This article describes a liquefaction database that contains a summary of 209 liquefaction, non-liquefaction, and marginal case histories compiled from the 2010 Mw 8.8 Maule, 2014 Mw 8.2 Iquique, 2015 Mw 8.3 Illapel, and 2016 Mw 7.6 Melinka earthquakes, where the liquefaction phenomenon caused damage to buildings, bridges, roads, and drainage systems, generating millions in losses at the infrastructure level. The database structure is organized into nine main tables that contain site information, geotechnical tests, and seismic parameters. The main tables include the locations of the sites, surface evidence of liquefaction or absence of them, geotechnical parameters from boreholes, and geophysical and laboratory tests. The database contains 7977 m of standard penetration test logs and 390 m of cone penetration test soundings from 209 sites explored. In addition, the seismic parameters of these earthquakes include ground-motion intensity measures estimated for each site. The information in this database allows a better characterization of the seismic demand and the geotechnical properties of the soil involved in predicting liquefaction triggering in this subduction zone. The data associated with this article are available in DesignSafe, where users can freely download and process data to train or evaluate predictive liquefaction models.
AkiK (1957) Space and Time Spectra of Stationary Stochastic Waves, with Special Reference to Microtremors. Tokyo, Japan: The University of Tokyo.
2.
Al AtikLAbrahamsonNBommerJScherbaumFCottonFKuehnN (2010) The variability of ground-motion prediction models and its components. Seismological Research Letters81(5): 794–801.
3.
AlfaroF (2013) Comparación entre la Metodología para evaluar el Potencial de Riesgo de Licuefacción y los Catastros Realizados luego del Terremoto de 2010 en Concepción. Concepción: Departamento de Ingeniería Civil y Ambiental, Universidad del Bio-Bío.
4.
AndrusRStokoeK (2000) Liquefaction resistance of soils from shear-wave velocity. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering126(11): 1015–1025.
5.
BarrientosSand National Seismological Center (CSN) (2018) The seismic network of Chile. Seismological Research Letters89(2A): 467–474.
6.
BoulangerRWIdrissIM (2014) CPT and SPT Based Liquefaction Triggering Procedures. Davis, CA: Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California, Davis.
7.
BoulangerRWIdrissIM (2016) CPT-based liquefaction triggering procedure. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering142(2): 04015065.
CetinKOSeedRBDerKiureghianATokimatsuKHarderLFJrKayenREMossRES (2004) Standard penetration test-based probabilistic and deterministic assessment of seismic soil liquefaction potential. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering130(12): 1314–1340.
10.
CetinKOSeedRBKayenREMossRESBilgeHTIlgacMChowdhuryK (2018) Dataset on SPT-based seismic soil liquefaction. Data in Brief20: 544–548.
11.
ContrerasJ (2012) Estudio de los Efectos del Terremoto del 27/2/2010 en la Zona de las Comunas de Buín y Paine de la Región Metropolitana. Santiago: Departamento de Ingeniería Civil, Universidad de Chile.
12.
DobryRAbdounT (2015) Threshold load factor for liquefaction triggering evaluations. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering141: 02815003.
13.
DobryRLaddRYokelFChungRPowellD (1982) Prediction of Pore Water Pressure Buildup and Liquefaction of Sands During Earthquakes by the Cyclic Strain Method, vol. 138. Washington, DC: National Bureau of Standards.
14.
DukeCMLeedsDJ (1963) Response of soils, foundations, and earth structures to the Chilean earthquakes of 1960. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America53: 309–357.
15.
EkströmGNettlesMDziewonskiA (2012) The global CMT project 2004–2010: Centroid-moment tensors for 13,017 earthquakes. Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors200–201: 1–9.
16.
EscribanoDEMontalvaGABrennanAJ (2019) Soil behaviour under non-uniform and bidirectional cyclic loading. In: Proceedings of the XVI Pan-American conference on soil mechanics and geotechnical engineering, Cancún, Mexico, 17–20 November.
17.
EspinozaD (2018) Evaluación del Potencial de Licuación en Zonas de Subducción. Concepción: Departamento de Ingeniería Civil, Universidad de Concepción.
18.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), US Department of Transportation (2011) Postearthquake Reconnaissance Report on Transportation Infrastructure Impact of the February 27, 2010, Offshore Maule Earthquake in Chile. Washington, DC: FHWA, US Department of Transportation.
19.
FotiSHollenderFGarofaloFAlbarelloDAstenMBardP-YCominaCCornouCCoxBDi GiulioGForbrigerTHayashiKLunedeiEMartinAMerceratDOhrnbergerMPoggiVRenalierFSiciliaDSoccoV (2018) Guidelines for the good practice of surface wave analysis: A product of the InterPACIFIC project. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering16: 2367–2420.
20.
Geotechnical Extreme Events Reconnaissance (GEER) Association (2010) Geo-engineering reconnaissance of the February 27, 2010 Maule, Chile earthquake (eds. Bray J and Frost D). Report no. GEER-022, 25May. pp. 347. DOI: 10.18118/G6NP4W.
21.
Geotechnical Extreme Events Reconnaissance (GEER) Association (2014) Geotechnical aspects of April 1, 2014 M8.2 iquique, Chile earthquake (eds. Rollins K, Ledezma C, and Montalva G). Report no. GEER-038, 22October. DOI: 10.18118/G6KS3X.
22.
Geotechnical Extreme Events Reconnaissance (GEER) Association (2015) Geotechnical reconnaissance of the 2015 Mw8.3 Illapel, Chile earthquake (eds. De Pascale G, Montalva G, Candia G and Ledezma C). Report no. GEER-043, 10December. DOI: 10.18118/G6QG66.
23.
GeyinMMaurerBWBradleyBAGreenRAVan BallegooyS (2021) CPT-based liquefaction case histories compiled from three earthquakes in Canterbury, New Zealand. Earthquake Spectra37: 2920–2945.
24.
GonzálezJ (2015) Estudio del Fenómeno de Licuefacción en Chile para el Terremoto del Maule 2010. Santiago: Departamento de Ingeniería Civil, Universidad de Chile.
25.
GonzálezJVerdugoR (2014) Sitios Afectados por Licuefacción a Causa del Terremoto 27-F. Santiago: Sociedad Chilena de Geotecnia.
26.
HayesGP (2017) The finite, kinematic rupture properties of great-sized earthquakes since 1990. Earth and Planetary Science Letters486: 94–100.
27.
HousnerG (1952) Intensity of Ground Motion During Strong Earthquakes. ONR Report, pp. 1–60, August 1952.
28.
IdrissIMBoulangerRW (2010) SPT-Based Liquefaction Triggering Procedures. Davis, CA: Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, College of Engineering, University of California, Davis.
29.
IshiharaK (1996) Soil Behaviour in Earthquake Geotechnics. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.
30.
KayenREMossRESThompsonEMSeedRBCetinKODer KiureghianATanakaYTokimatsuK (2013) Shear-wave velocity–Based probabilistic and deterministic assessment of seismic soil liquefaction potential. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering139: 407–419.
31.
KishidaTTsaiC-C (2014) Seismic demand of the liquefaction potential with equivalent number of cycles for probabilistic seismic hazard analysis. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering140: 04013023.
32.
LaddR (1978) Preparing test specimens using undercompaction. Geotechnical Testing Journal1(1): 16–23.
33.
MaiMPThingbaijamKKS (2014) SRCMOD: An online database of finite-fault rupture models. Seismological Research Letters85(6): 1348–1357.
34.
MontalvaGALeytonF (2014) Discussion of “Shear-wave velocity–Based probabilistic and deterministic assessment of seismic soil liquefaction potential.”Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering140(4): 07014005.
35.
MontalvaGARuzF (2017) Liquefaction evidence in the Chilean subduction zone. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on performance-based design in earthquake geotechnical engineering (PBD-III), Vancouver, BC, Canada, 16–19 July.
36.
MontalvaGABastiasNLeytonF (2021a) Strong ground motion prediction model for PGV and spectral velocity for the Chilean subduction zone. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America. Epub ahead of print 17August. DOI: 10.1785/0120210037.
37.
MontalvaGABastíasNRodríguez-MarekA (2017) Ground-motion prediction equation for the Chilean subduction zone. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America107: 901–911.
38.
MontalvaGARuzFEscribanoDBastias TejosNEspinozaDParedesF (2021b) Liquefaction Triggering in Subduction Zones (Field SPT, CPT, Vs, Tsite along with surface evidence of liquefaction). DesignSafe-CI. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17603/ds2-g3yc-6z20 (Last accessed December 30, 2021).
39.
PathakSRDalviAN (2013) Elementary empirical model to assess seismic soil liquefaction. Natural Hazards69: 425–440.
40.
RoncaglioloJE (2017) Evaluación de Potencial de Licuación de Suelos en Zona Subductiva Chilena. Concepción: Departamento de Ingeniería Civil, Universidad de Concepción.
41.
SeedHBIdrissIM (1971) Simplified procedure for evaluating soil liquefaction potential. Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division97: 1249–1274.
42.
Servicio Nacional de Geología y Minería [National Geology and Mining Service] (SERNAGEOMIN) (2010) Efectos Geológicos del Sismo del 27 de Febrero del 2010. Providencia: SERNAGEOMIN.
43.
Servicio Nacional de Geología y Minería [National Geology and Mining Service] (SERNAGEOMIN) (2017) Efectos Geológicos del Terremoto de Chiloé del 25 de Diciembre de 2016 Región de Los Lagos. Providencia: SERNAGEOMIN.
44.
Site EffectS assessment using AMbient Excitations (SESAME) (2004) Guidelines for the implementation of the H/V spectral ratio technique on ambient vibrations: Measurements, processing and interpretation. SESAME European Research Project WP12—Deliverable D23.12; European Commission—Research General Directorate Project no. Evg1-Ct-2000-00026 SESAME, December 2004.
45.
StaffordPJ (2015) Extension of the random-effects regression algorithm to account for the effects of nonlinear site response. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America105: 3196–3202.
46.
VuceticM (1994) Cyclic threshold shear strains in soils. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering120(12): 2208–2228.
47.
YasudaSVerdugoRKonagaiKSuganoKVillalobosFOkamuraMTowhataI (2010) Description and analysis of geotechnical aspects associated to the large 2010 Chile earthquake. ISSMGE Bulletin4(2): 16–27.
48.
YoudTLIdrissIMAndrusRDArangoICastroGChristianJDobryRFinnWDLHarderLFHynesMEIshiharaKKoesterJPLiaoSSCMarcusonWFMartinGRMitchellJKMoriwakiYPowerMSRobertsonPKSeedRBStokoeKH (2001) Liquefaction resistance of soils: Summary report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF workshops on evaluation of liquefaction resistance of soils. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering127: 817–833.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
