Site-specific seismic hazard analysis is crucial for designing earthquake resistance structures, particularly in seismically active regions. Shear wave velocity ( VS) is a key parameter in such analysis, although the economy and other factors restrict its direct field measurement in many cases. Various VS–SPT– N correlations are routinely incorporated in seismic hazard analysis to estimate the value of VS. However, many uncertainties question the reliability of these estimated VS values. This paper comes up with a statistical approach to take care of such uncertainties involved in VS calculations. The measured SPT– N values from all the critical boreholes were converted into statistical parameters and passed through various correlations to estimate VS 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 ( VS30) is estimated after accounting for various epistemic and aleatoric uncertainties. The scattering nature of the VS values estimated using different VS– N 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 VS30 using general and soil-specific correlations.
. [J]. Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering, 2021, 15(5): 1199-1208.
Jithin P ZACHARIAH, Ravi S JAKKA. Accounting for the uncertainties in the estimation of average shear wave velocity using VS– N correlations. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2021, 15(5): 1199-1208.
A I Kanlı, P Tildy, Z Prónay, A Pınar, L Hermann. V S30 mapping and soil classification for seismic site effect evaluation in Dinar region, SW Turkey. Geophysical Journal International, 2006, 165( 1): 223– 235 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2006.02882.x
2
Z Wang. A technical note on seismic microzonation in the central United States. Journal of Earth System Science, 2008, 117( S2): 749– 756 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-008-0060-8
3
A Ansal, A Kurtuluş, G Tönük. Seismic microzonation and earthquake damage scenarios for urban areas. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2010, 30( 11): 1319– 1328 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2010.06.004
4
J B Scott, T Rasmussen, B Luke, W J Taylor, J L Wagoner, S B Smith, N Louie. 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 https://doi.org/10.1785/0120050044
5
R Tuladhar, F Yamazaki, P Warnitchai, J Saita. Seismic microzonation of the greater Bangkok area using microtremor observations. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2004, 33( 2): 211– 225 https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.345
6
T Thitimakorn. Seismic microzonation maps of Phrae city, Northern Thailand. Geomatics, Natural Hazards & Risk, 2019, 10( 1): 2276– 2290 https://doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2019.1693705
7
S Rosa-Cintas, D Clavero, J Delgado, C López-Casado, J J Galiana-Merino, J Garrido. 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 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2016.10.016
8
P Anbazhagan, T G Sitharam. Seismic microzonation of Bangalore, India. Journal of Earth System Science, 2008, 117( S2): 833– 852 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-008-0071-5
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
A Bashir, D Basu. Revisiting probabilistic seismic hazard analysis of Gujarat: An assessment of Indian design spectra. Natural Hazards, 2018, 91( 3): 1127– 1164 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-018-3171-9
11
Kramer S L. Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering. Prentice-Hall International Series in Civil Engineering and Engineering Mechanics. Hoboken: Prentice Hall, 1996
12
H B Seed, I M Idriss, I Arango. 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
C Hanumantharao, G V Ramana. Dynamic soil properties for microzonation of Delhi, India. Journal of Earth System Science, 2008, 117( S2): 719– 730 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-008-0066-2
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
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
S H H Lee. Analysis of the multicollinearity of regression equations of shear wave velocities. Soil and Foundation, 1992, 32( 1): 205– 214 https://doi.org/10.3208/sandf1972.32.205
22
K Pitilakis, D Raptakis, K Lontzetidis, T H Tika-Vassilikou, D Jongmans. 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 https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469909350352
23
P Anbazhagan, A Kumar, T G Sitharam. 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 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-012-0525-1
24
Y Ohsaki, R Iwasaki. On dynamic shear moduli and Poisson’s ratios of soil deposits. Soil and Foundation, 1973, 13( 4): 61– 73 https://doi.org/10.3208/sandf1972.13.4_61
25
Y Ohta, N Goto. Empirical shear wave velocity equations in terms of characteristic soil indexes. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 1978, 6( 2): 167– 187 https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290060205
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
S H H Lee. Regression models of shear wave velocities in Taipei (China) basin. Journal of the Chinese Institute of Engineers, 1990, 13( 5): 519– 532 https://doi.org/10.1080/02533839.1990.9677284
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
D W Sykora, K Stokoe. 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
K Yokota, T Imai, M Konno. Dynamic deformation characteristics of soils determined by laboratory tests. OYO Tec Rep, 1981, 3 : 13– 37
31
R Uma Maheswari, A Boominathan, G R Dodagoudar. 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 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-009-9285-9
32
B Kirar, B K Maheshwari, P Muley. 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– https://doi.org/10.1007/s40891-016-0047-5
33
N Roy, A Shiuly, R B Sahu, R S Jakka. Effect of uncertainty in V S− N correlations on seismic site response analysis. Journal of Earth System Science, 2018, 127( 7): 103– https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-018-1007-3
34
P Anbazhagan, T G Sitharam. Mapping of average shear wave velocity for Bangalore region: A case study. Journal of Environmental & Engineering Geophysics, 2008, 13( 2): 69– 84 https://doi.org/10.2113/JEEG13.2.69
35
A Sil, T G Sitharam. 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
N Vu-Bac, T Lahmer, H Keitel, J Zhao, X Zhuang, T Rabczuk. Stochastic predictions of bulk properties of amorphous polyethylene based on molecular dynamics simulations. Mechanics of Materials, 2014, 68 : 70– 84 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmat.2013.07.021
37
B Liu, N Vu-Bac, X Zhuang, T Rabczuk. Stochastic multiscale modeling of heat conductivity of Polymeric clay nanocomposites. Mechanics of Materials, 2020, 142 : 103280– https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmat.2019.103280
38
N Vu-Bac, M Silani, T Lahmer, X Zhuang, T Rabczuk. A unified framework for stochastic predictions of mechanical properties of polymeric nanocomposites. Computational Materials Science, 2015, 96 : 520– 535 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2014.04.066
39
N Vu-Bac, T Lahmer, X Zhuang, T Nguyen-Thoi, T Rabczuk. A software framework for probabilistic sensitivity analysis for computationally expensive models. Advances in Engineering Software, 2016, 100 : 19– 31 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2016.06.005
40
N Vu-Bac, R Rafiee, X Zhuang, T Lahmer, T Rabczuk. Uncertainty quantification for multiscale modeling of polymer nanocomposites with correlated parameters. Composites. Part B, Engineering, 2015, 68 : 446– 464 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2014.09.008
41
Grafarend EW. Linear and Nonlinear Models: Fixed Effects, Random Effects, and Mixed Models. Boulder: Netlibrary, 2007
