Engineering Geology 87 (2006) 85 104

www.elsevier.com/locate/enggeo

Evaluation of site amplification and site period using different

methods for an earthquake-prone settlement in Western Turkey
Nilsun Hasancebi, Resat Ulusay
Hacettepe University, Department of Geological Engineering, 06800 Beytepe, Ankara, Turkey
Received 14 March 2006; received in revised form 23 May 2006; accepted 24 May 2006
Available online 11 July 2006

Abstract
Seismic micro hazard zonation for urban areas is the first step towards a seismic risk analysis and mitigation strategy. Essential
here is to obtain a proper understanding of the local subsurface conditions and to evaluate ground shaking effects. In this study,
present and future settlement areas of Yenisehir, which is located in the earthquake-prone Marmara Region of Turkey, were
evaluated with respect to site amplification and site period. Borings in conjunction with in-situ penetration tests, seismic velocity
measurements, resistivity surveys and microtremor studies were performed, and available data from previous investigations were
complied to determine the variation of the soil profile as well as the characteristics of the soil layers within the study site. In
addition, new empirical correlations between shear wave velocity (Vs) and number of blows from standard penetration test (SPT-N)
were also developed to be used for the estimation of amplification factors. Site amplification was assessed using empirical methods
based on estimated values of Vs, 1-D site response numerical modeling program and microtremor measurements. Among the three
methods employed, the numerical technique and microtremor method yielded considerably higher amplification factors when
compared to those obtained from the empirical method. This situation is considered as a limitation of the empirical methods. The
survey of site response suggests ground amplification. The microzonation map based on soil site amplification suggests
amplification factors between 1.6 and 5 in the present settlement, while the areas at the north and south of the settlement generally
amplify the motion 5 to 9 times. The site periods obtained from microtremor studies vary from 0.51 to 0.8 s throughout the
settlement. In addition, the comparison between fundamental site periods and fundamental building periods, which were measured
in a few buildings and estimated from an empirical expression, indicate that prime attention should be paid to resonance
phenomena, particularly for the northern part of the settlement where high-rise buildings are still in construction.
2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Microzonation; Microtremor measurement; Numerical modeling; Predominant site period; Shear wave velocity; Site amplification;
Yenisehir (Bursa)

1. Introduction
It is well known and widely accepted that the effects of
surface geology on seismic motion exist and can be large.
Corresponding author. Fax: +90 312 299 20 34.
E-mail address: resat@hacettepe.edu.tr (R. Ulusay).
0013-7952/$ - see front matter 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.enggeo.2006.05.004

The earthquake damage is generally larger over soft

sediments than on firm bedrock outcrops. This is
particularly important because most of urban settlements
have occurred along river valleys over such young and
soft surface deposits. Ground-shaking site effect caused
by an earthquake can vary significantly within a small
distance. This is because at sites having soft soil and/or

86

N. Hasancebi, R. Ulusay / Engineering Geology 87 (2006) 85104

topographic and basement undulations, seismic energy

gets trapped, leading to amplification of vibration to manmade structures. Man-made structures with resonance
frequency matching that of the site have the maximum
likelihood of getting damaged. Therefore, information
about the site response is an integral part of the
construction of seismically-safe structures and urban
planning. One of the well known examples of such effects
is Mexico City. In Mexico City, there exist very soft clay
deposits underneath the downtown area of the city. These
led to very large amplifications which caused loss of life
and structural damages during the distant Gurrero
Michoacan earthquake of 1985 (Kramer, 1996).
Turkey is one of the most seismically active countries
in the World. In particular, the August 17, 1999 Kocaeli
earthquake, which resulted in more than 20,000 fatalities
and extensive structural damage, was a major disaster for
the most industrial and urbanized region of Turkey called
Marmara Region. Therefore, this earthquake focused the
attention on densely urbanized and industrialized settlements. In addition to extensive liquefaction and associated
ground failures, and submarine landslides at different
parts of the earthquake region, site amplification and
related damages were also reported. The most typical
amplification during this earthquake was experience at
Avcilar district of Istanbul (Tezcan et al., 2002; Ergin et
al., 2004).
On the other hand, a large earthquake, which is
expected to occur in the Marmara Sea within the next
30 years (Parsons et al., 2000), also pose a threat
particularly to the settlements located in the Marmara
Region. In addition to Istanbul and Kocaeli provinces,
Bursa is also one of the three most industrialized and
populated cities of the Marmara Region. There are 17
towns officially belonging to Bursa. One of them is
Yenisehir which is found 50 km east of Bursa (Fig. 1).
Increase in its population resulted in urbanization and
construction of new buildings. The 1999 Kocaeli
earthquake was also felt in Yenisehir, but did not cause
serious structural damage in this settlement. After this
devastating earthquake, prime consideration began to be
paid to geological and geotechnical investigations by
municipalities particularly by those in the affected region
including the municipality of Yenisehir.
The first geotechnical study in Yenisehir was
performed by Doyuran et al. (2000) for the evaluation
of the foundation conditions of the present and future
settlement areas of the town. The study involved drilling
at 17 locations, standard penetration testing (SPT), trial
pitting and laboratory testing. Doyuran et al. (2000)
established a microzonation map of the town based on
the earthquake risks and geotechnical characteristics of

the foundation material and identified two zones in

terms of suitability of settlement. However, groundshaking site effects such as site amplification and
fundamental site periods were not included in this
previous study.
In this most recent study, site amplifications and
fundamental site periods in the settlement area of
Yenisehir and its close vicinity were investigated using
Grade-2 and Grade-3 methods recommended by the
Technical Committee for Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering (TCEGE, 1999). For the purpose, available
geotechnical data from Yenisehir were compiled, geotechnical studies involving borings with SPT tests and
groundwater level measurements, and laboratory testing.
In addition, the data of seismic and resistivity surveys and
microtremor measurements (MTM) collected by the
General Directorate of Disaster Affairs (GDAA) (Dikmen
et al., 2004) for this study were also evaluated. The soil
amplification was assessed using three methods, such as
shear wave velocity-based empirical relationships, 1-D
site response program SHAKE and microtremor data. Site
periods obtained by SHAKE modeling were presented
and compared with those obtained from microtremor
study. Finally, an attempt was made to establish microzonation maps derived from amplification factors and site
periods for Yenisehir town.
2. Description of the site
The town of Yenisehir is situated within an elliptical
basin called the Yenisehir Plain (Fig. 2). This basin is
separated from Iznik Plain and Inegol Plain by ridges at
the north and south, respectively. The Kocasu stream,
flowing from southwest to northeast (Fig. 2), is the main
stream of the basin. Yenisehir is founded on a flat area
mainly consisting of alluvial deposits (Fig. 3a). However, towards the south and the north, where urbanization
has not extended yet, elevations gradually increase. The
average slope of the site is generally less than 5. It
reaches to 10 in the north, while is between 10 and 30
along the ridges formed by metamorphic rocks in the
south.
The population of Yenisehir is 26,000. Increase in its
population resulted in urbanization. Therefore, new
buildings particularly high-rise buildings are under
construction in the northern part of the settlement
(Fig. 3b). The present and future settlement areas of
Yenisehir cover about 18 km2. An organized industrial
district on gentle slopes at the southern part of the
settlement is being planned. In addition, a civil airport
located 4 km west of the town was opened to domestic
flights one year ago (Fig. 2).

N. Hasancebi, R. Ulusay / Engineering Geology 87 (2006) 85104

Fig. 1. Location map of the study area.

87

88

N. Hasancebi, R. Ulusay / Engineering Geology 87 (2006) 85104

3. General settings
3.1. Geology
The geology of the Yenisehir basin was studied by
Genc (1986) in detail. In this study, therefore, formation
names assigned by this investigator were used. Yenisehir settlement and its vicinity are comprised of PreNeogene basement rocks, Neogene deposits and

Quaternary deposits (Fig. 4). The basement rocks,

belonging to Dereyoruk formation, are mainly represented by the foliated metamorphic rocks such as
micaschists, talcschists and fillates with occasional
marble bands. These rocks crop out only on the slopes
at the south of the site (Fig. 4). The schistosity planes
striking in NESW direction generally dip towards the
north. These units are unconformably overlain by the
Neogene deposits.

Fig. 2. Digital elevation model of the Yenisehir Plain.

N. Hasancebi, R. Ulusay / Engineering Geology 87 (2006) 85104

The Kopruhisar formation consists of the Neogene

deposits (Genc, 1986). These deposits are mainly
composed of loosely cemented conglomerates and
sandstones, and claystonesiltstone alternations cropping
out along the ridges in the north and marls in the south
(Fig. 4). The rounded and semi-rounded particles forming
the conglomerates are of sedimentary and metamorphic
origin. Bedding planes in this sequence dip towards south
and southeast with inclinations of 34. The yellowishgreen marls observed in the south are weak rocks and have
transformed into clay at shallow depths.
The Quaternary deposits cover the middle of the basin.
Yenisehir town is located within these deposits which are
characterized by alluvium and detritic materials. Based on
the information from the previous boreholes drilled in the
Yenisehir Plain by the State Hydraulic Works (DSI), at the
northern part of the plain by the State Harbors and
Airports Directority (DLH, 2002) and in the settlement
area by Doyuran et al. (2000), and from those drilled
during this study, thick deposits of sand and gravel with
clay interlayers dominate at the south, particularly along
the Kocasu stream. While the sequence is mainly
represented by thick clay and silt deposits with sand and
gravel interbeds and/or lenses at the northern part of the

89

basin. Hydrogeological boreholes opened by DSI indicate

that the thickness of these deposits reaches up to 115 m.
3.2. Seismotectonics
The Yenisehir Basin is a pull-apart basin bounded by
the Yenisehir fault extending in NESW direction and
small faults (Barka and Kadinsky-Cade, 1988) as seen in
Fig. 5. The field studies performed by Doyuran et al.
(2000) indicated that there is no field evidence
suggesting that these faults are still active. In addition,
a fault, which was described as a probable fault between
the pre-Neogene and Neogene units by Doyuran et al.
(2000) (Fig. 5) was clarified by electrical sounding
studies during this study. This fault dips towards north
and is a normal fault.
The main active faults controlling the seismicity of
the Yenisehir Plain are GeyveIznik fault zone (GIFZ),
which is the southwestern strand of the North Anatolian
Fault Zone (NAFZ) and Bursa Fault (BF) (Doyuran
et al., 2000) (Fig. 5). The GIFZ includes right lateral
strike-slip faults and its distance to Yenisehir is 25 km. It
has a potential to generate an earthquake with a
magnitude of 7.5 (Gulkan et al., 1993). The BF is a

Fig. 3. Views from (a) Yenisehir settlement and (b) high-rise buildings at the northern part of the town.

90

N. Hasancebi, R. Ulusay / Engineering Geology 87 (2006) 85104

right-lateral strike-slip fault with some normal component. The most recent earthquake on this fault, which is
called BursaMustafa Kemal Pasa earthquake, occurred
in 1855 with maximum modified Mercalli intensity IX
(Coburn and Kuran, 1985).
The recent destructive 1999 Kocaeli earthquake was
also felt in Yenisehir, but it did not caused any loss of life
and structural damage in this settlement. Based on the
evaluations by Doyuran et al. (2000) on previous earthquakes occurred in the region, these investigators indicate
that the GIFZ and BF may cause destructive earthquakes in

the region due to the accumulation of strain energy along

these fault zones since 145 and 500 (?) years, respectively.
4. Geotechnical investigations and subsurface
conditions
In the present and future settlement areas of Yenisehir,
geotechnical studies for the assessment of foundation
conditions (Topal et al., 2003; Doyuran et al., 2000) and
railway route conditions by DLH (2002) were conducted. These studies included a total of 37 boreholes

Fig. 4. Geological map of the study area (modified from Doyuran et al., 2000).

N. Hasancebi, R. Ulusay / Engineering Geology 87 (2006) 85104

accompanied by SPT. The maximum depth of the

boreholes drilled during the study by Doyuran et al.
(2000) was 20 m. By considering the locations of these
previously drilled boreholes, 12 boreholes were also
drilled during this most recent study. It is well known that
average shear wave velocity of the uppermost 30 m of the
ground is an important factor (Borcherdt, 1994; Dobry
et al., 2000) for ground characterization. Therefore, the
boreholes were planned to reach up to 30 m as possible as.
Depth of 9 boreholes was 30 m and others ranged between
4.5 and 17 m. SPT tests were conducted at 1 m intervals
and the samples from SPT were employed for laboratory
testing. Depth of groundwater level in each borehole was
also measured. Locations of the boreholes and simplified
logs of three selected boreholes are shown in Figs. 6 and 7,
respectively.
An accurate evaluation of seismic site depending
parameters needs a proper shear wave velocity profile.
Seismic refraction is one of the techniques which are
largely used in determining dynamic properties of the
underlying layers. Shear wave velocities were measured at

91

the locations of 9 boreholes drilled during this study. Due

to some restrictions encountered at the locations of
boreholes H6 and H7, and shallow depth of borehole
H12, seismic refraction measurements could not be
performed at these locations. In order to obtain some
information about stratigraphical knowledge of the basin,
three electrical sounding profiles (resistivity surveys) were
also taken at a total of 11 points (Fig. 6). In addition, as
seen from Fig. 6, microtremor measurements were also
taken at different points in the study area for microzonation. Assessments on microtremor records are discussed in
the next section. All these geoseismic investigations were
performed by the team of the General Directorate of
Disaster Affairs (Dikmen et al., 2004) for this study.
Besides, during the seismic refraction studies, some
contributions were also provided from the Geophysical
Engineering Department of Ankara University.
Both previous and recent geotechnical borehole logs
suggest that the Quaternary deposits generally start with
light brown silty clay with high SPT blow-counts
indicating a stiff soil. Below this, there exists medium-

Fig. 5. Seismotectonic map of the eastern Marmara Region (after Doyuran et al., 2000).

92

N. Hasancebi, R. Ulusay / Engineering Geology 87 (2006) 85104

dense-to-loose silty sand (Fig. 8a and b). At the south,

particularly in the vicinity of boreholes H7, H8 and H11,
which are located in the old flood plain of the Kocasu
stream, sand layers form the top layer of the sequence.
However, at some places the silty clay may also appear
below the sandy zone. Occasional gravel layers of
variable thickness are also observed in the Quaternary
sequence at shallow depths (Fig. 8a and b). During the
electrical soundings, marls were penetrated at a depth of
about 10 m below the Quaternary deposits at the southern
part of the site. The higher resistivity values (Fig. 8c)

obtained in the north when compared to those in the south

suggest that fine grained soils and saturated sandy layers
dominate in the north and south, respectively.
In laboratory, sieve and hydrometer analyses and
Atterberg limit determinations on 149 SPT samples were
carried out in accordance with the standards of ASTM
(1994). Then, based on the test results, the samples were
classified according to Unified Soil Classification System.
The laboratory studies suggest that the Quaternary
deposits in the southern part of the site are mainly
consisted of poorly- and well-graded sandy soils falling

Fig. 6. Location of geotechnical boreholes, geoseismic investigations and microtremor recording points.

N. Hasancebi, R. Ulusay / Engineering Geology 87 (2006) 85104

into SP and SW soil classes, and silty and clayey sands

of SC and SM groups. While CL and CH groups finegrained soils with low and high plasticity dominate
towards the north. Range of grain size distribution of the
soils and plasticity chart are given in Fig. 9a and b,
respectively. These findings show a good agreement to
those obtained by Doyuran et al. (2000).
Depths of groundwater table measured in the
previously drilled boreholes (Doyuran et al., 2000) and
in those drilled in this study are shallow and range
between 2.2 and 10 m. However, Doyuran et al. (2000)
indicate that the groundwater levels are deeper ( 14 m)
in the north and shallower in the south. Sand and gravel
lenses and/or interbeds in the alluvial sequence form the
water bearing zones.

93

5. Assessments on site amplification and site period,

and microzonation
5.1. Amplifications estimated from shear wave velocity
Prediction of ground shaking response at soil sites
requires knowledge of stiffness of the soil, expressed in
terms of shear wave velocity (Vs). This property is useful
for evaluating site amplification (Borcherdt, 1994).
While it is preferable to determine Vs directly from field
tests, it is not often economically feasible to make Vs
measurements at all locations. When the direct measurements of Vs for soil layers are not available, the existing
correlations between SPT blow-counts (SPT-N) and Vs
could be used. For the purpose, a number of correlations

Fig. 7. Some typical engineering logs illustrating the subsurface ground conditions and depth of groundwater table in the study area.

94

N. Hasancebi, R. Ulusay / Engineering Geology 87 (2006) 85104

were developed (Table 1). The correlations given in

Table 1 are all based on uncorrected SPT-N values.
Since the aerial extend of the study site is large and Vs
measurements are limited only for the locations of nine
boreholes drilled during this study, derivation of
empirical correlations between Vs and SPT-N values of
the soils of the study site was considered as a useful tool
to be used in amplification evaluations.
The correlation equations were developed using a
simple regression analysis for the existing database. The
database consists of 97 data pairs (Vs and SPT-N) obtained
both from boreholes and shear wave velocity profiles at

each borehole location. The relationships between Vs and

SPT-N were proposed in three categories considering soil
types, such as sandy soils, clayey soils and all soils.
Because only a few data from silty layers and no data from
gravelly layers were available, these categories could not
be evaluated. These relationships are shown in Fig. 10.
Comparisons between measured and predicted values of
Vs using the equations given in Fig. 10 are presented in
Fig. 11. The plotted data are scattered between the lines
with 1:0.5 and 1:2 slopes confirming that the regression
equations generally show a reasonable fit of the complied
data for the investigated soils.

Fig. 8. (a) and (b) typical cross-sections showing the subsurface conditions of the study area and (c) resistivity cross-section of profile A1A5 (see
Fig. 6 for section lines).

N. Hasancebi, R. Ulusay / Engineering Geology 87 (2006) 85104

95

Table 1
Some existing correlations between Vs and SPT-N for all soils
Author (s)

Vs (m/s)

Ohba and Toriumi (1970)

Imai and Yoshimura (1970)
Fujiwara (1972)
Imai (1977)
Ohta and Goto (1978)
Imai and Tonouchi (1982)
Jinan (1987)
Sisman (1995)
Iyisan (1996)
Kiku et al. (2001)

Vs = 84N 0.31
Vs = 76N 0.33
Vs = 92.1N 0.337
Vs = 91N 0.337
Vs = 85.35N 0.348
Vs = 0.97N 0.314
Vs = 116.1(N + 0.3185)0.202
Vs = 32.8N 0.51
Vs = 51.5N 0.516
Vs = 68.3N 0.292

In addition to comparison shown in Fig. 13a, in order

to compare the performance of the relationships, a graph
between the scaled percent error given in Eq. (1) and

Fig. 9. (a) Range of grain size distribution of 149 soil samples from SPT
tubes and (b) distribution of the fine-grained soils on plasticity chart.

In order to assess the effect of soil type on these

correlations, the correlation curves for different soils
shown in Fig. 10 are transferred onto the same plot.
Fig. 12 suggests that types of soil investigated in this study
has no influence on the values of Vs. This result shows a
good agreement with that obtained by Iyisan (1996), who
studied on the soils collected from an earthquake-affected
area in the eastern part of Turkey. He indicated that expect
that for gravels, the relationship equations developed for
all soils, sands and clays yield approximately similar Vs
values. Therefore, in this most recent study by the authors,
the relationship for all soils given in Fig. 10a was
employed in further evaluations. This equation of the
present study is plotted in Fig. 13a together with other
existing comparable correlations given in Table 1. Fig.
13a indicates that the equations developed by Sisman
(1995) and Kiku et al. (2001) underpredict the Vs values.
Except these equations, all the equations compared
estimate Vs values close to each other in the case of
SPT-N values less than 20 as seen from Fig. 13a. For SPTN values greater than 20, the equation developed in this
study compares well with the regression equations by
Ohba and Toriumi (1970), and Imai and Yoshimura
(1970). The differences seen between the relationships
may be due to the quantity of the processed data and
different methods employed during Vs measurements.

Fig. 10. Correlations between Vs and SPT-N for (a) all soils, (b) sandy
and (c) clayey soils.

96

N. Hasancebi, R. Ulusay / Engineering Geology 87 (2006) 85104

cumulative frequency was drawn (Fig. 13b) considering

the data employed in this study.
Scaled percent error Vsc Vsm =Vsm 100

Where, Vsc and Vsm are the predicted and measured

shear wave velocities, respectively. As seen in Fig. 13b,

Fig. 12. Effect of soil type on VsSPT(N) relationships.

85% of the values of Vs predicted from the equation of this

study (Fig. 10a) fall into 20% of the scaled percent error
indicating a better estimate for the studied soils when
compared to those from the existing equations. Based on
additional regression analyses performed by Hasancebi
(Okan) (2005) using corrected SPT-N and Vs values from
the study site revealed that the relationships with highest
correlation coefficients between Vs and SPT-N are
obtained when uncorrected SPT-N values are used for
estimation of Vs. Thus, in this study, the equation in Fig.
10a was preferred to estimate the values of Vs which are
employed to calculate soil amplification factors.
Shear wave velocity of surface layers is a useful
index property for evaluating site amplification. Shima
(1978) found that the analytically calculated amplification factor is linearly related with the ratio of Vs of the
surface layer to that of bedrock. Investigations based on
the observation and analyses of ground motion have
revealed that the average Vs of surface soils to a certain
depth shows strong correlation with the relative
amplification (Midorikawa, 1987; Borcherdt et al.,
1991). The available correlation equations by Midorikawa (1987) and Borcherdt et al. (1991) are given in
Eqs. (2) and (3.1) (3.2) , respectively.
A 68V10:6
A 1:0

Fig. 11. Comparison of the measured and predicted Vs for (a) all soils,
(b) sand and (c) clayey soils.

V1 < 1100 m=s

V1 > 1100 m=s

2:1
2:2

AHSA 700=V1

for weak motion

3:1

AHSA 700=V1

for strong motion

3:2

Where; A is the relative amplification factor for peak

ground velocity, AHSA is the average horizontal
spectral amplification in period range of 0.4 to 0.2 s,
and V1 is the average shear wave velocity over a depth of
30 (in m/s). The Grade-2 methods recommended by
TCEGE (1999) include the use of above-given empirical

N. Hasancebi, R. Ulusay / Engineering Geology 87 (2006) 85104

equations for the estimation of amplification factor. By

considering this, in this study, Eqs. (2.1) and (3.1) were
employed. The amplification factors computed from Eq.
(2.1) varied in a relatively narrow range of 2.3 to 2.8.
But the amplification factors obtained from Eq. (3.1)
were slightly greater and range between 2.4 and 3.4.
5.2. Site modeling
The Grade-3 approach recommended by TCEGE
(1999) requires an in-depth understanding of the necessary
analytical models and numerical procedures, when the
geotechnical characteristics of the site are known; site
effects can be, in principle, estimated through numerical
analysis. These analyses may be performed considering

97

either linear or a non-linear behavior for the soil. The nonlinearity is very often approximated by a linear equivalent
method that uses an interactive procedure to adapt the soil
parameters, such as rigidity and damping to actual strain it
undergoes. The soil column is modeled as a series of
horizontal layers. These layers are subjected to base
motions that are considered representative of those likely
occur in the region of interest. The SHAKE program is one
of the most widely used for such calculations (Schnabel
et al., 1972). In this study, preliminary one-dimensional
shear wave prorogation analysis was conducted, from
bedrock to surface, for nine soil profiles at the locations of
boreholes H1 to H5 and H8 to H11 using the SHAKE 2000
computer program (Ordonez, 2004). The thickness and
equivalent shear wave velocity used for each layer were

Fig. 13. (a) Comparison of VsSPT(N) regression equation (Fig. 10a) developed in this study with those given in Table 1, and (b) scaled percent error
of Vs predicted from different correlation relationships.

98

N. Hasancebi, R. Ulusay / Engineering Geology 87 (2006) 85104

obtained from boreholes and seismic refraction surveys.

The unit weights of sands and clays used for modeling are
18.6 kN/m3 and 18 kN/m3, which were taken from the
table of unit weights recommended by Tatsuoka et al.
(1980), and unit weight determinations in laboratory,
respectively. The time history motion assumed at bedrock
level is the EW-component of the 1999 Kocaeli earthquake
recorded at Sakarya strong ground motion station which is
founded on rock ground and the closest station to the study
site (see Fig. 5). The other parameters required for the
analysis, such as G/Gmax ratio, damping ratio and shear
modulus were estimated from the graphs recommended by
Seed and Idriss (1970) and Sun et al. (1988) for sands and
clays, respectively. The amplification spectra and response
spectra for 0.5% and 10% damping values obtained for the
soil profiles representing the locations of boreholes H3 and
H8 are depicted in Fig. 14 as typical examples, and site
periods for the locations investigated were also obtained
(Table 2). Table 2 suggests that except borehole locations
H2 and H10, amplification factors are between 3.5 and

Table 2
Values of site amplification and natural site periods estimated from
numerical analysis
Borehole no.

Amplification

Period (s)

H-1
H-2
H-3
H-4
H-5
H-8
H-9
H-10
H-11

6.16
12.06
9.03
7.08
3.58
3.59
6.00
11.05
5.22

0.15
0.19
0.47
0.57
0.57
0.80
0.32
0.17
0.44

9.03. Boreholes H2 and H10, where amplification factors

are greater than 10 and generally range between 11 and 12
were obtained, are located near the basin margins in the
north and south, respectively, above an inclined bedrock
topography as seen in Fig. 8. Although the amplification
factors at the locations of boreholes H5 and H8 are nearly

Fig. 14. Amplification spectra and response spectra for the location of boreholes H3 and H8.

N. Hasancebi, R. Ulusay / Engineering Geology 87 (2006) 85104

same, site period at location H8, where sand layers

dominate, is considerably higher. Site periods and amplification factors obtained by SHAKE modeling are compared
with those obtained from MTM in the following
paragraphs.
5.3. Microtremor measurements
The use of MTM in estimation of site response has been
investigated since it was proposed in the 1950s. Although
there is ongoing discussion about the applicability of it in
various site conditions and ground shaking levels, it has
been widely used to estimate the fundamental period of
soil deposits (Lermo and Chavez-Garcia, 1994) and
recommended as one the approaches in Grade-2 methods
in zoning for ground motions (TCEGE, 1999). Microtremor measurements are relatively easy and economically
feasible method to estimate site response under earthquake
excitations. For this study, microtremor measurements
were conducted by the team of GDDA (Dikmen et al.,
2004) at 131 points within the settlement area of Yenisehir
and its close vicinity to estimate site amplification and
predominant soil periods. The locations of measurement
points are shown in Fig. 6. A Datamark LS-8000wd type
recorder and Akashi-Jep6a3 type three-component accelerometer were used through the measurements. At each
observation point, a minimum of 3 min ambient noise

99

sampled at 100 Hz was recorded. Nakamura's (1989)

methods was employed for the determination of the fundamental site period and estimation of seismic amplification at each point. The microtremor measurements
indicated amplification factors ranging between 1.64 and
8.5, and predominant site periods varying from 0.15 to 1 s.
The site amplifications and predominant site periods
obtained by this method were compared to those obtained
from other methods employed in the following paragraphs.
5.4. Comparison of the results and microzonation
The amplification factors obtained from Vs-based
empirical equations, SHAKE modeling and MTM are
compared in Fig. 15a. Because SHAKE analyses were
carried out only for soil columns at the locations of nine
boreholes, the comparisons among three methods could
be made only for these locations. It is clear from Fig. 15a
that the amplifications obtained from the empirical
equations are considerably lower than those obtained
from other two methods. Although the coefficient
correlations of the existing empirical equations between
Vs and SPT-N are high, it should be kept in mind that Vs
and SPT-N values are affected from various factors, and
therefore, values of Vs obtained from the empirical
equations should not be evaluated as measured values.
Fig. 15a also suggests that the amplification ratios from

Fig. 15. Comparison of the amplification factors (a) and site period (b) for the Yenisehir area.

100

N. Hasancebi, R. Ulusay / Engineering Geology 87 (2006) 85104

SHAKE are generally larger than those obtained from

MTM, but at few locations (H5, H8 and H11) these
factors from both methods are close to each others. On
the other hand, the periods computed by MTM are larger
than the SHAKE periods (Fig. 15b). As mentioned by
Ventura et al. (2004), while the periods from SHAKE
generally reflect the stratigraphy, the periods determined
from microtremor measurements may be affected by
local variations in geology and may be also reflective of
topographical (e.g. basin edge) effects and 3-D wave
reflection/refraction effects due to the geometry and
rapid changes in thickness of the layers.

Based on MTM, maps showing the distribution of

amplifications (Fig. 16) and fundamental site periods
(Fig. 17) over the investigated area were established.
Fig. 16 suggests that the amplification ranges between
1.6 and 5 in the present settlement area of Yenisehir.
While the northern and southern parts of the basin generally amplifies the motion 5 to 7 times, and locally 8 to 9
times. Particularly greater amplifications found for the
southern part of the investigated area are probably associated with the presence of thick and loose sand layers
and very shallow-seated groundwater table. As seen from
Fig. 17 the fundamental periods generally increase from

Fig. 16. Spatial distribution of amplification factors.

N. Hasancebi, R. Ulusay / Engineering Geology 87 (2006) 85104

the south to north which is interpreted as a thickening of

the sediments of the alluvial deposits towards north.
Similar trends were also observed by Bour et al. (1998)
and Ventura et al. (2004) who studied on amplification
and natural period of soils on a plain near Rhone Delta
(France) and Fraser River Delta (Canada), respectively.
The periods in the current settlement area of Yenisehir
generally range between 0.51 and 0.8 s, while some spot
areas with periods between 0.91 and 1 s exist (Fig. 17).
Because the settlement area of Yenisehir extends
particularly to the north, where high-rise buildings are
being constructed, it was considered that a simple com-

101

parison between the fundamental periods of some buildings

and site would be useful for the sake of providing
preliminary information to future comprehensive microzonation of Yenisehir. For the purpose, an additional MTM
study was also performed by the team of GDDA (Dikmen
et al., 2004) at four buildings for residential use (Fig. 17).
Buildings numbered from 1 to 3 are four-storied and
building 4 is six-storied. All buildings have reinforced
concrete framed structures and height of each floor is
approximately 3 m. At the top and ground floors of three
buildings microtremor monitors were observed. In the
latest Turkish building code (GDDA, 1999), approximate

Fig. 17. Fundamental site period distribution zoning map.

102

N. Hasancebi, R. Ulusay / Engineering Geology 87 (2006) 85104

Table 3
Comparison of the selected building periods and site periods
Building
No.

Building period (s)

Measured

b1
b2
b3
b4
a
b

0.500.51
0.660.67
0.71b
0.750.76

Estimated
0.45
0.45
0.45
0.60

Site
periods (s)
0.510.60
0.510.60
0.610.70
0.510.60

Measured at ground floor and top floor.

Periods both in ground and top floors are same.

fundamental period, T1, of moment-resisting framed concrete buildings may be estimated by the following empirical
expression.
3=4

T1 Ct HN

Where; HN is the total height of building and Ct is a

constant taken as 0.07 for buildings with HN 25 m in
the first- and second-degree earthquake zones. Table 3
tabulates the observed and approximately computed
(Eq. (4)) fundamental periods of the buildings with the
ranges of fundamental soil periods at the location of
these buildings obtained from the microzonation map
given in Fig. 17. In building 1, the observed and
computed fundamental periods are close to each others,
while in buildings 2 to 4 the observed fundamental
periods are larger than the computed ones. However,
except that of building 2, the ranges of measured
fundamental periods of three buildings and the enclosed
sites show good agreement. In addition, Eq. (4) suggests
a fundamental period of 0.76 s for 8-storey buildings
under construction at the northern part of the settlement
area. At the location of these apartment blocks, the
fundamental site period ranges between 0.71 and 0.8 s
(Fig. 17). Although this preliminary evaluation is based
on a very limited observations and estimations from an
empirical equation, it emphasizes that the coincidence of
the fundamental periods of the buildings particularly
those of high rise buildings, and site seems to be highly
possible. Therefore, resonance phenomena should be
taken into consideration to select appropriate and safe
structural configurations.
6. Conclusions
In this study, ground amplification was evaluated using
empirical relationships, 1-D numerical modeling and
MTM, and an empirical relationship between VsSPT
(N) values was established. In addition, natural site periods
were also determined and compared to those of some

selected buildings. The following conclusions are drawn

from this study.
Among the three methods employed in the study, the
numerical modeling and microtremor measurements
yielded higher soil amplifications. This situation is
probably due to different methods of shear wave velocity
measurement, the quantity of processed data and procedure
of SPT which are considered in derivation of empirical
equations for VsSPT(N) and amplification factor. The
survey of site response, using both numerical method and
MTM, has shown that ground amplification exists. Map of
amplification obtained from MTM indicates amplification
factors ranging between 1.6 and 5 in the present settlement
area. While northern and southern parts of the basin, where
the settlement extends, generally amplifies the motion 5 to
9 times. The presence of loose sand layers and shallowseated groundwater table at the southern part of the site are
probably the main factors contributing high amplifications.
The fundamental site periods computed from MTM
were larger than those computed from the numerical
method. The site periods obtained from MTM vary from
0.15 to 1 s, and 0.51 to 0.8 s throughout the whole study
site and in the current settlement area, respectively. In
addition, preliminary evaluations based on the comparisons between fundamental site and building periods
indicate that prime attention should be paid to resonance
phenomena particularly for high-rise buildings in the town.
This study, which is related to a particular town
located in the first-degree earthquake zone of Turkey,
clearly shows the importance of microzonation maps
showing various degrees of risk zones associated with
dynamic soil behavior such as soil amplification and
liquefaction. With the availability of such maps, the
engineers and architects will be able to select appropriate and safe structural configurations.
Acknowledgements
This study was supported by the Research Project
Grants Division of Hacettepe University (Project No.
0302602008). The authors sincerely acknowledge the
General Directorate of Disaster Affairs of Turkey and
the geophysical team of this organization for the efforts
exhibited during the geoseismic experiments and data
processing. The authors also wish to express their
gratitude to B. Hamdi Cingil, the mayor of Yenisehir,
and architecture Sinan Suzgun and the personnel of
municipality for their kind interest and the logistic
support they provided throughout the site investigations.
Prof. Dr. Ahmet T. Basokur and research assistant Irfan
Akca of Ankara University, and Dr. Nihat Sinan Isik of
Gazi University are also acknowledged for their kind

N. Hasancebi, R. Ulusay / Engineering Geology 87 (2006) 85104

contributions during the interpretations of the seismic

records and numerical analysis, respectively.
References
ASTM, 1994. Annual Book of ASTM Standards Soil and Rock,
Building Stones. Section 4. Constructions, vol. 04.08. ASTM
Publications. 972 pp.
Barka, A.A., Kadinsky-Cade, K., 1988. Strike-slip fault geometry in
Turkey and its influence on earthquake activity. Tectonics 7 (3),
663684.
Borcherdt, R.D., 1994. Estimates of site dependent response spectra
for design (methodology and justification). Earthquake Spectra 10
(4), 617654.
Borcherdt, R.D., Wentworth, C.M., Janssen, A., Fumal, T., Gibbs, J.,
1991. Methodology for predictive GIS mapping of special study
zones for strong ground shaking in the San Francisco Bay Region.
Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Seismic
Zonation, vol. 3, pp. 545552.
Bour, M., Fouissac, D., Dominique, P., Martin, C., 1998. On the use of
microtremor readings in seismic microzonation. Soil Dynamics
and Earthquake Engineering 17, 465474.
Coburn, A.W., Kuran, U., 1985. Earthquake-induced damage and state of
emergency for Bursa: a preliminary report for seismic assessment.
General Directorate of Disaster Affairs of Turkey, Ankara. 68 pp. (in
Turkish).
Dikmen, U., Mirzaoglu, M., Sipahi, O., 2004. Geophysical investigations
at Yenisehir (Bursa) settlement area. General Directorate of Disaster
Affairs of Turkey, Ankara, 14 p (in Turkish, unpublished report).
Dobry, R., Borcherdt, R.D., Crouse, C.B., Idriss, I.M., Joyner, W.B.,
Martin, G.R., Power, M.S., Rinne, E.E., Seed, R.B., 2000. New
site coefficient and site classification system used in recent
building code provisions. Earthquake Spectra 16 (1), 4167.
Doyuran, V., Kocyigit, A., Yazicigil, H., Karahanoglu, N., Toprak, V.,
Topal, T., Suzen, M.L., Yesilnacar, E., Yilmaz, K.K., 2000. Geological
and geotechnical investigation at Yenisehir settlement area. Middle East
Technical University, Ankara, 79 p (in Turkish, unpublished report).
DLH, 2002. Report on investigation and engineering works for
Ayazma-Inn railway route (in Turkish, unpublished report).
Ergin, M., Ozalaybey, S., Aktar, M., Yakin, M.N., 2004. Site
amplification at Avcilar, Istanbul. Tectonophysics 391, 335346.
Fujiwara, T., 1972. Estimation of ground movements in actual
destructive earthquakes. Proceedings of the Fourth European
Symposium on Earthquake Engineering, London, pp. 125132.
GDDA, 1999. Laws and Regulations for the Construction of Buildings
in Hazard Areas. Trkiye Hazr Beton Birlii Yayn, Ankara. 122
pp. (in Turkish).
Genc, S., 1986. Geology of the area between Uludag and Iznik Lake.
MTA Report No: 7853, Ankara (in Turkish).
Gulkan, P., Yucemen, S., Kocyigit, A., Doyuran, V., Basoz, N., 1993.
Earthquake Zoning Map of Turkey Based on Recent Data.
Publication, vol. 93-01. Middle East Technical University,
Earthquake Research Center. 156 pp. (in Turkish).
Hasancebi (Okan) N., 2005. Geotechnical evaluation on soil amplification
at Yenisehir (Bursa) district. MSc Thesis, Hacettepe University,
Geological Engineering Department, Ankara, 158 p (in Turkish).
Imai, T., 1977. P and S wave velocities of the ground in Japan.
Proceeding of IX International Conference on Soil Mechanics and
Foundation Engineering, vol. 2, pp. 127132.
Imai, T., Yoshimura, Y., 1970. Elastic wave velocity and soil properties
in soft soil. Tsuchito-Kiso 18 (1), 1722 (in Japanese).

103

Imai, T., Tonouchi, K., 1982. Correlation of N-value with S-wave

velocity and shear modulus. Proceedings of the 2nd European
Symposium of Penetration Testing, Amsterdam, pp. 5772.
Iyisan, R., 1996. Correlations between shear wave velocity and in-situ
penetration test results. Chamber of Civil Engineers of Turkey.
Teknik Dergi 7 (2), 11871199 (in Turkish).
Jinan, Z., 1987. Correlation between seismic wave velocity and the
number of blow of SPT and depth. Selected Papers from the
Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, pp. 92100.
Kiku, H., Yoshida, N., Yasuda, S., Irisawa, T., Nakazawa, H., Shimizu, Y.,
Ansal, A., Erkan, A., 2001. In-situ penetration tests and soil profiling
in Adapazari, Turkey. Proceedings of the ICSMGE/TC4 Satellite
Conference on Lessons Learned From Recent Strong Earthquakes,
pp. 259265.
Kramer, S.L., 1996. Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering. Prentice
Hall. 653 pp.
Lermo, J., Chavez-Garcia, F.J., 1994. Are microtremors useful in site
response evaluation? BSSA 84, 13501364.
Midorikawa, S., 1987. Prediction of isoseismal map in the Kanto plain
due to hypothetical earthquake. Journal of Structural Engineering
33B, 4348.
Nakamura, Y., 1989. A method for dynamic characteristics estimation
of subsurface using microtremor on the ground surface. Quick
Report of Railway Techniques Research Institute 30 (1), 2533 (in
Japanese).
Ohba, S., Toriumi, I., 1970. Dynamic response characteristics of
Osaka Plain. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting, A. I. J. (in
Japanese).
Ohta, Y., Goto, N., 1978. Empirical shear wave velocity equations in
terms of characteristics soil indexes. Earthquake Engineering and
Structural Dynamics 6, 167187.
Ordonez, G.A., 2004. SHAKE2000 a Computer Program for the 1D
Analysis of Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering Problems User's
Manual. 306 pp.
Parsons, T., Toda, S., Stein, R.S., Barka, A., Deiterich, J.H., 2000.
Heightened odds of large earthquakes near Istanbul: an interactionbased probability calculation. Science 288, 661665.
Schnabel, P.B., Lysmer, J., Seed, H.B., 1972. SHAKE: a Computer
Program for Earthquake Response Analysis of Horizontally
Layered Soils. Report No. EERC 72-12. University of Berkeley,
Earthquake Engineering Research Center, California, USA.
Seed, H.B., Idriss, I.M., 1970. Soil moduli and damping factors for
dynamic response analyses. Report No. EERC 70-10. Earthquake
Engineering Research Center, University of Berkeley, California,
USA.
Shima, E., 1978. Seismic microzonation map of Tokyo. Proceedings
of the 2nd International Conference on Microzonation, vol. 1,
pp. 433443.
Sun, J.I., Golesorkhi, R., Seed, H.B., 1988. Dynamic Moduli and
Damping Ratios for Cohesive Soils. Report No. UCB/EERC-88/
15. University of Berkeley, Earthquake Engineering Research
Center, California, USA.
Sisman, H., 1995. An investigation on relationships between shear
wave velocity, and SPT and pressuremeter test results. MSc Thesis,
Ankara University, Geophysical Engineering Department, Ankara,
75 p (in Turkish).
TCEGE, 1999. Manual for zonation on seismic geotechnical hazards.
Publication of the Japanese Geotechnical Society, Revised Version.
209 pp.
Tatsuoka, F., Iwasaki, T., Tokida, K., Yasuda, S., Hirose, M., Imai, T.,
Konno, M., 1980. Standard penetration tests and soil liquefaction
potential evaluation. Soils and Foundations 20 (4), 95111.

104

N. Hasancebi, R. Ulusay / Engineering Geology 87 (2006) 85104

Tezcan, S.S., Kaya, E., Bal, .E., zdemir, Z., 2002. Seismic
amplification at Avclar, Istanbul. Engineering Structures 22,
661667.
Topal, T., Doyuran, V., Karahanoglu, N., Toprak, V., Suzen, M.L.,
Yesilnacar, E., 2003. Microzonation for earthquake hazards:
Yenisehir settlement, Bursa, Turkey. Engineering Geology 70,
93108.

Ventura, C., Onur, E., Hao, T., 2004. Site period estimations in the
Fraser river delta using microtremor measurements experimental and analytical studies. Proceedings of the 13th World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, B. C., Canada.
Paper, vol. 1075. on CD.