This paper provides first-hand observations (before or just at the onset of repair) of widespread liquefaction and the associated effects. Observations related to uplift of manholes, settlement of ground, performance of buildings and bridges and the effects of ground improvements are also presented.
This paper provides first-hand observations (before or just at the onset of repair) of widespread liquefaction and the associated effects. Observations related to uplift of manholes, settlement of ground, performance of buildings and bridges and the effects of ground improvements are also presented.
This paper provides first-hand observations (before or just at the onset of repair) of widespread liquefaction and the associated effects. Observations related to uplift of manholes, settlement of ground, performance of buildings and bridges and the effects of ground improvements are also presented.
Liquefaction of soil in the Tokyo Bay area from the 2011
Tohoku (Japan) earthquake S. Bhattacharya a,n , M. Hyodo b , K. Goda a , T. Tazoh c , C.A. Taylor a a University of Bristol, United Kingdom b Yamaguchi University, Japan c Shimizu Corporation, Japan a r t i c l e i n f o Article history: Received 14 May 2011 Received in revised form 15 June 2011 Accepted 16 June 2011 Available online 7 July 2011 a b s t r a c t Immediately following the 11th March 2011 M w 9.0 Tohoku (Japan) earthquake, a eld investigation was carried out around the Tokyo Bay area. This paper provides rst-hand observations (before or just at the onset of repair) of widespread liquefaction and the associated effects. Observations related to uplift of manholes, settlement of ground, performance of buildings and bridges and the effects of ground improvements are also presented. Recorded ground motions near the Tokyo Bay area were analysed to understand their key characteristics (large amplitude and long duration). Lessons learnt are also presented. Crown Copyright & 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction A devastating earthquake of moment magnitude M w 9.0 struck the Tohoku and Kanto regions of Japan on 11th March at 2:46 pm. The earthquake caused great economic loss, loss of life and tremendous damage to structures and infrastructures. This was the largest earthquake ever recorded in Japan and one of the ve most powerful earthquakes in the world since modern record- keeping began in 1900. According to the Japan Meteorological Association (JMA), the epicentre was located about 150 km off- shore from Sendai (largest city in the Tohoku region) and at a depth of about 24 km (Fig. 1). Intense tremors were felt across coastal areas of the Tohoku and Kanto regions (67 magnitude based on JMA seismic intensity scale). Extensive damage was caused by massive tsunami in many cities and towns along the coast. At many locations (e.g. Natori, Oofunato and Onagawa), tsunami heights exceeded 10 m, and sea walls and other coastal defence systems failed to prevent the disaster. The earthquake and its associated effects (i.e. tsunami) also initiated the crisis of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plants. In Tokyo, which is about 350400 km southwest from the epicentre, a relatively intense tremor of JMA scale 5 was registered. This earthquake induced many large aftershocks with M w greater than 6.0, which caused additional damage to structures that survived during the mainshock. It is expected that the increased seismicity will be relatively high in the next several months to a few years and which will impose additional threat to residents in the affected regions. This study reports a geotechnical eld investigation in the Tokyo Bay area that was conducted immediately after the 2011 Tohoku earthquake (1215 March). The studied area (i.e. Shin- kiba, Urayasu and Tokyo Disneyland; see Fig. 2) was damaged severely by widespread liquefaction. Organised large-scale eld investigations by various international agencies were delayed so that the humanitarian efforts were not disturbed and due to the radiation problems at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plants. This survey provides the rst raw details (unrepaired structures and ground condition) of the effects of the earthquake. Most importantly, these investigations provide valuable insights on civil engineering lessons from this catastrophic event and identify challenges/issues that need to be addressed to mitigate seismic damage due to future destructive earthquakes. 2. Fault rupture and ground motion characteristics The M w 9.0 earthquake occurred off-shore of the Miyagi Pre- fecture, Japan. This was an interface subduction earthquake with a low-angle reverse mechanism, and was caused by tectonic move- ments of the North American (Okhotsk) plate and the Pacic plate. The relative movement of the Pacic plate with respect to the Okhotsk plate is in the range of 8090 mm/year whereby the Pacic plate moves under the Okhotsk plate. The accumulated strain at plate boundary is occasionally released, resulting in large subduc- tion earthquakes. In the off-shore Miyagi Prefecture (where the rupture was initiated), many large earthquakes have occurred with average recurrence of about 30 years and have caused severe Contents lists available at ScienceDirect journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/soildyn Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 0267-7261/$ - see front matter Crown Copyright & 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.soildyn.2011.06.006 n Corresponding author. E-mail address: subhamoy.bhattacharya@gmail.com (S. Bhattacharya). Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 31 (2011) 16181628 destruction (e.g. 1978 M w 7.7 earthquake). One distinct difference of the 2011 Tohoku earthquake from previous ones is that the rupture zone was signicantly larger and involved multiple nearby rupture zones, such as off-shore Fukushima Prefecture and off-shore Ibaraki Prefecture to south, and off-shore Iwate Prefecture to north (which were usually thought to rupture individually, rather than simulta- neously). In other words, the 2011 Tohoku earthquake resulted from coupled co-seismic rupture of the above-mentioned major fault segments; such simultaneous ruptures have not happened since the 869 Jogan earthquake [16], which caused massive tsunami along the coastal areas of the Tohoku region. The entire rupture process involved a large fault plane with 400500 km in length by 100200 km in width [10,19]. The fault rupture models estimated by Shao et al. [19] (UCSB model) and by the Geospatial Information Authority of Japan (2011) (GSI model) are illustrated in Fig. 1 (note: many other fault plane models are available). These models were derived by focusing on macro features of observed ground deformation and long-period ground motions. In particular, the GSI model approximates the overall rupture process as a sequence of two sub-processes, initiated in the northern plane and propagated to the southern plane. Although the overall extent of the estimated fault rupture area differs GSIs plane 1 M w = 8.8 GSIs plane 2 M w = 8.3 UCSBs plane M w = 9.1 34 o N 36 o N 38 o N 40 o N 42 o N 138 o E 140 o E 142 o E 144 o E 0 100 200 km Kanto area FKS013 IBR007 MYG008 Hypocentre 500 cm/s 2 500 cm/s 2 200 s NS component EW component MYG008 Rrup = 65.5 km VS30 = 273.6 m/s FKS013 Rrup = 75.6 km VS30 = 292.4 m/s 200 s NS component EW component NS component EW component 200 s 500 cm/s 2 500 cm/s 2 500 cm/s 2 500 cm/s 2 IBR007 Rrup = 51.2 km VS30 = 292.8 m/s Strong ground motion generation zone by Irikura & Kurahashi (2011) Fig. 1. Map of the Tohoku and Kanto regions and recorded ground motion data at three K-NET stations. Haneda Airport Kinshicho KNG002 (K-NET) CHB008 (K-NET) Urayasu CHB014 (K-NET) Higashisuna Tokyo Disneyland CHB009 (K-NET) Chiba Shinkiba Fig. 2. Locations of survey around the Tokyo Bay area (photo courtesy Google Maps). S. Bhattacharya et al. / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 31 (2011) 16181628 1619 signicantly, depending on the analysis methods and the considered frequency ranges for earthquake source inversion, locations for large slips are generally similar among different approaches (i.e. an area around the GSIs rupture plane 1 in Fig. 1). A signicant amount of permanent ground deformation of up to about 30 m to the east [10] occurred along the trench line off-shore of the Tohoku region (i.e. eastern boundary of the GSI/UCSB fault planes in Fig. 1) and this was mainly responsible for the generation of massive tsunami. The macro-rupture process based on preliminary analyses conducted by various research groups generally indicates that the rupture initiated at the earthquake epicentre and propagated southwards, rupturing the segments off-shore Fukishima and Ibaraki Prefectures [10]. Moreover, a closer investigation into strong ground motion generation in the short-period range by Irikura and Kurahashi [12] suggests that the initiated rupture also propagated towards deeper segments along the dip and triggered several small patches of fault rupture with high stress drops in areas between the UCSBs western boundary and the GSIs western boundary shown in Fig. 1. (Note: high stress drops usually produce intense short-period ground motions, and are typical characteristics of deep inslab earthquakes.) In particular, the source model by Irikura and Kurahashi [12] includes four small rupture segments (see grey patches shown in Fig. 1): two segments are placed in the west of the GSIs northern plane (i.e. off-shore Miyagi Prefecture), while the other two segments are placed in the west of the GSIs southern plane (i.e. one is off-shore Fukushima Prefecture and the other is off-shore Ibaraki Prefec- ture). These four segments are closer to the coastal areas of the Tohoku region and are at deeper locations; generated seismic waves travel through a so-called high-Q region [15], experiencing less attenuation of seismic waves over distance, and thus results in larger ground motions. Hence, the rupture and wave propaga- tion process of the Tohoku earthquake was rather complex, because multiple sub-ruptures were responsible for different episodes of the overall rupture process (shallow versus deep) and their effects on generated ground motions differ, depending on the frequency range of interest (high versus low). Another important consideration in understanding a relationship between complex rupture process and observed ground motions is the directivity effect. Observed ground motion time-series data tend to be greater in peak and more concentrated in duration if the rupture propagation direction coincides with the orientation from the rupture source to the site, whereas they tend to be smaller in peak and stretched over longer duration if the rupture direction is opposite of the source-to-site orientation. The complex rupture process described above can be illustrated by inspecting recorded acceleration time-series data (both NS and EW components) at three K-NET stations MYG008, FKS013 and IBR007 (see Fig. 1). At the MYG008 station, two clear phases of seismic wave arrivals can be seen, whereas at the FKS013 and IBR007 stations, a single phase of seismic wave arrivals is featured. In particular, for the IBR007 station, the acceleration amplitude or strong motion part is more concentrated than the other two stations. This is due to the combined effects of the complex rupture process with multiple strong motion generation sources and the source-to-site directivity; the rupture is initiated at the epicentre and triggering of rupture moved towards south and west. By considering a typical rupture propagation speed (which is about 80% of the seismic wave propagation speed at deeper locations), arrivals of the triggered seismic waves at different parts of the fault tend to be more concentrated in time, if a recording station is located towards the direction of fault rupture process (e.g. IBR007), whereas they become more spread out if a recording station is in the opposite of the rupture propagation direction (e.g. MYG008). It is also noted that the observed values of peak ground acceleration (PGA) at these K-NET stations are large, exceeding the PGA of 1000 cm/s 2 (at some K-NET stations, MYG004 and MYG012, recorded PGAs exceeded 2500 cm/s 2 ). Large observed PGAs at several stations in Miyagi, Fukushima and Ibaraki Prefectures are partly due to proximity to localised strong ground motion genera- tion areas along the coastline [12]. 3. Field survey around Tokyo Bay area Immediately following the earthquake, a eld investigation was carried out along the coastline of Tokyo Metropolitan Government and Chiba Prefecture. The survey area was limited to Urayasu, ShinKiba, Chiba, Kinshicho, Haneda airport, Tokyo Disneyland and Higashisuna along the river Naka (see Fig. 2). No apparent failures or collapses of large superstructures were observed. The damage was dominated by soil liquefaction. Surface liquefaction was observed at many locations. The streets and car parks were lled up with a solid mixture of brown and/or grey colour ne particle materials and water. Clearly these materials erupted from underneath the ground Fig. 3. Map of the Kanto region and recorded ground motion data at four K-NET stations. S. Bhattacharya et al. / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 31 (2011) 16181628 1620 and were mostly ll materials and/or young alluvium. In the following, observed ground motions and eld investigations of liquefaction and ground settlement around the Tokyo Bay area are summarised. 3.1. Observed ground motions around the Tokyo Bay area Typical recorded ground acceleration time-series data at four K-NET stations in the Tokyo Bay area are presented in Fig. 3. The selected stations are at soft soils (typically, average shear wave velocity in the upper 30 m V S30 is less than 200 m/s, corresponding to the NEHRP site class D/E boundary or E). These sites are susceptible to soil liquefaction. The recorded ground motions at the four stations are similar and have a PGA of about 100200 cm/s 2 . Note that the duration of the strong ground motion part (or signicant cyclic load reversals) is rather long, because of the large size of the event. These ground motion characteristics (i.e. soft soil, relatively large ground motion amplitude and long duration) are the necessary conditions for liquefaction triggering [18,22]. Moreover, to inspect the frequency content of the observed ground motion records and elastic seismic demand characteristics, power spectral densities of two horizontal components of the four records are shown in Fig. 4(a)(d) Average 5%-damped response spectra of the four records are shown in Fig. 4(e). The dominant period ranges of the recorded ground motions at sites around the Tokyo Bay area were around 0.751.25 s, and high-frequency content of these records was relatively low. 3.2. Observed liquefaction in parks and streets Fig. 5 shows the condition of the 10-lane road to Tokyo Disney- land and parking as noted on the 12th March morning before the repair work commenced. At one location the road surface buckled, Fig. 4. Power spectral density of ground motion data (ad) and 5%-damped acceleration response spectra of ground motion data (e) at four K-NET stations in the Tokyo Bay area. S. Bhattacharya et al. / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 31 (2011) 16181628 1621 and other surface liqueed soil can be seen at the surface, while in the parking area widespread liquefaction was observed. Fig. 6 shows the brittle failure of a thin black top asphalt slab of the road to Tokyo Disneyland. Clearly a compressive force was developed on the earth surface causing the weak pavement slab to buckle upwards. The possible causes may be due to a combination of vertical up- down motion, dynamic surface wave propagation effects or accu- mulated permanent compressive strains in the surface soils. These observations of buckled pavements were not very common in the damaged area surveyed (i.e. localised), which may hint that these zones were those where the construction of the road or compaction of the ground was less than perfect. Widespread liquefaction was observed in certain areas with plenty of evidence of sand boils. Fig. 7 shows photographs of sand boils on the morning of 12th March. While Fig. 7(left) shows the sand boils in the Takasu Park, Fig. 7(right) shows the liquefaction in the paved car park of the Disneyland amusement park. The liqueed and ejected soil consisted of different types of materials ranging from pure sand (brown colour) with small nes content to grey silty sand, and also in some locations dredged recycled material. The type of ejected materials varied from location to location and seemed to depend on the dates when the land reclamation or ground improvement was carried out. The boiled material also differed from place to place and was highly dependant on the specic gravity of the solid grains constituting the soil. Liquefaction caused settlement, and the amount varied from location to location, depending on the type of ground improvement carried out in the locations. Generally, the parks incurred liquefaction disturbance more than the built up areas. More discussion of ground improvement practices is given later in the paper. Fig. 8 shows the enormous quantity of ejected sand in the main roads. It mainly erupted from the edges where the road met the footpath or the cycle path. It must also be mentioned that as the duration of the earthquake was rather long (approximately 100200 s, see Fig. 3), the soil was subjected to a signicant number of load reversals beyond that normally expected. This must have contributed to the unusually high amounts of liqueed material ejected to the ground surface. Fig. 8 shows the repair work being carried out on one of the main roads where a vast amount of ejected liqueable material was on the road surface. Fig. 5. Black top exible pavement to Tokyo Disneyland. Fig. 6. Buckled pavements in the road to Tokyo Disneyland. Fig. 7. Observed liquefaction in the park (left) and parking area of Disneyland (right). S. Bhattacharya et al. / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 31 (2011) 16181628 1622 For illustration, a simplied stress-based liquefaction trigger- ing analysis [18,22] was carried out by considering a typical soil prole in Urayasu, where widespread liquefaction and sand boils were observed. Specically, a probabilistic model of liquefaction initiation, developed by Cetin et al. [7], was adopted. The results are shown in Fig. 9. The calculated probability of liquefaction over depth up to 20 m is presented in the third sub-gure in Fig. 9. Three analysis cases were conducted by considering the different moment magnitude values, because the developed model has not been validated/calibrated against a mega thrust M w 9.0 subduc- tion event. The analysis results indicate that soil liquefaction is highly likely to be triggered at shallow depths (up to 6 m) and medium depths (1216 m), and the effects of the moment magnitude are not so signicant at these depths. The main reason for the high liquefaction potential for this prole is the low N count (less than 5). It is noted that the liquefaction triggering is not necessarily a reliable indicator of the extent of soil liquefac- tion and settlement; more detailed analysis is needed (which is beyond the scope of this study). 3.3. Liquefaction induced damage to light structures, walkways, trafc signal posts and sign posts In some locations, liquefaction caused damage to light struc- tures, such as trafc signal posts, lamp posts and electrical poles, foot paths, walkways and plinth protection structures of buildings. Gaps were formed between sidewalks of buildings and the building itself, causing noticeable relative settlement. Fig. 10 shows a photograph illustrating the settlement of the footpath in a multi- storied building in Urayasu. It was observed that the relative settlement between the footpath and the building was variable due to the different types of foundations. In some buildings minor tilting associated with differential settlement was observed. Minor tilting also limited the damage to the superstructure. Fig. 11 shows some light weight structures where signicant tilt can be noted. Many of these light weight structures were supported on small footings connected through grade beams. The relative settlement varied between 5 and 15 cm. 3.4. Liquefaction induced damage to yovers and elevated highways Many of the elevated highways, yovers and bridges were surveyed. Damage to superstructures or piers of these structures was not observed, which can be considered as a success in comparison with the performance of Hanshin expressway during the 1995 Kobe earthquake. However, it should be noted that ground motion amplitudes in the Tokyo area were much lower than those observed in Kobe, but the duration of the strong motion in 2011 Tohoku earthquake was signicantly longer than the Kobe motion. The downtime was minimal and these struc- tures became operational within a few hours after inspection. This allowed the survey team to travel by train to the site almost Fig. 8. Repair works of the road along with ejected material at the surface of the road. D e p t h
( m ) 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Liquefaction probability 0.0 0.5 1.0 N count Soil type 0 10 20 30 Max M w = 8.5 Max M w = 8.0 Max M w = 9.0 Sandy silt Sandy silt Fine sand Sandy silt Silty fine sand Input parameter: PGA: 142.9 cm/s 2 V S12 : 123 m/s Water table: 1 m Dry density: 1.76 g/cm 3 Wet Density: 1.92 g/cm 3 Fig. 9. Typical soil prole in Urayasu (for location see Fig. 2). S. Bhattacharya et al. / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 31 (2011) 16181628 1623 immediately. Fig. 12 shows the liquefaction induced damage around the foundations of the piers for the elevated yovers in Maihama. The damage was due to uneven settlement of the surrounding ground relative to the pier; the relative settlement varied between 10 and 30 cm. The foundations of these elevated highways were piles. 3.5. Uplift of manholes As was observed in previous earthquakes (such as 2004 Niigata Ken-Chuetsu earthquake), many manholes popped out of the ground, causing damage to the water and sewerage pipelines. Fig. 13 shows a photograph of an uplifted manhole. A plausible reason is a combination of the settlement of the surrounding ground and the upward buoyancy force generated by liquefaction. 4. Discussion The failures (structural and/or geotechnical) in past earth- quakes have shown the shortcomings of design methodologies and construction practices. Post earthquake reconnaissance inves- tigations have led to the identication of limitations of engineer- ing analysis, design and construction practices, as outlined in Table 1. This section of the paper summarises the key observa- tions from the present eld investigations and discusses the lessons learnt. The observations are also compared and contrasted with the previous earthquakes. Fig. 11. Differential settlement of light structures: (a) Tilting of vending machines due to subsurface liquefaction; (b) tilting of signal posts; (c) severe differential settlement of a transformer box near Maihama Station. Fig. 12. Damage around the footing of the elevated highways. Fig. 10. (a) Gap forming between a building and a sidewalk of a building; (b) local settlement depression of a hotel; (c) settlement of surrounding ground next to a bridge pier. S. Bhattacharya et al. / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 31 (2011) 16181628 1624 4.1. Ground response Fig. 14 compares ground motion time-series data at two recording sites: CHB008 and CHBH14 (see Figs. 2 and 3 for locations). CHBH14 station is a part of the KiK-NET, and both the surface and borehole data (recording at the bedrock) are available. Fig. 14(c) shows the bedrock motion recorded at the CHBH14 site, which can be considered to be the same as the site CHB008 for all practical analysis purposes. Fig. 14(a) and (b), on the other hand, shows the effect of wave propagation on soil layering at two locations. The comparison of surface-to-borehole ground motion data at these locations demonstrates the soil amplication in the top soft soil layers. At these locations, the ground motion was amplied by more than 4 times. Fig. 14(a) and (b) also demonstrates the long-duration cyclic loading with rela- tively large amplitudes at CHB008 and CHBH14. Both amplitudes and large number of load reversals contribute signicantly to the liquefaction triggering [22]. 4.2. Effects of ground improvement It was clear from the survey that the severity of liquefaction varied enormously at different locations. There was a construc- tion site in Hanamigawa-Ku (Chiba) with a stark contrast. The part of the site where the ground was improved did not liquefy at all, while the remaining part liqueed. Sand compaction piles (SCP) were used at the site for ground improvement. Another contrasting example was the excellent performance of Haneda airport, which was built on reclaimed land using various ground improvement techniques. There was practically no downtime in Haneda airport, and ights were operational from the very next day of the earthquake. Table 1 Historical development of earthquake engineering practice. Earthquake Remarks Post earthquake developments 1908 Reggio Messina earthquake (Italy) 120,000 fatalities. A committee of nine practising engineers and ve professors were appointed by Italian government to study the failures and to set design guidelines. Base shear equation evolved i.e. the lateral force exerted on the structure is some percentage of the dead weight of the structure, (typically 515%). 1923 Kanto earthquake (Japan) Destruction of bridges, buildings. Foundations settled, tilted and moved. Seismic coefcient method (equivalent static force method using a seismic coefcient of 0.10.3) was rst incorporated in design of highway bridges in Japan (MI 1927). 1933 Long Beach earthquake (USA) Destruction of buildings specially school buildings. UBC (1927) revised. This is the rst earthquake for which acceleration records were obtained from the recently developed strong motion accelerograph. 1964 Niigata earthquake (Japan) Soil can also be a major contributor of damage. Soil liquefaction studies started. 1971 San Fernando earthquake (USA) Bridges collapsed, dams failed causing ood. More soil effects were observed. Liquefaction studies intensied. Bridge retrot studies started. 1994 Northridge earthquake (USA) Steel connections failed in bridges. Importance of ductility in construction realised. Signicant damage potential due to near-fault motions was recognised. 1995 Kobe earthquake (Japan) Massive foundation failure. Soil effects were the main cause of failure. Downward movement of a slope (lateral spreading) is said to be one of the main causes of foundation failure. JRA (1996) code modied (based on lateral spreading mechanism) for design of bridge piles. 1999 Chi-Chi earthquake (Taiwan) Many bridges collapsed as they were located close to the faults. Special care must be undertaken while designing important structure in the vicinity of the plate boundaries and faults 1999 Koceli earthquake (Turkey) Damage to Bolu tunnel due to fault movement. Damage to buildings and bridges. However, buildings conforming the design codes performed well. Research on fault induced failures intensied. 2001 Bhuj earthquake (India) Large-scale destruction. Good performance of some new jetties of the Kandla port. Tilting of the Kandla Tower building without any damage. Large diameter piles concrete performed better than small diameter piles. Steel piles lled in concrete also performed better. 2004 Sumatra earthquake and tsunami Destruction to built environment due to earthquake and giant tsunami waves. New research focused on tsunami warning systems. Fig. 13. Uplift of manholes. S. Bhattacharya et al. / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 31 (2011) 16181628 1625 Various methods are available for ground improvement in Japan, such as the sand drain method and the sand compaction pile method. 4.2.1. Sand drain method In this method, vertical drains either of coarse soil or permeable synthetic variety are installed through liqueable soils to alleviate the liquefaction problems. The principle is to speed the dissipation of the excess pore water pressure before reaching full liquefaction. This method was used in the Haneda airport underneath some of the runways. A good discussion on the vertical drains and the associated methodology can be found in Yasuda et al. [21], Orense et al. [17], Adalier et al. [2] and Brennan and Madabhushi [6]. 4.2.2. Sand compaction pile (SCP) This method was originally developed in Japan in the 1960s to treat liqueable soil. It essentially induces densication and sub- sequent compaction of the soil matrix. The equipment used is similar to that used for sand drain installation, where large amounts of sand are injected into the ground through a combination of repeated driving down and extracting motions of large diameter steel pipes. Essentially, when the equipment reaches a particular chosen depth, the equipment is withdrawn and the sand is poured for a predetermined depth through its mandrel. Subsequently, using the vibrator attached to the top of the mandrel, sand is compacted and allowed to expand across the diameter. The injection of sand increases the relative density of the soil and thus strengthens the susceptibility against liquefaction. Following the ground improve- ment, proper foundations (pile or mat) are put in place. For the ongoing construction site in Hanamigawa-Ku referred to earlier, the sand compaction piles were 700 mm in diameter and extended to a depth of 1620 m. Sand compaction piles were used to treat the Haneda airport. The latter experienced the earthquake without suffering signicant liquefaction damage. A good discussion of the methodology of SCP can be found in Akiyoshi et al. [1]. 4.3. Good performance of the Haneda airport using the various methods of ground improvement The airport was constructed on reclaimed land from the sea using various methods of ground improvement: sand compaction pile, sand drain, deep cement mixing and soil replacement. Ground improvement was one of the major construction hurdles in this project. Out of the total 36 months construction period, 12 months were devoted to ground improvement. A good discussion of the methods of ground improvement employed in the Haneda airport can be found in JGS [14]. 4.4. Choice of recycled material for land reclamation Land reclamation is very common in Japan, as 70% of Japan is covered by mountains. Therefore, the choice and procurement of Fig. 14. Amplication of ground motion as evidenced from the recordings at two stations; (a) ground motion as recorded at the surface at CHB008 location (K-NET); (b) ground motion as recorded at the surface at CHBH14 location (KiK-NET); (c) bedrock motion recorded at the CHBH14 site. S. Bhattacharya et al. / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 31 (2011) 16181628 1626 good ll materials are very important. The ll materials used at sites that performed very well during the earthquake consisted of sands, stones and light weight cement treated dredged soils with and without air. It has been estimated that 6 million m 3 of cement treated dredged soils were used during the construction of Haneda airport. They are considered to be very light and strong recycled materials. Cement treated dredged soil without air is heavier than water but lighter than ordinary soils. On the other hand, cement treated dredged soil with air, known as Super Geo Material (SGM), is very light and almost the same weight as water. These soils were used as land reclamation materials behind the sea wall, underneath the runway and taxiway. The earthquake showed that these soils are very effective in reducing consolida- tion/settlement and avoiding ground failure of sea walls. 4.5. A case study: good performance of piled-supported 15-storey building Based on the preliminary investigation and experience from the past earthquakes, it was apparent that the soil remained liqueed for some time. A survey was carried out in a modern (2005) 15-storey condominium (mansion) in Higashisuna in the Sunamachi area on the banks of Naka River (Nakagawa). The condominium has 236 apartments and runs parallel to the Tokyo Metropolitan Area highway. There was no damage to the super- structure, see Fig. 15 for photograph taken after the earthquake and the plan of the building. It may be noted that the building is L shaped but there is no structural connection between the two sections. The building is supported on concrete piles having 12 m diameter and is 5354 m long. The diameter of the pile at the base ranges from 1.4 to 3.5 m to have an enhanced end-bearing. The load carrying capacity of the pile ranges between 2356 and 15,009 kN. Each column was supported on one of these large diameter piles. The superstructure is a steel frame encased within reinforced concrete and the interior is light wood partition wall. The long side of the building runs along the river Naka (Naka- gawa). Lateral spreading was not observed along the river banks due to good performance of river bank protection work. Table 2 lists the diameter of piles of ten pile-supported structures in liqueable soils and their observed performance following a strong earthquake. The case records were taken from the performance of structures following the 1964 Niigata earth- quake, the 1995 Kobe earthquake and the 2001 Bhuj earthquake. It may be noted that the 1960s design concept of few small diameter piles (typically 0.30.6 m) were gradually replaced by a few large diameter piles in the 1990s. The poor performance in this context signies formation of plastic hinges in the pile and cracking. Further details of these case studies and failure modes can be found in Dash et al. [8,9], Bhattacharya and Madabhushi [3] and Bhattacharya et al. [4,5]. In most of these cases it has been estimated that soil liqueed up to 710 m of depth. It is quite clear from the table that small diameter piles performed poorly. Bhattacharya et al. [4] carried out a comprehensive study of 15 case histories of piled foundation performance based on buckling analysis parameters. Essentially, the study showed that a pile is laterally unsupported in the liqueable zone due to the removal of lateral connement by the soil owing to liquefaction. The slenderness ratio, L eff /r min , of the pile in the region that could become unsupported is used to classify pile foundation perfor- mance. L eff is the Eulers effective length of an equivalent pin ended strut and r min is the minimum radius of gyration of the pile section. The study showed that a line representing a slenderness ratio (L eff /r min ) of 50 could distinguish between poor and good pile performance. This line is of some signicance in structural Fig. 15. Pile-supported condominium in Sunamachi area (photo and plan view). Table 2 Case histories of pile foundation performance during past earthquakes. Case history and reference Pile diameter Performance (good/poor) NFCH pile-supported building during 1964 Niigata earthquake, see [11] 0.35 m dia RCC hollow Poor Pile-supported Yachiyo Bridge during 1964 Niigata earthquake, see [11] 0.3 m dia RCC Poor Pile-supported N.H.K building during 1964 Niigata earthquake [11] 0.35 m dia RCC Poor Pile-supported Showa Bridge during the 1964 Niigata earthquake [5] 0.6 m dia Steel Poor Pile-supported LPG tank 101 during 1995 Kobe earthquake [13] 1.1 m dia RCC Good Pile-supported LPG tank 106 and 107 during 1995 Kobe earthquake [13] 0.3 m dia RCC hollow Poor Pile-supported 14 storey building during 1995 Kobe earthquake [20] 2.5 m dia RCC Good Pile-supported Kandla Port Tower during 2001 Bhuj earthquake [8] 0.4 m dia RCC Poor Pile-supported old jetty in Kandla port during the 2001 Bhuj earthquake [3] 0.5 m dia RCC Poor Pile-supported new jetty in Kandla port during the 2001 Bhuj earthquake [3] 1.0 m RCC lled steel tube Good S. Bhattacharya et al. / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 31 (2011) 16181628 1627 engineering, as it is often used to distinguish between long and short columns. Columns having slenderness ratios below 50 are expected to fail by plastic squashing whereas those above 50 are expected to fail by buckling, both modes being modied by induced bending moments. This slenderness ratio of 50 signies a length to diameter of about 12 for RC columns. Furthermore, the study carried out by Dash et al. [9] showed that large diameter piles were safe against the bending, bucking and bendingbuckling interaction types of failure. The good performance of the building described in Fig. 15 further reinforces the hypothesis that few large diameter piles are better that many small diameter piles. 5. Conclusions The 11th March 2011 moment magnitude M w 9.0 off the coast Tohoku earthquake was the largest earthquake ever recorded in Japan. It was an interface subduction earthquake with a low-angle reverse mechanism, and was caused by tectonic movements of the North American (Okhotsk) plate and the Pacic plate. Intense tremors were felt in the Kanto (Tokyo) area, which is about 350 400 km from the epicentre. Analysis of the recorded strong motion data showed that the dominant period ranges of the sites around the Tokyo Bay area are around 0.751.25 s. The high-frequency content of these records was relatively low. The duration of the earthquake was unusually long at approximately 100200 s. Widespread liquefaction was observed in the Tokyo bay area especially in the zones of reclaimed land, ll areas or sites having young alluvium. Liquefaction caused ground failures and also damage to the built environment. Typical examples of damage included tilting of light structures, such as trafc signal posts, while gaps formed between sidewalks of buildings and the buildings. The long-duration effects of ground motion contributed signicantly to the liquefaction induced damage. Liquefaction susceptibility and the damage caused by liquefaction seemed to be dependant on the age of ll (i.e. when the land reclamation was carried out), type of ll material (source whether it is dredged material, pure sand or silty sand) and the type of ground improvement carried out. Acknowledgements The rst author would like to acknowledge the support extended by Professor Kohji Tokimatsu (Centre for Urban Earth- quake Engineering, Tokyo Institute of Technology) and Engineer- ing and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) for support through the Grant EP/H015345. The data available through the K-NET database and NEIC data catalogue is also acknowledged. The authors also thank Dr Nick Alexander for fruitful discussions. The third author is grateful to Professor Kojiro Irikura for his thorough explanations on the rupture process of the 2011 Tohoku earthquake. References [1] Akiyoshi T, Fuchida K, Matsumoto H, Hyodo T, Fang HL. Liquefaction analyses of sandy ground improved by sand compaction piles. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 1993;12:299307. [2] Adalier K, Elgamel A, Meneses J, Baez JI. Stone columns as liquefaction countermeasure in non-plastic silty soils. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 2003;23:57184. [3] Bhattacharya S, Madabhushi SPG. A critical review of methods of pile design in seismically liqueable soils. Bull of Earthquake Engineering 2008;6:40747. [4] Bhattacharya S, Madabhushi SPG, Bolton MD. An alternative mechanism of pile failure in liqueable deposits during earthquakes. Geotechnique 2004;54(April issue, 3):20313. [5] Bhattacharya S, Bolton MD, Madabhushi SPG. A reconsideration of the safety of the piled bridge foundations in liqueable soils. Soils and Foundations 2005;45(4):1326. [6] Brennan AJ, Madabhushi SPG. Liquefaction remediation by vertical drains with varying penetration depths. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 2006;26:46975. [7] Cetin KO, Seed RB, Der Kiureghian A, Tokimatsu K, Harder Jr. LF, Kayen RE, et al. Standard Penetration Test-based probabilistic and deterministic assessment of seismic soil liquefaction potential. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenviron- mental Engineering 2004;130:131440. [8] Dash SR, Gobindraju L, Bhattacharya S. A case study of damages of the Kandla Port and Customs Ofce tower supported on a matpile foundation in liqueed soils under the 2001 Bhuj earthquake. Soil Dynamics and Earth- quake Engineering 2008;29(2009):33346. [9] Dash SR, Bhattacharya S, Blakeborough A. Bendingbuckling interaction as a failure mechanism of piles in liqueable soils. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 2010;30:329. [10] Geospatial Information Authority of Japan (GSI). Crustal deformation and fault model obtained from GEONET data analysis; 2011. [Available at: /http://www.gsi.go.jp/cais/topic110313-index-e.htmlS]. [11] Hamada M. Large ground deformations and their effects on lifelines: 1964 Niigata earthquake. Case Studies of liquefaction and lifelines performance during past earthquake. Technical Report NCEER-92-0001, Volume-1, Japa- nese case studies, National Centre for Earthquake Engineering Research, Buffalo, NY; 1992. [12] Irikura K, Kurahashi S. Source model for generating strong ground motions during the 11 March 2011 off Tohoku, Japan earthquake. In: Proceedings of the Japan geoscience union international symposium. Makuhari, Chiba, Japan; 2011. [13] Ishihara K. Terzaghi oration: Geotechnical aspects of the 1995 Kobe earth- quake. In: Proceedings of the ICSMFE, Hamburg; 1997, p. 204773. [14] Japanese Geotechnical Society. Geotechnical engineering of Tokyo interna- tional airport offshore expansion project-slide library, 1999. [15] Kanno T, Narita A, Morikawa N, Fujiwara H, Fukushima Y. A new attenuation relation for strong ground motion in Japan based on recorded data. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 2006;96:87997. [16] Minoura K, Imamura F, Sugawara D, Kono Y, Iwashita T. The 869 Jogan tsunami deposit and recurrence interval of large-scale tsunami on the Pacic coast of northeast Japan. Journal of Natural Disaster Science 2001;23:838. [17] Orense RP, Morimoto I, Yamamoto Y, Yumiyama T, Yamamoto H, Sugawara K. Study on wall-type gravel drains as liquefaction countermeasure for underground structures. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 2003;23(1):1939. [18] Seed HB, Idriss IM. Simplied procedure for evaluating soil liquefaction potential. Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division 1971;97:124973. [19] Shao G, Li X, Ji C, Maeda T. Preliminary Results of the March 11, 2011 M w 9.1 Honshu Earthquake. University of California, Santa Barbara; 2011. [Available at: /http://www.geol.ucsb.edu/faculty/ji/big_earthquakes/2011/ 03/0311/Honshu_main.htmlS]. [20] Tokimatsu K, Mizuno H, Kakurai M. Building damage associated with geotechnical problems. Special issue of Soils and Foundations, Japanese Geotechnical Society; 1996, p. 21934. [21] Yasuda S, Ishihara K, Harada K, Shinkawa N. Effect of soil improvement on ground subsidence due to liquefaction. Soils and Foundation 1996:99107. [22] Youd TL, Idriss IM, Andrus RD, Arango I, Castro G, Christian JT, 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 and Geoenvironmental Engineering 2001;127:81733. S. Bhattacharya et al. / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 31 (2011) 16181628 1628