Sixth International Conference on

Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics

August 1 6, 2016, IIT Roorkee Extension Centre, 20 Knowledge Park II, Greater Noida, India

EVALUATION OF DYNAMIC SOIL PROPERTIES, LOCAL SITE EFFECTS AND DESIGN GROUND MOTIONS FOR A
NUCLEAR REACTOR SITE
Dr. NAVEEN JAMES
Assistant Professor,
Department of Civil Engineering,
Birla Institute of Technology & Science-Pilani,
Hyderabad Campus-500078
naveenjames7@gmail.com

Dr. T.G SITHARAM

Professor
Department of Civil Engineering,
Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore -560012
sitharam@civil.iisc.ernet.in

ABSTRACT
The studies of past earthquakes show that the intensity of earthquake damages at a location is controlled mainly by, earthquake source,
path characteristics, local site condition, standards of structural design and quality of the construction. Of these, the factor which is of
interest to a geotechnical engineer is the aspects of local site conditions. The local site effect can be defined as the change in the
seismic ground motion characteristics (such as its amplitude, frequency content and duration of ground shaking) due the influence of
the topography and material properties of the overlying soil layers. This paper presents a detailed estimation of dynamic properties of
in-situ soil based on geophysical tests along with site response study carried out for a nuclear power plant facility located at the eastern
coast of India. Site characterization and evaluation of low strain soil stiffness was done based on field tests such as standard
penetration test (SPT) and multichannel analysis of surface wave (MASW) test. A new model was developed to predict the shear wave
velocity based on the corrected SPT(N) values. Synthetic ground motion, compatible to the site response spectrum obtained from
deterministic seismic hazard analysis (DSHA), was generated for performing ground response analysis. The final hazard analysis for
the power plant site was done by considering the Peak horizontal acceleration (PHA) at ground surface, predominant frequencies,
spectral acceleration corresponding to the predominant frequency of surface ground motion and amplification factors. The output of
the current study can very well be adopted for the siting and design of many important nuclear structures as well as carrying out the
vulnerability studies of existing ones.

INTRODUCTION
Earthquake hazards are one of the most damaging natural
disasters, causing huge loss of human life and massive
destruction of man-made structures. The safety of critical
structures such as the nuclear power plants is always put to
question against natural hazards especially against
earthquakes. Furthermore, with the greater demand for nuclear
power in India, more and more nuclear power plants are being
set up at various locations. In a densely populated country like
India, any damage to nuclear power plant during an
earthquake will result in a cataclysm. Damages caused by
1985 Michoacan earthquake (Ms=8.1), 1989 Loma Prieta
earthquake (Ms=7.1) and 2001 Bhuj earthquake (Mw=7.7)
have reaffirmed that apart from the source characteristics, the
local soil conditions also greatly influences the damage
potential of an earthquake (Kramer 1996; Narayan and
Sharma 2004). The predominant influence of local
soil/geological conditions on the earthquake ground motion
characteristics is termed as local site effect. The study of local
site effect is of great importance in the case of shallow

Paper No. abs 116

founded structures like retaining walls and dams, floating piles

and underground structures. The precise knowledge about the
geology, geomorphology, geophysical data and geotechnical
details are the key parameters required for the assessment of
local site effects. Hence the assessment of local site effect is of
great significance as it is a fundamental input for the
earthquake resistant design of new nuclear power plants and
also for carrying out the vulnerability studies of the existing
ones. Seismic hazard and the response spectrum at bedrock
level were evaluated using the deterministic seismic hazard
assessment methodology. Seismic characterization of soil
strata and estimation of the low strain shear modulus (Gmax)
were carried out using standard penetration tests (SPT) and
multichannel analysis of surface wave (MASW) tests
respectively. A correlation between shear wave velocity and
corrected SPT (N) value for the study area was also
determined. Synthetic ground motion was generated as per the
methodology suggested by Feng-xin and Yu-shan (2006)
which is compatible to the response spectrum obtained from

the deterministic seismic hazard analysis. 1D equivalent linear

ground response analysis was done using SHAKE 2000
(Ordonez 2000), an upgraded version of SHAKE program
developed by Schnabel et al., (1972) to evaluate earthquake
motion at the surface. Response spectra at ground surface
were also evaluated for 8 major locations in the study area.
Spatial variations in peak horizontal acceleration (PHA) at
ground surface, predominant frequency of surface ground
motion, and amplification factor throughout the study area are
presented in this paper.
STUDY AREA- GEOLOGY AND TECTONICS
The site is situated on the eastern coastal belt of South India
(Fig.1) known as Comromandel coast, having the Bay of
Bengal on the east side. Geologically the study area forms a
part of the Southern Granulite Terrane, a tectonic province of
the Peninsular India which consists of metamorphic blocks
belonging to late Archaean to Neoproterozeric era
.

Fig 1. Location of the study area

The surface soil of the study area is mainly composed of loose
alluvium having geomorphic characteristics of dunes and
beach ridges (Boominathan et al., 2000) which can
geotechnically be characterized as loose to medium dense
sand. Geotechnical and geophysical investigations were
carried out to determine the subsurface profile of the site.
Studies reveal the existence of three major strata under the
deposited alluvium which include the geological formations
such as very soft high plastic clay having light bluish grey
color, residual soil composed of completely weathered rock
having light greenish grey coloration and finally the strong
granitic bed rock. These granitic bedrocks belong to the class
of Charnockite suite of rocks that occur at about 10-20m depth
in this region. This Charnockite rock mass consists of quartz,
feldspar, biotite and pyroxene (Gurumoorthy et al., 2004). The
depth of ground water table was found to vary from 1.5m to
3.0m below the ground level.
SEISMIC HAZARD ASSESSMENT

Paper No. abs 116

Seismic hazard analysis has been carried out to quantify the

magnitude of ground shaking at the bedrock level for the
entire study area. Deterministic seismic hazard analysis
(DSHA) considers the worst scenario where a maximum
magnitude is assumed to occur at point in a source which
closest to the site of interest. Thus it projects a high value of
hazard for that region which normally does not occur in the
life span of common structures. Moreover, Krinitzsky (1995)
suggests that, for a critical structure, DSHA provides
appropriate earthquake motions for the small areas important
to critical structures. Hence in the present study, DSHA was
used to evaluate earthquake ground motions for the nuclear
power plant site. The hazard assessment was done by
considering earthquake sources and events which falls within
a radius of 300 km from the nuclear power plant site. A
seismotectonic atlas of the study area (Fig. 2) was prepared by
superimposing georeferrenced declustered earthquake data and
the faults/lineaments.

Fig.2 Seismotectonic atlas of Kalpakkam and surrounding area

Deterministic seismic hazard analysis was performed using an
indigenously developed MATLAB code. The study area was
first discretized into grids of size 0.0010 0.0010 (approx. 0.1
km 0.1 km) and based on the hypocentral distance from
source to site and PHA values were evaluated at the center of
each grid. Average focal depth of earthquakes in the study
area was taken as 15 km which is based on previous studies of
Sitharam et al. (2006). Two source models, smoothened point
source (Coasta et al., 1993; Panza et al., 1999) and linear
source were selected. If the linear source model alone is used
for the seismic hazard assessment, the effect of these
earthquake events will not be considered and hence
underestimates the seismic hazard value at a particular site.
Thus the inclusion of a point source model in the deterministic
seismic hazard analysis, can effectively address the above
issue. The study area was divided into grids of size 0.2o 0.2o
and the maximum reported magnitude within each cell was
assigned to the center of that cell. After assigning the

maximum magnitude to the center of each grid in the study

area, a smoothening procedure was applied to account for the
source dimension and the location errors (Costa et al. 1993;
Panza et al. 1999). Smoothing process will account the
variation of rupture length depending upon the earthquake
magnitude. In the present study, a magnitude dependent
smoothing window (where the radius of the smoothing
windows varies with earthquake magnitude range) was
selected for smoothing purpose instead of the smoothing
window with a constant radius as employed by Costa et al.
(1993). For magnitude range of 4 - 4.9, the radius of the
smoothing window was selected as 0.2. Similarly, for other
magnitude ranges, 5 - 5.9 and 6, the radius of the smoothing
windows was selected as 0.4 and 0.6 respectively.
Three region compatible attenuation relations proposed by
Raghu Kanth and Iyengar (2007), Atkinson and Boore (2006)
and Campbell and Brozagnia (2003) for the hazard analysis.
There are two types of uncertainties associated with seismic
hazard modelling epistemic and aleatory uncertainties. To
capture epistemic uncertainties associated with source models
and attenuation relations, a logic tree algorithm (Bommer et
al., 2005) was employed. A typical logic tree structure consists
of a series of nodes and several models can be assigned to
each node as different branches with different weightages. The
allotment of these weightages is subjective and depends upon
the level of uncertainty in the model and its accuracy. In the
present study, the two source models were assigned equal
weightages of 0.5.

in the PHA value at bedrock level.

SITE CHARACTERIZATION
Local geological conditions have a significant effect on the
earthquake ground motion at a given site. The response of the
soil varies from type to type, when they are subjected to the
earthquake excitations. It is observed that when the wave
enters a loose medium having low impedance, the particle
movement gets exaggerated, so as to conserve the energy thus
resulting in the amplification of seismic waves. Hence the
younger loose soils often amplify the ground motion more
when compared to the older compact soils or hard rock. The
main aim of the site characterization study is to evaluate the
physical properties of soil, which in turn is used to determine
the amplification of ground motion and the natural frequency
of the soil layer. In this study, seismic site characterization
was done using MASW test (Park et al. 1999) data. A typical
MASW test setup used for the present study consists of 24channel geophones of 4.5 Hz capacity. A 40 kg propelled
energy generator (PEG), more efficient than conventional
sledge hammer, was used for generating surface wave. Spatial
distribution of MASW test locations in the site is shown in
Fig. 4.

Fig.4 Locations where MASW testing were carried out

Fig.3 Spatial variation of PHA at bedrock from DSHA

The ground motion prediction equation (GMPE) proposed by
Raghu Kanth and Iyengar (2007) was assigned with a
weightage of 0.4 as it is specifically developed for Peninsular
India. A weightage of 0.3 was assigned to the other two
GMPEs - Atkinson and Boore (2006) and Campbell and
Brozagnia (2003), since these were developed for Eastern
North America (ENA). Figures 3 present the spatial variations

Paper No. abs 116

The surface waves produced by the PEG were recorded with

24-channel geophones of 4.5 Hz capacity. The shear wave
(Vs) and P-wave velocity (Vp) variation below the surveyed
area, which is responsible for the dispersion pattern of the
surface waves, was deduced using an inversion procedure. As
per the studies of Borcherdt (1994), NEHRP (BSSC, 2003),
Stewart et al. (2003), Raghu kanth and Iyengar (2007), the
average shear wave velocity up to 30m is decisive for site
characterization as shown in Table 1, and it is being evaluated
as per equation (1).

Vs 30

30
n

v
i 1

Where is the in-situ density (in kN/m3), g-acceleration due to

gravity (in m/s2) and Vs is the shear wave velocity (in m/s).

(1)

Fig.6 . Gmax profile for selected locations in the study area

Figure 13 presents the Gmax profile of 8 major locations in the
study area (as per Fig.6) which are close to boreholes 1 to 8.
Fig. 5 Spatial distribution site classes based on Vs30
Where di is depth of each soil layer, vi is the corresponding
shear wave velocity for each layer and n is the number of soil
layers. As per Fig. 5 the site is mainly categorized into two
major site classes, site class C (dense soil or very soft rock)
and site class D (stiff soil) on the basis of average shear wave
velocity for top 30 m as per NEHRP (BSSC, 2003).
Evaluation of Low Strain Shear Modulus (Gmax)
Shear modulus (G) is an important soil parameter required to
predict site response and liquefaction potential. Shear modulus
(G) of any soil material subjected to cyclic loading at a
constant density and confining pressure depends on the
magnitude of shear strain induced in the specimen (Ishihara
1996, Kramer 1996). Soils exhibit an elastic behaviour up to a
strain level well below 10-5, and the stiffness (shear modulus)
of the soil at this strain range is independent of loading rate
and number of load repetitions (Ishihara 1996). Thus the shear
modulus will have its maximum value at a strain level less
than 10-5 (for samples having a constant density and confining
pressure) and this ideally represents the in situ conditions. In
this paper, Gmax profile for the nuclear power plant site was
evaluated by correlating borehole data and MASW test data
obtained for the selected locations. MASW test data gives the
variation of shear wave velocity with depth. The other details
such as the type of soil and the in-situ density at different
depths were obtained from the borelog data of the
corresponding location. Low strain shear modulus (G max) is
obtained from the equation (2).

G max Vs 2
g

Paper No. abs 116

Correlation Between Shear Wave Velocity And SPT (N)

Value
A knowledge of shear wave velocity (Vs) is essential in the
case of seismic characterization and ground response studies
as it indirectly indicates the shear modulus at low strains. Even
though the geophysical tests are most commonly used method
to estimate the shear wave velocity (Vs) profile, it is not
feasible to measure the Vs at each and every location. Hence a
method, which deduces the shear wave velocity values from
the conventional geotechnical field tests like SPT will prove to
be advantageous. Therefore, in this study, a correlation
between shear wave velocity and SPT (N) value is developed
for the east coast region of south India. The N-values
measured in the field were corrected for (1) overburden
pressure (CN), (2) hammer energy (CE), (3) borehole diameter
(CB), (4) presence of liner (CS), (5) rod length (CR) and (6)
fine contents (CFC) (Seed et al., 1983; Skempton, 1986; Youd
et al., 2001 and Cetin et al., 2004).
Figure 7 shows the correlation between Vs and (N1)60cs for the
study area. A similar model between Vs and corrected SPT(N)
value was proposed for the Bangalore region, in India by
Anbazhagan and Sitharam (2008). Figure 8 presents a
comparison between the present study and Anbazhagan and
Sitharam (2008). It is evident (Fig. 17) that both the models
match well at lower values of SPT-N. At higher values of
SPT-(N), the two models show significant deviation. This
deviation between two correlation equations can be attributed
to the errors associated with SPT measurements. Moreover,
the variability in the results will largely depend on the on the
differences in the mode of execution as well.

(2)

and spectral acceleration ratio are evaluated. As there are no

suitable earthquake records for the study area in any major
database, synthetic acceleration time history is used for the
site response analysis. A MATLAB code was developed to
generate artificial earthquake time history based on the
methodology proposed by Feng-xin and Yu-shan (2006).

Fig.7 Shear wave velocity vs corrected SPT-N value

Fig.9 Synthetic strong motion for the study area
The synthetic ground motion generated (in Fig. 9) has a peak
acceleration of 0.129g at 3.07 sec, peak velocity of 2.630
cm/sec at 5.48 sec and a peak displacement of 0.435cm at 5.39
sec.
Modeling the soil profile

Fig.8 Comparison between the correlation relations developed

for corrected SPT-N values
GROUND RESPONSE ANALYSIS
The prediction of the response of the local soil during an
earthquake, i.e. the determination of earthquake motion at the
ground surface is one of the major challenges for geotechnical
engineer (Kramer 1996). In the present study, ground response
analysis was carried out in order to evaluate the surface level
motion and to develop the response spectra that can be used
for earthquake resistant structural design. Equivalent linear
approach, proposed by Seed and Idriss (1969) approximates
the non-linear behaviour of the soil by adopting an iterative
procedure. It assumes that the response of soil is
predominantly due to the vertically propagating SH-waves
from bedrock and soil layers are assumed to be horizontal and
infinitely extending in the horizontal direction. In the present
study, 1-D equivalent linear ground response analysis for the
study area is carried out using SHAKE 2000 (Ordonez 2000)
and surface motion, response spectra, predominant frequency

Paper No. abs 116

One of the most important steps in ground response analysis is

stratifying and assigning appropriate modulus reduction and
damping model for the soil overburden. In the present study,
stratum identification was done based on the borelog data and
shear wave velocity data. Field test data revealed the existence
of five types of soil layers, which were identified mainly as
loose sand, soft silty clay, residual soil (Gravelly Sand),
weathered rock and bedrock (Charnockite rock type).
Properties of each of these soil types are described in Table 1.
Table.1 Dynamic properties assigned to each soil type
Sl.no Soil Type
G/Gmax curve
Damping curve
1

Sand

Clay

Residual
Soil

Weathered
rock

Hard
Rock

Sand Ave. [Seed

and Idriss 1970]
Clay upper range
[Seed and Idriss
1970]
Gravel (Mean)
[Rollins et al.,
1998]
Rockfill [Gazetas
and
Dakoulas1992]
Rock [Schnabel
1973]

Sand Ave. [Seed

and Idriss 1970]
Clay upper
[Seed and Sun
1989]
Gravel (Mean)
[Rollins et al.,
1998]
Rockfill
[Gazetas and
Dakoulas1992]
Rock [Schnabel
1973]

Borelog data also reveal the presence of dense filled up soil

between borehole locations of BH-5 and BH-6 (Fig. 4), and is

a mixture of clay and sand with a brownish coloration. After

the characterization of soil stratum, the next important task
was to assign appropriate modulus reduction curve and
damping curve. SHAKE 2000 provides different types of
modulus reduction and damping ratio curves proposed by
many researchers for different types of geo-materials. Details
of modulus reduction and damping curves used for each
stratum are given in Table 1.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
One dimensional equivalent ground response analysis was
carried out at eight important locations in the nuclear power
plant site using SHAKE 2000 and the results are presented.
Spatial variation of surface level PHA values obtained from
SHAKE is shown in Fig. 10.

Fig. 10 Spatial variation of PGA values at the ground surface

Fig.11 Spatial variation of amplification factor for PHA

Paper No. abs 116

throughout the study area

The central sector of the nuclear power plant site is found to
have high site amplification hazard, where the surface level
PHA is in the range of 0.3g to 0.45g as shown in Fig. 29. The
maximum PHA at ground surface for the study area is close to
0.45g near to BH-3 location, in the central sector. The
amplification factor for the central sector of the nuclear power
plant site is found to be in the range of 2 to 3.5 as in Fig. 11.
Site close to the BH-3 location fall in site class C (as per Fig.
12), where Vs30 value is found to be 514 m/s. Borelog data
reveal the existence of a rocky layer (weathered rock to hard
rock) at a depth of 7 to 15m from the ground surface in the
central sector. Such a high value of PHA aggravates the
liquefaction hazard in the location due to the presence of loose
sandy stratum and shallow ground water table.
However, the northern and southern sectors on the nuclear
power plant site are relatively safe compared to central sector,
where the expected surface level PHA is less than 0.3g. Both
northern and southern sectors of the nuclear power plant site
falls in site class D (Fig. 12). The amplification factor for the
northern and southern sectors is found to be in the range of 1
to 2 (Fig. 30). Location BH-1 and BH-2 in the southern sector
have Vs30 value of 304 m/s and 246 m/s respectively.
Similarly, locations BH-7 and BH-8 in the northern sector
have Vs30 value of 276 m/s and 328 m/s respectively. The
rock strata (weathered as well as the hard rock) in the northern
and southern sectors is found to be in much deeper depth (15m
to 20m) when compared to the central sector of the nuclear
power plant site. As the depth of rocky strata is large, soft
overburden offers more damping and hence surface level PHA
value reduces. In this study the predominant frequency of the
surface ground motion was also evaluated after converting it
into frequency domain using Fast Fourier Transform (FFT)
algorithm. Predominant frequency is the frequency at which
the maximum amplitude is observed for a ground motion in
the frequency domain (Kramer 1996).

Fig. 12 Spatial variation of the predominant frequency of the

surface ground motion throughout the study area

The Fourier spectrum obtained from FFT fluctuates
significantly and to avoid the influence of individual spikes,
predominant frequency was obtained from a smoothened
spectrum. Hanning window (Towhata 2008) was adopted for
smoothening procedure. Towhata (2008) also suggested that
significant amplification can be observed at places where the
natural frequency of the soil matches with the predominant
frequency of the earthquake motion, leading to building
damage. The predominant frequency in the study area is s
presented in Fig. 12. The high value of predominant
frequency is observed in the central sector of the nuclear
power plant site, ranging from 5Hz to 9.5 Hz. Comparing to
the central sector, both northern and southern sectors of the
nuclear power plant site has a low value of predominant
frequency ranging from 2Hz to 5Hz.
This paper also presents response spectra of single degree of
freedom (SDOF) for the amplified surface motion
corresponding to 5% damping (Fig. 32) obtained using
SHAKE 2000. Spectral acceleration of SODF corresponding
to the predominant frequency of surface motion was also
evaluated (Table 5) which can provide an insight into the
response of structure with natural frequency close to the
predominant frequency of the surface motion. It can be
observed that, the response of SDOF having natural frequency
close to the predominant period of the surface motion is high.
Particularly in the central sector (close to BH-3), if structure
having the natural frequency close to 9.25 Hz, the expected
intensity of shaking experienced by that structure is more than
2g.
CONCLUSIONS
This paper presents a detailed study to assess the local site
effect on seismic ground motion, for a nuclear power plant
site. Seismic site characterizations were carried using SPT and
MASW tests and soil stiffness (shear modulus) corresponding
to the in-situ state is evaluated. Site investigation studies in the
nuclear power plant site reveal the existence of a weak
overburden soil layer (thickness ranging from 7m to 20m)
above the bedrock. The seismic site characterization studies
show that nuclear power plant site can be categorized into two
major NEHRP (BSSC 2003) site classes viz. class C and D. A
correlation between shear wave velocity and corrected SPT Nvalue was developed for the study area. The above correlation
equation can very well predict the shear wave velocity based
on the corrected SPT N-values.
Ground motion at bedrock level, for site response analysis was
developed from response spectrum obtained from the
deterministic hazard analysis. The generated synthetic ground
motion produces response spectrum which is compatible with
the initial target response spectrum. This methodology is
relatively simple, effective and highly useful when the
seismological parameters for that region is unknown or
unavailable. One-dimensional equivalent ground response
analysis was carried out to evaluate peak horizontal

Paper No. abs 116

acceleration (PHA) at ground surface predominant frequency

response spectra, and amplification factor.
Analysis shows that the central sector has a high site
amplification hazard. Since the existing nuclear reactor facility
is located in the central sector, appropriate mitigation works
are very essential to reduce the effect of aggravated ground
shaking. Even though the nuclear reactor is founded on the
bedrock, the same may not be the case with other supporting
structures of nuclear reactor facility. Hence depending on
structural characteristics of these buildings, appropriate hazard
mitigation schemes needs to be adopted based on spatial
variation in the surface level PHA values. Spatial variation of
other parameters such as predominant frequency and
amplification factor etc. can be the input criteria for siting
critical nuclear infrastructures within a nuclear power plant
site. As the predominant frequency of the central sector is
high, high level of shaking is expected for low rise building
(having high natural frequency) in this area. Similarly, high
level of shaking is expected for high rise buildings (having
low natural frequency) in northern and southern sectors where
predominant frequency is low.
REFERENCES
1. Anbazhagan, P. and Sitharam, T.G. (2008) Mapping of
Average Shear Wave Velocity for Bangalore Region: A
Case Study, Journal of Environmental and Engineering
Geophysics. 13 (2), 69-84.
2. Atkinson, G.M. and Boore, D.M. (2006) Earthquake
Ground-Motion prediction equations for Eastern North
America. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of
America, 96(6), 2181 - 2205.
3. Bommer, J.J., Scherbaum, F., Bungum, H., Cotton, F.,
Sabetta, F. and Abrahamson, N.A. (2005) On the use of
logic trees for ground-motion prediction equations in
seismic hazard analysis, Bulletin of the Seismological
Society of America, 95(2), 377 - 389.
4. Boominathan, A., Koteswara Rao, P.C., Pillai, C.S. and
Hari, S. (2000) Measurement of Dynamic Properties and
Evaluation of Liquefaction Potential of A 500mw
Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor Site Located In South Of
India, 13th World Conference On Earthquake
Engineering, paper no. 964.
5. Borcherdt, R.D. (1994) Estimates of site-dependent
response spectra for design (methodology and
justification), Earthquake Spectra, 10(4), 617 - 653.
6. BSSC. (2003) NEHRP recommended provisions for
seismic regulations for new buildings and other structures
(FEMA 450), Part 1: Provisions, Building Seismic Safety
Council for the Federal Emergency Management Agency,
Washington, D.C., USA
7. Campbell, K.W. and Bozorgnia, Y. (2003) Updated nearsource ground motion (attenuation) relations for the
horizontal and vertical components of peak ground
acceleration and acceleration response spectra. Bulletin of
the Seismological Society of America, 93(1), 314 - 331.
8. Cetin, K.O., Seed, R.B., Kiureghian, D.A., Tokimastu, K.,

Harder, L.F., Kayen, R.E., and Moss, R.E.S. (2004).

Standard penetration test-based probabilistic and
deterministic assessment of seismic soil liquefaction
potential, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental
Engineering, 130(12), 1314 1340
9. Costa, G., Panza, G.F., Suhadolc, P. and Vaccari, F. (1993)
Zoning of the Italian territory in terms of expected peak
ground acceleration derived from complete synthetic
seismograms. Geophysical Exploration in Areas of
Complex Geology, II, eds Cassinis R., Helbig K., Panza
G.F., Journal of Applied Geophysics, 30, 149 160.
10. Feng-xin Zhao and Yu-shan Zhang (2006), Artificial
Ground Motion Compatible with Specified Peak Velocity
and Target Spectrum, Acta Seismologica Sinica, 19 (4):
461-471
11. Gazetas, G. and Dakoulas, P. (1992) Seismic Analysis
and Design of Rockfill Dams: State-of-the-Art, Soil
Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 11(1), 27-61.
12. Gurumoorthy, C., Sasidhar, P., Arumugham, V. and
Mathur, R.K. (2004) Sub-Surface Investigations on Deep
Saline Groundwater of Charnockit E Rock Formation,
Kalpakkam, India, Environmental Monitoring and
Assessment, 91(1), 211222.
13. Kramer,
S.L.
(1996)
Geotechnical
Earthquake
Engineering, Pearson Education Pvt. Ltd, Reprinted 2003,
Delhi, India
14. Krinitzsky, E.L. (1995). Deterministic versus probabilistic
seismic hazard analysis for critical structures. Engineering
Geology, 40(1):17.
15. Narayan, J.P. and Sharma, M.L. (2004) Effects of Local
Geology On Damage Severity During Bhuj, India
Earthquake, 13th World Conference on Earthquake
Engineering Vancouver, B.C., Canada, Paper No. 2042
16. Ordonez, G.A. (2000) SHAKE 2000: A computer
program for the 1-D analysis of geotechnical earthquake
engineering problems Lacey, Washington, 2000
http://www.shake2000.com.
17. Panza, G.F., Vaccari, F. and Cazzaro, R. (1999)
Deterministic seismic hazard assessment; F. Wenzel et al.
(eds.), Vrancea, Earthquakes, Tectonic and Risk
Mitigation.
Kluwer
Academic
Publishers,
The
Netherlands, 269 - 286.
18. Park, C.B., Miller, R.D. and Xia, J. (1999) Multi-channel
analysis of surface waves, Geophysics, 64(3), 800-808.
19. Raghu Kanth, S.T.G. and Iyengar, R.N. (2007) Estimation
of seismic spectral acceleration in Peninsular India.
Journal of Earth System Sciences, 116(3), 199 214.
20. Robertson, P.K. and Wride, C.E. (1997) Cyclic
liquefaction and its evaluation based on the SPT and CPT.
In Proceedings of the NCEER Workshop on Evaluation of
Liquefaction Resistance of Soils, Technical Report
NCEER-97-0022: National Center for Earthquake
Engineering Research, Buffalo, NY, pp. 4187.
21. Rollins, K.M., Evans, M.D., Diehl, N.B. and Daily, W.D.

Paper No. abs 116

(1998) Shear modulus and damping relationships for

gravels, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental
Engineering, 124(5), 396405.
22. Schnabel, P.B., Lysmer, J. and Seed, H.B. (1972)
SHAKE: A Computer Program for Earthquake Response
Analysis of Horizontally Layered Sites, Earthquake
Engineering Research Center, University of California,
Berkeley: Report No. UCB/EERC-1972/12: 102
23. Schnabel, P.B. (1973) Effect of Local Geology and
Distance from Source on Earthquake Ground Motions,
PhD Thesis, University of California, Berkeley, California.
24. Seed, H.B., and Idriss, I.M. (1969) The influence of soil
conditions on ground motions during earthquakes. Journal
of the Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering
Division, ASCE, 94, 93-137
25. Seed, H.B., and Idriss. I.M. (1970) Soil Moduli and
Damping Factors for Dynamic Response Analysis, Report
No. EERC 70-10, University of California, Berkeley
26. Seed, H.B., Idriss, I.M. and Arango, I. (1983) Evaluation
of liquefaction potential using field performance data,
Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 109(3), 458482.
27. Seed, H.B. and Sun, J.H. (1989) Implication of Site
effects in the Mexico City earthquake of September 19,
1985 for earthquake-resistance-design criteria in the San
Francisco Bay Area of California, Report No.
UCB/EERC-89/03, University of California, Berkeley,
California.
28. Sitharam, T.G., Anbazhagan, P., & Ganesha Raj, K.
(2006). Use of remote sensing and seismotectonic
parameters for seismic hazard analysis of Bangalore.
Natural Hazards and Earth System Science, 6(6):927939.
29. Skempton, A.W. (1986) Standard Penetration Test
Procedures and the Effects in Sands of Overburden
Pressure, Relative Density, Particle Size, Ageing and
Overconsolidation, Geotechnique, (36)3, 425-447.
30. Stewart, J.P., Liu, A.H. and Choi, Y. (2003)
Amplification Factors for Spectral Acceleration in
Tectonically Active Regions Bulletin of the Seismological
Society of America, 93(1), 332352
31. Towhata, I. (2008) Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering.
Springer Verlag- Berlin Heidelberg.
32. Vucetic, M. and Dobry, R. (1991) Effect of Soil Plasticity
on Cyclic Response, Journal of Geotechnical
Engineering ASCE, 117(1), 89-107.
33. Youd, T.L., Idriss, I.M., Andrus, R.D., Arango, I.,
Castro, G., Christian, J.T., Dobry, R., Liam Finn, W.D.,
Harder, L.F., Hynes, M.E, Ishihara, K., Koester, J.P.,
Laio, S.S.C., Marcuson, W.F., Martin, G.R., Mitchell,
J.K., Moriwaki, Y., Power, M.S., Robertson, P.K., Seed,
R.B. and Stokoe, K.H. (2001) Liquefaction resistance of
soils. summary report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998
NCEER/NSF workshops on evaluation of liquefaction
resistance of soils, Journal of Geotechnical and
Geoenvironmental
Engineering,
127(10),817833.