Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, Vol. 94, No. 3, pp.

961–976, June 2004

A Method to Estimate Phase Velocities of Rayleigh Waves Using

Microseisms Simultaneously Observed at Two Sites
by Hitoshi Morikawa,* Sumio Sawada, and Junpei Akamatsu

Abstract The frequency-wave number (F-K) method and the spatial autocorrela-
tion (SPAC) method can both be applied to estimate the subsurface structure by using
array observations of long-period (1–10 sec) microtremors. Since these methods
require more than four to seven sets of simultaneous recordings, the allocation of
many resources, not only of instruments, but also of personnel, must be provided for
the observations. To avoid this difficulty, we propose an alternative method based
on the conventional SPAC method. It is called the two-site SPAC (2sSPAC) method
and requires only two sets of seismographs under the assumption that the wave fields
are spatially and temporally stationary. After formulating the analytical background
of the 2sSPAC method, we use data from actual microtremors to discuss the limita-
tions of the assumption and the applicability of this method through a comparison
with conventional methods. This discussion leads to the conclusion that the 2sSPAC
method provides reasonable values for phase velocities in the frequency range lower
than about 1.0 Hz at the sites studied.

Introduction
We have recently studied the anomalous distribution of
areas that have been severely damaged by earthquakes. The
Hyogoken-nanbu Earthquake of 17 January 1995 (MW 6.9)
brought great destruction to the Kobe-Osaka area of Japan
in the northern margin of the Osaka Basin. The extremely
severe damage, which indicated a seismic intensity of 7 on
the JMA (Japan Meteorological Agency) scale, was distrib-
uted in an east-northeast–west-southwest-oriented beltlike
zone running through the narrow urban area between the
Rokko Mountains and Osaka Bay [e.g., United Nations Cen-
ter for Regional Development (UNCRD), 1995; Suzuki
et al., 1995]. The Lijiang Earthquake of 3 February 1996
(M 7.0) and its largest aftershock (M 6.0) brought serious
damage to the people of the Lijiang Naxi Autonomous
County in the northwest Yunnan Province of China. In the
Lijiang Basin, the anomalous distribution of severe damage
to wooden houses and reinforced concrete buildings was ob-
served (Akamatsu, 1997). The most severely damaged zone
(MMI 10) was located 1.5–2 km away from the basin edge,
whereas the damage was only moderate or even light near
the source fault.
It is difficult, however, to explain these anomalous dis-
tributions of damage by the difference in shallow ground
structures, such as the alluvial deposits. To explain these
*Present address: Department of Civil, Architectural and Environmental
Engineering, Drexel University, 3141 Chestnut St., Philadelphia, PA
19104.
phenomena, some researchers suggest the effect of the fo-
cusing and/or the defocusing of seismic waves caused by the
3D configuration of the bedrock and the existence of surface
waves generated at the edge of the basin (e.g., Nakagawa
et al., 1996; Shiono et al., 1996; Pitarka et al., 1996). Thus,
detailed information about the 3D configuration of the bed-
rock must be obtained for the prevention and the mitigation
of earthquake disasters.
In the past century, many methods have been proposed
to estimate the velocity structure to the bedrock by means
of elastic waves. Four approaches have been applied for this
purpose: namely, refraction surveys, reflection surveys, geo-
tomography, and surveys using microseisms that are long-
period (1–10 sec) microtremors. Although the former three
methods can provide detailed and precise models of the ve-
locity structure, many resources are required for the con-
trolled sources, sensors, personnel, and so on, that result in
high costs. In addition, it is very difficult to carry out surveys
around residential districts with the refraction method be-
cause it requires blasting by dynamite. As for methods using
microseisms, estimations of the deep ground structure that
are based on these methods, in generally, can be realized
through a simpler system and an easier operation than those
based on refraction or reflection surveys. This is because
microseisms can be observed anytime and anywhere by us-
ing several data loggers and sensors. When applying meth-
ods based on microseisms, long-period waves must be used
to estimate the deep structure. This means that the resolu-

961
A 962
Method to Estimate Phase Velocities of Rayleigh Waves Using Microseisms Simultaneously Observed at TwoS.Sites
962
962
tions of the estimations obtained by these methods are
slightly worse than those obtained by other methods that use
short-period elastic waves. However, this does not at all
spoil the attraction of the methods based on microseisms,
because the facileness of the methods makes up for the small
deficiency in the resolution.
The methods for estimating the 3D configuration of bed-
rock with microseisms can be divided into two types: first,
methods that use the phase velocities obtained from the array
observations, and second, methods that are based on the
horizontal-to-vertical (H/V) spectral ratio calculated from the
three-component data observed at a single site.
We can safely say, on the basis of many observational
results, that the peak periods of the H/V ratio reflect the rela-
tive variations in the depth to bedrock (various interpreta-
tions and case studies on the H/V ratio have been presented,
e.g., Nakamura, 1989; Lermo and Chávez-Garcı́a, 1993,
1994; Lachet and Bard, 1994; Yamanaka et al., 1994). Since
it is easy to obtain data for calculating the peak periods of
the H/V ratio, we can densely survey a large area in a short
time. It is difficult, however, to detect the absolute depth to
bedrock using only the peak periods of the H/V ratio, because
information about the velocity is necessary to estimate the
absolute value of the thickness of the ground layers.
If simultaneous observations of the vertical component
of microtremors can be carried out at many sites, then the
velocity structure can be calculated from the phase velocities
of the microtremors by using inversion techniques. In this
procedure, it is assumed that the vertical component of the
microtremors mainly consists of fundamental-mode Ray-
leigh waves. To efficiently estimate the 3D configuration of
bedrock, therefore, we have to perform not only a single-site
observation for the H/V ratio, but also an array of observa-
tions, as mentioned subsequently.
The F-K spectrum method or the SPAC method is usu-
ally applied to obtain the phase velocities. The F-K spectrum
method was developed to detect the earthquake ground mo-
tions contaminated by noise (Capon 1969; LaCoss et al.,
1969). Since the layout of the array is freely designed to
calculate the F-K spectra, many researchers have applied this
method (e.g., Horike 1985; Matsushima and Okada 1990;
Akamatsu et al., 1997). On the other hand, the SPAC method
was established by Aki (1957) to estimate the phase veloc-
ities of microtremors. Although this method requires circular
or equilateral triangular arrays, the procedure of the analysis
is very simple. In the past decade, this method once again
began to attract notice (Okada, 1992; Matsuoka et al., 1996).
Although the F-K spectrum and the SPAC methods pro-
vide good estimates of phase velocities, both methods re-
quire that the data on the microseisms be observed simul-
taneously at more than four, and usually seven, sites to
ensure the accuracy of the estimations. This means that ar-
rangements must be made for many instruments and nu-
merous skillful personnel as operators. In some situations,
this may create an obstacle to carrying out the observations.
To avoid such difficulties, we propose a substitute for
H. Morikawa, 962
Sawada, and J. Akamatsu
962
962
the conventional SPAC method. The adequacy of our method
is confirmed through a comparison with various analyses of
the observed data. The method uses a dataset observed si-
multaneously from only two sets of seismographs, one at a
fixed site and the other at the vertexes of the triangular array
which are at a given distance from the fixed site. Hereafter,
we call this method the “two-site SPAC (2sSPAC) method.”
The 2sSPAC method has the following advantages over
the conventional method: (1) a reduction in resources for the
observations and (2) the unification of the array and the
single-site observations for the H/V ratio. The first advantage
means that we can reduce the cost for the observations, the
maintenance of the instruments, the training of the operators,
the freight, and so on, because the number of instruments
required for the observations is drastically reduced. The sec-
ond factor means that it is a good idea to add another set of
seismographs for the fixed site when you plan to carry out
the observations to estimate the subsurface structure by us-
ing the H/V spectrum method. Then, the data from the single-
site and the array observations can be obtained at the same
time, and the reliability of the estimated ground structure can
be enormously improved.
In the following sections, we provide the theoretical
background of the 2sSPAC method and confirm the adequacy
of this method by using observed microseisms. Finally, a
new procedure for the observation of microseisms is pro-
posed.
Theoretical Background
Conventional SPAC Method
Aki (1957) presented a theoretical background for es-
timating phase velocities by means of the SPAC method. This
section is devoted to summarizing the conventional SPAC
method within the limits of the information needed in this
study according to Okada (1992) and Matsuoka et al. (1996).
Let us consider a circular array with a radius r for ob-
serving microseisms. The harmonic waves at angular fre-
quency x of the vertical component of the microseisms are
represented by u(t; x, 0, 0) and u(t; x, r, h), which are
observed at the center C(0, 0) of the array and a site X(r, h)
on the circle, respectively. It is thought that the vertical com-
ponent of the microseisms mainly consists of Rayleigh
waves with a fundamental mode. A schematic description of
these symbols is shown in Figure 1.
The spatial autocorrelation function is defined as
f(x; r, h) 4 ^u(t; x, 0, 0) • u(t; x, r, h)&, (1)
where ^z(t)& stands for the mean value of z(t) in a time do-
main with duration T defined as follows:
T
1
^z(t)& 4 # z(t)dt. (2)
T 0
A 963
Method to Estimate Phase Velocities of Rayleigh Waves Using Microseisms Simultaneously Observed at TwoS.Sites
H. Morikawa, 963
Sawada, and J. Akamatsu
963 963
963 963
SCX(x; r, h) and normalized by the power spectrum at
C(0, 0).
The SPAC coefficients, q(x; r), can be directly calcu-
lated from the observed data on the microseisms using equa-
u(t; w, r, q) tion (5). It is easy to complete this calculation by applying
a numerical technique such as the fast Fourier transform
(FFT) method. Furthermore, the phase velocity at frequency
x will be obtained as the argument of the Bessel function in
r X(r,q)
C(0,0) equation (4). In this calculation, we can use an inversion
q technique, such as a grid search, to find the optimum value
for phase velocity c(x).

u(t; w, 0, 0) 2sSPAC Method

Let us recall the procedure for deriving SPAC coeffi-

Figure 1. A schematic description of the symbols
for the observation sites and the vertical component
of the microseisms. u(t; x, 0, 0) and u(t; x, r, h)
denote the harmonic waves at frequency x, which are
obtained at the center C(0, 0) of the array and site X(r,
h) on the circle shown by “c”.
The spatial autocorrelation coefficients are defined as the
average SPAC function at all the observation sites on the
circular array, in other words,
2p
1 X(r, h) instead of through simultaneous observations at all
#
q(x; r) 4 f(x; r, h)dh,
2p • f(x; 0, 0) 0 sites of the array. The only modification to equation (5) is
where f(x; 0, 0) is the autocorrelation function at center
C(0, 0). After a mathematical reduction, the integral of equa-
tion (3) is rewritten as
xr
q(x; r) 4 J0 1c(x) 2,
where J0(•) is the Bessel function of the first kind with the
zeroth order and c(x) is the phase velocity at frequency x
for the Rayleigh waves with the fundamental mode.
The SPAC coefficients denoted by equation (3) can be
directly calculated in a frequency domain using the Fourier
transform of the observed microseisms, that is,
1 # 2p
real[SCX(x; r, h)]
cients q(x; r). Although the autocorrelation functions shown
by equation (1) must be calculated with respect to various
hs to obtain the SPAC coefficients, the autocorrelation func-
tion requires that only two time histories be observed si-
multaneously at C(0, 0) and X(r, h).
From this, it is expected that the statistical properties of
the SPAC coefficients will be independent of the time sched-
ule for the observations at each pair of C(0, 0) and X(r, h),
if the wave fields are spatially and temporally stationary.
This means that we can obtain the SPAC coefficients through
simultaneous observations at the various pairs of C(0, 0) and
(3)
that the integrand is formed separately for each h.
Figure 2 schematically shows the preceding concept and
the procedure for the analysis by the 2sSPAC method. The
procedure is illustrated in Figure 2 with the array given in
the figure. The steps are as follows:
(4) 1. Set up the instruments at site 0 at the center of the array
and at site 1 of the vertex, and start the simultaneous
observations at a pair of these sites.
2. After completing the observations for sites 0 and 1, move
the instruments located at site 1 to site 2 and set them up.
Then, perform the next observations at sites 0 and 2.
3. Similarly, repeat the simultaneous observations at 0–3,
. . . , and 0–6. In the upper-left panel of Figure 2, the
clocks show the time when the observations at a pair of
sites were started. However, the order of the observations

q(x; r) 4 dh, (5) is not important if the wave fields can be assumed to be
2p 0
!SC(x; 0, 0) • SX(x; r, h) stationary and this figure shows an example.
4. Calculate the autocorrelation functions for the vertical
where real [•] stands for the real part of a complex value, functions with regard to site location h, where the coherence
and SC(x; 0, 0) and SX(x; r, h) are the power spectra of the functions are defined as the real part of cross spectrum
microseisms at two sites, C(0, 0) and X(r, h), respectively.
SCX(x; r, h) is the cross spectrum between u(t; x, 0, 0) and
u(t; x, r, h).
It can be seen in both equations (3) and (5) that the SPAC
coefficients are obtained by averaging the coherence
 A 964
Method to Estimate Phase Velocities of Rayleigh Waves Using Microseisms Simultaneously Observed at TwoS.Sites
H. Morikawa, 964
Sawada, and J. Akamatsu
964 964
964
component of the microseisms, which is an integrand of 964
equation (5), for each pair of simultaneous observations
shown in the lower-left panels, one for the array which
consists of sites 0, 1, 2, and 3 and the other for sites 0,
4, 5, and 6.
5. Take the arithmetic mean of the autocorrelation functions
with the same radius r to obtain SPAC coefficients q(x;
r). The lower-right panels show q(x; r) for arrays 0-1-2-
3 and 0-4-5-6.
A 965
Method to Estimate Phase Velocities of Rayleigh Waves Using Microseisms Simultaneously Observed at TwoS.Sites
H. Morikawa, 965
Sawada, and J. Akamatsu
965 965
965 965

Observation of the microseisms Calculation of the phase velocity

5

Array: 0-4-5-6

Phase velocity
1 2
Array: 0-1-2-3
0: fixed

6
4 3 0 Frequency

These clocks show when

the observation starts.

Calculation of the SPAC coefficients

1.0 1.0
auto-correlation func.
Normalized spatial

SPAC coefficient
Array: 0-1-2-3
Averaging
0-2 0-1

0-3
-0.5 -0.5
0 Frequency 0 Frequency
auto-correlation func.

1.0 1.0
Normalized spatial

SPAC coefficient

Array: 0-4-5-6
Averaging
0-4
0-5

0-6
-0.5 -0.5
0 Frequency 0 Frequency

Figure 2. The concept and procedure of the analysis for the 2sSPAC method. The
upper-left panel shows the simplest example of the collocation of the instruments for
the array observation. The simultaneous observations are repeated at a pair of two sites,
such as 0–1, 0–2, 0–3, . . . , 0–6. The shaded circles denote clocks and symbolize that
the time of each observation is different. In the lower panel, the SPAC coefficients are
calculated using equation (5). Then, the phase velocities can be obtained from the
argument in equation (4), as shown in the upper-right panel.

6. Calculate the phase velocities of the Rayleigh waves with
the fundamental mode at frequency x, applying the tech-
nique of a grid search to equation (4).
7. Combine the phase velocities obtained from the arrays
with various radius r to complete the estimation of the
dispersion curve, as shown in the upper-right panel.
In the preceding example, the simultaneous observa-
tions are used at seven sites to estimate the dispersion curve
by using the conventional SPAC method. This means that
seven sets of instruments and numerous personnel are re-
quired. When applying the 2sSPAC method, on the other
hand, the estimation of the dispersion curves can be com-
pleted by repeating the simultaneous observations at only
two sites, the center and one of the vertexes of the array.
Thus, the 2sSPAC method does not require as many instru-
ments or operators, which are indispensable for the conven-
tional method. Instead, however, a long period is needed for
the observations.
A 966
Method to Estimate Phase Velocities of Rayleigh Waves Using Microseisms Simultaneously Observed at TwoS.Sites
966
966
Observations and Instruments
The 2sSPAC method assumes that the wave fields must
be spatially and temporally stationary, as described in the
previous section. The next part of this article discusses the
validity of this assumption and its applicability to actual data
on microseisms. For this purpose, we have carried out ob-
servations and compared the dispersion curves obtained
from the 2sSPAC method with those obtained from the F-K
and the conventional SPAC methods.
The microseisms have been observed three times in the
northern part of the Nara Basin in Japan, where the depth to
bedrock was found to be about 500 to 600 m by a few deep
boreholes. These observations were performed on 17 July
1997, 28 December 1997, and 6 January 1998, and each
observation included two arrays with radiuses of different
sizes. Hereafter, we call these observations OBS-A, OBS-B,
and OBS-C, respectively. In this area, the microseisms are
dominated by the offshore waves of the Japan Sea in winter
and by those of the Pacific Ocean in summer (e.g., Okano,
1961a,b). Thus, the stability of the analysis for the micro-
seisms can be discussed in terms of different sources.
H. Morikawa, 966
Sawada, and J. Akamatsu
966
966
The arrangement of the arrays and their details are
shown in Figure 3 and Table 1. In the figure, HJK denotes
the center of the arrays, and H01, H02, . . . , and H12 are
the names of the sites at the vertexes of the arrays. As listed
in Table 1, the arrays have the names of the three characters
related to the names of the observations and the maximum
radiuses of the arrays. For example, array “B05” means that
this array was observed on 28 December 1997 (OBS-B) and
its maximum length of radius is about 0.5 km. Table 1 also
shows the site names that compose each array. In this table,
the hyphen “-” stands for the combination of simultaneous
observations and the slash mark “/ ” stands for “or” and
“individual” observations. For example, array B05 was ob-
served simultaneously at seven sites of HJK, H04, H05,
. . . , and H09 and array A02 consisted of three observations
at HJK-H01, HJK-H02, and HJK-H03.
To analyze the data by means of the F-K and the
conventional SPAC methods, we have made simultaneous
observations at seven sites with OBS-B, with vertical-
component velocity-type seismographs, of the vertical com-
ponent with a long natural period of T0 4 10 sec. On the

Figure 3. Locations of the observation sites. The observation sites are located in
the northern part of the Nara Basin, Japan, where the depth to bedrock is known to be
about 500 to 600 m by a deep borehole (Ichikawa, 1993). The sediments consist mainly
of three layers: recent Alluvial deposits with a thickness of 50 m, the lower part of the
Osaka group with a thickness of 300 m deposited in the Quaternary early Pleistocene,
and the lowest part of the Osaka group with a thickness of 250 m deposited in the
Neogene Pliocene. We set four arrays, with radii of 185 to 950 m, considering the
wavelengths of the Rayleigh waves with a frequency range lower than 2 Hz. HJK is
the center of these arrays, and KMP and HKJ are the borehole sites. Because H08 and
H12 are located near a railroad and a main street, respectively, the observations were
carried out in the middle of the night.
A 967
Method to Estimate Phase Velocities of Rayleigh Waves Using Microseisms Simultaneously Observed at TwoS.Sites
H. Morikawa, 967
Sawada, and J. Akamatsu
967 967
967 967
Table 1
Array Configurations and Sensor Types
Dates of Names of Maximum Maximum §
Observations Arrays* Sites† Radius (m) Distance‡ (m) T0 of sensorsVertexes
HJK (sec) Notes

7 July 1997 A02 HJK-H01/H02/H03 185 185 10 10 for 2sSPAC

(OBS-A) A05 HJK-H07/H08/H09 512 512 10 10
28 December 1997 B05 HJK-H04-H05-H06-H07-H08-H09 512 884 10 10 for F-K
(OBS-B) B10 HJK-H07-H08-H09-H10-H11-H12 952 1645 10 10 and SPAC
6 January 1998 C05 HJK-H07/H08/H09 512 512 10 1 for 2sSPAC
(OBS-C) C10 HJK-H10/H11/H12 952 952 10 1

*The name of each array corresponds to the name of the observation and the maximum radius of the array; for example, A02 denotes the array with a
radius of about 0.2 km for OBS-A.
†
“-” stands for the combination of simultaneous observations and “/ ” stands for “or”; for example, in A02, simultaneous observations were carried out
three times at two sites for HJK-H01, HJK-H02, and HJK-H03, and in the case of B05, one simultaneous observation was carried out at seven sites for
HJK and H04 to H09.
‡
The maximum distance between two sites was observed simultaneously.
§
T0 is the natural period.

other hand, observations OBS-A and -C were conducted for

the 2sSPAC method. Simultaneous observations were carried Sensor
out with two sets of three-component seismographs, where Velocity
Antenna
one set was fixed at the center of the array (site HJK shown
in Fig. 3), and the other set was moved site by site on the
DC power Bridge box
vertexes of the triangular arrays.
supply
For OBS-A, the same type of seismographs were used
as for OBS-B. However, the velocity-type seismographs with
Amplifier
a short natural period (T0 4 1 sec) were used for OBS-C and
GPS clock with
a long-period type. The long-period type was the same as
OBS-B for the center of the array, and the short-period type
low pass filter
was the same as for the vertexes. Because the short-period

seismographs can be set up quickly, observations at many 14 bit digital recorder

sites can be done in a night.
Before these array observations, we observed micro-
seisms at some sites around the Nara Basin and estimated the
characteristics of the sensors and the signal/noise (S/N) ratio
of the system. From the preliminary observations, it was
verified that we can obtain an identical output through these
two different types of seismographs (T0 4 1 and 10 sec),
after correcting the specific response of the instruments.
The microseisms were recorded by digital recorders
with a resolution of 14 bits. The records were synchronized
with the slow code generated by Global Positioning System
(GPS) clocks. The block diagram of the observation system
and an example of the recorded microseisms are shown in
Figures 4 and 5, respectively.
As a consequence, we have obtained two datasets from
OBS-B and six datasets each from OBS-A and -C. These data-
sets contained records 20 to 45 min in length. The detailed
conditions of the observations are listed in Table 2. Since
observed records are occasionally contaminated by artificial
noise, such as the vibration from vehicles, trains, factories,
and so on, we chose more than eight good-quality portions
from each dataset for the analysis. The length of each portion
was 20.48 to 81.92 sec.
FD
Figure 4. Block diagram of the observation sys-
tem. The sensors are of a velocity type with a natural
period of 1 or 10 sec. The records are synchronized
using a slow code generated by the GPS clock. The
bridge box includes shunt resistance and the mecha-
nism to cause the electrical impulses to measure the
natural period and the damping coefficient of the pen-
dulum.
Results and Discussion
Dispersion Curves by the Conventional Methods
Before turning to the results of the analysis, we must
give some attention to the relationships between the wave-
length and the maximum distance of the seismographs.
When the F-K spectrum and the SPAC methods are applied
to one dataset of microseisms, the detectable wavelength
varies, depending on the method of the analysis, the size of
the array, the ground structure, and so on. Miyakoshi et al.
(1996) pointed out that the wavelength detected by the SPAC
method is more than five times as long as the maximum
A 968
Method to Estimate Phase Velocities of Rayleigh Waves Using Microseisms Simultaneously Observed at TwoS.Sites
968
968
Figure 5. An example of the microseism records
from OBS-B (array B10). Each trace indicates the
ground velocity of the up-down component.
distance between seismographs. On the other hand, the
wavelength can be caught only less than three times the dis-
tance by the F-K spectrum method. It must be noted, how-
ever, that this guidance is obtained from numerical simula-
tions under ideal and simple conditions. From observation
data of actual microtremors, the detectable wavelength is
three to four times (occasionally up to eight times) the max-
imum distance of the seismographs by the SPAC method and
up to twice by the F-K spectrum method (Yamamoto, 1998).
The F-K spectrum is calculated from the data of the
H. Morikawa, 968
Sawada, and J. Akamatsu
968
968
OBS-B by the maximum likelihood method (MLM) (Capon,
1969). Figure 6 shows examples of the F-K spectrum at some
frequencies, in which the symbol “c” is for the largest peak
value. Since there is a distinct peak for each panel in the
figure, it is easy to determine the slowness, which is the
distance between the center and “c”, and the propagation
direction, which is parallel with the line at the center to “c”.
Using these slownesses, the phase velocities are plotted in
Figure 7. This includes those from two arrays of different
sizes and displays the width of one standard deviation from
the averaged values using error bars. Furthermore, the two
straight lines correspond to twice the wavelength of the max-
imum distance between seismographs for each array. We can
believe the phase velocities located in the lower-right area
of each line. This figure shows that two arrays contribute to
the dispersion curve at this site and that the phase velocities
from these two arrays are linked seamlessly. The estimated
values of the phase velocities will be acceptable in the fre-
quency range higher than 0.6 Hz on the basis of the rela-
tionships between the wavelength and the distance of the
seismographs.
Figure 8 shows the phase velocities obtained through
the conventional SPAC method by using the same data as
that in the F-K spectrum analysis. The trusted areas of the
estimations are indicated by the lower-right area of the
straight lines and shaded areas, where the range of the wave-
length is denoted as being three to five times as long as the
maximum distance of the seismographs. The phase veloci-
ties from this figure can be accepted with confidence in the
frequency range higher than 0.5 Hz.
Comparing Figures 7 and 8, it is seen that the dispersion
characteristics obtained through the different methods are
almost the same. This shows that the dataset from OBS-B

Table 2
Parameters of the Observations
Analyzing Portions
Recording Lengths Cutoff* Sampling Frequencies
Arrays Sites (min) (Hz) (Hz) Length (sec) Number

A02 HJK-H01 12 3 200 20.48 10

HJK-H02 12 3 200 20.48 10
HJK-H03 12 3 200 20.48 10
A05 HJK-H07 25 1 100 40.96 10
HJK-H08 25 1 100 40.96 10
HJK-H09 25 1 100 40.96 10
B05 HJK-H04-H05-H06-H07-H08-H09 45 4 100 40.96 8
B10 HJK-H07-H08-H09-H10-H11-H12 45 4 100 81.92 10
C05 HJK-H07 20 3 100 40.96 10
HJK-H08 20 3 100 40.96 10
HJK-H09 20 3 100 40.96 10
C10 HJK-H10 40 3 50 81.92 10
HJK-H11 40 3 50 81.92 10
HJK-H12 40 3 50 81.92 10

*Cut-off frequency of the low-path filter.

A 969
Method to Estimate Phase Velocities of Rayleigh Waves Using Microseisms Simultaneously Observed at TwoS.Sites
969
969
gives reliable results that can be considered as a reference
of the phase velocity at this site. Thus, our interest is focused
on the similarity in dispersion curves between the 2sSPAC
and the conventional methods.
Dispersion Curves by the 2sSPAC Method
Following the procedure of the 2sSPAC method shown
in Figure 2, we calculate the SPAC coefficients between a
pair of microseism data recorded at the center and the vertex
sites of an array. Since data are available for OBS-A to an-
alyze two different sizes of arrays, A02 and A05, we can
obtain two sets of SPAC coefficients, as shown in Figure 9,
which include each normalized spatial autocorrelation func-
tion between the microseisms at the center and the vertex,
and the SPAC coefficients obtained as their averaged value.
The other two sets of SPAC coefficients from OBS-C can be
obtained by the same procedure as that shown in Figure 10.
Since q(x; r) in equation (4) is given by the averaged
values of the SPAC coefficients, shown as solid lines in Fig-
ures 9 and 10, phase velocities c(x) can be derived by ap-
plying the technique of a grid search to equation (4). The
dispersion curves calculated from OBS-A and -C are shown
in Figure 11. The shaded areas in this figure denotes the
maximum limitation of the acceptable region with respect to
the wave length for each array, as is shown in Figure 8.
According to Figure 8, the phase velocities estimated
from arrays A05 and C05 are consistent. These two arrays
share the sites, but the observations for these arrays were
carried out using different seismographs in different seasons
(see Table 1). This indicates two things, namely, that the
2sSPAC method provides stable estimates of phase veloci-
ties, even though the dominant source of the microseisms is
different, and that we can obtain accurate records through
short-period seismographs with easy and quick setups in-
stead of long-period ones that require a complicated setup
and skilled personnel to deal with them.
H. Morikawa, 969
Sawada, and J. Akamatsu
969
969
Figure 6. Examples of the F-K spectrum at
some frequencies obtained from OBS-B (the
upper three panels from array B05 and the
lower three panels from array B10). The sym-
bol “c” shows the largest peak values. The dis-
tance between the center and “c” gives the
slowness of the Rayleigh waves at the fre-
quency and is parallel with the line at the center
to “c” in the direction of the wave propagation.
3
Array B10
Array B05
2.5
Phase velocity [km/s]
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Frequency [Hz]
Figure 7. Phase velocities obtained from the F-K
spectrum method (the error bars denote the averages
plus or minus one standard deviation). The two
straight lines correspond to twice the wavelength of
the maximum distance between seismographs for
each array. The large array, B10, provides phase ve-
locities in the frequency range of 0.55 to 0.7 Hz, and
the small array, B05, provides phase velocities in the
frequency range of 0.7 to 1.2 Hz. These phase veloc-
ities can be smoothly combined.
Comparison of the Three Methods
First, to confirm the availability of the 2sSPAC methods,
we compare the results obtained from the F-K, conventional
SPAC, and 2sSPAC methods using the same dataset. Such a
comparison would provide a clear evaluation of the validity
and limitation of the 2sSPAC method. For this purpose, a
simple simulation was carried out; hereafter, we call this
calculation “simulated 2sSPAC” method. With the dataset of
array B10, which includes simultaneous observations at
seven sites, we simulate the procedure of the 2sSPAC
method, that is:
A 970
Method to Estimate Phase Velocities of Rayleigh Waves Using Microseisms Simultaneously Observed at TwoS.Sites
H. Morikawa, 970
Sawada, and J. Akamatsu
970 970
970 970
3 1
Array B10 (a) HJK-H01
Array B05
0.8 HJK-H02
2.5 HJK-H03
Averaged

SPAC coefficient
0.6
Phase velocity [km/s]

2
0.4
1.5
0.2
1 0

0.5 -0.2
-0.4
0 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Frequency [Hz] Frequency [Hz]

Figure 8. Phase velocities obtained from the con- (b) 1

ventional SPAC method (the error bars denote the av- HJK-H07
0.8 HJK-H08
erages plus or minus one standard deviation). The HJK-H09
shaded areas denote the ranges in wave lengths three Averaged

SPAC coefficient
to five times as long as the maximum distance of the 0.6
seismographs. These results are obtained from the
0.4
same datasets as the F-K spectrum method shown in
Figure 7. From this figure, it is observed that the same 0.2
characteristics of dispersion are obtained independent
of the method used for the analysis. Thus, it seems 0
reasonable to conclude that the dataset from OBS-B
yields reliable estimations for the phase velocities and -0.2
that these results can be used for reference.
-0.4
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Frequency [Hz]
1. Divide the records of the microseisms into three portions.

2. Apply the procedure of the 2sSPAC method to these data-
sets, since each portion is a dataset obtained at a different
time.
3. Calculate the correlation for HJK-H10 from the first por-
tion, for HJK-H11 from the second one, and for HJK-
H12 from the third one. These calculations can simulate
the case of an array for the 2sSPAC method with a max-
imum distance of 1645 m.
4. Average these three correlations to obtain the SPAC co-
efficients.
5. Estimate the phase velocities using an inversion tech-
nique such as a grid search.
In Figure 12, we can compare the phase velocities ob-
tained from the different methods using the same data from
array B10 of OBS-B. Because we can use three different
distances between the sensors for the simulated 2sSPAC
method: the distances are 512 m (HJK-H07, HJK-H08, and
HJK-H09), 952 m (HJK-H10, HJK-H11, and HJK-H12),
and 1645 m (H10-H11, H11-H12, and H12-H10), the thick
lines in this figure correspond to the phase velocities ob-
tained from these arrays with different distance. The ob-
tained phase velocities from the simulated 2sSPAC method
agree with the ones from the conventional methods. This
suggests that the 2sSPAC method is consistent with the con-
ventional methods. We may note, in passing, that the phase
velocities from the simulated 2sSPAC method coincide with
Figure 9. SPAC coefficients obtained from simul-
taneous observations at two sites (OBS-A). The dashed
lines show the normalized spatial autocorrelation
functions for each observation pair, which are calcu-
lated using the integrand of equation (5), and the solid
lines show their average, which is defined as q(r, x)
in equation (5).
the ones obtained from arrays A05, C05, and C10 for the
actual (not simulated) 2sSPAC method, comparing Figures
11 and 12.
We now turn to the comparison between the phase ve-
locities from the 2sSPAC method and from the conventional
methods. Figure 13 compares the dispersion curves obtained
from the three methods, where the error bars are omitted and
the meanings of the shaded areas and the straight lines are
the same as for Figures 7, 8, and 11. The phase velocities
estimated from the 2sSPAC method almost agree with the
estimates from the other two methods in the frequency range
between 0.6 and 1.0 Hz, whereas they are slightly larger than
the others in the frequency range higher than 1.0 Hz and
smaller in the range lower than 0.6 Hz.
What causes these differences?
In the higher-frequency range, the stationarity of the
microseisms may not be satisfied spatially and temporally
during the observations, because artificial noise predomi-
A 970
Method to Estimate Phase Velocities of Rayleigh Waves Using Microseisms Simultaneously Observed at TwoS.Sites
H. Morikawa, 970
Sawada, and J. Akamatsu
970 970
970 970
1 3
(a) HJK-H07 Array C10
Array C05
0.8 HJK-H08 Array A05
HJK-H09 2.5
Array A02
Averaged
SPAC coefficient

0.6

Phase velocity [km/s]

2
0.4
1.5
0.2
0 1

-0.2 0.5

-0.4
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Frequency [Hz] Frequency [Hz]

(b) 1 Figure 11. Dispersion curves obtained from the

HJK-H10 2sSPAC method (OBS-A and -C). The shaded areas
0.8 HJK-H11
HJK-H12 denote the ranges in wave lengths three to five times
Averaged as long as the maximum distance of the seismographs
SPAC coefficient

