Analysis on the Bias of Seismic Ground Motion Prediction in a Shallow Stiff-Soil Site by LSSRL-1 Program


Article Preview

The main causes of the ground motion blind prediction bias are the variability of the adopted program, the shear-wave velocity of the site, and the soil nonlinear dynamic parameters. By considering the variability of shear-wave velocity and the dynamic parameters, this essay used LSSRLI-1 Codes and Mw6.0 seismic record of Parkfield earthquake to calculate ground responses of 9 different conditions at Turkey Flat site. The authors believe that the variability of shear-wave velocity caused the dominant impact to the blind prediction of this shallow stiff-soil site. That impact is much greater than that of the dynamic parameters. LSSRLI-1 program may either underestimate the ground response of the shallow stiff-soil site or may overestimate it, so we should combine the specific site conditions and a large amounts of data to do the further analysis.



Advanced Materials Research (Volumes 915-916)

Edited by:

Yun-Hae Kim




Z. S. Chen et al., "Analysis on the Bias of Seismic Ground Motion Prediction in a Shallow Stiff-Soil Site by LSSRL-1 Program", Advanced Materials Research, Vols. 915-916, pp. 18-21, 2014

Online since:

April 2014




* - Corresponding Author

[1] Annie O. L. Kwok, Jonathan P. Stewart, and Youssef M. A. Hashash; Nonlinear Ground-Response Analysis of Turkey Flat Shallow Stiff-Soil Site to Strong Ground Motion; Bulletin of  the Seismological Society  of  America, February 2008, vol. 98, pp.331-343.


[2] Toshimi Satoh, Toshiaki Sato, and Hiroshi Kawase ; Nonlinear behavior of soil sediments identified by using borehole records observed at the Ashigra Valley, Japan; Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, Vol. 85, No. 6, pp.1821-1834, December (1995).

[3] Chen Xueliang, Jin Xing, Tao Xiaxin et al. Inversion of waveforms from Xiangtang borehole seismic array for soil dynamic property. China; Acta Seismologica Sinica. 2007. 29(4), pp.400-408.


[4] Real, C. R. Turkey Flat, USA site effects test area: report 2, site characterization, Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology Tech. Rept. 88-2.

[5] Real, C. R., and C. H. Cramer (1989). Turkey Flat, USA Site Effects Test Area: Report 3: Weak-Motion Test: Prediction Criteria and Input Rock Motions, Calif. Div. Mines Geol. Tech. Rept. 89-1.