Influence of site-specific soil amplification on seismic response of piles in liquefiable soils

  • Kaustav ChatterjeeEmail author
Technical Note


Kolkata city in eastern India is spread along the banks of Hooghly River in a north–south direction and having typical alluvial soil which is generally soft and thick in nature. The city is situated in seismic zones III and IV and is an implication of moderate to high seismic risk. Hence in the present study, the influence of ground response analysis and subsequent soil amplification in the design of pile foundations in liquefiable soils is thoroughly discussed. One-dimensional equivalent linear ground response analysis of Kolkata city is conducted using SHAKE2000 computer program and 1989 Loma Gilroy, 1995 Kobe, 2001 Bhuj and 2011 Sikkim motions being the chosen input ground motions. The spectral acceleration at a damping ratio of 5% is seen to be 0.41 g, while the amplification factor of maximum horizontal acceleration is found to be 2.98 when 2001 Bhuj motion is the selected earthquake motion. The high magnitudes of soil amplification are attributed to the alluvial soil in maximum parts of the city. The analysis is further extended to earthquake resistant analysis of pile foundation embedded in liquefying and non-liquefying soil strata and exposed to combined loadings. The maximum bending moment is noticed at the boundary of the liquefying and non-liquefying soil layers with the depth of liquefying soil layer being almost 65% of total pile length. The importance of deflection and bending moment of the pile foundation as important parameters in seismic analysis of deep foundations is portrayed in the current study. The present results and design charts can be used by engineers for designing pile foundations against earthquake forces.


Pile Liquefaction Ground response analysis Earthquake Bending moment Amplification 


  1. 1.
    Chatterjee K (2018) Impact of ground response analysis on seismic behavior and design of piles in Kolkata city. Indian Geotech J 48(3):459–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chatterjee K, Choudhury D (2013) Variations in shear wave velocity and soil site class in Kolkata city using regression and sensitivity analysis. Nat Hazards 69(3):2057–2082CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chatterjee K, Choudhury D (2016) Influences of local soil conditions for ground response in Kolkata city during earthquakes. Proc Natl Acad Sci India Sect A Phys Sci 88(4):515–528Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chatterjee K, Choudhury D (2018) Influence of seismic motions on behaviour of piles in liquefied soils. Int J Numer Anal Meth Geomech 42(3):516–541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chatterjee K, Choudhury D, Poulos HG (2015) Seismic analysis of laterally loaded pile under influence of vertical loading using finite element method. Comput Geotech 67:172–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Choudhury D, Savoikar P (2009) Equivalent-linear seismic analyses of MSW landfills using DEEPSOIL. Eng Geol 107(3–4):98–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Choudhury D, Phanikanth VS, Reddy GR (2009) Recent advances in analysis and design of pile foundations in liquefiable soils during earthquake: a review. Proc Natl Acad Sci India Sect A Phys Sci 79(II):141–152Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Choudhury D, Phanikanth VS, Mhaske SY, Phule RR, Chatterjee K (2015) Seismic liquefaction hazard and site response for design of piles in Mumbai city. Indian Geotech J 45(1):62–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dash SR, Bhattacharya S, Blakeborough A (2010) Bending–buckling interaction as a failure mechanism of piles in liquefiable soils. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 30(1–2):32–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Desai SS, Choudhury D (2015) Site-specific seismic ground response study for nuclear power plants and ports in Mumbai. Nat Hazards Rev 16(4):04015002-1_13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    IS 1893: Part 1 (2002) Criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures—part 1: general provisions and buildings. Bureau of Indian Standards, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    IS 2911: Part 1 Section 1 (2010) Design and construction of pile foundations—code of practice: driven cast in situ concrete piles. Bureau of Indian Standards, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Katzenbach R, Leppla S, Choudhury D (2016) Foundation systems for high-rise structures. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 1–298. ISBN 978-1-4987-4477-5Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kramer SL (2005) Geotechnical earthquake engineering. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Liyanapathirana DS, Poulos HG (2005) Seismic lateral response of piles in liquefying soil. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 131(12):1466–1479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    MATLAB (2012) Programming, Version 7. The Math Works Inc, MA, USAGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mhaske SY, Choudhury D (2010) GIS-based soil liquefaction susceptibility map of Mumbai city for earthquake events. J Appl Geophys 70(3):216–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Naik NP, Choudhury D (2014) Comparative study of seismic ground responses using DEEPSOIL, SHAKE and D-MOD for soils of Goa, India. In: Geo-congress 2014: Geotechnical Special Publication No. 234, ASCE, Reston, VA, USA, pp 1101–1110Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nimbalkar SS, Choudhury D (2008) Effects of body waves and soil amplification on seismic earth pressures. J Earthq Tsunami 2(1):33–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nimbalkar SS, Choudhury D (2010) Effect of amplification on seismic stability of tailings dam. In: GeoShanghai 2010: soil dynamics and earthquake engineering, Geotechnical Special Publication No. 201, ASCE, Reston, VA, USA, pp 340–346Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ordonez GA (2012) SHAKE2000: a computer program for the 1D analysis of geotechnical earthquake engineering problems. User’s Manual, GeoMotions LLC, Lacey, Washington, USAGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Phanikanth VS, Choudhury D, Reddy GR (2011) Equivalent-linear seismic ground response analysis of some typical sites in Mumbai. Geotech Geol Eng Int J 29(6):1109–1126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Phanikanth VS, Choudhury D, Reddy GR (2013) Behaviour of single pile in liquefied deposits during earthquakes. Int J Geomech ASCE 13(4):454–462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rawat P, Chatterjee K (2018) Seismic stability analysis of soil slopes using soil nails. In: Geotechnical earthquake engineering and soil dynamics V: Slope Stability and Landslides, Laboratory Testing, and In Situ Testing, Geotechnical Special Publication No. 293, ASCE, Reston, VA, USA, pp 79–87Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Savoikar P, Choudhury D (2010) Effect of cohesion and fill amplification on seismic stability of MSW landfills using limit equilibrium method. Waste Manag Res 28(12):1096–1113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Shukla J, Choudhury D (2012) Seismic hazard and site-specific ground motion for typical ports of Gujarat. Nat Hazards 60(2):541–565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Shylamoni P, Choudhury D, Ghosh S, Ghosh AK, Basu PC (2014) Seismic ground response analysis of KK-NPP site in the event of NCO earthquake using DEEPSOIL. In: Geo-congress 2014: Geotechnical Special Publication No. 234, ASCE, Reston, VA, USA, pp 840–849Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringIndian Institute of Technology RoorkeeRoorkeeIndia

Personalised recommendations