Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
The nonlinear analysis for assessing the cyclic behavior of a specific location is widely applied to minimize geohazards, especially soil liquefaction. The Mandalika circuit project in the Lombok area is highly prone to earthquakes and is located on sand as the subgrade. The high soil liquefaction susceptibility leads to a comprehensive assessment by implementing the appropriate soil constitutive model. One-dimensional nonlinear analysis with two constitutive models, Modified Kondner–Zelasko (MKZ) and General Quadratic/Hyperbolic (GQ/H), provided by the DEEPSOIL program, is examined to generate the dynamic behavior aimed at by this research. Five boreholes from SPT data are conducted as part of the soil investigation data. Based on the pore water pressure, the MKZ and GQ/H in the maximum value (full liquefaction condition) are almost similar in output. However, in other situations, they show the opposite result. The GQ/H predicts a more realistic simulation in the low and medium liquefaction cases, which presents the most significant correlation between strain ratio and shear stress results in all sites. For an accurate evaluation of liquefaction behavior, the combination of dynamic features from an appropriate constitutive model should be considered to simulate the liquefaction behavior of sand.
Article Details
Amalia, K. P., Ismanti, S., & Saputra, A. (2023). Liquefaction potential evaluation in Toba crater Indonesia. International Journal of GEOMATE, 25(110), 123–131. https://doi.org/10.21660/2023.110.3990 (Crossref)
Boccieri, G., Gaudio, D., & Conti, R. (2024). An uncoupled approach for estimating seismic-induced pore water pressures in liquefiable sandy soils. Computers and Geotechnics, 170, 106266. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2024.106266 (Crossref)
Brandenberg, S. J., Bellana, N., & Shantz, T. (2010). Shear wave velocity as function of standard penetration test resistance and vertical effective stress at California bridge sites. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 30(10), 1026–1035. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2010.04.014 (Crossref)
Carlton, B., & Kaynia, A. M. (2017). Nonlinear site response model with improved damping and strain softening. In Proceedings of 16th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Santiago, Chile. Paper 0721. http://wcee.nicee.org/wcee/article/16WCEE/WCEE2017-721.pdf
Chen, G., Qin, Y., Wu, Q., Gu, X., & Juang, C. H. (2024). A Unified Model of Cyclic Shear–Volume Coupling and Excess Pore Water Pressure Generation for Sandy Soils under Various Cyclic Loading Patterns. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 150(9), 4024075. https://doi.org/10.1061/JGGEFK.GTENG-12247 (Crossref)
Chiaradonna, A., Tropeano, G., d’Onofrio, A., & Silvestri, F. (2018). Development of a simplified model for pore water pressure build-up induced by cyclic loading. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 16(9), 3627–3652. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-018-0354-4 (Crossref)
Chiaradonna, A., Tropeano, G., d’Onofrio, A., Silvestri, F., & Park, D. (2015, November 1-4). Application of a simplified model for the prediction of pore pressure build-up in sandy soils subjected to seismic loading. 6th International Conference on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering, Christchurch, New Zealand. https://secure.tcc.co.nz/ei/images/ICEGE15%20Papers/Chiaradonna%20189.00_.pdf
Chiu, P., Pradel, D. E., Kwok, A. O. L., & Stewart, J. P. (2008). Seismic response analyses for the silicon valley rapid transit project. In Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics IV (pp. 1–10). ASCE Library. https://doi.org/10.1061/40975(318)210 (Crossref)
DEEPSOIL (2024). A nonlinear and equivalent linear seismic site response of 1-D soil columns. User manual. Board of Trustees of University of Illinois at Urbana. https://deepsoil.cee.illinois.edu/Files/DEEPSOIL_User_Manual_v7.pdf
Demir, S. (2021). Numerical assessment of the performance of different constitutive models used to predict liquefiable soil behavior. International Advanced Researches and Engineering Journal, 5(2), 260–267. https://doi.org/10.35860/iarej.871429 (Crossref)
Di Buccio, F., & Pagliaroli, A. (2020). Numerical modelling of seismic site response at large strains: a parametric study. American Journal of Civil Engineering, 8(5), 117–127. https://hdl.handle.net/11564/736424 (Crossref)
Diaz-Segura, E. G. (2016). The coefficient of earth pressure at rest. Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 21(5). https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-9062(94)90690-4 (Crossref)
Dobry, R., Ladd, R. S., Yokel, F. Y., Chung, R. M., & Powell, D. (1982). Prediction of pore water pressure buildup and liquefaction of sands during earthquakes by the cyclic strain method: Building science series. National Bureau of Standards, US Department of Commerce, US Governmental Printing Office. (Crossref)
Eskandarinejad, A., Jahanandish, M., & Zafarani, H. (2017). Divergence between nonlinear and equivalent-linear 1D site response analyses for different VS realizations of typical clay sites. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 174(10), 3955–3978. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-017-1586-y (Crossref)
Fitri, S. N., & Pramana, I. M. W. (2025). Non-linear seismic response for liquefaction analysis: pore water pressure and strain ratio approach. Scientific Review Engineering and Environmental Sciences, 34(3). https://doi.org/10.22630/srees.10426 (Crossref)
Fitri, S. N., & Sawada, K. (2024). Evaluation and opportunities for soil liquefaction vulnerability research: Lesson learned from Japan for Indonesia-A bibliometric analysis. In Proceedings of the 2024 11th International Conference on Geomatics in Civil Engineering (pp. 14–29). Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-68624-5_2 (Crossref)
Fitri, S. N., & Sawada, K. (2025a). Comprehensive assessment for liquefaction vulnerability in Indonesia: empirical and element simulation approaches. Civil Engineering Journal, 11(1), 326–345. https://doi.org/10.28991/CEJ-2025-011-01-019 (Crossref)
Fitri, S. N., & Sawada, K. (2025b). Soil liquefaction induces lateral spreading estimation based on site-specific response analysis. In S. A. Kristiawan, K. C. Tsai, M. Shahin, A. R. M. Sam & P. D. Hai (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Rehabilitation and Maintenance in Civil Engineering (Vol. 2, pp. 255–266). Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-96-4694-4_26 (Crossref)
Fitri, S. N., Soemitro, R. A. A., Warnana, D. D., & Sutra, N. (2018). Application of microtremor HVSR method for preliminary assessment of seismic site effect in Ngipik landfill, Gresik. MATEC Web of Conferences, 195, 03017. https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201819503017 (Crossref)
Golkarfard, H., Ravichandran, N., Sedaghat, A., Saketh Jella, V., & Andrus, R. (2024, February 25-28). Effects of different soil constitutive models on nonlinear seismic site response analysis using DEEPSOIL for the Blue Ridge and Piedmont Regions, South Carolina. Geo-Congress 2024, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784485316.028 (Crossref)
Groholski, D. R., Hashash, Y. M., Kim, B., Musgrove, M., Harmon, J., & Stewart, J. P. (2016). Simplified model for small-strain nonlinearity and strength in 1D seismic site response analysis. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 142(9), 04016042. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001496 (Crossref)
Groholski, D. R., Hashash, Y. M. A., Musgrove, M., Harmon, J., & Kim, B. (2015, November 1-4). Evaluation of 1-D non-linear site response analysis using a general quadratic/hyperbolic strength-controlled constitutive model. 6th International Conference on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering, Christchurch, New Zealand. https://secure.tcc.co.nz/ei/images/ICEGE15%20Papers/Hashash%20269.00.pdf
Hashash, Y. M. A., Park, D. (2001). Non-linear one-dimensional seismic ground motion propagation in the Mississippi Embayment. Engineering Geology, 62(1–3), 185–206. (Crossref)
He, H., Miao, Y., & Wang, S. (2025). Reproducing nonlinear ground response and pore pressure variations using in-situ soil properties. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 194, 109380. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2025.109380 (Crossref)
Hori, R., Inoue, K., Ikeda, T., & Kiyota, T. (2023). Analytical study on ground behavior during the 2018 Sulawesi earthquake, Indonesia. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1244(1), 012035. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1244/1/012035 (Crossref)
Jalil, A., Fathani, T. F., Satyarno, I., & Wilopo, W. (2021). Nonlinear site response analysis approach to investigate the effect of pore water pressure on liquefaction in Palu. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 871(1), 012053. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/871/1/012053 (Crossref)
Lee, Y. G., Pervaiz, U., Park, D., Kim, B., & Han, J. T. (2025). Assessment of liquefaction potential using simplified method and one-dimensional effective stress ground response analysis during 2017 Pohang earthquake in South Korea: A case study. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 196, 109463. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2025.109463 (Crossref)
Matasović, N. (1993). Seismic response of composite horizontally-layered soil deposits (doctoral dissertation). University of California. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/34090029
Matasović, N., & Vucetic, M. (1993). Cyclic characterization of liquefiable sands. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 119(11), 1805–1822. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1993)119:11(1805) (Crossref)
Mei, X. (2018). Pore pressure generation and liquefaction analysis using nonlinear, effective stress-based site response analysis (doctoral dissertation). University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. http://hdl.handle.net/2142/102927
Pervaiz, U., Park, D., Hashash, Y., & Xing, G. (2021). Testing performance of pore pressure models implemented in one-dimensional site response analysis program against centrifuge test data measured in mildly sloping ground. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 149, 106867. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2021.106867 (Crossref)
Phillips, C., & Hashash, Y. M. (2009). Damping formulation for nonlinear 1D site response analyses. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 29(7), 1143–1158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2009.01.004 (Crossref)
Raza, H., & Ahmad, N. (2024). Assessment of seismic liquefaction hazard and ground response in subduction zone: a 1D non-linear effective stress approach. Engineering Research Express, 6(4), 045121. https://doi.org/10.1088/2631-8695/ad980a (Crossref)
Shamsher, S., Won, M. S., Park, Y. C., Park, Y. H., & Sayed, M. A. (2025). Effect of nonlinear constitutive Models on seismic site response of soft reclaimed soil deposits. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 13(7), 1333. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse13071333 (Crossref)
Stokoe, K. H., Darendeli, M. B., Gilbert, R. B., Menq, F. Y., & Choi, W. K. (n.d.). Development of a new family of normalized modulus reduction and material damping curves. https://apps.peer.berkeley.edu/lifelines/Workshop304/pdf/Stokoe_PlenaryPaper.pdf
Sunarto, S., Setyono, E., Darmawan, A. A., & Ondang, K. K. (2024). Liquefaction potential and soil bearing capacity improvement with stone column case study. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2927(1), 030009. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0193689 (Crossref)
Taruna, R. M., Septiadhi, A., Sungkono, Mase, L. Z., & Mashuri. (2024). Preliminary assessment of liquefaction vulnerability using microtremor analysis in North Lombok. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2866(1), 012061. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2866/1/012061 (Crossref)
Tsai, C. C., & Li, P. C. (2024). Quantifying near-fault motion effects on soil liquefaction through effective stress site response analysis. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 183, 108779. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2024.108779 (Crossref)
Wang, R., Cao, W., Xue, L., & Zhang, J. M. (2021). An anisotropic plasticity model incorporating fabric evolution for monotonic and cyclic behavior of sand. Acta Geotechnica, 16(1), 43–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-020-00984-y (Crossref)
Wang, R., Zhang, J. M., & Wang, G. (2014). A unified plasticity model for large post-liquefaction shear deformation of sand. Computers and Geotechnics, 59, 54–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2014.02.008 (Crossref)
Downloads
- Siti Nurlita FITRI, I Made Wahyu PRAMANA, Non-linear seismic response for liquefaction analysis: pore water pressure and strain ratio approach , Scientific Review Engineering and Environmental Sciences (SREES): Vol. 34 No. 3 (2025)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.