Quick
Search: 
 
advanced search
 GSW Home    GeoRef Home    My GSW Alerts    Contact GSW    About GSW    Journals List    Help 
Journal of Environmental & Engineering Geophysics Don't get GSW? Talk to your librarian.
JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

Journal of Environmental & Engineering Geophysics; June 2005; v. 10; issue. p. 85; DOI: 10.2113/JEEG10.2.85
© 2005 Environmental & Engineering Geophysical Society
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Asten, M.
Right arrow Articles by Boore, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation

Comparison of Shear-velocity Profiles of Unconsolidated Sediments Near the Coyote Borehole (CCOC) Measured with Fourteen Invasive and Non-invasive Methods Editorial

Michael Asten1 and David Boore2

1 Centre for Environmental and Geotechnical Applications of Surface Waves (CEGAS) School of Geosciences, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC 3800 Australia, Email: michael.asten@sci.monash.edu.au
2 Earthquake Hazards, US Geological Survey, Menlo Park, CA 94025 U.S.A., Email: boore@usgs.gov

The first 20% of the full text of this article appears below.


    Overview
 
A set of fourteen invasive and non-invasive geophysical methods are compared for the measurement of the shear-velocity (Vs) profile at or near a borehole at the Coyote Creek outdoor Classroom, Santa Clara Valley, California. The borehole with geophysical logs provided opportunity for a series of blind trials of methods for measurement of the Vs profile in thick, soft sediments. The various methods are important in the task of establishing shear-velocity profiles for purposes of earthquake hazard site classification in California. Results of the trials were presented at a one-day workshop at the US Geological Survey in May 2004; this paper summarizes results, relative depths of penetration and . . . [Full Text of this Article]







JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2009 by Environmental & Engineering Geophysical Society