Session 1A – Ground Motions and Intensity Measures Paul Somerville Andrew Whittaker Greg Deierlein.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Ground Motions Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering: Steve Kramer
Advertisements

Edward (Ned) Field USGS, Pasadena plus Tom Jordan, Nitin Gupta, Vipin Gupta, Phil Maechling, Allin Cornell, Ken Campbell, Sid Hellman, & Steve Rock OpenSHA.
Nirmal Jayaram Nilesh Shome Helmut Krawinkler 2010 SCEC Annual Meeting A statistical analysis of the responses of tall buildings to recorded and simulated.
EERI Seminar on Next Generation Attenuation Models SCEC GMSV Workshop: Summary of Other Validation Methodologies/Applications Nicolas Luco, Research Structural.
Prague, March 18, 2005Antonio Emolo1 Seismic Hazard Assessment for a Characteristic Earthquake Scenario: Integrating Probabilistic and Deterministic Approaches.
GMSM Mission and Vision Jennie Watson-Lamprey October 29, 2007.
Panel Discussion: PBEE Practice and Needs Paul Somerville, URS Joe Maffei, R&C Ron Hamburger, SGH Lloyd Cluff, PG&E Tom Shantz, Caltrans Jim Malley, Degenkolb.
PEER Jonathan P. Stewart University of California, Los Angeles May 22, 2002 Geotechnical Uncertainties for PBEE.
103/25/04 NGA Workshop Parameterization of Basin Response Based on 3D Simulations by PEER/SCEC 3D Ground Motion Project Team PI: Steven M. Day San Diego.
Earthquake Hazard Assessment in the Pacific Northwest: Site Response Thomas L. Pratt U. S. Geological Survey School of Oceanography University of Washington.
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.
Ground Motion Intensity Measures for Performance-Based Earthquake Engineering Hemangi Pandit Joel Conte Jon Stewart John Wallace.
SESAC September 13, “Thoughts on the USGS role in the Intermountain West, in the context of hazard evaluation in extensional settings” John G. Anderson.
Further Development of Site Response in NGA Models PEER Lifelines Program NGA-West2 Project Topic #8 Working Group Meeting Meeting #2October 26, 2010.
Science for a changing world The USGS and the Development of the Nevada Great Basin Community Velocity Model.
The use of risk in design: ATC 58 performance assessment procedure Craig D. Comartin.
March 7, 2008NGA-East 2nd Workshop1 RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN STRONG MOTION SIMULATIONS FOR CEUS Paul Somerville and Robert Graves URS Pasadena MOTIVATION:
Characterization of Ground Motion Hazard PEER Summative Meeting - June 13, 2007 Yousef Bozorgnia PEER Associate Director.
The NEESacademy: A strong foundation for education and outreach Sean Brophy, Thalia Anagnos, Barbara Cooper, Jason Lambert and Jared West.
Yousef Bozorgnia, Mahmoud Hachem, Kenneth Campbell PEER GMSM Workshop, UC Berkeley October 27, 2006 Attenuation of Inelastic Spectra and Its Applications.
03/24/2004NGA Workshop: Validation1 BROADBAND SIMULATION METHODOLOGY: A HYBRID DETERMINISTIC AND STOCHASTIC APPROACH  Use Deterministic Methodology at.
First a digression The POC Ranking the Methods Jennie Watson-Lamprey October 29, 2007.
Assessing Effectiveness of Building Code Provisions Greg Deierlein & Abbie Liel Stanford University Curt Haselton Chico State University … other contributors.
S a (T 1 ) Scaling Nilesh Shome ABS Consulting. Methodology Developed in 1997 (Shome, N., Cornell, C. A., Bazzurro, P., and Carballo, J. (1998), “Earthquake,
Project Review and Summary of NGA Supporting Research Norm Abrahamson NGA Workshop #6 July, 2004.
11/02/2007PEER-SCEC Simulation Workshop1 NUMERICAL GROUND MOTION SIMULATIONS: ASSUMPTIONS, VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION Earthquake Source Velocity Structure.
PEER-SCEC WORKSHOP ON GROUND MOTION SIMULATION AND BUILDING RESPONSE SIMULATION with focus on long period ground motions and tall buildings PEER Nov 2,
Selection of Time Series for Seismic Analyses
Roberto PAOLUCCI Department of Structural Engineering
Ground Motion Parameters Measured by triaxial accelerographs 2 orthogonal horizontal components 1 vertical component Digitized to time step of
The Nuclear Renaissance & Research Opportunities in the Nuclear Field Dr. Annie Kammerer PEER NEES Quake Summit 2010 San Francisco, California October.
Comparison of Recorded and Simulated Ground Motions Presented by: Emel Seyhan, PhD Student University of California, Los Angeles Collaborators: Lisa M.
Description of selected broadband ground motion simulation methods Paul Somerville, URS Yuehua Zeng, USGS Golden.
Seismic Hazard Assessment for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
PEER EARTHQUAKE SCIENCE-ENGINEERING INTERFACE: STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING RESEARCH PERSPECTIVE Allin Cornell Stanford University SCEC WORKSHOP Oakland, CA.
IMPLEMENTATION OF SCEC RESEARCH IN EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING ONGOING PROJECTS SCEC PROPOSAL TO NSF SCEC 2004 RFP.
Major Ongoing Ground Motion Research Programs at PEER Yousef Bozorgnia, Ph.D., P.E. PEER, University of California, Berkeley.
1 SCEC Broadband Platform Development Using USC HPCC Philip Maechling 12 Nov 2012.
SCEC – PG&E-SCE 2013 Research Coordination Meeting Norm Abrahamson Sep 14, 2012.
EERI Seminar on Next Generation Attenuation Models Role of SCEC Ground Motion Simulation Validation Technical Activity Group (GMSV TAG) in SEISM Project.
Next Generation Attenuation Models for Central & Eastern US (NGA-East) Stakeholder Workshop: Introduction March 7, 2008 Yousef Bozorgnia, Ph.D., P.E. PEER.
SCEC Workshop on Earthquake Ground Motion Simulation and Validation Development of an Integrated Ground Motion Simulation Validation Program.
Probabilistic Ground Motions for Scoggins Dam, Oregon Chris Wood Seismotectonics & Geophysics Group Technical Service Center July 2012.
Lg Q Across the Continental US Dan McNamara and Rob Wesson with Dirk Erickson, Arthur Frankel and Harley Benz.
Important topics related to earthquake hazard Calling for Bi-lateral collaboration.
NEEDS FOR PERFORMANCE-BASED GEOTECHNICAL EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING
CISN: Draft Plans for Funding Sources: OES/FEMA/ANSS/Others CISN-PMG Sacramento 10/19/2004.
Epistemic Uncertainty on the Median Ground Motion of Next-Generation Attenuation (NGA) Models Brian Chiou and Robert Youngs The Next Generation of Research.
Geotechnical Engineering Research Ideas Cascadia Working Group 05/15/2012.
SCEC: An NSF + USGS Research Center Evaluation of Earthquake Early Warnings as External Earthquake Forecasts Philip Maechling Information Technology Architect.
Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, PEER GMSM Program: Recommendations for Selection and Scaling of Ground.
06/22/041 Data-Gathering Systems IRIS Stanford/ USGS UNAVCO JPL/UCSD Data Management Organizations PI’s, Groups, Centers, etc. Publications, Presentations,
1J. Baker Jack Baker Civil & Environmental Engineering Stanford University Use of elastic & inelastic response spectra properties to validate simulated.
Phase 1: Comparison of Results at 4Hz Phase 1 Goal: Compare 4Hz ground motion results from different codes to establish whether the codes produce equivalent.
Unified Structural Representation (USR) The primary mission of the USR Focus Area has been the development of a unified, object-oriented 3-D representation.
Ground Motions and Liquefaction – The Loading Part of the Equation
Southern California Earthquake Center SI2-SSI: Community Software for Extreme-Scale Computing in Earthquake System Science (SEISM2) Wrap-up Session Thomas.
NGA Project Review and Status Norm Abrahamson NGA Workshop #5 March, 2004.
PEER 2003 Meeting 03/08/031 Interdisciplinary Framework Major focus areas Structural Representation Fault Systems Earthquake Source Physics Ground Motions.
NLSSI and Current Seismic R&D Justin Coleman, P.E. Nuclear Science and Technology Idaho National Laboratory October 7 th and 8 th, 2015.
Disaster Mitigation Competence Centre Project Meeting Coordinator: Simon Lin March 31, 2015.
Analysis of ground-motion spatial variability at very local site near the source AFIFA IMTIAZ Doctorant ( ), NERA Project.
NGA-East Tentative Plan
High-F Project Southern California Earthquake Center
Philip J. Maechling (SCEC) September 13, 2015
End-Users Needs in Seismic Hazard Analysis
March 21-22, University of Washington, Seattle
Notes on the Intensity Measure Breakout Session - PEER Annual Meeting - Jan. 17, 2002   ·   Testbeds will not provide definitive answers as to the best.
Presentation transcript:

Session 1A – Ground Motions and Intensity Measures Paul Somerville Andrew Whittaker Greg Deierlein

Spectral Values and beyond.. NGA effort (response spectral prediction) –things beyond spectra … ground motions –next phase of PEER LL-NGA ?? (not yet fully scoped out) Scaling of Records (do we agree on the approaches being used) –Procedures in building codes have little scientific basis –Spectral matching (not appropriate for nonlinear evaluation?) –DOE (deagg. to separate spectra) –PEER spectral scaling at T1 (or average of several spectral values, or vector intensity measures, e.g., Cornell-Somerville project)

Record Scaling (cont.’d) Dependency of structural characteristics (strength, period, ductility demand) on the scaling question Scaling violates the earthquake physics. How does the earth science physics (fault rupture, …) dictate the frequency content/magnitude of records as reflected in hazard curve (and epsilons from the median). Bias induced by scaling to spectral values (resulting in overscaling?; use of “epsilon” to condition scaling) Frequency scaling? “A nice interactive problem!”

Other topics Transferability – “west coast” hazard thinking to “eastern” earthquakes (smaller events, less frequent large events, different source characteristics, site conditions, etc.) “north- west” (subduction zone) versus “south-west” hazard –PEER NGA project may shed some light on site effects. –Intensity Measures (ground motion and structure dependent) Basin and edge effects (extreme effects, reflected in attenuation models and hazard maps, interaction with SSI issues) Extrapolation of motions to large magnitude events (Are we doing this correctly? Too conservative? Can SCEC develop suites of ground motions for use in research and design practice?).

Synthetic Motions Does SCEC or PEER-LL(NGA) have plans to make the various synthetic ground motions available (1D, 3D)? How might the SCEC ITR group contribute. How does this relate the PEER-LL/CDMG project on ground motion selection. Validation and verification on synthetic and hybrid records. How is this being covered in the PEER-LL and SCEC research. Upon what basis does one validate the methods/records? Focus of SCEC in next two years?

NEES, Verticals, Design Practice NEES – Data repository issues (links between experimental databases and ground motion libraries). SCEC proposal to generate times histories for NEES research. Links with grand challenge proposals. Vertical components of ground motions can be very important for long-span bridges and NS components in buildings. Guidance for design communities on ground motion issues (scaling, basin, SSI, …). FEMA is receptive to partnering with SCEC and other organizations. See FEMA 349 (445) PBD action plan.

Geographically Dist. Systems Geographically distributed scenarios versus specific site scenarios (correlations of motions at different sites). Spatial variation of motions for long structures (SCEC is working on it, but is there active collaboration with engineers).

IT issues Storage of data from strong motion sites, motions and site/bore hole data (Geotechnical Virtual Data Center) SCEC simulation capabilities should be made more public (design community, emergency response, …). IT can simplify the IM question by allowing one to access structure-specific hazard models (e.g., on- line nonlinear spectral values).