Geology and topography based Vs30 map for Sylhet City of Bangladesh

  • Md. Zillur Rahman
  • Sumi SiddiquaEmail author
  • A. S. M. Maksud Kamal
Original Paper


Time-averaged shear wave velocity of the soil layers to a depth of 30 m (Vs30) is primarily estimated by different geophysical and geotechnical site investigation techniques, such as downhole and crosshole seismics (DS and CS), spectral analysis of surface waves (SASW), multichannel analysis of surface waves (MASW), and the standard penetration test (SPT). Sufficiently dense field measurements of the Vs30 using these techniques are not feasible for VS30 mapping at a regional scale. Therefore, secondary information, such as geological and topographical constrains are used as proxies to predict the Vs30 for mapping purposes. In the present study, a Vs30 map for Sylhet City has been prepared based on the geological and topographical constrains. The map has five Vs30 units having a distinct mean Vs30 value for each unit. This Vs30 map can be used as an effective proxy to estimate site response of the soil layers in Sylhet City.


Vs30 Site response Geology Topography Sylhet city 



The authors would like to acknowledge the support from the University of British Columbia (UBC) for this study through the University Graduate Fellowship (UGF). The support from the Comprehensive Disaster Management Program (CDMP), Bangladesh, for collecting the data is highly appreciated. The authors are also grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their constructive inputs to improve the article.


  1. Abrahamson N, Silva W (2008) Summary of the Abrahamson & Silva NGA ground-motion relations. Earthquake Spectra 24:67–97. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alam MK, Hasan AKMS, Khan MR, Whitney JW (1990) Geological map of Bangladesh. Geological Survey of Bangladesh, DhakaGoogle Scholar
  3. Ambraseys NN, Douglas J (2004) Magnitude calibration of north Indian earthquakes. Geophys J Int 159:165–206. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anderson JG, Lee Y, Zeng Y, Day S (1996) Control of strong motion by the upper 30 meters. Bull Seismol Soc Am 86:1749–1759Google Scholar
  5. Athanasopoulos GA (1995) Empirical correlations Vso-NSPT for soils of Greece: A comparative study of reliability. In: Proc. of 7th Int. Conf. on Soil Dyn. Earthquake Engg. pp 19–25Google Scholar
  6. Bard PY, Cadet H, Endrun B, et al (2010) From non-invasive site characterization to site amplification: recent advances in the use of ambient vibration measurements. In: Garevski M, Ansal A (eds) Earthquake engineering in Europe, geotechnical, geological, and earthquake engineering. pp 105–123Google Scholar
  7. Bilham R (2009) The seismic future of cities. Bull Earthq Eng 7:839–887CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bilham R, Hough S (2006) Future earthquakes on the Indian subcontinent: inevitable hazard, preventable risk. South Asian Journal 12:1–9Google Scholar
  9. Boore DM, Atkinson GM (2008) Ground-motion prediction equations for the average horizontal component of PGA, PGV, and 5%-damped PSA at spectral periods between 0.01 s and 10.0 s. Earthquake Spectra 24:99–138. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Boore DM, Brown LT (1998) Comparing shear-wave velocity profiles from inversion of surface-wave phase velocities with downhole measurements: systematic differences between the CXW method and downhole measurements at six USC strong-motion sites. Seismol Res Lett 69:222–229. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Boore DM, Joyner W, Fumal TE (1993) Estimation of response spectra and peak acceleration from Western North American Earthquakes: an interim reportGoogle Scholar
  12. Borcherdt RD (1994) Estimates of site-dependent response spectra for design. Earthquake Spectra 10:617–653CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. BSSC (1994) NEHRP recommended provisions for seismic regulations for new buildings. Part 1 (provisions). FEMA 222A, Building Seismic Safety Council, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  14. BSSC (1998) NEHRP recommended provisions for seismic regulations for new buildings and other structures. Part 1 (provisions) and Part 2 (commentary), FEMA 302/303, Building Seismic Safety Council, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  15. BSSC (2015) NEHRP recommended seismic provisions for new buildings and other structures. Part 1 (provisions) and Part 2 (commentary), FEMA P-1050-1, Building Seismic Safety Council, Federal Emergency Management Agency. Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  16. Campbell KW, Bozorgnia Y (2008) NGA ground motion model for the geometric mean horizontal component of PGA, PGV, PGD and 5% damped linear elastic response spectra for periods ranging from 0.01 to 10 s. Earthquake Spectra 24:139–171. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Castro RR, Rebollar CJ, Inzunza L et al (1997) Direct body-wave Q estimates in northern Baja California, Mexico. Phys Earth Planet Inter 103:33–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. CDMP (2009) Seismic hazard and vulnerability assessment of Dhaka, Chittagong and Sylhet city corporation areas. Final report, Comprehensive Disaster Management Programme, Ministry of Food and Disaster Management, Dhaka, BangladeshGoogle Scholar
  19. Chiou BSJ, Youngs RR (2008) An NGA model for the average horizontal component of peak ground motion and response spectra. Earthquake Spectra 24:173–215. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dikmen Ü (2009) Statistical correlations of shear wave velocity and penetration resistance for soils. J Geophys Eng 6:61–72. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dobry R, Borcherdt RD, Crouse CB et al (2000) New site coefficients and site classification system used in recent building seismic code provisions. Earthquake Spectra 16:41–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Foti S, Parolai S, Bergamo P et al (2011) Surface wave surveys for seismic site characterization of accelerometric stations in ITACA. Bull Earthq Eng 9:1797–1820. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Foti S, Lai C, Rix G, Strobbia C (2014) Surface wave methods for near-surface site characterization. CRC Press, Boca RatonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fujiwara T (1972) Estimation of ground movements in actual destructive earthquakes. In: Proceedings of the Fourth European Symposium on Earthquake Engineering. London, pp 125–132Google Scholar
  25. Fumal TE (1978) Correlations between seismic wave velocities and physical properties of near-surface geologic materials in the southern San Francisco Bay region, California. U S Geological Survey Open-file report 78–1067Google Scholar
  26. Hanumantharao C, Ramana GV (2008) Dynamic soil properties for microzonation of Delhi, India. Journal of Earth System Science 117:719–730CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hayashi K, Suzuki H (2004) CMP cross-correlation analysis of multi-channel surface-wave data. Explor Geophys 35:7–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hayashi K, Inazaki T, Suzuki H (2005) Buried channel delineation using microtremor array measurements. In: SEG/Houston 2005 Annual Meeting. pp 1137–1141Google Scholar
  29. Hossain MS, Kamal ASMM, Rahman MZ et al (2014) Predominant period and amplification factor estimation with respect to geomorphology - a case study of Sylhet city corporation area, Bangladesh. Bangladesh J Sci Res 27:1–10. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. ICC (2015) International building code 2015. International Code Council, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  31. Idriss IM, Eeri M (2008) An NGA empirical model for estimating the horizontal spectral values generated by shallow crustal earthquakes. Earthquake Spectra 24:217–242. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Imai T (1977) P and S wave velocities of the ground in Japan. In: Proceeding of IX International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. pp 127–132Google Scholar
  33. Imai T, Tonouchi K (1982) Correlation of N-value with S-wave velocity and shear modulus. In: Proceedings of the 2nd European Symposium of Penetration Testing. Amsterdam, pp 57–72Google Scholar
  34. Kiku H, Yoshida N, Yasuda S, et al (2001) In-situ penetration tests and soil profiling in Adapazari, Turkey. In: Proceedings of the ICSMGE/TC4 Satellite Conference on Lessons Learned From Recent Strong Earthquakes. pp 259–265Google Scholar
  35. Martin G, Dobry R (1994) Earthquake site response and seismic code provisions. NCEER Bulletin 8:1–6Google Scholar
  36. Mayne PW, Coop MR, Springman SM, et al (2009) Geomaterial behavior and testing Comportement et essai de Geomaterial. In: Proc. 17th Intl. Conf. Soil Mechanics & Geotechnical Engineering. Alexandria, Egypt, pp 2777–2872Google Scholar
  37. Mhaske SY, Choudhury D (2011) Geospatial contour mapping of shear wave velocity for Mumbai city. Nat Hazards 59:317–327. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Morino M, Kamal ASMM, Muslim D et al (2011) Seismic event of the Dauki fault in 16th century confirmed by trench investigation at Gabrakhari Village, Haluaghat, Mymensingh, Bangladesh. J Asian Earth Sci 42:492–498. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Morino M, Kamal ASMM, Akhter SH et al (2014) A paleo-seismological study of the Dauki fault at Jaflong, Sylhet, Bangladesh: historical seismic events and an attempted rupture segmentation model. J Asian Earth Sci 91:218–226. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Naik SP, Patra NR, Malik JN (2014) Spatial distribution of shear wave velocity for late quaternary alluvial soil of Kanpur city, northern India. Geotech Geol Eng 32:131–149. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Nakamura Y (1989) A Method for dynamic characteristics estimation of subsurface using microtremor on the ground surface. Quarterly Report of Railway Technical Research Institute (RTRI) 30(1), JapanGoogle Scholar
  42. Nazarian S, Stokoe KHI, Hudson WR (1983) Use of spectral analysis of surface waves method for determination of moduli and thicknesses of pavement systems: transport. Res Record 930:38–45Google Scholar
  43. Ohta Y, Goto N (1978) Empirical shear wave velocity equations in terms of characteristics soil indexes. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 6:167–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Okada H (2003) The microtremor survey method. Geophys monograph series, SEGGoogle Scholar
  45. Oldham RD (1899) Report on the Great Earthquake of 12th June 1897. Mem. Geol. Surv. India 29Google Scholar
  46. Park S, Elrick S (1998) Predictions of shear-wave velocities in southern California using surface geology. Bull Seismol Soc Am 88:677–685Google Scholar
  47. Park CB, Miller RD (2008) Roadside passive multichannel analysis of surface waves (MASW). J Environ Eng Geophys 13:1–11. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Park CB, Miller RD, Xia J (1999) Multichannel analysis of surface waves. Geophysics 64:800–808.
  49. Park CB, Miller RD, Ryden N et al (2005) Combined use of active and passive surface waves. J Environ Eng Geophys 10:323–334.
  50. Rahman MZ, Siddiqua S (2017) Evaluation of liquefaction-resistance of soils using standard penetration test, cone penetration test, and shear-wave velocity data for Dhaka, Chittagong, and Sylhet cities in Bangladesh. Environ Earth Sci 76:207. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Rahman MZ, Siddiqua S, Kamal ASMM (2015) Liquefaction hazard mapping by liquefaction potential index for Dhaka City, Bangladesh. Eng Geol 188:137–147. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Rahman MZ, Siddiqua S, Kamal ASMM (2016) Shear wave velocity estimation of the near-surface materials of Chittagong City, Bangladesh for seismic site characterization. J Appl Geophys 134:210–225. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Rahman MZ, Hossain MS, Kamal ASMM et al (2017) Seismic site characterization for Moulvibazar town, Bangladesh. Bull Eng Geol Environ.
  54. Rahman MZ, Kamal ASMM, Siddiqua S (2018) Near-surface shear wave velocity estimation and Vs 30 mapping for Dhaka City, Bangladesh. Nat Hazards.
  55. Schmertmann JH (1979) Statics of SPT. J Geotech Eng Div 105:655–670Google Scholar
  56. Socco LV, Foti S, Boiero D (2010) Surface-wave analysis for building near-surface velocity models: established approaches and new perspectives. Geophysics 75:75A83–75A102. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Steckler MS, Mondal DR, Akhter SH et al (2016) Locked and loading megathrust linked to active subduction beneath the indo-Burman ranges. Nat Geosci 9:615–618. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Szeliga W, Hough S, Martin S, Bilham R (2010) Intensity, magnitude, location, and attenuation in India for felt earthquakes since 1762. Bull Seismol Soc Am 100:570–584. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Thompson EM, Wald DJ, Worden CB (2014) A VS30 map for California with geologic and topographic constraints. Bull Seismol Soc Am 104:2313–2321. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Tian G, Steeples DW, Xia J et al (2003) Multichannel analysis of surface wave method with the autojuggie. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 23:243–247. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Wald DJ, Allen TI (2007) Topographic slope as a proxy for seismic site conditions and amplification. Bull Seismol Soc Am 97:1379–1395. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Wang Y, Sieh K, Tun ST et al (2014) Active tectonics and earthquake potential of the Myanmar region. J Geophys Res Solid Earth 119:3767–3822. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Wills CJ, Clahan KB (2006) Developing a map of geologically defined site-condition categories for California. Bull Seismol Soc Am 96:1483–1501. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Wills CJ, Gutierrez CI, Perez FG, Branum DM (2015) A next generation Vs30 map for California based on geology and topography. Bull Seismol Soc Am 105:3083–3091. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Xia J, Miller RD, Park CB et al (2002) Comparing shear-wave velocity profiles inverted from multichannel surface wave with borehole measurements. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 22:181–190. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Yeats RS, Sieh K, Allen CR (1997) The geology of earthquakes. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  67. Yong A, Hough SE, Iwahashi J, Braverman A (2012) A terrain-based site-conditions map of California with implications for the contiguous United States. Bull Seismol Soc Am 102:114–128. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EngineeringThe University of British ColumbiaKelownaCanada
  2. 2.Department of Disaster Science and ManagementUniversity of DhakaDhaka 1000Bangladesh

Personalised recommendations