Search USGS⌕ Search

Geology topics

Cecile Cornou

Publications and source records attributed to Cecile Cornou.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Application of non-stationary shear-wave velocity randomization approach to predict 1D seismic site response and its variability at two downhole array recordings

Accounting for uncertainties in seismic site response is crucial to improving the performance of one-dimensional (1D) ground response analyses (GRAs) at downhole array recording sites. In addition to site effects, uncertainties in 1D-GRAs can also be contributed from the seismic source and/or path. Though often representing not more than one percent of the distance (path) from the source, site conditions are known to have an enormous influence on ground shaking. In this study, we focus on the site shear-wave velocity ( V S ) structure, which is the main ingredient for estimating the variability of site response. As such, V S can manifest aleatory uncertainties related to the effects of small-scale spatial heterogeneities within the near surface, thus V S can substantially modify ground shaking during earthquakes. We apply a novel V S randomization approach to propagate the small-scale heterogeneities of V S to estimate seismic site response within a non-stationary probabilistic framework. The randomization approach generates samples of V S profiles that are used to perform several 1D-GRAs and obtain an averaged site response and related variability. The proposed method is implemented on data recorded at two downhole array sites with different subsurface soil conditions: a soft soil site on Treasure Island (California, United States of America) and a rock outcrop site in Cadarache (South-East France). We show that synthetic surface-to-borehole transfer functions from 1D-GRAs provide an acceptable fit to the empirical transfer functions from low-motion earthquake records and succeed in reproducing most of the site-specific seismic response variability. The remaining mismatch between transfer functions is likely due to insufficient precision on the seismic bedrock and the impedance contrast. The variability in site response is discussed with emphasis on the role of V S small-scale heterogeneities, attenuation, and input motion incidence angle in ground motion variability for the site and soil conditions at both locations.

California↗

Microtremor array method using spatial autocorrelation analysis of Rayleigh‑wave data

Microtremor array measurements (MAM) and passive surface wave methods in general, have been increasingly used to non-invasively estimate shear-wave velocity structures (Vs) for various purposes. The methods estimate dispersion curves and invert them for retrieving S-wave velocity profiles. This paper summarizes principles, limitations, data collection and processing methods. It intends to enable students and practitioners to understand the principles needed to plan a microtremor array investigation, record and process the data, and evaluate the quality of investigation result. The paper focuses on the spatial autocorrelation (SPAC) processing method among microtremor array processing methods because of its relatively simple calculation and stable applicability.

Journal of Seismology↗

An assessment of uncertainties in VS profiles obtained from microtremor observations in the phased 2018 COSMOS blind trials

Site response is a critical consideration when assessing earthquake hazards. Site characterization is key to understanding site effects as influenced by seismic site conditions of the local geology. Thus, a number of geophysical site characterization methods were developed to meet the demand for accurate and cost-effective results. As a consequence, a number of studies have been administered periodically as blind trials to evaluate the state-of-practice on-site characterization. We present results from the Consortium of Organizations for Strong Motion Observation Systems (COSMOS) blind trials, which used data recorded from surface-based microtremor array methods (MAM) at four sites where geomorphic conditions vary from deep alluvial basins to an alpine valley. Thirty-four invited analysts participated. Data were incrementally released to 17 available analysts who participated in all four phases: (1) two-station arrays, (2) sparse triangular arrays, (3) complex nested triangular or circular arrays, and (4) all available geological control site information including drill hole data. Another set of 17 analysts provided results from two sites and two phases only. Although data from one site consisted of recordings from three-component sensors, the other three sites consisted of data recorded only by vertical-component sensors. The sites cover a range of noise source distributions, ranging from one site with a highly directional microtremor wave field to others with omni-directional (azimuthally distributed) wave fields. We review results from different processing techniques (e.g., beam-forming, spatial autocorrelation, cross-correlation, or seismic interferometry) applied by the analysts and compare the effectiveness between the differing wave field distributions. We define the M index as a quality index based on estimates of the time-averaged shear-wave velocity of the upper 10 ( V S10 ), 30 ( V S30 ), 100 ( V S100 ), and 300 ( V S300 ) meters and show its usefulness in quantitative comparisons of V S profiles from multiple analysts. Our findings are expected to aid in building an evidence-based consensus on preferred cost-effective arrays and processing methodology for future studies of seismic site effects.

Seismological Research Letters↗