Advertisement

Journal of Seismology

, 12:453 | Cite as

Broadband (0.05 to 20 s) prediction of displacement response spectra based on worldwide digital records

  • Carlo CauzziEmail author
  • Ezio Faccioli
Original article

Abstract

A new set of empirical equations for prediction of displacement response spectral ordinates from 20 Hz to T = 20 s is illustrated. The coefficients of the equations were obtained by regressing a dataset based on 1,155 tri-axial digital and 9 analog accelerometer records from 60 earthquakes worldwide. Long period disturbances in the accelerograms were evaluated and removed using a very recent method, aimed at preserving the long-period spectral content of the records. Analysis of variance has disclosed only little evidence for regional dependence of ground motions, while a carefully conducted evaluation of site effects resulted in clearly differentiated spectral amplification bands associated to the main ground types B, C, and D of Eurocode 8. Spectral ordinates for vibration periods >5 s were found to scale with magnitude quite consistently with theoretical scaling from Brune’s model. On the other hand, comparison of results with those yielded by recent prediction models in Europe and the United States (NGA), indicated that the latter may not be uniformly reliable at long periods. The proposed empirical equations are easily implemented in computer programs for seismic hazard assessment, being characterized by a simple functional form and a restricted number of predictor variables.

Keywords

Attenuation relationships Digital accelerograms Displacement-based design Displacement response spectra Ground motion prediction Long-period ground motion 

Supplementary material

10950_2008_9098_MOESM1_ESM.xls (588 kb)
ESM 1 (XLS 587 KB)

References

  1. Akkar S, Bommer JJ (2006) Influence of long-period filter cut-off on elastic spectral displacements. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn 35:1145–1165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Akkar S, Bommer JJ (2007a) Prediction of elastic displacement response spectra in Europe and the Middle East. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn 36(10):1275–1301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Akkar S, Bommer JJ (2007b) Empirical prediction equations for peak ground velocity derived from strong-motion records from Europe and the Middle East. Bull Seism Soc Am 97(2):511–530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ambraseys N, Smit P, Sigbjornsson R, Suhadolc P, Margaris B (2002) Internet-site for European strong-motion data. European Commission, Research-Directorate General, Environment and Climate Programme, www.isesd.cv.ic.ac.uk/ESD
  5. Ambraseys NN, Douglas J, Sarma SK, Smit PM (2005) Equations for the estimation of strong ground motions from shallow crustal earthquakes using data from Europe and the Middle East: horizontal peak ground acceleration and spectral acceleration. Bull Earthq Eng 3:1–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berge-Thierry C, Cotton F, Scotti O, Griot-Pomniera DA, Fukushima Y (2003) New empirical spectral response attenuation laws for moderate European earthquakes. J Earthq Eng 7(2):193–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bommer JJ, Douglas J, Strasser FO (2003) Style-of-faulting in ground-motion prediction equations. Bull Earthq Eng 1:171–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bommer JJ, Stafford PJ, Alarcón JE, Akkar S (2007) The influence of magnitude range on empirical ground-motion prediction. Bull Seism Soc Am 97(6):2152–2170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Boore DM (2001) Effect of baseline corrections on displacements and response spectra for several recordings of the 1999 Chi-Chi, Taiwan, earthquake. Bull Seismol Soc Am 91(5):1199–1211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Boore DM (2004) Estimating VS(30) (or NEHRP site classes) from shallow velocity models (depths <30 m). Bull Seismol Soc Am 94(2):591–597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Boore DM (2005) On pads and filters: processing strong-motion data. Bull Seismol Soc Am 95(2):745–750CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Boore DM, Joyner WB, Fumal TE (1994) Estimation of response spectra and peak accelerations from Western North American earthquakes: an interim report—part 2. USGS open-file report 94–127Google Scholar
  13. Boore DM, Joyner WB, Fumal TE (1997) Equations for estimating horizontal response spectra and peak acceleration from Western North American earthquakes: a summary of recent work. Seismol Res Lett 68(1):128–153Google Scholar
  14. Boore DM, Stephens CD, Joyner WB (2002) Comment on baseline correction of digital strong-motion data: examples from the 1999 Hector Mine, California, earthquake. Bull Seismol Soc Am 92(4):1543–1560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Boore DM, Bommer JJ (2005) Processing of strong-motion accelerograms: needs, options and consequences. Soil Dyn Earthqu Eng 25(2005):93–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Boore DM, Watson-Lamprey J, Abrahamson NA (2006) GMRotD and GMRotI: orientation-independent measures of ground motion. Bull Seismol Soc Am 96:1502–1511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Boore DM, Atkinson GM (2007) Boore-Atkinson NGA ground motion relations for the geometric mean horizontal component of peak and spectral ground motion parameters, PEER 2007/01, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  18. Boore DM, Atkinson GM (in press) Ground-motion prediction equations for the average horizontal component of PGA, PGV, and 5%-damped PSA at spectral periods between 0.01 s and 10.0 s. Earthq SpectraGoogle Scholar
  19. Brune JN (1970) Tectonic stress and the spectra of seismic shear waves. J Geophys Res 75:4997–5009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. BSSC, Building Seismic Safety Council (2003) The 2003 NEHRP Recommended provisions for new buildings and other structures. Part 1: provisions (FEMA 450), www.bssconline.org
  21. Campbell KW, Bozorgnia Y (2007) Campbell-Bozorgnia NGA ground motion relations for the geometric mean horizontal component of peak and spectral ground motion parameters, PEER 2007/02, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  22. CEN, European Committee for Standardization (2004) Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance—part 1: general rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings. BruxellesGoogle Scholar
  23. Choi Y, Stewart JP (2005) Nonlinear site amplification as a function of 30 m shear wave velocity. Earthq Spectra 21(1):1–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Converse AM, Brady AG (1992) BAP: basic strong-motion accelerogram processing software, version 1.0. USGS Open-File Rept. 92-296A, 174 ppGoogle Scholar
  25. Douglas J (2003) Earthquake ground motion estimation using strong-motion records: a review of the equations for the estimation of peak ground acceleration and response spectral ordinates. Earth-Sci Rev 61:43–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Douglas J (2004a) An investigation of analysis of variance as a tool for exploring regional differences in strong ground motions. J Seismol 8:485–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Douglas J (2004b) Use of analysis of variance as a tool for the investigation of regional dependence of strong ground motions. In: Proceedings of the13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, B. C., Canada, Paper no. 29Google Scholar
  28. Douglas J (2007) On the regional dependence of earthquake response spectra. ISET J Earthq Technol 44(1):71–99Google Scholar
  29. Douglas J, Smit PM (2001) How accurate can strong ground motion attenuation relations be? Bull Seismol Soc Am 91(6):1917–1923CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Draper NR, Smith H (1981) Applied regression analysis, 2nd edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. Faccioli E, Paolucci R, Rey J (2004) Displacement spectra for long periods. Earthq Spectra 20:347–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Faccioli E, Cauzzi C, Paolucci R, Vanini M, Villani M, Finazzi D (2007) Long period strong ground motion and its use as input to displacement based design. In: Pitilakis K (ed) Earthquake geotechnical engineering. 4th International Conference on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering—Invited Lectures. Springer NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  33. Figini R (2006) Analisi degli effetti di sito sui lunghi periodi degli spettri di risposta di spostamento. Master’s Thesis, Politecnico di MilanoGoogle Scholar
  34. Fletcher JB, Baker LM, Spudich P, Goldstein P, Sims JD, Hellweg M (1992) The USGS Parkfield, California, dense seismograph array: UPSAR. Bull Seismol Soc Am 82:1041–1070Google Scholar
  35. Fletcher JB, Spudich P, Baker LM (2006) Rupture propagation of the 2004 Parkfield, California, earthquake from observations at UPSAR. Bull Seismol Soc Am 96(4B):S129–S142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Fukushima Y, Tanaka T (1990) A new attenuation relation for peak horizontal acceleration of strong earthquake ground motion in Japan. Bull Seismol Soc Am 80(4):757–783Google Scholar
  37. Gruppo di lavoro CPTI (2004) Catalogo Parametrico dei Terremoti Italiani, versione 2004 (CPTI04). Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia (INGV), Bologna, emidius.mi.ingv.it/CPTI
  38. Halldórsson B, Ólafsson S, Sigbjörnsson R (2007) A fast and efficient simulation of the far-fault and near-fault earthquake ground motions associated with the June 17 and 21, 2000, earthquakes in South Iceland. J Earthq Eng 11:343–370Google Scholar
  39. Jangid RS, Kelly JM (2001) Base isolation for near-fault motions. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn 30(5):691–707CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Japanese Working Group on Effects of Surface Geology on Seismic Motion, Association for Earthquake Disaster Prevention (1998) CD-ROM for the Kobe simultaneous simulation, distributed to participants to the experiment. Proc. of the 2nd International Symposium on the Effects of Surface Geology on Earthquake Ground Motion, Yokohama, JapanGoogle Scholar
  41. Jousset P, Douglas J (2007) Long-period earthquake ground displacements recorded on Guadeloupe (French Antilles). Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn 36(7):949–963CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Joyner WB, Boore DM (1981) Peak horizontal acceleration and velocity from strong-motion records including records from the 1979 Imperial Valley, California, earthquake. Bull Seismol Soc Am 71(6):2011–2038Google Scholar
  43. Joyner WB, Boore DM (1993) Methods for regression analysis of strong-motion data. Bull Seismol Soc Am 83(2):469–487Google Scholar
  44. Joyner WB, Boore DM (1994) Errata: methods for regression analysis of strong-motion data. Bull Seismol Soc Am 84:955–956Google Scholar
  45. Paolucci R, Rovelli A, Faccioli E, Cauzzi C, Finazzi D, Vanini M, Di Alessandro C, Calderoni G (2008) On the reliability of long period spectral ordinates from digital accelerograms. Earthquake Engng Struct Dyn 2008(37):697–710Google Scholar
  46. Park R, Paulay T (1976) Reinforced concrete structures. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  47. PEER, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (2007) Next generation attenuation of ground motions (NGA) project. Web site: peer.berkeley.edu/products/nga_project.html
  48. Pousse G, Berge-Thierry C, Bonilla F, Bard PY (2005) Eurocode 8 design response spectra evaluation using the K-Net Japanese database. J Earthq Eng 9(4):547–574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Priestley MJN, Calvi GM, Kowalsky MJ (2007) Displacement-based seismic design of structures. IUSS, PaviaGoogle Scholar
  50. Rathje EM, Stewart JP, Bora Baturay M, Bray JD, Bardet JP (2006) Strong ground motions and damage patterns from the 1999 Duzce earthquake in Turkey. J Earthq Eng 10(5):693–724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Rey J, Faccioli E, Bommer J (2002) Derivation of design soil coefficients (S) and response spectral shapes for Eurocode 8 using the European strong motion database. J Seismol 6(4):547–555CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Spudich P, Joyner WB, Lindh AG, Boore DM, Margaris DM, Fletcher JB (1999) SEA99: a revised ground motion prediction relation for use in extensional tectonic regimes. Bull Seismol Soc Am 89(5):1156–1170Google Scholar
  53. Stafford PJ, Strasser FO, Bommer JJ (2008) An evaluation of the applicability of the NGA models to ground-motion prediction in the Euro-Mediterranean Region. Bull Earthq Eng DOI  10.1007/s10518-007-9053-2
  54. Wang GQ, Boore DM, Tang G, Zhou X (2007) Comparisons of ground motions from colocated and closely spaced one-sample-per-second global positioning system and accelerograph recordings of the 2003 M 6.5 San Simeon, California, earthquake in the Parkfield region. Bull Seismol Soc Am 97(1B):76–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Wells DL, Coppersmith KJ (1994) New empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, rupture area, and surface displacement. Bull Seismol Soc Am 84:974–1002Google Scholar
  56. Westaway R, Smith RB (1989) Strong ground motion in normal-faulting earthquakes. Geophys J 96:529–559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Zaré M (2004) Long period Iranian strong motions recorded during 1994–2002, processing and analysis. In: Proceedings of the13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, B. C., Canada, Paper no. 2002Google Scholar
  58. Zhao JX, Irikura K, Zhang J, Fukushima Y, Somerville PG, Asano A, Ohno Y, Oouchi T, Takahashi T, Ogawa H (2006) An empirical site-classification method for strong-motion stations in Japan using H/V response spectral ratio. Bull Seismol Soc Am 96:914–925CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Structural EngineeringPolitecnico di MilanoMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations