Seediscussions,stats,andauthorprofilesforthispublicationat:http://www.researchgate.net/publication/251558592

Empiricalcorrelationsofshearwavevelocity(Vs)andpenetrationresistance(SPT-N)fordifferentsoilsinanearthquake-pronearea(Erbaa-Turkey)ARTICLEinENGINEERINGGEOLOGYAPRIL2011ImpactFactor:1.76DOI:10.1016/j.enggeo.2011.01.007

CITATIONS10

DOWNLOADS640

VIEWS550

3AUTHORS,INCLUDING:

MugeK.AkinYuzuncuYilUniversity9PUBLICATIONS36CITATIONS

SEEPROFILE

TamerTopalMiddleEastTechnicalUniversity50PUBLICATIONS601CITATIONS

SEEPROFILE

Availablefrom:TamerTopalRetrievedon:29June2015

itya

Article history:Received 17 August 2010Received in revised form 17 January 2011Accepted 24 January 2011Available online 2 February 2011

Keywords:SPT-based upholeShear wave velocitySPT-NErbaa

Engineering Geology 119 (2011) 117

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering

e ls1. Introduction

Turkey is one of themost earthquake-prone countries in theworld.The seismicity of the northern part of Turkey is mainly controlled bythe active North Anatolian Fault Zone (NAFZ). The NAFZ is one of themain active seismic zones, and has caused numerous destructiveearthquakes and related hazards in the northern region of Turkey. Thesettlement of Erbaa (population approximately 100,000), locatedalong the eastern segment of the NAFZ, is one of the largest towns ofTokat Province in the Middle Black Sea Region of Turkey. It is located

region was shifted to the hilly region south of the Kelkit River.Substantial development remained on the alluvial deposits near theriver, however, and rapid increase in population has led to pressure toexpand the developed areas back toward the Kelkit River. Thelocations of the new and old settlements are depicted in Fig. 1.

As a part of a microzonation study for the Erbaa area, shear wavevelocity (Vs) values of the geological units exposed in this area arerequired for site response analyses. The shear wave velocity is afundamental parameter required to dene the dynamic properties ofsoils. It is useful in the evaluation of foundation stiffness, earthquakein a critical area in terms of the construaspects. The city center of Erbaa is located onthe Kelkit River. After the disastrous 194(Ms=7.6) earthquakes, most subsequent de

Corresponding author. Fax: +90 312 210 57 50.E-mail address: mugeakink@gmail.com (M.K. Akin).

0013-7952/$ see front matter 2011 Elsevier B.V. Aldoi:10.1016/j.enggeo.2011.01.007 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.TurkeyThe seismicity of the northern part of Turkey is mainly controlled by the North Anatolian Fault zone (NAFZ).The NAFZ is one of the world's most active seismic zones, and has produced destructive earthquakes andrelated hazards in the northern region of Turkey. Several earthquakes and earthquake-related hazards haveoccurred along different segments of this fault zone in the recent past. The study area, Erbaa town, is locatedalong the eastern segment of North Anatolian Fault Zone (NAFZ) and is one of the largest towns of TokatProvince in the Middle Black Sea Region of Turkey. The center of Erbaa is located on the left embankment ofthe Kelkit River. After the disastrous 1942 (Ms=7.2) and 1943 (Ms=7.6) earthquakes, the settlement wasshifted southwards.As a part of a seismic microzonation study of the Erbaa area, shear wave velocity (Vs) values of the geologicalunits exposed in this area were required for site response analyses. The geological units in the study areaconsist mainly of alluvial and Pliocene units. These layers were evaluated on the basis of drilling, in-situ (SPT,SCPTU and SPT-based uphole) and laboratory testing. In this study, empirical correlations between shearwave velocity (Vs) and standard penetration test blow counts (SPT-N) were considered in order to deneshear wave velocity proles for the study area. The relationships between shear wave velocity, StandardPenetration Test (SPT) blow-counts and the soil properties were evaluated as functions of depth. SPT-baseduphole tests were performed to measure shear wave velocity during drilling operations in some of theborings. The SPT-based Vs values were computed with different empirical formulas and compared with themeasured SPTbased uphole Vs measurements. The empirical correlations were found to require modicationto provide the best correlation for this site. The depth factor was considered during the development of newempirical equations. Therefore, a site-specic formula was proposed in order to obtain Vs proles for all layersin the study area.ction and developmentthe left embankment of2 (Ms=7.2) and 1943velopment in the Erbaa

site response, lisoil stratigraphySeed and Idriss, 1Burland, 1989; S1996; Andrus an1999; Dobry et aStewart et al., 20McGillivray, 200

l rights reserved.a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c tEmpirical correlations of shear wave velocfor different soils in an earthquake-prone

Muge K. Akin a,, Steven L. Kramer b, Tamer Topal c

a Dept. of Geological Engineering, Yuzuncu Yl University, Van, Turkeyb Dept.of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, USAc Dept. of Geological Engineering, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey

j ourna l homepage: www.(Vs) and penetration resistance (SPT-N)rea (Erbaa-Turkey)

Geology

evie r.com/ locate /enggeoquefaction potential, soil density, site classication,and foundation settlements (Richart et al., 1970;970; Schnabel et al., 1972; Sykora and Stokoe, 1983;asitharan et al., 1994; Shibuya et al., 1995; Kramer,d Stokoe, 1997; Wills and Silva, 1998; Mayne et al.,l., 2000; Lehane and Fahey, 2002; Seed et al., 2003;03; McGillivray andMayne, 2004; Holzer et al., 2005;7).

2 M.K. Akin et al. / Engineering Geology 119 (2011) 117Shear wave velocities of soil proles are most accuratelydetermined using in-situ seismic measurements. Because in-situmeasurements involve very low strain levels, the measured shearwave velocity can be used to obtain the maximum shear modulus(Gmax) at a particular depth in a soil deposit. The maximum shear

Fig. 1. Location map omodulus can be computed from shear wave velocity andmass density() using the following expression:

Gmax = V2s 1

f the study area.

However, the maximum shear modulus (Gmax) can also beestimated (Kramer, 1996) by empirical correlation to the results ofin-situ tests such as the Standard Penetration Test (SPT), Cone

Penetration Test (CPT), Dilatometer Test (DMT), and PressuremeterTest (PMT).

One of the most commonly used empirical approaches is based onthemeasured SPT resistance of the soil. A number of studies have beencarried out to identify empirical shear wave velocity relationships fordifferent soils (Ohba and Toriumi, 1970; Imai and Yoshimura, 1970;Fujiwara, 1972; Ohsaki and Iwasaki, 1973; Imai, 1977; Ohta and Goto,1978; Seed and Idriss, 1981; Imai and Tonouchi, 1982; Sykora andStokoe, 1983; Jinan, 1987; Lee, 1990; Sisman, 1995; Iyisan, 1996;Kayabal, 1996; Jafari et al., 1997; Pitilakis et al., 1999; Kiku et al.,2001; Jafari et al., 2002; Andrus et al., 2006; Hasanebi and Ulusay,2007; Hanumantharao and Ramana, 2008; Dikmen, 2009). Some ofthe empirical relationships use uncorrected SPT blow counts and, theothers are based on energy-corrected SPT blow counts. Such relation-ships have been proposed for many different soils.

In this study, the empirical correlations between shear wavevelocity and SPT blow counts are considered in order to characterizethe shearwave velocity proles of the Erbaa study area. The geologicalunits were evaluated on the basis of drilling, in-situ testing (e.g. SPT,SPT-based uphole, and SCPTU), and laboratory testing. Two maintypes of units were observed in the study area, namely Pliocene andalluvial deposits. They were distinguished as Pliocene clay and sandlayers and/or alluvial clay and sand layers in the empirical calcula-tions. The in-situ and laboratory data obtained in subsurfaceinvestigations were correlated to dene proper site-specic Vs

Fig. 2. Simplied geological and tectonic map of Erbaa and its vicinity.Modied from Barka et al., 2000.

3M.K. Akin et al. / Engineering Geology 119 (2011) 117Fig. 3. Geological map of the study area.

4 M.K. Akin et al. / Engineering Geology 119 (2011) 117proles in Erbaa. A new technique, referred to as the SPT-baseduphole method by Bang and Kim (2007), was used to measure theshear wave velocities. Measured Vs values from SPT-based uphole andthose implied by SPT-based empirical approacheswere both obtained.The comparison of the measured and empirical relations wasconducted to illustrate the efciency of this new method, as well.The empirically calculated and measured shear wave velocities werecorrelated, and then new empirical site-specic formulas areproposed for the study area.

2. Geology and tectonics

The study area of Erbaa and its close vicinity arewithin a pull-apartbasin formed by the tectonic activity of the NAFZ. The NAFZ is 1500-km-long, seismically active, right-lateral strike slip fault that accom-modates relative motion between the Anatolian and Black Sea Plates(Sengor et al., 1985). Between 1939 and 1967, the NAFZ rupturedduring six large, westward-propagating earthquakes withmagnitudesgreater than 7, and caused approximately 900 km surface break(Allen, 1969; Ketin, 1969; Ambraseys, 1970). Erbaa is located on theeastern part of the NAFZ. Surface ruptures of the 1939 (Ms=8.0),1942 (Ms=7.2) and 1943 (Ms=7.6) earthquakes occurred in theTasova-Erbaa and Niksar basins (Barka et al., 2000). The November,26, 1943 Tosya earthquake (Mw=7.6) produced 280 km long surfacerupture which could be the second longest surface faulting in thatsequence (Emre et al., 2006). The Tasova-Erbaa pull-apart basin isapproximately 65 km long and 1518 km wide. The northern marginof the study area is surrounded by the fault segments that ruptured inthe 1942 and 1943 earthquakes (Fig. 2). The southern part is boundedby the Esencay fault, which has a different morphological expression;

Fig. 4. The general distribution of the previouhowever, no instrumental and/or historical earthquakes have beenmentioned in the study of Barka et al. (2000) related to this fault.

Erbaa lies within the First Degree Earthquake Zone of Turkey (http://www.deprem.gov.tr/indexen.html). It is one of the most importantseismic areas on the NAFZ with a past seismic activity. The 1942 and1943Niksar-Erbaa earthquakes are themost destructive earthquakes forthe region. No seismic activitywith highermagnitude has been recordedsince the 1942 Erbaa-Niksar earthquake in this area.

Metamorphic rocks and the limestone layers as basement rockscan be observed with an age from Permian to Eocene in the study areain a regional macro scale. These rocks are overlain by Upper Eocenevolcanics (basalt, andesite, agglomerate, and tuff) and alternatingsandstone and siltstone layers. These units are covered by Pliocenedeposits consisting of semi-consolidated clay, silt, sand, and gravelwith an unconformity and a recent Quaternary alluvial unit (Aktimuret al., 1992) (Fig. 2). The alluvium, which includes gravel, sand, andsilty clay, can be observed in the basement of Kelkit river valleys andin the northern part of the Erbaa basin. The alluvial unit consists ofheterogeneous materials, derived from various older geological unitsin the vicinity. Their lateral and vertical extents cannot be easilytraced, since they are in the form of wedges and lenses. TheQuaternary alluvial unit and Pliocene deposits broadly cover thestudy area. While the northern part of the settlement area is locatedon the alluvial unit, the Pliocene deposits dominate the southern partof Erbaa (Ylmaz, 1998) (Fig. 3).

3. In-situ tests

A total of 104 boreholes have been drilled in the study area. Previousgeotechnical investigations of the study area, which include 56 borings

s and recent boreholes in the study area.

5M.K. Akin et al. / Engineering Geology 119 (2011) 117and laboratory test results (Ankara University Project, Canik andKayabali,2000; Industrial area, Akademi Ltd. Sti., 2002; andWater treatment plant,Metropol Muh., 2005), were evaluated in this study. The depths of theseboreholes ranged from 10 to 20 m. SPT blow counts were taken at 1.5 mdepth intervals in the boreholes. A total of 48 new boreholes withintended 30 m depths were drilled to obtain and correlate SPT-basedshear wave velocity values. An intensive sampling and testing programwas applied during the drilling. SPT tests carried out through new 48boreholes were performed at every 1 m and undisturbed samples (UD)were taken at every 1 m (where possible) to obtain a continuous soilprole asmuch as possible. However, some boreholes could not reach thedesired depth due to the presence of gravelly layers which causedborehole collapse. The distribution of these boreholes is shown in Fig. 4.

A total of 1390 m of drilling, including 1341 SPT and 312 UDsamples, was performed in this study. The depth of the ground waterlevel (GWL) at the study area varied between 1 and 19 m, with a fewdry boreholes encountered in the Pliocene units. The GWL in the areaof the Pliocene units, which were generally at higher ground surfaceelevations, was deeper (1319 m) than those in the alluvium. Thealluvium unit had a very shallow GWL (12 m) with about one-halfmeter uctuation in the dry season near the Kelkit River (Fig. 5). SPTblow count values from the boreholes were evaluated separately forthe different geological units. The alluvial units had generally low SPTblow count values (Nb20) indicating a loose-medium densesedimentation. Refusal SPT blow counts were mostly obtained ingravelly layers of the alluvium. In addition, the Pliocene units mostlyreveal refusal during SPT tests after 1015 m in depth.

Several geophysical tests were performed at the site to compare thecharacteristics of the soil layers with other eld and laboratory data.Some 24 electrical resistivity, 23 seismic refraction, 30 seismic cone

Fig. 5. Depth to GWL mapenetrometer with pore water pressure (SCPTU) applications, 10 SPT-based uphole surveys, and three downhole surveys were carried out.

Resistivity surveys were performed at 24 points along three prolesin Erbaa to differentiate geological units and the bedrock depth (Fig. 6).Electrical soundings using the Schlumberger method (Schlumberger,1920) were applied during resistivity measurements and a total of150 m depth was investigated. A low frequency original resistivityinstrument working with an alternating current was employed duringthe resistivity surveys. Seismic refraction measurements were per-formed at 23 locations to obtain the subsurface geologic conditions inErbaa. A digital seismograph with 24-byte A/D resolution and 12channels was utilized in the seismic refraction surveys. Seismicrefraction surveys were carried out to a depth of 30 m along threesections to obtain shear wave velocity prole (Fig. 6). Eventually, threedifferent layers were dened with respect to seismic measurements.

The SPT-based uphole method, which uses the impact energy of thesplit spoon sampler during the SPT test as a vibration source, was rstlyintroduced by Ohta et al. (1978). Later, Bang and Kim (2007) used thesame method by interpreting the test results. They introduced the SPT-based uphole test as a combination of low and high-strain tests. The SPT-based uphole test is a modied version of the seismic uphole method. Ituses a number of receivers (geophones) inserted on the ground surfaceto obtain the shearwave velocity prole of a site. A schematic diagramofthe SPT-based uphole method is shown in Fig. 7.

The testing procedure can be briey described as follows: surfacegeophones are placed on the ground surface at selected distancesfrom the boring. A minimum of two receivers are required and at leastve receivers are recommended since using more receivers canprovide better results. The interpretation process assumes the site tobe horizontally layered. Data from the receivers close to the drill rig

p of the study area.

6 M.K. Akin et al. / Engineering Geology 119 (2011) 117are preferred because less refraction of their wave paths occurs.However, the nearby receivers can be affected by vibrations from thedrill rig, so it is advised to drop the hammermanually after turning offthe drill rig. SPT tests are generally performed at 1 to 1.5 m intervals.After reaching the desired depth, the SPT-based upholemethod can beperformed simultaneously with the conventional SPT test. In order to

Fig. 6. Distribution of geop

Fig. 7. A schematic diagram of SPTModied from Bang and Kim, 2007check the repeatability, signal traces from multiple hammer blowsshould be compared at each testing depth. The distance from the tip ofthe split spoon sampler to the ground surface should be measured ateach stage of testing. After drilling to the next testing depth, the samesteps should be repeated until the end of borehole (Kim et al., 2004;Bang and Kim, 2007).

hysical survey points.

-based uphole method..

The SPT-based upholemethodwas used for the rst time in Turkeyas a part of this study. The methodwas applied in the newly drilled 10boreholes (BH 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 23, 28, 30, and 33) to obtain shearwave velocity of both Pliocene and alluvial deposits. A total of sevengeophones with 2 m spacing were placed on the nearly horizontalground surface, and the measurements were recorded duringhammering in SPT applications. As recommended, two-component(radial and vertical) geophones were used in order to obtain bettertravel time information. Two recordings were conducted during SPTapplication for every meter (Akin et al., 2010).

In this method, the shear waves are produced by SPT hammerimpact without any additional explosives or mechanical sources. Oneof the typical examples of SPT-based uphole records is depicted inFig. 8 for BH-10.

A total of 30 SCPTU measurements with varying depths wereperformed in accordance with ASTM D5778-95 (2000) standards(Fig. 9). The depths reached by the cone penetration test (CPT) apparatusat some locations were adversely affected by gravelly layers. The depthsof the SCPTU applications ranged from 1m to 11.4 m.

4. Subsurface conditions for Alluvial and Pliocene soils in Erbaa

The Pliocene deposits are mainly observed towards the hills in thesouthern part of the Erbaa study area. As previously described, thePliocene deposits consist mainly of uncemented gravel, sand andoccasionally uncompacted sandstone layers. The groundwater level isassumed to be deeper, since some of 30 m deep boreholes towards thehills opened during this study in this geological unit were all dry.

Most of the study area is covered with alluvium. The thickness ofthe alluvium in the northern part (near the Kelkit River) is generallygreater than that found in the southern part. The alluvium containsstratied materials of heterogeneous grain sizes, derived from various

the lithology of the soil layers changes as the ground surface slopesdownward towards the Kelkit River.

7M.K. Akin et al. / Engineering Geology 119 (2011) 117Fig. 8. One of the typical examples of SPT-based uphole records for BH-10.Typical gravel lenses whichmay produce refusal blow counts wererarely seen in the typical cross-section. The boundary of the soil units,especially in the Pliocene units, is also illustrated in the same gure. Asshown in Fig. 11, the groundwater level became shallower toward theKelkit River.

5. Empirically-calculated shear wave velocity (Vs)

Correlations between SPT resistance and shear wave velocity havebeen proposed for a number of different soil types (Ohba and Toriumi,1970; Imai and Yoshimura, 1970; Fujiwara, 1972; Ohsaki and Iwasaki,1973; Imai, 1977; Ohta and Goto, 1978; Seed and Idriss, 1981; Imaiand Tonouchi, 1982; Sykora and Stokoe, 1983; Jinan, 1987; Lee, 1990;Sisman, 1995; Iyisan, 1996; Kayabal, 1996; Jafari et al., 1997; Pitilakiset al., 1999; Kiku et al., 2001; Jafari et al., 2002; Andrus et al., 2006;Hasanebi and Ulusay, 2007; Hanumantharao and Ramana, 2008;Dikmen, 2009). One of the typical calculations of SPT-N based Vscorrelations for all soils in BH-2with respect to different researchers isgiven in Fig. 12. In these relationships, SPT-N30 blow count is mostlyconsidered, but some relations were derived using energy correctedSPT blow count (N60). A summary of the actual empirical relationshipsbetween SPT resistance and Vs in the literature is presented in Table 1for different soil types. A common feature of these empirical relationsis their lack of dependence on effective stress or depth. Fig. 13(current gure without Erbaa data) shows the high level of variabilityin Vs predicted by these empirical models; this variability likelyreects the different characteristics of the soils fromwhich each of theempirical models were developed. Such high variability suggests thatsome site-specic Vs measurements may be required in order to makeaccurate predictions of Vs from SPT results.

It should be noted that nearly all of the empirical relationships listedin Table 1 use a powerlaw relationship between Vs and SPT resistance.In these relationships, the values of the exponent, which control thecurvature of the relationship, aremore consistent than the constant thatgeological units in the vicinity. The alluvium in the Erbaa area consistsof gravelly, sandy, silty, clayey layers. The alluvium has a generallyshallow groundwater level, especially in the northern part of Erbaatowards the Kelkit River. Besides, the alluvial fans were observed inthe small river beds do not spread over a wide area in the Erbaa basin(Fig. 3).

Laboratory tests indicated that the gravelly and sandy layers hadlower water contents than the silty and clayey layers in alluvium unit.Moreover, the average water content of the clay layers in the Plioceneunits was lower than those in the alluvial areas. The water contents ofsamples varied between 1.1% and 63.9% for the alluvium, and between4% and 31.6% for the Pliocene unit. The soil classication is based onthe Unied Soil Classication System (USCS), sandy (SM and SP-SW)and clayey sand (SC) layers were observed in the alluvium. The clayeygravel (GC) unit showed plasticity similar to the clayey sand (SC).Based on Atterberg limits, the alluvial clay would be classied as lowplasticity clay (CL). The Pliocene gravel unit contains clay particles.The clayey gravel unit (GC) is low-plastic. Furthermore, the sandylayers are represented by clayey sand (SC) and the clayey deposits(CL-CH) in the Pliocene unit were also generally observed.

The geological and geotechnical properties of the study area wereinvestigated in sections and an overall evaluation of the eld studieswas performed. Five cross-sections along the study area (Fig. 10) wereinvestigated; one of the cross-sections (IVIV) mentioned in Fig. 10 isillustrated in Fig. 11 including SPT blow counts (N30, is the number ofblows for 30 cm depth in SPT) for each borehole. This cross-sectionreveals the heterogeneity of the soil layers from SE to NW of the studyarea. Pliocene layers are exposed at topographically higher levels andcontrols the amplitude. This accounts for the generally similar shapes of

8 M.K. Akin et al. / Engineering Geology 119 (2011) 117the curves. A notable exception is the relationship of Jafari et al. (1997),which shows an inconsistently large sensitivity of Vs to SPT resistance.

The relationships proposed for all Erbaa alluvial and Pliocene soilsin this study (red dashed line in Fig. 13) are quite compatible with theequations, which have similar trends, introduced by Hasanebi andUlusay (2007), Imai and Tonouchi (1982), and Ohba and Toriumi(1970). On the other hand, the Jafari et al. (1997) relationship revealsa very different trend from all the other equations. Furthermore, therelationship proposed for the Erbaa alluvial sand (red dashed line inFig. 14) presents similarities with Dikmen (2009) and Raptakis et al.(1995) correlations. For sandy soils, Okamoto et al. (1989) andHanumantharao and Ramana (2008) relations provide higher veloc-ities than all the other equations. The newly developed relation for thePliocene sands shows similarities with Imai (1977) and Hasanebi andUlusay (2007) relations (Fig. 14). The Lee (1990) relationship for thealluvial clay type soils has a similar trend with the proposedrelationships in this study. Besides, Imai (1977) relationship is quiterelevant to the relation suggested for the Pliocene clay in the studyarea (Fig. 15).

6. Measured shear wave velocity (Vs) based on SPT-based upholemethod

The shear wave velocity of the Erbaa soils can be determined fromSPT-based uphole method using seven geophones at ten differentboreholes (BH-4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 23, 28, 30, and 33). The distributionsof shear wave velocity with depth given by the seven differentgeophones at BH-4 are illustrated in Fig. 16.

At the beginning of the shear wave velocity measurements fromthe SPT-based uphole tests, travel time measurements from all seven

Fig. 9. Distribution ofgeophones are evaluated. However, the two geophones closest to thedrill rig were found to produce unrealistically high velocitiesapparently caused by their proximity to the rig. Although it is advisedto turn off the engine, it has a capability to give unrealistic results forthe interpretations. On the other hand, the results from the moredistant geophones were prone to the effects of refraction-inuencedpath. As a result, the shear wave velocities obtained from the 3rdgeophone were believed to provide the best indication of in situvelocity. The reason for selecting these 3rd geophone results wasachieving consistent and realistic results for the study area after theinterpretations of all geophone results. Therefore, the shear wavevelocities obtained from the third geophone (g-3) were used todevelop the nal shear wave velocity proles (Akin et al., 2010). Theshear wave velocity proles obtained from SPT-based uphole testsbased on the third geophone results are depicted in Fig. 17 for thealluvial and Pliocene soils of Erbaa.

7. Comparison of measured and empirically-calculated shear wavevelocities

The shear wave velocities measured in the SPT-based uphole testscan be compared with those estimated using empirical models fordifferent soil types. The SPT-N and Vs correlations of the Erbaa soilswith respect to the aforementioned relationships are presented withthe shear wave velocities determined from the SPT-based upholeresults. Moreover, the shear wave velocity determined from CPT,seismic refraction, and the SPT-based uphole tests are compared inFig. 18. Although a continuous shear wave velocity prole down to adepth of 25 m could be obtained from the SPT-based uphole test forBH-10, seismic refraction and CPT-based Vs measurements only give

SCPTU locations.

Fig. 10. A schematic diagram of cross-section lines in the study area.

Fig. 11. A typical cross-section of study area (from SE to NW).

9M.K. Akin et al. / Engineering Geology 119 (2011) 117

05

10

15

20

25

30

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

Dep

th (m

)

Vs (m/s)

BH-2

Kanai (1966)Ohba&Toriumi (1970)Imai&Yoshimura (1970)Fujiwara (1972)Ohsaki&Iwasaki (1973)Imai et al. (1975)Imai (1977)Ohta&Goto (1978)Seed&Idriss (1981)Imai&Tonouchi (1982)Tonouchi et al. (1983)Jinan (1987)Yokota et al. (1991)Kalteziotis et al. (1992)Athanasopoulos (1995)Sisman (1995)Iyisan (1996)Jafari et al. (1997)Kiku et al. (2001)Hasancebi&Ulusay (2007)Hanumantharao&Ramana(2008)Dikmen (2009)

Fig. 12. SPT-N and Vs correlations for all soils in BH-2 with respect to different researchers.

Table 1Summary of empirical correlations based on SPT-N vs. Vs.

Researcher(s) Vs (m/s)

All soils Sands Clays

Kanai (1966) Vs=19N0.6 Imai and Yoshimura (1970) Vs=76N0.33 Ohba and Toriumi (1970) Vs=84N0.31 Fujiwara (1972) Vs=92.1N0.337 Shibata (1970) Vs=32N0.5 Ohta et al. (1972) Vs=87N0.36 Ohsaki and Iwasaki (1973) Vs=81.4N0.39 Vs=59.4N0.47 Imai et al. (1975) Vs=89.9N0.341 Imai (1977) Vs=91N0.337 Vs=80.6N0.331 Vs=102N0.292

Ohta and Goto (1978) Vs=85.35N0.348 Seed and Idriss (1981) Vs=61.4N0.5 Imai and Tonouchi (1982) Vs=97N0.314 Seed et al. (1983) Vs=56.4N0.5 Sykora and Stokoe (1983) Vs=100.5N0.29 Tonouchi et al. (1983) Vs=97N0.314 Fumal and Tinsley (1985) Vs=152+5.1N0.27 Jinan (1987) Vs=116.1(N+0.3185)0.202 Okamoto et al. (1989) Vs=125N0.3 Lee (1990) Vs=57N0.49 Vs=114N0.31

Yokota et al. (1991)a Vs=121N0.27 Kalteziotis et al. (1992) Vs=76.2N0.24 Pitilakis et al. (1992) Vs=162N0.17 Athanasopoulos (1995) Vs=107.6N0.36 Raptakis et al. (1995) Vs=100N0.24 Sisman (1995) Vs=32.8N0.51 Iyisan (1996) Vs=51.5N0.516 Kayabal (1996) Vs=175+(3.75 N) 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=27N0.73Hasanebi and Ulusay (2007) Vs=90N0.309 Vs=90.82N0.319 Vs=97.89N0.269

Hanumantharao and Ramana (2008) Vs=82.6N0.43 Vs=79N0.434 Dikmen (2009) Vs=58N0.39 Vs=73N0.33 Vs=44N0.48

a Adopted from Jafari et al. (2002).

10 M.K. Akin et al. / Engineering Geology 119 (2011) 117

0100

200

300

400

500

600

0 10 20 30 40 50

V s (m

/s)

SPT-N30Kanai (1966) Ohba & Toriumi (1970) Imai & Yoshimura (1970)Fujiwara (1972) Ohsaki & Iwasaki (1973) Imai et al. (1975)Imai (1977) Ohta & Goto (1978) Seed & Idriss (1981)Imai & Tonouchi (1982) Tonouchi et al. (1983) Jinan (1987)Yokota et al. (1991) Kalteziotis et al. (1992) Athanasopoulos (1995)Sisman (1995) Iyisan (1996) Jafari et al. (1997)Kiku et al. (2001) Hasancebi & Ulusay (2007) Hanumantharao & Ramana (2008)Dikmen (2009) This study This study

All alluvial soils

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0 10 20 30 40 50

V s (m

/s)

SPT-N30Kanai (1966) Ohba & Toriumi (1970) Imai & Yoshimura (1970)Fujiwara (1972) Ohsaki & Iwasaki (1973) Imai et al. (1975)Imai (1977) Ohta & Goto (1978) Seed & Idriss (1981)Imai & Tonouchi (1982) Tonouchi et al. (1983) Jinan (1987)Yokota et al. (1991) Kalteziotis et al. (1992) Athanasopoulos (1995)Sisman (1995) Iyisan (1996) Jafari et al. (1997)Kiku et al. (2001) Hasancebi & Ulusay (2007) Hanumantharao & Ramana (2008)Dikmen (2009) This study This study

All Pliocene soils

a

b

Fig. 13. SPT-N and Vs empirical relations for all soils in Erbaa.

11M.K. Akin et al. / Engineering Geology 119 (2011) 117

050

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

0 10 20 30 40 50

V s (m

/s)

SPT-N30

V s (m

/s)

SPT-N30

Shibata (1970) Ohta et al. (1972)Imai (1977) Ohsaki & Iwasaki (1973)Seed et al. (1983) Sykora & Stokoe (1983)Fumal & Tinsley (1985) Okamoto et al. (1989)Lee (1990) Pitilakis et al. (1992)Raptakis et al. (1995) Kayabali (1996)Hasancebi & Ulusay (2007) Hanumantharao & Ramana (2008)Dikmen (2009) This studyThis study

Alluvial sandsa

b

0

100

200

300

400

500

0 10 20 30 40 50

Shibata (1970) Ohta et al. (1972)Imai (1977) Ohsaki & Iwasaki (1973)Seed et al. (1983) Sykora & Stokoe (1983)Fumal & Tinsley (1985) Okamoto et al. (1989)Lee (1990) Pitilakis et al. (1992)Raptakis et al. (1995) Kayabali (1996)Hasancebi & Ulusay (2007) Hanumantharao & Ramana (2008)Dikmen (2009) This studyThis study

Pliocene sands

12 M.K. Akin et al. / Engineering Geology 119 (2011) 117

500Imai (1977)Alluvial clays

a13M.K. Akin et al. / Engineering Geology 119 (2011) 117400shear wave velocity values to depths of 57 m. The correlation ofshear wave velocity proles is similar for the available data in bothCPT-based measurements and SPT-based uphole measurements asseen in Fig. 18.

0

100

200

300

0 10 20 30

V s (m

/s)V s

(m

/s)

SPT-N30

SPT-N30

0

100

200

300

400

500

0 10 20 30

bPliocene clays

Fig. 15. SPT-N and Vs empirical rela

Fig. 14. SPT-N and Vs empirical relLee (1990)8. General evaluation

Each of the empirical relationships listed in Table 1 expressedshear wave velocity measurement directly as a function of SPT blow

40 50

Jafari et al.(2002)

Hasancebi& Ulusay(2007) Dikmen(2009)

This study

This study

40 50

Imai (1977)

Lee (1990)

Jafari et al.(2002)

Hasancebi& Ulusay(2007)

Dikmen(2009)

This study

This study

tions for clayey soils in Erbaa.

ations for sandy soils in Erbaa.

The distribution of the shear wave velocity data with respect toSPT-N value at the same depth with SPT application and SPT-baseduphole test is considered in the interpretations. These proposed

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Dep

th (m

)Vs (m/s)

SPT-based uphole (BH-4)

g-1

g-2

g-3

g-4

g-5

g-6

g-7

Average

Fig. 16. Shear wave velocity distribution for all geophones (BH-4).

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0 100 200 300 400 500

Dep

th (m

)

Vs (m/s)

CPT-based Vs

Seismic refraction-based Vs

SPT-based uphole (geophone-3)

Fig. 18. Comparison of shear wave velocity determined from CPT, seismic refraction,and SPT-based uphole for BH-10 location.

14 M.K. Akin et al. / Engineering Geology 119 (2011) 117count without overburden corrections or consideration of verticaleffective stress or depth (Bellana, 2009). One exception belongs to thestudy of Andrus et al. (2006) who used N1(60) values for the

calculation of shear wave velocity.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0 100 200 300 400 500

Dep

th (m

)

Vs (m/s)

BH-4

BH-6

BH-8

BH-10

BH-18

BH-28

BH-30

a

Fig. 17. Shear wave velocity proles obtained from SPT-basrelationships are classied into three main groups according to threemain soil types of the study area: for all soils, for sand, and for clay.Moreover, the alluvial and Pliocene deposits are evaluated separatelyto consider the geologic age factor in this study. Consequently, newempirical relationships between SPT-N and Vs are proposed for

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Vs (m/s)b

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Dep

th (m

)

BH-12

BH-23

BH-33

ed uphole tests (a: alluvial soils, and b: Pliocene soils).

a0

5

10

15

100.00 150.00 200.00 250.00

epth

(m

)

Vs (m/s)

15M.K. Akin et al. / Engineering Geology 119 (2011) 11720

25

30

Ddifferent alluvial and Pliocene soils in the study area in accordancewith the SPT-based uphole measurements.

As aforementioned, the shear wave velocity determined from SPT-based uphole test and SPT-N30 blow count at the same depth with SPTapplication and SPT-based uphole tests are considered during the

b35

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

150.00 200.00 250.00

Dep

th (m

)

Vs (m/s)

Fig. 19. Comparison of the proposed empirical relations for constan

Table 2The results of regression analyses.

Soil type Model 1 Model 2

a b ln Vs c d e ln Vs

Alluvial sand 4.0280 0.4405 0.3231 4.0852 0.1091 0.4257 0.1940Alluvial clay 4.7037 0.2629 0.1564 4.8023 0.1007 0.2161 0.0916All alluvial soils 4.2052 0.4671 0.2905 4.3576 0.1162 0.3505 0.1883Pliocene sand 3.7432 0.4740 0.3037 3.6519 0.1756 0.4815 0.1421Pliocene clay 4.9479 0.1941 0.1512 4.9457 0.0490 0.2317 0.0934All Pliocene soils 3.6542 0.5440 0.1344 3.9523 0.3588 0.1772 0.0656300.00 350.00 400.00

N=10

N=20

N=30

N=40

N=50construction of empirical relationships. The proposed empiricalrelationships between Vs (m/s) and SPT-N30 are evaluated toinvestigate the effect of changes for the depth (z) or vertical effectivestress. The following powerlaw expressions including depth (inmeters) based on multiple regressions are obtained for different soilcategories. It should be noted that the proposed Eqs. ((2) to (7)) arevalid down to 25 m depth for the study area.

Vs = 59:44N0:109z0:426 for all alluvial soils r = 0:89 2

Vs = 38:55N0:176z0:481 for alluvial sand r = 0:94 3

Vs = 78:1N0:116z0:35 for alluvial clay r = 0:92 4

Vs = 121:75N0:101z0:216 for all Pliocene soils r = 0:94 5

Vs = 52:04N0:359z0:177 for Pliocene sand r = 0:98 6

300.00 350.00 400.00

N=10

N=20

N=30

N=40

N=50

t SPT-N value for (a) all alluvial soils, and (b) all Pliocene soils.

16 M.K. Akin et al. / Engineering Geology 119 (2011) 117Vs = 140:61N0:049z0:232 for Pliocene clay r = 0:89 7

Two of the proposed correlations are evaluated for constant SPT-Nblow count value and the related graphics are shown in Fig. 19. Theserelationships reveal that the low values for SPT-N blow count aremostly affected from the depth during the calculation of shear wavevelocities.

To investigate the inuence of depth on the prediction of shearwave velocity for the Erbaa soils, two velocity models wereinvestigated. The rst was of a form similar to the great majority ofthose listed in Table 1 in that the velocity was assumed to beindependent of depth or vertical effective stress, i.e.,

Vs = aNb 8

where a and b are the constants to be determined by regression. Thesecond model assumed that the velocity was inuenced by both SPTresistance and depth, and was of the form

Vs = cNdze 9

where c, d, and e are the constants to be determined by regression. Thepowerlaw forms of these models allow them to be written as

lnVs = lna + b lnN 10

and

lnVs = lnc + d lnN + e lnz 11

In this form, linear regression can be used to determine the valuesof the constants that best t the velocity data. The results of theseanalyses are presented in Table 2. Of particular note are the values ofthe standard deviations of the residuals these values indicate theuncertainty in Vs associated with each of the models.

The results of the regression analyses provide means forcomparing the uncertainties in predicting Vs from measured SPTresistance for the Erbaa soils both with and without consideration ofdepth. The uncertainty in Vs given N and z can be seen to besignicantly lower than that obtained when Vs is estimated given Nalone as given in Table 2.

Similar correlations between Vs and energy-corrected SPT-N (N60)for silts, sands, and clays were proposed by Pitilakis et al. (1999).Accordingly, SPT-N value was corrected by 60% energy ratio to get theaverage ratio of the actual energy delivered by safety hammers to thetheoretical free-fall energy. Pitilakis et al. (1999) mentioned that theproposed correlation for clays is compatible with the existingrelationships proposed by Imai (1977) and Lee (1990). However,the relationship proposed for silts and sands reveal quite dissimilarresults when compared to the existing relations. The reason fordissimilarity was explained in these sand soil type relations by thesaturation of Vs at 400 m/s depending upon the employed dataset.Furthermore, Hasanebi and Ulusay (2007) stated that the proposedequations based on uncorrected SPT-N values provide a somewhatbetter t than the equations based on energy-corrected SPT-N values.The use of equation for all soils based on uncorrected blow-counts(SPT-N) is applicable for the indirect estimations of Vs (Hasanebi andUlusay, 2007).

Furthermore, the proposed equations based on uncorrected SPTblow count values including the depth effect will be useful for the

shear wave velocity prole. The use of these equations for differentsoils will be applicable for the indirect estimations of Vs in Erbaa(Akin, 2009).

9. Conclusions and recommendations

Shear wave velocity proles of Erbaa were developed to providedata for site response analyses as a part of a microzonation study. Thegeological units observed in the study area consist of alluvial andPliocene mostly clayey-sandy units. The layers were separatelyevaluated on the basis of the in-situ and laboratory tests, and eldexplorations.

The seismic uphole method which uses the impact energy of thesplit spoon sampler of SPT test as a source was applied in this study(SPT-based uphole method) to obtain shear wave velocity measure-ments. The measured SPT values were computed with differentempirical formulas and compared with Vs measurements for the site-specic area.

Shear wave velocity values obtained from geophysical tests andempirical correlations were also evaluated in this study. Thecorrelated results conrmed that these newly adapted formulasincluding depth effects can be used for the study area. Measured andempirically calculated shear wave velocities are consistent with eachother. The dataset obtained from SPT-based uphole tests can be usedin the future investigations.

Acknowledgements

This work has been supported by the Scientic and TechnicalResearch Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) (TUBITAK-CAYDAG no:107Y068), the Research Foundation of Middle East TechnicalUniversity (BAP no: 2009-03-09-01) and the Research Foundationof the PrimeMinistry State Planning Organization (DPT no: CUBAPM-359/DPT 2006K-120220). The authors gratefully acknowledge Prof.Dr. Orhan Tatar from Cumhuriyet University for his support during theDPT project. The Fulbright program gave the opportunity to make thisresearch mutually and internationally possible in USA. The authorswould like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their comments.

References

Akademi Ltd. Sti., 2002. Erbaa Organize Sanayi Bolgesi Jeoloji-Jeoteknik Etut Raporu,Ankara, (unpublished-in Turkish).

Akin, M., 2009. Seismic Microzonation of Erbaa (Tokat-Turkey) Located Along EasternSegment of the North Anatolian Fault Zone, PhD Dissertation, Middle East TechnicalUniversity, pp. 416.

Akin, M., Kramer, S.L., Topal, T., 2010. Comparison of measured and estimated shearwave velocities in a seismically active area (Erbaa, Turkey). Fifth InternationalConference on Recent advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and SoilDynamics, Paper No:1.21a, San Diego, California.

Aktimur, T., Ates, S., Yurdakul, E., Tekirli, E., ve Kecer, M., 1992. Niksar-Erbaa ve DestekDolayinin Jeolojisi. MTA Dergisi, 114. 36 pp., (in Turkish).

Allen, C.R., 1969. Active Faulting in Northern Turkey Division of Geological Science,California Institute of Technology, Contribution No. 1577, p. 32.

Ambraseys, N.N., 1970. Some characteristic features of the North Anatolian fault zone.Tectonophysics 9, 143165.

Andrus, R.D., Stokoe, K.H., 1997. Liquefaction resistance based on shear wave velocity inevaluation of liquefaction resistance of soils. In: Youd, T.L., Idriss, I.M. (Eds.),National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research (NCEER) Workshop.Proceedings, Salt Lake, UT, pp. 89128.

Andrus, R.D., Fairbanks, C.D., Zhang, J., Camp, W.M., Casey, T.J., Cleary, T.J., Wright, W.B.,2006. Shear-wave velocity and seismic response of nearsurface sediments inCharleston, South Carolina. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 96 (5),18971914.

ASTM D 577895, 2000. Standard Test Method for Performing Electronic Friction Coneand Piezocone Penetration Testing of Soils. ASTM, West Conshohocken, PA.

Athanasopoulos, G.A., 1995. Empirical correlations Vs-N SPT for soils of Greece: acomparative studyof reliability. In: Akmak, A.S. (Ed.), Proceedings of 7th InternationalConference on Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering (Chania, Crete).Computational Mechanics, Southampton 1936.

Bang, E., Kim, D., 2007. Evaluation of shear wave velocity prole using SPT-baseduphole method. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 27, 741758.

Barka, A.A., Akyz, S.H., Cohen, H.A., Watchorn, F., 2000. Tectonic evolution of theNiksar and Taova, Erbaa pull-apart basins, North Anatolian Fault Zone: their

signicance for the motion of the Anatolian block. Tectonophysics 322, 243264.

Bellana, N., 2009. Shear Wave Velocity as Function of SPT Penetration Resistance andVertical Effective Stress at California Bridge Sites. MSc. Thesis, University ofCalifornia, Los angeles. 67 pages.

Burland, J.B., 1989. Small is beautiful: the stiffness of soils at small strains. Canadian

McGillivray, A.V., Mayne, P.W., 2004. Seismic piezocone and seismic at dilatometertests at Treporti. Proceedings of 2nd Int. Conf. on Site Characterization, Porto, 2,pp. 16951700.

Metropol Muh., 2005. Erbaa (Tokat) Sivi-atik Aritma Tesis Sahasinin Jeoljik-Jeoteknik-Jeozik Etut Raporu, Samsun (unpublished-in Turkish).

Ohba, S., Toriumi, I., 1970. Dynamic response characteristics of Osaka Plain. Proceedings

17M.K. Akin et al. / Engineering Geology 119 (2011) 117Canik, B. and K. Kayabali, 2000. Erbaa (Tokat) Zeminlerinin Depremsellik AcisindanDegerlendirilmesi, Ankara University report (unpublished-in Turkish).

Dikmen, U., 2009. Statistical correlations of shear wave velocity and penetrationresistance for soils. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering 6, 6172.

Dobry, R., Borcherdt, R.D., Crouse, C.B., Idriss, I.M., Joyner, W.B., Martin, G.R., Power, M.S.,Rinne, E.E., Seed, R.B., 2000. New site coefcient and site classication system used inrecent building code provisions. Earthquake Spectra 16 (1), 4167.

Emre, O., Kondo, H., Yildirim, C., Ozaksoy, V., 2006. Surface Rupture of 1943 TosyaEarthquake, North Anatolian Fault. 59th Geological Congress of Turkey, MTA,Ankara (in Turkish).

Fujiwara, T., 1972. Estimation of ground movements in actual destructive earthquakes.Proceedings of the Fourth European Symposium on Earthquake Engineering,London, pp. 125132.

Fumal, T.E., Tinsley, J.C., 1985. Mapping shear wave velocities of near surface geologicalmaterials. In: Ziony, T.I. (Ed.), In: Predicting areal limits of earthquake inducedlandsliding; In evaluation of earthquake hazards in the Los Angeles region Anearth science perspective. USGS Paper 1360, 127150.

Hanumantharao, C., Ramana, G.V., 2008. Dynamic soil properties for microzonation ofDelhi, India. Journal of Earth Systen Science 117 (S2), 719730.

Hasanebi, N., Ulusay, R., 2007. Empirical correlations between shear wave velocity andpenetration resistance for ground shaking assessments. Bulletin of EngineeringGeology and the Environment 66, 203213.

Holzer, T.L., Bennett, M.J., Noce, T.E., Tinsley, J.C., 2005. Shear-wave velocity of surcialgeologic sediments in northern California: statistical distributions and depthdependence. Earthquake Spectra 21, 161177.

http://www.deprem.gov.tr/indexen.html.Imai, T., 1977. P and S wave velocities of the ground in Japan. Proceeding of IX

International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, 2, pp.127132.

Imai, T., Tonouchi, K., 1982. Correlation of N-value with S-wave velocity and shearmodulus. Proceedings of the 2nd European Symposium of Penetration Testing,Amsterdam, pp. 5772.

Imai, T., Yoshimura, Y., 1970. Elastic wave velocity and soil properties in soft soil.Tsuchito-Kiso 18 (1), 1722 (in Japanese).

Imai, T., Fumoto, H., Yokota, K., 1975. The relation of mechanical properties of soil to P-and S- wave velocities in Japan. Proceedings of 4th Japan Earthquake EngineeringSymp. 8996 (in Japanese).

Iyisan, R., 1996. Correlations between shear wave velocity and in-situ penetration testresults. Chamber of Civil Engineers of Turkey. Teknik Dergi 7 (2), 11871199(in Turkish).

Jafari, M.K., Asghari, A., Rahmani, I., 1997. Empirical correlation between shear wavevelocity (Vs) and SPT-N value for south of Tehran soils. Proceedings of 4thInternational Conference on Civil Engineering (Tehran, Iran) (in Persian).

Jafari, M.K., Shaee, A., Razmkhah, A., 2002. Dynamic properties of ne grained soils insouth of Tehran. Journal of Seismological Earthquake Engineering 4, 2535.

Jinan, Z., 1987. Correlation between seismic wave velocity and the number of blow ofSPT and depth. Selected Papers from the Chinese Journal of GeotechnicalEngineering, pp. 92100.

Kalteziotis, N., Sabatakakis, N., Vassiliou, J., 1992. Evaluation of dynamic characteristicsof Greek soil formations. In: Second Hellenic Conference on GeotechnicalEngineering 2, 239246 (in Greek).

Kanai, K., 1966. Conf. on Cone Penetrometer The Ministry of Public Works andSettlement (Ankara, Turkey) (presented by Y Sakai, 1968).

Kayabal, K., 1996. Soil liquefaction evaluation using shear wave velocity. EngineeringGeology 44 (1), 121127.

Ketin, I., 1969. Kuzey Anadolu Fay hakknda. MTA Dergisi 72, 125 (in Turkish).Kiku, H., Yoshida, N., Yasuda, S., Irisawa, T., Nakazawa, H., Shimizu, Y., Ansal, A., Erkan,

A., 2001. In-situ penetration tests and soil proling in Adapazari, Turkey.Proceedings of the ICSMGE/TC4 Satellite Conference on Lessons Learned FromRecent Strong Earthquakes, pp. 259265.

Kim, D.S., Bang, E.S., Seo, W.S., 2004. Evaluation of shear wave velocity prole usingSPT-Uphole method. International site characterization, ISC-2 Porto, Portugal,pp. 339344.

Kramer, S.L., 1996. Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering. Prentice Hall, Upper SaddleRiver, New Jersey. 653 pp.

Lee, S.H., 1990. Regression models of shear wave velocities. Journal of the ChineseInstitute of Engineers 13, 519532.

Lehane, B., Fahey, M., 2002. A simplied non-linear settlement prediction model forfoundations on sand. Canadian Geotechnical Journal 39 (2), 293303.

Mayne, P.W., Schneider, J.A., Martin, G.K., 1999. Small- and large strain soil propertiesfrom seismic at dilatometer tests. Proceedings of 2nd Int. Symp. on Pre-FailureDeformation Characteristics of Geomaterials, Torino, 1, pp. 419427.

McGillivray, A.V., 2007. Enhanced integration of shear wave velocity proling in direct-push site characterization systems. Ph.D. thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology,370 pp.of the Annual Meeting, A. I. J (in Japanese).Ohsaki, Y., Iwasaki, R., 1973. On dynamic shear moduli and Poisson's ratio of soil

deposits. Soil Found 13, 6173.Ohta, Y., Goto, N., 1978. Empirical shear wave velocity equations in terms of

characteristics soil indexes. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 6,167187.

Ohta, T., Hara, A., Niwa, M., Sakano, T., 1972. Elastic shear moduli as estimated fromN-value Proc. 7th Ann. Convention of Japan Society of Soil Mechanics andFoundation Engineering, pp. 265268.

Ohta, Y., Goto, N., Kagami, H., Shiono, K., 1978. Shear wave velocity measurementduring a standard penetration test. Earthquake Engineering and StructuralDynamics 6, 4350.

Okamoto, T., Kokusho, T., Yoshida, Y., Kusuonoki, K., 1989. Comparison of surface versussubsurface wave source for P-S logging in sand layer. Proceedings of 44th Ann.Conf. JSCE, 3, pp. 996997 (in Japanese).

Pitilakis, K.D., Anastasiadis, A., Raptakis, D., 1992. Field and laboratory determination ofdynamic properties of natural soil deposits. Proceedings of 10th World Conf.Earthquake Engineering, Rotherdam 12751280.

Pitilakis, K., Raptakis, D., Lontzetidis, K.T., Vassilikou, T., Jongmans, D., 1999.Geotechnical and geophysical description of Euro-Seistests, using eld andlaboratory tests, and moderate strong ground motions. Journal of EarthquakeEngineering 3, 381409.

Raptakis, D.G., Anastasiadis, S.A.J., Pitilakis, K.D., Lontzetidis, K.S., 1995. Shear wavevelocities and damping of Greek natural soils. Proceedings of 10th European Conf.Earthquake Engineering, Vienna, pp. 477482.

Richart, F.E., Hall, J.R., Woods, R.D., 1970. Vibrations of Soils and Foundations. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J. 414 pp.

Sasitharan, S., Robertson, P.K., Sego, D.C., Morgenstern, N.R., 1994. State-boundarysurface for very loose sand and its practical implications. Canadian GeotechnicalJournal 31, 321334.

Schlumberger, C., 1920. Etude sur la prospection electrique du sous-sol. Gaultier-Villarset Cie, Paris. 94 pp.

Schnabel, P.B., Lysmer, J.L., Seed, H.B., 1972. SHAKE: a computer program for earthquakeresponse analysis of horizontally layered sites. Report EERC-72/12, EarthquakeEngineering Research Center (EERC), Berkeley, California.

Seed, H.B., Idriss, I.M., 1970. Soil moduli and damping factors for dynamic responseanalyses. Rep. No. EERC-70/10, Earthquake Engg. Research Center, Univ. ofCalifornia at Berkeley, Berkeley, California.

Seed, H.B., Idriss, I.M., 1981. Evaluation of liquefaction potential sand deposits based onobservation of performance in previous earthquakes. ASCE National Convention(MO), pp. 481544.

Seed, H.B., Idriss, I.M., Arango, I., 1983. Evaluation of liquefaction potential using eldperformance data. J. Geotech. Eng., ASCE 109, 458482.

Seed, R.B., Cetin, K.O., Moss, R.E.S., Kammerer, A.M., Wu, J., Pestana, J.M., Riemer, M.F.,Sancio, R.B., Bray, J.D., Kayen, R.E., Faris, A., 2003. Recent advances in soilliquefaction engineering: a unied and consistent framework. 26th Annual ASCELos Angeles Geotechnical Spring Seminar, Long Beach, CA, ASCE, Reston, VA, 71.

Sengor, A.M.C., Gorur, N., Saroglu, F., 1985. Strikeslip faulting and related basinformation in zones of tectonic escape: Turkey as a case study. In: Biddle, K.,Christie-Blick, N. (Eds.), StrikeSlip Deformation, Basin Formation, Sedimentation:SEPM Spec. Publ., 37, pp. 227264.

Shibata, T., 1970. Analysis of liquefaction of saturated sand during cyclic loading.Disaster Prevention Res. Inst. Bull. 13, 563570.

Shibuya, S., Yamashita, S., Mitachi, T., Tanaka, H., 1995. Effects of sample disturbance onGmax of soilsa case study. 1st International Conference on Earthquake Geotech-nical Engineering, Tokyo, Japan, 1, p. 77.

Sisman, H., 1995. An investigation on relationships between shear wave velocity, andSPT and pressuremeter test results. MSc Thesis, Ankara University, GeophysicalEngineering Department, Ankara, 75 p (in Turkish).

Stewart, J.P., Liu, A.H., Choi, Y., 2003. Amplication factors for spectral acceleration intectonically active regions. Bulletin. Seismological Society of America 93 (1),332352.

Sykora, D.E., Stokoe, K.H., 1983. Correlations of in-situ measurements in sands of shearwave velocity. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 20, 125136.

Tonouchi, K., Sakayama, T., Imai, T., 1983. S wave velocity in the ground and thedamping factor. Bull. Int. Assoc. Eng. Geologists 2627, 327333.

Wills, C.J., Silva, W., 1998. Shear wave velocity characteristics of geologic units inCalifornia. Earthquake Spectra 14 (3), 533556.

Yilmaz, I., 1998. Kklce Reglatr-Erbaa HES Iletim Hatti Gzergahindaki AlvyalZeminlerin ime ve Oturma Sorunlarinin Jeomhendislik Deerlendirmesi Ph.D.thesis, Cumhuriyet Univ., Sivas, 102 p., unpublished (in Turkish).

Yokota, K., Imai, T., Konno, M., 1991. Dynamic deformation characteristics of soilsdetermined by laboratory tests. OYO Tee. Rep. 3, p. 13.Geotechnical Journal 26 (4), 499516.