Downhole arrays provide enhanced understanding of dynamic soil behavior and site response. Historically, downhole array recordings have been available only for earthquakes with relatively limited durations. New recordings from a number of KiK-net downhole arrays during the 11 March 2011, Mw 9.0, subduction zone earthquake near the east coast of Honshu, Japan, allow us to investigate dynamic soil characteristics and site response due to long-duration subduction zone earthquakes. Using these recordings, we perform one-dimensional site response analyses to evaluate the applicability of commonly used analysis approaches under long-duration earthquakes. We find that site response analyses capture key features of measured surface response spectra particularly at soft rock/stiff soil sites subject to long-duration motion. However, at softer soil sites, it appears that the modulus reduction is overestimated and site-specific characterization is needed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), 1985. Cycle counting in fatigue analysis. Annual Book of ASTM Standards; vol. 03.01., Designation E1049-85.
2.
BommerJ.J., HancockJ., and AlarcónJ.E., 2006. Correlations between duration and number of effective cycles of earthquake ground motion, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering26, 1–13.
3.
BommerJ. J., StaffordP. J., and AlarcónJ. E., 2009. Empirical equations for the prediction of the significant, bracketed, and uniform duration of earthquake ground motion, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America99, 3217–3233.
4.
BonillaL. F., TsudaK., PulidoN., RegnierJ., and LaurendeauA., 2011. Nonlinear site response evidence of K-NET and KiK-net records from the 2011 off the Pacific coast of Tohoku earthquake, Earth, Planets and Space63, 785–789.
5.
DarendeliM. B., 2001. Development of a New Family of Normalized Modulus Reduction and Material Damping Curves, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Texas at Austin, 362 pp.
6.
DobryR., PierceW. G., DyvikR., ThomasG. E., and LaddR. S., 1985. Pore Pressure Model for Cyclic Straining of Sand, Department of Civil Engineering, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY.
7.
Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), 1993. Guidelines for Determining Design Basis Ground Motions, Palo Alto, CA.
8.
HanksT. C., and KanamoriH., 1979. A moment magnitude scale, Journal of Geophysical Research B: Solid Earth84, 2348–2350.
9.
HashashY. M. A., GroholskiD., MusgroveM., ParkD., PhillipsC., and TsaiC.-C., 2011. Deepsoil V5.0 Manual and Tutorial, Board of Trustees of University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL.
10.
HashashY. M. A., and ParkD., 2001. Nonlinear one-dimensional seismic ground motion propagation in the Mississippi embayment, Engineering Geology62, 185–206.
11.
IshiharaK., LysmerJ., YasudaS., and HiraoH., 1976. Prediction of liquefaction in sand deposits during earthquakes, Soils and Foundations16, 1–16.
12.
KramerS. L., 1996. Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J., xviii, 653 pp.
13.
KwokA. O. L., StewartJ. P., and HashashY. M. A., 2008. Nonlinear ground-response analysis of Turkey Flat shallow stiff-soil site to strong ground motion, Bulletin of Seismological Society of America98, 331–343.
14.
MatasovicN., 1993. Seismic Response of Composite Horizontally-Layered Soil Deposits, Ph.D. Thesis, University of California, Los Angeles, 452 pp.
15.
MatasovicN., and VuceticM., 1993. Cyclic characterization of liquefiable sands, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, 119, 1805–1822.
16.
MoyaA., AguirreJ., and IrikuraK., 2000. Inversion of source parameters and site effects from strong ground motion records using genetic algorithms, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America90, 977–992.
PechA., Sánchez-SesmaF. J., SniederR., Ignacio-CaballeroF., Rodríguez-CastellanosA., and Ortíz-AlemánJ. C., 2012. Estimate of shear wave velocity, and its time-lapse change, from seismic data recorded at the SMNH01 station of KiK-net using seismic interferometry, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering39, 128–137.
19.
PhillipsC., and HashashY. M. A., 2009. Damping formulation for nonlinear 1-D site response analyses, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering29, 1143–1158.
20.
SatoT., GravesR. W., SomervilleP. G., and KataokaS., 1998. Estimates of regional and local strong motions during the great 1923 Kanto, Japan, earthquake (Ms 8.2). Part 2: forward simulation of seismograms using variable-slip rupture models and estimation of near-fault long-period ground motions, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America88, 206–227.
21.
SeedH. B., and IdrissI. M., 1969. Influence of soil conditions on ground motions during earthquakes, J Soil Mech Found Div, ASCE, 95, 99–137.
22.
StaffordP. J., and BommerJ. J., 2009. Empirical equations for the prediction of the equivalent number of cycles of earthquake ground motion, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering29, 1425–1436.
23.
TonouchiK., SakayamaT., and ImaiT., 1983. S wave velocity in the ground and the damping factor, Bulletin of the International Association of Engineering Geology (Bulletin de l'Association Internationale de Géologie de l'Ingénieur)26–27, 327–333.
VuceticM., and DobryR., 1988. Cyclic triaxial strain-controlled testing of liquefiable sands, in Advanced Triaxial Testing of Soil and Rock, ASTM STP 977, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, 475–485.
26.
VuceticM., and DobryR., 1991. Effect of soil plasticity on cyclic response, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering117, 87–107.
27.
YeeE., StewartJ. P., and TokimatsuK., 2011. Nonlinear Site Response and Seismic Compression at Vertical Array Strongly Shaken by 2007 Niigata-ken Chuetsu-oki Earthquake, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley.
