Which spectral acceleration are you using?

Earthquake Spectra

Volumn 22, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 293-312

  Baker, Jack W ^a   Cornell, C Allin ^a  

^a Stanford University   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EARTHQUAKE RESISTANCE; HAZARDS; RISK ASSESSMENT; SEISMIC PROSPECTING;

EARTHQUAKE GROUND MOTIONS; SEISMIC RISK; SPECTRAL ACCELERATION;

EARTHQUAKES;

DYNAMIC RESPONSE; EARTHQUAKE MAGNITUDE; GROUND MOTION; NUMERICAL MODEL; RISK ASSESSMENT; SEISMIC RESPONSE; STRUCTURAL RESPONSE;

EID: 33644541955     PISSN: 87552930     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1193/1.2191540     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Abrahamson, N. A., 1988. Statistical properties of peak ground accelerations recorded by the SMART 1 array, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 78 (1), 26-41.
2. Abrahamson, N. A., 2000. State of the practice of seismic hazard evaluation, GeoEng 2000 Melbourne, Australia.
3. Abrahamson, N. A., and Silva, W, J., 1997. Empirical response spectral attenuation relations for shallow crustal earthquakes, Seismol. Res. Lett. 68 (1), 94-126.
4. Abrahamson, N. A., 2000. Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings, prepared for the SAC Joint Venture, published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Report No. FEMA-356, Washington, D.C.
5. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2002. ASCE Standard: Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, SEI/ASCE 7-02, Reston, VA.
6. Anderson, J. G., 1997. Benefits of scenario ground motion maps, Eng. Geol. 48, 43-57.
7. Baker, J. W, and Cornell, C. A., 2003. Uncertainty Specification and Propagation for Loss Estimation Using FOSM Methods, PEER Report 2003/07, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Center, University of California, Berkeley, 89 pp.
8. Baker, J. W., and Cornell, C. A., 2004. Choice of a vector of ground motion intensity measures for seismic demand hazard analysis, Proceedings, 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, Canada, 15 pp.
9. Banon, H., Cornell, C. A., Crouse, C. B., Marshall, P, Nadim, F., and Younan, A., 2001. ISO seismic design guidelines for offshore platforms, Proceedings, 20th OMAE, OMAE 2001/S&R-2114, Rio de Janeiro.
10. Bazzurro, P, and Cornell, C. A., 2002. Vector-valued probabilistic seismic hazard analysis, in Proceedings, 7th US. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Boston, Mass., 10 pp.
11. Bazzurro, P., Cornell, C. A., Shome, N., and Carballo, J. E., 1998. Three proposals for characterizing MDOF nonlinear seismic response, J. Struct. Eng. 124 (11), 1281-1289.
12. Boore, D. M., 2005. Erratum: Equations for estimating horizontal response spectra and peak acceleration from western North American earthquakes: A summary of recent work, Seismol. Res. Lett. 76 (3), 368-369.
13. Boore, D. M., Joyner, W. B., and Furnal, T. E., 1997. Equations for estimating horizontal response spectra and peak acceleration from western North American earthquakes: A summary of recent work, Seismol. Res. Lett. 68(1), 128-153.
14. Campbell, K. W, 1997. Empirical near-source attenuation relationships for horizontal and vertical components of peak ground acceleration, peak ground velocity, and pseudo-absolute acceleration response spectra, Seismol. Res. Lett. 68 (1), 154-179.
15. Chopra, A. K., 2001. Dynamics of Structures: Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 844 pp.
16. Cornell, C. A., Jalayer, F, Hamburger, R. O., and Foutch, D. A., 2002. Probabilistic basis for 2000 SAC federal emergency management agency steel moment frame guidelines, J. Struct. Eng. 128 (4), 526-533.
17. Cornell, C. A., and Krawinkler, H., 2000. Progress and challenges in seismic performance assessment, PEER Center News 3 (2).
18. Frankel, A. D., 2004. Personal communication.
19. Frankel, A. D., Petersen, M. D., Mueller, C. S., Haller, K. M., Wheeler, R. L., Leyendecker, E. V., Wesson, R. L., Harmsen, S. C., Cramer, C. H., Perkins, D. M., and Rukstales, K. S., 2002. Documentation for the 2002 Update of the National Seismic Hazard Maps, US. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rep. 02-420, 33 pp.
20. Jalayer, F., 2003. Direct Probabilistic Seismic Analysis: Implementing Non-Linear Dynamic Assessments, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, 244 pp. http://www.stanford.edu/groupa/rms/ (accessed 3/14/05)
21. Jalayer, F., and Cornell, C. A., 2003. A Technical Framework for Probability-Based Demand and Capacity Factor Design (DCFD) Seismic Formats, PEER Report 2003/08, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Center, University of California, Berkeley, 106 pp.
22. Moehle, J., and Deierlein, G. G., 2004. A framework methodology for performance-based earthquake engineering, Proceedings, 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver Canada, 13 pp.
23. Reiter, L., 1990. Earthquake Hazard Analysis: Issues and Insights, Columbia University Press, New York, 254 pp.
24. SAC Joint Venture, 2000a. Recommended Post-earthquake Evaluation and Repair Criteria for Welded Steel Moment-Frame Buildings, prepared for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Report No. FEMA-352, Washington, D.C.
25. SAC Joint Venture, 2000b. Recommended Seismic Design Criteria for New Steel Moment-Frame Buildings, prepared for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Report No. FEMA-350, Washington, D.C.
26. SAC Joint Venture, 2000c. Recommended Seismic Evaluation and Upgrade Criteria for Existing Welded Steel Moment-Frame Buildings, prepared for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Report No. FEMA-351, Washington, D.C.
27. Sadigh, K., Chang, C.-Y, Egan, J. A., Makdisi, E, and Youngs, R. R., 1997. Attenuation relationships for shallow crustal earthquakes based on California strong motion data, Seismol. Res. Lett. 68 (1), 180-189.
28. Shome, N., and Cornell, C. A., 1999. Probabilistic Seismic Demand Analysis of Nonlinear Structures, RMS Program, RMS-35, Stanford, CA, 320 pp. http://www.stanford.edu/group/rms/ (accessed 3/14/05).
29. Spudich, P, Joyner, W B., Lindh, A. G., Boore, D. M., Margaris, B. M., and Fletcher, J. B., 1999. SEA99: A revised ground motion prediction relation for use in extensional tectonic regimes, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 89 (5), 1156-1170.
30. Stewart, J. P, Chiou, S.-J., Bray, J. D., Graves, R. W, Somerville, P. G., and Abrahamson, N. A., 2001. Ground Motion Evaluation Procedures for Performance-Based Design, PEER Report 2001/09, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Center, University of California, Berkeley, 229 pp.
31. Vamvatsikos, D., and Cornell, C. A., 2002. Incremental dynamic analysis, Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn. 31 (3), 491-514.
32. Yun, S.-Y., Hamburger, R. O., Cornell, C. A., and Foutch, D. A., 2002. Seismic performance evaluation for steel moment frames, J. Struct. Eng. 128 (4), 12.