The Use of The Multi-Channel Analysis of Surface Waves (MASW) Method As An Initial Estimator of Liquefaction Susceptibility in Greymouth, New Zealand

The Use of the Multi-channel Analysis
of Surface Waves (MASW) Method as

an Initial Estimator of Liquefaction
Susceptibility in Greymouth, New
Zealand
A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Science in Engineering Geology
at the
University of Canterbury
By
Clem Alexander Molloy Gibbens
2014
Looking east up Mawheranui (the Grey River) towards Greymouth. The world-renowned
Greymouth Barber, a katabatic wind formation is pictured rolling over the Twelve Apostles
Range (left) and Peter Ridge (right).
Acknowledgements
I wish to acknowledge the following people who have assisted me in writing this
thesis:
To my supervisors Mr. David Bell and Dr. Brendan Duffy. Your guidance and support
throughout the entire process was greatly appreciated. I know at times you were
frustrated with me but you were always available to assist when I asked.
To the guys that assisted me in the field: Brendan, Cam Asher, my ‘little’ brother
Reid and my dad Jim. Thanks for giving up your time to ensure I was able to collect
the data efficiently. Also thank you to Southern Geophysical for lending me the gear.
To the technical team in the geology department, thanks for making the last minute
rush jobs to get field equipment so much easier and less stressful.
To Karl at the Grey District Council and Elena and Mark at Opus Consultants in
Greymouth, thanks for giving me access to the sites for testing, and also for
providing me with useful information for use in my thesis.
To the people that helped keep me sane: Cam, Gina Vettoretti, Emma Rhodes,
Mitch Green, Jono Mukhtar, Millie Gibbens, Andy Kelly, all the guys and girls in the
office and everyone else who I have crossed paths with. Thanks for all the laughs
over the last few years.
Lastly, and probably the biggest thanks, goes to my family. For all the love and
support you have shown throughout the university studies. My parents, Therese and
Jim, you have been there whenever I needed you. All the little talks and words of
wisdom helped get me through (and the odd bit of financial support too). To my
brothers, Jordie and Reid, and my sister Millie; thanks for being there when I needed
a break or chat. My extended family, especially Brian and Diane Molloy, thanks for
being there (and for all the fresh vegetables). And last to my grandmother, Maureen.
She was one of my biggest fans throughout my thesis but unfortunately she isn’t
here to see me finish it, so this thesis is dedicated, in part, for her.
i
Abstract
Combined analysis of the geomorphic evolution of Greymouth with Multi-channel

Analysis of Surface Waves (MASW) provides new insight into the geotechnical
implications of reclamation work.
The MASW method utilises the frequency dependent velocity (dispersion) of planar
Rayleigh waves created by a seismic source as a way of assessing the stiffness of
the subsurface material. The surface wave is inverted to calculate a shear wave
velocity (Park et al., 1999). Once corrected, these shear-wave (Vs) velocities can be
used to obtain a factor of safety for liquefaction susceptibility based on a design
earthquake.
The primary study site was the township of Greymouth, on the West Coast of New
Zealand’s South Island. Greymouth is built on geologically young (Holocene-age)
deposits of beach and river sands and gravels, and estuarine and lagoonal silts
(Dowrick et al., 2004). Greymouth is also in a tectonically active region, with the high
seismic hazard imposed by the Alpine Fault and other nearby faults, along with the
age and type of sediment, mean the probability of liquefaction occurring is high
particularly for the low-lying areas around the estuary and coastline. Repeated
mapping over 150 years shows that the geomorphology of the Greymouth Township
has been heavily modified during that timeframe, with both anthropogenic and
natural processes developing the land into its current form. Identification of changes
in the landscape was based on historical maps for the area and interpreting them to
be either anthropogenic or natural changes, such as reclamation work or removal of
material through natural events.
This study focuses on the effect that anthropogenic and natural geomorphic
processes have on the stiffness of subsurface material and its liquefaction
susceptibility for three different design earthquake events. Areas of natural ground
and areas of reclaimed land, with differing ages, were investigated through the use
of the MASW method, allowing an initial estimation of the relationship between
landscape modification and liquefaction susceptibility. The susceptibility to
liquefaction of these different materials is important to critical infrastructure, such as
the St. John Ambulance Building and Greymouth Aerodrome, which must remain
ii
functional following an earthquake. Areas of early reclamation at the Greymouth
Aerodrome site have factors of safety less than 1 and will liquefy in most plausible
earthquake scenarios, although the majority of the runway has a high factor of safety
and should resist liquefaction. The land west of the St. John’s building has slightly to
moderately positive factors of safety. Other areas have factors of safety that reflect
the different geology and reclamation history.
iii
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................... i
Abstract .................................................................................................................................................. ii
List of Figures ..................................................................................................................................... vii
1 Introduction.................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background ........................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Objectives .............................................................................................................................. 4
1.3 Regional Geological Setting ............................................................................................... 5
1.3.1 Bedrock Units ................................................................................................................ 8
1.3.2 Quaternary Sediments................................................................................................. 9
1.3.3 Greymouth Surficial Geology.................................................................................... 11
1.3.4 Tectonic History .......................................................................................................... 14
1.4 Principles of Liquefaction .................................................................................................. 18
1.4.1 Terminology................................................................................................................. 18
1.4.2 Liquefaction Mechanism............................................................................................ 19
1.4.3 Liquefaction Effects .................................................................................................... 19
1.5 Thesis Organisation ........................................................................................................... 23
2 The Multichannel Analysis of Surface Waves technique ..................................................... 24
2.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................................... 24
2.2 MASW Data Acquisition .................................................................................................... 26
2.3 Dispersion Curve Extraction ............................................................................................. 29
2.4 Inversion .............................................................................................................................. 30
2.5 Walkaway surveys ............................................................................................................. 32
2.6 Parameters used for this study ........................................................................................ 32
3 Geomorphology .......................................................................................................................... 35
3.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................................... 35
3.2 Structural Geomorphology ................................................................................................ 35
3.3 Present Day Geomorphology of Greymouth .................................................................. 38
iv
3.4 Geomorphic Evolution over the past 150 years............................................................. 40
4 Site Investigations ...................................................................................................................... 52
4.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................................... 52
4.2 Greymouth Aerodrome ...................................................................................................... 53
4.2.1 Site Description........................................................................................................... 53
4.2.2 Site Geomorphology .................................................................................................. 53
4.2.3 Test Locations............................................................................................................. 55
4.2.4 Test Results ................................................................................................................ 56
4.3 Victoria Park Racecourse.................................................................................................. 61
4.3.3 Test Locations............................................................................................................. 63
4.3.4 Test Results ................................................................................................................ 64
4.4 Charles O’Connor Street Truck Park .............................................................................. 69
4.4.3 Test Locations............................................................................................................. 71
4.4.4 Test Results ................................................................................................................ 71
5 Analysis for Susceptibility of Liquefaction .............................................................................. 74
5.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................................... 74
5.2 Procedure for assessment of liquefaction susceptibility............................................... 74
5.2.1 Cyclic Stress Ratio (CSR) ......................................................................................... 74
5.2.2 Overburden Stress-Corrected Shear-Wave Velocity ............................................ 76
5.2.3 Cyclic Resistance Ratio (CRR) ................................................................................ 77
5.2.4 Factor of Safety (FoS) ............................................................................................... 80
5.3 Stress-Corrected Shear-Wave Velocity Profiles for Greymouth ................................. 80
5.3.1 Parameters used in this study .................................................................................. 81
5.3.2 Overburden stress-corrected Shear Wave Velocity .............................................. 82
v
5.3.3 Factor of Safety .......................................................................................................... 88
6 Discussion ................................................................................................................................... 95
6.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................................... 95
6.2 Discussion of results of analysis ...................................................................................... 95
6.2.1 Alpine Fault Mw8.0 Earthquake ................................................................................ 95
6.2.2 Local Mw6.5 Earthquake ............................................................................................ 96
6.2.3 Local Mw5.5 Earthquake ............................................................................................ 96
6.3 Implications of results with regard to geology and geomorphology ........................... 96
6.4 Implications of results with regard to the seismic hazard and infrastructure ............ 99
6.5 Influence of factors on Analysis ..................................................................................... 100
6.5.1 Seismic Factors ........................................................................................................ 101
6.5.2 Geological Factors ................................................................................................... 102
6.5.3 Hydrological Factors ................................................................................................ 104
6.6 Limitations of using Shear-Wave Velocity for Liquefaction Susceptibility Analysis 105
6.7 Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 106
6.8 Future Work....................................................................................................................... 107
7 References ................................................................................................................................ 108
Appendices........................................................................................................................................ 116
Appendix A: Geology........................................................................................................................... 117
Appendix B: Greymouth Argus Excerpt ........................................................................................ 121
vi
List of Figures
Figure 1.1 - Locations of Key West Coast Town Locations (with Alpine Fault lineated) ......................... 5
Figure 1.2 - Geological Map of the Greymouth Area (QMAP Series - Nathan et al., 2002) ................... 6
Figure 1.3 - Geology of Field Area (defined by Figure 1.2) with relevant stratigraphic relationship
(QMAP Series - Nathan et al., 2002) ....................................................................................................... 7
Figure 1.4 - Microzoned map of Greymouth showing different types of surficial deposits (Dowrick et
al., 2003) ............................................................................................................................................... 13
Figure 1.5 - (A) the known locations of active (in red) and inactive (in black) faults in the area
surrounding Greymouth; and (B) the location of known folds in the Greymouth Area (Canterbury
Geotechnical Database Map CGD5120 - GNS Greymouth Geology [via GeoServer]). ......................... 15
Figure 1.6 - Location of Historical large (>Mw5.0) earthquakes in the Central and Northern South
Island ..................................................................................................................................................... 16
Figure 1.7 - Sites of Liquefaction following the 1929 Murchison Earthquake (Carr, 2004) .................. 17
Figure 1.8 - Diagrams showing some of the types of failure associated with liquefaction processes: (a)
Loss of bearing strength – Liquefaction weakens the soil reducing the foundation support, allowing
heavy structures to settle and tip; (b) Ground Oscillation – Shows decoupling of the surface layers
through liquefaction (cross-hatched zone). The decoupled layer oscillates in a different mode than
the surrounding ground causing fissures to form; (c) Lateral Spreading; and (d) Flow Failure – Failure
is caused by liquefaction and loss of soil strength lying on a steep slope, creating instability (Youd
1992; Greene et al, 1994) ..................................................................................................................... 20
Figure 2.1 - Particle motions associated with a Rayleigh wave. Rayleigh waves are a result of
interfering P- and S- waves and this is illustrated here with particles undergoing dilation and
compression associated with P-waves, and oscillations associated with S-waves .............................. 24
Figure 2.2 - Typical shot sequence for a fixed-receiver walkaway record ............................................ 25
Figure 2.3 - Schematic of a linear array of geophones on a land-streamer (Park Seismic) .................. 26
Figure 2.4 - MASW survey geometry using a linear array, known as a land streamer (sled-mounted
geophones). The key acquisition parameters (near offset, array dimension, far offset and receiver
spacing are illustrated here and selection of these is discussed in the text (Image courtesy of
Brendan Duffy) ...................................................................................................................................... 27
Figure 2.5 - Rayleigh wave propagation away from a generation point. Near the sources the
wavefront is cylindrical, whilst further away it becomes planar (Park and Miller, 2006) .................... 27
Figure 2.6 - Typical Dispersion Curve Plot with phase velocity (y-axis) versus frequency (x-axis) ....... 30
Figure 2.7 - Typical 1-D inverted profile showing depth (frequency) vs velocity ................................. 31
vii
Figure 2.8 - Sample of the dispersion curves produced through the SurfSeis Software. The top 2
images are from the Greymouth Aerodrome, the middle 2 images are from Victoria Park Racecourse,
and the bottom 2 images are from the Awatuna Freighters Truck Stop on Charles O’Connor Street 34
Figure 3.1 - Topographic map showing the Twelve Apostles Range and Peter Ridge constraining
Greymouth to the east, and locations of marine terraces (Sourced from NZ Topo Maps) .................. 36
Figure 3.2 - (A) Digital elevation map of the Greymouth Area with bedrock and Quaternary geological
units represented. Major structural features are also represented. (B) Schematic cross-section of
Greymouth ............................................................................................................................................ 37
Figure 3.3 - Flooding on Mawhera Quay following the 1887 flood (McMillan Brown Library, UC) ..... 38
Figure 3.4 - Greymouth town following the September 1988 Flood event. Photo is looking west
towards the Tasman Sea (Grey District Library Charlton Collection) ................................................... 39
Figure 3.5 - Current Geomorphological features in the Greymouth Area ............................................ 40
Figure 3.6 - Changes in the extents of geomorphic features from 1871 (purple) to 1873 (green) ...... 42
Figure 3.7 - Changes in the extents of geomorphic features from 1873 (green) to 1879 (orange) ..... 43
Figure 3.8 - Changes in the extents of geomorphic features from 1879 (orange) to 1888 (yellow) .... 44
Figure 3.9- Changes in the extents of geomorphic features from 1888 (yellow) to 1895 (pink) ......... 45
Figure 3.10 - Changes in the extents of geomorphic features from 1895 (pink) to 1945 (red)............ 46
Figure 3.11 - Changes in the extents of geomorphic features from 1945 (red) to 1979 (blue) ........... 47
Figure 3.12 - Changes in the extents of geomorphic features from 1979 (blue) to present ................ 48
Figure 3.13 - Areas of different types of landscape modification (with MASW testing lines overlain
[black lines]) .......................................................................................................................................... 51
Figure 4.1 - Locations of site investigations .......................................................................................... 52
Figure 4.2 - Geomorphology of the Greymouth Aerodrome with known historical estuary and
coastline extents shown (Image redrawn based on West Coast Business Unit Historic Drawing, dated
1873; Aerial Photographs dated 1945; and Microzoning map of Greymouth, Dowrick et al., 2003). . 54
Figure 4.3 - Greymouth Aerodrome MASW Profile Locations .............................................................. 55
Figure 4.4 - Seismic Velocity Profile for Greymouth Aerodrome Line 1 (Runway Parallel) .................. 58
Figure 4.5 - Seismic Velocity Profile for Greymouth Aerodrome Line 2 (Transverse North) ................ 59
Figure 4.6 - Seismic Velocity Profile for Greymouth Aerodrome Line 3 (Oblique South) ..................... 60
Figure 4.7 - Geomorphology of Victoria Park Racecourse with known historical extents of the estuary
shown (Image redrawn based on West Coast Business Unit Historic Drawing, dated 1873; West Coast
Business Unit Historic Drawing, dated 1879; Aerial Photographs dated 1945; and Microzoning map of
Greymouth, Dowrick et al., 2003) ......................................................................................................... 62
Figure 4.8 - Victoria Park Racecourse Test Locations ........................................................................... 64
viii
Figure 4.9 - Seismic Velocity Profile for Victoria Park Racecourse Line 1 ............................................. 66
Figure 4.10 - Fixed-Receiver Walkaway Deep Sounding 1 (Eastern Straight of Racecourse Track) ..... 67
Figure 4.11 - Fixed-Receiver Walkaway Deep Sounding 2 (Southwest corner of Victoria Park site) ... 68
Figure 4.12 - Geomorphology of the Charles O'Connor Street Truck Stop with known historical
extents of the estuary shown (Image redrawn based on West Coast Business Unit Historic Drawing,
dated 1873; West Coast Business Unit Historic Drawing, dated 1879; West Coast Business Unit
Historic Drawing, dated 1895; Aerial Photographs dated 1945; and Microzoning map of Greymouth,
Dowrick et al., 2003) ............................................................................................................................. 70
Figure 4.13 - Charles O'Connor Street Truck Stop Test Locations ........................................................ 71
Figure 4.14 - Seismic Velocity Profile for Aratuna Freighters Truck Stop on Charles O'Connor Street 73
Figure 5.1 - Variations of stress reduction coefficient (rd) with depth and earthquake
magnitude (Idriss and Boulanger, 2014) ........................................................................................ 76
Figure 5.2 - Comparison of seven relationships between liquefaction resistance (CRR) and
overburden stress-corrected shear wave velocity for granular soils (Andrus and Stokoe, 2000; Youd
and Idriss, 2001) .................................................................................................................................... 77
Figure 5.3 - Liquefaction Relationship (CRR-VS1) curves recommended for clean, uncemented soils
from liquefaction case histories (Andrus and Stokoe, 2000; Youd and Idriss, 2001) ........................... 79
Figure 5.4 - Overburden Stress-Corrected Shear Wave Velocity Profiles for the testing based at the
Greymouth Aerodrome ........................................................................................................................ 85
Figure 5.5 - Overburden Stress-Corrected Shear Wave Velocity Profile for the testing based at
Victoria Park Racecourse ...................................................................................................................... 86
Figure 5.6 - Overburden Stress-Corrected Shear Wave Velocity Profiles for the testing based at the
Truck Depot on Charles O'Connor Street.............................................................................................. 87
Figure 5.7 - Factor of Safety Profile based on a design Mw8.0 Alpine Fault Earthquake for the soils
found at the Greymouth Aerodrome.................................................................................................... 90
Figure 5.8 - Factor of Safety Profile based on a design Mw6.5 Localised Earthquake for the soils
Figure 5.9 - Factor of Safety Profile based on a design Mw5.5 Localised Earthquake for the soils
Figure 5.10 - Factor of Safety Profiles based on all design earthquakes for soils found at Victoria Park
Racecourse ............................................................................................................................................ 93
Figure 5.11 - Factor of Safety Profiles based on all design earthquakes for soils found at Charles
O'Connor Street Truck Depot................................................................................................................ 94
Figure 6.1 - Microzones of surficial sediment type and origin (Dowrick et al., 2004) .......................... 98
ix
Figure 6.2 - Mean Monthly Rainfall for Hokitika and Westport from 1981 – 2010 [Note: no rainfall
information was available for Greymouth] (NIWA) ............................................................................ 104
List of Tables
Table 1.1 - Quaternary Chronology (kya ≡ thousand years) ................................................................... 9

Table 2.1 - Optimum field parameters for MASW surveys for most common soil sites (Reproduced
from Park et al. (2005)) ........................................................................................................................ 29
Table 2.2 - Summary of parameters used for the roll-along MASW data acquisition as part of this
study...................................................................................................................................................... 32
Table 4.1 - Summary Table of Seismic Line at Greymouth Aerodrome ................................................ 56
Table 4.2 - Summary Table of Seismic Line at Victoria Park Racecourse.............................................. 65
Table 4.3 - Summary Table of Soundings at Victoria Park Racecourse................................................. 65
Table 4.4 - Summary Table of Seismic Line at Aratuna Freighters Truck Stop on Charles O'Connor
Street..................................................................................................................................................... 71
Table 5.1 - Summary Table of Design Earthquake Parameters used in this study ............................... 81
Table 5.2 - Summary Table of all constant values used in the analysis as part of this study ............... 82
Table 6.1 – The relationship between fines content and the limiting upper value for liquefaction (VS1)
(Andrus and Stokoe, 2000) ................................................................................................................. 103
x
1 Introduction
This thesis examines the use of multichannel analysis of surface waves (MASW) for
the initial assessment of liquefaction potential as a guide to a more detailed testing
regime.
1.1 Background
The susceptibility of a soil material to liquefy during seismic loading is enhanced in
young loose sediments. This is generally reflected in the low resistance to
penetration (e.g. using CPT- and SPT-based testing), high pore-water content
(saturation), and relatively low deformation values.
Techniques for emplacement of uncontrolled and controlled (engineered) fill, which is

effectively young sediment, have evolved over the 20th century with implications for
its rigidity, porosity and strength. However, it is presently unclear to what extent
anthropogenic cut/fill processes over these long time periods affect the soil stability
in urban environments.
In September 2010, Canterbury experienced the first of 4 large, severely-damaging

earthquakes (Quigley et al., 2010; 2012). This earthquake initiated a sequence of
thousands of aftershocks, including the lethal February 2011 earthquake that
claimed 185 lives in New Zealand’s second most populated city, Christchurch
(Bannister and Gledhill, 2012). The subsurface geology in Christchurch and the
surrounding area was extensively known (Brown and Weeber, 1992) as well as the
potential for a proximal seismic hazard (Pettinga et al., 2001; Downes and Yetton,
2012). However, even with this knowledge the land on which Christchurch is
constructed performed poorly during these events. As a result of these events, the
focus of many city, district and regional councils has been shifted to developing
ground models of the subsurface beneath the developed areas they have control
over.
It is a widely accepted fact that natural soft, saturated sediments can fail during
earthquakes with examples including the 1964 Niigata Earthquake (Ishihara and
Koga, 1981), 2004 Chuetsu Earthquake (Wang et al., 2007), and February 2011
Christchurch Earthquake (Brackley, 2012). Also areas of emplaced fill can fail during
seismic events, for example the 1994 Northridge Earthquake (Stewart et al., 1996)
1
and the 1995 Kobe Earthquake (Soga, 1998). During the Canterbury Earthquake
Sequence (CES) areas of known fill in the city failed as a result of liquefaction, either
due to failure of the fill itself, or of the underlying sediment. Fill emplacement has to
be done correctly so that the land is safe under earthquake loading. If fill
emplacement is not done correctly then the possibility of the sediments beneath the
fill liquefying is increased, which can lead to failure of the material overlying the
liquefiable material.
Liquefaction resistance can be estimated using several techniques, with Cone

Penetration Tests (CPT’s) and Standard Penetration Tests (SPT’s) being the most
common methods. The original procedure for assessment of liquefaction resistance
was developed by Seed and Idriss (1971) using the SPT method and in the mid-
1980’s the procedure for using CPT was introduced by Robertson and Campanella
(1985). These original procedures have both been revised and updated numerous
times since their introduction. Idriss and Boulanger (2008) provides the framework
for assessment of liquefaction resistance, though this will not be covered within the
scope of this study.
Andrus and Stokoe (2000) provided a way for estimation of liquefaction resistance
based on shear-wave velocity (Vs). This is a promising alternative, or supplement, to
the penetration-based approaches. The use of Vs as an index for liquefaction
resistance is soundly based because both Vs and liquefaction resistance are
similarly influenced by many of the same factors (for example, age of deposit, water
content and void ratio). Advantages of using Vs as an indication of liquefaction
resistance include, but are not limited to the following: (1) measurements are
possible in soils that are hard to sample where penetration tests may be unreliable;
(2) Vs is a basic mechanical property of soil materials, directly related to small strain
shear modulus; (3) Vs can be estimated by surface inversion techniques (e.g.
Stokoe et al., 1994; Park et al., 1999). There are other advantages, and also
disadvantages, covered later in this thesis.
Greymouth, located on the West Coast of New Zealand’s South Island, is

constructed on the delta of the Grey River. Modern European occupation of the area
began in the mid-19th century due to the abundance of gold and coal in the region.
The population has increased since the first settlement, with a population of
2
approximately 9940 currently residing within the Greymouth area (2013 estimate
from Statistics New Zealand). This has meant that land requirements have
increased, leading to widespread modification of the natural landscape. The
sediments on which the town is constructed are geologically young, and therefore
may be susceptible to liquefaction and other geotechnical issues following a seismic
event (McCahon et al., 2007). Robinson and Davies (2013) reported that McCahon
et al. (2007) found that liquefaction was likely to occur in a number of places. These
included the swampy areas of large lakes and around the river estuary in
Greymouth.
Greymouth is located close to multiple active fault sources, including the Alpine
Fault, and the possibility of severe shaking being experienced during an earthquake
is high; meaning liquefaction could be considered probable rather than a possibility.
This study aims to make an initial estimate of liquefaction potential through: (1)
documenting the anthro-geomorphic evolution of Greymouth; (2) Using MASW to
evaluate Vs of selected sites where modification has occurred; and (3) discuss the
implications for seismic hazard mitigation and resilience of key infrastructure.
3
1.2 Objectives
The primary objective of this study has been to make an initial determination of
liquefaction resistance for low-lying areas in Greymouth and surrounding suburbs,
and with some respect towards the impact of the estuary modification. Using the
MASW method, shear-wave velocity (Vs) profiles were obtained to give initial
estimates of liquefaction potential using the simplified procedure outlined by Andrus
and Stokoe (2000).
This primary objective was achieved by the following:
 Determination of areas of natural and reclaimed land by studying historical

maps of the township, allowing for the development of a geomorphological
evolution timeline over the last 150 years; The area that this study
concentrates on is the suburb of Blaketown and areas on the western side of
the Greymouth Township, south of the Grey River, where the Erua Moana
Lagoon and Karoro Lake, which make up the estuary, are located.
 Using the timeline, assessment of the feasibility for MASW testing for areas of
natural soil and areas of reclamation of varying ages. Three areas were tested
as part of this study: The Greymouth Aerodrome, the old Victoria Park
Racecourse, and the Truck Stop, owned by Aratuna Freighters, located at the
north-western end of Charles O’Connor Street. All of these areas were
chosen due to the fact that they have, at some stage during the past two
centuries, been influenced by the estuary located within the wider Greymouth
area, and also due to them all having reclamation land within the site
boundaries. More specific details for these sites are given in Chapter 5.
 Subsequent processing and analysis of the MASW shear-wave profiles to
provide an initial estimate for liquefaction potential;
 Discussion of the implication of the results with regard to the seismic hazard
for the Greymouth Township, with emphasis on key infrastructure (e.g. St
John’s Ambulance Building, Greymouth Aerodrome)
Greymouth was chosen due to its high seismic hazard, relatively young soft
sediments, and my own personal connection to the area.
4
1.3 Regional Geological Setting
The West Coast region studied encompasses part of the tectonically active Alpine
Fault on the South Island of New Zealand. This fault separates the Indo-Australian
and Pacific plates.
Much of the ground on which the town of Greymouth, and much of the other West
Coast towns, is founded on is geologically young ground. Greymouth, along with
Westport, Hokitika and Karamea are located at river mouths and in a lagoonal or
estuarine environment which formed in postglacial times when sea level reached its
present day levels approximately 6,000-7,000 years ago, and as such are especially
susceptible to liquefaction effects.
The locations of these towns are shown in Figure 1.1.
West Coast
Region Boundary
Extent of
Figure 1.2
Alpine Fault
Figure 1.1 - Locations of Key West Coast Town Locations (with Alpine Fault lineated)
5
The geological evolution of the West Coast has occurred all throughout the
Paleozoic, Mesozoic and Cenozoic (Nathan et al., 2002); with some volcanic rocks
dating back to the Cambrian in age. However, many of these rocks do not outcrop at
the surface within the Greymouth area, due to either being at depth or due to now
being covered by Quaternary sediments.
The rocks that do outcrop make up much of the topographic features around
Greymouth, and these rocks are described, in stratigraphic order, below. However,
these descriptions only apply to geology of the area immediately around Greymouth.
The geological time scale, along with a full scale map, stratigraphic legend and
detailed geological history are provided in Appendix A.
Field Area
(Shown in
Figure 1.3)
Figure 1.2 - Geological Map of the Greymouth Area (QMAP Series - Nathan et al., 2002)
6
Erk
Mbs
Erk
Figure 1.3 - Geology of Field Area (defined by Figure 1.2) with relevant stratigraphic relationship (QMAP
Series - Nathan et al., 2002)
The geology of the field area defined by Figure 1.3 comprises a sedimentary
sequence ranging in age from Eocene (61 million years ago [Ma]) to the present day.
Bedrock material consists of the Nile Group (Cobden Limestone and Port Elizabeth
7
Member) and marine mudstones that underlie (Kaiata Formation) and overlie (Blue
Bottom Group) the limestone. Surficial units unconformably overlie the bedrock and
comprise Quaternary material, deposited during a series of glacial and interglacial
episodes (Metcalf, 1993).
1.3.1 Bedrock Units
Kaiata Formation (Erk)
The Kaiata Formation is Eocene in age (61 to 33.7 Ma) and is defined as a dark-
coloured, fine grained, calcareous mudstone or dark brown muddy micaceous
sediments, which are found between the underlying Eocene coal measures (Brunner
Coal Measures) and overlying Oligocene limestone unit (Nile Group) in the
Greymouth Area (Nathan, 1974; Metcalf, 1993; Nathan et al., 2002). The Kaiata
Formation is described as “a massive, brown mudstone, more calcareous towards
the top, locally interbedded with coarse sandstone and conglomerate” (Nathan,
1974). These conglomeratic sediments within the unit were later described by
Nathan et al. (2002) as interbedded mass-flow (debris-flow) deposits.
Nile Group (Port Elizabeth Member and Cobden Limestone)
The Nile Group (On) is a grouping of all calcareous sediments for much of the West
Coast formed during the Oligocene (33.7 to 23.8 Ma) (Nathan, 1974; Metcalf, 1993).
The Port Elizabeth Member (Onp) sits conformably above the Kaiata Formation. This
member consists of a grey-brown calcareous mudstone. Nathan (1974) originally
included this unit within the Kaiata Formation, though this is revised by Nathan et al.
(2002) and is now stated as part of the Nile Group. The Cobden Limestone (Onc) is
a muddy micritic limestone, with thin layers of clay/mud infill between some beds,
giving the outcrops a wavy appearance due to the less resistant mud layers being
eroded quicker than the limestone beds (Nathan et al., 2002).
The Nile Group outcrops in Greymouth as the high relief areas directly east of
Greymouth (Twelve Apostles Range and Peter Ridge) as part of the westward-
dipping limb of the Brunner Anticline.
8
Blue Bottom Group (Stillwater Mudstone)
The Blue Bottom Group consists of marine detrital sediments, mainly mudstone and
sandy mudstone, which overlie the Nile Group (Nathan, 1974).
The Stillwater Mudstone (Mbs) is a massive blue-grey calcareous mudstone that

formed throughout the Early to Middle Miocene (23 to 14 Ma) and sits conformably
above the Cobden Limestone of the Nile Group (Nathan et al., 2002).
The Stillwater Mudstone forms the majority of the minor relief found at the foot of the
Nile Group ridgelines (Twelve Apostles Range and Peter Ridge) and continues
south-east up the valley formed by Sawyers Creek towards Boddytown.
1.3.2 Quaternary Sediments

Much of the Grey Valley and lowlands have a complex cover of late Quaternary
moraine, river and alluvial fan gravel, coastal and lagoon deposits, and swamps.
These surficial deposits correlate to a succession of ice advances and contemporary
periods of low sea levels, and intervening interglacial high sea levels. This sequence
is associated with oxygen isotope stages 1 through 10. The ages of these deposits,
with associated symbols are described in Table 1.1 below.
These symbols are used in conjunction with the deposit type to classify the
Quaternary deposits in the Greymouth area.
Table 1.1 - Quaternary Chronology (kya ≡ thousand years)
Oxygen Age of deposits

Symbol
Isotope (kya)
1 <12 Q1
2 12 – 24 Q2
3 24 – 59 Q3
4 59 – 71 Q4
5 71 – 128 Q5
6 128 - 186 Q6
7 186 – 245 Q7
8 245 – 303 Q8
9 303 – 339 Q9
10 339 – 362 Q10
>362 eQ
9
Glacial till deposits (Q4t, Q6t, Q10t) are mapped as discrete units based on their
elevation, dissection and the relationship to nearby outwash gravels. These
exposures consist of interbedded till (sub-rounded to sub-angular clasts up to
boulder size in a tight clayey matrix) and fluvial outwash gravel (Nathan et al., 2002).
Alluvial and fluvioglacial gravels (Q1a, Q2a, Q4a, Q5a, Q6a, Q8a, and Q10a) are
widespread, and are well preserved in the floodplains and aggradation surfaces of
the major river valleys. They generally consist of rounded boulders in a sandy matrix.
Because these deposits can be dated from both glacial and interglacial periods,
these deposits occur as terraces and are closely related to terminal moraines. This
allows them to be easily identified, though many become fragmentary down-valley
especially in narrow valleys where erosion is more widespread. Fluvial gravels from
interglacial periods are more recognisable closer to the coast, where they grade to
marine surfaces. Further inland these deposits are inferred to be times of down-
cutting, with little aggradation. Near Greymouth these deposits are widespread and
appear to cover much of the current floodplains (or historic floodplains) and alluvial
terraces (Nathan et al., 2002).
Large alluvial fans, screes and colluvial deposits (Q1a, Q2a, and Q6a) occur as
localised deposits at the foot of steep streams draining range fronts. They consist
generally of moderately to poorly sorted pebble to boulder-size clasts with a sandy
matrix. In the map area, these deposits are small due to either the fan deposits being
removed due to the fluvial processes (for example, river eroded margins in flood
events), or being mapped as part of other alluvial deposits (Nathan et al., 2002).
Coastal marine deposits (Q1b, Q5b, Q7b, eQb) are present near the coast as
deposits from successive interglacial periods. They consist mainly of well sorted
beach sand and nearshore gravel and sand. Coastal deposits appear around
Greymouth on the coastal margins. Some older deposits are seen to be overlying
tertiary sediments (Stillwater Mudstone) in the southern part of Greymouth behind
the suburbs of Karoro and Paroa. Close to the Paparoa Ranges near Rapahoe, the
oldest marine cover beds (eQb) have been identified overlying Kaiata Formation
(Nathan et al., 2002).
Swamp deposits (Q1a) are mapped in flat, generally low-lying areas close to the
coast, commonly on the landward side of dunes or beach deposits. They consist of
10
poorly consolidated sand, mud and peat. The only mapped section of these deposits
occurs within Greymouth Township where the estuary (Erua Moana) is mapped, or
where the historical extents of the estuary were located (Nathan et al., 2002).
Landslides (uQl) are common features in steeper terrain, although many are too
small to be mapped separately. Their composition varies from largely coherent but
shattered rock to unsorted fragments of rock in a silty clay matrix. Many of the
landslides have been triggered by earthquakes, especially during the 1929
Murchison and Arthur’s Pass earthquakes and from the 1968 Inangahua earthquake
(Nathan et al., 2002).
Areas of ground disturbed by human activities such as sluicing and dredging for gold
have been mapped as Q1n. Older dredge tailings have been piled up and show a
characteristic hummocky landform. However, since the 1980’s it has been
mandatory to rehabilitate mined land, and as such mined land is much harder to
recognise. These types of ground are distributed randomly around the Greymouth
area, with many of them being located south near the Taramakau River and Kumara,
where gold mining has been a large productive industry in the past (Nathan et al.,
2002).
1.3.3 Greymouth Surficial Geology

Suggate (1965), Suggate (1968), Suggate and Moar (1970), Mew (1980) and Metcalf
(1993) describe the nature of the surficial deposits to a greater extent and in greater
detail. The surficial units are summarised below.
The Karoro Formation consists of marine sands and gravels (greywacke, granitic
and schistose in origin) partially cemented by iron pan development, and is
preserved south of Point Elizabeth as a discontinuous coastal terrace (Suggate,
1965; Metcalf, 1993). Suggate (1965) correlated the Karoro Formation with the
Terangi Interglacial period (300kya).
The Loopline Formation consists of extensive aggradational surfaces consisting of

sands and gravels were formed in conjunction with ice advances down the Arnold
Valley during the Otiran glaciation (Suggate and Moar, 1970; Metcalf, 1993). Dating
of some deposits indicated that ice advance culminated shortly after 18kya.
11
The Nine Mile Formation is grouped as all sediments deposited since the glaciers
started to retreat, circa 14kya (Metcalf, 1993). Marine sediments include gravels of
greywacke and granitic origin, while fluvial sediments include mud, sand and gravel
derived from the breakdown of Cobden Limestone, Stillwater Mudstone and erosion
of other Quaternary deposits (Metcalf, 1993).
There are also 10 pedological soil types recognised by Mew (1980). The distribution
and composition of these soils are functions of areal extent and composition of the
underlying parent materials (Metcalf, 1993). These soils will not be discussed here.
The surficial geology of the Greymouth Township itself has been interpreted based
on the descriptions in Suggate and Wood and a map was developed by Dowrick,
Rhoades and Davenport in 2003 (Figure 1.4) This map divides the town and
surrounding areas into microzones based on the types of deposits present.
The lagoonal and estuarine silt represented in Figure 1.4, along with the less
consolidated beach sand and gravel is what is believed to be the most liquefiable
during cyclic loading, with the clay-rich sediments being unlikely to be susceptible to
liquefaction. Carr (2004) noted that due to the rate of accretion, and the less
energetic environment in which the sediment is trapped, the sediments in the
Blaketown are thought to be loose in comparison to sand dunes subject to wave
action, and hence more susceptible to liquefaction.
12
Figure 1.4 - Microzoned map of Greymouth showing different types of surficial deposits (Dowrick et al.,
2003)
13
1.3.4 Tectonic History
The Alpine Fault is the dominant structural element within the region with a
predominantly dextral strike-slip movement. It forms the active plate boundary
between the Australian Plate to the west and the Pacific Plate to the east. The active
compressional tectonic strain along the fault zone is responsible for the high uplift
rates (up to 22mm/year) which resulted in the formation of the Southern Alps
(Metcalf, 1993), with the eastern side uplifting relative to the western side. Movement
is also horizontal based on field evidence of matching rock units offset by upwards of
450km across the fault zone (McCahon et al., 2007).
The most active part of the fault is the central section, which extends from Haast in
the south to Inchbonnie in the north, along the western boundary of the Southern
Alps. North of this area the fault becomes less active as movement is spread across
the Marlborough Fault Zone (McCahon et al., 2007). However, the Alpine Fault is not
the only active fault in the region. In Figure 1.5(A) below, the area immediately
around Greymouth has known faults represented. There is a trend in the orientation
of the faults and folds (Figure 1.5(B)) that run approximately sub-parallel to the
orientation of the Alpine Fault. These features are part of a broad shear zone, known
as the Paparoa Tectonic Zone (PTZ), extending from the Alpine Fault at the Hokitika
River to Kongahu Point. It trends along a NNE orientation. Elements within the PTZ
include faulting and folding (e.g. the Brunner anticline and Grey Valley syncline) as
seen in Figure 1.2. These are responsible for the deformation of Quaternary
sediments (Metcalf, 1993).
14
A
Greymouth
Greymouth
Figure 1.5 - (A) the known locations of active (in red) and inactive (in black) faults in the area surrounding
Greymouth; and (B) the location of known folds in the Greymouth Area (Canterbury Geotechnical Database
Map CGD5120 - GNS Greymouth Geology [via GeoServer]).
15
Historically, there have been large earthquakes felt in Greymouth that have caused,
or had the potential to cause, damage. Figure 1.5 shows the location of historic large
earthquakes with moment magnitudes greater than Mw5.0. The 1929 Murchison and
1968 Inangahua Earthquakes had the greatest effect on Greymouth.
Figure 1.6 - Location of Historical large (>Mw5.0) earthquakes in the Central and Northern South Island
Following the 1929 Murchison earthquake, where shaking intensities were recorded
at approximately MM7 on the Modified Mercalli Scale, liquefaction was reported
around the Blaketown Lagoon, and damage that occurred was worse on the western
side of town in Blaketown than other areas. Most damage occurred in areas of
reclaimed land, and where the land has been built up by the combination of
longshore deposition and sand trapped by the effective groyne feature, namely the
southern breakwater (Figure 1.7). Other anecdotal evidence has been described
where sand boils and geysers occurred in paddocks in Coal Creek and fissuring was
reported near Victoria Park (possibly as a result of liquefaction-induced lateral
spreading). Severe fissuring of the roadway was also reported on Steer Avenue, on
16
reclaimed land. More details of these accounts are given in Carr (2004) and Metcalf
(1993).
Following the 1968 Inangahua Earthquake no sand boils were reported, though Carr
(2004) states personal communications with former mayor Kevin Boon, suggested
that a number of pipes had to be replaced, suggesting some lateral spreading
occurred. The locations and extent of the work is not known.
Southern
Breakwater
Coal Creek
Victoria Park
Steer Avenue
Figure 1.7 - Sites of Liquefaction following the 1929 Murchison Earthquake (Carr, 2004)
17
1.4 Principles of Liquefaction
1.4.1 Terminology
The phenomenon of liquefaction and related ground failures are commonly
associated with large earthquakes. The common definition of liquefaction is “loss of
strength in saturated, cohesionless soils due to the build-up of pore-water pressures
during cyclic loading” (Rauch, 1997).
Idriss and Boulanger (2008) defines the phenomenon of liquefaction as follows:

“Loose sands tend to contract under cyclic loading imposed by earthquake shaking,
which can transfer normal stress from the sand matrix onto the pore water if the soil
is saturated and largely unable to drain during shaking. The result is a reduction in
the effective confining stress within the soil and an associated loss of strength and
stiffness that contributes to deformations of the soil deposit”.
Marcuson (1978) also defines liquefaction: “…the transformation of a granular

material from a solid to a liquefied state as a consequence of increased pore-water
pressure and reduced effective stress.”
A more precise definition, as stated by Rauch (1997), is the definition provided by

Sladen et al. (1985): “Liquefaction is a phenomenon wherein a mass of soil loses a
large percentage of its shear resistance, when subjected to monotonic, cyclic, or
shock loading, and flows in a manner resembling a liquid until the shear stresses
acting on the mass are as low as the reduced shear resistance.”
The granular nature of New Zealand soils and the location of many New Zealand
cities and towns, such as Christchurch and Greymouth, on such soils mean that the
potential risk of liquefaction would be likely, especially in areas more prone to
seismic events or in areas where liquefaction has occurred before. Understanding
the phenomenon of liquefaction and identifying where liquefaction is likely to occur is
highly important as the stability of the supporting ground beneath developed areas
play a key role in the ability of towns and cities to survive following a significant
seismic event.
18
1.4.2 Liquefaction Mechanism
The mechanism of liquefaction is well understood. In order for a soil deposit to

liquefy it must be saturated (i.e. below the water table), loose and fine grained, and
generally consist of either sand or a coarse silt, though loose gravels can liquefy.
Under shaking conditions, the soil grains try to compact to a denser configuration
(Carr, 2004). Youd et al. (2001) state that increased pore-water pressure is induced
by the tendency of granular materials to compact when subjected to cyclic shear
deformations. Greene et al. (1994) add that seismic waves passing through the
granular layers distort the structure and cause loosely packed groups of particles to
collapse. These collapses increase the pore-water pressure between the grains if
drainage cannot occur. If the pore-water pressure rises to a level approaching the
weight of the overlying soil, the granular layer temporarily behaves as a viscous
liquid rather than a solid.
As liquefaction occurs, the soil stratum softens, allowing large cyclic deformation to
occur. In loose materials, the softening is also accompanied by a loss of shear
strength that may lead to large shear deformations or even flow failure under
moderate to high shear stresses, such as beneath a foundation or sloping ground
(Youd et al., 2001). The liquefaction phenomenon is generally limited to the top 10 to
15 metres, as beneath this depth pressure cannot be relieved by venting the material
to the surface due to the weight of the overlying soil (Carr, 2004). Rauch (1997)
describes the mechanism of liquefaction in greater detail.
1.4.3 Liquefaction Effects
The liquefaction phenomenon by itself may not be particularly damaging or

hazardous. However, when liquefaction is accompanied by some form of ground
failure or displacement is it destructive to the built environment. Adverse effects of
liquefaction can take many forms, including: flow failures; lateral spreading; ground
oscillation; loss of bearing capacity; sand boils; differential and/or uniform settlement;
and rise of buried structures (Greene et al., 1994; Carr, 2004). Diagrams of some of
these failures are shown in Figure 1.6.
19
a
c
Figure 1.8 - Diagrams showing some of the types of failure associated with liquefaction processes: (a)
Loss of bearing strength – Liquefaction weakens the soil reducing the foundation support, allowing
heavy structures to settle and tip; (b) Ground Oscillation – Shows decoupling of the surface layers
through liquefaction (cross-hatched zone). The decoupled layer oscillates in a different mode than the
surrounding ground causing fissures to form; (c) Lateral Spreading; and (d) Flow Failure – Failure is
caused by liquefaction and loss of soil strength lying on a steep slope, creating instability (Youd 1992;
Greene et al, 1994)
Flow Failures
Flow failures are the most catastrophic ground failures caused by liquefaction. They
usually develop on slopes greater than 3 degrees and occur in loose saturated sand
and silts. The liquefiable layer loses strength and flows down a slope either en
masse (i.e. as blocks of intact material sliding on a layer of liquefied material) or as
completely liquefied material. Failures commonly extend tens of metres, though run-
outs of kilometres have been known to have occurred (Greene et al., 1994; Carr,
2004).
20
Lateral Spreading
Lateral spreading involves lateral displacement of large surficial blocks of soil as a

result of liquefaction of a subsurface layer, and generally occurs on shallow slopes
(0.3 to 3 degrees [Greene et al., 1994]). Displacement occurs in response to the
combination of gravitational forces and inertial forces generated by a seismic event,
causing the upper layer to break up into blocks through fissuring, which move down
slope or towards a free face, such as an incised river channel. Horizontal
displacements commonly range up to tens of metres.
Damage associated with lateral spreading include damage to foundations of building

located on or across the failure surface, rupturing of pipelines and other utilities, and
failure of abutments and toes of engineering structures, such as bridges (Greene et
al., 1994; Rauch, 1997; Carr, 2004).
Ground Oscillation
Where the ground is generally flat or the slope is too gentle to allow lateral
displacement (less than 0.3 degrees), liquefaction can decouple the overlying
sediment layers, allowing the upper soil to oscillate back and forth in the form of
ground waves. These oscillations are usually accompanied by opening and closing
of fissures, and fracturing of rigid structures such as paths and pavements as well as
subsurface utilities (Greene et al., 1994).
Loss of Bearing Capacity
When liquefaction of a soil occurs, the substantial reduction of soil strength can
result in large deformations. If this soil is supporting a structure, it can result in a
reduction of foundation support, leaving the structure to experience differential
settling. This can occur gradually where liquefaction propagates upwards through the
overlying soil, and thus weakening the soil and allowing the building to slowly settle
differentially. (Greene et al., 1994; Carr, 2004).
Sand Boils
Carr (2004) states that sand boils (though actual grainsize of liquefied material can
range from coarse silt [0.03mm in diameter] to fine gravel [6mm in diameter]) are an
21
unambiguous indicator that liquefaction has occurred. They are easily recognisable,
making them useful as the basis for discerning whether or not a site has liquefied.
Sand boils are formed during earthquake shaking when the compaction of granular
materials creates zones of high “slurry” pressure, and to relieve this pressure the
slurry is expelled through the cracks in the overlying strata or through vents formed
vertically through the overlying sediment to reach the ground surface. The water can
flow violently, carrying sediment with it, which then settles and forms a conical shape
around the vent hole (Carr, 2004).
Settlements
The densification of a soil deposit due to earthquake shaking can result in the
subsidence of an area (Carr, 2004). Furthermore, the weight of a structure may not
be great enough to cause the large settlements associated with bearing capacity
failures. However smaller settlements may occur as soil pore-water pressure
dissipates and the soil consolidates. These settlements can be damaging, but not on
the magnitude of the effects identified above (Greene et al., 1994). Also, if ejecta
was observed at the surface (e.g. sand boils) then the removal of the material from
underground can cause voids underground, leading to differential settlement over
time as the overlying sediment subsides to fill the void areas where material has
been removed.
Rise of Buried Structures
When surrounding soil liquefies, buried structures that are less dense than the
surrounding soil (such as pipes, piles and tanks), can rise buoyantly. This has an
impact on lifeline services (Carr, 2004).
22
1.5 Thesis Organisation
Chapter 2 comprises a literature review of the MASW method, summarising the

various stages from data acquisition to final production of shear-wave velocity
profiles. It also discusses the limitations of the method.
Chapter 3 considers the geomorphology of the Greymouth Township, with particular

regard to the evolution of the land over the last 150 years.
Chapter 4 describes the individual site investigations undertaken as part of this

study. This chapter presents the specific site conditions, details of the data and the
initial results obtained.
Chapter 5 details the analysis undertaken on the initial results obtained following the
MASW test processing. It concentrates specifically around the simplified procedure
outlined by Andrus and Stokoe (2000) and how liquefaction susceptibility can be
estimated using shear-wave velocity. Further analysis to determine the factor of
safety of the areas tested is also provided.
Chapter 6 provides discusses the results obtained, with particular regard to the
surficial geology and geomorphology. It also discusses the implications of the results
for the seismic hazard and critical infrastructure. Together with the analysis, the
potential for future work in this area and an effective way of making estimates for
liquefaction potential is outlined. It will also discuss how the results obtained in this
study can be further enhanced to provide more accurate results.
23
2 The Multichannel Analysis of Surface Waves technique
2.1 Introduction
The multichannel analysis of surface waves (MASW) method was first introduced
into the geotechnical and geophysical community in early 1999, although earlier
development versions came out several years prior (Park et al., 1999; Park and
Brohammer, 2003; Yuan, 2011). MASW is a seismic method that generates a shear-
wave velocity (Vs) profile versus depth. This method analyses Rayleigh-type surface
waves on a multi-channel record, as Rayleigh waves make up more than two-thirds
of the energy imparted in a seismic survey (Park et al., 1999; Park and Brohammer,
2003; Ivanov et al., 2005; Duffy, 2008;). MASW utilises energy commonly considered
noise on conventional reflection seismic surveys (Park et al., 1999), and uses
multichannel recording and processing concepts widely used for decades in
reflection surveying for oil exploration (Park and Brohammer, 2003). Construction of
a shear-wave velocity profile through the analysis of planar, fundamental-mode
Rayleigh waves is one of the most common ways to use the dispersive properties of
surface waves. This type of analysis provides key parameters commonly used to
evaluate near-surface stiffness, which is a critical property in geotechnical studies
(Park et al., 1999).
Rayleigh waves are the result of interfering P- (compressional body waves) and S-
waves (oscillating body waves) (Figure 2.1). Rayleigh waves, in general, are surface
waves that travel along a free surface, such as the earth-air interface, with the depth
of penetration dependent on the wavelength.
Figure 2.1 - Particle motions associated with a Rayleigh wave. Rayleigh waves are a result of interfering P- and S- waves
and this is illustrated here with particles undergoing dilation and compression associated with P-waves, and oscillations
associated with S-waves
24
Ground roll is a particular type of Rayleigh wave that travels along or near the
ground surface and is usually characterised by being relatively low velocity, low
frequency, and high amplitude (Park et al., 1999; Xia et al., 1999). Long wavelengths
penetrate deeper and are more sensitive to the elastic properties of the deeper
layers. Longer wavelengths generally also exhibit greater phase velocities. The
shorter wavelengths are sensitive to the physical properties of the surface layers.
Based on this reasoning a particular mode of surface wave will possess a unique
phase velocity for each unique wavelength, leading to the dispersion of the seismic
signal (Xia et al., 1999).
Rayleigh waves propagate as different modes, with a mode being a ‘packet’ of

acoustic energy that propagates in one direction whilst confined in the other two
directions. Being surface waves, this means that Rayleigh waves are confined to the
earth-air interface (Duffy, 2008). Therefore, as mentioned above, a particular mode
of Rayleigh wave will have a particular propagation velocity for a given frequency. Of
these modes, fundamental mode Rayleigh-waves, which travel in an anticlockwise
motion, are the slowest and so appear closer to the origin in a frequency versus
phase velocity plot. This is known as a dispersion plot.
There are 3 common types of MASW survey: active source MASW, where data
collection is impact triggered; passive source MASW, measured over longer times
without an active source (Park and Miller, 2006); and walkaway active source MASW
surveys, where 2-4 shot records are ‘stitched’ into composite records, keeping either
the source or receiver static (Figure 2.2) (Vincent et al., 2006).
Figure 2.2 - Typical shot sequence for a fixed-receiver walkaway record
The methodology described below in Section 2.2 is generally for the active source
MASW survey. Descriptions of the walkaway methods are given in Section 2.3 of this
chapter.
25
2.2 MASW Data Acquisition
The MASW process requires a multichannel record with at least 12 traces to produce
reliable results. The method described in this chapter is related to the use of a 24-
channel recording device, with the geophones oriented in a linear array (Figure 2.3).
There are three stages to the MASW process: data acquisition; dispersion curve
extraction; and finally, inversion of the dispersion curve.
Figure 2.3 - Schematic of a linear array of geophones on a land-streamer (Park Seismic)
The first step in the MASW process is the data acquisition in the field. The purpose
of this is to acquire broadband high frequency planar fundamental-mode Rayleigh
wave records, in either an ‘active’ or ‘passive’ manner.
The correct selection of an appropriate source is essential to ensuring that enough

energy is delivered (Park et al., 2005). Impulsive sources are cheaper and more
convenient so are used for all surveys conducted as part of this study. An 8kg
sledgehammer and plate was chosen as the seismic source and the signal recorded
with a 24-channel array of 4.5Hz sled-mounted vertical geophones, which are
suitable for materials in the top 30 m (Park et al., 2005).
The basic field configuration and acquisition procedure is generally similar to that
used in conventional common midpoint (CMP) body-wave reflection surveys. The
results obtained from MASW testing can be affected by the field setup with key
factors including source type, source location, geophone spacing and type, the
number of geophones and the site conditions (Yuan, 2011).
26
Figure 2.4 - MASW survey geometry using a linear array, known as a land streamer (sled-mounted
geophones). The key acquisition parameters (near offset, array dimension, far offset and receiver spacing
are illustrated here and selection of these is discussed in the text (Image courtesy of Brendan Duffy)
Selection of an appropriate near offset (x1 in Figure 2.4) (the distance between the
source and nearest geophone), is critical to avoid the near-field and far-field effects.
Near-field effects are caused by cylindrical rather than planar propagation of the
Rayleigh-waves close to the source (Figure 2.5), manifesting themselves as a lack of
linear coherency at lower frequencies (Park et al., 1999).
Figure 2.5 - Rayleigh wave propagation away from a generation point. Near the sources the wavefront is
cylindrical, whilst further away it becomes planar (Park and Miller, 2006)
It is assumed that the Rayleigh wave is planar only after near-offset (x1) is larger
than approximately half of the maximum desired wavelength (λmax):
This means that the longer a wavelength, the further it must travel before becoming
planar, thus requiring a larger near offset for deeper investigations (Richart et al.,
1970; Park et al., 1999; Duffy, 2008; Yuan, 2011).
27
A conservative estimate of the reliable investigation depth for surface wave surveys
(zmax) (e.g. Stokoe, 1994) is given by:
where;
This half wavelength criterion is based on the premise that the maximum depth (zmax)
for which the shear wave velocity (vs) can be calculated is about half the longest
wavelength (λmax) measured (Park et al., 1999). However Park et al. (2001; 2005)
state that a near-offset of 10 meters as used in this study can be used to sample
wavelengths as large as 50 metres without interference of near-field effects, though
this assumption is dependent on the site conditions.
Far field effects are defined as contamination of the body-wave record due to
attenuation of high-frequency ground roll at longer offsets (Park et al., 1999) or high-
frequency component dissipation at larger distances from the source (Stokoe, 1994).
At excessive offsets higher mode surface waves (Ivanov, 2001; 2005) dominate over
fundamental mode surface waves and this limits the array dimension D (Figure 2.1).
This effect limits the highest frequency at which phase velocity (fmax) can be
measured, and thus the minimum reliable surface layer thickness (Stokoe et al.,
1994; Duffy, 2008; Yuan, 2011) such that:
where Cmin and λmin are phase velocity and wavelength, respectively, corresponding
to a particular fmax (Park et al., 1999). Although the final inverted shear-wave profile
may possess shallow layers thinner than H1, calculated vs values for these upper
layers should be considered unreliable (Park et al., 1999; Duffy, 2008). Furthermore,
the geophone spacing (dx in Figure 2.1) cannot be smaller than half the shortest
wavelength measured, to ensure that spatial aliasing is avoided (Park et al., 1999;
Yuan, 2011):
28
By convolving a full wavefield impulsive record with a sweeping stretch function and
examining the swept frequency record obtained, a near offset can be selected that
minimises near and far field effects for a useful range of wavelengths. As stated
above the reliable investigation depth is approximately half the maximum
wavelength, so by optimizing the near offset this results in the maximisation of the
investigation depth (Park et al., 1999; Duffy, 2008). However in most soil site surveys
a full wavefield survey is unnecessary and general parameters can be adopted from
Park et al. (2005). Table 2.1 summarises these general parameters.
Table 2.1 - Optimum field parameters for MASW surveys for most common soil sites
(Reproduced from Park et al. (2005))
Receiver
Max. Depth Minimum Maximum
Receiver (Hz) Spacing [dx]
[zmax] (m) Offset [x1] (m) Offset (m)
(m)
4.5 50 10 100 1
10 30 10 100 1
40 15 10 100 1
2.3 Dispersion Curve Extraction

Dispersion is the property of frequency-dependent velocity. Generation of a
dispersion curve is one of the most critical steps for generating an accurate shear-
wave velocity profile. Dispersion curves are generally displayed as phase velocity
versus frequency (Figure 2.6).
The shot records must be processed in SurfSeis to image the dispersion to extract
fundamental mode dispersion curves (Duffy, 2008). Surfseis applies a wavefield
transformation to generate a dispersion image. A multichannel coherency measure is
applied to a swept-frequency record in the offset-frequency domain and used to
calculate phase velocity with frequency. These variables are mapped continuously to
produce a dispersion map from which a curve can be picked (Duffy, 2008).
The accuracy of a dispersion curve can be enhanced by the analysis and removal of
noise on ground roll data (Park et al., 1999), however this was not necessary in this
study.
29
Figure 2.6 - Typical Dispersion Curve Plot with phase velocity (y-axis) versus frequency (x-axis)
It is normally assumed that the fundamental mode of surface waves dominates the
recorded wavefield and higher modes can be ignored. In reality, however, higher
modes are commonly generated and can sometimes possess significant amounts of
energy (Park et al., 1998). Contribution of higher modes tends to become more
significant at higher frequencies than normally analysed in conventional application
of surface waves. Near-surface application of surface waves deals with these higher
frequencies. Reliable separation of different modes is possible only through a multi-
channel recording method combined with an appropriate multi-channel data-
processing technique (Park et al., 1998; Ivanov et al., 2001; 2005).
2.4 Inversion
Xia et al. (1999) modelled the contribution of elastic properties to fundamental mode
Rayleigh-wave phase velocity. They found, for both their models and in-field testing,
that S-wave velocity is the dominant property at frequencies greater than 5Hz. The
low sensitivity of Rayleigh-wave phase velocity to P-wave velocity and density allows
these properties to be estimated to within 25% without a significant adverse effect on
the convergence of model and inversion. Definition of a layer model by division of the
subsurface into layers of constant velocity removes layer thickness as a variable,
leaving S-wave velocity as the only remaining variable. S-wave velocities can thus
be derived by inverting Rayleigh-wave dispersion data to fit a layer model with fixed
30
estimates of layer thickness, Poisson’s ratio or P-wave velocity and density. Once
individual dispersion curves are inverted, the resulting 1-D profiles are interpolated to
construct a 2-D S-wave velocity profile (Figure 2.7) (Duffy, 2008).
Figure 2.7 - Typical 1-D inverted profile showing depth (frequency) vs velocity
The validity of an inversion of a fundamental mode Rayleigh-wave dispersion curve

is heavily dependent on the accuracy of the curve (Xia et al., 2003; Zhang and Chan,
2003; O’Neill and Matsuoka, 2005) A well picked fundamental mode dispersion
curve will invert to a model that closely resembles the earth model, but if the
dispersion curve is inaccurate at any point along its length a partly or completely
imitation S-wave velocity profile can result.
Zhang et al. (2003) observed that cross-mode mixing of up to 40% at middle to high
frequencies made little difference to the inverted result, but anything more than 5%
mixing at low frequencies adversely affected the inverted model. Mixing <10%
dramatically reduced penetration depth whilst higher mixing ratios produced similarly
reduced penetration depth and significantly higher velocities within those penetration
depths. (Duffy, 2008)
Xia et al. (2003) proposed an alternative approach based on inverting both

fundamental and higher mode Rayleigh-waves. This is implemented in the SurfSeis
3 software. Higher mode Rayleigh-waves are even more strongly dependent on S-
wave velocity than are fundamental mode Rayleigh waves. This means that a small
31
change in S-wave velocity at a given wavelength produces a many times larger
standard deviation in the phase velocity of the higher mode than that of the
fundamental mode The higher modes stabilise the inversion procedure.
2.5 Walkaway surveys

This study used fixed receiver (source move-out – Vincent et al., 2006) walkaway
survey geometry at several sites. The process for conducting walkaway surveys is
the same to that of a rolling MASW survey, described above, with only the data
acquisition being different, thought the processing is generally the same. The term
walkaway is defined as a survey performed by moving source points to progressively
larger offsets while keeping geophones fixed, or the source point can remain fixed
while the geophones are moved to progressively larger offsets. In fixed-receiver
walkaway surveys (FRW), the geophone spread remains stationary, whereas the
source location moves out one geophone spread length at a time (Vincent et al.,
2006). This study used fixed-receiver walkaways for deep soundings only. Using the
fixed-receiver walkaway method, rather than the fixed-source walkaway method, we
reduce the effect of heterogeneity in the subsurface (Vincent et al., 2006).
The source is placed at 10 metre spacing between the source and first geophone,
then moved at multiples of the array length. Individual shot records are added to
produce a pseudo-96-channel record. A schematic of the FRW process is shown in
Figure 2.3 above.
2.6 Parameters used for this study
The active source MASW method was used for the field investigations as part of this
study. The field data was collected as roll along methodology, with some deep
walkaway soundings. The survey parameters used as part of this study are shown
below in Table 2.2.
Table 2.2 - Summary of parameters used for the roll-along MASW data acquisition as part of this study
Receiver Minimum # of Maximum Geophone Stack

(Hz) Offset (m) Geophones Offset (m) Spacing (m) number
4.5 10 24 33 1 6 (12)
32
As part of the surveys completed for this study, a geophone array consisting of 24
4.5Hz geophones at 1m spacing was used. The stack number indicates the number
of records that were taken at each distance along a profile. Generally 6 stacks were
taken at each location, while up to 12 stacks were taken when ambient noise from
the surroundings would register on the equipment.
The processing of the data was all completed using the SurfSeis 3 software.
The data obtained was encoded with geometry. The geometry-encoded fixed-
receiver walkaway records were added to build 96-channel records. Dispersion
maps (overtone images) were generated using the active overtone technique.
Frequency ranges were typically from 5 to 50Hz.
Fundamental mode dispersion curves were extracted within user-defined

boundaries. Representative dispersion curves for the different sites are shown below
in Figure 2.4. The dispersion curve was typically coherent, clear of higher modes and
strongly dispersive.
The dispersion curves were inverted using the default 10-layer model and
interpolated in SurfSeis to produce 2-D profiles. Further analysis is reported in
Chapter 5 and the results discussed in Chapter 6. All dispersion curves plots are
provided in Appendix E.
33
Greymouth Aerodrome
Victoria Park Racecourse
Truck Stop on Charles O’Connor Street
Figure 2.8 - Sample of the dispersion curves produced through the SurfSeis Software. The top 2 images are
from the Greymouth Aerodrome, the middle 2 images are from Victoria Park Racecourse, and the bottom 2
images are from the Awatuna Freighters Truck Stop on Charles O’Connor Street
34
3 Geomorphology
3.1 Introduction
The Greymouth area has been affected by a combination of late Cenozoic uplift and
erosion, the effects of Quaternary glaciation, and coastal erosion (Nathan et al.,
2002). The Greymouth township is situated on a narrow coastal plain extending
immediately south of Point Elizabeth to beyond the southern extent of the field area
(Metcalf, 1993). This chapter describes the current structural (Figure 3.2) and
surficial geomorphology and processes, and also describes the geomorphic
evolution over the last 150 years from natural and anthropogenic factors.
3.2 Structural Geomorphology
The dominant structural geomorphological feature in the area surrounding

Greymouth is the steep hill country, including the Twelve Apostles Range and Peter
Ridge described in Chapter 1.3. This steep hill country feature has formed on
erosion-resistant Tertiary limestone (Cobden Limestone) that forms the landward
boundary of the coastal plain to the east, with less dominant hills formed at the base
of the limestone beds from the less erosion-resistant mudstone (Stillwater
Mudstone). The dip in these limestone beds formed with the active development of
the Brunner-Mt Davy Anticline, resulting in the western limb dipping at approximately
30°. This structure possesses the highest relief in the area, with elevations of 330m
above sea level (asl) for the Twelve Apostles Range and 270m asl. for Peter Ridge
(Figure 3.1) (Metcalf, 1993). The digital elevation map shown in Figure 3.2 shows the
location of the dominant structural features.
35
Point Elizabeth
Marine
Terrace
Breakwaters
Start of Southern
Floodwall
Marine
Terrace
Boddytown
Peter Ridge
Figure 3.1 - Topographic map showing the Twelve Apostles Range and Peter Ridge constraining Greymouth
to the east, and locations of marine terraces (Sourced from NZ Topo Maps)
36
A
Figure 3.2 - (A) Digital elevation map of the Greymouth Area with bedrock and Quaternary geological units
represented. Major structural features are also represented. (B) Schematic cross-section of Greymouth
Tectonically uplifted marine terraces at approximately 6–9m asl form a higher section
of the coastal plain. Another terrace at 70–80m asl is also present north and south of
the Grey River (Metcalf, 1993). These terraces generally overlie eroded marine
mudstone (Stillwater Mudstone). The uplift of these terraces has preserved the
marine mudstone and overlying Quaternary deposits from coastal and alluvial
processes during interglacial periods. The susceptibility to erosion of this mudstone
37
unit results in the removal of the mudstone from above the limestone units forming
the ridges. As a result of this, the relief developed above the mudstone is much more
subdued. This is observed in the southeast of the township that extends towards
Boddytown (as seen in Figure 3.1 and Figure 3.2), where a broad valley has eroded
into the mudstone during incision of Sawyer’s Creek (Figure 3.2) (Metcalf, 1993).
3.3 Present Day Geomorphology of Greymouth
The dominant geomorphic agents are the Grey River, and also the Tasman Sea
coastline. The river has been completely constrained on the southern bank from the
Cobden Rail Bridge east of the town, westwards to the coastline through
construction of the wharves for boat moorings and more recently a floodwall (Figure
3.1, 3.2). This has not allowed the river to form meanders on the southern bank. It is
also partially constrained on the north bank through the entrainment walls, though
these are smaller than, and not as continuous as, the floodwall constructed on the
southern bank. Flood protection was built between 1988 and 1990, following two
major floods in 1988. Flooding has historically been an issue with floods recorded
since European occupation (Figures 3.4, 3.5 and Appendix D).
Figure 3.3 - Flooding on Mawhera Quay following the 1887 flood (McMillan Brown Library, UC)
38
Figure 3.4 - Greymouth town following the September 1988 Flood event. Photo is looking west towards the
Tasman Sea (Grey District Library Charlton Collection)
The other dominant geomorphological feature is the coastline, which constrains the
western side of Greymouth, extending north and south. The coastline is broken by
two breakwaters, which were built in the early 20th century (see Greymouth Argus
excerpt dated 11 August 1904 [Appendix B]).
The Erua Moana lagoon and Lake Karoro (Figure 3.2) make up the modern extent of
the estuary. The entrance to the estuary is located in the floodwall along the south
bank of the Grey River. The entrance is constrained by the presence of the floodwall
and the Port of Greymouth. The estuary extends through Greymouth, with the
southern extent being Lake Karoro located at the Greymouth Aerodrome. Apart from
Lake Karoro, the estuary is bounded on all sides by floodwalls, though the bounds of
Lake Karoro have still been influenced by anthropogenic methods.
39
Figure 3.5 - Current Geomorphological features in the Greymouth Area
3.4 Geomorphic Evolution over the past 150 years
The current geomorphology of Greymouth is heavily constrained by human

influences. The geomorphological evolution outlined below has been based on
historical maps, which can be found in Appendix C, along with larger versions of the
maps used below. This section focuses on the southern bank of the Grey River, the
estuary and the Tasman Sea coastline south of the Grey River mouth.
It should be noted that not all maps have the same extents, so only the interpretation
that can be observed has been documented below. A site-specific geomorphological
evolution has also been provided in each section of Chapter 4 relevant to each site.
40
1871 to 1873
The extent of the Grey River, Tasman Sea coastline and location of the estuary as
mapped in 1871, and the change over time to 1873 is shown in Figure 3.6. Based on
the 1871 extent (purple line) the Grey River mouth flowed into the Tasman Sea in a
northwest direction. The entrance to the estuary was very narrow, and the presence
of sand bar at the mouth of the river indicates the influence of the river meeting the
north-flowing longshore drift in the Tasman Sea. The map for 1871 only defines the
area around the river mouth.
From the 1871 extent to the 1873 extent (green line), the mouth of the Grey River
had migrated south and the meander in the river had begun to straighten. However,
the entrance to the estuary was still narrow. There is no information on presence of
the sandbar across the mouth of the river in 1873. In addition the extent of the
estuary (Erua Moana and Lake Karoro) is defined. Several tributaries to the estuary
are shown, predominantly as drainage from the elevated area making up Peter
Ridge, also associated sources from Sawyers Creek flowing from the southeast of
the map. The coastline of the Tasman Sea is shown also.
41
Figure 3.6 - Changes in the extents of geomorphic features from 1871 (purple) to 1873 (green)
42
1873 to 1879
The evolution from 1873 to 1879 (orange line) is shown in Figure 3.7. The
construction of the Port of Greymouth, which picked up in the 1880’s to meet the
demand associated with the gold and coal at the time (Grey District Council, 2014)
can be seen on the southern bank of the Grey River. The river had continued to
migrate south during this time. The entrance to the estuary was still narrow and
appears to have been constrained on its eastern edge by the Port of Greymouth
construction. The river had straightened further, possibly caused by a large flood
event or by dredging of the channel, which had removed much of the material that
made up river mouth on the southern bank.
Figure 3.7 - Changes in the extents of geomorphic features from 1873 (green) to 1879 (orange)
43
1879 to 1888
Figure 3.8 demonstrates the changes from 1879 to 1888 (yellow). Continuing
construction of the port had further constrained the eastern portion of the southern
bank of the river. The entrance to the estuary had widened and initial construction of
the floodwall and breakwater west of the estuary entrance is apparent. Dredging of
the channel along the southern bank allowed for the reclamation for the port to be
developed on the river (Westfleet). The river channel appears to be narrower.
Figure 3.8 - Changes in the extents of geomorphic features from 1879 (orange) to 1888 (yellow)
44
1888 to 1895
The changes from 1888 to 1895 (pink) are shown in Figure 3.9. By 1895 the initial
construction of the southern wall, both east and west of the estuary entrance
appears to have been completed. The estuary entrance had widened further also.
The entrainment walls appear to have influenced the northern bank of the river,
through a reduction of energy allowing more material to be deposited. Historically,
build-up of a sandbar at the mouth of the Grey River caused significant issues for
vessels attempting to leave or arrive at the Port of Greymouth. It’s likely these were
constructed as a way to entrain the flow to naturally remove the sandbar build-up at
the river mouth.
Figure 3.9- Changes in the extents of geomorphic features from 1888 (yellow) to 1895 (pink)
45
1895 to 1945
Figure 3.10 shows the geomorphological evolution from 1895 to 1945 (red). This is a
considerable time gap (50 years) and as such, the changes in the Greymouth area
were extensive. The constraint through the port construction on the southern bank
was completed as far east as the current Cobden Bridge location. The southern and
northern breakwaters were completed during this period (Greymouth Argus, 1904)
along with the wall between the southern breakwater and the estuary entrance. Erua
Moana has been constrained on the eastern, southern and western bounds, with
some land being reclaimed on the western boundary when compared to the 1873
extent. Though the 1873 extent isn’t shown it is referred to from Figure 3.7 due to it
being the last map that had the extents shown for the area south of the river.
Figure 3.10 - Changes in the extents of geomorphic features from 1895 (pink) to 1945 (red)
The channel connecting Erua Moana and Lake Karoro remained intact. Lake Karoro
had also been constrained through the reclamation on land within when compared to
46
the 1873 extent. This is largely in part to the development of an airfield on the site
west of Lake Karoro. The coastline appears to have prograded westward, probably
due to accretion of material behind the newly constructed southern breakwater.
1945 to 1979
Figure 3.11 shows the change between 1945 and 1979 (blue), and generally the
extent of the major water bodies has not changed during this time. The main change
is the further progradation of the coastline to the west. It is unclear whether the small
changes in the size/shape of Erua Moana were due to seasonal fluctuations or minor
reclamation work.
Figure 3.11 - Changes in the extents of geomorphic features from 1945 (red) to 1979 (blue)
47
1979 to present
From 1979 to the present day there have been several significant changes (Figure
3.12), and areas of reclamation are visible in Figure 3.9, particularly around Erua
Moana lagoon. The southern portion of Erua Moana has been reclaimed, along with
the historic channel connecting Erua Moana to Lake Karoro. A new channel has
been constructed at the southeast part of the newly confined Erua Moana Lagoon to
Lake Karoro. A floodwall has also been constructed around all of the reclamation
land, confining the estuary, and not allowing it to increase in size or migrate. Further
seaward progradation has occurred on the coastline as material continues to likely
accrete behind the southern breakwater.
Cobden Island
Figure 3.12 - Changes in the extents of geomorphic features from 1979 (blue) to present
48
Summary of geomorphological evolution
In the time from 1871 to the present day, some 143 years, the landscape of the
Greymouth delta has changed significantly. While initially the changes were likely
due to natural causes (e.g. flood events), around the turn of the century
anthropogenic influences became the major factor in the changing geomorphology.
Numerous areas of reclamation especially around the estuary (Erua Moana and
Lake Karoro), and the constraint of southern bank of the Grey River have been the
major human influences during this time. These areas are shown in Figure 3.13
below.
Areas of natural accretion have resulted from:
 The construction and extension of the breakwaters in the early 1900’s

extensive accretion of the southern coastline of the Tasman Sea has
occurred. This is a result of longshore drift being disrupted causing the
suspended sediment load to be deposited;
 The accretion of material on the northern coastline is likely to be also a result
of the construction of the southern and northern breakwaters. Material being
transported by the river is delivered into the Tasman Sea, where wave action
then moves it north into the area north of the northern breakwater, causing
subsequent deposition. This accretion has not been on the scale interpreted
on the southern coastline, though it is still extensive.
Areas of reclamation have resulted from:
 Primarily it is anthropogenic processes that have resulted in reclamation. The

major areas of reclamation are around the Aerodrome site at Lake Karoro
and the construction of both breakwaters between 1873 and 1945. Also the
southern extent of Erua Moana at the current Messenger Park location and
the historical channel connecting Erua Moana to Lake Karoro, with this land
being reclaimed post-1979;
 Minor areas of reclamation occurred between 1873 and 1945 where a thin
historical extent of the estuary moved north-east towards the present day
Cobden Bridge. This could be either due to natural infilling of the channel or
anthropogenic emplacement of fill.
49
The areas of land removal have resulted from:
 Natural removal of material between 1873 and 1945. This is likely to be a

result of high-energy events such as floods removing the natural obstruction
of the material at the mouth of the river. Anthropogenic influences were
possibly involved with the removal of this ground (e.g. dredging of the river
mouth) though it is unlikely;
 Anthropogenic removal of the land post-1979 occurred at the south-eastern
extent of the current Erua Moana lagoon to allow for the construction of the
new channel connecting it to Lake Karoro. This was required as a result of the
reclamation of the land where the historical channel used to reside.
It should be noted that Cobden Island, which is clearly visible in Figure 3.12, has
been evolving continuously throughout this time. The constant changing shape of
Cobden Island gives an idea of how active this environment has been, and continues
to be. Numerous channels have formed within it (as seen in Figures 3.6, 3.8 and
3.10), while Figures 3.11 and 3.12 show large reductions in the size and number of
channels. This gives a prime example of how dynamic this environment continues to
be.
50
Figure 3.13 - Areas of different types of landscape modification (with MASW testing lines overlain [black
lines])
51
4 Site Investigations
4.1 Introduction
The sites that were chosen for the field investigative testing were based on the
historical geomorphology of the site and also on observations made during previous
seismic events that induced liquefaction. The three sites chosen were based on the
common criteria that they were influenced at some stage during the Holocene by the
estuary (Erua Moana and Lake Karoro), while there was anecdotal evidence of
liquefaction occurring at 2 of the 3 sites. The 3 sites and their locations are shown
below in Figure 4.1.
Figure 4.1 - Locations of site investigations
The sites are all located on the low lying land on the western side of the Greymouth
Township, in areas that are in close proximity to the estuary. Photos of the sites are
included in Appendix D, and all original historic drawings are included in Appendix C.
52
4.2 Greymouth Aerodrome
4.2.1 Site Description
The Greymouth Aerodrome is located close to the coastline on the west side of the
town, and is situated within the suburbs of Blaketown and Karoro. It is a large
cleared, relatively flat area with a single concreted runway running northeast-
southwest. There are several buildings on site, all located on the western edge of the
area, consisting of control buildings and storage hangars.
4.2.2 Site Geomorphology
The current geomorphology of the Greymouth Aerodrome consists of a large flat

area with no distinctive features other than the lake that bounds the northern part of
the eastern boundary on the site. Historically the site has experienced significant
change over the last 140 years, as can be seen in Figure 4.2.
The two major geomorphological changes that have occurred during this timeframe
is the reduction in the size of Lake Karoro, which makes up part of the estuary, and
the westward movement of the beach and coastline.
Large areas of the estuary have been reclaimed from 1873 to 1945 (1945 Historic
Drawing; Aerial Photographs dated 1945). There were no available maps between
these dates to better constrain when the reclaim occurred. There was further
reclamation work completed from 1945 to 1979 (Aerial Photographs dated 1945;
Dowrick et al., 2003), though that was on a smaller scale around Lake Karoro, likely
to allow for the construction of the concrete runway, as it was still a grass landing
strip in the 1945 aerial photos. Post-1979 a further reclamation took place at the
northern boundary to allow for the construction of a roadway, with material being
removed and replaced as fill in other areas for what appears to be the realignment of
the road. The channel between Lake Karoro and Erua Moana, the main estuary, also
appears to have been narrowed (Current Aerial Photographs, dated 2004).
The coastline south of the Grey River has prograded approximately 120m since
1873, as seen in Figure 4.2, and appears to coincide with the construction of the
breakwaters at the river mouth in the late 1880’s (Greymouth Argus excerpt
[Appendix B]).
53
Paleostream
Figure 4.2 - Geomorphology of the Greymouth Aerodrome with known historical estuary and coastline
extents shown (Image redrawn based on West Coast Business Unit Historic Drawing, dated 1873; Aerial
Photographs dated 1945; and Microzoning map of Greymouth, Dowrick et al., 2003).
54
Northward-flowing longshore drift has caused material being transported to
encounter the breakwaters, and subsequently deposit its sediment load.
The other geomorphological change is the clearance of land at the southern

boundary. Since 1945 approximately 470 metres of land has been cleared to allow
for the extension and construction of the current runway. Much of the land appears
to have been scrubland though a quarry stockpile yard makes up some of the area
which is now incorporated into the aerodrome.
Based on Dowrick et al. (2003) the site appears to be dominated by lagoonal and
estuarine silt for the eastern half, while beach sand and gravels make up the western
half, which correlates to the approximate locations of the historical estuary and
coastline extents respectively.
4.2.3 Test Locations

The locations for the seismic testing at the Greymouth Aerodrome are shown in
Figure 4.3 below. The testing consisted of 3 MASW seismic lines completed in
September 2013, totalling approximately 1900 metres. Line 1 was a profile running
north-eastwards, parallel to the runway. Line 2 was an east-west oriented line
Line 1 – Runway Parallel
Line 2 – Transverse North
Line 3 – Oblique South
Figure 4.3 - Greymouth Aerodrome MASW Profile Locations
55
running from the eastern boundary near Lake Karoro, to the western boundary. Line
3 was run south-westwards, starting near the newly constructed St. John’s
Ambulance building on the eastern boundary to the southwest corner of the site.
4.2.4 Test Results

The initial seismic velocity profiles for Line 1, Line 2 and Line 3 are shown below in
Figure 4.4, 4.5 and 4.6, respectively.
Line 1 was the longest line, running parallel to the runway, with the length of the
seismic profile being approximately 1090 metres and it reached a depth of 29
metres.
Lines 2 and 3 were smaller lines, extending across the site, intersecting with Line 1.
Line 2 had a total length of about 420 metre and reached a depth of 23 metres, while
Line 3 was 390 metres long and reached a depth of 20 metres.
The details of the seismic lines are summarised below in Table 4.1.
Table 4.1 - Summary Table of Seismic Line at Greymouth Aerodrome
Line Number Name Length Heading Depth

Line 1 Runway Parallel 1090m 030° NNE 29m
Line 2 Transverse North 420m 273° W 23m
Line 3 Oblique South 390m 225° SW 20m
Based on the initial results obtained through the testing, the following observations
were made:
 The velocities for much of the top 10m on the runway line are less than
250m/s, which is consistent with potentially liquefiable soils (Andrus and
Stokoe, 2000). These low velocities extend deeper to approximately 15m
depth as we approach the northern end of the profile.
 Velocities of 600m/s were encountered relatively consistently at 25 metres
depth in Line 1; with high velocities (>1000m/s) being reached at places along
the profile at approximately 26m to 27m depth, though these velocities are not
consistent throughout.
56
 In Line 2, low velocity (≤250m/s) material is observed up to ~23m depth for
the eastern extent of the profile; with very low velocities of less than 100m/s
being encountered in the top 5m.
 High velocity material (>600m/s) is encountered up to 20m depth on the
western end of the survey.
 Line 3 has low velocity material (<250m/s) reaching a depth of 10m, with a
small layer of very low velocity (<100m/s) material is initially encountered.
 Velocities of >600m/s are encountered from approximately 15m depth
throughout the profile.
57
Figure 4.4 - Seismic Velocity Profile for Greymouth Aerodrome Line 1 (Runway Parallel)
58
Figure 4.5 - Seismic Velocity Profile for Greymouth Aerodrome Line 2 (Transverse North)
59
Figure 4.6 - Seismic Velocity Profile for Greymouth Aerodrome Line 3 (Oblique South)
60
4.3 Victoria Park Racecourse

Victoria Park Racecourse is located approximately 550 metres southwest of the town
centre, with the southern boundary of the site bounding the estuary. It is a relatively
flat site, with a gravel racecourse making up the northeast side of the site. Within the
racecourse, there is a grassed area, which is lower than the surrounding ground.
Historically there has been a grandstand on the western edge of the track and
stables in the southwest section of the site which, at the time of testing, have both
been removed.

As seen in Figure 4.7 below, the geomorphology of the Victoria Park Racecourse
appears to be relatively flat, a low point within the racetrack itself. There are no
distinctive geomorphological features within the site; however there is a remnant
channel of the estuary on the western boundary.
It appears that only the estuary has affected the geomorphological evolution of the
site. The major change in the geomorphology is the apparent reduction in the size of
the estuary channel along the western boundary and another paleochannel along the
eastern boundary.
The main channel of the estuary in 1873 formed part of what is now the Victoria Park
Racecourse. Based on the available maps for 1873 to 1895 (1873 Historical
Drawing; 1895 Historical Drawing), much of the estuary channel between Lake
Karoro and Erua Moana becomes confined, with the eastern side of the channel
reduced in size to the apparent extent that exists today. On the eastern boundary the
estuary appears to have covered an area that appears as a “finger” moving north.
There was no information on when this area was reclaimed between 1873 and 1895;
however the next map for 1945 shows that size of this part of the estuary is
considerably reduced with it now appearing as small stream or inlet.
The next stage of reclamation between 1895 and 1945 (1945 Aerial Photographs)
shows that there was minimal land reclaimed on the site in this time, other than the
small inlet on the eastern boundary mentioned prior.
61
Paleostream
Paleostream
Paleostream
Figure 4.7 - Geomorphology of Victoria Park Racecourse with known historical extents of the estuary shown
(Image redrawn based on West Coast Business Unit Historic Drawing, dated 1873; West Coast Business Unit
Historic Drawing, dated 1879; Aerial Photographs dated 1945; and Microzoning map of Greymouth, Dowrick
et al., 2003)
62
Between 1945 and 1979 (Dowrick et al. 2003), again there was no discernable
change in the area around and within the Victoria Park site, with the estuary channel
still observable on the west side of the site and the small inlet on the east side of the
site, though the size of the inlet appears to be reduced, through possible reclamation
work.
Post-1979 the inlet on the eastern side of the site has been completely reclaimed
and is no longer present on the site. The major change has occurred with the
historical channel of the estuary connecting Erua Moana and Lake Karoro. It has
been reclaimed from the road to Erua Moana, with a new artificial channel being
constructed further south. The banks of the new channel also act as flood walls and
as a result have cut off the southern end of the channel from the estuary, confining
the old channel as a lake-like feature.
The map produced by Dowrick et al. in 2003, based on the geology of Suggate and
Wood in 1979, there appear to be two different surficial deposits making up the site.
These deposits are described as ‘lagoonal and estuarine silt’ and ‘river gravel and
sandy gravel. The lagoonal and estuarine silt material is assumed to be the same
material mapped at the Greymouth Aerodrome site described in Section 5.2 and
makes up the western side of the site while the river gravel and sandy gravel makes
up the eastern part of the site. There also appears to be a thin strip of the silt
material extending northeast from the eastern boundary of the silt. This is potentially
associated with the historical extent of the apparent inlet.

The locations for the seismic testing completed at the Victoria Park Racecourse as
shown in Figure 4.8 below. The testing consisted of a single MASW seismic line, as
well as two deep soundings using MASW completed in April 2014.
Line 1 was a MASW seismic profile line that followed the racetrack, starting on the
eastern straight, which extended north-northeast before turning left and continuing in
a westerly direction toward the estuary. The intention was to align the survey with
three boreholes, completed by Opus International Consultants, at the site. The
locations of these boreholes are shown in Figure 4.8 and the borehole logs are
attached in Appendix E.
63
Line 1
Figure 4.8 - Victoria Park Racecourse Test Locations
The deep soundings (also shown in Figure 4.8) were completed with the intention of
obtaining the seismic velocity of the material at a depth greater than was achieved
with the normal MASW survey. The first sounding (Deep Sounding 1) was completed
at the same location that Line 1 started, while the second sounding (Deep Sounding
2) was completed on an old access road to the stables on the southwestern side of
the site.
4.3.4 Test Results

The initial seismic velocity (Vs) profile for Line 1 is shown below in Figure 4.9. The
individual sounding profiles for Deep Sounding 1 and Deep Sounding 2 are also
shown below in Figure 4.10 and 4.11, respectively.
Line 1 extended for approximately 330 metres, from the back straight to near the
entrance gate, and reached a deep of about 26 metres.
64
The deep soundings were unable to reach greater depths, with penetration only
obtaining a few metres deeper than the normal seismic test.
Deep Sounding 1 reached a depth of approximately 28 metres, while Deep Sounding

2 reached a depth of approximately 29 metres.
The details are summarised below in Table 4.2 for the seismic profiles and Table 4.3
for the soundings.
Table 4.2 - Summary Table of Seismic Line at Victoria Park Racecourse
Name Length Initial Heading Final Heading Depth

Line 1 330m 025° NNE 289° WNW 26m
Table 4.3 - Summary Table of Soundings at Victoria Park Racecourse
Name Array Length Array Orientation Depth

Deep Sounding 1 96m 025° NNE 28m
Deep Sounding 2 48m 266° W 29m
were made:
 A high velocity (500 – 600m/s) material is initially encountered at a depth of

approximately 10m in Line 1, though this stops at about 140 metres along the
profile.
 Material with a velocity as low as 200m/s is observed to a depth of 25m from
140m along the survey, signifying that this material is potentially liquefiable
(Andrus and Stokoe, 2000).
 Thin layers (~1 – 2m thick) are observed within the top 5m, though this is not
consistent across the survey.
 Deep Sounding 1 appears to confirm what was found at the start of Line 1,
with velocities of ~500m/s observed between 10 and 12.5m, before dropping
down below 400m/s to a depth of 22m. A sharp increase to >1100m/s is then
observed. Material with a velocity less than 100m/s is confined to the top 2m.
 For Deep Sounding 2 we see a relatively uniform increase in velocity, from
~150m/s at 2m depth, to 500m/s to a depth of about 18m. A maximum
velocity of 900m/s was attained at approximately 23m depth.
65
Figure 4.9 - Seismic Velocity Profile for Victoria Park Racecourse Line 1
66
Figure 4.10 - Fixed-Receiver Walkaway Deep Sounding 1 (Eastern Straight of Racecourse Track)
67
Figure 4.11 - Fixed-Receiver Walkaway Deep Sounding 2 (Southwest corner of Victoria Park site)
68
4.4 Charles O’Connor Street Truck Park

The Truck Stop located on Charles O’Connor Street is located next to the estuary on
northern end of the street and it is owned by Aratuna Freighters. It is situated within
Greymouth and currently consists of a cleared site with perimeter fencing. No
buildings were present at the time of testing though construction has been planned
for the near future.

The current geomorphology of the Truck Stop is largely anthropogenic in nature. It
consists of a relatively flat lot with gravel shingle making up the surficial material.
Historically the area has experienced significant change, largely within the 35 years.
The changes can be seen in Figure 4.12.
The major geomorphological change that has occurred over the last 140 years is the
reclamation of the historical estuary channel. As seen in Figure 4.12 the channel
connecting Erua Moana and Lake Karoro has been situated in the vicinity of the
Truck Stop. There has been very little geomorphological change from 1873 to 1979,
with only apparent minor migration of the channel, though the general location has
not changed during this time.
Post-1979 however, the construction of the floodwall and confinement of the estuary
has led to the reclamation of this area with the channel, historically, making up a
large portion of the current site.
Based on Dowrick et al. (2003), the surficial material in 1979 was categorised as
“lagoonal and estuarine silt”, though much of the site was categorised as water due
to the old channel.
69
Figure 4.12 - Geomorphology of the Charles O'Connor Street Truck Stop with known historical extents of the
estuary shown (Image redrawn based on West Coast Business Unit Historic Drawing, dated 1873; West Coast
Business Unit Historic Drawing, dated 1879; West Coast Business Unit Historic Drawing, dated 1895; Aerial
Photographs dated 1945; and Microzoning map of Greymouth, Dowrick et al., 2003)
70
The testing location at the Aratuna Freighters Truck Stop on Charles O’Connor
Street is shown below in Figure 4.13. Testing at this site consisted of a single MASW
seismic line, with the intention to lineate the historical channel under the reclamation
material.
Though the image below shows vegetation on the site, at the time of testing this had
been cleared to allow for construction to occur. The single line ran in a northeast
direction diagonally across the site.
Line 1
Figure 4.13 - Charles O'Connor Street Truck Stop Test Locations
4.4.4 Test Results

The initial seismic profile for Line 1 is shown in Figure 4.14. Line 1 was
approximately 150 metres in length and reached a depth of nearly 30 metres.
The details of the testing is summarised below in Table 4.4. Again the initial results
displayed areas of interest, which will be discussed further in Chapter 6.
Table 4.4 - Summary Table of Seismic Line at Aratuna Freighters Truck Stop on Charles O'Connor
Street
Name Length Initial Heading Depth

Line 1 150m 066° ENE 30m
71
were made:
 Velocities of <250m/s are encountered up to 25m depth, and based on

Andrus and Stokoe (2000) means it is potentially liquefiable.
 The presence of higher velocity (400 – 500m/s) material is observed from
approximately 27m depth, and is relatively consistent across the profile.
 A very low velocity layer, of less than 100m/s, extends across the profile at a
depth of 5m, though the layer is only ~1m thick.
72
Figure 4.14 - Seismic Velocity Profile for Aratuna Freighters Truck Stop on Charles O'Connor Street
73
5 Analysis for Susceptibility of Liquefaction
5.1 Introduction
Over the past 35 years, numerous studies have been conducted to investigate the
relationship between shear-wave velocity (VS) and liquefaction resistance. These
studies involved field observations (e.g. Andrus and Stokoe, 1997), penetration-VS
correlations (e.g. Seed at al., 1983), analytical investigations (e.g. Stokoe et al.,
1988), and laboratory tests (e.g. Tokimatsu and Uchida, 1990). Several of the
liquefaction evaluation procedures developed from these studies follow the general
format of the Seed-Idriss simplified procedure, where Vs is corrected to a reference
overburden stress and correlated with the cyclic stress ratio (Andrus and Stokoe,
2000).
5.2 Procedure for assessment of liquefaction susceptibility
The analysis conducted as part of this study for liquefaction susceptibility follows the
guidelines outlined in Andrus and Stokoe (2000), and summarised by Youd and
Idriss (2001). This procedure requires the calculation of three parameters: (1) the
level of cyclic loading on the soil caused by the earthquake, expressed as a cyclic
stress ratio (CSR); (2) stiffness of the soil, expressed as an overburden stress-
corrected shear-wave velocity; and (3) resistance of the soil to liquefaction,
expressed as a cyclic resistance ratio (CRR).
Following calculation of these parameters, a factor of safety can be determined to

predict whether liquefaction will or will not occur during a specific design earthquake.
5.2.1 Cyclic Stress Ratio (CSR)
The cyclic stress ratio at a particular depth in a level soil deposit can be expressed
by:
( )( )
74
where τav = average equivalent uniform cyclic shear stress caused by the earthquake
and is assumed to 0.65 of the maximum induced stress (Andrus and Stokoe, 2000);
amax = peak ground acceleration; g = acceleration of gravity; σ’V = initial effective
vertical overburden stress at the depth in question; σV = total vertical overburden
stress at the same depth; and rd = shear stress reduction coefficient to adjust for the
flexibility of the soil profile.
The initial effective overburden stress is given by:
where ρS = the soil density; and d = depth (in metres below ground level [m bgl]).
The total overburden stress is given by Terzaghi’s Principle:
where u = the pore-water pressure at a given depth. The pore-water pressure is

given:
Where ρw = density of water; and h = depth below the water table.
The values for rd are estimated from the chart by Seed and Idriss (1971) shown in
Figure 5.1. The values used for the analysis are shown in the spreadsheets in
Appendix E. This coefficient, as stated above, accounts for flexibility in the soil profile
(Youd and Idriss, 2001), while Idriss and Boulanger (2014) describe the parameter
as the ratio of cyclic stresses for a flexible soil column to the cyclic stresses for a
rigid soil column. Seed and Idriss (1971) determined the average curve analytically
using a variety of earthquake motions and soil conditions. Idriss (1999) proposed
revised average rd values based on the analytical work by Golesorkhi (1989). Unlike
the original values, these revised rd values are magnitude-dependent and reflect the
differing CSR caused by different magnitude earthquakes.
75
Figure 5.1 - Variations of stress reduction coefficient (rd) with depth and earthquake
magnitude (Idriss and Boulanger, 2014)
5.2.2 Overburden Stress-Corrected Shear-Wave Velocity
Shear-wave velocities can be measured in situ by several seismic tests, including

cross hole, downhole, seismic cone penetrometer, suspension logger, and surface
wave inversion (i.e. SASW and MASW). Following the traditional procedures for
correcting Standard Penetration Test (SPT) blow count and Cone Penetration Test
(CPT) tip resistance to account for overburden stress, VS can also be corrected to a
reference overburden stress by the expression (Andrus and Stokoe, 2000):
( )
where VS1 = overburden stress-corrected shear-wave velocity at a given depth; CV =

factor to correct measured shear-wave velocity for overburden pressure; Pa =
reference stress of 100 kPa or about atmospheric pressure; and σ’V = initial effective
vertical overburden stress at the depth in question. A maximum C V value of 1.4 is
generally applied to Vs data at shallow depths. By applying this formula it is assumed
that the initial effective horizontal stress is a constant factor of the effective
overburden stress. It is assumed that VS is measured with both particle motion and
76
wave propagation polarized along principal stress directions, and that one of those
directions is vertical (Stokoe et al., 1985; Andrus and Stokoe, 2000; Youd and Idriss,
2001).
5.2.3 Cyclic Resistance Ratio (CRR)
The value of CSR separating liquefaction and non-liquefaction occurrences for a

given VS1 is called the cyclic resistance ratio (CRR). Figure 5.2 compares seven
CRR-VS1 curves. These curves were determined through various laboratory
(Tokimatsu and Uchida, 1990) and field performance data from various sites in
California (Kayen et al., 1992; Robertson et al., 1992; Lodge, 1994). Andrus and
Stokoe (1997) developed their curve based on uncemented, Holocene-aged
(<10,000 year old) soils with 5% or less fines using field performance data from 20
earthquakes and over 50 measurements sites. Andrus and Stokoe (2000) revised
this curve based on new information and an expanded database that includes 26
earthquakes and more than 70 measurement sites (Youd and Idriss, 2001).
Figure 5.2 - Comparison of seven relationships between liquefaction resistance (CRR) and overburden stress-
corrected shear wave velocity for granular soils (Andrus and Stokoe, 2000; Youd and Idriss, 2001)
77
Andrus and Stokoe (1997) proposed the following relationship between CRR and
VS1:
( ) ( )
where VS1* = limiting upper value of VS1 for liquefaction occurrence; and a and b are
curve fitting parameters. The assumption of a limiting upper value of V S1 is
equivalent to the assumption commonly made in CPT- and SPT-based procedures
dealing with clean sands, where liquefaction is considered not possible above a
corrected tip resistance of about 160 and a corrected blow count of about 30 blows
per 300mm for CPT and SPT respectively (Andrus and Stokoe, 2000; Youd and
Idriss, 2001). Dobry (1989) explains that in dense soils settlement is insignificant and
no sand boils or failure take place because of small amounts of water being
expelled. This is important because the definition of liquefaction used to classify the
field behaviour, as well as the penetration-based procedures, is based on surface
manifestations (Andrus and Stokoe, 2000).
CRR-VS1 curves recommended for engineering practice by Andrus and Stokoe

(2000) for magnitude 7.5 earthquakes and uncemented Holocene-age soils with
various fines contents (≤5% fines, 20% fines, and ≥35% fines), are shown in Figure
5.3. Also plotted on this figure are points calculated from liquefaction case history
information from magnitude 5.9 – 8.3 earthquakes. The three curves shown were
determined through an iterative process of varying values of a and b until nearly all
points indicative of liquefaction were bounded by the curves with the least number of
non-liquefaction points plotted in the liquefaction region.
78
Figure 5.3 - Liquefaction Relationship (CRR-VS1) curves recommended for clean, uncemented soils from
liquefaction case histories (Andrus and Stokoe, 2000; Youd and Idriss, 2001)
The final values of a and b used to create these curves were 0.022 and 2.8,
respectively. Values for VS1* were assumed to vary linearly from 200m/s for soils with
fines contents greater than or equal to 35%, to 215m/s for soils with fines contents of
5% or less.
The equation for CRR provided above can be scaled for other magnitude values, it
was based on a magnitude 7.5 event. The magnitude scaling factor (MSF) is
traditionally applied to CRR rather than CSR, and equals 1.0 for earthquakes with a
magnitude of 7.5, while other magnitudes can be represented by (Youd et al., 1997;
Youd and Idriss, 2001):
( )
where MW = moment magnitude; and n = exponent. Moment magnitude is the scale

most commonly used for engineering applications and is preferred for liquefaction
79
resistance calculations. The lower bound for MSF recommended by Youd et al.
(1997) is defined as n = -2.56; while the upper bound of the recommended range is
defined as n = -3.3 (Andrus and Stokoe, 1997) for earthquakes with magnitudes ≤7.5
(Andrus and Stokoe, 2000).
By applying these values listed above, the equation for CRR can be rewritten as
follows:
{ ( ) ( )}
where KC = correction factor for high values of VS1 caused by cementation and aging
of the soil profile. Average estimates of KC for Pleistocene-age (10 to 2600 kya) soils
range from 0.6 to 0.8 based on penetration-VS1 correlations (Andrus and Stokoe,
2000).
5.2.4 Factor of Safety (FoS)
A common way to quantify the potential for liquefaction is in terms of factor of safety.
The factor of safety against liquefaction can be determined by (Andrus and Stokoe,
2000):
Liquefaction is predicted to occur when FoS ≤ 1, and liquefaction is predicted not to

occur when FoS > 1. The acceptable value of FS will depend on several factors,
including the acceptable level of risk for the project, potential for ground deformation
including lateral spreading, extent and accuracy of seismic measurements,
availability of other site information, and conservatism in determining the design
earthquake magnitude and expected value of amax (Andrus and Stokoe, 2000; Youd
and Idriss, 2001).
5.3 Stress-Corrected Shear-Wave Velocity Profiles for Greymouth
The following section outlines the parameters used as part of the analysis for the
study completed in Greymouth with the outputs for both overburden stress-corrected
80
shear-wave velocity, and the factor of safety profiles for the tested areas provided in
Section 5.3.2 and 5.3.3, respectively. The analysis follows that which is outlined by
Andrus and Stokoe (2000), as described above.
5.3.1 Parameters used in this study
The parameters used for the analysis are summarised below in Tables 5.1 and 5.2.
All calculations were completed on spreadsheets, and are provided in Appendix E.
Three different design earthquake events were completed as part of the analysis for
this study: a magnitude 8 Alpine Fault earthquake (based on McCahon et al., 2007);
a localised Mw5.5 earthquake, with accelerations similar to that experienced during
the 1991 Hawks Crag earthquake (Dowrick and Sritharan, 1993); and a localised
Mw6.5 earthquake with accelerations similar to that experienced following the
February 2011 Christchurch earthquake (Bradley and Hughes, 2012a; 2012b).
Table 5.1 - Summary Table of Design Earthquake Parameters used in this study
Moment PGA* expected Magnitude

Event Name Magnitude in Greymouth Scaling Factor
2
(Mw) (m/s ) (MSF)
Alpine Fault Event 8.0 0.3 0.848
Localised Mw5.5 Event 5.5 0.2 2.212
Localised Mw6.5 Event 6.5 0.45 1.442
* Peak Ground Accelerations
81
Table 5.2 - Summary Table of all constant values used in the analysis as part of this study
Correction
Water Table Shear Stress
Soil Density Upper Limit factor for
Parameter 3
(m below Reduction
(ρs) (t/m ) of V*S1 (m/s) cementation
ground level Factor (Rd)
and aging (Kc)
Dependent on
Value 1.8 215*** 0.6 1.0
depth**
** Based on Figure 5.1
*** Conservative value (i.e. maximum)
Due to a lack of subsurface data through CPT and SPT-based approaches, the
factors stated in Table 5.2 are hypothetical. The values for K c and V*S1 are based on
values outlined by Andrus and Stokoe (2000). The value for the limiting upper value
for overburden stress-corrected shear wave velocity is defined by the fines content of
the soil. Due to no particle size distribution tests being conducted (as a result of no
soil samples) this was set to the most conservative value (i.e. 215m/s). The
correction for the age and cementation of the soil (Kc) is generally based on
penetration data and known information on the age of deposition of the material.
Andrus and Stokoe (2000) state that Kc equals one if the soil to be evaluated is
uncemented and <10000 years old. The surficial material can be assumed to be
younger than this in Greymouth, though as Andrus and Stokoe (2000) outline; if
penetration data is not available, a value of 0.6 can be assumed for K c. The soil
density used was conservative and based on geologically young gravel with an
approximate density of 1.8t/m3 (David Bell, per comm., 2014). A water table depth of
1m bgl was assumed due to the general low-lying elevation in respect to nearby
water features (i.e. Lake Karoro and Erua Moana Lagoon).
5.3.2 Overburden stress-corrected Shear Wave Velocity

The overburden stress-corrected shear-wave velocity profiles for the Greymouth
Aerodrome, Victoria Park Racecourse and Charles O’Connor Street are shown
below in Figures 5.4, 5.5 and 5.6, respectively. The overburden stress-corrected
82
profiles strongly outlined areas of soft or loose (soft refers to cohesive material and
loose refers to granular material (NZGS, 2005)) sediment. The clear definition of soft
or loose sediments provides an initial estimate for locations for potential future
penetration-based testing (CPT or SPT). The upper boundary defined in Andrus and
Stokoe (2000) for liquefaction to occur in gravelly soil is proposed as 215m/s for the
stress-corrected shear-wave velocity. This boundary is shown as the sharp change
from blue to green on the profiles. Several of the profiles show areas of overburden
stress-corrected shear-wave velocities less than 215m/s.
AT the Greymouth Aerodrome site, the most notable area is observed within Line 2
(Figure 5.4). Low velocity (Vs < 215m/s) areas as deep as 25 metres have been
interpreted based on the analysis, however this is limited to approximately the first
200 metres of the profile length. It appears based on the analysis that the eastern
boundary of the Aerodrome site has low velocity material as Line 3 also displays low
velocity material down to 10 metres depth. Both of these lines display an increase on
velocity at shallow depths as the lines approach the western side of the site. Line 1
displayed a reduction in corrected shear-wave velocity at the northern extent of the
Aerodrome, as it approached the current estuary. Localised “soft” spots (areas that
do not reach more than 5 metres depth) are present throughout these profiles though
they are not continuous across the site.
At Victoria Park Racecourse, much the same is observed based on the profile
(Figure 5.5). Generally, the material displays a corrected shear-wave velocity greater
than 215m/s, with localised “soft” spots in the upper 2 – 3 metres below the surface.
There is a distinct low velocity layer at depths between ~7 – 10 metres for the last
170 metres of the profile however. This is likely due to the effect of the change in the
direction of the array as it went from running parallel to running perpendicularly
towards the historic estuary channel, with the last 40 metres of the profile showing
this low velocity layer becoming thicker and extending to the surface.
The truck depot situated on Charles O’Connor Street clearly displays a continuous
low velocity layer from ~5 – 10 metres depth across the array profile (Figure 5.6).
This likely reflects the historical estuary channel with the fill material emplaced above
it, showing higher velocities. This highlighted the possibility for fill land to fail during
83
earthquake event, where low velocity material below the fill can fail, resulting in
failure of the overlying material (as was seen during the 1995 Kobe Earthquake
[Soga, 1998]).
Based on Figure 5.3, the relationship between liquefaction susceptibility and

CSR/CRR is outlined graphically based on case history data. This relationship
signifies that as CSR or CRR increase, the upper limit for liquefaction occurring with
regard to stress-corrected shear-wave velocity also increases exponentially.
Applying this as an initial estimate to whether liquefaction will occur, it was
interpreted that the areas displayed in blue colouration for the overburden stress-
corrected shear-wave velocity profiles in Chapter 5 that liquefaction is possible,
though this would be heavily dependent on the CRR/CSR obtained through the
analysis, and analysis for the factor of safety (FoS) would state the potential for
liquefaction to occur, as outlined below in Chapter 5.3.3.
84
Figure 5.4 - Overburden Stress-Corrected Shear Wave Velocity Profiles for the testing based at the Greymouth Aerodrome
85
Figure 5.5 - Overburden Stress-Corrected Shear Wave Velocity Profile for the testing based at Victoria Park Racecourse
86
Figure 5.6 - Overburden Stress-Corrected Shear Wave Velocity Profiles for the testing based at the Truck Depot on Charles O'Connor Street
87
5.3.3 Factor of Safety
The profiles for Factor of Safety are shown below. Figures 5.7, 5.8 and 5.9 are
based on the Greymouth Aerodrome for earthquakes of Mw 8.0, 6.5 and 5.5,
respectively. Figure 5.10 shows the factor of safety for these events based on the
Victoria Park profile, while Figure 5.11 shows the factor of safety for the 3 design
earthquakes based on the work done at the Charles O’Connor Street Truck depot.
The analysis for CRR and CSR, with regard to the particular overburden stress-
corrected velocities, provides a factor of safety profile, indicating the resistance of
the soil to liquefy in the given design earthquake scenarios and parameters defined
in Tables 5.1 and 5.2. As above, the clear contrast between blue (FoS≤1) and green
(FoS>1) was used to define the boundary between possible liquefiable and non-
liquefiable soils, respectively.
The profiles for the Mw8.0 Alpine Fault and Mw6.5 localised earthquake for the test
lines based at the Greymouth Aerodrome are very similar (Figures 5.7 and 5.8). The
area identified at the start of Line 2 which could be susceptible is very distinct again
in the factor of safety profiles. Based on the analysis it is inferred that the top 10
metres of the north-eastern part of the site is potentially highly susceptible to
liquefaction following an Alpine Fault or localised event similar to that which was
experienced in Christchurch on February 22 2011. Localised areas at the surface
also indicate liquefaction is possible though this would be dependent on what depth
the water table is at the time of the event. The influence of the water table is
discussed later in this chapter. The area of interest within Line 3, described in
Section 6.2.1, indicates that liquefaction is unlikely to occur for both these events. It
should be noted however, that the values appear to be close to the boundary
between liquefaction and non-liquefaction values, meaning this designation could
change with better constraint of the constants used in the analysis, such as fines
content for individual layers. The Mw5.5 localised earthquake event (Figure 5.9) does
not appear to indicate any potential liquefaction susceptibility in any of the test lines
completed at the Aerodrome. Though, like was mentioned above, the area of
possible liquefaction at the start of Line 2 following the larger events, this area
appear to show values close to the boundary between potential liquefaction and non-
88
liquefaction. Further testing here would allow better constraint of the parameters
used in the analysis, thus giving a more accurate prediction.
The factor of safety analysis carried out on the line at Victoria Park Racecourse
indicates a similar pattern to that of the Aerodrome analysis. The Alpine Fault design
earthquake and localised Mw6.5 design earthquake provide very similar profiles. The
analysis completed indicates that liquefaction is unlikely to occur following these
events however. The layer of low velocity material indicated in the stress-corrected
velocity profiles is prevalent in the factor of safety profiles also. This layer, though
considered non-liquefiable, has values represented that are again close to the
boundary between liquefaction occurring and not occurring. As stated above with
regard to Line 2 and 3 at the Aerodrome, sampling and penetration-based testing
should allow better constraint of the parameters used in the analysis. Also similar to
the Aerodrome analysis, the Mw5.5 local event does not appear to induce
liquefaction due to all values having a factor of safety greater than 1. The values
obtained for this event are much higher than the boundary so liquefaction can be
interpreted to not occur at this site following an event similar to the design
earthquake used in this analysis.
The Charles O’Connor Street Truck Stop mirrors the other two sites tested, in
particular the Victoria Park site. The larger events (i.e. the Alpine Fault and local
Mw6.5 events) show the soil here to be non-liquefiable, though the low velocity layer
represented in the stress-corrected velocity profile is distinct. Again these values
obtained are close to the boundary and following more testing the analysis applied
here could better determine the material susceptibility during events similar to that
used as part of the analysis. Like the other sites again, the Mw5.5 event does not
appear to induce liquefaction and the factor of safety values are sufficiently high that
the interpretation that liquefaction not occurring following an event similar to this can
be stated with some confidence.
89
Figure 5.7 - Factor of Safety Profile based on a design Mw8.0 Alpine Fault Earthquake for the soils found at the Greymouth Aerodrome
90
Figure 5.8 - Factor of Safety Profile based on a design Mw6.5 Localised Earthquake for the soils found at the Greymouth Aerodrome
91
Figure 5.9 - Factor of Safety Profile based on a design Mw5.5 Localised Earthquake for the soils found at the Greymouth Aerodrome
92
Figure 5.10 - Factor of Safety Profiles based on all design earthquakes for soils found at Victoria Park Racecourse
93
Figure 5.11 - Factor of Safety Profiles based on all design earthquakes for soils found at Charles O'Connor Street Truck Depot
94
6 Discussion
6.1 Introduction
Based on the results obtained as following the overburden stress-corrected shear

wave velocity and factor of safety analysis completed in Chapter 5 it is observed that
the majority of the areas tested as part of this study are likely to be highly resistant to
liquefaction for the design earthquakes proposed. This chapter discusses the
implications of the results obtained, with regard to the surficial geology and
geomorphology, seismic hazard, and critical infrastructure. Particular comment with
regard to areas of reclamation or fill that were assessed as part of this study is also
discussed. The influences that factors such as seismicity and geology, have on the
analysis are described.
Limitations of the results obtained will be discussed with regard to liquefaction

susceptibility and potential future land use possibilities for the areas tested. Finally,
recommendations for future work are outlined along with recommendations for
supplementary work to better assess the analysis completed as part of this study.
6.2 Discussion of results of analysis

The aim of this study was to assess the use of shear-wave velocity as a proxy for
liquefaction potential. This is reflected in the factor of safety analysis from Andrus
and Stokoe (2000). Each analysis was undertaken for one of three different seismic
events outlined below.
6.2.1 Alpine Fault Mw8.0 Earthquake

The results for liquefaction susceptibility obtained following the analysis of the Mw8.0
Alpine Fault were as to be expected. This event shows the largest areas of
liquefaction susceptibility for the three earthquakes used, with the area on the north-
eastern part of the Aerodrome appearing to be most likely to liquefy during this type
of event. The upper 10m in this part of the site shows low factors of safety (FoS < 1).
Small areas of the Aerodrome also appear to be liquefiable though this is restricted
to the upper 1-2 metres. Of the other sites (Victoria Park and Charles O’Connor
Street), no areas appear liquefiable though the values for factor of safety are close to
95
the boundary between liquefaction and non-liquefaction, predominantly in areas that
historically could have been influenced by the estuary.
6.2.2 Local Mw6.5 Earthquake

A Mw6.5 local earthquake with accelerations similar to that of the February 2011
Christchurch earthquake was used as a basis for the next design earthquake. Based
on the experiences of Christchurch, liquefaction could be expected following an
event of this type. Similar to the Alpine Fault event, the north-eastern event shows a
high potential for liquefaction, though the total area is slightly smaller. Overall the
analysis of this event highlights areas of liquefaction susceptibility much the same
areas to that of the Alpine Fault event. The other sites both again appear to be non-
liquefiable, though some values were close to the boundary between liquefaction
and non-liquefaction.
6.2.3 Local Mw5.5 Earthquake

The smallest of the proposed design earthquakes displays factors of safety much
higher than those found in the two larger events. The areas of high liquefaction
susceptibility at the Aerodrome are visible in the first two events, though the factors
of safety are greater than 1 indicating non-liquefaction. Some values for the factor of
safety analysis are close to the threshold between liquefaction and non-liquefaction
however. This is also reflected at the other sites, where lower factor of safety values
are represented, though the values are higher in general.
6.3 Implications of results with regard to geology and geomorphology
There are several implications with regard to the surficial geology and
geomorphology that this analysis has identified.
Firstly, the more recent reclamation work (i.e. post-1979) appears to have been
completed to a standard sufficient enough that liquefaction can be considered
unlikely following events similar to that used as design events in this analysis. This is
best represented by the Charles O’Connor Street testing, where the factor of safety
analysis signified that the fill material and natural ground beneath the fill are at an
acceptable level that renders failure due to liquefaction-induced causes unlikely. The
older reclamation works, however, appear to not be to as liquefaction resistant. This
96
is best represented by the north-eastern part of the area of the Aerodrome site. This
material was reclaimed and filled between 1873 and 1945 although this time-frame
was unable to be constrained further. As observed in both the stress-corrected
velocity and factor of safety profiles, this material appears to be highly susceptible to
liquefaction, especially following events greater than Mw5.5. This site could
potentially be deemed liquefiable following the smaller event if further penetration-
based testing and analysis better constrain the parameters.
Secondly, the surficial geology appears to have distinct differences based on the
stress-corrected profiles in particular. An overlay of the microzones map for
Greymouth (Dowrick et al., 2003), on the aerial photo (Figure 6.1) shows that the
Greymouth Aerodrome and Victoria Park Racecourse are located across an inferred
boundary between different kinds of deposits. Based on the analysis completed
during this study, it was interpreted that the “estuarine and lagoonal silt” (Dowrick et
al., 2003) is of much lower shear-wave velocity than the other materials that were
tested. A clear example of this is Line 2 at the Aerodrome. Based on Figure 6.1, the
low velocity material is classified as this silt material, and the western part of the line,
with increased shear-wave velocities is “beach sand and gravel”. The difference in
the material types is clearly defined in the shear-wave velocity profiles. Likewise, but
to a lesser extent, the profile from Victoria Park showed the transition from the
“sandy gravel and river gravel” material towards the “estuarine and lagoonal silt”.
Based on these analyses, some inferences can be made about the nature of the
material on which this part of Greymouth is built on, though the total area of tested is
low and more extensive testing should be completed to confirm these inferences.
Carr (2004) states that the sediments trapped in the Blaketown area (i.e. around the
estuary) are thought to be fairly loose in comparison to sand dunes subject to wave
action. This looser material is thought to be more susceptible to liquefaction. The
interpretation as part of this study confirms this. Therefore the material that has been
deposited in more energetic environments (i.e. the coastline and river) is inferred to
be more consolidated than that in low energy environments (i.e. the estuary) and
therefore more resistant to liquefaction. As mentioned earlier, this should be
confirmed through further testing as only a small portion the material was tested
during this study.
97
Charles O’Connor Street
Victoria Park Racecourse
Greymouth Aerodrome
Figure 6.1 - Microzones of surficial sediment type and origin (Dowrick et al., 2004)
98
6.4 Implications of results with regard to the seismic hazard and
infrastructure
Based on the analysis undertaken during this study, implications for seismic hazards
to critical infrastructure have been identified.
The seismic hazard in associated with the Alpine Fault is high, with it being located
approximately 30 kilometres east of Greymouth, and being capable of producing an
earthquakes of Mw8.0+ (Robinson and Davies, 2013). These analyses have shown
that generally the areas tested could be resilient enough to not liquefy during an
event of this magnitude. There is an exception to this, where the north-eastern part
of the Aerodrome site has been inferred to show a high potential for liquefaction, with
a liquefiable layer possibly reaching 10 metres in depth. There are also small
localised areas throughout all three test sites where the factor of safety values
obtained to close to the threshold between liquefaction and non-liquefaction
occurring, and it is still a possibility that these layers could fail following cyclic loading
in an earthquake.
There are also several mapped local faults and several unmapped faults in the area
around Greymouth. Given their dimension (typically ~10 – 12km long) it is entirely
possible that these faults produce events similar to that experienced in the
Canterbury Earthquake Sequence. The factor of safety analysis based on a
Christchurch-type event produced similar results to that of the Alpine Fault scenario.
Based on this, it can be implied that these sites, as an initial estimation, will be
generally resilient to liquefaction and liquefaction-based effects. Aside to this
historical earthquakes have affected some of the areas tested. During the 1929
Murchison earthquake, Victoria Park sustained ground fracturing following the event.
However, no liquefaction was observed with the ground cracking. This is consistent
with the results obtained through the factor of safety analysis. Also, based on
anecdotal evidence, a small area of the Aerodrome had sand boils occur on the site
following the event. The sand boils were located near a flagpole which is currently
located on the north-eastern part of the site, which again is consistent with the
results of the analysis carried out as part of this study. This is important because
99
Quigley et al. (2013) state that old liquefaction structures can act reactivate and act
as a conduit for future liquefaction-inducing seismic events, as observed following
the Canterbury Earthquake Sequence.
Infrastructure, such as the St. John Building and Greymouth Aerodrome, are going to
be critical assets in response to a large seismic event. Functionality of these assets
following an event is of paramount importance to the civil response effort. McCahon
et al. (2007) state that the Aerodrome is the primary way of getting resources into the
community if access is limited after an earthquake, and initially based on this study,
the Aerodrome should theoretically remain functional. Along with the Aerodrome, the
St. John Ambulance Service needs to be functional. The St. John Ambulance
Building is located next to the Aerodrome and part of the ambulance site was
surveyed during the testing completed at the Aerodrome. The start of Line 3 runs
parallel to the boundary between the Aerodrome and the St. John Building and as
seen in Chapter 5, this ground can generally be considered resistant to liquefaction.
Currently no critical infrastructure is planned for the other sites tested during this
survey, though any future developments on the sites may cause them to become
important, for example, as a civil defence base. Future construction of critical sites
should focus on un-filled locations, particularly avoiding old fill.
It should be noted that these implications are related to liquefaction-based effects

only; other effects as a result of an earthquake (e.g. building damage) are not
covered by the scope of this study.
6.5 Influence of factors on Analysis
A number of factors that are used as part of the simplified procedure can have an
influence on the outcome of the analysis. Some of these factors are described
below, and include but are not limited to: Seismic factors (i.e. moment magnitude
and peak acceleration); geological factors (i.e. age of deposit and the effect of soil
type); and hydrological factors (seasonal fluctuations in water table levels).
100
6.5.1 Seismic Factors
The application of the simplified procedure for the evaluation of liquefaction

susceptibility requires estimates of two ground motion parameters – earthquake
magnitude and peak horizontal ground acceleration. These factors characterise
duration and intensity of ground shaking, respectively (Youd and Idriss, 2001).
6.5.1.1 Earthquake Magnitude
Though magnitude is the primary factor that characterises duration of shaking during
an earthquake, this relationship is rather uncertain and factors other than magnitude
also influence duration. An example of this is unilateral faulting, in which rupture
begins at one end of the fault and propagates to the other, usually produces longer
shaking duration for a given magnitude than bilateral faulting, in which slip begins
near a midpoint on the fault and propagates in both directions simultaneously.
Duration also generally increases with distance from the seismic source and may
vary with site conditions and bedrock topography (basin effects), for example (Youd
and Idriss, 2001).
Characteristics of coseismic slip and shaking duration are difficult to predict in

advance of an earthquake event. These effects are not sufficiently predictable to be
adequately accounted for in engineering practice. Therefore the conservative
relationship between magnitude and duration is applied for the simplified procedure
outlined by Seed and Idriss (1971) and summarised by Andrus and Stokoe (2000)
and Youd and Idriss (2001).
Changes in the moment magnitude can tend to affect the results as it influences the
magnitude scaling factor (MSF), which is applied directly to the CRR value. Thus
influences the factor of safety to a greater extent than any other seismic factor. It
should be noted that the MSF applied in the case of this study (Andrus and Stokoe,
2000) does tend to be at the upper end of range of magnitude scaling factors used in
engineering practice, making it a conservative predictor of liquefaction.
101
6.5.1.2 Peak Ground Acceleration
The Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) applied in the procedure is the peak
acceleration that would occur at the ground surface in the absence of pore pressure
increases or liquefaction.
A change in the peak acceleration is less likely to affect the overall factor of safety
calculation, and thus liquefaction susceptibility, due to the acceleration being
standardised against the acceleration due to gravity within the equation for CSR.
This would give a small overall change and is likely to only influence this result when
CRR and CSR are equal, the point between liquefaction and non-liquefaction.
6.5.2 Geological Factors
Geological factors can have an effect on the behaviour of the soil during a seismic
event. Two of these factors (age of the deposit and sediment type) are discussed
briefly below.
6.5.2.1 Age of deposit
Liquefaction resistance increases with age (Youd and Hoose, 1977; Youd and
Perkins, 1978; Seed, 1979; Youd and Idriss, 2001).
Sediments deposited within the last few thousand years are generally much more
susceptible to liquefaction than older Holocene sediments; Pleistocene sediments
are even more resistant; and pre-Pleistocene sediments are generally immune to
liquefaction.
Andrus and Stokoe (2000) provide a correction factor K C to correct for high values of
VS1 caused by cementation and aging. However this is generally based on
penetration data. They do however provide a range of values from 0.6 - 1.0 that are
representative of these differences. Selection of these values depends on knowledge
of sediment age and penetration data. This correction is applied to the CRR equation
which is very sensitive to the selected value. Lower values of KC result in lower
factors of safety.
102
6.5.2.2 Sediment Type
The type of sediment within the subsurface will have an effect on the susceptibility
for liquefaction. More specifically the fines content (expressed as a percentage) can
be accounted for, within the CRR equation. This is done by reducing the limiting
upper value of V*S1 to account for the increase in fines content of the soil as shown
in Table 6.1 (Andrus and Stokoe, 2000).
Table 6.1 – The relationship between fines content and the limiting upper value for liquefaction (VS1)
(Andrus and Stokoe, 2000)
Limiting Upper Value (V*S1)

Fines Content (FC)
based on FC
FC ≤ 5% V*S1 = 215 m/s
5% < FC < 35% V*S1 = 215 – 0.5(FC – 5) m/s
FC ≥ 35% V*S1 = 200 m/s
An increase in the fines content results on a reduction in the pore space between the
individual grains. This in turn limits the amount of water in the pore space and thus
larger pore-water pressure increases may not be possible in an earthquake. This
would reduce liquefaction susceptibility, and this is reflected in the reduction of the
upper limit of VS1 for liquefaction occurring. The effect that differing fine content has
on the analysis can be significant. Due to no information being available for fines
contents the largest value of V*S1 is used, making it conservative, especially in areas
that have greater fines content. Thus the potential susceptibility determined using
this method is conservative.
Also in soils above the ground-water table, particularly silty soils, negative pore
pressures can increase the effective stress and, hence, the value of V S measured in
seismic tests. This effect should be considered in the estimation of σ’ V for correcting
VS to VS1 and for computing CSR (Andrus and Stokoe, 2000).
103
6.5.3 Hydrological Factors
The predominant hydrological factor associated with this survey is the water table
depth, and therefore the amount of saturated material. However, seasonal
fluctuations in the water table can change liquefaction susceptibility.
6.5.3.1 Seasonal Water Table Fluctuations
Seasonal fluctuations in the water table can influence the stresses associated with
overburden stress. The West Coast is known for its high annual precipitation, with up
to 3000mm annually (NIWA, 2014). This is reflected in Figure 6.2 below.
West Coast Mean Monthly Rainfall for the

period from 1981 - 2010
(Data sourced from NIWA)
350.0
Average Monthly Rainfall (mm)
300.0
250.0
200.0
Hokitika
150.0
Westport
100.0
50.0
0.0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Figure 6.2 - Mean Monthly Rainfall for Hokitika and Westport from 1981 – 2010 [Note: no rainfall
information was available for Greymouth] (NIWA)
These differences in rainfall can influence the depth to water table. This not only
affects the effective hydrostatic pressure (and total effective pressure as a result),
but also affects the material that can liquefy following an earthquake event. For
example, an earthquake that occurred in December when rainfall is high could result
in liquefaction being more likely to occur due to the higher rainfall reducing the depth
104
to the water table. This will increase the amount of the soil profile that is saturated,
which is a requirement for liquefaction to occur.
6.6 Limitations of using Shear-Wave Velocity for Liquefaction

Susceptibility Analysis
There are three concerns over the use of shear-wave velocity as an indicator of
liquefaction susceptibility:
(1) No physical soil samples are obtained as part of seismic testing. This means that
no soil classification and identification of non-liquefiable material can be conducted;
(2) Thin, low shear-wave velocity strata may not be detected if the measurement
interval is too large. This could result in liquefiable material being missed during the
analysis process, and thus giving an inaccurate estimate for liquefaction potential;
And, (3) seismic measurements are made at small strains, whereas pore-water
pressure build-up and liquefaction are medium- to high-strain phenomena. This
limitation can be significant for cemented soils, because small-strain measurements
are highly sensitive to weak interparticle bonding that is eliminated at medium to high
strains. It is also significant in silty soils above the water table where negative pore-
water pressures can increase shear-wave velocity.
By conducting sufficient in-situ testing (i.e. penetration based testing) and drilling of
boreholes, liquefiable weakly cemented soils and non-liquefiable clay-rich soils can
be identified, and also thin liquefiable strata that may not have been observed
following the seismic testing.
105
6.7 Conclusions
To conclude, the initial desk-based investigation into the geomorphology clearly

identified areas of natural and reclamation fill land. These areas of reclamation
material are distributed generally around the historic estuary boundary as a way to
constrain the extent of the estuary and also to mitigate against flood hazards by the
increase in elevation of the land surrounding the estuary.
Following the testing completed at the various sites chosen as part of this study,
areas of low shear-wave velocity were able to be identified. Further analysis was
based on the simplified procedure outlined by Andrus and Stokoe (2000), and using
a range design earthquakes events. The analysis showed that much of the area
tested was resistant to liquefaction effects following these design events. An area of
historic, early 20th century fill, located in the north-east of the Aerodrome site showed
high potential for liquefaction to occur following the Alpine Fault and local M w6.5
design earthquakes. Areas of more modern fill, such as that tested on Charles
O’Connor Street showed low potential for liquefaction, reflecting the improved
methods of reclamation and fill emplacement.
Based on the analysis completed it can be stated with some confidence that these
sites would generally be resistant to liquefaction effects based on the design events.
However due to several assumptions made as part of the analysis these predictions
should not be used as the sole indicator for liquefaction. Penetration-based in-situ
testing and soil sampling should be conducted in the areas tested to allow for better
constraint of the parameters used in the analysis. This more thorough testing is of
particular importance to areas where critical infrastructure is located, such as the
Aerodrome site. The importance of key buildings such as the St. John’s Ambulance
building to remain in working order following a potentially lethal earthquake event is
paramount, though ground stability is only one factor related to a buildings ability to
function after an earthquake. As an initial estimate it appears that this ground is
resistant to liquefaction.
106
6.8 Future Work
Below are several suggestions for future supplementary work, as a result of this
study:
 The multichannel analysis of surface wave (MASW) method is a cheap, effective

way to obtain shear-wave velocity data and therefore can be used to make initial
estimations of liquefaction susceptibility. Further MASW testing around the rest
of the township, with particular attention to key infrastructure, such as the
hospital, medical centres, police and fire stations etc. This could allow for
detailed modelling of the Greymouth subsurface to determine the extents of
potentially liquefiable material beneath the town.
 It is recommended that penetration-based (CPT and SPT) testing be carried out
and boreholes be drilled to determine the stratigraphy. This will allow for
parameters used in the simplified method to be better constrained leading to a
better estimation of liquefaction susceptibility and also the identification of thin
low velocity, potentially liquefiable layers that may not have been identified
otherwise. The combination of seismic profiles with CPT and SPT data would
allow an extensive and detailed analysis of the Greymouth subsurface to be
carried out.
 This method of using MASW to provide initial estimates for liquefaction
susceptibility in Greymouth makes it a useful tool for making estimates for this in
other towns constructed on similar material, and that face similar seismic
hazards, such as Hokitika and Westport.
107
7 References
Andrus, R.D., and Stokoe, K.H., 1996, Guidelines for evaluation of liquefaction
resistance using shear wave velocity: Draft of paper presented at the NCEER
Workshop on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance, Salt Lake City, UT, January 4-5.
--, 1997, Liquefaction resistance based on shear wave velocity: Proceedings from
the NCEER Workshop on Evaluation of Liquefaction resistance of soils, Technical
report NCEER-97-0022, National Centre for Earthquake Engineering Research,
Buffalo, pp. 89-128.
--, 2000, Liquefaction resistance of soils from shear-wave velocity: Journal of

Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, v. 126, p.1015-1025.
Bannister, S & Gledhill, K 2012, 'Evolution of the 2010–2012 Canterbury earthquake

sequence', New Zealand Journal of Geology and Geophysics, vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 295-
304. DOI:10.1080/00288306.2012.680475
Brackley, H.L., 2012, Review of liquefaction hazard information in eastern

Canterbury, including Christchurch City and parts of Selwyn, Waimakariri and
Hurunui Districts: GNS Science Consultancy Report 2012/218. 99 pp.
Bradley, B.A. and Hughes, M., 2012a, Conditional peak ground accelerations in the
Canterbury earthquakes for conventional liquefaction assessment: Technical report
prepared for the Department of Building and Housing, 13 April 2012.
--, 2012b, Conditional peak ground accelerations in the Canterbury earthquakes for
conventional liquefaction assessment Part 2: Technical report prepared for the
Department of Building and Housing, 22 December 2012.
Brown, LJ & Weeber, JH 1992, 'Geology of the Christchurch urban area'. Institute of
Geological and Nuclear Sciences Ltd., Lower Hutt, New Zealand, p. 1 map sheet +
104p.
Carr, K.M., 2004, Liquefaction Case Histories from the West Coast of the South
Island, New Zealand; Unpublished Master’s Thesis, University of Canterbury,
Christchurch.
108
Cubrinovski, M, Green, RA, Allen, J, Ashford, S, Bowman, E, Bradley, B, Cox, B,
Hutchinson, T, Kavazanjian, E, Orense, R, Pender, M, Quigley, MC & Wotherspoon,
L 2010, 'Geotechnical reconnaissance of the 2010 Darfield (Canterbury) earthquake',
Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, vol. 43, no. 4, pp.
243-320.
Dobry, R., 1989, Some basic aspects of soil liquefaction during earthquakes:
Earthquake hazards and the design of constructed facilities in the eastern United
States, Ann. Of the New York Academy of Science, K.H. Jacob and C.J. Turkstra,
erds., New York, 558, pp.172-182.
Downes, G & Yetton, M 2012, 'Pre-2010 historical seismicity near Christchurch, New
Zealand: the 1869 M W 4.7–4.9 Christchurch and 1870 M W 5.6–5.8 Lake Ellesmere
earthquakes', New Zealand Journal of Geology and Geophysics, vol. 55, no. 3, pp.
199-205. DOI:10.1080/00288306.2012.690767
Dowrick, D.J., Rhoades, D.A., and Davenport, P.N., 2003, Effects of microzoning
and foundations on damage ratio for domestic property in the magnitude 7.2 1968
Inangahua, New Zealand earthquake: Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for
Earthquake Engineering, v. 36, No. 1.
Dowrick, D.J. and Sritharan, S., 1993, Attenuation of peak ground accelerations in
some recent New Zealand earthquakes: Bulletin of the New Zealand National
Society fro Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 26, No. 1.
Duffy, B.D., 2008, Development of Multi-channel Analysis of Surface Waves

(MASW) for characterising the internal structure of active fault zones as a predictive
method of identifying the distribution of ground deformation: Unpublished master’s
thesis, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.
Golesorkhi, R., 1989, Factors influencing the computational determination of

earthquake-induced shear stresses in sandy soils: Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
University of California, Berkeley, California.
Greene, M., Power, M., and Youd, T.L., 1994, Liquefaction - What it is and what to
do about it: Earthquake Basics Brief, No. 1, 7p.
109
Grey District Council, 2014, Port of Greymouth, updated 25 June 2014,
http://www.greydc.govt.nz/our-services/port/Pages/default.aspx
Hicks, M.A., 2011, Geotechnical Investigations of Wind Turbine Foundations using

Multichannel Analysis of Surface Waves (MASW): Unpublished master’s thesis,
University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.
Idriss, I.M., 1999, Presentation notes – An update to the Seed-Idriss simplified

procedure for evaluating liquefaction potential: Proceedings from the TRB Workshop
on New Approaches to Liquefaction Analysis, Publication No. FHWA-RD-99-165,
Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C.
Idriss, I. M., and Boulanger, R. W., 2008, Soil liquefaction during earthquakes.
Monograph MNO-12, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, CA, 261
pp.
-- , 2014, CPT and SPT Based Liquefaction Triggering Procedures: Report

UCD/CGM-14/01, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of
California, Davis, CA,136 pp.
Ishihara, K. and Koga, Y., 1981, Case Studies of Liquefaction in the 1964 Niigata
Earthquake: Soils and Foundations, Vol. 21, No. 3, p. 35-52
Ivanov, J., Park, C.B., Miller, R.D., and Xia, J., 2005, Analyzing and filtering surface
wave energy by muting shot gathers: Journal of Environmental and Engineering
Geophysics, v. 10, p. 307-322.
Ivanov, J., Park, C.B., Miller, R.D., Xia, J., and Overton, R., 2001, Modal separation
before dispersion curve extraction by MASW method, Proceedings of the SAGEEP:
Denver, Colorado.
Kaiser, A, Dellow, G, Denys, P, Fielding, E, Fry, B, Gerstenberger, M, Langridge, R,

Massey, C, Motagh, M, Pondard, N, McVerry, G, Holden, C, Ristau, J, Stirling, M,
Thomas, J, Uma, SR, Zhao, J, Beavan, J, Beetham, D, Benites, R, Celentano, A,
Collett, D, Cousins, J & Cubrinovski, M 2012, 'The M-w 6.2 Christchurch earthquake
110
of February 2011: preliminary report', New Zealand Journal of Geology &
Geophysics, vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 67-90. DOI:10.1080/00288306.2011.641182
Kayen, R. E., Mitchell, J. K., Seed, R. B., Lodge, A., Nishio, S., and Coutinho, R.,
1992, Evaluation of SPT-, CPT-, and shear wave-based methods for liquefaction
potential assessment using Loma Prieta data: Proc., 4th Japan-U.S. Workshop on
Earthquake Resistant Des. of Lifeline Fac. and Countermeasures for Soil
Liquefaction, Tech. Rep. NCEER-92-0019, M. Hamada and T. D. O’Rourke, eds.,
Vol. 1, National Centre for Earthquake Engineering Research, Buffalo, pp. 177–204.
Marcuson, W.F., 1978, Definition of Terms Related to Liquefaction: Journal of the

Geotechnical Engineering Division, Vol. 104, No. 9, pp. 1197-1200
Mew, G., 1980, Soils of Greymouth-Hokitika Region, South Island New Zealand and,
Soil Mapping Unit Descriptions for Greymouth-Hokitika Region, South Island, New
Zealand. Separate parts of: NZ Soil Survey Report 58, New Zealand Soil Bureau,
Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, Wellington, New Zealand.
McCahon, I., Mackenzie, J., Dewhirst, R., and Elms, D., 2007, Grey District Lifelines
study: Alpine fault earthquake scenario & lifelines vulnerability assessment, Grey
District Council, 198 pp.
Metcalf, P.L., 1993, Landslide Investigation and Hazard zonation in the Greymouth
Urban area: Unpublished Master’s Thesis, University of Canterbury, Christchurch.
Nathan, S., 1974, Stratigraphic nomenclature for the Cretaceous-lower Quaternary

rocks of Buller and North Westland, West Coast, South Island, New Zealand: New
Zealand Journal of Geology and Geophysics, Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 423-445.
Nathan, S., Rattenbury, M.S., and Suggate, R.P., 2002, Geology of the Greymouth
Area: Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences Ltd., Lower Hutt, New Zealand.
O'Neill, A., and Matsuoka, T., 2005, Dominant higher surface-wave modes and
possible inversion pitfalls: Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics, v.
10, p. 185-201.
111
Park Seismic, n.d., Retrieved on 22 August 2014, from Multichannel Analysis of
Surface Waves (MASW): http://www.masw.com/DataAcquisition.html
Park, C.B. and Brohammer, M., 2003, Surfseis Multichannel Analysis of Surface
Waves - MASW User’s Manual, Lawrence, Kansas Geological Survey.
Park, C.B., and Miller, R.D., 2006, Roadside passive MASW: Proceedings of the
SAGEEP, April 2-6, 2006, Seattle, Washington.
Park, C.B., Miller, R.D., and Ivanov, J., 2002, Filtering surface waves, Proceedings
of the SAGEEP 2002: Las Vegas, Nevada
Park, C.B., Miller, R.D., and Miura, H., 2005, Optimum Field Parameters of an
MASW survey: http://www.kgs.ku.edu/Geophysics2/Pubs/Pubs/PAR-02-03.pdf,
Kansas Geological Survey.
Park, C.B., Miller, R.D., and Xia, J., 1998, Imaging dispersion curves of surface
waves on multi-channel record, 68th Annual International Meeting of the Society of
Exploration Geophysicists, Expanded Abstracts, p. 1377-1380.
—, 1999, Multichannel analysis of surface waves: Geophysics, v. 64, p. 800-808.
Pettinga, JR, Yetton, MD, Van Dissen, RJ & Downes, G 2001, 'Earthquake source
identification and characterisation for the Canterbury Region, South Island, New
Zealand.', Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, vol. 34,
no. 4, pp. 282-317.
Quigley, M, Bastin, S & Bradley, B., 2013, Recurrent liquefaction in Christchurch,

New Zealand, during the Canterbury earthquake sequence, Geology, Vol. 41, No. 5,
p. 614. DOI:10.1130/G33944.1
Quigley, MC, Van Dissen, R, Litchfield, N, Villamor, P, Duffy, B, Barrell, D, Furlong,

K, Stahl, T, Bilderback, E and Noble, D, 2012, Surface rupture during the 2010 M W
7.1 Darfield (Canterbury) earthquake: implications for fault rupture dynamics and
seismic-hazard analysis', Geology, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 55-8. DOI:10.1130/G32528.1
112
Quigley, MC, Villamor, P, Furlong, K, Beavan, J, Van Dissen, R, Litchfield, N, Stahl,
T, Duffy, B, Bilderback, E, Noble, D, Barrell, D, Jongens, R & Cox, S, 2010,
Previously unknown fault shakes New Zealand's South Island, EOS, vol. 91, no. 49,
pp. 469-70.
Rauch, A.F., 1997, EPOLLS: An Empirical Method for Predicting Surface

Displacements due to Liquefaction-Induced Lateral Spreading in Earthquakes:
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University,
Virginia, United States of America.
Richart, F. E., Jr., Woods, R. D., and Hall, J. R. Jr., 1970, Vibrations of Soils and
Foundations: Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 414 pp.
Robertson, P.K., and Campanella, R.G., 1985, Liquefaction Potential of sands using
the CPT: J. Geotech. Engrg., ASCE, Vol. 111, Vol. 3, p.384-403.
Robertson, P. K., Woeller, D. J., and Finn, W. D. L., 1992. Seismic cone penetration
test for evaluating liquefaction potential under cyclic loading: Canadian Geotechnical
Journal., Ottawa, Vol. 29, pp. 686–695.
Seed, H.B., and Idriss, I.M., (1971, Simplified procedure for evaluating soil
liquefaction potential: J. Soil Mechanics and Foundations Div., ACSE, Vol. 97, No. 9,
p. 1249-1273.
Seed, H.B., Idriss, I.M., and Arango, I., 1983, Evaluation of liquefaction potential
using field performance data: Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 109,
No. 3, pp. 458-482.
Sladen, J.A., D’Hollander, R.D., and Krahn, J., 1985, The liquefaction of sands, a
collapse surface approach: Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 22, pp. 564-578.
Soga, K., 1998, Soil liquefaction effects observed in the Kobe earthquake of 1995:
Proceedings of the ICE – Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 1331, No. 1, pp 34-51.
Stewart, J.P., Seed, R.B., and Bray, J.D., 1996, Incidents of ground failure from the
1994 Northridge earthquake: Bulletin Seismological Society America, Vol. 86, No.
1B, pp. S300-S318.
113
Stokoe, K.H., Roesset, J.M., Bierschwale, J.G., and Aouad, M, 1988, Liquefaction
potential of sands from shear-wave velocity: Proceedings from the 9th World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 3, pp. 213-218.
Stokoe, K.H., Wright, G.W., James, A.B. and Jose, M.R., 1994, Characterisation of
geotechnical sites by SASW method, in geophysical characterisation sites, ISSMFE
Technical Committee #10, Oxford Publishers, New Delhi.
Suggate, R.P., 1965, Late Pleistocene geology of the northern part of the South
Island, New Zealand: Bulletin of the NZ Geological Survey, Vol. 77.
Suggate, R.P., 1968, The Paringa Formation, Westland, New Zealand: NZ Journal of
Geology and Geophysics, Vol. 13, pp. 742-750.
Suggate, R.P. and Moar, N.T., 1970, Revision of the chronology of the late Otira
glacial: NZ Journal of Geology and Geophysics, Vol. 13, pp. 742-746
Tokimatsu, K. and Uchida, A., 1990, Correlation between liquefaction resistance and
shear wave velocity: Soils and Foundations, Tokyo, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 33-42
Vincent, P.D., Tsoflias, G.P., Steeples, D.W., and Sloan, S.D., 2006, Fixed-source
and fixed-receiver walkaway seismic noise tests: A field comparison: Geophysics,
Vol. 71, p. W41-W44.
Wang, H.B., Sassa, K. and Xu, W.Y., 2004, Analysis of a spatial distribution of
landslides triggered by the 2004 Chuetsu earthquakes of Niigata Prefecture, Japan:
Natural Hazards, Vol. 41, No. 1, p. 43-60. DOI:10.1007/s11069-006-9009-x
Westfleet Seafood Ltd., date unknown, History of our wharf,

http://www.westfleet.co.nz/about-westfleet/our-factory/
Xia, J., Miller, R.D., and Park, C.B., 1999, Estimation of near-surface shear-wave
velocity by inversion of Rayleigh waves: Geophysics, v. 64, p. 691-700.
Youd, T. L., et al., 1997, Summary report. Proc., NCEER Workshop on Evaluation of
Liquefaction Resistance of Soils, Tech. Rep. NCEER-97-0022, T. L. Youd and I. M.
Idriss, eds., National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, Buffalo, 1–40.
114
Youd, T.L., 1992, Liquefaction ground Failure and consequent damage during the 22
April 1991 Costa Rica Earthquake: Proceedings of the NSF/UCR U.S.-Costa Rica
Workshop on the Costa Rica Earthquakes 1990-1991: Effects on soils and
structures. Oakland, California, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute
Youd, T. L., and Hoose, S. N., 1977, Liquefaction susceptibility and geologic setting:
Proc., 6th World Conf. on Earthquake Engrg., Vol. 3, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs,
N.J., pp. 2189–2194.
Youd, T.L., and Idriss, I.M., 2001, Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report
from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of
Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental
Engineering, Vol. 127, No. 4.
Youd, T. L., and Perkins, D. M., 1978, Mapping of liquefaction induced ground failure
potential: Journal of Geotech. Engrg. Div., ASCE, Vol. 104, No. 4, pp. 433–446.
Yuan, J., 2011, Field Studies comparing SASW, beamforming and MASW test
methods and characterization of geotechnical materials based on Vs: Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, University of Texas, Austin, TX, United State of America.
Zhang, S.X., and Chan, L.S., 2003, Possible effects of misidentified mode number
on Rayleigh wave inversion: Journal of Applied Geophysics, v. 53, p. 17-29.
115
Appendices
A. Detailed Geological History (with Geological Map on CD-ROM)
B. Greymouth Argus Excerpt
C. Historical Maps and Drawings (on CD-ROM)
D. Historical and Site Testing Photos (on CD-ROM)
E. Field Data and Analysis Spreadsheets (on CD-ROM)
116
Appendix A: Geology
The following description relates to all bedrock units found within the wider
Greymouth Area. It is based on the descriptions provided by Nathan et al. (2002).
Geological Map and Full Stratigraphic Column are included on the CD-ROM.
Ordovician (490 to 443 Ma)
The oldest rocks to outcrop in the Greymouth area are the Greenland Group (Ɵg).
This consists of interbedded light greenish grey muddy quartzose sandstone
(greywacke) and shale (argillite), which has been hornfelsed locally near granitoid
plutons. These have been interpreted as a proximal turbidite sequence deposited on
a submarine fan. It contains abundant detrital quartz, minor sodic plagioclase and
scattered volcanic and sedimentary rock fragments. The age of these rocks
(Ordovician) is based on graptolites found at the Waitahu River.
The Greenland Group rocks make up much of the mountainous terrain in the north of
Greymouth and are distributed from the coastline, inland. There are also smaller
localised outcrops within the inland valleys of the Grey River and associated
tributaries. The localised outcrops are also generally bounded by faults.
Early Cretaceous (142 to 98.9 Ma)
Following the Greenland Group rocks there was several other rock units deposited.
However the next rock that outcrops in the area is the Pororari Group. The Pororari
Group rocks are mainly coarse-grained, non-marine sedimentary rocks. These rocks
are generally preserved in partly fault-bounded blocks in and around the Paparoa
Ranges. These sedimentary rocks contain clasts of nearby basement lithologies,
indicating local derivation. Pollen and spores show it is of late Early Cretaceous age.
The dominant lithology with the Pororari Group is the Hawks Crag Breccia (Koh).
This unit consists of a poorly-sorted, matrix-supported breccia and breccia-
conglomerate in a coarse-grained sandy matrix. The Hawks Crag Breccia is located
on the southern edge of the Greenland Group contact, generally constrained by
faults, in an area several kilometres north-northeast of Greymouth.
117
Late Cretaceous to Paleocene (98.9 to 54.8 Ma)
Overlying the Pororari Group is the Paparoa Coal Measures (Kpc). This consists of a
non-marine assemblage of fluvial conglomerate and sandstone, lacustrine mudstone
and lensoidal coal seams. This formation is subdivided into seven members; 3 coal
units with 4 mudstone and sandstone units separating the coal units. Basalt flows
and breccia are interbedded within the lower part of the Paparoa Coal Measures with
these deposits being dated between 68 and 71 million years ago, and appear to part
of an episode of latest Cretaceous basaltic volcanism that was widespread on the
West Coast. Dating of pollen shows most of the Paparoa Coal Measures is latest
Cretaceous in age, but the uppermost part is Early Paleocene. The Cretaceous-
Tertiary boundary is recorded within a coal seam in the upper part of the Rewanui
Member. The Paparoa Coal Measures outcrop north of the towns of Runanga and
Dunollie, some 10 kilometres north-east of Greymouth, along with a limb that
extends from the eastern edge, south towards the town of Taylorville.
Eocene (54.8 to 33.7 Ma)
Following a regional unconformity, the next lithology is the Brunner Coal Measures
(Eb). The Brunner Coal Measures consists of quartz sandstone, conglomerate,
carbonaceous shale and lensoidal coal seams, some up to 10 metres thick locally.
The formation as a whole is quartzose, due to being largely derived from deeply
weathered, granitoid basement rocks. The sandstone beds are commonly silica-
cemented, due to be deeply buried in some areas, and therefore from characteristic
bluffs and plateaus.
The Brunner Coal Measures are not extensive near Greymouth and are only present
as small outcrops on the south side of the Paparoa Coal Measures.
Lying conformably on top of the Brunner Coal Measures are the Island Sandstone
and the Kaiata Formation.
The Island Sandstone (Ers) consists of a shallow marine sandstone. However this
unit is not widespread and is only observed in localised areas, and has a variety of
local names, with the Island Sandstone being one of these varieties which outcrops
near Greymouth.
118
The major overlying conformable unit above the Brunner Coal Measures is the
Kaiata Formation (Erk). This is a massive, dark brown carbonaceous mudstone
which contains interbedded mass-flow deposits (conglomerate debris-flow beds)
near Greymouth. The Kaiata Formation is a shallow-water sedimentary rock, as well
as the Island Sandstone, as a result of marine transgression though the Kaiata
Formation is much more widespread including outcrops around Westport.
The Island Sandstone forms the hills east of the Runanga and Rapahoe townships,
whereas the Kaiata Formation forms much of terrain south and east of Kaiata and is
bounded by the Oligocene formations within the limbs of the Brunner Anticline.
Oligocene (33.7 to 23.8 Ma)
The continued marine transgression from the Eocene meant that terrigenous
sediment dwindled and consequently the Oligocene sediments are calcareous and
limestone units are widespread. The Nile Group (On) is a grouping of all calcareous
sediments for much of the West Coast during the Oligocene. This Group is then
divided into two major facies: Platform facies, consisting of shallow-water bioclastic
limestone and muddy micaceous limestone formed on a relatively stable shelf; and
Basinal facies, consisting of muddy limestone, massive calcareous mudstone and
interbedded calcareous sandstone and mudstone formed in rapidly subsiding basins.
The Platform facies is not observed in the Greymouth area, and is generally confined
to the northern part of the West Coast. However, the Basinal facies occurs mainly
around Greymouth.
The Port Elizabeth Member (Onp) sits directly above the Kaiata Formation. This
member consists of a grey-brown calcareous mudstone.
The Port Elizabeth Member grades upwards into the Cobden Limestone (Onc). The
Cobden Limestone is a muddy micritic limestone, with thin layers of clay/mud infill
between some beds, giving the outcrops a wavy appearance due to the less
resistant mud layers being eroded quicker than the limestone beds.
119
The Nile Group outcrops in Greymouth as the hills directly behind Greymouth as part
of the westward-dipping limb of the Brunner Anticline and also further inland as part
of the eastward-dipping limb
Miocene (23.8 to 5.3 Ma)
The Blue Bottom Group was deposited above the Nile Group during the Miocene.
This Group reflects another change in tectonic activity and uplift as another change
from carbonate-rich to terrigenous muddy sediments. There are several members
within the Blue Bottom Group, with some members being locally unconformable due
to regional uplift and changing depocentres.
The Stillwater Mudstone (Mbs) is a grey calcareous mudstone that formed

throughout the Early to Middle Miocene and sits conformably above the Cobden
Limestone of the Nile Group.
During the Late Miocene the Eight Mile Formation (Mbe) formed above the Stillwater
Mudstone. This formation has a dominant lithology of blue-grey muddy sandstone
and yellow-brown fine-grained sandstone.
These formations outcrop as part of the eastward-dipping limb of the Brunner

Anticline. They have been eroded extensively due to river incision and other
processes during the Quaternary period. The Stillwater Mudstone is also present as
the lesser hills behind the southern part of Greymouth, as part of the westward-
dipping limb of the same anticline.
Pliocene (5.3 to 1.8 Ma)
The youngest sedimentary rocks in the area around Greymouth are the Old Man
Group (Po) and are Late Pliocene in age. This Group originated due to rapid uplift of
the Southern Alps and is reflected by a flood of fluvial gravel and sand. The resulting
conglomerate is dominated by clasts of greywacke and schist. Locally, glacial beds
have been recorded. In some places the Eight Mile Formation grades upwards into
the Old Man Group.
The Old Man Group is present in the stratigraphic record as a localised deposit near
Stillwater, approximately 12 kilometres inland from Greymouth.
120
Appendix B: Greymouth Argus Excerpt
Excerpt from the Greymouth Argus, dated 11 August 1904, page 3
Greymouth Harbour
Mr Thompson's Report
Regarding the Greymouth harbour, Mr Thompson, engineer, reported to the Harbour Board
yesterday as follows: — As instructed, I have now the honour to lay before you a report on
the present state of the entrance. As the members may not be acquainted with what has
taken place, I have given a short account of the works from the commencement.
In December, 1870, Sir John Coode sent plans and a report showing how the proposed
harbour works were to be constructed. In the report he says: It is also impossible that the
width (400ft) at low water may in some small degree be varied with advantage. Experience
alone can determine with precision this, as well as the other points just named, but the width
laid down in the drawing has been arrived at after calculation and careful consideration;
based on the data, available for the purpose.
The work was actually set out to give a width of 450 feet at low water and the level of the
stone on the South Breakwater was made up to the sleeper level on top of the staging,
instead of being kept to about 3ft above high water, as shown on Sir John Coode's plans.
The latter alteration, although it gave increased shelter, contracted the width of the sailing
channel, as the stone went further into the river. Another cause of the narrowing of the
channel was the use of too many small stones, which could not resist the heavy seas, and
were flattened out, forming wide aprons along the river face of the South Mole. I found, on
taking charge in 1893, that the above conditions existed, but that to assist the width no stone
had been tipped for some time from the inner line of railway on the North Mole, thus
improving matters to the extent of 25ft. The final results from measurements were that at the
narrowest point the width at low water was 430 feet, and opposite the end of the North Mole
it was 445 ft. The overlap of the South Breakwater at the time work stopped in 1895 was 530
feet.
In June, 1895, Messrs Hales and Napier Bell reported on the harbour, and recommended
the extension of the North Breakwater, the line being slightly altered to give a width of 550 ft
at low water. No action was taken.
121
Mr Napier Bell again reported on the harbour in June, 1900, and advised the Board to at
once set about extending the southern one (breakwater) partly on account of the shelter it
will give to the entrance, and partly because, as it must be done before long, it may as well
be done now. He also had no doubt that before long the North Breakwater must also be
extended to preserve the depth by confining the currents. He also advised that instead of
extending the work on the lines of the present wall, it should be done by constructing a new
breakwater parallel to the old, but 200 feet further up the beach, so as to give a width of
entrance of 600 ft at low water mark. The report goes on to say that the width of 600ft at low
water mark is no doubt too wide for a small river like this with such au insufficient tidal
compartment, but this cannot be helped, as the present width of 400ft at low water, although
more suitable for the size of the river, is dangerous for navigation. To assist the scour he
advises the opening up of the lagoons, as was previously advised by Sir John Coode.
Plans for the extension of the breakwaters were prepared on these lines and submitted to
Government for approval. The Marine Engineer, however, objected on account of the width
being too great. He then came down and examined the site, and as a result plans were
prepared for the extension of the South Mole on the present lines, but instead of adopting Mr
Napier Bell's proposed new North Breakwater, it was proposed to extend the present one by
continuing the two northerly rows of piles only. This would have given an additional 25ft, and
as I proposed to keep the stone on the South Mole down to Sir John Coote’s level, there
would also be a gain of width on the south side. Altogether, at the outer and the low water
width would have been above 475 feet.
These plans were approved, and work commenced lengthening the South Breakwater.
Shortly afterwards permission to go on with the South Mole was withdrawn in order to
reconsider the question of site and width. I then advised the Board to stop work on the south
side till matters were settled, as we had already constructed an additional 150 feet making
the overlap 700 feet, which was quite too great. The two designs were then sent to London
for the opinion of Messrs Coode, Son and Mathews, who are chief engineers to the
Admiralty for the new Dover Harbour, now being built by the Home Government.
Their report of September, 1902, states that there can be no question that the time has now
arrived when further works of extension can with advantage be undertaken. Also, that after
careful consideration, we are unable to recommend this (Mr Napier Bell's) project, mainly on
grounds corresponding to those given in the report of the Marine. . . We are of opinion that
600ft would be a far greater width than could be effectively kept open by the scour, and as
pointed out by the Marine Engineer…dredging in such an exposed position as the entrance
122
to the Grey River, where there is always a heavy swell, and frequently seas running, would
be both a difficult and expensive work.
They recommended the extension of the South Breakwater 400ft and the North Breakwater
500 ft. The North Breakwater to start at the same point as shown on the Marine Engineer's
plan, but to trend slightly to the north, so as to give a low water width of 500ft at its seaward
end. They also recommended an overlap of 450 feet.
After consideration of the three plans, it was decided to carry out Mr Napier Bell's idea, and
to extend the new breakwater to such a length that its outer end would be 400 feet seaward
of the old North Mole. The work was put in hand at once. We are now within 50 feet of the
terminal point.
Owing to dry weather and heavy seas the entrance has been in a very bad condition since
the end of June. The average depth at H.W.O.S.T. in June was 20 feet 10 inches. In July it
was only 16ft 10in, the least depth being 14ft on the 23rd. In August the depth has only been
14 and 15 feet. In addition, since the 21st July, the larger vessels have had to be towed in
and out, and during the first week in August three coal-laden vessels had to discharge part
of their cargoes to enable them to go to sea.
These facts show that although the new breakwater is in such an advanced condition, it has
not had the slightest beneficial effect in regulating the current or increasing the depth on the
bar. At the present time there is a bank commencing at the river face of the South
Breakwater, and extending right across the river, overlapping the end of the old North Mole,
with only a depth of seven feet at low water, or 16 foot at high water, in the line of entrance
for shipping.
Recommendations — as it would be impracticable, now that so much of the new work had
been built, to carry out either Messrs Hales or Coode’s plans, the only thing to do is the
following: —As many be seen from the authorised plan, the greater portion of the new work
is built in a straight line at an angle to the beach trending to the southwards. This is
continued till the width of entrance is narrowed to 600 feet. The work then turns seaward,
and the other portion is parallel to the South Breakwater. I would recommend the Board to
go back on the work to where the straight portion ends, and continue this straight till the
width is reduced to 500 feet at low water, and then turn seawards.
Regarding the amount of overlap, Sir John Coode reported the precise amount can only be
determined by experience. His original plan scales 130 feet. The point where the alteration
123
recommended above meets a line 500 feet from and parallel to the south pier is about
opposite to the beginning of the 150 feet addition lately built. Consequently, when we get to
that point the overlap would the 150 feet, and if this was then found to be too small we have
authority to extend the South Breakwater another 250 feet which would give an overlap of
400 feet if necessary.
124

The Use of The Multi-Channel Analysis of Surface Waves (MASW) Method As An Initial Estimator of Liquefaction Susceptibility in Greymouth, New Zealand

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Use of The Multi-Channel Analysis of Surface Waves (MASW) Method As An Initial Estimator of Liquefaction Susceptibility in Greymouth, New Zealand

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Use of The Multi-Channel Analysis of Surface Waves (MASW) Method As An Initial Estimator of Liquefaction Susceptibility in Greymouth, New Zealand

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Use of the Multi-channel Analysis

of Surface Waves (MASW) Method as

Master of Science in Engineering Geology

Clem Alexander Molloy Gibbens

Combined analysis of the geomorphic evolution of Greymouth with Multi-channel

List of Figures ..................................................................................................................................... vii

1.1 Background ........................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Objectives .............................................................................................................................. 4

1.3 Regional Geological Setting ............................................................................................... 5

1.3.1 Bedrock Units ................................................................................................................ 8

1.3.2 Quaternary Sediments................................................................................................. 9

1.3.3 Greymouth Surficial Geology.................................................................................... 11

1.3.4 Tectonic History .......................................................................................................... 14

1.4 Principles of Liquefaction .................................................................................................. 18

1.4.2 Liquefaction Mechanism............................................................................................ 19

1.4.3 Liquefaction Effects .................................................................................................... 19

1.5 Thesis Organisation ........................................................................................................... 23

2 The Multichannel Analysis of Surface Waves technique ..................................................... 24

2.2 MASW Data Acquisition .................................................................................................... 26

2.3 Dispersion Curve Extraction ............................................................................................. 29

2.4 Inversion .............................................................................................................................. 30

2.5 Walkaway surveys ............................................................................................................. 32

2.6 Parameters used for this study ........................................................................................ 32

3.2 Structural Geomorphology ................................................................................................ 35

3.3 Present Day Geomorphology of Greymouth .................................................................. 38

4 Site Investigations ...................................................................................................................... 52

4.2 Greymouth Aerodrome ...................................................................................................... 53

4.2.1 Site Description........................................................................................................... 53

4.2.2 Site Geomorphology .................................................................................................. 53

4.2.3 Test Locations............................................................................................................. 55

4.2.4 Test Results ................................................................................................................ 56

4.3 Victoria Park Racecourse.................................................................................................. 61

4.3.1 Site Description........................................................................................................... 61

4.3.2 Site Geomorphology .................................................................................................. 61

4.3.3 Test Locations............................................................................................................. 63

4.3.4 Test Results ................................................................................................................ 64

4.4 Charles O’Connor Street Truck Park .............................................................................. 69

4.4.1 Site Description........................................................................................................... 69

4.4.2 Site Geomorphology .................................................................................................. 69

4.4.3 Test Locations............................................................................................................. 71

4.4.4 Test Results ................................................................................................................ 71

5 Analysis for Susceptibility of Liquefaction .............................................................................. 74

5.2 Procedure for assessment of liquefaction susceptibility............................................... 74

5.2.1 Cyclic Stress Ratio (CSR) ......................................................................................... 74

5.2.2 Overburden Stress-Corrected Shear-Wave Velocity ............................................ 76

5.2.3 Cyclic Resistance Ratio (CRR) ................................................................................ 77

5.2.4 Factor of Safety (FoS) ............................................................................................... 80

5.3 Stress-Corrected Shear-Wave Velocity Profiles for Greymouth ................................. 80

5.3.1 Parameters used in this study .................................................................................. 81

5.3.2 Overburden stress-corrected Shear Wave Velocity .............................................. 82

6.2 Discussion of results of analysis ...................................................................................... 95

6.2.1 Alpine Fault Mw8.0 Earthquake ................................................................................ 95

6.2.2 Local Mw6.5 Earthquake ............................................................................................ 96

6.2.3 Local Mw5.5 Earthquake ............................................................................................ 96

6.3 Implications of results with regard to geology and geomorphology ........................... 96

6.5 Influence of factors on Analysis ..................................................................................... 100

6.5.1 Seismic Factors ........................................................................................................ 101

6.5.2 Geological Factors ................................................................................................... 102

6.5.3 Hydrological Factors ................................................................................................ 104