1NCEE Tenth U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering Frontiers of Earthquake Engineering July 21-25, 214 Anchorage, Alaska ANALYSIS OF PILE FOUNDATIONS AFFECTED BY LIQUEFACTION AND LATERAL SPREADING WITH PINNING EFFECT DURING THE 21 MAULE CHILE EARTHQUAKE K. Kato 1, D. Gonzalez 2, C. Ledezma 3 and S. Ashford 4 ABSTRACT Earthquake provides unique opportunities for engineering designs to confirm full-scale foundation and structural performances during ground shaking. Pile foundations suffered from liquefaction and lateral spreading in the 21 Maule Chile earthquake is collected to analyze their performances and compared to the recently developed displacement-based design procedure. Three pile-supported bridges were selected from screened case-history data, and the analysis was performed with several sand models to calibrate the pinning effect against slope displacement. Results show that the prediction of slope displacement is affected by soil modeling and slope stability procedures. Also, in most cases, the pinning effect develops before reaching the maximum restricting force of the piles. 1 Graduate student researcher, School of Civil and Construction Engineering, Oregon State University, 11 Kearney Hall, Corvallis, USA 2 Graduate student researcher, Departamento de Ingeniería Estructural y Geotécnica, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Vicuña Mackenna 486, Macul, Santiago, Chile 3 Assistant Professor, Departamento de Ingeniería Estructural y Geotécnica, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Vicuña Mackenna 486, Macul, Santiago, Chile 4 Dean, College of Engineering, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, USA
1NCEE Tenth U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering Frontiers of Earthquake Engineering July 21-25, 214 Anchorage, Alaska Analysis of pile foundations affected by liquefaction and lateral spreading with pinning effect during the 21 Maule Chile Earthquake K. Kato 1, D. Gonzalez 2, C. Ledezma 3 and S. Ashford 4 ABSTRACT Earthquake provides unique opportunities for engineering designs to confirm full-scale foundation and structural performances during ground shaking. Pile foundations suffered from liquefaction and lateral spreading in the 21 Maule Chile earthquake is collected to analyze their performances and compared to the recently developed displacement-based design procedure. Three pile-supported bridges were selected from screened case-history data, and the analysis was performed with several sand models to calibrate the pinning effect against slope displacement. Results show that the prediction of slope displacement is affected by soil modeling and slope stability procedures. Also, in most cases, the pinning effect develops before reaching the maximum restricting force of the piles. Introduction Performance evaluation of existing pile foundations in areas subject to liquefaction and lateral spreading is an important process for earthquake design. The 21 Maule Chile earthquake provides an opportunity to confirm the recently developed design procedure for pile foundations by Ashford et al. (211) for liquefaction and lateral spreading, with making use of the wealth of data collected during reconnaissance efforts. Brandenberg et al. (213) analyzed three bridges affected by liquefaction with different performance levels using a beam on nonlinear Winkler foundation model. The well prediction for pile foundations in gently sloped ground are reported when the measured lateral displacements were imposed. Ledezma et al. (21) concluded that seismic performance of bridges founded by on piles is significantly affected by liquefaction and the pile-pinning effect. However, these analyses were implemented for bridges on gently sloped ground, and they do not provide parameters for piles in slopes. In this paper, three pile-supported bridges in sloping ground condition affected by liquefaction and lateral spreading during the 21 Maule Chile earthquake are analyzed. The screened case history data documented by several reconnaissance efforts (e.g., Ledezma et al. 212) are selected to evaluate pile behavior using the design procedure recommended by Ashford et al. (211) and Shantz (213). The results are compared to observed pile performances to provide engineering demand parameters. 1 Graduate student researcher, School of Civil and Construction Engineering, Oregon State University, 11 Kearney Hall 2 Graduate student researcher, Departamento de Ingeniería Estructural y Geotécnica, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Vicuña Mackenna 486, Macul, Santiago, Chile 3 Assistant Professor, Departamento de Ingeniería Estructural y Geotécnica, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Vicuña Mackenna 486, Macul, Santiago, Chile 4 Kearney Professor and School Head, School of Civil and Construction Engineering, Oregon State University, 11 Kearney Hall
Description of Cases Mataquito Bridge The Mataquito Bridge is located in Iloca, which is 124 km away from the 21 earthquake s epicenter, and was moderately damaged by liquefaction and lateral ground spreading. Peak ground acceleration (PGA).389g (north-south),.461g (west-east), and.39g (vertical) were recorded in Hualañe -north of Iloca, 12 km away from the bridge (Boroschek et al., 21). Although significant liquefaction and lateral ground spreading at the south abutment as observed, no displacement was observed on the abutment structure and nor on the pier adjacent to river. In contrary, the north abutment was slightly displaced (less than 2m) due to settlement of the approach fill and lateral ground spreading. The north abutment wall experienced a minor crash with the deck as a result of displacement. The approach fill settled approximately.5 m to 1. m. Transvers cracks approximately 2 on the north approach embankment was observed (FHWA 211). The bridge consists of eight spans and seven interior piers that consist of 3 1 groups of the same drilled shafts. The piers are capped at the connection to the bridge girders. Two seat-type abutments with wingwalls on both ends of the bridge were supported by 4 2 groups of reinforced concrete drilled shafts, 1.5 m in diameter, and 17 m long. The height of both abutments is 1., the width is 14., and the transverse length is 8. (McGann et al. 212). Liquefiable sand, 4 m in thickness, is embedded beneath the north abutment. Subsurface explorations were made adjacent to each abutment. Figure 1 shows that the SPT N- values at the north abutment vary from 9 to 26 blows/foot in the liquefiable sand s (i.e., some of the sand is very loose and liquefiable, and other deposits are denser). Below the liquefiable sand, a 4 m of fine, dense sand is embedded. At the south abutment, a 4 meters- thick liquefiable sand is embedded. SPT N-values at the south abutment range from 4 to 1 blows/foot within the liquefiable sand s. 1 8 m 8 m G.W.L. 1 SPT N-value 1 23 4 5 SPT N-value 1 23 4 5 A A' 1 G.W.L. -4 m -5 m -5 m 17 m RC Pile 4x2 Pile group -1-1 RC Pile 4x2 Pile group 17 m -15 m -15 m D=1.5m -2-2 D=1.5m North abutment -25 m -25 m South abutment Figure 1 Boring data near the north and south abutments, and pile section of Mataquito Bridge Juan Pablo II Bridge The Juan Pablo II Bridge crosses the Biobío River in Concepción, and it was constructed in 1974. PGAs of.42g (north-south),.284g (east-west), and.398g (vertical) were recorded in
SanPedrrvrteynconcepciónConcepción (Boroschek et al. 21). Liquefaction and lateral spreading caused severe damages on the bridge structures and on the approach road. The north approach road settled significantly and it was not in service after the earthquake. Vertical settlements, ranging from.4 m to 1.5 m at some piers which were supported by short piles, were observed. Piers #45 and #6 located in the middle of the bridge settled about.6 m and.8 m, respectively. The settlement of the piers close to the approaching road in Concepción was larger than that of the piers close to San Pedro. Sand and water ejecta on the vicinity of the piers were observed. The bridge consists of 7 spans (each 33 m long and 21.9 m wide) which are composed of seven reinforced concrete girders and a concrete deck supported by two drilled concrete piers and rather short piles (16 m long) (Ledezma et al. 212). Boring explorations along the bridge were made on June 21. SPT values at the S- 14 site obtained before the earthquake shows that a liquefiable fine sand from -2.65 m to - 8.5 m is embedded (N-values range from 6 to 2 blows/foot). Non-plastic silt and clay is embedded below the liquefiable s. o33 m 33 m C4.2 Pier #66 S-13 Pier #67 Pier #68 6.3 color, medium moisture, low to high, SPT N-value 1 23 4 5 dark gray -5 m ysand, G.W.L -2.82 m Fine sand, dark gray color, medium-high S-14 SPT N-value 1 23 4 5 G.W.L -2.65 m -5 m 16 m Sandy slime, gray color, high moisture, low Fine sand, dark gray color, averaged moisture, low High averaged compacted sand, dark gray color -1-15 m -2 Dark gray silt, no plasticity, low Clay silt, light gray color, high plasticity, good consistency -1-15 m -2 Slime, dark gray color, high humidity, slightly plastic, low, low consistency Slime, dark gray color, good consistency, low Weak slimly sand, dark gray color, averaged moisture, low Sand, dark gray color, moisture low Sandy, clear gray, moisture, non plastic, low very good consistency, -25 m -3 adgraycgdnyilt,lr,osconsistencyssdocooonisaeklight gray silt, medium plasticity, low, good consistency Weakly silt sand, dark gray color, very good -25 m -3 Pier section Figure 2 Boring data and soil profiles near the north abutment, the pile section of Juan Pablo II Bridge Llacolén Bridge The Llacolén Bridge, which has four vehicular lanes and pedestrian access, crosses the Biobío River and it was constructed in Concepción in 2. The span at the north approach unseated due to lateral ground movement. Cracks on the columns supporting the cap beam at the level of the rock rip rap on the embankment below the bridge were observed, likely developed due to the lateral ground movement. FHWA (211) reported that although no damages on the bent or columns at the opposite end of the unseated span were observed, the ground settled about.4 m and resulted in a separation of about.25 m between the columns and the surrounding ground. Several locations with liquefaction-induced ground settlements near the bridge bents at the west end of the Llacolén Bridge were observed. The total length of the bridge is 2,16. Each span consisted of a deck slab and six precast and prestressed girders supported by six column bents. The columns are supported by 2 long reinforced concrete piles (1.5 m diameter). Although there are no soil data at north abutment, SPT data indicates that weak soil s, N-values ranging from 1 to 13 blows/ft, are embedded near the pier #45.
SanPedroConcepción33 m Pier #48 3.68 m S-6 SPT N-value 1 23 4 5 5.51 m -5 m B B' -1 2-15 m -2 Pile cross section B-B -25 m Figure 3 Profile of Boring S-6 near the north abutment, and pile section of Llacolén Bridge Equivalent non-linear single pile method Ashford et al. (211) and Shantz (213) recommended a design procedure for pile foundations in areas subjected to liquefaction and lateral spreading. The following steps describe the material modeling and the evaluation of the soil-pile interaction to estimate pile-group performance in laterally spreading ground. Details of the procedures are described in Shantz (213). Pile modeling A pile group is modeled as an equivalent non-linear single pile. The bending stiffness of the rigid abutment is calculated as one hundred times the bending stiffness of the original pile by the number of piles in the group. The abutment configurations are modeled as a single pile that has the same diameter as the original pile. The bending stiffness of the equivalent single pile is calculated by multiplying the bending stiffness of the original pile by the number of piles in the group. The diameter of the equivalent single pile is the same as the original pile. Although the bending stiffness of the piles in liquefiable soil during ground shaking is affected by the confining pressure of the surrounding soils, no changes are considered in the soil-pile interaction in this model. Developing p-y curve for the crust Two possible failure modes are considered for estimating the passive pressure against the abutment and pile due to the crust movement. For the first case, a log-spiral based passive pressure is applied to an abutment. This passive pressure is combined with the lateral resistance provided by the portion of pile length that extends through the crust s. A side force on the pile cap is also added to the passive resistance. For the second case, the abutment, soil crust beneath the abutment, and piles within the crust are assumed to behave as a composite block. Rankine based passive pressure is applied to this composite block. The side force is developed over the full height of the block. Rankine passive pressure is utilized in second case because the loads from the liquefied is small and does not transmit enough to develop the deeper log-spiral failure surface that is generated by wall face friction. And, if the possible failure surface of the log spiral based passive pressure directly reaches beneath the composite block, such a condition is not appropriate to
estimate passive pressure acting on an abutment. The ultimate load due to ground laterally spreading ground is computed using equation (1). FULT FPASSIVE FPILES FSIDES (For Rankine pressure, FPILES equals to zero) (1) Brandenberg et al. (27) suggests that mobilization of the full passive force requires relative displacements much larger than 5% of wall height for the case of a crust overlying a liquefied. The maximum displacement for the p-y curve of the crust is estimated using equation (2). T.5.45 f f (2) MAX depth width Evaluating the group reduction factor for non-liquefied and liquefied soil s Piles in group tend to reduce resisting lateral load per pile. This effect for subgrade reactions is simply described by using p-multipliers mp. Mokwa and Duncan (2) recommended p- multipliers as a function of pile spacing and transverse oriented row. To apply this to an equivalent single pile, the p-multiplier is averaged. The subgrade reaction in liquefied soil is less efficient in resisting lateral load due to the loss of shear strength. The scale down p-multipliers to modify the p-y curve of liquefied soil s is used. The back calculated p-multipliers from a number of studies for the liquefied soil s are utilized in this analysis (Ashford et al., 28). A recommended equation for mp-liq is given in equation (2). In this equation, N refers to the cleansand equivalent corrected blow count (N1)6CS. A clean sand correction is provided by Idriss and Boulanger (28). 2 m.31 N.34 N (3) p liq 1 6, CS 1 6, CS The occurrence of liquefaction affects subgrade reactions near the boundary of the non-liquefied soil s because non-liquefied s above or below liquefied s are pushed into the liquefied s. To consider this effect for the soil-foundation interaction, p-multiplier is adjusted to appropriate values for soil s close to liquefied ones. The modified p-multiplier for near liquefied soil s is estimated using equation (4). In this equation, z is the depth from the ground surface, D is the diameter of pile, sb is the modification factor (sb is range from 1 to 2), and pu-l and pu-nl are the ultimate subgrade reactions in the adjoining liquefied and non-liquefiable s respectively. u L 1 pu L p z mp near pu NL pu NL sbd (4) Estimation of the crust displacement due to liquefaction with pinning effect When piles are located in a slope which is potentially moving downwards, pile s lateral restricting loads restrain this movement by the pinning effect. To consider this restricting effect, the shear resistance force in the pile should correspond to the driving force against the piles at the bottom of the slope failure surface. The pushover analysis for the foundation model, for a series of increasing soil displacement profiles, is developed using the LPile 212 software. Since the driving force of piles in the equivalent single pile at the bottom of the slope failure surface is obtained, the relationship between the imposed soil displacement and the shear force can be plotted. Next is the
calculation of the resistance force R that restricts the crust displacement at the bottom of the slope failure surface. This resistance force R derives from the pinning effect. If the bridge deck is considered to behave as a longitudinal resistance to an abutment movement, the calculation of the passive force is required for the full mobilization of this resistance against the crust movement. The slope displacement is calculated using Bray and Travasarou (27). The point corresponding to the intersection the pushover analysis and the slope displacement represents the expected crust displacement demanded on the foundation. Results and Discussions Mataquito Bridge Figure 4 shows the relationship between the resistance force and the displacement using several analysis of the south abutment foundation of the Mataquito Bridge. The simplified Bishop and Janbu methods for slope stability analysis were conducted in this analyses. The estimated displacement using an equivalent single pile method is 4 cm. McGann et al. (212) analyzed the south abutment pile foundation using an OpenSees 3D finite-element model. The estimated slope displacement was 24 cm, relatively consistent with field observations. Gonzalez and Ledezma (213) also analyzed the abutment foundation using the LPile 212 software with modified mp sand models, and the estimated slope displacement was 11 cm. The result of the pushover analysis is closer to the one by Gonzalez and Ledezma (213) and the difference is approximately 18%. In contrast, the comparison against the 3D FEM analysis indicates that 3D geometry clearly affects the pile response in liquefiable sand. Figure 5 shows the pile deflection, bending moment, shear force, and subgrade reaction profiles for the pile foundations with 4.3 cm lateral ground displacement. The fixed condition at the top of the abutment is applied. Although this prediction is adequately corresponding to the observation, the estimated ground displacement is still high because negligible displacement of the south abutment was observed. 2,5 Equivalent single pile method Gonzalez and Ledezma (213) McGann et al. (212) Restricting force (kn/m) 2, 1,5 1, 5 Janbu Bishop 4 cm 11 cm 12 cm 5 1 15 2 25 Displacement (cm) Figure 4 Estimated lateral displacement and resisting force for the piles in the south abutment of the Mataquito Bridge 24 cm
1 Abutment section Crust c = kpa ϕ = 4 γ = 22kN/m 3 Liquefiable sand N ave = 7, γ = 18kN/m 3 Dense sand c = kpa ϕ = 35 γ = 2kN/m 3 Depth (m) 5-5 -1 Equivalent single pile Soil -15 Pile group section My-equivalent = 24, kn-m -2 -.2.2.4.6 Lateral Displacement (m) -3, -15, 15, Bending Moment (kn-m) Figure 5 Analysis of the Mataquito Bridge abutment foundation using the equivalent single- pile method, 4.3 cm of slope displacement were applied Juan Pablo II Bridge -5, 5, 1, Shear Force (kn) -1, -5, 5, Subgrade Reaction (kn/m) Since no structural data about the pile was found, some assumptions were made in this analysis. A pile cross section with a diameter D=2.5 and steel area equivalent to 1.8% of the cross area, 55 35mm rebar, were used. Figure 6 shows that the relationship between the estimated lateral displacement and the resisting force for the pile at the north approach road of the Juan Pablo II Bridge. The simplified Bishop and Janbu methods for slope stability analysis were conducted in this analyses. The top of the pier columns is fixed against displacement and rotation and an inertial load deriving from the pier 6,8 kn, which is estimated by assuming to reach the yield moment of the pier, is imposed at the top of pile cap section. The estimated ground surface displacement with the modified mp sand models by Gonzalez and Ledezma (213) is 12.4 cm. Figure 7 shows the pile deflection, bending moment, shear force, and subgrade reaction profiles for the pile foundations with 3.6 cm lateral ground displacement. 1, 9 8 Ristricting force (kn/m) 7 6 5 4 3 2 1cm Janbu Bishop Equivalent single pile method Gonzalez and Ledezma (213) 11cm 12m 1 5 1 15 2 Displacement (cm) Figure 6 Estimated lateral displacement and resisting force for the pile at the north approach road of the Juan Pablo II Bridge
Liquefiable sand ϕ = 3, γ = 19kN/m 3 Pile cap section 6,8kN Dense sand, c = kpa ϕ = 4 γ = 21 kn/m 3 Liquefiable sand N ave = 17, γ = 17 kn/m 3 5 Equivalent single pile Soil Dense sand, c = kpa, ϕ = 4 γ = 21 kn/m 3 Depth (m) 1 15 Liquefiable sand ϕ = 32, γ = 2 kn/m 3 Pile group section My-equivalent = 34, kn-m 2 -.2.2.4 Lateral Displacement (m) -1, -5, 5, 1, -1, -5, 5, Bending Moment (kn-m) Shear Force (kn) Figure 7 Analysis of the Juan Pablo II Bridge foundation at the north approach road using equivalent single- pile method, 3.6 cm slope displacement were applied Llacolén Bridge -2, 2, 4, 6, 8, Subgrade Reaction (kn/m) Figure 8 shows the relationship between the estimated lateral displacement and the resisting force for the pile at the north approach road of the Llacolén Bridge. The simplified Bishop and Janbu method for slope stability analysis were conducted in this analyses. This bridge presented small to moderate damage. However, vicinity of the north abutment the bridge deck unseated, forcing the closure of the bridge. An inertial load deriving from the pier 1,66 kn, which is estimated by assuming to reach yield moment capacity of the pier, is imposed at the top of pile cap section. The estimated displacement using an equivalent single pile method is 5.8 cm. Gonzalez and Ledezma (213) analyzed the slope displacement using several soil models. The estimated displacement ranges from 2.4 cm to 4.1 cm. The pushover analyses indicate that about 9 % of the maximum resisting force of the piles in Llacolén Bridge is reached with approximately 1 cm of lateral displacement. In all cases of the Llacolén Bridge, the slope displacement is reached before the maximum restricting force is achieved. Figure 9 shows the pile deflection, bending moment, shear force, and subgrade reaction profiles for the pile foundations using 5.8 cm lateral ground displacement. 1, Ristricting force (kn/m) 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2cm 3cm 2.4cm 4cm 4cm Bishop 2.6cm Janbu Equivalent single pile method Sand Models Modified m p Sand Models Liquefied Sand Models Gonzalez and Ledezma (213) 2 1 6cm 5 1 15 2 Displacement (cm) Figure 8 Estimated lateral displacement and resisting force for the piles in the north approach road of the Llacolén Bridge
Liquefiable sand, N ave = 6, c = kpa, γ = 19kN/m 3 1,66kN Pile cap section Medium sand, c = kpa ϕ = 4 γ = 19.5 kn/m 3 Liquefiable sand N ave = 8, c = kpa γ = 17 kn/m 3 Dense sand, c = kpa, ϕ = 38 γ = 2 kn/m 3 Liquefiable sand N ave = 15, c = kpa γ = 17 kn/m 3 Dense sand c = kpa ϕ = 38 γ = 2kN/m 3 Pile group section My-equivalent = 34, kn-m Figure 9 Analysis of the Llacolén Bridge foundation at the north approach road using equivalent single- pile method, 5.8 cm slope displacement were applied Parameter Depth (m) liquefiable Table 1 Input parameters for the analysis Mataquito Bridge Juan Pablo II Bridge Llacolén Bridge Nonliquefiablliquefiable Non- liquefiable liquefiable Nonliquefiable c (kpa) ϕ (degree) 3 35-4 3-32 4 3 38 γ (kn/m 3 ) 19 2-22 19-2 21 17 2 p-multiplier m p.4.82.15.87.4-.15.87 SPT N-value 2-14 35-5 1-21 22-5 6-17 22-5 Range of predicted slope 4-24 3 12 2 6 displacements (cm) Measured slope displacements (cm) 5 1 15 2 Soil Equivalent single pile -.2.2.4.6.8 Lateral Displacement (m) less than 2 cm -2,-1, 1, 2, Bending Moment (kn-m) Conclusions -5, 5, 1, Shear Force (kn) Settlement and slope movement were observed -5, 5, Subgrade Reaction (kn/m) Cracks on the slope were observed The case history data of three bridges that suffered from liquefaction and lateral spreading in the 21 Maule Chile earthquake are described to identify pile performances during ground shaking. The Mataquito Bridge experienced negligible abutment displacement although significant liquefaction was observed in the vicinity of the bridge. The pile foundations and piers of Juan Pablo II Bridge and Llacolén Bridge, located in Concepción where large ground displacements occurred due to liquefaction, were damaged due to settlement and cracking. The procedure of an equivalent single-pile method is described and used to evaluate pile behavior against lateral spreading. Finally, observed damages and the analysis are compared to calibrate the pinning effect. Several sand models are used in the pushover analyses to estimate slope displacements. Analyses of the three bridges considering the pinning effect leads to the following conclusions. (1) 3D geometry clearly affects the laterally loaded pile behavior. For example, when LPile and 3D FEM approaches are used to compute the lateral displacement of the south abutment foundation of the Mataquito Bridge, the estimations range from 4 cm to 24 cm.
(2) Although no specific data about slope displacements of the Juan Pablo II Bridge and the Llacolén Bridge, the predictions tend to underestimate the slope displacements judging from the comparison against the observed level of damage. (3) In most cases, the pinning effect using the restricting force versus displacement relationship is exhibited before reaching the maximum restricting force of the piles. References 1. Ashford, S., Boulanger, R., and Brandenberg, S. (211). Recommended design practice for pile foundations in Laterally Spreading Ground. Report PEER, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER), Berkeley, CA. 2. Bray, J, D., and Travasarou, T. (27). Simplified procedure for estimating earthquake-induced deviatoric slope displacements. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 133(4), 381-392. 3. Boroschek, R., Soto, P., Leon, R., and Comte, D. (21). Terremoto centro sur Chile, 27 de Febrero de 21 Mw= 8.8. Informe renadic 1/5 Rev.2, Unive rity of Chile, Department of Civil Engineering and Department of Geophysics, Santiago, Chile. 4. Brandenberg, S. J., Boulanger, R. W., Kutter, B. L., and Chang, D. (27). Liquefaction-induced softening of load transfer between pile groups and laterally spreading crusts. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., ASCE, 133(1), 91-13 5. Brandenberg, S. J, Zhao, M., and Kashighandi, P. (213). Analysis of Three Bridges That Exhibited Various Performance Levels in Liquefied and Laterally Spreading Ground. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 139(7), 135 148. 6. Gonzalez, P, D., and Ledezma, A, C. (213). Simplified Evaluation of the Seismic Performance of Three Pile- Supported Bridges Affected by Liquefaction during the M8.8 Maule Chile Earthquake. Personal communication. 7. Ledezma, C. and Bray, J. (21). Probabilistic Performance-Based Procedure to Evaluate Pile Foundations at Sites with Liquefaction-Induced Lateral Displacement. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 136(3), 464 476. 8. Ledezma, C., Hutchinson, T., Ashford, S, A., Moss, R., Arduino, P., Bray, J, D., Olson, S., Hashash, Y, M, A., Verdugo, R., Frost, D., Kayen, R., and Rollins, K. (212). Effects of ground failure on bridges, roads, and railroads. Earthquake Spectra, Volume. 28, No. S1, S119-S143. 9. Idriss, I, M., and Boulanger, R. W. (28). Soil liquefaction during earthquakes, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, CA, 235. 1. McGann, C., Arduino, P., Ledezma, C., and Mackenzie-Helnwein, P. (212). Numerical evaluation of forces on piles bridge foundations in laterally spreading soil. Preliminary Report to WSDOT No.1. 11. Mokwa, R, L., and Duncan, J, M. (2). "Experimental evaluation of lateral-load resistance of pile caps." J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., ASCE. 127(2). 185-192. 12. Shantz, T. (213). Guidelines on foundation loading and deformation due to liquefaction induced lateral spreading. Caltrans Technical Reference. Available online. 13. Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center. (21). Postearthquake reconnaissance report on transportation infrastructure impact of the february 27, 21, Offshore Maule Earthquake in Chile. No. FHWA-HRT-11-3.