SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Gazi University Journal of Science / 2026 / Volume: 26 Issue: 2

Comparison of Liquefaction Susceptibility Maps of Saruhanlı Town (Turkey) Based on Various Liquefaction Indices

Mustafa Ozer
Mehmet Orhan
Nihat Isık
Ali Ates
Pages
—
Publication Date
2013-07-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Besides, liquefaction-induced ground  settlement maps were also prepared for the study site.  Key words: Liquefaction, liquefaction susceptibility maps, liquefaction index, CPT, Saruhanlı.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, liquefaction susceptibility maps of the Saruhanlı district of Manisa (Turkey) were prepared based  on different methods for the evaluation of liquefaction potential and various liquefaction indices.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The total length of this fault zone is about 150 km, and it is about 33  km from the study site.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Besides, liquefaction-induced ground  settlement maps were also prepared for the study site.  Key words: Liquefaction, liquefaction susceptibility maps, liquefaction index, CPT, Saruhanlı.
🔬Design:Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Liquefaction · liquefaction susceptibility maps · liquefaction index

Abstract

In this study, liquefaction susceptibility maps of the Saruhanlı district of Manisa (Turkey) were prepared based  on different methods for the evaluation of liquefaction potential and various liquefaction indices. Three main  fault zones are present near the study area, namely Bergama, Buyuk Menderes, and Gediz Graben. The Gediz  Graben controls the seismicity of the area. The total length of this fault zone is about 150 km, and it is about 33  km from the study site. By considering historical earthquakes within the Gediz Graben and its length, a design  earthquake with a moment magnitude of 7.1 was selected for the study site. A peak ground acceleration of  0.28g was calculated for the study site using attenuation relationships developed for Turkey. In order to analyze  liquefaction susceptibility of the Saruhanlı region, results from a total of 28 cone penetration tests (CPT)  were  evaluated. Four different CPT-based methods were used for the calculation of factor of safety against  liquefaction. These factors of safety were used to define the liquefaction indices. Three different liquefaction  indices were used to develop the liquefaction susceptibility maps of the area. Hence, a total of twelve  liquefaction susceptibility maps were prepared to evaluate liquefaction potential of the area. In additon,liquefaction susceptibility maps were prepared using varying depths of the ground water table to determine the  effect of seasonal ground water level changes on the liquefaction severity. Besides, liquefaction-induced ground  settlement maps were also prepared for the study site.  Key words: Liquefaction, liquefaction susceptibility maps, liquefaction index, CPT, Saruhanlı.

🔖

Cite This Article

Ozer, M., Orhan, M., Isık, N., Ates, A. (2013). Comparison of Liquefaction Susceptibility Maps of Saruhanlı Town (Turkey) Based on Various Liquefaction Indices. Gazi University Journal of Science, Volume: 26 Issue: 2. https://ajindex.com/articles/1269740

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (53)

  1. KOERI-NEMC, Bogaziçi University Kandilli Observatory and Earthquake Research Institute (KOERI), National Earthquake Monitoring Center (NEMC),
  2. http://www.koeri.boun.edu.tr/sismo/default.htm
  3. (accessed on 5 April 2010).
  4. at Çiftçi, N.B., and Bozkurt, E., “Pattern of normal faulting in the Gediz Graben, SW Turkey”, Tectonophysics, 473(1-2): 234-260, (2009).
  5. Çiftçi, N.B., and Bozkurt, E., “Evolution of the miocene sedimentary fill of the Gediz Graben, SW Turkey”, Sedimentary Geology, 216(3-4): 49 – 79, (2009).
  6. Metli, F., Tan, T., Baykul, A., Akalin, H.L., Avsar, M., Turkbilegi, H., Sun, A., Saygili, N., Isin, R., “Environment geology and area usage potential of Manisa city and its vicinity”, Geological Investigations Department, MTA, Ankara, Report No. 10480 (in Turkish), (2001).
  7. at http://www.sayisalgrafik.com.tr/deprem/tr_frames.h tm, (Accessed on 12 May 2009).
  8. Wells, D.L., Coppersmith, K.J., “New empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture
  9. displacement”, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 84(4): 974–1002, (1994).
  10. Ulusay, R., and Tuncay, E., Sonmez, H., and Gokceoglu, C., “An attenuation relationship based on Turkish strong motion data and iso- acceleration map of Turkey”, Engineering Geology, 74: 265–291, (2004).
  11. Seed, H.B., Idriss, I.M., “Simplified procedure for evaluating soil liquefaction potential”, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, 97(9): 1249- 1273, (1971).
  12. Lee, D.H., Ku, C.S., Yuan, H., “A study of the liquefaction risk potential at Yuanlin, Taiwan”, Engineering Geology, 71: 97–117, (2003).
  13. Bulut, İ., Sağlam, M., Bektaş, İ.A., Şahin, M.S., Demir, M., Uran, Ş., Üçkardeşler, C., Güner, F., Araz, A.H., “Geological and geotechnical report of the sites requiring detailed geotechnical investigations for the town planning of Saruhanlı (Manisa) municipality”, Report No. ILB-I/45- 039-004, Ankara-Turkey (in Turkish), (2006).
  14. Tsuchida, H., “Prediction and countermeasure against liquefaction in sand deposits”, Abstract of the Seminar of the Port and Harbour Research Institute, Ministry of Transport, Yokosuka, Japan, 3.1–3.33 (in Japanese), (1970).
  15. Youd, T.L, et al., “Liquefaction resistance of soils: Summary report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF workshops on evaluation of liquefaction resistance of soils”, Journal of Geotechnical
  16. Engineering, ASCE; 127(10):817–833, (2001).
  17. Geoenvironmental [15] Robertson, P.K., Wride (Fear), C.E., “Evaluating cyclic liquefaction potential using the cone penetration
  18. Journal, 35(3): 442–459, (1998).
  19. Geotechnical [16] Boulanger, R.W., Idriss, I.M.,
  20. “State normalization of penetration resistance and the effect of overburden stress on liquefaction resistance”, Proceedings 11th International Conference on Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering and 3rd International Conference on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering. Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA, 2: 484–491, (2004).
  21. Juang, C.H., Fang. S.Y., Khor. E.H., “First- Order Reliability Method for Probabilistic Liquefaction Triggering Analysis Using CPT”, Journal
  22. Geoenvironmental Engineering, 132 (3): 337– 350, (2006).
  23. and Moss, R.E.S., Seed, R.B., Kayen, R.E., Stewart, J.P., Der Kiureghian, A., Cetin, K.O., “CPT- Based
  24. assessment of in situ seismic soil liquefaction potential”, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 132(8): 1032– 1051, (2006).
  25. deterministic [19] Robertson, P.K., “Estimation of minimum undrained shear strength for flow liquefaction using the CPT”, In: P. Sêco e Pinto (Ed.), Earthquake geotechnical engineering, Balkema, Rotterdam, 1021–1028, (1999).
  26. Zhang, G., Robertson, P.K., Brachman, R.W.I., “Estimating
  27. settlements from CPT for level ground”, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 39(5): 1168– 1180, (2002).
  28. ground [21] Liao, S.S.C., Whitman, R.V., “Catalogue of A and Liquefaction
  29. Occurrences During Earthquakes”, Research Report, Department of Civil Engineering, Massachusetts
  30. Cambridge, Mass, (1986).
  31. Non-Liquefaction Institute of
  32. Technology, [22] Seed, H.B., Idriss, I.M., “Ground motions and soil
  33. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute Monograph, Oakland, California, (1982).
  34. Hynes, M.E., Olsen, R.S., ”Influence of confining stress on liquefaction resistance”, Proceeding
  35. Physics and Mechanics of Soil Liquefaction, Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 145- 152, (1999). Workshop
  36. on Idriss, I.M., Boulanger, R.W., “Semi-empirical procedures for evaluating liquefaction potential during earthquakes”, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 26(2-4): 115–130, (2006).
  37. Çetin, K.O., Seed, R.B., Der Kiureghian, A., Tokimatsu, K., Harder, L.F., Jr. Kayen, R.E., Moss, R.E.S., “Standard penetration test-based probabilistic and deterministic assessment of seismic soil liquefaction potential”, Journal of Geotechnical
  38. Engineering. 130(12): 1314–1340, (2004).
  39. Geoenvironmental [26] Iwasaki, T., Tokida, K., Tatsuoka, F., Watanabe, S.,
  40. “Microzonation for soil liquefaction potential using simplified methods”, In: Proceedings of the
  41. microzonation, Seattle, USA, 3: 1319–1330, (1982). S., Sato, H., 3th International Conference
  42. on JSHE, Highway Bridge Design Guide Book, Japan Society of Highway Engineering, Tokyo (In Japanese), (1990).
  43. Juang, C.H., Yuan, H., Lee, D.H., Lin, P.S., “A simplified cone penetration test–based method for evaluating liquefaction potential of soils”, Journal
  44. Geoenvironmental Engineering, 129(1): 66– 80, (2003).
  45. and Sönmez, H., Gökçeoğlu, C., “A liquefaction severity index suggested for engineering practice”, Environmental Geology, 48: 81–91, (2005). [30] Day, R.W., “Geotechnical Handbook”,
  46. McGraw-Hill Engineering
  47. Company Inc., U.S.A, (2002).
  48. Ishihara, K., Yoshimine, M., “Evaluation of sand settlements
  49. liquefaction during earthquakes”, Soils and Foundations, 32(1): 173–188, (1992).
  50. Skemton, A.W and MacDonald, D.H., “The allowable settlement of buildings”, ICE Proceedings: Engineering Divisions, 5( 6): 727–768, (1956).
  51. Çetin, K.O., Bilge, H.T., Wu, J., Kammerer, A.M., Seed R.B., “Probabilistic model for the assessment reconsolidation
  52. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering. 135(3): 387–398, (2009).
  53. induced settlements”,