Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparative analysis of liquefaction susceptibility assessment methods based on the investigation on a pilot site in the greater Lisbon area

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In Portugal, particularly in the greater Lisbon area, there are widespread alluvial sandy deposits, which need to be carefully assessed in terms of liquefaction susceptibility and risk zonation. For this purpose, a pilot site has been set up, as part of the European H2020 LIQUEFACT project. An extensive database of geological and geotechnical reports was collected and a comprehensive site investigation campaign was carried out, including boreholes with standard penetration (SPT), piezocone penetrometer and seismic dilatometer tests as well as geophysical methods, complemented by undisturbed soil sampling for laboratory characterisation. The assessment of liquefaction susceptibility based on field tests was made using the simplified procedure, considering the factor of safety against liquefaction (FSliq), which relates the cyclic resistance ratio (CRR) with the cyclic stress ratio (CSR). While the computation of the CSR is relatively straightforward, the reliability of the CRR strongly depends on the adopted in situ testing technique. Alternative approaches to liquefaction assessment have been proposed, based on quantitative liquefaction damage indexes, namely the Liquefaction Potential Index (LPI) and Liquefaction Severity Number. In this paper, the geotechnical field data is integrated in these distinct approaches to liquefaction assessment. A comparative and in-depth analysis of the conventional approach is presented and the inclusion of specific information on soil type, as a means to overcome the observed differences, is discussed particularly for SPT and VS results. The combination of these criteria enabled to clearly identify the most critical layers, in terms of liquefaction potential and severity.

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
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

ag :

Design ground acceleration on type A ground

agR :

Reference peak ground acceleration on type A ground

amax :

Peak ground acceleration

CH:

Cross-hole test

CPTu:

Piezocone penetrometer test

CRR:

Cyclic resistance ratio

CSR:

Cyclic stress ratio

Cσ :

Overburden coefficient

DMT:

Flat dilatometer test

DWF:

Distance Weighting Factor

EC8:

Eurocode 8

EC8-NA:

Eurocode 8, National Annex

EILDs:

Earthquake Induced Liquefaction Disasters

FC:

Fines content

FSliq :

Factor of safety against liquefaction

g:

Acceleration of gravity

hliq :

Height of liquefiable layer

IC :

Soil behaviour type index

ID :

Material index

Ka1 :

Ageing correction factor

Ka2 :

Ageing correction factor

KD :

Horizontal stress index from DMT

Kσ :

Effective overburden stress coefficient

LPI:

Liquefaction Potential Index

LSN:

Liquefaction Severity Number

MSF:

Magnitude scaling factor

MSFmax :

Upper limit of MSF

Mw :

Moment magnitude

(N1)60cs :

Normalised equivalent clean sand SPT blow count number

pa :

Reference atmospheric pressure

PI:

Plasticity index

PL :

Liquefaction probability

qc :

Cone tip resistance

qc1Ncs :

Normalised equivalent clean sand CPT cone tip resistance

Qcn :

Normalised cone tip penetration resistance

rd :

Shear stress reduction coefficient

S:

Soil factor defined in EN 1998-1:2004

SASW:

Spectral analysis of surface waves test

SCPTu:

Seismic piezocone penetration test

SDMT:

Seismic dilatometer test

SI:

Site investigation point

Smax :

Soil factor depending on ground type

SPT:

Standard penetration test

SR:

Seismic refraction test

u2 :

Pore pressure

VS :

Shear wave velocity

VS_AS:

Shear wave velocity calculated with Andrus and Stokoe (2000)

VS_KAE:

Shear wave velocity calculated with Kayen et al. (2013)

VS1 :

Stress-corrected shear wave velocity

VS1*:

Upper boundary value of VS1

z:

Depth

α:

Parameter to calculate rd

β:

Parameter to calculate rd

γI :

Importance factor

\(\upsigma_{\text{v}}^{\prime }\) :

Effective overburden stress

\(\upsigma_{{\text{v0}}}^{\prime }\) :

Initial effective overburden stress

τcyc :

Cyclic shear stress

References

  • Amoroso S (2014) Prediction of the shear wave velocity Vs from CPT and DMT at research sites. Front Struct Civ Eng 8(1):83–92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-013-0234-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrus, RD, II Stokoe KH, Juang CH (2004) Guide for shear-wave-based liquefaction potential evaluation. Earthquake Spectra 20(2):285–308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrus RD, Mohanan NP, Piratheepan P, Ellis BS, Holzer TL (2007) Predicting shear-wave velocity from cone penetration resistance. In: Proceedings of 4th international conference on earthquake geotechnical engineering, Thessaloniki, Greece

  • Azevedo J, Guerreiro L, Bento R, Lopes M, Proença J (2010) Seismic vulnerability of lifelines in the greater Lisbon area. Bull Earthq Eng 8:157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boulanger RW, Idriss IM (2014). CPT and SPT based liquefaction triggering procedures. Report No. UCD/CGM-14/01. Center for Geotechnical Modeling, University of California, Davis

  • CEN (2010) Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance

  • Cubrinovski M, Rhodes A, Ntritsos N, Van Ballegooy S (2017) System response of liquefiable deposits. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on performance-based design in earthquake geotechnical engineering, Vancouver, 16–19 July 2017

  • Ferrão C, Bezzeghoud M, Caldeira B, Borges JF (2016) The seismicity of portugal and its adjacent atlantic region from 1300 to 2014: maximum observed intensity (MOI) map. Seismol Res Lett 87(3):743–750. https://doi.org/10.1785/0220150217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferreira C, Viana da Fonseca A, Saldanha AS, Ramos C, Amoroso S, Minarelli L (2018) Estimated versus measured Vs profiles and Vs30 at a pilot site in the lower Tagus Valley, Portugal. In: Proceedings of the 16th European conference on earthquake engineering, Thessanoliki, 18–21 June 2018, ID: 10591

  • GeoLogismiki (2017) https://geologismiki.gr/products/cliq/. Accessed in November 2017

  • HegazyYA, Mayne PW (1995) Statistical correlations between VS and cone penetration data for different soil types. In: Proceedings of the international symposium on cone penetration testing, CPT’95, pp 173–178

  • Idriss IM (1999) An update to the Seed-Idriss simplified procedure for evaluating liquefaction potential. In: Proceedings of the TRB workshop on new approaches to liquefaction, Federal Highway Administration

  • Idriss IM, Boulanger RW (2004) Semi-empirical procedures for evaluating liquefaction potential during earthquakes. In: Doolin D et al (eds) Proceedings, 11th international conference on soil dynamics and earthquake engineering, and 3rd international conference on earthquake geotechnical engineering, vol 1. Stallion Press, pp 32–56

  • Iwasaki T, Tokida K, Tatsuoka F, Watanabe S, Yasuda S, Sato H (1982) Microzonation for soil liquefaction potential using simplified methods. Proceedings of 3rd international conference on microzonation, vol 3. Seattle, pp 1319–1330

  • Idriss IM, Boulanger RW (2006) Semi-empirical procedures for evaluating liquefaction potential during earth-quakes. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 26:115–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Idriss IM, Boulanger RW (2010) SPT-based liquefaction triggering procedures. Report No. UCD/CGM-10-02. Center for Geotechnical Modeling, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California, Davis

  • ISO 22476-1:2012 (2012) Geotechnical investigation and testing—field testing—part 1: electrical cone and piezocone penetration test

  • 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: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on microzonation. San Francisco, CA, USA, pp 885–896

  • Jorge C (1993) Zonation of liquefaction potential. Application attempt to the Portuguese Territory. M.Sc. in Sciences in Engineering Geology, New University of Lisbon

  • Jorge C, Vieira A (1997) Liquefaction potential assessment—application to the Portuguese Territory and to the Town of Setúbal. In: Sêco e Pinto (ed) Seismic behaviour of ground and geotechnical structures. Balkema, pp 33–43

  • Kayen R, Moss RES, Thompson EM, Seed RB, Cetin KO, Kiureghian A, Tanaka Y, Tokimatsu K (2013) Shear-wave velocity-based probabilistic and deterministic assessment of seismic soil liquefaction potential. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 139(3):407–419. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000743

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LIQUEFACT (2017) Project overview. http://www.liquefact.eu. Accessed in November 2017

  • Marchetti S (1980) In situ tests by flat dilatometer. J Geotech Eng Div ASCE 106(GT3):299–321

    Google Scholar 

  • Marchetti S (2016) Incorporating the Stress history parameter KD of DMT into the liquefaction correlations in clean uncemented sands. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 142(2):04015072

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marchetti S, Monaco P, Totani G, Calabrese M (2001) The flat dilatometer test (DMT) in soil investigations—a report by the ISSMGE Committee TC16. In: Failmezger RA, Anderson JB (eds) Proceedings of international conference on insitu measurement of soil properties and case histories, Bali, 2001, official version reprinted in Flat Dilatometer Testing, Proceedings of 2nd international conference on the Flat Dilatometer, Washington D.C., April 2–5, 2006, pp 7–48

  • Marchetti S, Monaco P, Totani G, Marchetti D (2008) In situ tests by seismic dilatometer (SDMT). In: Laier JE, Crapps DK, Hussein MH (eds) From Research to Practice in Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, Geotechnical Special Publication, vol 180, pp 292–311

  • Mayne PW (2006) In situ test calibrations for evaluating soil parameters. In: Proceedings of characterization and engineering properties of natural soils II, Singapore

  • Millen M, Ferreira C, Gerace A, Viana da Fonseca A (2019) Simplified equivalent soil profiles based on liquefaction performance. In: 7th international conference on earthquake geotechnical engineering. Rome, Italy

  • Monaco P, Marchetti S, Totani G, Calabrese M (2005) Sand liquefiability assessment by flat dilatometer test (DMT). In: Proceedings of the 16th international conference on soil mechanics and geotechnical engineering. Millpress Science Publishers/IOS Press, pp 2693–2697. https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-656-9-2693. Accessed 10 Jan 2019

  • Robertson PK (1990) Soil classification using cone penetration test. Canadian Geotech J 27:151–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robertson PK (2009) Interpretation of cone penetration tests: a unified approach. Can Geotech J 46(11):1337–1355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robertson PK (2012) The James K. Mitchell Lecture: interpretation of in situ tests—some insights. In: Proceedings of 4th international conference on geotechnical and geophysical site characterization, Porto de Galinhas, vol 1, pp 3–24

  • Robertson PK, Wride CE (1997) Cyclic liquefaction and its evaluation based on SPT and CPT. In: Proceedings, NCEER workshop on evaluation of liquefaction resistance of soils

  • Rodrigues C, Amoroso S, Cruz N, Viana da Fonseca A (2016) Liquefaction assessment CPTu tests in a site in South of Portugal. In: Geotechnical and geophysical site characterisation 5—Lehane, Acosta-Martínezí, Kelly (eds). Australian Geomechanics Society, Sydney, Australia, pp 633–638. https://australiangeomechanics.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/ISC5_Proceedings-Vol1_20170209-ISBN-978-0-9946261-1-0-LowRes.pdf. Accessed 10 Jan 2019 (ISBN 978-0-9946261-2-7)

  • Saldanha AS, Viana da Fonseca A, Ferreira C (2018) Microzonation of the liquefaction susceptibility: case study in the lower Tagus valley. Geotecnia J Portuguese Geotech Soc 142:7–34. https://doi.org/10.24849/j.geot.2018.142.01

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Tonkin & Taylor (2013) Canterbury earthquakes 2010 and 2011. Land report as at 29 February 2012. Earthquake Commission, p 108. https://www.eqc.govt.nz/sites/public_files/documents/liquefaction-vulnerability-study-final.pdf. Accessed 10 Jan 2019

  • Viana da Fonseca A, Ferreira C, Ramos C (2017) D2.1—Part 2: report on ground characterization of the four areas selected as testing sites by using novel technique and advanced methodologies to perform in situ and laboratory tests—Lisbon Area in Portugal. Deliverable D2.1 of the European H2020 LIQUEFACT research project. January 2017

  • Viana da Fonseca A, Ferreira C, Saldanha AS, Ramos C, Rodrigues C (2018) Comparative analysis of liquefaction susceptibility assessment by CPTu and SPT tests. In: Hicks MA, Pisanò F, Peuchen J (eds) Cone penetration testing 2018, Proceedings of the 4th international symposium on cone penetration testing (CPT’18). CRC Press, Delft, pp 669–675

  • Wair BR, DeJong JT, Shantz T (2012) Guidelines for estimation of shear wave velocity profiles. PEER Report 2012/08. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center

  • Wotherspoon LM, Orense RP, Green RA, Bradley BA, Cox BR, Wood CM (2015) Assessment of liquefaction evaluation procedures and severity index frameworks at Christchurch strong motion stations. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 79(Part B):335–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2015.03.022

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

LIQUEFACT project (“Assessment and mitigation of liquefaction potential across Europe: a holistic approach to protect structures/infrastructures for improved resilience to earthquake-induced liquefaction disasters”) has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. GAP-700748. Acknowledgements are also due to the Portuguese stakeholders of LIQUEFACT, namely Teixeira Duarte, LNEG, ENMC, CMMontijo, CMBenavente, ABLGVFX, BRISA, CENOR, GEOCONTROLE and COBA, as well as to Dr. Luca Minarelli and Dr. Rui Carrilho Gomes. The second and third authors have received funding from FCT (Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology) in the form of the SFRH/BPD/120470/2016 and SFRH/BD/120035/2016 grants, respectively.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CONSTRUCT-GEO, Faculty of Engineering of University of Porto, Rua Roberto Frias, s/n, 4200-465, Porto, Portugal

    Cristiana Ferreira, António Viana da Fonseca & Catarina Ramos

  2. Faculty of Engineering of University of Porto, Rua Roberto Frias, s/n, 4200-465, Porto, Portugal

    Ana Sofia Saldanha

  3. University of Chieti-Pescara, Viale Pindaro, Pescara, Italy

    Sara Amoroso

  4. Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia, Viale Crispi, L’Aquila, Italy

    Sara Amoroso

  5. Polytechnic Institute of Guarda, Av. Dr. Francisco Sá Carneiro, 50, 6300-559, Guarda, Portugal

    Carlos Rodrigues

Authors
  1. Cristiana Ferreira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. António Viana da Fonseca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Catarina Ramos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ana Sofia Saldanha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sara Amoroso
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Carlos Rodrigues
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cristiana Ferreira.

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

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ferreira, C., Viana da Fonseca, A., Ramos, C. et al. Comparative analysis of liquefaction susceptibility assessment methods based on the investigation on a pilot site in the greater Lisbon area. Bull Earthquake Eng 18, 109–138 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-019-00721-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-019-00721-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation