Encyclopedia of Earthquake Engineering

2015 Edition
| Editors: Michael Beer, Ioannis A. Kougioumtzoglou, Edoardo Patelli, Siu-Kui Au

Seismic Actions Due to Near-Fault Ground Motion

  • George P. MavroeidisEmail author
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-35344-4_121


Damping coefficient; Forward directivity; Near field; Near source; Permanent translation (fling); Response spectrum; Seismic ground excitation; Strength reduction factor; Time history


Near-fault seismic ground motions are frequently characterized by intense velocity and displacement pulses of relatively long duration that clearly distinguish them from typical far-field ground motion records. This observation, along with its engineering significance, was first made with respect to the C02 record (Fig. 1a) generated by the 1966 Parkfield earthquake at a distance of only 80 m from the fault break (Housner and Trifunac 1967). The damage that the Olive View Hospital sustained during the 1971 San Fernando earthquake was also attributed to the effect of near-fault ground motions on flexible structures (Bertero et al. 1978). That was perhaps the first time that earthquake engineers linked the structural damage caused by an earthquake to the impulsive character of...
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.



The material presented in this entry is primarily based on previous articles published by the author and Professor Apostolos S. Papageorgiou. The author is grateful to Professor Papageorgiou for providing him with the opportunity to work on this research, as well as for his guidance and advice.

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) under Grant Nos. EEC-9701471, CMS-0077504, and CMMI-1032504; by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) under Contract DTFH61-98-C-00094; and by the US Geological Survey (USGS) under Award No. 04HQGR0029. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the funding agencies.


  1. Alavi P, Krawinkler H (2001) Effects of near-fault ground motion on building structures (Report). CUREE-Kajima Joint Research Program, RichmondGoogle Scholar
  2. Archuleta RJ (1984) A faulting model for the 1979 Imperial Valley earthquake. J Geophys Res 89:4559–4585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baker JW (2007) Quantitative classification of near-fault ground motions using wavelet analysis. Bull Seismol Soc Am 97:1486–1501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bertero VV, Mahin SA, Herrera RA (1978) Aseismic design implications of near fault San Fernando earthquake records. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 6:31–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bouchon M (1997) The state of stress on some faults of the San Andreas system as inferred from near-field strong motion data. J Geophys Res 102:11731–11744CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bray JD, Rodriguez-Marek A (2004) Characterization of forward-directivity ground motions in the near-fault region. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 24:815–828CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Halldorsson B, Papageorgiou AS (2005) Calibration of the specific barrier model to earthquakes of different tectonic regions. Bull Seismol Soc Am 95:1276–1300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Halldorsson B, Mavroeidis GP, Papageorgiou AS (2011) Near-fault and far-field strong ground motion simulation for earthquake engineering applications using the specific barrier model. J Struct Eng ASCE 137:433–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Heaton TH (1982) The 1971 San Fernando earthquake: a double event? Bull Seismol Soc Am 72:2037–2062Google Scholar
  10. Housner GW, Trifunac MD (1967) Analysis of accelerograms – Parkfield earthquake. Bull Seismol Soc Am 57:1193–1220Google Scholar
  11. Hubbard DT, Mavroeidis GP (2011) Damping coefficients for near-fault ground motion response spectra. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 31:401–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Makris N (1997) Rigidity-plasticity-viscosity: can electrorheological dampers protect base-isolated structures from near-source ground motions? Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 26:571–591CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Mavroeidis GP (2004) Modeling and simulation of near-fault strong ground motions for earthquake engineering applications. PhD dissertation, Department of Civil, Structural and Environmental Engineering, State University of New York at Buffalo, BuffaloGoogle Scholar
  14. Mavroeidis GP, Papageorgiou AS (2002) Near-source strong ground motion: characteristics and design issues. In: Proceedings of the seventh U.S. national conference on earthquake engineering, BostonGoogle Scholar
  15. Mavroeidis GP, Papageorgiou AS (2003) A mathematical representation of near-fault ground motions. Bull Seismol Soc Am 93:1099–1131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mavroeidis GP, Papageorgiou AS (2010) Effect of fault rupture characteristics on near-fault strong ground motions. Bull Seismol Soc Am 100:37–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mavroeidis GP, Dong G, Papageorgiou AS (2004) Near-fault ground motions, and the response of elastic and inelastic single-degree-of-freedom (SDOF) systems. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 33:1023–1049CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Newmark NM, Hall WJ (1982) Earthquake spectra and design. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  19. Papageorgiou AS (1997) Engineering seismology. In: Beskos DE, Anagnostopoulos SA (eds) Computer analysis and design of earthquake resistant structures. Computational Mechanics Publications, Southampton, pp 153–200Google Scholar
  20. Papageorgiou AS, Aki K (1983a) A specific barrier model for the quantitative description of inhomogeneous faulting and the prediction of strong ground motion. I. Description of the model. Bull Seismol Soc Am 73:693–722Google Scholar
  21. Papageorgiou AS, Aki K (1983b) A specific barrier model for the quantitative description of inhomogeneous faulting and the prediction of strong ground motion. II. Application of the model. Bull Seismol Soc Am 73:953–978Google Scholar
  22. Sasani M, Bertero VV (2000) Importance of severe pulse-type ground motions in performance-based engineering: historical and critical review. In: Proceedings of the twelfth world conference on earthquake engineering, AucklandGoogle Scholar
  23. Somerville P (2003) Magnitude scaling of the near fault rupture directivity pulse. Phys Earth Planet In 137:201–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Vassiliou MF, Makris N (2011) Estimating time scales and length scales in pulse-like earthquake acceleration records with wavelet analysis. Bull Seismol Soc Am 101:596–618CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Veletsos AS, Newmark NM (1960) Effect of inelastic behavior on the response of simple systems to earthquake motions. In: Proceedings of the second world conference on earthquake engineering, TokyoGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Earth SciencesUniversity of Notre DameNotre DameUSA