Seismic Wave Propagation in Layered Liquefiable Soils

  • Praveen M. HudedEmail author
  • Suresh R. Dash
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering book series (LNCE, volume 55)


Many past earthquakes with the magnitude close to 7.0 (Mw) or more have shown liquefaction phenomenon. Often liquefiable deposits occur in layers. Seismic waves travelling from bedrock are modified by the presence of layered soil, where seismic impedance contrast is seen as the reason. Recent studies have shown that the presence of a liquefiable soil layer can significantly reduce inertial load on the superstructure, i.e. liquefaction of soil layer prevents the transmission of seismic waves (mainly shear waves) acting as shield protecting the above layers (base isolation effect). However, many studies are limited to only two-layered soil, where a liquefiable soil layer is present above a non-liquefiable soil layer. However, in the field, there could be situations with multiple soil layers and a liquefiable layer could be present as a sandwiched layer between non-liquefiable layers. The seismic site response study considering the effect of layering in the soil deposits for liquefiable sites is least considered while carrying out foundation design. In the present study, two soil profiles (a sandwiched liquefiable layer and a sandwiched non-liquefiable layer) were studied by varying the thickness of each soil layer. The soil profiles were subjected to a typical ground motionfrom 1995 Kobe earthquake. The effect of layered liquefiable deposits on the seismic response of the ground is studied. The results, such as attenuation of acceleration, displacement and the spectral acceleration, were studied in detail and presented in this paper.


Seismic response study Site amplification Attenuation Layered liquefiable soil 



The first author would like to thank Ministry of Human Resources Department (MHRD), Government of India for providing financial assistance during the research work.


  1. 1.
    Bouckovalas GD, Tsiapas YZ, Theocharis AI, Chaloulos YK (2016) Ground response at liquefied sites: seismic isolation or amplification? Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 91:329–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Youd TL, Carter BL (2004) Influence of soil softening and liquefaction on spectral acceleration. J Geotech Geoenvironmental Eng 131(7):811–825CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hadjian AH, Anderson D, Tseng WS, Tsai NC, Chang CY (1991) The learning from the large scale Lotung soil-structure interaction experiments. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Confernce on Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics, University of Missouri at Rolla, Rolla, Mo. 3, pp 2047–2070Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Trifunac MD, Todorovska MI (1996) Nonlinear soil response—1994 Northridge, California, earthquake. J Geotech Eng 122(9):725–735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Trifunac MD, Hao TY, Todorovska MI (1999) On recurrence of site specific response. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 18(8):569–592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kokusho T (2014) Seismic base-isolation mechanism in liquefied sand in terms of energy. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 63:92–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kanai KA (1966) short note on the seismological features of the Niigata earthquake. Soils Founds VI(2):8–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Photographs in Records of Niigata Earthquake (1964) Niigata Nippou News Company (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Adalier K, Zeghal M, Elgamal AW (1997) Liquefaction mechanism and counter measures. Seismic behaviour of ground and geotechnical structures. In: Proceedings of discussion special technical session on earthquake geotechnical engineering during 14. International conference on soil mechanics and foundation engineering, Hamburg, Germany, 6–12 Sept 1997, pp 155–162Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lai S, Morita T, Kameoka T, Matsunaga Y, Abiko K (1995) Response of a dense sand deposit during 1993 Kushiro-Oki earthquake. Soils Found 35(1):115–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sato K, Kokusho T, Matsumoto M, Yamada E (1996) Nonlinear seismic response and soil property during strong motion. Soils Found, 41–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Matsui T, Oda K (1996) Foundation damage of structures. Soils Found 36:189–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kokusho T, Motoyama R (2002) Energy dissipation in surface layer due to vertically propagating SH wave. J Geotech Geoenvironmental Eng 128(4):309–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yoshida N, Tokimatsu K, Yasuda S, Kokusho T, Okimura T (2001) Geotechnical aspects of damage in Adapazari city during 1999 Kocaeli, Turkey earthquake. Soils Found 41(4):25–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tokimatsu K, Tamura S, Suzuki H, Katsumata K (2012) Building damage associated with geotechnical problems in the 2011 Tohoku Pacific earthquake. Soils Found 52(5):956–974CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Petalas A, Galavi V (2013) PLAXIS liquefaction model UBC3D-PLM. Technical report, PLAXISGoogle Scholar
  17. 19.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Research Scholar, Civil EngineeringIndian Institute of Technology BhubaneswarBhubaneswarIndia
  2. 2.Assistant Professor, Civil EngineeringIndian Institute of Technology BhubaneswarBhubaneswarIndia

Personalised recommendations