ARTICLE IN PRESS

Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29 (2009) 1–16

www.elsevier.com/locate/soildyn

Free vibration of soils during large earthquakes

S. Ruiz, G.R. Saragoni
Civil Engineering Department, University of Chile, Casilla 228/3, Santiago, Chile
Received 6 November 2006; received in revised form 15 December 2007; accepted 17 January 2008

Abstract

Free vibration of soils happens frequently during some large earthquakes, perhaps seeming like a paradox. This happens because the
energy released from seismic sources in some cases is not stationary in time, allowing relaxation intervals in between without important
seismic wave arrivals in which free soil vibration happens. Two techniques to estimate the natural period of the free vibration from
accelerograms are presented: autocorrelograms and Fourier spectra. Both techniques sometimes allow measuring higher mode
frequencies of the soil for the three first modes as well as modal damping. Free vibration modal periods satisfy the classic 1D equation S-
wave theory. The presence of free vibrations corresponds to shear wave soil energy radiation episodes rather than to energy amplification
of incoming stationary seismic shear waves suggested by the dynamic soil amplification. These results explain the discrepancies observed
between the theoretical soil dynamic amplification and the accelerographic measurement. Observation of free vibration of soils is not
always possible, it depends on the duration of the time windows without important seismic waves arrivals compared to the natural period
and damping of the soil.
r 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Soil free vibration; Earthquake; Accelerogram; Autocorrelogram; Fourier spectra; Soil amplification

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2. Autocorrelograms of earthquake accelerograms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Theoretical functions for autocorrelograms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
4. Free vibration of soils in large earthquake accelerograms estimated from autocorrelograms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Soil damping. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. Soil fundamental period estimation using Fourier spectra and comparison with the autocorrelogram technique . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7. Soil higher modes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
8. Soil degradation in free vibrations from large earthquakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
9. Influence of soil free vibrations on soil dynamic amplification during large earthquakes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
10. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

1. Introduction

Present seismic design practices, which incorporate

information from strong motion accelerograms, very
Corresponding author. Tel.: +56 2 978 43 72; fax: +56 2 689 28 33. seldom reconcile the differences between accelerographic
E-mail address: rsaragon@ing.uchile.cl (G.R. Saragoni). measurements and theoretical predictions. One factor

0267-7261/$ - see front matter r 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.soildyn.2008.01.005
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
2 S. Ruiz, G.R. Saragoni / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29 (2009) 1–16
involved, which is recognized as being very influential, is
the effect of local conditions.
Scholars studying earthquake damage have observed the
modification of earthquake motion by local soil for a long
time [1].
The earliest researchers to quantify the problem were the
Japanese, the most prominent ones being Sezawa [2,3] and
Kanai [4,5]. These researchers obtained algebraic expres-
sions in the frequency domain for the surface motion to
incident wave ratio from the assumption of stationary,
vertically propagating, plane SH waves. Their work is
limited to one and two horizontal layers of constant
velocity for which they included the visco-elastic behavior
and predict important amplification at the natural mode
periods of the soil given by
4H
Tn ¼ , (1)
V S ð2n  1Þ
where n is the mode number, H the soil depth and VS is the
soil shear wave velocity.
Therefore, when Fourier spectra from earthquake
accelerograms show important peaks at the natural
frequencies of the soil, they are normally considered to
be a consequence of the soil amplification of stationary,
incoming shear waves.
However, the unexpected collapse of structures due to
soil amplification effects, designed according to modern
seismic codes during the Mexico 1985 earthquake, has
taken to review soil amplification theories by deploying
high-density accelerograph arrays to have a better under-
standing of the phenomenon.
On September 19, 1985, a large subduction MS=8.1
earthquake, with epicenter in the Pacific Ocean off
Michoacan state, struck Mexico. In Mexico City, 400 km
away, large damages and collapse of modern high-rise
buildings were observed despite the reduced damages
reported at the epicentral zone: Ixtapa, Zihuatanejo and
Lazaro Cárdenas [6].
In Mexico City, for the 1985 earthquake—an ideal case
where the most common assumptions for the soil
amplification theory are fulfilled, i.e. strong contrast
between soil impedances, almost linear soil behavior and
vertical incident shear waves due to the condition of being
a far epicenter of Pacific subduction earthquakes (epicenter
distances longer than 400 km)—most accepted amplifica-
tion theories are partially verified. These theories can only
reproduce the natural soil response period but fail to
estimate the observed large soil amplification ratios and
large durations [7–10].
Bard and Tucker [11] and Geli et al. [12] have also stated
that amplifications observed in the field are systematically
larger than the values predicted using theoretical models.
In this paper, the assumption of stationary incident
seismic waves in the soil response will be studied from the
viewpoint of accelerographic measurements for large
earthquakes in the epicentral zone or for long-epicentral
distances, such as the classic Mexico City case, to try to
understand the origin of the vibration at the natural
periods of the soil. Two techniques will be considered for
the interpretation of accelerograms: autocorrelogram and
Fourier spectra.
2. Autocorrelograms of earthquake accelerograms
The first researcher that considered earthquake accel-
erograms as a sample of stationary random processes was
Housner [13]. He assumed that accelerograms could be
represented as a series of pulses randomly distributed in
time as a white noise process. Housner’s idea does not
consider at all any filtering effect due to the soil.
On the other hand, in Japan, Tajimi [14], based on a
Kanai work [5], studied the frequency content of accel-
erograms. He observed that the pulse duration is similar to
the natural period of buildings, since Japanese accelero-
grams have a predominant period of less than 0.8 s.
Based on these observations, Tajimi proposed the
filtering of an incident random white noise through a one
degree of freedom oscillator that represents the soil
response. This assumption leads to power spectral density
functions with a predominant period. Other authors have
later improved this model proposed by Tajimi, but keeping
the two major ideas, i.e. an acceleration random process
and a predominant soil period.
The autocorrelation function of an accelerogram is
called the autocorrelogram, which measures the expected
value of the correlation between two values of a time series
separated by a time difference t. The definition is given by
Z
1 T=2
fxx ðtÞ ¼ lim xðtÞxðt þ tÞ dt, (2)
T!1 T T=2
where x(t) in this case is the ground acceleration at time t
and T is the total duration of the accelerogram [15].
Arias and Petit-Laurent [16] analyzed the autocorrelo-
grams of accelerograms of USA, Mexico City and Santiago,
Chile considered as a random process. They found out that
the Mexico City 1962 earthquake accelerograms had
deterministic components despite the fact that USA and
Chile accelerograms show high randomness in a wide band
of frequencies. For Arias and Petit-Laurent, the frequency
band was a consequence of the soil properties at the site.
The autocorrelation functions analysis for different accel-
erograms shows that some of them have an important
presence of sine wave components (deterministic), as Arias
and Petit-Laurent [16] found for the Mexico City autocorre-
lograms of the 1962 Mexico earthquake. A similar situation is
observed for some autocorrelograms of the Parkfield 1966
earthquake [17], Rumania 1977 and 1986 earthquakes [18]
and some Chilean earthquakes [19] (see Fig. 1).
3. Theoretical functions for autocorrelograms
The shape of these autocorrelograms, i.e. the character-
istic period and the attenuation constant, allows to
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
S. Ruiz, G.R. Saragoni / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29 (2009) 1–16 3

Fig. 1. Normalized autocorrelograms: (a) Parque Alameda, 1962 [16], (b) Temblor S25W, USA 1966 [17], (c) Bucharest NS, Rumania 1977 [18], and
(d) San Isidro L. Chile 1985 [19].
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
4 S. Ruiz, G.R. Saragoni / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29 (2009) 1–16

Fig. 2. Comparison between autocorrelograms and theoretical functions: (a) Autocorrelogram CDAO N00E, (b) CDAO N00E, (c) SCT N00E, (d) San
Isidro L, (e) Tarzana 90, and (f) Boeing 270.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
S. Ruiz, G.R. Saragoni / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29 (2009) 1–16 5

Table 1 fact that the energy released from the seismic source is not
Soil natural period and damping estimation using the autocorrelogram permanently continuous in time; there are relaxation
technique
intervals in between without important seismic wave
Accelerographic station Fundamental mode arrivals from the source in which free vibration of the soil
happens many times. Therefore, accelerograms can be
Natural period TS Soil damping considered as a random sequence of seismic episodes of
(s) b
seismic wave arrivals and episodes of free vibrations of the
1. San Isidro Longitudinal, Chile 0.34 0.104 soil.
Central 1985 However, the observation of soil free vibrations in
2. SCT N00E, Mexico 1985 2.04 0.045 accelerograms of large earthquakes will not be always
3. CDAO N00E, Mexico 1985 3.57 0.050
possible; it depends on the duration of the time windows
4. Tarzana 90, Whittier Narrow 1987 0.32 0.100
5. Boeing 270, Nisqually 2001 1.22 0.070 without important seismic arrivals compared to the natural
period and the damping of the soil and also the almost
elastic soil response. Therefore, soil free vibrations are
assimilate them to the corresponding deterministic function difficult to estimate in accelerograms of short duration and
of the displacement of the free vibration of the one degree in the long duration ones, but with a more permanent
of freedom oscillator with an initial displacement and zero arrival of seismic waves.
velocity, i.e.: The autocorrelation function estimation is usually done
  considering Eq. (2) by using only one sample accelerogram
bð2pðt=T S ÞÞ t
yðtÞ ¼ Ae cos 2p , (3) based on the ergodic theorem; however the use of this
TS theorem in practice implies considering random samples.
where TS is the natural period and b is the damping ratio. When the samples, as in the case analyzed, have strong
Making this assumption and choosing adequate values deterministic components, the estimator is only recognizing
for the natural period and damping ratio of the oscillator, the presence of many free vibrations along the record due
both curves coincide [19]. to random initial conditions originated by intermittent
In Fig. 2a, the autocorrelogram of Central de Abastos episodes of short-duration, random seismic wave arrivals.
(CDAO) N00E accelerogram of the Mexico 1985, MS ¼ The free vibration of a structure in a push-back test is
8.1 earthquake is shown. The autocorrelogram has been used to measure the natural period and damping of
normalized by the expected quadratic value. For this structures. Similarly, the free vibration of the soil can be
autocorrelogram, the following TS and b values were used to measure the soil damping as the random decrement
estimated: TS ¼ 3.57 s and b ¼ 0.05. Then Eq. (3) becomes method. Other authors have also proposed the measure-
 t  ment of soil damping in a probabilistic manner [20,21].
yðtÞ ¼ e0:05ð2pðt=3:57ÞÞ cos 2p . (4) These deterministic free vibrations of the soil are
3:57
observed in different accelerograms as shown in Fig. 3:
Fig. 2b shows an excellent match between the function of Tarzana 90, Whittier Narrow 1987; Central de Abastos
Eq. (4) and the autocorrelogram of CDAO N00E in a time Oficina (CDAO) N00E, Mexico 1985; Boeing 270, Nisqu-
range of 20 s. This result suggests that soil at the CDAO ally 2001 and San Isidro Longitudinal, Chile 1985. All
station mainly vibrated freely during the 1985 Mexico these accelerograms show time windows with a clear
earthquake as a simple damped one-degree of freedom damping of the acceleration amplitudes. This situation is
oscillator. reflected in their corresponding autocorrelograms. There-
Figs. 2c–f also show an excellent match between the fore, in these cases, autocorrelograms allow estimating the
corresponding autocorrelograms of Ministry of Commu- natural period and damping of the soil.
nications and Transportation (SCT), N00E, Mexico 1985; In Fig. 3, in addition to the accelerograms, in the central
San Isidro Longitudinal, Chile 1985; Tarzana 90, Whittier part there is close-up of a specific region of the strong
Narrows 1987 and Boeing 270, Nisqually 2001 and their motion part of the accelerogram where the natural period
corresponding theoretical function of the type of Eq. (3). and the damping of the soil can be clearly observed. To the
Autocorrelograms of Fig. 2 have been normalized to have left of the figure, the corresponding autocorrelograms are
an expected square acceleration equal to one. shown with similar period and damping.
The corresponding values of the soil natural period TS The most evident fact of this discovery is that they
and damping b of the theoretical function of the cases happen during the strong motion part of accelerograms of
analyzed in Fig. 2 are indicated in Table 1. large earthquakes in epicentral zones or for long distances,
as the Mexico 1985 earthquake demonstrates. Further-
4. Free vibration of soils in large earthquake accelerograms more, for some time the peak ground acceleration of the
estimated from autocorrelograms record corresponds to these free vibrations of the soil as the
case of Boeing 270 of the Nisqually 2001 earthquake.
The reason why free vibration happens during some This result suggests that accelerograms with harmonic
large earthquakes, which seems like a paradox, is due to the autocorrelograms correspond mainly to episodes of free
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
6 S. Ruiz, G.R. Saragoni / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29 (2009) 1–16
Fig. 3. (a) Free vibration in different accelerograms, (b) zoom of strong motion zones showing almost harmonic damped vibrations, and
(c) autocorrelogram with same period and damping.
vibrations of the soil and the deterministic components
found in autocorrelograms by other authors in the past are
these free vibrations of the soil.
In Fig. 4, the corresponding autocorrelograms for the
three components of Cauquenes station, 1985 Chile,
Tarzana station, Northridge 1994 and SCT station, Mexico
1985 are shown. In this figure it can be also observed that
in addition to the deterministic autocorrelograms for the
horizontal components, the vertical autocorrelograms also
show the same pattern.
This situation, which is not always frequent, can also be
appreciated for the Tarzana vertical, Northridge 1994
earthquake in the near source region of a large earthquake
(PGAE1 g). Fig. 4 suggests that in some cases the vertical
mode of the soil vibration can also be estimated from the
autocorrelograms.
From Fig. 4 it can be appreciated that the characteristic
period of both horizontal autocorrelograms are similar,
however vertical autocorrelograms have a period that is
lower than the horizontal ones. In general, the vertical
damping for vertical vibrations is higher.
These episodes of vertical free vibrations of the soil that
are due to seismic waves arriving from the source are
strongly coupled in the three accelerogram components by
high-frequency Rayleigh waves [9,22].
5. Soil damping
Soil damping b has been empirically calculated by using
the autocorrelogram technique. The values obtained from
Fig. 2 for CDAO N00E and SCT N00E, Mexico 1985, San
Isidro Longitudinal, Chile Central 1985, Tarzana 90,
Whittier Narrow 1987 and Boeing 270, Nisqually 2001,
are summarized in Table 1.
In particular, the soil damping values estimated for
SCT and CDAO stations for the lake clay of Mexico
City are larger than the ones estimated by the resonant
column test of b ¼ 0.01–0.03 [23] and by the random
decrement technique of b ¼ 0.02–0.03 [20]. The b values
obtained from the autocorrelogram technique usually
slightly overestimate soil damping values due to the
interference of small seismic wave arrivals during free
vibrations and the interference of the other higher mode
response.
Small damping values as SCT and CDAO Mexico City
stations lead to a large number of free vibrations which
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
S. Ruiz, G.R. Saragoni / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29 (2009) 1–16 7

Fig. 4. Autocorrelograms of the three accelerogram components, showing free damped vibrations in horizontal and vertical directions.

together with the soil’s natural periods of 2.04 and 3.57 s Table 2
produce long free vibrations of 20 s or more which affect Soil profile of Central de Abasto Oficinas (CDAO ) acelerographic
stations, Mexico City [24]
the total duration of the accelerogram and explain their
observed differences. Depth (m) Soil type Shear wave velocity (m/s)

6. Soil fundamental period estimation using Fourier spectra 0–5 Silty sand 60
5–42 Clay 60
and comparison with the autocorrelogram technique
42–52 Sandy silt and silty clay 110
52–56 Stiff clay 110
In this section the periods of the peaks of the Fourier Hard layer 900
spectra are compared with the periods estimated from
autocorrelation functions of the accelerograms, which
correspond to free vibrations of the soil.
During the 1985 Mexico earthquake, important accel- peaks of the Fourier spectra and also matches the period of
erograms were recorded at the Mexico City lake zone. I the first cycle of the autocorrelograms as indicated in
n particular, the two components of the accelerograms Table 3.
recorded at CDAO accelerographic station in Mexico From Table 3 it can be observed that the soil
City for the 1985 and other three earthquakes are fundamental period T1 obtained from the peak of Fourier
studied in this section. The stratigraphic soil of CDAO spectra coincide with the one from the autocorrelograms
station is presented in Table 2. In addition, in Fig. 5, for the two components of the four different earthquakes
the two horizontal components of CDAO station studied. In addition, these values match the results of
are shown with their corresponding Fourier spectra Eq. (1) of the elastic soil 1D model for the fundamental
and normalized autocorrelograms for the 1985 Mexico period:
earthquake.
The soil fundamental period estimated from the four 4H
T1 ¼ . (5)
different earthquakes is 3.53 s [25]. This value matches the VS
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
8 S. Ruiz, G.R. Saragoni / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29 (2009) 1–16

Fig. 5. Horizontal components CDAO station, Mexico earthquake 1985 with their corresponding Fourier spectra and autocorrelograms.

It can be concluded for these cases that Fourier spectra
and autocorrelograms represent mainly free vibrations of
soils in shear mode with few episodes of forced seismic
wave response. Therefore, the fundamental soil period can
be also estimated either by autocorrelogram or Fourier
spectra techniques from large earthquake accelerograms.
7. Soil higher modes
The presence of different modes of soil vibration in
accelerograms can be also detected using Fourier spectra.
In Fig. 6 the first, second and third horizontal mode
frequencies of the soil are shown by the three Fourier
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
S. Ruiz, G.R. Saragoni / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29 (2009) 1–16 9

Table 3 second mode damping is somewhat larger than the one

Comparison of soil natural period at CDAO station from different corresponding to the first mode.
Mexican earthquakes estimated from Fourier spectra and autocorrelo-
gram techniques
8. Soil degradation in free vibrations from large earthquakes
Earthquake Magnitude MS Autocorrelogram Fourier spectra
period (s) period (s) The soil natural period estimated in Table 3 for CDAO
soil for Mexico September 19, 1985 earthquake compared
Component Component
with the one corresponding for the aftershock of Septem-
N00E N90E N00E N90E ber 21, 1985 shows a slight degradation. The difference
between the main event and small events such as the
09/19/1985 8.1 3.69 3.93 3.62 3.78
09/21/1985 7.6 3.71 3.62 3.71 3.43 Guerrero 1989 and Ometepec 1995 earthquakes may be a
04/25/1989 6.9 3.29 3.47 3.35 3.46 consequence of soil non-linearity due to high peak ground
09/14/1995 7.4 (Mw) 3.17 2.99 3.13 2.85 accelerations or because small magnitude earthquakes only
excite the upper part of the soil stratum.
On March 3, 1985 an earthquake MS ¼ 7.8 struck the
central part of Chile, and this event was recorded by many
spectra peaks for CDAO N00E and CDAO N90E stations. In particular, accelerograms recorded at Iloca
accelerograms of the CDAO, Mexico City; for different station, at an epicentral distance of 200 km and with a
Mexican earthquakes and for both components of PGA of 0.2 g, are studied in detail, in a similar manner as
Ventanas and Almendral, Valparaiso stations for the that for the CDAO Mexican station.
Chile 1985 earthquake and the corresponding main after- The period observed in the autocorrelograms and
shocks. Fourier spectra of Fig. 8 can be easily identified in the
The frequency values of the different Fourier spectra accelerograms. Table 7 summarizes the soil natural periods
peaks for the CDAO, Ventanas and Almendral, Valparaiso estimated for Iloca station from Fourier spectra and
stations are presented in Table 4. These values satisfy the autocorrelograms for the main shock and four aftershocks
approximate relationship 1:3:5 indicated in Table 5. of the 1985 Chile earthquake.
Therefore, the frequency of the Fourier spectra peaks The soil periods estimated for Iloca do not show
satisfies the relation, expressed in this case as a natural significant soil degradation from earthquakes of different
period of vibration, by Eq. (1). magnitudes. Similar results were obtained for most of
From the analysis of these accelerograms of large the Chilean accelerographic stations with the exception of
earthquakes, it can be concluded that upper modes of the ones located on gravel and sand that show light
vibration of soils are also observed in accelerograms of degradation, despite the large magnitude of this earth-
large earthquake and they satisfy the shear soil vibration quake [26].
condition given by Eq. (1). However, the accelerographic networks that recorded
These last results can only be observed when the soil is Chilean and Mexican 1985 earthquakes did not consider
allowed by the earthquake source to freely vibrate in down-hole arrays allowing a detailed study on the non-
time windows with enough time to show many cycles linear characteristics of soil response in order to confirm
of free vibration. These time windows are sometime that slight variation of soil natural period estimated from
possible between intermittent wave arrivals of a large free vibrations in accelerograms is due to this effect.
earthquake. The observed differences between the soil natural periods
Since soil vibrates in the fundamental and higher modes, for both horizontal accelerographic components may be
the best way to estimate the modal damping is filtering the due to seismic wave arrivals with a strong directivity effect,
accelerogram around the fundamental period and then which the soil response attenuates by coupling the motion
estimating the damping from the corresponding autocor- in both directions.
relogram. The important Tarzana 901, Northridge 1994 accelero-
With the assumption that Fourier spectra have a narrow gram has the largest PGA ¼ 1.8 g of this earthquake
band characteristic, it is possible to filter the accelerograms and no important soil degradation was apparently ob-
avoiding the influence of the other modes and have a better served. In Fig. 9, the Tarzana 901 record is shown overlaid
estimation of the soil modal damping. with a sine wave of a 0.27 s period and constant amplitude.
This technique is applied to the CDAO N00E 1985 The sine wave is shown in four parts of the accelerogram
Mexico, Ventanas EW and Almendral S40E, Valparaiso, illustrating that the record keeps the same characteristic
Chile 1985 accelerograms. Fig. 7 shows the corresponding period.
autocorrelograms for the filtered accelerograms around the However, it must keep in mind that PGA alone is not the
first and second mode periods. The autocorrelograms have best indication for the degree of soil nonlinearity induced
the characteristics given by Eq. (3). Table 6 indicates the by the quakes, and this is particularly important for
damping obtained for the first and second soil modes. accelerograms having significant high-frequency spikes as it
From these figures and Table 6 it can be observed that the is the case of some of the analyzed.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
10 S. Ruiz, G.R. Saragoni / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29 (2009) 1–16

9. Influence of soil free vibrations on soil dynamic
amplification during large earthquakes
The presence of free vibrations detected in accelerograms
from large earthquakes corresponds to episodes of soil
energy radiation of shear waves rather than energy
amplification of incoming seismic waves claimed by the
dynamic S-wave soil amplification theory. However, the
coincidence of mode natural periods of free vibration and
periods of soil amplification both given by Eq. (1) leads to

Fig. 6. Fourier spectra of accelerograms showing the peaks corresponding to the three first soil mode frequencies. Frequencies remain the same for each
station for different seisms.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
S. Ruiz, G.R. Saragoni / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29 (2009) 1–16 11

Fig. 6. (Continued)

Table 4
Natural frequencies of the different modes of vibration of soil estimated from Fourier spectra peaks

Earthquake Soil mode natural frequencies (Hz)

First mode. Component Second mode. Component Third mode. Component

México CDAO N00E N90E N00E N90E N00E N90E

09/19/1985 0.28 0.25 0.74 0.78 1.27 1.26
09/21/1985 0.27 0.29 0.77 0.82 1.31 1.27
04/25/1989 0.30 0.29 0.90 0.82 1.34 1.36
09/14/1995 0.32 0.35 0.88 0.84 1.42 1.41
Chile Ventanas EW NS EW NS EW NS
03/03/1985 1.00 0.99 2.72 3.02 4.38 4.53
04/09/1985 1.11 1.02 2.93 2.66 4.22 4.84
Chile Almendral S40E N50E S40E N50E S40E N50E
03/03/1985 1.21 1.07 3.59 3.44 4.74 4.26

Table 5
Ratio between the soil mode natural frequency and the first natural mode frequency estimated from Fourier spectra peak values

Earthquake Ratio between different soil natural mode frequencies

First mode/first mode. Component Second mode/first mode. Component Third mode/first mode. Component

Mexico CDAO N00E N90E N00E N90E N00E N90E

09/19/1985 1 1 2.6 3.1 4.5 5.0
09/21/1985 1 1 2.9 2.8 4.9 4.4
04/25/1989 1 1 3.0 2.8 4.5 4.7
09/14/1995 1 1 2.8 2.4 4.4 4.0
Chile Ventanas EW NS EW NS EW NS
03/03/1985 1 1 2.7 3.1 4.4 4.6
04/09/1985 1 1 2.6 2.6 3.8 4.7

Chile Almendral S40E N50E S40E N50E S40E N50E

03/03/1985 1 1 3.0 3.2 3.9 4.0

the misinterpretation that all the energy released at those
values is only due to soil amplification.
These results mainly explain the discrepancy observed
between the soil dynamic amplification theory and the ratio
between the amplitude Fourier spectra of accelerographic
records obtained in the soil and the bedrock.
In several works related to the amplification of the
subsoil of Mexico City, the maximum amplification factor
has been found around the observed fundamental period.
Nevertheless, this predicted amplitude value is extremely
smaller than the one that was observed. Kawase and Aki
[8] found great discrepancy in the spectral ratios between
the accelerograms of the 1985 Mexico earthquake, and the
computed one using the 1D model.
Fig. 10 shows the Fourier amplitude spectral ratios of
the accelerograms observed at SCT and CDAO with
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
12 S. Ruiz, G.R. Saragoni / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29 (2009) 1–16

Fig. 7. Comparison of autocorrelograms of the two first soil modes. CDAO N00E, Mexico, Almendral S40E1, Chile and Ventanas EW, Chile.

Table 6 S-wave excitation, evaluated with the SHAKE [27]

Autocorrelogram soil period and damping estimation for the first two program when the models were subjected to the Tacubaya
modes
recorded accelerogram.
CDAO N00E Ventanas EW Almendral S40E The models consider strain-dependent shear module
Mexico 1985 Chile 1985 Chile 1985 and damping ratio values for the clay according to Romo
et al. [23].
First mode
In theses sites, as in most of the area of the Lake Zone,
Period (s) 3.57 1 0.83
Filtrate rank (s) 10–2 2–0.67 2–0.5 the impedance ratio is about 0.10. In both stations the
Damping 0.018 0.04 0.06 calculated amplifications factors are considerably smaller
than the observed spectral ratios: about 5 times in the SCT-
Second mode
Period (s) 1.35 0.37 0.28 EW component and about 4 times in the CDAO-NS
Filtrate rank (s) 2–1 0.67–0.25 0.5–0.2 component. Predominant site periods are approximately
Damping 0.09 0.08 0.09 similar to the ones observed.
The amplification relations calculated assuming that the
soil is overlaying bedrock are also included in Fig. 10 [10].
respect to TACY (Tacubaya), a hill zone station, for the This transfer function represents the boundary limit in the
1985 Mexico earthquake [9]. This figure also includes the S-wave amplification approach, because in this model the
amplification characteristics calculated under the 1D effects of radiation damping are disregarded. However, this
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
S. Ruiz, G.R. Saragoni / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29 (2009) 1–16 13

Fig. 8. Horizontal components of Iloca station, Chile Central 1985 earthquake, showing their corresponding Fourier spectra and autocorrelograms.

curve is also lower than the one observed, illustrating
the important effect of the free vibrations in the Lake
Zone. When the soil is overlaying rigid rock, the transfer
function reaches a maximum value of 20, but when the
model is assuming elastic rock, this amplification factor is
only about 8. Namely, although the base should be the
considered elastic, a significant amount of the shear waves
elastic energy (about 60%) is not effectively removed from
the soil layer by radiation, due to the free vibration effects
found.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
14 S. Ruiz, G.R. Saragoni / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29 (2009) 1–16

Table 7
Estimation of soil natural period at Iloca station considering the main shock and four aftershocks of the 1985 Chile earthquake using autocorrelogram and
Fourier spectra [26]

Earthquake Magnitude MS PGA (cm/s2) Autocorrelogram period (s) Fourier spectra period (s)
Component Component Component

EW NS EW NS EW NS

03/03/1985 7.8 277 209 0.31 0.32 0.29 0.30

03/03/1985R 6.4 42 44 0.29 0.30 0.30 0.31
03/25/1985R 6.3 89 101 0.29 0.30 0.29 0.31
04/03/1985R 6.0 74 52 0.30 – 0.31 0.28
04/09/1985R 7.2 110 159 0.30 0.32 0.30 0.33

R ¼ afterstock.

intervals in between without important seismic wave

Fig. 9. Comparison in four parts between Tarzana 901, 1994 of PGA 1.8 g
with sine wave of the same period and constant amplitude, showing that
the soil period remains constant.
The fact that more than 60% of the amplification factors
considered in the analyzed cases of 1985 Mexico City are
mainly due to the free vibrations found also explain the
paradox why the 1D model of the soil response in the area
of the Lake Zone has rendered similar results than more
sophisticated 3D models [28].
In addition, the duration of free vibrations controlled by
common low soil damping and different soil fundamental
periods explains the time duration differences between
different accelerographic stations at the Lake Zone.
Accelerogram stations with soil with longer natural periods
have longer duration, phenomena which cannot be
explained by the 1D S-wave theory [8].
10. Conclusions
1. Free vibration in soils happens many times during some
large earthquakes, something that seems like a paradox.
The reason is because the energy released from seismic
sources is not stationary in time, allowing relaxation
arrivals from the source in which free vibrations of the
soil can happen many times along the accelerograms.
Therefore, accelerograms of this type for large earth-
quakes can be considered as a random sequence of
seismic episodes with seismic wave arrivals and episodes
of free vibrations of the soil.
Observation of free vibration of soils in accelerograms
from large earthquakes will not be always possible, it
depends on the duration of the time windows without
important wave arrivals, compared with the natural
period and damping of the soil, and the non-linear
response of the soil. Therefore, soil free vibrations are
difficult to estimate in accelerograms of short duration
and in the ones with long duration, but with more
continuous arrivals of seismic waves.
2. Two techniques to estimate free vibrations of soils from
accelerograms were presented: autocorrelograms and
Fourier spectra. Both techniques sometimes allow
measuring up to the three first soil modes as well as
the corresponding modal damping. These techniques
also allow measuring natural periods and the damping
of the free vertical vibrations of the soil.
These techniques allow to experimentally measure soil
properties under large deformations due to large earth-
quakes and comparing them with the ones obtained
from laboratory measurements.
Soil damping estimates using the autocorrelogram
technique can be overestimated due to the interference
of small seismic wave arrivals and higher mode
responses during soil free vibrations.
3. Free vibration modal periods satisfy the classic 1D
equation for S-waves, specially the three first mode
natural frequencies satisfying the 1:3:5 ratio.
Free soil vibrations correspond to episodes of shear
wave soil energy radiation rather than energy amplifica-
tion of incoming seismic waves claimed by the dynamic
S-wave soil amplification theory.
4. The coincidence of mode natural periods of free
vibrations and periods of soil amplification leads to
the misinterpretation that all the observed phenomena
during large earthquakes are only due to soil amplification
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
S. Ruiz, G.R. Saragoni / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29 (2009) 1–16
Fig. 10. Disagreement between the maximum observed and estimated values for amplitude spectral relations of SCT and CDAO accelerograms with
respect to TACY Mexico’85 [10].
of incident S-waves without including the free vibration
episodes.
These results mainly explain the underestimation of
the soil dynamic S-wave amplification theory and
observed ratio between Fourier spectra of accelero-
graphic records obtained from the soil and bedrock.
The longer duration of accelerograms, which cannot
be explained by the S-wave amplification theory, is due
to the presence of free vibrations of the soil found
through the records.
Acknowledgement
Authors wish to thank Professor José Manuel Roesset of
Texas A&M University for the comments and reviewing of
this paper’s draft.
References
[1] Duke CM. Effects of ground on destructiveness of large earthquakes.
J Soil Mech Found Div Am Soc Civil Eng 1958;84(SM3):1–23.
[2] Sezawa K. Possibility of the free—oscillations of the surface layer
excited by the seismic waves. Bull Earthquake Res Inst 1930;13:1–12.
[3] Sezawa K, Kanai K. Decay constants of seismic vibrations of a
surface layer. Bull Earthquake Res Inst 1935;13:251–65.
[4] Kanai K, Yoshizawa S. Relation between the amplitude of earth-
quake motions and the nature of surface layer. Bull Earthquake Res
Inst 1956;34:168–84.
15
[5] Kanai K. The requisite conditions for the predominant vibration of
ground. Bull Earthquake Res Inst 1957;35:457–70.
[6] Astroza M, Saragoni GR, Yañez F. The Mexico earthquake of
September 19, 1985. In: Fourth Chilean congress on seismology and
earthquake engineering, Viña del Mar, 1986 [in Spanish].
[7] Faccioli E, Reséndiz D. Soil dynamics: behaviour including liquefac-
tion. In: Lomnitz C, Rosenblueth E, editors. Developments in
geotechnical engineering. Amsterdam, Oxford, New York, NY:
Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company; 1976.
[8] Kawase H, Aki K. A study on the response of a soft basin for
incident S, P and Rayleigh waves with special reference to the long
duration observed in Mexico City. Bull Seismol Soc Am 1989;79(5):
1361–82.
[9] Gómez A, Saragoni GR. Interpretation of dynamic soil effects on
Mexico City Valley using the dense accelerograph network. In:
Proceedings of the fifth international, conference on seismic zonation,
vol. 1, Nice, France; 1995. p. 747–54.
[10] Gomez A. Interpretation of soil effect at Mexico City valley using
accelerograph high-density arrays. PhD thesis, Facultad de Ingenier-
ı́a, Universidad Autónoma de Mexico, Mexico; 2002 [in Spanish].
[11] Bard PY, Tucker BE. Ridge and tunnel effects: comparing observa-
tion with theory. Bull Seismol Soc Am 1985;75:905–22.
[12] Geli L, Bard PY, Jullien B. The effect of topography on earthquake
ground motion: a review and new results. Bull Seismol Soc Am 1988;
78:42–63.
[13] Housner GW. Characteristics of strong—motion earthquakes. Bull
Seismol Soc Am 1947;37(1):19–31.
[14] Tajimi H. A statistical method of determining the maximum response
of a building structure during an earthquake. In: Proceedings of the
second world conference on earthquake engineering, vol. II, Tokyo,
Japan; 1960. p. 781–98.
[15] Bendat J, Piersol AC. Random data: analysis and measurement
procedures. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley-Interscience; 1986.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
16 S. Ruiz, G.R. Saragoni / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29 (2009) 1–16
[16] Arias A, Petit-Laurent L. Autocorrelation and power spectra function
of strong motion accelerogram. Rev IDIEM 1963;3(3) [in Spanish].
[17] Liu S. Autocorrelation and power spectral density functions of the
Parkfield earthquake of June 27, 1966. Bull Seismol Soc Am
1969;59(4):1475–93.
[18] Lungu D, Demetrio S, Cornea T. Frequency bandwidth of Vrancea
earthquakes and the 1991 edition of seismic Code of Romania. In:
Earthquake engineering, 10th world conference, Balkema, Rotter-
dam; 1992.
[19] Ruiz S, Saragoni GR. Experimental measurement of 1D soil dynamic
response by using autocorrelograms of accelerograms of MS ¼ 7.8,
1985 Chile earthquake. In: Proceedings of the fifth Congreso Chileno
de Geotecnia, Santiago, Chile; 2004 [in Spanish].
[20] Yang JCS, Qi GZ, Pavlin V, Durelli AJ, Esteva L. In-situ
determination of soil damping in the lake deposit area of Mexico
City. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng 1989;8(1):43–52.
[21] Huerta CI, Roesset JM, Stokoe KH. Evaluation of the random
decrement method for in-situ soil properties estimation. In: Proceed-
ings of second international symposium on the effects of surface
geology on seismic motion, vol. II. Recent progress and new horizon
on ESG study, Yokohama, Japan; 1998. p. 749–56.
[22] Malischewsky PG, Lomnitz C, Wuttke F, Saragoni GR. Prograde
Rayleigh-wave motion in the valley of Mexico. Geofis Int 2006;5(3):
149–62.
[23] Romo MP, Jaime A, Reséndiz D. The Mexico earthquake of
September 19, 1985. General soil conditions and clay properties in the
valley of Mexico. Earthquake Spectra 1988;4(4):731–52.
[24] Seed HB, Romo MP, Jaime A, Lysmer J. The Mexico earthquake
of September 19, 1985 relationships between soil conditions
and earthquake ground motions. Earthquake Spectra 1998;4(4):
687–729.
[25] Singh SK, Lermo J, Domı́nguez T, Ordaz M, Espinosa JM, Mena E,
et al. The Mexico earthquake of September 19, 1985. A study of
amplification of seismic waves in the valley of Mexico with respec to a
Hill Zone site. Earthquake Spectra 1988;4(4):653–73.
[26] Saragoni GR, Ruiz S. Elastic 1D models from the dynamic
response analyzed of Central Chile earthquake accelerograms. In:
Proceedings of fifth Congreso Chileno de Geotecnia, Chile; 2004 [in
Spanish].
[27] Schanabel B, Lysmer J, Seed HB. SHAKE, a computer program for
earthquake response analysed of horizontal layered sites. Report no.
EERC 72-12U, Berkeley, CA; 1972.
[28] Reinoso E. Two and three dimensional scattering from topo-
graphical structure and alluvial valleys and comparisons with
accelerometric data: The case of Mexico City. Paper 1643. In:
Eleventh World Conference on earthquake engineering, Acapulco,
Mexico; 1996.