Engineering Geology 166 (2013) 237–244

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Geology
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/enggeo

Sliding displacements due to subduction-zone earthquakes

Alfredo Urzúa a, John T. Christian b,⁎
a
Prototype Engineering Inc., 57 Westland Avenue, Winchester, MA 01890, USA
b
Prototype Engineering, Inc., 36E Seven Springs Lane, Burlington, MA 01803, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Empirical studies of earthquake ground motions have developed relations between sliding displacement and
Received 7 May 2013 acceleration ratio and other parameters such as Arias intensity. Computations using strong motion records
Received in revised form 9 August 2013 from the Maule 2010 Chile M = 8.8 earthquake indicate that the published relations do not conform well to
Accepted 11 August 2013
the computed displacements, and some tend to be unconservative. Extensions to the empirical equations
Available online 30 August 2013
incorporating Arias intensity are, if anything, less accurate. These results suggest that these empirical relations
Keywords:
may not apply to subduction zone events and indicate that further study using records from other recent
Acceleration subduction zone events is appropriate. Examining the analytical solutions for sliding displacements induced by si-
Arias intensity nusoidal shaking and the definition of Arias intensity leads to an improved normalization for sliding displacements.
Displacements When this improved normalization is applied to the records from three different earthquakes in different parts of
Earthquakes Chile, the results are nearly identical, and the results for the Chi Chi and Northridge earthquakes are very close to
Slope stability those from the Chilean events. Suggestions for practical use of the new normalization relations are provided.
Subduction zone © 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Estimating the displacements that occur when a potentially unstable
mass of soil or rock is shaken by earthquake stress waves can be a
difficult and daunting task. The amplitude, frequency content, and
duration of the incoming signal are often not well known, and even
probabilistic descriptions involve large uncertainties. The properties of
the soils and rocks are also known imperfectly. Furthermore, the entire
process of deformation and amplification is strongly non-linear. In such
a situation it is not surprising that engineers and seismologists have
resorted to simplified analytical methods, of which one of the most
widely used is the simplified sliding-block model (Newmark, 1965).
The sliding-block analysis assumes that the sliding mass rests on a
plane and that the shear strength of the interface between block and
plane is known. The strength can be frictional or non-frictional, and it
can be allowed to decrease as a function of the sliding displacement,
although most applications assume the strength is constant. The input
earthquake motion is an acceleration time–history that describes the
motion of the plane. If at any time the block is at rest with respect to
the plane (that is, it is moving along with the plane) and the accelera-
tion of the plane is less than the acceleration that can be transmitted
by the interface, the block continues to move along with the plane.
Once the acceleration of the plane exceeds a critical value, the block
begins to slide along the plane. It continues to slide until (a) the acceler-
ation of the plane falls below the critical value ac and (b) frictional forces
⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 781 272 3196.
E-mail addresses: alfredo.urzua@bc.edu, prototypeengineering@comcast.net
(A. Urzúa), jtchrist36@comcast.net (J.T. Christian).
between block and plane have slowed the relative sliding so that the
block and plane have the same absolute velocity. In effect, the motion
consists of a series of cumulative sliding pulses.
Although the sliding-block method is easily implemented on a
computer, the calculations can become tedious when the analysis is to
be used for zoning purposes. Jibson (2007), using a suite of accelerograms
from several earthquakes and referring to a series of computational stud-
ies described in his earlier papers and reports, proposed empirical rela-
tionships between the computed displacement, DR, and the ratio (ac/
amax) between the critical acceleration, ac, and the maximum acceleration
in the time–history, amax. One possible shortcoming of these relations is
that they may not include information on many seismological parame-
ters, such as magnitude, local intensity, duration, and dominant period.
Jibson proposed several modifications to his basic empirical relation, in
particular incorporating the Arias (1970, 1973, 1993) intensity, defined as
Z
π t 2
Ia ¼ ½aðτÞ dτ ð1Þ
2g 0
in which g is the acceleration of gravity, a is the ground acceleration, and τ
is the variable of integration equal to time. It is customary to integrate
over the entire duration of the strong motion record (t = length of re-
cord), but t can be any time after the start of the record so that Ia is actually
a function of time. If there is no other indication, Ia is taken as the value
integrated over the entire record. The Arias intensity has units of velocity
and is usually expressed in meters per second (m/s) or centimeters per
second (cm/s). Jibson also proposed a relation incorporating magnitude.
It should be noted that Jibson's displacements, and the displacements
discussed further on in this paper, are not observed values but are the

0013-7952/$ – see front matter © 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2013.08.005
238 A. Urzúa, J.T. Christian / Engineering Geology 166 (2013) 237–244

values computed by applying the sliding-block model to recorded deviation at each value of ac/amax. The solid lines are drawn through
accelerograms. the anti-logarithms of the means and means plus one standard
Other researchers (Ambraseys and Menu, 1988; Crespellani et al., deviation of the logarithms of the results. Thus, the lower solid line is
1998; Bray and Travasarou, 2007; Rathje and Saygili, 2008; Saygili and the plot of the median displacements. The lines representing the
Rathje, 2008; Rathje and Saygili, 2009; Hsieh and Lee, 2011; Saragoni, means plus one standard deviation of both the displacements and the
2012) have also developed or used empirical relationships incorporat- logarithms of the displacements are so close that they plot on top of
ing the acceleration ratio, Arias intensity, and other parameters such each other.
as the destructiveness potential factor PD (Araya and Saragoni, 1984).
These authors went to some lengths to eliminate bias in the input to 3. Existing empirical relationships
the regression models, but, inevitably, the number of records made
during large subduction zone earthquakes is limited by the rarity of The empirical relationships used in this study are, in chronological
such events. The recordings from three earthquakes generated off the order, as follows:
coast of Chile make it possible to compare the sliding displacements
3.1 Ambraseys and Menu (1988) proposed a simple relation using
computed by applying the sliding-block method to actual recordings
only the acceleration ratio:
from subduction-zone events with the earlier empirical predictions.
This paper reports on those comparisons and proposes improvements.  2:53   
a ac −1:09
log DR ¼ 0:90 þ log 1− c  0:30 ð2Þ
2. Displacements computed from the Maule earthquake a max a max

The first set of records used in these analyses were made in the
Logarithms are to base 10.
Maule region of Chile during the strong motion of the 2010 (M = 8.8)
3.2 Crespellani et al. (1998), in the notation of this paper, proposed
earthquake (the www.renadic.cl website contains further details). The
analysis used 18 records. Each recording included both horizontal 0:977 −1:338
DR ¼ 0:011P D kc ð3Þ
components, and each recording was run through the analysis with
log DR ¼ 0:977P D −1:388kc −1:9586
the original and reversed sense of motion, so there were 72 time-
histories in total. The amplitude, frequency, and other parameters of
PD is the destructiveness potential factor defined by Araya and
the accelerograms are obviously influenced by propagation and by
Saragoni (1984) and Saragoni and Hart (1974) as
local site conditions, but no further effects of local conditions were
considered. The analysis for each record proceeded as follows: 2
P D ¼ I a =ν0 ð4Þ
1. A value of ac/amax was selected.
2. One of the 72 time-histories was chosen. where ν0 is the zero crossing intensity per second. The zero
3. The sliding-block analysis was performed for that combination of crossing intensity can be calculated by counting the crossings
time-history and ac/amax. that occur between the times that the Arias intensity reaches
4. Steps 1 through 3 were repeated for the other values of ac/amax and 5% of its final value and 95% of its final value. This procedure elim-
for all time-histories. inates the values from the beginning and the tail of the record to
concentrate attention on the strongest portion of the motion.
Fig. 1 displays the results. For each value of ac/amax the computed
Since the zero crossing intensity has units of the inverse of
displacements are plotted as asterisks. The dashed lines are drawn
time, PD has units of meter–seconds or centimeter–seconds.
through the values of the means and the means plus one standard
The parameter kc is the critical acceleration expressed in units
of g's (i.e., kc = ac/g).
3.3 Bray and Travasarou (2007) proposed relations that incorporat-
ed the flexibility of the sliding mass, but they also proposed the
following relation for the case of a rigid sliding mass

2
ln ðDR Þ ¼ −0:22−2:83 ln ðac Þ−0:333ð ln ðac ÞÞ
þ 0:566 ln ðac Þ ln ða max Þ þ 3:04 ln ða max Þ ð5Þ
2
−0:244ð ln ða max ÞÞ þ 0:278ðM−7Þ  ε

The notation has been changed to agree with that of the present
paper. M is the moment magnitude of the earthquake, and ε is a
normally distributed error term with zero mean. In Eq. (5) and
subsequent equations ln () is the natural logarithm
3.4 Based on the work of Ambraseys and Menu (1988), Jibson (2007)
proposed this relation using only the acceleration ratio

 2:341   
a ac −1:438
logDR ¼ 0:215 þ log 1− c  0:510ð6Þ
a max a max

The last term is the standard deviation of the regression. Incorpo-

Fig. 1. Results from sliding block analysis of Maule strong motions recordings together rating Arias intensity in his regression, Jibson arrived at
with observed and proposed empirical relations. Asterisks are the computed results.
Dashed lines are the mean and mean plus of standard deviation of the results, and solid
lines are the mean and mean plus one standard deviation of the logarithms of the results. log DR ¼ 0:561 log Ia −3:833 logðac =a max Þ−1:474  0:616 ð7Þ
 A. Urzúa, J.T. Christian / Engineering Geology 166 (2013) 237–244 239

3.5 Saygili and Rathje (2008) and Rathje and Saygili (2008) proposed
six relations. The first and simplest is
     
ac ac 2 ac 3
ln ðDR Þ ¼ 5:52−4:43 −20:39 þ 42:61
a max a max a max
 
ac 4
−28:74 þ 0:72 ln ða max Þ þ εσ ln D
a max
ð8Þ

In this equation ε is a standard normal variate with zero mean and

unit standard deviation, and σlnD is the standard deviation of the
natural logarithm of the displacement. In the subsequent parts
of this paper, this is identified as “Saygili and Rathje (2008) #1.”
Their sixth relation incorporates both the period and the Arias
intensity:
     
ac ac 2 ac 3
ln ðDR Þ ¼ 4:27−4:62 −21:49 þ 46:53
a max a max a max
 
ac 4 ð9Þ
−31:66 −0:57 ln ða max Þ þ 1:14 ln ðT Þ
a max
þ 0:86 ln ðIa Þ þ εσ ln D

It is identified as “Saygili and Rathje (2008) #6.” Fig. 2. Results from empirical relations compared to anti-logarithm of mean of the loga-
3.6 Rathje and Saygili (2009) proposed a relation incorporating the rithms of the computed results from Maule 2010. The data points from Fig. 1 have been
removed for clarity.
magnitude of the earthquake
     
ac ac 2 ac 3
ln ðDR Þ ¼ 4:89−4:85 −19:64 þ 42:49 3. For each equation and at each value of ac/amax, the mean of the
a max a max a max
  logarithms of the computed values of DR among the records were
ac 4
−29:06 þ 0:72 ln ða max Þ þ 0:89ðM−6Þ computed.
a max
4. Curves were drawn through the points computed in step 4. These are
ð10Þ
the curves plotted in Fig. 2.

3.7 By incorporating data from the 1999 Chi Chi Taiwan earthquake
(M = 7.3) Hsieh and Lee (2011) proposed relations incorporating
Arias intensity for soil and rock sites. Their equation for rock sites is
log DR ¼ 0:788 log Ia −10:166 ac þ 5:95ac log I a þ 1:779
 0:294 ð11Þ
4. Results from empirical equations
Fig. 2 compares the predictions of the various empirical equations
with the median curves in Fig. 1 for the displacements calculated from
the observed data for the Maule set of records from the 2010 earth-
quake. The data points for the individual time histories are not plotted
to avoid cluttering the figure. Ambraseys and Menu (1988) and Jibson
(2007) equations use the acceleration ratios alone (Eqs. 2 and 6), and
the corresponding curves were developed by inserting the appropriate
acceleration ratios into the empirical equations. The error terms at the
end of some of the equations were not included in the calculations.
Crespellani et al. (1998), Jibson (2007), Bray and Travasarou, 2007;
Rathje and Saygili, 2008; Saygili and Rathje, 2008; Rathje and Saygili,
2009, and Hsieh and Lee (2011) proposed equations incorporating
other parameters, including Arias (1970, 1973, 1993) intensity. To
investigate the applicability of this type of formulation, the analysis
proceeded as follows:
1. For each record the Arias intensity and the other seismic parameters
were computed. Because the acceleration is squared for Ia, the sense
of the motion is irrelevant.
2. For each record and for each of the proposed equations that incorpo-
rate parameters in addition to ac/amax and for each value of ac/amax,
the parameters were inserted in the proposed equation to obtain a
predicted value of DR. This gave, for each record, for each equation,
and for each value of ac/amax, a set of predictions of DR.
Major observations are that Jibson's revised equation incorporating
the Arias intensity provides a poor match to the computed results for
this event and that the Ambraseys and Menu relation fits the data
best, even though it is the oldest relation and is based on the least
data. Of the other proposals, the relation proposed by Bray and
Travasarou (2007) fits the computed results well at low values of the
acceleration ratio but deviates from the computed results at higher ac-
celeration ratios, and that proposed by Saygili and Rathje (2008) fits
best at higher values of acceleration ratio but more poorly at low values.
Rathje and Saygili's (2009) relation recovers the slope of the computed
line well but is located substantially higher in the plot.
On November 16, 2007, an M = 7.7 earthquake occurred along the
northern portion of the offshore Chilean subduction zone, and 16
recordings of strong motion were made in the Tocopilla region of north-
ern Chile. Similarly, 22 of the recordings of the March 3, 1985, M = 8.0
offshore earthquake, which has been named after Valparaiso. These re-
cordings were processed in the same way as the Maule recordings. Fig. 3
shows the results for the Tocopilla data, and Fig. 4 does the same for the
Valparaiso data. The histograms for seismic parameters for the three
Chilean earthquakes are in Appendix A.
Figs. 2, 3, and 4 show that there is a great deal of scatter in the pre-
dictions of the empirical equations. Relations that agree well with the
data for one event, such as the Ambraseys–Menu equation in Fig. 2, do
poorly for other sets of recordings. None of the empirical relationships
is consistently good or poor.
It should be noted that all these relations have dimensional irregu-
larities. Those expressed in terms of the dimensionless acceleration
ratio alone do not incorporate parameters describing the intensity or
duration of the strong motion. Those that do incorporate other parame-
ters do so in ways that do not preserve dimensions such as velocity,
displacement, or time. It would be desirable to have a truly rational di-
mensionless expression that incorporates more strong motion parame-
ters than the acceleration ratio.
240 A. Urzúa, J.T. Christian / Engineering Geology 166 (2013) 237–244

Fig. 3. Results from empirical relations compared to anti-logarithm of mean of the loga-
rithms of the computed results from Tocopilla 2007. The data points from Fig. 1 have
been removed for clarity.
5. Analytical derivation for idealized seismic displacements
Yegian et al. (1991) developed analytical solutions for the sliding dis-
placements induced by single pulses of rectangular, triangular, and sinu-
soidal shape. If the displacement during a single pulse is DN, the total
displacement during N such pulses is DR = N · DN. Yegian et al. found that
h i
2
DR ¼ f ðac =a max Þ  a max NT ð12Þ
where f(ac/amax) is a function of the acceleration ratio and T is the period of
the pulse. The function f(ac/amax) depends on the shape of the acceleration
pulse. Fig. 5 is a plot of the function for a sinusoidal pulse. For the limiting
case that ac = 0, the value of the function is 1/2π. At other values of ac/amax
the function must be calculated by iterative solution of the sliding-block
Fig. 5. Sliding displacement during single sinusoidal pulse (after Yegian et al., 1991).
equations. In most practical cases of actual sliding the value of the acceler-
ation ratio will be between 0.05 and 0.5, a range where Fig. 5 shows the
logarithm of f(ac/amax) is nearly linear.
It should be noted that the solution for sliding-block displacement
for any prescribed shape of input accelerogram must have the function-
al form of Eq. (12). The specific composition of the function f(ac/amax)
depends on the details of the shape of the input motion. As mentioned
above, Yegian et al. (1991) gave solutions for the cases of sequences of
sinusoidal, rectangular, and triangular wave trains. Solutions could be
developed for a series of Dirac delta functions or any other shape of
accelerogram. The details of the function f(ac/amax) may be quite
complicated, but all solutions will be of the form of Eq. (12). The fact
leads to a suggestion for a rational way to improve the dimensionless
relations between sliding displacements and acceleration ratios. The
sinusoidal input is the obvious starting point.
For a sinusoidal acceleration pulse of period T and amplitude amax,
the Arias intensity is
Z Z
π t 2
π t
2 2
Ia ¼ jaðτÞj dτ ¼ a max sin ð2πτ=T Þ dτ ð13Þ
2g 0 2g 0

Integrating over a single period gives the Arias intensity for a single
pulse:
π 2
Ia ¼ a T ð14Þ
4g max

and for N pulses, with the ground acceleration expressed as Ka in

units of g (i.e., amax = Kag)

π 2
Ia ¼ NgTK a ð15Þ
4

Substituting Eq. (15) into Eq. (12) and performing some algebraic
manipulation yields
 
I T
DR ¼ f ðac =a max Þ a ð16Þ
Ka

In other words, a rational way to normalize the computed or esti-

Fig. 4. Results from empirical relations compared to anti-logarithm of mean of the loga-
mated sliding displacements in a dimensionless plot is to divide the
rithms of the computed results from Valparaiso 1985. The data points from Fig. 1 have computed values by the bracketed term in Eq. (16), which has units of
been removed for clarity. displacement.
 A. Urzúa, J.T. Christian / Engineering Geology 166 (2013) 237–244 241

6. Normalized relation applied to three sets of recordings

There are three populations of computed sliding displacements for a

range of values of acceleration records and for three different subduc-
tion zone earthquakes recorded in different parts of Chile (Maule in
the central south, Tocopilla in the north, and Valparaiso in the center).
Fig. 6 displays the mean values of the displacements normalized
according to Eq. (16) and the means plus and minus one standard
deviation. The results for the three events are very close, confirming
that the normalization of Eq. (16) is rational and reproducible.
Although the slightly curved lines in Fig. 6 could be employed to
estimate displacements during other earthquakes, straight lines would
be easier to use. Therefore, regressions were run to obtain linear rela-
tions between the logarithms of the normalized computed displace-
ments and the acceleration ratios. It should be noted that these
regressions were run only to find the best linear approximations to
the slightly curved lines in Fig. 6 and do not represent further statistical
analysis of the data. Fig. 7 shows the resulting set of straight lines for the
three sets of recordings. The equations for the normalized displacement
are all of the form:

log DN ¼ β0 þ β1 ðac =a max Þ ð17Þ

Table 1 contains the values of the parameters for each case, as well as
the parameters for all three sets of records taken together. The results
for the three events fall so close to each other that, for engineering
purposes, Eq. (17) could be simplified to
log DN ¼ −0:1−4:3ðac =a max Þ
This procedure gives results for the median lines that are identical to
what would be obtained by regressing on all the data, but the intermedi-
ate step reveals how close the normalized median relations are to a
straight line. As Fig. 6 demonstrates, the relations are already very close
to linear, so it is not surprising that the values of R2 for the regressions
to obtain the straight lines of Fig. 7 are all either 0.997 or 0.998. When
Fig. 7. Linear regression lines for the results in Fig. 6.
linear regression is performed on all the results underlying Fig. 6, the
values of R2 are: for Maule 0.898, for Tocopilla 0.888, for Valparaiso
0.896, for all three Chilean earthquakes 0.892, and for the Chilean earth-
ð18Þ quakes plus Chi Chi and Northridge (discussed further below) 0.861.
An interesting result from these analyses is that, for any single suite
of accelerograms, the slope of the linear regressions through the mean
values of logarithms of normalized displacements are independent of
the normalizing factor. Any differences due to the choice of normalizing
factor are reflected in the intercepts. These statements are not true for
the regressions through the means plus and minus one standard
deviation. Appendix B demonstrates why this is true.

7. Application to other earthquake records

This work originally dealt with sliding displacements induced by

subduction zone earthquakes with specific reference to events in
Chile. However, the relations developed ought to be applicable to earth-
quakes in other regions with different seismic generating mechanisms.
A full investigation of this topic is beyond the scope of the present effort,
but as a preliminary step, the authors applied the methodology to
records from the January 21, 1999, Chi Chi earthquake (M = 7.6) and
the January 17, 1994, Northridge earthquake (M = 6.7). The Chi Chi
event was a shallow thrust earthquake, and the Northridge event oc-
curred along a blind thrust fault. In order to concentrate on the motions
that might cause sliding distress, approximately 50 records with the
largest peak ground accelerations were used for each earthquake.

Table 1
Values of parameters for Eq. (16).

