Evaluation of Site‐Dependent Inelastic Seismic Design Spectra
Publication: Journal of Structural Engineering
Volume 119, Issue 5
Abstract
The effect of site conditions on the response of single‐degree‐of‐freedom inelastic systems is investigated. The study is based on 124 earthquake ground motions recorded on rock, alluvium, and soft soil sites. Special emphasis is given to the effects of the level of inelastic deformation on strength and displacement demands. For each soil group, inelastic strength demand spectra corresponding to mean and mean‐plus‐one standard deviation ordinates are presented. The use of elastic analysis to estimate inelastic displacements is evaluated through mean values of the ratio of maximum inelastic to maximum elastic displacements. Spectra are presented for different levels of inelastic deformation and for different soil conditions. Results indicate that inelastic demands are strongly dependent on site conditions, period of vibration, and level of inelastic deformation. Results are compared with design forces specified by current seismic codes. It is shown that design force and displacement demands that are based on inelastic response spectra together with estimates of the overstrength of a structure can lead to a more rational and transparent approach than that of current U.S. design codes.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Benioff, H. (1934). “The physical evaluation of seismic destructiveness.” Bull. Seismological Society Am., 24(2), 398–403.
2.
Bertero, V. V. (1986). “Lessons learned from recent earthquakes and research implications for earthquake‐resistant design of building structures in U.S.” Report No. EERC/UCB‐86/03, Earthquake Engrg. Res. Ctr., Univ. of California, Berkeley, Calif.
3.
Bertero, V. V., Anderson, J. C., Krawinkler, H., and Miranda, E. (1991). “Design guidelines for ductility and drift limits.” Report No. EERC/UCB‐91/15, Earthquake Engrg. Res. Ctr., Univ. of California, Berkeley, Calif.
4.
Biot, M. A. (1941). “A mechanical analyzer for the prediction of earthquake stresses.” Bull. Seismological Society Am., 31(2), 151–171.
5.
Blume, J. A., Sharpe, R. L., and Dalal, J. S. (1973). “Recommendations for shape of earthquake response spectra.” Report AEC WASH—1254, John A. Blume and Assoc., Engrs., San Francisco, Calif.
6.
Der Kiureghian, A. (1980). “Probabilistic modal combination for earthquake loading.” Proc. 7th World Conf. on Earthquake Engrg., Turkish Society on Earthquake Engrg., Istanbul, Turkey, 729–736.
7.
Earthquake resistant regulations—A world list. (1988). Int. Association of Earthquake Engrg., Tsukuba, Japan.
8.
Elghadamsi, F. E., and Mohraz, B. (1987). “Inelastic earthquake spectra.” Earthquake Engrg. and Struct. Dynamics, 15(1), 91–104.
9.
Hall, W. J., Mohraz, B., and Newmark, N. M. (1976). “Statistical studies of vertical and horizontal earthquake spectra.” Report USAEC AT(49‐5)‐2667, Nathan M. Newmark Consulting Engrg. Services, Urbana, Ill.
10.
Hayashi, S., Tsuchida, H., and Kurata, E. (1971). “Average response spectra for various subsoil conditions.” Proc. Third Joint Meeting, U.S.‐Japan Panel on Wind and Seismic Effects, U.S.‐Japan Cooperative Program in Natural Resources, Tokyo, Japan, May 10–12.
11.
Housner, G. W. (1959). “Behavior of structures during earthquakes.” J. Engrg. Mech. Div., ASCE, 85(4), 109–129.
12.
Katayama, T., Iwasaki, T., and Saeki, M. (1978). “Statistical analysis of earthquake acceleration response spectra.” Trans. Japan Soc. of Civ. Engrg., 10, 311–313.
13.
Kiremidjian, A. S., and Shah, H. C.(1980). “Probabilistic site‐dependent response spectra.” J. Struct. Div., ASCE, 106(1), 69–86.
14.
Krawinkler, H., and Nassar, A. (1990). “Strength and ductility demands for SDOF and MDOF systems subjected to Whittier Narrows earthquake ground motions.” CSMIP‐1990, California Dept. of Conservation, Sacramento, Calif.
15.
Lai, S. P., and Biggs, J. M. (1980). “Inelastic response spectra for aseismic building design.” J. Struct. Div., ASCE, 106(6), 1295–1310.
16.
Mahin, S. A., and Lin, J. (1983). “Construction of inelastic response spectra single‐degree‐of‐freedom systems.” Report No. UCB/EERC‐83/17, Earthquake Engrg. Res. Ctr., Univ. of California, Berkeley, Calif.
17.
Miranda, E. (1991). “Seismic evaluation and upgrading of existing buildings,” Ph.D. thesis, Univ. of California, Berkeley, Calif.
18.
Miranda, E., and Bertero, V. V. (1991). “Evaluation of structural response factors using ground motions recorded during the Loma Prieta earthquake.” CSMIP‐1991, California Dept. of Conservation, Sacramento, Calif.
19.
Mohraz, B. (1976). “A study of earthquake response spectra for different soil conditions.” Bull. Seismological Society Am., 66(3), 915–935.
20.
Mohraz, B., Hall, W. J., and Newmark, N. M. (1973). “A study of vertical and horizontal earthquake spectra.” Report AEC WASH—1253, Nathan M. Newmark Consulting Engrg. Services, Urbana, Ill.
21.
Murakami, M., and Penzien, J. (1975). “Nonlinear response spectra for probabilistic seismic design and damage assessment of reinforced concrete structures.” Report No. UCB/EERC‐75‐38, Earthquake Engrg. Res. Ctr., Univ. of California, Berkeley, Calif.
22.
Nau, J. M., and Hall, W. J. (1982). “An evaluation of scaling methods for earthquake response spectra.” Struct. Res. Series No. 499, Civ. Engrg. Dept., Univ. of Illinois, Urbana‐Champaign, Ill.
23.
Newmark, N. M., and Hall, W. J. (1969). “Seismic design criteria for nuclear reactor facilities.” Proc. of the Fourth World Conf. on Earthquake Engrg., Chilean Association on Seismology and Earthquake Engrg., Santiago, Chile, 2(B‐4), 37–50.
24.
Osteraas, J. D., and Krawinkler, H. (1990). “Strength and ductility considerations in seismic design.” Report No. 90, The John A. Blume Earthquake Engrg. Center, Stanford Univ., Stanford, Calif.
25.
“Recommended provisions for the development of seismic regulations for new buildings.” (1988). Publication No. 95, Fed. Emergency Mgmt. Agency, Washington, D.C.
26.
Riddell, R., and Newmark, N. M. (1979). “Statistical analysis of the response of nonlinear systems subjected to earthquakes.” Struct. Res. Series No. 468, Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Univ. of Illinois, Urbana, Ill.
27.
Riddell, R., Hidalgo, P., and Cruz, E. (1989). “Response modification factors for earthquake resistant design of short period structure.” Earthquake Spectra, 5(3), 571–590.
28.
Seed, H. B., Ugas, C., and Lysmer, J. (1974). “Site‐dependent spectra for earthquake‐resistant design.” Report No. EERC 74‐12, Earthquake Engrg. Res. Ctr., Univ. of California, Berkeley, Calif.
29.
“Tentative provisions for the development of seismic regulations for buildings.” (1978). Report ATC 3‐06, Applied Tech. Council, Palo Alto, Calif.
30.
Trifunac, M. D. (1988). “The Whittier Narrows, California earthquake of October 1, 1987—Note on peak accelerations during the 1 and 4 October earthquakes.” Earthquake Spectra, 4(1), 101–113.
31.
Trifunac, M. D., and Lee, V. V. (1989). “Empirical models for scaling pseudovelocity spectra of strong earthquake ground acceleration in terms of magnitude, distance, site intensity and recording site conditions.” Int. J. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engrg., 8(3), 126–144.
32.
Uniform building code. (1988). Int. Conf. of Bldg. Officials, Whittier, Calif.
33.
Veletsos, A. S. (1969). “Response of ground‐excited elastoplastic systems.” Report No. 6, Rice Univ., Houston, Tex.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Structural Engineering
Volume 119 • Issue 5 • May 1993
Pages: 1319 - 1338
Copyright
Copyright © 1993 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: May 6, 1992
Published online: May 1, 1993
Published in print: May 1993
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.