Accounting for the uncertainties in the estimation of average shear wave velocity using V SN correlations

Jithin P ZACHARIAH, Ravi S JAKKA

Front. Struct. Civ. Eng. ›› 2021, Vol. 15 ›› Issue (5) : 1199-1208.

PDF(3678 KB)
PDF(3678 KB)
Front. Struct. Civ. Eng. ›› 2021, Vol. 15 ›› Issue (5) : 1199-1208. DOI: 10.1007/s11709-021-0749-1
RESEARCH ARTICLE
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Accounting for the uncertainties in the estimation of average shear wave velocity using V SN correlations

Author information +
History +

Abstract

Site-specific seismic hazard analysis is crucial for designing earthquake resistance structures, particularly in seismically active regions. Shear wave velocity ( V S) is a key parameter in such analysis, although the economy and other factors restrict its direct field measurement in many cases. Various V S–SPT– N correlations are routinely incorporated in seismic hazard analysis to estimate the value of V S. However, many uncertainties question the reliability of these estimated V S values. This paper comes up with a statistical approach to take care of such uncertainties involved in V S calculations. The measured SPT– N values from all the critical boreholes were converted into statistical parameters and passed through various correlations to estimate V S at different depths. The effect of different soil layers in the boreholes on the Vs estimation was also taken into account. Further, the average shear wave velocity of the top 30 m soil cover ( V S30) is estimated after accounting for various epistemic and aleatoric uncertainties. The scattering nature of the V S values estimated using different V SN correlations was reduced significantly with the application of the methodology. Study results further clearly demonstrated the potential of the approach to eliminate various uncertainties involved in the estimation of V S30 using general and soil-specific correlations.

Graphical abstract

Keywords

uncertainties / V SN correlations / V S30 / SPT data / statistical methodology

Cite this article

Download citation ▾
Jithin P ZACHARIAH, Ravi S JAKKA. Accounting for the uncertainties in the estimation of average shear wave velocity using V SN correlations. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2021, 15(5): 1199‒1208 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-021-0749-1

