Shear-wave velocity profiles from California, Taiwan, and Japan are used to evaluate the regionalized linear VS30 scaling in the recent NGA-West2 GMPEs. Profiles in the same VS30 range are compared, and their differences and similarities are discussed. A simple parametric model for the median velocity profile and its standard deviation is provided for California and Japan. The model should only be used for 250 ≤ VS30 ≤ 850 m/s, representing the range of profile data availability. We make the following recommendation: for site-specific evaluations, knowledge of VS30 alone is insufficient. A representative velocity profile should be constructed either from site-specific measurements or from measured profiles in a similar geological settings and depositional environment. The representative velocity profile should be consistent with one of the proposed profiles in terms of both its median and standard deviation, for the corresponding VS30 model in the GMPE to be used, regardless of true geographical association.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbrahamsonN., and SilvaW., 2008. Summary of the Abrahamson & Silva NGA ground-motion relations, Earthquake Spectra24, 67–97.
2.
AbrahamsonN., SilvaW., and KamaiR., 2013. Update of the AS08 Ground-Motion Prediction Equations Based on the NGA-West2 Data Set, PEER Report No. 2013/04, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley.
3.
AbrahamsonN. A., SilvaW. J., and KamaiR., 2014. Summary of the ASK14 ground motion relation for active crustal regions, Earthquake Spectra30, 1025–1055.
4.
AkiK., and RichardsP. G., 2002. Quantitative Seismology, University Science Books, Mill Valley, CA, 700 pp.
5.
Al AtikL., AbrahamsonN., BommerJ. J., ScherbaumF., CottonF., and KuehnN., 2010. The variability of ground-motion prediction models and its components, Seismological Research Letters81, 794–801.
6.
AnchetaT. D., DarraghR. B., StewartJ. P., SeyhanE., SilvaW. J., ChiouB., WooddellK. E., GravesR. W., KottkeA. R., BooreD. M., KishidaT., and DonahueJ. L., 2013. NGA-West2 Database, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA.
7.
AnchetaT. D., DarraghR. B., StewartJ. P., SeyhanE., SilvaW. J., ChiouB., WooddellK. E., GravesR. W., KottkeA. R., BooreD. M., KishidaT., and DonahueJ. L., 2014. NGA-West2 database, Earthquake Spectra30, 989–1005.
8.
AndersonJ. G., 2007. 4.18—Physical processes that control strong ground motion, in Treatise on Geophysics (SchubertG., editor), Elsevier, Amsterdam, 513–565.
9.
AndersonJ. G., and HoughS. E., 1984. A model for the shape of the Fourier amplitude spectrum of acceleration at high frequencies, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America74, 1969–1993.
10.
AndersonJ. G., LeeY., ZengY., and DayS., 1996. Control of strong motion by the upper 30 meters, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America86, 1749–1759.
11.
BooreD. M., and AtkinsonG. M., 2008. Ground-motion prediction equations for the average horizontal component of PGA, PGV, and 5%-damped PSA at spectral periods between 0.01 s 10.0 s, Earthquake Spectra24, 99–138.
12.
BooreD. M., JoynerW. B., and FumalT. E., 1993. Estimation of Response Spectra and Peak Accelerations from Western North American Earthquakes: An Interim Report, U.S. Geological Survey, OPR 93–509.
13.
BooreD. M., JoynerW. B., and FumalT. E., 1997. Equations for estimating horizontal response spectra and peak acceleration from western North American earthquakes: a summary of recent work, Seismological Research Letters68, 128–153.
14.
BooreD. M., StewartJ. P., SeyhanE., and AtkinsonG., 2013. NGA-West2 Equations for Predicting Response Spectral Accelerations for Shallow Crustal Earthquakes, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley.
15.
BooreD. M., StewartJ. P., SeyhanE., and AtkinsonG., 2014. NGA-West2 equations for predicting PGA, PGV, and 5% damped PSA for shallow crustal earthquakes, Earthquake Spectra30, 1057–1085.
16.
BooreD. M., ThompsonE. M., and CadetH., 2011. Regional correlations of VS30 and velocities averaged over depths less than and greater than 30 meters, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America101, 3046–3059.
17.
BorcherdtR. D., 1970. Effects of local geology on ground motion near San Francisco Bay, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America60, 29–61.
18.
BorcherdtR. D., 1994. Estimates of site-dependent response spectra for design (methodology and justification), Earthquake Spectra10, 617–653.
19.
BorcherdtR. D., and GibbsJ. F., 1976. Effects of local geological conditions in San Francisco Bay region on ground motions and intensities of 1906 earthquake, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America66, 467–500.
20.
BorcherdtR. D., GibbsJ. F., and FumalT. E., 1979. Progress on ground motion predictions for the San Francisco Bay region, California, U.S. Geological Survey Circular807, 13–25.
21.
CadetH., BardP.-Y., DuvalA.-M., and BertrandE., 2012. Site effect assessment using KiK-NET data: part 2—site amplification prediction equation based on f0 and Vsz, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering10, 451–489.
22.
CampbellK. W., 1985. Strong motion attenuation relations: A ten-year perspective, Earthquake Spectra1, 759–804.
23.
CampbellK. W., 1997. Empirical near-source attenuation relationships for horizontal and vertical components of peak ground acceleration, peak ground velocity, and pseudo-absolute acceleration response spectra, Seismological Research Letters68, 154–179.
24.
CampbellK. W., and BozorgniaY., 2008. NGA ground motion model for the geometric mean horizontal component of PGA, PGV, PGD and 5% damped linear elastic response spectra for periods ranging from 0.01 to 10 s, Earthquake Spectra24, 139–171.
25.
CampbellK. W., and BozorgniaY., 2013. NGA-West2 Campbell-Bozorgnia Ground Motion Model for the Horizontal Components of PGA, PGV, and 5%-Damped Elastic Pseudo-Acceleration Response Spectra for Periods Ranging from 0.01 to 10 sec, PEER Report 2013/06, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA.
26.
CampbellK. W., and BozorgniaY., 2014. Summary of the CB14 ground motion prediction equation for active crustal regions, Earthquake Spectra30, 1087–1115.
27.
CastellaroS., and MulargiaF., 2014. Simplified seismic soil classification: the Vfz matrix, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering12, 735–754.
28.
ChiouB.-J., and YoungsR. R., 2008. An NGA model for the average horizontal component of peak ground motion and response spectra, Earthquake Spectra24, 173–215.
29.
ChiouB., DarraghR., GregorN., and SilvaW., 2008. NGA project strong-motion database, Earthquake Spectra24, 23–44.
30.
ChiouB., and YoungsR., 2013. Update of the Chiou and Youngs NGA Ground Motion Model for Average Horizontal Component of Peak Ground Motion and Response Spectra, PEER Report 2013/07, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA.
31.
ChiouB., and YoungsR., 2014. Update of the Chiou and Youngs NGA Model for the Average Horizontal Component of Peak Ground Motion and Response Spectra, Earthquake Spectra30, 1117–1153.
32.
Di AlessandroC., BonillaL. F., BooreD. M., RovelliA., and ScottiO., 2012. Predominant-period site classification for response spectra prediction equations in Italy, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America102, 680–695.
33.
FieldE., and JacobK., 1993. The theoretical response of sedimentary layers to ambient seismic noise, Geophysical Research Letters20, 2925–2928.
34.
FieldE. H., and JacobK. H., 1995. A comparison and test of various site-response estimation techniques, including three that are not reference-site dependent, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America85, 1127–1143.
35.
FumalT., and TinsleyJ., 1985. Mapping shear-wave velocities of near-surface geologic materials, Evaluating earthquake hazards in the Los Angeles region: an earth-science perspective, U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper1360, 101–126.
36.
IdrissI. M., 2008. An NGA empirical model for estimating the horizontal spectral values generated by shallow crustal earthquakes, Earthquake Spectra24, 217–242.
37.
IdrissI. M., 2013. NGA-West2 Model for Estimating Average Horizontal Values of Pseudo-Absolute Spectral Accelerations Generated by Crustal Earthquakes, PEER Report 2013/08, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley.
38.
IdrissI. M., 2014. An NGA-West2 empirical model for estimating the horizontal spectral values generated by shallow crustal earthquakes, Earthquake Spectra30, 1155–1177.
39.
JoynerW. B., and BooreD. M., 1981. Peak horizontal acceleration and velocity from strong-motion records including records from the 1979 imperial valley, California, earthquake, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America71, 2011–2038.
40.
KamaiR., AbrahamsonN., and SilvaW., 2013. Nonlinear Horizontal Site Response for the NGA-West2 Project, PEER Report 2013/12, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA.
41.
KamaiR., AbrahamsonN., and SilvaW., 2014. Nonlinear horizontal site amplification for constraining the NGA-West2 GMPEs, Earthquake Spectra30, 1223–1240.
