1887
Volume 6, Issue 4
  • ISSN: 1569-4445
  • E-ISSN: 1873-0604

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Site amplification of earthquake ground motion can arise from local stratigraphic and morphological conditions. In this respect, a detailed geo‐mechanical 2D model is needed, in particular for peculiar situations such as the ones in Alpine valleys. This paper reports a site characterization case history for seismic response analysis, where a combination of both body and surface wave seismic techniques has been used. In particular, it is shown that synergies and mutual cross‐checking of information lead to a reliable 2D model for site amplification studies.

The evaluation of the deep structure and the location of the seismic bedrock have been obtained through seismic reflection and combined active‐passive surface wave analysis, while the shear‐wave velocity profile of the sediments has been obtained by downhole measurements and surface wave tests. Furthermore, a detailed compressional wave velocity model has been retrieved by tomographic inversion of the first arrivals picked on seismic reflection records. This model is useful for geological interpretation as well as for quality control of the other methods. Surface wave analysis has also been performed on the ground roll of the seismic reflection records. The large amount of profile oriented data has made it possible to reconstruct lateral variations of the shear‐wave velocity in the soil deposit. The final pseudo‐2D shear‐wave velocity model is the product of an innovative inversion approach, based on the integration of the Monte Carlo and laterally constrained least‐squares techniques. In the laterally constrained inversion the shear‐wave velocity profiles obtained from downhole tests and data from passive surface wave measurements have been used to constrain the inversion. This has greatly improved the final solution.

This case history underlines the necessity of combining different seismic techniques to derive an accurate and reliable 2D model for site amplification studies. Through several different and independent analyses of the same seismic records, the cost effectiveness of the whole survey is optimized and a full exploitation of the information contained in the reflection seismic data set is achieved.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2008020
2008-06-01
2024-03-28
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AukenE. and ChristiansenA. V.2004. Layered and laterally constrained 2D inversion of resistivity data. Geophysics69, 752–761.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. BallardR.F.1964. Determination of soil shear moduli at depth by in situ vibratory techniques. U.S. Army waterways experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississipi.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. BoieroD., WisénR. and SoccoL.V.2006. Scale property Monte Carlo driven inversion of surface wave data. Proceeding of Near Surface Geophysics Section of EAGE Helsinki, 2–6 September.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. BakirB. S., SucuoluH. and YilmazT.2002. An overview of local site effects and the associated building damage in Adapazari during the 17 August 1999 Izmit earthquake. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America92, 509–526
    [Google Scholar]
  5. FotiS. and StrobbiaC.2002. Some notes on model parameters for surface wave data inversion. Proceedings of the SAGEEP 2002, Las Vegas, USA, February 10–14.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. FotiS.2005. Surface wave testing for geotechnical characterization. In: Surface Waves in Geomechanics: Direct and Inverse Modelling for Soils and Rocks, (eds C.G.Lai and K.Wilmanski ), pp. 47–71. Springer
    [Google Scholar]
  7. FotiS., LancellottaR., MarchettiD., MonacoP. and TotaniG.2006. Interpretation of SDMT tests in a transversely isotropic medium. Proceeding of the. 2nd International Conference on the Flat Dilatometer, Washington DC, USA, 275–280
    [Google Scholar]
  8. FotiS., CominaC. and BoieroD.2007. Reliability of combined active and passive surface wave methods. RIG (Italian Geotechnical Journal)41, 39–47
    [Google Scholar]
  9. GrandjeanG. and BitriA.2006. 2M‐MASW: Multifold multichannel seismic inversion of local dispersion of Rayleigh waves in laterally heterogeneous subsurface: Application to the Super‐Sauze earthflow, France. Near Surface Geophysics4, 367–375
    [Google Scholar]
  10. KramerS.L.1996. Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering.Prentice‐Hall.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. LaiC.G., FotiS. and RixG.J.2005. Propagation of data uncertainty in surface wave inversion. Journal of Engineering and Environmental Geophysics EEGS10, 219–228.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. LancellottaR.2004. Geotecnica, 3rd edn. Zanichelli, Bologna (in Italian)
    [Google Scholar]
  13. MarosiK.T. and HiltunenD.R.2004. Characterization of SASW phase angle and phase velocity measurement uncertainty. Geotechnical Testing Journal ASTM27, 205–213.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. NoletG. and PanzaG.F.1976. Array analysis of seismic surface waves: Limits and possibilities. Pure and Applied geophysics114, 776–790.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. OkadaH.2003. The microtremor survey method. Geophysical monograph series, number 12, SEG, Tulsa, USA.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. ParkC.B., MillerR.D. and XiaJ.1999. Multichannel analysis of surface waves. Geophysics64, 800–808
    [Google Scholar]
  17. PressW.H., TeukolskyS.A., VetterlingW.T. and FlanneryB.P.1997. Numerical Recipes in Fortran 77. The Art of Scientific Computing,. 2nd edn.. Volume 1 of Fortran Numerical Recipes. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. RichartF.E.Jr., WoodR.D. and HallJ.R.Jr1970. Vibration of Soils and Foundations.Prentice‐Hall.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. SeedH.B., WongR.T., IdrissI.M. and TokimatsuK.1986. Moduli and damping factors for dynamic analyses of cohesionless soils. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering ASCE, 112, 1016–1032,
    [Google Scholar]
  20. SoccoL.V. and StrobbiaC.2004. Surface wave methods for near‐surface characterisation: A tutorial. Near Surface Geophysics2, 165–185
    [Google Scholar]
  21. SoccoL.V., BoieroD., WisénR. and FotiS.2006. Laterally constrained inversion of ground roll of seismic reflection records. 76th SEG meeting, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, Expanded Abstracts, pp. 1441–1445.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. SoccoL.V. and BoieroD.2008. Improved Monte Carlo inversion of surface wave data. Geophysical Prospecting56, 357–371.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. StokoeK.H.II, WrightS.G., BayJ.A. and RoessetJ.M.1994. Characterization of geotechnical sites by SASW method. In: Geophysical Characterization of Sites (ed. R.D.Woods ), pp. 15–25. Oxford & IBH Pub. Co., New Delhi, India.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. TokimatsuK.1995. Geotechnical site characterization using surface waves. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering, IS‐Tokyo ‘95, Tokyo, 1333–1368. Balkema, Rotterdam.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. TselentisG‐A. and ZahradnikJ. 2000. The Athens earthquake of 7 September1999. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America90, 1143–1160
    [Google Scholar]
  26. WisénR. and ChristiansenA. V.2005. Laterally and mutually constrained inversion of surface wave seismic data and resistivity data. Journal of Environmental & Engineering Geophysics10, 251–262.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. WisénR., AukenE. and DahlinT.2005. Combination of 1D laterally constrained inversion and 2D smooth inversion of resistivity data with a priori data from boreholes. Near Surface Geophysics3, 71–79.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. WisénR., SvenssonM. and LindénM.2007. Delineation of an old coal mine in an urban environment with surface wave seismic using a land‐streamer and laterally constrained inversion. Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems. Proceeding of SAGEEP 2007.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. XiaJ., MillerR.D. and ParkC.B.1999. Estimation of near‐surface shear‐wave velocity by inversion of Rayleigh wave. Geophysics64, 691–700
    [Google Scholar]
  30. YilmazÖ., EserM. and BerilgenM.2006. A case study of seismic zonation in municipal areas. The Leading Edge25, 319–330
    [Google Scholar]
  31. YoonS. and RixG.J.2004. Combined active‐passive surface wave measurements for near surface site characterization. SAGEEP 2004, San Antonio, USA, 1556–1564.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. ZywickiD.J.1999. Advanced signal processing methods applied to engineering analysis of seismic surface waves. PhD thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, USA.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. ZywickiD.J. and RixG.J.1999. Frequency wavenumber analysis of passive surface waves. Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems. Proceedings of SAGEEP 1999.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2008020
Loading
/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2008020
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error