Site- and motion-dependent parametric uncertainty of site-response analyses in earthquake simulations

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America

Volumn 100, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 954-968

  Li, W ^a   Assimaki, D ^a  

^a Georgia Institute of Technology   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DOWNHOLES; DYNAMIC RUPTURE MODELS; EARTHQUAKE SIMULATION; FINITE SOURCES; FREQUENCY CONTENTS; FREQUENCY RANGES; GEOTECHNICAL DATA; GROUND MOTIONS; GROUND SURFACE MOTION; GROUND-MOTION; GROUND-MOTION VARIABILITY; INTENSITY-DEPENDENT; LOS ANGELES; MOTION-DEPENDENT; NEAR-SURFACE; NON-LINEAR DYNAMICS; NONLINEAR SOIL PROPERTIES; PARAMETRIC UNCERTAINTIES; RESPONSE ANALYSIS; SEISMIC INPUT; SEISMIC MOTIONS; SITE AMPLIFICATION; SITE-SPECIFIC; SOFT SOILS; SOIL MODEL; SOIL PARAMETERS; SOIL PROPERTY; STATISTICAL DESCRIPTIONS; SYNTHETIC GROUND MOTIONS; VELOCITY PROFILES;

AMPLIFICATION; DATA FLOW ANALYSIS; SEISMIC RESPONSE; SOILS; STOCHASTIC MODELS;

GEOLOGIC MODELS;

AMPLIFICATION; COMPUTER SIMULATION; GROUND MOTION; NONLINEARITY; NUMERICAL MODEL; PARAMETERIZATION; RESPONSE ANALYSIS; SITE EFFECT; SOIL DYNAMICS; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS; VELOCITY PROFILE;

CALIFORNIA; LOS ANGELES BASIN; UNITED STATES;

EID: 77952632227     PISSN: 00371106     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1785/0120090030     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Anderson, D. G. (2003). Laboratory testing of nonlinear soil properties: I & II, Lifelines Research Program, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California at Berkeley.
2. Andrade, J. E., and R. I. Borja (2006). Quantifying sensitivity of local site response models to statistical variations in soil properties, Acta Geotec. 1,3-14.
3. Assimaki, D., A. Kalos, and W. Li (2010). A wavelet-based seismogram inversion algorithm for the in-situ characterization of nonlinear soil behavior, Pure Appl. Geophys. (in press).
4. Assimaki, D., W. Li, J. M. Steidl, and J. Schmedes (2008). Quantifying nonlinearity susceptibility via site response modeling uncertainty at three sites in the Los Angeles Basin, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 98, no. 5, 2364-2390.
5. Assimaki, D., A. Pecker, R. Popescu, and J. Prevost (2003). Effects of spatial variability of soil properties on surface ground motion, J. Earthquake Eng. 7, 1-44.
6. Assimaki, D., Steidl, J., Liu, P.-C. (2006). Attenuation and velocity structure for site response analyses via downhole seismogram inversion, Pure Appl. Geophys. 163, 81-118.
7. Bazzurro, P., and C. A. Cornell (2004). Ground-motion amplification in nonlinear soil sites with uncertain properties, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 94, no. 6, 2090-2109.
8. Benjamin, J., and C. A. Cornell (1971). Probability, Statistics, and Decisions for Civil Engineers, McGraw-Hill, New York.
9. Boore, D. M., and G. M. Atkinson (2008). Ground-motion prediction equations for the average horizontal component of PGA, PGV, and 5%-damped PSA at spectral periods between 0.01 s and 10.0 s, Earthquake Spectra 24, no. 1, 99-138.
10. Borja, R. I., C.-H. Lin, K. M. Sama, and G. M. Masada (2000). Modelling non-linear ground response of non-liquefiable soils, Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn. 29, 63-83.
11. Darendeli, M. B. (2001). Development of a New Family of Normalized Modulus Reduction and Material Damping Curves, Department of Civil, Architectural and Environmental Engineering, The University of Texas, Austin, Texas.
12. Dham, S., and R. Ghanem (1995). Stochastic finite element analysis for multiphase flow in heterogeneous porous media, in Computational Stochastic Mechanics, P. D. Spanos (Editors), Balkema, Rotterdam, 429-434.
13. EPRI (1993). Guidelines for determining design basis ground motions, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, California.
14. Fenton, G. A. (1990). Simulation and Analysis of Random Fields, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey.
15. Fenton, G. A., and D. V. Griffiths (1996). Stochastics of free surface flow through stochastic earth dam, J. Geotech. Eng. 122, no. 6, 427-436.
16. Fenton, G. A., and D. V. Griffiths (2001). Bearing capacity of spatially random c φ soils, Proc. of the 10th International Conf. Computer Methods and Advances in Geomechanics (IACMAG 01), Tucson, Arizona, 7-12 January 2001, 1411-1415.
17. Field, E. H., and K. H. Jacob (1993). Monte-Carlo simulation of the theoretical site response variability at Arkey Flat, California, given the uncertainty in the geotechnically derived input parameters,c Earthquake Spectra 9, no. 4, 669-701.
18. Griffiths, D. V., and G. A. Fenton (1993). Seepage beneath water retaining structures founded on spatially random soil, Geotechnique 43, no. 4, 577-587.
19. Hashash, Y. M. A., D. R. Groholski, C. A. Phillips, and D. Park (2008). DEEPSOIL v3.5beta User Manual and Tutorial, University of Ilinois at Urbana-Champaign.
20. Hwang, H. H. M., and C. S. Lee (1991). Parametric study of site response analysis, Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 10, no. 6, 282-290.
21. Idriss, I. M., and J. I. Sun (1992). User's Manual for Shake91, Center for Geotechnical Modeling, Department of Civil Engineering, University of California, Davis.
22. Kottke, A. R., and E. M. Rathje (2008). Technical Manual for Strata, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center.
23. Kramer, S. L. (1996) Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
24. Kwok, A. O. L., J. P. Stewart, and Y. M. A. Hashash (2008). Nonlinear ground-response analysis of Turkey Flat shallow stiff-soil site to strong ground motion, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 98, no. 1, 331-343.
25. Liu, P., R. J. Archuleta, and S. H. Hartzell (2006). Prediction of broadband ground-motion time histories: Hybrid low/high-frequency method with correlated random source parameters, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 96,2118-2130.
26. Matasovic, N., and V. Mladen (1995). Seismic response of soil deposits composed of fully-saturated clay and sand layers, in Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering, Balkema, Rotterdam.
27. Muravskii, G. (2005). On description of hysteretic behavior of materials, Int. J. Solids Struct. 42, 2625-2644.
28. Nobahar, A., and R. Popescu (2000). Spatial variability of soil properties-effects on foundation design, Proc. of the 53rd Canadian Geotechnical Conference, Montreal, Quebec, 1139-1144.
29. Nour, A., A. Slimani, N. Laouami, and H. Afra (2003). Finite element model for the probabilistic seismic response of heterogeneous soil profile, Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 23, 331-348.
30. Ohtomo, K., and M. Shinozuka (1990). Two-dimensional spatial severity of liquefaction, Proc. of the 8th Japan Earthquake Engineering Symposium, Tokyo.
31. Paice, G. M., D. V. Griffiths, and G. A. Fenton (1996). Finite element modeling of settlements on spatially random soil, J. Geotech. Eng. 122, no. 9, 777-779.
32. Phoon, K.-K., and F. H. Kulhawy (1999). Characterization of geotechnical variability, Can. Geotech. J. 36, 612-624.
33. Popescu, R. (1995). Stochastic Variability of Soil Properties: Data Analysis, Digital Simulation, Effects on System Behavior, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey.
34. Popescu, R., J. H. Prevost, and E. H. Vanmarcke (1995). Numerical simulations of soil liquefaction using stochastic input parameters, Proc. of the 3rd International Conference on Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics, St. Louis, Missouri, 2-7 April 1995.
35. Pyke, R. (1979). Nonlinear soil model for irregular cyclic loading, J. Geotech. Eng. Div. 105, 715-726.
36. Rahman, M. S., and C. H. Yeh (1999). Variability of seismic response of soils using stochastic finite element method, Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 18, 229-245.
37. Roblee, C. J., W. J. Silva, G. R. Toro, and N. A. Abrahamson (1996). Variability in site-specific seismic ground motion design predictions, in Uncertainty in the Geologic Environment: From Theory to Practice, C. D. Shakelford and P. P. Nelson (Editors), ASCE Geotech Special Publication No. 58, Proc. of Uncertainty, Madison Wisconsin, 31 July-3 August 1996.
38. Stewart, J. P., and A. O. Kwok (2008). Nonlinear seismic ground response analysis: Code usage protocols and verification against vertical array data, in Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Dynamics IV, D. Zeng, M. T. Manzari, and D. R. Hiltunen (Editors), ASCE Geotechnical SpecialPublicationNo.181,Sacramento,California, 24pp (electronicfile).
39. Suzuki, S., and K. Asano (1992). Dynamic amplification functions of the surface layer considering the variation of soil parameters, in 10th World Conf. on Earthquake Engineering, Madrid, Spain, 19-24 July 1992.
40. Tian, L., and L. Jie (1992). Influence of random mechanical parameter on earthquake response analysis of site, 10th World Conf. on Earthquake Engineering, Madrid, Spain, 19-24 July 1992.
41. Toro, G. R. (1993). Probabilistic model of soil-profile variability, in Early Site Permit Demonstration Program: Guidelines for Determining Design Basis Ground Motions, J. F. Schneider (Editor), EPRI Project RP3302, Volume II, Appendix 6A, Electric Power Research Institute.
42. Ural, D. (1995). Effects of spatial variability of soil properties on liquefaction, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey.
43. Wang, S., and H. Hao (2002). Effects of random variations of soil properties on site amplification of seismic ground motions, Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 22, 551-564.
44. Wu, Z., and G. Han (1992). Stochastic seismic response analysis for soil layers with random dynamic parameters, 10th World Conf. on Earthquake Engineering, Madrid, Spain, 19-24 July 1992. School of Civil and Environmental Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology Atlanta, Georgia.