Ralph Rollins, performed geotechnical investigations for over 5000 structures

I took Soil Mechanics class from my Father

Rachel Rollins is a Civil Engineering student

Rachel took Soil Mechanics class from her Father

Granddaughter, Ella, shows early interest in soil behavior…

Post-Earthquake Geotechnical Reconnaissance Studies

Kyle RollinsCivil & Environmental Engineering

Brigham Young University

EERI Learning From Earthquakes

GEER Team Members in Chile

Travel in Japan after Fukushima failureCarried Geiger counterRadiation less than would be received if we stayed in US

Earthquake Interrupts Earthquake Briefing

Process of InvestigationCoordinate/Collaborate with local engineers/researchers1ststst wave: Initial overview of areas of interest by advance team2ndndnd wave: Follow-up with second wave to provide more detailed examination of key sites3rdrdrd wave: Measurement of soil properties in key areas [Vss, SPT (N11)1 60606 , CPT qcc,c Icc, etc.]

Understand the Seismo-Tectonic Setting

MagnitudeFault type (Strike-slip, Normal, thrust, Subduction)Distribution of acceleration stations and measured peak accelerations

Tectonic Setting

Nazca Plate moving under South America Plate13 Earthquakes >7.0 since 1973M9.5 in 1960 largest on record

M = 8.8 Chile Earthquake

Large Magnitude Subduction Zone Event

Long Duration of Shaking (often > 60 s)

Well-Designed Earth Systems Shaken

Many Opportunities to Gain Knowledge

Hospital in Curico R. Boroschek, Universidad de Chile

Ground motionsK-NET: surface (693)Kik-NET: v array (496)BRI: buildings (50) 16 recordings PGA > 1.0 gRrup = 49 to 500 km

Accelerations at K-Net Tsukidate (MYG004 station)(from National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, NIED, 2011)

~ 50 seconds

M7.6 Samara Costa Rica Earthquake2012

Nicoya Peninsula

Zone of Amplification

Fig. 1.1 – Location of epicenter and peak ground accelerations measured by the seismic network operated by the Engineering Seismology Laboratory (LIS) at the University of Costa Rica. The recordings are color coded according to the acceleration level and Mercalli scale categories shown at the base of the map (LIS, 2012a).

NiNNicocooyayaaayaaaa Peniinnsullaa

ZoZoZoZoooZoooneneneneneneenennnenennnnennnen ooooooooff ff ff AmAmAmAmAmmAmAmAmmAmAmmmmAmmmmmmmAmmmmmAmmmmmmmAmmmmmmmmmmmmmAmmmmmmmmmmmmAmmAmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmpppplpplplppplplplpplplpplppplpppppppppppppppppppppplplplpppppppppppppppp ififffififffifii icicicciciciicici atattataatatatatataaataaataaaaaaaatataaaataaaaatioioiioioioionnnnn

Peninsula

Understand the Geologic Setting

Areas of deep soft soilAreas of saturated loose sand/fill materialAreas of rock or stiff soilsBasin structure

Fig. 2.1 - Geology map of Costa Rica (modified from Dutch 2012) with locations of epicenters from M7.5 1991 Limon Earthquake and M7.6 2012 Samara Earthquake

M7.5 1991 Limon Epicenter

M7.5 2012 SamaraEpicenter

Limon

Intensity Map Geology Map

Understand Surface Geology Relative to Shaking

What are we looking for?

What are we looking for?Liquefaction Triggering

GravelsSilts/Sandy Silts/Clayey sandsMagnitude effects on liquefaction

Liquefaction EffectsSettlementUplift of utilitiesLateral SpreadingResidual Strength of liquefied soilPile downdrag

What are we looking for?Ground Response and Amplification

Topographic Amplification Influence of local soil conditionsBasin effectsResonance with structural period

Comparison of good and bad performance at adjacent sitesInfluence of ground improvement on performance

What are we looking for?Landslides

Slope, acceleration level, duration, etc.Influence of foundation type on performance (shallow vs deep foundations)Performance of utilities/pipelinesPerformance of levees and damsBehavior of earth retaining systems Performance relative to Tsunami

Mechanics of Liquefaction

Definition of Liquefaction

A decrease in strength and stiffness caused by a build-up of water pressure due to earthquake

shaking.

= ( - u) tan

where = vertical stress from soilu = the water pressure

tan = the friction coefficient

Where will we find liquefaction?

Port facilitiesBeachesRivers/bridgesLow lying areas with loose fill

Look for sand boils and ejecta indicating liquefaction

Photo credit: D. D. Zekkosos, 2014 Cephalonia

Gravel Ejecta after 2008 M7.6 Wenchuan, China Earthquake

Photo Credit: Cao et al, 2013

Chinese Dynamic Cone Penetrometer

Gravel Liquefaction Curves

Liquefiable soil

Liquefaction in Adapazari, Turkey

Photo credit: USGS Sanchio et al (2004)

GEER 2011 (photo: Boulanger)

Effects on buildings (e.g., Kamisu City)

GEER R 2011 1 (photo: K.M. Rollins)

GEER 2011 (photo: Rollins)

Settlement analyses for the Urayasu area

Katsumata &Tokimatsu (2012) 2) –– AIJ proceduresKatsumata &Tokimatsu (2012)K 2) AIJ proceduresAMissing information? Other procedures? Bias & dispersion?

Liquefaction around Pile Supported Ferris Wheel

GEER Photo: K.M. Rollins

Building Settlement & Rotation

Constructed on 26 m long concrete Piles (3° Rotation)

GEER 2011 (photo: K.M. Rollins)

Liquefaction settlement of building on shallow footings

Fig. 2.5 – Foundations Punching through liquefied ground (a) exterior column, north side; (b) interior column, left behind a 60cm crater.

Shear wave velocity, Vs, from Surface Wave Measurementsat Liquefaction Site-Costa Rica 2012

Vs profile: R. Luna

Drag Load & Settlement from Liquefaction

Bearing Stratum

Liquefiable Soil

Non-Liquefiable Soil

Endnd-d-Bearing

Side Shear

Applied Load

Reduced SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiidddddddddddddddddddddeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSShhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiidddddddddddddddddddddeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSShhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrReduced Side Shear Liquefied Soil

Negative Negative Side Shear

Lateral spreading

Pier settlement

Juan Pablo II Bridge, ConcépcionBent damage due to lateral spreading on NE approachLiquefaction-induced pier settlements along bridge span

N

Photo taken from NE

Piers # 113-116 Piers # 113-116

Juan Pablo II BridgeLiquefaction-induced pier settlements along bridge span

0.5m-0.7m

Modes of deformationLiquefaction-induced pier settlement

Before earthquake

After earthquake

Port of Coronel, South of Concepcion

Lateral Spreading at Puerto Coronel

“Bring a tape and a field book, not just a camera!”

T. Leslie YoudEmeritus Prof. BYU

Lateral Spreading at Puerto CoronelCoronel, Chile Port Lateral Spread

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

0 5 10 15 20 25 30Distance from Wall Face (m)

Cum

ulat

ive

Hor

izon

tal D

ispl

acem

ent (

m)

Line 1Line 2

Lateral Spreading Damage - Ports

Ground Movement

2010 M8.8 Maule Chile Earthquake

Sketch from field notes

Base Isolated Pier (< 0.5 m offset)

Base isolators Stabilizing

Pile

Collapse Holes from Lateral Spreading

Collapse Holes from Lateral Spreading

Lateral Spreading at Puerto Coronel

Lateral Spreading at Puerto CoronelNear Port Coronel, Chile Lateral Spread

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

0 20 40 60 80 100Distance from Wall Face (m)

Cum

ulat

ive

Hor

izon

tal D

ispl

acem

ent

(m)

Fisherman’s Pier at Coronel

Lateral spread measurement line

Damaged piles dueto lateral spreading

Lateral Spreading near Puerto Coronel

Ground Movement

D=2.8 m

D=1.5 m

D=0.45 m

D= 0 m

(N11)1 60606 < 10

10<(N11)1 60606 < 15

16<(N11)1 60

20<(N11)1 60

Contrasting Performance of Adjacent Piers

Contrasting Performance of Adjacent Structures

Contrasting Performance of Adjacent Structures

Geo-referenced Photographs

Port of Iquique, Chile April 2014

Cone Penetrometer Testing (Donated by ConeTec)

Cone Penetration Test Soundings

Port of Iquique, Chile April 2014

UAVs for Reconnaissance

Identifying unique points from multiple directions

Structure from Motion Point Clouds

Kevin Franke, BYU

Structure from Motion Point Clouds

Measured vs. UAV Displacements

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Cum

ulat

ive

Disp

lace

men

t (m

)

Distance from West Base (m)

Section Through CPT 3, 4 and 5UAV-CPT 3,4 and 5North End of PierUAV North End of Pier

Passive Force from Lateral Spreading

Passive force often drives displacementSelection of smaller passive force (lower Kpp)may be unconservative

Liquefaction

Lateral Spread of Abutment in bridge

355 cm 355 m cmoffset in offset in

rebar

Shearing of Shearing of back wall back wall on beam

Lateral Spreading Around Abutment

Retaining wall Abutment wall

Lateral Spread Damage-Bridge

1991 Limon, Costa Rica Earthquake

Obtain plans for bridge foundations

24.96 6 m 75.02 m 75.24 m

176.14 m

Rio Estrella Bridge, Costa Rica, 1991

Liquefaction in the Atacama Desert?

Liquefactionin the

Desert?

Liquefaction at Tana Bridge

Liquefaction in the Atacama Desert

Lateral Spreading at Puerto Valparaiso

Lateral displacement and settlement behind dock wall

Apparent lateral spreading at Berth 5

Lateral Quaywall Movement at Puerto Valparaiso

Lateral Spread at Puerto Valparaiso

Valpariso, Chile Port Lateral Spread

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Distance from Wall Face (m)

Cum

ulat

ive

Hor

izon

tal

Dis

plac

emen

t (cm

) Horizontal Movement

Lateral Spreading at Port of Valparaiso

Shear failure

Lateral spread

Liquefaction

Lateral spread

Lateral spread

Deck settlement

Deck settlement

Juan Pablo II Bridge

evidence of liquefaction

Lateral spreading and bridge bent damage on NE approach

Deck settlement

La Mochita Bridge, Concépcion

Site Effects: Vespucio Norte & Ciudad Empresiarial

Gravel, Sandy Gravel, Sgravel

Silty Clay, Silty Sand

CollapseCollapsepNo collapse

H/V peaks: 0.5-2sec (Bonnefoy et al, 2008)Damage to 5 to 20-story buildings

QQQfnoono: Silt & Clay Layers

Localized Damage – Site Effects?

AB

CSilty CA

B

Liquefaction at Strong Motion Sites

GEER 2011 (photo: K.M. Rollins)

GEER 2011 (photos: Boulanger)

Strong ground motion stations with liquefaction nearby

Station CHB024Station CHB009

-0.2

-0.1

0

0.1

0.2

Acc

e ler

a tio

n(g

)

40 80 120 160 200Time (s)

-0.2

-0.1

0

0.1

0.2

CHB009 - NS

CHB009 - EW

-0.2

-0.1

0

0.1

0.2

40 80 120 160 200Time (s)

-0.2

-0.1

0

0.1

0.2

CHB024 - NS

CHB024 - EW

GEER 2011 (photos: Boulanger)

Landslides in Steep Slopes/Stiff dry clay

West of Arauco

Landslides in Steep Slopes/Stiff dry clay

Bearing Failure and Lateral Spread at Tupul Bridge

Bearing failure along highway

Lateral spreading impacts bridge abutment

Tupul Bridge

Failure of Highway Embankment

Liquefiable Zone

Embankment Fill

Soft Clay

Liquefiable Zone

Embankment Fill

Soft Clay

Skewed Bridge Abutment Overview40% of 600,000 bridges in US are skewed

Current AASHTO design code does not consider any effect of skew on passive forceObservations of poor performance of skewed bridges

Shamsabadi et al. 2006

Greater Damage to Skew Abutments

Permanent Abutment Offset at Skewed Bridge

4 inch 4 inch Longitudinal Longitudinal Displacement

3 inch 3 inch Transverse Transverse

Displacement

Earthquake Damage to Skewed Bridges(Paine, Chile)

Top Bridge

Bottom Bridge

Top Bridge

Bridge decks have rotated and bridge was demolished

Bottom Bridge

Bridge deck was offset and was eventually demolished

Top Bridge

Bridge remained in service after the earthquake

Damage rate for skewed bridges was twice that of non-skewed bridges (Toro et al 2013)

Field Test Setup - Plan View

12.75 inch Dia. Steel Pipe Piles

11 ft wide x 5.5 ft high Pile Cap

24 ft

22 ft

Transverse Wingwalls2 x 4 ft Reinforced Concrete blocks

4 ft Dia. Drilled ShaftSheet Pile Wall Section AZ-18

2 – 600 kip Actuators

Field Test Setup Elevation View

11 ft m wide x 5.5 ft high x 15 ft long Pile Cap

6 ft6.4m

4 ft Dia. Drilled ShaftSheet Pile Wall Section AZ-18

2 – 600 kip Actuators 12.75 inch Dia. Steel Pipe Piles

No Skew - 0° Test Setup

15° Skew Test Setup

30° Skew Test Setup

Passive Force Reduction Factor vs. Skew

Rskew = 8x10-05 2 - 0.018 + 1R² = 0.98

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

0 15 30 45 60 75 90

Red

uctio

n Fa

ctor

, Rsk

ew

Skew Angle, [degrees]

Lab TestsNumerical AnalysisField Tests (This Study)Proposed Reduction Line

Settlement and Sliding of Approach Fills

Settlement and Sliding of Approach Fills

Damage to braced retaining system

GEER 2011 (photo: K.M. Rollins)

No Damage Associated with MSE Walls

Highly Corrosive Soil

Sand Compaction Piles (Fudo Tetra)

Typical Installation Arrangement

Elevation View Plan View

Building Area

Treatment Area

Z/2

Non-liquefiable Soil

Non-liquefiable Soil

Liquefiable SoilTreatment zone, Z

Z/2

Sand column

Area Replacement ratio (Ar) of 10% for low fines to 20% for higher fines

Sand

Pile

Gravel column

Contrast between Tokyo Disney and Urayasu City Liquefaction

Courtesy Japan Probe

Courtesy Japan Probe

Area around structures in Tokyo Disney treated with compaction Piles-little settlement

Parking lot at Tokyo Disney not treated and experienced 50 cm of settlement

Parking Lot at Tokyo Disney

Space Mount at Tokyo Disney

GEER 2011 (photo: K.M. Rollins)

Seismic Performance of Dams & LeveesCoihueco Zoned Earth Dam

Upstream Slope Failure

Rapel Concrete Dam

(most dams performed well)

Levee Breach

Seismic Performance of Tailings DamsLas Palmas Tailings Dam Failure

Approximate area of failure and flow direction

Naruse River left levee at km 11.3

GEER 2011 (photo: L. F. Harder)

RiverSystem

Type and Number of Levee Damage Sites Reported

Failure Settlement SlopeSlumping

LeveeCracking

Revetment/Wall

Damage

GateDamage Other Total

Mabuchi 0 1 1 1 5 1 5 13

Kitakami 13 62 47 278 121 67 58 646

Naruse 9 27 25 183 56 26 37 363

Natori 1 2 1 26 2 2 1 35

Abukuma 2 26 16 73 2 10 3 132

TOTAL 25 118 90 561 186 106 104 1190

Levee Damage in the Tohoku Region (MLIT 2011)

GEER Photo: K.M. Rollins

Tsunami Damage

Car on top of 4 story building

Pile Supported Building vs Tsunami

Rematch

Tips for Sucessful Geotechical Recon

Be safe out thereDevelop friendships during your careerCollaborate with local engineers, geologists, seismologistsMake use of Google Earth for scouting/reportingDocument performance, don’t just photographUse UAVs for topographic mappingQuantify site conditions if possible (Vs, CPT, SPT, DMT)Look for contrasting sites (good/bad performance)Obtain plans where if possibleMorning plan of attack, Evening reports