Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Overview of GMSM Methods Nicolas Luco 1 st Workshop on Ground Motion Selection and Modification (GMSM) for Nonlinear Analysis – 27 October 2006.

Published by Modified over 9 years ago

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Overview of GMSM Methods Nicolas Luco 1 st Workshop on Ground Motion Selection and Modification (GMSM) for Nonlinear Analysis – 27 October 2006."— Presentation transcript:

1 Overview of GMSM Methods Nicolas Luco 1 st Workshop on Ground Motion Selection and Modification (GMSM) for Nonlinear Analysis – 27 October 2006

2 NSF Year 7 Site Visit GMSM Methods Currently being Compared

3 NSF Year 7 Site Visit Nonlinear Analysis Results being Compared (Objectives of GMSM Methods Currently being Compared) 1. Cumulative Distribution Function (CDF) of the Engineering Demand Parameter (EDP) for a given earthquake magnitude (M), source-to-site distance (R), 30m shear wave velocity (S), and style of faulting (F). 2. Median EDP | M, R, S, F. 3. CDF of EDP | M, R, S, F and a given pseudo spectral acceleration at the estimated fundamental period of the structure (and a 5% damping ratio), SA(T 1 ). 4. Median EDP | M, R, S, F and SA(T 1 ).

4 NSF Year 7 Site Visit Specifics of Current Comparison Case Structure =4-Story Reinforced Concrete (RC) Special Moment Frame (SMF) Building, T 1 ≈ 1 sec. EDP =maximum (over height) peak (over time) inter-story drift ratio (MIDR) M = 7 (moment magnitude) R = 10 km (closest distance to rupture) S = 400 m/sec (30m shear wave velocity) F = strike-slip (style of faulting) SA(T 1 ) =+2 sigma level (  =2) based on Campbell & Bozorgnia (2006) GM prediction equation

5 NSF Year 7 Site Visit Specifics of Current Comparison Case SA(T 1 )=1.08g

6 NSF Year 7 Site Visit Categories of Methods for Objective #1 ( i.e., CDF of EDP | M, R, S, F ) Select GMs for a M-R-S-F "bin" chosen to be consistent with the given M, R, S, F (no scaling). (Watson-Lamprey) Scale (in amplitude) each GM in bin so as to "correct" for ranges of M, R, S, F values vs. given values. (Bozorgnia) Select GMs that, with scaling, will both … (i)closely match the median response spectrum (ii)sample the variability of the response spectra (Rathje, Youngs/DGML, Almoradi) Adjust resulting variability of EDP for effects of scaling. (Shome)

7 NSF Year 7 Site Visit Example GMSM Method for Objective #1 ( i.e., CDF of EDP | M, R, S, F ) Selection Procedure 1. Gather GMs for bin consistent with given M, R, S, F. 2. Select from combinations of scaled GMs generated by modification procedure Modification Procedure 1. Scale GMs such that their median matches the median response spectrum for given M, R, S, F, and such that their variability matches the variability in SA(T).

8 NSF Year 7 Site Visit Example GMSM Method for Objective #1 ( i.e., CDF of EDP | M, R, S, F )

9 NSF Year 7 Site Visit Categories of Methods for Objective #2 ( i.e., Median of EDP | M, R, S, F ) Select GMs according to M-R-S-F bin and scale to median value of scalar EDP-proxy (e.g., SA(T 1 ) or inelastic spectral displacement) for given M, R, S, F. (Shome, Haselton, Cornell, Bozorgnia) Select GMs to match, with scaling allowed, median of EDP-proxy (e.g., elastic response spectrum or inelastic spectral displacement) for given M, R, S, F. (Youngs/DGML, Alimoradi, Baker, Watson-Lamprey, Shantz) Select GMs according to M-R-S-F bin (or randomly select?) and spectral-match them to median elastic or inelastic response spectrum. (Bazzurro/RASCAL, Watson-Lamprey/RSPMATCH, Bozorgnia)

10 NSF Year 7 Site Visit Example GMSM Method for Objective #2 ( i.e., Median of EDP | M, R, S, F ) Selection Procedure 1. Gather GMs for bin consistent with given M, R, S. 2. After scaling (procedure below), select GMs with smallest Mean Squared Error (MSE) w.r.t. median spectrum for given M, R, S, F. Modification Procedure 1. Scale GMs to minimize MSE w.r.t. median spectrum for given M, R, S, F.

11 NSF Year 7 Site Visit Example GMSM Method for Objective #2 ( i.e., Median of EDP | M, R, S, F ) (Source: Youngs, Power & Chin; 2006)

12 NSF Year 7 Site Visit Categories of Methods for Objective #3 ( i.e., CDF of EDP | M, R, S, F, and SA(T 1 ) ) Select GMs for bin that is consistent with given M, R, S, F, and SA(T 1 ) (no scaling). Scale (individually) GMs in bin to "correct" for ranges of M, R, S, F, and SA(T 1 ) values vs. given values. (Luco/Bozorgnia/Tothong) Select GMs for M-R-S-F-consistent bin and scale them to given SA(T 1 ). (Shome) Select GMs for Objective #1 (CDF of EDP | M, R, S, F) and scale them to given SA(T 1 ). (Alimoradi, Youngs/DGML)

13 NSF Year 7 Site Visit ( i.e., CDF of EDP | M, R, S, F, and SA(T 1 ) ) Selection Procedure 1. Gather GMs for bin consistent with | M, R, S, F, SA(T 1 ). Modification Procedure 1. For each GM (unscaled), calculate … 2. Iteratively scale each GM such that … IM 1I&2E =scalar combination of first-mode inelastic spectral displacement and SA(T 2 ) (Luco & Cornell, 2002) Example GMSM Method for Objective #3

14 NSF Year 7 Site Visit Example GMSM Method for Objective #3 ( i.e., CDF of EDP | M, R, S, F, and SA(T 1 ) ) Ground Motion Prediction Equation (GMPE) for IM 1I&2E is available from Tothong & Cornell (2007). GMPEs for Inelastic Spectral Displacement (part of IM 1I&2E ) are available for … … constant strength, d y (Tothong & Cornell, 2006) … constant ductility,  (Bozorgnia et al., 2006) … constant strength reduction factor, R (???) Combine with GMPE for SA(T 2 ) and its correlation with SA(T 1 ) to approximate GMPE for IM 1I&2E.

15 NSF Year 7 Site Visit Categories of Methods for Objective #4 ( i.e., Median of EDP | M, R, S, F and SA(T 1 ) ) Select GMs for Objective #2 (Median of EDP | M, R, S, F) and scale them to given SA(T 1 ). (Youngs/DGML) Select GMs to match, with scaling allowed, median (or other target) of EDP-proxy (e.g., elastic or inelastic response spectrum) for given M, R, S, F, and SA(T 1 ). (Alimoradi, Baker, Watson-Lamprey, Shantz, Rathje) Select GMs according to M-R-S-F bin (or randomly select?) and spectral-match them to elastic or inelastic response spectrum consistent with SA(T 1 ). (Bazzurro/RASCAL, Watson-Lamprey/RSPMATCH, Bozorgnia)

16 NSF Year 7 Site Visit Example GMSM Method for Objective #4 ( i.e., Median of EDP | M, R, S, F, and SA(T 1 ) ) Selection Procedure 1. Gather GMs for bin consistent with given M, R, S, F, and/or SA(T 1 ) (e.g., M = 6.75 to 7.25, R = 0 to 20 km). Or … randomly select GMs? Modification Procedure 1. Spectral-match each GM to Conditional Mean Spectrum (CMS – Baker & Cornell, 2006) for given M, R, S, F and SA(T 1 ).

17 NSF Year 7 Site Visit Example GMSM Method for Objective #4 ( i.e., Median of EDP | M, R, S, F, and SA(T 1 ) ) e.g., from Bazzurro using RASCAL (Silva & Lee, 1987)

18 NSF Year 7 Site Visit GMSM Methods Currently being Compared

19 NSF Year 7 Site Visit Additional GMSM Methods to be Compared

20 NSF Year 7 Site Visit

21 Example GMSM Method for Objective #1 ( i.e., CDF of EDP | M, R, S, F ) Selection Procedure 1. Decide on "bin" consistent with given M, R, S, F. (e.g., M = 6.75 to 7.25, R = 0 to 20 km) 2. Gather GMs for chosen bin. Modification Procedure 1. Scale each GM by … … where the Median SA(T 1 ) is from a GM Prediction Equation (GMPE).

Download ppt "Overview of GMSM Methods Nicolas Luco 1 st Workshop on Ground Motion Selection and Modification (GMSM) for Nonlinear Analysis – 27 October 2006."

Similar presentations

PEER 2002 PEER Annual Meeting PEER 2002 Annual Meeting uHelmut Krawinkler Seismic Demand Analysis.

PEER 2002 PEER Annual Meeting PEER 2002 Annual Meeting uHelmut Krawinkler Seismic Demand Analysis.
Ground Motions Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering: Steve Kramer

Ground Motions Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering: Steve Kramer
Response Spectrum Analysis as per Indian IS: 1893 (Part 1)-2002

Response Spectrum Analysis as per Indian IS: 1893 (Part 1)-2002
Nirmal Jayaram Nilesh Shome Helmut Krawinkler 2010 SCEC Annual Meeting A statistical analysis of the responses of tall buildings to recorded and simulated.

Nirmal Jayaram Nilesh Shome Helmut Krawinkler 2010 SCEC Annual Meeting A statistical analysis of the responses of tall buildings to recorded and simulated.
TBI Committee Members Y. Bozorgnia C.B. Crouse J.P. Stewart

TBI Committee Members Y. Bozorgnia C.B. Crouse J.P. Stewart
NGA Site Response Study Joseph Sun, Tom Shantz, Zhi-Liang Wang.

NGA Site Response Study Joseph Sun, Tom Shantz, Zhi-Liang Wang.
EERI Seminar on Next Generation Attenuation Models SCEC GMSV Workshop: Summary of Other Validation Methodologies/Applications Nicolas Luco, Research Structural.

EERI Seminar on Next Generation Attenuation Models SCEC GMSV Workshop: Summary of Other Validation Methodologies/Applications Nicolas Luco, Research Structural.
Deterministic Seismic Hazard Analysis Earliest approach taken to seismic hazard analysis Originated in nuclear power industry applications Still used for.

Deterministic Seismic Hazard Analysis Earliest approach taken to seismic hazard analysis Originated in nuclear power industry applications Still used for.
GMSM Mission and Vision Jennie Watson-Lamprey October 29, 2007.

GMSM Mission and Vision Jennie Watson-Lamprey October 29, 2007.
PEER Jonathan P. Stewart University of California, Los Angeles May 22, 2002 Geotechnical Uncertainties for PBEE.

PEER Jonathan P. Stewart University of California, Los Angeles May 22, 2002 Geotechnical Uncertainties for PBEE.
Inelastic Displacement Surface Method Tom Shantz CALTRANS- Division of Research and Innovation.

Inelastic Displacement Surface Method Tom Shantz CALTRANS- Division of Research and Innovation.
GMSM Methodology and Terminology Christine Goulet, UCLA GMSM Core Members.

GMSM Methodology and Terminology Christine Goulet, UCLA GMSM Core Members.
1 Workshop on GMSM for Nonlinear Analysis, Berkeley CA, October 26, 2006 ATC-63 Selection and Scaling Method Charles Kircher Curt B. Haselton Gregory G.

1 Workshop on GMSM for Nonlinear Analysis, Berkeley CA, October 26, 2006 ATC-63 Selection and Scaling Method Charles Kircher Curt B. Haselton Gregory G.
Quantifying risk by performance- based earthquake engineering, Cont’d Greg Deierlein Stanford University …with contributions by many 2006 IRCC Workshop.

Quantifying risk by performance- based earthquake engineering, Cont’d Greg Deierlein Stanford University …with contributions by many 2006 IRCC Workshop.
Ground Motion Intensity Measures for Performance-Based Earthquake Engineering Hemangi Pandit Joel Conte Jon Stewart John Wallace.

Ground Motion Intensity Measures for Performance-Based Earthquake Engineering Hemangi Pandit Joel Conte Jon Stewart John Wallace.
The use of risk in design: ATC 58 performance assessment procedure Craig D. Comartin.

The use of risk in design: ATC 58 performance assessment procedure Craig D. Comartin.
Demand and Capacity Factor Design: A Performance-based Analytic Approach to Design and Assessment Sharif University of Technology, 25 April 2011 Demand.

Demand and Capacity Factor Design: A Performance-based Analytic Approach to Design and Assessment Sharif University of Technology, 25 April 2011 Demand.
Characterization of Ground Motion Hazard PEER Summative Meeting - June 13, 2007 Yousef Bozorgnia PEER Associate Director.

Characterization of Ground Motion Hazard PEER Summative Meeting - June 13, 2007 Yousef Bozorgnia PEER Associate Director.
Yousef Bozorgnia, Mahmoud Hachem, Kenneth Campbell PEER GMSM Workshop, UC Berkeley October 27, 2006 Attenuation of Inelastic Spectra and Its Applications.

Yousef Bozorgnia, Mahmoud Hachem, Kenneth Campbell PEER GMSM Workshop, UC Berkeley October 27, 2006 Attenuation of Inelastic Spectra and Its Applications.
Yousef Bozorgnia PEER Associate Director PEER GMSM Workshop, UC Berkeley October 27, 2006 PEER Ground Motion Selection & Modification (GMSM) Workshop.

Yousef Bozorgnia PEER Associate Director PEER GMSM Workshop, UC Berkeley October 27, 2006 PEER Ground Motion Selection & Modification (GMSM) Workshop.

Similar presentations

Ads by Google