Advertisement

Liquefaction Countermeasures for Soil Supporting Existing Structures: A Review

  • Adyasha Swayamsiddha AmantaEmail author
  • Satyanarayana Murty Dasaka
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering book series (LNCE, volume 29)

Abstract

Liquefaction of ground is a very common problem in geotechnical field. And for this problem, there are enough countermeasures to improve our grounds against liquefaction. However, most of these measures deal with the improvement of open ground against liquefaction. But there are many important structures standing which were designed without considering liquefaction. Majority of the liquefaction cases reported are due to earthquake, but few other sources of dynamic load are traffic load, vibrations from blasting, etc., which may lead to the generation of excess pore pressures. With the growing population and advancement of technology, the loads on the existing railway and road embankments are also increasing in the form of high-speed trains and heavily loaded traffic. This may lead to the generation of higher vibrations, which these embankments are not designed for. It is very difficult to use the existing countermeasures to improve the soil supporting these structures. This study mainly provides a review on the methods available to countermeasure liquefaction for soils supporting existing structures.

Keywords

Liquefaction Countermeasures Existing structures 

References

  1. Adalier K, Pamuk A, Zimmie TF (2004) Earthquake retrofit of highway/railway embankments by sheet-pile walls. Geotech Geol Eng 22(1):73–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. He J, Chu J, Wu S, Peng J (2016) Mitigation of soil liquefaction using microbially induced desaturation. J Zhejiang Univ Sci A 17(7):577–588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ishihara K, Koga Y (1981) Case studies of liquefaction in the 1964 Niigata earthquake. Soils Found 21(3):35–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ishihara M, Okamura M, Oshita T (2003) Desaturating sand deposit by air injection for reducing liquefaction potential. In: Pacific conference on earthquake engineeringGoogle Scholar
  5. Koseki J, Wakamatsu K, Sawada S, Matsushita K (2015) Liquefaction-induced damage to houses and its countermeasures at Minami-Kurihashi in Kuki City during the 2011 Tohoku Earthquake, Japan. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 79:391–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Kramer SL (1996) Geotechnical earthquake engineering. Prentice HallGoogle Scholar
  7. Marasini NP, Okamura M (2015) Air injection to mitigate liquefaction under light structures. Int J Phys Model Geotech 15(3):129–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Masakatsu M, Masaho Y, Masaru K (1992) Small scale tests on countermeasures against liquefaction for pipelines using gravel drain system. In: Proceedings of 4th US–Japan workshop on earthquake resistant design of lifeline facilities and countermeasures against soil liquefaction, Buffalo, NYGoogle Scholar
  9. Mitrani H, Madabhushi SPG (2005) Centrifuge tests investigating inclined grout micro-piles as a method of liquefaction remediation for existing buildings. In: Proceedings of the sessions of the geo-frontiers 2005 congress, ASCEGoogle Scholar
  10. Mizutani T, Towhata I (2001) Model tests on mitigation of liquefaction-induced subsidence of dike by using embedded sheet-pile walls. In: Proceedings of 4th international conference of recent advances in geotechnical earthquake engineering and soil dynamics, San Diego, USAGoogle Scholar
  11. Motohashi Y, Yasuhara K, Komine H, Murakami S (2011) Mitigation of existing structure settlement by sheet pile walls when liquefaction. Geo-Frontiers 2011, ASCE, pp 1815–20Google Scholar
  12. Nagao K, Azegami Y, Yamada S, Suemasa N, Katada T (2007) A mirco-bubble injection method for a countermeasure against liquefaction. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on earthquake geotechnical engineering, Thessaloniki, pp 25–28Google Scholar
  13. Ohsaki Y (1970) Effects of sand compaction on liquefaction during the Tokachioki Earthquake. Soils Found 10(2):112–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Okamura M, Teraoka T (2006) Shaking table tests to investigate soil desaturation as a liquefaction countermeasure, Geotechnical Special Publication 145, ASCE, pp 282–293Google Scholar
  15. Okamura M, Ishihara M, Oshita T (2003) Liquefaction resistance of sand deposit improved with sand compaction piles. Soils Found 43(5):175–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Okamura M, Masaya T, Katsuji N, Nao F, Motoharu J, Takehiko I, Hideaki Y, Emiko N (2011) In-situ desaturation test by air injection and its evaluation through field monitoring and multiphase flow simulation. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 137(7):643–652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Orense RP, Morimoto I, Yamamoto Y, Yumiyama T, Sugawara K (2003) Study on wall-type gravel drains as liquefaction countermeasure for underground structures. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 23(1):19–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rasouli R, Towhata I, Hayashida T (2015) Mitigation of seismic settlement of light surface structures by installation of sheet-pile walls around the foundation. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 72:108–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Rasouli R, Towhata I, Rattez H (2016) Shaking table model tests on mitigation of liquefaction-induced distortion of shallow foundation. In: Proceedings of geotechnical hazards from large earthquakes and heavy rainfalls, pp 463–477Google Scholar
  20. Sáez E, Ledezma C (2015) Liquefaction mitigation using secant piles wall under a large water tank. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 79:415–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sasaki Y, Taniguchi E (1982) Shaking table tests on gravel drains to prevent liquefaction of sand deposits. Soils Found 22(3):1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Tokimatsu K, Yoshimi Y (1980) Effects of vertical drains on the bearing capacity of saturated sand during earthquakes. In: Proceedings of the international conference on engineering for protection from natural disasters, BangkokGoogle Scholar
  23. Towhata I, Otsubo M, Uchimura T, Shimura M, Liu B, Hayashida T, Taeseri D, Cauvin B (2015) Shaking model tests on liquefaction mitigation of embedded lifeline. In: Perspectives on earthquake geotechnical engineering. Springer, pp 311–41Google Scholar
  24. Watanabe T (1966) Damage to oil refinery plants and a building on compacted ground by the Niigata earthquake and their restoration. Soils Found 6(2):86–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Yasuda S (2007) Methods for remediation of existing structures against liquefaction. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on earthquake geotechnical engineering, Keynote LectureGoogle Scholar
  26. Yasuda S, Harada K (2014) Measures developed in Japan after the 1964 Niigata earthquake to counter the liquefaction of soil. In: 10th U.S. national conference on earthquake engineeringGoogle Scholar
  27. Yasuhara H, Okamura M, Kochi Y (2008) Experiments and predictions of soil desaturation by air-injection technique and the implications mediated by multiphase flow simulation. Soils Found 48(6):791–804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Yegian MK, Eseller-Bayat E, Alshawabkeh A, Ali S (2007) Induced-partial saturation for liquefaction mitigation: experimental investigation. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 133(4):372–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Zeybek A, Madabhushi SPG (2017) Influence of air injection on the liquefaction-induced deformation mechanisms beneath shallow foundation. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 97(2):266–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Zheng J, Suzuki K, Ohbo N, Prevost JH (1996) Evaluation of sheet pile-ring countermeasure against liquefaction for oil tank site. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 15(6):369–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adyasha Swayamsiddha Amanta
    • 1
    Email author
  • Satyanarayana Murty Dasaka
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringIndian Institute of Technology BombayPowai, MumbaiIndia

Personalised recommendations