SpringerLink
Log in

Ground response analysis and liquefaction hazard assessment for Vishakhapatnam city

  • Case Study
  • Published:
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Liquefaction is a complex phenomenon where the soil is subjected to high strain levels due to dynamic loading at the time of seismic events, contributing to severe damage and collapse of the structures. The effect of liquefaction can be predicted in three stages, i.e., evaluation of susceptibility, hazard and deformations. Soil susceptibility to liquefaction can be assessed using the geotechnical properties such as grain size, age of the soil deposit, penetration resistance of the soil, whereas hazard can be assessed in terms of factor of safety estimated against liquefaction. In the present study, one-dimensional equivalent linear ground response analysis has been carried in the study area Vishakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh (India) and the surface peak ground acceleration (PGA) has been estimated using DEEPSOIL. The surface PGA values obtained have been used in liquefaction hazard assessment using stress-based method (SBM) and energy-based method (EBM). Hazard maps were generated from the estimated values of PGA and factor of safety against liquefaction (F L). The surface PGA values obtained are in the range of 0.09–0.14 g which are higher than 0.1 g (limiting value provided by Seismic code of India (IS: 1893-2002)). It is observed that the locations in the central part of the city are prone to higher accelerations comparatively. From liquefaction potential assessment, it is evident that most of the locations in northern and central parts of the city are prone to liquefaction. As the study area has two operational ports and is highly industrialized, findings from the present study will be helpful in retrofitting, analysis and design of structures, therefore, solving practical challenges in structural and geotechnical engineering.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price includes VAT (Germany)

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Akhila M, Ghosh C, Satyam DN (Sep 2012) Detailed ground response analysis at Park Hotel in Kolkata city, India. In: 15 World Conference on Earthquake Engineering (Lisbon)

  2. Anbazhagan P, Sitharam TG, Vipin KS (2009) Site classification and estimation of surface level seismic hazard using geophysical data and probabilistic approach. J Appl Geophys 68(2):219–230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Andrus RD, Stokoe KH (1997) Liquefaction resistance based on shear wave velocity (No. Technical Report NCEER-97)

  4. Berrill JB, Davis RO (1985) Energy dissipation and seismic liquefaction of sands: revised model. Soils Found 25(2):106–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bird JF, Bommer JJ (2004) Earthquake losses due to ground failure. Eng Geol 75(2):147–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Boulanger RW, Idriss IM (2004) Evaluating the potential for liquefaction or cyclic failure of silts and clays. Center for Geotechnical Modeling, Davis, California, p 131

    Google Scholar 

  7. Chapman R, Lisle JC, Mo JN, Paul E, Simcock A, Willmott JC, Leslie JR, Price HG, Walker PM, Bacelar JC, Garrett JD (1983) Rotational behavior at high spin in Hf 168. Phys Rev Lett 51(25):2265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Davis RO, Berrill JB (1982) Energy dissipation and seismic liquefaction in sands. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 10(1):59–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Figueroa JL, Dahisaria N (1991) An energy approach in defining soil liquefaction. In: 2nd International conference on recent advances in geotechnical earthquake engineering and soil dynamics

  10. Figueroa JL, Saada AS, Liang L, Dahisaria NM (1994) Evaluation of soil liquefaction by energy principles. J Geotech Eng 120(9):1554–1569

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ganapathy GP, Rajawat AS (2012) Evaluation of liquefaction potential hazard of Chennai city, India: using geological and geomorphological characteristics. Natl Hazards 64(2):1717–1729

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Guo T, Prakash S (2000) Liquefaction of silt-clay mixtures. In: Proceedings of 12th world conference on earthquake engineering. New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering

  13. Hashash Y, Phillips C, Groholski DR (2010) Recent advances in non-linear site response analysis. Fifth international conference on recent advances in geotechnical earthquake engineering and soil dynamics, San Diego, California, pp 1–22

  14. Hashash YMA, Groholski DR, Phillips CA, Park D, Musgrove M (2012) DEEPSOIL 5.1, user manual and tutorial. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering–University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

  15. Holzer TL (2008) Probabilistic liquefaction hazard map**. In: Geotechnical earthquake engineering and soil dynamics IV, pp 1–32

  16. Idriss IM (1990) Response of soft soil sites during earthquakes. In: Proceedings of H. Bolton Seed Memorial Symposium, vol 2, No. 4. University of California, Berkeley

  17. Idriss IM, Moriwaki Y, Wright SG, Doyle EH, Ladd RS (1980) Behavior of normally consolidated clay under simulated earthquake and ocean wave loading conditions. In: International symposium on soils under cyclic and transient loading, pp 437–445

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

  19. Kokusho T (2013) Liquefaction potential evaluations: energy-based method versus stress-based method. Can Geotech J 50(10):1088–1099

