity. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 126(11):1015–1025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kayen R, Moss RES, Thompson EM, Seed RB, Cetin KO, Der Kiureghian A, Tanaka Y, Tokimatsu K (2013) Shear-wave velocity-based probabilistic and deterministic assessment of seismic soil liquefaction potential. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 139(3):407–419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Aki K, Richards PG (2009) Quantitative seismology, 2nd edn. Univ. Science Books

  16. Kokusho T, Ito F, Nagao Y, Green A (2012) Influence of non/low-plastic fines and associated aging effects on liquefaction resistance. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 138(6):747–756

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Dobry R, Abdoun T, Stokoe KH, Moss R, Hatton M, EI Ganainy H (2015) Liquefaction potential of recent fills versus natural sands located in high-seismicity regions using shear-wave velocity. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 141(3):04014112. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Sassa S, Yamazaki H (2017) Simplified liquefaction prediction and assessment method considering waveforms and durations of earthquakes. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 143(2):04016091. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001597

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Sassa S, Yamazaki H, Konishi T, Adachi M, Shinsaka T, Takenouchi K, Morohashi H, Saito H, Okada H, Takada K, Watanabe S, Kaneko C, Takahashi T (2019) Development of a new compaction grouting method with improved upheaval control and efficacy of liquefaction countermeasures. Tech Note PARI 1354

  20. Takenouchi K, Sassa S (2020) The new compaction grouting method with improved upheaval control. lecture notes civil eng 62: Geotechnics for sustainable infrastructure development, pp 611–618

  21. Takenouchi K, Sassa S, Yamazaki H, Konishi T, Shinsaka T, Kanno Y, Okada H, Takahashi T (2018) Development and field verification of a new compaction grouting method with improved upheaval control. ASCE Geotech Spec Publ 296:283–293

    Google Scholar 

  22. Dobry R, Abdoun T (2011) An investigation into why liquefaction charts work: a necessary step toward integrating the states of art and practice. In: Proceedings of 5th international conference on earthquake geotechnical engineering, Santiago, pp 13–45

  23. Schnabel PB, Lysmer J, Seed HB (1972) SHAKE—a computer program for earthquake response analysis of horizontally layered sites. University of California, Berkeley. Report EERC, pp 72–12

  24. Liu AH, Stewart JP, Abrahamson NA, Moriwaki Y (2001) Equivalent number of uniform stress cycles for soil liquefaction analysis. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 127(12):1017–1026

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. MLIT: Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism, Japan (2007) Ground liquefaction. Technical standards and commentaries for port and harbor facilities of Japan

  26. MLIT: Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism, Japan (2018) Ground liquefaction. Technical standards and commentaries for port and harbor facilities of Japan

  27. Idriss IM, Boulanger RW (2008) Soil liquefaction during earthquakes. Monograph MNO-12, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. Oakland, CA

  28. Sassa S, Sekiguchi H (2001) Analysis of wave-induced liquefaction of sand beds. Géotechnique 51(2):115–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Ishihara K, Yasuda S (1973) Sand liquefaction under random earthquake loading. In: Proceedings of 5th international conference on earthquake engineering, Rome, vol 1, pp 329–338

  30. Ishihara K, Yasuda S (1975) Sand liquefaction in hollow cylinder torsion under irregular excitation. Soils Found 15(1):45–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Meyerhof GG (1957) Discussion of session 1. In: Proceedings of 4th international conference on soil mechanics and foundation engineering, London, vol 3, p 110

  32. Ishihara K (1996) Soil behaviour in earthquake geotechnics. Oxford engineering science series. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  33. Sassa S, Sekiguchi H, Miyamoto J (2001) Analysis of progressive liquefaction as a moving boundary problem. Géotechnique 51(10):847–857

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. ASCE (American Society of Civil Engineers) (2019) Compaction grouting consensus guide. ASCE/G-I 53–19:1–67

    Google Scholar 

  35. Warner J (1982) Compaction grouting—first thirty years. In: Proceedings of grouting in geotechnical engineering, pp 694–707

  36. Nichols SC, Goodings DJ (2000) Physical model testing of compaction grouting in cohesionless soil. J Geotech Geoenv Eng ASCE 126(9):848–852

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Essler RD, Drooff ER, Falk E (2000) Compensation grouting: concept, theory and practice. ASCE Geotech Spec Publ 104:1–15

    Google Scholar 

  38. Baez JI, Henry JP (1993) Reduction of liquefaction potential by compaction grouting at Pinopolis West Dam, SC. ASCE Geotech Spec Publ 35:493–506

    Google Scholar 

  39. Boulanger RW, Hayden RF (1995) Aspects of compaction grouting of liquefiable soil. J Geotech Eng 121(12):845–855

    Google Scholar 

  40. Miller EA, Roycroft GA (2004) Compaction grouting test program for liquefaction control. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 130(4):355–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. El-Kelesh AM, Matsui T, Tokida K (2012) Field investigation into effectiveness of compaction grouting. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 138(4):451–460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Brown DR, Warner J (1973) Compaction grouting. J Soil Mech Found Div 99(8):589–601

    Google Scholar 

  43. Warner J (1992) Compaction grout: rheology vs effectiveness. ASCE Geotech Spec Publ 30:229–239

    Google Scholar 

  44. El-Kelesh AM, Mossaad ME, Basha IM (2001) Model of compaction grouting. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 127(11):955–964

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Graf ED (1969) Compaction grouting technique and observations. J Soil Mech Found Div 95(5):1151–1158

    Google Scholar 

  46. Geraci J (2005) Compaction grouting for in-situ ground improvement. In: Structure magazine, pp 30–33

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Port and Airport Research Institute, National Institute of Maritime, Port and Aviation Technology, 3-1-1 Nagase, Yokosuka, 239-0826, Japan

    Shinji Sassa

Authors
  1. Shinji Sassa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shinji Sassa.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sassa, S. New horizons in practical liquefaction prediction and mitigation measures for existing structures. Innov. Infrastruct. Solut. 5, 74 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-020-00324-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-020-00324-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation