Project Report on Soil Liquefaction

STUDY OF LIQUEFACTION CHARACTERISTICS
OF SOIL UNDER DIFFERENT MAGNITUDE OF
EARTHQUAKE USING SPT ANALYSIS
Project report submitted in fulfilment of requirement
Bachelor of Technology
Submitted by
Ayush Kumar ( 1603012 )
Under the guidance of
Dr. Shiva Shankar Choudhary
(Assistant Professor)
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY PATNA
MAY 2020
I

PROJECT EVALUATION SHEET
THE
PROJECT ENTITLED
STUDY OF SOIL LIQUEFACTION CHARACTERISTICS
Submitted by
AYUSH KUMAR ( 1603012 )
EXAMINED AND FOUND ………………………………….... FOR THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE
OF BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY IN CIVIL ENGINEERING.
INTERNAL EXAMINER EXTERNAL EXAMINER HEAD OF DEPARTMENT
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING,
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY PATNA
MAY 2020
II

CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the major project entitled ““STUDY OF
LIQUEFACTION CHARACTERISTICS OF SOIL UNDER DIFFERENT
MAGNITUDE OF EARTHQUAKE USING SPT ANALYSIS” submitted by
AYUSH KUMAR in fulfillment of the requirement for the award of Bachelor of
Technology degree in Civil Engineering at National Institute of Technology Patna is
an authentic work carried out by me under my supervision and guidance. To the best
of my knowledge, the matter embodied in the project has not been submitted to any
other institute/university for the award of any degree.
DATE: 21/05/2020 Dr. SHIVA SHANKAR CHOUDHARY
Department of Civil Engineering
National Institute of Technology, Patna
III

DECLARATION
I, hereby, declare that the work, which is being presented in this dissertation entitled
“STUDY OF LIQUEFACTION CHARACTERISTICS OF SOIL UNDER
DIFFERENT MAGNITUDE OF EARTHQUAKE USING SPT ANALYSIS”
towards partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of Degree Bachelor of
Technology in Civil Engineering in an authentic record of our own work under the
supervision of Dr. Shiva Shankar Choudhary .
The work presented in this project has not been submitted for the award of any other
degree of this or any other institute. I have taken care in all respects to honor the
intellectual property right and have acknowledged the contribution of other for using
them for this academic purpose.
AYUSH KUMAR
(1603012)
IV

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We would like to make our deepest appreciation and gratitude to Prof. Shiva Shankar
Choudhary for their invaluable guidance, constructive criticism and encouragement during
the course of this project. Grateful acknowledgement is made to all the staff and faculty
members of Civil Engineering Department, National Institute of Technology, Patna for their
encouragement. We would also like to extend our sincere thanks to all our fellow graduate
students for their time, invaluable suggestions and help. In spite of numerous citations above,
the author accepts full responsibility for the content that follows.
AYUSH KUMAR (1603012)
B.Tech 8th semester
Civil Engineering
NIT Patna
V

CONTENTS
CERTIFICATE…………………………………………………………………………........III.
DECLARATION………………………………………………………………………..........IV.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT………………………………………………………………….....V.
CONTENTS…………………………………………………………………………………...VI.
ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………………………VIII.
LIST OF TABLES……………………………………………………………………………IX.
LIST OF GRAPHS…………………………………………………………………………….X.
Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Definition………………………………………………………………………………….1.
1.2 Causes behind Liquefaction….................................................................................1.
1.3 Past records of Liquefaction…………………………………………………………....2.
Chapter 2 LITERATURE OVERVIEW
2.1 General Literature Overview…………………………………………………………..3.
2.2 Susceptibility of Soils to Liquefaction in Earthquakes……………………………...6.
2.3 Ground Failure Resulting from Soil Liquefaction…………………………………....8.
2.4 Mechanism of Liquefaction………………………………………………….…………9.
2.5 Criteria for Liquefaction…………………….………………………………………….11.
2.6 Soil Properties During Liquefaction…………………………………………………12.
Chapter 3 ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK
3.1 Earthquake-induced cyclic stress ratio (CSR) ……………………………………...16.
3.2 Cyclic resistance ratio (CRR) and penetration resistances………………………..17.
. 3.3 IDRISS AND BOULANGER Method………………………………………………….19.
3.3.1 Stress reduction coefficient, rd……………………………………………………..22.
3.3.2 Magnitude scaling factor, MSF……………………………………………………..23.
VI

3.3.3 Overburden correction factor, Kσ…………………………………………………….23.
3.3.4 Normalization of penetration resistances, CN ……………………………………..24.
3.3.5 Evaluation of CSR............................................................................................25.
3.3.6 Evaluation of CRR……………………………………………………………….....25.
3.4 IS Code Method ( Youd & Idriss Method )…………………………………………. 26.
Chapter 4 INVESTIGATION OF SOIL DATA
4.1 Chemical Analysis of Soil and Water………………………………………………..31.
4.2 Properties of soil for Four Bore Holes at IGIMS Patna…………………………….32.
Chapter 5 OBSERVATION TABLES
5.1 IS Code Method…………………………………………………………..……………36.
5.2 Idriss and Boulanger Method………………………………………………………..48.
5.3 SPT N vs Depth Graph……………………………………………………………….60.
Chapter 6 RESULT AND GRAPHS
6.1 Comparison of FOS values between IS Code and Idriss and Boulanger………61.
CONCLUSION……………………………………………………………………………..63.
REFERENCES…………………………………………………………………………….64.
VII

ABSTRACT
Liquefaction is the phenomena when there is loss of strength in saturated and cohesion-less
soils because of increased pore water pressures and hence reduced effective stresses due to
dynamic loading. It is a phenomenon in which the strength and stiffness of a soil is reduced
by earthquake shaking or other rapid loading.
In this paper the field data of three major possible earthquakes of magnitude Mw = 6.5,
Mw = 7.0 and Mw =7.5 of the SPT case data has been undertaken. In this paper, two
methods have been studied namely, IS Code Method (Youd & Idriss Method) and Idriss and
Boulanger method for evaluating soil liquefaction potential have been adopted for the proper
study. A comparative study has been done using all the above mentioned methods.
VIII

List of Tables
1. Calculation of CSR and CRR at different values of Mw by IS Code Method:-
(1) Table 1: BH1 at Mw=6.5 Water Table at Ground Level………….33.
(10) Table 10: BH4 at Mw=6.5 Water Table at Ground Level………..42.
(11) Table 11: BH4 at Mw=7.0 Water Table at Ground Level………...43.
(12) Table 12: BH4 at Mw=7.5 Water Table at Ground Level………...44.
2. Calculation of CSR and CRR at different values of Mw by Idriss & Boulanger
Mehod :-
(1) Table 13: BH1 at Mw=6.5 Water Table at Ground Level…………45.
(12) Table 24: BH4 at Mw=7.5 Water Table at Ground Level…............56.
IX

List of graphs
Comparison of FOS values between IS Code & Idriss and Boulanger method at
different Magnitudes of Earthquake (Mw) :-
(1) Graph 1:- For BH1……………………………………………………………..57.
(2) Graph 2: For BH2……………………………………………………………..57.
(3) Graph 3: For BH3……………………………………………………………..58.
(4) Graph 4: For BH4……………………………………………………………..58.
X

1
Chapter1 INTRODUCTION
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
1.1 Definition
Liquefaction is the phenomena when there is loss of strength in saturated and cohesion-less
soils because of increased pore water pressures and hence reduced effective stresses due to
dynamic loading. It is a phenomenon in which the strength and stiffness of a soil is reduced
by earthquake shaking or other rapid loading.
Liquefaction occurs in saturated soils and saturated soils are the soils in which the space
between individual particles is completely filled with water. This water exerts a pressure on
the soil particles that. The water pressure is however relatively low before the occurrence of
earthquake. But earthquake shaking can cause the water pressure to increase to the point at
which the soil particles can readily move with respect to one another.
Although earthquakes often triggers this increase in water pressure, but activities such as
blasting can also cause an increase in water pressure. When liquefaction occurs, the strength
of the soil decreases and the ability of a soil deposit to support the construction above it.
Soil liquefaction can also exert higher pressure on retaining walls, which can cause them to
slide or tilt. This movement can cause destruction of structures on the ground surface and
settlement of the retained soil.
1.2 Cause behind liquefaction
It is required to recognize the conditions that exist in a soil deposit before an earthquake in
order to identify liquefaction. Soil is basically an assemblage of many soil particles which
stay in contact with many neighboring soil. The contact forces produced by the weight of the
overlying particles holds individual soil particle in its place and provide strength.

2
Soil grains in a soil deposit. The height of
the blue column to the right represents the
level of pore-water pressure in the soil.
The length of the arrows represents the size of the
contact forces between individual soil grains. The
contact forces are large when the pore-water
pressure is low.
Occurrence of liquefaction is the result of rapid load application and break down of the loose
and saturated sand and the loosely-packed individual soil particles tries to move into a denser
configuration. However, there is not enough time for the pore-water of the soil to be squeezed
out in case of earthquake. Instead, the water is trapped and prevents the soil particles from
moving closer together. Thus, there is an increase in water pressure which reduces the contact
forces between the individual soil particles causing softening and weakening of soil deposit.
In extreme conditions, the soil particles may lose contact with each other due to the increased
pore- water pressure. In such cases, the soil will have very little strength, and will behave
more like a liquid than a solid - hence, the name "liquefaction".
1.3 Pastrecords of liquefaction
Earthquakes accompanied with liquefaction have been observed for many years. In fact,
written records dating back hundreds and even thousands of years have descriptions of
earthquake effects that are now known to be associated with liquefaction. However,
liquefaction has been so common in a number of recent earthquakes that it is often considered
to be associated with them. Some of those earthquakes are

3
(1) Alaska, USA(1964)
(2) Niigata, Japan(1964)
(3) Loma Prieta, USA(1989)
(4) Kobe, Japan (1995)
1.4 Methods of reducing liquefaction hazards
There are basically three methods of reducing hazards
liquefaction hazards:
1) By Avoiding Liquefaction Susceptible Soils
Construction on liquefaction susceptible soils is to be avoided. It is required to
characterize the soil at a particular building site according to the various criterias
available to determine the liquefaction potential of the soil in a site
2) Build Liquefaction Resistant Structures
The structure constructed should be liquefaction resistant i.e., designing the
foundation elements to resist the effects of liquefaction if at all it is necessary to
construct the structure on liquefiable soil because of favourable location, space
restriction and other reasons.
3) Improve the Soil
This involves mitigation of the liquefaction hazards by improving the strength,
density and drainage characteristics of the soil. This can be done using variety of soil
improvement techniques.

4
Chapter 2 LITERATUREREVIEW
2.1 Generalliterature review
A more precise definition as given by Sladen et al (1985)[6] states that “Liquefaction is a
phenomena wherein a mass of soil loses a large percentage of its shear resistance, when
subjected to monotonic, cyclic, or shocking loading, and flows in a manner resembling a
liquid until the shear stresses acting on the mass are as low as the reduced shear resistance”
Soils have the tendency to decrease in volume when they are subjected to shearing stresses.
The soil grains tend to configure themselves into a more denser packing with less space in the
voids, as water is forced to move out of the pore spaces. If the drainage of this pore water is
obstructed then there is an increase in the pore water pressure with the shearing load.
Therefore there is a transfer of stress i.e. there is decrease in effective stress and hence in the
shearing resistance of the soil. If the static, driving shear stress is greater than the shear
resistance of the soil, then it undergoes deformations which we term as liquefaction.
Liquefaction of loose, cohesionless soils can be observed under monotonic as well as cyclic
shear loads.
When dense sands are sheared monotonically, the soil gets compressed first, and then it
gets dilated as sand particles move up and over one another. When dense saturated sands
are sheared impeding the pore water drainage, their tendency of volume increase results in a
decrease in pore water pressure and an increase in the effective stress and shear strength.
When dense sand is subjected to cyclic small shear strains under undrained pore water
conditions, excess pore water pressure may be generated in each load cycle leading to
softening and the accumulation of deformations. However, at lager shear strains, increase in
volume relieves the excess pore water pressure resulting in an increased shear resistance of
the soil.
After initial liquefaction if large deformations are prevented because of increased undrained
shear strength then it is termed,” limited liquefaction” (Finn 1990)[7]. When dense saturated
sands are subjected to static loading they have the tendency to progressively soften in undrained
cyclic shear achieving limiting strains which is known as cyclic mobility(Castro 1975; Castro
and Poulos 1979)[8]. Cyclic mobility should not be confused with liquefaction. Both can be
distinguished from the very fact that a liquefied soil displays no appreciable increase in shear
resistance regardless of the magnitude of deformation (Seed 1979)[9]. Soils undergoing

5
mobility first soften subjected to cyclic loading but later when monotonically loaded without
drainage stiffen because tendency to increase in volume reduce the pore pressures. During
cyclic mobility, the driving static shear stress is less than the residual shear resistance and
deformations get accumulated only during cyclic loading. However, in layman‟s language, a
soil failure resulting from cyclic mobility is referred to as liquefaction.
According to Selig and Chang (1981)[10] and Robertson (1994)[11], a dilative soil can attain
a state of zero effective stress and shear resistance. Cyclic loads may produce a reversal in
the shear stress direction when the initial static shear stress is low i.e. the stress path passes
through a condition which is known as state of zero shear stress. Under such conditions, a
dilative soil may accumulate enough pore pressures which help to attain a condition of zero
effective stress and large deformations may develop. However, deformations stabilize when
cyclic loading comes to an end as the tendency to expand with further shearing increases the
effective stresses and hence shear resistance. Robertson (1994)[11] termed this, “cyclic
liquefaction”. It involves some deformation occurring while static shear stresses exceed the
shear resistance of the soil(when the state of zero effective stress is approached).However the
deformations stop after cyclic loading ends as the tendency to expand quickly results in strain
hardening. This type of failure in saturated, dense cohesionless soils is also referred to as
“liquefaction” but with limited deformations.
Compiling all these ground failure mechanisms, Robertson (1994) and Robertson et
al(1994)[11]have suggested a complete classification system to define “soil liquefaction”.
The latest put forward by Robertson and Fear (1996)[12] has been given below:
(1) Flow Liquefaction-The undrained flow of saturated, contractive soil when subjected
to cyclic or monotonic shear loading as the static shear stress exceeds the residual
strength of the soil
(2) Cyclic softening-Large deformations occurring during cyclic shear due to increase in
pore water pressure that would tend to dilate in undrained, monotonic shear.
Cyclic softening, in which deformations discontinue after cyclic loading stops, can be
further classified as

6
 Cyclic liquefaction-It occurs when the initial, static shear stress is exceeded by
the cyclic shear stresses to produce a stress reversal. This may help n attaining
a condition of zero effective stress during which large deformations may
develop.
 Cyclic mobility-Cyclic loads do not result in a reversal of shear stress and
condition of zero effective stress does not occur. Deformations accumulate in
each cycle of shear stress.
No definition or classification system appears entirely satisfactorily. Hence a broad
definition of soil liquefaction will be adopted for our future study. As defined by the
National Research Council‟s Committee on Earthquake Engineering (1985)[13],soil
liquefaction is defined as the phenomena in which there is a loss of shearing resistance or
the development of excessive strains as a result of transient or repeated disturbance of
saturated cohesionless soils.
2.2 Susceptibility of Soils to Liquefaction in Earthquakes
Liquefaction is most commonly observed in shallow, loose, saturated cohesionless soils
subjected to strong ground motions in earthquakes. Unsaturated soils are not subject to
liquefaction because volume compression does not generate excess pore water pressure.
Liquefaction and large deformations are more associated with contractive soils while cyclic
softening and limited deformations are more likely with expansive soils. In practice, he
liquefaction potential in a given soil deposit during an earthquake is often evaluated using in-
situ penetration tests and empirical procedures.
Since liquefaction phenomena arises because of the tendency of soil grains to rearrange when
sheared, any factor that prevents the movement of soil grains will increase the liquefaction
resistance of a soil deposit. Particle cementation, soil fabric, and again are some of the
important factors that can hinder soil particle movement.
Stress history is also crucial in determining the liquefaction resistance of a soil. For example,
soil deposits with an initial static shear stress i.e. anisotropic consolidation conditions are
generally

7
more resistant to pore water pressure generation(Seed 1979)[9] although static shear stresses
may result in greater deformations since liquefaction gets initiated.
Over consolidated soils (i.e. the soils that have been subjected to greater static pressures in
the past) are more resistant to particle rearrangement and hence liquefaction as the soil grains
tends to be in a more stable arrangement.
Liquefaction resistance of a soil deposit increases with depth as overburden pressure
increases. That is why soil deposits deeper than about 15m are rarely found to have liquefied
( Krinitzky et al.1993)[14]
Characteristics of the soil grains like distribution of shapes, sizes, shape, composition etc
influence the susceptibility of a soil to liquefy (Seed 1979)[9]. While sands or silts are most
commonly observed to liquefy, gravelly soils have also been known to have liquefied.
Rounded soil particles of uniform size are mostly susceptible to liquefaction (Poulus et
al.1985)[15]. Well graded soils, due to their stable inter-locking configuration, are less prone
to liquefaction. Natural silty sands tend to be deposited in a looser state, and hence are more
likely to display contractive shear behaviour, than clear sands.
Clays with appreciable plasticity are resistant to relative movement of particles during shear
cyclic shear loading and hence are usually not prone to pore water pressure generation and
liquefaction. Soils with n appreciable plastic content are rarely observed to liquefy in
earthquakes. Ishihara (1993)[16] gave the theory that non-plastic soil fines with dry surface
texture do not create adhesion and hence do not provide appreciable resistance to particle
rearrangement and liquefaction. Koester (1994)[17] stated that sandy soils with appreciable
fines content may be inherently collapsible, perhaps because of greater compressibility of the
fines between the sand grains.
Permeability also plays a significant role in liquefaction. When movement of pore water
within the soil is retarded by low permeability, pore water pressures are likely to generate
during the cyclic loading. Soils with large non-plastic fines content are more likely to get
liquefied because the fines inhibit drainage of excess pore pressures. The permeability of
surrounding soils also affects the vulnerability of the soil deposit. Less pervious soils such as
clay can prevent the rapid dissipation of excess pore water pressures that may have generated
in the adjacent saturated sand deposit. Sufficient drainage above or below a saturated deposit
may inhibit the accumulation of

8
excess pore water pressure and hence liquefaction. Gravelly soils are less prone to
liquefaction due to a relatively high permeability unless pore water drainage is impeded by
less pervious, adjoining deposits.
2.3 Ground Failure Resulting from Soil Liquefaction
The National Research Council (Liquefaction...1985)[13] lists eight types of ground
failure commonly associated with the soil liquefaction in earthquakes:
 Sand boils resulting in land subsidence accompanied by relatively minor change.
 Failure of retaining walls due to increased lateral loads from liquefied backfill or loss
of support from the liquefied foundation soils.
 Ground settlement, generally linked with some other failure mechanism.
 Flow failures of slopes resulting in large down slope movements of a soil mass.
 Buoyant rise of buried structures such as tanks.
 Lateral spreads resulting from the lateral movements of gently sloping ground.
 Loss of bearing capacity resulting in foundation failures.
 Ground oscillation involving back and forth displacements of intact blocks of surface
soil.
The nature and severity of soil liquefaction damage can be said to be a function of both
reduced shear strength and the magnitude of the static shear loads acting on the soil deposit.
When the reduced strength of a liquefied soil deposit becomes less than the driving shear
loads, there is a loss of stability resulting in extensive ground failures or flow slides. And if
the shear strength is greater than the driving shear stresses, may be due to the expansion at
larger strains, only limited shear deformations are likely to occur. On level ground with no
shear stresses acting on it, excess pore water pressures may come out to the surface resulting
in the formation of sand boils while the venting of liquefied soil deposits may result in
settlements, damages are generally not extensive in the absence of static shear loads.
Ground failures associated with the phenomena of liquefaction under cyclic loading can
be classified in a broader sense as (Liquefaction... 1985: Robertson et al.1992)[18]:

9
(1) Flow failures-It is observed when the liquefaction of loose, contractive soils (i.e. the
soils where there is no increase in strength at larger shear strains) results in very large
deformations.
(2) Deformation failures-It is observed when there is a gain in shear resistance of the
liquefied soil at larger strain, resulting in limited deformations but no loss of stability.
However, putting an end to the confusion in terminology, all types of ground failure resulting from
built-up pore water pressure and consequent loss in the shear strength of the soils during cyclic loading
is commonly termed as liquefaction.
2.4 Mechanism of Liquefaction
The mechanism of liquefaction has been discussed in the following sections
Theoretical Background
The shear strength of sands is due to internal friction only. For an element of soil, it is expressed by:
 tan'
f (2.1)
Where,
f = Shear strength of sand
'
 = Effective over burden pressure or Effective Stress on the element
 = Angle of internal friction
If there is an increase in pore water pressure in saturated sands due to dynamic loads, the strength
may now be expressed as:
   tan)( '
Udynf  (2.2)
Where,
dynf )( = dynamic shear strength
U = excess pore water pressure due to dynamic loads

10
It is seen that with development of additional positive pore pressures, the strength of
sand is reduced.
For complete loss of strength dynf )( must become zero i.e.
0'
U
or 1
'

U

(2.3)
Hence for complete liquefaction to occur the pore water pressure developed should be equal
to effective overburden pressure or the effective stresses in the element.
Now consider an element at depth Z in saturated soil deposit where an excess water pressure
head (h) has been developed under dynamic loads.
The effective overburden pressure on the element is given by:
Z
e
G
w



1
1'
(2.4)
and excess pore water pressure )(U is given by:
U = wh (2.5)
Substituting Eq. 2.4 and Eq. 2.5 in Eq. 2.3
1
1
1














h
Z
e
G
(2.6)
Thus for complete liquefaction to occur at depth Z in the soil deposit, the pore water pressure h
is given by:
e
G
Z
h



1
1
(2.7)
Where,
G = Specific gravity of soil particles
e = Void ratio
It will be seen that because of increase in pore water pressure, the effective stress reduces resulting
in loss of strength. Transfer of intergranular stress takes place from soil grains to pore water. Thus if
this transfer is complete there is complete loss of strength resulting in what is known as complete

11
liquefaction. However, if only partial transfer of stress from the grains to the pore water occurs,
there is partial loss of strength, resulting in partial liquefaction. It must be appreciated at this stage
that in case of complete liquefaction, the soil behaves as a viscous fluid and the phenomenon can be
observed visually.
Thus an important feature of the phenomenon of liquefaction is the fact that its onset in one zone of a
deposit may lead to liquefaction of other zones which would have remained stable otherwise.
2.5 Criteria for Liquefaction
The factors which control the liquefaction characteristics of soils are
 Soil type - Liquefaction occurs normally in cohessionless soils as they loss their strength
completely under vibration due to the development of pore pressure which in turn reduce the
effective stress to zero. However, in some of the earthquakes liquefaction of cohesive soil (highly
sensitive clays) has been observed (Mexico earthquake of 1985).
 Initial relative density - It is one of the most important factors controlling liquefaction. Both pore
water pressures and settlement are considerably reduced during vibrations with increase in initial
relative density and hence chances of liquefaction reduce with increased relative density.
 Vibration characteristics - Out of the three parameters of dynamic load (frequency, amplitude,
and duration) frequency and amplitude are more important. Frequency of the dynamic load plays
vital role only if it is close to the natural frequency of the system. Further the liquefaction
depends on the type of the dynamic load i.e. whether it is a transient load or the load causing
steady state of vibrations. Whole stratum gets liquefied at the same time under transient loading,
while it may proceed from top to lower layers under steady state vibration (Florin and Ivanov,
1961).
 Location of drainage and dimension of deposit-Sands are more pervious than fine grained sands
However, if a pervious deposit has large dimensions, the drainage path increases and the deposit
may behave as undrained, thereby increasing the chances of liquefaction of such a deposit.
 Surcharge load - If the surcharge load, i.e. the initial effective stress is large, then transfer of
stress from soil grains to pore water will require higher intensity of vibrations or vibrations for a
longer duration. If the initial stress condition is not isotropic as in field, then stress condition
causing liquefaction depends upon K0 (Coefficient of earth pressure at rest).
 Period under sustained loading - Age of sand deposit may influence its liquefaction
characteristics. A substantial increase in liquefaction resistance has been reported on liquefaction

12
of undisturbed sand compared to its freshly prepared sample which may be due to some form of
cementation or welding at contact points of sand particles and associated with secondary
compression of soil.
2.6 SoilProperties During Liquefaction
2.6.1 Shrinkage Limit
The shrinkage limit (SL) is the water content where further loss of moisture will not result in
any more volume reduction.
2.6.2 Plastic Limit
The plastic limit (PL) is determined by rolling out a thread of the fine portion of a soil on a
flat, non-porous surface.
2.6.3 Liquid Limit
The liquid limit (LL) is often conceptually defined as the water content at which the behavior
of a clayey soil changes from plastic to liquid . Actually, clayey soil does have a very small
shear strength at the liquid limit and the strength decreases as water content increases; the
transition from plastic to liquid behavior occurs over a range of water contents.
2.6.4 The Atterberg Limits
The Atterberg Limits are a basic measure of the critical water contents of a fine grained soil, such
as its shrinkage limit, plastic limit, and liquid limit. As a dry, clayey soil takes on increasing amounts
of water,it undergoes dramatic and distinct changes in behavior and consistency. Depending on the
water content of the soil, it may appear in four states:solid, semi-solid, plastic and liquid. In each state,
the consistency and behavior of a soil is different and consequently so are its engineering properties.
Thus, the boundary between each state can be defined based on a change in the soil's behavior.
The Atterberg limits can be used to distinguish between silt and clay, and it can distinguish between
different types of silts and clays. These limits were created by Albert Atterberg, a Swedish chemist.
Plastic to liquid behavior occurs over a range of water contents. They were later refined by
Arthur Casagrande. These distinctions in soil are used in assessing the soils that are to have structures
built on. Soils when wet retain water and some expand in volume. The amount of expansion is related

13
to the ability of the soil to take in water and its structural make-up (the type of atoms present). These
tests are mainly used on clayey or silty soils since these are the soils that expand and shrink due to
moisture content. Clays and silts react with the water and thus change sizes and have varying shear
strengths. Thus these tests are used widely in the preliminary stages of designing any structure to ensure
that the soil will have the correct amount of shear strength and not too much change in volume as it
expands and shrinks with different moisture contents. As a hard, rigid solid in the dry state,soil
becomes a crumbly (friable) semisolid when a certain moisture content, termed the shrinkage limit, is
reached. If it is an expansive soil, this soil will also begin to swell in volume as this moisture content is
exceeded. Increasing the water content beyond the soil's plastic limit will transform it into a malleable,
plastic mass,which causes additional swelling. The soil will remain in this plastic state until its
liquid limit is exceeded,which causes it to transform into a viscous liquid that flows when jarred.
2.6.5 PORE WATER PRESSURE DURING LIQUEFACTION
A state of 'soil liquefaction' occurs when the effective stress of soil is reduced to essentially zero, which
corresponds to a complete loss of shear strength. This may be initiated by either monotonic loading (e.g.
single sudden occurrence of a change in stress – examples include an increase in load on an embankment or
sudden loss of toe support) or cyclic loading (e.g. repeated change in stress condition – examples include
wave loading or earthquake shaking) In both cases a soil in a saturated loose state, and one which may
generate significant pore water pressure on a change in load are the most likely to liquefy. This is because
a loose soil has the tendency to compress when sheared, generating large excess Porewater Pressure as
load is transferred from the soil skeleton to adjacent pore water during undrained loading. As pore water
pressure rises a progressive loss of strength of the soil occurs as effective stress is reduced. It is more likely
to occur in sandy or non-plastic silty soils, but may in rare cases occur in gravels and clays.

14
2.6.6 OCCURRENCE OF SOIL LIQUEFACTION
Liquefaction is more likely to occur in loose to moderately saturated granular soils with poor drainage,
such as silty sands or sands and gravels capped or containing seams of impermeable sediments. During
wave loading, usually cyclic undrained loading, e.g. seismic loading, loose sands tend to decrease in
volume, which produces an increase in their pore water pressures and consequently a decrease in shear
strength, i.e. reduction in effective stress The resistance of the cohesionless soil to liquefaction will
depend on the density of the soil, confining stresses,soil structure. The magnitude and duration of the
cyclic loading, and the extent to which shear stress reversaloccurs. Depending on the initial void ratio,
the soil material can respond to loading either strain-softening or strain-hardening. Strain-softened soils,
e.g. loose sands, can be triggered to collapse, either monotonically or cyclically, if the static shear stress
is greater than the ultimate or steady-state shear strength of the soil. In this case flow liquefaction occurs.
2.6.7 Earthquake Liquefaction
The pressures generated during large earthquakes with many cycles of shaking can cause the liquefied sand
and excess water to force its way to the ground surface from severalmetres below the ground. This is often
observed as "sand boils" also called "sand blows" or "sand volcanoes" (as they appear to form small volcanic
craters) at the ground surface. The phenomenon may incorporate both flow of already liquefied sand from a
layer below ground, and a quicksand effect whereby upward flow of water initiates liquefaction in
overlying non-liquefied sandy deposits due to buoyancy. One positive aspect of soil liquefaction is the
tendency for the effects of earthquake shaking to be significantly damped (reduced) for the remainder of
the earthquake. This is because liquids do not support a shear stress and so once the soil liquefies due to
shaking, subsequent earthquake shaking (transferred through ground by shear waves) is not transferred to
buildings at the ground surface. Studies of liquefaction features left by prehistoric earthquakes,called
Paleo liquefaction or Paleo-seismology, can reveal a great deal of information about earthquakes that
occurred before records were kept or accurate measurements could be taken. Soil liquefaction induced by
earthquake shaking is also a major contributor to urban seismic risk.

15
2.6.8 Types of Failure
1. Cyclic Mobility
2. Over Turning
3. Sand Boiling
These are some of failures.
2.6.9 Factors Affecting SoilLiquefaction
1. Soil Type
2. Grain size and its distribution
3. Initial relative density
4. Vibration characteristics
5. Location of drainage and dimension of deposit
6. Surcharge load
7. Method of soil formation
8. Period under sustained load
9. Previous strain history
10. Trapped Air
These are some factors affecting Soil Liquefaction.
2.6.10ConsequenceofLiquefaction
 Settlements
 Lateralspreads
 Lateralflows
 Loss of lateral support
 Loss of bearing support
 Flotation of bearing supports
These are some consequences of Soil Liquefaction.

16
Chapter 3. ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK
A stress-basedframework
The stress-based approach for evaluating the potential for liquefaction triggering,
initiated by Seed and Idriss (1967), compares the earthquake-induced cyclic stress
ratios (CSR) with the cyclic resistance ratios (CRR) of the soil. The soil's CRR is
usually correlated to an in-situ parameter such as CPT penetration resistance, SPT blow
count, or shear wave velocity, Vs. An overview of the stress-based approach that has been
used with CPT or SPT data is presented in this section, followed by additional details
regarding specific model components and analysis procedures in sections 2.2 – 2.7.
3.1 Earthquake-induced cyclic stress ratio (CSR)
The earthquake-induced CSR, at a given depth, z, within the soil profile, is usually
Expressed as a representative value (or equivalent uniform value) equal to 65% of the
maximum cyclic shear stress ratio, i.e.:
CSR = 0.65 (τmax/σ’v) (3.1)
where τmax = maximum earthquake induced shear stress, σ’v = vertical effective stress, and
the subscripts on the CSR indicate that it is computed for a specific earthquake magnitude
(moment magnitude, M) and in-situ σ’v. The choice of the reference stress level
(i.e., the factor 0.65) was selected by Seed and Idriss (1967) and has been in use since.
Selecting a different reference stress level would alter the values of certain parameters
and relationships but would have no net significant effect on the final outcome of the derived
liquefaction evaluation procedure, as long as this same reference stress level is used throughout,
including forward calculations. The value of τmax can be estimated from dynamic response

17
analyses, but such analyses must include a sufficient number of input acceleration time series
and adequate site characterization details to be reasonably robust. Alternatively, th
e maximum shear stress can be estimated using the equation, developed as part of the
Seed-Idriss Simplified Liquefaction Procedure, which is expressed as,
CSR = 0.65 (𝝈𝒗/𝝈’𝒗) (amax/g) rd (3.2)
where σv = vertical total stress at depth z, amax/g = maximum horizontal acceleration
(as a fraction of gravity) at the ground surface, and rd = shear stress reduction factor that
accounts for the dynamic response of the soil profile.
3.2 Cyclic resistance ratio (CRR) and penetration resistances
The CRR is correlated to CPT and SPT penetration resistances after application of procedural
and overburden stress corrections. For SPTs, the various procedural corrections for arriving at a
standardized, energy-corrected N60 value are summarized in Idriss and Boulanger (2008, 2010)
and thus not repeated herein. For CPTs, a procedural aspect which warrants clarification for
liquefaction applications is correction of the measured tip resistance (qc) for unequal end area
effects (Campanella et al. 1982) as,
qt = qc + ( 1 - ar ) u2 (3.3)
where qt = the cone tip resistance corrected for unequal end area effects, ar = area ratio for the
cone tip (typical values between 0.65 and 0.85), and u2 = pore pressure measured behind the
cone tip. The magnitude of this correction can be significant for soft clays (as u2 > u0,
where uo = steady state or hydrostatic pore pressure), but is typically quite small for sands
(as u2 ≈ u0).
Thus, the terms qc and qt are approximately equal in sands and often used interchangeably
even if the correction for unequal area effects has been performed. The term qc is used
herein, with the understanding that the correction has been performed whenever the u2
data are available.

18
CPT and SPT penetration resistances are corrected for overburden stress effects as,
N1 60 = CN N60
Where,
CN = overburden correction factor, Pa = atmospheric pressure, qcN = qc/Pa, and qc1N and (N1)60
are the penetration resistances that would be obtained in the same sand at an overburden
stress of 1atm if all other attributes remain constant (e.g., same relative density, fabric,
age, degree of cementation, loading history). Maki et al. (2014) provide a review of
overburden normalization frameworks for sands and clays that are based on different
assumptions (i.e., same state parameter versus same void ratio); the effect of these alternative
normalization schemes on liquefaction triggering correlations are currently being examined,
but are not included in this report.
The soil's CRR is dependent on the duration of shaking (which is expressed through an
Earthquake magnitude scaling factor, MSF) and effective overburden stress (expressed
through a K factor).

19
3.3 IDRISS AND BOULANGER Method for Liquefaction Determination
Evaluation of the liquefaction potential of saturated cohesionless soils during earthquakes
were re-examined and revised using semi-empirical procedures for use in practice by I. M.
Idriss, R.
W. Boulanger[1]. The stress reduction factor (rd), earthquake magnitude scaling factor for
cyclic stress ratios (MSF), overburden correction factor for cyclic stress ratios (K), and the
overburden normalization factor for penetration resistances (CN) were discussed and recently
modified relations were presented. These modified relations were used in re-evaluations of
the SPT and CPT case history databases. Based on these re-evaluations, revised SPT- and
CPT-based liquefaction correlations were recommended for use in practice. In addition, shear
wave velocity based procedures and the approaches used to evaluate the cyclic loading
behavior of plastic fine- grained soils were also discussed.
Using this procedure, the some SPT and CPT cases of the two major earthquakes, namely
Chi- Chi, Taiwan earthquake (magnitude Mw =7.6) and Kocaeli, Turkey earthquake
(magnitude Mw
= 7.4) in 1999, has been evaluated and compared with the liquefaction potential results
obtained from the on-field test for both of them.
Basically, Semi-empirical field-based procedures for evaluating liquefaction potential during
earthquakes have two essential components: (1) the development of an analytical framework
to organize past case history experiences, and (2) the development of a suitable in-situ index
to represent soil liquefaction characteristics. There has been a number of re-evaluations to the
various components, but the original simplified procedure (Seed and Idriss 1971)[ ] for
calculating earthquake induced cyclic shear stresses is still the essential component of this
analysis framework.
The strength semi-empirical procedure is the use of both experimental findings together with
the theoretical considerations for establishing the framework of the analysis procedure. It is
far more advanced method of evaluation because it ties together the theory and the field
observations.

20
The paper by I. M. Idriss, R. W. Boulanger [1] provides an update on the semi-
empirical field- based procedures for evaluating liquefaction potential of
cohesionless soils during earthquakes. This update includes recommended
relations for each part of the analytical framework, including the:
 Stress reduction coefficient rd ,
 Magnitude scaling factor MSF,
 Overburden correction factor K for cyclic stress ratios, and
 Overburden correction factor CN for penetration resistances.
Overview of the framework for the use of Semi-empirical liquefaction
procedures used in this paper:
A brief overview is provided for the framework that is used as the basis for
most semi- empirical procedures for evaluating liquefaction potential of
cohesionless soils during earthquakes as given by I. M. Idriss, R. W. Boulanger
[1] is as follows
The Simplified Procedure for Estimating Cyclic Shear Stress Ratios
Induced by Earthquake Ground Motions
The Seed-Idriss (1971) simplified procedure is used to estimate the cyclic shear
stress ratios (CSR) induced by earthquake ground motions, at a depth z below the
ground surface, using the following equation (1):
Where, amax -maximum horizontal acceleration at the ground surface
σvo - total vertical stress
σ vo-effective vertical stress at depth z
rd -stress reduction coefficient that accounts for the flexibility of the soil column

21
o
Adjustment for the Equivalent Number of Stress Cycles in
Different Magnitude Earthquakes
It has been customary to adjust the values of CSR calculated by equation
(1) so that the adjusted values of CSR would pertain to the equivalent
uniform shear stress induced by the earthquake ground motions generated
by an earthquake having a moment magnitude M = 7½, i.e., ( CSR)M-7.5.
Accordingly, the values of (CSR)M-7.5are given by equation (2):
Where amax -maximum horizontal acceleration
at the ground surface
σ vo - total vertical stress
σ’vo-effective vertical
stress at depth z
rd -stress reduction coefficient that accounts for the flexibility of the soil column
MSF- magnitude scaling factor
Use of the SPT Blow Count and CPT Tip Resistance as Indices for
Soil Liquefaction Characteristics
The effective use of SPT blow count and CPT tip resistance as indices for
soil liquefaction charactertics require that the effects of soil density and
effective confining stress on penetration resistance be separated [Boulanger
and Idriss (2004)]. Hence Seed et al (1975a) included the normalization of
penetration resistances in sand to an equivalent of one atmosphere (1
Pa =1 tsf =101 kPa) as part of the semi-empirical procedure. This

22
3.3.1 Stress reduction coefficient, rd
The stress reduction coefficient rd was introduced by Seed and Idriss
(1971) as a parameter describing the ratio of cyclic stresses for a flexible
soil column to the cyclic stresses for a rigid soil column. They obtained
values of rd for a range of earthquake ground motions and soil profiles
having sand in the upper 15± m (50 ft) and suggested an average curve for
use as a function of depth. The average curve, which was extended only to
a depth of about 12 m (40 ft), was intended for all earthquake magnitudes
and for all profiles.
Idriss (1999) extended the work of Golesorkhi (1989) and performed
several hundred parametric site response analyses and concluded that for
the conditions of most practical interest, the parameter rd could be
adequately expressed as a function of depth and earthquake magnitude (M).
The following relation was derived using those results:
These equations given above were considered for z<=34 m. for z >34 m
the equation to be used is:
Where, z-depth
M-Magnitude of the earthquake
rd - stress reduction coefficient

23
3.3.2 Magnitude scaling factor, MSF
The magnitude scaling factor, MSF, has been used to adjust the induced CSR during
earthquake magnitude M to an equivalent CSR for an earthquake magnitude, M = 7½.
The MSF is thus defined as:
The values of MSF are calculated by combining correlations of the number of equivalent
uniform cycles versus earthquake magnitude and the laboratory based relations between
the cyclic stress ratio required to cause liquefaction and the number of uniform stress
cycles.
Idriss (1999)[22] re-evaluated the MSF derivation using results of cyclic tests on high
quality samples obtained by frozen sampling techniques. The re-evaluated relation was
slightly different from the simplified procedure (Seed et al 1975)[23]. The MSF relation
produced by this reevaluation is given by:
Where M- magnitude of the earthquake
3.3.3 Overburden correction factor, Kσ
By the studies by Boulanger and Idriss (2004)[1] it is found that overburden stress effects
on CRR could be represented in either of two ways: (1) through the additional
normalization of penetration resistances for relative state, thereby producing the quantities
(N1 )60 and qC1 ,or (2) through a K factor. The recommended K curves are expressed as
(Boulanger and Idriss 2004):

24
3.3.4 Normalization of penetration resistances, CN
One of the most commonly used expressions for the overburden correction was proposed by
Liao and Whitman (1986), viz:
But after re-evaluation Boulanger and Idriss (2004)[1] subsequently used the relations given
below to obtain the following expressions for determining CN:
SPT-BASED PROCEDURE FOR EVALUATING LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL OF
COHESIONLESS SOILS
Semi-empirical procedures for the liquefaction potential analysis was developed using the
Standard Penetration Test (SPT) for differentiating between liquefiable and non-liquefiable
conditions in the 1964 Niigata earthquake, Japan. In this paper we have used the semi-empirical
approach for differentiating between liquefiable and non-liquefiable conditions for 40 SPT cases

25
Thus following the semi-empirical approach, the CSR and (N1)60 values were re-
calculated using the revised rd, MSF , K and CN relations recommended herein.
3.3.5 Evaluationof CSR
The K factor is usually applied to the “capacity” side of the analysis during design but it
must also be used to convert the CSR [Boulanger and Idriss (2004)[1] It is given as
follows:
3.3.6 Evaluationof CRR
For the CRR value, at first the SPT penetration resistance was adjusted by Boulanger and
Idriss (2004)[1] to an equivalent clean sand value:
The value of the CRR for a magnitude of earthquake=7.5 and an effective vertical stress
of 1 atm can be calculated on the basis of the value of (N1)60cs using the following
expression:

26
3.4 IS Code Method ( Youd & Idriss Method )
Due to the difficulties in obtaining and testing undisturbed representative sample from
potentially liquefiable sites, in-situ testing is the approach preferred widely for evaluating
the liquefaction potential of a soil deposit. Liquefaction potential assessment procedures
involving both the SPT and CPT are widely used in practice. The most common procedure used
in engineering practice for the assessment of liquefaction potential of sands and silts is the
simplified procedure. The procedure may be used with either standard penetration test (SPT) blow
count or cone penetration test(CPT) tip resistance or shear wave velocity Vs measured within the
deposit as described below:
Step 1 — The subsurface data used to assess liquefaction susceptibility should include the
location of the water table, either SPT blow count N or tip resistance qc of a CPT cone or shear
wave velocity Vs, unit weight, and fines content of the soil (percent by weight passing the IS
Standard Sieve No. 75 µ).
Step 2 — Evaluate total vertical overburden stress σvo and effective vertical overburden stress
σ 'vo at different depths for all potentially liquefiable layers within the deposit
Step 3 — Evaluate stress reduction factor rd using:
where z is the depth (in metre) below the ground surface.
Step 4 — Calculate cyclic stress ratio CSR induced by the earthquake using:

27
Where
amax = peak ground acceleration (PGA) preferably in terms of
g = acceleration due to gravity, and
rd = stress reduction factor.
If value of PGA is not available, the ratio (amax/g) may be taken equal to seismic zone
factor Z (as per Table 3).
Where,
CRR7.5= standard cyclic resistance ratio for a 7.5 magnitude earthquake obtained
using values of SPT or CPT or shear wave velocity (as per Step 6), and
MSF = magnitude scaling factor given by following equation:
This factor is required when the magnitude is different than 7.5. The correction for high
overburden stresses Kσ is required when overburden pressure is high (depth > 15 m) and can
be found using following equation:
where σ 'vo effective overburden pressure and Pa atmospheric pressure are measured in the same
units and f is an exponent and its value depends on the relative density Dr. For Dr = 40 percent ~
Step 5 — Obtain cyclic resistance ratio CRR by correcting standard cyclic resistance ratio
CRR7.5 for earthquake magnitude , high overburden stress level and high initial static
shear stress using :

28
60 percent, f = 0.8 ~ 0.7 and for Dr = 60 percent ~ 80 percent, f = 0.7 ~ 0.6. The correction for
static shear stresses Kα is required only for sloping ground and is not required in routine
engineering practice. Therefore, in the scope of this standard, value of Kα shall be assumed
unity.
For assessing liquefaction susceptibility using:
a) SPT, go to Step 6(a) or
b) CPT, go to Step 6(b) or
c)Shear wave velocity, go to Step 6(c).
Step 6 — Obtain cyclic resistance ratio CRR7.5,
Using values of SPT
Evaluate the SPT (standard penetration test) blow count N60, for a hammer efficiency of 60
percent. Specifications for standardized equipment are given in Table 11. If equipment used
is of non-standard type, N60 shall be obtained using measured value (N):
Factors CHT, CHW, CSS, CRL and CBD recommended by various investigators for
some common non-standard SPT configurations are provided in Table 12. For SPT
conducted as per IS 2131, the energy delivered to the drill rod is about 60 percent
therefore, C60 may be assumed as 1. The computed N60 is normalized to an effective
overburden pressure of approximately 100 kPa using overburden correction factor CN

29
The cyclic resistance ratio CRR7.5 is estimated from Fig. 8, using (N1)60 value.
Effect of fines content FC (in percent) can be rationally accounted by correcting (N1)60
and finding (N1)60CS as follows:
Again, Fig. 8 can be used to estimate CRR7.5, where (N1)60CS shall be used instead of (N1)60 and
only SPT clean sand based curve shall be used irrespective of fines contents. The CRR7.5 can be
estimated using following equation, instead of Fig. 8:

30
Step 7 — Calculate the factor of safety FS against initial liquefaction using:
FOS =
𝑪𝑹𝑹
𝑪𝑺𝑹
where CSR is as estimated in Step 4 and CRR in Step 5. When the design ground motion is
conservative, earthquake related permanent ground deformation is generally small, if FS ≥ 1.2 .
Step 8 — If FS < 1, then the soil is assumed to liquefy.

31
Chapter 4 INVESTIGATION OF SOIL DATA
4.1 The Chemical analysis of Soil & Chemicalanalysis of Water found at
IGIMS Patna site are as follows :-
Chemical Analysis of Soil
Chemical Analysis of Water
Bore Hole No. Depth(m) pH Chloride(mg/L) Sulphate(mg/L) TDS
1 4.8 6.86 212 426 294
2 5.75 7.15 260 428 325
3 5.5 7.42 256 462 310
4 5.8 7.62 305 398 315
Bore Hole
No. Depth(m) pH Chloride(mg/L) Sulphate(mg/L) TDS
1 3 6.89 222 467 394
2 3 7.15 280 576 375
3 3 7.48 292 545 410
4 3 7.29 321 589 415

32
4.2 Properties of Soil of Four Bore Holes under observation are
as follows:-
BH1
S.No. Depth(m)
N
value ϒsat(kN/m^3) ϒ'(kN/m^3)
75µ
passing LL(%) PL(%) PI(%) Soil Group
1 0 - 20.07 10.07 51.5 35 18 17 CL
2 1.5 8 20.07 10.07 58 37 19 18 CI
3 3 9 20.07 10.07 57 36 19 17 CI
4 4.5 10 20.07 10.07 59 40 20 20 CL
5 6 12 20.07 10.07 53 41 20 21 CL
6 7.5 15 20.07 10.07 51 40 23 17 CI
7 9 18 20.07 10.07 47 34 14 13 SC
8 10.5 19 20.07 10.07 45 25 - NP SM
9 12 22 20.07 10.07 41 21 - NP SM
10 13.5 21 20.07 10.07 46 20 - NP SM
11 15 22 20.07 10.07 42 15 - NP SM
12 16.5 24 20.07 10.07 25 18 - NP SM
13 18 25 20.07 10.07 29 22 - NP SM
14 19.5 26 20.07 10.07 30 15 - NP SM
15 21 28 20.07 10.07 24 14 - NP SM
16 22.5 30 20.07 10.07 21 13 - NP SM
17 24 32 20.07 10.07 19 12 - NP SM
18 25.5 37 20.07 10.07 20 11 - NP SM
19 27 40 20.07 10.07 23 10 - NP SM
20 28.5 45 20.07 10.07 19 9 - NP SM
21 30 48 20.07 10.07 17 10 - NP SM
22 31.5 54 20.07 10.07 16 11 - NP SM
23 33 57 20.07 10.07 18 10 - NP SM
24 34.5 61 20.07 10.07 20 11 - NP SM
25 36 63 20.07 10.07 19 5 - NP SM
26 37.5 REF 20.07 10.07 21 4 - NP SM
27 39 68 20.07 10.07 12 3 - NP SM
27 40 REF 20.07 10.07 8.4 3 - NP SM

33
BH2
S.No. Depth(m)
N
75µ
1 0 DS 20.07 10.07 65.5 48 24 24 CI
2 1.5 8 20.07 10.07 69 51 26 25 CH
3 3 10 20.07 10.07 65 46 23 23 CI
4 4.5 12 20.07 10.07 64 47 22 25 CI
5 6 13 20.07 10.07 61 41 20 21 CI
6 7.5 14 20.07 10.07 56 43 21 22 CI
7 9 19 20.07 10.07 51 39 20 19 CI
8 10.5 21 20.07 10.07 43 26 14 12 SM
9 12 22 20.07 10.07 44 27 15 12 SM
10 13.5 25 20.07 10.07 38 20 - NP SM
11 15 23 20.07 10.07 33 19 - NP SM
12 16.5 26 20.07 10.07 29 16 - NP SM
13 18 28 20.07 10.07 27 15 - NP SM
14 19.5 32 20.07 10.07 22 12 - NP SM
15 21 34 20.07 10.07 23 13 - NP SM
16 22.5 38 20.07 10.07 21 11 - NP SM
17 24 44 20.07 10.07 18 10 - NP SM
18 25.5 50 20.07 10.07 20 9 - NP SM
19 27 52 20.07 10.07 22 10 - NP SM
20 28.5 54 20.07 10.07 20 9 - NP SM
21 30 56 20.07 10.07 17 8 - NP SM
22 31.5 55 20.07 10.07 16 8 - NP SM
23 33 56 20.07 10.07 17 10 - NP SM
24 34.5 66 20.07 10.07 19 9 - NP SM
25 36 77 20.07 10.07 20 10 - NP SM
26 37.5 REF 20.07 10.07 16 8 - NP SM
27 39 20.07 10.07 14 7 - NP SM
27 40 REF 20.07 10.07 11 4 - NP SM

34
BH3
S.No. Depth(m)
N
75µ
1 0 - 20.07 10.07 62.3 52 26 26 CH
2 1.5 6 20.07 10.07 70 55 27 28 CH
3 3 7 20.07 10.07 68 49 25 24 CI
4 4.5 8 20.07 10.07 62 48 24 24 CI
5 6 10 20.07 10.07 61 47 25 22 CI
6 7.5 11 20.07 10.07 58 46 23 23 CI
7 9 15 20.07 10.07 53 42 20 22 CI
8 10.5 20 20.07 10.07 45 33 17 16 SC
9 12 21 20.07 10.07 39 27 15 12 SM
10 13.5 24 20.07 10.07 37 19 - NP SM
11 15 27 20.07 10.07 32 18 - NP SM
12 16.5 28 20.07 10.07 28 15 - NP SM
13 18 32 20.07 10.07 26 13 - NP SM
14 19.5 37 20.07 10.07 24 12 - NP SM
15 21 41 20.07 10.07 26.6 14 - NP SM
16 22.5 46 20.07 10.07 21.8 13 - NP SM
17 24 48 20.07 10.07 18.4 9 - NP SM
18 25.5 54 20.07 10.07 16.3 8 - NP SM
19 27 55 20.07 10.07 15.5 9 - NP SM
20 28.5 57 20.07 10.07 12 6 - NP SM
21 30 60 20.07 10.07 18 7 - NP SM
22 31.5 REF 20.07 10.07 16 6 - NP SM
23 33 REF 20.07 10.07 14 7 - NP SM
24 34.5 72 20.07 10.07 15.4 8 - NP SM
25 36 REF 20.07 10.07 12 7 - NP SM
26 37.5 REF 20.07 10.07 10.3 4 - NP SM
27 39 REF 20.07 10.07 8 3 - NP SM
27 40 REF 20.07 10.07 8.4 3 - NP SM

35
BH4
S.No. Depth(m)
N
75µ
1 0 DS 20.07 10.07 55 35 18 17 CL
2 1.5 6 20.07 10.07 60 46 22 24 CI
3 3 8 20.07 10.07 58 44 23 21 CI
4 4.5 10 20.07 10.07 53 41 20 21 CL
5 6 12 20.07 10.07 52 40 20 20 CL
6 7.5 15 20.07 10.07 49 38 18 14 SC
7 9 16 20.07 10.07 47 30 15 15 SC
8 10.5 17 20.07 10.07 39 30 16 14 SC
9 12 19 20.07 10.07 36 29 15 14 SC
10 13.5 15 20.07 10.07 3 30 17 13 SC
11 15 18 20.07 10.07 32 21 - NP SM
12 16.5 22 20.07 10.07 31 22 - NP SM
13 18 27 20.07 10.07 28 19 - NP SM
14 19.5 32 20.07 10.07 26 15 - NP SM
15 21 UDS 20.07 10.07 23 14 - NP SM
16 22.5 38 20.07 10.07 22 13 - NP SM
17 24 39 20.07 10.07 18 11 - NP SM
18 25.5 43 20.07 10.07 14 9 - NP SM
19 27 48 20.07 10.07 13 8 - NP SM
20 28.5 REF 20.07 10.07 15.4 9 - NP SM
21 30 52 20.07 10.07 10.8 6 - NP SM
22 31.5 66 20.07 10.07 8.7 4 - NP SM
23 33 68 20.07 10.07 12.8 7 - NP SM
24 34.5 72 20.07 10.07 15.4 8 - NP SM
25 36 REF 20.07 10.07 12 7 - NP SM
26 37.5 REF 20.07 10.07 10.3 4 - NP SM
27 39 REF 20.07 10.07 8 3 - NP SM
27 40 REF 20.07 10.07 8.4 3 - NP SM

36
Chapter5. OBSERBED TABLES AND GRAPHS
5.1 IS CODE METHOD :- Table 1 ( BH1 at Mw=6.5 WT is at Ground Level)
S.NO. Depth ϒd ϒsub σvo σ'vo σvo/σ'vo rd amax CSR
(m) (kN/m^3) (kN/m^3) (kPa) (kPa)
1 1.5 20.17 10.07 30.26 15.11 2.00 0.99 0.24 0.31
2 3 20.17 10.07 60.51 45.32 1.34 0.98 0.24 0.20
3 4.5 20.17 10.07 90.77 45.32 2.00 0.97 0.24 0.30
4 6 20.17 10.07 121.02 60.42 2.00 0.95 0.24 0.30
5 7.5 20.17 10.07 151.28 75.53 2.00 0.94 0.24 0.29
6 9 20.17 10.07 181.53 90.63 2.00 0.93 0.24 0.29
7 10.5 20.17 10.07 211.79 105.74 2.00 0.89 0.24 0.28
8 12 20.17 10.07 242.04 120.84 2.00 0.85 0.24 0.27
9 13.5 20.17 10.07 272.30 135.95 2.00 0.81 0.24 0.25
10 15 20.17 10.07 302.55 151.05 2.00 0.77 0.24 0.24
11 16.5 20.17 10.07 332.81 166.16 2.00 0.73 0.24 0.23
12 18 20.17 10.07 363.06 181.26 2.00 0.69 0.24 0.22
13 19.5 20.17 10.07 393.32 196.37 2.00 0.65 0.24 0.20
14 21 20.17 10.07 423.57 211.47 2.00 0.61 0.24 0.19
15 22.5 20.17 10.07 453.83 226.58 2.00 0.57 0.24 0.18
16 24 20.17 10.07 484.08 241.68 2.00 0.53 0.24 0.17
17 25.5 20.17 10.07 514.34 256.79 2.00 0.49 0.24 0.15
18 27 20.17 10.07 544.59 271.89 2.00 0.45 0.24 0.14
19 28.5 20.17 10.07 574.85 287 2.00 0.41 0.24 0.13
20 30 20.17 10.07 605.10 302.1 2.00 0.37 0.24 0.12
75µm
passing
(N1)60 (N1)60cs CRR7.5 MSF
Kα
f Pa Kσ CRR FOS
%FC Mw=6.5 (kPa)
58 8 10.1 0.11 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.16 0.53
57 9 11.3 0.12 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.18 0.88
59 10 12.5 0.14 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.20 0.65
53 12 14.9 0.16 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.23 0.77
51 15 18.5 0.20 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.28 0.97
47 18 22.1 0.24 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 0.95 0.33 1.14
45 19 23.3 0.26 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.02 0.39 1.21
41 22 26.9 0.34 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.09 0.53 1.98
46 21 25.7 0.31 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.16 0.51 2.10
42 23 28.1 0.37 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.22 0.66 2.52
25 24 31.049 0.56 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.28 1.04 3.55
29 25 33.291 1.65 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.34 3.19 NL
30 26 34.718 -1.14 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.39 NL NL
24 28 35.191 -0.58 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.44 NL NL
21 30 36.365 -0.16 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.50 NL NL
19 32 37.764 0.01 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.54 0.02 0.12
20 37 43.554 0.21 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.59 0.49 3.18
23 40 48.071 0.28 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.64 0.66 4.68
19 45 51.711 0.32 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.68 0.78 6.05
17 48 53.896 0.34 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.73 0.86 7.35

37
 Table 2 ( BH1 at Mw=7.0 Water Table is at Ground Level)
(m) (kN/m^3) (kN/m^3) (kPa) (kPa)
1 1.5 20.17 10.07 30.26 15.11 2.00 0.99 0.24 0.31
2 3 20.17 10.07 60.51 45.32 1.34 0.98 0.24 0.20
3 4.5 20.17 10.07 90.77 45.32 2.00 0.97 0.24 0.30
4 6 20.17 10.07 121.02 60.42 2.00 0.95 0.24 0.30
5 7.5 20.17 10.07 151.28 75.53 2.00 0.94 0.24 0.29
6 9 20.17 10.07 181.53 90.63 2.00 0.93 0.24 0.29
7 10.5 20.17 10.07 211.79 105.74 2.00 0.89 0.24 0.28
8 12 20.17 10.07 242.04 120.84 2.00 0.85 0.24 0.27
9 13.5 20.17 10.07 272.30 135.95 2.00 0.81 0.24 0.25
10 15 20.17 10.07 302.55 151.05 2.00 0.77 0.24 0.24
11 16.5 20.17 10.07 332.81 166.16 2.00 0.73 0.24 0.23
12 18 20.17 10.07 363.06 181.26 2.00 0.69 0.24 0.22
13 19.5 20.17 10.07 393.32 196.37 2.00 0.65 0.24 0.20
14 21 20.17 10.07 423.57 211.47 2.00 0.61 0.24 0.19
15 22.5 20.17 10.07 453.83 226.58 2.00 0.57 0.24 0.18
16 24 20.17 10.07 484.08 241.68 2.00 0.53 0.24 0.17
17 25.5 20.17 10.07 514.34 256.79 2.00 0.49 0.24 0.15
18 27 20.17 10.07 544.59 271.89 2.00 0.45 0.24 0.14
19 28.5 20.17 10.07 574.85 287 2.00 0.41 0.24 0.13
20 30 20.17 10.07 605.10 302.1 2.00 0.37 0.24 0.12
75µm
passing
(N1)60 (N1)60cs CRR7.5 MSF
Kα
f Pa Kσ CRR FOS
%FC Mw=7.0 (kPa)
58 8 10.1 0.11 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.14 0.51
57 9 11.3 0.12 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.15 0.73
59 10 12.5 0.14 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.16 0.54
53 12 14.9 0.16 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.19 0.64
51 15 18.5 0.20 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.24 0.74
47 18 22.1 0.24 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 0.95 0.27 0.77
45 19 23.3 0.26 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.02 0.32 1.14
41 22 26.9 0.34 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.09 0.44 1.64
46 21 25.7 0.31 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.16 0.42 1.67
42 23 28.1 0.37 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.22 0.54 2.10
25 24 31.049 0.56 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.28 0.86 3.12
29 25 33.291 1.65 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.34 2.64 NL
30 26 34.718 -1.14 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.39 -1.89 NL
24 28 35.191 -0.58 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.44 -1.01 NL
21 30 36.365 -0.16 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.50 -0.28 NL
19 32 37.764 0.01 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.54 0.02 0.10
20 37 43.554 0.21 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.59 0.40 2.63
23 40 48.071 0.28 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.64 0.55 3.87
19 45 51.711 0.32 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.68 0.65 4.00
17 48 53.896 0.34 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.73 0.71 5.08

38
 Table 3 ( BH1 at Mw=7.5 Water Table is at Ground Level)
(m) (kN/m^3) (kN/m^3) (kPa) (kPa)
1 1.5 20.17 10.07 30.26 15.11 2.00 0.99 0.24 0.31
2 3 20.17 10.07 60.51 45.32 1.34 0.98 0.24 0.20
3 4.5 20.17 10.07 90.77 45.32 2.00 0.97 0.24 0.30
4 6 20.17 10.07 121.02 60.42 2.00 0.95 0.24 0.30
5 7.5 20.17 10.07 151.28 75.53 2.00 0.94 0.24 0.29
6 9 20.17 10.07 181.53 90.63 2.00 0.93 0.24 0.29
7 10.5 20.17 10.07 211.79 105.74 2.00 0.89 0.24 0.28
8 12 20.17 10.07 242.04 120.84 2.00 0.85 0.24 0.27
9 13.5 20.17 10.07 272.30 135.95 2.00 0.81 0.24 0.25
10 15 20.17 10.07 302.55 151.05 2.00 0.77 0.24 0.24
11 16.5 20.17 10.07 332.81 166.16 2.00 0.73 0.24 0.23
12 18 20.17 10.07 363.06 181.26 2.00 0.69 0.24 0.22
13 19.5 20.17 10.07 393.32 196.37 2.00 0.65 0.24 0.20
14 21 20.17 10.07 423.57 211.47 2.00 0.61 0.24 0.19
15 22.5 20.17 10.07 453.83 226.58 2.00 0.57 0.24 0.18
16 24 20.17 10.07 484.08 241.68 2.00 0.53 0.24 0.17
17 25.5 20.17 10.07 514.34 256.79 2.00 0.49 0.24 0.15
18 27 20.17 10.07 544.59 271.89 2.00 0.45 0.24 0.14
19 28.5 20.17 10.07 574.85 287 2.00 0.41 0.24 0.13
20 30 20.17 10.07 605.10 302.1 2.00 0.37 0.24 0.12
75µm
passing
(N1)60 (N1)60cs CRR7.5 MSF
Kα
f Pa Kσ CRR FOS
%FC Mw=7.5 (kPa)
58 8 10.1 0.11 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.11 0.37
57 9 11.3 0.12 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.12 0.61
59 10 12.5 0.14 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.14 0.45
53 12 14.9 0.16 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.16 0.53
51 15 18.5 0.20 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.20 0.67
47 18 22.1 0.24 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 0.95 0.23 0.55
45 19 23.3 0.26 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.02 0.27 0.78
41 22 26.9 0.34 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.09 0.37 1.21
46 21 25.7 0.31 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.16 0.35 1.13
42 23 28.1 0.37 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.22 0.46 1.45
25 24 31.049 0.56 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.28 0.72 3.15
29 25 33.291 1.65 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.34 2.21 NL
30 26 34.718 -1.14 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.39 -1.59 NL
24 28 35.191 -0.58 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.44 -0.84 NL
21 30 36.365 -0.16 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.50 -0.24 NL
19 32 37.764 0.01 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.54 0.01 0.09
20 37 43.554 0.21 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.59 0.34 2.20
23 40 48.071 0.28 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.64 0.46 3.24
19 45 51.711 0.32 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.68 0.54 4.19
17 48 53.896 0.34 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.73 0.59 5.10

39
 Table 4 (BH2 at Mw=6.5 Water Table is at Ground Level)
(m) (kN/m^3) (kN/m^3) (kPa) (kPa)
1 1.5 20.17 10.07 30.26 15.11 2.00 0.99 0.24 0.31
2 3 20.17 10.07 60.51 45.32 1.34 0.98 0.24 0.20
3 4.5 20.17 10.07 90.77 45.32 2.00 0.97 0.24 0.30
4 6 20.17 10.07 121.02 60.42 2.00 0.95 0.24 0.30
5 7.5 20.17 10.07 151.28 75.53 2.00 0.94 0.24 0.29
6 9 20.17 10.07 181.53 90.63 2.00 0.93 0.24 0.29
7 10.5 20.17 10.07 211.79 105.74 2.00 0.89 0.24 0.28
8 12 20.17 10.07 242.04 120.84 2.00 0.85 0.24 0.27
9 13.5 20.17 10.07 272.30 135.95 2.00 0.81 0.24 0.25
10 15 20.17 10.07 302.55 151.05 2.00 0.77 0.24 0.24
11 16.5 20.17 10.07 332.81 166.16 2.00 0.73 0.24 0.23
12 18 20.17 10.07 363.06 181.26 2.00 0.69 0.24 0.22
13 19.5 20.17 10.07 393.32 196.37 2.00 0.65 0.24 0.20
14 21 20.17 10.07 423.57 211.47 2.00 0.61 0.24 0.19
15 22.5 20.17 10.07 453.83 226.58 2.00 0.57 0.24 0.18
16 24 20.17 10.07 484.08 241.68 2.00 0.53 0.24 0.17
17 25.5 20.17 10.07 514.34 256.79 2.00 0.49 0.24 0.15
18 27 20.17 10.07 544.59 271.89 2.00 0.45 0.24 0.14
19 28.5 20.17 10.07 574.85 287 2.00 0.41 0.24 0.13
20 30 20.17 10.07 605.10 302.1 2.00 0.37 0.24 0.12
%FC (N1)60 (N1)60cs CRR7.5 MSF Kα f Pa Kσ CRR FOS
Mw=6.5 (kPa)
69 8 10.1 0.11 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.16 0.53
65 10 12.5 0.14 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.20 0.86
64 12 14.9 0.16 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.23 0.68
61 13 16.1 0.17 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.25 0.98
56 14 17.3 0.18 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.27 0.90
51 19 23.3 0.26 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 0.95 0.36 1.23
43 21 25.7 0.31 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.02 0.45 1.11
44 22 26.9 0.34 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.09 0.53 1.88
38 25 30.5 0.51 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.16 0.85 2.15
33 23 28.1 0.37 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.22 0.66 2.72
29 26 34.437 NL 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.28 NL NL
27 28 36.127 NL 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.34 NL NL
22 32 38.907 0.08 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.39 0.16 0.78
23 34 41.469 0.17 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.44 0.35 1.83
21 38 45.055 0.24 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.50 0.51 2.87
18 44 50.154 0.30 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.54 0.68 4.07
20 50 57.587 0.38 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.59 0.87 5.65
22 52 60.771 0.41 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.64 0.96 6.81
20 54 61.905 0.42 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.68 1.01 7.86

40
(m) (kN/m^3) (kN/m^3) (kPa) (kPa)
1 1.5 20.17 10.07 30.26 15.11 2.00 0.99 0.24 0.31
2 3 20.17 10.07 60.51 45.32 1.34 0.98 0.24 0.20
3 4.5 20.17 10.07 90.77 45.32 2.00 0.97 0.24 0.30
4 6 20.17 10.07 121.02 60.42 2.00 0.95 0.24 0.30
5 7.5 20.17 10.07 151.28 75.53 2.00 0.94 0.24 0.29
6 9 20.17 10.07 181.53 90.63 2.00 0.93 0.24 0.29
7 10.5 20.17 10.07 211.79 105.74 2.00 0.89 0.24 0.28
8 12 20.17 10.07 242.04 120.84 2.00 0.85 0.24 0.27
9 13.5 20.17 10.07 272.30 135.95 2.00 0.81 0.24 0.25
10 15 20.17 10.07 302.55 151.05 2.00 0.77 0.24 0.24
11 16.5 20.17 10.07 332.81 166.16 2.00 0.73 0.24 0.23
12 18 20.17 10.07 363.06 181.26 2.00 0.69 0.24 0.22
13 19.5 20.17 10.07 393.32 196.37 2.00 0.65 0.24 0.20
14 21 20.17 10.07 423.57 211.47 2.00 0.61 0.24 0.19
15 22.5 20.17 10.07 453.83 226.58 2.00 0.57 0.24 0.18
16 24 20.17 10.07 484.08 241.68 2.00 0.53 0.24 0.17
17 25.5 20.17 10.07 514.34 256.79 2.00 0.49 0.24 0.15
18 27 20.17 10.07 544.59 271.89 2.00 0.45 0.24 0.14
19 28.5 20.17 10.07 574.85 287 2.00 0.41 0.24 0.13
20 30 20.17 10.07 605.10 302.1 2.00 0.37 0.24 0.12
Mw=7.0 (kPa)
69 8 10.1 0.11 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.14 0.44
65 10 12.5 0.14 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.16 0.80
64 12 14.9 0.16 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.19 0.55
61 13 16.1 0.17 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.20 0.69
56 14 17.3 0.18 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.22 0.75
51 19 23.3 0.26 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 0.95 0.30 1.15
43 21 25.7 0.31 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.02 0.37 0.98
44 22 26.9 0.34 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.09 0.44 1.54
38 25 30.5 0.51 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.16 0.70 2.05
33 23 28.1 0.37 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.22 0.54 2.21
29 26 34.437 NL 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.28 NL NL
27 28 36.127 NL 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.34 NL NL
22 32 38.907 0.08 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.39 0.13 0.65
23 34 41.469 0.17 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.44 0.29 1.52
21 38 45.055 0.24 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.50 0.43 2.38
18 44 50.154 0.30 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.54 0.56 3.37
20 50 57.587 0.38 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.59 0.72 4.67
22 52 60.771 0.41 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.64 0.80 5.63
20 54 61.905 0.42 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.68 0.84 6.50
17 56 62.377 0.42 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.73 0.87 7.46

41
 Table 6(BH2 at Mw=7.5 Water Table is at Ground Level)
(m) (kN/m^3) (kN/m^3) (kPa) (kPa)
1 1.5 20.17 10.07 30.26 15.11 2.00 0.99 0.24 0.31
2 3 20.17 10.07 60.51 45.32 1.34 0.98 0.24 0.20
3 4.5 20.17 10.07 90.77 45.32 2.00 0.97 0.24 0.30
4 6 20.17 10.07 121.02 60.42 2.00 0.95 0.24 0.30
5 7.5 20.17 10.07 151.28 75.53 2.00 0.94 0.24 0.29
6 9 20.17 10.07 181.53 90.63 2.00 0.93 0.24 0.29
7 10.5 20.17 10.07 211.79 105.74 2.00 0.89 0.24 0.28
8 12 20.17 10.07 242.04 120.84 2.00 0.85 0.24 0.27
9 13.5 20.17 10.07 272.30 135.95 2.00 0.81 0.24 0.25
10 15 20.17 10.07 302.55 151.05 2.00 0.77 0.24 0.24
11 16.5 20.17 10.07 332.81 166.16 2.00 0.73 0.24 0.23
12 18 20.17 10.07 363.06 181.26 2.00 0.69 0.24 0.22
13 19.5 20.17 10.07 393.32 196.37 2.00 0.65 0.24 0.20
14 21 20.17 10.07 423.57 211.47 2.00 0.61 0.24 0.19
15 22.5 20.17 10.07 453.83 226.58 2.00 0.57 0.24 0.18
16 24 20.17 10.07 484.08 241.68 2.00 0.53 0.24 0.17
17 25.5 20.17 10.07 514.34 256.79 2.00 0.49 0.24 0.15
18 27 20.17 10.07 544.59 271.89 2.00 0.45 0.24 0.14
19 28.5 20.17 10.07 574.85 287 2.00 0.41 0.24 0.13
20 30 20.17 10.07 605.10 302.1 2.00 0.37 0.24 0.12
Mw=7.5 (kPa)
69 8 10.1 0.11 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.11 0.37
65 10 12.5 0.14 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.14 0.58
64 12 14.9 0.16 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.16 0.95
61 13 16.1 0.17 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.17 0.57
56 14 17.3 0.18 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.18 0.62
51 19 23.3 0.26 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 0.95 0.25 0.85
43 21 25.7 0.31 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.02 0.31 0.74
44 22 26.9 0.34 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.09 0.37 1.37
38 25 30.5 0.51 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.16 0.59 1.41
33 23 28.1 0.37 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.22 0.46 1.54
29 26 34.437 NL 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.28 NL NL
27 28 36.127 NL 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.34 NL NL
22 32 38.907 0.08 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.39 0.11 0.54
23 34 41.469 0.17 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.44 0.24 1.27
21 38 45.055 0.24 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.50 0.36 1.99
18 44 50.154 0.30 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.54 0.47 2.82
20 50 57.587 0.38 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.59 0.60 3.92
22 52 60.771 0.41 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.64 0.67 4.72
20 54 61.905 0.42 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.68 0.70 5.45

42
(m) (kN/m^3) (kN/m^3) (kPa) (kPa)
1 1.5 20.17 10.07 30.26 15.11 2.00 0.99 0.24 0.31
2 3 20.17 10.07 60.51 45.32 1.34 0.98 0.24 0.20
3 4.5 20.17 10.07 90.77 45.32 2.00 0.97 0.24 0.30
4 6 20.17 10.07 121.02 60.42 2.00 0.95 0.24 0.30
5 7.5 20.17 10.07 151.28 75.53 2.00 0.94 0.24 0.29
6 9 20.17 10.07 181.53 90.63 2.00 0.93 0.24 0.29
7 10.5 20.17 10.07 211.79 105.74 2.00 0.89 0.24 0.28
8 12 20.17 10.07 242.04 120.84 2.00 0.85 0.24 0.27
9 13.5 20.17 10.07 272.30 135.95 2.00 0.81 0.24 0.25
10 15 20.17 10.07 302.55 151.05 2.00 0.77 0.24 0.24
11 16.5 20.17 10.07 332.81 166.16 2.00 0.73 0.24 0.23
12 18 20.17 10.07 363.06 181.26 2.00 0.69 0.24 0.22
13 19.5 20.17 10.07 393.32 196.37 2.00 0.65 0.24 0.20
14 21 20.17 10.07 423.57 211.47 2.00 0.61 0.24 0.19
15 22.5 20.17 10.07 453.83 226.58 2.00 0.57 0.24 0.18
16 24 20.17 10.07 484.08 241.68 2.00 0.53 0.24 0.17
17 25.5 20.17 10.07 514.34 256.79 2.00 0.49 0.24 0.15
75µm
passing (N1)60 (N1)60cs CRR7.5 MSF Kα f Pa Kσ CRR FOS
%FC Mw=6.5 (kPa)
70 6 7.7 0.09 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.13 0.44
68 7 8.9 0.10 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.15 0.73
62 8 10.1 0.11 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.16 0.95
61 10 12.5 0.14 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.20 0.66
58 11 13.7 0.15 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.21 0.72
53 15 18.5 0.20 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 0.95 0.27 0.93
45 20 24.5 0.28 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.02 0.42 0.81
39 21 25.7 0.31 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.09 0.48 1.61
37 24 29.3 0.43 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.16 0.71 2.21
32 27 32.9 1.15 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.22 2.02 2.88
28 28 36.43 NL 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.28 NL NL
26 32 40.311 NL 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.34 NL NL
24 37 45.16 0.24 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.39 0.48 2.36
26.6 41 50.658 0.31 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.44 0.65 3.37
21.8 46 54.119 0.35 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.50 0.75 4.17
18.4 48 54.625 0.35 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.54 0.78 4.70
16.3 54 59.857 0.40 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.59 0.92 5.96

43
(m) (kN/m^3) (kN/m^3) (kPa) (kPa)
1 1.5 20.17 10.07 30.26 15.11 2.00 0.99 0.24 0.31
2 3 20.17 10.07 60.51 45.32 1.34 0.98 0.24 0.20
3 4.5 20.17 10.07 90.77 45.32 2.00 0.97 0.24 0.30
4 6 20.17 10.07 121.02 60.42 2.00 0.95 0.24 0.30
5 7.5 20.17 10.07 151.28 75.53 2.00 0.94 0.24 0.29
6 9 20.17 10.07 181.53 90.63 2.00 0.93 0.24 0.29
7 10.5 20.17 10.07 211.79 105.74 2.00 0.89 0.24 0.28
8 12 20.17 10.07 242.04 120.84 2.00 0.85 0.24 0.27
9 13.5 20.17 10.07 272.30 135.95 2.00 0.81 0.24 0.25
10 15 20.17 10.07 302.55 151.05 2.00 0.77 0.24 0.24
11 16.5 20.17 10.07 332.81 166.16 2.00 0.73 0.24 0.23
12 18 20.17 10.07 363.06 181.26 2.00 0.69 0.24 0.22
13 19.5 20.17 10.07 393.32 196.37 2.00 0.65 0.24 0.20
14 21 20.17 10.07 423.57 211.47 2.00 0.61 0.24 0.19
15 22.5 20.17 10.07 453.83 226.58 2.00 0.57 0.24 0.18
16 24 20.17 10.07 484.08 241.68 2.00 0.53 0.24 0.17
17 25.5 20.17 10.07 514.34 256.79 2.00 0.49 0.24 0.15
75µm
%FC Mw=7.0 (kPa)
70 6 7.7 0.09 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.11 0.36
68 7 8.9 0.10 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.12 0.61
62 8 10.1 0.11 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.14 0.88
61 10 12.5 0.14 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.16 0.54
58 11 13.7 0.15 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.18 0.62
53 15 18.5 0.20 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 0.95 0.22 0.77
45 20 24.5 0.28 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.02 0.34 1.23
39 21 25.7 0.31 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.09 0.40 1.50
37 24 29.3 0.43 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.16 0.59 2.31
32 27 32.9 1.15 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.22 1.67 2.52
28 28 36.43 NL 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.28 NL NL
26 32 40.311 NL 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.34 NL NL
24 37 45.16 0.24 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.39 0.40 1.95
26.6 41 50.658 0.31 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.44 0.53 2.79
21.8 46 54.119 0.35 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.50 0.62 3.45
18.4 48 54.625 0.35 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.54 0.65 3.88

44
(m) (kN/m^3) (kN/m^3) (kPa) (kPa)
1 1.5 20.17 10.07 30.26 15.11 2.00 0.99 0.24 0.31
2 3 20.17 10.07 60.51 45.32 1.34 0.98 0.24 0.20
3 4.5 20.17 10.07 90.77 45.32 2.00 0.97 0.24 0.30
4 6 20.17 10.07 121.02 60.42 2.00 0.95 0.24 0.30
5 7.5 20.17 10.07 151.28 75.53 2.00 0.94 0.24 0.29
6 9 20.17 10.07 181.53 90.63 2.00 0.93 0.24 0.29
7 10.5 20.17 10.07 211.79 105.74 2.00 0.89 0.24 0.28
8 12 20.17 10.07 242.04 120.84 2.00 0.85 0.24 0.27
9 13.5 20.17 10.07 272.30 135.95 2.00 0.81 0.24 0.25
10 15 20.17 10.07 302.55 151.05 2.00 0.77 0.24 0.24
11 16.5 20.17 10.07 332.81 166.16 2.00 0.73 0.24 0.23
12 18 20.17 10.07 363.06 181.26 2.00 0.69 0.24 0.22
13 19.5 20.17 10.07 393.32 196.37 2.00 0.65 0.24 0.20
14 21 20.17 10.07 423.57 211.47 2.00 0.61 0.24 0.19
15 22.5 20.17 10.07 453.83 226.58 2.00 0.57 0.24 0.18
16 24 20.17 10.07 484.08 241.68 2.00 0.53 0.24 0.17
17 25.5 20.17 10.07 514.34 256.79 2.00 0.49 0.24 0.15
75µm
%FC Mw=7.5 (kPa)
70 6 7.7 0.09 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.09 0.35
68 7 8.9 0.10 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.10 0.51
62 8 10.1 0.11 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.11 0.75
61 10 12.5 0.14 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.14 0.46
58 11 13.7 0.15 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.15 0.50
53 15 18.5 0.20 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 0.95 0.19 0.64
45 20 24.5 0.28 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.02 0.29 1.03
39 21 25.7 0.31 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.09 0.33 1.25
37 24 29.3 0.43 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.16 0.49 1.54
32 27 32.9 1.15 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.22 1.40 2.21
28 28 36.43 NL 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.28 NL NL
26 32 40.311 NL 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.34 NL NL
24 37 45.16 0.24 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.39 0.33 1.64
26.6 41 50.658 0.31 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.44 0.45 2.34
21.8 46 54.119 0.35 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.50 0.52 2.89
18.4 48 54.625 0.35 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.54 0.54 3.26
16.3 54 59.857 0.40 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.59 0.64 4.13

45
(m) (kN/m^3) (kN/m^3) (kPa) (kPa)
1 1.5 20.17 10.07 30.26 15.11 2.00 0.99 0.24 0.31
2 3 20.17 10.07 60.51 45.32 1.34 0.98 0.24 0.20
3 4.5 20.17 10.07 90.77 45.32 2.00 0.97 0.24 0.30
4 6 20.17 10.07 121.02 60.42 2.00 0.95 0.24 0.30
5 7.5 20.17 10.07 151.28 75.53 2.00 0.94 0.24 0.29
6 9 20.17 10.07 181.53 90.63 2.00 0.93 0.24 0.29
7 10.5 20.17 10.07 211.79 105.74 2.00 0.89 0.24 0.28
8 12 20.17 10.07 242.04 120.84 2.00 0.85 0.24 0.27
9 13.5 20.17 10.07 272.30 135.95 2.00 0.81 0.24 0.25
10 15 20.17 10.07 302.55 151.05 2.00 0.77 0.24 0.24
11 16.5 20.17 10.07 332.81 166.16 2.00 0.73 0.24 0.23
12 18 20.17 10.07 363.06 181.26 2.00 0.69 0.24 0.22
13 19.5 20.17 10.07 393.32 196.37 2.00 0.65 0.24 0.20
14 21 20.17 10.07 423.57 211.47 2.00 0.61 0.24 0.19
15 22.5 20.17 10.07 453.83 226.58 2.00 0.57 0.24 0.18
16 24 20.17 10.07 484.08 241.68 2.00 0.53 0.24 0.17
17 25.5 20.17 10.07 514.34 256.79 2.00 0.49 0.24 0.15
18 27 20.17 10.07 544.59 271.89 2.00 0.45 0.24 0.14
75µm
passing
(N1)60 (N1)60cs CRR7.5 MSF
Kα
f Pa Kσ CRR FOS
%FC Mw=6.5 (kPa)
60 6 7.7 0.09 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.13 0.44
58 8 10.1 0.11 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.16 0.81
53 10 12.5 0.14 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.20 0.98
52 13 16.1 0.17 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.25 0.83
49 15 18.5 0.20 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.28 0.97
47 16 19.7 0.21 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.31 1.05
39 17 20.9 0.23 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.02 0.33 0.88
36 19 23.3 0.26 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.09 0.41 1.23
32 15 18.5 0.20 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.16 0.33 1.30
32 18 22.1 0.24 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.22 0.43 1.77
31 22 30.347 0.49 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.28 0.91 3.98
28 27 35.292 NL 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.34 NL NL
26 32 40.311 0.14 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.39 0.27 1.10
23 33 40.369 0.14 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.44 0.29 1.05
22 38 45.466 0.24 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.50 0.53 2.44
18 39 44.822 0.23 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.54 0.52 3.14
14 43 47.027 0.27 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.59 0.61 3.97
13 48 51.658 0.32 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.64 0.76 5.36
15.4 50 55.13 0.36 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.68 0.86 6.70
10.8 52 54.466 0.35 1.44 1 0.6 101.32 1.73 0.87 7.47

