Encyclopedia of Earthquake Engineering

2015 Edition
| Editors: Michael Beer, Ioannis A. Kougioumtzoglou, Edoardo Patelli, Siu-Kui Au

Site Response: 1-D Time Domain Analyses

  • Neven MatasovicEmail author
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-35344-4_5


1-D nonlinear seismic site response analysis; 1-D nonlinear site response analysis; One-dimensional (1-D) time domain analysis


One-dimensional (1-D) time domain analysis is one of several currently available methods to evaluate the influence of local site conditions on input (i.e., bedrock) ground motions. However, this method is favored by Geotechnical Earthquake Engineers as it takes into account the unique geotechnical characteristic of a given site, including soil nonlinearity and hysteretic behavior and porewater pressure generation and dissipation. It can also be applied for a wide range of shaking intensities, and it is relatively easy to implement in practice as it is coded in commercially available software.

Through back analysis of numerous case histories, the 1-D time domain analysis has been shown to work well when analyzed soil deposits are horizontally layered, there is a significant impedance contrast within the profile, and when material (model)...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. Assimaki D, Steidl J (2007) Inverse analysis of weak and strong motion downhole array data from the Mw 7.0 Sanriku-Minami earthquake. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 27:73–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Borja RI, Duvernay BG, Lin CH (2002) Ground response in Lotung: total stress analyses and parametric studies. J Geotech GeoEnviron Eng 128(1):54–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Clough RW, Penzien J (1993) Dynamics of structures, 2nd edn. McGraw Hill, LondonzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Darendeli MB (2001) Development of a new family of normalized modulus reduction and material damping curves. PhD thesis, University of Texas at Austin, AustinGoogle Scholar
  5. Dobry R, Pierce WG, Dyvik R, Thomas GE, Ladd RS (1985) Pore pressure model for cyclic straining of sand. Research Report, Civil Engineering Department, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, 56 pGoogle Scholar
  6. Duncan JM, Chang C-Y (1970) Nonlinear analysis of stress and strain in soils. J Soil Mech Found Div 96(SM5):1629–1653Google Scholar
  7. Elgamal A, Lai T, Yang Z, He L (2001) Dynamic soil properties, seismic downhole arrays and applications in practice. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on recent advances in geotechnical earthquake engineering and soil dynamics, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  8. Hashash YMA, Park D (2001) Nonlinear one-dimensional seismic ground motion propagation in the Mississippi embayment. Eng Geol (Amst) 62(1–3):185–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hashash YMA, Phillips C, Groholski D (2010) Recent advances in non-linear site response analysis. In: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on recent advances in geotechnical earthquake engineering and soil dynamics, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  10. Hashash YMA, Groholski DR, Phillips CA, Park D, Musgrove M (2011) DEEPSOIL 4.0, User Manual and Tutorial. 98 pGoogle Scholar
  11. Idriss IM, Dobry R, Singh RD (1978) Nonlinear behavior of soft clays during cyclic loading. J Geotech Eng Div ASCE 104(12):1427–1447Google Scholar
  12. Kondner RL, Zelasko JS (1963) A hyperbolic stress–strain formulation of sands. In: Proceedings of the 2nd Pan American conference on soil mechanics and foundation engineering, Sao Paulo, pp 289–324Google Scholar
  13. Kramer SL (2009) Analysis of Turkey flat ground motion prediction experiment – lessons learned and implications for practice. In: SMIP09 seminar on utilization of strong-motion data, San Francisco, pp 1–22Google Scholar
  14. Kwok O-LA, Stewart JP, Hashash YMA, Matasovic N, Pyke R, Wang Z, Yang Z (2007) Use of exact solutions of wave propagation problems to guide implementation of nonlinear ground response analysis procedures. ASCE J Geotechn Geoenviron Eng 133(11):1385–1398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Martin PP, Seed HB (1978) APOLLO, a computer program for the analysis of pore pressure generation and dissipation in horizontal sand layers during cyclic earthquake loading. Report No. EERC 78–21, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  16. Martin GR, Finn WDL, Seed HB (1975) Fundamentals of liquefaction under cyclic loading. J Geotech Eng Div ASCE 101(GT5):423–438Google Scholar
  17. Masing G (1926) Eigenspannungen und Verfestigung beim Messing. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international congress on applied mechanics, Zürich, pp 332-335Google Scholar
  18. Matasovic N (1993) Seismic response of composite horizontally layered soil deposits. PhD dissertation, Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, University of California, Los Angeles, 452 pGoogle Scholar
  19. Matasovic N (2006) D-MOD_2 – a computer program for seismic response analysis of horizontally layered soil deposits, earthfill dams, and solid waste landfills. User’s Manual, GeoMotions, LLC, Lacey, 20 p (plus Appendices)Google Scholar
  20. Matasovic N, Hashash YMA (2012) Site response analysis in transportation engineering practice – a TRB Survey. In: Proceedings of the GeoCongress 2012, Oakland, CD-ROM paper, pp 1789–1798Google Scholar
  21. Matasovic N, Ordonez GA (2007) D-MOD2000 – a computer program package for seismic response analysis of horizontally layered soil deposits, earthfill dams, and solid waste landfills. User’s Manual, GeoMotions, LLC, Lacey, Washington, 182 p. http://www.geomotions.com
  22. Matasovic N, Vucetic M (1992) A pore pressure model for cyclic straining of clay. Soils Found J JSSMFE 32(3):156–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Matasovic N, Vucetic M (1993) Cyclic characterization of liquefiable sands. ASCE J Geotech Eng 119(11):1805–1822CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Matasovic N, Vucetic M (1995a) Generalized cyclic degradation-pore pressure generation model for clays. ASCE J Geotech Eng 121(1):33–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Matasovic N, Vucetic M (1995b) Seismic response of soil deposits composed of fully saturated clay and sand layers. In: Kenji Ishihara AA (ed) Proceedings of the IS-Tokyo’95, the first international conference on earthquake geotechnical engineering, Balkema, RotterdamGoogle Scholar
  26. Newmark NM (1959) A method of computation for structural dynamics. J Eng Mech Div 85:67–94Google Scholar
  27. Pestana JM (1994) A unified constitutive model for clays and sands. ScD thesis, MIT, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  28. Phillips C, Hashash YMA (2009) Damping formulation for nonlinear 1D site response analyses. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 29(7):1143–1158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Polito CP, Green RA, Lee JH (2008) Pore pressure generation models for sands and silty soils subjected to cyclic loading. J Geotech Geoenviron 134(10):1490–1500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Potts DM, Zdravković L (1999) Finite element analysis in geotechnical engineering: theory. Thomas Telford, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pyke RM (1979) Nonlinear soil models for irregular cyclic loadings. J Geotech Eng Div, ASCE 105(GT6):715–726Google Scholar
  32. Pyke RM (2000) TESS: a computer program for nonlinear ground response analyses. TAGA Engineering Systems & Software, Lafayette, http://www.tagasoft.com
  33. Ragheb AM (1994) Numerical analysis of seismically induced deformations in saturated granular soil strata. PhD dissertation, Department of Civil Engineering, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, TroyGoogle Scholar
  34. Ramberg W, Osgood WR (1943) Description of stress–strain curves by three parameters. Technical Note 902, National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  35. Rayleigh JWS, Lindsay RB (1945) The theory of sound. Dover, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  36. Roscoe KH, Schofield AN (1963) Mechanical behavior of an idealized ‘wet’ clay. In: Proceedings of the 2nd European conference on soil mechanics, vol 1, Wiesbaden, pp 47–54Google Scholar
  37. Tsai C-C, Hashash YMA (2007) A novel framework integrating downhole array data and site response analysis to extract dynamic soil behavior. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 28(3):181–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Vucetic M (1986) Pore pressure buildup and liquefaction of level sandy sites during earthquakes. PhD dissertation, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, 616 pGoogle Scholar
  39. Vucetic M (1990) Normalized behavior of clay under irregular cyclic loading. Can Geotech J 27:29–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wang ZL (1990) Bounding surface hypoplasticity model for granular soils and its applications. PhD dissertation, University of California at DavisGoogle Scholar
  41. Zeghal M, Elgamal AW (1993) Lotung sites: downhole seismic data analysis. Electric Power Research Institute, Palo AltoGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Geosyntec ConsultantsHuntington BeachUSA