Journal of Seismology

, Volume 23, Issue 5, pp 1071–1084 | Cite as

Variability of deconvolved bedrock motion of the 2011 off Pacific Coast of Tohoku Earthquake around the K-NET Tsukidate station considering uncertainty in shallow S-wave velocity model from inversion of Rayleigh wave phase velocity

  • SaifuddinEmail author
  • Hiroaki Yamanaka
Original Article


A large acceleration with a peak amplitude of 2700 cm/s2 was recorded at the K-NET Tsukidate station (MYG004) during the 2011 off Pacific Coast of Tohoku Earthquake. Nonetheless, there was little structural damage around the station. In this study, we estimate the engineering bedrock’s motion variability due to the main shock, deconvolved from the observed surface motions, considering uncertainties in shallow S-wave velocity (Vs) profiles. The Vs profile uncertainty at the strong motion station is estimated with observed Rayleigh wave phase velocities, from microtremor explorations, using the Markov-chain Monte Carlo inversion. We obtain upper and lower possible values of the estimated bedrock spectral accelerations and the ground motion proxies at MYG004 using the uncertainty of the Vs profile. The estimated bedrock peak ground acceleration ranges are 610–930 cm/s2 and 2000–3100 cm/s2 for the east–west (EW) and north–south (NS) directions, respectively. Meanwhile, the ranges of the peak ground velocities are about 35–40 cm/s and 90–120 cm/s for the EW and NS components, respectively. The results indicate that the minimum and maximum possible values of the deconvolved spectral acceleration and the ground motion proxies are not only affected by Vs profile uncertainty but also by surface ground motion characteristics. Moreover, the spectral velocities at a station in the main part of Tsukidate Town are also estimated with the observed phase velocity. They have predominant peaks at periods shorter than 0.5 s, suggesting only minor structural damage in the city center.


The 2011 off Pacific Coast of Tohoku Earthquake MYG004 Uncertainty S-wave velocity profile Variability Deconvolved engineering bedrock motions 



The authors are grateful to Assistant Professor Kosuke Chimoto at Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan for discussion during this research. We are also grateful to an anonymous reviewer for helpful comments. The first author thanks Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology (MEXT), Japan for a generous scholarship during his study as Research and Doctoral students at Tokyo Institute of Technology. We thank Professor Nozomu Yoshida for providing DYNEQ code for free (, last accessed August 15, 2018). We also thank National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster (NIED), Japan for providing strong motion data (, last accessed August 15, 2018) and soil column (, last accessed August 15, 2018) for MYG004. Figure 1a is generated by Generic Mapping Tools (Wessel and Smith 1998).


  1. Chimoto K, Yamanaka H, Tsuno S, Miyake H, Yamada N (2016) Estimation of shallow S-wave velocity structure using microtremor array exploration at temporary strong motion observation stations for aftershocks of the 2016 Kumamoto earthquake. Earth, Planets Sp 68.
  2. Di Giulio G, Gaudiosi I, Cara F, Milana G, Tallini M (2014) Shear-wave velocity profile and seismic input derived from ambient vibration array measurements: the case study of downtown L’Aquila. Geophys J Int 198:848–866. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Geweke J (1992) Evaluating the accuracy of sampling-based approaches to the calculation of posterior moments. Bayesian stat 4. Oxford Univ Press, pp 169–193Google Scholar
  4. Goto H, Morikawa H (2012) Ground motion characteristics during the 2011 off the Pacific Coast of Tohoku Earthquake. Soils Found 52:769–779. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hartzell S, Bonilla LF, Williams RA (2004) Prediction of nonlinear soil effects. Bull Seismol Soc Am 94:1609–1629. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Haskell NA (1953) The dispersion of surface waves on multilayered media. Bull Seismol Soc Am 43:17–34. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hastings WK (1970) Monte Carlo sampling methods using Markov chains and their applications. Biometrika 57:97–109. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Horike M (1985) Inversion of phase velocity of long-period microtremors to the S-wave velocity structure down to the basement in urbanized areas. J Phys Earth 33:59–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Idriss IM, Sun JI (1992) SHAKE91: a computer program for conducting equivalent linear seismic response analyses of horizontally layered soil deposits. Center for Geotechnical Modeling, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California at DavisGoogle Scholar
  10. Irikura K, Susumu K (2012) Strong ground motion during the 2011 Pacific Coast off Tohoku, Japan earthquake. In: Proceedings of the international symposium on engineering lessons learned from the 2011 great East Japan earthquake, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  11. Kitsunezaki C, Goto N, Kobayashi Y, Ikawa T, Horike M, Saito T, Kurota T, Yamane K, Okuzumi K (1990) Estimation of P- and S-wave velocities in deep soil deposits for evaluating ground vibrations in earthquake. Japan Soc Nat Disaster Sci 9:1–17 (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  12. Ko Y, Hsu S, Chen C (2009) Analysis for seismic response of dry storage facility for spent fuel. Nucl Eng Des 239:158–168. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Motosaka M (2012) Lessons of the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake focused on characteristics of ground motions and building damage. In: Proceedings of the international symposium on engineering lessons learned from the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake, Tokyo, pp 166–185Google Scholar
  14. Nagashima F, Matsushima S, Kawase H, Sánchez-Sesma FJ, Hayakawa T, Satoh T, Oshima M (2014) Application of horizontal-to-vertical spectral ratios of earthquake ground motions to identify subsurface structures at and around the K-NET site in Tohoku, Japan 104:2288–2302. doi: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Saifuddin, Yamanaka H, Chimoto K (2018) Variability of shallow soil amplification from surface-wave inversion using the Markov-chain Monte Carlo method. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 107:141–151. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Sakai Y (2009) Reinvestigation on period range of strong ground motions corresponding to buildings damage. J Struct Constr Eng 74:1531–1536 (in Japanese)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Shimizu R, Maeda T, Saito G (2008) Ground motion simulation in Anamizu town during the 2007 Noto-Hanto earthquake. In: 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering (14WCEE). BeijingGoogle Scholar
  18. Wessel P, Smith WHF (1998) New, improved version of generic mapping tools released. EOS Trans Am Geophys Union 79:579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Yamanaka H (2007) Inversion of surface-wave phase velocity using hybrid heuristic search method. Butsuri-Tansa (Geophys Explor) 60:265–275. (in Japanese). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Yamanaka H, Tsuno S, Chimoto K, Yamada N, Fukumoto S, Eto K (2011) Estimation of site amplification from observation of aftershocks of the 2011 off the Pacific Coast of Tohoku Earthquake and microtremor explorations in the vicinity of K-NET Tsukidate Station, Miyagi Prefecture, Japan. Butsuri-Tansa (Geophys Explor) 64:389–399 (in Japanese)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Yoshida N (2015) Seismic ground response analysis. Springer Netherlands, DordrechtCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Yoshida N, Kobayashi S, Suetomi I, Miura K (2002) Equivalent linear method considering frequency dependent characteristics of stiffness and damping. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 22:205–222. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Environmental Science and TechnologyTokyo Institute of TechnologyYokohamaJapan

Personalised recommendations