1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Near Surface Geophysics
  4. Volume 16, Issue 3
  5. Article
Volume 16, Issue 3
  • ISSN: 1569-4445
  • E-ISSN: 1873-0604

Abstract

ABSTRACT

The ambient noise measurements were performed at 200 sites in and around the upcoming urban centre of Kangra Valley to derive the predominant frequency of soil. The shear‐wave velocity of the soft soil cover is obtained by joint‐fit inversion modelling of the horizontal‐to‐vertical spectral ratio and the dispersion curves derived from multichannel simulation with one receiver survey. Simultaneously, shear‐wave velocity investigations were also performed employing an active 24‐channel engineering seismograph using multichannel analysis of surface waves. Finally, the derived one‐dimensional shear‐wave velocity profiles were compared between these two different approaches, which were found to be in good agreement. The shear‐wave velocity investigations of the study area have indicated that the majority of the sites either fall in soil class D (, stiff soil) or class C (, very stiff soil) as per NEHRP classification. The microtremor data also suggest high fundamental frequency (4 to >20 Hz) within and on the fringes of the basin, thus covering 80% of the study area, which is in agreement with the known shear‐wave velocity variation in the Kangra Valley. The large variation in high frequencies cannot be attributed to the presence of thick loose alluvial sediments (gravels and sand) but can be related to the presence of moraine deposits or bedrock (upper conglomerates) underneath the basin. However, a few isolated locations in the northern and southeastern parts of the basin are characterised by a low predominant frequency (2–3 Hz) or frequency less than even 2 Hz. The results further suggest that both multichannel analysis of surface waves and horizontal‐to‐vertical spectral ratio methods, in combination with multichannel simulation with one receiver, are complementary to each other and are suitable for estimating the shear‐wave velocity structure for hilly urban regions, where exploring a large area is a major challenge. The analysis further reveals that Kangra Valley can have a major devastation from a near‐source earthquake rather than from a far‐source event.

© European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers © 2018 European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2018008
2018-04-01
2024-04-16

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2018008
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AmbraseysN. and DouglasJ.2004. Magnitude calibration of North Indian earthquakes. Geophysical Journal International159(1), 165–206.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. AryaA.S.2000. Recent development towards earthquake risk in India. Current Science79(9), 1270–1277.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. BIS 2002. IS 1893:1984 criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures
    BIS 2002. IS 1893:1984 criteria for earthquake resistant design of structureshttp://www.bis.org.in/other/quake.htm.
  4. Bonnefoy‐ClaudetS., BaizeS., BonillaLF., Berge‐ThierryC., PastenC., CamposJ.et al. 2009. Site effect evaluation in the basin of Santiago de Chile using ambient noise measurements. Geophysical Journal International176(3), 925–937.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Bonnefoy‐ClaudetS., CornouC., BardP.Y., CottonF., MoczoP., KristekJ.et al. 2006. H/V ratio: a tool for site effects evaluation. Results from 1‐D noise simulations. Geophysical Journal International167(2), 827–837.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. CastellaroS.2016. The complementary of H/V and dispersion curves. Geophysics81(6), 323–338.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. CastellaroS. and MulargiaF.2009. VS30 estimates using constrained H/V measurements. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America99(2A), 761–773.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. DelgadoJ., CasadoC.L., GinerJ., EstévezA., CuencaA. and MolinaS.2000. Microtremors as a geophysical exploration tool: applications and limitations. Pure and Applied Geophysics157(9), 1445–1462.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. GallipoliM.R., MucciarelliM., EeriM., GallicchioS., TropeanoM. and LizzaC.2004. Horizontal to vertical spectral ratio (HVSR) measurements in the area damaged by the 2002 Molise, Italy, earthquake. Earthquake Spectra20(S1), 81–93.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. GosarA.2009. A microtremor HVSR study of the seismic site effects in the area of the town of Brezice (SE Slovenia). Acta Geotechnica Slovenica6, 31–45.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. GosarA.2017. Study on the applicability of microtremor HVSR method to support seismic microzonation in the town of Idrija (W Slovenia). Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences17(6), 925–937.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. GosarA. and LenartA.2010. Mapping the thickness of sediments in the Ljubljana Moor basin (Slovenia) using microtremors. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering8(3), 501–518.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. HarutoonianP., LeoC.J., DoanhT., CastellaroS., ZouJ.J., Liyanapathiranaet al. 2014. Microtremor measurements of rolling compacted ground. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering41, 23–31.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. HazarikaD., KumarN. and YadavD.K.2013. Crustal thickness and Poisson’s ratio variations across northwest Himalaya and Eastern Ladakh and its tectonic implications. Acta Geophysika61(4), 905–922.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. KanaiK. and TanakaT.1961. On microtremors. VIII, Bulletin of the Earthquake Research Institute39, 97–114.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. KarunakaranC. and RaoA.R.1976. Status of exploration for hydrocarbons in the Himalayan region—Contributions to stratigraphy and structure. Geological Survey of India Miscellaneous Publication41(5), 1–66.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. KramerS.L.1996. Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, 1st edn.Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 653pp.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. KumarS. and MahajanA.K.2001. Seismotectonics of the Kangra region, Northwest Himalaya. Tectonophysics331(4), 359–371.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. LermoJ. and Chavez‐GarciaF.1994. Are microtremors useful in site response evaluation?Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America84(5), 1350–1364.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. LinS. and AshlockJ.C.2016. Surface‐wave testing of soil sites using multichannel simulation with one‐receiver. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering87, 82–92.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. MahajanA.K.2009. NEHRP soil classification and estimation of 1‐D site effect of Dehradun fan deposits using shear wave velocity. Engineering Geology104(3), 232–240.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. MahajanA.K.2017. Landslide monitoring of Tira Lines slide zone in Dharamshala region, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh. DST project no. NRDMS/11/3023/013(G) project completion report submitted to Department of Science and Technology, Govt. of India (unpublished).
     [Google Scholar]
  23. MahajanA.K. and KumarS.1994. Linear features registered on the Landsat imagery and seismic activity in the Dharamsala–Palampur region (NW Himalaya). Geofizika11(1), 15–25.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. MahajanA.K., MundepiA.K., ChauhanN., JasrotiaA.S., RaiN. and GachhayatT.K.2012. Active seismic and passive microtremor HVSR for assessing site effects in Jammu city, NW Himalaya, India—A case study. Journal of Applied Geophysics77, 51–62.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. MahajanA.K. and RaiN.2011. Using MASW to map depth to bedrock underneath Dehradun fan deposits in NW Himalaya. Current Science100(2), 233–238.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. MahajanA.K., SlobS., RanjanR., SporryR., Champati RayP.K. and WestenC.J.2007a. Seismic microzonation of Dehradun City using geophysical and geotechnical characteristics in the upper 30 m of soil column. Journal of Seismology11 (4), 355–370.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. MahajanA.K., SporryR.J., Champati RayP.K., RanjanR., SlobS. and VanW.C.2007b. Methodology for site‐response studies using multichannel analysis of surface wave technique in Dehradun city. Current Science92(7), 945–955.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. MahajanA.K., ThakurV.C., SharmaM.L. and ChauhanM.2010. Probabilistic seismic hazard map of NW Himalaya and its adjoining area, India. Natural Hazards53, 443–457.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Micromed Tromino
    Micromed Tromino2013. (online) Available from www.tromino.eu
  30. MiddlemissC.S.1910. The Kangra earthquake of 4th April 1905. Memoirs of the Geological Survey of India38, 409.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. MoisidiM., VallianatosF., KershawS. and CollinsP.2015. Seismic site characterization of the Kastelli (Kissamos) Basin in northwest Crete (Greece): assessments using ambient noise recordings. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering13(3), 725–753.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. MotamedR., GhalandarzadehA., TawhataI. and TabatabaeiSH.2007. Seismic microzonation and damage assessment of Bam city, southeastern Iran. Journal of Earthquake Engineering11(1), 110–132.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. MucciarelliM. and GallipoliM.R.2001. A critical review of 10 years of microtremor HVSR technique. Bollettino di Geofisica Teorica ed Applicata42(3), 255–266.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. MucciarelliM., GallipoliM.R. and ArcieriM.2003. The stability of the horizontal‐to‐vertical spectral ratio of triggered noise and earthquake recordings. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America93(3), 1407–1413.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. NakamuraY.1989. A method for dynamic characteristics estimation of subsurface using microtremor on the ground surface. Quarterly Report of the Railway Technical Research Institute30(1), 25–33.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. NakamuraY.2000. Clear identification of fundamental idea of Nakamura’s technique and its application. Proceedings of the 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering., Auckland, New Zealand, p. 8.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. NogoshiM. and IgarashiT.1970. On the propagation characteristics estimations of subsurface using microtremors on the ground surface. Journal of the Seismological Society of Japan23, 264–280.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. NogoshiM. and IgarashiT.1971. On the amplitude characteristics of microtremor. Journal of the Seismological Society of Japan24, 26–40.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. ParkC.B., MillerR.D. and XiaJ.1998. Imaging dispersion curves of surface waves on multichannel records. Technical programme with biographies. 68th SEG annual meeting, New Orleans, LA.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. ParkC.B., MillerR.D. and XiaJ.1999. Multichannel analysis of surface waves. Geophysics64(3), 800–808.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. RixG.J. and LeipskiA.E.1991. Accuracy and resolution of surface wave inversion. In: Recent Advances in Instrumentation, Data Acquisition and Testing in Soil Dynamics (eds S.K.Bhatia and G.W.Blaney ), pp. 17–23. American Society of Civil Engineering, Geotechnical Special Publication no. 28.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. RydenN., ParkC.B., UlriksenP. and MillerR.D.2004. Multimodal approach to seismic pavement testing. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering130(6), 636–645.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. SahM.P. and SrivastavaR.A.K.1992. Morphology and facies of the alluvial‐fan sedimentation in the Kangra Valley, Himachal Himalaya. Sedimentary Geology76(1–2), 23–42.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. ScheibA., MorrisP., MurdieR. and PianeC.D.2016. A passive seismic approach to estimating the thickness of sedimentary cover on the Nullarbor Plain, Western Australia. Australian Journal of Earth Sciences63(5), 583–598.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. SehtM.I.V. and WohlenbergJ.1999. Microtremor measurements used to map thickness of soft sediments. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America89(1), 250–259.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. SESAME
    SESAME2003. Site EffectS assessment using AMbient Excitations. http://sesamefp5.obs.ujf‐grenoble.fr.
  47. SESAME
    SESAME2004. Guidelines for the implementation of the H/V spectral ratio technique on ambient vibrations, Rapport final.
  48. SrivastavaP., RajakM.K. and SinghL.P.2009. Late Quaternary alluvial fans and paleosols of the Kangra basin, NW Himalaya: tectonic and paleoclimatic implications. Catena76(2), 135–154.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. StankoD., MarkušićS., StrelecS. and GazdekM.2017. HVSR analysis of seismic site effects and soil–structure resonance in Varaždin city (North Croatia). Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering92, 666–677.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. StreetR., WooleyE.W., WangZ. and HarrisJ.B.2001. NEHRP soil classification for estimating site dependent seismic coefficients in the upper Mississippi Embayment. Engineering Geology62(1–3), 123–135.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Surfseis 5.0. 2016
    Surfseis 5.0. 2016 . Software for Multichannel Analysis of Surface Waves. Kansas Geological Survey. www.kgs.ku.edu/software/surfSeis/publications.html.
  52. SwatiS. and MahajanA.K.2018. Utilization of finite element method for slope stability analysis of a debris landslide in Himalaya—Communicated toBulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment (under review).
     [Google Scholar]
  53. TunM., PekkanE., OzelO. and GuneyY.2016. An investigation into the bedrock depth in the Eskisehir Quaternary Basin (Turkey) using the microtremor method. Geophysical Journal International207(1), 589–607.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. WadhawanM., HazarikaD., PaulA., KumarN., ThakurS.S. and GuptaV.2017. Crustal thickness and Poisson’s ratio variation in the Satluj Valley, Northwest Himalaya. Himalayan Geology38(1), 38–48.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. WyssM.GuptaS. and RossetP.2017. Casualty estimate in two up‐dip complementary Himalayan earthquakes. Seismological Research Letters88(6), 1508–1515.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. XiaJ., MillerR.D. and ParkC.B.1999. Estimation of near surface shear wave velocity by inversion of wave. Geophysics64(3), 691–700.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. XiaJ., MillerR.D., ParkC.B., HunterJ.A., HerrisJ.B. and IvanovJ.2002. Comparing shear wave velocity profiles inverted from multichannel surface waves with borehole measurement. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering22(3), 181–190.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2018008
Loading
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 (2018); https://doi.org/10.3997/1873-0604.2018008
/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2018008
/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2018008
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Ambient noise; Kangra Valley.; Seismic data processing; Site characterisation

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