Seismic Ground Response Analysis of Input Earthquake Motion and Site Amplification Factor at KUET

  • Sonia Akter Ahsanullah University of Science and Technology, Bangladesh
Keywords: Amplification Factor, PSA, PGA, DEEPSOIL, Shear Wave Velocity


Ground motion is the movement of the earth's surface due to explosions or the propagation of seismic waves. In the seismic design process, ground response analysis evaluates the impact of local soil conditions during earthquake shaking. However, it is difficult to determine the dynamic site response of soil deposits in earthquake hazard-prone areas. Structural damage has a great influence on the selection of input ground motion, and in this study, the importance of bedrock motion upon the response of soil is highlighted. The specific site response analysis is assessed through “DEEPSOIl" software with an equivalent linear analysis method. Furthermore, four input motions including Kobe, LomaGilroy, Northridge, and Chi-Chi were selected to obtain normalized response spectra. This study aims to obtain the site amplification of ground motion, peak spectral acceleration (PSA), and maximum peak ground acceleration (PGA) based on shear wave velocity from the detailed site-specific analysis of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibor Rahman hall at Khulna University of Engineering & Technology. The maximum shear wave velocity obtained was 205 m/s while the amplification factor varied from 4.01 (Kobe) to 1.8 (Northridge) for rigid bedrock properties. Furthermore, the Kobe earthquake produced the highest (4.3g) PSA and the Northridge earthquake produced the lowest (1.08g) PSA for bedrock, with Vs=205 m/s. The surface PGA values were acquired in the range of 0.254g (Northridge) to 0.722g (Kobe), and the maximum strain values for Kobe earthquakes were in the range of 0.016 to .303. Therefore, the surface acceleration values were very high (>0.12g) for the Kobe earthquake motion.


Ansary, M.A., Noor, M.A. and Yasin, M., 2005. Seismic Hazard Analysis of Bangladesh. Proceedings of First Bangladesh Earthquake Symposium. Dhaka, 14-15 December 2005.

Boore, D.M. and Atkinson, G.M., 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(1), pp.99–138.

Boore, D.M. and Joyner, W.B., 1997. Site amplifications for generic rock sites. Bulletin of the seismological society of America, 87(2), pp.327–341.

Chiou, B. J. and Youngs, R.R., 2008. An NGA model for the average horizontal component of peak ground motion and response spectra. Earthquake spectra, 24(1), pp.173–215.

Choi, Y. and Stewart, J.P., 2005. Nonlinear site amplification as function of 30 m shear wave velocity. Earthquake spectra, 21(1), pp.1–30.

Dickenson, S.E. and Seed, R.B., 1996. Nonlinear dynamic response of soft and deep cohesive soil deposits. In: Proceedings of the international workshop on site response subjected to strong earthquake motions. pp.67–81.

Dobry, R., Borcherdt, R.D., Crouse, C.B., Idriss, I.M., Joyner, W.B., Martin, G.R., Power, M.S., Rinne, E.E. and Seed, R.B., 2000. New site coefficients and site classification system used in recent building seismic code provisions. Earthquake spectra, 16(1), pp.41–67.

Farrokhzad, F. and Choobbasti, A.J., 2016. Empirical correlations of shear wave velocity (Vs) and standard penetration resistance based on soil type in Babol city. Indian Journal of Geo Marine Sciences, 45(11), pp. 1566–1577.

Filiatrault, A., Christopoulos, C. and Stearns, C., 2002. Guidelines, specifications, and seismic performance characterization of nonstructural building components and equipment. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center.

Govindaraju, L. and Bhattacharya, S., 2012. Site-specific earthquake response study for hazard assessment in Kolkata city, India. Natural hazards, 61(3), pp.943–965.


Kamai, R., Abrahamson, N.A. and Silva, W.J., 2014. Nonlinear horizontal site amplification for constraining the NGA-West2 GMPEs. Earthquake Spectra, 30(3), pp.1223–1240.

Kwok, A.O.L., Stewart, J.P. and Hashash, Y.M.A., 2008. Nonlinear ground-response analysis of Turkey Flat shallow stiff-soil site to strong ground motion. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 98(1), pp.331–343.

Majer, E.L., Baria, R., Stark, M., Oates, S., Bommer, J., Smith, B. and Asanuma, H., 2007. Induced seismicity associated with enhanced geothermal systems. Geothermics, 36(3), pp.185–222.

Martin, G.R. and Dobry, R., 1994. Earthquake site response and seismic code provisions. NCEER Bulletin, 8(4), pp.1–6.

Rubinstein, J.L. and Mahani, A.B., 2015. Myths and facts on wastewater injection, hydraulic fracturing, enhanced oil recovery, and induced seismicity. Seismological Research Letters, 86(4), pp.1060–1067.

Salic, R., Sandıkkaya, M.A., Milutinovic, Z., Gulerce, Z., Duni, L., Kovacevic, V., Markusic, S., Mihaljevic, J., Kuka, N. and Kaludjerovic, N., 2017. Reply to “Comment to BSHAP project strong ground motion database and selection of suitable ground motion models for the Western Balkan Region” by Carlo Cauzzi and Ezio Faccioli. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 15(4), pp.1349–1353.

Sandıkkaya, M.A., Akkar, S. and Bard, P., 2013. A nonlinear site‐amplification model for the next pan‐European ground‐motion prediction equations. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 103(1), pp.19–32.

Seyhan, E. and Stewart, J.P., 2014. Semi-empirical nonlinear site amplification from NGA-West2 data and simulations. Earthquake Spectra, 30(3), pp.1241–1256.

Walling, M., Silva, W. and Abrahamson, N., 2008. Nonlinear site amplification factors for constraining the NGA models. Earthquake spectra, 24(1), pp.243–255.

How to Cite
Akter, S. (2021). Seismic Ground Response Analysis of Input Earthquake Motion and Site Amplification Factor at KUET . Journal of the Civil Engineering Forum, 8(1), 45-54.