Advertisement

The traditional approach for empirical scaling of the amplitudes of strong earthquake ground motion revolves around the linear representation of the amplification of seismic waves when they propagate through soft surface sediments and soil. However, in the near field, when the amplitudes of shaking become large, the soil experiences nonlinear strains, and tensile cracks, fissures, and pounding zones form, resulting in highly nonlinear response characteristics. This means that the characteristic site response, and the patterns of amplifications measured via small earthquake records, or by analysis of microtremors, will disappear, departing from the linear amplification characteristics completely. This leads to chaos and creates a problem for seismic zoning because the nonlinear response is strongly dependent upon the amplitudes and on the time history of shaking, so that it becomes virtually impossible to predict the distribution of amplification from the local site conditions. If we assume that the observed damage distribution is a useful indication of the distribution and of the nature of shaking amplitudes, we can conduct a full-scale experiment every time a moderate or large earthquake leads to some damage. Analyses of these patterns, combined with detailed maps of the properties of the soil and of surface geology, suggest that there are reappearing patterns of nonlinear site response from one earthquake to the next. We show one such example for two earthquakes in the Los Angeles metropolitan area. This example implies that the relative movement along the boundaries of the blocks of soil, and along the cracks formed by previous strong shaking, may recur during future earthquakes. The implication is significant for all engineering analyses of response and for engineering design in the near field because it means that in the vicinity of these cracks the complexity of strong shaking is further increased by large differential motions and by large transient and permanent strains and tilts.

Keywords

effects of site response during earthquakes local soil site conditions local geologic site conditions nonlinear site response site response in near field 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abrahamson, N. A. and Silva, W. J. (1997) Empirical response spectral attenuation relations for shallow crustal earthquakes, Seism. Res. Lett. 68(1), 94–127.Google Scholar
  2. Aki, K. (1988) Local site effects on strong ground motion. In Proc. of Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics II, GT Div./ASCE, Park City, Utah.Google Scholar
  3. Ambraseys, N. N., Douglas, J., Sarma, S. K., and Smit, P. M. (2005a) 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. Earthquake Eng. 3, 1–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ambraseys, N. N., Douglas, J., Sarma, S. K., and Smit, P. M. (2005b) Equations for the estimation of strong ground motions from shallow crustal earthquakes using data from Europe and the middle east: Vertical peak ground acceleration and spectral acceleration, Bull. Earthquake Eng. 3, 55–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ambraseys, N. N., Simpson, K. A., and Bommer, J. J. (1996) Prediction of horizontal response spectra in Europe, Earthquake Eng. Structural Dyn. 25, 371–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Anderson, J. G., Trifunac, M. D., Teng, T. L., Amini, A., and Moslem, K. (1981) Los Angeles vicinity strong motion accelerograph network, Report CE 81-04, Department of Civil Engineering, Univ. of Southern Calif., Los Angeles, CA.Google Scholar
  7. Boore, D. M., Joyner, W. B., and Fumal, T. (1997) Equations for estimating horizontal response spectra and peak acceleration from western north american earthquakes: A summary of recent work, Seism. Res. Lett. 68(1), 128–153.Google Scholar
  8. Borcherdt, R. D. (1970) Effects of local geology on ground motion near San Francisco Bay, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 60, 29–61.Google Scholar
  9. Borcherdt, R. D. and Gibbs, J. F. (1976) Effects of local geological conditions in the San Francisco Bay region on ground motions and intensities of the 1906 earthquake, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 66, 467–500.Google Scholar
  10. Campbell, K. and Duke, C. M. (1974) Bedrock intensity attenuation and site factors from San Fernando earthquake records, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 64, 173–185.Google Scholar
  11. Castellaro, S., Mulargia, F., and Rossi, P. L. (2008) Vs30: Proxy for seismic amplification? Seism. Res. Lett. 79(4), 540–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chiou, B., Darragh, R., Gregor, N., and Silva, W. (2008) NGA project strong-motion database, Earthquake Spectra 24(1), 23–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Coulter, H. W., Waldron, H. H., and Devine, J. F. (1973) Seismic and geologic siting considerations for nuclear facilities. In Proc. of the 5th World Conf. on Earthquake Engineering, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
  14. Duke, C. M. (1958) Bibliography of effects of soil conditions on earthquake damage, Berkeley, CA, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute.Google Scholar
  15. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (1995) Northridge earthquake of January 17, 1994, Reconnaissance Report, Vol. 1. In Earthquake Spectra 11, Suppl. C.Google Scholar
  16. Field, E. H. and Hough, S. H. (1997) The variability of PSV response spectra across a dense array deployed during the Northridge aftershock sequence, Earthquake Spectra 13(2), 243–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Freeman, J. R. (1932) Earthquake Damage and Earthquake Insurance, New York, McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  18. Gao, S., Liu, H., Davis, P. M., and Knopoff, L. (1996) Localized amplification of seismic waves and correlation with damage due to the Northridge earthquake: Evidence for focusing in Santa Monica, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 86(1B), S209–S230.Google Scholar
  19. Gičev, V. and Trifunac, M. D. (2008) Transient and permanent rotations in a shear layer excited by strong earthquake pulses, Bull. Seism. Soc. Amer. (submitted). doi:10.1785/0120080066.Google Scholar
  20. Goto, H., Kameda, H., and Sugito, A. (1982) Use of N-value profiles for estimation of site dependent earthquake motions, Collected Papers 317, pp. 69–78, Japanese Society of Civil Engineering (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  21. Gutenberg, B. (1957) Effects of ground on earthquake motion, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 47, 221–250.Google Scholar
  22. Harmsen, S. C. (1997) Determination of site amplification in the Los Angeles urban area from inversion of strong motion records, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 87, 866–887.Google Scholar
  23. Hartzell, S. (1998) Variability of nonlinear sediment response during Northridge, California earthquake, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 88(6), 1426–1437.Google Scholar
  24. Hartzell, S., Leeds, A., Frankel, A., and Michael, J. (1996) Site response for urban Los Angeles using aftershocks of the Northridge earthquake, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 86(1B), S168–S192.Google Scholar
  25. Haskell, N. A. (1969) Elastic displacements in the near-field of a propagating fault, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 59, 865–908.Google Scholar
  26. Idriss, I. M. and Seed, H. B. (1968) An analysis of ground motions during the 1957 San Francisco earthquake, Bull. Seism. Soc. Amer. 58, 2013–2032.Google Scholar
  27. Ivanović, S. S., Trifunac, M. D., and Todorovska, M. I. (2000) Ambient vibration tests of structures—A review, Bull. Indian Soc. Earthquake Tech. 37(4), 165–197.Google Scholar
  28. Kanai, K. (1983) Engineering Seismology, Tokyo, Univ. of Tokyo Press.Google Scholar
  29. Lee, K. L. and Albaisa, A. (1974) Earthquake induced settlements in saturated sands, J. Geotechnical Eng. 100(GT4), 387–406.Google Scholar
  30. Lee, V. W. (1987) Influence of local soil and geologic site conditions on pseudo relative velocity response spectrum amplitudes of recorded strong motion accelerations, Report No. CE 87-05, Department of Civil Engineering, Univ. of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.Google Scholar
  31. Lee, V. W. (2002) Empirical scaling of earthquake ground motion. Part I: Attenuation and scaling response spectra, ISET J. 39(4), 219–254.Google Scholar
  32. Lee, V. W. (2007) Empirical scaling and regression methods for earthquake strong-motion spectra—A review, ISET J. 44(1), 39–69.Google Scholar
  33. Lee, V. W. and Trifunac, M. D. (1995) Frequency dependent attenuation function and fourier amplitude spectra of strong earthquake ground motion in California, Report No. CE 95-03, Dept. of Civil Eng., Univ. of Southern Cal., Los Angeles, CA.Google Scholar
  34. Lee, V. W., Trifunac, M. D., Todorovska, M. I., and Novikova, E. I. (1995) Empirical equations describing attenuation of the peaks of strong ground motion, in terms of magnitude, distance, path effects and site conditions, Report No. CE 95-02, Dept. of Civil Eng., Univ. of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.Google Scholar
  35. Leighton and Associates, Inc. (1990) Technical appendix to the safety of the Los Angeles County General Plan, Vol. 1, Prepared for Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, Regional Planning Comm., Dept. of Regional Planning.Google Scholar
  36. Novikova, E. I. and Trifunac, M. D. (1993a) Modified Mercalli intensity and the geometry of the sedimentary basin as the scaling parameters of the frequency dependent duration of strong ground motion, Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 12(4), 209–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Novikova, E. I. and Trifunac, M. D. (1993b) Duration of strong earthquake ground motion: Physical basis and empirical equations, Report No. CE 93-02, Dept. of Civil Eng., Univ. Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.Google Scholar
  38. Novikova, E. I. and Trifunac, M. D. (1994a) Duration of strong ground motion in terms of earthquake magnitude epicentral distance, site conditions and site geometry, Earthquake Eng. Structural Dyn. 23(6), 1023–1043.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Novikova, E. I. and Trifunac, M. D. (1994b) Influence of geometry of sedimentary basins on the frequency dependent duration of strong ground motion, Earthquake Eng. and Eng. Vibration 14(2), 7–44.Google Scholar
  40. Novikova, E. I. and Trifunac, M. D. (1995) Frequency dependent duration of strong earthquake ground motion: Updated empirical equations, Report No. CE 95-01, Dept. of Civil Eng., Univ. Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.Google Scholar
  41. Reid, H. F. (1910) The California earthquake of April 18, 1906. In The Mechanics of the Earthquake, 2 Report of the State Earthquake Investigation Commission, Carnegie Institute of Washington, Publ. 87, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  42. Rogers, A. M., Tinsley, J. C., and Borcherdt, R. D. (1985) Predicting relative ground response. In J. L. Ziony (ed.), Evaluating Earthquake Hazards in the Los Angeles Region, U.S.G.S. Professional Paper 1360, pp. 221–248Google Scholar
  43. Seed, H. B., Ugas, C., and Lysmer, J. (1976) Site-dependent spectra for earthquake-resistant design, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 66, 221–243.Google Scholar
  44. Tinsley, J. C. and Fumal, T. E. (1985) Mapping quaternary sedimentary deposits for areal variation in shaking respnse. In Evaluating Earthquake Hazards in the Los Angeles Region—An Earth Science Perspective, U.S. Geological Survey Pofessionl Paper 1360, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  45. Tinsley, J. C., Youd, T. L., Perkins, D. M., and Chen, A. T. F. (1985) Evaluating liquefaction potential, In Evaluating Earthquake Hazards in the Los Angels Region—An Earth Science Perspective, U.S.G.S. Professional Paper 1360, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  46. Todorovska, M. I. and Trifunac, M. D. (1998) Discussion of “The role of earthquake hazard maps in loss estimation: A study of the Northridge Earthquake,” by R. B. Olshansky, Earthquake Spectra 14(3), 557–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Todorovska, M. I., Trifunac, Todorovska M. D., and Lee, V. W. (2007) Shaking hazard compatible methodology for probabilistic assessment of permanent ground displacement across earthquake faults, Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 27(6), 586–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tokimatsu, K. and Seed, H. B. (1987) Evaluation of settlements in sands due to earthquake shaking, J. Geotechnical Eng., ASCE 113(8), 861–878.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Trifunac, M. D. (1971a) Response envelope spectrum and interpretation of strong earthquake ground motion, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 61, 343–356.Google Scholar
  50. Trifunac, M. D. (1971b) Surface motion of a semi-cylindrical alluvial valley for incident plane SH waves, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 61(6), 1755–1770.Google Scholar
  51. Trifunac, M. D. (1974) A three-dimensional dislocation model for the San Fernando, California, earthquake of 9 February 1971, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 64, 149–172.Google Scholar
  52. Trifunac, M. D. (1976a) Preliminary analysis of the peaks of strong earthquake ground motion dependence of peaks on earthquake magnitude, epicentral distance and recording site conditions, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 66, 189–219.Google Scholar
  53. Trifunac, M. D. (1976b) A note on the range of peak amplitudes of recorded accelerations, velocities and displacements with respect to the modified Mercalli intensity, Earthquake Notes 47(1), 9–24.Google Scholar
  54. Trifunac, M. D. (1978) Response spectra of earthquake ground motion, J. Eng. Mech. Div. ASCE 104, 1081–1097.Google Scholar
  55. Trifunac, M. D. (1979) Preliminary empirical model for scaling Fourier amplitude spectra of strong motion acceleration in terms of modified Mercalli intensity and geologic site conditions, Earthquake Eng. Structural Dyn. 7, 63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Trifunac, M. D. (1987) Influence of local soil and geologic site conditions on Fourier spectrum amplitudes of recorded strong motion accelerations, Report No. CE 87-04, Dept. of Civil Eng., Univ. of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.Google Scholar
  57. Trifunac, M. D. (1989) Threshold magnitudes which cause the ground motion exceeding the values expected during the next 50 years in a metropolitan area, Geofizika 6, 1–12.Google Scholar
  58. Trifunac, M. D. (1990) How to model amplification of strong earthquake ground motions by local soil and geologic site conditions, Earthquake Eng. Structural Dyn. 19(6), 833–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Trifunac, M. D. (2003) Nonlinear soil response as a natural passive isolation mechanism. Paper II—The 1933, Long Beach, California earthquake, Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 23(7), 549–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Trifunac, M. D. (2008a) The role of strong motion rotations in the response of structures near earthquake faults, Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 29(20), 382–393, doi:10.1016/ j.soildyn.2008.04.001.Google Scholar
  61. Trifunac, M. D. (2008b) Design of structures crossing active faults. In Monograph Celebrating 85th anniversary of the birth of Prof. Milan Djurić, Gradjevinski Fakultet u Beogradu, Katedra za Tehničku Mehaniku i Teoriju Konstrukcija, Beograd.Google Scholar
  62. Trifunac, M. D. (2009) Nonlinear problems in earthquake engineering. In Springer's Encyclopedia of Complexity and System Science (in press).Google Scholar
  63. Trifunac, M. D. and Anderson, J. G. (1977) Preliminary empirical models for scaling absolute acceleration spectra, Report No. 77–03, Dept. of Civil Eng., Univ. of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.Google Scholar
  64. Trifunac, M. D. and Anderson, J. G. (1978a) Preliminary empirical models for scaling pseudo relative velocity spectra, Report No. 78-04, Dept. of Civil Eng., Univ. of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.Google Scholar
  65. Trifunac, M. D. and Anderson, J. G. (1978b) Preliminary models for scaling relative velocity spectra, Report No. 78–05, Dept. of Civil Eng., Univ. of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.Google Scholar
  66. Trifunac, M. D. and Brady, A. G. (1976) On the correlation of seismic intensity scales with the peaks of recorded strong ground motion, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 66, 139–162.Google Scholar
  67. Trifunac, M. D., Hao, T. Y., and Todorovska, M. I. (1999) On reoccurrence of site specific response, Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 18(8), 569–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Trifunac, M. D. and Ivanović, S. S. (2003a) Reoccurrence of site specific response in former Yugoslavia. Part I: Montenegro, Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 23(8), 637–661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Trifunac, M. D. and Ivanović, S. S. (2003b) Reoccurrence of site specific response in former Yugoslavia. Part II: Friuli, Banja Luka, and Kopaonik, Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 23(8), 663–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Trifunac, M. D. and Lee, V. W. (1978) Dependence of the Fourier amplitude spectra of strong motion acceleration on the depth of sedimentary deposits, Report No. 78–14, Dept. of Civil Eng., Univ. of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.Google Scholar
  71. Trifunac, M. D. and Lee, V. W. (1979) Dependence of the pseudo relative velocity spectra of strong motion acceleration on the depth of sedimentary deposits, Report 79–02, Dept. of Civil Eng., Univ. of Southern Cal., Los Angeles, CA.Google Scholar
  72. Trifunac, M. D. and Todorovska, M. I. (1996) Nonlinear soil response–1994 Northridge California, earthquake, J. Geotech. Eng. ASCE 122(9), 725–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Trifunac, M. D. and Todorovska, M. I. (1998a) Damage distribution during the 1994 Northridge, California, earthquake in relation to generalized categories of surficial geology, Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 17(4), 239–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Trifunac, M. D. and Todorovska, M. I. (1998b) Nonlinear soil response as a natural passive isolation mechanism—the 1994 Northridge earthquake, Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 17(1), 41–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Trifunac, M. D. and Todorovska, M. I. (2000a) Long period microtremors, microseisms and earthquake damage: Northridge, CA, earthquake of 17 January, 1994, Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 19(4), 253–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Trifunac, M. D. and Todorovska, M. I. (2000b) Can aftershock studies predict site amplification? Northridge, CA, earthquake of 17 January, 1996, Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 19(4), 233–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Trifunac, M. D. and Todorovska, M. I. (2004) 1971 San Fernando and 1994 Northridge, California, earthquakes: Did the zones with severely damaged buildings reoccur? Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 24(3), 225–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Trifunac, M. D., Todorovska, M. I., and Ivanović, S. S. (1994) A note on distribution of uncorrected peak ground accelerations during the Northridge, California earthquake of 17 January 1994, Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 13(3), 187–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Udwadia, F. E. and Trifunac, M. D. (1973) Comparison of earthquake and microtremor ground motions in El Centro, California, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 63(4), 1227–1253.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mihailo D. Trifunac
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringUniversity of Southern CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations