Dynamic soil properties for microzonation of Delhi, India

C Hanumantharao1,∗ and G V Ramana2,∗∗

1
Civil Engineering Group, Birla Institute of Technology and Science Pilani, Pilani 333 031, India.
2
Civil Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi 110 016, India.
∗
e-mail: hrao@bits-pilani.ac.in
∗∗
e-mail: ramana@civil.iitd.ac.in

Delhi, the capital of India, has experienced mild seismic shaking during several earthquakes in
the past. The large variations of depth to bedrock and ground water table coupled with different
soil types at different locations of Delhi necessitate a seismic microzonation study. Dynamic soil
properties such as shear wave velocity, modulus reduction and damping characteristics of local soils
are the basic and essential input parameters for conducting even a preliminary ground response
analysis which is an essential input in microzonation studies. Shear wave velocity is not measured
routinely due to its high cost and lack of the required expertise. Several researchers in the past
developed correlations between shear wave velocity (Vs ) and routinely measured N values. In the
present study, shear wave velocity profiles measured in the field at more than 80 borehole locations
to a depth of about 20 to 32 m using Spectral Analysis of Surface Waves (SASW) are presented and
correlations between shear wave velocity and N values are also presented for use by engineers and
designers. Results of strain and stress controlled cyclic triaxial tests on remoulded samples of sand-
silt mixtures in the high strain range are used for generating the modulus reduction and damping
curves and are compared with the well-known curves in the literature. The results presented in
this article can be used for microzonation studies as well as site specific ground response analyses
at Delhi.

1. Introduction of built environment that takes into account the

behaviour of local soil deposits reduces the loss of
The extensive loss of life and damage caused by life and damage to infrastructure.
the recent earthquakes (Uttarkashi (1991, Mw 7.0), Shear wave velocity or shear modulus at very
Jabalpur (1997, Mw 5.8), Chamoli (1999, Mw 6.5), low strains is the most important input para-
and Bhuj (2001, Mw 7.6)) has demonstrated the meter in the analysis of engineering problems
seismic hazard being faced by India. If a major city involving earthquake engineering, particularly in
like Delhi is subjected to such earthquakes, it would microzonation studies. It is widely accepted that
certainly result in higher devastation and major the shear wave velocity profile of a site is a fun-
loss of life. Several earthquakes of magnitudes rang- damental parameter to estimate the site-specific
ing from 3 to 7.7 have been observed in and around amplification factor. In most geotechnical investi-
Delhi during the past three centuries (Srivastava gation programs, dynamic in situ tests are usu-
and Somayajulu 1966; Parvez et al 2004). Delhi lies ally not conducted due to cost considerations and
in seismic zone IV as per the seismic hazard map of lack of specialized personnel. For this reason many
India (IS: 1893–2002) with an expected zero period attempts have been made in the past to correlate
acceleration of 0.24 g. It has been a well established values of shear wave velocity (Vs ) or shear modulus
fact that a detailed dynamic analysis and design to other readily available soil parameters such as N

Keywords. Shear wave velocity; modulus reduction curves; damping curves.

J. Earth Syst. Sci. 117, S2, November 2008, pp. 719–730

© Printed in India. 719
720 C Hanumantharao and G V Ramana

Geophysical methods are based on the fact that

the velocity of propagation of a wave in an elastic
body is a function of the modulus of elasticity, Pois-
son’s ratio and density of the material (Hvorslev
1949). Methods employing wave propagation prin-
ciples in determining Vs variation with depth is
either intrusive or non-intrusive. Spectral Analysis
of Surface Waves (SASW) method (Nazarian and
Stokoe 1984), a non-intrusive and non-destructive
testing technique is used in the present study to
measure Vs . Comparison of SASW test results with
those of crosshole, downhole, and suspension logs
at the same test sites have been reported in the
literature (Nazarian and Stokoe 1984; Dennis et al
1988; Stokoe et al 1988, 1999; Brown et al 2002)
and the difference in measured shear wave velocity
results between these methods is of the order of
10 to 15 per cent. In general, SASW results were
reported to be on the lower side at the surface
(Brown et al 2002).
The SASW method is an established method
for measuring shear wave velocity and is being
increasingly used. This test comprises three steps,
namely: (i) field testing (ii) dispersion calcula-
tions, and (iii) inversion. A detailed description
Figure 1. Geological map of Delhi (modified from Parvez
et al 2004). of the test procedures, factors affecting the results
and the details on inversion processes are well doc-
umented in literature (e.g., Nazarian and Stokoe
value. Several empirical equations have been pro- 1984; Ignacio et al 1987; Salinero et al 1987; Stokoe
posed for estimating the shear wave velocity by use et al 1999; Rao and Ramana 2004). In the cur-
of several soil indexes, so as to avoid in situ mea- rent work, as a first approximation in the inversion
surement and also to examine the physical relation process, the thickness of the layer is assumed to be
between soil indices and shear wave velocity. The approximately equal to half of the wavelength and
most common relations are based on the N value shear wave velocity as approximately 1.1 times the
obtained from the standard penetration test. On phase velocity. By trial and error, attempts were
similar lines, empirical correlations are developed made to obtain a close match between the theo-
between shear wave velocity and N values for sands retical and experimental curve (Joh 1992). In the
and silty sand/sandy slit to represent the two pre- inversion process, a Poisson’s ratio of 0.33 is con-
dominant types of soils encountered in Delhi, as sidered for the soils above ground water table and
shown in figure 1. compression wave velocity of 1500 m/s is adopted
It is also widely accepted that the shear mod- for the soils below ground water table (Ignacio et al
ulus and damping ratio of soils is a function of 1987; Rix et al 1991; Brown et al 2002). The unit
the amplitude of shear strain under cyclic loading. weight of the soil is taken from the nearest bore-
Modulus reduction and damping curves of local hole. Typical shear wave velocity measured at three
soils are an essential input for carrying out ground representative sites is shown in figure 2.
response analysis using the most commonly used
equivalent linear technique. Hence strain depen-
dent modulus reduction and damping curves are 3. Standard penetration tests
generated using cyclic triaxial tests for different
sand-silt mixtures. More than 2000 borelogs are available at several
locations for Delhi from various public as well as
private organizations. However, a large scatter was
2. Measurement of shear wave observed between the results from different agen-
Vs )
velocity (V cies at the same test location and the reported
N value is not consistent between different orga-
In situ measurement of Vs using geophysical nizations. In view of this, no attempts were made
methods is the best method for measuring the low for developing the regression correlation based on
strain shear modulus, Gmax (Rollins et al 1998b). the entire dataset and N values from locations
 Dynamic soil properties for Delhi 721

Figure 2. Typical SPT borelogs and shear wave velocity profiles used for Vs –N correlation (Vs is in m/s, depth is in m,
CL: clayey silt, SP-SM: fine sand with mica, SP: fine sand, MI: sandy silt, and SM: silty fine sand).

where tests were conducted under the supervision are comprehensively summarized in table 1. These
of Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi only are relations are often expressed in the following form:
used.
Standard penetration tests are conducted in the
boreholes of 150 mm diameter and were advanced Vs = AN B , (1)
using shell and auger method in accordance with
IS: 1892–1979. SPT values are measured at 1.5 m where A, B are constant parameters and are often
depth intervals by connecting a split spoon sampler accompanied by a correlation coefficient R. Usu-
to A-rods and a 63.5 kg hammer falling freely from ally the trend observed is that if A increases B
a height of 750 mm is used to drive it to 450 mm decreases for the same type of soil (Ohsaki and
penetration. All the tests are conducted in accor- Iwasaki 1973; Imai 1977; Ohta and Goto 1978; Imai
dance with IS: 2131–1981. The number of blows and Tonouchi 1982).
for each 150 mm of penetration of the split spoon Geologic age and soil type are often used by sev-
sampler is recorded. The blows required to pene- eral researchers (Ohsaki and Iwasaki 1973; Imai
trate the initial 150 mm of the split spoon (seating 1977; Ohta and Goto 1978; Imai and Tonouchi
drive) are ignored due to the possible presence of 1982; Pitikilas et al 1992; Raptakis et al 1995;
loose materials or cuttings from the drilling oper- Rollins et al 1998a) to enhance correlations
ation. The cumulative number of blows required between shear wave velocity and N value. The
to penetrate the remaining 300 mm of the 450 mm empirical correlations for cohesive soils are more
sampling interval is termed the SPT value or N consistent than those for sandy soils and also
value. Typical borelogs are shown in figure 2. In the showed higher shear wave velocities than sand
borelogs, CL represents clayey silt, SP-SM repre- (Ohsaki and Iwasaki 1973). In contradiction to this
sents fine sand with mica, SP represents fine sand, observation, Imai (1977) reported that the sandy
MI represents sandy silt, and SM represents silty soils showed better correlation and higher velocities
fine sand. than cohesive soils. Ohta and Goto (1978) used soil
type as an additional parameter in correlation and
observed that the Vs, gravel ≥ Vs, sand ≥ Vs, clay . Imai
4. Correlation between Vs and N value and Tonouchi (1982) observed that Vs is greatest
in tertiary, less in diluvial, and least in alluvial lay-
In the literature several correlations are reported ers. They also reported that the clayey soils show
between Vs and N values measured in the field and higher Vs than sands. Rollins et al (1998b) reported
722 C Hanumantharao and G V Ramana
Table 1. Vs –N correlations reported in literature.

Author (s) Correlation Soil Country

Imai and Yoshimura (1970) $
Vs = 76.0N 0.39
All Japan
Ohba and Toriumi (1970)$ Vs = 84.0N 0.31 Alluvial Japan
Shibata (1970)∗ Vs = 32.0N 0.50 Sands Japan
Ohta et al (1972)$ Vs = 87.0N 0.36 Sands Japan
Ohsaki and Iwasaki (1973) Vs = 82.0N 0.39 All Japan
Ohsaki and Iwasaki (1973) Vs = 59.0N 0.47 Cohesionless Japan
Imai et al (1975)∗ Vs = 90.0N 0.34 All Japan
Imai (1977) Vs = 91.0N 0.34 All Japan
Ohta and Goto (1978) Vs = 85.3N 0.35 All Japan
JRA (1980)∗ Vs = 100.0N 0.33 Clays Japan
JRA (1980)∗ Vs = 80.0N 0.33 Sands Japan
Imai and Tonouchi (1982) Vs = 97.0N 0.31 All Japan
Yokota et al (1991)∗ Vs = 121.0N 0.27 All Japan
Seed and Idriss (1981)∗ Vs = 61.0N 0.50 All USA
Seed et al (1983) Vs = 56.4N 0.50 Sands USA
Sykora and Stokoe (1983) Vs = 106.7N 0.27 Granular USA
Fumal and Tinsley (1985) Vs = 152 + 5.1N 0.27 Sands and USA
gravelly sands
Sykora and Koester (1988) Vs = 63.0N 0.43 Holocene gravels USA
Sykora and Koester (1988) Vs = 132.0N 0.32 Pleistocene gravels USA
Lee (1990) Vs = 57.0N 0.49 Sands USA
Lee (1990) Vs = 114.0N 0.31 Clays USA
Lee (1990) Vs = 106.0N 0.32 Silts USA
Rollins et al (1998a, b) Vs = 63.0N600.43
Holocene gravel USA
Rollins et al (1998a, b) Vs = 132.0N600.32
Pleistocene gravel USA
Rollins et al (1998a, b) Vs = 222.0N 0.06 Recent fill USA
Andrus et al (2004) Vs1cs = 87.8N1,60cs
0.25
All USA
Pitikilas et al (1992) Vs = 155.1N 0.17
Debris fill Greece
Pitikilas et al (1992) Vs = 162.0N 0.17 Silty sand Greece
Pitikilas et al (1992) Vs = 165.7N 0.19 Soft clays Greece
Pitikilas et al (1992) Vs = 357.5N 0.19 Hard clays Greece
Kalteziotis et al (1992)∼ Vs = 76.2N 0.24 All soils Greece
Kalteziotis et al (1992)∼ Vs = 76.6N 0.45 Cohesive soil Greece
Kalteziotis et al (1992)∼ Vs = 49.1N 0.50 Cohesionless soil Greece
Athanasopoulos (1995) Vs = 107.6N 0.36 All soils Greece
Raptakis et al (1995) Vs = 123.4N 0.29 Loose sand Greece
Raptakis et al (1995) Vs = 100.0N 0.24 Medium dense sand Greece
Raptakis et al (1995) Vs = 105.7N 0.33 Soft clays Greece
Raptakis et al (1995) Vs = 184.2N 0.17 Stiff clays Greece
Raptakis et al (1995) Vs = 192.4N 0.13 Gravel Greece
Jafari et al (1997)∗ Vs = 22.0N 0.85 All soils Iran
Jafari et al (2002) Vs = 27.0N 0.73 Clays Iran
Jafari et al (2002) Vs = 22.0N 0.77 Silts Iran
Jafari et al (2002) Vs = 19.0N 0.85 Fine grained soil Iran
Chein et al (2000) Vs = 22.0N 0.76 Silty sand Taiwan
Kayabali (1996) Vs = 175 + 3.75N Granular soils Turkey
$
Adopted from Ohsaki and Iwasaki (1973);
∗
Adopted from Jafari et al (2002);
∼
Adopted from Athanasopoulos (1995).

that the estimation of shear wave velocity can be While developing the correlations, N values less
improved, if the effective stress is included in the than 2 and more than 50 are rejected in the regres-
regression equation. sion analysis because of poor reliability (e.g., Ohta
 Dynamic soil properties for Delhi 723

locations, and (ii) at least two Vs measurements

and the corresponding test intervals are within the
uniform layer. N values are measured at every
1.5 m interval, but shear wave velocity profile is
developed based on the layer formations observed
from SPT and experimental dispersion curves from
SASW testing. As the shear wave velocity for a par-
ticular layer is constant from the test results, shear
wave velocity profile is also transferred to 1.5 m
interval using weighted average method. The entire
database for each group is made into pairs of Vs
and N to develop the regression equations between
N and Vs . Simple linear power regression analy-
sis as suggested by several previous researchers is
carried out for developing the correlation between
Vs and N . The developed correlations satisfactorily
predict the measured Vs values with the measured
N values of up to 40, since most of the data-
base used in the regression analysis fall in this
range. Estimated shear wave velocities for N val-
ues between 40 and 50 should be used with engi-
neering judgement. However, these correlations are
not applicable for N values above 50. It may be
because of power regression used in the present
study. The datasets used to develop correlations
between Vs –N are shown in figure 3 along with the
correlation coefficient. The developed correlations
are compared with the available correlations from
literature in figure 4.
The following empirical correlations between Vs
and N are recommended for Delhi region and these
equations are applicable for N values up to 40, and
can also be used with engineering judgement for
N values in between 40 and 50. However, these
correlations cannot be used for N values above 50.

Vs = 79.0N 0.434 m/s (for sand), (2)

Vs = 86.0N 0.42 m/s (for silty sand/sandy silt),

Figure 3. Correlation developed between Vs and N for (3)
(A) sand, (B) sandy silt/silty sand and (C) all soils of
Delhi.
Vs = 82.6N 0.43 m/s (for all soils). (4)

and Goto 1978). Uncorrected N values are used

for developing the regression correlation with the
uncorrected shear wave velocity at same depth 5. Strain dependent modulus reduction
(Sykora and Koester 1988; Rollins et al 1998a). G/Gmax ) and damping curves
(G/G
Correlations are developed based on N values alone
(did not consider other parameters such as soil In general, damping ratio decreases with the
type, geological age, depth, effective stress, etc.) increase in depth (Seed and Idriss 1970; Elgamal
and are developed for two different soil types: one et al 2005). At larger depths (> 60 m), the soil
consisting of predominately sand and the other response was practically linear (Elgamal et al 1996)
comprising sandy silt to silty sand. and it maintains the same stiffness and response
The general criteria used for selecting the pene- patterns throughout the earthquake. Relative den-
tration and Vs measurements are: (i) penetration sity has no significant influence on the dynamic
test locations are within 6 m of the Vs test properties of soils in the large strain (> 1%) levels,
724 C Hanumantharao and G V Ramana

Figure 4. Comparison of Vs –N correlations for the soils of Delhi with other correlations reported in the literature.

but it has considerable influence at small strain lev-

els (Sitharam et al 2004a, b). The seismic geophys-
ical tests do not provide a realistic estimation of
material damping, which can be determined accu-
rately only by laboratory testing (Boominathan
2004).
In order to characterize the dynamic properties
of Delhi soils, undrained strain and stress con-
trolled cyclic triaxial tests were conducted on spec-
imens formed using various mixtures of Yamuna
sand and non-plastic fines (obtained from wash-
ing Delhi silt). In general, soils of Delhi consist
of Yamuna sand and silt in different proportions,
along with some minor fraction of clay and kankar.
These minor constituents are not considered in Figure 5. Grain size distribution curves of different
the current study. Clean Yamuna sand (S100M00) sand-silt mixtures used.
and Yamuna sand mixed with 15% (S85M15), 30%
(S70M30), and 50% (S50M50) fines are used to
represent the different soil mixtures encountered 5.1 Grain size distribution
in different parts of Delhi. In the present study,
the different sand-silt mixtures are referred to as Grain size distribution for the different sand-silt
S(x)M (100-x) where S and M represent sand and mixtures used in the present study is shown in
silt respectively and x refers to the percentage by figure 5 and the grain size parameters are given
weight of sand in the sand-silt mixture. The per- in table 2 along the other index properties. The
centage of sand by weight is taken so as to be rep- non-plastic silt fraction is obtained by washing
resentative of field conditions encountered in Delhi Delhi silt through 0.075 mm sieve. As reported by
(Tuli 1994). The fines present in Delhi are non- Tuli (1994), it is observed that the fines are non-
plastic, and even if there is some clay present, the plastic in most of the places, particularly in flu-
plasticity index of Delhi silt is usually below 10. vial beds. Hence in this study, fines are considered
 Dynamic soil properties for Delhi 725
Table 2. Index properties of sand-silt mixtures.

Geotechnical F C = 0% F C = 15% F C = 30% F C = 50% F C = 100%

properties (S100M 00) (S85M 15) (S70M 30) (S50M 50) (S00M 100)
Specific gravity 2.660 2.668 2.675 2.685 2.710
(Gs )
Uniformity 2.0 5.3 19 28 10.7
coefficient (Cu )
Coefficient of 1.20 2.30 1.90 1.30 1.04
curvature (Cc )
D10 (mm) 0.110 0.040 0.010 0.005 0.003
D50 (mm) 0.210 0.185 0.160 0.078 0.026
Maximum density, 17.2 18.2 19.1 19.7 17.0
γdmax (kN/m3 )
Minimum density, 13.2 14.1 14.2 14.0 12.2
γdmin (kN/m3 )
Maximum void 1.015 0.892 0.884 0.918 1.221
ratio (emax )
Minimum void ratio 0.546 0.466 0.401 0.363 0.594
(emin )

primarily as non-plastic and insignificant clay con- 5.4 Cyclic loading

tent encountered at few locations is not taken into
account. Strain and stress controlled undrained cyclic tri-
axial tests are conducted on remoulded speci-
5.2 Sample preparation mens of 70 mm diameter and 140 mm height under
a sinusoidal loading at 1 Hz frequency as per
The modulus reduction and damping curves are ASTM D3999B for evaluating the modulus reduc-
less sensitive to specimen preparation method, tion and damping curves. Since the fines present
degree of saturation and drainage conditions in Delhi are non-plastic and percentage of non-
(Tatsuoka et al 1979; Kokusho 1980). Remoulded plastic fines changes the void ratio only, these
specimens are prepared using moist tamping under fines do not influence the damping and modulus
compaction method (Ladd 1978; Chan 1985) in reduction behaviour significantly (Sun et al 1988;
seven layers. Membrane correction is not consid- Vucetic and Dobry 1991). Hence clean Yamuna
ered for fine grained soils (Frydman et al 1973; sand (S100M00) and Yamuna sand mixed with
Silver 1977; Erten and Maher 1995; Polito and equal proportions (S50M50) of non-plastic fines are
Martin 2000) since the membrane penetration per only used for strain controlled testing. For other
unit area is negligible. Area correction is also not mixtures (S85M15; S70M30) stress controlled tests
considered to the cyclic triaxial loading data in were used to evaluate the modulus reduction and
accordance with standard practice as outlined by damping curves. As all the tests are conducted
Chan (1985). on saturated samples in undrained condition, Pois-
son’s ratio (υ) is considered as 0.5 (Rollins et al
5.3 Saturation and consolidation 1998b).
All the specimens were saturated by passing car- 5.5 Estimation of Gmax
bon dioxide as well as deaired water so as to achieve
higher saturation at lower back pressure and in less One of the most reliable methods to characte-
time. Incremental back pressure saturation as per rize small strain shear modulus (Gmax ) is in situ
BS: 1377 (1990) is adopted for saturation and all measurement of shear wave velocity (Vs ) in the field
the specimens are saturated using a back pressure at small strains using seismic methods (Rollins et al
of 313 ± 1 kPa to achieve Skempton pore pres- 1998b). Since the SASW test is performed on the
sure parameter B in excess of 0.98. Back pres- ground surface at strain levels less than 0.001%,
sure is kept constant for all the tests to eliminate small strain shear modulus, Gmax , can be deter-
the effect of back pressure on modulus and dam- mined from the measured shear wave velocity (Vs )
ping. All the specimens are tested at a void ratio profile by assuming the density, ρ as:
(e) of 0.75 and are isotropically consolidated to

an effective confining pressures (σ3c ) of 100 and
150 kPa. Gmax = ρVs2 . (5)
726 C Hanumantharao and G V Ramana


Figure 8. Hysteresis loop for S100M00 (σ3c = 146 ± 1 kPa,
f = 1 Hz, e = 0.75, εDA = 0.4%).

where a, b are correlation coefficients (e.g., a = 1.2

and b = 0.8 (Ohsaki and Iwasaki 1973)). Similarly,
number of correlations given for Vs and N in table 1
can also be used to estimate Gmax by assuming the
density of soil, since slight variation of density does
not influence the estimated value.

5.6 Normalised modulus reduction

and damping curves

A typical test result at a double amplitude strain

(εDA ) of 0.4% for clean Yamuna sand is pre-
sented and explained here. For the double ampli-
tude strain applied, the resulting deviator stress
and generated excess pore pressure ratio are shown
in figure 6(a), (b), and (c) respectively. It can be
observed that with increasing number of cycles of
strain application, the pore pressure increased as
Figure 6. (A) Applied axial strain, (B) induced deviator the specimen is saturated. It can also be observed
stress and (C) Pore pressure ratio variation with number of

cycles for S100M00 (σ3c = 146 ± 1 kPa, f = 1 Hz, e = 0.75, from figure 7 that both mean normal effective stress
εDA = 0.4%). and deviator stress reached zero at the end of 40
cycles of strain application. The stiffness of the
soil decreased during successive cycles of strain
application, as is evident from figure 8 is primarily
because of tests were conducted on saturated
specimens.
Kokusho (1980) reported that the stiffness is
not changing significantly with number of cycles
when the strain amplitude is low. However, the
modulus will decrease significantly if the strain
is large because of pore pressure development. It
was observed that for pore pressure ratio of about
0.2, the maximum closure error criteria as speci-
fied in ASTM D3999 is also satisfied. In view of
 this modulus reduction and associated damping in
Figure 7. Effective stress path for S100M00 (σ3c =
146 ± 1 kPa, f = 1 Hz, e = 0.75, εDA = 0.4%). this study are reported for the cycle where the pore
pressure ratio has attained a value of about 0.2.
Figures 9 and 10 show the hysteresis loops
Gmax can also be estimated directly from N value obtained and used for estimation of shear modulus
in the field as: and damping at different strains for clean Yamuna
sand (S100M00) and sand-silt mixture (S50M50)
Gmax = aN b , (6) respectively.
 Dynamic soil properties for Delhi 727

Figure 9. Hysteresis loops for

S100M00 at double amplitude
strain of (A) 0.2%, (B) 0.4%,
(C) 0.5%, (D) 0.75%, and (E) 1%

(σ3c = 146 kPa, e = 0.75, f =
1 Hz, ru = 0.2).

Figure 11 shows the estimated shear modulus at a particular void ratio, confining pressure and
and damping curves for different sand-silt mixtures frequency of cyclic loading. The curves generated
using standard procedures (as outlined in differ- in the current study indicate that soils of Delhi,
ent codes of practice). These values are normalized in general, can be represented using lower bound
with reference to the Gmax , which was obtained estimates of Seed and Idriss (1970).
from the in situ measured shear wave velocity so
as to plot them on modulus reduction and dam-
ping curves for sands as given by Seed and Idriss 6. Conclusions
(1970). By considering the shear wave velocity of
3
240 m/s and saturated unit weight of 20 kN/m , Based on extensive well-planned field and
Gmax is estimated as 118 MPa, and is used in the laboratory testing that takes into account the
present study. different soil conditions encountered in Delhi,
Figures 12 and 13 show the modulus reduc- dynamic soil properties required for a meaning-
tion and damping behaviour of Yamuna sand and ful microzonation from geotechnical earthquake
different sand-silt mixtures superimposed on the engineering perspective are presented. Extensive
range of values reported by Seed and Idriss (1970). SASW testing coupled with judicially selected
As reported in the literature, modulus reduction borelogs are used for developing Vs –N correla-
and damping behaviour of non-plastic soils is rel- tion for Delhi region and are compared with other
atively independent of confining pressure, compo- reported values in the literature. Strain and stress
sition and loading frequency (Mitchell 1993) and controlled cyclic triaxial tests as per ASTM D3999
hence the tests in the current study are conducted indicated that the modulus reduction and damping
728 C Hanumantharao and G V Ramana

Figure 10. Hysteretic loops for

S50M50 at double amplitude strain
of (A) 0.2%, (B) 0.5%, (C) 0.75%,

(D) 1%, and (E) 2% (σ3c =
100 kPa, e = 0.75, f = 1 Hz, ru =
0.2).

Figure 11. Variation of shear modulus with shear strain for Figure 12. Normalized shear modulus (G/Gmax ) versus
different sand-silt mixtures. shear strain.

behaviour can be approximated by lower bound strains due to the lack of appropriate equipment.
Seed and Idriss (1970) values for sand. This con- The results presented in this paper can be used
clusion is based on measurements at large strains for estimation of site period, site classification,
only and no attempt was made to estimate the soil amplification factor, and liquefaction hazard
modulus reduction and damping behaviour at low assessment. The present results can be used to
 Dynamic soil properties for Delhi 729
Chien L K, Lin M C and Oh Y N 2000 Shear wave velo-
city and SPT-N values of in-situ reclaimed soil in west
Taiwan; Geotech. Engg. J., Southeast Asian Geotech.
Engg. Soc. 31 63–77.
Dennis R, Hiltunen S M and Woods R D 1988 SASW and
cross-hole test results compared; Earthquake Engg. Soil
Dyn. II – Recent advances in ground motion evaluation,
GSP 20, Proc. of an ASCE Geotech. Engg. Div. Specia-
lity Conf., Park City, Utah, 279–289.
Elgamal A-W, Yang Z, Lai T, Kutter B L and Wilson D W
2005 Dynamic response of saturated dense sand in lami-
nated centrifuge container; J. Geotech. Geoenv. Engg.,
ASCE 131 598–609.
Elgamal A-W, Zeghal M, Parra E, Gunturi R, Tang H T
and Stepp J C 1996 Identification and modelling of earth-
quake ground response I. Site amplification; Soil Dyn.
Figure 13. Variation of damping ratio with shear strain. Earthquake Engg. 15 499–522.
Erten D and Maher M H 1995 Cyclic undrained behavior of
silty sand; Soil Dyn. Earthquake Engg. 14 115–123.
further refine the first cut microzonation map for Frydman S, Zeitlen J G and Alpan I 1973 The membrane
Delhi developed by different government agencies effect in triaxail testing of granular soils; J. Test. Eval.,
ASTM 1 37–41.
such as Department of Science and Technology Fumal T E and Tinsley J C 1985 Mapping shear wave
and Indian Meteorological Department. However, velocities of near surface geological materials; In: Pre-
before using the correlations to estimate shear dicting areal limits of earthquake induced landsliding; In
wave velocity based on N values, a few confirma- evaluation of earthquake hazards in the Los Angeles
tory boreholes at the site of interest need to be region – An earth science perspective (ed.) Ziony T. I,
USGS Paper 1360 127–150.
drilled. Hvorslev M J 1949 Subsurface exploration and sampling of
soils for civil engineering purposes; Waterways Experi-
ment Station, Vicksburg, Missisippi, p. 521.
Acknowledgement Iganacio S S, Jose M R, Shao K Y, Stokoe K H and Rix
G J 1987 Analytical evaluation of variables affecting sur-
face wave testing of pavements; Transp. Res. Rec. 1136
The authors greatly acknowledge the financial sup- 86–95.
port provided by Seismology Division, Depart- Imai T 1977 P - and S-wave velocities of the ground in
ment of Science and Technology for Cyclic Triaxial Japan; Proc. 9th Int. Conf. Soil Mech. and Foundn.
system facility at IIT Delhi. Engg., Tokyo, 257–260.
Imai T and Tonouchi K 1982 Correlation of N -value with
S-wave velocity; Proc. 2nd Euro. Symp. on Penetration
Testing 67–72.
References IS 1892 (1979) Code of practice for subsurface investigation
for foundations; Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
Andrus R D, Piratheepan P, Ellis B, Zhang J and IS 1893: Part 1 (2002) Criteria for earthquake resistant
Juang H 2004 Comparing liquefaction evaluation meth- design of structures – Part 1: General provisions and
ods using penetration–VS relationships; Soil Dyn. Earth- buildings; Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
quake Engg. 24 713–721. IS 2131: 1981 Indian Standard Method for Standard Pene-
ASTM D3999-91 2003 Test method for the determination tration Test for soils; Bureau of Indian Standards, New
of the modulus and damping properties of soils using the Delhi.
cyclic triaxial apparatus; Annual book of ASTM stan- Jafari M K, Shafiee A and Razmkhah A 2002 Dynamic prop-
dards, ASTM International, West Conhohocken, PA. erties of fine grained soils in south of Tehran; Soil Dyn.
Athanasopoulos G A 1995 Empirical correlations Vso -NSP T Earthquake Engg. 4 25–35.
for soils of Greece: A comparative study of reliability; Joh S-H 1992 User’s Guide to WinSASW, a program for
Proc. of 7th Int. Conf. on Soil Dyn. Earthquake data reduction and analysis of SASW measurements;
Engg., Computation Mechanics Publications, Southamp- University of Texas at Austin.
ton, Boston, 19–25. Kayabali K 1996 Soil liquefaction evaluation using shear
Boominathan A 2004 Seismic site characterization for wave velocity; Engg. Geol. 44(1) 121–127.
nuclear structures and power plants; Curr. Sci. 87 Kokusho T 1980 Cyclic triaxial test of dynamic soil proper-
1384–1397. ties for wide strain range; Soils and Foundn. 20 45–60.
Brown L T, Boore D M and Stokoe K H-II 2002 Compa- Ladd R S 1978 Preparing test specimens using under com-
rison of shear wave slowness profiles at 10 strong motion paction; Geotech. Test. J., ASTM 1 16–23.
sites from noninvasive SASW measurements and mea- Lee S H H 1990 Regression models of shear wave velocities;
surements made in boreholes; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 92 J. Chinese Institute of Engineers 13 515–532.
3116–3133. Mitchell J K 1993 Fundamentals of soil behaviour; Wiley
BS: 1377 1990 Methods of testing soils for civil engineering Inter Science, 2nd edn., p. 380.
purpose; British Standards Institution, London, UK. Nazarian S and Stokoe K H-II 1984 In situ shear wave
Chan C K 1985 Instruction manual, CKC E/P cyclic loa- velocities from spectral analysis of surface waves; Proc.
ding triaxial system user’s manual; Soil Engg. Equipment 8th World Conf. Earthquake Engg., San Francisco,
Company, San Francisco, CA. California, III, 31–38.
730 C Hanumantharao and G V Ramana
Ohsaki Y and Iwasaki R 1973 Dynamic shear moduli and Seed H B, Idriss I M and Arango I 1983 Evaluation
Poisson’s ratio of soil deposits; Soils and Foundn. 13 of liquefaction potential using field performance data;
61–73. J. Geotech. Engg., ASCE 109 458–482.
Ohta Y and Goto N 1978 Empirical shear wave velocity Silver M L 1977 Laboratory triaxial testing procedures
equations in terms of characteristic soil indexes; Earth- to determine the cyclic strength of soils; NUREG-0031,
quake Engg. Struct. Dyn. 6 167–187. National Technical Information Service, Springfield. Va.
Ohta Y, Goto N, Kagami H and Shiono K 1972 Shear wave Sitharam T G, Govindaraju L and Sridharan A 2004a
velocity measurement during a standard penetration test; Dynamic properties and liquefaction potential of soils;
Earthquake Engg. Struct. Dyn. 6 43–50. Curr. Sci. 87 1370–1378.
Parvez I A, Vaccari F and Panza G F 2004 Site-specific Sitharam T G, Govindaraju L and Srinivasa Murthy B R
microzonation study in Delhi metropolitan city 2-D mod- 2004b Evaluation of liquefaction potential and dynamic
eling of SH and P-SV waves; Pure Appl. Geophys. 161 properties of silty sand using cyclic triaxial testing;
1165–1184. Geotech. Testing J., ASTM 27 1–7.
Pitilakis K D, Anastasiadis A and Raptakis D 1992 Field Srivastava L S and Somayajulu J G 1966 The seismicity of
and laboratory determination of dynamic properties of area around Delhi; Proc. 3rd Symp. Earthquake Engg.,
natural soil deposits; Proc. 10th World Conf. Earthquake Roorkee, 417–422.
Engg., Rotherdam, 1275–1280. Stokoe K H-II, Nazarian S, Rix G J, Sanchez-Salinero I,
Polito C P and Martin-II J R 2000 Effects of non plastic Sheu J-C and Mok Y-J 1988 In situ seismic testing of
fines on the liquefaction resistance of sands; J. Geotech. hard to sample soils by surface wave method; Earthquake
Geoenv. Engg., ASCE 127 408–415. Engg. Soil Dyn. II – Recent advances in ground motion
Rao H Ch and Ramana G V 2004 Correlation between evaluation, GSP 20, ASCE, Proc. Geotech. Engg. Div.,
shear wave velocity and N value for Yamuna sand Speciality Conf., Park City, Utah, 264–278.
of Delhi; Proc. Int. Conf. Geotech. Engg., UAE Stokoe K H-II, Danendeli M B, Andrus R D and Brown L T
262–268. 1999 Dynamic soil properties: Laboratory, field and corre-
Raptakis D G, Anastasiadis S A J, Pitilakis K D and lation studies; Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. Earthquake Geotech.
Lontzetidis K S 1995 Shear wave velocities and damping Engg., Lisboa, Portugal, 811–846.
of Greek natural soils; Proc. 10th European Conf. Earth- Sun J I, Golesorkhi R and Seed H B 1988 Dynamic moduli
quake Engg., Vienna, 477–482. and damping ratios for cohesive soils; Report No. EERC
Rix G J, Stokoe K H-II and Roesset J M 1991 Experimen- 88-15, University of California, Berkeley.
tal study of factors affecting the spectral analysis of sur- Sykora D W and Koester J P 1988 Correlations between
face waves method; Research Report 1123-5, Center for dynamic shear resistance and standard penetration resis-
Transp. Res., the University of Austin Texas. tance in soils; Earthquake Engg. Soil Dyn. II – Recent
Rollins K M, Diehl N B and Weaver T J 1998a Implications Advances in Ground Motion Evaluation, GSP 20, ASCE,
of Vs -BPT (N1 )60 correlations for liquefaction assessment Proc. Geotech. Engrg. Div., Speciality Conf., Park City,
in gravels; GSP 75, ASCE 506–517. Utah, 389–404.
Rollins K M, Evans M D, Diehl N B and Daily W D Sykora D W and Stokoe K H-II 1983 Correlations of in situ
1998b Shear modulus and damping relationships measurements in sands of shear wave velocity, soil char-
for gravels; J. Geotech. Geoenv. Engg., ASCE 124 acteristics, and site conditions; Report GR 83-33, Civil
396–405. Engg. Dept., Univ. Texas at Austin, 484 pp.
Salinero S I, Roesset J M, Shao K Y, Stokoe K H-II and Tatsuoka F, Iwasaki T and Fukushima S H 1979 Stress con-
Rix G J 1987 Analytical evaluation of variables affecting ditions and stress histories affecting shear modulus and
surface wave testing of pavements; Transp. Res. Record damping of sand under cyclic loading; Soils and Foundn.
1136 86–95. 19 29–43.
Seed H B and Idriss I M 1970 Soil moduli and dam- Tuli R 1994 Shear behaviour in constitutive modelling of
ping factors for dynamic response analyses; Rep. No. Delhi silt; M. Tech Thesis, IIT Delhi, New Delhi.
EERC-70/10, Earthquake Engg. Research Center, Univ. Vucetic M and Dobry R 1991 Effect of soil plasticity on
of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, California. cyclic response; J. Geotech. Engg., ASCE 117 89–107.

MS received 30 September 2007; revised 29 December 2007; accepted 6 March 2008