Correlation of Ground Motion Duration with Its Intensity Metrics: A Simulation Based Approach

Document Type: Invited Article

Authors

1 Department of Civil Engineering, University of Science and Culture, Rasht, Iran

2 Department of Civil Engineering, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

There are different kinds of intensity measures to characterize the main properties of the earthquake records. This paper proposes a simulation-based approach to compute correlation coefficients of motion duration and intensity measures of the earthquake ground motions. This method is used to investigate the influence of the ground motion data set selection in resulting duration-intensity correlation coefficients. The simulation procedure is used to tackle the problem of inadequate available ground motions with specific parameters. Correlation coefficients are investigated in three different cases. In case one, simulated ground motions differ in terms of earthquake source parameters, site characteristics, and site-to-source distances. In case two, ground motions are simulated in a specific site from probable earthquake events. In case 3, ground motions are simulated from a specific event in different sites. The first case doesn’t show a significant correlation, while the second and the third case demonstrate significant positive and negative correlations, respectively.

Keywords

Main Subjects


[1]       ASCE/SEI 7-10. Minimum design loads for building and other structures. American Society of Civil Engineers: Reston, VA: 2010.
[2]       ASCE/SEI 41-17. Seismic evaluation and retrofit of existing buildings (41-17) 2017.
[3]       FEMA-356. Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings 2000.
[4]       Baker JW, Cornell CA. Spectral shape , epsilon and record selection. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 2006;35:1077–95. doi:10.1002/eqe.571.
[5]       Katsanos EI, Sextos AG, Manolis GD. Selection of earthquake ground motion records: A state-of-the-art review from a structural engineering perspective. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 2010;30:157–69. doi:10.1016/j.soildyn.2009.10.005.
[6]       Belejo A, Barbosa AR, Bento R. Influence of ground motion duration on damage index-based fragility assessment of a plan-asymmetric non-ductile reinforced concrete building. Eng Struct 2017;151:682–703. doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.08.042.
[7]       Chandramohan R, Baker, W J, Deierlein J J. Quantifying the influence of ground motion duration on structural collapse capacity using spectrally equivalent records. Earthq Spectra 2016;32:927–50.
[8]       Han J, Sun X, Zhou Y. Duration effect of spectrally matched ground motion records on collapse resistance capacity evaluation of RC frame structures. Struct Des Tall Spec Build 2017;26:1–12. doi:10.1002/tal.1397.
[9]       Hancock J, Bommer JJ. Using spectral matched records to explore the influence of strong-motion duration on inelastic structural response. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 2007;27:291–9. doi:10.1016/j.soildyn.2006.09.004.
[10]     Sarieddine M, Lin L. Investigation Correlations between Strong-motion Duration and Structural Damage. Struct Congr 2013 2013:2926–36. doi:10.1061/9780784412848.255.
[11]     Raghunandan M, Liel AB. Effect of ground motion duration on earthquake-induced structural collapse. Struct Saf 2013;41:119–33. doi:10.1016/j.strusafe.2012.12.002.
[12]     Wang G, Zhang S, Zhou C, lu W. Correlation between strong motion durations and damage measures of concrete gravity dams. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 2015;69:148–62. doi:10.1016/j.soildyn.2014.11.001.
[13]     Zhang S, Wang G, Pang B, Du C. The effects of strong motion duration on the dynamic response and accumulated damage of concrete gravity dams. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 2013;45:112–24. doi:10.1016/j.soildyn.2012.11.011.
[14]     Xu B, Wang X, Panga R, Zhoua Y. Influence of strong motion duration on the seismic performance of high CFRDs based on elastoplastic analysis. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 2018;114:438–47. doi:10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.08.004.
[15]     Wang C, Hao H, Zhang S, Wang G. Influence of Ground Motion Duration on Responses of Concrete Gravity Dams. J Earthq Eng 2018;2469:1–25. doi:10.1080/13632469.2018.1453422.
[16]     Bommer JJ, Magenes G, Hancock J, Penazzo P. The influence of strong-motion duration on the seismic response of masonry structures. Bull Earthq Eng 2004;2:1–26. doi:10.1023/B:BEEE.0000038948.95616.bf.
[17]     Mashayekhi M, Estekanchi HE. Significance of effective number of cycles in Endurance Time analysis. Asian J Civ Eng (Building Housing) 2012;13:647–57.
