SITE CHARACTERISATION BY THE HVSR TECHNIQUE

Pavlick Harutoonian1, Chin J. Leo1, Samanthika Liyanapathirana1 and Henry Wong2

1
School of Computing, Engineering and Mathematics and the Centre of Civionics Research, University of Western
Sydney, Australia
2
Université de Lyon, Laboratoire Géomatériaux FRE3237 CNRS, Ecole Nationale des Travaux Publics de l’Etat,
France

ABSTRACT
A geotechnical characterisation study of a proposed development site has been conducted using the non-invasive
passive ambient noise HVSR technique. The simplicity of the HVSR technique is manifested in having a short setup
time (relative to other methods), and precluding the need for any active excitation sources and external cabling. In the
study a lightweight battery operated sensor was utilised to capture the prevailing ambient noise (microtremors)
reflecting the structure in the ground. Microtremor measurements were taken at regularly spaced stations at the
proposed development site, with each recording at a station taking no more than 10 minutes. Thus the entire site was
measured expeditiously within hours. The site characterisation involved (1) estimating the site fundamental resonance
frequency and amplification, parameters of interest in the study of a site’s susceptibility to seismic activities (2)
interpreting the measured HVSR curves for a preliminary assessment of the soil layering and (3) fitting the HVSR
curves to a theoretical model to estimate the shear wave velocity (Vs) profile of the ground. Results from the HVSR
technique have been verified against data from classical invasive methods (viz. borehole data and SPT). Further
verification has also been made against the results from the array based MASW technique. The study suggests that the
HVSR technique could be used for characterising a site in combination with a reduced number of mechanical in situ
tests, and especially to fill in the gaps of the soil stratigraphy at the locations not covered by the mechanical tests.

1 INTRODUCTION
Site investigation is an indispensable part of geotechnical design. Information gathered from site investigation will have
a profound influence on the design, performance, safety and the eventual cost of construction. Traditional in situ
techniques (e.g. SPT, CPT, DMT) are commonly applied in conjunction with complementary laboratory methods (e.g.
soil classification, triaxial, shear box tests) to assess the geotechnical characteristics of a site. These methods are
generally thought to provide reliable geotechnical data, albeit at a relatively high unit cost and effort. More recently,
non-invasive array based surface wave methods (e.g. SASW, MASW, ReMi, etc) have received much attention for
providing a cost effective and time efficient means of site characterisation (e.g. Lai & Rix 1998; Xia et al., 1999),
although not at the same level of accuracy as the traditional in situ methods. Array-based surface wave methods
essentially rely on a test set up comprising an array of interconnected geophones, and in some cases the use of active
noise sources (e.g. sledgehammer hit to the ground, accelerated weight drops, etc) to measure the phase velocity
dispersion curve. Theoretical dispersion curves are then fitted to the measured curve to infer the shear wave velocity
(Vs) profile revealing the stratigraphy of the ground.
The Horizontal to Vertical Spectral Ratio (HVSR) surface wave technique, has been applied in this paper to
geotechnically characterise a potential development site, located at the Penrith (Kingswood) campus of the University
of Western Sydney (UWS). This technique is unique among surface wave methods. This is because it does not attempt
to measure the phase velocity dispersion curve, but the HVSR of the microtremors of a site. Microtremors (or ambient
noises) are ubiquitous in the Earth surface and are attributed to the natural atmospheric phenomena (e.g. ocean current,
wind) and cultural sources (e.g. anthropic activities such as traffic, construction and plant operations). Previous
investigators have applied this technique to estimate the site effects (e.g. resonance frequencies and site amplification of
a site), earthquake risk assessment and for seismic microzonation in Australia (e.g. Coutel & Mora 1998; Asten et al.,
2005; Claprood & Asten 2007; Roberts & Asten 2007; Turnbull 2008; Hao & Gaull 2009; Liang et al., 2009), but not
for geotechnical characterisation of a site as has been proposed in the current paper. Empirical experimental evidence
and theoretical modelling results have suggested that the shape of the H/V (Horizontal/Vertical) spectral ratio curve
depends mainly on the local geology or stratigraphy of the subsurface (Nakamura 1989; Fah et al., 2003). This has lead
to recent studies successfully determining the subsurface structure of a site based on the forward modelling of an
assumed soil stratification and on the measured HVSR curves of the microtremors (e.g. Fah et al., 2003; Arai &
Tokimatsu 2004; Lunedei & Albarello 2009, 2010). This is a process of fitting the theoretical HVSR curve generated
from a theoretical model to the measured HVSR curve to infer the Vs profile reflecting the layering of the ground.
In this paper, the site characterisation using the HVSR technique involved: (1) estimating the fundamental resonance
frequency and site amplification, (2) interpreting measured HVSR curves to obtain a preliminary assessment of the

3 Australian Geomechanics Vol 47 No 3 September 2012 101

SITE CHARACTERISATION BY THE HVSR TECHNIQUE HARUTOONIAN et al.

ground structure and (3) constrained forward modelling of the measured HVSR curves to infer the Vs profile which
conveys the stiffness of the ground. In the study, a methodology was established to utilise bore log data at some stations
to “calibrate” the HVSR curves as a means to improve the site characterisation. The results of the HVSR technique
were verified against data from the remaining boreholes as well as from an independent MASW method.

2 SITE CONDITIONS AND TEST PROCEDURES

2.1 TEST SITE
A future development site at the Penrith (Kingswood) campus of UWS was made available for this study entailing an
extensive geotechnical survey based on the passive ambient noise HVSR technique. In situ borehole and SPT data from
previous tests were also available for constraining the HVSR technique (this is discussed below) and for the verification
of the HVSR results.
The campus lies on the Cumberland plain to the east of the Blue Mountain plateau within the Sydney Basin. The
geology of the campus site is dominated by Bringelly shale of the Wianamatta group. The near surface soil is made up
of fills from more recent construction activities. According to available borehole data, the surface of the site consists of
highly variable depths of fill ranging from 0.4 m to 2.6 m, assessed to be mostly poorly to moderately compacted silty
clay of low to high plasticity. The upper soils, mostly silty and sandy clays, were inferred to be of alluvial origin. Some
of the deeper silty clays, on approaching the bedrock profile, were assessed to be of residual origin since some
contained remnants of the shale structure (Jeffrey and Katauskas, 2008). The silty and sandy clays are generally of very
stiff variety. Very low to low strength weathered shale or bedrock is encountered at depths ranging from 3.6 m to 13.6
m at borehole termination.
The locations of the HVSR stations (denoted by squares) and the available borehole locations (denoted by the circles)
are shown in Figure 1. The stations are regularly spaced and arranged in three rows by five lines making a total of 15
test stations. The layout of the test stations has been planned taking cognizance of the locations of the prior borehole
investigations, and deliberate situating of some stations at the same locations as the boreholes.

Figure 1: Test grid at the Penrith (Kingswood) campus of UWS. HVSR only measurements are shown by squares and
HVSR measurements at borehole locations are shown by circles.

2.2 MEASUREMENT OF AMBIENT VIBRATIONS

Ambient noise or microtremor measurements were made using a highly portable three component (2 horizontal and 1
vertical directions) high-resolution electro-dynamic sensor (TrominoTM from Micromed). Since these measurements
were made in compliance with the guidelines of SESAME (2004) to satisfy the criteria for reliable and clear HVSR
results, a step-by-step methodology will not be repeated here, except to highlight a few significant points. Before
measuring ambient noise, the sensor was aligned, secured and coupled with the ground. Ambient noise was sampled at
128 Hz for 10 minutes at each site to ensure adequate statistical sampling in the range 0.1 – 50 Hz. The HVSR curves
were calculated by averaging the H/V (horizontal/vertical) ratios obtained after dividing the signal into non-overlapping
20 second windows. Each window was detrended, tapered, padded, Fast Fourier Transformed (FFT) and smoothed with
triangular windows of width equal to 10% of the central frequency.

102 Australian Geomechanics Vol 47 No 3 September 2012

SITE CHARACTERISATION BY THE HVSR TECHNIQUE HARUTOONIAN et al.

H EW × H NS
HVSRm = (1)
V
The two horizontal EW and NS components were combined using the geometric average, to create the single horizontal
(H) spectrum. This was then divided by the vertical component to produce the measured HVSR curve, as shown in
Equation (1).