References

[1]
Kanlı A I, Tildy P, Prónay Z, Pınar A, Hermann L. V S30 mapping and soil classification for seismic site effect evaluation in Dinar region, SW Turkey. Geophysical Journal International, 2006, 165( 1): 223– 235
CrossRef Google scholar
[2]
Wang Z. A technical note on seismic microzonation in the central United States. Journal of Earth System Science, 2008, 117( S2): 749– 756
CrossRef Google scholar
[3]
Ansal A, Kurtuluş A, Tönük G. Seismic microzonation and earthquake damage scenarios for urban areas. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2010, 30( 11): 1319– 1328
CrossRef Google scholar
[4]
Scott J B, Rasmussen T, Luke B, Taylor W J, Wagoner J L, Smith S B, Louie N. Shallow shear velocity and seismic microzonation of the urban Las Vegas, Nevada, basin. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 2006, 96( 3): 1068– 1077
CrossRef Google scholar
[5]
Tuladhar R, Yamazaki F, Warnitchai P, Saita J. Seismic microzonation of the greater Bangkok area using microtremor observations. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2004, 33( 2): 211– 225
CrossRef Google scholar
[6]
Thitimakorn T. Seismic microzonation maps of Phrae city, Northern Thailand. Geomatics, Natural Hazards & Risk, 2019, 10( 1): 2276– 2290
CrossRef Google scholar
[7]
Rosa-Cintas S, Clavero D, Delgado J, López-Casado C, Galiana-Merino J J, Garrido J. Characterization of the shear wave velocity in the metropolitan area of Málaga (S Spain) using the H/V technique. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2017, 92 : 433– 442
CrossRef Google scholar
[8]
Anbazhagan P, Sitharam T G. Seismic microzonation of Bangalore, India. Journal of Earth System Science, 2008, 117( S2): 833– 852
CrossRef Google scholar
[9]
Kumar S S, Krishna A M, Dey A. Nonlinear site-specific ground response analysis: case study of Amingaon, Guwahati. In: 15th symposium on earthquake engineering. Department of Earthquake Engineering, India: IIT Roorkee, 2014
[10]
Bashir A, Basu D. Revisiting probabilistic seismic hazard analysis of Gujarat: An assessment of Indian design spectra. Natural Hazards, 2018, 91( 3): 1127– 1164
CrossRef Google scholar
[11]
Kramer S L. Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering. Prentice-Hall International Series in Civil Engineering and Engineering Mechanics. Hoboken: Prentice Hall, 1996
[12]
Seed H B, Idriss I M, Arango I. Evaluation of liquefaction potential using field performance data. Manager, 1983, 109( 3): 458– 482
[13]
Singh M, Duggal S K, Pallav K, Sharma K K. Correlation of shear wave velocity with standard penetration resistance value for Allahabad city. In: Advances in Computer Methods and Geomechanics: IACMAG Symposium 2019. Gandhinagar: Springer, 2020
[14]
Seed H B, Idriss I M. Evaluation of liquefaction potential sand deposits based on observation of performance in previous earthquakes. In: ASCE national convention (MO). St Louis: American Society of Civil Engineers, 1981, 81–544
[15]
Hanumantharao C, Ramana G V. Dynamic soil properties for microzonation of Delhi, India. Journal of Earth System Science, 2008, 117( S2): 719– 730
CrossRef Google scholar
[16]
Imai T, Yoshimura M. The Relation of Mechanical Properties of Soils to P and S Wave Velocities for Soil Ground in Japan. Tokyo: Urana Research Institute, OYO Corporation, 1976
[17]
Lee C T, Tsai B R. Mapping V S30 in Taiwan, China. Journal of Terrestrial, Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, 2008, 19( 6): 671– 682
CrossRef Google scholar
[18]
Seed H B, Idriss I M, Arango I. Evaluation of liquefaction potential using field performance data. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 1983, 109( 3): 458– 482
CrossRef Google scholar
[19]
Pitilakis K D, Anastassiadis D, Raptakis D. Field and laboratory determination of dynamic properties of natural soil deposits. In: Proceedings of the Tenth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Madrid: CRC Press, 1992, 1275–1280
[20]
Okamoto T, Kokusho T, Yoshida Y, Kusuonoki K. Comparison of surface versus subsurface wave source for P–S logging in sand layer. In: Proceedings of the 44th Annual Conference. Japan Society of Civil Engineers, 1989
[21]
Lee S H H. Analysis of the multicollinearity of regression equations of shear wave velocities. Soil and Foundation, 1992, 32( 1): 205– 214
CrossRef Google scholar
[22]
Pitilakis K, Raptakis D, Lontzetidis K, Tika-Vassilikou T H, Jongmans D. Geotechnical and geophysical description of euro-seistest, using field, laboratory tests and moderate strong motion recordings. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 1999, 3( 3): 381– 409
CrossRef Google scholar
[23]
Anbazhagan P, Kumar A, Sitharam T G. Seismic site classification and correlation between standard penetration test N value and shear wave velocity for Lucknow City in Indo-Gangetic Basin. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 2013, 170( 3): 299– 318
CrossRef Google scholar
[24]
Ohsaki Y, Iwasaki R. On dynamic shear moduli and Poisson’s ratios of soil deposits. Soil and Foundation, 1973, 13( 4): 61– 73
CrossRef Google scholar
[25]
Ohta Y, Goto N. Empirical shear wave velocity equations in terms of characteristic soil indexes. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 1978, 6( 2): 167– 187
CrossRef Google scholar
[26]
Imai T, Tonouchi K. Correlation of N value with S-wave velocity and shear modulus. In: Proceedings of the Second European Symposium on Penetration Testing. Amsterdam: CRC Press, 1982, 67–72
[27]
Lee S H H. Regression models of shear wave velocities in Taipei (China) basin. Journal of the Chinese Institute of Engineers, 1990, 13( 5): 519– 532
CrossRef Google scholar
[28]
Athanasopoulos G A. Empirical correlations Vso-NSPT for soils of Greece: A comparative study of reliability. In: Seventh International Conference on Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering (SDEE 95). Crete: Computational Mechanics Publications, 1995, 19–26
[29]
Sykora D W, Stokoe K. Correlations of in situ measurements in sands of shear wave velocity, soil characteristics, and site conditions. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 1983, 20 : 125– 136
[30]
Yokota K, Imai T, Konno M. Dynamic deformation characteristics of soils determined by laboratory tests. OYO Tec Rep, 1981, 3 : 13– 37
[31]
Uma Maheswari R, Boominathan A, Dodagoudar G R. Use of surface waves in statistical correlations of shear wave velocity and penetration resistance of Chennai soils. Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, 2010, 28( 2): 119– 137
CrossRef Google scholar
[32]
Kirar B, Maheshwari B K, Muley P. Correlation between shear wave velocity ( V S) and SPT resistance ( N) for Roorkee region. International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering, 2016, 2( 1): 9–
CrossRef Google scholar
[33]
Roy N, Shiuly A, Sahu R B, Jakka R S. Effect of uncertainty in V S− N correlations on seismic site response analysis. Journal of Earth System Science, 2018, 127( 7): 103–
CrossRef Google scholar
[34]
Anbazhagan P, Sitharam T G. Mapping of average shear wave velocity for Bangalore region: A case study. Journal of Environmental & Engineering Geophysics, 2008, 13( 2): 69– 84
CrossRef Google scholar
[35]
Sil A, Sitharam T G. Dynamic site characterization and correlation of shear wave velocity with standard penetration test ‘ N’ values for the city of Agartala, Tripura state, India. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 2014, 171( 8): 1859– 1876
[36]
Vu-Bac N, Lahmer T, Keitel H, Zhao J, Zhuang X, Rabczuk T. Stochastic predictions of bulk properties of amorphous polyethylene based on molecular dynamics simulations. Mechanics of Materials, 2014, 68 : 70– 84
CrossRef Google scholar
[37]
Liu B, Vu-Bac N, Zhuang X, Rabczuk T. Stochastic multiscale modeling of heat conductivity of Polymeric clay nanocomposites. Mechanics of Materials, 2020, 142 : 103280–
CrossRef Google scholar
[38]
Vu-Bac N, Silani M, Lahmer T, Zhuang X, Rabczuk T. A unified framework for stochastic predictions of mechanical properties of polymeric nanocomposites. Computational Materials Science, 2015, 96 : 520– 535
CrossRef Google scholar
[39]
Vu-Bac N, Lahmer T, Zhuang X, Nguyen-Thoi T, Rabczuk T. A software framework for probabilistic sensitivity analysis for computationally expensive models. Advances in Engineering Software, 2016, 100 : 19– 31
CrossRef Google scholar
[40]
Vu-Bac N, Rafiee R, Zhuang X, Lahmer T, Rabczuk T. Uncertainty quantification for multiscale modeling of polymer nanocomposites with correlated parameters. Composites. Part B, Engineering, 2015, 68 : 446– 464
CrossRef Google scholar
[41]
Grafarend EW. Linear and Nonlinear Models: Fixed Effects, Random Effects, and Mixed Models. Boulder: Netlibrary, 2007
[42]
FEMA. NEHRP Recommended Seismic Provisions. Fema, 2009, P-750: 406
[43]
IS. (Part 1) (2002) 7.11 Deformations. Earthquake Resistant Engineering Structures, 1893, 1893: 27

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2021 Higher Education Press 2021.
AI Summary AI Mindmap
PDF(3678 KB)

Accesses

Citations

Detail

Sections
Recommended

/