Evaluation of 1-D Seismic Site Response Analysis and Design of Acceleration Spectra for Different Site Conditions

Document Type : Research Article


Departments of Civil Engineering, Sirjan University of Technology, Sirjan, Iran.


Understanding how regional geology and soil conditions affect the intensity of ground shaking is one of the fundamental tasks of seismology and earthquake engineering. As a result, it is necessary to explore a wide range of features, including material, nonlinearity, and different non-linear models. In this study, five different earthquake models with peak accelerations ranging from 0.01 to 0.8g are used to examine the impact of the local site on design parameters. This study uses three different types of recorded ground motions, with maximum accelerations between 0.001 and 0.1g (type I), 0.1 and 0.3g (type II), and 0.3 and 0.8g. (type III). Downhole tests in four bore-holes in the Hormozgan province were used to assess wave shear velocity (Vs) for this purpose. To determine soil parameters, various tests such as sieve or hydrometer and atterberg limits were performed on samples. The results showed that a larger frequency band is caused by increased soil cohesiveness and that the frequency band's increase enhances the possibility of resonance. Based on the results, it is clear that the non-linear method provides a more comprehensive explanation of true non-linearity in soil behavior than equivalent-linear approaches. This study tends to support the idea that site analysis is essential for significant projects and that response analysis should be performed on each identified site.


Main Subjects

  1. NP-5747, Soil response to earthquake ground motion, EPRI, Electric Power Research Institute (1991) 293.
  2. L. Kramer, Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, Prentice Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, (1996).
  3. Lanzo, Risposta, sismica locale aspetti geotecnici della progettazione in zone sismiche, Linee Guida AGI (in Italian), (2005).
  4. Yu, J.G. Anderson, R. Siddharthan, On the characteristics of nonlinear soil response, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 83(1) (1993) 218-244.
  5. Rodriguez-Marek, J.D. Bray, N.A. Abrahamson, An empirical geotechnical seismic site response procedure, Earthquake Spectra, 17(1) (2001) 65-87.
  6. D. Frankel, D.L. Carver, R.A. Williams, Nonlinear and linear site response and basin effects in Seattle for the M 6.8 Nisqually, Washington, earthquake, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 92(6) (2002) 2090-2109.
  7. Amadio, M. Fragiacomo, S. Rajgelj, The effects of repeated earthquake ground motions on the non‐linear response of SDOF systems, Earthquake engineering & structural dynamics, 32(2) (2003) 291-308.
  8. -G. Sun, D.-S. Kim, C.-K. Chung, Geologic site conditions and site coefficients for estimating earthquake ground motions in the inland areas of Korea, Engineering Geology, 81(4) (2005) 446-469.
  9. E. Mohamedzein, J. Abdalla, A. Abdelwahab, Site response and earthquake design spectra for central Khartoum, Sudan, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 4(3) (2006) 277.
  10. Cavallaro, S. Grasso, M. Maugeri, Site Response Analysis for Tito Scalo Area (PZ) in the Basilicata Region, Italy, in: Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics IV, 2008, pp. 1-11.
  11. J. Yang, U. Dutta, G. Xu, K. Hazirbaba, E.E. Marx, Numerical analysis of permafrost effects on the seismic site response, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 31(3) (2011) 282-290.
  12. Phanikanth, D. Choudhury, G.R. Reddy, Equivalent-linear seismic ground response analysis of some typical sites in Mumbai, Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, 29(6) (2011) 1109.
  13. Goda, Nonlinear response potential of mainshock–aftershock sequences from Japanese earthquakes, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 102(5) (2012) 2139-2156.
  14. Héloïse, P.-Y. Bard, A. Rodriguez-Marek, Site effect assessment using KiK-net data: Part 1. A simple correction procedure for surface/downhole spectral ratios, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 10(2) (2012) 421-448.
  15. Zahedi-Khameneh, R.J. Scherer, M. Zaré, A non-parametric wave type based model for real-time prediction of strong ground motion accelerogram, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 49 (2013) 181-196.
  16. -H. Zhai, W.-P. Wen, Z. Chen, S. Li, L.-L. Xie, Damage spectra for the mainshock–aftershock sequence-type ground motions, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 45 (2013) 1-12.
  17. Nimtaj, M.H. Bagheripour, Non-linear seismic response analysis of the layered soil deposit using hybrid frequency–time domain (HFTD) approach, European journal of environmental and civil engineering, 17(10) (2013) 1039-1056.
  18. Nagashima, S. Matsushima, H. Kawase, F.J. Sánchez‐Sesma, T. Hayakawa, T. Satoh, M. Oshima, Application of horizontal‐to‐vertical spectral ratios of earthquake ground motions to identify subsurface structures at and around the K‐NET site in Tohoku, Japan, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 104(5) (2014) 2288-2302.
  19. Han, Y. Li, J. van de Lindt, Impact of aftershocks and uncertainties on the seismic evaluation of non-ductile reinforced concrete frame buildings, Engineering Structures, 100 (2015) 149-163.
  20. M. Hashash, S. Dashti, M.I. Romero, M. Ghayoomi, M. Musgrove, Evaluation of 1-D seismic site response modeling of sand using centrifuge experiments, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 78 (2015) 19-31.
  21. Stamati, N. Klimis, T. Lazaridis, Evidence of complex site effects and soil non-linearity numerically estimated by 2D vs 1D seismic response analyses in the city of Xanthi, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 87 (2016) 101-115.
  22. Rong, Z. Wang, E.W. Woolery, Y. Lyu, X. Li, S. Li, Nonlinear site response from the strong ground-motion recordings in western China, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 82 (2016) 99-110.
  23. Roy, A. Shiuly, R. Sahu, R.S. Jakka, Effect of uncertainty in Vs_ N correlations on seismic site response analysis, Journal of Earth System Science, 127(7) (2018) 1-21.
  24. Gobbi, L. Lenti, M.P. Santisi d’Avila, J.-F. Semblat, P. Reiffsteck, Influence of the variability of soil profile properties on weak and strong seismic response, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 135 (2020) 106200.
  25. Roy, S. Mukherjee, R.B. Sahu, Influence of trapped soft/stiff soil layer in seismic site response analysis, Journal of Earth System Science, 129(1) (2020) 1-19.
  26. Bajaj, P. Anbazhagan, Effective input velocity and depth for deep and shallow sites for site response analysis, Geomechanics and Geoengineering, (2022) 1-15.
  27. Chavan, T.G. Sitharam, P. Anbazhagan, Site response analysis of liquefiable soil employing continuous wavelet transforms, Géotechnique Letters, 12(1) (2022) 35-45.
  28. Zhao, Q. Wang, H. Zhuang, Z. Li, G. Chen, A fully coupled flow deformation model for seismic site response analyses of liquefiable marine sediments, Ocean Engineering, 251 (2022) 111144.
  29. Al-Ajamee, M.M.M. Mahmoud, A.M. El Sharief, Site-Specific Seismic Ground Response Analysis for Typical Soil Sites in Central Khartoum, Sudan, in: T.G. Sitharam, S. Kolathayar, R. Jakka (Eds.) Earthquake Geotechnics, Springer Nature Singapore, Singapore, 2022, pp. 529-546.