Volume 42, N. 2, May-August 2019 | PDF(5 downloads)
In order to manage the risks associated with an earthquake, a particular attention should be given to reduce and resist the effects caused by the earthquake such as soil liquefaction. Several evaluation procedures have evolved over the last four decades, since the use of the simplified method suggested by Seed & Idriss in 1971. However, these procedures present various differences among them. The target of this article is to investigate the differences between the three deterministic liquefaction correlations presented by Seed et al. and those that were published more recently by Cetin et al. and Idriss & Boulanger.Acase study of a petroleum site located in the south of Saudi Arabia is utilized for this comparison. This site is representative of the sites located in that area. Based on SPT (Standard Penetration Test) measurements, results reveal the impact of these differences on cyclic resistance and cyclic stress ratios (CRR and CSR) and on the safety factor (FS). In addition, results reveal a comparison between the considered methods in terms of economical, conservative and moderate for the considered case. Also, a step by step procedure is suggested for engineers and designers to follow when evaluating the liquefaction potential of a certain site.