See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/320937632

Seismic Site Characterization Of The Marmara Region Using Masw, Remi And
Microtremor Methods

Conference Paper · November 2017

DOI: 10.3997/2214-4609.201702576

CITATIONS READS

0 146

15 authors, including:

Cengiz Kurtulus Fadime Sertçelik

Kocaeli University Kocaeli University
53 PUBLICATIONS   279 CITATIONS    35 PUBLICATIONS   85 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Hamdullah Livaoğlu İbrahim Sertcelik

Kocaeli University Kocaeli University
31 PUBLICATIONS   25 CITATIONS    30 PUBLICATIONS   123 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Determining the risk analysis and management of urban disaster areas of Kocaeli- Gölcük- Değirmendere town View project

Detecting the site classification of Turkey's strong ground motion stations with hybrid schmes View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Hamdullah Livaoğlu on 23 November 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Introduction

The Marmara region, which is located in a seismically active region along the North Anatolian Fault
zone, is subjected to frequent and damaging earthquakes. This area has subjected two destructive
earthquakes existed on 17 August 1999 (Mw 7.4) and 12 November 1999 (Mw 7.1). About 20,000
people died and more than 100,000 people were injured. The Marmara region consists of 11 large
cities with populations of more than 24 million. There is heavy industrialization, especially in the
northern part of the Izmit Gulf, whereas the neighboring area to the south is predominantly residential
and heavily populated. Destructive earthquakes occurred in the past have shown that local site
conditions have grate effects on ground motions. Sediments covering on firm bedrock can amplify
seismic waves and cause severe damage during a destructive earthquake. S-wave velocity (Vs)
structure is an important parameter in site amplification calculations for earthquake damages
scenarios. The average shear wave velocity averaged S-wave velocity of the top 30 m strata (Vs30) is
considered essential for seismic site characterization to estimate the local amplification factor of the
seismic waves during an earthquake.(Rahman et al., 2016). Seismic refraction, MASW (Multichannel
Analysis of Surface Waves), ReMi (Refraction Micotremor) (Louie, 2001; Pancha et al., 2008) and
SASW (Spectra Analysis of Surface Wave), are all well-known noninvasive techniques for estimating
S-wave velocities. Therefore, MASW and REMI surveys were applied to determine S-wave velocities
from the surface waves which are generated and amplified with long durations within sedimentary
layers (Seo et al., 1980). Microtremor is used to determine resonant frequency and amplification
factor, since Nakamura (1989) proposed a Horizontal to Vertical Spectra Ratio (HVSR) method for
earthquake and microtremor. He has taken into consideration that a seismic noise tends to induce
Rayleigh waves in vertical component because the surface artificial sources have mostly prevailing
vertical motions since the Rayleigh waves are assumed as noise of microtremor.

Many site effect studies in terms of microtremor survey, earthquake observations, surface-wave
survey and bore-hole data for diffrent regions in Turkey such as (e.g. Ateş and Bayülke, 1982; Erdik;
1984; Ambraseys et al., 1993; İnan et al., 1996; Aydan and Hasgör, 1997; Durukal et al., 1998; Çelebi
et al., 2001; Erdik and Durukal, 2001; Ozalaybey et al., 2002; Rathje et al., 2003; Ergin et al., 2004;
Kalafat et al., 2007; Erdogan, 2008; Sandıkkaya, 2008; Sandıkkaya et al., 2009; Kalkan and Gürkan,
2004; Ulusay et al., 2004; Yılmaz et al., 2008).

In this study seismic refraction, Multichannel Analysis of Surface Waves (MASW), refraction
microtremor (ReMi) and microtremor studies were conducted at 54 strong-motion stations of AFAD
located in the Marmara region to investigate S-wave velocity distribution, dominant period and
frequency values, Fig.1. In addition, the engineering properties such as Dynamic elasticity modulus,
Poisson’s ratio, bearing capacity and site classes of the investigation area were determined and
mapped.

Data Acquisition and Analysis

Seismic refraction data were recorded for 2 sec with a sampling rate of 1 sec using a 50kg weight
dropper energy source equipped with a hydraulic weight lifting unit driven by an electric motor
powered by a battery. 48 4.5 Hz P-wave geophones were fixed at 2m intervals in line. Data were
collected from forward, midpoint and reverse shootings with 2m offsets and were transmitted to two
24-channel GEODE recording units and converted from analog to digital form. The shot records at
each side were used in the analysis of the surface waves (MASW) to estimate the Vs profiles of the

9th Congress of the Balkan Geophysical Society

5-9 November 2017, Antalya, Turkey
topmost 30m. The ReMi data were recorded for 32 sec with a sampling rate of 2 ms with the same
field layout using ambient noise generally coming from wind and traffic as a seismic source. 24-25
records were stacked at each ReMi setup. The REMI and MASW velocity spectra were combined to
illustrate deeper Vs profile. Velocity based broad-band sensor (flat response between 0.03-50 Hz) has
been used for ambition noise record. The spectra of the 3 components microtremor data were
determined. H/V amplitude spectrum of dominant frequency and amplification were picked from
these spectra. The sites were classified in accordance with NEHRP Provisions (BSSC,2003),
Eurocode 8 (CEN. 2003), TBDY (Turkish Building Earthquake Regulations, 2017) and (Rodrigez-
Marez et al., 2001). From the study Vs(30), fundamental frequency, H/V peak amplitudes and bearing
capacity maps were prepared (Figs 2,3,4,5).

Figure 1. Distribution of the strong ground motion stations

Figure 2. Vs(30) map of the investigation area Figure 3. Predominant peridos map of the
investigation area

Figure 4. H/V peak amplitude map of the Figure 5. Bearing capacity of the investigation
investigation area area

9th Congress of the Balkan Geophysical Society

5-9 November 2017, Antalya, Turkey
Conclusions

The max Vs(30) values were determined around Darıca and min values were found in the east of the
İzmit Gulf and the Sapanca lake, Düzce and Yalova (Fig. 2). The max fundamental frequency values
were achieved Darıca and min values were observed in the east of the İzmit Gulf and Çorlu (Fig. 3).
The max peak amplitudes were determined in a wide area in the Marmara region but the min values
were achieved in Sakarya and Akyazı districts (Fig. 4). The max bearing capacity of the second later
(>5m of depth) were obtained in Kocaeli peninsula, south of İstanbul and around Mudanya whereas
the min values were determined in east of the İzmit Gulf and Düzce (Fig. 5). According to NEHRP
provision classification soil classes of Sakarya and Düzce are generally C and D, Kocaeli, Bursa are C
and D, İstanbul is mostly C and D rarely A and B, Yalova, Çanakkale and Tekirdağ are C and D. The
poisson’s ratio and dynamic elasticity modulus determined show large distribution in the area.
Generally high Poisson’s values and low elasticity values were determined in soft soil areas as
expected.

Acknowlegment

This study is a part of a project funded by AFAD (Disaster and Emergency Management Presidency)
National Earthquake Research Program (UDAP-G-15-04) within the scope of “Determination of Soil
Parameters of Turkish Strong Motion Recording Stations Project”.

Reference

Ambraseys, N.,Durukal, E. andFree, M., (1993). Re-evaluation of strong-motiondata in Tukey, ESEE

Research Report, No. 93/2; Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, Civil Engineering
Department, London SW7 2 BU

Ateş, R.C. and Bayülke N., (1982). The 19 August 1976 Denizli, Turkey, earthquake: evaluation of
the strong motion accelerograph record. Bulletin of Seismological Society of America, Vol.72,
pp.1635–1649.

Aydan, O.,and Hasgür, Z., (1997). The characteristics of acceleration waves of Turkish earthquakes,
Proceedings of the 4th National Confeernce on Earthquake Engineering, Ankara, Turkish National
Committee of eartqhauke Engineering, pp. 30– 37, (inTurkish).

Çelebi, M.,Akkar, S., Gülerce, U., Şanlı, A., Bundock, H. and Salkın, A., (2001): Mainshock and after
shock records of the 1999 İzmit and Düzce, Turkey earth quakes, USGS/OFDA Project [USGS
Project No.: 1-7460-63170], USGS Open-File Report 01-163.

Durukal E., Alpay, Y., Biro, T., Mert, A. and Erdik, M. (1998). Analysis of strong motion data of the
1995 Dinar, TurkeyEarthquake, Second Japan-Turkey Workshop: Earthquake Disaster Prevention
Research in Turkey, 23-25 February 1998, Technical University of İstanbul.

9th Congress of the Balkan Geophysical Society

5-9 November 2017, Antalya, Turkey
 Erdik, M. andDurukal, E., (2001). 1999 Kocaeli and Düzce, Turkey earthquakes: strong ground
motion, XV ICSMGE TC4 'Lessons learned from recent strong earthquakes', 25 August 2001,
İstanbul, Turkey

Erdik, M., (1984). Report on theTurkish earthquake of October 30, 1983, Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 1,
pp.151-172.

Erdoğan Ö. (2008). “Main Seismological Features of Recently Compiled Turkish Strong Motion
Database” M. Sc. Thesis, Middle East Technical University, Ankara.

Ergin, M., Aktar, M. and Eyidoğan, H., (2004). Present-day seismicity and seismotectonics of the
Cilician Basin: Eastern Mediterranean region of Turkey, Bulletinof SeismicSociety of America, Vol.
94, 930-939.

İnan, E., Çolakoğlu, Z., Koç, N., Bayülke, N. and Çoruh, E., (1996). Earthquakecatalogs with
acceleration records from 1976 to 1996,General Directorate of Disaster Affairs, Earthquake Research
Department, Ankara, Turkey (98 pp., in Turkish).

Kalafat, D., Güneş, Y., Kara, M., Deniz, P., Kekovalı, K., Kuleli, H. S., Gülen, L., Yılmazer, M. and
Özel, N. M., (2007). A revised and extended earthquake catalogue for Turkey since 1900 (Mw ≥ 4.0),
Bosphorus University, İstanbul.

Kalkan, E.,andGülkan, P., (2004). Site-dependentspectraderivedfromgroundmotion records in Turkey,

EarthquakeSpectra, Vol. 20, pp.1111-1138. Ulusay, R., Tuncay, E., Sönmez, H. and Gökçeoğlu, C.,
(2004). An attenuation Relationship based on Turkish strong motion data and acceleration map of
Turkey, Engineering Geology, Vol. 74, pp.265-291.

Md. ZillurRahman, SumiSiddiqua, A.S.M. MaksudKamal,2016. Shear wave velocity estimation of

the near-surface materials of Chittagong City, Bangladesh for seismic site characterization, Journal of
Applied Geophysics, V. 134, 210-225

Özalaybey, S., Ergin, M., Aktar, M., Tapırdamaz, C., Biçmen, F. and Yörük, A., (2002). The 1999
Izmit earthquake sequence in Turkey: seismological and tectonic aspects, Bulletin of Seismic Society
of America, Vol. 92, pp.376-386.

Rathje, E. M.,Stokoe II, K. H. andRosenblad, B. L., (2003). Strong-motion station characterization

and site effects during the 1999 earthquakes in Turkey, Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 19, pp.653-676.
Sandıkkaya, M. A., (2008).

Site classification of national strong-motion recording sites, M.Sc. Thesis, Civil Engineering
Department, Middle East Technical University, Ankara.

Sandıkkaya, M. A., Yılmaz, M. T., Bakır S. B., Yılmaz, Ö., (2009). Site classification of Turkish
national strong-motion stations, submitted to Journal of Seismology for review,

Seo, K. and K. Kobayashi, 1980. On the rather long-period earthquake ground motion due to deep
ground structure of Tokyo area, Proceedings of the 7th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering,
Istanbul, Vol. 1, 9-16.

Yılmaz, Ö., Savaşkan, E., Bakır, B. S., Yılmaz, M. T., Eser, M. , Akkar, S., Tüzel, B., İravul, Y.,
Özmen, Ö. T., Denizlioğlu, A. Z., Alkan, A., and Gürbüz, M. (2008). “Shallow Seismic and
Geotechnical Site Surveys at the Turkish National Grid for Strong-Motion Seismograph Stations”
14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijing.

9th Congress of the Balkan Geophysical Society

5-9 November 2017, Antalya, Turkey

View publication stats