Performance-based procedures represent an improvement over current state-of-practice procedures that treat the assessment of seismic demand and engineering response parameters independently. Procedures used in current practice generally provide estimates of liquefaction-induced ground settlement that are inconsistent with the desired ground settlement hazard level. A recently developed probabilistic procedure to estimate liquefaction-induced ground settlement is employed to develop a new performance-based procedure that estimates ground settlement which accounts for key sources of uncertainty. The ground-motion intensity and ground settlement estimations are integrated in the proposed procedure to produce hazard curves for liquefaction-induced ground settlement. The hazard curve for ground settlement links different hazard levels with their corresponding values of ground settlement by evaluating a wide range of ground-motion intensities and site characterization parameters with their associated uncertainties. The proposed performance-based procedure also permits the evaluation of different sources of uncertainty and their effects on the ground settlement estimate.
AbrahamsonNASilvaWJKamaiR (2014) Summary of the ASK14 ground motion relation for active crustal regions. Earthquake Spectra30(3): 1025–1055.
3.
AkaiKBrayJDBoulangerRWChristianJTLiam FinnWDHarderLFIdrissIMIshiharaKIwasakiYTMitchellJKMoriwakiYNakagawaKO’RourkeTDSeedRBSitarNSogaKYoudTL (1995) Geotechnical Reconnaissance of the effects of the January 17, 1995, Hyogoken-Nanbu Earthquake, Japan. Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Report no. UCB/EERC-95/01, July. Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley.
4.
BoulangerRWIdrissIM (2016) CPT-based liquefaction triggering procedures. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering142(2): 04015065.
5.
BrayJDMacedoJ2017. 6th Ishihara lecture: Simplified procedure for estimating liquefaction-induced building settlement. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 102 (11): 215–231.
6.
BrayJDMacedoJL (2023) Performance-based seismic assessment of slope systems. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering168(2023): 107835.
7.
BrayJDOlayaFR (2023) 2022 H. Bolton seed medal lecture—Evaluating the effects of liquefaction. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering149(8): 11242.
8.
CetinKOBilgeHTWuJKammererAMSeedRB (2009a) Probabilistic model for the assessment of cyclically induced reconsolidation (volumetric) settlements. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering135(3): 387–398.
9.
CetinKOBilgeHTWuJKammererAMSeedRB (2009b) Probabilistic models for cyclic straining of saturated clean sands. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering135(3): 71–86.
10.
DeierleinGKrawinklerHCornellC (2003) A framework for performance-based earthquake engineering. In: Pacific conference On earthquake engineering, Christchurch, New Zealand, 13–15 February.
11.
DhakalRCubrinovskiMBrayJD (2020) Geotechnical characterization and liquefaction evaluation of gravelly reclamations and Hydraulic fills (Port of Wellington, New Zealand). Soils and Foundations60: 1507–1531.
12.
DukuPMStewartPMWhangDHYeeE (2008) Volumetric strains of clean sands subject to cyclic loads. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering134(8): 1073–1078.
13.
EkstromLTFrankeKW (2016) Simplified procedure for the performance-based prediction of lateral spread displacements. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering142(7): 04016028.
14.
FrankeKWKramerSL (2014). Procedure for the Empirical Evaluation of Lateral Spread Displacement Hazard Curves. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng., ASCE, 140(1): 110–120.
15.
FrankeKWPetersonBDErrorBMHeJHarperJN (2021) Probabilistic seismic loading considerations for the assessment of liquefaction-induced volumetric settlements in the free field. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering147(3): 04020175.
16.
FrankeKWUlmerKJEkstromLTMenesesJF (2016) Clarifying the difference between traditional liquefaction hazard maps and probabilistic liquefaction reference parameter maps. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering90(2016): 240–249.
17.
HutabaratDBrayJD (2022). Estimating the severity of liquefaction ejecta using the cone penetration test. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng., ASCE, 148(3): 04021195.
18.
IdrissIBoulangerR (2008) Soil Liquefaction During Earthquakes. Oakland, CA: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (EERI).
19.
IshiharaKYoshimineM (1992) Evaluation of settlements in sand deposits following liquefaction during earthquakes. Soils Found32(1): 173–188.
20.
JuangCChingJWangLKhoshnevisanSKuC-S (2013) Simplified procedure for estimation of liquefaction-induced settlement and site-specific probabilistic settlement exceedance curve using Cone Penetration Test (CPT). Canadian Geotechnical Journal50(10): 1–44.
21.
KramerSL (2008) Performance-based earthquake engineering: Opportunities and implications for geotechnical engineering practice. Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics IV181: 1–32.
22.
KramerSL (2013) Performance-based methodologies for geotechnical earthquake engineering. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering12: 1049–1070.
23.
KramerSLMayfieldRT (2007) Return period of soil liquefaction. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering133(7): 802–813.
24.
KramerSLHuangYMGreenfieldMW (2014) Performance-based assessment of liquefaction hazards. In: IaiS (ed.) Geotechnics for Catastrophic Flooding Events. London: Taylor & Francis, pp. 17–26.
25.
KuCSJuangCHChangCWChingJ (2012) Probabilistic version of the Robertson and Wride method for liquefaction evaluation: Development and application. Canadian Geotechnical Journal49(1): 27–44.
26.
LeeKLAlbaisaA (1974) Earthquake induced settlements in saturated sands. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering4: 387–406.
27.
LiuCMacedoJCandiaG (2021). Performance-based probabilistic assessment of liquefaction-induced building settlements. Soil Dynamics Eq Eng, 151, 106955.
MayfieldRTKramerSLHuangYM (2010) Simplified approximation procedure for performance-based evaluation of liquefaction potential. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering136(1): 140–150.
30.
Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) (2012) Guidance: Repairing and Rebuilding Houses Affected By the Canterbury Earthquakes. Wellington, New Zealand: MBIE.
31.
MougDBassalPBrayJDCetinKOKendirSBSahinACakirESoylemezBOcakS (2023) February 6, 2023 Türkiye earthquakes: GEER phase 3 team report on selected geotechnical engineering effects. GEER Association Report 082-S1, 30June. Berkeley, CA: GEER.
32.
OlayaFRBrayJD (2022) Strain potential of liquefied soil. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering148(11): 04022099.
33.
OlayaFRBrayJD (2023) Post-liquefaction free-field ground settlement case histories. International Journal of Geoengineering Case Histories7: 18–33.
34.
RathjeEMSaygiliG (2008) Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis for the sliding displacement of slopes: Scalar and vector approaches. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering134(6): 804–814.
35.
RathjeEMSaygiliG (2011) Pseudo-probabilistic versus fully probabilistic estimates of sliding displacements of slopes. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering137(3): 208–217.
36.
RobertsonPK (2009) Performance-based earthquake design using the CPT. In: Proceedings of the international conference on performance-based design in earthquake, Tokyo, Japan, 15–18 June.
37.
RobertsonPK (2010) Estimating in-situ state parameter and friction angle in sandy soils from CPT. In: 2nd international symposium on cone penetration testing, Huntington Beach, CA, May.
38.
RobertsonPKCabalKL (2015) Guide to CPT For Geotechnical Engineering. 6th ed.Signal Hill, CA: Gregg Drilling Testing.
39.
RobertsonPKWrideCE (1998) Evaluating cyclic liquefaction potential using the cone penetration test. Canadian Geotechnical Journal35(3): 442–459.
40.
WuJSeedRB (2004) Estimating of liquefaction-induced ground settlement case studies. In: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on case histories in geotechnical engineering, New York, 13–17 April.
41.
YasudaSIshiharaKHaradaKShinkawaN (1996) Effect of soil improvement on ground subsidence due to liquefaction. Soils Found36: 99–107.
42.
ZhangGRobertsonPKBrachmanRWI (2002) Estimating liquefaction-induced ground settlements from CPT for level ground. Canadian Geotechnical Journal39: 1168–1180.
43.
ZhangJXianJTWuCGZhengWTZhengJG (2022) Performance-based assessment of permanent displacement of soil slopes using two-dimensional dynamic analysis. Assessment and Management of Risk for Engineered Systems and Geohazards161: 178–195.
