Estimation of S-Wave Velocity Structures in Yogyakarta Basin, Indonesia
Estimation of S-Wave Velocity Structures in Yogyakarta Basin, Indonesia
60-77
Abstract 1 Introduction
For the theoretical simulation or prediction of strong The May 27, 2006 earthquake caused severe
ground motion, it is prime importance to get in- damage in Yogyakarta Basin, especially in Ban-
formation of underground structures, especially for tul area. One main reason for such damage is
sedimentary layers overlying on bedrock, like in Yo- strong ground motion and ground amplifica-
gyakarta Basin. The Standard Penetration Test, tion. It is also important to determine site ef-
Spectral Analysis of Surface Wave (SASW) and fects quantitatively. During an earthquake, the
other geotechnical properties are used to estimate subsurface soil column acts like a filter with
S–wave velocity structures in this basin. SPT tests strain-dependent properties that can increase
were conducted at nine sites and SASW measure- the duration and amplitude of shaking in a nar-
ments were performed at seventeen sites. As a result, row frequency band related to the soil thick-
the S-wave velocity structures of top 30 m depth had ness, physical properties (P- and S-wave veloc-
been evaluated in each site. The average shear wave ities, density), and the shape of the surface and
velocity v30s had been successful estimated and the subsurface boundaries. The spectral content
sites are classified into three types; soft soil, medium (amplitude, period, and phase) and duration of
dense soil and hard soil. All sites where SPT per- earthquake recordings can therefore be signif-
formed are on soft soil according to their v30 s . How- icantly affected by local site conditions, espe-
ever, according to v30s from SASW measurements, 10 cially at unconsolidated soil and sediment sites
sites are located on medium dense soils type, 5 sites with a near-surface impedance contrast with
on dense soils and 2 sites on soft soils. The accept- underlying bedrock. The resonant period of
able equivalent S-wave velocitystructure is observed the ground is therefore of great importance for
by comparing the results from SASW and geotechni- earthquake engineering (Molnar et al., 2007).
cal approach in Imogiri, Bambang Lipuro, Pundong The most influential parameter in determin-
(Watu, Pranti) and Pandak (Wijirejo) areas. ing strong ground motion is the subsurface
Keywords: Ground motion, underground struc- shear-wave velocity (Vs ) structure. The 2005
ture, sedimentary layer, SPT, SASW, Pundong. Canadian National Building Code is based on
averaging the shear-wave velocity of the top 30
m (or equivalent) in order to designate a Na-
tional Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program
(NEHRP) amplification site class with an ap-
∗ Corresponding author: T. NAING, Department of propriate multiplicative amplification hazard
Geological Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Gadjah factor. This is similar to current practice in the
Mada University, Jl. Grafika 2 Yogyakarta, 55281, Indone-
sia
60
ESTIMATION OF S-WAVE VELOCITY STRUCTURES IN YOGYAKARTA BASIN, INDONESIA
2 SASW Method
General Procedure SASW testing consists of Data Analysis First of all, the recorded data
measuring the surface wave dispersion curve are transformed into cross power spectrum
at the site and interpreting it to obtain the cor- by using fast Fourier Transform method. The
responding shear wave velocity profile. A dy- obtained auto power spectrum is then trans-
Recorded data
⇓
Where,
Time Delay ti = thickness of ith soil layer
t(ω ) = phase ( GGy1 y2 ( f ))/ω Ni = recorded blows number of ith soil layer
n = number of soil layer
⇓
and short-period is the best solution for that Das B. M., 1993, Principles of Soil Dynamics,
purpose. PWS-KENT Publishing Company, Boston, Mas-
sachusetts.
Fathani T. F., 2007, The Determination of Peak
Acknowledgement Ground Acceleration at Opak-Oyo Fault, Bantul
Regency, Yogyakarta, The Yogyakarta Earthquake
2006, Geological Engineering Department, UGM.
Sincere gratitude is directed to Geological En-
Kramer, S.L., 1996, Geotechnical Earthquake Engi-
gineering Department, UGM and Japan Inter- neering, Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
national Co-operation Agency (JICA) for their Molnar S. et al., 2007, Comparison of Geophysical
supports in every academic affair. The great Shear Wave Velocity Methods, Ninth Canadian
debt of gratitude is to my advisor Dr. Subagyo Conference, Ottawa, Canada
Pramumijoyo for his guidance and suggestions. Panah A. K. et al., 2002, Site Effect Classification in
The acknowledgement is extended to Professor East-Central of Iran, JSEE: Spring, Vol.4.No. 1/37.
Dr. Hiroshi Kawase for his empowerment and Satoh T. et al., 2001, Estimation of S-Wave Velocity
Structure in and around the Sendai Basin, Japan,
advices. Special gratitude and appreciation are
Using Array Records of Microtremors, Bulletin of
to Dr. Gunawan Handayani for his kind per- the seismological Society of America, 91, 2, pp.
mission to use SASW data. 206-218.
Satoh T. et al., 2001, S-Wave Velocity Structure of
the Taichung Basin, Taiwan, Estimated from Ar-
References ray and single station Records of Microtremors,
Bulletin of the seismological Society of America,
Craig R. F., 1991, Soil Mechanics, CHAPMAN & 91, 5, pp. 1267-1282.
HALL, 2-6 Boundary Row, London SE1 8HN.