Seismic Site Effects on the French Riviera

Analysis by the Boundary Element Method
  • J.-F. Semblat
  • P. Dangla
  • A.-M. Duval
Conference paper
Part of the International Centre for Mechanical Sciences book series (CISM, volume 397)


The analysis of site effects through numerical approaches is interesting since it gives quantitative results on both following parameters : the amplification level and the location of its highest values. It is then possible to compare or improve (with) the experimental investigations concerning this phenomenon. In this paper, site effect is investigated considering boundary element method (in the frequency domain) and a pure plane SH wave as the seismic loading. The specific site considered is located in the center of Nice on the french Riviera. The influence of frequency and incidence is analyzed. In a second part, pure P-waves and SV-waves are considered. Shear waves (SH and SV) give higher amplification factors than pressure waves. The thickness of the layer, its general shape as well as the seismic wave type involved have a great influence on the maximum amplification factor and the frequency for which it occurs. These results are in good agreement with experimental ones.


Boundary Element Boundary Element Method Seismic Response Site Effect Alluvial Deposit 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bonnet, M. 1995. Integral equations and boundary elements (in French), CNRS Editions-Eyrolles, 316 p., Paris.Google Scholar
  2. Dangla, P. 1988. A plane strain soil-structure interaction model, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 16: 1115–1128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Dangla, P. 1989. Finite elements-integral equations coupling in elastodynamics and soil-structure, Ph.D. thesis (Ecole Nationale des Ponts et Chaussées), Paris.Google Scholar
  4. Duval, A.M. 1996. Determination of the seismic response of a site using microtremors. Experimental estimation, Ph.D. thesis (University Paris VI), Etudes et Recherches des L.P.C, GT62, L.C.P.C, Paris.Google Scholar
  5. Duval, A.M., Méneroud, J.P., Vidal, S. and Bard, P.Y. 1996. A new method for the estimation of seismic soil response by microtremor measurement (in French), Bulletin des Laboratoires des Ponts et Chaussées, 203: 75–90.Google Scholar
  6. Heitz, J.F. 1992. Waves propagation in non linear medium (in French). Ph.D. thesis (Grenoble University).Google Scholar
  7. Humbert, P. 1989. CESAR-LCPC : a general finite element code (in French), Bulletin des Laboratoires des Ponts & Chaussées, 160: 112–115.Google Scholar
  8. Pecker, A. 1984. Soils dynamics (in French), Presses de l’ENPC, 259 p., Paris.Google Scholar
  9. Semblat, J.F. 1997. Rheological interpretation of Rayleigh damping, Jal of Sound and Vibration 206(5): 741–744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Semblat, J.F. & Luong, M.P. 1998a. Wave propagation through soils in centrifuge testing, Jal of Earthquake Engineering 2(10): 147–171.Google Scholar
  11. Semblat, J.F. 1998b. Damping and dispersion of waves : physical and numerical points of view (in French), Revue Française de Génie Civil, 2(1): 91–111.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Wien 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • J.-F. Semblat
    • 1
  • P. Dangla
    • 1
  • A.-M. Duval
    • 2
  1. 1.Laboratoire Central des Ponts et ChausséesParisFrance
  2. 2.CETE MéditerranéeL.R.P.C.NiceFrance

Personalised recommendations