Assessment of Liquefaction-Induced Land Damage for Residential Christchurch

Ballegooy, Sjoerd van; Malan, P.; Lacrosse, V.; Jacka, Mike; Cubrinovski, Misko; Bray, Jonathan D.; O’Rourke, Thomas D.; Crawford, Shane; Cowan, Henry J.

doi:10.1193/031813eqs070m

Cited by 197 publications

(97 citation statements)

References 20 publications

(44 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As the rebuilding of Christchurch progresses, the number of CPT soundings performed in the region and available through the Canterbury Geotechnical Database ( [11]) continues to increase with presently in excess of 16,000 soundings (e.g., [55]). Drawing from a high-quality subset of this data performed under the direct auspices of the EQC, this study utilizes 3500 CPT soundings performed at sites where the severity of liquefaction manifestation was well-documented following both the Darfield and Christchurch earthquakes, resulting in 7000 case studies.…”

Section: Cpt Soundingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fines-content effects on liquefaction hazard evaluation for infrastructure in Christchurch, New Zealand

Maurer

Green

Cubrinovski

et al. 2015

Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Cpt Soundingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fines-content effects on liquefaction hazard evaluation for infrastructure in Christchurch, New Zealand

Maurer

Green

Cubrinovski

et al. 2015

Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Flood hazard has also been exacerbated along the Avon River due to (i) narrowing and shallowing of the stream channel due to lateral spread of river banks and deformation of channel floor; (ii) shallowing of the stream channel due to sedimentation from liquefaction ejecta entering waterways, and (iii) liquefaction-induced subsidence of surrounding floodplains. Lowering of surface elevations relative to water tables (van Ballegooy et al, 2014a(van Ballegooy et al, , 2014b(van Ballegooy et al, , 2014c is also likely to have increased the liquefaction and flood hazard. With groundwater levels (i.e., fully saturated soils) now closer to the ground surface, there is less capacity for the soil to absorb water during storm events.…”

Section: Effects and Distributionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The 2010–2011 Canterbury Earthquake Sequence: Environmental effects, seismic triggering thresholds and geologic legacy

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tSeismic shaking and tectonic deformation during strong earthquakes can trigger widespread environmental effects. The severity and extent of a given effect relates to the characteristics of the causative earthquake and the intrinsic properties of the affected media. Documentation of earthquake environmental effects in wellinstrumented, historical earthquakes can enable seismologic triggering thresholds to be estimated across a spectrum of geologic, topographic and hydrologic site conditions, and implemented into seismic hazard assessments, geotechnical engineering designs, palaeoseismic interpretations, and forecasts of the impacts of future earthquakes. The 2010-2011 Canterbury Earthquake Sequence (CES), including the moment magnitude (M w ) 7.1 Darfield earthquake and M w 6.2, 6.0, 5.9, and 5.8 aftershocks, occurred on a suite of previously unidentified, primarily blind, active faults in the eastern South Island of New Zealand. The CES is one of Earth's best recorded historical earthquake sequences. The location of the CES proximal to and beneath a major urban centre enabled rapid and detailed collection of vast amounts of field, geospatial, geotechnical, hydrologic, biologic, and seismologic data, and allowed incremental and cumulative environmental responses to seismic forcing to be documented throughout a protracted earthquake sequence. The CES caused multiple instances of tectonic surface deformation (≥3 events), surface manifestations of liquefaction (≥11 events), lateral spreading (≥6 events), rockfall (≥6 events), cliff collapse (≥3 events), subsidence (≥4 events), and hydrological (10s of events) and biological shifts (≥3 events). The terrestrial area affected by strong shaking (e.g. peak ground acceleration (PGA) ≥0.1-0.3 g), and the maximum distances between earthquake rupture and environmental response (R rup ), both generally increased with increased earthquake M w , but were also influenced by earthquake location and source characteristics. However, the severity of a given environmental response at any given site related predominantly to ground shaking characteristics (PGA, peak ground velocities) and site conditions (water table depth, soil type, geomorphic and topographic setting) rather than earthquake M w . In most cases, the most severe liquefaction, rockfall, cliff collapse, subsidence, flooding, tree damage, and biologic habitat changes were triggered by proximal, moderate magnitude (M w ≤ 6.2) earthquakes on blind faults. CES environmental effects will be incompletely preserved in the geologic record and variably diagnostic of spatial and temporal earthquake clustering. Liquefaction feeder dikes in areas of severe and recurrent liquefaction will provide the best preserved and potentially most diagnostic CES features. Rockfall talus deposits and boulders will be well preserved and potentially diagnostic of the strong intensity of CES shaking, but challenging to decipher in terms of single versus multiple events. Most other phenomena will be transient (e.g., distal groundwater r...

show abstract

“…Liquefaction phenomena are responsible for significant damage to lifelines, infrastructure, agricultural lands and properties, as recently highlighted by the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence in New Zealand (van Ballegooy et al, 2014) and by the 2012 Emilia earthquake sequence in the Po Plain, northern Italy (EMERGEO Working Group, 2013). Some of the most massive liquefaction effects worldwide were also induced by the 1964 M9.2 Alaska earthquake (Waller, 1966;Seed, 1968) and by the 1964 M7.5 Niigata earthquake (Seed and Idriss, 1967), as well as by the 1810-1811 M8 New Madrid earthquakes (Obermeier, 1989), the 1995 M6.9 Kobe (Japan), the 1999 M7.5 Chi-Chi (Taiwan) and the 1999 M7.4 Izmit (Turkey) earthquakes (Elgamal et al, 1996;Wang et al, 2003;Wong et al, 2007;Aydan et al, 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Liquefaction susceptibility assessment in fluvial plains using airborne lidar: the case of the 2012 Emilia earthquake sequence area (Italy)

Civico

Brunori

Martini

et al. 2015

Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. We report a case study from the Po River plain region (northern Italy), where significant liquefaction-related land and property damage occurred during the 2012 Emilia seismic sequence. We took advantage of a 1 m pixel lidar digital terrain model (DTM) and of the 2012 Emilia coseismic liquefaction data set to (a) perform a detailed geomorphological study of the Po River plain area and (b) quantitatively define the liquefaction susceptibility of the geomorphologic features that experienced different abundance of liquefaction. One main finding is that linear topographic highs of fluvial origin -together with crevasse splays, abandoned riverbeds and very young land reclamation areas -acted as a preferential location for the occurrence of liquefaction phenomena. Moreover, we quantitatively defined a hierarchy in terms of liquefaction susceptibility for an ideal fluvial environment. We observed that a very high liquefaction susceptibility is found in coincidence with fluvial landforms, a high-tomoderate liquefaction susceptibility within a buffer distance of 100 and 200 m from mapped fluvial landforms and a low liquefaction susceptibility outside fluvial landforms and relative buffer areas. Lidar data allowed a significant improvement in mapping with respect to conventionally available topographic data and/or aerial imagery. These results have significant implications for accurate hazard and risk assessment as well as for land-use planning. We propose a simple geomorphological approach for liquefaction susceptibility estimation. Our findings can be applied to areas beyond Emilia that are characterized by similar fluvial-dominated environments and prone to significant seismic hazard.

show abstract

Assessment of Liquefaction-Induced Land Damage for Residential Christchurch

Cited by 197 publications

References 20 publications

Fines-content effects on liquefaction hazard evaluation for infrastructure in Christchurch, New Zealand

Fines-content effects on liquefaction hazard evaluation for infrastructure in Christchurch, New Zealand

The 2010–2011 Canterbury Earthquake Sequence: Environmental effects, seismic triggering thresholds and geologic legacy

Liquefaction susceptibility assessment in fluvial plains using airborne lidar: the case of the 2012 Emilia earthquake sequence area (Italy)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About