Evaluating cyclic liquefaction potential using the cone penetration test: Discussion

Abstract

The authors have presented an update on the use of the cone penetration test (CPT) for assessment of liquefaction potential. The writers consider some of the information presented to be potentially misleading. In particular, the proposed method appears to confuse the soil-identification or stratigraphic-logging phase of site exploration with the assessment of stress–strain behaviour of the soil under particular loading conditions. This may result in a short-circuiting of the design process. The writers wish to address three specific issues: (1) apparent errors in the text, (2) the link between the liquefaction definitions and the CPT screening method, and (3) the concept of “apparent fines content.”