Case β0 β1

Maule—mean of log displacement −0.124509 −4.26177

Maule—mean plus s. d. of log displacement +0.040330 −4.12274
Maule—mean minus s. d. of log displacement −0.289348 −4.40080
Tocopilla—mean of log displacement −0.050656 −4.32436
Tocopilla—mean plus s. d. of log displacement +0.077725 −4.01717
Tocopilla—mean minus s. d. of log displacement −0.179036 −4.63156
Fig. 6. Normalized displacements computed from accelerograms recorded during the
Valparaiso—mean of log displacement −0.120225 −4.29918
three earthquakes in Chile for a range of acceleration ratios. For each acceleration ratio
Valparaiso—mean plus s. d. of log displacement +0.055346 −4.18101
and each earthquake the results are the means and standard deviations of the logarithms
Valparaiso—mean minus s. d. of log displacement −0.295797 −4.41734
of the computed displacements. The solid lines are for the Maule earthquake, the dashed
All three—mean of log displacement −0.101725 −4.29435
lines for the Tocopilla earthquake, and the short dashed lines for the Valparaiso records.
All three—mean plus s. d. of log displacement +0.059039 −4.11832
In each case the top line is for the mean plus one standard deviation, the middle line for
All three—mean minus s. d. of log displacement −0.262429 −4.47038
the mean, and the bottom line for the mean minus one standard deviation.
242 A. Urzúa, J.T. Christian / Engineering Geology 166 (2013) 237–244
Fig. 8 is a plot of the dimensionless mean displacements computed
according to the proposed procedure for the records from the five earth-
quakes (Maule, Tocopilla, Valparaiso, Chi Chi, and Northridge). The results
are similar despite the substantial differences in faulting, propagation ge-
ometry, and local conditions, which, for example, would call for different
attenuations or ground motion relations in a probabilistic seismic hazard
analysis. Therefore, it is not surprising that there are some differences
among the results for different seismic conditions, even though the differ-
ences are small. Further investigation of the applicability of the proposed
methodology to more earthquakes and a larger database is warranted.
Finally, Fig. 8 gives the impression that the results for the five earth-
quakes deviate somewhat for higher values of the acceleration ratio.
This is an artifact of the logarithmic plot. Fig. 9 shows that, in a plot of
the normalized displacements themselves instead of the logarithms,
the absolute differences are smaller for large acceleration ratios and
larger for small acceleration ratios.
8. Use of results
If Eq. (16) is to be used in practice, engineers must have some way of
estimating its parameters. Usually the engineer will have an estimate of
the critical acceleration ac for a particular project. If the acceleration
ratio is to be used, there must be an estimate of amax, and this is true
for any of the methods discussed in this paper. One would expect that
values of amax would be part of the design criteria for a site. Values of
Ia can be computed from a suite of strong motion records from the
area or can be developed as an additional part of a PSHA.
One could select T by any of several reasonable and consistent
procedures and obtain reliable results provided that the users of the di-
mensionless plots and corresponding normalizing factor used that same
definition of T. First, design criteria often include design response spec-
tra, and T can be estimated from the shape of the response spectra in the
absence of other data. That was the procedure adopted for this paper,
and users of the equations in this paper should be aware of that fact.
In almost all cases the response spectra had clear peaks, making it
easy to identify the corresponding period. This procedure has the
advantage that it does not require extraordinary manipulation of earth-
quake records. Second, an estimate can be obtained from the Fourier
spectra of typical records made in the area. Third, T could be estimated
as the inverse of the intensity of zero crossings in the strongest part of
Fig. 8. Results for Maule, Tocopilla, Valparaiso, Chi Chi, and Northridge records plotted as
in Fig. 7.
Fig. 9. Results for five earthquakes in Fig. 8 plotted to arithmetic scale.
the accelerogram. Experimentation with the different ways of
estimating T indicates that the results from the inverse of the zero cross-
ing intensity show slightly less scatter than those from the other
techniques.
Fourth, Rathje et al. (2004) identified four values of T that could be
used to characterize earthquake strong shaking: Tm—the weighted aver-
age of the periods in the discrete Fourier transform of the accelerogram
using the squares of the Fourier coefficients as weights, Tavg—the
weighted average of the periods in the 5% damped response spectrum
using the squares of the spectral accelerations as weights, T0—the
weighted average of the periods in the 5% damped response spectrum
using the logarithms of the spectral accelerations as weights, and Tp—
the period corresponding to the peak of the 5% damped response spec-
trum. They noted, “T0 is most sensitive to the high frequency (low peri-
od) content of strong ground motions…[and] Tm and Tavg best account
for the long period content of strong motions…”
Performing Fourier analyses of accelerograms or evaluating the fre-
quency of zero crossings in the strongest portion of the ground motion
will often be beyond the scope that the design engineers are prepared to
undertake. In most practical cases visual examination of the response
spectra will provide a satisfactory approximate estimate of the range
of T, and a more precise estimate can be obtained by evaluating Tavg
from Rathje et al. (2004). The empirical results presented here are
based on the peak of the response spectrum.
As demonstrated in Appendix B, the slope of the regression line for
the mean of the logarithms of dimensionless displacement is a function
of (ac/amax) and is independent of the values of the normalizing param-
eters. This is not true for the other regression lines, such as the means
plus or minus one standard deviation, but it is true for the mean of the
dimensionless displacement. Since the value of T is in the normalizing
factor, this result implies that the choice of T affects the intercept or
vertical placement of the regression line but not its slope.
Once the design values of amax, Ia, and T have been established, the
design engineer can establish the critical value of ac at which the slope
will start to fail. In most cases this will correspond to a factor of safety
of 1.00. The engineer then computes the ratio ac/amax and enters Fig. 7
or Table 1 to find the estimated normalized displacement. This is then
multiplied by the bracketed term in Eq. (16) to obtain the estimated
total sliding displacement. This procedure assumes that there is no
loss of strength with shearing and that amplification effects need to be
incorporated in the analysis.
 A. Urzúa, J.T. Christian / Engineering Geology 166 (2013) 237–244
An alternative case arises when it is desired to limit the sliding dis-
placements to a value such as 100 cm. Then the designer divides the
limiting displacement by the bracketed term to obtain a dimensionless
displacement and enters Fig. 7 from the left to obtain the limiting
acceptable value of the acceleration ratio.
9. Conclusions
Applying the sliding-block analysis to strong motion time–histories
recorded in the Maule area during the 2010 earthquake, in the Tocopilla
area during the 2007 earthquake, and in Valparaiso during the 1985
earthquake indicates that the previously proposed empirical relations
between sliding displacement and acceleration ratio do not agree well
with computed results. The agreement is not significantly improved
when the Arias intensity is incorporated in the empirical equations to
account for duration effects. It appears that the empirical relations do
Appendix A. Histograms for Chilean earthquakes
243
not account for the particular effects observed in subduction zone
earthquakes.
A new relation, Eq. (16), based on combining the expressions for
Arias intensity and displacements in a single pulse has been shown to
provide reproducible normalization of the computed sliding displace-
ments. Furthermore, it is a rational extension of the analytical solution
for sinusoidal pulses. When applied to recordings in different parts of
Chile from three different earthquakes, the new relation gives very
similar results. Limited application to records from the Chi Chi and
Northridge events also give similar results.
Acknowledgments
Alejandro Contreras and Patricio Pineda helped in obtaining the re-
cords, and Dr. Rodolfo Saragoni made his papers available.
244 A. Urzúa, J.T. Christian / Engineering Geology 166 (2013) 237–244

Appendix B. Regression results The bars over variables indicate the means. All the x terms are inde-
pendent of the normalization factor. Each of the y terms is as follows:
The dependent variables in the analyses presented in this paper
1X n
1X n
are the logarithms of the normalized displacement, that is each ðyi −yÞ ¼ μDi þ μA− μDi − μA
value is log10(D · A), where D is a displacement and A is a normaliz- n i¼1 n i¼1
ing factor. In the normalizations used in this paper each value of 1X n
¼ μDi þ μA− μDi −μA ðB:4Þ
D depends on the parameters of the earthquake and on the ratio n i¼1
ac/amax, but A is functionally independent of ac/amax. The following 1X n

notation is adopted: ¼ μDi − μDi

n i¼1

1. There are n values of ac/amax, and each is identified by a subscript i. Thus, each of the y terms in parentheses is also independent of the
Thus, i = 1,…, n. acceleration ratio, so the slope of the regression line is independent of
2. There are m accelerograms, each identified by the subscript j. Thus, the normalization factor.
j = 1,…, m. The intercept of the regression line is β0:
Note that the normalization factor A proposed in the paper is (Ka/IaT) β0 ¼ y−β1 x ðB:5Þ
in which Ka = amax/g, but it could be anything else so long as it does not
include dependence on the acceleration ratio ac/amax. In this expression y is clearly a function of the normalization factor,
For each value of i and j, the data point log10(D · A)ij = log10(Dij) + so the intercept is not independent of the normalization factor.
log10(Aj) because A is independent of the acceleration ratio and thus If we now consider not the means of the normalized displacements
does not require a subscript i. For each of the i values of acceleration expressed by Eq. (B.1) but their variances or standard deviations, the
ratio the mean of the logarithms of the normalized displacements, terms include products of the logarithms of Dij and Aj. Therefore, the
which we will call yi for conciseness, is terms corresponding to yi cannot be separated as they were for the
means. Thus, we expect that the results do depend on the normalization
factors.
1X m   1X m   1X m  
yi ¼ log10 Dij  A j ¼ log10 Dij þ log10 A j ðB:1Þ References
m j¼1 m j¼1 m j¼1
Ambraseys, N.M., Menu, J.M., 1988. Earthquake-induced ground displacements. Earthq.
Eng. Struct. Dyn. 16, 985–1006.
Araya, R., Saragoni, G.R., 1984. Earthquake accelerogram destructiveness potential factor.
Eighth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, San Francisco, CA, pp. 835–842.
Arias, A., 1970. “A measure of earthquake intensity”, Seismic Design for Nuclear Power
To simplify further the notation on the right hand side of this equa- Plants. In: Hansen, R.J. (Ed.), Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, Cambridge,
tion, call the first term μDi and the second μA, and call the acceleration MA, pp. 438–483.
ratio xi, or Arias, A., 1973. Earthquake intensity and smoothed earthquake spectra. Fifth World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Rome, paper 208.
Arias, A., 1993. “La intensidad sismica como magnitud tensorial”, discurso de incorporación
como miembro de número de la Academia de Ciencias del Instituto de Chile.

1X m   Bray, J.D., Travasarou, T., 2007. Simplified procedure for estimating earthquake-induced
μDi ¼ log10 Dij deviatoric slope displacements. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. ASCE 133 (4), 381–392.
m j¼1 Crespellani, T., Madiai, C., Vannucchi, G., 1998. Earthquake destructiveness potential
factor and slope stability. Geotechnique 49, 411–419.
1X m  
Hsieh, S.-Y., Lee, C.-T., 2011. Empirical estimation of the Newmark displacement from
μA¼ log10 A j ðB:2Þ Arias intensity and critical acceleration. Eng. Geol. 122, 34–42.
m j¼1
Jibson, R.W., 2007. Regression models for estimating coseismic landslide displacement.
yi ¼ μDi þ μ A Eng. Geol. 91, 209–218.
Newmark, Nathan M., 1965. Effects of earthquakes on dams and embankments.
xi ¼ ðac =a max Þi Geotechnique 15, 139–160.
Rathje, E.M., Saygili, G., 2008. Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis for the sliding displace-
ment of slopes: scalar and vector approaches. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. ASCE 134
(6), 804–814.
Rathje, E.M., Saygili, G., 2009. Probabilistic assessment of earthquake-induced sliding
We then fit a straight line through the i points defined by xi and displacements of natural slopes. Bull. N. Z. Soc. Earthq. Eng. 42 (1), 18–27.
Rathje, E.M., Faraj, F., Russell, S., Bray, J.D., 2004. Empirical relationships for frequency
yi. From linear regression theory the slope of the least-square error
content parameters of earthquake ground motions. Earthquake Spectra 20, 119–144.
fit is Saragoni, G.R., 2012. Earthquake Performance design of dams using destructiveness
potential factor. Second International Conference of Performance-Based Design in
Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering, Taormina, Italy.
X
n Saragoni, G.R., Hart, G.C., 1974. Simulation of artificial earthquakes. Earthq. Eng. Struct.
ðyi −yÞðxi −xÞ Dyn. 2, 249–267.
i¼1 Saygili, G., Rathje, E.M., 2008. Empirical predictive models for earthquake-induced sliding
β1 ¼ ðB:3Þ
X
n
2
displacements of slopes. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. ASCE 134 (6), 790–803.
ðxi −xÞ Yegian, M.K., Marciano, E.A., Ghahraman, V.G., 1991. Earthquake-induced permanent
i¼1 deformations: probabilistic approach. J. Geotech. Eng. ASCE 117, 35–50.