Assessing adequacy of spectrum-matched ground motions for response history analysis

Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics

Volumn 42, Issue 9, 2013, Pages 1265-1280

  Grant, Damian N ^a   Diaferia, Riccardo ^b  

^a ARUP   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Ground motion scaling and modification; Response spectrum matching

Indexed keywords

EARTHQUAKE EFFECTS; REINFORCED CONCRETE; STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS;

EARTHQUAKE SCENARIO; FUNDAMENTAL PERIOD; GROUND-MOTION SCALING; QUANTITATIVE CRITERIA; RESPONSE HISTORY ANALYSIS; RESPONSE SPECTRA; SINGLE DEGREE OF FREEDOM SYSTEMS; SPECTRUM-MATCHING;

SPECTRUM ANALYSIS;

DAMPING; GROUND MOTION; REINFORCED CONCRETE; SEISMIC RESPONSE; STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS; STRUCTURAL RESPONSE;

EID: 84878991711     PISSN: 00988847     EISSN: 10969845     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/eqe.2270     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. NEHRP Consultants Joint Venture. Selecting and Scaling Earthquake Ground Motions for Performing Response-history Analyses. National Institute of Standards and Technology: Redwood City, California, 2011.
2. American Society of Civil Engineers. ASCE/SEI Standard 7-10: Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, 2010.
3. Comité Européen de Normalisation. Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance-Part 1: General rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings, 2004.
4. Hancock J, Bommer JJ, Stafford PJ. Numbers of scaled and matched accelerograms required for inelastic dynamic analyses. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2008; 37(14):1585-1607.
5. Bazzurro P, Luco N. Do scaled and spectrum-matched near-source records produce biased nonlinear structural responses? Proceedings of the 8th National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 2006.
6. Carballo JE, Cornell CA. Probabilistic Seismic Demand Analysis: Spectrum Matching and Design. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Stanford University: California, 2000.
7. Heo Y, Kunnath SK, Abrahamson N. Amplitude-scaled versus spectrum-matched ground motions for seismic performance assessment. Journal of Structural Engineering 2011; 137(3):278-288.
8. Huang Y-N, Whittaker AS, Luco N. Performance Assessment of Conventional and Base-isolated Nuclear Power Plants for Earthquake and Blast Loadings. Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research (MCEER), University at Buffalo: New York, 2008.
9. Iervolino I, De Luca F, Cosenza E. Spectral shape-based assessment of SDOF nonlinear response to real, adjusted and artificial accelerograms. Engineering Structures 2010; 32(9):2776-2792.
10. Haselton CB, Baker JW, Bozorgnia Y, et al. Evaluation of Ground Motion Selection and Modification Methods: Predicting Median Interstory Drift Response of Buildings. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center: University of California, Berkeley, 2009.
11. Gasparini DA, Vanmarcke E. SIMQKE: a Program for Artificial Motion Generation: User's Manual and Documentation. MIT Department of Civil Engineering, Cambridge, MA, 1976.
12. Grant DN. Preservation of velocity pulses in response spectral matching. Proceedings of the 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Lisbon, Portugal, 2012.
13. Arias A. A measure of earthquake intensity. In Seismic Design for Nuclear Power Plants, Hansen RJ (ed.). MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1970; 438-483.
14. Haselton CB, Whittaker AS, Hortacsu A, et al. Selecting and scaling earthquake ground motions for performing response-history analysis. Proceedings of the 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Lisbon, Portugal, 2012.
15. Baker JW. The conditional mean spectrum: a tool for ground motion selection. Journal of Structural Engineering 2011; 137(3):322-331.
16. Applied Technology Council. Quantification of Building Seismic Performance Factors. Federal Emergency Management Agency: Washington, D.C., 2009.
17. Stewart JP, Abrahamson NA, Atkinson GM, et al. Representation of bi-directional ground motions for design spectra in building codes. Earthquake Spectra 2011; 27(3):927-937.
18. Grant DN. Response spectral matching of two horizontal ground-motion components. Journal of Structural Engineering 2011; 137(3):289-297.
19. Campbell KW, Bozorgnia Y. NGA ground motion model for the geometric mean horizontal component of PGA, PGV, PGD and 5% damped linear elastic response spectra for periods ranging from 0.01to10s. Earthquake Spectra 2008; 24(1):139-171.
20. Jayaram N, Lin T, Baker JW. A computationally efficient ground-motion selection algorithm for matching a target response spectrum mean and variance. Earthquake Spectra 2011; 27(3):797-815.
21. Hancock J, Watson-Lamprey JA, Abrahamson NA, et al. An improved method of matching response spectra of recorded earthquake ground motion using wavelets. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 2006; 10(Special Issue 1): 67-89.
22. Hancock J, Bommer JJ. Using spectral matched records to explore the influence of strong-motion duration on inelastic structural response. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 2007; 27(4):291-299.
23. Grant DN, Greening PD, Taylor ML, Ghosh B. Seed record selection for spectral matching with RSPMatch2005. Proceedings of the 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Beijing, China, 2008.
24. Baker JW. Measuring bias in structural response caused by ground motion scaling. Proceedings of the 8th Pacific Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Nangyang Technological University, Singapore, 2007.
25. Mallat SG. A Wavelet Tour of Signal Processing: The Sparse Way, 3rd edition. Academic Press, Burlington, MA, 2008.
26. Mukherjee S, Gupta VK. Wavelet-based characterization of design ground motions. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2002; 31(5):1173-1190.
27. Suárez LE, Montejo LA. Generation of artificial earthquakes via the wavelet transform. International Journal of Solids and Structures 2005; 42(21-22):5905-5919.
28. Anderson JG. Quantitative measure of the goodness-of-fit of synthetic seismograms. Proceedings of the 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Vancouver, Canada, 2004.
29. Olsen KB, Mayhew JE. Goodness-of-fit criteria for broadband synthetic seismograms, with application to the 2008 Mw 5.4 Chino Hills, California, earthquake. Seismological Research Letters 2010; 81(5):715-723.
30. Uang C-M, Bertero VV. Use of energy as a design criterion in earthquake-resistant design. Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California: Berkeley, California, 1988.
31. Mendenhall W, Sincich T. A Second Course in Statistics: Regression Analysis (7th edn), Pearson, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2011.