an implementation of numerical analysis in …

Prosiding

……

Lindung Zalbuin Mase, Hardiansyah 191

Civil Engineering and Built Environment Conference 2019

AN IMPLEMENTATION OF NUMERICAL ANALYSIS IN PREDICTING THE

LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL ON SOIL SITES IN UNIVERSITY OF

BENGKULU, INDONESIA

Lindung Zalbuin Mase1)

, Hardiansyah2)

1),2)

Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering,

University of Bengkulu, Indonesia.

e-mail: [email protected], [email protected]

Abstract

This paper presents an implementation of numerical analysis using pressure dependent

hyperbolic model to estimate liquefaction potential on sandy layers in University of Bengkulu’s

sites. Two sites located at the embankment area and the swamp area are studied. Furthermore,

non-linear one-dimensional seismic response analysis is performed to investigate the soil

behaviours, such as the excess pore pressure, the hysteresis loop, and effective stress path. In

this study, the ground motion of Elcentro is used as the input motion at the base of investigated

sites. In general, this study could recommend the practical analytical method in seismic

response analysis to consider the liquefaction effect before constructing. The results show that

the investigated sites are vulnerable to undergo liquefaction, especially for layers dominated by

loose to medium sandy soils. It can be therefore concluded if a strong earthquake with the peak

ground acceleration similar with the input motion happens near the location, the liquefaction

damage will be possible to occur.

Keywords: hyperbolic model, seismic response analysis, excess pore pressure, liquefaction

INTRODUCTION

Bengkulu is one of provinces in Indonesia, which has the high seismic activity. This is due to

fact that seismotectonic settings of Bengkulu City is relatively complex. It also means that

several earthquake sources exist in Bengkulu. Mase (2018) mentioned that there are three major

earthquake sources existing in Bengkulu City. The first source is subduction zone which is

located at the border of Eurasian Plate and Indo-Australian Plate. Within last two decades, this

subduction zone had triggered two major earthquakes which occurred on 4 June 2000 (the

Bengkulu-Enggano Earthquake) and 12 September 2007 (the Bengkulu-Mentawai Earthquake),

with the magnitude more than 7 Mw. The second source is Mentawai Fault, which is located on

the west of Sumatra Island. Similar with Subduction Zone, the Mentawai Fault has also ever

triggered the destructive earthquake along coastal area of Sumatra Island, such as the great

Padang Earthquake occurred on 30 September 2009 (Hakam, 2009). The last major earthquake

source in Bengkulu City is Sumatra Fault crossing the Sumatra Island. This fault is also

recognised as the main earthquake source during the Liwa Earthquake in 15 February 1994

(Widiwijayanti et al., 1996). Referring to the seismotectonic settings of Bengkulu Province in

general, the intensive earthquake studies have been started since several years ago, especially

related to the two major earthquakes occurred on June 2000 and September 2007.

Several local researchers had studied the earthquake impacts during the Bengkulu-Enggano

Earthquake and the Bengkulu-Mentawai Earthquake. Mase (2015) studied the characteristic of

mailto:[email protected]

Prosiding

……

Lindung Zalbuin Mase 192


earthquake in Bengkulu City. Generally, based on Mase (2015), both earthquakes could trigger

the extensive damage with the Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) scale up to XI. Mase (2017

and 2018) studied the liquefaction potential along coastal area of Bengkulu City. The results of

those studies show that along coastal area of Bengkulu City is very vulnerable to undergo

liquefaction at shallow depth. Mase (2018) studied the seismic ground response analysis and the

reliability of spectral acceleration design to the earthquakes for Bengkulu City. The results of

those study reached a conclusion that the concern to designed spectral acceleration before

construction should be firstly considered. In general, the previous studies have reached a

conclusion that the general site of Bengkulu City is very vulnerable to undergo the earthquakes

and liquefactions impacts. The previous studies also considered the site-specific analysis for the

construction in Bengkulu City. However, the detail investigation to the specific site is still rarely

found. Mase et al. (2018) performed a study of site specific during the earthquake in University

Bengkulu, a centre of high education in Bengkulu City. The results of this recent study show

that the studied sites are necessary to be seriously investigated to observe the soil behaviours

during the earthquake. Mase et al. (2018) also recommend to study the soil behaviour of sandy

layers at the studied area, which were suspected to undergo liquefaction during the strong

earthquakes. Learning from Mase et al. (2018), an extended study of seismic response analysis

to observe the soil behaviour related to the liquefaction is performed. Elcentro ground motion is

applied at the bottom of investigated sites. The excess pore water pressure (u), the acceleration

(amax), and the relative displacement () profiles are presented. The time histories responses

including excess pore pressure ratio (ru), hysteretic loop (-), and effective stress path (c-) are

observed. This study also exhibits the comparison of spectral acceleration for the sites. In

general, this study could give a better understanding in the implementation of seismic response

analysis for liquefaction study. This study also would like to recommend the stake holder to

reconsider earthquake and liquefaction for the construction design.

STUDY AREA

Two sites in Bengkulu City Area are investigated in this study (Figure 1). The locations are

referring to Mase et al. (2018) study. The first site is located at the integrated engineering

laboratory, whereas the second site is located at science laboratory. The cone penetration test

(CPT) and geophysical survey using microtremor are performed in the site by Mase et al.

(2018). The CPT data is furthermore analysed to obtain the information of soil profile or soil

type by using Robertson and Cabal (2015) method. In Figure 2, the first site is noted as S-1,

whereas the second one is noted as S-2. The first location is located at the embankment area in

the University of Bengkulu, whereas the second one is located at swamp area.

The results of site investigation data for S-1 and S-2 are presented in Figure 2 and Figure 3,

respectively. In Figure 2, S-1 site is dominated by clayey sands at shallow depth (0 to 3 m

depth). At this depth range, the clays with organic contain and high plasticity (OH and CH) and

silty clay (CM) exist. The average cone resistance or qc for this depth range is about 20 kg/cm2,

whereas the shear wave velocity (Vs) is about 270 m/s. Another CM layer is also found at 4.2 to

6.2 m below the ground surface. The average qc for this layer is about 20 kg/cm2 and the Vs of

about 270 m/s. The silty sand (SM) layers are found at 3 to 4.2 m depth and 6.2 to 7.4 m depth,

Prosiding

……



respectively. These layers have the average qc of about 20 to 50 kg/cm2 with Vs of 27 m/s. The

well graded sand (SW) layer is found at depth range of 7.4 to 14.4 m. This layer has qs average

of 120 kg/cm2 and Vs of about 400 m/s. The gravelly sand (GS) is found at the depth of 14.4 to

15.2 m depth, with qc average of 220 kg/cm2 and Vs of 420 m/s.

Figure 1. Site investigation data (modified from Mase et al (2018) and Google Earth (2018))

Figure 3 presents the site investigation data in S-2. Similar with S-1 site, the clay layers

including OH and CM also exist at shallow depth, i.e. up to 2.6 m depth. Another CM layer is

also found at 6.8 to 7.6 m. This layer has the average qc of about 20 kg/cm2 and Vs of 320 m/s.

These layers have the average qc of about 20 kg/cm2 and Vs of 230 m/s. SM layers are also

found at several depth ranges, i.e. at 2.6 to 3.2, 6.2 to 6.8, and 7.6 to 8.4 m. These layers have

the average qc of about 20 to 80 kg/cm2 and Vs of about 320 m/s. SW layer is found at depth of

8.4 to 11.4 m depth, with Vs of about 400 m/s and qc of about 200 kg/cm2. In general, based on

site investigation result, it can be concluded that the geological conditions of S-1 and S-2 are

relatively similar. According to Mase et al. (2018), the seismic ground response analysis is

necessary to perform. In this study, the main focus is to investigate the liquefaction potential on

the sandy layers. A further analysis to the existing sandy layers at the investigated sites is

therefore performed.

THEORY

Non-linear pressure dependent hyperbolic model

Several models for seismic ground response analysis have introduced by several researchers.

One of those models is Non-linear pressure dependent hyperbolic model, which is proposed by

Elgamal et al. (2006). This model is originally developed by Matasovic (1993). This model

emphasises on the implementation of hyperbolic function to simulate the non-linearity of soil

behaviour during cyclic (Elgamal et al., 2006). The model simultaneously models the increment

of plasticity to simulate the permanent deformation for hysteretic damping. Therefore, a number

of yield surface is implemented in this model.

Prosiding

……



Mase et al. (2017) mentioned that the importance of this model is on the controlling the

permanent shear mechanism is soil types. This is due to fact that during the earthquake, there

are the decrease of stiffness on sandy soil. This model implements the evaluation of stiffness on

each step as. In another word, the model applies a number of yield surface to model the cyclic

behaviour. Hence, the evaluation of the stiffness on each stage of cyclic loading is relatively

relevant with real condition. For the implementation of the model, several studies have applied

this model to model the non-linear seismic ground response analysis problem, such as Pender et

al. (2016) and Mase et al. (2017). Generally, this model has successful to model the liquefaction

problem for those cases.

0.0 m

0.2 m

1.6 m

3.0 m

4.2 m

6.2 m

7.4 m

14.4 m

15.2 m

OH

CH

CM

SM

CM

SM

SW

GS

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

11.0

12.0

13.0

14.0

15.0

0 200 400 600

Dep

th (

m)

Vs (m/s)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

0 1 2 3 4 5

Dep

th (

m)

fs (kg/cm2)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

0 100 200 300

qc (kg/cm2)

S-1

Figure 2. Site investigation data at S-1 (modified from Mase et al. (2018)

Finite element method for one dimensional seismic response analysis

One of analytical methods implemented for seismic ground response analysis is the finite

element method. For non-linear seismic ground response analysis, such as liquefaction cases,

the finite element model is common to be implemented, Mase et al. (2017) presented the

procedure to use the finite element method for one-dimensional seismic response analysis to

solve the liquefaction problem during the 6.8 Mw Tarlay Earthquake in Northern Thailand, as

described in Figure 4. In Figure 4, the soil column is initially presented. Furthermore, the

Prosiding

……



wavelength analysis is performed to generate the mesh size. In the application, Mase et al. (2016

and 2017) suggested that mesh maximum size of 0.5 m should be used. Figure 4 also

recommended several criteria for seismic ground response analysis using finite element method.

For soil column model, the drainage is assumed only on vertical direction. There is no drainage

path on both vertical and bottom sides or in another word, the bottom of soil column is assumed

as the impermeable layer. The deformation is allowable on vertical direction, whereas the

horizontal displacements on both sides are the same. In the analysis, the lateral normal stress on

both sides are able to be generated. The soil behaviours such as the excess pore pressure, the

effective stress path, and the hysteresis loop can be generated for the selected elements. In

general, the procedure to use the finite element method for one dimensional seismic ground

response analysis is relatively similar with other simulation methods. However, the main factor

in determining the reliable results on the simulation is selection of the appropriate model.

Therefore, Mase et al. (2017) suggested that for liquefaction problem, the effective stress model,

as proposed by Elgamal et al. (2006) can be the alternative.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

0 100 200 300

qc (kg/cm2)

0.0 m

0.4 m

0.8 m

1.8 m

2.6 m

5.2 m

6.2 m

6.8 m

7.6 m

8.4 m

11.4 m

SW

SM

CM

SM

SP

SM

CM

OH

OH

CM0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

0 200 400 600

Vs (m/s)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

0 1 2 3 4 5

fs (kg/cm2)

S-2

Figure 3. Site investigation data at S-2 (modified from Mase et al. (2018)

METHODOLOGY

In general, the method implemented in this study is relatively similar with several studies which

also investigated the soil behaviour during the earthquake. This study is initially conducted by

collecting the site investigation data at S-1 and S-2. As elaborated in the previous section, the

site investigation data used in this study are the secondary data obtained from Mase et al.

(2018). Based on the site investigation data, the soil column model on each site is generated by

following the procedure suggested by Mase et al. (2017). Furthermore, the non-linear pressure

dependent hyperbolic model is applied for the soil layers. The ground water is assumed at

Prosiding

……



ground surface. To simulate the earthquake response, the input motion is applied at the bottom

of boreholes. Since there is no the recorded ground motion in the studied area, the Elcentro

ground motion recorded in 1940 (Figure 5) is applied in this study. This ground motion is

obtained from Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research or PEER (2019) Institute. The

maximum recorded acceleration in Figure 5 is about 0.349g. It is still larger than the predicted

ground motion of the 8.6 Mw Bengkulu Earthquake predicted by Mase (2018) i.e. 0.212g. The

applied ground motion of Elcentro can be therefore roughly describing an impact resulted from

a larger earthquake than the largest earthquake had ever occurred in Bengkulu City. In this

study, the assumption of rigid surface at the bottom of boreholes is implemented since there is

no information where the engineering bedrock exists. During the simulation, soil behaviours

including time history of excess pore pressure, hysteresis loop, and effective stress path are

observed. In addition, the profiles of maximum acceleration (a max) on each depth, the maximum

relative displacement on vertical direction (), and the excess pore pressure as well as the

effective confining pressure (c) are presented. In general, this study is expected to provide a

better understanding in implementing of non-linear seismic response analysis to investigate

liquefaction in sandy soils.

Figure 4. Soil column model for one-dimensional seismic ground response analysis

(Mase et al., 2016)

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Accele

ra

tio

n (g

)

Time (sec)

0.349g

Figure 5. The Elcentro ground motion (PEER, 2019)

Prosiding

……



RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Soil responses profiles

Figure 6 presents the responses profiles during the simulation of Elcentro ground motion at S-1.

In Figure 6, the responses including the relative displacement, the acceleration, and the

comparison of effective stress (v) and the excess pore pressure (u). For relative displacement,

it can be observed that during the cyclic loading, there are the soil deformation resulted during

the simulation. At ground surface, the relative displacement () of about 0.036 m or about 3.6

cm. For acceleration, there is de-amplification of acceleration at ground surface. This is

indicating that the soil is already failure. There is no elastic response resulted; therefore, at the

ground surface the acceleration tends to decrease. For effective stress and excess pore pressure,

it can be observed that the excess pore pressure exceeds the initial effective stress at depth of 3

to 4.2 m, at depth of 6 to 10.5 m depth. Theoretically, liquefaction has happened at those ranges,

since the bearing capacity of those depths has unavailable after the excess pore pressure builds

up. In general, it can be roughly estimated that liquefaction could be possible to happen at first

sand layer (SM), second sand layer (SM), and half of third sand layer (SW). Figure 7 presents

the responses profiles at S-2. The relative displacement at ground surface is about 0.038 m or

3.8 cm. The similar phenomenon, i.e. de-amplification of acceleration is also observed at S-2.

At ground surface, the maximum acceleration during the cyclic loading is about 0.08g. The

liquefied layers are also observed at S-2, especially at depth of 3 to 6.4 m depth. The effective

stress at those depths is exceeded by the excess pore pressure.

-15

-14

-13

-12

-11

-10

-9

-8

-7

-6

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

0 30 60 90 120

Dep

th (

m)

Pressure (kPa)

Effective stress

Excess pore pressure

-15

-14

-13

-12

-11

-10

-9

-8

-7

-6

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

Dep

th (

m)

Acceleration (g)

-15

-14

-13

-12

-11

-10

-9

-8

-7

-6

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04

Dep

th (

m)

Relative Displacement (m)

Figure 6. The soil responses profiled at S-1

Prosiding

……



-11.2

-10.2

-9.2

-8.2

-7.2

-6.2

-5.2

-4.2

-3.2

-2.2

-1.2

-0.2

0 30 60 90

Dep

th (

m)

Pressure (kPa)

Effective stress

Excess pore pressure

-11.2

-10.2

-9.2

-8.2

-7.2

-6.2

-5.2

-4.2

-3.2

-2.2

-1.2

-0.2

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

Dep

th (

m)

Acceleration (g)

-11.5

-10.5

-9.5

-8.5

-7.5

-6.5

-5.5

-4.5

-3.5

-2.5

-1.5

-0.5

0 0.02 0.04 0.06

Dep

th (

m)

Relative Displacement (m)


Spectral acceleration comparison

Figure 8 shows the spectral accelerations at selected layers at both S-1 and S-2. In Figure 8,

only spectral accelerations at sand layers on each site are presented in this study. The

comparison to the seismic design code of Indonesia (SNI 03-1726-2012) is also performed in

Figure 8. From Figure 8a (S-1), it can be seen that in general at sandy layers the spectral

acceleration exceeds the designed spectral acceleration. Similar tendency is also exhibited by

Figure 8b (S-2). Referring to the results of spectral comparison, the structural design in the

study area should consider the earthquake design for the construction plan in the study area.

Soil behaviour during the cyclic loading

Figure 9 presents the liquefied soil behaviours at S-1. In Figure 9, the selected depths are 3.5 m,

7 m, those selected depths represent the sand layers at S-1. For 3.5 m, i.e. SM layer (Figure 9a),

it can be seen that the excess pore water pressure ratio has reached the liquefaction threshold i.e.

ru >1. It indicated that liquefaction has occurred at this depth. The hysteresis loop comparison

also shows that the response is totally non-linear, which indicates that there is the reduction of

shear modulus during dynamic loading. The effective stress path also indicates that the

liquefaction is able to occur on this layer. It is exhibited by the reduction of effective confining

pressure until zero which indicates that the layer has undergone the loss of bearing capacity.

Similar to first sand layer, the second sand layer (SM) represented at depth of 7 m also shows

the similar tendency, as presented in Figure 9b. In Figure 9b, the excess pore pressure ratio has

exceeded the liquefaction threshold. It indicates that liquefaction occurred at this depth. Other

facts are presented by the hysteresis loop and the effective stress. The hysteresis loop shows the

tendency of shear modulus reduction by the flattered hysteresis loop. It might present that the

soil layer could be failure due to loss of bearing capacity caused by excess pore pressure.

Effective stress path exhibits the reduction of effective confining pressure significantly during

the dynamic loading. The effective stress path also shows that the effective confining pressure

has reached zero. It means that liquefaction could happen in this depth.

Prosiding

……



0.01

0.1

1

0.01 0.1 1 10

Sp

ectr

al A

ccel

erat

ion

(g)

Period (sec)

S-2

Input Motion

At 4 m depth (SM)

At 5.5 m depth (SP)

At 6.5 m depth (SM)

At 8 m depth (SM)

At 10 m depth (SW)

SNI 03-1726-2012 (SE)

SNI 03-1726-2012 (SD)

SNI 03-1726-2012 (SC)0.01

0.1

1

0.01 0.1 1 10

Sp

ectr

al A

ccel

erat

ion

(g)

Period (sec)

S-1

Input Motion

At 3.5 m depth (SM)

At 7 m depth (SM)

At 10.5 m depth (SW)

At 15 m depth (GS)

SNI 03-1726-2012 (SE)

SNI 03-1726-2012 (SD)

SNI 03-1726-2012 (SC)


Figure 10 presents soil behaviour resulted from one dimensional seismic ground response

analysis at S-2. Figure 10a presents the soil behaviour for depth of 4.0 m (SM layer). For excess

pore pressure ratio, it can be seen that the liquefaction threshold has been exceeded by the

excess pore pressure ratio. For the hysteresis loop, the flattered curve indicates that there is the

significant reduction of shear modulus due to the excess pore pressure. The excess pore pressure

also gives the impact to decrease of effective confining pressure as presented in Figure 03a. The

similar tendency is also presented in Figure 10b (SP layer) for depth of 5.5 m. The excess pore

pressure ratio has exceeded the liquefaction threshold. It indicates that liquefaction can be

potentially occurred at this depth. During the loading, the reduction of shear modulus happened.

It is exhibited by the flattered curve of hysteresis loop. The excess pore pressure also tends to

reduce the effective confining pressure. It is presented by the significant reduction of effective

confining pressure.

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

-6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6

Sh

ea

r S

tress

()

(kP

a)

Shear Strain () (%)

SM (At 3.5 m depth)

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

0 10 20 30 40

Excess

Po

re P

ress

ure

Ra

tio

(r u

)

Time (sec)

SM (At 3.5 m depth)

Liquefaction threshold

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

0 2 4 6 8

Sh

ea

r S

tress

() (k

Pa

)

Effective Confining Pressure (v)

SM (At 3.5 m depth)

(a)

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

-6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6

Sh

ea

r S

tress

()

(kP

a)

Shear Strain () (%)

SM (At 7 m depth)

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

0 10 20 30 40

Excess

Po

re P

ress

ure

Ra

tio

(r u

)

Time (sec)

SM (At 7 m depth)


-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Sh

ea

r S

tress

()

(kP

a)


SM (At 7 m depth)

(b)

Figure 9. The soil behaviour at S-1 (a) at depth of 3.5 m and (b) at depth 7 m

Prosiding

……



0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

0 10 20 30 40

Ex

cess

Po

re P

ress

ure

Ra

tio

(r

u)

Time (sec)

SM (At 4 m depth)


-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

-6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6

Sh

ear

Str

ess

()

(kP

a)

Shear Strain () (%)

SM (At 4 m depth)

-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

0 3 6 9 12 15

Sh

ear

Str

ess

()

(kP

a)


SM (At 4 m depth)

(a)

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

0 10 20 30 40

Exc

ess

Po

re P

ress

ure

Ra

tio

(r u

)

Time (sec)

SP (At 5.5 m depth)


-8

-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

-6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6

Sh

ear

Str

ess

()

(kP

a)

Shear Strain () (%)

SP (At 5.5 m depth)

-8

-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

0 3 6 9 12 15 18

Sh

ear

Str

ess

()

(kP

a)


SP (At 5.5 m depth)

(b)

Figure 10. The soil behaviour at S-2 (a) at depth of 4 m and (b) at depth of 5.5

CONCLUDING REMARKS

Implementation of non-linear seismic ground response analysis has been successful to observe

liquefaction potential in study area. An attention to liquefaction countermeasures to minimise

the possible effect of liquefaction in the study area should be a priority before construction.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This research was supported by the Mandatory Research from the University of Bengkulu

Research Fund Grant No. 3968/UN30.15/LT/2018.

REFERENCES

Elgamal, A., Yang, Z., and Lu, J. (2006). Cyclic1D: a computer program for seismic ground

response, Department of Structural Engineering, University of California, San Diego.

Google Earth. (2018). Bengkulu Province Region. Available online at http: www.google.co.id

Hakam, A. (2016). Laboratory Liquefaction Test of Sand Based on Grain Size and Relative

Density. Journal of Engineering and Technological Sciences, 48(3), 334-344.

Mase LZ (2015) Earthquake Charateristic in Bengkulu City. Jurnal Teknosia, 2(15): 25-34. (in

Indonesian

Mase LZ, (2018) Reliability study of spectral acceleration design to earthquakes in Bengkulu

City. International Journal of Technology, 9(5), 910-924.

Mase LZ, Tobita T and Likitlersuang S (2017) One-dimensional analysis of liquefaction

potential: A case study in Chiang Rai Province, Northern Thailand. Journal of JSCE Ser

A1. Structural Eng and Earthquake Eng, 74 (4):I_135I_147

Mase, L. Z. (2017). Liquefaction Potential Analysis Along Coastal Area of Bengkulu Province

due to the 2007 Mw 8.6 Bengkulu Earthquake. Journal of Engineering and Technological

Sciences, 49(6), 721-736.

Mase, L. Z., Tobita, T., and Likitlersuang, S. (2016, October 17-18) Liquefaction Potential in

Chiang Rai Province, Northern Thailand due to 6.8 Mw Earthquake On March 24, 2011,

paper presented at The 36th JSCE Conference on Earthquake Engineering: Kanazawa,

Japan, JSCE.

http://www.google.co.id/

Prosiding

……



Mase, L.Z. (2018), Mawardi, Amri, K. (2018, September 27). A Comparison of Soil Models For

Seismic Response Analysis (A case study in soil sites in University of Bengkulu

Indonesia). Proceeding of Seminar Nasional Inovasi, Teknologi dan Aplikasi. Bengkulu,

Indonesia.

Mase, L.Z. (2018). Reliability Study of liquefaction analysis method using SPT due to the 8,6

Mw earthquake on 12 September 2007 along coastal area of Bengkulu City. Civil

Engineering Journal, 25(1): 53-60. (in Indonesian).

Matasovic, N. (1993). Seismic Response of Composite Horizontally-layered Soil Deposits.

Ph.D. thesis, University of California at Los Angeles.

PEER. (2019). PEER Ground Motion Database. University of California Berkeley, USA.

Pender, M., Orense, R., Wotherspoon, L., and Storie, L. 2016. Effect of permeability on the

cyclic generation and dissipation of pore pressures in saturated gravel layers.

Géotechnique, 66(4): 313-322

Robertson, P. K., & Cabal, K. L. (2010). Guide to cone penetration testing for geotechnical

engineering. Gregg Drilling & Testing, USA.

SNI 03-1726-2012. (2012). Standard of Earthquake Resistance Design for Building,

National Standardization Agency, Jakarta, Indonesia [in Indonesian]

Widiwijayanti, C., Déverchère, J., Louat, R., Sébrier, M., Harjono, H., Diament, M., & Hidayat,

D. (1996). Aftershock sequence of the 1994, Mw 6.8, Liwa earthquake (Indonesia):

Seismic rupture process in a volcanic arc. Geophysical research letters, 23(21), 3051-

3054.

an implementation of numerical analysis in …

Documents