[18]     Mashayekhi M, Estekanchi H. E. Investigation of strong-motion duration consistency in endurance time excitation functions. Sci Iran 2013;20:1085–93.
[19]     Park Y, Ang AH ‐S. Mechanistic Seismic Damage Model for Reinforced Concrete. J Struct Eng 1985;111:722–39. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1985)111:4(722).
[20]     Mashayekhi M, Harati M, Estekanchi H. Relationship between Duration and Amplitude-Based Intensity Measures and Its Application in Nonlinear Seismic Assessment. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 2019.
[21]     Bravo-Haro MA, Elghazouli AY. Influence of earthquake duration on the response of steel moment frames. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 2018;115:634–51. doi:10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.08.027.
[22]     Kiani J, Camp C, Pezeshk S. Role of conditioning intensity measure in the influence of ground motion duration on the structural response. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 2018;104:408–17. doi:10.1016/j.soildyn.2017.11.021.
[23]     Pan Y, Ventura CE, Liam Finn WD. Effects of Ground Motion Duration on the Seismic Performance and Collapse Rate of Light-Frame Wood Houses. J Struct Eng 2018;144:4018112. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0002104.
[24]     Rezaee Manesh M, Saffari H. Empirical equations for the prediction of the bracketed and uniform duration of earthquake ground motion using the Iran database. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 2020;137:106306. doi:10.1016/j.soildyn.2020.106306.
[25]     Bommer JJ, Marytínezpereira A. The effective duration of earthquake strong motion. J Earthq Eng 1999;3:127–72. doi:10.1080/13632469909350343.
[26]     EPRI. A criterion for determining exceedance of the operating basis earthquake. Report No. EPRI NP-5930, Palo Alto, California: 1988.
[27]     Cabañas, L., Benito, B., Herráiz M. An approach to the measurement of the potential structural damage of earthquake ground motions. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 1997;26:79–92. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199701)26.
[28]     Bradley BA. Correlation of Arias intensity with amplitude, duration and cumulative intensity measures. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 2015;78:89–98. doi:10.1016/j.soildyn.2015.07.009.
[29]     Bradley BA. Empirical Correlations between Cumulative Absolute Velocity and Amplitude-Based Ground Motion Intensity Measures. Earthq Spectra 2012;28:37–54. doi:10.1193/1.3675580.
[30]     Jack W. Baker and Brendon A. Bradley. Intensity measure correlations observed in the NGA-West2 database, and dependence of correlations on rupture and site parameters. Earthq Spectra 2017;33:145–56. doi:10.4231/R7FB513S.
[31]     Mashayekhi M, Harati M, Estekanchi HE. Estimating the duration effects in structural responses by a new energy-cycle based parameter. 8th Int. Conf. Seismol. Earthq. Eng., Tehran: International Institude of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Tehran, Iran.; 2019, p. 1–8.
[32]     Du W, Wang G. Empirical correlations between the effective number of cycles and other intensity measures of ground motions. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 2017;102:65–74. doi:10.1016/j.soildyn.2017.08.014.
[33]     Campbell KW, Bozorgnia Y. NGA-West2 ground motion model for the average horizontal components of PGA, PGV, and 5% damped linear acceleration response spectra. Earthq Spectra 2014;30:1087–114. doi:10.1193/062913EQS175M.
[34]     Afshari K, Stewart JP. Physically parameterized prediction equations for significant duration in active crustal regions. Earthq Spectra 2016;32:2057–81. doi:10.1193/063015EQS106M.
[35]     Abrahamson N, Silva W. Summary of the Abrahamson & Silva NGA ground-motion relations. Earthq Spectra 2008;24:67–97.
[36]     Campbell KW, Bozorgnia Y. Campbell-Bozorgnia NGA Empirical Ground Motion Model for the Average Horizontal Component of PGA , PGV , PGD and SA at Selected Spectral Periods ( Version 1 . 1 ). C-B NGA Rep Dec 15, 2006 (Ver 11) 2006. doi:10.1080/10962247.2015.1031921.
[37]     Kaklamanos J, Baise LG, Boore DM. Estimating unknown input parameters when implementing the NGA ground-motion prediction equations in engineering practice. Earthq Spectra 2011;27:1219–35. doi:10.1193/1.3650372.
[38]     Chiou BS-J. Documentation for NGA flatfile used for development of NGA models. Pacific Earthq Eng Res Center, Univ California, Berkeley 2005.
[39]     Kaklamanos, J., Boore, D. M., Thompson, E. M., and Campbell KW. New empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, rupture area, and surface displacement: Seismological Society of. Am Bull 1994;v:84p974-1002.
[40]     FEMA. NEHRP Guidelines for Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings, Report FEMA-273 1997.