Impact of Different Earthquake Types on the Statistics of Ductility Demand
Publication: Journal of Structural Engineering
Volume 136, Issue 7
Abstract
Probabilistic assessments of the seismic ductility demand for hysteretic bilinear single-degree-of-freedom systems have been reported in the literature. However, a systematic assessment of possible differences in the estimated ductility demand for different earthquake types using recorded ground motions is not available, although ground motion prediction equations for different earthquake types are developed. The assessment of the differences can be important for estimating structural reliability and expected damage cost under seismic excitations since partial damage and collapse could be related to the ductility demand. Therefore, if the differences are significant one must use consistent sets of ground motion prediction equation and ductility demand relation for each earthquake type affecting a site of interest to evaluate the seismic hazard and risk. To assess the differences of the ductility demand, 413 records for Mexican interplate earthquakes, 275 records for Mexican inslab earthquakes, and 592 records for California earthquakes are employed. The evaluation considers ranges of values of natural vibration periods and ratios of initial to postyield stiffness. The obtained results indicate that the statistics of displacement ductility demand differs for different earthquake types. The results are used to develop empirical relations for predicting the expected displacement ductility demand.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
The financial support of the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada and the National Council of Science and Technology (CONACYT) of Mexico is gratefully acknowledged. We thank K. Goda, A. Pozos-Estrada, and J. A. Escobar for their many constructive comments, suggestions, and criticisms; and S. K. Singh of the Geophysical Institute, UNAM, and D. Garcia for providing Mexican records. We are grateful for the comments and suggestions of the three anonymous reviewers, which led to the improvement of the results reported in this study.
References
Adams, J., and Atkinson, G. M. (2003). “Development of Seismic Hazard Maps for the 2005 National Building Code of Canada.” Can. J. Civ. Eng., 30, 255–271.
Applied Technology Council (ATC). (2005). “Improvement of nonlinear static seismic analysis procedure.” FEMA 440 Rep., FEMA, Washington, D.C.
Atkinson, G. M., and Boore, D. M. (2003). “Empirical ground-motion relationship for subduction-zone earthquakes and their application to Cascadia and other regions.” Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 93(4), 1703–1729.
Boore, D. M. (2005). “On pads and filters: Processing strong-ground motion data.” Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 95(2), 745–750.
Building Seismic Safety Council (BSSC) of the National Institute of Building. (2004). “NEHRP recommended provisions for seismic regulations for new buildings and other structures.” FEMA 450, FEMA, Washington, D.C., ⟨http://www.bssconline.org/⟩ (Nov. 14, 2005).
Chopra, A. K. (2001). Dynamics of structures, 2nd Ed., Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J.
Chopra, A. K., and Chintanapakdee, C. (2004). “Inelastic deformation ratios for design and evaluation of structures: single-degree-of-freedom bilinear systems.” J. Struct. Eng., 130(9), 1309–1319.
Dudewicz, E. J., and Mishra, S. N. (1988). Modern mathematical statistics, Wiley, New York.
Frankel, A., et al. (1996). “National seismic hazard maps.” Open File 96-532, U.S. Dept. of the Interior, USGS, Denver.
García, D. (2006). “Estimación de parámetros del movimiento fuerte del suelo para terremotos interplaca e intraslab en México central.” Ph.D. thesis, Facultad de Ciencias Físicas, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
García, D., Singh, S. K., Herráiz, M., Ordaz, M., and Pacheco, J. F. (2005). “Inslab earthquakes of Central Mexico: Peak ground-motion parameters and response spectra.” Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 95(6), 2272–2282.
Goda, K., and Hong, H. P. (2006). “Optimum seismic design considering risk attitude, societal tolerable risk level and life quality criterion.” J. Struct. Eng., 132(12), 2027–2035.
Hong, H. P., and Goda, K. (2007). “Orientation-dependent ground motion measure for seismic hazard assessment.” Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 97(5), 1525–1538.
Hong, H. P., Goda, K., and Davenport, A. G. (2006). “Seismic hazard analysis: A comparative study.” Can. J. Civ. Eng., 33, 1156–1171.
Hong, H. P., and Hong, P. (2007). “Assessment of ductility demand and reliability of bilinear single-degree-of-freedom systems under earthquake loading.” Can. J. Civ. Eng., 34(12), 1606–1615.
Hong, H. P., and Jiang, J. (2004). “Ratio between inelastic and elastic responses with uncertain structural properties.” Can. J. Civ. Eng., 31(4), 703–711.
Hong, H. P., Pozos-Estrada, A., and Gomez, R. (2009). “Orientation effect on ground motion measure for Mexican subduction earthquakes.” Earthquake Eng. Eng. Vib., 8(1), 1–16.
Krawinkler, H., and Nassar, A. A. (1992). “Seismic based design on ductility and cumulative damage demands and capacities.” Nonlinear seismic analysis and design of reinforced concrete buildings, P. Fajfar and H. Krawinkler, eds., Elsevier Science, New York.
McGuire, R. K. (2004). Seismic hazard and risk analysis, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, Calif.
Medina, R., and Krawinkler, H. (2003). “Seismic demands for nondeteriorating frame structures and their dependence on ground motions.” Rep. No. TR-144, The John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Stanford Univ., Stanford, Calif.
Mexican Society of Seismic Engineering (MSSE). (1996). Mexican strong motion database (CD-ROM), Vol. 2, Mexico City, Mexico.
Miranda, E. (2000). “Inelastic displacement ratios for structures on firm sites.” J. Struct. Eng., 126(10), 1150–1159.
Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research (PEER) Center. (2006). “Next generation attenuation database.” ⟨http://peer.berkeley.edu/nga/index.html⟩ (Apr. 4, 2006).
Riddell, R., Garcia, J. E., and Garces, E. (2002). “Inelastic deformation response of SDOF systems subjected to earthquakes.” Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn., 31, 515–538.
Ruiz-García, J., and Miranda, E. (2003). “Inelastic displacement ratios for evaluation of existing structures.” Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn., 32(8), 1237–1258.
Tothong, P., and Cornell, C. A. (2006). “An empirical ground-motion attenuation relation for inelastic spectral displacement.” Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 96(6), 2146–2164.
Veletsos, A. S., and Newmark, N. M. (1960). “Effect of inelastic behavior on the response of simple systems to earthquake motions.” Proc., 2nd World Conf. on Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 2, Science Council of Japan, Tokyo, 895–912.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Structural Engineering
Volume 136 • Issue 7 • July 2010
Pages: 770 - 780
Copyright
© 2010 ASCE.
History
Received: Nov 11, 2008
Accepted: Dec 28, 2009
Published online: Dec 30, 2009
Published in print: Jul 2010
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.