Journal of Seismology

, Volume 11, Issue 4, pp 355–370 | Cite as

Seismic microzonation of Dehradun City using geophysical and geotechnical characteristics in the upper 30 m of soil column

  • A. K. Mahajan
  • Siefko Slob
  • Rajiv Ranjan
  • Rob Sporry
  • P. K. Champati ray
  • Cees J. van Westen
Original Article


The understanding of geotechnical characteristics of near-surface material is of fundamental interest in seismic microzonation. Shear wave velocity (Vs), one of the most important soil properties for soil response modeling, has been evaluated through seismic profiling using the multichannel analysis of surface waves in the city of Dehradun situated along the foothills of northwest Himalaya. Fifty sites in the city have been investigated with survey lines between 72 and 96 m in length. Multiple 1-D and interpolated 2-D profiles have been generated up to a depth of 30–40 m. The Vs were used in the SHAKE2000 software in combination with seismic input motion of the recent Chamoli earthquake to obtain site response and amplification spectra. The estimated Vs are higher in the northern part of the study area (i.e., 200–700 m/s from the surface to a depth of about 30 m) as compared to the south and southwestern parts of the city (i.e., 180–400 m/s for the same depth range). The response spectra suggest that spectral acceleration values for two-story structures are three to eight times higher than peak ground acceleration at bedrock. The analysis also suggests peak amplification at 3–4, 2–2.5, and 1–1.5 Hz in the northern, central, and south-southwestern parts of the city, respectively. The spatial distributions of Vs and spectral accelerations provide valuable information for the seismic microzonation in different parts of the urban area of Dehradun.


Seismic microzonation Shear wave velocity (Vs) Spectral acceleration Response spectrum Multichannel analysis of surface waves (MASW) SHAKE2000 Northwest Himalaya 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aki K, Richards PG (1980) Quantitative seismology. Freeman, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  2. 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
  3. Arya AS (2000) Recent developments towards earthquake risk reduction in India. Curr Sci 79:1270–1277Google Scholar
  4. Auden JB (1936) The structures of the Himalaya in Garhwal. Rec Geol Surv India 71:409–433Google Scholar
  5. Bilham R, Gaur VK, Molnar P (2001) Himalayan seismic risk. Science 293:1442–1444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boore DM, Joyner WB, Fumal TE (1993) Estimation of response spectra and peak acceleration from western North American earthquakes, an interim report. Open file report 93-509. United States Geological Survey, Menlo ParkGoogle Scholar
  7. Borcherdt RD (1970) Effects of local geology on ground motion near San Francisco Bay. Bull Seismol Soc Am 60:29–61Google Scholar
  8. Borcherdt RD (1994) Estimation of site-dependant response spectra for design (methodology and justification). Earthq Spectra 10:617–653CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bullen KE (1963) An introduction to the theory of seismology, 3rd edn. Cambridge University Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  10. Celebi M, Prescott W, Stein R, Hudnut K, Behr J, Wilson S (2003) GPS monitoring of structures: recent advances. In: Kueppers AN, Zschau J (eds) Early warning systems for natural disaster reduction. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, p 710Google Scholar
  11. Dziewonski A, Blosch S, Landisman M (1969) A technique for the analysis of transient seismic signals. Bull Seismol Soc Am 59:427–444Google Scholar
  12. Finn, WDL (1991) Geotechnical engineering aspects of seismic microzonation. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on seismic zonation, vol 1. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, pp 199–250, 25–29 August 1991Google Scholar
  13. Gazetas G, Dakoulas P (1992) Seismic analysis and design of rockfill dams: state-of-the-art. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 11:27–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Herrmann RB (1973) Some aspects of band pass filtering of surface waves. Bull Seismol Soc Am 63:663–671Google Scholar
  15. Ivanov J, Park CB, Miller RD, Xia J (2000) Mapping poison’s ratio of unconsolidated materials from a joint analysis of surface-wave and refraction events. In: Proceedings of the symposium on the applications of geophysics to engineering and environmental problems, Arlington, 20–24 February 2000Google Scholar
  16. Kramer SL (1996) Geotechnical earthquake engineering. Prentice Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  17. Kumar S, Mahajan AK (1993) The Uttarkashi earthquake of 20th October 1991: field observations. Terra Nova 6:95–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mahajan AK, Virdi NS (2001) Macroseismic field generated by 29 March, 1999 Chamoli earthquake and its seismotectonics. J Asian Earth Sci 19:507–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mahajan AK, Mihilov V, Dojcinovski D (2002) A preliminary probabilistic seismic hazard assessment of northwest Himalaya. In: Paul DK, Kumar A, Sharma ML (eds) Proceedings of the 12th symposium on earthquake engineering. Phonix, New Delhi, pp 277–286Google Scholar
  20. Mahajan AK, Sporry, R, Chabak SK (2005) Shear wave velocity survey for seismic hazard zonation studies in Dehradun, India. In: Near Surface 2005, Palermo, 5–8 September 2005Google Scholar
  21. Middlemiss CS (1910) The Kangra earthquake of 4th April, 1905. Mem Geol Surv India 38:1–409Google Scholar
  22. Miller RD, Xia J, Park CB, Ivanov JM (1999) Multichannel analysis of surface waves to map bedrock. Lead Edge 18:1392–1396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mitchell, B (1973) Radiation and attenuation of waves from the southeastern Missouri earthquake of October 21, 1965. J Geophys Res 78:886–899Google Scholar
  24. Mooney HM, Bolt BA (1966) Dispersive characteristics of the first three modes for a single surface layer. Bull Seismol Soc Am 56:43–67Google Scholar
  25. Mundepi AK, Kamal (2006) Effective soft sediment thickness in Dehradun City using ground ambient vibrations. Himal Geol 27:183–188Google Scholar
  26. Nakata, T (1972) Geomorphic history and crustal movement of the foot-hills of the Himalayas, Sci. Report, Tohoku University, Japan, 7th Ser. Geography 22:39–177Google Scholar
  27. Nazarian S, Stokoe KH, Hudson WR (1983) Use of spectral analysis of surface wave method for determination of moduli and thickness of pavement. Transp Res Rec 930:38–45Google Scholar
  28. Nossin, JJ (1971) Outline of geomorphology of the Doon valley, northern UP. Z Geomorphol 12:18–50Google Scholar
  29. Park CB, Brohammer M (2003) SurfSeis 1.5V software for multichannel analysis of surface waves. Kansas Geological Survey, LawrenceGoogle Scholar
  30. Park, CB, Miller, RD, Xia J (1998) Imaging dispersion curves of surface waves on multichannel records. Technical programme with biographies, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, 68th Annual meeting, New OrleansGoogle Scholar
  31. Park CB, Miller RD, Xia, J (1999) Multichannel analysis of surface waves. Geophysics 64:800–808CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Park CB, Miller RD, Miura H (2002) Optimum field parameters of an MASW survey. Ext. Abstract, Society of Exploration Geophysicists of Japan, Tokyo, 22–23 May 2002Google Scholar
  33. Phillip G (1995) Active tectonics of Doon valley. Himal Geol 6:55–62Google Scholar
  34. Rautela P, Sati D (1996) Recent crustal adjustments in Dehradun valley, Western Uttar Pradesh, India. Curr Sci 71:776–780Google Scholar
  35. Romero MS, Rix GJ (2001) Ground motion amplification of soil in the Upper Mississippi Embayment (GIT/CEE/GEO-01-1). Georgia Institute of Technology, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Atlanta, pp 493Google Scholar
  36. Schnabel PB (1973) Effects of local geology and distance from source on earthquake ground motions. Ph.D. thesis, University of California, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  37. Schnabel PB, Lysmer J, Seed HB (1972) SHAKE: a computer program for earthquake response analysis of horizontally layered sites, report no. UCB/EERC-72/12. Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  38. Scott JB, Rasmussen T, Luke B, Taylor WJ, Wagoner JL, Smith SB, Louie, JN (2006) Shallow shear velocity and seismic microzonation of the urban Las Vegas, Nevada Basin. Bull Seismol Soc Am 96:1068–1077CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Seed HB, Idriss IM (1970) Soil moduli and damping factors for dynamic response analysis, report no. EERC 70-10. University of California, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  40. Seed HB, Wong RT, Idriss IM, Tokimatsu K (1986) Moduli and damping factors for dynamic analyses of cohesionless soils. J Geotech Eng 112:1016–1032Google Scholar
  41. Singh AK, Prakash B, Manchanda M (2004) Tectonic geomorphology of the Dehradun valley using digital terrain model and optically stimulated luminescence dating. Himal Geol 25:59–78Google Scholar
  42. Slob S, Hack R, Scarpas T, van Bemmelen B, Duque A (2002) A methodology for seismic microzonation using GIS and SHAKE—a case study from Armenia, Colombia. Cited 1 June 2004
  43. Street R, Wooley EW, Wang Z, Harris, JB (2001) NEHRP soil classification for estimating site dependant seismic coefficients in the Upper Mississippi Embayment. Eng Geol 62:123–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sun JI, Golesorkhi R, Seed HB (1988) Dynamic moduli and damping ratios for cohesive soils, report no. EERC 88–15. University of California, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  45. Thakur VC (1995) Geology of Dun Valley, Garhwal Himalaya: neotectonics and coeval deposition with fault—propagation folds. J Himal Geol 6(2):1–8Google Scholar
  46. Thakur VC, Pandey AK (2004) Late quarternary tectonic evolution of Dun in fault bend/propagated fold system, Garhwal Sub-Himalaya. Curr Sci 87:1567–1576Google Scholar
  47. Tian G, Steeples DW, Xia J, Miller RD (2003) Multichannel analysis of surface wave method with the autojuggie. Soil Dyn Earthqu Eng 23:243–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tsai YB, Aki K (1969) Simultaneous determination of the seismic moment and attenuation of seismic surface waves. Bull Seismol Soc Am 59:275–288Google Scholar
  49. Vucetic M, Dobry R (1991) Effect of soil plasticity on cyclic response. J Geotech Eng 117:89–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Xia J, Miller RD, Park CB (1999) Estimation of near surface shear wave velocity by inversion of wave. Geophysics 64:691–700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Xia J, Miller RD, Park CB, Ivanov J (2000) Construction of 2-D vertical shear wave velocity field by the multichannel analysis of surface wave technique. In: Proceedings of the symposium on the application of geophysics to engineering and environmental problems, Arlington, 20–24 February 2000Google Scholar
  52. Xia J, Miller RD, Park CB, Hunter JA, Herris JB, Ivanov J (2002) Comparing shear wave velocity profiles inverted from multichannel surface waves with borehole measurement. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 22:181–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. K. Mahajan
    • 1
  • Siefko Slob
    • 2
  • Rajiv Ranjan
    • 3
  • Rob Sporry
    • 2
  • P. K. Champati ray
    • 4
  • Cees J. van Westen
    • 2
  1. 1.Wadia Institute of Himalayan GeologyDehradunIndia
  2. 2.International Institute for Geo-information Science and Earth Observation (ITC)EnschedeThe Netherlands
  3. 3.RMSINoidaIndia
  4. 4.Indian Institute of Remote SensingDehradunIndia

Personalised recommendations