See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/258308796

A multi-approach geophysical estimation of soil dynamic properties in

settlements: A case study in Güzelbahce-İzmir (Western Anatolia)

Article  in  Journal of Geophysics and Engineering · June 2013

DOI: 10.1088/1742-2132/10/4/045001

CITATIONS READS

17 148

4 authors:

Mustafa Akgün Tolga Gönenç

Dokuz Eylul University Dokuz Eylul University
63 PUBLICATIONS   113 CITATIONS    57 PUBLICATIONS   183 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Aykut Tunçel Oya Ankaya Pamukçu

Dokuz Eylul University Dokuz Eylul University
20 PUBLICATIONS   30 CITATIONS    93 PUBLICATIONS   397 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Bu çalışma Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi BAP (Bilimsel Araştırma Projesi) (2015.KB.FEN.032) kapsamında desteklenmiştir. View project

INVESTIGATION OF LITHOSPHERIC STRUCTURES BY ISOSTATIC RESPONSE FUNCTIONS View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Aykut Tunçel on 12 May 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Home Search Collections Journals About Contact us My IOPscience

A multi-approach geophysical estimation of soil dynamic properties in settlements: a case

study in Güzelbahce-İzmir (Western Anatolia)

This content has been downloaded from IOPscience. Please scroll down to see the full text.

2013 J. Geophys. Eng. 10 045001

(http://iopscience.iop.org/1742-2140/10/4/045001)

View the table of contents for this issue, or go to the journal homepage for more

Download details:

IP Address: 194.27.62.40
This content was downloaded on 20/07/2014 at 14:44

Please note that terms and conditions apply.

IOP PUBLISHING JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICS AND ENGINEERING
J. Geophys. Eng. 10 (2013) 045001 (12pp) doi:10.1088/1742-2132/10/4/045001

A multi-approach geophysical estimation

of soil dynamic properties in settlements:
a case study in Güzelbahce-İzmir
(Western Anatolia)
Mustafa Akgün, Tolga Gönenç, Aykut Tunçel and Oya Pamukçu
Department of Geophysics, Engineering Faculty, Dokuz Eylul University, Buca İzmir, Turkey
E-mail: tolga.gonenc@deu.edu.tr

Received 7 September 2012

Accepted for publication 26 March 2013
Published 13 June 2013
Online at stacks.iop.org/JGE/10/045001

Abstract
An earthquake is a natural disaster which cannot be predicted beforehand. The economic
losses and casualties induced by earthquakes badly influence human life. In order to reduce
these negative effects, buildings and structures should be designed to be earthquake resistant.
In the design stage of earthquake-resistant structures, models of soil under dynamic conditions
are used. The parameters that are required to account for soil dynamic models are shear wave
velocity (Vs) values, stiffness, thickness, the number of layers, attenuation, rigidity and the
depth to bedrock. These parameters are used to calculate an empirical transfer function, the
bearing capacity of the soil and liquefaction. Within this context, these soil dynamic
parameters should be obtained with the help of geophysical methods in situ, in the
İzmir-Güzelbahçe region and its surrounds. The İzmir-Güzelbahçe region and its surrounds are
located at the intersection point of two major faults (the İzmir fault and the Seferihisar fault).
For this reason, soil dynamic parameters are variable in the lateral and vertical directions.
These changes affect the soil Vs profiles. To identify the shear wave velocity (Vs) profile,
common mid-point cross-correlation analysis of multi-channel surface-wave data (CMPCC
MASW method), microtremor and microgravity methods can be used in common. As a result,
when these three methods were evaluated together, it was concluded that the aforementioned
region shows sudden lateral structure changes. Relying on these changes, the dynamic
analyses that would be carried out to determine soil behavior at a possible earthquake site
should be taken into consideration.

Keywords: microgravity, MASW, İzmir, microtremor

(Some figures may appear in colour only in the online journal)

Introduction
According to data from the Turkish Republic Disaster
and Emergency Management Presidency and Earthquake
Department (AFAD1), Turkey possesses an average 42%
of first category, 24% of second category, 18% of third
category and 16% of fourth category earthquake zones.
1 www.deprem.gov.tr/SarbisEng/Shared/haritaaciklama.aspx
This fact shows us that about 70% of the whole population
of Turkey is under high threat of earthquakes. Since the
seismic risk is so high, the importance of earthquake-
resistant structures is increased. The prerequisite of high
earthquake-resistant buildings is to be able to predict
the behavior of soil during strong shaking. In order to
achieve this goal, the soil parameters should be determined
accurately.

1742-2132/13/045001+12$33.00 © 2013 Sinopec Geophysical Research Institute Printed in the UK 1

J. Geophys. Eng. 10 (2013) 045001
(a)
(b)
Figure 1. General location of the study area.
Almost all of the soil dynamic parameters (shearing
strength, elasticity modulus, incompressibility modulus,
natural vibration frequency, seismic amplification coefficient,
Poisson’s ratio etc) are directly related to the Vs. Therefore,
the change of Vs value with the changing depth is of great
importance. The Vs is utilized in the determination of dynamic
soil behavior together with soil amplification and fundamental
period (Joyner and Furnal 1984, Borcherd et al 1991).
Therefore, seismic refraction or multi-channel surface-wave
(MASW) methods are prominent among other studies that
have been conducted for the determination of soil dynamic
parameters.
As another method, microtremor measurements are
used in the determination of soil types, number of layers,
fundamental period and empirical transfer function (Ansal et al
1997). Several methods are employed to obtain the empirical
transfer function. These methods can be listed as the direct use
of the strong ground motion, single station method (Nakamura
1989, Lermo and Chavez-Garcia 1994, Ansal et al 2000, Güllü
2001), the reference station method (Seo and Samano 1993)
and soil dynamic analyses. The predominant frequency found
by the Nakamura method is related to the thickness of soil.
As the depth of bedrock increases, the predominant frequency
decreases.
In recent years, the microgravity method has been used
in the exploration of shallow structures particularly in places
2
M Akgün et al
where settlements have accumulated (Issawy et al 2010). The
gravity data obtained from the application of this method are
evaluated together with the results obtained from MASW and
microtremor measurements. Since the principle of this method
depends upon the stiffness, almost-intrinsic gravity models
can be composed by benefiting from the stiffness that will be
computed from the Vs velocity contrasts. For this reason, the
microgravity method should definitely be used with MASW
studies in the exploration of bedrock–soil interface topography
and in the composure of soil models (Xu and Butt 2006, Crice
2005, Koichi et al 2005).
In this study, the methods mentioned above were used
in settlements that are exposed to high seismic risk in İzmir-
Güzelbahçe province located in western Anatolia. The soil
structures in the study area and its close surroundings (figure 1)
have remained under the effect of periodic aggregation of
sediments carried by the rivers that flow from south to north
toward the İzmir bay (Sözbilir et al 2008). In the previous
studies of Sözbilir et al (2008) and Emre et al (2005), fan-
like structures that were formed in the periodical aggregation
of these delta sediments were defined (figure 2). Although
these bear the same structural elements geologically, they show
different soil characteristics from the aspect of seismic (Vp and
Vs velocities) and geotechnical parameters (elasticity, Young
modulus, bulk modulus, Poisson’s ratio and stiffness) (Gülerce
2002).
J. Geophys. Eng. 10 (2013) 045001 M Akgün et al

Figure 2. General view of Güzelbahce and relationships of detailed tectonic components of the study area (the study area is confined with
red rectangle). Holocene alluvial plain and onshore sediments (1), holocene alluvial fans (2), pleistocene terrestrial alluvial sediments (3),
miocene volcano sedimentary units (4), Upper-Cretaceous Paleocene bedrock, Bornova Flysch or melange (5), İzmir fault, Seferihisar fault.

Within this study area, following an earthquake, the Geological setting

possible damage that might occur in buildings that were
constructed over this complicated soil will be dependent upon
various soil characteristics. Hence, in order to investigate
the soil properties in a 2D cross-section in the study area,
MASW, microtremor and microgravity geophysical methods
were applied along a profile. Thus, a profound research of the
soil was conducted.
Consequently, the findings of the methods were
investigated separately and then all the results were assessed
together, making a healthy synthesis regarding the soil
dynamic characteristics of the study area.
Güzelbahçe is tectonically situated at the intersection point of
two major faults, namely the Seferihisar fault and the İzmir
fault. The study area is within the vicinity of İzmir (western
Anatolia), where an extensive tectonic regime dominates
western Turkey (figure 2).
The İzmir fault (figures 2 and 3) (Emre and Barka 2000),
which outcrops along the southern border of İzmir Bay and
confines the Seferihisar uplift from the north, trends in the
E–W direction (figures 2 and 3). The length of this fault is
40 km and it intercepts the Bornova Flysch generally or forms
a contact between the quarternary sediments (Emre et al 2005).

3
J. Geophys. Eng. 10 (2013) 045001 M Akgün et al

Figure 3. Morphological situation of the Güzelbahce region under

the effect of the Seferihisar and İzmir faults.

There are alluvial fans that extend along the coastline

and the İzmir fault trending in the N–NE direction (figures 2
and 3). These fan structures convert into delta coast sediment
moving toward İzmir Bay (Sözbilir et al 2008; Emre et al
2005). The region is located over the bedrock defined as the
Bornova Flysch according to geologic findings and formed of
Miocene-, Pleistocene- and Holocene-aged soil strata (Uzel
et al 2012).
In the uplifting block of the İzmir fault, there exist the
Upper-Cretaceous and Paleocene-aged Bornova melange and
also the Miocene-aged volcano sediments. In the descending
block of this fault, quarternary alluvial, fluvial and thalassic
sediments are seen together with outcropping sandstone and
shales of Bornova melange (figure 2).

Geophysical field studies

The modeling of soil layers that are present between the

bedrock and soil plane is based on geophysical field studies.
In this context, MASW, microgravity and microtremor studies
were performed (figure 4).

Microtremor studies
In this study, spectral amplification, fundamental period, depth
of bedrock and local soil behavior were searched by means
of microtremor measurements (figure 4). For this purpose,
a three-component CMG-6TD velocity recorder was used
to collect microtremor data. The measurement interval was
approximately 150 m between 11 microtremor points on
one profile oriented N–S, while the recording time was
30 min sampled at 100 Hz. During the measurements, the
necessary precautions were taken to reduce the influence
of environmental and anthropogenic impacts such as wind
and traffic noise. Also, the recording of ambient noise was
performed at night rather than contemporaneously.
In measurements and data evaluation, SESAME project
(SESAME 2004) criteria were taken as the basis and
Figure 4. Distribution of survey points in the study area. Red circles
are microtremor measurement points, green circles are microgravity
stations and the red lines are MASW profiles.
the obtained field data were evaluated by Geopsy (1997)
(www.geopsy.org) software. According to the SESAME
criteria, H/V ratios are calculated for the frequency range
0.1–20 Hz, using 20–50 s time windows, removing any time
windows contaminated by transients. The objective is to
ensure that ambient vibrations are stationary, and to avoid
the transients often associated with specific urban sources
(footsteps, traffic). The procedure to detect transients is based
on a classical comparison between the short-term average

4
J. Geophys. Eng. 10 (2013) 045001 M Akgün et al

(a) (g)

(b) (h)

(c) (i)

(d) (j)

(e) (k)

(f) (l )

Figure 5. Average H/V spectral ratios of noise (solid line) sorted N–S direction from T1 to T11 and ± 1 standard deviation (dashed line).
Red pointed triangle represents the predominant frequency taken from H/V spectral ratio. (a) H/V spectrum of T1 location,
(b) H/V spectrum of T2 location, (c) H/V spectrum of T3 location, (d) H/V spectrum of T4 location, (e) H/V spectrum of T5 location,
( f ) H/V spectrum of T6 location, (g) H/V spectrum of T7 location T8, (h) H/V spectrum of location, (i) H/V spectrum of T9 location,
( j) H/V spectrum of T10 location, (k) H/V spectrum of T11 location.

5
J. Geophys. Eng. 10 (2013) 045001 M Akgün et al

Table 1. The numerical values of H/V results (amplification factor and predominant frequency) and the number of windows used at the
processing of the microtremor data.
T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10 T11
Amplification factor 2.61 3.37 2.19 2.29 2.09 6.24 2.08 2.00 3.08 2.04 3.79
Predominant frequency (Hz) 1.00 0.90 0.62 1.00 1.11 0.18 0.81 5.23 9.45 16.15 11.75
Number of windows 11 11 13 15 15 10 12 10 15 28 20

(a) (a)

(b) (b)

Figure 6. Dispersion curves and shear wave velocities estimated
from MP1 MASW profile. (a) Picked dispersion curves for all
CMPCC gathers, where the difference of color indicates the CMP
location, (b) shear wave velocity 2D cross-section from inversion of
CMPCC surface-wave dispersion curves.
(STA, the average level of signal amplitude over a short period
of time, i.e. 1 s) and the long-term average (LTA, the average
level of signal over a much longer period of time, i.e. 30 s).
An STA/LTA ratio between 0.2 and 2.5 is kept for the H/V
computation. After avoiding transients, at least ten windows
were included for evaluation. For every selected time window,
the Fourier amplitude spectra were smoothed with a Konno
and Ohmachi (1998) filter by using a coefficient of 30 for the
bandwidth. The final H/V ratio and the associated standard
deviation were obtained by averaging the H/V ratios from all
windows. The obtained graphs of H/V spectral ratios are given
in figure 5 and the numerical values are given in table 1.
MASW field studies
A MASW field study was performed in 2D, along four profiles
as shown in figure 4 as MASW PRO1 (MP1), MASW PRO2
Figure 7. Dispersion curves and shear wave velocities estimated
from MP2 MASW profile. (a) Picked dispersion curves for all
CMPCC gathers, where the difference of color indicates the CMP
location. (b) shear wave velocity 2D cross-section from inversion of
CMPCC surface-wave dispersion curves.
(MP2), MASW PRO3 (MP3), MASW PRO4 (MP4). For
profile MP1, MP3 and MP4, 24 geophones were employed
with a geophone spacing of 5 m. In MP2, 48 geophones were
employed with a spacing of 1 m.
The data sets were created using a Geometrics Geode
(242) Ch Seismic receiver, 24–48 geophones of 4.5 Hz resonant
frequency and a 100 lb hydraulic hammer as the energy source.
During the field studies, the sampling interval utilized was
0.125 ms and the recording time was 2 s. At MP1, three shots
were conducted. The first shot was 5 m offset at the beginning,
the second was between the 12th and 13th geophones and the
third shot was 5 m away from the last geophone. At MP2, six
shots were applied. Four of these shots were conducted at a
1 m sampling interval with a 2 m offset, one of these shots
was conducted at the point of the 25th geophone, and the last
one was conducted 1 m away from the last geophone. At MP3

6
J. Geophys. Eng. 10 (2013) 045001
(a)
(b)
Figure 8. Dispersion curves and shear wave velocities estimated
from MP3 MASW profile. (a) Picked dispersion curves for all
CMPCC gathers, where the difference of color indicates the CMP
location, (b) shear wave velocity 2D cross-section from inversion of
CMPCC surface-wave dispersion curves.
and MP4, 25 shots were conducted with 5 m intervals and
a 2.5 m offset. The data evaluation was performed using the
Seisimager software program.
The MASW method was introduced by Park et al (1999).
In their method, phase velocities were directly determined
from MASW data after transforming seismic data to the phase
velocity–frequency domain.
The common mid-point cross-correlation (CMPCC)
(Hayashi and Suzuki 2004) analysis method is used to evaluate
MASW data. CMPCC analysis is a further extension of
MASW that enables us to determine phase velocities from
multi-shot data directly, by using CMPCC gathers. To increase
the number of CMPCC data, a multi-shot method was used and
the shot points were moved. The data were binned using a CMP
bin size of 5 m for MP1, MP2 and MP3 and 1 m for MP2,
which is equal to the natural bin size, for increasing folds so as
to allow for a more stable phase-velocity analysis. After this
process, 23 CMPCC gathers for each of the MP1, MP3 and
MP4 profiles and 47 CMPCC gathers for the MP2 profile were
obtained so dispersion curves for each CMPCC gather were
presented. A multi-channel analysis was applied to the CMP
cross-correlation gathers for calculating the phase velocities
of surface waves. During the process some low-quality data
were eliminated and individual smoothing was applied to
the dispersion curves. Finally, 2D S-wave velocity profiles
7
M Akgün et al
(a)
(b)
Figure 9. Dispersion curves and shear wave velocities estimated
from MP4 MASW profile. (a) Picked dispersion curves for all
CMPCC gathers, where the difference of color indicates the CMP
location, (b) shear wave velocity 2D cross-section from inversion of
CMPCC surface-wave dispersion curves.
were reconstructed through nonlinear least-squares inversion.
Dispersion curves (selected dispersion curves for all CMPCC
gathers) and 2D Vs profiles were monitored (figures 6–9).
Microgravity field studies
Microgravity measurements were achieved by using a Scintrex
CG-5 Auto Grav Gravity device with a sampling interval of
50 m along the profile depicted in figure 5. Regarding the
topographic surveys that will be used for corrections, a Leica
1200+ GNSS device set was used. The gravity measurements
were made at each point with a minimum time of 60 s and with
five repetitive readings. As the study area is located in densely
populated settlements, the industrial, traffic, micro seismic
and wind noise was also taken into account. The field data
were evaluated and the Bouguer gravity values were obtained
(figure 10).
A first-degree trend application was applied to the
obtained Bouguer gravity anomalies and a probable bedrock
and soil interface was attempted to be determined in the N–S
direction (figure 11).
In order to investigate the stiffness of the soil strata
between the bedrock and the soil interface more profoundly,
first-degree trend values were subtracted from the Bouguer
gravity values (figure 12).
J. Geophys. Eng. 10 (2013) 045001 M Akgün et al

Figure 10. Regional Bouguer gravity anomaly profile from north to south.

Figure 11. Regional trend gravity anomaly profile from north to south.

Figure 12. Residual Bouguer gravity anomaly profile from north to south.

Discussion and conclusions
The reference site method and single station method (H/V)
were utilized in the description of the empirical transfer
function. The empirical transfer function is one of the
important types of data used to design the earthquake-resistant
buildings. For this reason, in situ measurements are necessary
to make these calculations. The soil profile must be defined
by using Vs. Vs velocity can be obtained using some of
the geophysical methods such as seismic reflection, seismic
refraction, MASW, spatial auto correlation and sonic log.
Kubotera and Otsuka (1970) observed microtremors with
a period of 1–3 s in the Aso Caldera area, and determined
that they are Love waves and there is a relation between their
effective periods and the ground layer thickness in their study.
In the study of Teves-Costa et al (1996), it is proposed that the
dominant frequencies found by the Nakamura (1989) method
are compatible with alluvium thicknesses.
In this paper, the soil structure models regarding the study
area, composed by means of certain geophysical methods
such as MASW, microtremor and microgravity, were obtained
following the Butler (1984), Nakamura (1989), Nakamura
and Samizo (1989), Nakamura (2001), Nakamura and Sato
(2001), Xu and Butt (2006), Kubotera and Otsuka (1970) and
Teves-Costa et al (1996) approaches.
According to the H/V amplitude–frequency changes, the
fundamental frequencies from north to south show variation
(figure 5). As the depth of the engineering bedrock decreases,
the dominant frequency values increase (figures 5 and 15).
Hence, the soil amplification effect will vary depending on the
soil thickness (Kubotera and Otsuka 1970, Teves-Costa et al
1996).
Fundamental frequencies are absolutely around 1 Hz at
the microtremor points between T1 and T7. Only the T6
microtremor point gives a very low fundamental frequency.
According to our field observation the microtremor point
takes place very close to the highway and a side road that
changed during the construction of these roads. Therefore the
fundamental frequency of the T6 microtremor point does not
fit with the general trend. For the microtremor points between

8
J. Geophys. Eng. 10 (2013) 045001
T8 and T11, the fundamental frequencies are larger than 5 Hz.
According to the geology map (figure 2), the microtremor
points between T1 and T7 take place on the geological unit
number 1, the microtremor points T8 and T9 take place on
the geological unit number 3 and the microtremor points T10
and T11 take place on the geological unit number 4. We can
say that the geology and the microtremor measurements along
the study field are compatible, hence as the stiffness increases
from number 1 to 5 on the geological map, the fundamental
frequencies taking place on these units increase too. As
Soliman and Fahey (1995) stated, the stiffness of natural
deposits tends to increase with age, both in ‘engineering’ time
and ‘geological’ time.
According to the SESAME (SESAME 2004) guideline
for flat H/V curves, if the subsurface is soil deposits, curves
can be observed as a likely absence of any sharp contrast at
depth, and does not necessarily mean there is no amplification.
When the 2D Vs models for MP1 and MP2 (figures 6 and 7)
were analyzed, no sharp contrast could be seen, and for that
reason the low amplitude value of nearly 2 can be explained
between T1 and T7 microtremor points, which were near MP1
and MP2. Additionally according to SESAME (SESAME
2004) guidelines for flat H/V curves, obtaining a flat curve at
rock sites means likely unweathered or only lightly weathered
rock. This explanation is compatible with our microtremor
point T10, which takes place near the MASW point MP4.
Vs values at MP4 (figure 9) represent the unweathered rock.
Following SESAME (SESAME 2004), in the case of peaks of
low amplitude the safest approach is to refrain from deriving
quantitative interpretations from the H/V curve. Although
the SESAME recommendations set the threshold for the
H/V peak amplitude at 2, other studies are more relaxed.
Bard (1998) suggests that an unclear bump on the H/V
curve, followed by a clear trough, may also be used for
the estimation of the fundamental frequency. In this sense,
Rodriguez and Midorikawa (2002) also argue that proscribing
H/V estimations relying solely on the small spectral ratios
criterion becomes inadequate.
T8 and some of the other data exhibits H/V curves
showing a large standard deviation for frequencies below 1 Hz
(figure 5). Such a large standard deviation associated with a
clear trend may be related to strong wind during the recording
(Mucciarelli et al 2005, Chatelain et al 2008).
The ModelHVSR (MatLab based) program (Herak 2008)
was used to compare the empirical transfer functions (Raptakis
and Makra 2010) from microtremor and 1D transfer functions
computed from Vs profiles. The observed HVSR from
microtremor data and the calculated HVSR of surface waves
were compared by the program. The HVSR data obtained
from microtremor measurement and the Vs, Vp (obtained from
using empirical relations) and depth values obtained from the
MASW method were entered into the program. The program
computed the HVSR spectrum using the given values obtained
from the MASW study and drew the HVSR–frequency graph
for both the microtremor and MASW methods. The MP4
MASW profile and T11 microtremor point are the closest and
optimum ones to compare for this study. We used the MASW
values at the point where the microtremor point takes place.
9
M Akgün et al
Figure 13. Comparison of HVSR. The red line is observed HVSR
from microtremor measurement point T11, the green one is
calculated HVSR from the MASW point MP4.
We achieved a good fit at the fundamental frequency using
microtremor data and MASW data. For both the microtremor
measurement point (T11) and the MASW measurement profile
(MP4), the HVSR value is between 3 and 3.5 and the
fundamental frequency is about 10 Hz (figure 13).
The relationship between the velocity and densities of the
soil are the parameters of the MASW (Vs) and microgravity
(ρ) techniques (figures 14(a) and (b)). Therefore, it is usually
important to evaluate the application of these two methods in
association.
The MASW method was employed in composing the
model of soil Vs-depth. According to the obtained the
Vs-depth changes, Vs values of the soil show sudden changes
both laterally and vertically. These changes were classified
at four different Vs values along the N–S profile (figure 15).
Within this classification, unit I was defined in the velocity
range 0–350 m s−1, unit II as 351–550 m s−1, unit III as
551–950 m s−1 and unit IV as 951–1150 m s−1.
On MP1 and MP2 cross-sections, which are very close
to the sea, the thickness of unit I happens to be nearly 80 m
(figures 6, 7 and 15). In the MP3 cross-section, the continuity
of unit I ends up (figure 8) like in MP4 (figure 9), and in
the MP4 cross-section, units II and III are observed under
which the layer of unit IV extends at a velocity range of
951–1150 m s−1 (figure 15).
The MP4 (figure 15) and G11–G12–G13–G14 stations of
microgravity profile are on the same line. In figure 15, the
velocity changes in units II, III and IV on the MASW model
in MP4 and the amplitude changes in the Bouguer anomaly
between G11 and G14 stations of the microgravity profile
show similarity. It is likely that the microgravity anomaly that
defines the soil structure is under the control of the interface
between units II, III and IV
The units I and IV could not be traced on MP3 (figure 15).
This situation is linked to the fact that these units lie beneath
J. Geophys. Eng. 10 (2013) 045001 M Akgün et al

(a)

(b)

Figure 14. (a) MASW and microgravity parameter relations, Nakamura non-reference method field configuration with the common
concepts of the geophysical methods (general correlation of the S velocity and density). (b) Microgravity response of soil and inner-soil
layer differentiation (taken from Butler 1984) and representative microtremor field location in the definition of soil transfer function.

unit I from south to north at deeper levels. Depending on the
result in MP4, the units that govern the amplitude rise of the
Bouguer anomaly at station G9 (figure 15) are probably III
and IV units at deeper levels rather than I and II. This result
indicates that the depth of engineering bedrock decreases in
the N–S direction. The increases observed in Bouguer anomaly
values in the N–S direction (figures 10 and 11) are consistent
with the geological data (Sözbilir et al 2008, Emre et al
2005). This consistency supports the outcome that the depth
of engineering bedrock decreases in the N–S direction.
The changes obtained as a consequence of a first-degree
trend application to the Bouguer gravity values (figure 12)
could be related to the transitions between the N–S trending
alluvial fans and delta coast sediments. This proves to us that
the soil comprises various stiffness, material types etc. These
changes observed in the soil structure are monitored in the
H/V dominant frequency values (figure 5).

10
J. Geophys. Eng. 10 (2013) 045001
Figure 15. Residual Bouguer gravity anomaly profile from north to south with MASW results along the topography.
Moving from south to north, the soil thickness increases
and the dominant microtremor frequency decreases (figure 5).
With respect to the Bouguer anomaly values, these changes are
observed in the form of relative anomaly changes stemming
from the stiffness underground (figures 13, 14(a) and (b)). In a
similar study conducted by Butler (1984), he emphasized that
the residual anomaly is influenced by shallow structures in a
lateral way (figure 14(b)). This result supports the idea that a
residual Bouguer gravity anomaly of the study area is affected
by the shallow structures which show variations in a lateral
way (figure 15).
According to the geological data, the transition zone
between Holocene-aged alluvial plains and Pleistocene
continental alluvial units (figure 2) is seen between the eighth
and ninth stations of microgravity as shown in figure 13. The
11
M Akgün et al
transition from Pleistocene-aged unit to Miocene-aged volcano
sediments, as previously stated by Sözbilir et al (2008), is
monitored starting from the 12th gravity station since the
amplitude increases in gravity anomaly values (figures 2, 4
and 15).
Under the guidance of all this information, the results of
microtremor, MASW and microgravity methods support each
other. Within the study area, the soil generally contains sudden
variations in the Vs values, the depth of engineering bedrock
and geotechnical parameters from north to south. Relying
on these variations, it can be concluded that the response
of soil under seismic excitation may significantly vary. This
condition should be taken into consideration while conducting
soil dynamic analyses.
J. Geophys. Eng. 10 (2013) 045001
Acknowledgments
This study has been achieved under the scope of no: 106G159
of The Scientific and Technological Research Council
of Turkey (TUBİTAK) project. We express our thanks
to Associate Professor Dr Çağatay PAMUKÇU from
Dokuz Eylül University Mining Engineering Department,
for language editing, Özkan Cevdet ÖZDAĞ from Dokuz
Eylul University Geophysical Engineering department, for
his performance during our study period. We also thank
the two anonymous reviewers for their suggestions, which
considerably improved the paper. Also MASW data, which
were collected for this paper, will be used in Aykut TUNÇEL’s
PhD thesis at the Institute of Natural and Applied Sciences in
Dokuz Eylül University.
References
Ansal A, İyisan R and Özkan M 1997 A preliminary microzonation
study for town of Dinar Seismic Behaviour of Ground and
Geotechnical Structures: Proc. Discussion Special Technical
Session on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering During 14th
Int. Conf. on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering
(Hamburg, Germany, 6–12 September) (London: Taylor and
Francis) pp 3–9
Bard P-Y 1998 Microtremor measurements: a tool for site effect
estimation? Proc. 2nd Int. Symp. on the Effects of Surface
Geology on Seismic Motion (Yokohama, Japan, 1–3 December)
vol 3 (Rotterdam: Balkema) pp 1251–79
Borcherd R D, Wentworth C M, Janssen A, Furnal T and Gibbs J
1991 Methodology GIS mapping of special study zones for
strong ground shaking in the San Francisco Bay region Proc.
4th Int. Conf. on Seismic Zonation vol 3 pp 545–52
Butler D K 1984 Mictogravimetric and gravity gradient techniques
for subsurface cavities Geophysics 49 1084–96
Chatelain J-L, Guillier B, Cara F, Duval A-M, Atakan K
and Bard P-Y 2008 Evaluation of the influence of experimental
conditions on H/V results from ambient noise recordings Bull.
Earthq. Eng. 6 33–74
Crice D 2005 MASW, the wave of future editorial J. Environ. Eng.
Geophys. 10 77–79
Emre O and Barka A 2000 Active faults between Gediz graben and
Aegean Sea (İzmir region) Batı-Anadolu’nun Depremselligi
Sempozyumu (Dokuz Eylül Universitesi Yayınlari, Bildiri
Kitabi) pp 131–2
Emre Ö, Özalp S, Doğan A, Özaksoy V, Yıldırım C and Göktas F
2005 Active faults and earthquake potential of İzmir and
surrounding region MTA Jeol Etütleri Rapor No 10754
Geopsy 1997 Geophysical Signal Database for Noise Array
Processing www.geopsy.org
Gülerce Ü 2002 İzmir İlindeki zemin hakim periyodu ve zemin
büyütmesi değişiminin microtremor ölçümleri ile belirlenmesi
Yüksek Lisans tezi İTÜ Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İstanbul
Güllü H 2001 Dinar’ın zemin büyütmelerine gore coğrafik bilgi
sistemleri ile mikrobölgelemesi Doktora tezi İTÜ Fen Bilimleri
Enstitüsü, İstanbul
Hayashi K and Suzuki H 2004 CMP cross-correlation analysis of
multi-channel surface-wave data Explor. Geophys. 35 7–13
Herak M 2008 ModelHVSR—a Matlab tool to model
horizontal-to-vertical spectral ratio of ambient noise Comput.
Geosci. 34 1514–26
Issawy E A, Othman A A, Mrlina J, Saad A M, Radwan A H,
Elhafeez T A and Emam M S 2010 Engineering and
geophysical approach for construction site selection at
AL-AMAL area, southeast of Cairo, Egypt Explor. Geophys.
Remote Sens. Environ. J. 56–67 www.caag.cz/egrse/2010-
2/04-10_2-Issawy_et_al.pdf
12
View publication stats
M Akgün et al
Joyner W B and Furnal T 1984 Use of measured shear-wave velocity
for predicting geological site effects on strong motion Proc. 8th
World Conf. On Earthquake Engineering vol 2 pp 777–83
Koichi H, Tsohifumi M and Hatekeyama H 2005 Joint analysis of a
surface wave method and micro gravity survey J. Environ. Eng.
Geophys. 10 175–84
Konno K and Ohmachi T 1998 Ground-motion characteristics
estimated from spectral ratio between horizontal and vertical
components of microtremor Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am.
88 228–41
Kubotera A and Otsuka M 1970 Nature of nonvolcanic microtremor
observed on the Aso-Caldera J. Phys. Earth 18 115–24
Lermo J and Chavez-Garcia F J 1994 Are microtremors useful in the
site response evaluation? Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 84 1350–64
Mucciarelli M, Gallipoli M, Di Giacomo D, Di Nota F and Nino E
2005 The influence of wind on measurements of seismic noise
Geophys. J. Int. 161 303–8
Nakamura Y 1989 A method for dynamic characteristics estimation
of subsurface using microtremor on the ground surface Q. Rep.
Railw. Tech. Res. Inst. 30 25–33
Nakamura Y 2001 Clear identification of fundamental idea of
Nakamura’s technique and its applications 4th EqTAP
Workshop (Kamakura) http://eqtap.edm.bosai.go.jp/
publications/EqTAP_ws/ws_4th/pdf/cd-rom/session_3/3_12_
nakamura/paper_3_12.pdf
Nakamura Y and Samizo M 1989 Site effect evaluation of surface
ground using strong motion records 20th JSCE Earthquake
Engineering Symp. pp 133–6
Nakamura Y and Sato T 2001 Inventory development for natural
and built environments: use of seismic motion and microtremor
for vulnerability assessment 4th EqTAP Workshop (Kamakura)
http://eqtap.edm.bosai.go.jp/publications/EqTAP_ws/ws_4th/
pdf/cd-rom/session_3/3_12_nakamura/paper_3_12.pdf
Park C B, Miller R D and Xia J 1999 Multi-channel analysis of
surface waves Geophysics 64 800–8
Raptakis D and Makra K 2010 Shear wave velocity structure in
western Thessaloniki (Greece) using mainly alternative SPAC
method Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 30 202–14
Rodriguez H S and Midorikawa S 2002 Applicability of the H/V
spectral ratio of microtremors in assessing site effects on
seismic motion Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 31 261–79
Seo K and Samano T 1993 Use of microtremors for prediction of
seismic motion Report of General Research (A) (Japan:
Ministry of Education) pp 198–200 (in Japanese)
SESAME 2004 Guidelines for the implementation of the H/V
spectral ratio technique on ambient vibrations: measurements,
processing and interpretation SESAME European Research
Project WP12-Deliverable D23.12
ftp://ftp.geo.uib.no/pub/seismo/SOFTWARE/SESAME/USER-
GUIDELINES/SESAME-HV-User-Guidelines.doc
Soliman A A and Fahey M 1995 Measurement and interpretation of
shear modulus in SBP tests in sand Proc. 4th Int. Symp. of the
Pressuremeter and its New Avenues (Quebec, Canada)
(Rotterdam: Balkema) pp 115–22
Sözbilir H, Uzel B, Sümer Ö, Ersoy Y E, Koçer T, Demirtaş R
and Özkaymak Ç 2008 Evidence for a kinematically linked
E–W trending İzmir fault and NE-trending Seferihisar fault:
kinematic and paleoseismological studies carried out on active
faults forming the İzmir Bay, Western Anatolia Geol. Bull.
Turkey 51 91–114
Teves-Costa P L, Matias L and Bard P Y 1996 Seismic behaviour
estimation of thin alluvium layers using microtremor
recordings Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 15 201–9
Uzel B, Sözbilir H and Özkaymak Ç 2012 Neotectonic evolution of
an actively growing superimposed basin in Western Anatolia:
the inner bay of İzmir Turkey Turkish J. Earth Sci. 21 439–71
Xu C and Butt S D 2006 Evaluation of MASW techniques to image
steeply dipping cavities in laterally inhomogeneous terrain
J. Appl. Geophys. 59 106–16