2.3 ESTIMATING THE SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY (VS) PROFILE OF THE GROUND
The flow chart for estimating the shear wave velocity (Vs) at the test station is shown in Figure 2. The main steps of the
flow chart are: (1) measurement of the microtremor ground motion at the test station (2) processing of the measured
microtremor data to give the measured HVSR curve (steps 1 and 2 have been discussed in the section above) (3)
computing the theoretical HVSR curve based on an assumed constrained soil model, then (4) inferring the Vs profile, by
minimising the visual difference between measured and theoretical HVSR curves. Steps 3 and 4 rely on an iterative
process to achieve an acceptable HVSR fitting. The assumed soil model consists of parallel, homogeneous and isotropic
layers of semi-infinite viscoelastic media within which Rayleigh and Love waves are generated by surrounding ambient
noise propagation. The present paper applied the model of Lunedei and Albarello (2009) to compute the theoretical
HVSR curve required in the forward modelling. However, the basis of their model can be traced further back to Arai
and Tokimatsu (2004). Here, an important assumption is made that the ambient noise (microtremors) in the ground are
the result of randomly distributed independent noise sources comprising vertical and horizontal harmonic point forces
situated outside a source-free area enclosing the test station. The source-free area limits the influence of body (P and S
type) waves on the ground motions at the station since they diminish more rapidly with distance compared to the
surface waves.

Figure 2: Flow chart of the process involved in estimating the Vs profile of the ground.
In the soil model (Figure 3), the layers are characterised by shear wave velocity (Vs1,....,Vsn), primary wave velocity
(Vp1,....,Vpn), soil layer thickness (y1,….,yn), bulk density (ρ1,...,ρn) and quality factors (Qs1,...., Qsn) and (Qp1,...., Qpn). Vs
and y, are the parameters that have the greatest influence on the fitting of the theoretical HVSR curve to the measured
HVSR curve. The soil model is numbered so that the uppermost layer at the free surface is layer 1 and the bedrock half-
space is layer n.

Australian Geomechanics Vol 47 No 3 September 2012 103

SITE CHARACTERISATION BY THE HVSR TECHNIQUE HARUTOONIAN et al.

Layer 1 Vs1, Vp1, y1, ρ1, Qs1, Qp1

Layer 2 Vs2, Vp2, y2, ρ2, Qs2, Qp2

Layer 3 Vs3, Vp3, y3, ρ3, Qs3, Qp3

Layer 4 Vs4, Vp4, y4, ρ4, Qs4, Qp4

⁞   ⁞
Layer n Vsn, Vpn, y∞, ρn, Qsn, Qpn

Figure 3: Layered soil model

3 EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
3.1 INTERPRETATION OF MEASURED HVSR CURVES
The HVSR measurements from all test stations (Figure 1) in the area are superposed in Figure 4. Variations between the
HVSR curves are expected and can be caused by several factors, including changes in layering thickness and material
properties. For the entire site, two common and identifiable significant characteristics were clearly observed in the
superposed curves, namely:
1. The largest HVSR amplitude (known henceforth as the “predominant peak”) occurring at the fundamental
resonance frequency (f0) (ranging from 4.5 – 6 Hz),
2. A HVSR peak possibly associated with a higher mode of f0 occurring at approximately 3f0, and other
discernible secondary resonance peaks at frequencies above f0 (or in the range 12 – 50 Hz).
In (1), the predominant peak indicates an impedance contrast between the bedrock and overlying surface layers, and the
amplitude of the peak correlates to the strength of the impedance contrast. Impedance is defined here as the product of
the density and the shear wave velocity, that is, ρVs. The frequency at which the predominant peak occurs has been
shown in previous studies to correspond to the fundamental resonance frequency of the site (see, e.g. Bonnefoy-Claudet
et al., 2006 and references therein). Thus a measurement of the HVSR would provide a relatively simple means to
determine the fundamental resonance frequency and a measure of the site amplification, collectively known as the site
effects, parameters which are of interest in the study of the susceptibility of a site to seismic activities. The measured
HVSR curves in this area produce a ‘double peak’ at some stations, which is believed to be caused by a combination of
cultural activities (i.e. traffic, human activities, etc) and the poorly defined transition (impedance contrast) from surface
layers to bedrock (i.e. transition zone from weathered soil to the stiff bedrock). In (2), the presence of secondary
resonance peaks if confirmed as not predominantly associated with the higher modes of f0 would indicate presence of
impedance contrasts within the surface layers (e.g. transition from fill to natural material at the site). Since there is also
a real possibility that a secondary peak at 3f0 is due to the first higher mode of f0, this possibility cannot be confirmed or
ruled out simply by visual inspection of the measured HVSR curve. Consequently, constrained forward modelling in
conjunction with independent mechanical tests is invoked in this study to resolve this ambiguity.

Figure 4: A summary of the measured HVSR curves from the proposed UWS development site.

104 Australian Geomechanics Vol 47 No 3 September 2012

SITE CHARACTERISATION BY THE HVSR TECHNIQUE HARUTOONIAN et al.

3.2 CONSTRAINED MODELLING OF MEASURED HVSR CURVES

This section outlines the procedures for constrained forward modelling proposed by the authors to infer the Vs profile
and to resolve ambiguities of the HVSR curves by taking advantage of soil information already available from in situ
bore logs. The aim of the proposed methodology is not to completely replace invasive mechanical methods (e.g. bore
logs, SPT) but to minimise the number of invasive tests required. For the purpose of this study, the four corner bore logs
(X1, Z1, X5, Z5 in Figure 1) were used to “calibrate” the measured HVSR curves at the same corresponding locations.
The two remaining bore logs (X3 and Z3) will be used for verification of the HVSR results. The “calibration”
methodology is described first. At the start, and beginning from right to left, from high to low frequency (i.e. from
shallow to deep soil), the amplitude and frequency of the predominant and secondary peaks of the HVSR curves were
identified. These features represent possible impedance contrasts identifying significant material changes picked up by
the ambient noise recordings, as well as giving an indication of the number and the likely depth of the soil layering. The
thicknesses of the soil layers revealed by the bore log were used to provide a reliable guide to constrain the layering
thickness of the soil model applied in the forward modelling. The soil type, the SPT data and depth of the water table
moreover provide feasible constraining ranges for the Vs and Vp values of the soil layers. These constraining data were
used to formulate an “initial guess” of the soil model while taking cognizance of the identified features from the HVSR
curve. A trial-and-error iteration of the layered soil properties of the soil model was then undertaken with due regard for
the constraints and the identified features of the HVSR curve to seek an improved fit at each successive iteration, until
the best possible fit deemed by visual inspection is achieved. It is noted that during the trial-and-error process, some of
the secondary peaks could be fitted (i.e. the theoretical and measured HVSR curves are in agreement at those points in
the curves) with a soil model that is consistent with the bore log, while other secondary peaks may not. The ones that
did not fit were thus ruled out as reflecting the impedance contrasts within the surface layers. At present state of
knowledge, this is a limitation of the methodology and some independent reliable tests (e.g. bore logs, SPT) will be
required to resolve the ambiguities.
The “calibrated” soil models (namely, the ones with the “best fit” from the four corner stations X1, Z1, X5, Z5) were
subsequently applied as the “initial guess” to infer the Vs profiles of the interspersing test stations inside the site area.
Here, the procedures for forward modelling are essentially the same as the above, using the constraints adopted from the
nearest corner bore log as a starting guide. Adjustments were then made to the “initial guess” with successive iterations
and to the constraints, if this is required, to achieve the best possible fit. It is noted that some flexibility was exercised
regarding the imposition of the constraints for these stations since they are deemed not to be bound by the results from
the bore logs. The HVSR curves for stations X3 and Z3 (both with bore logs) were “fitted blind” assuming no prior
knowledge of the bore log at these locations. This is because the results from X3 and Z3 were subsequently used for the
verification study as discussed in one of the sections below. The results from the remaining stations were applied to fill
the stratigraphy gaps at the locations not covered by the bore logs. The trial-and-error visual inspection approach has
been found to work well in this study as exemplified by the goodness-of-fit results at stations X5 (“calibration” case),
Z3 (“verification” case) and Y5 (“no bore log” case) shown in Figures 5a, b and c respectively. Similar levels of curve
fitting were achieved for the remainder of the stations but are not shown due to space limitations.

Figure 5: Measured and theoretical HVSR curves at stations (a) X5, (b) Z3 and (c) Y5 (shown left to right). Solid line
shows the measured HVSR curve and broken line shows the theoretical HVSR curve.

Australian Geomechanics Vol 47 No 3 September 2012 105

SITE CHARACTERISATION BY THE HVSR TECHNIQUE HARUTOONIAN et al.

The resulting Vs profiles inferred from the fitting of HVSR measurements at stations X5, Z3 and Y5 are shown in
Figure 6. The constrained forward modelling in conjunction with the bore log data helped to clarify and/or confirm the
key features of the HVSR curves:
1. A large jump in Vs occurs as the soil transitions from the surface layers to the shale bedrock at 3.55 m (X5), 6
m (Z3) and 4.9 m (Y5), and this is confirmed by the layering information from the bore log data. Working
backwards from left to right of the HVSR curve, the predominant HVSR peak with the lowest resonance
frequency (which is the fundamental frequency f0 ranging between 4.5 and 6 Hz for this site) of the measured
and the theoretical HVSR curves are fitted. Thus this peak is confirmed as the one associated with the deepest
impedance contrast defined by the surface layers/bedrock interface.
2. Sizeable jumps occur in Vs at depths of 0.55 m, 1.2 m and 0.8 m, for stations X5, Z3 and Y5 respectively,
showing smaller impedance contrasts at more shallow surface layers, which are also reflected in the layering
data from the bore logs. These jumps are able to be confirmed as the impedance contrast associated with the
fitted resonance peaks between theoretical and measured HVSR curves, at frequencies of approximately 37
Hz, 21 Hz and 29 Hz to the right of the fundamental resonance frequencies.

Figure 6: Estimated Vs profiles for stations X5 (solid line), Z3 (broken line) and Y5 (dotted line).

4 DISCUSSION
4.1 VERIFICATION OF RESULTS FROM HVSR MEASUREMENTS
A profile-to-profile comparison was made between the HVSR estimated Vs profiles and mechanical borehole data.
Figure 7 shows the soil layering data extracted from the bore log aligned against the estimated Vs profiles at two
locations, X1 and X5. The bore log is shown to 10 m, the depth of refusal and/or termination of the augering in shale
bedrock. The borehole data and Figure 7 clearly identify three distinct material layers, the uppermost layer comprising
fill material, the middle layer consisting of silty clay/sandy clay overlying the third layer which is a shale bedrock.
Inferred Vs profiles from trial-and-error fitting of the HVSR curves at stations X1 (left) and X5 (right) are shown to be
in good agreement with the relative stratigraphic layering from the mechanical bore log, which demonstrate that it is
possible to “calibrate” the fitting of the HVSR curves to the bore log satisfactorily using the above procedures described
by the authors. Figure 7 also shows the inferred Vs profile at station X3 which has been fitted “blind” assuming no prior
knowledge of the bore log at X3. The good agreement between the inferred Vs profile and the bore log at station X3 can
be observed in Figure 7.

106 Australian Geomechanics Vol 47 No 3 September 2012

SITE CHARACTERISATION BY THE HVSR TECHNIQUE HARUTOONIAN et al.

Figure 7: Verification – Boreholes at X1 (left), X3 (centre – fitted blind) and X5 (right) with their respective estimated
Vs profiles.
Figure 8 shows the relative stratigraphy of the Vs inferred from the HVSR measurements along Line 5. X5 and Z5 are
the “calibration” stations while Y5 has no bore log data. In this instance, HVSR results at Y5 confirm that the relative
stratigraphy could also be reasonably predicted by a linear interpolation of the profiles at X5 and Z5 (joined by broken
lines). Although the HVSR justification of the linear interpolation appears trivial, it adds confidence to the results from
the site characterisation study.

Figure 8: Verification – Boreholes at X5 (left) and Z5 (right) with estimated Vs profiles at HVSR stations X5 (left), Y5
(centre) and Z5 (right).
The estimated Vs profile inferred from the HVSR curve at station Y5 has also been verified against the profile deduced
from an independent MASW method. Here, a total of 19 single component (vertical) geophones were connected at a
spacing of 3 m continuously along Line 5 (Figure 1). Figure 9a shows the fitting of the theoretical and experimental
dispersion curves from the MASW test while Figure 9b shows the superposed Vs profiles from HVSR curve at station
Y5 and the MASW measurements taken along line 5. HVSR station Y5 is chosen because it is located at the mid-point
of the MASW projection at line 5. The profiles from both methods showed good agreement in respect to the relative
stratigraphy and absolute Vs values.

Australian Geomechanics Vol 47 No 3 September 2012 107

SITE CHARACTERISATION BY THE HVSR TECHNIQUE HARUTOONIAN et al.

Figure 9: Verification – MASW projected Vs along Line 5 (a) Phase velocity dispersion curve with active sources at
both ends (theoretical dispersion curve is shown by the white broken line), and (b) MASW estimated Vs profile at line 5
against HVSR estimated Vs profile at station Y5.

4.2 EMPIRICAL RELATIONSHIP – VS AND SPT-N

The Vs profile, if established, could potentially reveal valuable information on the stiffness and geotechnical properties
of the near surface (Lai & Rix 1998; Xia et al., 1999). This argument is justified from the standpoint of the theoretical
definition of Vs of a soil, which is given by:

µ (2)
Vs =
ρ
where, µ = shear modulus and ρ = bulk density. Equation (2) reveals that for constant density, Vs is a power function of
the shear modulus (a measure of the soil stiffness) of degree 0.5. A number of empirical relationships between Vs and
the SPT values have been established (e.g. Wei et al., 1996; Hasancebi & Ulusay, 2007 and references therein). Similar
relationships have been reported for Vs and CPT (qc) values (e.g. Karray et al., 2011 and references therein), Vs and dry
density (ρd) (e.g. Kim et al., 2001) and, Vs and bearing capacity (qa) (e.g. Tezcan et al., 2006). Due to the availability of
SPT data, this study seeks to identify a relationship between HVSR estimated Vs and SPT data for the proposed
development site at UWS.
The results from the UWS Penrith (Kingswood) campus are plotted in Figure 10 representing Vs in the range of 110 –
300 m/s versus uncorrected SPT-N in the range of 4 – 21. Ordinary least-squares regression of the data points yielded
the power law relationship (R2 = 0.93):

Vs = 47.5N 0.60 (3)

Although Vs is a stiffness parameter and SPT-N is strength parameter determined at different strain values, Figure 10
shows a good correlation between the two parameters, at least for the site under consideration. Note that this
relationship is site and soil specific. However, when used with caution it allows for an initial estimate of the SPT-N
value using Vs measurements at locations which are not covered by the mechanical SPT.

108 Australian Geomechanics Vol 47 No 3 September 2012

SITE CHARACTERISATION BY THE HVSR TECHNIQUE HARUTOONIAN et al.

Figure 10: HVSR estimated Vs versus measured SPT-N values.

5 CONCLUSIONS
The passive ambient noise HVSR technique has been applied to characterise a potential development site at the Penrith
(Kingswood) campus of UWS. The following components of the HVSR technique for geotechnical site characterisation
have been established in the present paper: (1) determining the site fundamental resonance frequency and the site
amplification, the parameters reflecting the ground’s susceptibility to seismic activities (2) interpreting the measured
HVSR curves to give a preliminary insight of the structure of the measured ground and (3) forward modelling of the
theoretical HVSR curves to estimate the shear wave velocity (Vs) of the ground in conjunction with available borehole
data, to confirm preliminary assessments and to provide detailed results regarding the soil stratigraphy. In the forward
modelling, a methodology was established to utilise available bore log data at some stations to “calibrate” the HVSR
curves as a means to improve the site characterisation. The results of the HVSR technique were verified against data
from the remaining boreholes as well as from an independent MASW method. This paper has shown that in
collaboration with mechanical in situ tests, the HVSR technique can be efficiently applied to characterise a site and
especially to fill in the gaps of the soil stratigraphy at the locations not covered by the localised and more costly
mechanical tests.

6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Pavlick Harutoonian is supported by a higher degree research PhD scholarship from the University of Western Sydney.
This study is partially funded by the Australian Research Council, Penrith Lakes Development Corporation and Coffey
Geotechnics.

7 REFERENCES
Arai, H. & Tokimatsu, K. 2004, 'S-Wave velocity profiling by inversion of microtremor H/V spectrum', Bulletin of the
Seismological Society of America, vol. 94, no. 1, pp. 53-63.
Asten, M.W., Stephenson, W.R. & Davenport, P.N. 2005, 'Shear-wave Velocity Profile for Holocene Sediments
Measured from Microtremor Array Studies, SCPT, and Seismic Refraction', Journal of Environmental and
Engineering Geophysics, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 235-242.
Bonnefoy-Claudet, S., Cornou, C., Bard, P.Y., Cotton, F., Moczo, P., Kristek, J. & Fah, D. 2006, 'H/V ratio: a tool for
site effects evaluation. Results from 1-D noise simulations.', Geophysical Journal International, vol. 167, pp.
827-837.
Claprood, M. & Asten, M.W. 2007, 'Use of SPAC, HVSR and strong motion analysis for site hazard study over the
Tamar Valley in Launceston, Tasmania. ', AEES2007, Paper No. 16, Wollongong, NSW, Australia.
Coutel, F. & Mora, P. 1998, 'Simulation-based comparison of four site-response estimation techniques', Bulletin of the
Seismological Society of America, vol. 88, no. 1, pp. 30-42.
Fah, D., Kind, F. & Giardini, D. 2003, 'Inversion of local S-wave velocity structures from average H/V ratios, and their
use for the estimation of site-effects', Journal of Seismology, vol. 7, pp. 449-467.
Hao, H. & Gaull, B.A. 2009, 'Estimation of strong seismic ground motion for engineering use in Perth Western
Australia', Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 909-924.
Hasancebi, N. & Ulusay, R. 2007, 'Empirical correlations between shear wave velocity and penetration resistance for
ground shaking assessments', Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment vol. 66, pp. 203-213.

Australian Geomechanics Vol 47 No 3 September 2012 109

SITE CHARACTERISATION BY THE HVSR TECHNIQUE HARUTOONIAN et al.

Jeffrey and Katauskas 2008, Report to the University of Western Sydney on additional geotechnical investigation for
proposed campus library at University of Western Sydney campus off John Flak Avenue, Kingswood, Sydney.
Karray, M., Lefebvre, G., Ethier, Y. & Bigras, A. 2011, 'Influence of particle size on the correlation between shear
wave velocity and cone tip resistance', Canadian Geotechnical Journal, vol. 48, pp. 599 - 615.
Kim, D.S., Shin, M.K. & Park, H.C. 2001, 'Evaluation of density in layer compaction using SASW method', Soil
Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, vol. 21, pp. 39 - 46.
Lai, C.G. & Rix, G.J. 1998, Simultaneous inversion of Rayleigh phase velocity and attenuation for near-surface site
characterisation, Georgia Insitute of Technology.
Liang, J.Z., Hao, H., Wang, Y. & Bi, K.M. 2009, 'Design Earthquake Ground Motion Prediction for Perth Metropolitan
Area with Microtremor Measurements for Site Characterization', Journal of Earthquake Engineering, vol. 13,
no. 7, pp. 997-1028.
Lunedei, E. & Albarello, D. 2009, 'On the seismic noise wavefield in a weakly dissipative layered earth', Geophysical
Journal International, vol. 177, pp. 1001 - 1014.
Lunedei, E. & Albarello, D. 2010, 'Theoretical HVSR curves from full wavefield modelling of ambient vibrations in a
weakly dissipative layered Earth', Geophysical Journal International, vol. 181, pp. 1093 - 1108.
Nakamura, Y. 1989, 'A method for dynamic characteristics estimation of subsurface using microtremor on the ground
surface', Quarterly Report of Railway Technical Research Institute (RTRI), vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 25 - 33.
Roberts, J. & Asten, M.W. 2007, 'Further investigation over quaternary silts using the spatial autocorrelation (SPAC)
and horizontal to vertical spectral ratio (HVSR) microtremor methods', Exploration Geophysics, vol. 38, pp.
175 - 183.
SESAME 2004, Guidelines for the implementation of the H/V spectral ratio tecnique on ambient vibrations.
Measurements, processing and interpretation. WP12 European Commission - Research General Directorate
Project No. EVG1-CT-2000-00026 SESAME, Report Number D23.12.
Tezcan, S.S., Keceli, A. & Ozdemir, Z. 2006, 'Allowable bearing capacity of shallow foundations based on shear wave
velocity', Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, vol. 24, pp. 203 - 218.
Turnbull, M.L. 2008, 'Relative seismic shaking vulnerability microzonation using an adaptation of the Nakamura
horizontal to vertical spectral ratio method', Journal of Earth System Science, vol. 117, S2, pp. 879 - 895.
Wei, B.Z., Pezeshk, S., Chang, T.S., Hall, K.H. & Liu, H.P. 1996, 'An empirical method to estimate shear wave velocity
of soils in the New Madrid seismic zone', Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, vol. 15, pp. 399 - 408.
Xia, J., Miller, R.D. & Park, C.B. 1999, 'Estimation of near-surface shear-wave velocity by inversion of Rayleigh
waves', Geophysics, vol. 64, no. 3, pp. 691 - 700.

110 Australian Geomechanics Vol 47 No 3 September 2012