Abstract
We study how the selection of site response model affects the ground motion predictions of seismological models, and in turn how the synthetic motion site response variability propagates to the structural performance estimation. For this purpose, we compute ground motion synthetics for six earthquake scenarios of a strike-slip fault rupture, and estimate the ground surface response for 24 typical soil profiles in Southern California. We use viscoelastic, equivalent linear and nonlinear analyses for the site response simulations, and evaluate the ground surface motion variability that results from the soil model selection. Next, we subject a series of bilinear single degree of freedom oscillators to the ground motions computed using the alternative soil models, and evaluate the consequent variability in the structural response. Results show high bias and uncertainty of the inelastic structural displacement ratio predicted using the linear site response model for periods close to the fundamental period of the soil profile. The amount of bias and the period range where the structural performance uncertainty manifests are shown to be a function of both input motion and site parameters. We finally derive empirical correlations between the site parameters and the variability introduced in structural analyses based on our synthetic ground motion simulations.
Keywords
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Assimaki D, Kausel E (2002) An equivalent linear algorithm with frequency- and pressure-dependent moduli and damping for the seismic analysis of deep sites. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 22:959–965
Assimaki D, Li W, Steidl J, Schmedes J (2008) Quantifying nonlinearity susceptibility via site response modeling uncertainty at three sites in the Los Angeles basin. Bull Seismol Soc Am 98(5):2364–2390
Bardet JP, Tobita T (2001a) Nonlinear earthquake site response analysis. User’s manual. Report, Civil Engineering Department, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA
Bardet JP, Tobita T (2001b) NERA: A computer program for nonlinear earthquake site response analyses of layered soil deposits. Technical report, University of Southern California
Bardet JP, Ichii K, Lin CH (2000) EERA A computer program for equivalent-linear earthquake site response analyses of layered soil deposits. Technical report, University of Southern California http://gees.usc.edu/GEES/Software/EERA2000/EERAManual.pdf
Bazzurro P, Sjoberg B, Luco N (2004) Post-elastic response of structures to synthetic ground motions. Technical report, AIR Worldwide Co, San Francisco
Berrill J (1977) Site effects during the San Fernando, California, earthquake. In Proceedings of the Sixth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, India pp 432–438
Bommer J, Scott S, Sarma S (2000) Hazard-consistent earthquake scenarios. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 19:219–231
Bonilla LF (2001) NOAH: user’s manual. Institute for Crustal Studies, University of California, Santa Barbara, 38 pp
Bonilla LF, Archeleta RJ, Lavellee D (2004) Hysteretic and dilatant behavior of cohesionless soils and their effects on nonlinear site response: field data observations and modeling. Bull Seism Soc Am 95:2373–2395
Boore DM (1983) Stochastic simulation of high-frequency ground motions based on seismological models of the radiated spectra. Bull Seism Soc Am 73:1865–1894
Boore DM, AtkinsonGM (2008) 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 Spectra 24(1):99–138, PEER NGA
Borcherdt RD, Gibbs JF (1976) Effects of local geological conditions in the San Francisco bay region on ground motions and the intensities of the 1906 earthquake. Bull Seism Soc Am 66(2):467–500
Building Seismic Safety Council (BSSC) (2003) NEHRP recommended provisions for seismic regulations for new buildings and other structures (FEMA 450). Technical report, prepared by the Building Seismic Safety Council for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC
Carcione JM, Kosloff D, Kosloff R (1988) Wave propagation in a linear viscoacoustic medium. Geophys J Roy Astr Soc 93:393–407
Chin B-H, Aki K (1991) Simultaneous study of the source, path, and site effects on strong ground motion during the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake: a preliminary result on pervasive nonlinear site effects. Bull Seism Soc Am 81(5):1859–1884
Chopra A (2000) Dynamics of Structures: Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering (2nd Edition) Prentice Hall, 844 pages, ISBN-10: 0130869732
Chopra AK, Chintanapakdee C (2004) Inelastic deformation ratios for design and evaluation of structures: single-degree-of-freedom bilinear systems. J Struct Eng 130(9):1309–1319
Cramer C (2006) Quantifying the uncertainty in site amplification modeling and its effects on site-specific seismic-hazard estimation in the upper Mississippi embayment and adjacent areas. Bull Seism Soc Am 96(6):2008–2020
Cramer CH, Gomberg JS, Schweig ES, Waldron BA, Tucker K (2004). Memphis, Shelby County, Tennessee, seismic hazard maps, US Geological Survey. Open-File Report 04–1294, 41 pp
Darragh RB, Shakal AF (1991) The site response of two rock and soil station pairs to strong and weak ground motion. Bull Seism Soc Am 81(5):1885–1899
Day SM, Minster JR (1984) Numerical simulation of attenuated wavefields using a Pade approximant method. Geophys J Roy Astr Soc 78:105–118
Drnevich VP, Hall JR Jr, Richart FE Jr (1966) Large amplitude vibration effects on the shear modulus of sand. University of Michigan Report to Waterways Experiment Station, Corps of Engineers, U.S. Army, Contract DA-22-079-eng-340
Duke C, Mal A (1978) Site and source effects on earthquake ground motion. Technical report, University of California, Los Angeles
Ellis GW, Cakmak AS (1987) Modeling earthquake ground motions in seismically active regions using parametric time series methods. Technical report, NCEER-87-0014, National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research
Emmerich H, Korn M (1987) Incorporation of attenuation into time-domain computations of seismic wave fields. Geophysics 52:1252–1264
Hardin BO, Drnevich VP (1972a) Shear modulus and damping in soil: measurement and parameter effects. J Soil Mech Found Div ASCE 98:603–624
Hardin BO, Drnevich VP (1972b) Shear modulus and damping in soil: design equations and curves. J Soil Mech Found Div ASCE 98:667–692
Hartzell S (1992) Site response estimation from earthquake data. Bull Seism Soc Am 82(6):2308–2327
Hartzell SH, Bonilla LF, Williams RA (2004) Prediction of nonlinear soil effects. Bull Seism Soc Am 94(5):1609–1629
Hashash YMA, Park D (2001) Non-linear one-dimensional seismic ground motion propagation in the Mississippi embayment. Eng Geol 62:185–206
Hashash YMA, Park D (2002) Viscous damping formulation and high frequency motion propogation in non-linear site response analysis. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 22:611–624
Idriss I, Seed H (1968) Seismic response of horizontal soil layers. J Soil Mech Found Div ASCE 94(4):1003–1031
Idriss IM, Sun JI (1992) User’s manual for SHAKE91. Center for Geotechnical Modeling, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California, Davis, CA
Iwan WD (1967) On a class of models for the yielding behavior of continuous and composite systems. J Appl Mech 34(3):612–617
Joyner WB, Warrick ER, Adolph I, Oliver A (1976) Analysis of seismograms from a downhole array in sediments near San Francisco Bay. Bull Seism Soc Am 66(3):937–958
Kanai I (1961) An empirical formula for the spectrum of strong earthquake motions. Bull Earthq Res Inst 39:85–95
Katsanos EI, Sextos AG, Manolis GD (2010) Selection of earthquake ground motion records: A state-of-the-art review from a structural engineering perspective. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 30(4):157–169
Kausel E, Assimaki D (2002) Seismic simulation of inelastic soils via frequency-dependent moduli and damping. J Eng Mech 128:34–47
Konder RL, Zelasko JS (1963) A hyperbolic stress-strain formulation for sands. In: Proceedings of 2nd Pan American conference on soil mechanics and foundation engineering, Brazil, pp 289–324
Kramer SL (1996) Geotechnical earthquake engineering. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 653 pages, Prentice Hall (January 7, 1996), ISBN-10: 0133749436
Li W, Assimaki D (2010) Site and ground motion dependent parametric uncertainty of nonlinear site response analyses in earthquake simulations. Bull Seism Soc Am 100(3)
Li W, Assimaki D, Fragiadakis M (2009) Nonlinear site response modeling variability in “rupture-to-rafters” ground motion simulations. In: Proceedings 2nd international conference on computational methods in structural dynamics and earthquake engineering (COMPDYN 2009), Rhodes, Greece, 22–24 June 2009
Liu P-C, Archuleta RJ (2002) The effect of a low-velocity surface layer on simulated ground motion. Seism Res Lett 73:267
Liu P-C, Archuleta RJ (2006) Efficient modeling of Q for 3D numerical simulation of wave propagation. Bull Seism Soc Am 96(4A):1352–1358
Liu P-C, Archuleta RJ, Hartzell SH (2006) Prediction of broadband ground-motion time histories: hybrid low/high-frequency method with correlated random source parameters. Bull Seism Soc Am 96:2118–2130
Ma S, Liu P-C (2006) Modeling of the perfectly matched layer absorbing boundaries and intrinsic attenuation in explicit finite-element methods. Bull Seism Soc Am 96(5):1779–1794
Masing G (1926) Eigenspannungen und Verfertigung beim Messing. Proceedings 2nd international congress on applied mechanics, Zurich
Matasovic N, Vucetic M (1993a) Cyclic characterization of liquefiable sands. J Geotech Eng 119(11):1805–1822
Matasovic J, Vucetic M (1993b) Analysis of seismic records obtained on November 24, 1987 at the Wildlife Liquefaction Array. Research Report, Civil Engineering Department, University of California, Los Angeles, 94 pp
Miranda E (1993) Site-dependent strength-reduction factors. J Struct Eng 119(12):3503–3519
Miranda E (2000) Inelastic displacement ratios for structures on firm sites. J Struct Eng 126(10):1150–1159
Miranda E (2001) Estimation of inelastic deformation demands of SODF systems. J Struct Eng 127(9):1005–1012
Mroz Z, Shrivastava HP, Dubey RN (1976) A non-linear hardening model and its application to cyclic loading. Acta Mechanica 25:51–61
Naeim F, Lew M (1995) On the use of design spectrum compatible time histories. Earthq Spectra 11:111–127
O’Connor IM, Ellingwood BR (1992) Site-dependent models of earthquake ground motion. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn 21:573–589
Paparizos IG (1986) Some observations on the random response of hysterestic systems. Technical report, Report No. EERL86-02, The California Institute of Technology
Park D, Hashash YMA (2004) Soil damping formulation in nonlinear time domain site response analysis. J Earthq Eng 8(2):249–274
Park D, Hashash YMA (2005) Evaluation of seismic site factors in the Mississippi embayment. II. Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis with nonlinear site effects. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 25:145–156
Reiter I (1990) Earthquake hazard analysis – issues and insights. Columbia University Press, New York
Ruiz-Garcia J, Miranda E (2004) Inelastic displacement ratios for design of structures on soft soils sites. J Struct Eng 130(12):2051–2061
Schnabel PB, Lysmer J, Seed HB (1972) SHAKE: A computer program for earthquake response analyses of horizontally layered sites. Technical report, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Report No. EERC 72–12, University of California, Berkeley
Seed HB, Idriss IM (1970) Soil moduli and damping factors for dynamic response analyses. Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California at Berkeley, UCB/EERC-70/10
Seed HB, Wong RT, Idriss IM, Tokimatsu K (1984) Moduli and damping factors for dynamic analyses of cohesionless soils. University of California at Berkeley, UCB/EERC-84
Silva WJ, Stark CL (1992) Source, path, and site ground motion model for the 1989 M 6.9 Loma Prieta earthquake. Technical report, California Division of Mines and Geology, Final report
Su F, Aki K, Teng T, Koyanagi S, Mayeda M (1992) The relation between site-amplification factor and surficial geology in central California. Bull Seism Soc Am 82:580–602
Tajimi K (1960) A statistical method of determining the maximum response of a building structure during an earthquake. In: Proceedings of 2nd world conference on earthquake engineering, Tokyo and Kyoto, Japan
Toro GR, Silva WJ (2001) Scenario earthquakes for Saint Louis, MO, and Memphis, TN, and seismic hazard maps for the central United States region including the effect of site conditions, Risk Engineering, Inc., Boulder, Colorado, USGS Grant: Final Technical Report
Veletsos AN, Newmark NM, Chepalati C (1965) Deformation spectra for elastic and elastoplastic systems subjected to ground shock and earthquake motion. In: Proceedings of 3rd world conference on earthquake engineering, vol II. Wellington, New Zealand, pp 663–682
Whitman RV, Protonotarios JN (1977) Inelastic response to site-modified ground motions. J Geotech Eng Div 103:1037–1053
Wiggins J (1964) Effects of site conditions on earthquake intensity. J Struct Div ASCE 90(2):279–313
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by the Southern California Earthquake Center. SCEC is funded by NSF Cooperative Agreement EAR-0106924 and USGS Cooperative Agreement 02HQAG0008. The SCEC contribution number for this chapter is 1344.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Assimaki, D., Li, W., Fragiadakis, M. (2011). Site Effects in Ground Motion Synthetics for Structural Performance Predictions. In: Papadrakakis, M., Fragiadakis, M., Lagaros, N. (eds) Computational Methods in Earthquake Engineering. Computational Methods in Applied Sciences, vol 21. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0053-6_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0053-6_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-0052-9
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-0053-6
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)