EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING A N D STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS, VOL.

6 , 167-187 (1978)

EMPIRICAL SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY EQUATIONS IN TERMS OF

CHARACTERISTIC SOIL INDEXES
YUTAKA OHTA AND NORITOSHI GOT0
Department of Arcltitectirral Engineering, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan

SUMMARY
An investigation to systematize empirical equations for the shear wave velocity of soils was made in terms of four
characteristic indexes. The adopted indexes are the N-value of the Standard Penetration Test, depth where the soil
is situated, geological epoch and soil type. As some of these indexes are variates belonging to interval scales while
others belong to nominal or ordinal scales, the technique known as a multivariate analysis cannot be employed.
A new approach to the theory of quantification, after C. Hayashi, was introduced and developed for solving this
difficulty.
Fifteen sets of empirical equations to estimate low strain shear wave velocity theoretically may be obtained by
combining the above four indexes. All of these sets were derived by use of about 300 data, and their accuracies
were evaluated by means of correlation coefficients between the measured and estimated shear wave velocities.
The best equation was found to be the one which included all the indexes, and its correlation coefficient was 0.86.
The empirical equation relating the standard penetration N-value to the shear wave velocity provided a correlation
of only 0-72, and is one of the lowest ranking among the 15 sets of equations.

INTRODUCTION
Shear wave velocity of the near-surface ground has been recognized as one of the important soil properties
in earthquake and civil engineering. Significant problems in earthquake engineering such as design earthquake
motions, soil-structure interaction and wave amplification require for their solution a knowledge of the
shear wave velocities of soil deposits. At present, effective techniques for in situ measurement of shear waves
have been developed and considerable amounts of such data have been accumulated.14 Concurrently, many
empirical equations have been proposed for estimating the shear wave velocity by use of several soil
indexessI0, so as to avoid the problems of in siru measurement and also to investigate the physical relation
between soil index and shear wave velocity. Such researches have been very popular in Japan. The most
common equations are based on the N-value which is obtained in conjunction with a Standard Penetration
Test.ll The fact that so many empirical relations between the N-value and the shear wave velocity have been
proposed, however, demonstrates that the shear wave velocity cannot be described satisfactorily in terms of
the N-value alone. To improve such empirical equations, several proposals have been presented introducing
other factors such as soil type and depth from the ground ~urface.'~-'~ Nevertheless, no significant work to
date has investigated comprehensively the relation of the shear wave velocity to other characteristic indexes
of the soil.
In this paper, a method is proposed to construct empirical formulas for estimating the low-strain level
shear wave velocity systematically in terms of all the soil indexes which are practically available. In the field
of shear wave velocity measurement, it is easy and also usual to describe N-value, depth, geological age and
soil type at any depths. Sometimes, data on water level, density and electric specific resistivity are available.
All of these may be important in characterizing soils. Thus, we tried to construct empirical equations
including as many characteristic indexes as possible.
There seem to be several reasons why empirical equations in the past have been formulated in terms of
only one or at most two variates. One reason, perhaps, is the shortage of shear wave velocity data, another
may be the difficulty of processing data. In the case when all the variates are metric, i.e. expressible as numeric
0098-8847/78/0206-0167$01 .OO Received 31 December 1976
@ 1978 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Revised 16 May 1977
167
168 Y. OHTA AND N. GOT0

values, a simple multivariate analysis is applicable with ease. In our case, however, some of the important
indexes are non-metric. Consequently, a more advanced approach to data processing must be introduced for
constructing an empirical equation of which the variates are metric and non-metric.

ANALYSIS
Scale classification of soil indexes
Commonly available characteristic indexes, used with in situ shear wave velocity measurement by means
of a borehole, are N-value, depth from the ground surface, geological age and soil type (grain size). In these,
however, quantitative and qualitative indexes are mixed. By definition of scale classification,16 the above
indexes have been classified into a few groups by their properties listed in Table I. An essential difference
in the classification depends upon whether the index is describable as a metric value or not. For example,
the indexing of geological age is best to be regarded as a nominal scale since the order itself has no special
meaning in this case. All indexes considered in this report are either metric or non-metric variates. If the
empirical equation involved metric indexes alone, its derivation could be obtained easily by well-known
multivariate analysis, which has been used in formulating all empirical equations in the past. However, in
cases containing non-metric indexes as predictor or independent variates, the ordinary techniques are not
applicable. One method to overcome this difficulty is to introduce the so-called quantification theory,”
which was first developed in the field of social science.

Table I. Scale classification of soil indexes

~

Scale Index
~~ ~ ~

Nominal Type of soil, Underwater level (above, below), etc.

Ordinal Geological age (Alluvium, Diluvium, Tertiary), etc.
Interval Velocity, N-value, Depth, Density, etc.

Theory of quantiJcation
Let us denote metric variables in an empirical equation by xl, x,, ...,xp, with corresponding weighting
coefficients b,, be, ...,bp, and assume that q items of non-metric indexes consist of kjcategories f o r j = 1,2, ...,q
and that a weighting coefficient corresponding to the kth category in thejth item is written as z j k . Defining
a function specified as
(1 N when the ath sample responds to the kth category in thejth item

then a general formula for the ath sample in terms of metric and non-metric variates is expressible as

where E , is a residual, and n is the total number of data. The relation of the independent (metric and non-
metric) variates to dependent variates is schematically shown in Figure 1.
In equation (1) unknown coefficients are bi for i = 1,2,...,p and z j k for j = 1,2,...,q and for
k = 1,2, ...,K j . These p + Kl + K, + ... + Kj unknown coefficients are evaluated from the condition that the
square sum of residuals between the measured and estimated values should be minimized, that is,

aslab, = o (i = 1,2, ...,PI

aspzjk= o ( j = 1,2, ...,4) (k = 1,2, ..., K,) (3)
 EMPIRICAL SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY EQUATIONS 169

b0
0

s
.-
3
m
4-
B
V

C
.-0
v)

iix
W

I2
170 Y. OHTA AND N. GOT0

Thus we get a set of simultaneous linear equations as

Q 4 n
5 (;xaixam]6,+
i-1 a-1
j-112-x1{ 8 a ( j k ) x a m } z j k = xy
a-1 axan ( m = 1,2,***,p)
n

hence an assumption of c&lxai = 0 (i = 1,2, . . . , p ) is introduced with no loss of generality. Writing r for
+ +
Kl K, + ...+ KQ,we have normal equations with ( p r ) unknowns. The solution can be obtained easily by
standard techniques.
Each equation in equations (4) is composed of three kinds of terms involving metric, non-metric and
mutually interferent variates; that is, equations (4) are formally written as
[metric] terms + [interferent] terms = known [metric] terms
[interferent] terms + [non-metric] terms = known [non-metric] terms
Then equations (4) are symbolically written as

In equation (9,a,,, a12, aZ1,a,,, U and V are matrices of which the elements are known, with orders of
( p , p ) , ( p , r ) , (r, p ) , (r,r), ( p , 1) and (r, I), respectively. And 9and Y are matrices having unknown elements of
orders of ( p , 1) and (r, 1). Multiplying the following matrix of order ( p , r ) from the left-hand side into both
sides of equation (5),
+ - a,, PR-l

we obtain
I, all PR-l Q
- a,, P9l-l 1+ '$%-l L1 1 (6)

where
V

P = as1a12, Q = ay,l, R = a,, - Qa,,

U +all PR-'(QU - V)
+ '$%-l(QV - U) I (7)

= aG1 Q = a12aG1, 9l = all -Ba,,

and
I,: unit matrix of order ( p , p )
I,: unit matrix of order (r,r)
Writing 9,and Yorespectively for the solution of simultaneous equations with metric variables only and
for that of non-metric variates only, then they take the forms Q0= a y . U and Yo= a,-,lV. The solution
including two sorts of variates can be expressed independently in metric (9,)and non-metric (Yo)terms,
with a correction term due to their interference, that is,
9 = 9,+PR-l(QU - V) = 9,+PR-Va,, 0,-V)
Y = Y,+?)%-l(QV-U) =~ o + ~ % - 1 ( a 1 2 ~ o - U )

These expressions are beneficial for an evaluation of the contributions of metric and non-metric terms to the
I
final solutions.
By means of optimum coefficients (bi,z j k ) obtained by solving equation (5) or equation (8), the empirical
equation is written as
 EMPIRICAL SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY EQUATIONS 171

The residual S is

and the correlation coefficient R, between the measured and estimated values is also

These equations for S and R, are useful for evaluating the accuracy and reliability of an empirical equation.

Preparatory adjustment of the variates

In equation (l), a linear relation is a priori hypothesized between the criterion (dependent) variable Y and
predictor (independent) variable xi as to the metric terms. Thus, an adjustment must be performed before
applying the quantification technique to our problem; or in other words, it is necessary to find a function
which satisfies approximately a linear relation between metric variables xi and Y. Empirical relations which
have been presented up to now are more or less instructive for this preparatory adjustment.
Referring to the relation of the shear wave velocity Vs to the N-value, most empirical equations have been
in the form of
VS= c1N C a
where c, and c2 are constants. This suggests that a linear relation between log Vs and log N is plausible.
The relation of shear wave velocity to the depth below the ground surface has not been studied in detail, but
for the compressional wave velocity Vp some empirical relations exist, such as18
v p = V0+C,H
However, this applies only to materials in deeper layers than those in our case. Regarding the depth as an
index of the overburden pressure, t, by which the soil has been compressed, we can visualize relations
between Vp and t aslev 2o
Vp = (V,z+ c, Pa>*
v p = [ v: + Cl(t + t o p ] *
where V,, to, C , and C, are constants. All of these show a tendency for compressional wave velocity increase
with increasing depth; this tendency is perhaps true for the shear wave velocity as well. However, appro-
priate functions for the linearization should be obtained by plotting the real data of Vs us each variate, while
making reference to the above-mentioned relations.
For the variates involving non-numeric indexes, there is no indication of such relationships. The only
preparation we can make is to search for an appropriate item-category set. For this, illustrations showing
shear wave velocity distribution due to each non-metric index may be helpful.

DATA
Acquisition of data
In our analysis, 300 sets of available data with a description about shear wave velocity, N-value, depth,
geological age and soil type were used. Most of these are from alluvial plains in Japan.
As most of the data used in this research were taken from graphs and columnar sections of the under-
ground structure cited in published reports and papers, they are not necessarily homogeneous. Some go into
details for the description but some others are .only general; therefore it was necessary to make a preliminary
adjustment of the data. The N-value and depth, which are metric variates, were averaged for an interval with
a constant shear wave velocity. Data having an N-value less than 2 or more than 50 were rejected, generally,
because of their poor accuracy; but the data for which the amount of penetration is described have been
adopted after correcting the value to that for a 30 cm penetration. Accuracy and necessity for correction of
 N U M B E R O F DATA d
vl 0
0 0 0
(m/s) I
-h 5031-83.2
v)
5
4 83.2- 138
5 138 - 229
m
C
229 - 380
1
4
Y
c*
380 - 630
2-5
z!
pr)
C
a z 6 - 12
PZ
2 : 13 - 31
$!? c
$!% 32 - 79
2
0, 80 - 200
0
a
0
a
: (m)
a 1 - 2
;I
5' 3 - 5
* m
v ) -
8% 6 - 13
s
4ti' 14 - 33
E
C
c 34,- 80
v)
0
2 -
2. fine sand
-
OLO9 'N a N V VLHO *A ZL I
 EMPIRICAL SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY EQUATIONS 173

N-values by the standard penetration test have frequently been discussed,2lnZ2but no special attention was
paid to it in this research.
Non-metric indexes adopted here are geological age and soil type. The former index was divided into two
categories as alluvium (Holocene) and diluvium (Pleistocene), and the latter into six categories of clay, fine
sand, medium sand, coarse sand, sand-and-gravel and gravel. So, for example, silty soils are placed in the
category of clay. All the data and their histograms in relation to each item-category group are shown in
Figure 2. The appropriateness of averaging the metric variables and of classifying the non-metric indexes
into the above-mentioned categories will be examined later, together with the evaluation of empirical
equations.
A note must be added here that shear wave velocities of in situ soils generally are determined by seismic
prospecting, in which the waves usually involve strains less than hence they are valid only at the pertinent
strain level, namely, in the low-strain condition.

Relations of shear waue velocity to individual index

To obtain a practical relationship between shear wave velocity and individual index, and to understand the
character of the data, the shear wave velocity us N-value was first plotted in a logarithmic graph (Figure 3).

50- . *
.
r I I ,,,I I I I I I I I 1 1

By inspection, a linear relation was hypothesized between log Vs and logN, and it was evaluated by least
squares to be
log VS= 1.931 +0*348logN (12)
which is equivalent to Vs = 85.34N0348 (m/s). The same procedure was applied for shear wave velocity
and depth (Figure 4), and the functional relation obtained was
log VS= 1.964+0*339logH (13)
that is, Vs = 92.12H0339(m/s), where H i s measured in metres. Though equation (13) is different from what
was suggested earlier in this paper, it is one of the simple relations which are indicative of a general tendency
of velocity increase with depth. For comparison, a more generalized equation
log Vs = c, f Cz(l0gH)C3
was applied and the three unknowns C,, C, and C, were determined. This demonstrated that equation (13)
is reasonable for the linearization between (Vs,H ) because of the slight difference in their correlation
coefficients and standard deviations. Very recently, a similar functional form to equation (13) was proposed
by an extension of the theory on effective confining pressure to s~bsoils.'~
174 Y. OHTA AND N. GOT0

Figure 5 shows histograms of shear wave velocity related to individual categories in the non-metric items
of geological age and soil type. The distributions in Figure 5 are scattered so widely that no definite empirical
fact is evident except that the shear wave velocity generally is lower for the smaller grain sizes or the younger
geological ages. We are convinced, however, that these wide scatterings are not due to random errors in the
shear wave velocity measurement (the error would be at most 10 per cent), but to the varieties of mechanical
and geological circumstances where the soils have been deposited. This thought stimulates us to interpret
shear wave velocity by means of characteristic indexes of the soils.

I-

1 5 10 50 m
Depth
Figure 4. Relation of shear wave velocity us depth

RESULTS
Empirical equations
From considerations in the previous section, the general empirical formula corresponding to equation (9)
is described as
log vs- log vs = CN(logN- log N ) + CH(logN- log H ) + & 6,(k) + 2k Fk 6&) (14)
k

where Ek and Fk are coefficients which represent each category in items of geological age (Epoch) and soil
-- -
type (Facies), and log Vs, logN and IogH mean averages in a logarithmic sense of the whole set of data.
F,, ...)F, can easily be obtained by the
Ten unknown coefficients in equation (14), that is, CN,C H ;El, E,;Fly
algorithms prescribed in the former sections.
Empirical equations for estimating the shear wave velocity can be constructed by an arbitrary combina-
tion among the specified four indexes. The total number of combinations of the four indexes (N-value,
depth, geological age and grain size) is simply

2 c,=
f=1
1s

Thus, 15 kinds of independent empirical equations were obtained and the contribution of each variate to the
velocity was investigated. Fifteen sets of the measured velocities us estimated velocities are illustrated in
Figures 6-1-6-15. Numbers in the figures indicate the number of matchings at the same co-ordinates and the
thick solid line with a slope of 45 degrees shows the correlation between measured and estimated velocities.
Correlation coefficients also were calculated by equation (1 1) and arranged in ascending order as shown in
Figure 7. The results are briefly summarized in Table 11. All the coefficients in the equations were normalized
 EMPIRICAL SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY EQUATIONS 175

--
L
L O . .

&

-
(r

~ I I I I I I I I 0

- 0 m o m 0 - 0
\ o m o c o 0 - 0 h
p q c u -

--
7
Eco In I I
--A w
A
0
m
c o o
o -
d
0
o h
d
In
In d N N

I In
V
0 E
n 3
w .r
>
3
7
P-
o u
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
176 Y. OHTA AND N. GOT0

2
1 2

Figure 6-1

Figure 6-1-6-15. Comparison of the observed and estimated shear wave velocities by several combinations of soil indexes

Figure 6-2
 EMPIRICAL SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY EQUATIONS 177

< 1 2 2 3 1 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 I 1
ln
h
21%1 ; 1 5 2
2 1 1
1 1

0 x > 3 2 2 1 1 1
u- 2 2
v,

s
m
0.
1
1 1 1
1
1 1
1 2
1
1 2
1
'12131
3'2 3 3 1
2'313
11' 2
1 1 1 2 13'5
1
3
1
1
v 1212122'1 1
1 1 12'2
; 1 2 2 1 2 11'11
2 2 2 2 1 2 5 3 2 1
1 1

500 -

(mls)

Figure 6-3

+ V; (calculated) (mls)

1 2
1 1 1

Figure 6-4
178 Y. OHTA AND N. GOT0

In 1 1 1 '121
a
U
- 2 2 24'2k11 1
1 1 1 41\31
l l
1
1:
1
::::\:
2 3 3 5 1 3 1

500 - 1 1
1
3
1
1
1
1

(mls) -

-3 V; (calculated) (rnls)
I 500 1000
1 " "

Figure 6-6
 EMPlRlCAL SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY EQUATIONS 179

Figure 6-7

-: : -
UI
0
1

1
2 1
1
l\ZZl
2.2132 3 1
1 1 2 1 2 r 1 1 : 1 l 1
1

rD 1 1 11.1’2 3 1 2

3n
Y
-
1 1 2 3 1 ‘1
;;@1?\2
1 1 1 11121\121
1 2 1
1 1 1
1 3 1
1
1 1 1 1\22
i a i 2 1 1 2 1 1 1
2 1 2 3 1 5 5‘2 1

500 - 1
2
2 1
1
1

(mlsl-
180 Y. OHTA AND N. GOT0

+ V; (calculated) (mls)
50 1 r 500 I I 1000
,

I 1 1

Figure 6-9

+ V; (calculated) (mls)
500 1000
" I '
I I
I

1 3 1 1 2

1 1
2 1 1 2 2 2
2 1 2 1 1 6 1 2 2 2

1 1 11'12 1 1 1
1
1

1 1 1 1 2 1' 1.
1 2 1 3 1 2 1 1 \ 1
1 2 3 2 1 4 4 1 1
1 1 1 3 2
1 2
\
1 2 1 1

c 1 1
1

(rnls)

Figure 6-10
 EMPIRICAL SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY EQUATIONS

1 ' " I

Figure 6-1 1

1 1 \s3121 1
1 2 4 2 1 4 1 3 1 1 1
<
UI ? l l X Z i l l ;
CI
0
1
1
1 22\ 1 2
1 1 1 4 2 1 5 1 2
1
1 .
a1 - 1
I
2 \ll
1 1 1 1 3 2
1 3 1 2 1 '112
1
. 1

2 2
< 1 1 llll'r
1111\1
1 1
1
1
1
0
n
Y
- 1 1 3 1 3 1 1 1 2 3 1
1 2 211'11121
1

1 l 1 ; l : Z l ~ :
1 1 1 3 3 5 4 1 3

-
1 1 121'11
3 21' 1
1 1 1 1 1 1
500 1
1 2
1
1

Figure 6-12
182 Y. OHTA AND N. GOT0

100 -

<
h
0
m
ul
-
1
<
rn
P -
Y

500 -
(rnls) -
Figure 6-13
 4Correlation Coefficient
e u l Q ) * b i o g
I I I I I I 1
2!
W
C
a
-1

3
0
3
x
W
0
s 0
B
z. 0
c)
3.
c HF
s”C HE z!
00
0
s. NE 5
2
U
Y NEF
E
VI

w
e,
NH
B HEF
0,
NHF a
NHE

NHEF
184 Y. OHTA AND N. GOT0

Table 11. Summary of empirical equations

Probable Correlation
No. Concerned index Equation error (%) coefficient
-
I Soil type 36.3 0.463

I1 Geological epoch Vs' = 172.9 1 000 31.5 0-621

(1:923) E
111 Depth 29.6 0.670
IV Geological epoch 28.5 0.696
Soil type 1.230
1.318
1*445
1.566

V N-value 27.4 0.719

VI N-value Vs' = 85.60N0*340 1.000 27.2 0-726
Soil type
(g)
1-222 F
VII Depth 25.2 0.765
Soil type 1-260
1.282
1.422
1.641

VIII Depth Vs' = 97*28H0*251

1.000 25.1 0-767
Geological epoch (1342)E
IX N-value Vs' = 92~18N0'2B5(1*000) 24.2 0-784
Geological epoch 1.456 E
X N-value
Geological epoch
Soil type
Vs' = 93*10N0'248
1 OOO
(l:448)E ):!i( 24.0 0.787

1-039
1-069
\1.221/ F
XI N-value 22.1 0.820

(q
Depth
XI1 Depth Vs' = 84.36H0'2451000 22.0 0.822
Geological (1:435) E
Soil type

1.927 F
XI11 N-value 21.5 0.830
Depth
Soil type
 EMPIRICAL SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY EQUATIONS 185

Table 11 (cont.)

Probable Correlation
No. Concerned index Equation error (%) coefficient
XIV N-value VS‘ = 68.44N0.209ffO.188 1 OO0 20.3 0.848
Depth (1:308)E
Geological epoch
XV N-value VS’ = 68-79N0”” Ho.lg9 19.7 0.856
Depth
Geological epoch
Soil type

Note: alluvium ‘clay

(di1uviurn)E fine sand
medium sand
coarse sand
sand and gravel
,gravel

by the coefficient of an alluvium-clay category. Hence the probable error in each empirical equation was
calculated as follows:

Error = [exp { 0 - 6 7 5 d ( g (Vo- VJ2/n)}- 1 1 x 100 (in per cent)

i=l

Ratlliing of einpirical equations

Examining the 15 correlation coefficients in Table 11, we can easily see that the accuracy of the empirical
equation is improved generally as the number of indexes increases. In the equation containing four indexes
of [N-value, depth, geological epoch and soil type], the correlation coefficient takes the highest value of 0.86
and a marked improvement can be seen there in comparison with the equation using only the N-value index,
of which the correlation coefficient is 0-72. Equations with correlation coefficients larger than 0.8 include
combinations of [N-value-Depth-Epoch], [Depth-Epoch-Type], [N-value-Depth-Type] and [N-value-
Depth]. It is worthy of note that the shear wave velocity can be estimated well by an empirical equation of
[Depth-Epoch-Type], that is, by an equation with no N value as variable. Combinations with the correlation
coefficient higher than 0.75 are [N-value-Epoch-Type], [N-value-Epoch], [Depth-Epoch] and [Depth- Type].
These suggest that the geological epoch (alluvium or diluvium) is an important and influential index in the
shear wave velocity, and agrees well with the preliminary result obtained by one of the authors.23 Further,
the contribution of depth to the velocity also seems significant. Another fact to note is that the accuracy of
the equations involving [Depth-Type] and [Depth-Epoch] is higher than that involving [N-value] only.
Equations with the correlation coefficient around 0.7 are by [N-value-Type], [N-value], [Epoch-Type] and
[Depth]. It was an unexpected result that the empirical equation consisting only of the [N-value] index was
little different in accuracy from those of [Epoch-Type] and [Depth]. This might be a strong criticism against
using an empirical equation of the single predictor N-value for estimating shear wave velocities. It is
true, however, that the N- value equations is the best among the equations having only one variate. Contrary
to proposals made in the past,12 the N-value equation is not significantly improved if the soil type is also
taken into consideration between clay and sand.
The fact that the velocity increases with grain size ( VsCltly< VS,,,~ < Vsgravel) was known p r e v i o u ~ l y . ~ ~
It also was recognized that the shear wave velocity of older soils is generally higher than that of younger soils.
13
186 Y. OHTA AND N. GOT0

The relationships mentioned above were automatically derived by the empirical equation consisting of two
indexes of [Epoch-Type]; that is,
Vs = 145.1 1.000 alluvium '1.000 clay
(1 *753diluvium 1-230 fine sand
1.318 medium sand
1445 coarse sand
1.566 sand and gravel
,1.828 gravel
though the correlation coefficient itself is not very high. These relationships also were suggested in the other
equations obtained here. This indicates that the selection and classification of items and categories in non-
metric indexes seem to be adequate. Some unsatisfactory results were obtained showing an unreasonable
inequality such as, for example, Vs (fine sand) > Vs (medium sand). Such disorders appear only in the case
of equations having a pair of indexes of [N-value and soil type]; the explanation is left to future investigations.

CONCLUSIONS
In this article an estimation of the shear wave velocity based on several kinds of soil indexes is demon-
strated, introducing and developing a quantification theory. Though the data available for analysis is
insufficient, both in quality and quantity, a highly accurate equation having a correlation coefficient of 0.86
was obtained. This satisfactory result must be due to the adoption of adequate indexes, and to the introduction
of a new technique to construct the empirical equation. Several high-ranking empirical equations in Table I1
have practical uses, although their application may be limited depending upon what kinds of soil indexes
actually are available.
Most of the equations obviously are more accurate than those available in the past. Nevertheless, a direct
velocity measurement may be essential. Strictly speaking, it is preferable to carry out field experiments
whenever the shear wave velocity is needed. Recently we proposed a simple and very accurate measurement
method: which is hoped to popularize in siru shear wave velocity measurements. Some may feel a contradic-
tion between that point of view and the intention of this article. One of the objectives of the present research
is to demand reconsideration among earthquake engineers who are accustomed to applying well-known but
inadequate empirical equations of shear wave velocity based on N-value only.
A point to be emphasized again is that all the data in this research are from alluvial plains in Japan, so
the direct application of the derived empirical equations to other countries may require circumspection. Still,
the developed procedure must undoubtedly have wide applicability not only in our immediate theme but also
in various kinds of data-processing problems.
Problems still remain for further improvement of the empirical equation. One of these is to use larger
amounts of high quality data; another is to select the soil indexes appropriately. It is expected that the
results might be improved by introducing other indexes such as ground water level and electric specific
resistivity, which are easily measured. In order to increase the significance of the empirical equations in
earthquake engineering, the shear wave velocities should be determined at higher strains. Important problems
still ahead of us are not only to derive an empirical equation from a practical point of view but also to investi-
gate the physical meaning behind it. The physical meaning of an N-value obtained by means of a standard
penetration test may not be self-evident. The same comment also applies to the depth index. Ease of obtaining
the field data on a given index and lucidness of its physical meaning are not necessarily compatible. Study
of the physical background of the empirical equations will give a clue to improving their accuracy.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors wish to thank Dr. H. Kagami and Mr. K. Shiono of Hokkaido University for providing data
and for helpful discussions. Thanks are also due to Miss R. Tsugawa for drafting and typing the manuscript.
This research was sponsored in part by the Ministry of Education, the Government of Japan, under
Grant No. 002502. Computations were carried out by the FACOM 230-75 of Hokkaido University.
 EMPIRICAL SHFAR WAVE VELOCITY EQUATIONS 187

K EFERENCES
1. Y. Ohta, ‘Generation of S waves and their applications’, Special Issue, 20th Anniversary SOC.Explor. Geophysicists,
Japan, Geophys. Explor. 20, 227-242 (1968). (In Japanese.)
2. C. M. Duke, ‘Techniques for field measurement of shear wave velocity in soils’, Proc. 4th World Conf. Earthq. Engng,
Santiago, Chile, A-5, 39-54 (1969).
3. V. J. Murphy, ‘Geophysical engineering investigation techniques for microzonation’, Proc. Int. Conf. Microzonation,
Washington Univ., 131-150 (1972).
4. Y. Ohta, N. Goto, H. Kagarni and K. Shiono, ‘Shear wave velocity measurement during a standard penetration test’,
Earthq. Engng Struct. Dyn. 6, 43-50 (1978).
5. S. Yoshikawa, ‘A short note on S-wave and its application’, Ceophys. Explor. 19,256-258 (1966). (In Japanese.)
6. Y. Sakai, ‘A study on determination of S-wave’s velocity by soil penetrometer-test’, Bull. Faculty. Engng, Hokkaido
Univ. 51, 1-8 (1968). (In Japanese with English abstract.)
7. T. Shibata, ‘Relation between shear wave velocity of ground and N value of standard penetration test’, Annual Meeting,
Japan Soc. Soil hlech. Found. Engng, 5 , 121-124 (1970). (In Japanese.)
8. Y. Sugimura, ‘Dynamic behavior of soft ground during an earthquake’, Proc. 3rd Japan Earthq. Engng Syinp., 223-230
(1970). (In Japanese with English abstract.)
9. T. Imai, H. Fumoto and K. Yokota, ‘The relation of mechanical properties of soils to P- and S-wave velocities in Japan’,
Proc. 4th Japan Earthq. Engng Synip., pp. 86-96 (1975). (In Japanese with English abstract.)
10. Y. Ohsaki and R. Iwasaki, ‘On dynamic moduli and Poisson’s ratios of soil deposits’, Soils and Foundations, 13, 61-73
(1973).
1 1 . K. Terzaghi and P. B. Peck, Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice, 2nd edn, Wiley, 1967.
12. K. Kanai, T. Tanaka, T. Morishita and K. Osada, ‘Observation of microtremors XI’, Bull. Earfhq. Res. Inst. 44, 1297-
1333 (1966).
13. N. M. Newmark and E. Rosenblueth, Fundanientals of Earthquake Engineering, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.,
1971.
14. T. Mochizuki, I. Matsuda and M. Miyano, ‘Response calculation of ground layers and its application to grounds in
Tokyo metropolitan area’, Soils and Foundation, J . Japan. Soc. Soil Mech. Found. Engng, 23, 11-17 (1975). (In Japanese.)
15. K. W. Campbell and C. M. Duke, ‘Correlations among seismic velocity, depth and geology in the Los Angeles area’,
UCLA-ENG-7662, School of Engineering and Applied Science, University of California, pp. 1 4 3 , 1976.
16. D. F. Morrison, Multiuariate Statistical i\.lethods, McGraw-Hill Series in Probability Statistics, McGraw-Hill, 1967.
17. C. Hayashi, ‘Theory of quantification and its examples (V)’, Bull. Stutist. Math. Res. Inst. 8, 149-151 (1961). (In
Japanese with English abstract.)
18. T. Hatakeyama, ‘A synthetic investigation of the geophysical methods in Kanto plain’, Geophys. Explor. 17, 50-71
(1964). (In Japanese with English abstract.)
19. F. Gassman, ‘Elastic waves through a packing spheres’, Geophys. 16, 673-685 (1951).
20. S. Honjo, ‘Velocity change of sedimentary rocks due to uniaxial pressure’, Geophys. Explor. 19, 79-85 (1966). (In
Japanese with English abstract.)
21. G. F. A. Fletcher, ‘Standard penetration test: its uses and abuses’, J. Soil. Mech. & Found. Div., A X E , 91, SM4, 67-75
(I 965).
22. G. Sanglerat, The Penetrometer and Soil Exploration, Elsevier, 1972.
23. E. Shinia, Y. Ohta, M. Yanagisawa, K. Kudo and H. Kawasumi, ‘S wave velocities of subsoil layers in Tokyo. 3’. Bull.
Earthq. Res. Inst. 46, 1301-1312 (1968). (In Japanese with English abstract.)
24. S. Omote, S. Komaki and N. Kobayashi, ‘Earthquake observations in Kawasaki and Turumi areas and seismic qualities
of the ground’, Bull. Earthq. Res. Inst. 34, 335-364 (1956).