【正文】 地帶。 因此，液化引起的地面破壞，預(yù)測由地震中的 M = 7和 PGA = 點附近觸發(fā)。 圖 3 圖顯示了通過在拉里薩（實心三角形）城市的現(xiàn)場測試提供的數(shù)據(jù)分布。 這一結(jié)果不與地表地質(zhì)為基礎(chǔ)的評估在拉里薩地區(qū)河流的地方液化敏感性，容易液化，沉積物映射一致。 參考書目 Bray, ., Sancio, ., Youd, ., Durgunoglu, T., Onalp, A., Cetin, ., Seed, ., Stewart, .,Christensen, C., Baturay, ., Karadayilar, T. amp。 588。 Papathanassiou, G. 2021. 研究包括 地表斷裂。 Chu, ., Stewart, ., Lee, S., Tsai, ., Lin, ., Chu, ., Seed, ., Hsu, ., Yu, . amp。土動力學(xué)和地震工程 24:647657。巖土地震工程土動力學(xué)四，普惠制 181， ASCE的。第 11屆全球會議土力學(xué)及基礎(chǔ)工程，舊金山，加州，鹿特丹 1:321376。 Iwasaki, T., Tatsuoka, F., Tokida, K. amp。第二屆國際會議小區(qū) 劃： 885896。 Sato, H. 1982. 土壤液化潛能小區(qū)劃使用簡化方法。三， 1319年至 1330年。 Ku, . 管的案件為基礎(chǔ)的方法。 Maravelakis (1943). 地質(zhì)和拉里薩破壞性地震強震研究， 1941年 3月 1日，第 27 Papathanassiou, G. 液化表面證據(jù)，工程地質(zhì)。 Seed, . amp。作者：土力學(xué)基礎(chǔ)部，ASCE的 97（ SM9） :1249 1273 Seed, ., Tokimatsu, K., Harder, . amp。地質(zhì)工程部的雜志 111（ 12） :1425 1445。 Choi, Y. 2021. 在構(gòu)造活動區(qū)譜加速度放大系數(shù)。分類號： Sonmez, H. （ Inegol土耳其）液化災(zāi)害空間。 Sonmez, H. 2021. 一個液化引起地面上的故障識別研究，并以1999年科賈埃利集集地震為依據(jù)，工程地質(zhì)， 97個計算數(shù)據(jù)： 112125。 Garris (1995) concludingthat the ability to accurately predict the potential for groundsurface disruption is a major concern for geotechnologists charged with the safe siting of constructed works. Ishihara (1985) proposed empirical criteria for assessing the likelihood of liquefaction manifesting at the ground surface by correlating the thickness of the overlying nonliquefiable layer, H 1, (cap layer) and thicknesses of the liquefiable layers, H 2, beneath it. The chart developed correlated these two parameters of thicknesses with the value of peak ground acceleration and proposed boundary curves for discriminating between occurrence and nonoccurrence of surface effects of liquefaction (Sonmez et al., 2021). The data collected by Ishihara (1985) es from areas with and without liquefaction triggered by two earthquakes,the 1983 nihonkai = ) and the 197= ). The criteria published in the Japa nese bridge code were applied to estimate the the thicknesses and liquefaction potential of the soil layers. In the 199039。 Garris (1995) used a data set of 308 borehole logs from areas where liquefaction could be expected or was noted after 15 earthquakes ranging in magnitude (M) from to used the proceduredeveloped by Seed et al. (1985), the simplified procedure, for the calculation of layer thicknesses. An important parameter in the study is that the materialsare highly susceptible to liquefaction. Youd amp。 sand boilsplus the effects of ground oscillation。 Garris, 1995). Furthermore, Yuan et al. (2021) and Chu et al. (2021) applied the charts proposed by Ishihara (1985) in cases associated with the 1999 ChiChi earthquake. The former study concluded that these diagrams match the data with only a few exceptions and the latter one that the liquefied sites were inconsistent with the method of Ishihara (1985). Sonmez et al. (2021) designed a new chart for assessing the potential for liquefaction effects to manifest at the ground surface by correlating the Liquefaction Severity Index (LSI) with the thickness of nonliquefiable cap layer. Their data were collected from insitu tests performed in liquefied and nonliquefied sites triggered by the earthquakes that occurred in Turkey and Taiwan in 1999. The proposed chart (Fig. 1) is divided in three zones,defined as:where liquefactioninduced ground surface disruption may be observed (zone A), liquefactioninduced ground surface disruption may is not observed (zone C) and a transition area between zones A and C (zone B). However, as Sonmez et al (2021) pointed out, the Ishihara procedure only takes into account the cap layer and the underlying liquefiable layer and doesnot consider the presence of a number of alternating liquefied and nonliquefiedlayers and their bined effects. Sonmez et al. (2021) used the liquefaction severity index instead of the thickness of liquefiable layer. This study avoids this limitation by developing a diagram that can be used for the prediction of liquefaction surface manifestation based on the correlation of the thickness of the nonliquefiable cap layer, H, with the Liquefaction Potential Index (LPI). This index, LPI, was selected because it can describe the performance of the whole soil column as noted by several researchers (Iwasaki et 。 Papathanassiou, 2021。 Idriss,1971。 F(z) is a function of the factor of safety against liquefaction, fs, where F(z)=1fs when fs1 and if fs1 than F(z)=.(1) expresses the LPI as a value ranging from 0 to 100. The LPI is related to the factorofsafety (fs).only soils where fs1 and that satisfy at the same time the liquefaction susceptibility criteria contribute to the severity of liquefaction (Juang amp。 02 low liquefiable and 2 and 5 moderate liquefiable. The advantage of LPI is that it quantifies the likelihood of liquefaction at the site by providing a unique value for the entire soil column instead of factors of safety for each of the layers. Consequently, the LPI values were used for the pilation of liquefaction hazard maps which can be used by planners as a tool for the preliminary assessment of the liquefaction potential. 3 Evaluating The Occurrence Of Liquefaction Man