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kumar BL, Rao GR, Rao KS (2012) Seismic hazard analysis of low seismic regions, Visakhapatnam: probabilistic approach. J Ind Geophys Union 16(1):11–20

    Google Scholar 

  21. Law KT, Cao YL, He GN (1990) An energy approach for assessing seismic liquefaction potential. Can Geotech J 27(3):320–329

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Murthy KSR, Subrahmanyam AS, Subrahmanyam V (2012) Tectonics of the eastern continental margin of India. The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI)

  23. Phanikanth VS, Choudhury D, Reddy GR (2011) Equivalent-linear seismic ground response analysis of some typical sites in Mumbai. Geotech Geol Eng 29(6):1109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Satyam ND, Towhata I (2016) Site specific ground response analysis and liquefaction assessment of Vijayawada city (India). Natl Hazards 81(2):705–724

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Nemat-Nasser S, Shokooh A (1979) A unified approach to densification and liquefaction of cohesionless sand in cyclic shearing. Can Geotech J 16(4):659–678

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Obermeier SF (1989) The new Madrid earthquakes: an engineering-geologic interpretation of relict liquefaction features. U.S. geological survey professional paper 1336-B, p 114

  27. Ramana CV, Bhaskar CH, Rao PP, Reddy TB (2015) Soil quality in four different areas of Visakhapatnam city, Andhra Pradesh, India. Int J Curr Microbiol App Sci 4(1):528–532

    Google Scholar 

  28. Reddy PR, Chandrakala K (2004) Seismicity in and around Ongole, Andhra Pradesh-an appraisal. J Indian Geophys Union 8(2):143–146

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Roy SK, Srinagesh D, Saikia D, Singh A, Kumar MR (2012) Seismic anisotropy beneath the Eastern Dharwar craton. Lithosphere 4:259–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Satyam DN (2006) Seismic microzonation of delhi region, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi (Doctoral dissertation)

  32. Schnabel PB, Lysmer J, Seed HB (1972) SHAKE: a computer program for earthquake response analysis of horizontal layered sites. Earthquake Engineering Research Centre, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA, Report No EERC 72-12

  33. Seed HB, Idriss IM (1970) Soil moduli and dam** factors for dynamic response analyses. Report EERC 70-10, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley

  34. Seed HB, Idriss IM (1971) Simplified procedure for evaluating soil liquefaction potential. J Soil Mech Found Div 97:1249–1273

    Google Scholar 

  35. Seed HB, Peacock WH (1971) Test procedures for measuring soil liquefaction characteristics. J Geotech Eng Div ASCE 97(8):1099–1119

    Google Scholar 

  36. Seed HB, Sun JI (1989) Implications of site effects in the Mexico City earthquake of Sept. 19, 1985 for earthquake-resistant design criteria in the San Francisco Bay Area of California, vol 89, No. 3. Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California

  37. Sitharam TG, Anbazhagan P, Vinod JS (2009) Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis for Bangalore. Nat Hazards 48(2):145–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Subba Rao N, Madhusudhana Reddy P (2006) Monitoring the groundwater quality in an urban area – An environmental impact assessment and management. J Appl Geochem 8:37–56

    Google Scholar 

  39. Susumu Y (2000) Collection of surface data for the prediction of liquefaction potential (partially quoted from the papers by Ishihara and Yasuda (1991) and TC4 (1999)

  40. Wakamatsu K, Yoshida N, Kiku H (2006) Liquefaction during the 2004 niigata-ken chuetsu earthquake—general aspect and geotechnical and geomorphologic conditions—. Doboku Gakkai Ronbunshuu C 62:236–276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Yoshida N, Kobayashi S, Suetomi I, Miura K (2002) Equivalent linear method considering frequency dependent characteristics of stiffness and dam**. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 22(3):205–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Youd TL, Hoose SN (1977) Liquefaction susceptibility and geologic setting. In: Proceedings of 6th world conference on earthquake engineering, vol 6, New Delhi, pp 37–42

  43. Youd TL, Idriss IM (2001) Liquefaction resistance of soils: summary report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF workshops on evaluation of liquefaction resistance of soils. J Geotechn Geo Environ Eng 127(4):297–313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Youssef MAH (2009) DEEPSOIL. http://www.geoengineer.org/software/applications-deepsoil.html

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Geotechnical Engineering Laboratory, EERC, International Institute of Information Technology, Hyderabad, 500 032, India

    Swathi Priyadarsini Putti & Neelima Satyam

Authors
  1. Swathi Priyadarsini Putti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Neelima Satyam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Swathi Priyadarsini Putti.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Putti, S.P., Satyam, N. Ground response analysis and liquefaction hazard assessment for Vishakhapatnam city. Innov. Infrastruct. Solut. 3, 12 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-017-0113-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-017-0113-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation