Probabilistic and deterministic seismic soil liquefaction triggering methodologies are proposed in Cetin et al. [1]. This manuscript: i) presents the protocols, which need to be followed for the correct use of this methodology for forward engineering (design) assessments, ii) guides the engineers through the procedure, and iii) discusses the "tricks" alongside the protocol. An illustrative soil profile shaken by a scenario earthquake is presented, through which consistent estimations of representative SPT blow-counts along with fines content are discussed. Additionally, the estimation of CSR input parameters are illustrated. Last but not least the uncertainty estimations of these input parameters are presented along with the probability and factory of safety for the assessment of liquefaction triggering. •A simplified methodology and its use to assess liquefaction triggering hazard of a soil site under an earthquake scenario event.•The consistent and unbiased mean estimates of input parameters of SPT blow-counts( N1,60 ), fines content ( FC ), vertical effective ( σ'v ) and total ( σv ) stresses, maximum ground acceleration ( amax ), stress reduction (or non-linear shear mass participation) factor ( rd ) and moment magnitude ( Mw ) along with their uncertainties are discussed.•Outlined methodology enables engineers to estimate the probability of- and factor of safety against- seismic soil liquefaction triggering for design problems.

This data article provides a summary of seismic soil liquefaction triggering and non-triggering case histories, which were compiled, screened for data completeness and quality, and then processed for the development of triggering relationships proposed in "SPT-based probabilistic and deterministic assessment of seismic soil liquefaction triggering hazard" [1]. The database is composed of 113 liquefaction, 95 non-liquefaction, and 2 marginal liquefaction case histories, from seismic events with moment magnitude M_w values varying in the range of 5.9 to 8.3. A spreadsheet summary of these case histories are included along with a separate spreadsheet, by which maximum likelihood assessment was performed. These data transparently enable researchers to access case history input parameters and processing details, and to compare the case history processing protocols with the ones of different researchers (e.g.: "The influence of SPT procedures in soil liquefaction resistance evaluations." [2], "SPT-based liquefaction triggering procedures." [3]).