TREATMENT OF SOFT GROUND TO MITIGATE GROUND

LIQUEFACTION PROBLEMS FROM STRONG MOTION EARTHQUAKE FOR

THE CENTRAL LUZON LINK EXPRESSWAY (CLLEX)

Virgilio C. Castillo, Benjamin A. Bautista, Jun Itoh2

Department of Public Works and Highways, Manila Philippines

2
Oriental Consultants Global Co., Ltd., Tokyo Japan

Abstract : The Central Luzon Link Expressway (CLLEX) Project Phase-I will provide motorists a smooth and faster travel
from Metro Manila to Cabanatuan. CLLEX will also improve access between the two (2) north large cities, Tarlac and Caba-
natuan, and will support industrialization of the northern part of Mega Manila.
Authors described soft ground treatment and ground liquefaction due to earthquake. The project site is located in flat terrain
(mainly rice field) There are few section having a ground liquefiable sand layer. For ground liquefaction countermeasure, sand
compaction pile is proposed and designed under structures. This technical paper introduces the designed countermeasures
against possible soil liquefaction.

Key words : Highway, Embankment, Seismic design, Ground Lique faction, FL method, Ground Liquefaction countermeas-
ure

1 INTRODUCTION There are two (2) major technical issues for CLLEX Phase-I.
In to Central Luzon, the Pan-Philippine Highway caters The first issue is to minimize the effects on flooding. The 15
many traffic as one of the major north-south directional km length of the expressway section passes through a flood
trunk national road linking between Metro Manila and Cen- prone area of Rio Chico River Basin where the average
tral/North Luzon. The traffic congestion on the Pan- flood level is about 4 m above existing ground level. Based
Philippine Highway has reached critical levels and needs to on the inundation analysis conducted during the detailed
be resolved at the earliest possible time by constructing an design of CLLEX Phase-I, construction of 1.5 km-long via-
alternate route. The Central Luzon Link Expressway duct and 24 RCBCs for water level equalizer are proposed
(CLLEX) Project Phase-I will provide motorists a smooth and designed.
and faster travel from Metro Manila to Cabanatuan through
the North Luzon Expressway (NLEX) and the Subic-Clark- The second issue is soft ground treatment and liquefaction.
Tarlac Expressway (SCTEX). CLLEX will also improve The project site is located in flat terrain (mainly rice field) so
access between the two (2) north large cities, Tarlac and Ca- that the majority of the section is designed as embankment.
banatuan, and will support industrialization of the northern In order to accelerate the consolidation settlement of the
part of Mega Manila. Central Luzon is expected to increase embankment, pre-loading with vertical drain is proposed and
its efficiency as an industrial hub with Clark Airport receiv- designed. Also, replacement of existing material with gravel
ing international flights. or sand is proposed and designed as part of the soft ground
treatment. There are also a few sections having a liquefiable
sand layer so that sand compaction piles are proposed and
designed for use under structures. This technical paper in-
troduces the designed countermeasures against possible soil
CLLEX Phase-I, L = 30 km
liquefaction.

2 GEOLOGY OF CENTRAL LUZON AND PRO-

Flood-Prone Area San Juan IC
JECT SITE
Aliaga IC
Cabanatuan IC
Luzon developed between the sialic continental region of
China and the basaltic Pacific Ocean basin. This position has
Tarlac IC
Rio Chico River Viaduct given it an intermediate to basic framework that supplied a
Sta. Lucia River Bridge
NUEVA ECIJA predominance of quartz-deficient clastics to idiogeosyn-
clines formed within it. The basement foundation of Luzon
is predominantly of early Tertiary age (Fig. 2.1). Most of the
sediments accumulated in Miocene and Pliocene time. In
TARLAC
early Miocene time the Cagayan and Central valleys were
one interconnected depositional site. After deposition of the
Fig. 1.1 Project Location Map Sicalao and Kennon limestones (in the Cagayan and Central

1

Fig. 2.1 Geology of Central Luzon (Galgana,)
valleys respectively), the Cordillera Central became a posi-
tive zone separating two depositional basins. The Cordillera
Central was the dominantly active tectonic feature of north-
ern Luzon, while the Sierra Madre was a more stable or pas-
sive element.
The depositional environments in northern Luzon progressed
from marine (Miocene) through marine-brackish (upper Mi-
ocene-Pliocene) to fluviatile (upper Pliocene-Pleistocene).
Concurrent with this development of idiogeosynclines, fill-
ing of the basins, and over-all acceleration of uplift from
Miocene to Pleistocene time, a volcanic cycle progressed
from mafic to silicic (quartz-bearing tuffs in the Ilagan and
Awidon Mesa formations of the Cagayan Valley) and a re-
cent reversion to mafic extrusives (Mt. Cagua and Camiguin
Island basalt cones).
Most of the anticlinal and synclinal trends visible at the sur-
face, fault zones, and stratigraphic units have been named.
The regions most seriously affected by the Luzon earthquake
Fig. 2.2 CLLEX longitudinal geological map
were the mountain area in the neighborhood of the city of
Baguio and the vast expanse of alluvial lowlands in the Cen-
tral Plain which is a northwest trending depression, bounded
on the west by the Zambales Mountains and on the east by
the Cordillera Central Range and Sierra Madre Mountains.
Cordillera Central Range in northeast of the area consists of
metamorphic and igneous rocks while Zambales Mountains
consists of ultramafic rocks in the southwest. These moun-
tains composed of sedimentary and metamorphic rocks of
Oligocene to Miocene, Neogene and undifferentiated igne-
ous rocks, and locally of pre-Jurassic base complex run at
right angles to the Philippine fault and parallel to each other,
interposing the longitudinal Cagayan Valley between them.
Cordillera Central is generally 1000 m to 3000 m high and
Central Sierra Madre is 1000 m to 2000 m high. The Central
Valley, about 60 km in width and 180 km in length between
Manila and Lingayen Gulf, is the most extensive lowland in
the Philippines and underlays thick Plio-Pleistocene sedi-
ments.
Fig. 2.2 shows CLLEX longitudinal geological map.
3 SOIL LIQUEFACTION
The mechanism of soil liquefaction caused by earthquake
ground motion and the soil conditions for occurrence of liq-
uefaction is explained.
Liquefaction induced damages to structures during past
earthquakes, such as subsidence and inclination of buildings
and bridges, uplift of underground structures, collapse of
quaywalls and embankment are introduced. The methods of
estimation of liquefaction potential based on topographical
and geographical conditions, in-situ soil test, laboratory test
and dynamic response analysis of surface ground are men-
tioned.
3.1 Mechanism of Soil Liquefaction and Its Damage
3.1.1 Mechanism of Soil Liquefaction
Fig. 3.1 shows conditions in Dagupan City just after the
1990 Luzon Island earthquake, which caused wide spread
soil liquefaction. Fig. 3.2, was taken in the suburb of Da-
gupan after the 1990 Luzon Islands earthquake, showing a
sand volcano of several meters in diameter, with sand and
2
water spreading outward concentrically [1]. According to
local residents on the scene, the sand surged as high as the
tops of telephone poles. Although this may have been exag-
gerated because of the state of agitation of these witnesses,
the fact that an enormous volume of sand and water boiled
out of the ground is indisputable.
consists of sand, it is likely to undergo liquefaction. Howev-
er when silt and clay are a major soil component, liquefac-
tion is not likely to occur. The permeability of gravels can
reduce pore pressure and prevent soil liquefaction. However,
during the 1995 Kobe earthquake, gravels of weathered

The mechanism of soil liquefaction and the reason for the

sand and water boiling can be understood as follows. As
indicated schematically in Fig. 3.3, water completely fills
the pores between sand grains, attaining a saturation condi-
tion. Prior to an earthquake, sand grains are coalesced and
support both the weight of soil and structures on or in the
ground. During earthquake ground motion, however, the
sand grains lose their contacts to each other. The state like a
liquid mixed with sand grains and the pore water is called
liquefaction.

The phenomenon can be understood as follows. As Fig.3.3

demonstrates, the total vertical stress at depth h is

v = s h (3a)
Fig. 3.1 Liquefaction in Dagupan City just after the 1990
Here, s represents the saturated unit weight and h is the Luzon Islands earthquake (Ishihara, c.e.)
depth from the ground surface to the estimated point of soil
stress. To simplify the explanation, we assume the ground-
water level to be the ground surface, that is all of the ground
is a stete of complete saturation.
The total vertical stressv is a sum total of the effective ver-
tical stress v carried by the sand grains, and the pore water
pressure u.

v = v + u (3b)

By earthquake ground motions, the pore water pressure u Fig. 3.2 Sand Volcano by the 1990 Luzon Island earth-
increases: quake. The diameter of sand volcano was about 5
m and sand spread about 15 m in radial direction
u = ui + u (3c) (Hamada)

ui represents the initial pore water pressure and u the ex- BeforeLiquefaction AfterLiquefaction
cess pore water pressure. As Eq. (3a) shows, v does not
change even during liquefaction, because saturated unit Boilingofsand
weight s is constant. Thus, v decreases with the increase andwater
of pore water pressure. Ultimately, v will be reduced to
zero with complete liquefaction, and u will be equal to v
will be equal to v. At that stage, sand grains lose their con-
tacts and the ground behaves as a liquid mixed with sand
h Increaseof
and groundwater. This results, as explained later, in consid- SandGrains
porewater
erable damage to structures. The pore water pressure propor- PoreWater pressure
tionally increases with progress of the liquefaction, so
ground water moves upward to ground surface. When the
ground is relatively weak and there are openings between vi' ui
uui+u
building foundations and surrounding ground, the sand and v: TotalVerticalStress=v +u ui: InitialPoreWaterPressure
water spouts out. v': EffectiveVerticalStress (HydrostaticPressure)
u: PoreWaterPressure u: ExcessivePoreWaterPressure
Soil is classified according to grain size. The largest is grav- vi'
v': EffectiveVerticalStress
el, from 2 to 75 mm in diameter. Next is sand from 0.07 to 2 0
mm, followed by silt and clay, consisting of a so-called fine
fraction that is smaller than sand. Silt grains measure 0.005 Fig. 3.3 Mechanism of occurrence of soil liquefaction
0.075 mm, and clay less than 0.005 mm. When soil mostly (after Hamada)

3
granite liquefied.
Conditions for the occurrence of soil liquefaction can be
summarized as follows:
(i) Sandy ground, i.e., soil containing a high percent-
age of sand.
(ii) A high ground water level, i. e., saturated soil
(iii) Loosely accumulated sandy ground
ing inner open spaces, of inground structures such as
sewage manholes and purification tanks, generally, be-
comes less than that of liquefied soil. This causes the
uplift of such structures due to soil liquefaction.
Fig.3.6 shows the uplift of: (a) & (b) a Gas station dur-
ing the 1990 Luzon Island earthquake

These conditions apply to lands reclaimed from sea, lake and

marsh, and lowland along rivers, delta, old stream, and flood
plain. The CLLEX project is lowland along the Rio Chico
River and flood plain. In contrast, liquefaction is much less
likely in mountain, plateau and hilly areas. The latter areas,
however, may be susceptible if there are small rivers with
loose sand sedimentation beside them.

3.1.2 Damage Caused by Liquefaction

Liquefaction came to be recognized from an engineering
standpoint in the aftermath of the 1964 Niigata earthquake. (a) Gas Station Uplift by the 1990 Luzon Island earthquake
However there had been reports on the phenomenon, includ-
ing spouting of sand water from sand volcanoes and ground
fissure during past earthquakes before the Niigata earth-
quake. Soil liquefaction occurs as a fluid-like behavior and
causes damage as described below.

(i) Subsidence, inclination, and collapse of structures from

a reduction in bearing capacity of the ground: due to
soil liquefaction, the ground behaves as a mixture of
the sand and water. Normally, sand grains are tightly
clustered, providing supportive force to weight of
structures and ground itself. Soil liquefaction largely
decreases the bearing capacity and thus causes subsid-
ence, inclination and collapse of structures.

Fig. 3.5 shows a bridge pier collapsed by the 1990 Lu- (b) Gas tank of Gas Station Uplift by the 1990 Luzon Island
zon Island earthquake. earthquake

Fig. 3.6 Uplift of underground structures due to buoyancy

of liquefied soil (youd, etc.)

(iii) Damage to earth structures: soil liquefaction causes

large scale deformation, slide and subsidence in earth
structures, such as a roads and railway embankments,
dikes, leaves and earth dams. In general, greater use of
sandy soil than of silt and clay makes construction
works easy. Fig. 3.7 shows damage of road of lateral
spreading by the 1990 Luzon Islands earthquake.

Fig. 3.5 Collapse of a bridge by bearing capacity loss

(1990 Luzon Island earthquake) (Ishihara)

(ii) Uplift of underground structures due to buoyancy of

liquefied soil: the unit weight of liquefied soil is rough-
ly 16 -20 KN/m3. The apparent unit weight, consider-

4
Fig. 3.7 Damage of road of lateral spreading by the 1990
Luzon Islands earthquake.3.2 Estimation of Liq-
uefaction Potential (Ishihara, etc.)
3.1.3 Estimation of Potential
Method for the estimation of liquefaction potential can be
selected from the following three approaches, according to
the importance of structures, area of estimation, and soil
survey precision:
(i) Method by topographical conditions
(ii) Method based on soil exploration( e.g., N-value and
grain size distribution)
(iii) Detailed method based on liquefaction vulnerability
tests in laboratory and dynamic response analysis of the
ground
The first method is used when estimation of liquefaction
potential is needed over wide areas, for example, highway
like a CLLEX. The second method has been adopted in
Specifications of Highway Bridges [3], Building Standards
[5], and Earthquake Resistant Design of Port Facilities [6].
The third method is used for the design of structures with a
high importance, such as high-rise buildings and long-span
bridge.
In the first method, liquefaction potential is categorized into
the following groups, depending on geology and geography:
High potential area of liquefaction (A) : Current and
old river channel, alluvial plain, lands reclaimed from
sea, river, swamp and valley, lowland between sand
dune.
Medium-potential area of liquefaction (B) : All ground
not fitting the description of either (A) or (C).
Low-potential area of liquefaction (C): Plateau, hill,
mountain, and alluvial fan.
Liquefaction assessment has been carried using two meth-
ods; Liquefaction Resistance Factor (FL) method. A lique-
faction potential index is calculated from the liquefaction
resistance factor (FL value) for every depth derived from
drilling data, geology sections and conditions of geomorpho-
logical unit. The possibility of liquefaction based on lique-
faction resistance factor (FL value) is generally assessed as
follows:
Fig. 3.9 Grain size distribution criterion (Sand Layer of
CLLEX)
FL > 1.0: There is little possibility of liquefaction in
the depth.
FL 1.0: There is the possibility of liquefaction in
the depth.
Japan Road Association (1996) revised Specifications for
Highway Bridges issued in 1990 based on the generating
situation of liquefaction by the 1995 Southern Hyogo Pre-
fecture Earthquake as follows:
(i) The range for object soil of liquefaction assessment
was expanded from only alluvial sandy soil to diluvial
or gravelly soil.
(ii) The underestimate of the intensity in a portion with
high N-value was resolved.
Liquefaction potential is assessed for following strata:
Alluvial sandy soil (other layers are included if re-
quired) in principle
Saturated soil shallower than 20m, with groundwater
level shallower than 10m
Soil with Fc 35%
Soil with Fc > 35% and Ip 15, here, Fc: granule part
content [%], Ip: plastic index
Soil with mean grain diameter 10mm or less and 10% grain
diameter 1mm or less.
The factor of safety against liquefaction (FL) in every depth
of the ground is defined with the dynamic shear strength
ratio R of the stratum and the seismic shear stress ratio L
acting on the stratum as follows:
F L R / L (3d)
4 COUNTERMEASURES AGAINST SOIL LIQ-
UEFACTION
The followings are two means to reduce the damage caused
by soil liquefaction:
(i) Prevention of occurrence of soil liquefaction
(ii) Reinforcement of foundation of structures for resisting
5
 soil liquefaction tion with soil susceptible to liquefaction. This gravel fill will
intercept upward groundwater flows and divert it away from
In this section, the first method which attempts to change the the embankment. Pore pressure build up will be reduced
ground to non liquefiable category is introduced. As resulting in the mitigation of the effects of liquefaction.
explained above, condition of occurrence of soil liquefaction
are that the soil consists of loose sand and is saturated with
groundwater. In case of CLLEX, beside bridge foundation
prevention of liquefaction by idea of (i), and embankment
prevention of liquefaction by idea combination (i) and (ii).
The essential idea to prevent occurrence of liquefaction is
elimination of one of these conditions. There are three con-
ceivable approaches:
(i) Densification of loose sand, so soil resists liquefaction
(ii) Lowering the groundwater level, so soil becomes un-
saturated
(iii) Drainage of groundwater to reduce excessive pore wa-
ter pressure

As the first method (i), the vibro flotation, sand compac-

tion pile, and dynamic consolidation methods have been
applied. The sand compaction pile method is illustrated by
Fig. 4.1. First steel pipes are driven into the ground and sand
is cast into the pipes. By vibrating the pipes, liquefaction
resistant dense sand columns are constructed in the ground.
This method has been widely used in Japan. It has been re- Fig. 4.1 Sand Compaction Pile Method
ported that prior to construction of Tokyo Disneyland,
ground improvements were conducted using the sand com-
paction pile method. It was consequently unaffected by liq-
uefaction from the 2011 Tohoku earthquake. The sand com-
paction pile method allows ground improvement to depths of
10 -20m. In case of CLLEX, sand compaction pile method is
used beside bridge foundation in liquefiable area.

Road and railway embankment has been damaged by soil

liquefaction during earthquakes. Measures to lessen the po-
tential for embankment sliding and settlement are particular-
ly important to increase the safety and reliability of ex-
pressway, such as the CLLEX. Fig. 4.2 shows road em-
bankment damage by lateral spreading during the 2011
Tohoku earthquake.

In case of CLLEX embankment, Fig. 4.3 shows a two meter Fig. 4.2 Road embankment damage by lateral spreading
thick gravel fill is proposed to be provided in the road sec- during the 2011 Tohoku earthquake (Itoh, etc)

Fig. 4.3 Embankment prevention of liquefaction (CLLEX)

6
5 THE LIQUEFACTION INDUCED BY THE 1990
LUZON ISLAND EARTHQUAKE AND ITS
IMPLICATIONS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING
Authors are prepared with the sole purpose of providing an
overall view of 1990 Luzon earthquake and its geotechnical
effects such as ground liquefaction. The information is
hoped to provide fundamental data for the design and con-
struction of new civil engineering structures such as the
CLLEX between Tarlac and Cabanatuan (Fig. 5.1)
Fig. 5.1 Planned CLLEX Expressway between Cabanatu-
an and Tarlac and liquefaction sites (Ishihara)
Ground Acceleration
Fig. 5.3 Estimated ground acceleration and velocity
5.1 Fundamental Characteristics of the 1990 Luzon Island
Earthquake
1990 Luzon earthquake occurred on July16, 1990 and had
surface magnitude Ms of 7.8 and moment magnitude Mw of
7.7. The hypocenter depth was estimated to be ranging be-
tween 15 and 30 km depending upon the reporting institute.
The focal mechanism solution indicated left lateral strike
slip faulting. The strike, dip and rake angle of the earthquake
fault were 153, 89 and 344 respectively. The total rupture
time was estimated to be ranging between 30 to 35 seconds.
Nevertheless, there are some reports that the rupture dura-
tion was longer. The earthquake resulted in 130 km long
surface rupture. However, the aftershock activity and its
possible extension to the Philippine Sea implied that the
rupture length should be around 160 km. The maximum slip
was 600 cm horizontally and 200 cm vertically and its recur-
rence period is estimated to be about 310 years.
Aydan (2002) established the following relation between the
MMI and maximum ground acceleration:
2.8 for soils and 0.56 for rocks. I and h stand for the intensi-
ty scale and depth of the hypocenter, respectively. Figure 6.7
compares the estimation with actual data. For intensity scale
of VIII, the maximum ground acceleration should be more
than 0.4g.
Maximum ground acceleration and velocity contours for
1990 Luzon earthquake were computed using strong motion
attenuation relations proposed by Aydan (2007, 2012); Ay-
dan and Itoh (2011) and given above and they are shown in
Fig. 5.3 for a moment magnitude of 7.7 and surface shear
velocity of 270 m/s. For the rock base motions, the numbers
can be reduced by a factor of 0.63.
Ground Velocity
7
 Table 5.1 The values of parameters in Eq. (5.1)

Bound Al Bl
Upper (UL) 36 160
Mean (ML) 36 200
Lower (LL) 36 200

As mentioned previously, the ground motions are strongly

affected by the directivity effects. Therefore, the equation
based on moment magnitude with the consideration of
orientation of the earthquake fault is proposed by Aydan
(2007) and given as follows:

Rl 0.08 3 0.5 sin 1.5 sin e 0.9 M w (5.2)

Figure 5.2. Relationship between MMI and maximum Estimations from this equation together and other available
ground acceleration equations are compared with ground liquefaction data of the
1990 Luzon earthquake as well as those for the Great East
Japan Earthquake of 2010 in Fig. 5.4. Eq. (5.2) and the em-
5.2 Ground Liquefaction Caused by the 1990 Luzon Island pirical relations by Wakamatsu (2000) and Ambraseys
Earthquake (1988) provide the best bounds for the maximum limiting
The city of Dagupan, which is the chief port and commercial distance for ground liquefaction and Eq. (5.2) takes into ac-
and financial center of Northern Luzon; was devastated by count the faulting orientation. However, it should be noted
the extensive liquefaction which occurred in the sandy de- that both the relations proposed Ambraseys (1988) and Ku-
posits prevailing in the city area along the Pantal river. Phys- ribayashi-Tatsuoka fail to estimate ground liquefaction for
ical evidences of liquefaction such as sand boiling and lat- magnitudes less than 5.4. Fig. 5.5 shows the areal estimation
eral flow of the ground were seen everywhere in the city. of ground liquefaction and compares with observations. It
The ground liquefaction was even observed in Manila. should be noted that the area consisting of firm soil/rocky
ground could not liquefy as indicated in the respective figure.
Depending upon the ground conditions, some structures
were uplifted or settled and tilted. The lateral spreading was
also widespread and it is reported that some of the ground
disappeared into the sea (Hamada 1991). For instance, in
Dagupan City, the road on the Nable street in the district of
Pantal moved by 1 to 3 m towards the river as a consequence
of liquefaction developed in the sandy deposits. The right
bank of the Pantal river in the vicinity of the Magsaysay
bridge is underlain by sandy deposits and consequently de-
veloped extensive liquefaction accompanied by a lateral
spreading amounting to about 5 m.

5.3 Empirical Criteria based on Magnitude

There are several relations to estimate the limiting epicen-
tral/hypocentral of distances to the site of liquefaction (i.e
Kuribayashi-Tatsuoka, 1975; Ambraseys, 1988; Wakamatsu,
2000; Aydan et al. 1998, 2000, 2009): Most of these equa-
tions may be categorized as semi-empirical equations. Aydan
& Itoh. (1998, 2000) suggested the following equation be-
tween the surface magnitude of the earthquake and hypocen-
tral limiting distance of ground liquefaction for lower, upper
and mean values.
Fig. 5.5 Comparison of areal limits by empirical relations
Rl = AlMs - Bl (5.1) for ground liquefaction and comparison with ob-
servations
The values of parameters in Eq. (5.1) are given in Table 5.1.

8

Fig. 5.4 Comparison of Empirical relations with observa-
tions
6 CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS ON THE
PLANNED EXPRESSWAY
The area is very close to the Philippine faults system and the
epicenter of the 1990 Luzon earthquake. There is no doubt
that the same situations would be repeated if an earthquake
with a similar magnitude occurs. However, the recurrence of
the similar magnitude earthquake in the same place requires
some accumulation of crustal straining. It is estimated that
the recurrence period of the earthquake fault, which caused
the 1990 Luzon earthquake, is about 300-320 years. There-
fore, the possibility of the rupture other faults such as the
East Zambales fault, Tubao fault or Valley Fault System
should be considered in view of the service-life of the ex-
pressway.
Therefore, Authors adopted disaster prevention and mitiga-
tion for the design in CLLEX and considered liquefaction
countermeasures.
REFERENCES
Hamada M. (2014). Engineering for Earthquake Disaster
Mitigation
Ando M. and M. Kikuchi (1991). A subfault system of the
16 July ]990 Luzon earthquake as observed on after-
shock distribution and complicated P waves, Reoconais-
sance Report on the 16 July 1990 Luzon earthquake,
Philippines.
Ambraseys, N.N. (1988). Engineering Seismology. Earth-
quake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, V.17,1-105.
Aydan, . (2002): The inference of the earthquake fault and
strong motions for Kutch earthquake of January 26,
2001. A symposium on the records and lessons from the
recent large domestic and overseas earthquakes. Japan
Earthquake Engineering Society, Tokyo, 135-140.
Aydan, ., (2007). Inference of seismic characteristics of
possible earthquakes and liquefaction and landslide risks
from active faults (in Turkish). The 6th National Confer-
ence on Earthquake Engineering of Turkey, Istanbul,
Vol.1, 563-574.
Aydan . Itoh J. (2011) A new proposal for strong ground
motion estimations with the consideration of earthquake
fault. 7th National Conference on Earthquake Engineer-
ing, stanbul, Turkey, Paper No. 65 (on CD).
Aydan , Ulusay R, Kumsar H (2000) Liquefaction phe-
nomenon in the earthquakes of Turkey, including recent
Erzincan, Dinar and Adana-Ceyhan eartqhuakes. Pro-
ceedings of the 12th World Conference on Earthquake
Engineering, Auckland, 12WCEE-2000, Paper No: 709,
7p (on CD).
Campbell, K.W. (1981): Near source attenuation of peak
horizontal acceleration. Bull. Seis. Soc. Am., 71(6),
2039-2070.
Fukushima Y, Tanaka T, Kataoka S (1988) A new attenua-
tion relationship for peak ground acceleration derived
from strong-motion accelerograms, Proc. 9th World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering 2, Tokyo-Kyoto,
Japan, pp. 343- 348.
Galgana, G, Hamburger, M, McCaffrey, R, Corpuz, E.,
Chen, Q. (2007): Analysis of crustal deformation in Lu-
zon, Philippines using geodetic observations and earth-
quake focal mechanisms. Tectonophysics, 432, 63-87.
Hamada, M. (1991 ): Report of Damage Reconnaissance for
the 1990 Philippine , Luzon Earthquake., Association for
Development of Earthquake Prediction (in Japanese).
Ishihara, K., Acacio, A. and Towhata, I., (1993) Liquefac-
tion Induced Ground Damage in Dagupan in the July 16,
1990 LUZON EARTHQUAKE, Soils and Foundations,
Vol.33,No. 1, 133-154, JGS.
Mechanics and Foundation EngineeringJoyner, W.B. and
Boore, D.M. (1981): Peak horizontal acceleration and
velocity from strong motion records from the 1979 Impe-
rial Valley California Earthquake. Bull. Seis. Soc. Am.,
71(6), 2011-2038.
Kuribayashi E, Tatsuoka F.1975Brief review of soil
liquefaction during earthquakes in Japan, Soils and
Foundations, 15, 4, 81-92.
Molas, G. L. and F. Yamazaki, 1994. Seismic macrozona-
tion of the Philippines based on seismic hazard analysis,
Structural Eng./Earthquake Eng. (JSCE), II:I; 33s-43s .
Nakata T, R.S, Punongbayan, H,Tsutsumi, R. Rimando, J.
Daligdig, A, Daag and G. Besana (1991 ).A preliminary
report on ground rupture of the 16 July 1990 Luzon
earthquake, Philippines, Reconaissance Report on the 16
July 1990 Luzon earthquake, Philippines.
Port and Harbour Research Institute, Japan (1997) Hand-
book on Liquefaction Remediation of Reclaimed Land,
Balkema, The Netherlands.
Seed HB, De Alba P (1986): Use of SPT and CPT tests for
evaluating the liquefaction resistance of sands. Proceed-
ings of In Situ86, ASCE, 281-302.
Seed HB, Idriss IM (1971). Simplified procedure for evalu-
ating soil liquefaction potential. ASCE, J. of Soil Mech.
& Foundations Div. 97(9), 1249-1273.
Tokimatsu K, Yoshimi Y (1983): Empirical correlation of
soil liquefaction based on SPT N-value and fines content.
Journal of Soil and Foundations 23 (4): 56-
74.Wakamatsu K (2000), Liquefaction history, 416-
1997, Japan. Proc. of 12th World Conference on Earth-
quake Engineering, Paper No. 2270, 8 pages.
Youd ,T.L., I. M. Idriss, R. D. Andrus, I.Arango, G.Castro,
J. T. Christian, R. Dobry, W. D. L. Finn, L.F. Harder Jr.,
M.E. Hynes, K. Ishihara, J. P. Koester, S.S C. Liao,13
W.F. Marcuson III, G.R. Martin, J.K. Mitchell,
Y.Moriwaki,M. S. Power, P.K. Robertson, R.B. Seed
and K. H. Stokoe II (2001). Liquefaction Resistance of
9
Soils: Summary Report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998
NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction
Resistance of Soils, J. of Geotechnical and Geo-
environmental Engineering, ASCE, 127, 10, 817-833.

10