Professional Documents
Culture Documents
A global approach to
Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Closing remarks
11/03/2013
Attenuation Models
Attenuation Models is an old term which is used in these slides
- nowadays often referred to as Ground motion prediction models
or Ground motion prediction equations
or simply Ground motion models
suited to low
and moderate
seismicity regions
with lack of data
Empirical Models
Semi-Theoretical Models
Intensity Models
Stochastic Seismological Models
11/03/2013
Empirical Models
Empirical model
developed by
Joyner and Boore
for Californian
earthquakes on
average soil sites
(extracted from
Seismic Design
Handbook by
Farzad Naeim)
Empirical Models
11/03/2013
Empirical Models
Empirical Models
M d lb
Model
by
Abrahamson & Silva
for shallow crustal
earthquakes (contd)
11/03/2013
Empirical Models
Five separate sets of ground motion models have been developed and published
during
du
g thee period
pe od 20077 2010 by five
ve we
well known
ow pplayers
ye s in thiss field
e d bbased
sed on
o
analyses of the PEER database of 1574 accelerograms recorded from mainshocks
of 58 shallow crustal earthquakes mainly from Western North America but also
contains recordings from Taiwan (plenty), Turkey, Italy and Iran.
Idriss
Empirical Models
Semi-Theoretical Models
Intensity Models
Stochastic Seismological Models
11/03/2013
Empirical Models
Semi-Theoretical Models
Intensity Models
Stochastic Seismological Models
Intensity Models
11/03/2013
Intensity Models
Intensity Models
MMI attenuation
relationshipp
for SE Australia
10
VIII
8
MMI for
M=5.6 R=20km
Is estimated at
between
betwee
VII and VIII
VI
M=7
6
M=6
IV
M=5
M=4
II
10
100
1000
R (km)
11/03/2013
Intensity Models
7
2MMI PGV
5
MMI = VII VIII
corresponds to
PGV in the order
of 125 mm/sec
1000
100
10
II
IV
VI
VIII
XII
Intensity Models
A magnitude M=5.6
M=5 6 earthquake at a hypocentral distance R = 20 km is
estimated to produce a peak ground velocity PGV = 125 mm/sec which is
consistent with MMI = VII VIII (in broad agreement with observations
from the 1989 Newcastle Earthquake)
Th
The presenters have
h
collated
ll d Intensity
I
i data
d from
f
countries
i including
i l di
Australia, China, Iran and India (Gujarat Earthquake) and have the
Intensity values converted to PGV values for comparison with existing
attenuation models.
11/03/2013
Empirical Models
Semi-Theoretical Models
Intensity Models
Stochastic Seismological Models
start time
3
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
0.5
start time
1.5
0.5
1.5
start time
0.5
1
time(s)
0.5
start time
1.5
1.5
1
tim e(s)
1.5
1
tim e(s)
1.5
1
tim e(s)
1.5
3
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
0
0.5
start time
1.5
1
tim e(s)
3
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
1
time(s)
0.5
start time
1
time(s)
3
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
Acceleration
(m/s/s)
3
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
1
time(s)
Acceleratiion
(m/s/s)
Accelerat ion
(m/s/s))
3
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
0.5
Acceleration
(m/s/s)
Acceleration
(m/s/s)
Acceleration
(m/s/s)
start time
3
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
Acceleration
(m/s/s)
Acceleration
(m/s/s)
start time
3
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
0.5
11/03/2013
10
10
100
Frequency (hz)
Acceleration (m
m/s/s)
Time--history
Time
6
3
0
-3
-6
-9
0
0.5
1
tim e(s)
1.5
Amplitude (m/s/s)
10
100
Frequency (hz)
Filtering
Amplitude ((m/s/s)
Amp
plitude (m/s/s)
10
0.1
0.1
10
Frequency (hz)
10
11/03/2013
Fourier
Amplitude
Spectrum
0.1
0.1
Corner
Acceleration (m/s/s
s)
10
Frequency fc
Frequency (hz)
Time--history
Time
6
3
0
-3
-6
-9
0
0.5
1
tim e(s)
1.5
10
Fourier Am
mplitude
(m/s
s)
Fourier Am
mplitude
(m/s
s)
0.1
0.1
1
Frequency (hz)
fc
10
0.1
10
1
Frequency (hz)
fc
10
Acceleration (m
m/s/s)
Acceleration (m
m/s/s)
0 .5
1
t im e ( s )
1.5
9
6
3
0
-3
-6
-9
0
0.5
1
tim e (s )
1.5
11
11/03/2013
Fourie
er Amplitude
(m/s)
Fourier
Amplitude
Spectrum
0.1
1
10
Frequency (hz)
Acceleration (m/s/s)
3
0
-3
-6
0
0.5
1
tim e(s)
1.5
12
11/03/2013
Focal depth = 20 km
= 2.8 t/m3 and = 3.7 km/s
Crustal Thickness D = 30 km.
Quality Factor Q0 = 150
Upper crustal attenuation factor = 0.02
18 synthetic accelerograms have been simulated stochastically with
random phase angles.
The response spectra recorded on a rock site in Singapore at both N-S
and E-W directions have been plotted.
Nelson Lam, Cvetan Sinadinovski, Raymond Koo and John Wilson (2003) "Peak Ground Velocity Modelling for
Australian Intraplate Earthquakes". International Journal of Seismology and Earthquake Engineering. Vol.5(2): 11-22 (2003)
China
T
Tsang,
H.H.,
H H Sh
Sheikh,
ikh N
N. and
dL
Lam, N
N.T.K.
T K (2010) Regional
R i l Differences
Diff
in
i Attenuation
Att
ti Modelling
M d lli for
f Eastern
E t
China, Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, 39(5): 451- 459.
Adrian Chandler and Nelson Lam. (2004) An attenuation model for distant earthquakes, . Journal of Earthquake
Engineering and Structural Dynamics. John Wiley & Sons Ltd., Vol.33(2):183-210 (2003). .
India
Iran
Yaghmaei-Sabegh, S and Lam, N.T.K. (2010). Ground motion modelling in Tehran based on the stochastic
method, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering. 30: 525-535
Malaysia & Singapore Lam, N.T.K., Balendra, T., Wilson, J.L. and Srikanth, V. (2009), Seismic Load Estimates of Distant
Subduction Earthquakes Affecting Singapore, Engineering Structures, 31(5): 1230-1240
13
11/03/2013
Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Closing remarks
A Global Approach
to ground motion - structural response modelling
Challenges
Many competing blends of ground motion models.
Steep learning curve for engineers also difficult to choose which one to use.
Challenges with interpreting inter-model discrepancies. Weighting factors often used to give
compromised results.
The NGA project is aimed at addressing this issue by bringing together experts into a unified framework
Even then, five different groups of experts came up with five different NGA models independently.
g NGA models claim to cover the whole world the data were nonetheless from onlyy a few
Although
countries (regions) including Western America, Taiwan, Turkey, Iran and Italy
Even though the database contains some 1500 records they were recorded from only 58 mainshocks of
earthquakes (whilst aftershocks dont count).
The empirical data has little representation from low-moderate seismicity regions.
14
11/03/2013
A Global Approach
to ground motion - structural response modelling
A Global Approach
to ground motion - structural response modelling
15
11/03/2013
Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Closing remarks
16
11/03/2013
AM
0.50
M6.5
BJF
0.40
RSAmax (g's)
CB
SD
0.30
AS
0.20
TAS(gulf)
TAS(mid-continental)
0 10
0.10
CAM(HardRock)
0.00
0
10
20
30
Distance (km)
40
50
60
CAM(Rock)
DA
17
11/03/2013
BO
450
AM
M7
RSVmax (mm/sec)
400
BJF
350
CB
300
SD
250
200
AM
150
TAS(gulf)
100
TAS(mid-continental)
50
C (
CAM(HardRock)
)
0
0
10
20
30
Distance (km)
40
50
60
CAM(Rock)
DA
18
11/03/2013
M6.5
Lumantarna, E., Wilson, J.L. & Lam, N.T.K. (2012) Bi-linear displacement response
spectrum model for engineering applications in low and moderate seismicity regions Soil
Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 43: 85-96.
