Environ Earth Sci (2017)76:207
DOI 10.1007/s12665-017-6533-9
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Evaluation of liquefaction-resistance of soils using standard
penetration test, cone penetration test, and shear-wave velocity
data for Dhaka, Chittagong, and Sylhet cities in Bangladesh
Md. Zillur Rahman1 • Sumi Siddiqua1
Received: 9 June 2016 / Accepted: 24 February 2017
Ó Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017
Abstract The evaluation of liquefaction-resistance for
saturated loose sandy and silty soils up to a depth of 20 m
is an important component of geotechnical site character-
ization in an earthquake-prone region. In the present study,
the standard penetration-test blow count (SPT-N), cone
penetration test (CPT) tip resistance (qc), and shear-wave
velocity (Vs) data of near-surface soils from Dhaka, Chit-
tagong, and Sylhet cities were used to evaluate the lique-
faction-resistance by a simplified procedure. At each site in
the cities, the liquefaction-resistance is evaluated using a
peak horizontal ground acceleration of 0.15, 0.20, and
0.25 g for a scenario earthquake of magnitude 7.5 (Mw).
Then, the liquefaction potential index (LPI) is calculated
for each site using the safety factors of liquefaction-resis-
tance and thickness of liquefiable soil layers to predict the
severity of liquefaction. The results indicate that sand boils
(LPI [ 5) and lateral spreading (LPI [ 12) will be gener-
ated due to liquefaction in the Holocene saturated sandy
and silty soils in Dhaka, Chittagong, and Sylhet cities. The
evaluation of liquefaction-resistance using the SPT-N, qc,
and Vs data shows considerable variation in the prediction
of safety factor and LPI. Therefore, it is necessary to use
two or more in situ test data to properly evaluate the liq-
uefaction-resistance of soils for an area; and the simplified
procedure needs to be used carefully. The results of the
liquefaction-resistance of soils can be used to improve the
ground condition in Dhaka, Chittagong and Sylhet cities
for the construction of earthquake-resilient structures and
future urban development.
& Sumi Siddiqua
sumi.siddiqua@ubc.ca
1
School of Engineering, The University of British Columbia,
Okanagan Campus, Kelowna, BC V1V 1V7, Canada
Keywords Liquefaction-resistance  SPT  CPT  Shear-
wave velocity  Simplified procedure  LPI
Introduction
Soil liquefaction is a common seismic hazard in saturated
loose sandy and silty soils during a damaging earthquake.
Liquefaction is the transformation of granular soils from a
solid state to a liquefied state due to excess pore water
pressure and reduced effective stress during an earthquake
(Marcuson 1978). Therefore, the evaluation of liquefac-
tion-resistance is an important component of geotechnical
site characterization for seismic-hazard assessment in an
earthquake-prone region. The liquefaction-resistance of
soils can be estimated from laboratory tests of soil samples,
such as the cyclic triaxial test, and from in situ tests, such
as the standard penetration test (SPT), cone penetration test
(CPT), shear-wave velocity (Vs) measurement. High-qual-
ity undisturbed soil samples are required to perform labo-
ratory tests for the evaluation of liquefaction-resistance.
But, it is sometimes difficult and costly to collect undis-
turbed samples from saturated loose sandy and silty soils.
Therefore, in situ tests are generally used for the evaluation
of seismic-liquefaction-resistance of soils.
The simplified procedure, originally proposed by Seed
and Idriss (1971), has been used for the evaluation of liq-
uefaction-resistance over the last four decades. This pro-
cedure has been modified, updated, and validated by
several researchers since its inception in 1971 (Seed and
Idriss 1971, 1982; Seed et al. 1983, 1984; Youd et al. 2001;
Idriss and Boulanger 2004). In the simplified procedure, the
corrected blow count for standard penetration test, (N1)60 is
commonly used to evaluate the liquefaction-resistance of
saturated loose sandy and silty soils in earthquake-prone
123
207 Page 2 of 14
regions (Seed and Idriss 1971, 1982; Seed et al.
1983, 1984, 1985; Juang et al. 2000; Youd et al. 2001;
Idriss and Boulanger 2004).
Because of intrinsic difficulties and poor repeatability of
the SPT, Robertson and Campanella (1985) have devel-
oped a procedure to evaluate the liquefaction-resistance of
soils using the CPT data. The procedure has been revised
and updated by Olsen (1997, 1988), Olsen and Koester
(1995), Robertson and Wride (1998), Seed and de Alba
(1986), Stark and Olson (1995) and others. The main
advantage of the CPT is that a nearly continuous penetra-
tion-resistance profile is generated for lithological inter-
pretation. The results of the CPT are more consistence and
repeatable than the SPT (Youd et al. 2001).
The SPT and CPT data are used to estimate the lique-
faction-resistance of non-gravelly soils. But, the penetra-
tion-resistance measurements by the SPT and CPT are not
generally reliable in gravelly soils. Large gravels may
interfere with the normal deformation of the soils around
the penetrometer and misleadingly increase the penetra-
tion-resistance. As a result, the Becker penetration test
(BPT) was recommended by Youd et al. (2001) to estimate
the penetration-resistance in gravelly soils.
Andrus and Stokoe (1997, 2000) have also proposed a
procedure to estimate the liquefaction-resistance of soils
using the field measurement of shear-wave velocity (Vs).
The advantages of using shear-wave velocity are that: 1)
the measurements are possible in hard soils where the SPT
and CPT are difficult to penetrate or to collect undisturbed
samples, such as gravelly soils, or at the site where the SPT
and CPT may not be permitted; 2) shear-wave velocity is a
basic mechanical property of soil materials, directly related
to the small-strain shear modulus; and 3) the small-scale
shear modulus is a parameter required in analytical pro-
cedures for estimating dynamic soil response and soil-
structure interaction analyses (Youd et al. 2001).
The simplified procedure is easy to use. The corrected
blow count for the standard penetration test (N1)60, the
corrected tip resistance for cone penetration test (qc1N), the
corrected Becker penetration-resistance (NBC), and the
corrected shear-wave velocity (Vs1) data are used to eval-
uate the liquefaction-resistance using the simplified pro-
cedure (Seed et al. 1983; Robertson and Campanella 1985;
Seed and de Alba 1986; Olsen and Koester 1995; Stark and
Olson 1995; Andrus and Stokoe 1997, 2000; Harder 1997;
Olsen 1997; Robertson and Wride 1998; Youd et al. 2001).
The simplified procedure is widely used in North America
and most parts of the world for the evaluation of lique-
faction-resistance of soils (Iwasaki et al. 1984; Chen and
Juang 2000; Broughton et al. 2001; Holzer et al. 2005;
Sonmez and Gokceoglu 2005; Holzer 2008; Juang et al.
2009; Heidari and Andrus 2010; Raghukanth and Dash
2010; Ulamiş and Kiliç 2012).
123
Environ Earth Sci (2017)76:207
Although the factor of safety of liquefaction (FL) can be
estimated by using the data of various in situ tests, it is not
a sufficient parameter to evaluate the severity of liquefac-
tion of a site (Sonmez and Gokceoglu 2005). Therefore, the
liquefaction potential index (LPI), originally proposed by
Iwasaki et al. (1978, 1982, 1984), has become a very
popular method due to the inclusion of the thickness and
depth of the liquefiable layer, and the factor of safety to
evaluate the liquefaction potential (Sonmez 2003; Toprak
and Holzer 2003; Rahman et al. 2015).
In the present study, the standard penetration-test blow
count (SPT-N), cone penetration test tip resistance (qc), and
shear-wave velocity (Vs) data from Dhaka, Chittagong, and
Sylhet cities in Bangladesh are used to evaluate the liq-
uefaction-resistance for a peak horizontal ground acceler-
ation of 0.15, 0.20, and 0.25 g using a scenario earthquake
of magnitude 7.5 (Mw). Then, the liquefaction potential
index (LPI) has been calculated using the method of Iwa-
saki et al. (1982) from the calculated factor of safety and
thickness of the liquefiable layers at a site.
Geology of study areas
The SPT-N, qc, and Vs data were collected for the evalu-
ation of liquefaction-resistance from Dhaka, Chittagong,
and Sylhet cities in Bangladesh (Fig. 1). Dhaka, the capital
city of Bangladesh, is one of the fastest growing cities in
the world. The megacity Dhaka, the largest city in Ban-
gladesh, is located at the bank of the Buriganga River in the
central part of the country. Dhaka City is built partly on the
elevated Pleistocene terrace (Madhupur Terrace) and partly
on the surrounding low-lying Holocene floodplains
(Fig. 2). The Pleistocene terrace consists of yellowish
brown medium stiff to very stiff silty clay and medium
dense to dense silty sand. The Pleistocene terrace sedi-
ments are the floodplain deposits of the earlier Ganges–
Brahmaputra rivers. It occurs in an extensive area above
the level of the Holocene floodplains, which indicates that
there has been differential movement between the Pleis-
tocene and Holocene time (Morgan and McIntire 1959).
The Holocene floodplain deposits of the Ganges and
Brahmaputra rivers are composed of gray, very soft to
medium stiff silty clay and very loose to medium dense
sand, silty sand, and silt (Morgan and McIntire 1959;
Rahman et al. 2015).
Chittagong, the second largest city and the largest port
city in Bangladesh, is located at the bank of the Karnaphuli
River in the southeastern part of the country. Chittagong
City is formed partly on the Tertiary folded sedimentary
rocks and partly on the Holocene alluvial and coastal plains
(Fig. 3). The Tertiary rocks are composed of soft sand-
stone, siltstone, and shale, whereas the alluvial and coastal
Environ Earth Sci (2017)76:207
Fig. 1 Historical and recent earthquakes (magnitude C6.5) from
1762 to 2016. Historical earthquakes locations and magnitudes are
from Ambraseys and Douglas (2004) and Szeliga et al. (2010). Recent
plains are composed of loose sand, silt, and clay (Rahman
et al. 2016).
Sylhet, the third largest city in Bangladesh, is located at
the bank of Surma River in the northeastern part of the
country. Sylhet City is built partly on the Tertiary folded
sedimentary rocks and partly on the Holocene alluvial
plains (Fig. 4). The Tertiary rocks of the city are composed
of soft sandstone, siltstone, and shale. The alluvial plains
consist of loose sand, silt, and clay (CDMP 2009).
Seismotectonics
Dhaka, Chittagong, and Sylhet cities are seismically vul-
nerable due to their locations close to the convergent plate
boundary between the Indian Plate and Eurasian Plate
(Fig. 1). Several historical earthquakes have occurred in
the northeastern parts of India, Nepal, Myanmar, and
Bangladesh along this plate boundary in the last 254 years
Page 3 of 14 207
earthquake locations and magnitudes are from United States Geo-
logical Survey (USGS). The plate boundaries and faults are according
to Maurin and Rangin (2009) and Steckler et al. (2008)
(Fig. 1). Among them, the 1762 Bengal-Arakan, 1885
Bengal, 1897 Great Indian, 1918 Srimangal, and 1934
Nepal-Bihar Earthquakes were prominent in Bangladesh.
Bilham (2009) predicted that an earthquake of magnitude 8
or more may cause one million casualties in a megacity of
this region. This prediction is because the cities of devel-
oping countries that are located close to the seismically
active zones are more vulnerable than those of developed
countries due to: (1) high population density; (2) unplanned
urbanization; (3) non-engineered construction practices; (4)
inadequate knowledge of the seismic design of structures;
(5) ignorance of building codes; and (6) poor monitoring
system of the concerned urban authorities during the con-
struction of structures.
The northward collision of the Indian Plate with the
Eurasian Plate has created the Himalayan Ranges between
the Indian Plate and Eurasian Plate, and the Bengal Basin
in the eastern part of the Indian Plate (Curray et al. 1982;
Aitchison et al. 2007). The Bengal Basin covers the
123
207 Page 4 of 14 Environ Earth Sci (2017)76:207

Fig. 2 Locations of standard penetration test (SPT), cone penetration test (CPT), and shear-wave velocity (Vs) measurement on the surface
geological map of Dhaka City (modified from Rahman et al. 2015)

northeastern part of the Indian Plate, which includes Ban- thickness of sedimentary deposits of more than 22 km
gladesh and parts of West Bengal, Tripura, and Assam of (Alam et al. 2003). Bangladesh covers about three-fourths
Indian states. The Bengal Basin is one of the largest sed- of the Bengal Basin, which is bounded in the west by the
imentary basins in the world, which has a maximum Indian Platform, in the north by the Precambrian Shilling

123
Environ Earth Sci (2017)76:207 Page 5 of 14 207

Fig. 3 Locations of standard penetration test (SPT), cone penetration test (CPT), and shear-wave velocity (Vs) measurement on the surface
geological map of Chittagong City (modified from Rahman et al. 2016)

Massif, in the east by the Indo-Burman Folded Belt Sys-
tem, and in the south by the Bay of Bengal (Reimann
1993).
Two major active tectonic belts are responsible for the
large and damaging earthquakes in Bangladesh, northern
and northeastern parts of India, Nepal, Bhutan, and
Myanmar. The tectonic elements are the Himalayan system
in the north and the Arakan subduction-collision system in
the east (Fig. 1). The Himalayan Frontal Thrust (HFT) and
the Dauki Fault (DF) are the main components of the

123
207 Page 6 of 14
Fig. 4 Locations of standard penetration test (SPT), cone penetration test (CPT), and shear-wave velocity (Vs) measurement on the surface
geological map of Sylhet City (modified from CDMP 2009)
Himalayan system. The Indo-Burman Folded Belt and
underlying megathrust are the manifestation of the Arakan
subduction-collision system (Steckler et al. 2008; Yu and
Sieh 2013).
The April 25, 2015, Nepal Earthquake of Mw 7.8 and
May 12, 2015, aftershock of Mw 7.3 that were located in
the west of the 1934 Nepal-Bihar Earthquake, also occur-
red along the Himalayan Frontal Thrust (HFT). The 2015
Nepal Earthquake that occurred approximately 80 km to
the northwest of the Nepalese capital of Kathmandu killed
8686 people and injured 6898 people (NSET, Nepal Web
site accessed on November 5, 2015). This earthquake
123
Environ Earth Sci (2017)76:207
occurred as a result of the thrust fault along the main
boundary thrust interface between the subducting Indian
Plate in the south and the overriding Eurasian Plate in the
north (United States Geological Survey Web site accessed
on June 10, 2015).
The 1897 Great Indian Earthquake, located in Assam,
caused huge damage to buildings in Dhaka city. The
Bengal-Arakan Earthquake, located near Chittagong city,
caused considerable damage in Chittagong city. The 1918
Srimangal Earthquake caused huge damage to structures in
Sylhet city. Several earthquakes having magnitudes from
4.0 to 6.0 occurred near Dhaka, Chittagong, and Sylhet
Environ Earth Sci (2017)76:207
Fig. 5 Earthquakes (magnitude C3) that occurred from 1908 to 2015 in Bangladesh and surroundings. The earthquake catalog is from United
States Geological Survey. The plate boundaries and faults are according to Maurin and Rangin (2009) and Steckler et al. (2008)
cities in recent years. Some of these earthquakes caused
slight damage in Chittagong and Sylhet cities, such as
cracks in the walls of buildings and tilting of buildings. The
earthquakes (magnitude C3) that occurred in and around
Bangladesh from 1908 to 2015 are shown in Fig. 5.
As the Indian Plate is moving northward at a rate of
4 cm/year and northeastward at a rate of 6 cm/year, large-
magnitude earthquakes between M 7.5 and M 8.5 are
expected to occur in the tectonic belt of Himalayan system
(Bilham and Hough 2006). Recent paleoseismological
investigation revealed that the Dauki Fault, which is con-
sidered as the source of the 1897 Great Indian Earthquake
(Oldham 1899), activated three times in the last thousand
years (Yeats et al. 1997; Morino et al. 2011, 2014a).
Therefore, the rate of plate movement and frequent
occurrence of large-magnitude earthquakes along this plate
boundary indicate that the northern and northeastern parts
of India, including Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan, and
Myanmar, are seismically active.
Page 7 of 14 207
The Holocene sandy and silty soils of an area up to a
depth of 20 m may liquefy due to cyclic loading during an
earthquake. As more than 50% areas of Dhaka, Chittagong,
and Sylhet cities are covered by thick layers of the Holo-
cene sandy and silty soils, the evaluation of liquefaction-
resistance is necessary for seismic-hazard assessment of
these cities.
Methodology
The simplified procedure for the evaluation of liquefac-
tion-resistance of soils has two parts: 1) the evaluation of
the cyclic stress or strain developed in the field due to a
design earthquake, i.e., cyclic stress ratio (CSR); and 2)
the evaluation of field liquefaction characteristics, i.e.,
cyclic resistance ratio (CRR) (Robertson and Campanella
1985). These two parts are described in the following
sections.
123
207 Page 8 of 14
Evaluation of cyclic stress ratio (CSR)
The cyclic characteristic of soil is best characterized by
cyclic stress ratio (CSR) that estimates the seismic demand
on a soil layer of level ground condition. The CSR is the
ratio of the average cyclic shear stress (sav) developed on
horizontal surface of soils due to cyclic or earthquake
loading to the initial vertical effective stress (r00 ) acting on
the soil layer before the cyclic stresses are applied
(Robertson and Campanella 1985). This parameter has the
advantage of taking into account the depth of the soil layer
involved, the depth of groundwater level, and the intensity
of earthquake shaking or other cyclic loading phenomena
(Seed et al. 1983). The Seed–Idriss (1971) simplified pro-
cedure is used to estimate the CSR developed in the field
due to an earthquake loading, at a depth of z from the
ground surface, using the following equation:
sav amax r0
CSR ¼ 0 ¼ 0:65   0  rd ð1Þ
r0 g r0
where amax = maximum horizontal acceleration at the
ground surface generated by the earthquake; g = acceler-
ation of gravity; r0 and r00 are total and effective vertical
overburden stresses, respectively, at depth of z; and rd = -
stress reduction coefficient that accounts for the flexibility
of the soil column. The factor 0.65 is used to convert the
peak cyclic shear stress ratio to a cyclic stress ratio that is
the representative of most significant cycles over the full
duration of loading (Idriss and Boulanger 2004).
Evaluation of cyclic resistance ratio (CRR)
The capacity of the soil to resist liquefaction is represented
by cyclic resistance ratio (CRR). The state-of-the-art paper,
that was published by Youd et al. (2001), summarized four
in situ test methods to estimate the CRR for the liquefac-
tion-resistance analysis: (1) standard penetration test
(SPT); (2) cone penetration test (CPT); (3) shear-wave
velocity measurement (Vs); and (4) Becker penetration test
(BPT). The CRR for 7.5 magnitude (Mw) earthquake
(CRR7.5) is estimated from the overburden stress-corrected
SPT resistance of equivalent clean sand, (N1)60cs (Seed
et al. 2001; Youd et al. 2001; Idriss and Boulanger 2004).
The CRR is also estimated from the overburden stress-
corrected CPT resistance of equivalent clean sand, (qc1N)cs
(Robertson and Wride 1998), the overburden stress-cor-
rected Vs of equivalent clean sand, Vs1 (Andrus and Stokoe
1997, 2000), and the overburden stress-corrected BPT
resistance, NBC (Harder 1997).
In the present study, Youd et al. (2001) recommended
methods be used to estimate the CRR from the (N1)60cs,
(qc1N)cs, and Vs1 to evaluate the liquefaction-resistance for
Dhaka, Chittagong, and Sylhet cities in Bangladesh.
123
Environ Earth Sci (2017)76:207
Determination of factor of safety (FL)
In the simplified procedure, Seed and Idriss (1971) com-
pared the cyclic stress ratio (CSR) to the liquefaction-re-
sistance of the soil represented by the cyclic resistance ratio
(CRR) for Mw = 7.5 earthquake (i.e., CRR7.5). A magni-
tude scaling factor (MSF) is used to adjust CRR7.5 to
determine the CRR for other earthquake magnitudes. The
factor of safety (FL) against liquefaction is defined in terms
of the CRR, CSR, and MSF as follows:
FL ¼ ðCRR7:5 =CSRÞMSF ð2Þ
Seismic factors
Two seismic ground-motion parameters are required to
evaluate the liquefaction-resistance of soils using the
simplified procedure. The parameters are earthquake
magnitude and peak horizontal ground acceleration. In the
present study, a scenario earthquake of magnitude 7.5
(Mw) having a peak horizontal ground acceleration of
0.15, 0.20, and 0.25 g is used to evaluate the liquefaction-
resistance of soils in Dhaka, Chittagong, and Sylhet cities
in Bangladesh.
Liquefaction potential index (LPI)
The LPI, proposed by Iwasaki et al. (1982), presumes that
the severity of liquefaction is proportional to: (1) the
thickness of the liquefied layer; (2) the proximity of the
liquefied layer from the ground surface; and (3) the amount
by which the factor of safety (FL) is less than 1.0.
The LPI is defined as:
Z 20
LI ¼ F ðzÞWðzÞ dz ð3Þ
0
FðzÞ ¼ 1  FL for FL \1:0 ð4aÞ
FðzÞ ¼ 0 for FL  1:0 ð4bÞ
WðzÞ ¼ 10  0:5 z for z\20 m ð4cÞ
WðzÞ ¼ 0 for z [ 20 m ð4dÞ
where z is the depth from the ground surface in meters.
Iwasaki et al. (1984) identified the LPI values of 5 and
15 as the lower bounds of ‘‘high’’ and ‘‘very high’’ lique-
faction, respectively, from the SPT measurements at 87
Japanese sites subjected to six earthquakes. Toprak and
Holzer (2003) also found similar results using 50 CPT
sounding at 20 sites affected by the 1989 Loma Prieta
(Mw = 6.9) earthquake to correlate with surface manifes-
tation of liquefaction. They ascertained that median values
of the LPI equal to 5 and 12 corresponded to the occurrence
of sand boils and lateral spreading, respectively. The San
Environ Earth Sci (2017)76:207 Page 9 of 14 207

Simeon earthquake also supports the use of LPI = 5 as the
threshold for surface manifestations of liquefaction (Holzer
et al. 2005).
Results
The present study deals with the evaluation of liquefaction-
resistance, where the standard penetration-test blow count
(SPT-N), cone penetration test tip resistance (qc), shear-
wave velocity (Vs), lithological borehole logs, grain-size
distribution, and unit weight of soils were collected from
the Comprehensive Disaster Management Program
(CDMP), a project implemented by the Government of
Bangladesh (CDMP 2009). The locations of the SPT, CPT,
and Vs measurements are shown on the surface geology
maps of Dhaka, Chittagong, and Sylhet cities (Figs. 2, 3,
4).
The liquefaction-resistance of soils has been evaluated
up to a depth of 20 m by the methods Youd et al. (2001)
recommended using the SPT-N and Vs data, which were
collected from seven borehole sites in Dhaka, from six
borehole sites in Chittagong, and from six borehole sites in
Sylhet. At each borehole site, the standard penetration test
(SPT) was performed to count the SPT-N at each 1.5-m
interval; and the down-hole seismic (DS) test was carried
out to estimate the Vs at each 1-m interval down to a depth
of 30 m from the ground surface. The liquefaction-resis-
tance of soils has also been evaluated down to a depth of
20 m by the method Youd et al. (2001) recommended
using the tip resistance (qc) of the CPT. The CPT was
performed at each 10-cm interval down to a depth of 30 m
from the ground surface at three sites in each city. Typical
profiles of the SPT, CPT, and Vs are shown in Fig. 6. The
analysis of liquefaction-resistance was performed using a
peak horizontal ground acceleration (amax) of 0.15, 0.20,

Fig. 6 Typical profiles of Depth BH-3 Lithology SPT-N CPT (MPa) curve Vs (m/sec) curve
standard penetration test blow (m) in
count (SPT-N), cone penetration 0 25 50 0 5 10 15 20 25 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Dhaka
test (CPT) tip resistance (qc),
1.0 Filling Elastic SILT
and shear-wave velocity (Vs) at
borehole site BH-3 in Dhaka 2.0 with Sand (MH)
city 3.0
4.0
Holocene Organic
5.0
SOIL (OL)
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
Holocene SILT with
10.0
Sand (ML)
11.0
12.0
13.0
Holocene Organic
14.0
SOIL with Sand (OL)
15.0
16.0
17.0 Holocene Sandy SILT
18.0 (ML)
19.0
20.0 Plio-Pleistocene Silty
21.0 SAND (SM)
22.0
Plio-Pleistocene Fat
23.0
CLAY (CH)
24.0
25.0
26.0
27.0 Plio-Pleistocene Silty
28.0 SAND (SM)
29.0
30.0

123
207 Page 10 of 14 Environ Earth Sci (2017)76:207

Table 1 Liquefaction potential index (LPI) from standard penetration test blow count (SPT-N) using a peak horizontal ground acceleration of
0.15, 0.20, and 0.25 g for a magnitude 7.5 (Mw) earthquake, where groundwater level is remained to a depth of 1 m from the ground surface
Name of city Borehole no. Liquefaction potential index (LPI) Surface geological unit
For 0.15 g For 0.20 g For 0.25 g

Dhaka BH-1 15.3 21.4 25.0 Holocene alluvial valley fill deposit
BH-2 4.4 6.8 8.2 Holocene alluvial valley fill deposit
BH-3 19.0 26.5 31.0 Holocene alluvium
BH-4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pleistocene terrace deposit
BH-5 21.1 32.6 41.1 Artificial fill
BH-6 0.0 1.3 3.4 Pleistocene terrace deposit
BH-7 18.0 25.7 30.3 Artificial fill
Chittagong BH-1 14.7 24.3 30.1 Holocene alluvium
BH-2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Holocene alluvial valley fill deposit
BH-3 13.1 18.4 21.8 Holocene terrace deposit
BH-4 11.2 18.9 24.0 Holocene alluvial fan deposit
BH-5 10.5 17.1 22.3 Holocene alluvial fan deposit
BH-6 17.3 28.3 34.5 Holocene tidal deposit
Sylhet BH-1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Holocene alluvium
BH-2 7.1 14.7 18.3 Holocene alluvial fan deposit
BH-3 0.2 5.5 15.5 Holocene alluvial fan deposit
BH-4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Tertiary folded sedimentary rock
BH-5 3.5 16.5 25.7 Holocene alluvial valley fill deposit
BH-6 0.0 3.9 12.1 Holocene alluvium

and 0.25 g for a scenario earthquake of magnitude 7.5
(Mw), where the groundwater level has remained at a depth
of 1 m from the ground surface.
The liquefaction potential index (LPI) has been esti-
mated by the method Iwasaki et al. (1982) suggested using
the calculated factor of safety (FL) and thickness of the
liquefiable soil layers that are predicted from the SPT-N,
qc, and Vs. The calculated LPI values of the SPT-N, Vs, and
qc for each city are given in Tables 1, 2, and 3,
respectively.
The liquefaction potential index (LPI) of the SPT-N
varies from 0 to 21.1 for 0.15 g, from 0 to 27.3 for 0.20 g,
and from 0 to 41.1 for 0.25 g of a scenario earthquake of
magnitude 7.5 (Mw) in Dhaka, Chittagong, and Sylhet
cities (Table 1). The LPI of the Vs varies from 0 to 22.6 for
0.15 g, from 0 to 26.7 for 0.20 g, and from 0 to 29.4 for
0.25 g of a scenario earthquake of magnitude 7.5 (Mw)
(Table 2). The LPI of the qc varies from 0 to 8.1 for 0.15 g,
from 0 to 11.2 for 0.20 g, and from 0 to 14.2 for 0.25 g of a
scenario earthquake of magnitude 7.5 (Mw) (Table 3).
Discussion
The LPI values of the SPT-N, Vs, and qc indicate that the
saturated sandy and silty soils of the artificial fill, alluvium,
Holocene terrace, Holocene alluvial valley fill, Holocene
alluvial fan, and Holocene tidal deposits in Dhaka, Chit-
tagong, and Sylhet cities will show surface manifestation of
liquefaction (LPI [ 5) and lateral spreading (LPI [ 12)
during an earthquake of magnitude 7.5 (Mw) for a peak
horizontal ground acceleration (amax) of 0.15, 0.20, and
0.25 g (Tables 1, 2, 3). From the results, it is observed that
in the same surface geological unit, the LPI value of the
SPT-N is close to that of the Vs, whereas the LPI value of
the qc is always lower than that of the SPT-N or Vs. For
example, at borehole site BH-3, which is located on the
alluvium in Dhaka city (Figs. 2, 6), the LPI values are 19
for the SPT-N (Table 1), 15.5 for the Vs (Table 2), and 2.2
for the qc (Table 3) for a scenario earthquake of magnitude
7.5 (Mw) having an amax of 0.15 g. The LPI values of the
SPT-N and Vs indicate that the site has high liquefaction
potential (LPI [ 15), which will create lateral spreading,
whereas the LPI value of the qc indicate that the site has
low liquefaction potential (LPI \ 5), which will not even
show surface manifestation of liquefaction (sand boils).
From this observation, it is clear that the liquefaction
potential of the site differs due to the use of different in situ
test data.
As the SPT-N is widely used to evaluate the liquefac-
tion-resistance of soils, in order to complement the results
of the SPT-N, other in situ test data need to be used to
properly assess the liquefaction-resistance of soils. Other-
wise, the results of liquefaction hazard that are estimated

123
Environ Earth Sci (2017)76:207 Page 11 of 14 207

Table 2 Liquefaction potential index (LPI) from shear-wave velocity (Vs) using a peak horizontal ground acceleration of 0.15, 0.20, and 0.25 g
for a magnitude 7.5 (Mw) earthquake, where groundwater level is remained to a depth of 1 m from the ground surface
Name of city Borehole no. Liquefaction potential index (LPI) Surface geological unit
For 0.15 g For 0.20 g For 0.25 g

Dhaka BH-1 9.9 12.9 14.9 Holocene alluvial valley fill deposit
BH-2 2.9 4.5 5.4 Holocene alluvial valley fill deposit
BH-3 15.5 18.5 21.1 Holocene alluvium
BH-4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pleistocene terrace deposit
BH-5 19.9 25.2 28.3 Artificial fill
BH-6 1.2 2.2 2.9 Pleistocene terrace deposit
BH-7 22.3 26.7 29.4 Artificial fill
Chittagong BH-1 22.6 26.0 28.1 Holocene alluvium
BH-2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Holocene alluvial valley fill deposit
BH-3 7.8 11.0 13.2 Holocene terrace deposit
BH-4 10.7 13.7 15.6 Holocene alluvial fan deposit
BH-5 14.9 17.6 19.2 Holocene alluvial fan deposit
BH-6 13.7 17.1 19.6 Holocene tidal deposit
Sylhet BH-1 0.9 1.1 1.2 Holocene alluvium
BH-2 7.7 9.2 10.6 Holocene alluvial fan deposit
BH-3 0.0 0.0 0.0 Holocene alluvial fan deposit
BH-4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Tertiary folded sedimentary rock
BH-5 13.2 16.3 18.2 Holocene alluvial valley fill deposit
BH-6 1.8 4.9 6.7 Holocene alluvium

Table 3 Liquefaction potential index (LPI) from cone penetration test (CPT) tip resistance (qc) using a peak horizontal ground acceleration of
0.15, 0.20, and 0.25 g for a magnitude 7.5 (Mw) earthquake, where groundwater level is remained to a depth of 1 m from the ground surface
Name of city Borehole no. Liquefaction potential index (LPI) Surface geological unit
For 0.15 g For 0.20 g For 0.25 g

Dhaka CPT-1 2.2 4.3 6.1 Holocene alluvium

CPT-2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pleistocene terrace deposit
CPT-3 2.0 3.2 3.8 Holocene alluvial valley fill deposit
Chittagong CPT-1 2.1 4.2 6.3 Holocene terrace deposit
CPT-2 0.7 2.2 3.7 Holocene alluvial fan deposit
CPT-3 8.1 11.2 14.2 Holocene alluvial valley fill deposit
Sylhet CPT-1 0.0 0.2 0.3 Holocene alluvium
CPT-2 0.2 1.3 3.2 Holocene alluvium
CPT-3 1.7 3.8 5.7 Holocene alluvium

from the SPT-N may give an incorrect prediction of the
liquefaction-resistance of soils for an area. Therefore, the
evaluation of liquefaction-resistance of soils for any site
should be carried out very carefully from the SPT-N, qc,
and Vs by using the simplified procedures. Accurate esti-
mations of the standard penetration-test blow count (SPT-
N), cone penetration test tip resistance (qc), shear-wave
velocity (Vs), and accurate characterization of soils are also
very important factors to accurately predict the liquefac-
tion-resistance of soils for an area.
The 1762 Bengal-Arakan (Mw = 7.5), 1885 Bengal
(Mw = 6.9), 1897 Great Indian (Mw = 8), and 1918 Sri-
mangal (Mw = 7.4) earthquakes that occurred close to
Dhaka, Chittagong, and Sylhet cities caused lateral
spreading and sand boils in several places of the Holocene
saturated sandy and silty soils in and around those cities
(Middlemiss 1885; Oldham 1899; Stuart 1920; Martin and
Szeliga 2010; Szeliga et al. 2010). In the present study, the
LPI values of the SPT-N and Vs indicate that lateral
spreading and sand boils may occur in the Holocene

123
207 Page 12 of 14
saturated sandy and silty soils. But, the LPI values of the qc
indicate that lateral spreading and sand boils may occur in
a few areas of the Holocene saturated sandy and silty soils.
From the above observation, it can be concluded that the
LPI values of the SPT-N and Vs overestimate the lique-
faction potential, whereas the LPI values of the qc under-
estimate the liquefaction potential.
Very little has been published on the paleoseismological
investigation in Bangladesh (Morino et al. 2011, 2014a, b).
But, no paleoseismological study has been conducted yet in
and around Dhaka, Chittagong, and Sylhet cities to ascer-
tain the locations of the past liquefaction hazard, although
it is very difficult to discover the liquefaction phenomena
in such a rapidly changing sedimentary basin (Bengal
Basin) after more than 100 years of earthquake occur-
rences. The liquefaction phenomena in and around these
cities during these earthquakes might be washed out due to
strong fluvial processes prevailing in these regions.
Therefore, the results of liquefaction hazards are validated
by considering some threshold values of the LPI from the
literature. Researchers predicted that liquefaction is com-
monly occurring in the Holocene alluvial sandy and silty
soils (Iwasaki et al. 1984; Seed and de Alba 1986; Sonmez
2003; Holzer et al. 2005). In the present study, high liq-
uefaction hazard is also predicted in the Holocene alluvial
sandy and silty soils in Dhaka, Chittagong, and Sylhet
cities, Bangladesh.
The low-laying areas inside the flood-protection
embankment and all areas outside the flood-protection
embankment in Dhaka, Chittagong, and Sylhet cities are
inundated due to heavy rainfall and flood during the
monsoon. The groundwater level exists close to the ground
surface at that time. If an earthquake of magnitude 7.5
(Mw) having a peak horizontal ground acceleration of
0.15 g or more occurs close to Dhaka, Chittagong, and
Sylhet cities during the monsoon, low (LPI \ 5) to very
high (LPI [ 15) liquefaction hazard will occur in the
Holocene sandy and silty soils of these units. Therefore, in
the present study, the groundwater level has remained at a
depth of 1 m from the ground surface to observe the worst-
case scenario of liquefaction. But, in most parts of the areas
in Dhaka, Chittagong, and Sylhet cities, the groundwater
levels always exist at a depth of more than 20 m from the
ground surface. Therefore, liquefaction will not occur in
areas of the Holocene sandy and silty soils, where the
groundwater levels remain at a depth of more than 20 m.
If an earthquake of magnitude 7.5 (Mw) occurs within
100 km from Dhaka, Chittagong, and Sylhet cities, peak
horizontal ground acceleration of more than 0.15 g may
generate in Dhaka, Chittagong, and Sylhet cities (CDMP
2009). Therefore, evaluation of liquefaction-resistance is
necessary for the Holocene saturated alluvial sandy and
silty soils of Dhaka, Chittagong, and Sylhet cities to
123
Environ Earth Sci (2017)76:207
improve the ground condition for the construction of
earthquake-resistance structures in those areas.
Conclusions
The liquefaction-resistance of soils has been evaluated
by using the simplified procedure from the SPT-N, CPT,
and Vs data for Dhaka, Chittagong, and Sylhet cities in
Bangladesh. The factor of safety of liquefaction is
determined using a scenario earthquake of magnitude 7.5
(Mw) for a peak horizontal ground acceleration (amax) of
0.15, 0.20, and 0.25 g. Then, the liquefaction potential
index (LPI) has been estimated using the factor of safety
of liquefaction and thickness of liquefiable layers. This
study reveals that the saturated loose sandy and silty
soils of the artificial fill, alluvium, Holocene terrace, and
Holocene alluvial valley fill, Holocene alluvial fan, and
Holocene tidal deposits in Dhaka, Chittagong, and Syl-
het cities will liquefy during an earthquake of magnitude
7.5 (Mw). Therefore, ground improvement is required for
these surface geological units prior to construction of
structures.
Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge the
University of British Columbia for supporting this study through
University Graduate Fellowship (UGF). The support from the Com-
prehensive Disaster Management Program (CDMP), Bangladesh, for
collecting the data is highly appreciated. The authors are also grateful
to the anonymous reviewers for their constructive inputs to improve
the article.
References
Aitchison JC, Ali JR, Davis AM (2007) When and where did India
and Asia collide? J Geophys Res 112:1978–2012
Alam M, Alam MM, Curray JR (2003) An overview of the
sedimentary geology of the Bengal Basin in relation to the
regional tectonic framework and basin-fill history. Sediment
Geol 155:179–208
Ambraseys NN, Douglas J (2004) Magnitude calibration of north
Indian earthquakes. Geophys J Int 159:165–206. doi:10.1111/j.
1365-246X.2004.02323.x
Andrus RD, Stokoe KH (1997) Liquefaction resistance based on shear
wave velocity. In: Proceeding of NCEER workshop on evalu-
ation of liquefaction resistance of soils. National Center for
Earthquake Engineering Research, Sate University of New York,
Buffalo, pp 89–128
Andrus RD, Stokoe KH (2000) Liquefaction resistance of soils from
shear-wave velocity. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 126:1015–1025
Bilham R (2009) The seismic future of cities. Bull Earthq Eng
7:839–887
Bilham R, Hough S (2006) Future earthquakes on the Indian
subcontinent: inevitable hazard, preventable risk. South Asian
J 12:1–9
Broughton AT, Van Arsdale RB, Broughton JH (2001) Liquefaction
susceptibility mapping in the city of Memphis and Shelby
County, Tennessee. Eng Geol 62:207–222. doi:10.1016/S0013-
7952(01)00062-X
Environ Earth Sci (2017)76:207
CDMP (2009) Seismic hazard and vulnerability assessment of Dhaka,
Chittagong and Sylhet city corporation areas. Final report,
Comprehensive Disaster Management Programme, Ministry of
Food and Disaster Management, Dhaka, Bangladesh
Chen CJ, Juang CH (2000) Calibration of SPT- and CPT-based
liquefaction evaluation methods. In: Mayne P, Hryciw R (eds)
Innovations and applications in geotechnical site characteriza-
tion, vol 97. Geotechnical Special Publication, ASCE, Reston,
pp 49–64
Curray JR, Emmel FJ, Moore DG, Raitt RW (1982) Structure,
tectonics, and geological history of the northeastern Indian
Ocean. In: Nairn AEM, Stehli FG (eds) The oceans basins and
margins. Plenum, New York, pp 399–449
Harder LF (1997) Application of the Becker penetration test for
evaluating the liquefaction potential of gravelly soils. In:
Proceeding of NCEER workshop on evaluation of liquefaction
resistance of soils. National Center for Earthquake Engineer-
ing Research, State University of New York, Buffalo,
pp 129–148
Heidari T, Andrus RD (2010) Mapping liquefaction potential of aged
soil deposits in Mount Pleasant, South Carolina. Eng Geol
112:1–12. doi:10.1016/j.enggeo.2010.02.001
Holzer TL (2008) Probabilistic liquefaction hazard mapping. ASCE,
Reston
Holzer TL, Noce TE, Bennett MJ et al (2005) Liquefaction at Oceano,
California, during the 2003 San Simeon earthquake. Bull
Seismol Soc Am 95:2396–2411
Idriss IM, Boulanger RW (2004) Semi-empirical procedures for
evaluating liquefaction potential during earthquakes. In: 11th
International conference on soil dynamics and earthquake
engineering, and 3rd international conference on earthquake
geotechnical engineering, Berkeley, pp 32–56
Iwasaki T, Tatsuoka F, Tokida K-I, Yasuda S (1978) A practical
method for assessing soil liquefaction potential based on case
studies at various sites in Japan. In: Proceedings of 2nd
international conference on microzonation, San Francisco,
pp 885–896
Iwasaki T, Tokida K, Tatsuoka F et al (1982) Microzonation for soil
liquefaction potential using simplified methods. In: Proceedings
of 3rd international earthquake microzonation conference,
Seattle, pp 1319–1330
Iwasaki T, Arakawa T, Tokida K-I (1984) Simplified procedures for
assessing soil liquefaction during earthquakes. Int J Soil Dyn
Earthq Eng 3:49–58. doi:10.1016/0261-7277(84)90027-5
Juang CH, Chen CJ, Jiang T, Andrus RD (2000) Risk-based
liquefaction potential evaluation using standard penetration tests.
Can Geotech J 37:1195–1208. doi:10.1139/t00-064
Juang CH, Lu C-C, Hwang J-H (2009) Assessing probability of
surface manifestation of liquefaction at a given site in a given
exposure time using CPTU. Eng Geol 104:223–231. doi:10.
1016/j.enggeo.2008.10.011
Marcuson WF (1978) Definition of terms related to liquefaction.
J Geotech Eng Div 104:1197–1200
Martin S, Szeliga W (2010) A catalog of felt intensity data for 570
earthquakes in India from 1636 to 2009. Bull Seismol Soc Am
100:562–569. doi:10.1785/0120080328
Maurin T, Rangin C (2009) Structure and kinematics of the Indo-
Burmese Wedge: Recent and fast growth ofthe outer wedge.
Tectonics 28:1–21. doi:10.1029/2008TC002276
Middlemiss CS (1885) Report on the Bengal earthquake of July 14,
1885. Rec Geol Surv India 18(4):200–221
Morgan JP, McIntire WG (1959) Quaternary geology of the Bengal
Basin, East Pakistan and India. Bull Geol Soc Am 70:319–342
Morino M, Kamal ASMM, Muslim D et al (2011) Seismic event of
the Dauki Fault in 16th century confirmed by trench investiga-
tion at Gabrakhari Village, Haluaghat, Mymensingh,
Page 13 of 14 207
Bangladesh. J Asian Earth Sci 42:492–498. doi:10.1016/j.
jseaes.2011.05.002
Morino M, Kamal ASMM, Akhter SH et al (2014a) A paleo-
seismological study of the Dauki fault at Jaflong, Sylhet,
Bangladesh: historical seismic events and an attempted rupture
segmentation model. J Asian Earth Sci 91:218–226. doi:10.1016/
j.jseaes.2014.06.002
Morino M, Monsur MH, Kamal ASMM et al (2014b) Examples of
paleo-liquefaction in Bangladesh. J Geol Soc Jpn 120:VII–VIII.
doi:10.5575/geosoc.2014.0032
Oldham RD (1899) Report on the great earthquake of 12th June 1897.
Mem Geol Surv India 29:1–379
Olsen RS (1988) Using the CPT for dynamic response characteriza-
tion. In: Proceedings of the earthquake engineering and soil
dynamics II conference. American Society of Civil Engineers,
New York, pp 111–117
Olsen RS (1997) Cyclic liquefaction based on the cone penetration
test. In: Proceeding of NCEER workshop on evaluation of
liquefaction resistance of soils. National Center for Earthquake
Engineering Research, State University of New York, Buffalo,
pp 225–276
Olsen RS, Koester JP (1995) Prediction of liquefaction resistance
using the CPT. In: Proceedings of the international symposium
on cone penetration testing, CPT’95, Linkoping, Sweden, vol 2.
SGS, pp 251–256
Raghukanth STG, Dash SK (2010) Evaluation of seismic soil-
liquefaction at Guwahati city. Environ Earth Sci 61:355–368.
doi:10.1007/s12665-009-0347-3
Rahman MZ, Siddiqua S, Kamal ASMM (2015) Liquefaction hazard
mapping by liquefaction potential index for Dhaka City,
Bangladesh. Eng Geol 188:137–147. doi:10.1016/j.enggeo.
2015.01.012
Rahman MZ, Siddiqua S, Kamal ASMM (2016) Shear wave velocity
estimation of the near-surface materials of Chittagong City,
Bangladesh for seismic site characterization. J Appl Geophys
134:210–225. doi:10.1016/j.jappgeo.2016.09.006
Reimann K-U (1993) Geology of Bangladesh. Gebruder Borntraeger
Verlagsbuchhandlung, Science Publishers, Berlin
Robertson PK, Campanella RG (1985) Liquefaction potential of sands
using the CPT. J Geotech Eng 111:384–403
Robertson PK, Wride CE (1998) Evaluating cyclic liquefaction
potential using the cone penetration test. Can Geotech J
35:442–459. doi:10.1139/t98-017
Seed HB, de Alba P (1986) Use of SPT and CPT tests for evaluating
the liquefaction resistance of sands. In: Clemence SP (ed) Use of
in situ tests in geotechnical engineering. American Society of
Civil Engineers, Geotechnical Special Publication, vol 6,
pp 281–302
Seed HB, Idriss IM (1971) Simplified procedure for evaluating soil
liquefaction potential. J Soil Mech Found Div 97:1249–1273
Seed HB, Idriss IM (1982) Ground motions and soil liquefaction
during earthquakes. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute
Monograph, Oakland
Seed HB, Idriss IM, Arango I (1983) Evaluation of liquefaction
potential using field performance data. J Geotech Eng
109:458–482
Seed HB, Tokimatsu K, Harder Jr LF, Chung R (1984) The influence
of SPT procedures on soil liquefaction resistance evaluations.
Report No. UCB/EERC-84/15, Earthquake Engineering
Research Center, University of California, Berkeley
Seed HB, Tokimatsu K, Harder LF, Chung RM (1985) Influence of
SPT procedures in soil liquefaction resistance evaluations.
J Geotech Eng 111:1425–1445. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-
9410(1985)111:12(1425)
Seed RB, Cetin KO, Moss RES et al (2001) Recent advances in soil
liquefaction engineering and seismic site response evaluation. In:
123
207 Page 14 of 14
Proceedings of 4th international conference and symposium on
recent advances in geotechnical earthquake engineering and soil
dynamics. University of Missouri, Rolla, p SPL-2
Sonmez H (2003) Modification of the liquefaction potential index and
liquefaction susceptibility mapping for a liquefaction-prone area
(Inegol, Turkey). Environ Geol 44:862–871. doi:10.1007/
s00254-003-0831-0
Sonmez H, Gokceoglu C (2005) A liquefaction severity index
suggested for engineering practice. Environ Geol 48:81–91.
doi:10.1007/s00254-005-1263-9
Stark TD, Olson SM (1995) Liquefaction resistance using CPT and
field case histories. J Geotech Eng ASCE 121:856–869
Steckler MS, Akhter SH, Seeber L (2008) Collision of the Ganges-
Brahmaputra Delta with the Burma Arc: implications for
earthquake hazard. Earth Planet Sci Lett 273:367–378. doi:10.
1016/j.epsl.2008.07.009
Stuart M (1920) The Srimangal earthquake of 8th July 1918. Mem
Geol Surv India 46(1):1–70
123
Environ Earth Sci (2017)76:207
Szeliga W, Hough S, Martin S, Bilham R (2010) Intensity, magnitude,
location, and attenuation in India for felt earthquakes since 1762.
Bull Seismol Soc Am 100:570–584. doi:10.1785/0120080329
Toprak S, Holzer TL (2003) Liquefaction potential index: field
assessment. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 129:315–322. doi:10.
1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2003)129:4(315)
Ulamiş K, Kiliç R (2012) Liquefaction potential evaluation of the
quaternary alluvium, Western Ankara (Turkey). Environ Earth
Sci 67:945–958. doi:10.1007/s12665-012-1526-1
Yeats RS, Sieh K, Allen CR (1997) The geology of earthquakes.
Oxford University Press, Oxford
Youd TL, Idriss IM, Andrus RD et al (2001) Liquefaction resistance
of soils: summary report from the 1996 NCEER 14 and 1998
NCEER/NSF workshop on evaluation of liquefaction resistance
of soils. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 127:817–833
Yu W, Sieh K (2013) Active tectonic features that pose a seismic
threat to Bangladesh. Comprehensive Disaster Management
Programme (CDMP) Report, Dhaka