46
(m) (kN/m^3) (kN/m^3) (kPa) (kPa)
1 1.5 20.17 10.07 30.26 15.11 2.00 0.99 0.24 0.31
2 3 20.17 10.07 60.51 45.32 1.34 0.98 0.24 0.20
3 4.5 20.17 10.07 90.77 45.32 2.00 0.97 0.24 0.30
4 6 20.17 10.07 121.02 60.42 2.00 0.95 0.24 0.30
5 7.5 20.17 10.07 151.28 75.53 2.00 0.94 0.24 0.29
6 9 20.17 10.07 181.53 90.63 2.00 0.93 0.24 0.29
7 10.5 20.17 10.07 211.79 105.74 2.00 0.89 0.24 0.28
8 12 20.17 10.07 242.04 120.84 2.00 0.85 0.24 0.27
9 13.5 20.17 10.07 272.30 135.95 2.00 0.81 0.24 0.25
10 15 20.17 10.07 302.55 151.05 2.00 0.77 0.24 0.24
11 16.5 20.17 10.07 332.81 166.16 2.00 0.73 0.24 0.23
12 18 20.17 10.07 363.06 181.26 2.00 0.69 0.24 0.22
13 19.5 20.17 10.07 393.32 196.37 2.00 0.65 0.24 0.20
14 21 20.17 10.07 423.57 211.47 2.00 0.61 0.24 0.19
15 22.5 20.17 10.07 453.83 226.58 2.00 0.57 0.24 0.18
16 24 20.17 10.07 484.08 241.68 2.00 0.53 0.24 0.17
17 25.5 20.17 10.07 514.34 256.79 2.00 0.49 0.24 0.15
18 27 20.17 10.07 544.59 271.89 2.00 0.45 0.24 0.14
19 28.5 20.17 10.07 574.85 287 2.00 0.41 0.24 0.13
20 30 20.17 10.07 605.10 302.1 2.00 0.37 0.24 0.12
75µm
passing
(N1)60 (N1)60cs CRR7.5 MSF
Kα
f Pa Kσ CRR FOS
%FC Mw=7.0 (kPa)
60 6 7.7 0.09 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.11 0.36
58 8 10.1 0.11 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.14 0.67
53 10 12.5 0.14 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.16 0.88
52 13 16.1 0.17 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.20 0.69
49 15 18.5 0.20 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.24 0.80
47 16 19.7 0.21 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.25 0.87
39 17 20.9 0.23 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.02 0.28 0.74
36 19 23.3 0.26 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.09 0.34 1.28
32 15 18.5 0.20 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.16 0.27 1.07
32 18 22.1 0.24 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.22 0.35 1.47
31 22 30.347 0.49 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.28 0.75 3.29
28 27 35.292 NL 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.34 NL NL
26 32 40.311 0.14 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.39 0.22 1.10
23 33 40.369 0.14 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.44 0.24 1.05
22 38 45.466 0.24 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.50 0.44 2.44
18 39 44.822 0.23 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.54 0.43 2.60
14 43 47.027 0.27 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.59 0.51 3.29
13 48 51.658 0.32 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.64 0.63 4.43
15.4 50 55.13 0.36 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.68 0.72 5.54
10.8 52 54.466 0.35 1.19 1 0.6 101.32 1.73 0.72 6.18

47
(m) (kN/m^3) (kN/m^3) (kPa) (kPa)
1 1.5 20.17 10.07 30.26 15.11 2.00 0.99 0.24 0.31
2 3 20.17 10.07 60.51 45.32 1.34 0.98 0.24 0.20
3 4.5 20.17 10.07 90.77 45.32 2.00 0.97 0.24 0.30
4 6 20.17 10.07 121.02 60.42 2.00 0.95 0.24 0.30
5 7.5 20.17 10.07 151.28 75.53 2.00 0.94 0.24 0.29
6 9 20.17 10.07 181.53 90.63 2.00 0.93 0.24 0.29
7 10.5 20.17 10.07 211.79 105.74 2.00 0.89 0.24 0.28
8 12 20.17 10.07 242.04 120.84 2.00 0.85 0.24 0.27
9 13.5 20.17 10.07 272.30 135.95 2.00 0.81 0.24 0.25
10 15 20.17 10.07 302.55 151.05 2.00 0.77 0.24 0.24
11 16.5 20.17 10.07 332.81 166.16 2.00 0.73 0.24 0.23
12 18 20.17 10.07 363.06 181.26 2.00 0.69 0.24 0.22
13 19.5 20.17 10.07 393.32 196.37 2.00 0.65 0.24 0.20
14 21 20.17 10.07 423.57 211.47 2.00 0.61 0.24 0.19
15 22.5 20.17 10.07 453.83 226.58 2.00 0.57 0.24 0.18
16 24 20.17 10.07 484.08 241.68 2.00 0.53 0.24 0.17
17 25.5 20.17 10.07 514.34 256.79 2.00 0.49 0.24 0.15
18 27 20.17 10.07 544.59 271.89 2.00 0.45 0.24 0.14
19 28.5 20.17 10.07 574.85 287 2.00 0.41 0.24 0.13
20 30 20.17 10.07 605.10 302.1 2.00 0.37 0.24 0.12
75µm
passing
(N1)60 (N1)60cs CRR7.5 MSF
Kα
f Pa Kσ CRR FOS
%FC Mw=7.5 (kPa)
60 6 7.7 0.09 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.09 0.30
58 8 10.1 0.11 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.11 0.56
53 10 12.5 0.14 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.14 0.45
52 13 16.1 0.17 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.17 0.57
49 15 18.5 0.20 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.20 0.67
47 16 19.7 0.21 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1 0.21 0.73
39 17 20.9 0.23 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.02 0.23 0.83
36 19 23.3 0.26 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.09 0.29 1.07
32 15 18.5 0.20 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.16 0.23 0.90
32 18 22.1 0.24 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.22 0.30 1.23
31 22 30.347 0.49 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.28 0.63 2.76
28 27 35.292 NL 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.34 NL NL
26 32 40.311 0.14 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.39 0.19 1.10
23 33 40.369 0.14 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.44 0.20 1.05
22 38 45.466 0.24 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.50 0.37 2.44
18 39 44.822 0.23 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.54 0.36 2.18
14 43 47.027 0.27 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.59 0.42 2.76
13 48 51.658 0.32 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.64 0.53 3.72
15.4 50 55.13 0.36 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.68 0.60 4.64
10.8 52 54.466 0.35 1.00 1 0.6 101.32 1.73 0.60 5.18

48
5.2 IDRISS AND BOULANGER METHOD
S.No. Depth ϒd ϒ' σvo σ'vo σvo/σ'vo amax rd MSF
(m) (kN/m^3) (kN/m^3) (kPa) (kPa) Mw=6.5
1 1.5 20.17 10.07 30.26 15.11 2.00 0.24 0.99 1.30
2 3 20.17 10.07 60.51 30.21 2.00 0.24 0.97 1.30
3 4.5 20.17 10.07 90.77 45.32 2.00 0.24 0.94 1.30
4 6 20.17 10.07 121.02 60.42 2.00 0.24 0.91 1.30
5 7.5 20.17 10.07 151.28 75.53 2.00 0.24 0.88 1.30
6 9 20.17 10.07 181.53 90.63 2.00 0.24 0.85 1.30
7 10.5 20.17 10.07 211.79 105.74 2.00 0.24 0.82 1.30
8 12 20.17 10.07 242.04 120.84 2.00 0.24 0.79 1.30
9 13.5 20.17 10.07 272.3 135.95 2.00 0.24 0.75 1.30
10 15 20.17 10.07 302.55 151.05 2.00 0.24 0.72 1.30
11 16.5 20.17 10.07 332.81 166.16 2.00 0.24 0.69 1.30
12 18 20.17 10.07 363.06 181.26 2.00 0.24 0.66 1.30
13 19.5 20.17 10.07 393.32 196.37 2.00 0.24 0.64 1.30
14 21 20.17 10.07 423.57 211.47 2.00 0.24 0.61 1.30
15 22.5 20.17 10.07 453.83 226.58 2.00 0.24 0.59 1.30
16 24 20.17 10.07 484.08 241.68 2.00 0.24 0.57 1.30
17 25.5 20.17 10.07 514.34 256.79 2.00 0.24 0.55 1.30
18 27 20.17 10.07 544.59 271.89 2.00 0.24 0.54 1.30
19 28.5 20.17 10.07 574.85 287.00 2.00 0.24 0.52 1.30
20 30 20.17 10.07 605.1 302.10 2.00 0.24 0.51 1.30
Pa (N1)60 Kσ CSR 75µ Passing Δ(N1)60 (N1)60CS CRR FOS
(kPa) %FC
100.00 8 1.16 0.20 58 5.61 13.61 0.14 0.65
100.00 9 1.11 0.21 57 5.61 14.61 0.15 1.11
100.00 10 1.07 0.21 59 5.60 15.60 0.16 0.77
100.00 12 1.05 0.21 53 5.61 17.61 0.18 0.94
100.00 15 1.03 0.21 51 5.61 20.61 0.21 1.12
100.00 18 1.01 0.20 47 5.61 23.61 0.26 1.39
100.00 19 0.99 0.20 45 5.61 24.61 0.28 1.41
100.00 22 0.97 0.19 41 5.59 27.59 0.37 2.31
100.00 21 0.96 0.19 46 5.61 26.61 0.33 2.38
100.00 23 0.94 0.19 42 5.59 28.59 0.41 2.84
100.00 24 0.92 0.18 25 5.08 29.08 0.43 3.18
100.00 25 0.90 0.18 29 5.32 30.32 0.51 3.24
100.00 26 0.89 0.17 30 5.37 31.37 0.59 3.38
100.00 28 0.86 0.17 24 4.99 32.99 0.76 4.43
100.00 30 0.83 0.17 21 4.65 34.65 1.03 5.06
100.00 32 0.80 0.17 19 4.32 36.32 1.48 6.69
100.00 37 0.72 0.18 20 4.49 41.49 NL NL
100.00 40 0.64 0.20 23 4.89 44.89 NL NL
100.00 45 0.41 0.31 19 4.32 49.32 NL NL
100.00 48 0.10 1.23 17 3.87 51.87 NL NL

49
1 1.5 20.17 10.07 30.26 15.11 2.00 0.24 0.99 1.14
2 3 20.17 10.07 60.51 30.21 2.00 0.24 0.97 1.14
3 4.5 20.17 10.07 90.77 45.32 2.00 0.24 0.95 1.14
4 6 20.17 10.07 121.02 60.42 2.00 0.24 0.93 1.14
5 7.5 20.17 10.07 151.28 75.53 2.00 0.24 0.91 1.14
6 9 20.17 10.07 181.53 90.63 2.00 0.24 0.88 1.14
7 10.5 20.17 10.07 211.79 105.74 2.00 0.24 0.85 1.14
8 12 20.17 10.07 242.04 120.84 2.00 0.24 0.83 1.14
9 13.5 20.17 10.07 272.3 135.95 2.00 0.24 0.80 1.14
10 15 20.17 10.07 302.55 151.05 2.00 0.24 0.77 1.14
11 16.5 20.17 10.07 332.81 166.16 2.00 0.24 0.74 1.14
12 18 20.17 10.07 363.06 181.26 2.00 0.24 0.72 1.14
13 19.5 20.17 10.07 393.32 196.37 2.00 0.24 0.69 1.14
14 21 20.17 10.07 423.57 211.47 2.00 0.24 0.67 1.14
15 22.5 20.17 10.07 453.83 226.58 2.00 0.24 0.65 1.14
16 24 20.17 10.07 484.08 241.68 2.00 0.24 0.63 1.14
17 25.5 20.17 10.07 514.34 256.79 2.00 0.24 0.61 1.14
18 27 20.17 10.07 544.59 271.89 2.00 0.24 0.60 1.14
19 28.5 20.17 10.07 574.85 287.00 2.00 0.24 0.58 1.14
20 30 20.17 10.07 605.1 302.10 2.00 0.24 0.51 1.14
(kPa) %FC
100.00 8 1.16 0.23 58 5.61 13.61 0.14 0.55
100.00 9 1.11 0.24 57 5.61 14.61 0.15 0.81
100.00 10 1.07 0.24 59 5.60 15.60 0.16 0.66
100.00 12 1.05 0.24 53 5.61 17.61 0.18 0.71
100.00 15 1.03 0.24 51 5.61 20.61 0.21 0.89
100.00 18 1.01 0.24 47 5.61 23.61 0.26 0.85
100.00 19 0.99 0.24 45 5.61 24.61 0.28 1.19
100.00 22 0.97 0.23 41 5.59 27.59 0.37 1.75
100.00 21 0.96 0.23 46 5.61 26.61 0.33 1.88
100.00 23 0.94 0.23 42 5.59 28.59 0.41 2.31
100.00 24 0.92 0.22 25 5.08 29.08 0.43 1.95
100.00 25 0.90 0.22 29 5.32 30.32 0.51 2.32
100.00 26 0.89 0.21 30 5.37 31.37 0.59 2.72
100.00 28 0.86 0.21 24 4.99 32.99 0.76 3.55
100.00 30 0.83 0.21 21 4.65 34.65 1.03 4.83
100.00 32 0.80 0.22 19 4.32 36.32 1.48 5.88
100.00 37 0.72 0.23 20 4.49 41.49 NL NL
100.00 40 0.64 0.26 23 4.89 44.89 NL NL
100.00 45 0.41 0.39 19 4.32 49.32 NL NL
100.00 48 0.10 1.41 17 3.87 51.87 NL NL

50
1 1.5 20.17 10.07 30.26 15.11 2.00 0.24 1.00 1.00
2 3 20.17 10.07 60.51 30.21 2.00 0.24 0.98 1.00
3 4.5 20.17 10.07 90.77 45.32 2.00 0.24 0.97 1.00
4 6 20.17 10.07 121.02 60.42 2.00 0.24 0.95 1.00
5 7.5 20.17 10.07 151.28 75.53 2.00 0.24 0.93 1.00
6 9 20.17 10.07 181.53 90.63 2.00 0.24 0.91 1.00
7 10.5 20.17 10.07 211.79 105.74 2.00 0.24 0.89 1.00
8 12 20.17 10.07 242.04 120.84 2.00 0.24 0.87 1.00
9 13.5 20.17 10.07 272.3 135.95 2.00 0.24 0.84 1.00
10 15 20.17 10.07 302.55 151.05 2.00 0.24 0.82 1.00
11 16.5 20.17 10.07 332.81 166.16 2.00 0.24 0.80 1.00
12 18 20.17 10.07 363.06 181.26 2.00 0.24 0.78 1.00
13 19.5 20.17 10.07 393.32 196.37 2.00 0.24 0.76 1.00
14 21 20.17 10.07 423.57 211.47 2.00 0.24 0.74 1.00
15 22.5 20.17 10.07 453.83 226.58 2.00 0.24 0.72 1.00
16 24 20.17 10.07 484.08 241.68 2.00 0.24 0.70 1.00
17 25.5 20.17 10.07 514.34 256.79 2.00 0.24 0.68 1.00
18 27 20.17 10.07 544.59 271.89 2.00 0.24 0.67 1.00
19 28.5 20.17 10.07 574.85 287.00 2.00 0.24 0.65 1.00
20 30 20.17 10.07 605.1 302.10 2.00 0.24 0.64 1.00
(kPa) %FC
100.00 8 1.16 0.27 58 5.61 13.61 0.14 0.41
100.00 9 1.11 0.28 57 5.61 14.61 0.15 0.59
100.00 10 1.07 0.28 59 5.60 15.60 0.16 0.51
100.00 12 1.05 0.28 53 5.61 17.61 0.18 0.59
100.00 15 1.03 0.28 51 5.61 20.61 0.21 0.71
100.00 18 1.01 0.28 47 5.61 23.61 0.26 0.61
100.00 19 0.99 0.28 45 5.61 24.61 0.28 0.85
100.00 22 0.97 0.28 41 5.59 27.59 0.37 1.31
100.00 21 0.96 0.28 46 5.61 26.61 0.33 1.22
100.00 23 0.94 0.27 42 5.59 28.59 0.41 1.49
100.00 24 0.92 0.27 25 5.08 29.08 0.43 1.59
100.00 25 0.90 0.27 29 5.32 30.32 0.51 1.88
100.00 26 0.89 0.27 30 5.37 31.37 0.59 2.19
100.00 28 0.86 0.27 24 4.99 32.99 0.76 2.84
100.00 30 0.83 0.27 21 4.65 34.65 1.03 3.84
100.00 32 0.80 0.27 19 4.32 36.32 1.48 5.45
100.00 37 0.72 0.30 20 4.49 41.49 NL NL
100.00 40 0.64 0.33 23 4.89 44.89 NL NL
100.00 45 0.41 0.50 19 4.32 49.32 NL NL
100.00 48 0.10 2.01 17 3.87 51.87 NL NL

51
1 1.5 20.17 10.07 30.26 15.11 2.00 0.24 0.99 1.30
2 3 20.17 10.07 60.51 30.21 2.00 0.24 0.97 1.30
3 4.5 20.17 10.07 90.77 45.32 2.00 0.24 0.94 1.30
4 6 20.17 10.07 121.02 60.42 2.00 0.24 0.91 1.30
5 7.5 20.17 10.07 151.28 75.53 2.00 0.24 0.88 1.30
6 9 20.17 10.07 181.53 90.63 2.00 0.24 0.85 1.30
7 10.5 20.17 10.07 211.79 105.74 2.00 0.24 0.82 1.30
8 12 20.17 10.07 242.04 120.84 2.00 0.24 0.79 1.30
9 13.5 20.17 10.07 272.3 135.95 2.00 0.24 0.75 1.30
10 15 20.17 10.07 302.55 151.05 2.00 0.24 0.72 1.30
11 16.5 20.17 10.07 332.81 166.16 2.00 0.24 0.69 1.30
12 18 20.17 10.07 363.06 181.26 2.00 0.24 0.66 1.30
13 19.5 20.17 10.07 393.32 196.37 2.00 0.24 0.64 1.30
14 21 20.17 10.07 423.57 211.47 2.00 0.24 0.61 1.30
15 22.5 20.17 10.07 453.83 226.58 2.00 0.24 0.59 1.30
16 24 20.17 10.07 484.08 241.68 2.00 0.24 0.57 1.30
17 25.5 20.17 10.07 514.34 256.79 2.00 0.24 0.55 1.30
18 27 20.17 10.07 544.59 271.89 2.00 0.24 0.54 1.30
19 28.5 20.17 10.07 574.85 287.00 2.00 0.24 0.52 1.30
20 30 20.17 10.07 605.1 302.10 2.00 0.24 0.51 1.30
(kPa) %FC
100.00 8 1.16 0.20 69 5.58 13.58 0.14 0.71
100.00 10 1.11 0.21 65 5.59 15.59 0.16 0.98
100.00 12 1.08 0.21 64 5.59 17.59 0.18 0.86
100.00 13 1.05 0.21 61 5.60 18.60 0.19 1.18
100.00 14 1.03 0.21 56 5.61 19.61 0.20 1.21
100.00 19 1.01 0.20 51 5.61 24.61 0.28 1.68
100.00 21 0.99 0.20 43 5.60 26.60 0.33 1.48
100.00 22 0.97 0.19 44 5.60 27.60 0.37 2.32
100.00 25 0.95 0.19 38 5.56 30.56 0.52 2.58
100.00 23 0.94 0.19 33 5.46 28.46 0.40 3.42
100.00 26 0.91 0.18 29 5.32 31.32 0.58 3.61
100.00 28 0.89 0.18 27 5.22 33.22 0.79 4.39
100.00 32 0.85 0.18 22 4.78 36.78 1.66 9.18
100.00 34 0.81 0.18 23 4.89 38.89 2.93 NL
100.00 38 0.74 0.19 21 4.65 42.65 NL NL
100.00 44 0.55 0.25 18 4.11 48.11 NL NL
100.00 50 -0.09 -1.45 20 4.49 54.49 NL NL
100.00 52 -0.97 -0.13 22 4.78 56.78 NL NL
100.00 54 -5.75 -0.02 20 4.49 58.49 NL NL
100.00 56 6.89 0.02 17 3.87 59.87 NL NL

52
1 1.5 20.17 10.07 30.26 15.11 2.00 0.24 0.99 1.14
2 3 20.17 10.07 60.51 30.21 2.00 0.24 0.97 1.14
3 4.5 20.17 10.07 90.77 45.32 2.00 0.24 0.95 1.14
4 6 20.17 10.07 121.02 60.42 2.00 0.24 0.93 1.14
5 7.5 20.17 10.07 151.28 75.53 2.00 0.24 0.91 1.14
6 9 20.17 10.07 181.53 90.63 2.00 0.24 0.88 1.14
7 10.5 20.17 10.07 211.79 105.74 2.00 0.24 0.85 1.14
8 12 20.17 10.07 242.04 120.84 2.00 0.24 0.83 1.14
9 13.5 20.17 10.07 272.3 135.95 2.00 0.24 0.80 1.14
10 15 20.17 10.07 302.55 151.05 2.00 0.24 0.77 1.14
11 16.5 20.17 10.07 332.81 166.16 2.00 0.24 0.74 1.14
12 18 20.17 10.07 363.06 181.26 2.00 0.24 0.72 1.14
13 19.5 20.17 10.07 393.32 196.37 2.00 0.24 0.69 1.14
14 21 20.17 10.07 423.57 211.47 2.00 0.24 0.67 1.14
15 22.5 20.17 10.07 453.83 226.58 2.00 0.24 0.65 1.14
16 24 20.17 10.07 484.08 241.68 2.00 0.24 0.63 1.14
17 25.5 20.17 10.07 514.34 256.79 2.00 0.24 0.61 1.14
18 27 20.17 10.07 544.59 271.89 2.00 0.24 0.60 1.14
19 28.5 20.17 10.07 574.85 287.00 2.00 0.24 0.58 1.14
20 30 20.17 10.07 605.1 302.10 2.00 0.24 0.57 1.14
(kPa) %FC
100.00 8 1.16 0.23 69 5.58 13.58 0.14 0.58
100.00 10 1.11 0.24 65 5.59 15.59 0.16 0.81
100.00 12 1.08 0.24 64 5.59 17.59 0.18 0.74
100.00 13 1.05 0.24 61 5.60 18.60 0.19 0.88
100.00 14 1.03 0.24 56 5.61 19.61 0.20 0.83
100.00 19 1.01 0.24 51 5.61 24.61 0.28 1.31
100.00 21 0.99 0.24 43 5.60 26.60 0.33 1.13
100.00 22 0.97 0.23 44 5.60 27.60 0.37 1.72
100.00 25 0.95 0.23 38 5.56 30.56 0.52 2.27
100.00 23 0.94 0.23 33 5.46 28.46 0.40 2.44
100.00 26 0.91 0.22 29 5.32 31.32 0.58 2.61
100.00 28 0.89 0.22 27 5.22 33.22 0.79 3.56
100.00 32 0.85 0.22 22 4.78 36.78 1.66 7.39
100.00 34 0.81 0.23 23 4.89 38.89 2.93 NL
100.00 38 0.74 0.24 21 4.65 42.65 NL NL
100.00 44 0.55 0.31 18 4.11 48.11 NL NL
100.00 50 -0.09 -1.83 20 4.49 54.49 NL NL
100.00 52 -0.97 -0.17 22 4.78 56.78 NL NL
100.00 54 -5.75 -0.03 20 4.49 58.49 NL NL
100.00 56 6.89 0.02 17 3.87 59.87 NL NL

53
1 1.5 20.17 10.07 30.26 15.11 2.00 0.24 1.00 1.00
2 3 20.17 10.07 60.51 30.21 2.00 0.24 0.98 1.00
3 4.5 20.17 10.07 90.77 45.32 2.00 0.24 0.97 1.00
4 6 20.17 10.07 121.02 60.42 2.00 0.24 0.95 1.00
5 7.5 20.17 10.07 151.28 75.53 2.00 0.24 0.93 1.00
6 9 20.17 10.07 181.53 90.63 2.00 0.24 0.91 1.00
7 10.5 20.17 10.07 211.79 105.74 2.00 0.24 0.89 1.00
8 12 20.17 10.07 242.04 120.84 2.00 0.24 0.87 1.00
9 13.5 20.17 10.07 272.3 135.95 2.00 0.24 0.84 1.00
10 15 20.17 10.07 302.55 151.05 2.00 0.24 0.82 1.00
11 16.5 20.17 10.07 332.81 166.16 2.00 0.24 0.80 1.00
12 18 20.17 10.07 363.06 181.26 2.00 0.24 0.78 1.00
13 19.5 20.17 10.07 393.32 196.37 2.00 0.24 0.76 1.00
14 21 20.17 10.07 423.57 211.47 2.00 0.24 0.74 1.00
15 22.5 20.17 10.07 453.83 226.58 2.00 0.24 0.72 1.00
16 24 20.17 10.07 484.08 241.68 2.00 0.24 0.70 1.00
17 25.5 20.17 10.07 514.34 256.79 2.00 0.24 0.68 1.00
18 27 20.17 10.07 544.59 271.89 2.00 0.24 0.67 1.00
19 28.5 20.17 10.07 574.85 287.00 2.00 0.24 0.65 1.00
20 30 20.17 10.07 605.1 302.10 2.00 0.24 0.64 1.00
(kPa) %FC
100.00 8 1.16 0.27 69 5.58 13.58 0.14 0.48
100.00 10 1.11 0.28 65 5.59 15.59 0.16 0.61
100.00 12 1.08 0.28 64 5.59 17.59 0.18 1.05
100.00 13 1.05 0.28 61 5.60 18.60 0.19 0.61
100.00 14 1.03 0.28 56 5.61 19.61 0.20 0.68
100.00 19 1.01 0.28 51 5.61 24.61 0.28 0.94
100.00 21 0.99 0.28 43 5.60 26.60 0.33 0.79
100.00 22 0.97 0.28 44 5.60 27.60 0.37 1.32
100.00 25 0.95 0.28 38 5.56 30.56 0.52 1.52
100.00 23 0.94 0.27 33 5.46 28.46 0.40 1.64
100.00 26 0.91 0.27 29 5.32 31.32 0.58 2.13
100.00 28 0.89 0.27 27 5.22 33.22 0.79 2.89
100.00 32 0.85 0.28 22 4.78 36.78 1.66 5.95
100.00 34 0.81 0.28 23 4.89 38.89 2.93 NL
100.00 38 0.74 0.30 21 4.65 42.65 NL NL
100.00 44 0.55 0.39 18 4.11 48.11 NL NL
100.00 50 -0.09 -2.32 20 4.49 54.49 NL NL
100.00 52 -0.97 -0.21 22 4.78 56.78 NL NL
100.00 54 -5.75 -0.04 20 4.49 58.49 NL NL
100.00 56 6.89 0.03 17 3.87 59.87 NL NL

Project Report on Soil Liquefaction

Project Report on Soil Liquefaction

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Project Report on Soil Liquefaction

Similar to Project Report on Soil Liquefaction (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Project Report on Soil Liquefaction