42.
KuoC. H., WenK. L., HsiehH. H., LinC. M., ChangT. M., and KuoK. W., 2012. Site Classification and Vs30 estimation of free-field TSMIP stations using the logging data of EGDT, Engineering Geology129–130, 68–75.
43.
LuziL., PugliaR., PacorF., GallipoliM. R., BindiD., and MucciarelliM., 2011. Proposal for a soil classification based on parameters alternative or complementary to Vs(,30), Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering9, 1877–1898.
44.
MagistraleH., DayS., ClaytonR.W., and GravesR., 2000. The SCEC Southern California Reference Three-Dimensional Seismic Velocity Model Version 2, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America90, S65–S76.
45.
MartinG. R., and DobryR., 1994. Earthquake site response and seismic code provisions, NCEER Bulletin8, 1–6.
46.
MatasovicN., and HashashY., 2012. NCHRP Synthesis 428: Practices and Procedures for Site-Specific Evaluations of Earthquake Ground Motions, National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
47.
McGuireR. K., 1978. Seismic ground motion parameter relations, Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division104, 481–490.
48.
NakamuraY., 2000. Clear identification of fundamental idea of Nakamura's technique and its applications, Proceedings of the 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland New Zealand.
49.
RathjeE., and NavidiS., 2013. Identification of Site Parameters that Improve Predictions of Site Amplifications, PEER Report 2013/18, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley.
50.
RathjeE. M., KottkeA. R., and TrentW. L., 2010. Influence of input motion and site property variabilities on seismic site response analysis, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering136, 607–619.
51.
RégnierJ., BonillaL. F., BertrandE., and SemblatJ. F., 2014. Influence of the VS profiles beyond 30 m depth on linear site effects: Assessment from the KiK-net data, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America104, 2337–2348.
52.
RégnierJ., CadetH., BonillaL. F., BertrandE., and SemblatJ. F., 2013. Assessing nonlinear behavior of soils in seismic site response: Statistical analysis on KiK-net strong-motion data, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America103, 1750–1770.
53.
SadighK., ChangC. Y., EganJ. A., MakdisiF., and YoungsR. R., 1997. Attenuation relationships for shallow crustal earthquakes based on California strong motion data, Seismological Research Letters68, 180–189.
54.
SchnabelP. B., LysmerJ., and SeedH. B., 1972. SHAKE: A computer program for earthquake response analysis of horizontally layered sites, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley.
55.
SeyhanE., and StewartJ. P., 2014. Semi-empirical nonlinear site amplification from NGA-West 2 data and simulations, Earthquake Spectra30, 1241–1256.
56.
SeyhanE., StewartJ. P., AnchetaT. D., DarraghR. B., and GravesR. W., 2014. NGA-West 2 site database, Earthquake Spectra30, 1007–1024.
57.
ThompsonE. M., BaiseL. G., TanakaY., and KayenR. E., 2012. A taxonomy of site response complexity, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering41, 32–43.
58.
ToroG. R., 1995. Probablistic Models of Site Velocity Profiles for Generic and Site-Specific Ground-Motion Amplification Studies, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY.
59.
WaldD. J., and AllenT. I., 2007. Topographic slope as a proxy for seismic site conditions and amplification, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America97, 1379–1395.
60.
WallingM., SilvaW., and AbrahamsonN., 2008. Nonlinear site amplification factors for constraining the NGA models, Earthquake Spectra24, 243–255.
61.
WillsC., and ClahanK., 2006. Developing a map of geologically defined site-condition categories for California, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America96, 1483–1501.
62.
YongA., HoughS. E., IwahashiJ., and BravermanA., 2012. A terrain-based site-conditions map of California with implications for the contiguous United States, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America102, 114–128.
63.
ZaslavskyY., ShapiraA., and ArziA. A., 2000. Amplification effects from earthquakes and ambient noise in the Dead Sea rift (Israel), Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering20, 187–207.
64.
ZhaoJ. X., IrikuraK., ZhangJ., FukushimaY., SomervilleP. G., AsanoA., OhnoY., OouchiT., TakahashiT., and OgawaH., 2006. An empirical site-classification method for strong-motion stations in Japan using H/V response spectral ratio, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America96, 914–925.
65.
ZhaoJ. X., and XuH., 2013. A comparison of VS30 and site period as site-effect parameters in response spectral ground-motion prediction equations, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America103, 1–18.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