19
11/03/2013
M5.5
M6
M6.5
20
11/03/2013
Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Closing remarks
T2 0.5 M25
Lam, N.T.K., Wilson, J.L., Chandler, A.M. and Hutchinson, G.L.,2000 : Response
Spectral Relationships for Rock Sites Derived from The Component Attenuation
Model ", Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol.29(10),1457-1490
T2
21
11/03/2013
versus
Empirical Data
Lumantarna, E., Wilson, J.L. & Lam, N.T.K. (2012) Bi-linear displacement response
spectrum model for engineering applications in low and moderate seismicity regions Soil
Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 43: 85-96.
22
11/03/2013
acceleration
Acceleration
Compatible with
tri-linear velocity
response spectrum
T1
T2
Natural period
RSV
Tri-linear form
in logarithmic
scale
Velocity
T1
T2
Natural period
RSD
displacement
sensitive region
PDD
Bi-linear
displacement
response spectrum
Displacement
Compatible with
tri-linear velocity
response spectrum
T1
T2
Natural
(c) Displacementresponse spectrum
period
Example
The expression T2 = 0.5 + 0.5 (M-5) = 0.5 + 0.5 (6.5 5) = 1.25s
23
11/03/2013
acceleration
sensitive region
Acceleration
Compatible with
tri-linear velocity
response spectrum
T1
T2
Natural period
RSV
Tri-linear form
in logarithmic
scale
Velocity
T1
T2
Natural period
RSD
displacement
sensitive region
PDD
Bi-linear
displacement
response spectrum
Displacement
Compatible with
tri-linear velocity
response spectrum
T1
T2
Natural
(c) Displacementresponse spectrum
period
or 0.19 g
PGA(m/s) ~1.9m/s
Basedd on M6.5
B
M6 5 at 30km
30k
which is considered to be
a rare earthquake
scenario (RP=2500 yrs)
in a low-moderate
seismicity regions
Example
RSA = 0.276 x /T
1.25s
24
11/03/2013
Amplification Factor
of up to 4
Nelson Lam, John Wilson (2004) Displacement Modelling of Intraplate Earthquakes Invited paper,
International Seismology and Earthquake Technology Journal (special issue on Performance Based Seismic
Design; Ed Nigel Priestley), 2004. Indian Institute of Technology, Vol.41(1), paper no. 439: pp. 15-52.
HH Tsang, AM Chandler and NTK Lam.(2006) Estimating non-linear site response by single period
approximation. Journal of Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics. 35(9): 1053-1076
Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Closing remarks
25
11/03/2013
World
City
China
Taiwan
0.80 1.0
Tokyo
0.80 1.0
Los
Angeles
0.80 1.0
City
Beijing
Wenchuan
Tangshan
0.4
Hong
Kong
0.24
Hong
Kong
0.24
Sydney,
Melbourne
0.16
Guangzho
u
0 1(Huadu) / 0
0.1(Huadu)
0.20
20
New York
0.1 0.2
Shenzhen
Shanghai
London
< 0.1
Macau
0.2
PGA (m/s/s)
500 years RP
upper
mid
lower
0.1
Design PGA
values in
Europe
100
1000
Distance from nearest tectonic plate boundary
10000
2500 years RP
upper
mid
PGA~1.5m/s2
PGA (m/s/s)
away from
tectonic
plate
boundaries
lower
0.1
100
600km
1000
10000
Distance from nearest tectonic plate boundary (km)
26
11/03/2013
PGA (m/sec^2)
500 years RP
Design
D
i PGA
values in
North America
mid
lower
0.1
100
1000
Distance to nearest tectonic boundaries (km)
10000
10
2500 years RP
PGA (m/s
sec^2)
away from
tectonic
plate
boundaries
upper
upper
mid
lower
0.1
100
1000
Distance to nearest tectonic boundaries (km)
10000
High seismic zone like Taiwan, Tokyo, Los Angeles 0.60g to 1.00g
27
11/03/2013
Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Closing remarks
1 roof
1 max
1avg
RSD1
Hb
H eff
2H b /3
1avg
1roof
Hb
1roof
RSD1
1.6
1avg 1.6
RSD1
Hb
28
11/03/2013
avg
2.5
2.0
avg=1.6
1.5
1.0
0.5
Num. results
0.0
0
4 5 6 7
Period (sec)
10
This slide was modified from the original version prepared by AProf Ray Su
1max
1max
1avg
3
RSD1
Hb
H eff
2H b /3
1avg
2.5
1.8
1 1.5
1.2
1
0.5
1st mode displacement
0
0
10
Period (sec)
This slide was modified from the original version prepared by AProf Ray Su
29
11/03/2013
max
max
1 max
max 12 avg
RSD1
RSD1
max
Hb
Hb
This slide was modified from the original version prepared by AProf Ray Su
max
5
4
For T<1.5 s
For 1.5T3 s
For 3<T5 s
3
2
avg
max
1
0
max=2.6
max=3.2
max=4.4
3
4
Period T (sec)
This slide was modified from the original version prepared by AProf Ray Su
30
11/03/2013
New Discovery on
Torsional Amplification
in Displacement Controlled Conditions
RSDmax
Lumantarna, E., Lam, N.T.K. & Wilson, J.L.(in
press) Displacement Controlled Behaviour of
Asymmetrical Single-Storey Building Models
Journal of Earthquake Engineering. Manuscript
no.UEQE-2012-1471
Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Closing remarks
31
11/03/2013
Closing Remarks
Summary
The meaning of an attenuation model (or ground motion model) has been
defined followed by a review of models that are available. A simple model
which provides prediction of the peak displacement demand (PDD) value for
given M-R combination was first introduced.
Given the value of PDD and second corner period (T2 ) the value of the peak
velocity demand (RSVmax) can be inferred. Given the value of the first corner
period (T1) which is typically 0.3s 0.4s on rock the value of the peak
acceleration demand (RSAmax), and that of the peak ground acceleration (PGA)
can also be inferred.
The calculated PGA value can be compared against global benchmarks to check
if the assumed earthquake scenario was appropriate.
appropriate
The PDD value could then be used to calculate the average and maximum interstorey drift of a building to evaluate its risks of collapse.
Illustration by example
Finally, the use of the proposed generic model in estimating the drift demand of
a building is illustrated by example.
Illustration by Example ( 1 of 4)
The new town is populated by buildings of up to 15
storeys (T<1s). Estimate the maximum drift for the
following building types on average (shallow) soil sites.
35 mm
1.25s
2
35 180 mm/s
1.25
2
RSAmax (m/s 2 )
0.180 3.8 m/s 2
0.3
3.8 m/s 2
PGA(m/s 2 )
1.5 m/s 2
2.5
RSVmax (mm/s)
32
11/03/2013
Illustration by Example ( 2 of 4)
Check if the earthquake scenario of M6.5 R=50 km is appropriate
The new town is located at
least 600 km away from the
nearest tectonic plate boundary
in a developing country.
country No
meaningful amount of local
seismological data has been
collected.
Earthquakes
of
magnitude up to M6.5 is
considered possible.
2500 years RP
upper
OK
mid
PGA (m/s/s)
PGA~1.5m/s2
lower
0.1
100
600km
1000
10000
Distance from nearest tectonic plate boundary (km)
Illustration by Example ( 3 of 4)
55
1.6 0.002 or 0.2%
45000
max 0.2%1.5 0.3% for symmetrical configurations
avg
T~1s
45 m
max
T~0.6s
3.5m
0.8 1.3%
depending on
degree of as-symmetry
33
11/03/2013
Illustration by Example ( 4 of 4)
acceleration
3.8 m/s2
Compatible with
tri-linear velocity
response spectrum
PGA=1.5 m/s2
T1
T2
Natural period
velocity sensitive
region
RSV
180 mm/s
Tri-linear form
in logarithmic
scale
T1
RSD
T2
Natural period
(b) Velocity
V l it response spectrum
t
displacement
sensitive region
PDD
Bi-linear
displacement
response spectrum
35 mm
Compatible with
tri-linear velocity
response spectrum
T1
T2
1.25s
period
End of Presentation
34