Effective input velocity and depth for deep and shallow sites for site response analysis

References

• Abdullah, H.H., Fattah, M.Y., and Abed, A.H., 2018. Determination of liquefaction potential for two selected sites in Kerbala City- Middle of Iraq. International Journal of Engineering & Technology, 7 (1), 25–32. doi:10.14419/ijet.v7i1.8268.
   Google Scholar
• Akin, M.K., Kramer, S.L., and Topal, T., 2016. Dynamic soil characterization and site response estimation for Erbaa, Tokat (Turkey). Nat Hazards, 82 (3), 1833–1868. doi:10.1007/s11069-016-2274-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al–Damluji, O. F., Al–Shakarch, Y. J., and Fattah, M. Y. A. 2002. Coupled Dynamic Response Analysis of a Sand Layer to Earthquake Motion Using the Finite Element Method. Journal of Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Baghdad, 8(2), 213–231.
   Google Scholar
• Anbazhagan, P., et al., 2016. Correlation of densities with shear wave velocities and SPT N values. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering, 13 (3), 320. doi:10.1088/1742-2132/13/3/320.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anbazhagan, P., et al., 2017. Selection of representative shear modulus reduction and damping curves for rock, gravel and sand sites from the KiK-Net downhole array. Nat Hazards, 88 (3), 1741. doi:10.1007/s11069-017-2944-x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anbazhagan, P., Sheikh, M.N., and Parihar, A., 2013. Influence of rock depth on seismic site classification for Shallow Bedrock regions. Natural Hazard Review ASCE, 14 (2), 108–121. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)NH.1527-6996.0000088.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anbazhagan, P. and Sitharam, T.G., 2008. Seismic microzonation of Bangalore. Journal of Earth System Science, 117 (S2), 833–852. doi:10.1007/s12040-008-0071-5.
   Google Scholar
• Ansal, A. and Tonuk, G., 2007. Source and site factors in microzonation. In: K.D. Pitilakis, ed. Earthquake geotechnical engineering, 4th international conference on earthquake geotechnical engineering-invited lectures, Thessaloniki, Greece, 73–92.
   Google Scholar
• Bajaj, K. and Anbazhagan, P., 2018. Determination of GMPE functional form for an active region with limited strong motion data: application to the Himalayan region. Journal of Seismology, 22 (1), 161–185. doi:10.1007/s10950-017-9698-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bajaj, K. and Anbazhagan, P., 2020. Identification of shear modulus reduction and damping curve for deep and shallow sites: KiK-Net data. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, Published Online doi:10.1080/13632469.2019.1643807.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bakir, B.S., Sucuoğlu, H., and Yilmaz, T., 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 America, 92 (1), 509–526. doi:10.1785/0120000819.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barani, S., Ferrari, R.D., and Ferretti, G., 2013. Influence of soil modeling uncertainties on site response. Earthquake Spectra, 29 (3), 705–732. doi:10.1193/1.4000159.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boore, D.M. and Bommer, J.J., 2005. Processing of strong-motion accelerograms: needs, options and consequences. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 25 (2), 93–115. doi:10.1016/j.soildyn.2004.10.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bradley, B.A., 2011. A framework for validation of seismic response analyses using seismometer array recordings. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 31 (3), 512–520. doi:10.1016/j.soildyn.2010.11.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bradley, B.A. and Cubrinovski, M., 2011. Near-source strong ground motions observed in the 22 February 2011 Christchurch earthquake. Seismological Research Letters, 82 (6), 853–865. doi:10.1785/gssrl.82.6.853.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chapman, M.C. and Talwani, P., 2002. Seismic hazard mapping for bridge and highway design, report to the South Carolina department of transportation, Columbia, SC.
   Google Scholar
• Cramer, H., 2006. Quantifying the uncertainty in site amplification modeling and its effects on site-specific seismic-hazard estimation in the upper Mississippi embayment and adjacent areas. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 96 (6), 2008–2020. doi:10.1785/0120060037.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Darendeli, M.B., 2001. Development of a new family of normalized modulus reduction and material damping curves. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas.
   Google Scholar
• Dawood, H.M., et al., 2016. A flatfile for the KiK-net database processed using an automated protocol. Earthquake Spectra, 32 (2), 1281–1302. doi:10.1193/071214eqs106.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). 1993. Guidelines for Site specific ground motions, Palo Alto, California, November, TR-102293.
   Google Scholar
• Fattah, M.Y., Abdullah, H.H., and Abed, A.H., 2018. Ground response analysis for two selected sites in Al-Hilla City in the middle of Iraq. Journal of the University of Babylon for Engineering Sciences, 26 (6), 235–257.
   Google Scholar
• Gardner, G.H.F., Gardner, L.W., and Gregory, A.R., 1974. Formation velocity and density—the diagnostic basics for stratigraphic traps. Geophysics, 39 (6), 770–780. doi:10.1190/1.1440465.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Govindaraju, L. and Bhattacharya, S., 2012. Site-specific earthquake response study for hazard assessment in Kolkata city, India. Natural Hazards, 61 (3), 943–965. doi:10.1007/s11069-011-9940-3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grelle, G. and Guadagno, F.M., 2009. Seismic refraction methodology for groundwater level determination: water seismic index. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 68 (3), 301–320. doi:10.1016/j.jappgeo.2009.02.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hashash, Y.M.A., et al., 2008. Soil-Column depth-dependent seismic site coefficients and hazard maps for the Upper Mississippi embayment. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 98 (4), 2004–2021. doi:10.1785/0120060174.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hashash, Y.M.A., et al., 2017. DEEPSOIL 7.0.5, user manual. Urbana: Board of Trustees of University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
   Google Scholar
• Hashash, Y.M.A. and Park, D., 2001. Non-linear one-dimensional seismic ground motion propagation in the Mississippi embayment. Engineering Geology, 62 (1–3), 185–206. doi:10.1016/S0013-7952(01)00061-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hough, S.E., et al., 2011. Site characterization and site response in Port-Au Prince, Haiti. Earthquake Spectra, 27 (1_suppl1), 137–155. doi:10.1193/1.3637947.
   Google Scholar
• Inazaki, T., 2006. Relationship between S-wave velocities and geotechnical properties of alluvial sediments. In: Proceedings of 19th annual symposium on application of geophysics to engineering and environmental problems (SAGEEP2006), 2-6 April, Seattle, Washington, USA, 1296–1303.
   Google Scholar
• Ishibashi, I. and Zhang, X., 1993. Unified dynamic shear moduli and damping ratios of sand and clay. Soils and Foundations, 33 (1), 182–191. doi:10.3208/sandf1972.33.182.
   Google Scholar
• Kaklamanos, J., et al., 2013. Critical parameters affecting bias and variability in site response analyses using KiK-net downhole array data. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 103 (3), 1733–1749. doi:10.1785/0120120166.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaklamanos, J., et al., 2015. Comparison of 1D linear, equivalent-linear, and nonlinear site response models at six KiK-net validation sites. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 69, 207–219. doi:10.1016/j.soildyn.2014.10.016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar, A., Anbazhagan, P., and Sitharam, T.G., 2012. Site specific ground response study of deep Indo-Gangetic basin using representative regional ground motion. Geo-Congress, State of art and practice in Geotechnical Engineering, Oakland California, Paper No. 1065, 1888–1897
   Google Scholar
• Kwok, A.O.L., Stewart, J.P., and Hashash, Y.M.A., 2008. Nonlinear ground response analysis of Turkey Flat shallow stiff-soil site to strong ground motion. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 98 (1), 331–343. doi:10.1785/0120070009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahajan, A.K., et al., 2007. Methodology for site response studies using multi-channel analysis of surface wave technique in Dehradun city. Current Science, 92 (7), 945–955.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malekmohammadi, M. and Pezeshk, S., 2015. Ground motion site amplification factors for sites located within the Mississippi embayment with consideration of deep soil deposits. Earthquake Spectra, 31 (2), 699–722. doi:10.1193/091712EQS291M.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menq, F.Y., 2003. Dynamic properties of sandy and gravelly soils. Ph.D. thesis. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Texas, Austin, TX.
   Google Scholar
• Omar, M., et al., 2013. Influence of local soil conditions on ground response: site amplification in Sharjah, United Arab Emirates. International Journal of Modern Engineering, 13 (2) Spring/Summer pp. 34–40, USA, .
   Google Scholar
• Park, D. and Hashash, Y.M.A., 2005. Evaluation of seismic site factors in the Mississippi embayment—Part II: probabilistic seismic hazard analysis with nonlinear site effects. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 25 (2), 145–156. doi:10.1016/j.soildyn.2004.10.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park, D., Pezeshk, S., and Hashash, Y., 2004. Nonlinear site response of deep deposits in West Tennessee, In: Proceedings, 4th National Seismic Conference and Workshop on Bridges and Highways, 9–12 February, Memphis, TN.
   Google Scholar
• Pinheiro, J.C. and Bates, D.M., 2000. Mixed-Effects models in S and S-PLUS. New York: Springer-Verlag, 528.
   Google Scholar
• Rollins, K., Evans, M., and Diehl, N.W., 1998. Shear modulus and damping relationships for gravels. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 124 (5), 396–405. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(1998)124:5(396).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seed, H., et al., 1986. Moduli and damping factors for dynamic analyses of cohesionless soils. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 112 (11), 1016–1032. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1986)112:11(1016).
   Google Scholar
• Seed, H.B. and Idriss, I.M., 1970. Soil moduli and damping factors for dynamic response analyses. Technical Report EERRC-70-10, University of California, Berkeley.
   Google Scholar
• Silva, W., 2008. Site response simulations for the PEER-NGA project, report prepared for the Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, E.M., et al., 2012. A taxonomy of site response complexity. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 41, 32–43. doi:10.1016/j.soildyn.2012.04.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vucetic, M. and Dobry, R., 1991. Effect of soil plasticity on cyclic response. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 117 (1), 89 107. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1991)117:1(89).
   Google Scholar
• Yang, Z., Yuan , J., Liu, J., Han, B. , et al., 2017. Shear modulus degradation curves of gravelly and clayey soils based on KiK-Net In Situ seismic observations. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 143 (9), 06017008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, J., Andrus, R., and Juang, C.H., 2005. Normalized shear modulus and material damping ratio relationships. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 131 (4), 453–464. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2005)131:4(453).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar