Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A state-of-the-art review of vertical ground motion (VGM) characteristics, effects and provisions

  • State-of-the-art paper
  • Published:
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Previous earthquake events have shown that the vertical component of strong ground motion has been proved to damage or totally destroy the structures. But in seismic resistant design of structures, effects of horizontal ground motions are mainly considered and effects of vertical ground motions (VGMs) are ignored. However, the field evidence of damaged structures indicates that the VGM was more significant particularly for near-fault earthquakes. Therefore, the addition of vertical component in seismic design has been recognized in the literature. In seismic resistant design of structures, horizontal ground motions are extensively studied and used for designing of structures. However, VGMs are not considered of more importance as horizontal one. But with the past near-fault earthquakes and their damage evidence effects have increased the awareness of VGMs. In this paper, the critical reviews of the literature associated with VGM are explained and reviewed. The important characteristics like vertical response spectra, near-fault influence, frequency influence and time lag between peak vertical and peak horizontal ground motion, vertical response period influence and local site conditions are explained. The provisions in latest national and international standards and the field evidence of damaging effects caused by VGM are also explained. Considering all the above parameters associated with VGM, the past studies on different types of structures are reviewed. Finally, a methodology for identification of critical parameters and future scope on VGM is proposed. This study leads to some important conclusions that VGM needs to be included in analysis and design.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig.14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Shaha P, Kamatchi P, Nayak CB (2018) Effect of vertical ground motions on the response of long span roof truss. In: The 16th symposium on earthquake engineering, Department of Earthquake Engineering, IIT Roorkee, pp 1–9

  2. Nerkar S, Nayak C (2016) Seismic behaviour of elevated storage reservoir by finite element method. Int J Adv Technol Eng Sci 4(1):1188–1197

  3. Wadgave P, Nayak C (2016) Vibrational analysis of chimney equipped with strakes and tune mass damper. Int J Adv Technol Eng Sci 4(1):321–333

  4. Nayak CB, Thakare SB (2017) Seismic behaviour of existing retrofitted elevated water tank after NDT investigations using SAP 2000. In: The 8th International conference on structural engineering and construction management 2017, Earl's Regency Hotel, Kandy, Sri Lanka, pp 1–6

  5. Nayak CB, Thakare SB (2017) Analysis and retrofitting of elevated water tank in Pune district: by Uttarkashi Earthquake. J Eng Tech 6:201–211

  6.  Nayak CB, Jain MA, Walke SB (2020) Parametric study of dome with and without opening. J Inst Eng (India): Series A 101(3):463–475. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40030-020-00447-3

  7. Jagadale UT, Nayak CB, Mankar A, Thakare SB, Deulkar WN (2020) An experimental-based python programming for structural health monitoring of non-engineered RC frame. Innov Infrastruct Solut 5(1):1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-020-0260-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Nayak CB, Thakare SB (2019) Seismic performance of existing water tank after condition ranking using non-destructive testing. Int J Adv Struct Eng 11:395–410. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40091-019-00241-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Kare V, Nayak CB, Jagadale UT, Deulkar WN (2019) Earthquake response of 3D frames with strap footing considering soil structure interactions. In: 2nd international conference on advanced technologies for societal applications, in book: Techno-Societal 2018, vol. 1, pp 895–904. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16848-3_81.

  10. Papazoglou AJ, Elnashai AS (1996) Analytical and field evidence of the damaging effect of vertical earthquake ground motion. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 25:1109–1137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Kunnath SK, Abrahamson N, Chai YH, Erduran E, Yilmaz Z (2008) Development of guidelines for incorporation of vertical ground motion effects in seismic design of highway bridges. Technical report CA/UCD-SESM-08–01, University of California at Davis

  12. Kim SJ, Holub CJ, Elnashai AS (2011) Experimental investigation of the behavior of RC bridge piers subjected to horizontal and vertical earthquake motion. Eng Struct 33:2221–2235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2011.03.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kim SJ, Holub CJ, Elnashai AS (2011) Analytical assessment of the effect of vertical earthquake motion on RC bridge piers. J Struct Eng 137(2):252–260. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kun C, Chen Y, Larkin T, Chouw N (2013) An experimental investigation of the seismic response of a bridge due to simultaneous horizontal and vertical excitations. Australian Earthquake Engineering Society Conference. Hobart, Tasmania, pp 1–8

    Google Scholar 

  15. Matsuzaki H, Kumagai Y, Kawashima, K (2012) Effect of strong vertical excitation on the seismic performance of the RC bridge columns. In: 15th World Conference in Earthquake Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal

  16. Changfeng W, Jikang Z, Long Z, Yijun B (2016) Effect of vertical excitation on the seismic performance of a seismically isolated bridge with sliding friction bearings. Earthq Eng Eng Vib 15:187–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-016-0315-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Yang H, Yin X (2015) Transient responses of girder bridges with vertical poundings under near-fault vertical earthquake. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 44:2637–2657. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2601

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Aryan H, Ghassemieh M (2014) Mitigation of vertical and horizontal seismic excitations on bridges utilizing shape memory alloy system. Adv Mater Res 831:90–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Aryan H, Ghassemieh M (2015) Seismic enhancement of multi-span continuous bridges subjected to three-directional excitations. Smart Mater Struct 24(4):045030. https://doi.org/10.1088/0964-1726/24/4/045030

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Aryan H, Ghassemieh M (2017) A superelastic protective technique for mitigating the effects of vertical and horizontal seismic excitations on highway bridges. J Intell Mater Syst Struct 28(12):1533–1552. https://doi.org/10.1177/1045389X16672593

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Newmark NM (1973) A Study of Vertical and Horizontal Spectra. Report WASH-1255. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Directorate of Licensing

  22. Kawashima K, Aizawa K, Takahashi K (1985) Attenuation of peak ground motion and absolute acceleration response spectra of vertical ground motion. Proc Jpn Soc Civil Eng 2(2):169–176. https://doi.org/10.2208/jscej.1985.362_169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Ambraseys NN, Simpson KA (1995) Prediction of vertical response spectra in Europe. Earthquake engineering and Structural dynamics, ESEE-95/1, Research Report, vol 25, pp 401–412. htps://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199604)25:4<401::AIDEQE551>3.0.CO;2-B

  24. Mohammadioun G, Mohammadioun B (1996) Vertical/horizontal ratio for strong ground motion in the near-field and soil non-linearity. Memorias, XI World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Acapulco, Mexico, CDROM

  25. Tsaparli V, Kontoe S, Taborda DMG, Potts DM (2016) Vertical ground motion and its effects on liquefaction resistance of fully saturated sand deposits. Proc R Soc A. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.2016.0434

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Bovo M, Barbaresi A, Torreggiani D, Tassinari P (2020) Collapse and damage to vernacular buildings induced by 2012 Emilia earthquakes. Bull Earthquake Eng 18:1049–1080. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-019-00737-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Shrestha B (2009) Vertical ground motions and its effect on engineering structures: a state-of-the-art-review. Int Seminar Hazard Manage Sustain Develop. https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.2863.6165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. ATC 63 (2007) Recommended Methodology for quantification of building system performance and response parameters—75% interim draft report. Applied Technology Council, Redwood City

    Google Scholar 

  29. IS 1893 (Part 1) (2016) Criteria for earthquake resistance design of structures. Bureau of Indian Standards, sixth edition, New Delhi

  30. IS 1893 (Part 1) (2002) Criteria for earthquake resistance design of structures. Bureau of Indian Standards, sixth edition, New Delhi

  31. Silva WJ (1997) Characteristics of vertical strong ground motions for applications to engineering design. In: Procedings Of the FHWA/NCEER Workshop on the Nat=l Representation of Seismic Ground Motion for New and Existing Highway Facilities

  32. UBC (1997) Uniform Building Code .International Council of Building Officials (ICBO), p 2

  33. EN 1998–1 (2004) Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance. Part 1: General rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings. European Committee for Standardization

  34. ECP-201(2012) Egyptian code for loads and forces. Housing and Building Research Center

  35. Bozorgnia Y, Niazi M, Campbell KW (1995) Characteristics of free-field vertical ground motion during the Northridge earthquake. Earthquake Spectra 11(4):515–525. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585825

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Bozorgnia Y, Niazi M (1993) Distance scaling of vertical and horizontal response spectra of the Lorna Prieta earthquake. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 22(8):695–707. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290220805

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Bozorgnia Y, Campbell KW, Niazi M (2000) Observed spectral characteristics of vertical ground motion recorded during worldwide earthquakes from 1957 to 1995. In: Proceedings of 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, Upper Hutt, New Zealand, 2000, Paper No. 2671

  38. Bozorgnia Y, Campbell KW (2019) Ground motion model for the Vertical-to-Horizontal (V/H) ratios of PGA, PGV, and response spectra. Earthquake Spectra 32(2):951–978. https://doi.org/10.1193/100614eqs151m

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Wilson T, Chen S, Mahmoud H (2015) Analytical case study on the seismic performance of a curved and skewed reinforced concrete bridge under vertical ground motion. Eng Struct 100:128–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.06.017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Adanur S, Altunisik AC, Bayraktar A, Akkose M (2012) Comparison of near-fault and far-fault ground motion effects on geometrically nonlinear earthquake behavior of suspension bridges. Nat Hazards 64(1):593–614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-012-0259-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Zhang S, Wang G (2013) Effects of near-fault and far-fault ground motions on nonlinear dynamic response and seismic damage of concrete gravity dams. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 53:217–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2013.07.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Sevim B, Atamturktur S, Altunisik AC, Bayraktar A (2016) Ambient vibration testing and seismic behavior of historical arch bridges under near and far fault ground motions. Bull Earthq Eng 14(1):241–259. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-015-9810-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Ma HB, Zhuo WD, Fiorentino G, Lavorato D, Nuti C, Sun Y (2017) Seismic responses of regular highway bridges under near-fault ground motions. In: 6th ECCOMAS thematic conference on computational methods in structural dynamics and earthquake engineering, pp 2119–2129. https://doi.org/10.7712/120117.5554.18034

  44. Ma HB, Zhuo WD, Lavorato D, Fiorentino G, Nuti C, Sabetta F (2017) Seismic response analysis of continuous highway bridges under near-fault ground motions. In: 6th ECCOMAS thematic conference on computational methods in structural dynamics and earthquake engineering, pp 2138–2148. https://doi.org/10.7712/120117.5555.18040

  45. Gullu H, Karabekme M (2017) Effect of near-fault and far-fault earthquakes on a historical masonry mosque through 3D dynamic soil-structure interaction. Eng Struct 152:465–492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.09.031

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Xuan G, Chen W, Jianbing Y (2018) Combined effect of vertical and horizontal ground motions on failure probability of RC chimneys. Adv Civil Eng 2018:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/9327403

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Bertero VV, Mahin SA, Herrera RA (1978) A seismic design implications of near-fault San Fernando earthquake records. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 6(1):31–42. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290060105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Hall JF, Heaton TH, Halling MW, Wald DJ (1995) Near source ground motion and its effects on the flexible buildings. Earthq Spectra 11(4):569–605. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585828

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Bozorgnia Y, Campbell KW (2004) The vertical-to-horizontal response spectral ratio and tentative procedure for developing simplified V/H and vertical design spectra. J Earthq Eng 8(2):175–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460409350486

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Singh JP (1995) Seismic loading: code versus site specific. Portland Regional Seminar on Seismic Engineering Issues

  51. Campbell KW (1985) Strong motion attenuation relations: a ten-year perspective. Earthq Spectra 1(4):759–804. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Nezamabadi MF, Vayeghan FY (2015) Development of seismic criteria for seismic responses of regular and irregular structures in plan considering vertical component of the near field records. J Struct Eng Geotech 5(1):9–20

    Google Scholar 

  53. PEER (2010) Technical report for the PEER ground motion database web application. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  54. Elgamal A, Liangcai H (2004) Vertical earthquake ground motion records: an overview. J Earthquake Eng 8(5):663–697. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460409350505

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Collier C, Elnashai A (2001) A procedure and spectra for combining vertical and horizontal seismic action effect. J Earthquake Eng 5(4):521–539. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460109350404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Kim SJ, Elnashai AS (2008) Seismic assessment of RC structures considering vertical ground motion. Ph.D. thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign, Urbana, Ill

  57. Pompei A, Scalia A, Sumbatyan MA (1998) Dynamics of rigid block due to horizontal ground motion. J Eng Mech ASCE 124(7):713–717

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Zhang J, Makris N (2001) Rocking response of free-standing blocks under cycloidal pulses. J Eng Mech ASCE 127(5):473–483

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) (2014) AASHTO LRFD Bridge design specifications, seventh edition. Washington, DC

  60. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) (2013) Caltrans seismic design criteria, version 1.7. Sacramento, CA

  61. Aryan H, Ghassemieh M (2019) Numerical assessment of vertical ground motion effects on highway bridges. Can J Civ Eng. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjce-2019-0096

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Patil RS, Rajakumara HN (2016) Effect of vertical ground acceleration on buildings. Int J Recent Adv Eng Technol (IJRAET) 4(10):19–26

    Google Scholar 

  63. Perea T, Esteva L (2004) Analysis of vertical ground motions of near source records in Mexico. In: Proceedings of the 13th world conference of earthquake engineering, paper no.1852, Vancouver, Canada, pp 1–14

  64. AS 1170.4 (2007) Structural design actions Part 4: Earthquake actions in Australia. Standards Australia

  65. Kouretzis G, Masia MJ, Allen C (2015) Structural design codes of australia and new zealand: seismic actions. Chapter in book of encyclopedia of earthquake engineering. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36197-5_120-1

  66. NZS 1170.5 (2004) Structural design actions part 5: Earthquake Actions-New Zealand. Standards New Zealand

  67. NZS 1170.5 Supplement 1 (2004) Structural design actions Part 5: Earthquake actions –New Zealand-Commentary. Standards New Zealand

  68. ASCE 7–16, Minimum design loads and associated criteria for buildings and other structures. ASCE Standard, American Society of Civil Engineers, Structural Engineering Institute

  69. BSSC BS (2009) NEHRP recommended seismic provisions for new buildings and other structures: part 1, provisions. Federal Emergency Management Agency (P-750), Washington DC

  70. Bhanu V, Ozcebe A, Smerzini C (2018) A study on vertical component of earthquake ground motion and its effects on a bridge. In: 16th European conference on earthquake engineering, Thessaloniki, pp 1–12

  71. Obaid L, Alani S, Omar M, Barakat S, Arab M, Leblouba M, Shanableh A, Tahmaz A (2019) The development of a local ground motion prediction equation from recorded data. In: Proceedings of the 4th world congress on civil, structural, and environmental engineering, Rome, Italy, pp 1–10. https://doi.org/10.11159/icgre19.181

  72. Omar M, Shanableh A, Abduljalil S, Hamad K, Arab M, Leblouba M, Tahmaz A (2019) Geotechnical mapping of seismic risk for Sharjah City, United Arab Emirates. Global Civil Eng Conf Lecture Notes Civil Eng 9:1185–1210. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8016-6_83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Hassan A, Pal S (2018) Effect of soil condition on seismic response of isolated base buildings. Int J Adv Struct Eng 10(3):249–261. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40091-018-0195-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Rayhani MHT, Naggar MHE, Tabatabaei SH (2008) Nonlinear analysis of local site effects on seismic ground response in the bam earthquake. Geotech Geol Eng 26:91–100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-007-9149-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Trifunac MD (2016) Site conditions and earthquake ground motion-A review. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 90:88–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2016.08.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Ghaboussi J, Dikmen SU (1981) Liquefaction analysis for multidirectional shaking. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 107:605–627

    Google Scholar 

  77. Asakereh A, Tajabadipour M (2018) Analysis of local site effects on seismic ground response under various earthquakes. AUT J Civil Eng 2(2):227–240. https://doi.org/10.22060/AJCE.2018.13696.5253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Kontoe S, Christopoulos A, May R (2013) Site response analysis for vertical ground motion. In: 4th ECCOMAS thematic conference on computational methods in structural dynamics and earthquake engineering, pp 1–9. https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.4826.9440

  79. Zhao L, Cheng X, Dan H, Tang Z, Zhang Y (2017) Effect of the vertical earthquake component on permanent seismic displacement of soil slopes based on the nonlinear Mohr-Coulomb failure criterion. Soils Found 57:237–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2016.12.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Yang J (2004) Reappraisal of vertical motion effects on soil liquefaction. Geotechnique 54(10):671–676. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.2004.54.10.671

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Zhang Z, Bilotta E, Yuan Y, Yu H, Zhao H (2019) Experimental assessment of the effect of vertical earthquake motion on underground metro station. Appl Sci 9:1–22. https://doi.org/10.3390/app9235182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Liu H, Tsai C (2018) Site effect of vertical motion- amplification behavior observed from downhole arrays. J Geol Eng 13(1):39–47. https://doi.org/10.6310/jog.2018.13(1).4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Tsai C, Liu H (2017) Site response analysis of vertical ground motion in consideration of soil nonlinearity. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 102:124–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2017.08.024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Peruzzi G, Albarello D (2017) The possible effect of vertical ground motion on the horizontal seismic response at the surface of a sedimentary structure. Bollettino di Geofisica Teorica ed Applicata 58(4):343–352. https://doi.org/10.4430/bgta0210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Tan J, Hu J (2020) A prediction model for vertical-to-horizontal spectral ratios of ground motions on the seafloor for moderate magnitude events for the Sagami Bay region in Japan. J Seismolog. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10950-020-09932-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Yuqiao Q, Hua T, Qin D, Xiaotao Y, Dongying W (2019) Regional seismic slope assessment improvements considering slope aspect and vertical ground motion. Eng Geol 259:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2019.105148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Kim S, Sung JK, Chunho C (2018) Analytical assessment of the effect of vertical ground motion on RC frames designed for gravity loads with various geometric configurations. Adv Civil Eng 2018:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/4029142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Diotallevi P, Landi L (2000) Effect of the axial force and of the vertical ground motion component on the seismic response of R/C frames. In: Proceedings of the 12th world conference on earthquake engineering, Auckland, New Zealand, pp 1–8

  89. Ghobarah A, Elnashai AS (1998) Contribution of vertical ground motion to the damage of RC buildings. In: Proceedings of the 11th European conference on earthquake engineering. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 1–10

  90. Farsangi EN, Tasnimi AA (2016) The influence of coupled horizontal vertical ground excitations on the collapse margins of modern RC-MRFs. Int J Adv Struct Eng 8(2):169–192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40091-016-0122-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Santos SHC, Lima SS, Arai A (2012) Comparative study of codes for seismic design of structures. Revista IBRACON de Estruturas e Mater 5(6):812–819. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1983-41952012000600006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Najafi LH, Tehranizadeh M (2015) Ground motion selection and scaling in practice. Period Polytech Civil Eng 59(2):233–248. https://doi.org/10.3311/PPci.7808

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Santos SHC, Luca Z, Carmen B, Silvio DL, Arai A (2013) Comparative study of codes for seismic design of structures. Math Model Civil Eng 9(1):1–12. https://doi.org/10.2478/mmce-2013-0001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. Murthy NT, Patil GR (2015) Effect of vertical ground motion on reinforced concrete structures. IOSR J Mech Civil Eng, pp 33–39

  95. Dana M, Cussen A, Chen YN, Davis C, Greer M, Houston J, Littler P, Roufegarinejad A (2014) Effects of the seismic vertical component on structural behavior—an analytical study of current code practices and potential areas of improvement. In: Proceedings of the 10th National Conference in Earthquake Engineering, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Anchorage, AK, pp 1–11. https://doi.org/10.4231/D3FF3M115

  96. Zou J, Hongjing L, Guangjun S (2018) Analysis of influence factors of P-Δ effect considering vertical ground motion. IOP Conf. Ser Mater Sci Eng 397:1–6. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/397/1/012033

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Gulerce Z, Erduran E, Kunnath SK et al (2012) Seismic demand models for probabilistic risk analysis of near-fault vertical ground motion effects on ordinary highway bridges. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 41(2):159–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Zhang L (2014) Effects of near-field and far-field ground motion on seismic response to long-span rigid frame bridge. Biotechnol Indian J (BTAIJ) 10(24):15290–15295

    Google Scholar 

  99. Li X, Dou H, Zhu X (2007) Engineering characteristics of near-fault vertical ground motions and their effect on the seismic response of bridges. Earthq Eng Eng Vib 6(4):345–350. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-007-0723-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Shrestha B (2014) Seismic response of long span cable-stayed bridge to near-fault vertical ground motions. KSCE J Civil Eng 19(1):180–187. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-014-0214-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  101. NBC 105 (1994) Seismic design of buildings in nepal government of Nepal. Ministry of Physical Planning and Works Department of Urban Development and Building Construction, Babar Mahal, Kathmandu

    Google Scholar 

  102. Rahai A (2004) Effect of earthquake vertical motion on RC bridge piers. In: 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Paper No. 3192, Vancouver, B.C., Canada, pp 1–6

  103. Hosseinzadeh N (2008) Vertical component effect of earthquake in seismic performance of reinforced concrete bridge piers. In: Proceedings of 14th world conference on earthquake engineering, Beijing, China, pp 1–7

  104. Zhibin J, Shiling P, Xiaozhen L, Hongyan L, Shizhong Q (2016) Effect of vertical ground motion on earthquake-induced derailment of railway vehicles over simply-supported bridges. J Sound Vib 383:277–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2016.06.048

    Article  Google Scholar 

  105. Haji-Soltani A, Pezeshk S, Zandieh MM (2017) A study of vertial-to-horizontal ratio of earthquake components in the golf coast region. Bull Seismol Soc Am 107(5):2055–2066. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120160252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  106. Bayraktar A, Kudu FN, Sumerkan S, Demirtas B, Akkose M (2020) Near-fault vertical ground motion effects on the seismic response of balanced cantilever bridges, Editorial. Proc Inst Civil Eng Bridge Eng 173(1):17–33. https://doi.org/10.1680/jbren.19.00007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  107. Jin Z, Pei S, Li X, Liu H, Qiang S (2016) Effect of vertical ground motion on earthquake-induced derailment of railway vehicles over simply-supported bridges. J Sound Vib 383:277–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2016.06.048

    Article  Google Scholar 

  108. Dehghanpoor A, Thambiratnam D, Taciroglu E, Chan T (2019) Soil-pile-superstructure interaction effects in seismically isolated bridges under combined vertical and horizontal strong ground motions. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 126:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2019.105753

    Article  Google Scholar 

  109. Abdollahiparsa H, Homami P, Khoshnoudian F (2016) Effect of vertical component of an earthquake on steel frames considering soil-structure interaction. KSCE J Civil Eng 20(7):2790–2801. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-016-0687-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  110. Shakib H, Safi R (2012) Behavior evaluation of the eccentric buckling-restrained braced frames under the near-fault ground motions. In: Proceedings of the 15th world conference of earthquake engineering, Lisbon, Portugal, pp 1–10

  111. Yamazaki S, Minami S, Mimura H, Udagawa K (2000) Effect of vertical ground motions on earthquake response of steel frames. In: 12th world conference of earthquake engineering, pp 1–8

  112. Hosseini M, Nezamabadi MF (2004) A study on the effect of vertical ground acceleration on the seismic response of steel buildings. In: Proceedings of 13th world conference on earthquake engineering, Vancouver, Canada, pp 1–8

  113. Ruiz D, Sarria A (2004) Response of large span steel frames subjected to horizontal and vertical seismic motions. In: Proceedings 13th world conference on earthquake engineering, Paper No.-1404, Vancouver, BC, Canada, pp 1–14

  114. Xiang Y, Luo Y, Huang Q, Shen Z (2018) Vertical ductility demand and residual displacement of roof-type steel structures subjected to vertical earthquake ground motions. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 104:259–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2017.10.019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  115. Xiang Y, Luo Y, Zhu Z, Shen Z (2017) Estimating the response of steel structures subjected to vertical seismic excitation: Idealized model and inelastic displacement ratio. Eng Struct 148:225–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.06.043

    Article  Google Scholar 

  116. Harrington CC, Liel AB (2016) Collapse assessment of moment frame buildings, considering vertical ground shaking. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 45(15):2475–2493. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2776

    Article  Google Scholar 

  117. Breccolotti M, Materazzi A (2014) The role of the vertical acceleration component in the seismic response of masonry chimneys. Mater Struct 49:29–44. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-014-0472-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Not applicable.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Vidya Pratishthan′s Kamalnayan Bajaj Institute of Engineering and Technology, Baramati, India

    Chittaranjan B. Nayak

Authors
  1. Chittaranjan B. Nayak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chittaranjan B. Nayak.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nayak, C.B. A state-of-the-art review of vertical ground motion (VGM) characteristics, effects and provisions. Innov. Infrastruct. Solut. 6, 124 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-021-00491-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-021-00491-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation