Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Which is a better proxy, site period or depth to bedrock, in modelling linear site response in addition to the average shear-wave velocity?

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study aims to identify the best-performing site characterization proxy alternative and complementary to the conventional 30 m average shear-wave velocity VS30, as well as the optimal combination of proxies in characterizing linear site response. Investigated proxies include T0 (site fundamental period obtained from earthquake horizontal-to-vertical spectral ratios), VSz (measured average shear-wave velocities to depth z, z = 5, 10, 20 and 30 m), Z0.8 and Z1.0 (measured site depths to layers having shear-wave velocity 0.8 and 1.0 km/s, respectively), as well as Zx-infer (inferred site depths from a regional velocity model, x = 0.8 and 1.0, 1.5 and 2.5 km/s). To evaluate the performance of a site proxy or a combination, a total of 1840 surface-borehole recordings is selected from KiK-net database. Site amplifications are derived using surface-to-borehole response-, Fourier- and cross-spectral ratio techniques and then are compared across approaches. Next, the efficacies of 7 single-proxies and 11 proxy-pairs are quantified based on the site-to-site standard deviation of amplification residuals of observation about prediction using the proxy or the pair. Our results show that T0 is the best-performing single-proxy among T0, Z0.8, Z1.0 and VSz. Meanwhile, T0 is also the best-performing proxy among T0, Z0.8, Z1.0 and Zx-infer complementary to VS30 in accounting for the residual amplification after VS30-correction. Besides, T0 alone can capture most of the site effects and should be utilized as the primary site indicator. Though (T0, VS30) is the best-performing proxy pair among (VS30, T0), (VS30, Z0.8), (VS30, Z1.0), (VS30, Zx-infer) and (T0, VSz), it is only slightly better than (T0, VS20). Considering both efficacy and engineering utility, the combination of T0 (primary) and VS20 (secondary) is recommended. Further study is needed to test the performances of various proxies on sites in deep sedimentary basins.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16

Similar content being viewed by others

Data and Resources

Velocity profiles of KiK-net recording stations were downloaded from the http://www.kyoshin.bosai.go.jp (last accessed on 05/06/2018). The J-SHIS velocity model was downloaded from http://www.j-shis.bosai.go.jp/map/?lang=en (last accessed on 05/06/2018).

References

  • Abrahamson NA, Youngs RR (1992) A stable algorithm for regression analyses using the random effects model. Bull Seismol Soc Am 82:505–510

    Google Scholar 

  • Al Atik L, Abrahamson N, Bommer JJ, Scherbaum F, Cotton F, Kuehn N (2010) The variability of ground-motion prediction models and its components. Bull Seismol Soc Am 81:794–801

    Google Scholar 

  • Ancheta TD, Darragh RB, Stewart JP, Seyhan E, Silva WJ, Chiou BSJ, Wooddell KE, Graves RW, Kottke AR, Boore DM, Kishida T, Donahue JL (2014) NGA-West2 database. Earthq Spectra 30:989–1005

    Google Scholar 

  • Aoi S, Obara K, Hori S, Kasahara K, Okada Y (2000) New Japanese uphole/downhole strong-motion observation network: KiK-net. Seismol Res Lett 72:239

    Google Scholar 

  • Assimaki D, Li W, Steidl JH, Tsuda K (2008) Site amplification and attenuation via downhole array seismogram inversion: a comparative study of the 2003 Miyagi-Oki aftershock sequence. Bull Seismol Soc Am 98:301–330

    Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson GM, Boore DM (2003) Empirical ground-motion relations for subduction zone earthquakes and their application to Cascadia and other regions. Bull Seismol Soc Am 93:1703–1729

    Google Scholar 

  • Bazzurro P, Cornell CA (2004) Ground-motion amplification in nonlinear soil sites with uncertain properties. Bull Seismol Soc Am 94:2090–2109

    Google Scholar 

  • Bendat JS, Piersol AG (1980) Engineering applications of correlation and spectral analysis. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Biggs JM (1964) Introduction to structural dynamics. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Boatwright J, Blair L, Catchings R, Goldman M, Perosi F, Steedman C (2004) Using twelve years of USGS refraction lines to calibrate the Brocher and Others (1997) 3-D velocity model of the bay area. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2004-1282, Washington, D.C

  • Boore DM, Thompson E, Cadet H (2011) Regional correlations of VS30 and velocities averaged over depths less than and greater than 30 meters. Bull Seismol Soc Am 101:3046–3059

    Google Scholar 

  • Boore DM, Stewart JP, Seyhan E, Atkinson GM (2014) NGA-West2 equations for predicting PGA, PGV, and 5% damped PSA for shallow crustal earthquakes. Earthq Spectra 30:1057–1085

    Google Scholar 

  • Bora SS, Scherbaum F, Kuehn N, Stafford P (2016) On the relationship between fourier and response spectra: implications for the adjustment of empirical ground-motion prediction equations (GMPEs). Bull Seismol Soc Am 106:1235–1253

    Google Scholar 

  • Borcherdt RD (1994) Estimates of site-dependent response spectra for design (methodology and justification). Earthq Spectr 10:617–653

    Google Scholar 

  • Cadet H (2007) Utilisation combinée des méthodes basées sur le bruit de fond dans le cadre du microzonage sismique. Ph.D. thesis, Joseph Fourier University (in French)

  • Cadet H, Bard P-Y, Rodriguez-Marek A (2012) Site effect assessment using KiK-net data: part 1. A simple correction procedure for surface/downhole spectral ratios. Bull Earth Eng 10:421–448

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell KW, Bozorgnia Y (2014) NGA-West2 ground motion model for the average horizontal components of PGA, PGV, and 5%-damped linear Response Spectra. Earthq Spectra 30:1087–1115

    Google Scholar 

  • Choi Y, Stewart JP, Graves RW (2005) Empirical model for basin effects accounts for basin depth and source location. Bull Seismol Soc Am 95:1412–1427

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawood HM, Rodriguez-Marek A, Bayless J, Goulet C, Thompson E (2016) A flatfile for the KiK-net database processed using an automated protocol. Earthq Spectra 32:1281–1302

    Google Scholar 

  • Derras B, Bard P-Y, Cotton F (2017) VS30, slope, H800 and f0: performance of various site-condition proxies in reducing ground-motion aleatory variability and predicting nonlinear site response. Earth Planets Space 69:133. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40623-017-0718-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dhakal YP, Yamanaka H (2013) An evaluation of 3-D velocity models of the Kanto basin for long-period ground motion simulations. J Seismol 17:1073–1102

    Google Scholar 

  • Field EH, Jacob KH, Hough SE (1992) Earthquake site responses estimation: a weal-motion case study. Bull Seismol Soc Am 82:2283–2307

    Google Scholar 

  • Fujimoto K, Midorikawa S (2006) Relationship between average shear-wave velocity and site amplification inferred from strong motion records at nearby station pairs. J Jpn Assoc Earthq Eng 6:11–22 (in Japanese with English abstract)

    Google Scholar 

  • Fujiwara H, Kawai S, Aoi S, Morikawa N, Senna S, Kudo N, Ooi M, Hao KX, Hayakawa Y, Yoyama N, Matsuyama H, Iwamoto K, Suzuki H, Liu Y (2009) A study on subsurface structure model for deep sedimentary layers of Japan for strong-motion evaluation. Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 337

  • Gallipoli MR, Mucciarelli M (2009) Comparison of site classification from VS30, VS10, and HVSR in Italy. Bull Seismol Soc Am 99:340–351

    Google Scholar 

  • Graves RW, Aagaard BT (2011) Testing long-period ground-motion simulations of scenario earthquakes using the Mw 7.2 El Mayor-Cucapah mainshock: evaluation of finite-fault rupture characterization and 3D seismic velocity models. Bull Seismol Soc Am 101:895

    Google Scholar 

  • Gueguen P, Cornou C, Garambois S, Banton J (2007) On the limitation of the H/v spectral ratio using seismic noise as an exploration tool: application to the Grenoble valley (France), a Small Apex Ratio Basin. Pure appl Geophys 164:115–134

    Google Scholar 

  • Hassani B, Atkinson GM (2018a) Site-effects model for central and eastern North America based on peak frequency and average shear-wave velocity. Bull Seismol Soc Am 107:338–350

    Google Scholar 

  • Hassani B, Atkinson GM (2018b) Application of a site-effects model based on peak frequency and average shear-wave velocity to California. Bull Seismol Soc Am 108:351–357

    Google Scholar 

  • Japan Road Association (1990) Specifications for highway bridges part V, Seismic Design, Maruzen Co., Ltd.

  • Kawase H, Matsuo H (2004) Amplification characteristics of K-NET, KiK-net, and JMA Shindokei network sites based on the spectral inversion technique. In: 13th world conference on earthquake engineering, Vancouver, Canada

  • Kohler M, Magistrale H, Clayton R (2003) Mantle heterogeneities and the SCEC three-dimensional seismic velocity model version 3. Bull Seismol Soc Am 93:757–774

    Google Scholar 

  • Konno K, Ohmachi T (1998) Ground-motion characteristics estimated from spectral ratio between horizontal and vertical components of microtremor. Bull Seismol Soc Am 88:228–241

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotha SR, Cotton F, Bindi D (2018) A new approach to site classification: mixed-effects ground motion prediction equation with spectral clustering of site amplification functions. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 110:318–329

    Google Scholar 

  • Lermo J, Chávez-García FJ (1993) Site effect evaluation using spectral ratios with only one station. Bull Seismol Soc Am 83:1574–1594

    Google Scholar 

  • Luzi L, Puglia R, Pacor F, Gallipoli MR, Bindi D, Mucciarelli M (2011) Proposal for a soil classification based on parameters alternative or complementary to Vs, 30. Bull Earthq Eng 9:1877–1898

    Google Scholar 

  • Magistrale H, Day S, Clayton R, Graves RW (2000) The SCEC Southern California reference three-dimensional seismic velocity model version 2. Bull Seismol Soc Am 90:S65–S76

    Google Scholar 

  • McVerry GH (2011) Site-effect terms as continuous functions of site period and Vs30. In: Pacific conference on earthquake engineering: building an earthquake resilient society, Auckland, New Zealand

  • Nakamura Y (1989) A method for dynamic characteristics estimation of subsurface using microtremor on the ground surface. Quarterly Report of Railway Technical Research Institute (RTRI), vol. 30, no 1

  • Okada Y, Kasahara K, Hori S, Obara K, Sekiguchi S, Fujiwara H, Yamamoto A (2004) Recent progress of seismic observation networks in Japan-Hi-net, F-net, K-NET and KiK-net. Earth Planets Space 56:15–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Oth A, Bindi D, Parolai S, Di Giacomo D (2011) Spectral analysis of K-NET and KiK-net data in Japan, part II: on attenuation characteristics, source spectra, and site response of borehole and surface stations. Bull Seismol Soc Am 101:667–687

    Google Scholar 

  • Pilz M, Cotton F (2019) Does the 1D assumption hold for site response analysis? A study of seismic site responses and implication for ground motion assessment using KiK-net strong-motion data. Earthq Spectra 35:883–905

    Google Scholar 

  • Pitilakis K, Gazepis C, Anastasiadis A (2004) Design response spectra and soil classification for seismic code provisions. In: Proceedings of the 13th world conference on earthquake engineering, Vancouver, B.C., Canada

  • Pitilakis K, Riga E, Anastasiadis A (2013) New code site classification, amplification factors and normalized response spectra based on a worldwide ground-motion database. Bull Earthq Eng 11:925–966

    Google Scholar 

  • Pitilakis K, Riga E, Anastasiadis A, Fotopoulou S, Karafagka S (2018) Towards the revision of EC8: proposal for an alternative site classification scheme and associated intensity dependent spectral amplification factors. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.03.030

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Régnier J, Bonilla LF, Bertrand E, Semblat JF (2014) Influence of the VS profiles beyond 30 m depth on linear site effects: assessment from the KiK-Net data. Bull Seismol Soc Am 104:2337–2348

    Google Scholar 

  • Şafak E (1997) Models and methods to characterize site amplification from a pair of records. Earhq Spectra 13:97–129

    Google Scholar 

  • Shearer PM, Orcutt JA (1987) Surface and near-surface effects on seismic waves: theory and borehole seismometer results. Bull Seismol Soc Am 77:1168–1196

    Google Scholar 

  • Si H, Midoriakwa S (1999) New attenuation relationships for peak ground acceleration and velocity considering effects of fault type and site condition. J Struct Constr Eng (Trans AIJ) 523:63–70 (in Japanese with English abstract)

    Google Scholar 

  • Stafford PJ, Rodriguez-Marek A, Edwards B, Kruiver PP, Bommer JJ (2017) Scenario dependence of linear site-effect factors for short-period response spectral ordinates. Bull Seismol Soc Am 107:2859–2872

    Google Scholar 

  • Stambouli AB, Zendagui D, Bard PY, Derras B (2017) Deriving amplification factors from simple site parameters using generalized regression neural networks: implications for relevant site proxies. Earth Planets Space 69:99. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40623-017-0686-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steidl JH (1993) Variation of site response at the UCSB dense array of portable accelerometers. Earthq Spectra 9:289–302

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart JP, Choi Y, Graves RW, Shaw JH (2005) Uncertainty of Southern California basin depth parameters. Bull Seismol Soc Am 95:1988–1993

    Google Scholar 

  • Süss MP, Shaw JH (2003) P wave seismic velocity structure derived from sonic logs and industry reflection data in the Los Angeles basin, California, J Geophys Res Solid Earth 108(B3):Article no 2170

  • Thompson EM, Baise LG, Kayen RE, Guzina BB (2009) Impediments to predicting site response: seismic property estimation and modeling simplifications. Bull Seismol Soc Am 99:2927–2949

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Houtte C, Drouet S, Cotton F (2011) Analysis of the origins of κ (Kappa) to compute hard rock to rock adjustment factors for GMPEs. Bull Seismol Soc Am 101:2926–2941

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang SY, Shi Y, Jiang WP, Yao EL, Miao Y (2018) Estimating site fundamental period from shear-wave velocity profile. Bull Seismol Soc Am 108:3431–3445

    Google Scholar 

  • Welch PD (1967) The use of fast Fourier transforms for the estimation of power spectra: a method based on time averaging over short modified periodograms. IEEE Trans Audio Electroacoust 15:70–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao JX, Xu H (2013) A comparison of VS30 and site period as site-effect parameters in response spectral ground-motion prediction equations. Bull Seismol Soc Am 103:1–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao JX, Irikura K, Zhang J, Fukushima Y, Somerville PG, Asano A, Ohno Y, Oouchi T, Takahashi T, Ogawa H (2006) An empirical site classification method for strong motion stations in Japan using H/V response spectrum ratio. Bull Seismol Soc Am 96:914–925

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhu C, Cotton F, Pilz M (2019) Testing the depths to 1.0 and 2.5 km/s velocity isosurfaces in a velocity model for Japan and implications for ground-motion modeling. Bull Seismol Soc Am. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120190016

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention (NIED), Japan, for making the site data of KiK-net recording stations, as well as the J-SHIS velocity model easily accessible to the public. The first author thanks Dr. Haitham Dawood for providing the processed KiK-net dataset, and Prof. Yu Miao for providing KiK-net site-period data. This work is supported by the Seismology and Earthquake Engineering Research Infrastructure Alliance for Europe (SERA) project funded by the EU Horizon 2020 Programme under Grant Agreement Number 730900.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences, 14473, Telegrafenberg, Potsdam, Germany

    Chuanbin Zhu, Marco Pilz & Fabrice Cotton

  2. University of Potsdam, Institute for Earth Sciences, Karl-Liebknecht-Str. 24-25, 14476, Potsdam, Germany

    Fabrice Cotton

Authors
  1. Chuanbin Zhu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marco Pilz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fabrice Cotton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chuanbin Zhu.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (XLSX 70 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhu, C., Pilz, M. & Cotton, F. Which is a better proxy, site period or depth to bedrock, in modelling linear site response in addition to the average shear-wave velocity?. Bull Earthquake Eng 18, 797–820 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-019-00738-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-019-00738-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation