Increasing Seismic Safety by CombiningEngineering Technologies and Seismological Data

This Series presents the results of scientific meetings supported under the NATO

Advanced Research Workshops (ARW) are expert meetings where an intense butinformal exchange of views at the frontiers of a subject aims at identifying directions forfuture action

re-organised. Recent volumes on topics not related to security, which result from meetingssupported under the programme earlier, may be found in the NATO Science Series.

Sub-Series

D. Information and Communication Security IOS PressIOS Press

http://www.nato.int/science

http://www.iospress.nl

Springer

Springer

E. Human and Societal Dynamics

Springer

http://www.springer.com

The Series is published by IOS Press, Amsterdam, and Springer, Dordrecht, in conjunctionwith the NATO Public Diplomacy Division.

A. Chemistry and Biology

C. Environmental SecurityB. Physics and Biophysics

Series C: Environmental Security

and Mediterranean Dialogue Country Priorities. The types of meeting supported are generally "Advanced Study Institutes" and "Advanced Research Workshops". The NATOSPS Series collects together the results of these meetings. The meetings are co-organized by scientists from NATO countries and scientists from NATO's "Partner" or"Mediterranean Dialogue" countries. The observations and recommendations made at the meetings, as well as the contents of the volumes in the Series, reflect those of parti-cipants and contributors only; they should not necessarily be regarded as reflecting NATOviews or policy.

latest developments in a subject to an advanced-level audienceAdvanced Study Institutes (ASI) are high-level tutorial courses intended to convey the

Following a transformation of the programme in 2006 the Series has been re-named and

NATO Science for Peace and Security Series

Programme: Science for Peace and Security (SPS).

Defence Against Terrorism; (2) Countering other Threats to Security and (3) NATO, Partner The NATO SPS Programme supports meetings in the following Key Priority areas: (1)

Published in cooperation with NATO Public Diplomacy Division

and

University of Basilicata, Department of Structures,Soil Dynamics and Applied Geology

Edited by

Increasing Seismic Safety

Seismological DataTechnologies and

Marco Mucciarelli

University of Zagreb, Faculty of Science, Department of Geophysics,Marijan Herak

John CassidyNatural Resources Canada, Geological Survey of Canada,

by Combining Engineering

ABC

Potenza, Italy

University of Basilicata, Department of Structures,Soil Dynamics and Applied Geology,Potenza, Italy

Zagreb, Croatia

Sidney, BC, Canada

Published by Springer,

Printed on acid-free paper

All Rights Reserved

in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming,No part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted© 2009 Springer Science + Business Media B.V.

www.springer.com

recording or otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher, with the exception

P.O. Box 17, 3300 AA Dordrecht, The Netherlands.

of any material supplied specifically for the purpose of being entered and executed on acomputer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work.

Proceedings of the NATO Advanced Research Workshop on

ISBN 978-1-4020-9194-0 (PB)

ISBN 978-1-4020-9196 -4 (e-book)

ISBN 978-1-4020-9193-3 (HB)

Library of Congress Control Number: 2008936835

Increasing Seismic Safety by Combining Engineering Technologies

Dubrovnik, Croatia

19–21 September 2007

and Seismological Data

Contents

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix

Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii

Participant Sketches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xvi

1 The Use of Ambient Noise for Building and Soil Characterisation . . . 1Marijan Herak

1.1 The Need for Standardized Approach for Estimating the LocalSite Effects Based on Ambient Noise Recordings . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Kuvvet Atakan

1.2 Are Transients Carrying Useful Information for EstimatingH/V Spectral Ratios? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17Stefano Parolai, Matteo Picozzi, Angelo Strollo, Marco Pilz,Domenico Di Giacomo, Barbara Liss, and Dino Bindi

1.3 Basic Structure of QTS (HVSR) and Examplesof Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33Yutaka Nakamura

1.4 Ambient Noise and Site Response: From Estimation of SiteEffects to Determination of the Subsoil Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53Francisco J. Chavez-Garcıa

1.5 In-Situ Estimates of Material Damping from EnvironmentalNoise Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73Dario Albarello and Francesco Baliva

1.6 Estimates of Vs30 Based on Constrained H/V RatioMeasurements Alone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85Silvia Castellaro and Francesco Mulargia

v

vi Contents

1.7 Comparison of Recorded Dynamic Characteristicsof Structures and Ground During Strong and Weak Shaking . . . 99Mehmet Celebi

1.8 HVSR Technique Improvement Using RedundantWavelet Transform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117Filippos Vallianatos and George Hloupis

2 Effect of Buildings on Free-Field Ground Motion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139Marco Mucciarelli

2.1 Effect of Building-Building Interaction on “Free-Field”Ground Motion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141Marco Mucciarelli, Rocco Ditommaso, Maria Rosaria Gallipoli,and Felice Ponzo

3 Role of Dynamic Properties on Building Vulnerability . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147Angelo Masi

3.1 How Far Ambient Noise Measurement May Help to AssessBuilding Vulnerability? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151Claude Boutin and Stephane Hans

3.2 Assessment of Seismic Capacity of Existing Buildings – Effectsof Uncertainties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181Dimitrios Baros, Miltiadis Kyrkos, Andreas Maravas,and Stavros Anagnostopoulos

3.3 Estimation of the Period of Vibration of Existing RC BuildingTypes Based on Experimental Data and Numerical Results . . . . . 207Angelo Masi and Marco Vona

3.4 Retrofitting and Strengthening Evaluation from StiffnessVariations of a Damaged Building from Ambient VibrationRecordings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227Mohammed N. Farsi, Bertrand Guillier, Jean-Luc Chatelain,and Sid-Ahmed Zermout

4 State-of-the-Art – Recent Advances and Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239John F. Cassidy

4.1 Microtremor Soil-Structure Resonance Study in the BovecBasin (NW Slovenia) Related to 1998 and 2004 DamagingEarthquakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241Andrej Gosar

4.2 Recent Earthquake Site Response Studies in Canada . . . . . . . . . . 257John F. Cassidy and Sheri Molnar

Contents vii

4.3 Recent Applications of Ambient Vibration Measurementsin Croatia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281Marijan Herak

4.4 Applications to World Heritage Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293Yutaka Nakamura, Jun Saita, and Tsutomu Sato

4.5 Two Applications of the HVSR Technique to Cultural Heritageand Historical Masonry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 325Domenico Liberatore, Marco Mucciarelli, Maria Rosaria Gallipoli,and Nicola Masini

4.6 Overview of Seismic Hazard Studies in Tunis City . . . . . . . . . . . . 337Najla Bouden-Romdhane, Pierre Mechler, Anne-Marie Duval,and Sameh Anibi

4.7 An Empirical Geotechnical Seismic Site Response Procedure . . . 353Adrian Rodriguez-Marek, Jonathan D. Bray,and Norm A. Abrahamson

5 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 381

Introduction

The current state-of-the-art allows seismologists to give statistical estimates of theprobability of a large earthquake striking a given region, identifying the areas inwhich the seismic hazard is the highest. However, the usefulness of these estimatesis limited, without information about local subsoil conditions and the vulnerabilityof buildings. Identifying the sites where a local amplification of seismic shakingwill occur, and identifying the buildings that will be the weakest under the seismicshaking is the only strategy that allows effective defence against earthquake damageat an affordable cost, by applying selective reinforcement only to the structures thatneed it.

Unfortunately, too often the Earth’s surface acted as a divide between seismol-ogists and engineers. Now it is becoming clear that the building behaviour largelydepends on the seismic input and the buildings on their turn act as seismic sources,in an intricate interplay that non-linear phenomena make even more complex. Thesephenomena are often the cause of observed damage enhancement during past earth-quakes. While research may pursue complex models to fully understand soil dynam-ics under seismic loading, we need, at the same time, simple models valid onaverage, whose results can be easily transferred to end users without prohibitiveexpenditure. Very complex models require a large amount of data that can only beobtained at a very high cost or may be impossible to get at all.

Today, the interaction between engineers and seismologists is increasing, but stillmany questions remain unanswered. The idea of organizing the Advanced ResearchWorkshop (ARW) in Dubrovnik, Croatia (19–21 September, 2007, http://nato.gfz.hr/Arw/Arw.html) came from recent discussions during meetings that puttogether seismologists and engineers: the NATO Science for Peace project named“Assessment of Seismic Site Amplification and Seismic Building Vulnerability inthe FYR Macedonia, Croatia and Slovenia” (ASSASBV, more details at http://nato.gfz.hr), the ECEES Conference, Session STS-10 (http://www.usc.edu/dept/civileng/Earthquake eng/ECEES STS-E10/) and a joint seismologists-engineers work-shop held in Italy (http://www.reluis.it/).

ix

x Introduction

Under the title “Increasing Seismic Safety by Combining EngineeringTechnologies and Seismological Data”, we grouped several topics to be discussedtogether by engineers and seismologists:

1. Can we use ambient noise building and soil characterisation to extract usefulinformation for engineers?

2. How we can tell apart a frequency decrease due to distributed damage, concen-trated damage, time-varying building and soil behaviour?

3. Which is the role of transients in ambient noise analysis?4. Can we quantify the influence of existing buildings on ground-motion recordings

(both noise and earthquake)?5. To which extent soil-building resonance is a cause of damage enhancement?6. How to couple soil and building non-linear behaviour?

The ARW aimed to bring together the most recent experience from highly qualifiedscientists, compare national experience and ongoing projects, and provide frame-work for discussion among participants.

The expected outcomes were guidelines that will help to make the most of currentpractice, new ideas to be put forward in future research and give the opportunity todevise new, larger projects on a trans-national basis.

Among the examples of possible practical results to be implemented followingthe outcome of the meeting are:

• Modification to existing building codes for soil classification• Simplified approaches to building vulnerability and soil-building resonance, to

be put in practice in megacities

However, it has to be pointed out that we did not want to reach consensus at allcosts. Among the invited speakers, some are known for different points of view onsome topics. The organisers believe that only from the comparison of contrastingtheories it is possible to achieve advancements in knowledge. If a single idea wasagreed upon, this was most welcome. But when contrasting views remained, theyare fairly represented in workshop proceedings, so to stimulate further research. Theconclusion of the ARW represent the current status of knowledge. On most questionthere is an unanimous answer, but in some cases different views are present and thedisagreement is faithfully reported.

The Editors wish to acknowledge the support of the NATO Science committeethat made possible the organisation of the workshop and the publication of this book.

Lectures Given

Wednesday, 19 September, 9:30–13:00

Marijan Herak – Marco Mucciarelli: Welcome speech and presentation of ProjectASSASBV (NATO SfP 980857)

Introduction xi

Kuvvet Atakan: The need for standardized H/V spectral ratio approach: Datacollection, processing and interpretationPaco Chavez-Garcia: Seismic noise, soil response, and subsoil structureYutaka Nakamura: Characteristics of H/V Spectrum

Wednesday, 19 September, 15:00–18:30

Dario Albarello: In situ estimate of seismic attenuation from noise measurementsFrancesco Mulargia: Constrained single-station only HVSR estimates of Vs30and deviations from 1-D subsoil geometryAndrej Gosar: Microtremor study for assessing site effects in the Bovec basin(NW Slovenia) related to 1998 Mw 5.6 and 2004 Mw 5.2 earthquakesJohn F. Cassidy: Earthquake Site Response Studies in Canada: Recent Advancesand Applications

Thursday, 20 September, 9:30–13:00

Adrian Rodriguez-Marek: Geotechnical Site Classifications for Building CodeApplicationsJohn Douglas: Using seismological data to improve ground-motion predictionsfor engineering purposesAdrian Rodriguez-Marek: Geotechnical Aspects of the August 15, 2007 Mw 8.0Pisco, Peru Earthquake: Preliminary ObservationsPierre-Yves Bard: Modifications to seismic hazard due to urban environment:increase or decrease – Constraints from numerical and physical modelling

Thursday, 20 September, 15:00–18:30

Marco Mucciarelli: Effect of built environment on “free field” ground motionJun Saita: Vulnerability Assessment for Ground and Structures using AmbientNoiseMarijan Herak: Recent measurements of ambient vibrations in buildings inCroatiaZoran Milutinovic: Modal analysis of special structures using ambient vibration

Friday, 21 September, 9:30–13:00

Dominik H. Lang: The application of ambient seismic noise for engineeringpurposesClaude Boutin: How far ambient noise measurements may help to assess buildingvulnerability?Stavros A. Anagnostopoulos: Assessment of seismic capacity of existing build-ings under uncertain soil propertiesNajla Bouden Romdhane: Overview of Seismic Site Response Analysis inTunis City

Friday, 21 September, 15:00–18:30

Mehmet Celebi: Comparison of recorded dynamic characteristics of structuresand ground during strong and weak shaking

xii Introduction

Angelo Masi: Estimation of the period of vibration of existing RC building typesbased on experimental data and numerical resultsSergey Tyagunov: Assessment of seismic vulnerability of built environment inearthquake prone areasDomenico Liberatore/Marco Mucciarelli: Applications of the HVSR techniqueto cultural heritage and historical masonryFinal discussion and conclusion

Contributors

Norm A. Abrahamson Geosciences Department, Pacific Gas & Electric Company,San Francisco, CA 94177

Dario Albarello Dip. Di Scienze della Terra – Universita di Siena – Via Laterina,8 – 53100 Siena – Italy, albarello@unisi.it

Stavros A. Anagnostopoulos Department of Civil Engineering, University ofPatras, 26500, Patras, Greece, saa@upatras.gr

Sameh Anibi Ecole Nationale d’Ingenieurs de Tunis, Department of Civil Engi-neering, Tunis, Tunisia

Kuvvet Atakan Department of Earth Sciences, University of Bergen, Norway,atakan@geo.uib.no

Francesco Baliva Dip. Di Scienze della Terra – Universita di Siena – Via Laterina,8 – 53100 Siena – Italy

Dimitrios Baros Department of Civil Engineering, University of Patras, 26500,Patras, Greece

D. Bindi Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia, via Bassini 15, 20133Milano, Italy

Najla Bouden-Romdhane Ecole Nationale d’Ingenieurs de Tunis, Department ofCivil Engineering, Tunis, Tunisia

Claude Boutin Universite de Lyon, Laborataire Geomateriaux, Departement GenicCivil et Biatiment, URA CNRS 1652, claude.boutin@entpe.fr

Jonathan D. Bray Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Univer-sity of California, Berkeley, CA 94720-1710

John F. Cassidy Geological Survey of Canada, Sidney, BC, CanadaandUniversity of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada, JCassidy@NRCan.gc.ca

xiii

xiv Contributors

Silvia Castellaro Dipartimento di Fisica, Universita di Bologna, Viale Berti Pichat8, 40127 Bologna, Italy

Mehmet Celebi Earthquake Hazards Team, USGS, Menlo Park, CA. 94025,celebi@usgs.gov

Francisco J. Chavez-Garcıa Coordinacion de Ingenierıa Sismologica, Institutode Ingenierıa, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Ciudad Universitaria,Mexico, D.F. 04510, Mexico

Rocco Ditommaso DiSGG – Universita della Basilicata, Potenza, Italy

Anne-Marie Duval CETE mediterranee, Nice, France

Maria Rosaria Gallipoli DiSGG – Universita della Basilicata, Potenza, Italy,gallipoli@imaa.cnr.it

D. Di Giacomo GeoForschungsZentrum Potsdam, Telegrafenberg, 14473Potsdam, GermanyandUnivertitat Potsdam, Karl-Liebknecht-Strasse, 14476 Potsdam, Germany

Andrej Gosar Environmental Agency of Slovenia, Seismology and GeologyOffice, Dunajska 47, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia and University of Ljubljana,Faculty of Natural Sciences and Engineering, andrej.gosar@gov.si

S. Hans Ecole Nationale des Travaux Publics de l’Etat, rue Maurice Audin, 69518Vaulx-en-Velin, France, stephane.hans@entpe.fr

Marijan Herak University of Zagreb, Faculty of Science, Department of Geo-physics, Horvatovac bb, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia, herak@irb.hr

George Hloupis Department of Electronic and Computer Engineering, Brunel Uni-versity, Uxbridge, Middlesex, UB83PH, United Kingdom

Miltiadis Kyrkos Department of Civil Engineering, University of Patras, 26500,Patras, Greece

D. Liberatore University of Basilicata, DiSGG, Potenza, Italy, domenico.liberatore@unibas.it

Andreas Maravas Department of Civil Engineering, University of Patras, 26500,Patras, Greece

Angelo Masi DiSGG, University of Basilicata, Campus Macchia Romana,Potenza, Italy, angelo.masi@unibas.it

N. Masini CNR, IBAM, Potenza, Italy, masini@iisf.pz.cnr.it

Pierre Mechler Departement de Geophysique Appliquee, Universite Paris 6

Contributors xv

Sheri Molnar Natural Resources Canada, Sidney, BC, Canada, and University ofVictoria, Victoria, BC, Canada

Marco Mucciarelli DiSGG – Universita della Basilicata, Potenza, Italy, marco.mucciarelli@unibas.it

Francesco Mulargia Dipartimento di Fisica, Universita di Bologna, Viale BertiPichat 8, 40127 Bologna, Italy

Yutaka Nakamura President, System and Data Research Co., Ltd.; VisitingProfessor, Department of Built Environment, Tokyo Institute Technology

S. Parolai GeoForschungsZentrum Potsdam, Telegrafenberg, 14473 Potsdam,Germany

M. Picozzi GeoForschungsZentrum Potsdam, Telegrafenberg, 14473 Potsdam,Germany

M. Pilz GeoForschungsZentrum Potsdam, Telegrafenberg, 14473 Potsdam,Germany

Felice Ponzo DiSGG – Universita della Basilicata, Potenza, Italy

Adrian Rodriguez-Marek Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164-2910

Jun Saita System and Data Research Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan

A. Strollo GeoForschungsZentrum Potsdam, Telegrafenberg, 14473 Potsdam,GermanyandUnivertitat Potsdam, Karl-Liebknecht-Strasse, 14476 Potsdam, Germany

Filippos Vallianatos Department of Natural Resources and Environment,Technological Educational Institute of Crete, Romanou 3, 73133, Chania, Greece,fvallian@chania.teicrete.gr

Marco Vona DiSGG, University of Basilicata, Campus Macchia Romana, Potenza,Italy

Participant Sketches

The participants to the ARW as portrayed by Dr. Yutaka Nakamura.1. Marco Vona, 2. Yutaka Nakamura, 3. Janez Roser, 4. Sergiey Tyagunov,

5. Marijan Herak, 6. Kresimir Kuk, 7. Maria Rosaria Gallipoli, 8. Angelo Masi,9. Predrag Kvasnicka, 10. Davorka Herak, 11. John Douglas, 12. Adrian RodiguezMarek, 13. Marco Mucciarelli, 14. Dario Albarello, 15. Francisco Chavez-Garcia,16. Josip Stipcevic, 17. Stavros A. Anagnostopoulos, 18. Francesco Mulargia,19. Pierre Yves Bard, 20. Andrej Gosar, 21. Claude Boutin, 22. Dominik Lang,23. Zoran Milutinovic, 24. Jun Saita, 25. Mehmet Celebi, 26. Marco Mucciarelli,27. Tatjana Olumceva, 28. Radmila Salic, 29. Kuvvet Atakan, 30. Nayla Bouden-Romdhane, 31. John Cassidy.

xvi

Participant Sketches xvii