Site Response Impacts of the Memphis Sand Layer within the Mississippi Embayment
Publication: Geo-Extreme 2021
ABSTRACT
In this study, the site response impacts of accurately characterizing and resolving the Memphis sand layer at the Central United States Seismic Observatory (CUSSO) site are explored. The Memphis sand, also known as the “500 ft sand,” is a major shallow impedance contrast in the Mississippi Embayment, influencing the site response estimates across the embayment. However, the Mississippi Embayment’s available velocity information, including the Central United States Seismic Velocity Model, often does a poor job of properly identifying the depth and impendence contrast associated with the Memphis sand layer. To understand the impacts of the Memphis sand layer on site response estimates, a parametric study using linear viscoelastic transfer function and nonlinear site response analysis is performed on a suite of shear-wave velocity (VS) profiles with varying depths to the Memphis sand and varying formation velocity of the Memphis sand. The linear and nonlinear site response results indicate that varying the depth and VS of the Memphis Sand layer within reasonable ranges can significantly impact site response results, with a variation of 10%–30% observed for periods less than 1.0 s. However, the largest variations are observed at periods between 1.0 and 2.0 s with variations of up to 45%. This highlights the need to properly resolve shallow impedance contrast, such as the Memphis Sand in the Mississippi embayment, for site response analyses.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this chapter.
REFERENCES
AASHTO. 2011. Guide Specifications for LRFD Seismic Bridge Design, 2nd Ed., Washington, D.C.
Cox, B. R., Ellis, T. B., and Griffiths, S. C. 2012. Site-Specific Ground Motion Analyses for Transportation Infrastructure in the New Madrid Seismic Zone,.
Darendeli, M. 2001. Development of a New Family of Normalized Modulus Reduction and Material Damping Curves, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Texas, Austin, Texas.
Field, E., and Jacob, K. 1993. The theoretical response of sedimentary layers to ambient seismic noise, Geophys. Res. Lett. 20, 2925–2928.
Hashash, M. A., and Park, D. 2001. Non-linear one-dimensional seismic ground motion propagation in the Mississippi Embayment, Engineering Geology 62, 185–206.
Hashash, Y. M. A., Musgrove, M. I., Harmon, J. A., Ilhan, O., Xing, G., Groholski, D. R., Phillips, C. A., and Park, D. 2020. DEEPSOIL 7.0, User Manual. Urbana, IL, Board of Trustees of University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Himel, A. 2018. Utilizing the HVSR Second Peak for Surface Wave Inversions in the Mississippi Embayment, Masters Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR.
Heo, Y., Kunnath, S., and Abrahamson, N. 2011. Amplitude-Scaled versus Spectrum-Matched Ground Motions for Seismic Performance Assessment, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, 137, 278–288.
Kramer, S. L. 1996. Geotechnical earthquake engineering. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
McGuire, R. K., Silva, W. J., and Costantino, C. J. 2001. Technical Basis for Revision of Regulatory Guidance on Design Ground Motions: Hazard- and Risk- consistent Ground Motion Spectra Guidelings, NUREG/CR – 6728. https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0131/ML013100012.pdf.
Phillips, C., and Hashash, Y. M. A. 2009. Damping formulation for nonlinear 1D site response analyses, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29(7), 1143–1158.
Ramírez‐Guzmán, L., Boyd, O., Hartzell, S., and Williams, R. 2012. Seismic velocity model of the central United States (Version 1): Description and simulation of the 18 April 2008 Mt. Carmel, Illinois, Earthquake, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 102, 2622–2645.
Rosenblad, B., Bailey, J., Csontos, R., and Van Arsdale, R. 2010. Shear Wave Velocities of Mississippi Embayment Soils from Low Frequency Surface Wave Measurements, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 30, 691–701.
Van Arsdale, R. B., and TenBrink, R. K. 2000. Late Cretaceous and Cenozoic Geology of the New Madrid Seismic Zone, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 90, 345–356.
Wood, C. M., and Baker, E. R. B. 2018. Cost Savings of Implementing Site-Specific Ground Motion Response Analysis in the Design of Short-Period Mississippi Embayment Bridges, Earthquake Spectra 34(3), 1155–1175.
Wood, C. M., and Himel, A. K. 2019. Development of deep shear wave velocity profiles at seismic stations in the Mississippi embayment, USGS Award No. G18AP00078. https://doi.org/10.17603/ds2-be10-q668.
Himel, A. K., and Wood, C. M. 2021. Developing an Updated Set of VS Profiles for the Central United States Seismic Observatory with Estimates of Uncertainty between Different Methods, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2021.106594.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
© 2021 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Published online: Nov 4, 2021
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.