Introduction to the Special Section on Advances in Site Response Estimation

Kaklamanos, James; Cabas, Ashly; Parolai, Stefano; Guéguen, Philippe

doi:10.1785/0120210152

Cited by 17 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 77 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The complete earthquake process consists of three parts: the source, path, and site effects (Denolle et al, 2014;Kaklamanos et al, 2021), and our study does not involve the source and path effects of earthquake. Different source locations, source mechanisms, and magnitudes do not affect the results (Fig.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimating frequency-dependent shear wave velocity in near-surface sediment based on seismic interferometry

Zhang,

Shi,

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Near-surface seismic shear wave is a basic tool for seismic investigations. However, its frequency-dependent property is not fully investigated, especially by the in-situ observation method. Here, we develop the seismic interferometry with a moving frequency window to process the natural seismic signals recorded by the KiK-net network. It is observed that the phase velocity of the shear wave decreases sharply as the frequency increases in the low-frequency range, and remains constant in the high-frequency range. The observed dispersion phenomenon presents a challenge to existing site effect prediction theories, while also providing an observational reference for understanding how the shear wave propagates in near-surface sediment.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimating frequency-dependent shear wave velocity in near-surface sediment based on seismic interferometry

Zhang,

Shi,

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Numerous analytical methods have been developed to estimate site response (Kaklamanos et al 2021). Some site-specific non-ergodic site response methods were based on spectral analyses (e.g., standard spectral ratio techniques) and do not require supplementary data beyond earthquake recordings.…”

Section: Site Effects and Site Responsementioning

confidence: 99%

Flexible multimethod approach for seismic site characterization

Stephenson

Yong

Martin³

2022

J Seismol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We describe the flexible multimethod seismic site characterization technique for obtaining shear-wave velocity (VS) profiles and derivative information, such as the time-averaged VS of the upper 30 m (VS30). Simply stated, the multimethod approach relies on the application of multiple independent noninvasive site characterization acquisition and analysis techniques utilized in a flexible field-based approach through a decision process based on primary factors such as the investigator’s available equipment, field logistics (e.g., available array deployment space, urban versus rural), geologic setting, and funding among other primary factors. In a multimethod approach, sites ideally should be characterized using both active and passive noninvasive (i.e., no drilling and only minimal disturbance to the ground surface) methods. Almost without exception, we recommend the use of at least one active-source technique for analyzing surface waves, which in the current state of practice would include one or more of the following: spectral analysis of surface waves (SASW; commonly Rayleigh waves) and multichannel analysis of surface waves (MASW; Rayleigh and/or Love waves). In addition, passive-source microtremor array methods (MAMs) using linear (one-dimensional) and two-dimensional arrays may be appropriate or even required for characterizing a given site. Similarly, the microtremor horizontal-to-vertical spectral ratio (mHVSR) method thacan be valuable for identifying shallow rock sites. Finally, P- and SH-wave seismic refraction methods warrant consideration, especially at rock and shallow-rock sites.

show abstract

“…To advance knowledge about site effects phenomena, special SRA-focused sessions have become common occurrences at internationally held earthquake conferences and scientific journals have frequently devoted special issues (or sections) to document the state of the knowledge (Field et al 2000 ; Panzera et al 2017 ; Kaklamanos et al 2021 ). Recently, Kaklamanos et al ( 2021 ) introduced a collection of papers compiled as a special section entitled Advancements in Site Response Estimation , which originated from a similarly named special session planned for the 2020 Annual Meeting of the Seismological Society of America (which was canceled due to the COVID-19 pandemic). Through open submissions, the guest editors organized articles into five interrelated sections about various aspects of site response (Kaklamanos et al 2021 ), including five papers addressing uncertainties as contributed through the SRA framework, as well as one general section on site characterization.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recently, Kaklamanos et al (2021) introduced a collection of papers compiled as a special section entitled Advancements in Site Response Estimation, which originated from a similarly named special session planned for the 2020 Annual Meeting of the Seismological Society of America (which was canceled due to the COVID-19 pandemic). Through open submissions, the guest editors organized articles into five interrelated sections about various aspects of site response (Kaklamanos et al 2021), including five papers addressing uncertainties as contributed through the SRA framework, as well as one general section on site characterization. Of the six papers included in this section, only two were primarily focused on V S measurements and both focused on the use of surface wave methods to generate in situ V S models (Hobiger et al 2021;Stephenson et al 2021).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%