首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
相似文献
 共查询到10条相似文献，搜索用时 109 毫秒
1.
This study develops a framework to evaluate ground motion selection and modification (GMSM) procedures. The context is probabilistic seismic demand analysis, where response history analyses of a given structure, using ground motions determined by a GMSM procedure, are performed in order to estimate the seismic demand hazard curve (SDHC) for the structure at a given site. Currently, a GMSM procedure is evaluated in this context by comparing several resulting estimates of the SDHC, each derived from a different definition of the conditioning intensity measure (IM). Using a simple case study, we demonstrate that conclusions from such an approach are not always definitive; therefore, an alternative approach is desirable. In the alternative proposed herein, all estimates of the SDHC from GMSM procedures are compared against a benchmark SDHC, under a common set of ground motion information. This benchmark SDHC is determined by incorporating a prediction model for the seismic demand into the probabilistic seismic hazard analysis calculations. To develop an understanding of why one GMSM procedure may provide more accurate estimates of the SDHC than another procedure, we identify the role of ‘IM sufficiency’ in the relationship between (i) bias in the SDHC estimate and (ii) ‘hazard consistency’ of the corresponding ground motions obtained from a GMSM procedure. Finally, we provide examples of how misleading conclusions may potentially be obtained from erroneous implementations of the proposed framework. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.  相似文献   

2.
This paper develops a procedure to select unscaled ground motions for estimating seismic demand hazard curves (SDHCs) in performance‐based earthquake engineering. Currently, SDHCs are estimated from a probabilistic seismic demand analysis, where several ensembles of ground motions are selected and scaled to a user‐specified scalar conditioning intensity measure (IM). In contrast, the procedure developed herein provides a way to select a single ensemble of unscaled ground motions for estimating the SDHC. In the context of unscaled motions, the proposed procedure requires three inputs: (i) database of unscaled ground motions, (ii) I M , the vector of IMs for selecting ground motions, and (iii) sample size, n; in the context of scaled motions, two additional inputs are needed: (i) a maximum acceptable scale factor, SFmax, and (ii) a target fraction of scaled ground motions, γ. Using a recently developed approach for evaluating ground motion selection and modification procedures, the proposed procedure is evaluated for a variety of inputs and is demonstrated to provide accurate estimates of the SDHC when the vector of IMs chosen to select ground motions is sufficient for the response quantity of interest. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.  相似文献   

3.
A generalized conditional intensity measure (GCIM) approach is proposed for use in the holistic selection of ground motions for any form of seismic response analysis. The essence of the method is the construction of the multivariate distribution of any set of ground‐motion intensity measures conditioned on the occurrence of a specific ground‐motion intensity measure (commonly obtained from probabilistic seismic hazard analysis). The approach therefore allows any number of ground‐motion intensity measures identified as important in a particular seismic response problem to be considered. A holistic method of ground‐motion selection is also proposed based on the statistical comparison, for each intensity measure, of the empirical distribution of the ground‐motion suite with the ‘target’ GCIM distribution. A simple procedure to estimate the magnitude of potential bias in the results of seismic response analyses when the ground‐motion suite does not conform to the GCIM distribution is also demonstrated. The combination of these three features of the approach make it entirely holistic in that: any level of complexity in ground‐motion selection for any seismic response analysis can be exercised; users explicitly understand the simplifications made in the selected suite of ground motions; and an approximate estimate of any bias associated with such simplifications is obtained. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.  相似文献   

4.
Two existing, contemporary ground motion selection and modification procedures – (i) exact conditional spectrum (CS‐exact) and (ii) generalized conditional intensity measure (GCIM) – are evaluated in their ability to accurately estimate seismic demand hazard curves (SDHCs) of a given structure at a specified site. The amount of effort involved in implementing these procedures to compute a single SDHC is studied, and a case study is chosen where rigorous benchmark SDHCs can be determined for evaluation purposes. By comparing estimates from ground motion selection and modification procedures with the benchmark, we conclude that estimates from CS‐exact are unbiased in many of the cases considered. The estimates from GCIM are even more accurate, as they are unbiased for most – but not all – of the cases where estimates from CS‐exact are biased. We find that it is possible to obtain biased SDHCs from GCIM, even after employing a very diverse collection of intensity measures to select ground motions and implementing its bias‐checking feature, because it is usually difficult to identify intensity measures that are truly ‘sufficient’ for the response of a complex, multi‐degree‐of‐freedom system. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.  相似文献   

5.
This paper presents a new way of selecting real input ground motions for seismic design and analysis of structures based on a comprehensive method for estimating the damage potential of ground motions, which takes into consideration of various ground motion parameters and structural seismic damage criteria in terms of strength, deformation, hysteretic energy and dual damage of Park & Ang damage index. The proposed comprehensive method fully involves the effects of the intensity, frequency content and duration of ground motions and the dynamic characteristics of structures. Then, the concept of the most unfavourable real seismic design ground motion is introduced. Based on the concept, the most unfavourable real seismic design ground motions for rock, stiff soil, medium soil and soft soil site conditions are selected in terms of three typical period ranges of structures. The selected real strong motion records are suitable for seismic analysis of important structures whose failure or collapse will be avoided at a higher level of confidence during the strong earthquake, as they can cause the greatest damage to structures and thereby result in the highest damage potential from an extended real ground motion database for a given site. In addition, this paper also presents the real input design ground motions with medium damage potential, which can be used for the seismic analysis of structures located at the area with low and moderate seismicity. The most unfavourable real seismic design ground motions are verified by analysing the seismic response of structures. It is concluded that the most unfavourable real seismic design ground motion approach can select the real ground motions that can result in the highest damage potential for a given structure and site condition, and the real ground motions can be mainly used for structures whose failure or collapse will be avoided at a higher level of confidence during the strong earthquake. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.  相似文献   

6.
An algorithm is presented for the selection of ground motions for use in seismic response analysis. The algorithm is based on the use of random realizations from the conditional multivariate distribution of ground motion intensity measures, IM|IMj, obtained from the generalized conditional intensity measure (GCIM) approach. The algorithm can be applied to the selection of both as-recorded amplitude-scaled and synthetic/simulated ground motions. A key feature is that the generality of the GCIM methodology allows for ground motion selection based on only explicit measures of the ground motions themselves, as represented by the various IM’s considered, rather than implicit causal parameters (e.g., source magnitude, source-to-site distance) which are presently used in other contemporary ground motion selection procedures. Several examples are used to illustrate the salient features of the algorithm, including: the effect of intensity measures considered; and the properties of ground motions selected for multiple exceedance probabilities. The flexibility of the proposed algorithm coupled with the GCIM methodology allows for objective and consistent ground motion selection as a natural extension of seismic hazard analysis.  相似文献   

7.
This paper examines four methods by which ground motions can be selected for dynamic seismic response analyses of engineered systems when the underlying seismic hazard is quantified via ground motion simulation rather than empirical ground motion prediction equations. Even with simulation‐based seismic hazard, a ground motion selection process is still required in order to extract a small number of time series from the much larger set developed as part of the hazard calculation. Four specific methods are presented for ground motion selection from simulation‐based seismic hazard analyses, and pros and cons of each are discussed via a simple and reproducible illustrative example. One of the four methods (method 1 ‘direct analysis’) provides a ‘benchmark’ result (i.e., using all simulated ground motions), enabling the consistency of the other three more efficient selection methods to be addressed. Method 2 (‘stratified sampling’) is a relatively simple way to achieve a significant reduction in the number of ground motions required through selecting subsets of ground motions binned based on an intensity measure, IM. Method 3 (‘simple multiple stripes’) has the benefit of being consistent with conventional seismic assessment practice using as‐recorded ground motions, but both methods 2 and 3 are strongly dependent on the efficiency of the conditioning IM to predict the seismic responses of interest. Method 4 (‘generalized conditional intensity measure‐based selection’) is consistent with ‘advanced’ selection methods used for as‐recorded ground motions and selects subsets of ground motions based on multiple IMs, thus overcoming this limitation in methods 2 and 3. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.  相似文献   

8.
The efficacy of various ground motion intensity measures (IMs) in the prediction of spatially distributed seismic demands (engineering demand parameters, (EDPs)) within a structure is investigated. This has direct implications to building‐specific seismic loss estimation, where the seismic demand on different components is dependent on the location of the component in the structure. Several common IMs are investigated in terms of their ability to predict the spatially distributed demands in a 10‐storey office building, which is measured in terms of maximum interstorey drift ratios and maximum floor accelerations. It is found that the ability of an IM to efficiently predict a specific EDP depends on the similarity between the frequency range of the ground motion that controls the IM and that of the EDP. An IMs predictability has a direct effect on the median response demands for ground motions scaled to a specified probability of exceedance from a ground motion hazard curve. All of the IMs investigated were found to be insufficient with respect to at least one of magnitude, source‐to‐site distance, or epsilon when predicting all peak interstorey drifts and peak floor accelerations in a 10‐storey reinforced concrete frame structure. Careful ground motion selection and/or seismic demand modification is therefore required to predict such a spatially distributed demands without significant bias. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.  相似文献   

9.
The influence of vertical ground motions on the seismic response of highway bridges is not very well understood. Recent studies suggest that vertical ground motions can substantially increase force and moment demands on bridge columns and girders and cannot be overlooked in seismic design of bridge structures. For an evaluation of vertical ground motion effects on the response of single‐bent two‐span highway bridges, a systematic study combining the critical engineering demand parameters (EDPs) and ground motion intensity measures (IMs) is required. Results of a parametric study examining a range of highway bridge configurations subjected to selected sets of horizontal and vertical ground motions are used to determine the structural parameters that are significantly amplified by the vertical excitations. The amplification in these parameters is modeled using simple equations that are functions of horizontal and vertical spectral accelerations at the corresponding horizontal and vertical fundamental periods of the bridge. This paper describes the derivation of seismic demand models developed for typical highway overcrossings by incorporating critical EDPs and combined effects of horizontal and vertical ground motion IMs depending on the type of the parameter and the period of the structure. These models may be used individually as risk‐based design tools to determine the probability of exceeding the critical levels of EDP for pre‐determined levels of ground shaking or may be included explicitly in probabilistic seismic risk assessments. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.  相似文献   

10.
Amplitude scaling is commonly used to select ground motions matching a target response spectrum. In this paper, the effect of scaling limits on ground motion selection, based on the conditional spectrum framework, is investigated. Target spectra are computed for four probabilistic seismic hazard cases in Western United States, and 16 ground motion suites are selected using different scaling limits (ie, 2, 5, 10, and 15). Comparison of spectral acceleration distributions of the selected ground motion suites demonstrates that the use of a scaling limit of 2 yields a relatively poor representation of the target spectra, because of the small limit leading to an insufficient number of available ground motions. It is also shown that increasing scaling limit results in selected ground motions with generally increased distributions of Arias intensity and significant duration Ds5-75, implying that scaling limit consideration can significantly influence the cumulative and duration characteristics of selected ground motions. The ground motion suites selected are then used as input for slope displacement and structural dynamic analyses. Comparative results demonstrate that the consideration of scaling limits in ground motion selection has a notable influence on the distribution of the engineering demand parameters calculated (ie, slope displacement and interstory drift ratio). Finally, based on extensive analyses, a scaling limit range of 3 to 5 is recommended for general use when selecting ground motion records from the NGA-West2 database.  相似文献   

设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号