0.6 for each array. It is observed that the phase velocities

0.4
0.2
0 suggests the stability of the 2sSPAC method, be- cause
-0.2
-0.4
0 0.5 1 1.5
Frequency [Hz]
Figure 10. SPAC coefficients obtained from si-
multaneous observations at two sites (OBS-C). The
descriptions of the line types are given in Figure 9.
Note that the averaged values of the SPAC coefficients
in (a) are the same as those in (b), in the frequency
range of 0.3 to 0.75 Hz, whereas these values are ob-
tained through the observations using different sen-
sors in different seasons. This suggests that the 2s-
SPAC method can provide stable estimations.
nates over this frequency range and the sources of these
noises usually vary depending on time. Nonstationarity will
affect all techniques. However, there is a big difference be-
tween the conventional methods (F-K and conventional
SPAC) and 2sSPAC method. Since the observations are car-
ried out simultaneously for the conventional methods, all the
data are obtained at once for an array. On the other hand,
we have to move site by site for the 2sSPAC method. This
means that the observed data, which constitute an array, are
obtained individually at different times and it takes a long
time to complete the observations for an array. For example,
although we spent only 45 min for the observation of the
array B10, we spent more than 8 hours for arrays C05 and
C10, because this includes three times of 20- and 40-min
observation and five times of clearing up and setting up seis-
mometers to change the stations (see Table 2). This differ-
ence of the duration for observation will affect the results.
Although it is difficult to show evidence to this effect,
obtained by the 2sSPAC method are smoothly com-
bined independent of the date of the observations or
the type of sensors. Note that the phase velocities from
arrays A05 and C05 are mutually consistent. This
the observations for these two arrays were car- ried
out in different seasons with different types of
sensors.
2
Figure 14 may suggest a temporal variation in the micro-
tremors in the high-frequency range. This figure shows the
power spectra observed every hour at the center of the array,
which is the fixed site, for OBS-A and -C. The power spectra
change temporally and complicatedly in the frequency range
higher than 1 Hz, but they are stable in the range lower than
1 Hz. Taking account of these characteristics of the power
spectra, we can suppose that the wave fields are temporally
nonstationary in the higher-frequency range, whereas we
cannot discuss the stability of spatial characteristics, such as
the direction of the propagation from the data observed at
one site. Generally speaking, however, if a wave field is
temporally nonstationary, it will be difficult to apply the
2sSPAC method to estimate the phase velocities even though
the wave field is spatially homogeneous, because this
method requires the temporal stationarity of the microseisms
during each entire observation.
Furthermore, the F-K spectra from OBS-B may provide
some information about the temporal stationarity of micro-
seisms. The characteristics of the stationarity can be inferred
from the F-K spectra of Figure 6, but we have to note that the
observations for OBS-B were carried out on different dates
than OBS-A and -C. This figure shows that the shapes of the
F-K spectra are complicated in the frequency range over 1.0
Hz. This suggests that the wave fields may be com- plex and
nonstationary in this range.
However, we can perhaps put an end to this problem by
making the observation over a long period of time at a pair
of sites, because the statistical meanings for the directions
A 971
Method to Estimate Phase Velocities of Rayleigh Waves Using Microseisms Simultaneously Observed at TwoS.Sites
971
971
3 3
F-K (Array B10)
Conventional SPAC (Array B10)
Simulated 2sSPAC (Array B10)
2.5
Phase velocity [km/s]
2 2
1.5
1 1
0.5
0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5
Frequency [Hz]
Figure 12. Comparison of the phase velocities ob-
tained from conventional methods and simulated
2sSPAC method by using the same data from array
B10 of OBS-B. The thick lines correspond to the three
different distances between the sensors for the simu-
lated 2sSPAC method: the distances are 512 m (HJK-
H07, HJK-H08, and HJK-H09), 952 m (HJK-H10,
HJK-H11, and HJK-H12), and 1645 m (H10-H11,
H11-H12, and H12-H10). The phase velocities from
the simulated 2sSPAC method are agreeable with the
values from conventional methods. From this, one can
safely state that the 2sSPAC method is consistent with
the conventional methods.
of the site and the wave propagation are mutually conjugate
from the theory of the SPAC method (Okada 1992; Miya-
koshi et al., 1996). We will leave a more detailed discussion
about the characteristics and the optimal observation of mi-
crotremors in the higher frequency range for our future de-
velopments of the 2sSPAC method.
In the lower-frequency range, the differences are caused
by the size of the array. Although the maximum distance
between the sites simultaneously observed for the 2sSPAC
method is about 950 m for array C10, array B10 of OBS-B
has a distance of about 1650 m which is the length of the
legs of the array triangle, as listed in Table 1 and shown
schematically in Figure 15. According to the limitations in-
dicated in Figure 13 for the range in wave length which can
be detected by each array, it is observed that the size of OBS-
B is sufficient for detecting the phase velocity in this fre-
quency range, whereas OBS-C (or -A) may not be sufficient
in size.
Note that the phase velocities are generally underesti-
mated with the SPAC method and overestimated with the
F-K spectrum method, when the array size is too small in
comparison with the wavelength (Miyakoshi et al., 1996).
Considering that the wavelength at 0.6 Hz is about 2.5 km,
observations for both OBS-B and -C (or -A) are of a size that
is sufficient for estimating the phase velocity, and the esti-
mated values almost agree in the frequency range higher
than 0.6 Hz.
To verify that the differences in the estimations in the
H. Morikawa, 971
Sawada, and J. Akamatsu
971
971
F-K
Conventional SPAC
2sSPAC (OBS-C)
2.5 2sSPAC (OBS-A)
Phase velocity [km/s]
1.5
0.5
2 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Frequency [Hz]
Figure 13. Comparison of the dispersion curves
obtained from various methods. “N”, the phase veloc-
ities estimated by the F-K spectrum method; “n”, the
phase velocities by the conventional SPAC method;
and solid and dashed lines, the phase velocities by the
2sSPAC method. The shaded areas denote the range
in wavelengths three to five times as long as the max-
imum distance of the seismographs for each array,
which are 1645 m for B10 and 950 m for C10. The
values derived from the three methods are almost
agreeable in the frequency range of 0.6 to 1.0 Hz. The
phase velocities by the 2sSPAC method, however, are
slightly overestimated in the range higher than 1.0 Hz
and underestimated in the range lower than 0.6 Hz.
lower frequency range are caused by the insufficient size of
the array for the 2sSPAC method, we will introduce the phase
velocities obtained from array B10 using the simulated
2sSPAC method again. In Figure 16, we compare the phase
velocities from the three calculations, in other words, the
conventional SPAC method (asterisk with error bars), the
simulated 2sSPAC method using the data from array B10
(solid lines), and the 2sSPAC method using data from arrays
C05 and C10 (square). The shaded areas denote the detect-
able limitations of the wave length for arrays of 950 m and
1645 m for maximum distances between the sites.
Figure 16 shows that the limitation for OBS-C (arrays
C05 and C10) is around 0.5 to 0.6 Hz and that the values
are underestimated in this frequency. On the other hand, the
estimates obtained from the simulated 2sSPAC method agree
well with the ones from the conventional SPAC method in
the frequency range lower than 0.5 Hz. This means that the
phase velocities can be estimated accurately from the 2s-
SPAC method in the frequency range lower than 1.0 Hz, as
long as the array dimensions are appropriate to the target
wavelength. Consequently, we can clarify the cause for the
differences in phase velocities in the lower-frequency range
between the conventional methods and the 2sSPAC method.
Comparison of Information from the Borehole Data
Finally, we discuss the velocity model, which satisfies
the dispersion curve obtained from the 2sSPAC and the sim-
A 972
Method to Estimate Phase Velocities of Rayleigh Waves Using Microseisms Simultaneously Observed at TwoS.Sites
972
972
(a) 0.01
Power spectrum [mkine^2*s]
0.001
0.0001
1e-05
0.1 1 analytically calculated for the final model obtained previ-
Frequency [Hz]
(b) 1
Power spectrum [mkine^2*s]
0.1
0.01
0.001
0.0001
1e-05
0.1 1
Frequency [Hz]
Figure 14. Temporal variation in power spectra
for the vertical component at the center of the array
(OBS-A and -C). The microseisms were observed at
the center of the array once every hour during the
observations of OBS-A and -B. Each line corresponds
to one observation. Apparently, the power spectra are
more temporally stable in the low-frequency range
than in the high-frequency range. This suggests the
temporal nonstationarity of the wave fields in the
high-frequency range.
ulated 2sSPAC methods. The model for the velocity structure
is composed of two overlying layers on a half-space bedrock,
and the initial values for the parameters of each layer are the
values defined in the model by Kagawa et al. (1992) for the
Osaka Plain, whose layered structure is similar to that of
the Nara Basin. However, the wave velocities and the den-
sity are slightly modified for better optimization in the fol-
lowing calculation. Comparing the observed phase velocities
with the dispersion curve obtained analytically for the fun-
damental mode of the Rayleigh waves that propagate on the
model, we search for the optimal values for the thickness of
each layer using the forward technique. The final model for
the velocity structure at HJK is listed in Table 3.
These results are compared with the thickness of each
H. Morikawa, 972
Sawada, and J. Akamatsu
972
972
layer obtained from the borehole data for deep wells shown
as KMP and HKJ in Figure 3. These borehole data provide
only the thickness of each layer. The borehole reaches a
depth of 1300 m at KMP (Postal Life Insurance Welfare
Corporation, personal comm., 2000) and 650 m at HKJ
(Ichikawa, 1993). Because HJK, KMP, and HKJ are closely
situated, it is thought that the ground structure at HJK is
similar to those at KMP and HKJ. Table 3 lists the param-
eters for the models of the ground structure at HJK, KMP,
and HKJ, and Figure 17 shows schematically the velocity
structures. This figure shows that the estimated structure at
HJK will be acceptable.
The dispersion curves are shown in Figure 18. One is
ously (solid line). The others are obtained by the 2sSPAC
method, which includes the results of the simulated 2sSPAC
method from the data of B10 (open square) and the F-K
method, which supplements the data in the high-frequency
range (asterisk). Comparing the phase velocities, it is seen
that they are linked seamlessly for various sizes of arrays.
The dispersion curves obtained with the 2sSPAC method
yield acceptable values for explaining the velocity structure,
which agrees with the data from the borehole located near
the array site.
It follows from what has been discussed in this section
that the 2sSPAC method provides good estimates of the phase
velocities in the frequency range lower than 1.0 Hz. This
means that we can obtain good estimates about the deep-
ground structures by means of the easy operation, but it may
be difficult to estimate accurately the very shallow structure
by using the 2sSPAC method.
H10
Array B10
HJK Array C10
H11
952m
1645m
H12
Figure 15. Difference in distance between the two
sites observed simultaneously for the 2sSPAC and the
conventional SPAC methods. The maximum distance
between the two sites observed simultaneously is dif-
ferent for arrays with the same radius, because we can
calculate the correlation between not only HJK and
H10 (HJK-H11 or HJK-H12), but also between H10
and H11 (H10-H11 or H11-H12) in the case of the
conventional SPAC method. Thus, when we use the
dataset observed from the same layout of arrays,
the conventional SPAC method can deal with longer
wave lengths than the 2sSPAC method.
A 973
Method to Estimate Phase Velocities of Rayleigh Waves Using Microseisms Simultaneously Observed at TwoS.Sites
H. Morikawa, 973
Sawada, and J. Akamatsu
973 973
973 973
3 0 1 [km]
Conventional SPAC (Arrays B10 & B05)
Simulated 2sSPAC (Array B10) West East
2sSPAC (Array C10)
2.5 2sSPAC (Array C05)

KMP HJK HKJ

Phase velocity [km/s]

2
0 1 2 3 4
1.5 Vs [km/s]

1
0.2

0.5
0 0.4
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Frequency [Hz]

Figure 16. Comparison of phase velocities ob- 0.6

tained from the 2sSPAC, the simulated 2sSPAC, and
the conventional SPAC methods. “N” and “n”, phase
velocities estimated by the 2sSPAC method, shown in
Figure 11; * with an error bar, phase velocities esti-
mated by the conventional SPAC method in Figure 8;
and a solid line, phase velocities estimated by the sim-
ulated 2sSPAC method simulated by means of a da-
taset identical with that of the conventional SPAC
method. The shaded areas denote the ranges in wave-
lengths three to five times as long as the maximum
distance of seismographs for each array, which are
1645 m for the conventional SPAC and the simulated
2sSPAC methods and 950 m for the 2sSPAC method
(C10). Estimations from the simulated 2sSPAC
method are agreeable to those from the conventional
SPAC method in the frequency range lower than 0.5
Hz, whereas the limitations of acceptable values are
found around 0.5 Hz or 0.6 Hz for the 2sSPAC method.
This suggests that the phase velocities are provided
accurately from the 2sSPAC method in the frequency
range lower than 1.0 Hz, only if the array observations
are performed with dimensions appro- priate to the
target wavelength.
Depth [km]
Figure 17. Comparison of the ground structure at
HJK and the borehole sites (KMP and HKJ) shown
in Figure 3. The locations of the sites are shown in
the upper bar, the profiles at the boreholes in the
lower-left (KMP) and lower-right panels (HKJ), and
the velocity structure estimated from the phase veloc-
ities in lower-midmost panel. In comparing the pro-
files at the boreholes, it seems that the estimated struc-
ture is acceptable.
An Efficient Method of Observation to Estimate
the Ground Structure
On the basis of the results obtained from the preceding
discussion, we emphasize the advantages of the 2sSPAC
method and propose an efficient method of observation to
estimate the subsurface structure.
The 2sSPAC method has clear advantages over the con-
ventional methods in the number of seismographs required,
namely, only two sets of seismographs are needed to make
observations for the former, whereas more than four, and
usually seven, sets are needed for the latter. This means that
the costs of the observations, the maintenance of instru-

Table 3
Velocity Structure at the Observation Sites of Microseisms (HJK) Estimated from the Phase
Velocities and the Depth to Each Layer Obtained from Nearby Deep Boreholes
(KMP and HKJ shown in Fig. 3)
Depth† (km)
Layer V P* V S* q*
Numbers (km/sec) (km/sec) (t/m 3) KMP HJK HKJ

1 1.800 0.600 1.800 0.357 0.340 '0.300

2 2.500 1.200 2.100 0.519 0.520 '0.600
3 5.400 3.200 2.700 ` ` `

*Parameters are based on Kagawa et al. (1992).

†
Depth to the lower boundary of each layer.
A 974
Method to Estimate Phase Velocities of Rayleigh Waves Using Microseisms Simultaneously Observed at TwoS.Sites
H. Morikawa, 974
Sawada, and J. Akamatsu
974 974
974 974
ments, the training of operators, freight, and so on, can be fixed site is set on the point marked by a star, the 2sSPAC
reduced because the number of instruments used for each method can be applied to four different sizes of arrays. Two
observation is drastically reduced. parties are introduced for this observation. The first party
As discussed in the Introduction, the single-site obser- makes observations at the fixed site marked by a star; these
vation of microtremors for the H/V spectrum method is a observations must be simultaneous and synchronized with
convenient way to estimate the relative variations in depth the observations by the second party at the sites marked with
to bedrock in large areas. However, this method does not c. After completing these observations, the second party
provide enough information to obtain absolute estimates for
the velocity structure. Thus, we propose that one more seis-
mograph be added for the fixed site when a single-site ob-
servation is planned for the estimation of the subsurface
structure using the H/V spectrum method. From this, it is
easy to obtain both the relative variation in depth to bedrock
and the absolute velocity structure with minimum labor.
To obtain these advantageous results, however, we must
consider the layout of the observation sites. Although we
usually use a grid layout of the sites for single-site obser-
vations, the sites must be in a cross-stitch-like layout to ap- Figure 19. An example of the equivalent layout
ply the 2sSPAC method. At least three different directions h of the triangular array. Because it does not matter
to vertex sites from the center are needed to calculate the whether the directions from the center to the vertex
average with respect to h of equation (3) or (5). In this cal- sites are h or h ` 180, variations in the equivalent
array layout can be used instead of the triangular
culation, some variations in equivalent array layouts can be array.
used instead of the triangular array, whose example is shown
in Figure 19, because the values of the SPAC coefficients
do not depend on the directions of h 4 a or a ` 180.
Considering these discussions, we present an example
of a layout for 15 observation sites in Figure 20. The upper
panel shows a conventional grid layout for single-site ob-
servations and the lower panel shows our proposal. When a

3
Simulated 2sSPAC Conventional grid layout
2sSPAC for single-site observations
F-K
2.5 Analytical
Phase velocity [km/s]

1.5

0.5
0 Cross-stitch-like layout for
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 a combination of single-site
Frequency [Hz] observations and 2sSPAC

Figure 18. Comparison of the dispersion curves
obtained from the 2sSPAC method and the analytical
calculation. The solid line is analytically calculated
for the fundamental mode of the Rayleigh wave using
the model of the ground structure shown in Figure 17.
The symbols are phase velocities obtained through the
2sSPAC method which include the results of the sim-
ulated 2sSPAC method by simulation and the F-K
method to supplement the data in the high frequency
range. It is seen that the phase velocities from the
observation and the analysis are mutually agreeable.
This suggests the adequateness of the estimations by
the 2sSPAC method.
Figure 20. An example of a layout for 15 sites for
an efficient observation. The upper panel shows the
conventional grid layout for single-site observations
for an H/V spectrum analysis. The lower panel shows
our proposed layout which recommends that we add
one fixed site for the simultaneous observation as
marked by the star. In this case, we can apply the
2sSPAC method to four different sizes of arrays con-
nected by different types of lines. Thus, we not only
obtain 15 datasets for the H/V spectrum analysis, but
also four datasets for the 2sSPAC method. Using these
datasets, both the velocity structure and the relative
variation in depth to bedrock can be estimated.
A 975
Method to Estimate Phase Velocities of Rayleigh Waves Using Microseisms Simultaneously Observed at TwoS.Sites
975
975
moves to the other site and performs simultaneous obser-
vations at the fixed site. As a result, we can obtain 15 datasets
for the H/V analysis and four datasets for the 2sSPAC method
from this layout of the sites. Using these datasets, we can
estimate both the velocity structure and the relative variation
in depth to bedrock.
The procedure for an efficient method of observation
and analysis can be described as follows.
1. Plan a cross-stitch-like layout of observation sites for the
target area, as shown in Figure 20, and determine a lo-
cation for the fixed site.
2. Set a seismograph for the vertical component at the fixed
site and three components at one of the other sites.
3. Make simultaneous observations at these two sites.
4. Repeat the simultaneous observations at various pairs of
fixed sites and others.
5. Calculate the H/V spectrum ratio using the data on the
three components for all the sites.
6. Calculate the phase velocities applying the 2sSPAC
method to the pairs of vertical component data.
7. Estimate the exact velocity structure from the phase ve-
locities and the relative variations in depth to bedrock
from the peak periods of the H/V spectrum ratio.
8. Compose the model of the subsurface structure around
the target area combining them.
Conclusion
We have presented a new 2sSPAC method to estimate
phase velocities using the observation data of microseisms.
The method is formulated based on the conventional SPAC
method and uses a dataset obtained with only two sets of
seismographs instead of simultaneous observations at four
or seven sites. To confirm the adequacy and the limitations
of the method, dispersion curves were calculated for a fun-
damental mode of Rayleigh waves by using various meth-
ods, namely, the F-K spectrum method, the conventional
SPAC method, and the 2sSPAC method. As a result, we can
conclude that the 2sSPAC method provides good estimates
of the subsurface structure if the collocation of the obser-
vation arrays has enough distance between the two sites for
the wavelength concerned. The stability of the 2sSPAC
method was also confirmed from the observations performed
twice, in winter and in summer. Furthermore, by estimating
the velocity structure on the basis of the phase velocities
obtained from the 2sSPAC method, it has been verified that
the structure is agreeable to the borehole data located close
to the array site.
However, the spatial autocorrelation coefficients are not
stable in the higher-frequency range of more than about 1.0
Hz. This suggests that the assumption of stationary wave
fields may not be satisfied. Therefore, we must develop a
method that can clarify whether the wave field is stationary
during observations; such efforts are presently underway.
H. Morikawa, 975
Sawada, and J. Akamatsu
975
975
The results of the present analysis lead to the conclusion
that the 2sSPAC method can indeed provide enough accuracy
for the estimation of phase velocities in the low-frequency
range. On this basis, we can drastically reduce the resources
for observations and propose a new and more efficient
method of observations to estimate the subsurface structure,
if a detailed estimate of the shallow-ground structure is not
required. The former will lead to an easy operation and a
reduction in cost for the observations. As for the latter, note
that we can easily combine the H/V spectrum analysis with
the array observations and improve the efficiency and the
accuracy of the estimations of the subsurface structure.
Acknowledgments
We gratefully acknowledge the generous cooperation of Mr. T. Ka-
gawa, Dr. K. Miyakoshi (Geo-Research Institute, Osaka, Japan), Dr. J. Ejiri,
Mr. D. Maejima (Obayashi Co., Japan), and D. Nakajima (Kyushu Railway
Co., Japan) in the observations of the microseisms. We express our special
thanks to Professor A. Zerva (Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsyl-
vania) for reading the draft and making many valuable and helpful sug-
gestions. Our special thanks also go to Professor K. Toki (Ritsumeikan
University, Japan) for his continual encouragement throughout this study.
We also thank Mr. T. Kagawa and Professor M. Horike of Osaka Institute
of Technology, Japan, for their permission to use the computer program
for calculating the F-K spectra. This research was partially supported by the
Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture, Grants-in-Aid for the
Encouragement of Young Scientists (A), Grant 15681010 (2003–2005).
References
Akamatsu, J. (Editor) (1997). Lijiang Earthquake in Yunnan, China, of
February 3, 1996, Reconnaissance report (supported by Japanese
Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture Grant 07300028).
Akamatsu, J., K. Nishimura, H. Morikawa, S. Sawada, K. Onoue, H. Saito,
M. Jido, T. Kagawa, K. Kamura, K. Sato, K. Furuno, and M. Ko-
mazawa (1997). Bedrock structure around faults and its relation to
earthquake disaster, Earthquake Proof Design and Active Faults, El-
sevier Science, Amsterdam, 199–216.
Aki, K. (1957). Space and time spectra of stationary stochastic waves, with
special reference to microtremors, Bull. Earthquake Res. Inst. Tokyo
Univ. 35, 415–456.
Capon, J. (1969). High-resolution frequency-wave number spectrum anal-
ysis, Proc. IEEE 57, 1408–1419.
Horike, M. (1985). Inversion of phase velocity of long-period microtremors
to the S-wave velocity structure down to the basement in urbanized
areas, J. Phys. Earth, 33, 59–96.
Ichikawa, M. (1993). The Osaka Group, Sogensha, Osaka, Japan (in Jap-
anese).
Kagawa, T., S. Sawada, T. Iwasaki, and A. Nanjoh (1992). Deep soil struc-
ture beneath Osaka plain derived from array observation of micro-
tremor, in Proc. Symp. on Recent Geologic Structure and the State-
of-the-Arts on Soil Characteristics of the Kansai Ground, 127–134
(in Japanese).
Lachet, C., and P.-Y. Bard (1994). Numerical and theoretical investigation
on the possibility and limitations of Nakamura’s technique, J. Phys.
Earth 42, 377–397.
LaCoss, R. T., E. J. Kelly, and M. N. Toksöz (1969). Estimation of seismic
noise structure using arrays, Geophysics 34, 21–38.
Lermo, J., and F. J. Chávez-Garcı́a (1993). Site effect evaluation using
spectral ratios with only one station, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 83, 1574–
1594.
A 976
Method to Estimate Phase Velocities of Rayleigh Waves Using Microseisms Simultaneously Observed at TwoS.Sites
976
976
Lermo, J., and F. J. Chávez-Garcı́a (1994). Are microtremors useful in site
response evaluation? Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 84, 1350–1364.
Matsuoka, T., N. Umezawa, and H. Makishima (1996). Experimental stud-
ies on the applicability of the spatial autocorrelation method for es-
timation of geological structures using microtremors, Butsuri Tansa
49, 26–41 (in Japanese).
Matsushima, T., and H. Okada (1990). Determination of deep geological
structures under urban areas using long-period microtremors, Butsuri
Tansa 43, 21–33.
Miyakoshi, K., H. Okada, and S. Ling (1996). A range of wavelengths
possible to estimate phase velocities of surface waves in micro-
tremors, Proc. 94th SEGJ Conference, 178–182.
Nakagawa, K., K. Shiono, N. Inoue, and M. Sano (1996). Geological char-
acteristics and problems in and around Osaka Basin as a basis for
assessment of seismic hazard, Special Issue of Soil and Foundations,
Japanese Geotechnical Society, Tokyo, 15–28.
Nakamura, Y. (1989). A method for dynamic characteristics estimations of
subsurface using microtremors on the ground surface, Quarterly Re-
port of Railway Technical Research Institute 30, 25–33.
Okada, H. (1992). A new method of underground structure estimation using
microtremors, Lect. Notes for Beijing Graduate School, China Insti-
tute of Mining and Technology.
Okano, K. (1961a). Observational study on microseisms (Part 1), Disaster
Prev. Res. Inst. Kyoto Univ. Bull. no. 44, 2–22.
Okano, K. (1961b). Observational study on microseisms (Part 2), Disaster
Prev. Res. Inst. Kyoto Univ. Bull. no. 47, 2–15.
Pitarka, A., K. Irikura, T. Iwata, and K. Kagawa (1996). Basin structure
effects in the Kobe area inferred from the modeling of ground motions
from two aftershocks of the January 17, 1995 Hyogoken-Nambu
Earthquake, J. Phys. Earth 44, 563–576.
Shiono, K., K. Nakagawa, M. Mitamura, S. Masumoto, and K. Irikura
H. Morikawa, 976
Sawada, and J. Akamatsu
976
976
(1996). Focusing of seismic waves along the Uemachi Fault: damages
in the Osaka area caused by the 1995 Hyogo-ken Nanbu Earthquake
and subsurface geologic structure, J. Phys. Earth 44, 591–599.
Suzuki, Y., T. Fujiwara, M. Nakashima, M. Bruneau, S. Iwai, and A. Ki-
tahara (1995). Overview of building damage and damage to wood
houses from the 1995 Hyogoken-nambu Earthquake, J. Nat. Disaster
Sci. 16, 79–87.
United Nations Center for Regional Development (UNCRD) (1995). Com-
prehensive study of the great Hanshin earthquake, UNCRD Research
Report Series no. 12.
Yamanaka, H., M. Takemura, H. Ishida, and M. Niwa (1994). Character-
istics of long-period microtremors and their applicability in explora-
tion of deep sedimentary layers, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 84, 1831–1841.
Yamamoto, H. (1998). Analytical and experimental approaches to the
method for estimation of phase velocities using the data of micro-
tremors with three components, Ph.D. Thesis, Hokkaido University
(in Japanese).
Department of Built Environment
Tokyo Institute of Technology
4259 Nagatsuta, Midori-ku, Yokohama 226-8502, Japan
(H.M.)
Disaster Prevention Research Institute
Kyoto University
Gokasho, Uji
Kyoto 611-0011, Japan
(S.S. and J.A.)
Manuscript received 22 January 2003.