Bull Eng Geol Environ (2007) 66:203–213
DOI 10.1007/s10064-006-0063-0
ORIGINAL PAPER
Empirical correlations between shear wave velocity and
penetration resistance for ground shaking assessments
Nilsun Hasancebi Æ Resat Ulusay
Received: 30 March 2006 / Accepted: 7 July 2006 / Published online: 29 August 2006

Springer-Verlag 2006
Abstract Prediction of the ground shaking response
at soil sites requires knowledge of the soil, expressed in
terms of shear wave velocity. Although it is preferable
to measure this dynamic soil parameter in situ, this is
often not economic at all locations. Existing correla-
tions between shear wave velocity and penetration
resistance have been assessed in this study and com-
pared with correlations with SPT values obtained
based on geotechnical and geoseismic data collected
from a first-degree earthquake zone in Turkey. The
results obtained support the findings of earlier studies
that blow-count is a significant parameter in these
correlations while type of soil has no important influ-
ence. The regression equations developed in this study
compare well with most of the previous equations and
exhibit good prediction performance. It is noted that
better correlations are obtained when uncorrected
blow-counts are used.
Keywords Correlation equation Æ Geotechnical
borehole Æ Seismic refraction Æ Shear wave velocity Æ
Standard penetration test Æ Turkey
Résumé La prévision de la réponse d’un site à une
sollicitation sismique nécessite des connaissances sur le
sol, relatives en particulier à la vitesse de propagation
des ondes de cisaillement. Il est préférable de mesurer
ce paramètre de dynamique des sols in situ. Cependant
ceci n’est pas toujours possible en raison de la config-
N. Hasancebi Æ R. Ulusay (&)
Department of Geological Engineering,
Hacettepe University, Beytepe, Ankara 06800, Turkey
e-mail: resat@hacettepe.edu.tr
uration du site et de contraintes économiques. Des
corrélations entre la vitesse de propagation des ondes
de cisaillement et des données pénétrométriques ont
été évaluées et comparées avec des corrélations entre
la vitesse de propagation des ondes de cisaillement et
des données SPT, ces dernières obtenues à partir de
données géotechniques et sismiques issues d’une zone
de forte sismicité en Turquie. Les résultats obtenus
confortent de précédentes études montrant que les
données SPT apportent un paramètre significatif, tan-
dis que le type de sol ne joue pas un rôle important
pour les corrélations établies. Des équations de
régression ont été établies et permettent de prévoir la
réponse d’un site à une sollicitation sismique.
Mots clés Equation de regression Æ Sondage
géotechnique Æ Réfraction sismique Æ Vitesse de
propagation des ondes de cisaillement Æ Essai SPT Æ
Turquie
Introduction
It has been recognized for a very long time that
earthquake damage is generally larger over soft sedi-
ments than on firm bedrock outcrops. This is particu-
larly important because most urban settlements have
occurred along river valleys over such young and soft
surface deposits. For this reason, particular consider-
ation is paid to the effect of local site conditions when
assessing ground motion characteristics for the seismic
design of buildings and other structures. Shear modu-
lus, damping ratio and shear wave velocity profiles are
important input parameters in site response analysis.
Prediction of the ground shaking response at soil sites
123
204
requires a knowledge of the stiffness of the soil, ex-
pressed in terms of shear wave velocity (Vs), which is
measured at small strain levels by in situ seismic
methods. While it is preferable to determine Vs directly
from field tests, it is often not economically feasible at
all locations. For this reason, a reliable correlation
between Vs and penetration resistance would be a
considerable advantage, reducing the number of field
verifications required.
In this study, which is an integral part of a research
study on soil amplification (Hasancebi 2005), the var-
iation of shear wave velocity measured by seismic
refraction and SPT blow-count (SPT-N) was investi-
gated and new correlations have been developed for
estimating the shear wave velocity. For this purpose, a
site with recorded high seismicity at Yenisehir, foun-
ded on an alluvial plain located in the Marmara Region
of Turkey (Fig. 1), was selected. The investiga-
tion programme included SPT borings at different
locations, seismic refraction studies, laboratory soil
Fig. 1 Location map of the
study site
123
N. Hasancebi and R. Ulusay
classification tests, the use of borehole data from the
previous work in the study site and statistical assess-
ments. Based on the statistical assessments and taking
into account the type of soil, a series of empirical
equations for the prediction of Vs from SPT-N
were developed and compared with those suggested in
previous studies in order to evaluate the prediction
capability of the equations.
General setting of the study site
Geology and seismotectonics
Yenisehir town is located within an alluvial basin which
is surrounded by ridges both to the north and south
(Fig. 2). The study site is geologically represented by
the basement rocks of pre-Neogene age and Neogene
and Quaternary deposits. The basement rocks seen in
the southern part of the site consist of schists and
Connection of shear wave velocity with SPT
Fig. 2 Geological map of the study site, and locations of
geotechnical and geoseismic investigations (modified from
Doyuran et al. 2000)
marbles. The Neogene deposits which appear on the
gentle slopes at the north and south consist predomi-
nantly of loosely cemented conglomerate, sandstone,
claystone and marl and unconformably overlie the
basement rocks (Genc 1992). The Quaternary deposits
are represented by alluvial soils and detritus and are
observed in the middle of the basin. Based on the data
from the records of the boreholes drilled by the State
Hydraulic Works (DSI), the thickness of the alluvial
sequence in the basin ranges between 25 and 115 m.
Yenisehir is located within a first-degree earthquake
zone of Turkey (GDDA 1996). The study site is sur-
rounded by a number of active faults as shown in
Fig. 3. The southern strand of the North Anatolian
Fault Zone (NAFZ) and the Bursa and Inonu–
Eskisehir faults are the most important earthquake
sources in the study site. The 1999 Kocaeli earthquake,
which resulted in extensive loss of life and damage to
structures particularly in the Marmara Region, was
also felt in Yenisehir and its vicinity.
SPT soundings, geoseismic investigations
and laboratory testing
In the present and future settlement areas of Yenisehir,
geotechnical studies for the assessment of foundation
conditions and a railway route were conducted by
205
Fig. 3 Siesmotectonic map of the Eastern Marmara Region
(after Doyuran et al. 2000)
Doyuran et al. (2000) and the State Port and Airport
Directory (DLH 2002). These previous studies in-
cluded a total of 37 boreholes and associated SPTs.
Twelve of these boreholes are relevant to the present
study. It is well known that the average shear wave
velocity in the upper 30 m of the ground is an impor-
tant factor for ground characterization (Borcherdt
1994; Dobry et al. 2000). Therefore, for the present
study, the boreholes were planned to penetrate to a
depth of 30 m if possible. In fact, 9 extended to 30.45 m
while the others ranged between 4.5 and 17 m. SPT
tests were conducted at 1 m intervals and the samples
from SPT tubes were used for laboratory testing. The
groundwater table in each hole was also measured.
Locations of the previous and recent boreholes and the
geoseismic investigations are shown in Fig. 2.
The most commonly used seismic methods for
velocity logging are the cross-hole and down-hole
techniques. Seismic refraction is largely used in deter-
mining the dynamic properties of the underlying layers.
In this study, shear wave velocities were measured
using seismic refraction with the assistance of the
General Directorate of Disaster Affairs (Dikmen et al.
2004) and Geophysical Engineering Department of
Ankara University. These measurements were taken at
the locations of nine boreholes drilled during the study.
Due to some restrictions at the locations of boreholes
H6 and H7 and the very shallow depth of borehole
H12, seismic studies were not undertaken at these
locations.
A total of 149 specimens extracted from SPT tubes
were tested in the laboratory to determine their grain
size distribution and Atterberg limits. The tests were
conducted in accordance with the methods given by
123
206 N. Hasancebi and R. Ulusay

Subsurface conditions

The data from the previous and recent boreholes and

Fig. 4 Geological cross sections (a) and some typical engineer-
ing logs (b) illustrating the subsurface ground conditions at
Yenisehir settlement and its vicinity
ASTM (1994). Based on these results, the specimens
were classified according to the Unified Soil Classifi-
cation System.
the resistivity study (Dikmen et al. 2004) suggest that
the alluvial sequence generally starts with silty clay.
This clay, with high SPT-N values, is a stiff soil. Below
this, there exists medium dense to loose silty sand.
However, at some localities the silty clay may also ap-
pear below the sandy zone. Occasionally, gravel layers
of variable thickness can be observed in the Quaternary
deposits at shallow depths. A typical cross-section
through the Yenisehir settlement area, some selected
geotechnical logs and two typical seismic refraction
profiles showing the variation of Vs at the locations of
boreholes H3 and H8 are depicted in Fig. 5, respec-
tively. As can be seen from the Vs–SPT(N) versus depth
plots for some selected borehole locations in Fig. 6, Vs
increases with increasing SPT values.
Statistical evaluations of the data from grain size
analyses are given in Table 1. Sand sized material in
the Quaternary deposits is dominant at the southern
part of the site and these soils are represented by SP
and SW, and SC and SM soil classes. Towards the
north, grain size decreases and clays and silty clays with
high plasticity dominate. Most of the tested soils from
the north of the site fall into the CH and CL soil
classes.
The groundwater table in the study site is shallow,
generally ranging between 3 and 8 m. However, based
on the data from Doyuran et al. (2000), it is deeper
(‡14 m) at the north and shallower in the south.

Fig. 5 Seismic refraction

profiles at the locations of
boreholes H3 and H8

123
Connection of shear wave velocity with SPT 207

Table 1 Statistical evaluation of grain size distribution of soil

samples
Grain size Max Min Mean Standard Standard
error deviation

Gravel (%) 0 49 11 12.47 0.084

Sand (%) 4 100 49 27.74 0.186
Silt (%) 0 76 30 23.91 0.160
Clay (%) 0 34 10 9.3 0.066

Fig. 6 Variation of Vs and SPT-N with depth at some borehole
locations
Proposed empirical correlations for Vs–SPT(N)
While it is preferable to determine Vs directly from
field tests, it is often not economically feasible to make
Fig. 7 Correlations between Vs and SPT-N for all soils (a), sandy
soils (b) and clayey soils (c)
Vs measurements at all locations. Many correlations
between Vs and penetration resistance have been
proposed; 17 are quoted in Table 2, the majority based
on uncorrected SPT-N values. Sykora and Stokoe
(1983) suggest that geological age and soil type are not

123
208 N. Hasancebi and R. Ulusay

Table 2 Some existing correlations between Vs and SPT-N

Author(s) Vs (m/s)
All soils Sands Clays

Ohba and Toriumi (1970) Vs = 84N0.31 – –

Imai and Yoshimura (1970) Vs = 76N0.33 – –
Fujiwara (1972) Vs = 92.1N0.337 – –
Ohsaki and Iwasaki (1973) Vs = 82N0.39 – –
Imai (1977) Vs = 91N0.337 Vs = 80.6N0.331 Vs = 80.2N0.292
Ohta and Goto (1978) Vs = 85.35N0.348 – –
Seed and Idriss (1981) Vs = 61N0.5 – –
Imai and Tonouchi (1982) Vs = 97N0.314 – –
Sykora and Stokoe (1983) – Vs = 100.5N0.29 –
0.202
Jinan (1987) Vs = 116.1(N + 0.3185) – –
Lee (1990) – Vs = 57.4N0.49 Vs = 114.43N0.31
Sisman (1995) Vs = 32.8N0.51 – –
Iyisan (1996) Vs = 51.5N0.516 – –
Jafari et al. (1997) Vs = 22N0.85 – –
Pitilakis et al. (1999) – Vs = 145(N60)0.178 Vs = 132(N60)0.271
Kiku et al. (2001) Vs = 68.3N0.292 – –
Jafari et al. (2002) – – Vs = 27N0.73

important parameters in determining Vs, while the
SPT-N value is of prime importance. However, as can
be seen from Table 2, some investigators have also
proposed correlations between Vs and SPT-N for dif-
ferent soils, such as clays, silts and sands. In addition,
the soil properties considered in the regression analy-
ses for some correlations included stress-corrected Vs,
energy-corrected SPT-N, energy- and stress-corrected
SPT-N, depth (D) and fines content (FC).
In this study, 97 data pairs (Vs and SPT-N) were
employed in the assessments. The correlations were
developed using a simple regression analysis for the
existing database. In the first series of analyses, new
relationships were proposed between uncorrected Vs
(m/s) and corresponding SPT-N values in three cate-
gories, i.e. for all soils, sandy soils and clayey soils
(Fig. 7). Because few data from the silty layers were
available, this category was not included in the evalu-
ations. The following relationships with their correla-
tion coefficients (r) are proposed between Vs (m/s) and
SPT-N values for the three different soil categories.
Vs ¼ 90N 0:309 ðr ¼ 0:73Þ; All soils
Vs ¼ 90:8N 0:319 ðr ¼ 0:65Þ; Sandy soils
Vs ¼ 97:9N 0:269 ðr ¼ 0:75Þ; Clayey soils
Comparisons between the measured Vs and Vs pre-
dicted from Eqs 1–3 are presented in Fig. 8. The
plotted data are scattered between the lines with 1:0.5
and 1:2 slopes, with smaller Vs values (Vs < 250 m/s)
falling close to the line 1:1.
The correlations from the present study are plotted
in Fig. 9 to assess the effect of soil type. Figure 9
suggests that the correlations for different soil catego-
ries yield similar values of Vs indicating that soil type
has little effect on these correlations. This is consistent
with the findings of Iyisan (1996). However, Iyisan
(1996), who also studied gravely soils in Turkey, indi-
cated that the situation for gravels is different because
the correlation for gravels estimates higher Vs values
when compared to those from other soils, due to the
effect of grain size and cementation.
Equations 1–3 are plotted in Fig. 10a, c together
with several of the earlier regression equations given in
Table 2. Except the relationships of Ohsaki and Iwa-
saki (1973), Seed and Idriss (1981), Sisman (1995),
Iyisan (1996), Jafari et al. (1997) and Kiku et al. (2001)
in Fig. 10a (which were recommended for all soils), all
the equations including the equation of the present
study (Eq. 1) yield similar Vs values. There is only a
slight difference between Eq. 1 and those developed by
ð1Þ Ohba and Toriumi (1970) and Imai and Yoshimura
(1970); Eq. 1 proposed in this study estimates Vs values
considerably closer to those derived from most of the
ð2Þ existing equations.
Similar comparisons made for sands (Fig. 10b)
indicated that except the equation developed by Lee
ð3Þ (1990), the proposed equation (Eq. 2) compares well
with the other equations for the prediction of the Vs of
sands. Based on the distribution of the plotted data, the
equation of Lee (1990) generally over-predicts Vs for
N > 20 and under-predicts Vs for N £ 20.

123
Connection of shear wave velocity with SPT
Fig. 8 Measured versus predicted shear wave velocities for all
soils (a), sandy soils (b) and clayey soils (c)
Fig. 9 Effect of soil type on Vs–SPT(N) relationship
209
Fig. 10 Comparisons between proposed and previous correla-
tions for Vs and SPT-N for all soils (a), sandy soils (b) and clayey
soils (c)
The comparison for clays given in Fig. 10c suggests
that the equations developed by Imai (1977) and Lee
(1990) predict higher Vs values when compared to
those from Eq. 3 of the present study. The equation of
Jafari et al. (2002) differs from the other three equa-
tions and yields under-predicted and over-predicted Vs
values for SPT-N £ 20 and SPT > 20 conditions,
respectively. The specific geotechnical conditions of
the studied area are probably the main cause of this
while the quantity of the processed data, the SPT
procedure and the different methods of shear wave
velocity measurements employed in various studies
may be other causes of difference.
In addition to the comparisons shown in Fig. 10, the
scaled percent error (Eq. 4) versus cumulative fre-
quency graphs have also been drawn in Fig. 11.
Scaled percent error ¼ ½ðVsc
Vsm Þ=Vsm   100 ð4Þ
where Vsc and Vsm are the predicted and measured
shear wave velocities, respectively.
123
210
Fig. 11 Scaled percent error
of Vs predicted for all soils
(a), sandy soils (b) and clayey
soils (c)
As seen in Fig. 11a, c, about 85% of the Vs values
predicted from Eqs. 1 to 3 for all soils, sands and clays
respectively, are within 20% of the scaled percent er-
ror, indicating a better estimate than those from the
existing equations.
The relationship between Vs and energy-corrected
SPT-N(N60) was also investigated and equations for all
soils, sands and clays were established. These were
compared to those suggested by Pitilakis et al. (1999)
who previously investigated N60–Vs relationships for
clays and sands. The SPT blow-counts were corrected
123
N. Hasancebi and R. Ulusay
for striking energy during the test employed in this
study (donut-type hammer raised and dropped by two
turns of rope). The developed relationships for differ-
ent soils are given in Fig. 12a, c. When the correlation
coefficients obtained from Vs to N60 relationships are
compared to those obtained from Eqs. 1 to 3, the
equations based on uncorrected SPT-N values provide
a somewhat better fit than the equations based on
energy-corrected measurements. This situation is also
seen from Fig. 12d, f. The equations given in Fig. 12b, c
are plotted in Fig. 13a, b respectively, together with the
Connection of shear wave velocity with SPT
Fig. 12 Vs–N60 relationships
for all soils (a), sandy soils (b)
and clayey soils (c), and
measured versus predicted
shear wave velocities for all
soils (d), sandy soils (e) and
clayey soils (f)
regression equations developed by Pitilakis et al.
(1999) for sands and clays. As shown in Fig. 13a, the
equation in Fig. 12b compares well with the regression
equation of Pitilakis et al. (1999) for sands. However,
the equation of Pitilakis et al. (1999) for clays yields
considerably higher Vs estimations when compared to
those from the equation developed in this study
(Fig. 13b). It appears from these assessments that the
equations based on uncorrected SPT-N values are
preferable for indirect estimations of Vs.
Conclusions
In this study, based on the geotechnical and geoseismic
data from the Yenisehir settlement situated in the
Marmara Region of Turkey, an attempt was made to
develop new relationships between SPT-N and Vs to
indirectly estimate the Vs to be used for practical
211
purposes. The results obtained from the study support
the findings of earlier work suggesting that blow-count
is a significant parameter in Vs–SPT(N) correlations,
while the type of soil has little influence.
The regression equations developed in this study
compare well with most of the previous equations and
exhibit a good prediction performance. The equations
based on uncorrected SPT-N values provide a some-
what better fit than the equations based on energy-
corrected SPT-N values. Therefore, the use of an
equation developed for all soils based on uncorrected
blow-counts is recommended for practical purposes.
The regression equations developed provide a viable
way of estimating Vs from SPT blow-count for pre-
liminary regional ground shaking mapping and site-
specific response analysis. The differences between
existing and proposed equations are mainly due to the
specific geotechnical conditions of the studied sites, the
quantity of processed data and the procedures used in
123
212
Fig. 13 Comparisons between N60 and Vs equations proposed in
this study and by Pitilakis et al. (1999) for sand soils (a) and
clayey soils (b)
undertaking the SPTs and geoseismic surveys. In view
of this, these empirical equations should be carefully
used and wherever possible checked against measured
Vs values.
Acknowledgments This study was supported by Project No.
0302602008 of the Research Projects, Division of Hacettepe
University. The authors would like to thank the General
Directorate of Disaster Affairs and the geophysical team of this
organization for their cooperation and the geophysical surveys;
the Municipality of Yenisehir for providing the logistic support;
the Geophysical Engineering Department of Ankara University
for seismic refraction equipment and interpretation of the mea-
sured data; and the General Directorate of State Hydraulic
Works (DSI) for permission to use the borehole logs.
References
ASTM (1994) Annual book of ASTM standards—soil and rock,
building stones. Section 4, Constructions, vol 04.08. ASTM
Publications, Philadelphia
123
N. Hasancebi and R. Ulusay
Borcherdt RD (1994) Estimates of site depending response
spectra for design methodology and justifications. Earth-
quake Spectra 10(4):617–654
Dikmen U, Mirzaoglu M, Sipahi O (2004) Geophysical investi-
gations at Yenisehir (Bursa) settlement area. General
Directorate of Disaster Affairs of Turkey, Ankara (in
Turkish, unpublished)
DLH (2002) Report on investigation and engineering works for
Ayazma-Inönü railway route (in Turkish, unpublished)
Dobry R, Borcherdt RD, Crouse CB, Idriss IM, Joyner WB,
Martin GR, Power MS, Rinne EE, Seed RB (2000) New site
coefficient and site classification system used in recent
building code provisions. Earthquake Spectra 16(1):41–67
Doyuran V, Kocyigit A, Yazicigil H, Karahanoglu N, Toprak V,
Topal T, Suzen ML, Yesilnacar E, Yilmaz KK (2000)
Geological and geotechnical investigation at Yenisehir
settlement area. Middle East Technical University, Ankara
(in Turkish, unpublished)
Fujiwara T (1972) Estimation of ground movements in actual
destructive earthquakes. In: Proceedings of the fourth
European symposium on earthquake engineering, London,
pp 125–132
Genc S (1992) Geology of the Bursa region. In: Proceedings of
the international symposium on the geology of the Black
Sea region, Guide Book, Ankara, pp 22–25
GDDA (1996) Earthquake zonation map of Turkey. Ankara
Hasancebi (Okan) N (2005) Geotechnical evaluation of soil
amplification at Yenisehir (Bursa) district. M.Sc. Thesis,
Hacettepe University, Geological Engineering Department,
Ankara (in Turkish, unpublished)
Imai T (1977) P-and S-wave velocities of the ground in Japan. In:
Proceedings of the IX international conference on soil
mechanics and foundation engineering, vol 2, pp 127–132
Imai T, Yoshimura Y (1970) Elastic wave velocity and soil
properties in soft soil (in Japanese). Tsuchito-Kiso 18(1):17–
22
Imai T, Tonouchi K (1982) Correlation of N-value with S-wave
velocity and shear modulus. In: Proceedings of the 2nd
European symposium of penetration testing, Amsterdam,
pp 57–72
Iyisan R (1996) Correlations between shear wave velocity and in-
situ penetration test results (in Turkish). Chamber of Civil
Engineers of Turkey, Teknik Dergi 7(2):1187–1199
Jafari MK, Asghari A, Rahmani I (1997) Empirical correlation
between shear wave velocity (Vs) and SPT-N value for south
of Tehran soils. In: Proceedings of the 4th international
conference on civil engineering, Tehran, Iran (in Persian)
Jafari MK, Shafiee A, Ramzkhah A (2002) Dynamic properties
of the fine grained soils in South of Tehran. JSEE 4(1):25–35
Jinan Z (1987) Correlation between seismic wave velocity and
the number of blow of SPT and depth. Selected papers from
the Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE,
92–100
Kiku H, Yoshida N, Yasuda S, Irisawa T, Nakazawa H, Shimizu
Y, Ansal A, Erkan A (2001) In-situ penetration tests and
soil profiling in Adapazari, Turkey. In: Proceedings of the
ICSMGE/TC4 satellite conference on lessons learned from
recent strong earthquakes, pp 259–265
Lee SHH (1990) Regression models of shear wave velocities.
J Chin Inst Eng 13:519–532
Ohba S, Toriumi I (1970) Dynamic response characteristics of
Osaka Plain. In: Proceedings of the annual meeting AIJ (in
Japanese)
Ohsaki Y, Iwasaki R (1973) On dynamic shear moduli and
Poisson’s ratio of soil deposits. Soil Found 13(4):61–73
Connection of shear wave velocity with SPT
Ohta Y, Goto N (1978) Empirical shear wave velocity equations
in terms of characteristics soil indexes. Earthquake Eng
Struct Dyn 6:167–187
Pitilakis K, Raptakis D, Lontzetidis K, Tika-Vassilikou T, Jong-
mans D (1999) Geotechnical and geophysical description of
Euro-Seistests, using field and laboratory tests, and moderate
strong ground motions. J Earthquake Eng 3(3):381–409
Seed HB, Idriss IM (1981) Evaluation of liquefaction potential
sand deposits based on observation of performance in
213
previous earthquakes. ASCE National Convention,
Missouri, pp 81–544
Sisman H (1995) An investigation on relationships between
shear wave velocity, and SPT and pressuremeter test results.
M.Sc. Thesis, Ankara University, Geophysical Engineering
Department, Ankara (in Turkish, unpublished)
Sykora DE, Stokoe KHII II (1983) Correlations of in-situ mea-
surements in sands of shear wave velocity. Soil Dyn Earth-
quake Eng 20(1-4):125–136
123