Missouri University of Science and Technology

Scholars' Mine
International Conferences on Recent Advances 2010 - Fifth International Conference on Recent
in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake
Soil Dynamics Engineering and Soil Dynamics

28 May 2010, 2:00 pm - 3:30 pm

Seismic Microzonation of the Texcoco Lake Area, Mexico

Luis Osorio Flores
Instituto de Ingeniería, UNAM, Mexico

Juan M. Mayoral Villa

Instituto de Ingeniería, UNAM, Mexico

Miguel P. Romo
Instituto de Ingeniería, UNAM, Mexico City, Mexico 04510

Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/icrageesd

Part of the Geotechnical Engineering Commons

Recommended Citation
Flores, Luis Osorio; Mayoral Villa, Juan M.; and Romo, Miguel P., "Seismic Microzonation of the Texcoco
Lake Area, Mexico" (2010). International Conferences on Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake
Engineering and Soil Dynamics. 13.
https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/icrageesd/05icrageesd/session06b/13

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.

This Article - Conference proceedings is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars' Mine. It has been
accepted for inclusion in International Conferences on Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering
and Soil Dynamics by an authorized administrator of Scholars' Mine. This work is protected by U. S. Copyright Law.
Unauthorized use including reproduction for redistribution requires the permission of the copyright holder. For more
information, please contact scholarsmine@mst.edu.
 SEISMIC MICROZONATION OF THE TEXCOCO LAKE AREA, MEXICO

Paper No. 6.10b

Luis Osorio Flores Juan M. Mayoral Villa and Miguel P. Romo

Instituto de Ingeniería, UNAM Instituto de Ingeniería, UNAM
Mexico City, Mexico 04510 Mexico City, Mexico 04510

ABSTRACT

This paper presents some of the most relevant results obtained from field, laboratory and analytical investigations aimed at
characterizing the seismic environment prevailing at the Texcoco lake region, in the Valley of Mexico, with the goal of developing a
microzonation. In particular, this study focuses on an area of 19.0 by 5.5 km2, which has been instrumented with four seismological
stations: TXSO, TXS1, TXS2 and TXCH that have recorded ground motions for at least 15 years. Field investigations were conducted
to define the subsoil conditions underneath each station. Dynamic testing in these high plasticity clays was carried out to establish the
variation of shear stiffness and damping with strain level. Ground motion definition was achieved through empirically derived
response spectra obtained from sets of earthquake ground motions recorded at a nearby station located in soft soil, which were
deconvolved to the base rock. An statistical analysis using random shear wave velocity profiles and an stochastic site response
analysis was used to developed sets of response spectra to reduce uncertainties associated with soil properties determination and
seismic environment characterization. The final proposed response spectra for each studied point were developed from the envelope
plus one standard deviation computed at each ground motion station. These spectra show good agreement both in frequency content
and spectral ordinates with those obtained directly from measurements taken at these seismological stations. Finally equations to
construct the proposed response spectra were proposed.

INTRODUCTION North-East. Figure 1, also shows the location of stations TXS1

and TXS2, and Table 1 presents their UTM coordinate.
Seeking to develop the Texcoco Lake seismic microzonation,
a research program has been undertaken to better characterize Station
key parameters such as 1) global seismicity of the region, 2) 0 5 km TXSO
local amplification effects, and 3) dynamic soil properties. The
work presented herein focuses mainly on the last two points.
The studied site has been instrumented with four
seismological stations (TXSO, TXS1, TXS2 and TXCH) as Texcoco Lake
depicted in fig. 1.
km
16.5

Station
DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDIED SITE TXS1
Transition
Station
2 TXS2
The studied site is nearly flat, has an area of 104.5 km , and is International
located in the North-Eastern portion of the old Texcoco Lake Airport
Mexico Station
(fig. 1), at about 12.6 km away, in average, from the Mexico TXCH
City
City International Airport. The closest station to the Airport
10.0 km
(TXCH) is located approximately at 10.0 km to the East,
whereas the further station (TXSO) is about 16.5 km to the
Fig. 1. Studied site location and layout of seismological
stations.

