Modeling Critical Ground-Motion Sequences for Inelastic Structures

  • Izuru Takewaki
  • Abbas Moustafa
  • Kohei Fujita
Part of the Springer Series in Reliability Engineering book series (RELIABILITY)


Earthquake loads are usually specified as inputs to engineering structures using the seismic coefficient method, the response or hazard spectra of the site, or in terms of the time history of the ground acceleration. On the other hand, the nonlinear time history analysis is compulsory in cases of important structures, critical facilities, structures having irregularities in plan or elevation, structures designed for high ductility levels, structures in which higher modes can get excited, and special structures containing seismic isolation or energy dissipation devices. This is because the time history analysis provides the most accurate means for dynamic analysis of structures.


Ground Motion Peak Ground Acceleration Ground Acceleration Damage Index Envelope Function 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    IBC (2009) International Building Code. International Code Council Inc, USAGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Architectural Institute of Japan (2004) Recommendations for loads on buildings. AIJ, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    European Committee for Standardization (2003) Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bommer JJ, Acevedo AB (2004) The use of real earthquake accelerograms as design input to dynamic analysis. J Earthq Eng 8(1):43–91Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pinho R (2007) Nonlinear dynamic analysis of structures subjected to seismic action. In: Pecker A (ed) Advanced earthquake engineering analysis. Springer, NYGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kyoshin-Net (2009) National research institute for earth science and disaster prevention. Available at
  7. 7.
    Moustafa A, Ueno K, Takewaki I (2010) Critical earthquake loads for SDOF inelastic structures considering evolution of seismic waves. Earthq Struct 1(2):147–162Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Elnashai A, Bommer JJ, Martinez-Pereira A (1998) Engineering implications of strong-motion records from recent earthquakes. In: Proceedings of 11th European conference on earthquake engineering, Paris, CD-ROMGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Amadio C, Fragiacomo M, Rajgelj S (2003) The effects of repeated earthquake ground motions on the non-linear response of SDOF systems. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 32:291–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Das S, Gupta VK, Srimahavishnu V (2007) Damage-based design with no repair for multiple events and its sensitivity to seismicity model. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 36:307–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hatzigeorgiou GD, Beskos DE (2009) Inelastic displacement ratios for SDOF structures subjected to repeated earthquakes. Eng Struct 31(11):2744–2755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Takewaki I (2007) Critical excitation methods in earthquake engineering. Elsevier Science, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Takewaki I (2002) Seismic critical excitation method for robust design: a review. J Struct Eng 128:665–672CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Takewaki I (2004) A comprehensive review of seismic critical excitation methods for robust design. Adv Struct Eng 8(4):349–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Abbas AM, Manohar CS (2002) Investigations into critical earthquake load models within deterministic and probabilistic frameworks. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 31:813–832CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Abbas AM, Manohar CS (2005) Reliability-based critical earthquake load models. Part 2: nonlinear structures. J Sound Vib 287:883–900CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Abbas AM, Manohar CS (2007) Reliability-based vector nonstationary random critical earthquake excitations for parametrically excited systems. Struct Saf 29:32–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Housner GW, Jennings PC (1977) The capacity of extreme earthquake motions to damage structures. In: Hall WJ (ed) Structural and geotechnical mechanics, a volume honoring Newmark NM. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, pp 102–116Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Arias A (1970) A measure of earthquake intensity: seismic design of nuclear power plants. MIT press, Cambridge, pp 438–468Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Amiri GG, Dana FM (2005) Introduction to the most suitable parameter for selection of critical earthquakes. Comput Struct 83(8–9):613–626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Naeim F, Anderson JC (1993) Classification and evaluation of earthquake records for design. The NEHRP Professional Fellowship Report to EERI and FEMAGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Trifunac MD, Brady AG (1975) A study on the duration of strong earthquake ground motion. Bull Seismol Soc Am 65(3):581–626Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Moustafa A (2009) Discussion of a new approach of selecting real input ground motions for seismic design: the most unfavourable real seismic design ground motions. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 38:1143–1149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Moustafa A, Takewaki I (2009) Use of probabilistic and deterministic measures to identify unfavorable earthquake records. J Zhejiang Univ: Sci A 10(5):619–634MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zhai C-H, Xie L–L (2007) A new approach of selecting real input ground motions for seismic design: the most unfavourable real seismic design ground motions. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 36:1009–1027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Powell GH, Allahabadi R (1988) Seismic damage predictions by deterministic methods: concepts and procedures. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 16:719–734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Cosenza C, Manfredi G, Ramasco R (1993) The use of damage functionals in earthquake engineering: a comparison between different methods. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 22:855–868CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Fajfar P (1992) Equivalent ductility factors, taking into account low-cyclic fatigue. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 21:837–848CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Park YJ, Ang AH-S, Wen YK (1987) Damage-limiting aseismic design of buildings. Earthq Spectra 3(1):1–26MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Park YJ, Ang AH-S (1985) Mechanistic seismic damage model for reinforced concrete. J Struct Eng 111(4):722–739CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Park YJ, Ang AH-S, Wen YK (1985) Seismic damage analysis of reinforced concrete buildings. J Struct Eng 111(4):740–757CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Zahrah TF, Hall WJ (1984) Earthquake energy absorption in sdof structures. J Struct Eng 110:1757–1772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Akiyama H (1985) Earthquake-resistant limit-state design for buildings. University of Tokyo Press, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Uang CM, Bereto VV (1990) Evaluation of seismic energy in structures. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 19:77–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Mehanny SS, Deierlein GG (2000) Modeling of assessment of seismic performance of composite frames with reinforced concrete columns and steel beams, Report No. 135, The John Blume earthquake research center, Stanford UniversityGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Bozorgenia Y, Bertero VV (2003) Damage spectra: characteristics and applications to seismic risk reduction. J Struct Eng 129(4):1330–1340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Chai YH, Romstad KM, Bird SM (1995) Energy-based linear damage model for high-intensity seismic loading. J Struct Eng 121(5):857–864CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Shinozuka M, Henry L (1965) Random vibration of a beam column. J Eng Mech 91:123–143Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Shinozuka M (1970) Maximum structural response to seismic excitations. J Eng Mech 96:729–738Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Arora JS (2004) Introduction to optimum design. Elsevier Academic Press, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Abbas AM (2006) Critical seismic load inputs for simple inelastic structures. J Sound Vib 296:949–967CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Caleman T, Branch MA, Grace A (1999) Optimization toolbox for the use with Matlab, user’s guide. Math Works Inc, USAGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Takewaki I, Murakami S, Fujita K, Yoshitomi S, Tsuji M (2011) The 2011 off the Pacific coast of Tohoku earthquake and response of high-rise buildings under long-period ground motions. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 31(11):1511–1528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Moustafa A (2009) Discussion of the effect of energy concentration of earthquake ground motions on the nonlinear response of RC structures. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 29:1181–1183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Quek ST, Teo YP, Balendra T (1990) Non-stationary structural response with evolutionary spectra using seismological input model. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 19:275–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Boore DM (1983) Stochastic simulation of high-frequency ground motions based on seismological models of the radiated spectra. Bull Seismol Soc Am 73:1865–1894Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Brune JN (1970) Tectonic stress and the spectra of seismic shear waves from earthquakes. J Geophys Res 75:4997–5009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Hanks TG, McGuire RK (1981) The character of high frequency ground motions based on seismic shear waves. Bull Seismol Soc Am 71:2071–2095Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Moustafa A, Takewaki I (2010) Modeling critical ground-motion sequences for inelastic structures. Adv Struct Eng 13(4):665–679CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Izuru Takewaki
    • 1
  • Abbas Moustafa
    • 2
  • Kohei Fujita
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Architecture and Architectural EngineeringKyoto UniversityKyotoJapan
  2. 2.Department of Civil EngineeringMinia UniversityMiniaEgypt

Personalised recommendations