Chapter 4 Quantification of Seismic Acceleration
Chapter 4 Quantification of Seismic Acceleration
Chapter 4 Quantification of Seismic Acceleration
4.1 Background
From a traditional method of rock slope stability analysis, it has been stated that
earthquake acceleration reduces frictional force, which resist sliding (because the
acceleration induced by the earthquake is to be added to an outward force W to the
force acting on the slopes).
When an earthquake occurs, different types of seismic waves are produced: body
waves and surfaces waves. Body waves, which can travel through the interior of the
earth, have two types: P-waves and S-waves.
Surface waves results from the interaction between body waves and the structure & superficial
layers of the earth. For engineering purposes, surface waves can be divided in rayleigh and love
waves. Rayleigh waves, produced by interaction of P- and S-waves with earth surface, involve
both vertical and horizontal particle motions. Love waves result from the interaction of SH-
waves with the soft superficial layer and have no vertical component of particles motion.
Figure 4.1 Notation for description of earthquake location (from Kramer, 1996)
Effects of earthquake
The major effects of earthquake may be broadly grouped into two general classes: (a) Faulting
and (b) Ground shaking
(a) Faulting
Faulting is a primary displacement of bedrock. It may or may not carry through to the surface,
and generally it is limited to relatively narrow, active fault zones. Typical displacements vary
from a few centimeters to meters (Nilsen and Palmstrom, 2000).
Although seismic waves travel through rock over the overwhelming majority of their trip from
the source of an earthquake to the ground surface, the final surface of the trip is often through
soil, and characteristics of the soil can greatly influence the nature of the shaking at the ground
surface. Soil deposits tend to act as “filters” to seismic waves. Since soil conditions often vary
very dramatically over short distances, the level of ground shaking can vary significantly within
a small area.
The “size” of an earthquake is obviously a very important parameter, and it has been described in
different ways. Prior to the development of modern instrumentation, methods for characterizing
the size of the earthquakes were based on crude and qualitative descriptions of the effects of the
earthquakes. More recently, modern seismographs have allowed the development of a number of
quantitative measures of earthquake sizes. In other words, the relative sizes of earthquakes can
be described either quantitatively or qualitatively.
The oldest measure of earthquake size is earthquake intensity. Earthquake intensity refers to
human reaction and degree of damage to the surroundings. Qualitative measures of intensity can
be determined by interviewing people and examining damage. The Modified Mercalli Intensity
(MMI) scale is more common today for qualitative measures of intensity.
The possibility of obtaining a more objective, quantitative measure of earthquake came about
with the development of modern instrumentation for measuring ground motion during
earthquakes. In the past 60 years, the developments of seismic instruments, and our
understanding of the quantities they measure, have increased dramatically. Seismic instruments
allow an objective, quantitative measurement of earthquake size called earthquake magnitude to
be made. Most measurements of earthquake magnitude are instrumental (i.e., based on some
measured characteristic of ground shaking). Methods have been established for describing
quantitatively how much energy is released during an earthquake.
The surface wave magnitude is most commonly used to describe the size of shallow (less than 70
km) focal depth. The surface wave magnitude (Gutenberg and Richter, 1936) is a worldwide
magnitude scale based on the amplitude on rayleigh waves with a period of about 20 second. The
surface wave magnitude is obtained from (Kramer, 1996):
For preliminary stability evaluation, knowledge of the conditions under which earthquake-
induced landslides have occurred in the past is useful. It is logical to expect that the extent of an
earthquake-landslide should increase with increasing earthquake magnitude and that there could
be a minimum magnitude below which earthquake-induced landsliding would rarely occur. It is
equally logical to expect that the extent of an earthquake-induced landslide activity should
decrease with increasing source to site distance and that there could be a distance beyond which
landslide would not be expected in an earthquake of a given size (Kramer, 1996).
The area over which earthquake-induced landsliding can be expected increases with increasing
earthquake magnitude (ref. Figure 4.2).
Owing to the uncertainty in the number, sizes and locations of future earthquakes it is
appropriate that engineers express seismic risk, as design winds or floods are, in terms of return
periods (Blume, 1965).
For risk assessment seismological factors (historical data on earthquake occurrences, magnitudes
etc) as well as geotechnical factors (stratigraphic section and properties of the various layer;
location of water table etc) have to be taken into consideration. In seismic design, i.e., design
taking into consideration the potential consequences of earthquakes; information on anticipated
magnitude is essential.
For analyzing potential consequences of earthquakes, in many cases, limit equilibrium method is
used today, with seismic acceleration as the key input parameter (Nilsen and Palmstrom, 2000).
Seismic acceleration (as) is given as a fraction of acceleration of gravity (g), for instance a s =
0.25 g.
In rock slope stability analysis, the so-called pseudo-statical principle is commonly used, i.e., to
consider the maximum earthquake load as an equivalent horizontal load (Fs), as the direction is
generally most unfavorable (Nilsen and Palmstrom, 2000).
In limit equilibrium calculation, the earthquake load is treated the same way as other forces
affecting stability.