Search

After the Earthquake Comes Liquefaction

Liquefaction silt. The photographer comments, "After the earthquake in Christchurch New Zealand, liquefaction covered the streets, but after it had risen from below ground whilst the ground was shaking it the liquid in the liquefaction wanted to drain away".

Liquefaction

Videos, UC QuakeStudies

A video recording of a lecture presented by Associate Professor Misko Cubrinovski as part of the 2011 University of Canterbury Earthquake Lecture Series.

The Liquefaction Flower

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Dried liquefaction silt in North New Brighton. The photographer comments, "Wet liquefaction after an earthquake can soon start to dry up".

The Strange Lines of Bubbles in Earthquake Liquefaction

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Liquefaction in North New Brighton. The photographer comments, "This is the liquid part of liquefaction left when the heavier sand content has dropped down. After the double quake in Christchurch local to me I found these strange lines of bubbles on the surface".

Select liquefaction case histories from the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquak…

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

The 2010–2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence began with the 4 September 2010, Mw7.1 Darfield earthquake and includes up to ten events that induced liquefaction. Most notably, widespread liquefaction was induced by the Darfield and Mw6.2 Christchurch earthquakes. The combination of well-documented liquefaction response during multiple events, densely recorded ground motions for the events, and detailed subsurface characterization provides an unprecedented opportunity to add well-documented case histories to the liquefaction database. This paper presents and applies 50 high-quality cone penetration test (CPT) liquefaction case histories to evaluate three commonly used, deterministic, CPT-based simplified liquefaction evaluation procedures. While all the procedures predicted the majority of the cases correctly, the procedure proposed by Idriss and Boulanger (2008) results in the lowest error index for the case histories analyzed, thus indicating better predictions of the observed liquefaction response.

New report maps quake liquefaction zone

Audio, Radio New Zealand

A major area of possible earthquake liquefaction has been identified south of Christchurch.

Relative efficacy of CPT- versus Vs-based simplified liquefaction evaluati…

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

The focus of the study presented herein is an assessment of the relative efficacy of recent Cone Penetration Test (CPT) and small strain shear wave velocity (Vs) based variants of the simplified procedure. Towards this end Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analyses were performed on the CPT- and Vs-based procedures using the field case history databases from which the respective procedures were developed. The ROC analyses show that Factors of Safety (FS) against liquefaction computed using the most recent Vs-based simplified procedure is better able to separate the “liquefaction” from the “no liquefaction” case histories in the Vs liquefaction database than the CPT-based procedure is able to separate the “liquefaction” from the “no liquefaction” case histories in the CPT liquefaction database. However, this finding somewhat contradicts the assessed predictive capabilities of the CPT- and Vs-based procedures as quantified using select, high quality liquefaction case histories from the 20102011 Canterbury, New Zealand, Earthquake Sequence (CES), wherein the CPT-based procedure was found to yield more accurate predictions. The dichotomy of these findings may result from the fact that different liquefaction field case history databases were used in the respective ROC analyses for Vs and CPT, while the same case histories were used to evaluate both the CPT- and Vs-based procedures.

Assessment of CPT-based methods for liquefaction evaluation in a liquefact…

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

In practice, several competing liquefaction evaluation procedures (LEPs) are used to compute factors of safety against soil liquefaction, often for use within a liquefaction potential index (LPI) framework to assess liquefaction hazard. At present, the influence of the selected LEP on the accuracy of LPI hazard assessment is unknown, and the need for LEP-specific calibrations of the LPI hazard scale has never been thoroughly investigated. Therefore, the aim of this study is to assess the efficacy of three CPT-based LEPs from the literature, operating within the LPI framework, for predicting the severity of liquefaction manifestation. Utilising more than 7000 liquefaction case studies from the 2010–2011 Canterbury (NZ) earthquake sequence, this study found that: (a) the relationship between liquefaction manifestation severity and computed LPI values is LEP-specific; (b) using a calibrated, LEP-specific hazard scale, the performance of the LPI models is essentially equivalent; and (c) the existing LPI framework has inherent limitations, resulting in inconsistent severity predictions against field observations for certain soil profiles, regardless of which LEP is used. It is unlikely that revisions of the LEPs will completely resolve these erroneous assessments. Rather, a revised index which more adequately accounts for the mechanics of liquefaction manifestation is needed.

Removing liquefaction silt - Christchurch earthquake

Images, eqnz.chch.2010

20100908_3393_1D3-28 Removing liquefaction silt - Christchurch earthquake The cleanup continues. #383