Evaluation of Hybrid Broadband Ground Motion Simulations for Response History Analysis and Design

Abstract

Chapter 16 of ASCE 7 governs the selection of ground motions for analysis of new buildings and requires recordings that meet specified criteria. If a sufficient number of recordings cannot be found, it allows the use of “appropriate simulated ground motions,” but does not provide further guidance. This paper outlines a procedure for generating and selecting a set of “appropriate” hybrid broadband simulations and a comparable set of recordings. Both ground motion sets are used to analyze a building in Berkeley, California, and the predicted structural performance is compared. The structural behavior resulting from recordings and simulations is similar, and most discrepancies are explained by differences in directional properties such as orientation of the maximum spectral response. These results suggest that when simulations meet the criteria outlined for recordings in ASCE 7 and properties such as directionality are realistically represented, simulations provide useful results for structural analysis and design.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aagaard

B. T.

Brocher

T. M.

Dolenc

Dreger

Graves

R. W.

Harmsen

Hartzell

Larsen

and Zoback

M. L.

2008. Ground-motion modeling of the 1906 San Francisco earthquake, Part I: validation using the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 98, 989–1011.

Aagaard

B. T.

Graves

R. W.

Rodgers

Brocher

T. M.

Simpson

R. W.

Dreger

Petersson

N. A.

Larsen

S. C.

and Jachens

R. C.

2010. Ground-motion modeling of Hayward Fault scenario earthquakes, Part II: simulation of long-period and broadband ground motions, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 100, 2945–2977.

American Society of Civil Engineers/Structural Engineering Institute (ASCE), 2010. Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures, ASCE 7-10, Reston, VA.

Beresnev

I. A.

and Atkinson

G. M.

1997. Modeling finite-fault radiation from the omega n spectrum, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 87, 67–84.

Beyer

and Bommer

J. J.

2006. Relationships between median values and between aleatory variabilities for different definitions of the horizontal component of motion, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 96, 1512–1522.

Boore

D. M.

1983. Stochastic simulation of high-frequency ground motions based on seismological models of the radiated spectra, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 73, 1865–1894.

Boore

D. M.

2010. Orientation-independent, nongeometric-mean measures of seismic intensity from two horizontal components of motion, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 100, 1830–1835.

Boore

D. M.

Watson-Lamprey

and Abrahamson

N. A.

2006. Orientation-independent measures of ground motion, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 96, 1502–1511.

Bray

J. D.

and Rodriguez-Marek

2004. Characterization of forward-directivity ground motions in the near-fault region, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 24, 815–828.

10.

Building Seismic Safety Council (BSSC), 2009. NEHRP Recommended Seismic Provisions for New Buildings and Other Structures, FEMA Report No. P-750, National Institute of Building Sciences, Washington, D.C.

11.

Burks

L. S.

and Baker

J. W.

2014. Validation of ground motion simulations through simple proxies for the response of engineered systems, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 104, 1930–1946.

12.

Chiou

Darragh

Gregor

and Silva

2008. NGA project strong-motion database, Earthquake Spectra 24, 23–44.

13.

Der Kiureghian

and Crempien

1989. An evolutionary model for earthquake ground motion, Structural Safety 6, 235–246.

14.

Frankel

2009. A constant stress-drop model for producing broadband synthetic seismograms: comparison with the Next Generation Attenuation Relations, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 99, 664–680.

15.

Galasso

Zareian

Iervolino

and Graves

R.W.

2012. Validation of Ground-Motion Simulations for Historical Events Using SDoF Systems. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 102, 2727–2740.

16.

Galasso

Zhong

Zareian

Iervolino

and Graves

R. W.

2013. Validation of ground-motion simulations for historical events using MDoF systems, Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 42, 1395–1412.

17.

Graves

R. W.

and Pitarka

2010. Broadband ground-motion simulation using a hybrid approach, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 100, 2095–2123.

18.

Hanks

T. C.

and McGuire

R. K.

1981. The character of high-frequency strong ground motion, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 71, 2071–2095.

19.

Hartzell

Guatteri

Mai

P. M.

Liu

P.-C.

and Fisk

2005. Calculation of broadband time histories of ground motion, part ii: kinematic and dynamic modeling using theoretical green's functions and comparison with the 1994 Northridge earthquake, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 95, 614–645.

20.

Hartzell

Harmsen

Frankel

and Larsen

1999. Calculation of broadband time histories of ground motion: Comparison of methods and validation using strong-ground motion from the 1994 Northridge earthquake, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 89, 1484–1504.

21.

Haselton

C. B.

Fry

Baker

J. W.

Hamburger

R. O.

Whittaker

A. S.

Stewart

J. P.

Elwood

K. J.

Luco

Hooper

J. D.

and Charney

F. A.

2014. Response history analysis for the design of new buildings: Part I - development of recommendations for the NEHRP provisions and the ASCE/SEI 7 standard, Earthquake Spectra, in review.

22.

Iervolino

De Luca

and Cosenza

2010. Spectral shape-based assessment of SDOF nonlinear response to real, adjusted and artificial accelerograms, Engineering Structures 32, 2776–2792.

23.

Jayaram

and Shome

2012. A statistical analysis of the response of tall buildings to recorded and simulated ground motions, in 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal, 1–10.

24.

Jones

and Zareian

2013. Seismic response of a 40-story buckling-restrained braced frame designed for the Los Angeles region, The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings 22, 291–299.

25.

Jurkevics

and Ulrych

T. J.

1978. Representing and simulating strong ground motion, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 68, 781–801.

26.

Mai

P. M.

Imperatori

and Olsen

K. B.

2010. Hybrid broadband ground-motion simulations: combining long-period deterministic synthetics with high-frequency multiple S-to-S backscattering, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 100, 2124–2142.

27.

Mobarakeh

A. A.

Rofooei

F. R.

and Ahmadi

2002. Simulation of earthquake records using time-varying Arma (2,1) model, Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics 17, 15–34.

28.

Motazedian

and Atkinson

G. M.

2005. Stochastic finite-fault modeling based on a dynamic corner frequency, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 95, 995–1010.

29.

Pousse

Bonilla

L. F.

Cotton

and Margerin

2006. Nonstationary stochastic simulation of strong ground motion time histories including natural variability: application to the K-Net Japanese database, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 96, 2103–2117.

30.

Rezaeian

and Der Kiureghian

2010. Simulation of synthetic ground motions for specified earthquake and site characteristics, Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 39, 1155–1180.

31.

Rutherford + Chekene, 2002. Geotechnical Investigation Final Report for Units 1 and 2 Housing Project, University of California, Berkeley.

32.

Southern California Earthquake Center (SCEC), 2012. Broadband Platform (version 11.2.3), available at http://scec.usc.edu/scecpedia/Broadband_Platform.

33.

Schmedes

Archuleta

and Lavallee

2010. Correlation of earthquake source parameters inferred from dynamic rupture simulations, Journal of Geophysical Research 115, B03304, doi:10.1029/2009JB006689.

34.

Shahi

S. K.

and Baker

J. W.

2011. An empirically calibrated framework for including the effects of near-fault directivity in probabilistic seismic hazard analysis, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 101, 742–755.

35.

Shahi

S. K.

and Baker

J. W.

2013. NGA-West2 Models for Ground-Motion Directionality, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center Report 2013/10, University of California, Berkeley.

36.

Star

L. M.

Stewart

J. P.

and Graves

R. W.

2011. Comparison of ground motions from hybrid simulations to NGA prediction equations, Earthquake Spectra 27, 331–350.

37.

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), 2008. 2008 Interactive Deaggregations (Beta), available at https://geohazards.usgs.gov/deaggint/2008/.

38.

Wells

D. L.

and Coppersmith

K. J.

1994. New empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, rupture area, and surface displacement, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 84, 974–1002.

39.

Zeng

Anderson

J. G.

and Yu

1994. A composite source model for computing realistic synthetic strong ground motions, Geophysical Research Letters 21, 725–728.

40.

Zimmerman

R. B.

Baker

J. W.

Haselton

C. B.

Bono

Hooper

Engel

Hamburger

Celikbas

and Jalalian

2014. Response history analysis for the design of new buildings: Part II - example applications to illustrate the recommended methodology, Earthquake Spectra, in review.