Geotechnical assessment of seismicity and liquefaction potential at the Banarli landfill in Tekirdag, Turkey

References

• Aksoy ME, Meghraoui M, Vallée M, Çakır Z. 2010. Rupture characteristics of the AD 1912 Murefte (Ganos) earthquake segment of the North Anatolian fault (Western Turkey). Geology. 38(11):991–994. doi: 10.1130/G31447.1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ambraseys N, Finkel C. 1987. The Saros-Marmara earthquake of 9 August 1912. Earthq Engng Struct Dyn. 15(2):189–211. doi: 10.1002/eqe.4290150204.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ambraseys N, Jackson J. 2000. Seismicity of the Sea of Marmara (Turkey) since 1500. Geophy J Int. 141(3):F1–F6. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-246x.2000.00137.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrus RD, Stokoe KH. 2000. Liquefaction resistance of soils from shear-wave velocity. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng. 126(11):1015–1025. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2000)126:11(1015).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). 2013. Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures. Reston, VA, USA: ASCE/SEI, p. 7–10.
   Google Scholar
• Boulanger RW, Idriss I. 2012. Probabilistic standard penetration test-based liquefaction-triggering procedure. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng. 138(10):1185–1195. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000700.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Building Seismic Safety Council (BSSC). 2009. NEHRP recommended seismic provisions for new buildings and other structures, Part 3 Resource papers. Washington, D.C., USA.: FEMA, p. 341–363
   Google Scholar
• Çelebi M. 1987. Topographical and geological amplifications determined from strong-motion and aftershock records of the 3 March 1985 Chile earthquake. B Seismol Soc Am. 77(4):1147–1167. doi: 10.1785/BSSA0770041147.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Çelebi M. 1991. Topographical and geological amplification: case studies and engineering implications. Struct Saf. 10(1-3):199–217. doi: 10.1016/0167-4730(91)90015-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CESMD. 2021. Centre of engineering strong motion data. https://www.strongmotioncenter.org/cgi-bin/CESMD/search_options.pl. Accessed on 1 Mar 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Cetin KO, Seed RB, Der Kiureghian A, Tokimatsu K, Harder LF, JrKayen RE, Moss RE. 2004. Standard penetration test-based probabilistic and deterministic assessment of seismic soil liquefaction potential. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng. 130(12):1314–1340. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2004)130:12(1314).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen CJ, Juang CH. 2000. Calibration of SPT-and CPT-based liquefaction evaluation methods. In: innovations and applications in geotechnical site characterization 2000, Geo-Denver 2000, Denver, Colorado, 5-8 Aug 2000. Reston, VA, USA: ASCE, p. 49–64. doi: 10.1061/9780784405055.
   Google Scholar
• Darendeli MB. 2001. Development of a new family of normalized modulus reduction and material damping curves [Ph.D. dissertation]. University of Texas at Austin.
   Google Scholar
• Dobry R, Stokoe KH, Ladd RS, Youd TL. 1981. Liquefaction susceptibility from S-wave velocity. In In-Situ Tests to Evaluate Liquefaction Susceptibility, St. Louis, Missouri: ASCE National Convention, Oct 1981, p. 26–31.
   Google Scholar
• Gunasekera R, Ishizawa E, Oscar A, Daniell JE, Pomonis A, Macabuag JLDC, Brand J, Schaefer A, Romero R, Esper S, et al. 2023. Global rapid post-disaster damage estimation (GRADE) Report: Feb 6, 2023, Kahramanmaras Earthquakes—Turkiye Report (English). World Bank Group, Washington, D.C. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/099022723021250141/P1788430aeb62f08009b2302bd4074030fb.
   Google Scholar
• Huded PM, Dash SR. 2020. Seismic Wave Propagation in Layered Liquefiable Soils. In Prashant, A., Sachan, A., Desai, C. (Eds.) Advances in Computer Methods and Geomechanics, IACMAG Symposium 2019, Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering 55, p. 417–428. Singapore: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-981-15-0886-8_34.
   Google Scholar
• Idriss IM, Boulanger RW. 2010. SPT-based liquefaction triggering procedures. Rep. UCD/CGM-10-2.
   Google Scholar
• Imai T, Tonouchi K. 1982. Correlation of N-value with S-wave velocity and shear modulus. In: The 2nd European Symposium on Penetration Testing, Balkema, Amsterdam, 24–27 May 1982, pp p. 67–72.
   Google Scholar
• Iwasaki T. 1986. Soil liquefaction studies in Japan: state-of-the-art. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng. 5(1):2–68. doi: 10.1016/0267-7261(86)90024-2.
   Google Scholar
• Iwasaki T, Tatsuoka F, Tokida K, Yasuda S. 1978. A practical method for assessing soil liquefaction potential based on case studies at various sites in Japan. In: Proc. of 2nd Int. National Conf. on Microzonation, Sanfrancisco, California, 26 Nov-1 Dec 1978, Vol. 2, p. 885–896.
   Google Scholar
• Iwasaki T, Tokida K, Tatsuoka F, Watanabe S, Yasuda S, Sato H. 1982. Microzonation for soil liquefaction potential using simplified methods. In: Proc. of the 3rd Int. Conf. on Microzonation, Seattle, Washington, 28 Jun 1982, Vol. 3(2), p. 1310–1330.
   Google Scholar
• Juang CH, Ching J, Luo Z, Ku CS. 2012. New models for probability of liquefaction using standard penetration tests based on an updated database of case histories. Eng Geol. 133-134:85–93. doi: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2012.02.015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Juang CH, Ching J, Luo Z. 2013. Assessing SPT-based probabilistic models for liquefaction potential evaluation: a 10-year update. Georisk. 7(3):137–150. doi: 10.1080/17499518.2013.778117.
   Google Scholar
• Kayabali K. 1996. Soil liquefaction evaluation using shear wave velocity. Eng Geol. 44(1-4):121–127. doi: 10.1016/S0013-7952(96)00063-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kayen R, Moss RES, Thompson EM, Seed RB, Cetin KO, Kiureghian AD, Tanaka Y, Tokimatsu K. 2013. Shear-wave velocity-based probabilistic and deterministic assessment of seismic soil liquefaction potential. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng. 139(3):407–419. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000743.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kottke AR, Rathje EM. 2008. Technical Manual for Strata (Report No. 2008/10). Berkeley: Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California.
   Google Scholar
• Kramer SL. 1996. Geotechnical earthquake engineering. New Delhi: Pearson Education India.
   Google Scholar
• Lee DH, Ku CS, Yuan H. 2004. A study of the liquefaction risk potential at Yuanlin, Taiwan. Eng Geol. 71(1-2):97–117. doi: 10.1016/S0013-7952(03)00128-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liao SS, Whitman RV. 1986. Overburden correction factor for SPT in Sand. J Geotech Engrg. 112(3):373–377. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1986)112:3(373).
   Google Scholar
• Likitlersuang S, Plengsiri P, Mase LZ, Tanapalungkorn W. 2020. Influence of spatial variability of ground on seismic response analysis: a case study of Bangkok subsoils. Bull Eng Geol Environ. 79(1):39–51. doi: 10.1007/s10064-019-01560-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mase, Lindung Zalbuin, Agustina, Sintia, Farid, Muchammad, Supriani, Fepy, Tanapalungkorn, Weeradecth, Likitlersuang, Suched, Hardiansyah, 2023. Application of simplified energy concept for liquefaction prediction in Bengkulu City, Indonesia. Geotech Geol Eng, 341: 1999–2021. doi: 10.1007/s10706-023-02388-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mase LZ, Likitlersuang S, Tobita T. 2018. Non-linear site response analysis of soil sites in northern Thailand during the Mw 6.8 Tarlay earthquake. EJ. 22(3):291–303. doi: 10.4186/ej.2018.22.3.291.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mase LZ, Likitlersuang S, Tobita T. 2019. Cyclic behaviour and liquefaction resistance of Izumio sands in Osaka, Japan. Mar Geores Geotechnol. 37(7):765–774. doi: 10.1080/1064119X.2018.1485793.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mase LZ, Likitlersuang S, Tobita T. 2022. Verification of liquefaction potential during the strong earthquake at the border of Thailand-Myanmar. J Earthqu Eng. 26(4):2023–2050. doi: 10.1080/13632469.2020.1751346.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maurer BW, Green RA, Cubrinovski M, Bradley BA. 2015. Assessment of CPT-based methods for liquefaction evaluation in a liquefaction potential index framework. Géotechnique. 65(5):328–336. doi: 10.1680/geot.SIP.15.P.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moss RE, Seed RB, Kayen RE, Stewart JP, Der Kiureghian A, Cetin KO. 2006. CPT-based probabilistic and deterministic assessment of in situ seismic soil liquefaction potential. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng. 132(8):1032–1051. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2006)132:8(1032).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muduli PK, Das SK, Bhattacharya S. 2014. CPT-based probabilistic evaluation of seismic soil liquefaction potential using multi-gene genetic programming. Georisk. 8(1):14–28. doi: 10.1080/17499518.2013.845720.
   Google Scholar
• Muduli PK, Das SK. 2014. Evaluation of liquefaction potential of soil based on standard penetration test using multi-gene genetic programming model. Acta Geophys. 62(3):529–543. doi: 10.2478/s11600-013-0181-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muduli PK, Das SK. 2015a. First-order reliability method for probabilistic evaluation of liquefaction potential of soil using genetic programming. Int J Geomech. 15(3):04014052. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0000377.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muduli PK, Das SK. 2015b. Model uncertainty of SPT-based method for evaluation of seismic soil liquefaction potential using multi-gene genetic programming. Soils Found. 55(2):258–275. doi: 10.1016/j.sandf.2015.02.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naddaf M. 2023. Turkey-Syria earthquake: what scientists know. Nature. 614(7948):398–399. doi: 10.1038/d41586-023-00364-y.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nath SK, Srivastava N, Ghatak C, Adhikari MD, Ghosh A, Sinha Ray SP. 2018. Earthquake induced liquefaction hazard, probability and risk assessment in the city of Kolkata, India: its historical perspective and deterministic scenario. J Seismol. 22(1):35–68. doi: 10.1007/s10950-017-9691-z.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Okten S, Yazicigil H. 2005. Investigation of safe and sustainable yields for the sandy complex aquifer system in the Ergene River Basin, Thrace Region, Turkey. Turk J Earth Sci. 14(2):209–226. https://journals.tubitak.gov.tr/earth/vol14/iss2/5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poursartip B, Fathi A, Kallivokas LF. 2017. Seismic wave amplification by topographic features: a parametric study. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng. 92:503–527. doi: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2016.10.031.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qodri MF, Mase LZ, Likitlersuang S. 2021. Non-linear site response analysis of Bangkok subsoils due to earthquakes triggered by Three Pagodas Fault. EJ. 25(1):43–52. doi: 10.4186/ej.2021.25.1.43.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• RETMC. 2021. Regional Earthquake-Tsunami Monitoring Centre. http://www.koeri.boun.edu.tr/sismo/2/deprem-verileri/sayisal-veriler/veri-indirme-miniseed/. Accessed 1 Mar 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Robertson PK, Wride CE. 1998. Evaluating cyclic liquefaction potential using the cone penetration test. Can Geotech J. 35(3):442–459. doi: 10.1139/t98-017.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadi M. 1912. Movement of the Marmara basin (Marmara Havzasýnýn 26-27 Temmuz Hareket-i Arzi 15 Eylul 1328, Resimli Kitap Mat). Bull Am Astron Soc. 1:45.
   Google Scholar
• Schwarz G. 1978. Estimating the dimension of a model. Ann Stat. 6(2):461–464. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2958889.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seed HB, Idriss IM. 1967. Analysis of soil liquefaction: Niigata earthquake. J Soil Mech and Found Div. 93(3):83–108. doi: 10.1061/JSFEAQ.0000981.
   Google Scholar
• Seed HB, Idriss IM. 1971. Simplified procedure for evaluating liquefaction potential. J Soil Mech and Found Div. 97(9):1249–1273. doi: 10.1061/JSFEAQ.0001662.
   Google Scholar
• Seed HB, Idriss IM. 1981. Evaluation of liquefaction potential of sand deposits based on observations of performance in previous earthquakes. ASCE, Preprint 81:544.
   Google Scholar
• Seed HB, Idriss IM, Arango I. 1983. Evaluation of liquefaction potential using field performance data. J Geotech Engrg. 109(3):458–482. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1983)109:3(458).
   Google Scholar
• Seed HB, Tokimatsu K, Harder LF, Chung RM. 1985. Influence of SPT procedures in soil liquefaction resistance evaluations. J Geotech Engrg. 111(12):1425–1445. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1985)111:12(1425).
   Google Scholar
• Shen M, Juang CH, Ku CS, Khoshnevisan S. 2019. Assessing effect of dynamic compaction on liquefaction potential using statistical methods—a case study. Georisk. 13(4):341–348. doi: 10.1080/17499518.2019.1623407.
   Google Scholar
• Suleymanpasa Bld. 2020. Geotechnical report for the energy generation power plant building (Mavi Jeoteknik) (Report No. V202006030). Suleymanpasa Belediyesi (Suleymanpasa Municipality), Turkey.
   Google Scholar
• Tan O. 2021. A homogeneous earthquake catalogue for Turkey. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci. 21(7):2059–2073. doi: 10.5194/nhess-21-2059-2021.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tang XW, Bai X, Hu JL, Qiu JN. 2018. Assessment of liquefaction-induced hazards using Bayesian networks based on standard penetration test data. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci. 18(5):1451–1468. doi: 10.5194/nhess-18-1451-2018.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• TBEC. 2018. Turkish Building Earthquake Code [Turkiye Bina Deprem Yonetmeligi]. Ankara: T.C. Resmi Gazete.
   Google Scholar
• Tokimatsu K, Kojima H, Kuwayama S, Abe A, Midorikawa S. 1994. Liquefaction-induced damage to buildings in 1990 Luzon earthquake. J Geotech Engrg. 120(2):290–307. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1994)120:2(290).
   Google Scholar
• Tokimatsu K, Yoshimi Y. 1983. Empirical correlation of soil liquefaction based on SPT N-value and fines content. Soils Found. 23(4):56–74. doi: 10.3208/sandf1972.23.4_56.
   Google Scholar
• Toprak S, Holzer TL. 2003. Liquefaction potential index: field assessment. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng. 129(4):315–322. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2003)129:4(315).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trifunac MD. 1995. Empirical criteria for liquefaction in sands via standard penetration tests and seismic wave energy. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng. 14(6):419–426. doi: 10.1016/0267-7261(95)00016-N.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Youd TL, Idriss IM. 2001. Liquefaction resistance of soils: summary report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF workshops on evaluation of liquefaction resistance of soils. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng. 127(4):297–313. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2001)127:4(297).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang J, Wang T, Xiao S, Gao L. 2021. Chinese code methods for liquefaction potential assessment based on standard penetration test: an extension. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng. 144:106697. doi: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2021.106697.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang J, Xiao S, Huang H, Zhou J. 2020. Calibrating a standard penetration test based method for region-specific liquefaction potential assessment. Bull Eng Geol Environ. 79(10):5185–5204. doi: 10.1007/s10064-020-01815-w.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou J, Huang S, Zhou T, Armaghani DJ, Qiu Y. 2022. Employing a genetic algorithm and grey wolf optimizer for optimizing RF models to evaluate soil liquefaction potential. Artif Intell Rev. 55(7):5673–5705. doi: 10.1007/s10462-022-10140-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou YG, Chen YM. 2007. Laboratory investigation on assessing liquefaction resistance of sandy soils by shear wave velocity. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng. 133(8):959–972. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2007)133:8(959).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar