Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Assessment of Simulated Ground Motions in Earthquake Engineering Practice: A Case Study for Duzce (Turkey)

  • Published:
Pure and Applied Geophysics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Simulated ground motions can be used in structural and earthquake engineering practice as an alternative to or to augment the real ground motion data sets. Common engineering applications of simulated motions are linear and nonlinear time history analyses of building structures, where full acceleration records are necessary. Before using simulated ground motions in such applications, it is important to assess those in terms of their frequency and amplitude content as well as their match with the corresponding real records. In this study, a framework is outlined for assessment of simulated ground motions in terms of their use in structural engineering. Misfit criteria are determined for both ground motion parameters and structural response by comparing the simulated values against the corresponding real values. For this purpose, as a case study, the 12 November 1999 Duzce earthquake is simulated using stochastic finite-fault methodology. Simulated records are employed for time history analyses of frame models of typical residential buildings. Next, the relationships between ground motion misfits and structural response misfits are studied. Results show that the seismological misfits around the fundamental period of selected buildings determine the accuracy of the simulated responses in terms of their agreement with the observed responses.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aagaard, B. T., Graves, R. W., Schwartz, D. P., Ponce, D. A., & Graymer, R. W. (2010). Ground-motion modeling of Hayward fault scenario earthquakes. Part I: Construction of the suite of scenarios. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 100, 2927–2944.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akyuz, H. S. (2002). Surface Rupture and Slip Distribution of the 12 November 1999 Duzce earthquake (M 7.1), North Anatolian Fault, Bolu, Turkey. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 92, 61–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Society of Civil Engineers. (2010). Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures (ASCE/SEI 7-10).

  • Arias, A. (1970). A measure of earthquake intensity. In R. J. Hansen (Ed.), Seismic design for nuclear power plants (pp. 438–483). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Askan, A., Karimzadeh, S., Asten, M., Kiliç, N., Sisman, F. N., & Erkmen, C. (2015). Assessment of seismic hazard in the Erzincan (Turkey) region: Construction of local velocity models and evaluation of potential ground motions. Turkish Journal of Earth Sciences, 24, 529–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Askan, A., Karimzadeh, S., & Bilal, M. (2016). Seismic intensity maps for North Anatolian Fault Zone (Turkey) based on recorded and simulated ground motion data, Book Chapter, Neotectonics and Earthquake Potential of the Eastern Mediterranean Region. New York: AGU Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson, G., & Goda, K. (2010). Inelastic seismic demand of real versus simulated ground-motion records for Cascadia subduction earthquakes. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 100, 102–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson, G., Goda, K., & Assatourians, K. (2011). Comparison of nonlinear structural responses for accelerograms simulated from the stochastic finite-fault approach versus the hybrid broadband approach. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 101, 2967–2980.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bazzurro, P., Sjoberg, B., & Luco, N. (2004). Post-elastic response of structures to synthetic ground motions. Report for Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research (PEER) Center Lifelines Program Project, pp. 65-112.

  • Beresnev, I., & Atkinson, G. (1997). Modeling finite-fault radiation from the ωn spectrum. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 87, 67–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boore, D. M. (1983). Stochastic simulation of high-frequency ground motions based on seismological models of the radiated spectra. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 73, 1865–1894.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boore, D. M. (2003). Simulation of ground motion using the stochastic method. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 160, 635–676.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boore, D. M. (2009). Comparing stochastic point-source and finite-source ground-motion simulations: SMSIM and EXSIM. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 99, 3202–3216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boore, D. M., & Joyner, W. (1997). Site amplifications for generic rock sites. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 87, 327–341.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouchon, M. (1981). A simple method to calculate Green’s functions for elastic layered media. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 714, 959–971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Electrical Power Research Institute (EPRI). (1988). A Criterion for determining exceedance of the operating basis earthquake, Report No. EPRI NP-5930, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA.

  • European Committee for Standardization (EC08). (1998). Eurocode 8: Design of Structures for earthquake resistance. Brussels: Belgium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frankel, A. (1993). Three-dimensional simulations of ground motions in the San Bernardino Valley, California, for hypothetical earthquakes on the San Andreas fault. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 83, 1020–1041.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galasso, C., & Zareian, F. (2012). Elastic and post-elastic response of structures to hybrid broadband synthetic ground motions. In Proceedings of 9th international conference on urban earthquake engineering/4th Asia conference on earthquake engineering, Marzo 6–8, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo.

  • Galasso, C., & Zareian, F. (2014). Engineering validation of hybrid broadband ground motion simulation using historical events. In: 10th U.S. National conference on earthquake engineering.

  • Goda, K., Kurahashi, S., Ghofrani, H., Atkinson, G. M., & Irikura, K. (2015). Nonlinear response potential of real versus simulated ground motions for the 11 March 2011 Tohoku-oki earthquake. Earthquake Spectra, 31(3), 1711–1734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Housner, G.W. (1952). Intensity of ground motion during strong earthquakes. California Inst. of Tech Pasadena Earthquake Engineering Research Lab.

  • International Conference on Building Officials (ICBO). (1982). Uniform Building Code, Whittier, CA.

  • Kadas, K. (2006), Influence of idealized pushover curves on seismic response. MS Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, METU University, Ankara City.

  • Kamae, K., Irikura, K., & Pitarka, A. (1998). A technique for simulating strong ground motion using hybrid Green’s function. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 88, 357–367.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karimzadeh, S. (2016). Use of simulated strong ground motion records in earthquake engineering applications. Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, METU University, Ankara City.

  • Komatitsch, D., Liu, Q., Tromp, J., Süss, P., Stidham, C., & Shaw, J. H. (2004). Simulations of ground motion in the Los Angeles basin based upon the spectral-element method. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 94, 187–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mai, P., Imperatori, W., & Olsen, K. (2010). Hybrid broadband ground-motion simulations: Combining long-period deterministic synthetics with high-frequency multiple S-to-S backscattering. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 100, 2124–2142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Motazedian, D., & Atkinson, G. (2005). Stochastic finite-fault modeling based on a dynamic corner frequency. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 95, 995–1010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Motazedian, D., & Moinfar, A. (2006). Hybrid stochastic finite fault modeling of 2003, M6. 5, Bam earthquake (Iran). Journal of Seismology, 10, 91–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NEHRP guidelines for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings (1997).

  • Olsen, K., Archuleta, R., & Matarese, J. (1995). Three-dimensional simulation of a magnitude 7.75 earthquake on the San Andreas fault. Science, 270, 1628.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, K. B., & Mayhew, J. E. (2010). Goodness-of-fit criteria for broadband synthetic seismograms, with application to the 2008 Mw5.4 Chino Hills, CA, Earthquake. Seismological Research Letters, 81, 715–723.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OpenSees 2.4.5, Computer Software, University of California, Berkeley, CA. Retrieved from http://opensees.berkeley.edu.

  • Pitarka, A., Somerville, P., Fukushima, Y., Uetake, T., & Irikura, K. (2000). Simulation of near-fault strong ground motion using Hybrid Green’s functions. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 90, 566–586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raghukanth, S., & Somala, S. (2009). Modeling of strong-motion data in northeastern India: Q, stress drop, and site amplification. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 99, 705–725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riddell, R. (2005). Correlation between ground motion intensity indices and structural response to earthquakes. Paper presented at Symposium Honoring Luis Esteva, September 2005, Mexico City.

  • Sahin, M., & Tari, E. (2000). The August 17 Kocaeli and the November 12 Duzce earthquakes in Turkey. Earth Planets, 52, 753–757.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shoja-Taheri, J., & Ghofrani, H. (2007). Stochastic finite-fault modeling of strong ground motions from the 26 December 2003 Bam, Iran, earthquake. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 97, 1950–1959.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strong Ground Motion Database of Turkey. (2013). DAPHNE. http://daphne.deprem.gov.tr:89/2K/daphne_v4.php. Last visited on Sept 2013.

  • Taucer, F. F., Spacone, E. & Filippou, F. C. (1991). A fiber beam-column element for seismic response analysis of reinforced concrete structures. Ucb/Eerc, pp. 91(17).

  • Turkish Seismic Design Code, Turkish Ministry of Public Works and Settlement (1997). Specification for structures to be built in disaster Areas, Ankara.

  • Turkish Seismic Code (TEC07). (2007). Specification for Structures to be built in Disaster Areas, Ankara.

  • Trifunac, M. D., & Brady, A. G. (1975). A study on the duration of strong earthquake ground motion. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 65, 581–626.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ugurhan, B., & Askan, A. (2010). Stochastic strong ground motion simulation of the 12 November 1999 Duzce (Turkey) earthquake using a dynamic corner frequency approach. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 100, 1498–1512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yakut, A., & Karakutuk, O. (2016). Influence of ground motion selection procedures on seismic response of buildings. In 1st international conference on natural hazards and infrastructure (ICONHIC), Chania, Crete, June 28–30.

  • Yilmaz, H. (2007). Correlation of deformation demands with ground motion intensity. MS Thesis, Department of Civil Eng., METU University, Ankara city.

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study is partially funded within a national project supported by Turkish National Geodesy and Geophysics Union with Grant Number: TUJJB-UDP-01-12.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Middle East Technical University, 06800, Ankara, Turkey

    Shaghayegh Karimzadeh, Aysegul Askan & Ahmet Yakut

  2. Department of Earthquake Studies, Middle East Technical University, 06800, Ankara, Turkey

    Aysegul Askan

Authors
  1. Shaghayegh Karimzadeh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Aysegul Askan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ahmet Yakut
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aysegul Askan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Karimzadeh, S., Askan, A. & Yakut, A. Assessment of Simulated Ground Motions in Earthquake Engineering Practice: A Case Study for Duzce (Turkey). Pure Appl. Geophys. 174, 3589–3607 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-017-1602-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-017-1602-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation