*3.2.2 Cluster II: dependence factors*

**3.2 MICMAC analysis: classification of CPT-based seismic soil liquefaction**

*Model depicting the relationships between seismic soil liquefaction significant factors based on ISM technique.*

The driving power and dependency power of each variable was measured using the final reachability matrix to analyze the strength of the relationship between seismic soil liquefaction significant factors. Driving power is characterized as an activity that propels other activities, while dependency power is defined as an activity that is driven by other activities. The driving power and dependency power are determined from the final reachability matrix by adding the sum of all '1's in

This is considered as an input to build a graph to classify the factors into four clusters i.e., Autonomous, Dependent, Linkage, and Independent factors (see **Figure 2**). Autonomous factors (first cluster) have weak driving power and weak dependence power. Dependent factors (second cluster) have weak driving power and strong dependence power. Linkage factors (third cluster) have strong driving power and strong dependence power. In the dependent factors (fourth cluster) acquires strong driving power and weak dependence power. The soil liquefaction factors have been categorized based on these aforementioned clusters. The four

Cluster I, represents autonomous factors and consists of soil liquefaction factors which have weak driving power and dependence power. This cluster has six seismic soil liquefaction factors (55%). Cluster I factors are relatively disconnected from the system. Autonomous factors in cluster I are earthquake magnitude F1 (*M*), closest distance to rupture surface F3 (*R*/*rrup*), fines content F4 (*FC*),

*<sup>v</sup>*), groundwater table F9 (*Dw*), and thickness of soil

**significant factors**

*Earthquakes - From Tectonics to Buildings*

**Figure 1.**

that factor's corresponding row and column.

clusters of soil liquefaction factors are:

*3.2.1 Cluster I: autonomous factors*

vertical effective stress F7 (*σ*<sup>0</sup>

layer F11 (*Ts*).

**172**

Dependence factors have a strong dependence power and weak driving power. This dependence cluster has two seismic soil liquefaction factors (18%) except liquefaction potential that including peak ground acceleration F2 (*a*max) and equivalent clean sand penetration resistance F5 (*qc*1*Ncs*), while, the liquefaction potential F12 (LP) falls in this cluster is not an influence factor of earthquake liquefaction, but a discriminate index. It is just proved that the driving power is poor and needs to rely on other factors to discernment liquefaction. In the ISM model, these factors form the top levels which need other soil liquefaction factors that collectively act to influence soil liquefaction.

#### *3.2.3 Cluster III: linkage factors*

Linkage factors have a strong driving power as well as strong dependence power. The factors affect each other and directly affect the liquefaction system. Therefore, the factors in this cluster are unstable. No factor in this model fall into this cluster, which indicates that the liquefaction influencing factors in this model are relatively stable.

#### *3.2.4 Cluster IV: independent/driving factors*

In this cluster, factors have strong driving power but weak dependence power. It is often the most critical factors of the system and also the essential factors. No factor in this model fall in this cluster.

A special case can be observed on factors that are depth of soil deposit F10, (*Ds*) and total vertical stress F8, (*σv*), on the middle between independent and autonomous factors whereas soil behavior type index F6, (*Ic*), on the middle between dependence and autonomous factors. Factors that are depth of soil deposit F10, (*Ds*) and total vertical stress F8, (*σv*), are lower on dependence but higher on driving

power, are located between two clusters, I and IV. Similarly, soil behavior type index F6, (*Ic*), factor is intermediate on dependence but lower driving power, but is located between two clusters, I and II. These factors need attention owing to establish and provide a more accurate and caution way of selecting significant factors for seismic soil liquefaction potential and its induced-hazards risk lassessment modeling.

**Conflict of interest**

**Author details**

Mahmood Ahmad1,2, Xiaowei Tang1

University of Osijek, Osijek, Croatia

Peshawar (Bannu Campus), Bannu, Pakistan

Architecture, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China

\*Address all correspondence to: tangxw@dlut.edu.cn

provided the original work is properly cited.

**175**

Ahsan Nawaz4 and Asim Farooq<sup>5</sup>

Technology, Dalian, China

\*, Feezan Ahmad1

1 State Key Laboratory of Coastal and Offshore Engineering, Dalian University of

2 Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology

3 Faculty of Civil Engineering and Architecture Osijek, Josip Juraj Strossmayer

4 Institute of Construction Project Management, College of Civil Engineering and

© 2021 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,

5 Department of Transportation Engineering, Pak-Austria Fachhochschule:

Institute of Applied Sciences and Technology, Haripur, Pakistan

, Marijana Hadzima-Nyarko<sup>3</sup>

,

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

*Elucidation of Seismic Soil Liquefaction Significant Factors*

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.97278*
