Assessment of Seismic Ground Response Analysis Modeling Uncertainty at Christchurch Hospital, New Zealand
Publication: Geo-Congress 2024
ABSTRACT
Modeling uncertainty was assessed for nonlinear seismic ground response analyses at the Christchurch Hospital strong motion station (CHHC). Ground response analyses in the central business district of Christchurch must consider a clay layer at depth, and the approach used to discretize this layer results in different modeling uncertainty. The clay layer creates a shear wave velocity (Vs) inversion that attenuates short-to-moderate-period motions, which can underestimate surface response spectra. A design approach developed for a nearby site was applied at CHHC, comprising development of a smoothed Vs profile with a minimum Vs for the clay layer. Input motions were selected to represent the M7.1 September 4, 2010, Darfield and M6.2 February 22, 2011, Christchurch earthquakes. The design approach yielded mixed results between the input motions when applied to CHHC, yet the average modeling uncertainty was smallest using the design approach instead of explicitly modeling the clay with its estimated in situ Vs.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this chapter.
REFERENCES
Ancheta, T. D., et al. (2014). “NGA-West2 database.” Earthquake Spectra, 30(3), pp.989–1005.
Bazzurro, P. and Cornell, C. A. (2004). “Nonlinear soil-site effects in probabilistic seismic-hazard analysis.” Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 94(6), pp.2110–2123.
Bradley, B. A. (2011). “A framework for validation of seismic response analyses using seismometer array recordings.” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 31(3), pp.512–520.
Bradley, B. A. (2013). “A New Zealand‐specific pseudospectral acceleration ground‐motion prediction equation for active shallow crustal earthquakes based on foreign models.” Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 103(3), pp.1801–1822.
Bradley, B. A. (2014). “Site-specific and spatially-distributed ground-motion intensity estimation in the 2010–2011 Canterbury earthquakes.” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 61, pp.83–91.
Bradley, B. A., and Cubrinovski, M. (2011). “Near-source strong ground motions observed in the 22 February 2011 Christchurch earthquake.” Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, 44(4), 181–194.
Darendeli, M. B. (2001). Development of a new family of normalized modulus reduction and material damping curves. The University of Texas at Austin.
Dismuke, J. D. (2023). “Assessment of seismic ground response analysis model uncertainty at Christchurch Cathedral College, Christchurch Central Business District, New Zealand.” Proceedings of Deep Foundations Institute DFI48, Seattle, WA.
Goda, K. and Hong, H. P. (2008). “Spatial correlation of peak ground motions and response spectra.” Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 98(1), pp.354–365.
Groholski, D. R., Hashash, Y. M., Kim, B., Musgrove, M., Harmon, J. and Stewart, J. P. (2016). “Simplified model for small-strain nonlinearity and strength in 1D seismic site response analysis.” Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 142(9), p.04016042.
Hashash, Y. M. A., Musgrove, M. I., Harmon, J. A., Ilhan, O., Xing, G., Numanoglu, O., Groholski, D. R., Phillips, C. A., and Park, D. (2020). DEEPSOIL 7.0, User Manual. Urbana, IL, Board of Trustees of University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Kaiser, A., Van Houtte, C., Perrin, N., Wotherspoon, L. and McVerry, G. (2017). “Site characterisation of GeoNet stations for the New Zealand strong motion database.” Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, 50(1), pp.39–49.
Markham, C. S., Bray, J. D., Macedo, J. and Luque, R. (2016). “Evaluating nonlinear effective stress site response analyses using records from the Canterbury earthquake sequence.” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 82, pp.84–98.
McGann, C. R., Bradley, B. A., Taylor, M. L., Wotherspoon, L. M. and Cubrinovski, M. (2015). “Development of an empirical correlation for predicting shear wave velocity of Christchurch soils from cone penetration test data.” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 75, pp.66–75.
Ntritsos, N., Cubrinovski, M. and Bradley, B. A. (2021). “Challenges in the definition of input motions for forensic ground-response analysis in the near-source region.” Earthquake Spectra, 37(4), pp.2562–2595.
Stewart, J. P., Afshari, K. and Hashash, Y. M. (2014). “Guidelines for performing hazard-consistent one-dimensional ground response analysis for ground motion prediction.” PEER Report, 16, p.117.
Stewart, J. P., Afshari, K. and Goulet, C. A. (2017). “Non-ergodic site response in seismic hazard analysis.” Earthquake Spectra, 33(4), pp.1385–1414.
Wotherspoon, L. M., Orense, R., Bradley, B., Cox, B. R., Wood, C. and Green, R. A. (2013). “Geotechnical characterization of Christchurch strong motion stations.”.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Geo-Congress 2024
Pages: 114 - 122
History
Published online: Feb 22, 2024
ASCE Technical Topics:
- Clays
- Continuum mechanics
- Dynamics (solid mechanics)
- Earthquake engineering
- Earthquake resistant structures
- Engineering fundamentals
- Engineering mechanics
- Geomechanics
- Geotechnical engineering
- Geotechnical investigation
- Ground motion
- Layered soils
- Motion (dynamics)
- Seismic effects
- Seismic tests
- Soil dynamics
- Soil mechanics
- Soils (by type)
- Solid mechanics
- Tests (by type)
- Uncertainty principles
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.