Advertisement

Journal of Earth Science

, Volume 21, Issue 6, pp 931–940 | Cite as

Numerical modelling of seismic site effects incorporating non-linearity and groundwater level changes

  • Dominik EhretEmail author
  • Joachim Rohn
  • Dieter Hannich
  • Carlos Grandas
  • Gerhard Huber
Article
  • 67 Downloads

Abstract

In the past decades, the necessity for detailed earthquake microzonation studies was recognized worldwide. Therefore, different approaches were established and applied. Unfortunately, the majority of these approaches are not based on pre-existing field data but require extensive seismic measurements and investigations. Furthermore, these approaches incorporate non-linearity inadequately and cannot take groundwater level changes into account. For this purpose, notably numerical models are most suitable. These models require a good knowledge of the local geological conditions (especially of the uppermost unconsolidated units), information about the geotechnical parameters of these units, and a hydrogeological model of the investigated area. Most of this information can be obtained from geotechnical investigations and surveys that have already been carried out in most densely populated areas. In a case study for Bucharest City, non-linear analyses were performed using software that is based on the visco-hypoplastic constitutive law. The results indicate that groundwater level changes have an important influence on duration and amplitude of ground response and thus should be considered for seismic microzonation studies. This approach can be used to display site effects and to identify different microzones taking different earthquake magnitudes and groundwater levels into account.

Key Words

microzonation site effect visco-hypoplasticity non-linearity Bucharest Romania 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References Cited

  1. Ansal, A. M., Iyisan, R., Güllü, H., 2001. Microtremor Measurements for the Microzonation of Dinar. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 158(12): 2525–2541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cid, J., Susagna, T., Goula, X., et al., 2001. Seismic Zonation of Barcelona Based on Numerical Simulation of Site Effects. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 158(12): 2559–2577CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cioflan, C. O., Apostol, B. F., Moldoveanu, C. L., et al., 2004. Deterministic Approach for the Seismic Microzonation of Bucharest. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 161(5–6): 1149–1164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ciugudean, V., Martinof, G. H., 2000. Geological, Geomorphological, and Hydrogeological Conditions in the City Area of Bucharest. S.C. Metroul S.A., Bucharest (in Romanian)Google Scholar
  5. Ehret, D., Kienzle, A., Hannich, D., et al., 2005. Seismic Microzonation of Bucharest Based on Non-linear Modelling. International Conference 250th Anniversary of the 1755 Lisbon Earthquake, Lisbon, Portugal. 369–371Google Scholar
  6. Fielitz, W., Seghedi, I., 2005. Late Miocene-Quaternary Volcanism, Tectonics and Drainage System Evolution in the East Carpathians, Romania. Tectonophysics, 410(1–4): 111–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ghenea, C., 1997. The Pliocene-Pleistocene Boundary in Romania. In: van Couvering, J. A., ed., The Pleistocene Boundary and the Beginning of the Quaternary. Cambridge University Press, London. 216–221Google Scholar
  8. Giardini, D., Jiménez, M. J., Grünthal, G., 2003. European-Mediterranean Seismic Hazard Map, Scale 1: 5 000 000. European Seismological Commission Hannich, D., Hötzl, H., Cudmani, R., 2006a. The Influence of Groundwater on Damage Caused by Earthquakes—An Overview. Grundwasser, 11(4): 286–294 (in German with English Abstract)Google Scholar
  9. Hannich, D., Hötzl, H., Ehret, D., et al., 2005. The Impact of Hydrogeology on Earthquake Ground Motion in Soft Soils. International Conference 250th Anniversary of the 1755 Lisbon Earthquake, Lisbon, Portugal. 358–361Google Scholar
  10. Hannich, D., Huber, G., Ehret, D., et al., 2006b. SCPTU-Techniques Used for Shallow Geologic/Hydrogeologic Site Characterization in Bucharest, Romania. ESG 2006-Third International Symposium on the Effects of Surface Geology on Seismic Motion, Grenoble, France. 1: 981–992Google Scholar
  11. Herle, I., 1997. Hypoplasticity and Granulometry of Simple Grain Assemblies. In: Gudehus, G., Natau, O., eds., Veröffentlichungen des Institutes für Bodenmechanik und Felsmechanik der Universität Fridericiana in Karlsruhe. Institut für Bodenmechanik und Felsmechanik der Universität Karlsruhe, Karlsruhe. 14: 135 (in German)Google Scholar
  12. Herle, I., Gudehus, G., 1999. Determination of Parameters of a Hypoplastic Constitutive Model from Properties of Grain Assemblies. Mechanics of Cohesive-Frictional Materials, 4(5): 461–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kienzle, A., Hannich, D., Wirth, W., et al., 2006. A GIS-Based Study of Earthquake Hazard as a Tool for the Microzonation of Bucharest. Engineering Geology, 87(1–2): 13–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Liteanu, E., 1952. Geology of Bucharest City Area. Com. Geol. St. Tehn. Econ, Series E.I., Bucharest (in Romanian)Google Scholar
  15. Lizcano, A., Rinaldi, V., Fuentes, W. M., 2007. Visco-hypoplastic Model for Pampean Loess. Mecánica Computacional, XXVI: 2646–2655Google Scholar
  16. Lungu, D., Aldea, A., Moldoveanu, T., et al., 1999a. Near-Surface Geology and Dynamic Properties of Soil Layers in Bucharest. In: Wenzel, F., Lungu, D., Novak, O., eds., Vrancea Earthquakes: Tectonics, Hazard and Risk Mitigation. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Netherlands. 137–148Google Scholar
  17. Lungu, D., Cornea, T., Nedelcu, C., 1999b. Hazard Assessment and Site-Dependent Response for Vrancea Earthquakes. In: Wenzel, F., Lungu, D., Novak, O., eds., Vrancea Earthquakes: Tectonics, Hazard and Risk Mitigation. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Netherlands. 251–267Google Scholar
  18. Mândrescu, N., Radulian, M., 1999. Seismic Microzoning of Bucharest (Romania): A Critical Review. In: Wenzel, F., Lungu, D., Novak, O., eds., Vrancea Earthquakes: Tectonics, Hazard and Risk Mitigation. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Netherlands. 109–121Google Scholar
  19. Mândrescu, N., Radulian, M., Mârmureanu, G., 2004. Site Conditions and Predominant Period of Seismic Motion in the Bucharest Urban Area. Rev. Roum. Géophysique, 48: 37–48Google Scholar
  20. Martin, M., Wenzel, F., 2006. High-Resolution Teleseismic Body Wave Tomography beneath SE-Romania. II. Imaging of a Slab Detachment Scenario. Geophysical Journal International, 164(3): 579–595CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mason, P. R. D., Seghedi, I., Szákacs, A., et al., 1998. Magmatic Constraints on Geodynamic Models of Subduction in the East Carpathians, Romania. Tectonophysics, 297(1–4): 157–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Nakamura, Y., 1990. Microtremor Measurements in the San Francisco Bay Region. Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, 38(11): 13–18Google Scholar
  23. Niemunis, A., 2003. Extended Hypoplastic Models for Soils. Schriftenreihe des Institutes für Grundbau und Bodenmechanik der Ruhr-Universität Bochum, 34: 233Google Scholar
  24. Oncescu, M. C., Marza, V. I., Rizescu, M., et al., 1999. The Romanian Earthquake Catalogue between 1984–1996. In: Wenzel, F., Lungu, D., Novak, O., eds., Vrancea Earthquakes: Tectonics, Hazard and Risk Mitigation. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. 43–47Google Scholar
  25. Osinov, V. A., 2003a. A Numerical Model for the Site Response Analysis and Liquefaction of Soil during Earthquakes. In: Natau, O., Fecker, E., Pimentel, E., eds., Geotechnical Measurements and Modelling. Swets & Zeitlinger, Lisse. 475–481Google Scholar
  26. Osinov, V. A., 2003b. Cyclic Shearing and Liquefaction of Soil under Irregular Loading: An Incremental Model for the Dynamic Earthquake-Induced Deformation. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 23(7): 535–548CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pillai, A. R., 1941. The Rumanian Earthquake of November 10, 1940. Current Science, X(1): 15–16Google Scholar
  28. Raileanu, V., Diaconescu, C., Radulescu, F., 1994. Characteristics of Romanian Lithosphere from Deep Seismic Reflection Profiling. Tectonophysics, 239(1–4): 165–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Reyes, D. K., Grandas, C., Lizcano, A., 2007. Numerical Modeling of Wave Propagation in Bogotá Soft Soils. In: Ling, H. I., Callisto, L., Leshchinsky, D., et al., eds., Soil Stress-Strain Behavior: Measurement, Modeling and Analysis. Springer-Verlag, Berlin. 779–789CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Schäfer, R., 2004. Influence of the Construction Process on Strain Behaviour of Diaphragm Walls in Soft Clayey Soil. Instituts für Grundbau und Bodenmechanik der Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Bochum. 36: 201 (in German with English Abstract)Google Scholar
  31. Sokolov, V., Bonjer, K. P., Oncescu, M., et al., 2005. Hard Rock Spectral Models for Intermediate-Depth Vrancea, Romania, Earthquakes. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 95(5): 1749–1765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sokolov, V., Bonjer, K. P., Rizescu, M., 2004a. Assessment of Site Effect in Romania during Intermediate Depth Vrancea Earthquakes Using Different Techniques. In: Cheng, Y. T., Panza, G. F., Wu, Z. L., eds., IUGG Special Volume: Earthquake Hazard, Risk, and Strong Ground Motion. Seismological Press, Beijing. 295–320Google Scholar
  33. Sokolov, V., Bonjer, K. P., Wenzel, F., 2004b. Accounting for Site Effect in Probabilistic Assessment of Seismic Hazard for Romania and Bucharest: A Case of Deep Seismicity in Vrancea Zone. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 24(12): 929–947CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sperner, B., Lorenz, F., Bonjer, K., et al., 2001. Slab Break-off-Abrupt Cut or Gradual Detachment? New Insights from the Vrancea Region (SE Carpathians, Romania). Terra Nova, 13(3): 172–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sperner, B., CRC 461 Team, 2005. Monitoring of Slab Detachment in the Carpathians. In: Wenzel, F., ed., Perspectives in Modern Seismology. Lecture Note in Earth Science, 105: 187–202Google Scholar
  36. van den Ham, G., Rohn, J., Meier, T., et al., 2006. A Method for Modeling of a Creeping Slope with a Visco-hypoplastic Material Law. Mathematical Geology, 38(6): 711–719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. van den Ham, G., Rohn, J., Meier, T., et al., 2009. Finite Element Simulation of a Slow Moving Natural Slope in the Upper-Austrian Alps Using a Visco-hypoplastic Constitutive Model. Geomorphology, 103(1): 136–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. von Wolffersdorff, P. A., 1996. A Hypoplastic Relation for Granular Materials with a Predefined Limit State Surface. Mechanics of Cohesive-Frictional Materials, 1(3): 251–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wenzel, F., Lorenz, F. P., Sperner, B., et al., 1999. Seismotectonics of the Romanian Vrancea Area. In: Wenzel, F., Lungu, D., Novak, O., eds., Vrancea Earthquakes: Tectonics, Hazard and Risk Mitigation. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. 15–25Google Scholar
  40. Wortel, M. J. R., Spakman, W., 2000. Subduction and Slab Detachment in the Mediterranean-Carpathian Region. Science, 290(5498): 1910–1917CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© China University of Geosciences and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dominik Ehret
    • 1
    Email author
  • Joachim Rohn
    • 1
  • Dieter Hannich
    • 2
  • Carlos Grandas
    • 3
  • Gerhard Huber
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Applied GeologyUniversity of Erlangen-NurembergErlangenGermany
  2. 2.Department of Applied GeologyUniversity (TH) of KarlsruheKarlsruheGermany
  3. 3.Institute of Soil and Rock MechanicsUniversity (TH) of KarlsruheKarlsruheGermany

Personalised recommendations