Strength reduction factors for near-fault forward-directivity ground motions

Engineering Structures

Volumn 32, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 273-285

  Gillie, Joanna L ^a   Rodriguez Marek, Adrian ^b   McDaniel, Cole ^c  

^a HWA Geosciences   (United States)

^b Washington State University   (United States)

^c CALIFORNIA POLYTECHNIC STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Constant ductility spectra; Forward directivity; Near fault; Nonlinear spectra; Strength reduction factors

Indexed keywords

ACTIVE FAULT; DESIGN SPECIFICATION; DIRECTIVITY; EARTHQUAKE MAGNITUDES; GROUND MOTIONS; NEAR-FAULT; NEAR-FAULT MOTIONS; NONLINEAR SPECTRUM; REDUCTION FACTOR; SHORT DURATIONS; SINGLE DEGREE OF FREEDOM SYSTEMS; SITE CONDITIONS; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTORS; VELOCITY PULSE;

DUCTILITY; EARTHQUAKES; SEISMIC DESIGN; SPECIAL EFFECTS;

FINITE DIFFERENCE METHOD;

DATA SET; DUCTILITY; DYNAMIC RESPONSE; EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING; GROUND MOTION; NONLINEARITY; SEISMIC DESIGN; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 70449646199     PISSN: 01410296     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2009.09.014     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Somerville P.G., Smith N.F., Graves R.W., and Abrahamson N.A. Modification of empirical strong ground motion attenuation relations to include the amplitude and duration effects of rupture directivity. Seismol Res Lett 68 1 (1997) 199-222
2. Alavi B., and Krawinkler H. Behavior of moment resisting frame structures subjected to near-fault ground motions. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 33 (2004) 687-706
3. Mavroeidis G.P., Dong G., and Papageorgiou A.S. Near-fault ground motions, and the response of elastic and inelastic single-degree-of-freedom (SDOF) systems. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 33 (2004) 1023-1049 10.1002/eqe.391
4. Hall J.F., Heaton T.H., Halling M.W., and Wald D.J. Near-source ground motions and its effects on flexible buildings. Earthq Spectra 11 4 (1995) 569-605
5. Heaton T.H., Hall J.F., Wald D.J., and Halling M.W. Response of high-rise and base-isolated buildings to a hypothetical Mw 7.0 blind thrust earthquake. Science 267 13 (1995) 206-211
6. Kalkan E., and Kunnath S.K. Effects of fling step and forward directivity on seismic response of buildings. Earthq Spectra 22 2 (2006) 367-390
7. Chopra A.K., and Chintanapakdee A.M. Comparing response of SDF systems to near-fault and far-fault earthquake motions in the context of spectral regions. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 30 (2001) 1769-1789 10.1002/eqe.92
8. Miranda E., and Bertero V.V. Evaluation of strength reduction factors for earthquake-resistant design. Earthq Spectra 10 2 (1994) 357-379
9. Bray J.D., and Rodriguez-Marek A. Characterization of forward-directivity ground motions in the near-fault region. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 24 (2004) 815-828 10.1016/j.soildyn.2004.05.001
10. Tothong P., Cornell A.C., and Baker J.W. Explicit directivity-pulse inclusion in probabilistic seismic hazard analysis. Earthq Spectra 23 4 (2007) 867-891
11. Veletsos AS, Newmark NM. Effect of inelastic behavior on the response of simple systems to earthquake motions. In: Proceedings of the 2nd world conference on earthquake engineering, vol. II. 1960. p. 895-912
12. Newmark NM, Veletsos AS. Design procedures for shock isolation systems of underground protective structures. Report No. RTD TDR-63-3096, Air Force Weapons Laboratory, New Mexico, 1964
13. Newmark N.M. Current trends in the seismic analysis and design of high-rise structures. In: Wiegel R.L. (Ed). Earthquake engineering (1970), Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs (NJ) 403-424 [Chapter 16]
14. Newmark N.M., Hall W.J.. Procedures and criteria for earthquake resistant design, building practices for disaster mitigation. National bureau of standards, building science series. vol. 46(1). MD; 1973. p. 209-36
15. Newmark N.M., and Hall W.J. Earthquake spectra and design. engineering monographs on earthquake criteria. Structural design, and strong motion records (1982), Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Berkeley (CA) 29-47
16. Riddell R, Newmark NM. Statistical analysis of the response of non-linear systems subjected to earthquakes. Structural Research Series No. 468. Urbana (Ill): Department of Civil Engineering, University of Illinois; 1979
17. Elghadamsi F.E., and Mohraz B. Inelastic earthquake spectra. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 15 (1987) 91-104
18. Nassar AA, Krawinkler H. Seismic demands for SDOF and MDOF systems. Report No. 95, The John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Stanford University, Stanford (CA) 1991
19. Miranda E. Site-dependent strength reduction factors. J Struct Eng (ASCE) 119 12 (1993) 3503-3519
20. Riddell R., Garcia J.E., and Garces E. Inelastic deformation response of SDOF systems subjected to earthquakes. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 31 (2002) 515-538 10.1002/eqe.142
21. Miranda E. Inelastic displacement ratios for structures on firm sites. J Struct Eng (ASCE) 126 (2000) 1150-1159
22. Baez JI, Miranda E. Amplification factors to estimate inelastic displacement demands for the design of structures in the near field. In: Proc. 12th world conference on earthquake engineering, New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, Auckland, (NZ), Paper No. 1561, 2000
23. Ruiz-Garcia J., and Miranda E. Inelastic displacement ratios for design of structures on soft soil sites. J Struct Eng (ASCE) 130 (2004) 2051-2061 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2004)130:12(2051)
24. Chopra A.K., and Chintanapakdee A.M. Inelastic deformation ratios for design and evaluation of structures: Single-degree-of-freedom bilinear systems. J Struct Eng (ASCE) 130 (2004) 1309-1319 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2004)130:9(1309)
25. Cuesta I., and Aschheim M.A. Inelastic response spectra using conventional and pulse R-factors. J Struct Eng (ASCE) 127 9 (2001) 1013-1020
26. Rodriguez-Marek A. Protocol for fling-step removal and application to the Chi-Chi Earthquake strong ground motion dataset. http://www.ce.wsu.edu/Faculty_Staff/Profiles/rodriguez.htm
27. Spudich P, Chiou BSJ, Graves R, Collins N, Somerville P. A formulation of directivity for earthquake sources using isochrone theory. USGS OF Report 2004-1268. US Geological Survey, Menlo Park, California, 2004
28. Baker J.W. Quantitative classification of near-fault ground motions using wavelet analysis. Bull Seismol Soc Am 97 5 (2007) 1486-1501
29. Iervolino I., and Cornell A. Probability of occurrence of velocity pulses in near-source ground motions. Bull Seismol Soc Am 98 (2008) 1999-1131
30. Consortium of Organizations for Strong-Motion Observation Systems (COSMOS). COSMOS Virtual Data Center 1999-2005. http://db.cosmos-eq.org/scripts/default.plx
31. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Center (PEER). PEER Strong Ground Motion Database. http://peer.berkeley.edu/products/strong_ground_motion_db.html
32. Tothong P., and Cornell A.C. An empirical ground motion attenuation relation for inelastic spectral displacement. Bull Seismol Soc Am 96 (2006) 2146-2164
33. Gillie JL. Nonlinear Response Spectra of Forward-Directivity Ground Motions. M.Sc. thesis, Washington State University, 2005
34. Abrahamson N.A., and Silva W.J. Empirical response spectral attenuation relationships for shallow earthquakes. Seismol Res Lett 68 1 (1997) 94-127
35. Watson-Lamprey J.A., and Boore D.M. Beyond SaGMRotI: Conversion to SaArb, SaSN, and SaMaxRot. Bull Seismol Soc Am 97 (2007) 1511-1524
36. Chopra A.K. Dynamics of structures: Theory and applications to earthquake engineering (1995), Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (NJ) p. 241-276
37. Krawinkler H, Alavi B. Development of improved design procedures for near-fault ground motions. SMIP 98, Seminar on Utilization of Strong Motion Data: Oakland (CA). 1998
38. Somerville PG. Development of an improved ground motion representation for near-fault ground motions. SMIP 98, Seminar on Utilization of Strong Motion Data. Oakland (CA). 1998
39. Mavroeidis G.P., and Papageorgiou A.S. A mathematical representation of near-fault ground motions. Bull Seismol Soc Am 93 3 (2003) 1999-1131
40. Benjamin J.R., and Cornell A. Probability, statistics, and decision for civil engineers (1970), Mc Graw-Hill, New York
41. Devore J.L. Probability and statistics for engineering and the sciences. 5th ed. (2000), Duxbury Thomson Learning, Pacific Grove (CA) p. 659-670