Proceedings of the International Symposium on Engineering Lessons Learned fromthe 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake, March 1-4, 2012, Tokyo, Japan

LIQUEFACTION IN THE 2011 GREAT EAST JAPAN
EARTHQUAKE: LESSONS FOR U.S. PRACTICE
Ross W. BOULANGER1
1

Professor, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California, Davis,
California, USA, rwboulanger@ucdavis.edu

ABSTRACT: Liquefaction in the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake will provide
important lessons for the geotechnical profession regarding the seismic performance of awide range of geotechnical and constructed facilities affected by liquefaction. This
paper examines three aspects of observed liquefaction effects and discusses how they
relate to current issues in geotechnical practice in the U.S. Potential opportunities forinternational group research efforts stemming from each of these examples are also
discussed.
Key Words: Great East Japan earthquake, earthquake engineering, liquefaction, levees,
strong ground motions

INTRODUCTION
Case histories of liquefaction in the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake provide important opportunities
for learning about the seismic performance of a wide range of geotechnical systems and constructedfacilities affected by liquefaction. The opportunities for learning are particular strong because of theextensive network of strong motion recording stations and the volume of detailed data being compiled.
The lessons learned from these case histories have implications for geotechnical engineering scienceand practice around the world.
Teams from the Geotechnical Extreme Events Reconnaissance (GEER) Association participated in
geotechnical reconnaissance efforts with support and collaboration of numerous colleagues in Japan.
A total of 25 GEER members worked with more than 26 Japanese counterparts in investigations of site
response, liquefaction, levees, dams, ports, bridges, lifelines, recovery, and surface rupture (April 11
earthquake). Additional field work and analyses of the data by GEER members in collaboration withJapanese colleagues are ongoing.
This paper and the associated panel presentation will examine select aspects of liquefaction effects
observed by GEER members (GEER 2011a, 2011b, 2011c, 2011d; http://geerassociation.org/) andJapanese colleagues (e.g., Ishihara et al. 2011, Tokimatsu et al. 2011), and discuss how they relate tosome current issues for geotechnical practice in the U.S. The presented observations and examples ofthe potential lessons they offer are drawn from the above referenced GEER reports and fromdiscussions with team members. Potential opportunities for future international research efforts
stemming from each of these examples are also discussed.

655

LIQUEFACTION AND STRONG MOTION RECORDING STATIONS
Evidence of liquefaction was observed at seven strong ground motion recording stations in the Tokyoand Kanto Plain areas; photos of three of these sites are shown in Fig. 1. Another seven recording
stations with soil profiles that would be considered susceptible to liquefaction did not exhibit surface
evidence of liquefaction. The recorded motions at the ground surface show clear evidence ofliquefaction in some cases, but in other cases the characteristics of the motions do not clearly exhibit
any signs of significant softening or cyclic mobility during the time of strong shaking. The data fromthese sites with and without liquefaction will provide an excellent basis for evaluating the capabilities
and limitations in one-dimensional nonlinear dynamic site response models.
GEER teams have assisted Japanese researchers with characterizing several of these sites using
surface wave techniques (e.g., MASW and SASW) and arrangements have been made for cone
penetration test (CPT) soundings at select sites. The sharing and on-line archiving of such data are
an important component of earthquake reconnaissance activities. The volume of data regarding
earthquake observations is growing rapidly, from seismology to sociology, such that systematic meansfor collecting, documenting, and mining such data also requires careful consideration and study.

(a)

(b)
(c)
Fig. 1 Sand boils at three strong ground motion recording stations (GEER 2011)656

A number of different one-dimensional nonlinear dynamic site response programs are used in U.S.
practice for estimating site response for liquefiable soil deposits. The results of such analyses areoften used to estimate motions in overlying geotechnical or constructed systems or kinematic loadingon embedded pile foundations. The constitutive models used for the liquefiable soils include somethat can account for cyclic mobility behaviors while others can only monotonically soften withincreasing pore pressure generation. Recent evaluations of these site response programs against
recordings of the liquefaction arrays at Port Island during the 1995 Kobe Earthquake and Wildlife in
the 1987 Superstition Hills Earthquake have illustrated that some of these programs produce
unrealistic responses (e.g., Sideras 2011, Ziotopoulou et al. 2012). Some of these differences
between recorded and computed responses for these two case histories are likely due to the combined
influence of the approximations and limitations associated with 1D site response analyses (i.e.,
assumption of vertical propagation of shear waves in horizontally layered profiles), sitecharacterization, soil properties, constitutive models, and numerical procedures. However, thedifferences in constitutive models are a major contributor to the more unrealistic responses. For thisreason, further examination of these programs against the broader set of recorded data from the Great
East Japan Earthquake can be expected to provide further illustration of important limitations in these
programs, and thus contribute to the adoption of better standardized practices for assessing site
response in liquefiable soil profiles.
An opportunity for an international group research effort would be the systematic evaluation ofvarious 1D nonlinear site response programs and procedures against this body of data. The
documentation of the simulation models, including the calibration and numerical procedure protocols,
would be a valuable step for defining the potential limitations (bias and dispersion) in such models.
The resulting database could present a lasting resource for evaluation of new simulation programs ormodeling protocols as they are developed in the future.

LIQUEFACTION AND BUILDINGS IN URAYASU
Liquefaction at communities around Tokyo Bay and along the Tone River caused extensive damage tolight residential and light commercial structures in many of the areas visited, with the magnitudes ofthe settlements and tilts for structures on shallow foundations being larger than often observed for suchlight structures. The photographs in Fig. 2 illustrate a case in Urayasu where the sidewalk and street
settled approximately 30 cm relative to a building on piles, while an adjacent three-story building on amat settled 40 cm more than the adjacent ground surface and tilted noticeably without observabledamage to the superstructure. Tilts of up to 2 or 3 degrees were observed in many cases forresidential homes (Fig. 3a). Many of the residential structures appear to have been founded on
mat-type foundations with deep grade beams (Fig. 3b) that limited damage to the superstructures
despite the large settlements and tilts.
Shallow foundations for light residential and commercial structures in U.S. practice are often
comprised of shallow spread footings with grade beam connections and a concrete surface slab.
These shallow foundation systems are not as stiff or strong as the example from Japan shown in Fig.
3b. Liquefaction of foundation soils can therefore cause significantly more deformation anddistortion across the foundation system and into the structure. For example, the Moss Landing
Marine Laboratory shown in Fig. 4 was destroyed when liquefaction during the 1989 Loma Prieta
earthquake caused the foundation to stretch by about 1.0 to 1.3 m. Stronger and stiffer foundations inareas of potential liquefaction appear to be an effective means of protecting the structure fromexcessive distortions even when ground settlements are relatively large. Of course, there is still thedamage to the underground utilities and the cost of leveling the structure after the earthquake, but thisis less expensive than the complete loss of the structure.

657

Fig. 2 Differential settlements between a building on piles (gray building on the left), a building on ashallow foundation (brown building on the right), and the ground surface in Urayasu (GEER 2011)

Fig. 3 Tilt and settlement of a residential home in Urayasu (left photo) and a foundation for aresidential home in construction (right photo) (GEER 2011)

Fig. 4 Wood frame structure on shallow foundations nearly collapsed due to liquefaction-induced
stretching of foundation by about 1.3 m in Loma Prieta earthquake (courtesy of L. F. Harder, Jr.)

Ishihara et al. (2011) report that SPT-based liquefaction analysis procedures do not appear to
explain the differences in liquefaction-induced settlements across the various alluvial and fill materialsof different ages and fines content in the Urayasu area. Resolution of such differences may require
more basic research on the effects of ageing and fines content on liquefaction behavior and associated658

modifications to design procedures.
An opportunity for international group research would be the systematic evaluation of various
engineering procedures for predicting liquefaction and liquefaction-induced settlements against thisbody of data. The comparison of engineering procedures against an established database would be avaluable step toward defining limitations and uncertainties (bias and dispersion) in the engineering
procedures used in different countries. The resulting database would present a lasting resource forthe future updating and development of engineering procedures as our knowledge and understandingof liquefaction phenomena improves.
Liquefaction-induced damage to utilities caused widespread disruptions for homeowners andbusinesses and is an important consideration for any urban area. Recent experiences from New
Zealand have demonstrated the tremendous ability of HDPE and MDPE pipes to withstand significant
ground deformations associated with liquefaction (O’Rourke, personal communication). The
compilation of experiences from urban areas such as Urayasu will provide further data to definefragilities of different types of piping systems. The combined lessons are expected to have an
important effect on the future practices in the U.S. and could similarly be of interest to many countries.

LIQUEFACTION AND LEVEES
It appears that the majority of the levee reaches along the rivers in the Tohoku and Kanto regions
performed well, with the large majority of their lengths exhibiting little or no damage or distress.
This generally good performance may be partly attributed to the fact that river levels were relatively
low at the time of the earthquake and thus the majority of levee embankments were not saturated. In
many areas, settlements of non-distressed levees appeared to be less than about 15 cm relative tostructures such as bridge piers or buried water conveyance structures.
Nonetheless, numerous levee reaches sustained moderate to major damage (e.g., Fig. 5) whichappeared to be related to foundation liquefaction. Settlements of 20-40 cm were observed in many
areas, with greater settlements in reaches of relatively limited lengths (commonly only 100-300 m inlength). Little or no flooding appeared to have resulted from the damage to the levees since waterlevels were low within the adjacent channels.
Levees along the Hinuma River had extensive damage from foundation liquefaction (Fig. 6).
These levees were apparently founded on reclaimed land, and developed extensive cracking andslumping for over 2.5 km along the western margin of the shallow, near-coastal lake. New fill had
been placed after the earthquake into some reaches where it appeared that the water might breach theslumped levee. The extensive damage to these levees, as opposed to the more limited (but multiple)
damaged reaches of levees in other locations, appears to reflect the presence of man-made foundationmaterials or of water levels high enough to saturate both the foundation and the lower portions of theembankment. In some sections, the water level appeared to be about a meter higher than the landsideground surface. Exposed embankment material in the numerous large cracks indicated that the upper
fill was composed of clayey sands and gravels. However, the numerous sand boils found in thecracks were generally clean, fine to medium-grained sands, which would be consistent with theunderlying foundation being reclaimed land or fills. The length of liquefaction damage hassignificant implications for saturated levees constructed of or on dredged material, such as those in the
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta in California’s Central Valley.
The performance of four levee reaches on improved ground along the Naruse River was examined.
These levee reaches had previously experienced major liquefaction damage during the 2003 Miyagi
North Continuation Earthquake (Mw 6.2) and had been repaired with a mix-in-place soil cementfoundation treatment. All four sites appeared to have performed well with no observable damage
from the apparently stronger 2011 earthquake shaking. Notably, two of these sites had moderateliquefaction-related levee damage directly beyond the limits of the ground treatment (Fig. 7a). In
some cases, this resulted in significant transverse cracks along the transition boundary between thetreated and non-treated sections of the levees (Fig. 7b). Such transverse cracking may be expected659

where the foundation stiffness of adjacent levee sections has abrupt, dramatic changes. Transverse
cracks between treated and non-treated levee reaches may be an issue that needs to be considered
carefully because such cracks have the potential to lead to failures by seepage erosion through thecracks if the adjacent water levels are high enough and the levee is not designed with internal details
that minimize the potential for such erosion failures.

Fig. 5 Levee Damage along Naruse River Left Levee at River Kilometer 11.3 (GEER 2011b,d)Fig. 6 Views of Hinuma River Levee Slumped and Cracked Due to Liquefaction (GEER 2011b,d)Fig. 7 View of Treated and Untreated Levee Reaches along Naruse River Right Levee at River
Kilometer 15.0 - 14.7 (previously treated section in the distance; left photo). Transverse Crack at
Boundary between Treated and Untreated Levee Reaches (right photo) (GEER 2011b,d)660

The seismic performance and recovery of the levee systems throughout the affected regions are ofinterest to ongoing seismic studies of levee systems throughout California. California has significant
seismic concerns for the levees protecting various urban areas and the vital Sacramento-San Joaquin
Delta (Fig. 8). A large portion of the Delta is comprised of “islands” which are ringed by levees andwhose land surfaces are below the level of the adjacent waterways (e.g., Fig. 9). The hundreds of km
of levees protecting these islands are therefore continuously holding back waters. Static failures ofthe levees periodically lead to flooding of the islands (e.g., Fig. 10), which can have a detrimental
effect on water quality for the State. Failure of multiple levees during a seismic event is a major
concern for the State of California due to its environmental and economic impacts.

Fig. 8 Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta in California (Lund et al. 2007; Copyright by Public Policy
Institute of California)

Toe ditch

Levee fill
Peat

Peat & silt
Silt & clay
Sand

0

5

10

Scale (m)Fig. 9 A levee cross-section from Sherman Island (Boulanger and Kishida 2007)

661

Fig. 10 Photographs from the Jones Tract failure in 2004 (photo courtesy of L. F. Harder, Jr.)

Statistics from Japan on the distribution of levee damage relative to geologic and constructedconditions can provide a basis for examining the procedures that are used to develop levee fragility
functions and assess the extent of damage across a system. These patterns of damages (and theirrelation to the geology), the performance of improved sections, and the associated practices forachieving rapid recovery offer potentially important lessons for California's levee systems. The
disaster in New Orleans and recent work on an International Levee Handbook illustrate the strong
international interest in sharing practices and understanding of levee systems. The experiences fromJapan could present an opportunity for an international group effort on exchanging and comparing
procedures used to assess the seismic response of levee systems and respond to seismic damages.

CONCLUDING REMARKSThe ongoing studies of liquefaction in Great East Japan Earthquake are likely going to have a major
impact on the science and engineering of liquefaction. The quantity and quality of data being
compiled in Japan: (1) provides unique opportunities for quantifying potential bias and dispersion in
the various analysis methods used to predict responses for a broad range of systems and (2) appears toindicate some unexpected behaviors that require further study. Documentation and archiving of thesedata in a form that facilitates their utilization by future researchers will be a lasting contribution to theadvancement of the science and engineering of liquefaction problems.
The experiences and data compiled from this earthquake offer some unique opportunities forstimulating international group research efforts. This paper briefly discussed observations regarding
strong ground motion recording stations underlain by liquefiable soils, liquefaction and buildings in
Urayasu, and levee damages due to liquefaction. Each of these example problems have importantconnections to problems in U.S. geotechnical practice and could be the basis for coordination ofinternational group research efforts which could produce significant advances for international
practices. Other aspects of liquefaction in this earthquake, while not discussed herein, offer similar
opportunities for significant advancements.
Societal risks associated with the presence of pervasive liquefaction hazards and larger thanconsidered ground motions need to be better understood and recognized so that appropriate decisions
can be made by at-risk communities and regions. The recent experiences with liquefaction in Japan
and New Zealand have made the risks to communities very clear and provide an opportunity for
improving public policies in various countries facing similar risks.

662

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
NSF provided support for geotechnical reconnaissance of this earthquake through a RAPID award to
Ross Boulanger, UC Davis, and Nick Sitar, UC Berkeley, under grant #CMMI-1138203. NSF
supported the field surface wave and CPT testing through a RAPID award to Brady Cox at Universityof Arkansas, under grant #CMMI-1138168. GEER is also supported by the National Science
Foundation (NSF) under grant #CMMI-00323914. Additional support for travel was provided by
Fugro, Geosyntec, Kleinfelder, and the US Geological Survey. Teams from GEER collaborated withcolleagues in Japan and teams from the Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (EERI), Pacific
Earthquake Engineering Research (PEER) Center, American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), andFederal Highways Administration (FHWA).
GEER team members included Pedro Arduino, Scott Ashford, Dominic Assimaki, Jonathan Bray,
Shideh Dashti, Craig Davis, Jennifer Donahue, David Frost, Les Harder, Jr., Youssef Hashash, Laurie
Johnson, Robert Kayen, Keith Kelson, Stephen Kramer, Ben Mason, Jorge Meneses, Robb Moss,
Thomas O'Rourke, Ellen Rathje, Kyle Rollins, Isabelle Ryder, Jonathan Stewart, Ashley Streig, Joe
Wartman, and Josh Zupan.
Numerous individuals and organizations from Japan contributed information and support,
including Akio Abe, Masanori Hamada, Kenji Ishihara, Tadahiro Kishida, Eiji Kohama, Takaji
Kokusho, Kazuhiko Kawashima, Kazuo Konagai, Tetsurou Kuwabara, Takashi Nagao, Shingo Satou,
Toshiro Suzuki, Kohji Tokimatsu, Yasuo Tanaka, Hajime Tanaka, Takahiro Sugano, Ikuo Towhata,Akihiro Takahashi, Jiro Takemura, Keiichi Tamura, Hideo Tokuyama, Toru Tomoika, Kiyoshi Yamada,
Yoshimichi Tsukamoto, Mitsutoshi Yoshimine, and M. Yoshizawa. Numerous graduate students andother colleagues throughout Japan assisted with the numerous challenges of field studies and travel.
The above assistance and support is greatly appreciated.

REFERENCES
Boulanger, R. W., and Kishida, T. (2007). "Seismic site response and hazards for the Sacramento-San
Joaquin Delta in California." Keynote lecture, International Conference on Civil andEnvironmental Engineering, Hiroshima University, October 11-12, Japan, 1-9.
California (1995). Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta Atlas, Department of Water Resources, Sacramento,
California.
Ishihara, K., Araki, K., and Bradley, B. (2011). “Characteristics of liquefaction-induced damage in the2011 Great East Japan Earthquake.” Geotec Hanoi, October, ISBN 978-604-82-000-8.
GEER (2011a). Quick Report 1: Geotechnical Quick Report on the Kanto Plain Region during the
March 11, 2011, Off Pacific Coast of Tohoku Earthquake, Japan. Geotechnical Extreme Events
Reconnaissance (GEER) Association, Report GEER-025a, http://geerassociation.org/.
GEER (2011b). Quick Report 2: Preliminary Observations of Levee Performance and Damage
Following the March 11, 2011 Tohoku Offshore Earthquake, Japan. Geotechnical Extreme Events
Reconnaissance (GEER) Association, Report GEER-025b, http://geerassociation.org/.
GEER (2011c). Google Earth File (May 10, 2011) for Tohoku Earthquake, Japan. Geotechnical
ExtremeEventsReconnaissance(GEER)
Association,
ReportGEER-025b,
http://geerassociation.org/.
GEER (2011d). Geotechnical Effects of the Mw 9.0 Tohoku, Japan, Earthquake of March 11, 2011.
EERI Special Earthquake Report, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, September, 12 pp.
Lund, J., Hanak, E., Fleenor, W., Howitt, R., Mount, J., and Moyle, P. (2007). Envisioning Futures for
the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Public Policy Institute of California, San Francisco, CA.
Sideras, S. S. (2011). “One-dimensional effective stress response analysis of liquefiable soil profiles,”Masters thesis, University of Washington, 207 pp.

663

Tokimatsu, K., Tamura, S., Suzuki, H., and Katsumata, K. (2011). “Quick Report on Geotechnical
Problems in the 2011 Tohoku Pacific Ocean Earthquake.” Research Reports on Earthquake
Engineering, CUEE, Tokyo Institute of Technology, No. 118, pp. 21-47 (in Japanese).
Ziotopoulou, K., Boulanger, R. W., and Kramer, S. L. (2012). "Site response analyses of liquefying
sites." Geo-Congress 2012: State of the Art and Practice in Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE
Geo-Institute, Oakland, CA, March 25-29, in-press.

664