Paper No 6.10b 1
 Table 1. Geographic location of exploration borings undisturbed sampling recovery, and four Cone Penetration
Tests, CPT, conducted at each seismological station (Mayoral
UTM Coordinate et al., 2008a). The locations of the exploration borings are
Site presented in fig. 2. In addition, two piezocone tests were
X Y carried out at stations TXSO and TXCH to characterize the in
TXSO 498035.7898 2164895.3380 situ pore water pressure distribution. With the information
TXS1 502686.3378 2155489.8570 gathered, a cross section (A-A’, fig. 2) of the subsoil profile of
the studied zone was prepared (fig. 3). This idealized
TXS2 502683.0012 2155067.7120 representation of the underground conditions allows verifying
TXCH 505253.4481 2148537.5403 that the soil layers are fairly horizontal, thus one dimensional
wave propagation analyses can be used as a good
Information gathered from previous subsoil investigation have approximation to compute the site response.
shown that the soil profile at this zone presents a desiccated
crust of clay at the top extending up to a depth of 1.0 m, which
0 5 km SPT-1
is underlain by a soft clay layer approximately 25.0 m thick, A Depth: 50.0 m
with interbedded lenses of sandy silt and silty sands. The

51. T-1
water content of these materials usually ranged from 190 to

3m
CP
295 % and plasticity index varied from 139 to 265%.

:
Underlying the clay there is a 4.0 m thick layer of very dense

pth
De

ke
sandy silt, which rests on top of stiff clay layer which goes up

La
o
to a 60.0 m depth. Underneath this elevation a competent layer

oc
CPT-2

xc
of very dense sandy silts (more that 100 SPT bows/ft) is

Te
Depth: 60.3 m
found. Average representative values of shear wave velocity SPT-3 SPT-2
of clayey materials are reported to vary from 60 to 110 m/sec, Depth: 65.1 m Depth: 65.1 m
at the soft and stiff clay layers, respectively. Values of shear CPT-3
Depth: 60.7 m
wave velocity at the hard layers can be of the order of 500
m/sec or greater (Romo and Seed, 1886), overall shear wave International
velocity profiles vary smoothly with depth. Airport SPT-4
CPT-4
Depth: 50.4 m
Depth: 45.7 m
FIELD EXPLORATION A'

The field exploration is comprised by four, Standard Fig. 2. Layout of exploration borings and depths.
Penetration Test, SPT, borings combined with selected

Station Station Station Station

TXSO TXS1 TXS2 TXCH
2240
2230
Elevation (m)

2220
2210

2200
2190

2180
2170

2160
0+000 5+000 10+500 10+925 15+000 17+945
SYMBOLS
Clay Sand Silt Distance: m

Fig. 3. Schematic representation of the underground condition at cross section (A-A’), shown in fig. 2.

Shear wave velocity profiles qc

Clays and silts. Shear wave velocities for clays and silts were
estimated using the expression proposed by Ovando and
Romo (1991) in terms of the tip penetration resistance, qc,
measured with the Cone Penetration Test.
V s =η (1)
N kh γ s
where: Vs is the shear wave velocity, in m/s; qc is the tip cone
penetration resistance in ton/m2; γs is the unit weight of the
soil, in ton/m3; Nkh and η are dimensionless parameters that
depend on the soil type. For the clays found at the site

Paper No 6.10b 2
Mayoral et al. (2008b) obtained that Nkh =7.7 and η=37.5
using an optimization procedure where the differences
between estimated Vs and measured values (using the PS
suspension logging technique) were minimized.
Sands. The estimation of shear wave velocities for sands was
carried out using the empirical expression proposed by Seed et
al. (1983), which provided the closest values to the measured
response, using the parameters α= 61 and β= 0.5 also
previously determined by Mayoral et al. (2008b).
. γr is a fixed reference value of the shear strain corresponding
Vs = α (N1 )60
β
(2)
Where: Vs is the shear wave velocity, in m/s; (N1)60 is the
number of blow counts, measured with SPT, corrected by
energy and overburden pressure.
Gmin is cutoff shear stiffness associated with the failure of the
soil at large strains,
λmin is the value of the damping ratio for small angular
deformations (i.e. 10-4%),
λmax is the value of damping ratio for large deformations (i.e.
near dynamic failure),
H(γ) is a function that depends on soil angular deformation,
A and B are soils parameters that define the geometry of the
curve G-γ, which are a function of the plasticity index of the
soil,
to 50% of modulus degradation,
Ir is the relative consistency, which can be expressed in terms
of the liquidity index, Li, as Ir=1-Li,
wL, wN and PI are the liquid limit, water content and plasticity
index of the soil respectively.

Shear wave velocity, V (m/s) Shear wave velocity, V (m/s)

Both empirical expressions were used to obtain the shear wave S S

velocity profiles depicted in fig. 4a, for each studied point.

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Figure 4b shows the idealized representation of the shear wave
0
velocity distributions with depth for each exploration point.

LABORATORY TESTING

Disturbed and undisturbed samples were recovered and taken

-10
to the laboratory for determining their index and dynamic
properties. Series of resonant column and cyclic triaxial tests
were conducted to study the dynamic behaviour of the
geomaterials found at the site. From these tests, normalized
modulus degradation and damping curves were obtained.
-20

Normalized modulus degradation and damping curves

With the results obtained from the cyclic traxial and resonant
column tests carried out on twin samples, normalized modulus
-30
degradation and damping curves were generated. Figure 5
Depth (m)

shows some of the results gathered for borings TXS1, TXS2

and TXSO for depths ranging from 2.40 to 52 m.

These experimental results were fitted with dotted line in fig. 5

-40
a Masing type model proposed by Romo (1995), defined by
the following expressions:

G = (G min − G max )H (γ ) + G max (3)

-50
λ = (λ max − λ min )H (γ ) + λ min (4)

A´
 
H (γ ) =  γ  1 +  γ  
2B 2B
(5)
γ γ
 r   r  -60
TXSO TXSO

TXS1 TXS1
A´= I r + A (6)
TXS2 TXS2

TXCH TXCH
w − wN
Ir = L (7) 70
(a) (b)
PI
where: Fig. 4. Estimated shear wave velocity profiles (a) and
Gmax is small strain shear stiffness (i.e. 10-4%), idealized distribution (b) for exploration points.

Paper No 6.10b 3
 IDEALIZED PROFILES FOR ANALYSES
1
From the geotechnical information gathered at the studied site,
four idealized soil profiles for analyses were constructed (fig.
0.8
7). It can be clearly seen the presence of thick clay layers,
máx

randomly interbedded with sand and silt lenses, and the

Normalized Shear modulus, G/G

variation of the base rock depth. This may affect the seismic
response changing both the magnitude of spectral ordinates
0.6 Solid and dotted lines and frequency content.
= Romo’s model
0.10
TXS1, 4.80-5.00 m, 194, -0.44
TXS2, 4.20-4.40 m, 226, -0.03
0.4 Synthetic 3
TXS1, 25.60-25.80 m, 288, 0.20 0.05

Acceleration (g)
Rock-like
TXS2, 25.80-26.00 m, 229, 0.13
TXS1, 17.40-17.60 m, 204, 0.17
0.00
TXS2, 9.20-9.40 m, 201, -0.37
0.2 TXS1, 34.20-34.40 m, 135, -0.27
TXS1, 51.80-52.00 m, 51, 0.66 -0.05
TXSO, 2.40-2.60 m,210, 0.18
TXSO, 5.60-5.80 m, 150, -0.03
-0.10
0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
Time (s)
Shear strain, γ (%)
(a)
(a)
25 0.25

Synthetic 3
TXS1, 4.80-5.00 m, 194, -0.44 Spectral acceleration, Sa (g)
0.2
TXS2, 4.20-4.40 m, 226, -0.03 5 % damping
20 TXS1, 25.60-25.80 m, 288, 0.20
TXS1, 17.40-17.60 m, 204, 0.17
0.15
TXS2, 9.20-9.40 m, 201, -0.37
Damping ratio, λ (%)

TXS1, 34.20-34.40 m, 135, -0.27

15 TXS1, 51.80-52.00 m, 51, 0.66
0.1
TXSO, 2.40-2.60 m,210, 0.18
TXSO, 5.60-5.80 m, 150, -0.03

Solid and dotted lines 0.05

10
= Romo’s model

5 Period (s)
0
0.001 0.01
Shear strain, γ (%)
(b)
Fig. 5. Estimated and measured normalized shear modulus (a)
and damping (b) curves for soft clays.
Seismic environment
The input ground motion used to define the seismic
environment was taken from a previous investigation
(Mayoral et al., 2008b). The acceleration time history and its
response spectrum are presented in fig. 6.
0
0 1 2 3 4 5
(b)
Fig. 6. Input ground motion (a) and response spectrum (b) on
rock (after Mayoral et al., 2008b).
0.1 1 10
STOCHASTIC SITE RESPONSE ANALYSIS
The seismic response of each idealized soil profile, sites
TXSO, TXS1, TXS2 and TXCH, was obtained with the
program RADSH (Barcena and Romo, 1994). This program
uses the extreme value and random vibration theories to
compute the site response using as excitation a response or a
power spectrum instead of an acceleration time history,
considering the seismic ground movements as a Gaussian
process with zero mean. Physically this definition of seismic
environment is equivalent to consider an infinite number of
acceleration time histories with the same average frequency
content but with randomly distributed phases (Romo, 1976).

Paper No 6.10b 4
Analysis approach calibration the results of these analyses, as well as the mean and mean ±
one standard deviation (σ), which was considered as a base for
As part of the calibration, the predictions obtained for each developing the final recommended response spectra.
site were compared with those computed from a deterministic
analysis using the program SHAKE (Schnabel et al., 1972). 1
TXS1
The acceleration time history used in the SHAKE analysis was Deterministic (SHAKE)
already presented in fig. 6. The results and comparisons of Stochastic (RADSH)

Spectral acceleration, Sa (g)

0.8 Input motion
RADSH and SHAKE for sites TXS1 and TXS2 are shown in
fig. 8 and fig. 9. As can be seen in these figures, there is a very
good agreement between the results obtained with RADSH 0.6
and SHAKE. The program RADSH was used in the next
analysis stage to obtain the stochastic site response for each
0.4
site.

Station Station 0.2

TXSO TXS1
0 0
0
10 10 0 2 4 6 8 10
Period (s)
20 20
Fig. 8. Computed response spectra using RADSH and SHAKE
30 30 for site TXS1.
Depth (m)

40 40 1
TXS2
Deterministic (SHAKE)
50 50 Stochastic (RADSH)

Spectral acceleration, Sa (g)

0.8 Input motion
60 60

70 70 0.6

80 80
0.4
Station Station
TXS2 TXCH
0 0 0.2

10 10
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
20 20
Period (s)
30 30
Fig. 9. Computed response spectra using RADSH and SHAKE
Depth (m)

40 40 for site TXS2.

50 50 1.2
Profile-21 Profile-1
Profile-22 Profile-2
60 60 1
Profile-23 Profile-3
Profile-4
Profile-24
Spectral acceleration, Sa (g)

Profile-5
Profile-25 Profile-6
Mean
70 70 Mean + 1σ
Profile-7
Profile-8
0.8
Clay Sand Silt Mean - 1σ Profile-9
Profile-10
80 80 Profile-11
Profile-12
0.6 Profile-13
Fig. 7. Idealized soil profiles for 1D wave propagation Profile-14
Profile-15
analyses. 0.4
Profile-16
Profile-17
Profile-18
Profile-19
Profile-20
Analysis results 0.2

A total of 25 random shear wave velocity distributions were 0

generated an analyzed to account for potential uncertainties in 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Period (s)
the determination of shear wave velocities, changing the
measured values within a ±30 % band. The shear wave Fig. 10. Response spectra obtained of random soil profiles for
velocity profiles were modified randomly assuming that its site TXSO.
variation follows a uniform distribution. Figure 10 to 13 show

Paper No 6.10b 5
 1.2
Profile-21 Profile-1
characteristic of the measured ground motion considered to
Profile-22
Profile-23
Profile-2
Profile-3 develop the empirically derived response spectra. Normalized
1 Profile-4
Profile-24 response spectra of both horizontal components (north-south
Spectral acceleration , Sa (g)
Profile-5
Profile-25 Profile-6
Mean Profile-7
Profile-8
and east-west) of the seventeen signals recorded events were
0.8 Mean + 1σ
Mean - 1σ
Profile-9
Profile-10
deemed appropriated for this study. Each empirically derived
Profile-11
Profile-12 response spectrum was normalized with respect to the
0.6 Profile-13
Profile-14
Profile-15
corresponding peak ground acceleration, PGA. The final
Profile-16
Profile-17
response spectra were obtained from the envelope of all
0.4 Profile-18
Profile-19 components considered. All response spectra were scaled by a
Profile-20
PGA of 0.1g, which approximately corresponds to that
0.2
measured at the site during the 1985 Michoacán earthquake,
0
which was considered the worse probable scenario. The final
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 envelope spectrum of two of the studied sites (TXS1 and
Period (s) TXS2) are presented in fig. 14 along with the mean and mean
Fig. 11. Response spectra obtained of random soil profiles for + 1σ recommended response spectra. A reasonable
site TXS1. congruence in both frequency content and spectral ordinates of
the response spectra computed at station TXS1 and TXS2
1.2 from the stochastic analysis and those derived directly from
Profile-21 Profile-1
Profile-22 Profile-2
Profile-3
measurements can be noticed (fig. 14).
1 Profile-23
Profilel-4
Profile-24
Spectral acceleration, Sa (g)

Profile-5
Profile-25
Mean
Profile-6 Table 2. Measured ground motions considered to develop the
Profile-7
0.8 Mean +1σ
Mean -1σ
Profile-8
Profile-9
design earthquake
Profile-10
Profile-11
Profile-12
0.6 Profile-13
Profile-14
Profile-15 Epicen-
Profile-16
tral Soil
Site Event Ms PGA (gal)
0.4 Profile-17
Profile-18
Profile-19
distance type
Profile-20 (km)
0.2
25/OCT/81 7.3 311.97 Soft NS=-23.79;
clay EW=-28.32
TXSO

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 21/SEP/85 7.60 381.1 Soft NS=38.56;
Period (s)
clay EW=34.75
19/SEP/85 8.10 444.42 Soft NS=103.04;
Fig. 12. Response spectra obtained of random soil profiles for clay EW=-102.97
site TXS2. Soft NS=32.83;
30/SEP/99 7.5 442.79 clay EW=30.85
1.2
Profile-1 21/JUN/99 5.8 333.60 Soft NS=-6.18;
Profile-21
Profile-22 Profile-2 clay EW=-5.90
TXS1

Profile-3
1 Profile-23 Profile-4 Soft NS=33.64;
Spectral acceleration es, Sa (g)

Profile-24 Profile-5
Profile-6
15/JUN/99 6.50 211.83 clay EW=35.82
Profile-25
Profile-7
Mean
0.8 Mean + 1σ
Profile-8
Profile-9 20/ABR/98 Mb=5.9 266.03 Soft NS=2.94;
Mean - 1σ Profile-10
Profile-11
clay EW=-4.26
0.6
Profile-12
Profile-13 03/FEB/98 6.2 503.10 Soft NS=3.03;
Profile-14
Profile-15
clay EW=3.17
Profile-16
Profile-17 30/SEP/99 7.5 442.27 Soft NS=-24.80;
0.4
Profile-18
Profile-19
clay EW=18.54
Profile-20
Soft NS=3.80;
21/JUN/99 5.8 333.40 clay
0.2 EW=3.45
TXS2

15/JUN/99 6.50 211.55 Soft NS=-24.14;

0 clay EW=25.71
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Soft NS=2.29;
Period (s) 20/ABR/98 Mb=5.9 265.83 clay EW=-4.87
Fig. 13. Response spectra obtained of random soil profiles for Soft NS=-3.13;
site TXCH. 03/FEB/98 6.2 502.71 clay EW=2.67
07/JUN/82
7.0 353.74 Soft NS=-11.41;
Comparison with measured response (2) clay EW=12.19
07/JUN/82
6.9 365.94 Soft NS=-22.17;
TXCH

Comparison of computed response spectra with empirically (1) clay EW=14.30

derived response spectra were obtained from all the 24/OCT/80 Mb=6.4 169.80 Soft NS=-30.88;
clay EW=26.07
representative recordings existing at TXSO, TXS1, TXS2 and 14/MAR/7 Soft NS=31.86;
TXCH Stations, compiled in the Mexican Strong Ground 9
Mb=7.0 324.74 clay EW=-22.43
Motion Data Base (BMSF, 1996). Table 2; summarize the

Paper No 6.10b 6
 1
1
TXSO
TXS1

Spectral acceleration , Sa (g)

Mean + 1σ Mean+1σ
(Estimated) 0.8 Recommended
Spectral acceleration , Sa (g)
0.8
Envelope
(Measured)
0.6
0.6

0.4
0.4

0.2
0.2

0
0 1 2 3 4 5
0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Period (s)
Period (s) Fig. 15. Recommended acceleration response spectra for the
studied point TXSO.
1 1
TXS2 TXS1
Mean +1σ Mean+1σ

Spectral acceleration , Sa (g)

(Estimated) Recommended
Spectral acceleration , Sa (g)

0.8 0.8
Envelope
(Measured)

0.6 0.6

0.4
0.4

0.2
0.2

0
0 0 1 2 3 4 5
0 1 2 3 4 5 Period (s)
Period (s) Fig. 16. Recommended acceleration response spectra for the
studied point TXS1.
Fig. 14. Response spectra estimated and measured envelope in
sites TXS1 and TXS2. 1
TXS2
PROPOSED RESPONSE SPECTRA
Spectral acceleration , Sa (g)

Mean+1σ
0.8 Recommended
The proposed design response spectra were established in
terms of the computed response spectra corresponding to
0.6
mean+1σ values, as it is depicted in fig. 15 to 18. Only 60 %
of the spectral amplitude of the mean+1σ response spectra was
considered when developing the recommended spectra. 0.4

A 60 % reduction in the spectral ordinates of the mean + 1σ

response spectra is justified in terms of the transitory nature of 0.2
the ground motion, that leads to a minimum change in the
displacement response spectra, as can be noticed in fig. 19 to
22, that compares the displacement response spectrum 0
0 1 2 3 4 5
obtained for the mean + 1σ and for the recommended response Period (s)
spectrum.
Fig. 17. Recommended acceleration response spectra for
the studied point TXS2.

Paper No 6.10b 7
 1 0.14
TXCH TXS2 Mean+1σ.
Recommended

Spectral displacement , S (m)

Spectral acceleration , Sa (g) Mean+1σ 0.12
0.8 Recommended

D
0.1

0.6 0.08

0.06
0.4

0.04
0.2
0.02

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5

Period (s) Period (s)

Fig. 21. Recommended displacement response spectra for the
Fig. 18. Recommended acceleration response spectra for
studied point TXS2.
the studied point TXCH.
0.14
0.14 TXCH
TXSO Mean+1σ.

Spectral displacement , SD (m)

Recommended 0.12
Spectral displacement , SD (m)

0.12

0.1
0.1
0.08
0.08

0.06
0.06
0.04
0.04
0.02 Mean+1σ.
0.02 Recommended
0
0 0 1 2 3 4 5
0 1 2 3 4 5
Period (s)
Period (s)
Fig. 22. Recommended displacement response spectra for the
Fig. 19. Recommended displacement response spectra for the
studied point TXCH.
studied point TXSO.

0.12
TXS1 Mean+1σ. The recommended acceleration response spectra are defined
by the following equations:
Spectral displacement , SD (m)

0.1
Recommended

Sa = aO + (c − aO )
T
0.08 ; if T < Ta (8)
Ta

0.06
Sa = c ; if Ta ≤ T ≤ Tb (9)

0.04 r
T 
Sa = c b  ; if T > Tb (10)
0.02 T 

0 The parameters of expressions 8 to 10 are compiled in Table

0 1 2 3 4 5 3.
Period (s)
Fig. 20. Recommended displacement response spectra for the
studied point TXS1.

Paper No 6.10b 8
Table 3. Parameter values for recommended response spectra Romo M P. [1976]. Soil-structure interaction in a random
seismic environment, PhD dissertation, University of
California, Berkeley
Exploration c ao Ta1 Tb1 r
point Romo M. P. and Seed H. B. [1986]. “Analytical modeling of
dynamic soil response in the Mexico earthquake of September
TXSO 0.50 0.15 0.78 1.90 2.7 19, 1985”, Proceedings of the ASCE Specialty International
Conference on The Mexico Earthquakes 1985, Mexico City,
TXS1 0.50 0.15 0.78 2.76 4.2 pp 148 162, September
TXS2 0.42 0.13 0.53 3.10 4.6
Romo, M. P. [1995]. “Clay Behavior, Soil Response and Soil
TXCH 0.40 0.14 0.90 3.50 4.8 Structure In-teraction Studies in Mexico City”. Proceedings of
1 the Third Interna-tional Conference on Recent Advances in
Period in seconds Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics. San
Luis Missouri, USA, Vol 2, pp 1039-1051
CONCLUSIONS Seed H. B., Idriss M. I. and Arango I. [1983]. “Evaluation of
liquefaction potential using field performance data”. Journal
This paper describes the framework used to establish the of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE 109(3): pp
seismic environment of a particular area located within the 458-82
Texcoco lake region. This research involved field, laboratory
and analytical investigations. In particular, CPT and SPT Schnabel, P.B., Lysmer, J., and Seed, H.B. [1972]. SHAKE -
techniques were used to develop a representation of the A computer program for earthquake response analysis of
subsoil conditions. Normalized soil stiffness and damping horizontally layered soils. Report No. EERC-72/12, University
relationships were constructed performing resonant column of California, Berkeley
and triaxial tests in twin samples. Finally design spectra for
four different exploration points were proposed. The
recommended response spectra exhibit a change in wide band,
as well as in their spectral amplitude when these goes from
exploration point TXSO to TXCH, exemplifying the extent of
ground motion variability associated with the rapid changes in
subsoil conditions that prevail at the studied sites.

REFERENCES

Barcena A. And Romo M. P. [1994]. “RADSH – Programa de

computadora para analizar depósitos de suelos estratificados
horizontalmente sujetos a excitaciones dinámicas aleatorias”,
Informe Interno, Instituto de Ingeniería, UNAM

BMDSF [1996]. “Base Mexicana de Datos de Sismos Fuertes.

Actualización de los Catálogos de Estaciones a 1995 y
Acelerogramas a 1994”. Catálogo de los registros de los
temblores del 14 de septiembre, 9 y 21 de octubre de 1995,
SMIS, CD.

Mayoral J. M., Osorio L. and Romo M. P. [2008a].

“Microzonificación sísmica de la zona del Ex-Lago de
Texcoco”, Informe Interno, Instituto de Ingeniería, UNAM.

Mayoral, J. M., Romo M. P. and Osorio L. [2008b]. “Seismic

parameters characterization at Texcoco lake, Mexico”. Soil
Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Volume 28, Issue 7,
Pages 507-521, July

Ovando E. and Romo M. P. [1991]. “Estimación de la

velocidad de ondas S en la arcilla de la ciudad de México con
ensayos de cono”, Revista Sismodinámica, 2, 107 123

Paper No 6.10b 9