The effective number of cycles of earthquake ground motion

Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics

Volumn 34, Issue 6, 2005, Pages 637-664

  Hancock, Jonathan ^a   Bommer, Julian J ^a  

^a IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Earthquake ground motions; Effective number of cycles; Strong motion duration

Indexed keywords

CORRELATION METHODS; CYCLIC LOADS; EARTHQUAKE EFFECTS; LIQUEFACTION; PARAMETER ESTIMATION; SOILS;

ACCELEROGRAMS; EARTHQUAKE GROUND MOTION; SEISMIC RESPONSE; SOIL DEPOSITS;

SEISMOLOGY;

EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING; GROUND MOTION; LIQUEFACTION;

EID: 18744382463     PISSN: 00988847     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/eqe.437     Document Type: Review

References (82)

1. Martin GR, Finn LWD, Seed HB. Fundamentals of liquefaction under cyclic loading. Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division (ASCE) 1975; 101(GT5):423-438.
2. Annaki M, Lee LK. Equivalent uniform cycle concept for soil dynamics. Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division (ASCE) 1977; 103 (GT6):549-564.
3. Youd TL, Idriss IM. Liquefaction resistance of soils: summary report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF workshops on evaluation of liquefaction resistance of soils. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering (ASCE) 2001; 127(4):297-313.
4. Lee KL, Chan K. Number of equivalent cycles in strong motion earthquakes. Proceedings of the International Conference on Microzonation for Safer Construction Research, vol. 2, 1972, pp. 609-627.
5. Liu A, Stewart JP, Abrahamson N, Moriwaki Y. Equivalent number of uniform stress cycles for liquefaction analysis. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering (ASCE) 2001; 127 (12):1017-1026.
6. Cosenza E, Manfredi G, Ramasco R. The use of damage functionals in earthquake engineering: a comparison between different methods. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1993; 22:855-868.
7. Mander J, Peckan G, Chen S. Low-cycle variable amplitude fatigue modelling of top-and-seat angle connections. Engineering Journal (AISC) 1995; 32(2):54-63.
8. Cosenza E, Manfredi G. Seismic design based on low cycle fatigue criteria. Proceedings of the 11th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Acapulco, 1996, Paper no. 1141.
9. Malhotra PK. Cyclic-demand spectrum. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2002; 31:1441-1457.
10. Kunnath SK, Chai YH. Cumulative damage-based inelastic cyclic demand spectrum. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2004; 33:499-520. DOI:10.1002/eqe.363.
11. Mortgat CP. A probabilistic definition of effective acceleration. Proceedings of the 2nd US National Conference on Earthquake Engineering , Stanford, 1979, pp. 743-751.
12. Bolt BA, Abrahamson NA. New attenuation relations for peak and expected accelerations of strong ground motion. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 1982; 72(6):2307-2321.
13. Schwarz J. Evaluation of effective design spectra. Seismic Design Practice into the Next Century: Research and Application. Booth E (ed.), Balkema, 1998, pp. 467-475.
14. FEMA. HAZUS-MH Technical Manuals. Federal Emergency Management Agency , Washington, D.C., 2003.
15. Kircher CA, Nassar AA, Kustu O, Holmes WT. Development of building damage functions for earthquake loss estimation. Earthquake Spectra 1997; 13(4):663-682.
16. Bommer JJ, Martínez-Pereira A. The effective duration of earthquake strong motion. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 1999; 3 (2):127-172.
17. Bommer JJ, Martínez-Pereira A. Strong motion parameters: definition, usefulness and predictability. Proceedings of the 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland, 2000, Paper no. 0206.
18. Miner MA. Cumulative damage in fatigue. Transactions of the ASME. Journal of Applied Mechanics 1945; 12(3):159-164.
19. Chung YS, Meyer C, Shinozuka M. A new damage model for reinforced concrete structures. Proceedings of the 9th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Tokyo, Japan, 1988, vol. 8, pp. 205-210.
20. Chung YS, Meyer C, Shinozuka M. Modelling of concrete damage. ACI Structural Journal 1989; 86(3): 259-271.
21. Seed HB, Idriss IM, Makdisi F, Baneijee N. Representation of irregular stress time histories by equivalent uniform stress series in liquefaction analysis. Earthquake Engineering Research Centre Report EERC 75-29, University of California, Berkeley, 1975.
22. Amini A, Trifunac MD. Distribution of peaks in linear earthquake response. Journal of the Engineering Division (ASCE) 1981; 107 (EM1):207-227.
23. Kawashima K, Aizawa K. Earthquake response spectra taking account of number of response cycles. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1986; 14:185-197.
24. Safak E. 3D response spectra: a method to include duration in response spectra. Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Paris, 1998.
25. Trifunac MD, Lee VW, Todorovska MI. Common problems in automatic digitisation of strong motion accelerograms. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 1999; 18:519-530.
26. Koliopoulos PK, Margaris BN. The 1999 Athens (Greece) earthquake: Energy and duration-related response spectral characteristics of different site conditions. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Recent Advances in Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Dynamics, San Diego, California, 2001, Paper no. 10.31.
27. ASTM. Cycle counting in fatigue analysis. Annual Book of ASTM Standards 1985; vol. 03.01., Designation E1049-85.
28. Dowling NE. Fatigue failure predictions for complicated stress-strain histories. Journal of Materials (JMLSA) 1972; 7(1):71-87.
29. Jeong GD, Iwan WD. The effect of earthquake duration on the damage of structures. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1988; 16:1201-1211.
30. Vanmarcke EH, Lai SP. Strong-motion duration and RMS amplitude of earthquake records. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 1980; 70(4):1293-1307.
31. Sarma SK, Srbulov M. A uniform estimation of some basic ground motion parameters. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 1998; 2 (2):267-287.
32. Sarma SK, Casey BJ. Duration of strong motion earthquakes. Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Moscow, vol. 10-A, 1990, pp. 174-179.
33. Calado L, Castiglioni CA, Barbaglia P, Bernuzzi C. Seismic design criteria based on cumulative damage concepts. Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Paris, 1998.
34. Taucer F, Negro P, Colombo A. Low-cycle fatigue and PSD testing of a two-storey moment resisting frame with beam-to-column welded connections. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 2000; 4 (4):437-477.
35. Tremblay R, Bouatay N. Loading protocols for the seismic testing of ductile bracing members in concentrically braced steel frames. Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering , London, 2002, paper 480.
36. Boore DM. Stochastic simulation of high-frequency ground motions based on seismological models of the radiated spectra. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 1983; 73(3):1865-1894.
37. Gupta ID. A note on the response spectra of peak amplitudes to be expected for a given number of cycles. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 1991; 10(1):5-9.
38. Gupta ID. Defining effective peak acceleration via order statistics of acceleration peaks. European Earthquake Engineering 1994; 2 :3-11.
39. Gupta ID, Trifunac MD. A note on the statistics of ordered peaks in stationary processes. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 1998; 17(3):317-328.
40. Gupta ID, Trifunac MD. A note on the nonstationarity of seismic response of structures. Engineering Structures 2000; 23:1567-1577.
41. Elghadamsi FE, Mohraz B, Lee CT. Time-dependent power spectral density of earthquake ground motion. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 1988; 7(1):15-21.
42. Zahrah TF, Hall WJ. Earthquake energy absorption in SDOF structures. Journal Structural Engineering Division (ASCE) 1984; 110 (ST8):1757-1772.
43. Chai YH, Fajfar P. A procedure for estimating input energy spectra for seismic design. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 2000; 4 (4):539-561.
44. Arango I. Magnitude scaling factors for soil liquefaction evaluations. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering (ASCE) 1996; 122 (11):929-936.
45. Haldar A, Tang WH. Statistical study of uniform cycles in earthquakes. Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division (ASCE) 1981; 107(GT5):577-589.
46. Green RA. Energy-based evaluation and remediation of liquefiable soils. Ph.D. dissertation, Faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia, 2001.
47. Seed HB, Idriss IM. Simplified procedure for evaluating soil liquefaction potential. Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division (ASCE) 1971; 97(SM9):1249-1273.
48. Valera JE, Donovan N. Soil liquefaction procedures - A review. Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division (ASCE) 1977; 103 (GT6):607-625.
49. Lu L, Annaka T, Tanabe S, Kawamura N. Estimation of velocity range distribution of earthquake ground motion for fatigue assessment. Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering , Paris, 1998.
50. Manfredi G, Polese M, Cosenza E. Cyclic demand in the near fault area. Proceedings of the 7th US National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Boston, Massachusetts, 2002, paper 00075.
51. Manfredi G, Polese M, Cosenza E. Cumulative demand of the earthquake ground motions in the near source. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2003; 32:1853-1865. DOI:10.1002/eqe.305.
52. Somerville PG, Smith NF, Graves RW, Abrahamson NA. Modification of empirical strong ground motion attenuation relations to include the amplitude and duration effects of rupture directivity. Seismological Research Letters 1997; 68(1):199-222.
53. Seed HB, Idriss IM. Analysis of soil liquefaction: Niigata earthquake. Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division (ASCE) 1967; 93(SM3):83-108.
54. Mohammadioun B. Nonlinear response of soils to horizontal and vertical bedrock earthquake motion. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 1997; 1(1):93-119.
55. Joyner WB. Strong motion from surface waves in deep sedimentary basins. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 2000; 90 (6B):S95-S112.
56. Bommer JJ, Magenes G, Hancock J, Penazzo P. Does strong-motion duration influence inelastic structural response? Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 2004; 2(1):1-26.
57. Trifunac MD, Brady AG. A study on the duration of strong earthquake ground motion. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 1975; 65(3):581-626.
58. Abrahamson NA, Silva WJ. Empirical ground motion models. Report to Brookhaven National Laboratory, 1996.
59. Stewart JP, Chiou S-J, Bray JD, Graves RW, Sommerville PG, Abrahamson NA. Ground motion evaluation procedures for performance-based design. PEER Report 2001/09, 2001, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California at Berkeley.
60. Biondi G, Cascone E, Maugeri M. Number of uniform stress cycles equivalent to seismic loading. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Berkeley, vol. 2, 2004, pp. 705-712.
61. Ambraseys NN, Sarma SK. Response of earth dams to strong earthquakes. Géotechnique 1967; 17:181-213.
62. Trifunac MD, Westermo BD. Dependence of the duration of strong earthquake ground motion on magnitude, epicentral distance, geologic conditions at the recording station and frequency of motion. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Southern California, LA, Report no. 76-02, 1976.
63. Joannon JG, Arias A, Saragoni RG. The time variation of the predominant frequency of earthquake motions. Proceedings of the 6th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, New Delhi, India, vol. 1, 1977, pp. 560-568.
64. Araya R, Saragoni GR. Capacity of the strong ground to cause structural damage. Proceedings of the 7th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Istanbul, Turkey, vol. 2, 1980, pp. 483-490.
65. Pauschke JM. Peak vs. root-mean-square acceleration to characterize strong ground motion. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, QE2 (New York to Southampton), 1985, pp. 1-29-1-38.
66. Saragoni GR. Azimuthal effects on earthquake destructiveness. Transactions of the 8th International Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology, vol. M, Brussels, Belgium, 1985, 303-308.
67. 95. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1987; 15:119-132.
68. Joyner WB, Boore D. Measurement, characterization and prediction of strong ground motion. Proceedings of Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics II, GT Division (ASCE) 1988; 43-102.
69. Siddhartan R, Norris GM. Residual porewater pressure and structural response. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 1990; 9 (5):265-271.
70. Saragoni GR. Response spectra and earthquake destructiveness. Proceedings of the 4th U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, vol. 2, 1990, pp. 35-43.
71. Manzocchi GME, Chryssanthopoulos M, Elnashai AS. An analytical solution for the probabilistic response of SDOF non-linear random systems subjected to variable amplitude cyclic loading. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1994; 23:489-506.
72. Gupta ID, Trifunac MD. Investigation of the non-stationarity in stochastic response of structures. University of Southern California Report CE 96-01, 1996.
73. Basu B, Gupta VK. A damage-based definition of effective peak acceleration. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1998; 27:503-512.
74. Gupta ID, Trifunac MD. A note on statistics of level crossings and peak amplitude in stationary stochastic processes. European Earthquake Engineering 1998; 3:52-59.
75. Bursi O, Caldara R. Composite substructures with partial shear connection: Low cycle fatigue behaviour and analysis issues. Proceedings of the 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland, 2000, Paper no. 0498.
76. Perera R, Alarcon E, Carnicero A. Modelization of low cycle fatigue damage in frames. Proceedings of the 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland, 2000, Paper no. 0714.
77. Manfredi G. Evaluation of seismic energy demand. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2001; 30:485-499.
78. Calado L, Castiglioni CA, Carydis P. Shaking table tests for seismic performance evaluation of steel frames. Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, London, 2002, Paper no. 685.
79. Erberik MA, Sucuoglu H. Energy-based low-cycle fatigue characteristics of degrading structures. Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, London, 2002, Paper no. 118.
80. Osinov VA. Cyclic shearing and liquefaction of soil under irregular loading: an incremental model for the dynamic earthquake-induced deformation. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 2003; 23 :535-548.
81. Teran-Gilmore A, Avila E, Rangel G. On the use of plastic energy to establish strength requirements in ductile structures. Engineering Structures 2003; 25:965-980.
82. Green RA, Terri GA, Nouri Y. The number of equivalent cycles concept for liquefaction evaluations - revisited. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Report UMCEE 04-07 revl, University of Michigan, September 2004.