Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, 2007 1 PEER GMSM Program: Recommendations for Selection and Scaling of Ground.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Recent Experience in Turkey for Building Vulnerability and Estimating Damage Losses P. Gülkan and A. Yakut Middle East Technical University.
Advertisements

Authors: J.A. Hausman, M. Kinnucan, and D. McFadden Presented by: Jared Hayden.
Ground Motions Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering: Steve Kramer
Seismic Design Guidelines for Tall Buildings Ronald O. Hamburger Senior Principal Simpson Gumpertz & Heger Inc. Quake Summit 2010 October 8, 2010.
Performance-based guidelines and regulations
Nirmal Jayaram Nilesh Shome Helmut Krawinkler 2010 SCEC Annual Meeting A statistical analysis of the responses of tall buildings to recorded and simulated.
Presentation on Software Development
ATC 58 Performance Assessment Calculation Tool (PACT)
Further Development of Site Response in NGA Models PEER Lifelines Program NGA-West2 Project Topic #8 Working Group Meeting Kickoff MeetingApril 20, 2010.
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.
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.
Inelastic Displacement Surface Method Tom Shantz CALTRANS- Division of Research and Innovation.
Scenario  You have last week’s closing stock price for a particular company. You are trying to place a value to a European call option which expires a.
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.
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.
Demand and Capacity Factor Design: A Performance-based Analytic Approach to Design and Assessment Sharif University of Technology, 25 April 2011 Demand.
1 Workshop on GMSM for Nonlinear Analysis, Berkeley CA, October 26, 2006 Structural Models: OpenSees and Drain RC Frames and Walls Curt B. Haselton - PhD.
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.
Framework for Performance-Based Earthquake Engineering Helmut Krawinkler, Stanford U. PEER Summative Meeting – June 13, 2007.
Yousef Bozorgnia PEER Associate Director PEER GMSM Workshop, UC Berkeley October 27, 2006 PEER Ground Motion Selection & Modification (GMSM) Workshop.
Overview of GMSM Methods Nicolas Luco 1 st Workshop on Ground Motion Selection and Modification (GMSM) for Nonlinear Analysis – 27 October 2006.
Review of GMSM Solicitation and Methods Nicolas Luco, On behalf of The PEER GMSM Program 2 nd Annual PEER Ground Motion Selection & Modification (GMSM)
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.
A Genetic Algorithm Solution for the Problem of Selection and Scaling of Ground Motion Records Arzhang Alimoradi and Farzad Naeim John A. Martin & Associates.
1 Structural Responses – Preliminary Results and Observations PEER GMSM Program Workshop, Richmond CA, October 29, 2007 Curt B. Haselton, PhD, PE Assistant.
1 Welcoming Remarks & Today's Task PEER GMSM Program Workshop, Richmond CA, October 29, 2007 Nicolas Luco Research Structural Engineer USGS, National Seismic.
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
Seismic LRFD for Pile Foundation Design
Statistical Methods For Engineers ChE 477 (UO Lab) Larry Baxter & Stan Harding Brigham Young University.
Determining Sample Size
Comparison of Recorded and Simulated Ground Motions Presented by: Emel Seyhan, PhD Student University of California, Los Angeles Collaborators: Lisa M.
PEER EARTHQUAKE SCIENCE-ENGINEERING INTERFACE: STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING RESEARCH PERSPECTIVE Allin Cornell Stanford University SCEC WORKSHOP Oakland, CA.
Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys Survey Design Workshop Sampling: Overview MICS Survey Design Workshop.
Performance-based Earthquake Engineering – A Very Short Introduction (why taking Dynamics of Structures) Dr. ZhiQiang Chen UMKC Spring,2011.
GROUND MOTION INTENSITY MEASURES THAT CORRELATE TO ENGINEERING DEMAND PARAMETERS Jonathan Bray and Thaleia Travasarou University of California, Berkeley.
Major Ongoing Ground Motion Research Programs at PEER Yousef Bozorgnia, Ph.D., P.E. PEER, University of California, Berkeley.
90288 – Select a Sample and Make Inferences from Data The Mayor’s Claim.
EvergreenEcon.com ESA 2011 Impact Evaluation Draft Report Public Workshop #2 August 7, 2013 Presented By: Steve Grover, President.
OPENQUAKE Mission and Vision It is GEM’s mission to engage a global community in the design, development and deployment of state-of-the-art models and.
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.
Session 1A – Ground Motions and Intensity Measures Paul Somerville Andrew Whittaker Greg Deierlein.
SCEC Workshop on Earthquake Ground Motion Simulation and Validation Development of an Integrated Ground Motion Simulation Validation Program.
Inferential Statistics A Closer Look. Analyze Phase2 Nature of Inference in·fer·ence (n.) “The act or process of deriving logical conclusions from premises.
Probabilistic Ground Motions for Scoggins Dam, Oregon Chris Wood Seismotectonics & Geophysics Group Technical Service Center July 2012.
NEEDS FOR PERFORMANCE-BASED GEOTECHNICAL EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING
Epistemic Uncertainty on the Median Ground Motion of Next-Generation Attenuation (NGA) Models Brian Chiou and Robert Youngs The Next Generation of Research.
GMSV in SEISM Project Jonathan P. Stewart University of California, Los Angeles.
1J. Baker Jack Baker Civil & Environmental Engineering Stanford University Use of elastic & inelastic response spectra properties to validate simulated.
Tall Buildings Initiative 3 year initiative to advance design of tall buildings Main participants –PEER, SCEC, USGS, FEMA, CSMIP, Pankow Foundation, SFDBI,
Ground Motions and Liquefaction – The Loading Part of the Equation
NGA Project Review and Status Norm Abrahamson NGA Workshop #5 March, 2004.
Overview of the Final Report and Findings from the Review of Sampling Methods in Extrapolated New Base-Year Generation Studies May 11-12, 2004.
M. R. Gouvea BR Session 1 – Block 1 – Transformers – Paper #36 Barcelona May RISK CRITERIA TO APPLY AND MANAGE DISTRIBUTION TRANSFORMERS M.
Review Design of experiments, histograms, average and standard deviation, normal approximation, measurement error, and probability.
Transition State Theory, Continued
CE 5603 Seismic Hazard Assessment
Campbell & Bozorgnia NGA Ground-Motion Relation
Notes on the Intensity Measure Breakout Session - PEER Annual Meeting - Jan. 17, 2002   ·   Testbeds will not provide definitive answers as to the best.
Lesson 9: Basic Monte Carlo integration
Presentation transcript:

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, PEER GMSM Program: Recommendations for Selection and Scaling of Ground Motions and Evaluation of the ATC-58 Procedures Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, 2007

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, Collaboration Among Many Researchers Program Members: Norm Abrahamson Jack Baker Yousef Bozorgnia Allin Cornell Christine Goulet Curt Haselton Erol Kalkan Nico Luco Tom Shantz Jonathan Stewart Polsak Tothong Jennie Watson- Lamprey Farzin Zareian

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, Collaboration Among Many Researchers Program Collaborators: Arzhang Alimoradi Paolo Bazzurro Greg Deierlein Jamshid Ghaboussi Mahmoud Hachem Charlie Kircher Praveen Malhotra Frank McKenna Coleen McQuoid Jack Moehle Farzad Naeim Maury Powers Ellen Rathje Nilesh Shome Brian Skyers Gang Wang Andrew Whittaker Bob Youngs Tony Yang

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, GMSM Mission To provide guidance and tools to the engineering community on appropriate GMSM methods for nonlinear dynamic analyses.

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, Ground Motion Selection and Modification Selection based only on seismological principles leads to large variability of results.

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, Large Variability in Results Building Code Mini-Study led by Jack Baker ASCE < M < < R < 30 km Strike slip events only Target spectrum exceeded as per code requirements

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, Building Code Method

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, Building Code Method

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, Building Code Method Median estimates are approximately one sigma above the expected median response. –Bias in results –Implied increase in return period of ground motion From this small sample there is a factor of 1.5 difference in median estimates. –Large variability of results

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, Ground Motion Selection and Modification Selection based only on seismological principles leads to large variability of results. There are two solutions to this problem: –Perform a high end analysis that uses more records –Be smarter about picking records

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, Solution 1. High End Analysis Large number of ground motions Regression on the results of the nonlinear dynamic analysis Coupling the regression with ground motion prediction equations gives a best estimate of structural response

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, Example building results from over 300 ground motions

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, Example building regression Identify key record properties that are important to building response - this will be building specific. Perform a regression to determine distribution of EDP as a function of the key properties. For example: Use spectral values at different periods to model the EDP.

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, Example building best estimate of response Scenario Event - magnitude & distance Design Event - magnitude, distance & ground motion Risk Based - full hazard curve for an engineering demand parameter

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, Example - Scenario Event

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, Example - Design Event

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, Example - Risk Based

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, Example - Risk Based

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, High End Analysis More time consuming Highly accurate estimate of both median and variability of structural response

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, Solution 2. Smarter Selection A large number (100s) of records is impractical in many cases We want a method of ground motion selection and modification that has a higher degree of accuracy using only a small number of records –Median –Variability - not discussed today In order to do this we have to know something about the building so we know what’s important for response

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, Solution 2. Smarter Selection Objection: The ground doesn’t know the building is there. The motions should be the same no matter what the building is.

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, Solution 2. Smarter Selection There is a distribution of record properties (Dur, PGV, RMS) for a given design event. These record properties affect the nonlinear response of structures.

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, Solution 2. Smarter Selection IF we could sample the entire distribution of all record properties with the ground motions then the set wouldn’t need to depend on the building. BUT when using a small number of ground motions it is impossible to capture so many record properties at once. THEREFORE we have to know which ones are important and select based on those important properties. In order to do this we have to know something about the structure.

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, COSMOS 2006 Results There are many simplified methods for selecting a small set of records. Depending on the method used there can be a factor of 3 difference in your results.

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, GMSM Mission To provide guidance and tools to the engineering community on appropriate GMSM methods for nonlinear dynamic analyses. To do this we need to evaluate the simplified methods and determine which ones produce the desired response.

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, GMSM Evaluation Procedure Identify an application for which the ground motions will be employed. –4 structural models, stories –Curt Haselton will discuss Identify the candidate GMSM methods. –46 methods are now being looked at –Draft summaries of the methods are available on the GMSM website

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, GMSM Evaluation Procedure Identify the goal of the application. –The building code made me do it –Learn something about the building –PBEE - defined distribution of EDP We start with median EDP | M, R, Sa - this is the building block for other more complicated analyses

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, GMSM Evaluation Procedure Calculate a best estimate of response using a high end analysis to serve as the point of comparison (POC) Compare the results from each GMSM method with the POC

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, GMSM Results 2007 Overview of Results - Curt Haselton –Bias in results can be reduced by taking into account spectral shape. –In order to reduce the variability between suites of motions the selection must be optimized based on record properties that are important for nonlinear response. –This means we have to know something about the structure.

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, GMSM Results 2007 Evaluation of ATC-58 35% - Farzin Zareian –Time-based selection method overestimates median response for above average ground motion because it ignores spectral shape. –Time-based selection has variability in median estimates of response because the motions are selected from an M, R bin.

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, GMSM Results 2007 Evaluation of ATC-58 35% - Farzin Zareian –Scenario-based selection method overestimates the variability of response because it double counts the ground motion variability at periods other than T1.

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, GMSM Results 2007 Wrap up - Nico Luco

Jennie Watson-Lamprey COSMOS Annual Meeting Technical Session November 9, Thank You