J-Rapid Nepal Okamura

Japan-Nepal Urgent Collaborative research/survey program
(J-RAPID)
Investigation of soil liquefaction and

geotechnical properties in Kathmandu
Final Workshop
June 21-22 ,Kathmandu Nepal
Mitsu Okamura, Ehime University Surya Narayan Shrestha, NSET

(Project Leader) (Nepal side leader)
Netra Prakash Bhandary, Ehime University. Indra P. Acharya, Tribhuvan University .
Narayan Prasad Marasini, Ehime University. Sujan Raj Adhikari, NSET
Ikuo Towhata, Kanto Gakuin University. Dinesh Pathak, Tribhuvan University
Abstract of the project
• The peak accelerations of the 2015 Nepal earthquake observed at a few locations in
Kathmandu valley were approximately 180gals. Although this acceleration was much smaller
than that expected (i.e. 300 gal), extensive soil liquefaction was observe at several locations
in the vicinity of major rivers in Kathmandu city. This strongly indicate that soils in the city are
quite prone to liquefaction and liquefaction assessment is of great importance to prepare for
stronger earthquakes in the future.
• Because of the uniqueness of soils in Kathmandu, which are rich in Mica, liquefaction
assessment methods established based on the experiences in Japan and the US have to be
verified. In order to refine or reestablish liquefaction assessment methods, identification of
field evidences of liquefaction including sand volcanos and lateral spreading are necessarily
and the 2015 April earthquake provided us a valuable opportunity to do this. Our research
team will conduct field survey, in-situ tests as well as laboratory test described below and
establish a liquefaction assessment method which is suitable for Kathmandu.
• Extensive field survey to identify locations of soil liquefaction all over the valley and
summarize in a map.
• In-situ tests at several liquefied sites including boring, standard penetration tests,
undisturbed soil sampling and PS logging. Based on test results we will be able to prepare
relationship between N value or S wave velocity and threshold acceleration which separates
liquefied and non-liquefied sites.
• Laboratory tests on samples including physical test, cyclic triaxial test to measure
liquefaction strength and X-ray deflection test. It is expected from these tests that
liquefaction strength characteristics of Kathmandu soils, which may exhibit strong influences
of Mica contents, are revealed.
• Extensive microtremor measurements will be conducted all over the valley which is expected
to reveal local amplification characteristics.
Background
• Peak accelerations of the 2015 Earthquake in Kathmandu was around
160gal (Dixit et al., 2015; Goda et al. 2015)
• Observed Peak acceleration is less than that expected (i.e.<300gal)
• Even in small acceleration, extensive soil liquefaction was observed at
several locations in Kathmandu city.
• This strongly indicate that soils in the city are quite prone to liquefaction
and liquefaction assessment is of great importance to prepare for stronger
earthquakes in the future.
Acceleration (cm/s/s)
300
200
100
0
-100
-200
-300
40 60 80 100 120
Time (sec)
Max. acc. at the central area of KTM,

Kanti path= 150-182 gal
Background
• Kathmandu soil is unique and heterogeneously distributed.
• Kathmandu soil are rich in Mica, liquefaction assessment methods
established based on the experiences in Japan and the US have to
be verified.
• In order to refine or reestablish liquefaction assessment methods,
identification of field evidences of liquefaction including sand
volcanos and lateral spreading are necessary.
• and the 2015 April earthquake provided us a valuable opportunity to
do this.
5000
4500
Quartz X-ray diffractometric
X-ray diffractometry
Diffraction counts （cps）
4000
3500
3000
2500
feldspar
2000 Quartz Mica
Calcite
1500 Mica feldspar Mica Mica
1000
Mica (B) (W)
500
0
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50
Angle，2θ （°）
Objectives
To conduct extensive field survey, in-situ tests as well as laboratory
tests described below and establish a liquefaction assessment
method which is suitable for Kathmandu;
• Extensive field survey to identify locations of soil liquefaction
all over the valley and summarize in a map.
• In-situ tests at several liquefied sites including boring, SPT,
undisturbed soil sampling and PS logging to prepare the
relationship between N value or S wave velocity and threshold
acceleration which separates liquefied and non-liquefied sites.
• Laboratory tests on samples including physical test, cyclic
triaxial test to measure liquefaction and reveal the liquefaction
strength characteristics of Kathmandu soils, which may exhibit
strong influences of Mica contents.
• Microtremor measurements to reveal the local amplification
characteristics of Kathmandu valley.
Identification of liquefaction
An extensive field survey was conducted all over the
valley and 11 liquefied locations were identified.
Manamaiju
Mulpani
Guheswori
NEC
Nayabazar
Ramkot
Tundikhel
Kamalvinayak
Syuchatar
Imadol
Hattiban
: Liquefied by 2015
Bungmati earthquake
: Liquefied by 1934
earthquake
Jharuwarashi
Observed liquefaction
Approx.. 150m
Silty sand
At Jharuwarashi
Observed liquefaction Cont….
Silty sand
Approx.. 150m
100
80
Percent finer by weight

60
40
At Bungmati
20 Jharuwarashi area (L1)
Bungamati are (L2)
0
0.01 0.05 0.1 0.5 1 5 10
Grain size (mm)
Observed liquefaction Cont….
At manamaiju area
At Nepal Engineering College (NEC)

area
Liquefaction of central KTM in 1934
Tundikhel Nayabazar
Liquefaction in Tundhikhen and Nayabazar area by

the 1934 earthquake (after Rana, 1935)
In-situ tests
 Standard Penetration test (SPT)
 Undisturbed soil sampling
 PS-logging
Manamaiju
NEC • Manamaiju
• Imadol
Ramkot
Manahara • NEC
• Ramkot
• Manahara
Imadol
: Liquefied by 2015
earthquake
: Do not liquefied by
2015 earthquake
SPT
 Rotary wash boring
 Energy loss
 others Problem on
weight drop
SPT-N value based Liq. Assess. at 5 sites
SPT N Value SPT N Value SPT N Value SPT N Value SPT N Value 0.5
Liquefied site
Cyclic stress ratio or resistance,CSR or CRR

00 100 20 0 100 20 0 100 20 0 100 20 0 100 20
Manamaiju, NEC, Imadol, Ramkot
Not Liquefied site (Manahara)
Legend
Black clay
Filled material
5 Sand
Silty sand
Seed et al. (1983)
Silty clay (M =7.5, Number of cycle=15)
Sandy gravel
10 Silt
Gorkha Earthquake 7.8
(Number of Cycle 5-6)
15
Manamaiju NEC Imadol Ramkot Manahara 0.25
Liquefaction
Cyclic stress ratio or resistance ratio CSR or CRR
0.8
Liquefied site
(Manamaiju, NEC, Imadol & Ramkot) Ramkot (FC=35%)
Not-Liquefied site (Manahara)
(Converted to An-isotropic Condition)

0.6
RL (Japan Road Association) No-Liquefaction
Liquefaction
0.4 0 10 20 30 40
Normalazied N value,
(N1)60cs
Simplified Method
0.2
τ   a  σ 
CSR =  av'  = 0.65 max  vo' rd
No-Liquefaction  σ vo   g  σ vo 
0 10 20 30 40
Normalized N value,
(Na) Both the curve under estimate the
α max  σ v  Liquefaction Potential for Kathmandu soil
JRA method L= *   * rd
g  σ v' 
PS- logging
Typical PS-Logging data
Manamaiju Site
Time (msec)
S-wave (Vs) based Liq. Assessment
σ v amax
CSR = 0.65 r
σv' g d Liquefied
0.6 (Manamaiju, Imadol, NEC & Ramkot)
Cyclic stress ratio or resistance ratio
CRR (Mw=7.5) Not-liquefied (Manahara)

Andrus and Stokoe (2000) Not-liquefied (JICA Study,2002)
0.5
Holocene clean sand
0.4 (Andrus et al, 2004)
CSR or CRR
300
0.3
Liquefacion
Vs1 (m/s)
0.2
No
Liquefaction 200
0.1
Manamaiju
Ramkot
0 100 200 300 NEC
Imadol
Normalized shear wave velocity, Vs1 (m/s) 100
00 0 100 200 300
0.25
N1
 100  170 N
Vs1 = Vs  N1 =
σ
 v 
' 70 + σ v '
This curve Over estimate the Liquefaction Potential

in Kathmandu soil
Tests Conditions
Laboratory Experiment
100
Percentage finer (%)
Manamaiju at 12m
NEC at 7m
80 Manahara at 5m
Imadol at 2m
Ramkot at 5m
60
Triaxial specimen
40
Cyclic triaxial setup
20
0
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 10
Particle grain size (mm)
Typical undrained cyclic triaxial test results
0.2 40
Deviator stress
Cyclic stress ratio
0.1 20
σd(kPa)
(σd/2σ'c)
0 0
-0.1 -20
-0.2 -40
0 5 10 15 20 0 20 40 60 80 100 12
10 Mean Effective Principle Stress -P'(kPa)
40
5 DA=5%
Axial strain
Deviator stress
20
εa(%)
σd(kPa)
0
0
-5
-20
-10
0 5 10 15 20
-40
-10 -5 0 5 10
Axial strain,εa(%)
Pore pressure ratio
1
2
(u/σ'c)
0.5 1
Shear stress
(τ=σd/2)
0 G0
0
0 5 10 15 20 -1
Number of Cycless-N
-2
Manamaiju (Dr=80%) 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1
Shear strain -γ (%)
Liquefaction strength curve
Manamaiju NEC
Cyclic stress ratio (CSR)
0.5 Relative Density, Dr = 45%

Relative Density, Dr=45%
Relative Density, Dr=60% Relative Density, Dr = 60%
Relative Density, Dr=80% 0.2 Relative Density, Dr =80%
Relative Density, Dr=110% Relative Density, Dr =100%
0.25
0.1
Effective stress, σ'c = 100kPa Effective stress, σ'c = 100kPa

0 0
1 10 100 100 1 10 100 100
Number of Cycles -N Number of Cycles -N
Imadol
0.2
Cyclic resistance ratio (CRR

0.8
Cyclic stress ratio (CSR)
Relative Density, DR =45%

Relative Density, DR =60% Toyoura sand
Tatsuoka et al. (1986)
Manamaiju
0.6 wet- tamped
NEC
(σd/(2σ'c)
σ'c=100kPa
0.1 0.4
0.2
Effective stress, σ'c = 100kPa
0 0
1 10 100 100 40 60 80 100 12
Number of Cycles -N Relative Density, Dr (%)
Deformation test results
Kathmandu soil (Manamaiju)
Toyoura sand (Kokusho ,1980) • Kathmandu soil is soft & more
[×10 ]
5 1.2 Ottawa sand (A.Gunzman A.,1989)
Relative Density, Dr= 60% compressible
Shear Modulus, G (kPa)
Confining pressure, σ'c= 100 kPa

• More elastic than Toyoura and
0.8
Ottawa sand
4-5
times • Stiffness is 4-5 times less than
0.4 Toyoura and Ottawa sand
• Deformation characteristic is
0 similar with the Toyoura sand
0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01
Shear strain (γ)
Kathmandu sand
1.2 Manamaiju NEC Imadol
Normalized shear modulus
More Elastic
Shear wave velocity calculate
0.8 Kathamndu sand by using this relation;
G0 = ρV
G/G0
Ottawa sand
(A-Gunzman A., 1989)
0.4
2
Toyoura sand
(Kokusho, 1980) s
Confining pressure, σ'c = 100 kPa
0
0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01
Shear strain (γ)
Proposed boundary curve for Kathmandu soil
Cyclic Triaxial test
• Field in-situ & laboratory test results are
Cyclic stress ratio or resistance ratio

0.6 Manamaiju
NEC
Imadol
combined and proposed the new 0.5
CRR (Mw=7.5)
Andrus and Stokoe (2000) Field data
boundary curve based on S-wave Liquefied

(Manahara, Imadol, NEC & Ramkot)
Proposed boundary curve Not-liquefied (Manahara)
velocity 0.4 for kathmandu soil
(CSR/CRR)
Not-liquefied (JICA Study,2002)
• For the time being until & unless the 0.3

SPT test procedure improve, new Liquefacion
boundary curve based on SPT N-value 0.2 No
are proposed to assess the liquefaction Liquefaction
0.1
in Kathmandu valley
0.5 0 100 200 300
Cyclic stress ratio or resistance,CSR or CRR
Liquefied site
Manamaiju, NEC, Imadol, Ramkot Normalized shear wave velocity, Vs1 (m/s)
Cyclic stress ratio or resistance ratio CSR or CRR

Not Liquefied site (Manahara) 0.8 Liquefied site
(Manamaiju, NEC, Imadol & Ramkot)
Seed et al. (1983) Not-Liquefied site (Manahara)
(M =7.5, Number of cycle=15) RL (Japan Road Association)
(Converted to An-isotropic Condition)
Gorkha Earthquake 7.8 0.6
(Number of Cycle 5-6)
0.25 Liquefaction
0.4
Purposed Boundary curve
for Kathamndu soil
0.2
Proposed boundary curve
for Kathmandu soil
No-Liquefaction
0 10 20 30 4 0 10 20 30 40
Normalazied N value,
(N1)60cs Normalized N value,
(N )
Conclusions
 Extensive field survey was conducted and identified 11 liquefied locations
during the April 25 Earthquake.
 X-ray diffraction analyses were conducted on sands erupted at liquefaction
sites and found that quartz, feldspar, mica and calcite are the dominant
minerals. The relative amount of minerals in the sands determined by the
integrated intensity ratio were quartz 60-–80%, feldspar 10–20%, mica 10–
20% and calcite 5–10%
 SPT, PS logging and continuous soil sampling were conducted at 5 sites in
which 4 are liquefied and 1 did not liquefied during April 25, earthquake.
 Undisturbed samples were obtained and carried out the laboratory tests
including undrained cyclic triaxail tests to measure the liquefaction strength
and found very susceptible for liquefaction.
 The detail investigations on in-situ field tests and laboratory experiments
carried out in the cyclic triaxil suggested that the existing method either based
on SPT-N value or S-wave velocity do not fully valid for Kathmandu soil.
 Finally, new boundary curve to separate the liquefaction and non-liquefaction
locations based on the relationship between N-value or S-wave velocity and
threshold acceleration are proposed. The proposed curve based on N-value
are for time being until and unless the field test procedure improve and
maintain the standards.
Thank you !!
JST, J-Rapid Kickoff Meeting @Kathmandu, 28 October 2015
Ambient Vibration Survey on Ground

and Tall Buildings of Kathmandu
Valley
Netra Prakash Bhandary

Ehime University
Japan side Nepal side

Mitsu Okamura Surya Narayan Shrestha
Netra P. Bhandary Sujan Raj Adhikari
Narayan Marasini Indra Prasad Acharya
Ikuo Towhata Dinesh Pathak
JST J-Rapid Final Workshop, 2016.6.21.22, Kathmandu
Building Damage Pattern

Other Low Natural Frequency Structures

Natural Period and Vibrational Resonance
Amplitude
Ground vibration
Time
One cycle Structural vibration

characteristics

Small-scale Shake Table Demo (Resonance Effect)
Tall
building
Long period
shaking
Medium-height
building
Medium period
shaking Short
building Rotating
Short period handle
shaking

Mini shake-table video

demonstration
(Refer to the video file if time allows!)

Research Framework
This study is composed of two parts:

Part I: Liquefaction Study
Field Investigation Laboratory Testing

(Site identification, SPT-N value, S-wave (Physical tests, Cyclic triaxial test,
velocity, Sand sampling) X-Ray diffraction test) Future Work
Liquefaction
Resistance of
Part II: Ambient Vibration Study Kathmandu Soil
PGA prediction
for scenario
Field Measurement Comparative Analysis earthquakes
(Predominant natural frequency of (with previous data and 2015 and more
ground and tall buildings) Gorkha Earthquake motion data) reliable/accurat
e liquefaction
map for KTM
Ground-Building Natural Frequency-based earthquake valley
resonance characteristics intensity and PGA maps
Hazard Predication

Total: 175 points
~ 11 km.
~ 18 km.

Microtremor (vibration) sources
In Kathmandu:
• Vehicle
movement
Volcano
Strong • Winds
winds
Tidal Railway • Industrial
machines
currents
Shock
• etc.
waves
Measu- Vehicle
rement s
Points
Industrial
machines
(From Tokyo Soil Research)

Transducer
Sensor
Computer for
Three components (EW, NS and data
recording
UP) of ground motion (velocity)
measured at single station
Noise
North- South (NS)
0.004
Vel. (cm/s)
component data
0.002
-0.002
-0.004
Time (T) Sec

0.00 1 20.48 40.96 61.44 81.92 102.40 122.88 143.36 163.84 184.32 204.80 225.28 245.76 266.24 286.72 307.20
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Nois
Noise
East- West (EW)
0.004
e
Vel. (cm/s)
component data
0.002
-0.002
-0.004
Time (T) Sec

0.00 20.48 40.96 61.44 81.92 102.40 122.88 143.36 8 163.84 184.32 204.80 225.28 245.76 266.24 286.72 307.20
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Vertical (UP) Noise

0.004
Vel. (cm/s)
component data
0.002
11
-0.002
JST J-Rapid
(T) Sec Final Workshop, 2016.6.21.22, Kathmandu
-0.004
Time
0.00 1 20.48 40.96 61.44 81.92 102.40 122.88 143.36 163.84 184.32 204.80 225.28 245.76 266.24 286.72 307.20
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Analysis process of microtremor data
Horizontal (R or T) component
V
T (sec) Three components (EW, NS and UP)
MT V
Vertical component of ground motion (velocity)
Instrument T (sec) measured at single station (Time
Sediment domain)
Incident Bedrock Fast Fourier
wavefield
Fourier amplitude spectra (Af) Transform
Horizontal component Vertical component
Fourier amplitude versus frequency

(Frequency domain)
Amax
Transfer Function or Frequency correspondences to
H/V Spectral Ratio
maximum value of H/V ratio gives
H/V =
A(f) Horizontal
the predominant frequency of the
A(f) Vertical
site 12
Fourier Analysis
Fourier Analysis
Amplitude Spectra
t
Frequency (Hz.)
Period
Function
10
P8
Frequency
H/V spectral ratio

analysis
1
Noise
0.004
Vel. (cm/s)
0.1
0.002
0.1 1 10
-0.002
Frequency (Hz.)
-0.004
Time (T) Sec

0.00 1 20.48 40.96 61.44 81.92 102.40 122.88 143.36 163.84 184.32 204.80 225.28 245.76 266.24 286.72 307.20
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Analysis and result
(F – Predominant frequency of the sites)

10 F = 0.95 Ｈｚ 10 F = 0.73 Ｈｚ
P8 P 100
H/V spectral ratio

H/V spectral ratio
1 1
0.1 0.1
0.1 1 10 0.1 1 10
Frequency Frequency
100 F = 8.9 Ｈｚ
P 133 100 F = 3.0 Ｈｚ
P 163
H/V spectral ratio

H/V spectral ratio
10
10
1
1
0.1
0.1
0.1 1 10 100 14
0.1J-Rapid Final Workshop,
1 10 Kathmandu
Frequency JST
Frequency 2016.6.21.22,
H/V spectral ratio of 5 zones
100
H/V spectral ratio

10
 Study area is divided into 1

five different range of Period range A
0.11 s to 0.60 s
predominant period using 0.1
natural break technique 0.1 1

Period, s
10
which regroups similar 100 100
values together and
H/V spectral ratio

H/V spectral ratio
10 10
represents the distribution
properly 1 1
Period range B Period range C

0.60 s to 0.80 s 0.1 0.80 s to 1.01 s
Predominant Description of
0.1
0.1 1 10 0.1 1 10
period range zone Period, s Period, s
100
A 0.11 s to 0.60 s
100
H/V spectral ratio
B 0.60 s to 0.80 s
H/V spectral ratio

10 10
C 0.80 s to 1.01 s
1 1
D 1.01 s to 1.30 s Period range D Period range E
1.01 s to 1.30 s 1.30 s to 2.05 s
E 1.30 s to 2.05 s 0.1 0.1
0.1 1 10 0.1 1 15 10
Period, s Period, s
Ground Predominant Frequency of the Survey Area
 Kathmandu valley center is a low frequency area

Ground Predominant Period Map of the Survey Area
 Period in the study area varies from 0.1-2.05 s

 Period in central part varies from 1-2 s, which covers about 30% of the urban area of the valley
Predominant period contours for the Kathmandu Valley
 Higher period range in the eastern and western part of the valley is separated by
the long low period line extended from north-west to south-east in the valley18
Comparison between depths calculated using Birgöen et al. (2009)
and Özalaybey et al. (2011) relationships

400
350
300
Thickness (m)
250
Thickness (m)
200
150
100
50
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Microtremor
Microtremor observation points
observation points
 The circle indicates the average value whereas the length of the line suggests
deviation from the average
 Average standard deviation = 7.44
 Proposed frequency depth relationship for Kathmandu Valley D=146.01fr-1.2079
Predominant Frequency-based Sediment Depth Distribution of the
Survey Area (D=146.01fr-1.2079 )

Basement Contour map for the Kathmandu Basin based on the
proposed relation, D=146.01fr-1.2079
Contour line
Major road
River and water bodies

A
B
A number of depressions are seen which are connected/separated by the buried ridges
21
3D view of Basement opography of the Kathmandu Basin
Top
N 0
Thickness (m) 100

0 II
200
100
300
200 I
400
300 S
W
400
Longest buried ridge which
Large deep depression in separated the central large
the center part of the depression from the eastern
valley represents the main shallow depression is extended
ancient lake of the valley Base from northwest to southeast
What We Did in This Particular Work
Part II-1: Ground-Tall Building Resonance Effect
Part II-2: Estimation of Peak Ground Acceleration in

the Core Kathmandu Valley
Why?
 Equation-derived value of natural period for a building structure is too
theoretical and does not exactly match with the real measured value.
 Ground and structural vibrations must resonate for shaking, thereby leading
to damage
 Still today, we do not know in numerical value what part of Kathmandu was
shaken how severely because we do not have a good network of devices to
measure the intensity.

Microtremor (Ambient Vibration) Survey Plan on Buildings
General Relation
Predominant Period:
T = 0.1n
(n: No. of story)
e.g., n = 10 story
Roof T = 1 s
floor Does it hold true for
Kathmandu buildings?
Middle
floor
Sensor locations
Ground What exactly happened to
the tall buildings during the
Gorkha Earthquake?
Building structure

Tall Building Locations in Kathmandu Valley
KMC College Duwakot Swoyambnath Temple (Only Ground)

UGC Sano Thimi (Only ground) New baneshwor building
DMG Lainchsaur (Only ground) Rio apartment Jwagal
CDG TU Kritipur (Only ground) Balkumari building
Municipality Kirtipur (Only ground) Ekantakuna building
NASA Building Gairigaun Kumaripati building
Pashupati vision Gaushala LP apartment
Sunrise apartment Dhobighat Vibor apartment
Sunrise apartment Nakhkhu Imperial apartment
suncity apartment Gothatar LLP apartment
cityscape apartment Hattiban Mercury sterling Sanepa
Cityview apartment Bakhundol Status enclave
Downtown apartment Dhapakhel The residency apartment Sanepa
Bagmati apartment Shankhamul Gunacolony Sinamangal
Gunacolony Gwarko Sunrise city homes Bijulibazar
Kohinoor Hill Housing Sanepa Height Kalash apartment Tahachal
Metro apartment Kuleshwor Retreat apartment Bijeshwori
Ambe apartment Chabahil Sigunature apartment ⅡTeku
Grand apartment Dhumbarahi Oriental colony ⅠKuleshwor
Super builders Sukerdhara Oriental colony ⅡKuleshwor
Grande apartment Tokha
Sunrise homes Balkumari
Park view horizon Dhapasi
Cresha plaza Newroad
silver luxury apartment Kalikathan
Maroitt hotel Thamel
Kings way (Only ground)
TCH 3 Panipokhari
Pulchowk engineer college (Only ground)
Kathmandu residensy Baghdole
signature1 Teku

Tall Buildings in Kathmandu Valley
Pre-dominant Natural Period , T (s)

T = f (n)
Number of story, n
Intensity Map Interpretation
PGA, apg (gal)

apg = f (T)
DMG
American Center
Predominant Period, T (s)
IoE UGC
Kirtipur Tribhuvan
Pulchowk
Municipal University
Office

Ambient Vibration Survey
 44 building sites
 51 ground sites

Survey Glimpses

Analysis Method
 Separate the data into segments.（2048 data for 1 segment）

 Remove the noise.
 Convert the data from time-domain to frequency-domain by
Fourier analysis
 Find the spectral ratio (H/H for building, H/V for ground)
Noise
0.01
velocity (cm/s)
0.005
0
-0.005
-0.01
Fourier transform
0 20.48 40.96 61.44 81.92 102.4 122.88 143.36 163.84
Smoothing by Parzen
window bandwidth 0.5 Hz

Evaluation of Natural Frequency
ω : Natural frequency of ground h (damping ratio) = 0.05

ω₀ : Natural frequency of building
10 Most of building are amplified
9
by frequency of ground.
8
Dynamic magnifier
6
h=0.05
5
h=0.1
4
h=0.2
3
ωg/ωb
2
0
0 1 2 3 4
Frequency ratio JST J-Rapid Final Workshop, 2016.6.21.22, Kathmandu

Wave Forms (Takai et al. 2016)
KATNP
KTP
PTN
THM
 The only waveform of KTP is

different from others.
TVU
 The seismic motion was

overlapped and amplified in
basin. JST J-Rapid Final Workshop, 2016.6.21.22, Kathmandu
Earthquake Motion Characteristics
 The seismic waves is getting the slow

velocity and big amplitude from hard
rock to sediment.
 The long period shaking would occur
in Kathmandu valley.
The seismic wave reflects and overlap

by surrounding hard rock.

Predominant Period of Earthquake
Multiple periods as The predominant frequency

observed in velocity f = 3.33
response spectra f = 1.43
(Takai et al. 2016) f = 0.66
f = 0.33
f = 0.20
Plot the dynamic magnifier at these values
f=3.33 (T = 0.3 s) f=0.66 (T = 1.5 s)
Fg/Fb
f=0.20 (T = 5 s) f=0.33 (T = 3 s)

f=1.43 (T = 0.7 s)
 The amplitude is not high when T = 3~5 (s)

(Long period)
 Dynamic magnifiers are greater than 1 for most of the

buildings at all case of T except for T = 0.3 (s)
Damage extent
Park View Horizon, Basundhara Cityscape Club House, Hattiban TCH Phase II, Thaiba
Oriental Apartment Phase II, Kuleshwor Cityscape Block B, Hattiban Southern Height Apartment, Thaiba
DUDBC categorized the

Prestige Apartment, Chandol Dhumbarahi Apartment, Dhumbarahi
Central Park Apartment, Bishal Nagar TCH Tower, Lazimpat
damage extent.
Grande Apartment, Dhumbarahi Bhat Bhateni Apartment, Bhat Bhateni
Grande Towers, Tokha Indreni Apartment, Bhat Bhateni
LP Apartment, Lazimpat Egrace Apartment, Naxal
KL Apartment, Sano Gaucharan
Red：dangerous to use
Binayak Apartment, Baluwatar
Sun Rise Apartment, Nakhkhu
Yellow：available after
Imperial Apartment, Sanepa
City View Apartment, Bakhudol
repaired
Mercury Sterling Apartment, Thado Dhunga
Sun Rise Apartment, Dhobighat
Green：safe to live
Kalash Apartment, Tahachal
Metro Apartment, Kuleshwor
Oriental Apartment Phase I, Kuleshwor
TCH Tower Phase IV, Sitapaila
Park view horizon has

TCH Tower Phase III, Pani Pokhari
Retreat Apartment, Bijeshwori
been damaged seriously.

Sun City Apartment, Gothatar
Ambe Residence, Chabahil
Downtown Apartment, Dhapakhel
Silver City Apartment, Kalikasthan
Signature Apartment I, Teku
Signature Apartment II, Teku
Civil Apartment II, Dhapakhel
Guna Colony, Sina Mangal
LLP Apartment, Pani Pokhari
Vibor Apartment, Kamal Pokhari

Westar Apartment, Balkumari
Damage extent
Park View Horizon, Basundhara Cityscape Club House, Hattiban TCH Phase II, Thaiba
Oriental Apartment Phase II, Kuleshwor Cityscape Block B, Hattiban Southern Height Apartment, Thaiba
DUDBC categorized the Park view horizon

Prestige Apartment, Chandol Dhumbarahi Apartment, Dhumbarahi
Central Park Apartment, Bishal Nagar TCH Tower, Lazimpat
damage extent.
Grande Apartment, Dhumbarahi Bhat Bhateni Apartment, Bhat Bhateni
Grande Towers, Tokha Indreni Apartment, Bhat Bhateni
LP Apartment, Lazimpat Egrace Apartment, Naxal
KL Apartment, Sano Gaucharan
Red：dangerous to use
Binayak Apartment, Baluwatar
Sun Rise Apartment, Nakhkhu
Yellow：available after
Imperial Apartment, Sanepa
City View Apartment, Bakhudol
repaired
Mercury Sterling Apartment, Thado Dhunga
Sun Rise Apartment, Dhobighat
Green：safe to live
Kalash Apartment, Tahachal
Metro Apartment, Kuleshwor
Oriental Apartment Phase I, Kuleshwor
TCH Tower Phase IV, Sitapaila
Park view horizon has

TCH Tower Phase III, Pani Pokhari
Retreat Apartment, Bijeshwori
been damaged seriously.

Sun City Apartment, Gothatar
Ambe Residence, Chabahil
Downtown Apartment, Dhapakhel
Silver City Apartment, Kalikasthan
Signature Apartment I, Teku
Signature Apartment II, Teku
Civil Apartment II, Dhapakhel
Guna Colony, Sina Mangal
LLP Apartment, Pani Pokhari
Vibor Apartment, Kamal Pokhari

Westar Apartment, Balkumari
What Nepal Building Code says (Period of Buildings)
T1: Natural period of vibration of the first mode of the structure (s)
D’: Overall length of the building at the base in the direction under consideration (m)
Simplified Dominant Period for Buildings
 Comparing the predominant period, height and width of the

buildings with previously proposed relation/s
 Predominant period
is influenced by the
height and width.
 The shapes,
structures and
materials effects on
predominant period

Major Assumption (Concept)
Low Peak Ground High Peak Ground

Acceleration (PGA) Acceleration (PGA)
Ground surface
Sediment Deposit
Basement
Rock Line Shallower depth
(i.e. high frequency
Greater depth
or low period)
(i.e. low frequency or
high period)

Estimating Peak Ground Acceleration (2015 Gorkha Earthquake)
Accelerometer Stations and MT Survey Points

H/V Spectral Ratio for Accelerogram Stations
PTN KATNP THM
F = 0.73 Hz F = 0.75 Hz F = 0.83 Hz
DMG TVU KTP
F = 0.88 Hz F = 1.37 Hz F = 2.15 Hz

Interpreting PGA on the basis of Natural Period
(2015 Gorkha Earthquake) (Data source: DMG, USGS, and Takai et al.)
S.No Station latitude longitude EW (m/s2) NS (m/s2) UD (m/s2) PGA (gal) Intensity (MMI) IJMA Frequeny (Hz) N. Period (s)
1 KATNP 27.71 85.32 1.55 1.542 1.549 155 6.357 5.321 0.75 1.33
2 KTP 27.68 85.27 2.548 1.536 1.14 254.8 7.147 5.752 2.15 0.47
3 TVU 27.68 85.29 2.288 1.647 1.383 228.8 6.976 5.659 1.37 0.73
4 PTN 27.68 85.32 1.281 1.507 1.339 150.7 6.312 5.296 0.73 1.37
5 THM 27.68 85.38 1.505 1.338 1.837 150.5 6.31 5.65 0.83 1.20
6 DMG 27.72 85.32 1.268 1.771 2.055 177.1 6.568 4.934 0.88 1.14
Preliminary
Relationship
apg = 102.8*ln(T) + 183.35

Predominant Natural Frequency (Ground) Distribution

Predominant Period (Ground) Distribution

Estimated Peak Ground Acceleration (2015 Gorkha Earthquake)

Concluding Remarks
 Paudyal et al. (2012) reveal that the central Kathmandu Valley is a long
period ground composed of thick sediment deposit. This is in agreement
with previous research work.
 During the 2015 Gorkha Earthquake, most tall buildings in the Kathmandu
Valley were heavily shaken, which is supposed to be due to long-period
ground shaking (i.e., 3-5 s).
 The ground shaking was long period in the central part while shorter in the
peripheral part where the basement rock is close to surface.
 Post-earthquake evaluation of pre-dominant period of ground and
buildings at tall building locations in the Kathmandu Valley reveals that
most buildings might have been shaken during 0.5 – 1.5 s dominant period
of the ground motion.
 A very rough relationship of peak ground acceleration (PGA) with the
ground natural period was established: PGA (gal) = -102.8ln(T(s)) + 183.35
 A very preliminary PGA map has been proposed (using the above
relationship) for the core Kathmandu Valley during the 2015 Gorkha
Earthquake.
Further Research Plan
 Precise estimation and verification of peak ground acceleration (PGA)

through the use of massive aftershock data (possibly at all six accelerogram
stations).
 Relational analysis for epicentral distance (main shock as well as
aftershocks) and peak ground acceleration in the Kathmandu Valley.
 And finally, interpretation of liquefaction-susceptible areas (locations) on
the basis of precisely estimated peak ground acceleration map.
Limitations:
 The damage depends on the duration of resonance
 Possible change in predominant periods of the buildings after
earthquake
 Preliminary micortremor measurement data might be
erroneous, and they need precise check
Thank you very much!


J-Rapid Nepal Okamura

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

J-Rapid Nepal Okamura

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Japan-Nepal Urgent Collaborative research/survey program

Investigation of soil liquefaction and

Mitsu Okamura, Ehime University Surya Narayan Shrestha, NSET

Max. acc. at the central area of KTM,

Percent finer by weight

At Nepal Engineering College (NEC)

Liquefaction in Tundhikhen and Nayabazar area by

Cyclic stress ratio or resistance,CSR or CRR

(Converted to An-isotropic Condition)

CRR (Mw=7.5) Not-liquefied (Manahara)

This curve Over estimate the Liquefaction Potential

0.5 Relative Density, Dr = 45%

Effective stress, σ'c = 100kPa Effective stress, σ'c = 100kPa

Cyclic resistance ratio (CRR

Relative Density, DR =45%

Confining pressure, σ'c= 100 kPa

• Field in-situ & laboratory test results are

Cyclic stress ratio or resistance ratio

boundary curve based on S-wave Liquefied

• For the time being until & unless the 0.3

Cyclic stress ratio or resistance ratio CSR or CRR

Ambient Vibration Survey on Ground

Netra Prakash Bhandary

Japan side Nepal side

JST J-Rapid Final Workshop, 2016.6.21.22, Kathmandu

JST J-Rapid Final Workshop, 2016.6.21.22, Kathmandu

One cycle Structural vibration

JST J-Rapid Final Workshop, 2016.6.21.22, Kathmandu

JST J-Rapid Final Workshop, 2016.6.21.22, Kathmandu

Mini shake-table video

JST J-Rapid Final Workshop, 2016.6.21.22, Kathmandu

This study is composed of two parts:

Field Investigation Laboratory Testing

JST J-Rapid Final Workshop, 2016.6.21.22, Kathmandu

Total: 175 points

JST J-Rapid Final Workshop, 2016.6.21.22, Kathmandu

(From Tokyo Soil Research)

JST J-Rapid Final Workshop, 2016.6.21.22, Kathmandu

Time (T) Sec

Time (T) Sec

Vertical (UP) Noise

Fourier amplitude versus frequency

H/V spectral ratio

Time (T) Sec

JST J-Rapid Final Workshop, 2016.6.21.22, Kathmandu

(F – Predominant frequency of the sites)

H/V spectral ratio

H/V spectral ratio

H/V spectral ratio

 Study area is divided into 1

natural break technique 0.1 1

which regroups similar 100 100

values together and

H/V spectral ratio

Period range B Period range C

H/V spectral ratio

 Kathmandu valley center is a low frequency area

JST J-Rapid Final Workshop, 2016.6.21.22, Kathmandu

 Period in the study area varies from 0.1-2.05 s

and Özalaybey et al. (2011) relationships

Survey Area (D=146.01fr-1.2079 )

JST J-Rapid Final Workshop, 2016.6.21.22, Kathmandu

proposed relation, D=146.01fr-1.2079