1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Near Surface Geophysics
  4. Volume 17, Issue 5
  5. Article
Volume 17, Issue 5
  • ISSN: 1569-4445
  • E-ISSN: 1873-0604

Abstract

ABSTRACT

We carried out shallow subsurface investigations at 600 sites covering all types of geological units in the Northwestern Deccan Volcanic Province of India, using the multichannel analysis of surface waves and suspension PS‐logging methods. The results reveal that values are in the range of 760–1500 m/s for granites and Deccan traps, thus enabling their classification as B‐class, as per the National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program recommendations. The Tertiary, Cretaceous, Jurassic and Paleoproterozoic sediments show values between 360 and 760 m/s, and hence, are assigned C‐class. Further, the Quaternary soils are categorized as D‐class, since they show in the range of 180–360 m/s. Also, the Holocene tidal flat and Rann sediments are classified as E‐class, since the values are less than 180 m/s. The observed site response reveals that the D‐ and E‐type soils have significantly higher seismic amplification than that in the B‐ and C‐category soils. We noticed that the buildings on D‐ and E‐classes soils experienced higher damage than those on the B‐ and C‐classes, during the past large earthquakes in the Northwestern Deccan Volcanic Province. Our study suggests that is a good proxy for soil classifications in the Northwestern Deccan Volcanic Province. We validated our results using available geological, geophysical and geotechnical data. For the first time, a regional site characterization map for the Northwestern Deccan Volcanic Province of India is prepared based on geology and .

© 2019 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers © 2019 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12066
2019-09-13
2024-04-18

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12066
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AkiK.1993. Local site effects on weak and strong ground motion. Tectonophysics218, 93–111.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. AkiK. and RichardsP.G.1980. Quantitative Seismology. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. BendickR., BilhamR., FieldingE., GaurV.K., HoughS.E., KierG., et al. 2001. The 26 January 2001 “Republic Day” earthquake, India. Seismological Research Letters72, 328–335.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. BIS . 2002. Indian Standard Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures, Part 1 General Provisions and Buildings (Fifth revision). Bureau Indian Standards (BIS), New Delhi, India.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. BiswasS.1987. Regional tectonic framework, structure and evolution of the western marginal basins of India. Tectonophysics135, 307–327.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. BiswasS.K., 2005. A review of structure and tectonics of Kutch basin, western India, with special reference to earthquakes. Current Science88, 1592–1600.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. 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 and 10.0 s. Earthquake Spectra24, 99–138.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. BooreD.M., BardP.Y. and ChaljubE.2006. Determining subsurface shear‐wave velocities: a review. In: Third International Symposium on the Effects of Surface Geology on Seismic Motion, vol. 30, pp. 67–85. Grenoble, France.
  9. BooreD.M., JoynerW.B. and FumalT.E., 1994. Estimation of response spectra and peak accelerations from western North American earthquakes: an interim report. Technical Report, U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey.
  10. 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.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. BooreD.M., StewartJ.P., SeyhanE. and AtkinsonG.M.2014. NGA‐West2 equations for predicting PGA, PGV, and 5% damped PSA for shallow crustal earthquakes. Earthquake Spectra30, 1057–1085.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. BorcherdtR.D.1970. Effects of local geology on ground motion near San Francisco Bay. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America60, 29–61.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. BorcherdtR.D.1994. Estimates of site‐dependent response spectra for design (methodology and justification). Earthquake Spectra10, 617–653.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. BozorgniaY. and CampbellK.W.2016. Ground motion model for the vertical‐to‐horizontal (V/H) ratios of PGA, PGV, and response spectra. Earthquake Spectra32, 951–978.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. BozorgniaY., AbrahamsonN.A., AtikL.A.AnchetaT.D., AtkinsonG.M., BakerJ.W., et al. 2014. NGA‐West2 research project. Earthquake Spectra, 30, 973–987.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. BSSC (2004). NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures (FEMA 450), Part 1: Provisions, 2003 edn., 288 p. Building Seismic Safety Council (BSSC). The Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC.
  17. ChopraS., RaoK.M., SairamB.et al. 2008. Earthquake swarm activities after rains in peninsular India and a case study from Jamnagar. Journal of Geological Society of India72, 245–252.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. ChopraS., KumarD., RastogiB.K., ChoudhuryP. and YadavR.B.S.2013. Estimation of site amplification functions in Gujarat region, India. Natural Hazards65, 1135–1155.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. ChungW.‐Y. and GaoH.1995. Source parameters of the Anjar earthquake of July 21, 1956, India, and its seismotectonic implications for the Kutch rift basin. Tectonophysics242, 281–292.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. DobryR., BorcherdtR.D., CrouseC.B., IdrissI.M., JoynerW.B., MartinG.R., et al. 2000. New site coefficients and site classification system used in recent building seismic code provisions. Earthquake Spectra16, 41–67.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. FotiS., HollenderF., GarofaloF., AlbarelloD., AstenM., BardP.‐Y., et al. 2018. Guidelines for the good practice of surface wave analysis: A product of the InterPACIFIC project. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering16, 2367–2420.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. GallipoliM.R. and MucciarelliM.2009. Comparison of site classification from VS30, VS 10, and HVSR in Italy. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America99, 340–351.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. GoelR.K.2001. Performance of Buildings during the January 26, 2001 Bhuj Earthquake. in Earth‐quake Spectra, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, CA.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. GouletC.A., KishidaT., AnchetaT.D., CramerC.H., DarraghR.B., SilvaW.J., et al. 2014. PEER NGA‐East Database. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research (PEER) Center Report No. 2014/17. https://peer.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/webpeer-2014-17-christine_a._goulet_tadahiro_kishida_timothy_d._ancheta_chris_h._cramer_robert_b._.pdf
  25. GSI . 2001. Geology and Mineral Resources og Gujarat, Daman and Diu.No. 30, Part XIV. 102. India: Geological Survey of India (GSI).
  26. GuptaH.K., HarinarayanT., KousalyM., MishraD.C., MohanI., RaoN.P., et al. 2001. Bhuj earthquake of 26 January, 2001. Journal of Geological Society of India57, 275–278.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. HaaseJ.S., NowackR.L., ChoiY.S., BowlingT.2011. Probabilistic seismic‐hazard assessment including site effects for Evansville, Indiana, and the surrounding region. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America101, 1039–1054.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. HoughS.E., MartinS., BilhamR., et al. 2002. The 26 January 2001 M 7.6 Bhuj, India, earthquake: observed and predicted ground motions. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America92, 2061–2079.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. IvanovJ., ParkC.B., MillerR.D. and XiaJ.2005. Analyzing and filtering surface‐wave energy by muting shot gathers. Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics10, 307–322.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. KalkanE., WillsC.J. and BranumD.M., 2010. Seismic hazard mapping of California considering site effects. Earthquake Spectra26, 1039–1055.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. KanlıA.I., TildyP., PrónayZ., PınarA. and HermannL.2006. VS 30 mapping and soil classification for seismic site effect evaluation in Dinar region, SW Turkey. Geophysical Journal International165, 223–235.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Kansas Geological Survey (KGS) . 2010. Surfseis: Seismic Processing Software, Version 3, KGS, Lawrence, Kansas.
  33. KrinitzskyE.L. and HynesM.E.2002. The Bhuj, India, earthquake: lessons learned for earthquake safety of dams on alluvium. Engineering Geology66, 163–196.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. LeeC.‐T., ChengC.‐T., LiaoC.‐W., TsaiY.‐B.2001. Site classification of Taiwan free‐field strong‐motion stations. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America91, 1283–1297.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. LeeC.‐T. and TsaiB.‐R.2008. Mapping Vs30 in Taiwan. Terrestrial Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences19, 671.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. MacauA., BenjumeaB., GabàsA., BellmuntF. and FiguerasS.2018. Geophysical measurements for site effects characterisation in the urban area of Girona, Spain. Near Surface Geophysics, 16, 340–355.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. MacmurdoJ.1823. Papers relating to the earthquake which occurred in India in 1819. Transactions of the Literary Society of Bombay3, 90–116.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. MahajanA.K. and KumarP.2018. Site characterisation in Kangra Valley (NW Himalaya, India) by inversion of H/V spectral ratio from ambient noise measurements and its validation by multichannel analysis of surface waves technique. Near Surface Geophysics, 16, 314–327.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. MandalP., ChadhaR.K., SatyamurtyC., RajuI.P. and KumarN.2005. Estimation of site response in Kachchh, Gujarat, India, region using H/V spectral ratios of aftershocks of the 2001 Mw 7.7 Bhuj earthquake. Pure and Applied Geophysics162, 2479–2504.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. MandalP., NarsaiahR., SairamB., SatyamurtyC. and RajuI.P.2006. Relocation of early and late aftershocks of the 2001 Bhuj earthquake using joint hypocentral determination (JHD) technique: implication toward the continued aftershock activity for more than four years. Pure and Applied Geophysics163, 1561–1581.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. MandalP., DuttaU. and ChadhaR.K.2008. Estimation of site response in the Kachchh seismic zone, Gujarat, India. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America98, 2559–2566.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Martínez‐PagánP., NavarroM., Pérez‐CuevasJ., AlcaláF.J., García‐JerezA. and VidalF.R.2018. Shear‐wave velocity structure from MASW and SPAC methods: the case of Adra town, SE Spain. Near Surface Geophysics16, 356–371.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. MerhS. and ChamyalL.1997. The Quaternary geology of Gujarat alluvial plains. Proceedings of Indian National Science Academy63, 1–98.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. MerhS., 1995. Geology of Gujarat, pp. 222. Geological Society of India, Bangalore, India.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. MohanK., RastogiB.K., PancholiV. and SairamB.2017. Estimation of strong motion parameters in the coastal region of Gujarat using geotechnical data. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering92, 561–572.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. OldhamR.1898. A note on the Allah‐Bund in the North‐west of the Rann of Kuchh. Geological Survey of India Memoirs28, 27–30.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. OldhamR.D.1926. The Cutch (Kachh) earthquake of 16th June, 1819: with a revision of the great earthquake of 12th June, 1897. Geological Survey of India Memoirs46.
  48. OYO . 2002. OYO Corporation Operation Manual, Model‐3660A, Suspension PS Logger. OYO Corporation, Tsukuba Technical Research and Development Center, Japan, 78.
  49. ParkC.B. and CarnevaleM.2010. Optimum MASW survey‐revisit after a decade of use. In: Proceedings of GeoFlorida, 1303–1312. American Society of Civil Engineers.
  50. ParkC.B., MillerR.D. and XiaJ.1999. Multichannel analysis of surface waves. Geophysics64, 800–808.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. ParkS. and ElrickS.1998. Predictions of shear‐wave velocities in southern California using surface geology. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America88, 677–685.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. PetersenM.D., BryantW.A., CramerC.H.ReichleM.S., RealC.R.1997. Seismic ground‐motion hazard mapping incorporating site effects for Los Angeles, Orange, and Ventura counties, California: a geographical information system application. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America87, 249–255.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. RajendranC.P. and RajendranK.2001. Characteristics of deformation and past seismicity associated with the 1819 Kutch earthquake, northwestern India. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America91, 407–426.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. RastogiB.K.2004. Damage due to the Mw 7.7 Kutch, India earthquake of 2001. Tectonophysics390, 85–103.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. RastogiB.K., GuptaH.K., MandalP., SatyanarayanaH.V.S., KousalyaM., RaghavanR., et al. 2001. The deadliest stable continental region earthquake occurred near Bhuj on 26 January 2001. Journal of Seismology5, 609–615.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. RastogiB.K., SinghA.P., SairamB., JainS.K., KanekoF., SegawaS., et al. 2011. The possibility of site effects: The Anjar case, following past earthquakes in Gujarat, India. Seismological Research Letters82, 59–68.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. RastogiB.K. and RamancharlaP.K. (2014). Assessment of vulnerability of installation near Gujarat coast vis‐à‐vis seismic disturbances. Project Number: MoES/P.O. (Seismo)/19/2008, dated: 04/03/2009, pp. 187.
  58. SairamB.2012. Study of source parameters and seismotectonics of the Gujarat State: implications towards the seismic risk mitigation. Ph.D. thesis, Osmania University, Osmania University, Hyderabad, India, pp. 198.
  59. SairamB., SinghA.P., PatelV., Pancholi, V., Chopra, S., DwivediV.K., et al. 2018a. Influence of local site effects in the Ahmedabad Mega city on the damage due to past earthquakes in Northwestern India. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 108, 2170–2182.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. SairamB., SinghA.P. and RaviK.M.2018b. Comparison of earthquake source characteristics in the Kachchh rift basin and Saurashtra horst, Deccan volcanic province, Western India. Journal of Earth System Science127, 55–75.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. SairamB., RastogiB.K., AggarwalS., ChauhanM. and BhondeU.2011. Seismic site characterization using VS30 and site amplification in Gandhinagar region, Gujarat, India. Current Science100, 754–760.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. ScherbaumF., HinzeK.‐G. and OhrnbergeM.2003. Determination of shallow shear wave velocity profiles in the Cologne, Germany area using ambient vibrations. Geophysical Journal International152, 597–612.
     [Google Scholar]
  63. SinghA.P.2015. Seismic hazard evaluation in Anjar city area of western India: microtremor array measurement. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering71, 143–150.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. SinghA.P., AnnamN. and KumarS.2014. Assessment of predominant frequencies using ambient vibration in the Kachchh region of western India: implications for earthquake hazards. Natural Hazards73, 1291–1309.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. SinghA.P., ParmarA. and ChopraS., 2017a. Microtremor study for evaluating the site response characteristics in the Surat City of western India. Natural Hazards89, 1145–1166.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. SinghA.P., ShuklaA., KumarM.R. and ThakkarM.G., 2017b. Characterizing surface geology, liquefaction potential, and maximum intensity in the Kachchh seismic zone, Western India, through Microtremor analysis. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America107, 1277–1292.
     [Google Scholar]
  67. SongY.Y., CastagnaJ.P., BlackR.A. and KnappR.W.1989, Sensitivity of near‐surface shear‐wave velocity determination from Rayleigh and Love waves. 59th Annual International Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts, 509–512
  68. StewartJ.P., DouglasJ., JavanbargM., BozorgniaY., AbrahamsonN.A., BooreD.M., et al. 2015. Selection of ground motion prediction equations for the global earthquake model. Earthquake Spectra31, 19–45.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. StewartJ.P., HoughS.E., Velan VandhanaS., MartinS. and India‐U.S. Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering Reconnaissance Team , 2002. Damage patterns. Earthquake Spectra18, 67–75.
     [Google Scholar]
  70. ThokchomS., RastogiB.K., DograN.N., PancholiV., SairamB., BhattacharyaF., et al. 2017. Empirical correlation of SPT blow counts versus shear wave velocity for different types of soils in Dholera, Western India. Natural Hazards86, 1291–1306.
     [Google Scholar]
  71. TurtleM.P., HengeshJ.V., TuckerK.B., LettisW.R., DeatonS.L. and Frostj.D.2002. Liquefaction. Earthquake Spectra18, 79–100.
     [Google Scholar]
  72. WaldD.J., QuitorianoV., HeatonT.H., KanamoriH., ScrivnerC.W. and WordenC.B.1999. TriNet “ShakeMaps”: rapid generation of peak ground motion and intensity maps for earthquakes in Southern California. Earthquake Spectra15, 537–555.
     [Google Scholar]
  73. WillsC.J. and ClahanK.B.2006. Developing a map of geologically defined site‐condition categories for California. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America96, 1483–1501.
     [Google Scholar]
  74. WillsC.J., GutierrezC.I., PerezF.G., BranumD.M.2015. A next generation VS30 map for California based on geology and topography. Bulletin of Seismological Society of America105, 3083–3091.
     [Google Scholar]
  75. XiaJ., MillerR.D. and ParkC.B., 1999. Estimation of near‐surface shear‐wave velocity by inversion of Rayleigh waves. Geophysics64, 691–700.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12066
Loading
VS30 mapping and site characterization in the seismically active intraplate region of Western India: implications for risk mitigation
Near Surface Geophysics 17, 533 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1002/nsg.12066
/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12066
/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12066
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): MASW; National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program; Seismic Hazard; Site Characterization; Suspension PS‐logging; VS30

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error