Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
Table 1.4. Values of q
c1N
obtained forpublished casehistories of liquefaction flow failures
Case history
Values forcases published by
Number
Structure
Seed (1987)
Seed and Harder (1990)
Olson and Stark(2002)
FC(%)
(
N
1
)
60
q
c1N
(
N
1
)
60
q
c1N
(
N
1
)
60
q
c1N
1
Wachusett Dam- North Dike
5
7
51.8
2
Lower SanFernando Dam
25
13
60.5
11.5
55.2
11.5
47.0
3
FortPeck Dam
50
7
25.6
6
22.5
8.5
30.2
4
Calaveras Dam
60
7.6
25.1
7.6
25.1
8
26.1
5
Hachiro-Gata Road Embankment
15
4.4
30.0
6
Lake Ackerman Highway Embankment
0
3
25.7
7
Route 272 at Higashiarckinai
20
6.3
38.4
8
River Bank,Lake Merced
3
5
40.5
6
48.0
9
Kawagishi-cho
3
4
33.2
4
32.8
10
Mochi-koshi TailingsDam - Dike 2
85
1
2.9
0
0.0
11
La Marquesa Dam- U/SSlope
30
4
22.0
12
La Marquesa Dam- D/S Slope
20
9
53.1
13
La Palma Dam
15
3
20.4
14
Uetsu Railway Embankment
2
3
25.5
3
25.5
3
25.5
15
Solfatara Canal Dike
7
4.6
36.8
3.6
29.2
16
Koda Numa Railway Embankment
13
1.8
13.3
1.8
13.3
3
21.9
17
Shibecha-cho Embankment
25
5.6
31.6
18
SheffieldDam
40
2.8
13.6
2.8
13.6
Notes:
(1) Values of
(
N
1
)
60
are either those published by author(s), or obtained from published
(
N
1
)
60
cs-Sr
and adjusted by subtracting applicable
(
N
1
)
60
.
(2) Values of q
c1N
are obtained by multiplying the values of
(
N
1
)
60
by the ratio of q
c1N
/(
N
1
)
60
for the applicable value of FC and
(
N
1
)
60
,
except for Cases 2 and 5 by Olson and Stark. Olson and Stark list values of q
c1N
of 47 and 30 for Cases 2 and 5, respectively, whereas
