PEAK ACCELERATION SCALING STUDIES the Seismogram Recorded by a Strong Motion Accelerograph Represents the Accumulative Effect Of
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more
Recommended publications
-
Processing of Strong-Motion Accelerograms: Needs, Options and Consequences
Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 25 (2005) 93–115 www.elsevier.com/locate/soildyn Processing of strong-motion accelerograms: needs, options and consequences David M. Boorea, Julian J. Bommerb,* aUS Geological Survey, 345 Middlefield Road, Menlo Park, CA 94025, USA bCivil and Environmental Engineering, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK Accepted 25 October 2004 Abstract Recordings from strong-motion accelerographs are of fundamental importance in earthquake engineering, forming the basis for all characterizations of ground shaking employed for seismic design. The recordings, particularly those from analog instruments, invariably contain noise that can mask and distort the ground-motion signal at both high and low frequencies. For any application of recorded accelerograms in engineering seismology or earthquake engineering, it is important to identify the presence of this noise in the digitized time- history and its influence on the parameters that are to be derived from the records. If the parameters of interest are affected by noise then appropriate processing needs to be applied to the records, although it must be accepted from the outset that it is generally not possible to recover the actual ground motion over a wide range of frequencies. There are many schemes available for processing strong-motion data and it is important to be aware of the merits and pitfalls associated with each option. Equally important is to appreciate the effects of the procedures on the records in order to avoid errors in the interpretation and use of the results. Options for processing strong-motion accelerograms are presented, discussed and evaluated from the perspective of engineering application. -
Guideline for Extraction of Ground Motion Parameters for Scientific Hydraulic Fracturing Review Panel
Guideline for Extraction of Ground Motion Parameters for Scientific Hydraulic Fracturing Review Panel Alireza Babaie Mahani Ph.D. P.Geo. Mahan Geophysical Consulting Inc. Victoria, BC Email: [email protected] Website: www.mahangeo.com Executive Summary The Scientific Review of Hydraulic Fracturing in British Columbia (2019) provides the key findings of a scientific panel on the topic of hydraulic fracturing in British Columbia and the associated environmental risks. As indicated in the report, the panel recommends preparation of guidelines for standard calculation of earthquake magnitude and ground motion parameters. Since Babaie Mahani and Kao (2019 and 2020) have addressed the methodology for calculation of local magnitude in two publications, this report deals with standard methodologies for extraction of ground motion parameters from recorded earthquake waveforms. The guidelines include data from both types of seismic sensors that are used for induced seismicity monitoring; seismometers that record ground motion velocities and accelerometers that are designed to record strong ground accelerations at short distances. Waveforms from the November 30, 2018 induced earthquake with moment magnitude (Mw) of 4.6 that occurred in northeast British Columbia within the Montney unconventional resource play are presented for better understanding of the processing steps. Data Formats The standard format that is used to archive earthquake data is called the SEED format (Standard for the Exchange of Earthquake Data; https://ds.iris.edu/ds/nodes/dmc/data/formats/seed/). When both the time series data and metadata are archived in one file, the name full-SEED is also used. miniSEED is the stripped down version of SEED that only includes waveform data (https://ds.iris.edu/ds/nodes/dmc/data/formats/miniseed/). -
Department D'analyse De Surete
COMMISSARIAT A LENERGIE ATOMIQUE XA04NO298 INSTITUT DE PROTECTION ET DE SURETE NUCLEAIRE DEPARTMENT D'ANALYSE DE SURETE INIS-XA-N--027 RAPPORT DAS/733 MAIN FACTORS AECTING STRONG GROUND MOTION CALCULATIONS CRITICAL REVIEW AND ASESSMENT. MOHAMMADIOUN B. PECKER A. RAPPORT DAS/733 MAIN FACTORS AECTING STRONG GROUND MOTION CALCULATIONS CRITICAL REVIEW AND ASSESSMENT. MOHAMMADIOUN B. , PECKER A. 1990 * DAS/SASC ** Soci6t6 G6odynamique et Structure I I MAIN FACTORS AFFECTING STRONG GROUND MOTION CALCULATIONS: CRITICAL REVIEW AND ASSESSMENT BAGHER MOHAMMADIOUN * AND ALUN PECKER" 1. 1. INTRODUCTION in the interests of guarding lives and property against the effects of earthquakes, building codes are frequently enforced when recting conventional structures, usually calling for simple, static calculations. Where more vulnerable facilities are involved, the failure of which, or of parts of which, could subject the environment to harmful substances, more sophisticated methods are used to compute or verify their design, often accompanied by safety margins intended to compen- sate for uncertainties encountered at various stages of the analysis that begins with input seismic data and culminates with an effective anti-seismic dsign. The forthcoming discussion will deal with what is known of the characteristics of strong ground motion, highly variable according to contM without entering into the problems raised by scismotectonic studies, which actually constitute the first aspect that must be addressed when performing such an analysis. Our conclusion will be devoted to cogent R & D work in this area. 1.2. STRONG MOTION DATA The earliest record obtained with a strong motion accelerograph dates back to 1933 and was triggered by the Long Beach, California earthquake. -
A Review of the Seismic Hazard Zonation in National Building Codes in the Context of Eurocode 8
A REVIEW OF THE SEISMIC HAZARD ZONATION IN NATIONAL BUILDING CODES IN THE CONTEXT OF EUROCODE 8 Support to the implementation, harmonization and further development of the Eurocodes G. Solomos, A. Pinto, S. Dimova EUR 23563 EN - 2008 A REVIEW OF THE SEISMIC HAZARD ZONATION IN NATIONAL BUILDING CODES IN THE CONTEXT OF EUROCODE 8 Support to the implementation, harmonization and further development of the Eurocodes G. Solomos, A. Pinto, S. Dimova EUR 23563 EN - 2008 The mission of the JRC is to provide customer-driven scientific and technical support for the conception, development, implementation and monitoring of EU policies. As a service of the European Commission, the JRC functions as a reference centre of science and technology for the Union. Close to the policy-making process, it serves the common interest of the Member States, while being independent of special interests, whether private or national. European Commission Joint Research Centre Contact information Address: JRC, ELSA Unit, TP 480, I-21020, Ispra(VA), Italy E-mail: [email protected] Tel.: +39-0332-789989 Fax: +39-0332-789049 http://www.jrc.ec.europa.eu Legal Notice Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use which might be made of this publication. A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet. It can be accessed through the Europa server http://europa.eu/ JRC 48352 EUR 23563 EN ISSN 1018-5593 Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities © European Communities, 2008 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged Printed in Italy Executive Summary The Eurocodes are envisaged to form the basis for structural design in the European Union and they should enable engineering services to be used across borders for the design of construction works. -
USGS Open File Report 2007-1365
Investigation of the M6.6 Niigata-Chuetsu Oki, Japan, Earthquake of July 16, 2007 Robert Kayen, Brian Collins, Norm Abrahamson, Scott Ashford, Scott J. Brandenberg, Lloyd Cluff, Stephen Dickenson, Laurie Johnson, Yasuo Tanaka, Kohji Tokimatsu, Toshimi Kabeyasawa, Yohsuke Kawamata, Hidetaka Koumoto, Nanako Marubashi, Santiago Pujol, Clint Steele, Joseph I. Sun, Ben Tsai, Peter Yanev, Mark Yashinsky, Kim Yousok Open File Report 2007–1365 2007 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey 1 U.S. Department of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Mark D. Myers, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia 2007 For product and ordering information: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS Suggested citation: Kayen, R., Collins, B.D., Abrahamson, N., Ashford, S., Brandenberg, S.J., Cluff, L., Dickenson, S., Johnson, L., Kabeyasawa, T., Kawamata, Y., Koumoto, H., Marubashi, N., Pujol, S., Steele, C., Sun, J., Tanaka, Y., Tokimatsu, K., Tsai, B., Yanev, P., Yashinsky , M., and Yousok, K., 2007. Investigation of the M6.6 Niigata-Chuetsu Oki, Japan, Earthquake of July 16, 2007: U.S. Geological Survey, Open File Report 2007-1365, 230pg; [available on the World Wide Web at URL http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2007/1365/]. Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. -
GEOTECHNICAL RECONNAISSANCE of the 2011 CHRISTCHURCH, NEW ZEALAND EARTHQUAKE Version 1: 15 August 2011
GEOTECHNICAL RECONNAISSANCE OF THE 2011 CHRISTCHURCH, NEW ZEALAND EARTHQUAKE Version 1: 15 August 2011 (photograph by Gillian Needham) EDITORS Misko Cubrinovski – NZ Lead (University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand) Russell A. Green – US Lead (Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA) Liam Wotherspoon (University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand) CONTRIBUTING AUTHORS (alphabetical order) John Allen – (TRI/Environmental, Inc., Austin, TX, USA) Brendon Bradley – (University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand) Aaron Bradshaw – (University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI, USA) Jonathan Bray – (UC Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA) Misko Cubrinovski – (University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand) Greg DePascale – (Fugro/WLA, Christchurch, New Zealand) Russell A. Green – (Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA) Rolando Orense – (University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand) Thomas O’Rourke – (Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA) Michael Pender – (University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand) Glenn Rix – (Georgia Tech, Atlanta, GA, USA) Donald Wells – (AMEC Geomatrix, Oakland, CA, USA) Clint Wood – (University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, USA) Liam Wotherspoon – (University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand) OTHER CONTRIBUTORS (alphabetical order) Brady Cox – (University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, USA) Duncan Henderson – (University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand) Lucas Hogan – (University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand) Patrick Kailey – (University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand) Sam Lasley – (Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA) Kelly Robinson – (University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand) Merrick Taylor – (University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand) Anna Winkley – (University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand) Josh Zupan – (University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA) TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 2.0 SEISMOLOGICAL ASPECTS 3.0 GEOLOGICAL ASPECTS 4.0 LIQUEFACTION AND LATERAL SPREADING 5.0 IMPROVED GROUND 6.0 STOPBANKS 7.0 BRIDGES 8.0 LIFELINES 9.0 LANDSLIDES AND ROCKFALLS 1. -
U. S. Department of the Interior Geological Survey
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY USGS SPECTRAL RESPONSE MAPS AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP WITH SEISMIC DESIGN FORCES IN BUILDING CODES OPEN-FILE REPORT 95-596 1995 This report is preliminary and has not been reviewed for conformity with U.S. Geological Survey editorial standards and stratigraphic nomenclature. Any use of trade, product or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. COVER: The zone type map is based on the 0.3 sec spectral response acceleration with a 10 percent chance of being exceeded in 50 year. Contours are based on Figure B1 in this report. Each zonal increase in darkness indicates a factor two increase in earthquake demand. The lightest shade indicates a demand < 5% g. The next shade is for demand > 10% g. Subsequent shades are for > 20% g, > 40% g, and > 80% g respectively. U. S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY USGS SPECTRAL RESPONSE MAPS AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP WITH SEISMIC DESIGN FORCES IN BUILDING CODES by E. V. Leyendecker1 , D. M. Perkins2, S. T. Algermissen3, P. C. Thenhaus4, and S. L. Hanson5 OPEN-FILE REPORT 95-596 1995 This report is preliminary and has not been reviewed for conformity with U.S. Geological Survey editorial standards and stratigraphic nomenclature. Any use of trade, product or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. 1 Research Civil Engineer, U.S. Geological Survey, MS 966, Box 25046, DFC, Denver, CO, 80225 2 Geophysicist, U.S. Geological Survey, MS 966, Box 25046, DFC, Denver, CO, 80225 3 Associate and Senior Consultant, EQE International, 2942 Evergreen Parkway, Suite 302, Evergreen, CO, 80439 (with the U. -
Predicting Ground Motion from Induced Earthquakes In
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, Vol. 103, No. 3, pp. 1875–1897, June 2013, doi: 10.1785/0120120197 Ⓔ Predicting Ground Motion from Induced Earthquakes in Geothermal Areas by John Douglas, Benjamin Edwards, Vincenzo Convertito, Nitin Sharma, Anna Tramelli, Dirk Kraaijpoel, Banu Mena Cabrera, Nils Maercklin, and Claudia Troise Abstract Induced seismicity from anthropogenic sources can be a significant nui- sance to a local population and in extreme cases lead to damage to vulnerable struc- tures. One type of induced seismicity of particular recent concern, which, in some cases, can limit development of a potentially important clean energy source, is that associated with geothermal power production. A key requirement for the accurate assessment of seismic hazard (and risk) is a ground-motion prediction equation (GMPE) that predicts the level of earthquake shaking (in terms of, for example, peak ground acceleration) of an earthquake of a certain magnitude at a particular distance. Few such models currently exist in regard to geothermal-related seismicity, and con- sequently the evaluation of seismic hazard in the vicinity of geothermal power plants is associated with high uncertainty. Various ground-motion datasets of induced and natural seismicity (from Basel, Geysers, Hengill, Roswinkel, Soultz, and Voerendaal) were compiled and processed, and moment magnitudes for all events were recomputed homogeneously. These data are used to show that ground motions from induced and natural earthquakes cannot be statistically distinguished. Empirical GMPEs are derived from these data; and, although they have similar characteristics to recent GMPEs for natural and mining- related seismicity, the standard deviations are higher. To account for epistemic uncer- tainties, stochastic models subsequently are developed based on a single corner frequency and with parameters constrained by the available data. -
Behavior of Peak Values and Spectral Ordinates of Near-Source Strong Ground Motion Over the Smart 1 Array
REPORT NO. UCBjEERC-90j 17 EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING RESEARCH CENTER JUNE 1990 BEHAVIOR OF PEAK VALUES AND SPECTRAL ORDINATES OF NEAR-SOURCE STRONG GROUND MOTION OVER THE SMART 1 ARRAY by MANSOUR NIAZI PREFACE by BRUCE A. BOLT COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT BERKELEY For sale by the National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Springfield, Virginia 22161. DISCLAIMER Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation or the Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California at Berkeley. if} !50271 101 REPORT DOCUMENTATION 11. REPORT NO. :::E9~-114djj PAGE NSF/ENG-90009 I 4. Title lind Subtitle S. Report Date Behavior of Peak Values and Spectral Ordinates of Near-Source June 1990 I Strong Ground Motion Over the SMART 1 Array 7. Author(s) A. Performin2 Oraanization Rept.. No. Mansour Niazi UCB/EERC-90/17 9. Performing O'\i:anizetion Name end Addren 10. ProjectfTask/Worit Unit No. Earthquake Engineering Research Center University of California, Berkeley 11. Contract(C) or Grant(G) No. 1301 So. 46th Street (C) Richmond, Calif. 94804 (G)ISI-8619612 12. Sponsorin" Organiutlon Name end Add~. 13. Type of Report & Period Covered National Science Foundation 1800 G Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20550 14. i ~--------------------------------------------------------~.-----------------------'15. Supplementary Note. I I 16. Abstract (Limit: 200 words) The array recordings are used to investigate several important properties of, the seismic ground motions themselves. The results reported here address the question of the variability of the peak vertical and horizontal accelerations, velocities and displacements. -
THE MEASUREMENT of GROUND MOTION of DESTRUCTIVE EARTHQUAKES by D. E. HUDSON ABSTRACT Tile Need for a Greatly Expanded Network Of
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America. Vol. 53, No. 2, pp. 419-437. February, 1963 THE MEASUREMENT OF GROUND MOTION OF DESTRUCTIVE EARTHQUAKES BY D. E. HUDSON ABSTRACT Tile need for a greatly expanded network of strong-motion accelerographs throughout the seismic regions of the world is stressed. A summary of the characteristics of currently available strong-motion accelerographs is presented, and the design details are given for an instrument suitable for acquiring the basic data needed by structural engineers for earthquake resistant design. It is shown that for such an instrument, the natural period must be less than 0.1 sec- onds, and that the recording speed must be at least 1 cm/sec. The critical nature of the inertia starting device is discussed, and some information is given on the transient response of the standard pendulum starter used in the United States Coast and Geodetic Survey Strong-Motion Accelerograph. The use of simpler, non-time-recording instruments such as the U.S.C.G.S. Seismoscope to supplement the accelerograph network is described. INTRODUCTION The occurrence of a great earthquake is a powerful stimulus to engineering re- searches in earthquake-resistant design, and structural engineers should always be prepared to make use of the general interest aroused by destructive earthquakes to further their studies in this field. At such times it is wise to evaluate anew the ade- quacy of our past knowledge, and to initiate new programs to supply deficiencies in it. The Chilean earthquakes of May 1960, with a main shock of magnitude 8.5, form one of the largest series of destructive earthquakes of history. -
Seismic Hazard Curves and Uniform Hazard Response Spectra for the United States by A
Seismic Hazard Curves and Uniform Hazard Response Spectra for the United States by A. D. Frankel and E. V. Leyendecker A User Guide to Accompany Open-File Report 01-436 2001 This report is preliminary and has not been reviewed for conformity with U.S. Geological Survey editorial standards or with the North American Stratigraphic Code. Any use of trade firm or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Gale A. Norton, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Charles G. Groat, Director Seismic Hazard Curves and Uniform Hazard Response Spectra for the United States A User Guide to Accompany Open-File Report 01-436 A. D. Frankel1 and E. V. Leyendecker2 ABSTRACT The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) recently completed new probabilistic seismic hazard maps for the United States. The hazard maps form the basis of the probabilistic component of the design maps used in the 2000 International Building Code (International Code Council, 2000a), 2000 International Residential Code (International Code Council, 2000a), 1997 NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings (Building Seismic Safety Council, 1997), and 1997 NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings (Applied Technology Council, 1997). The probabilistic maps depict peak horizontal ground acceleration and spectral response at 0.2, 0.3, and 1.0 sec periods, with 10%, 5%, and 2% probabilities of exceedance in 50 years, corresponding to return times of about 500, 1000, and 2500 years, respectively. This report is a user guide for a CD-ROM that has been prepared to allow the determination of probabilistic map values by latitude-longitude or zip code. -
Part I: Earthquake Hazard and Strong Motion Chapter 3 Observation, Characterization and Prediction of Strong Ground Motion X. G
PART I: EARTHQUAKE HAZARD AND STRONG MOTION CHAPTER 3 OBSERVATION, CHARACTERIZATION AND PREDICTION OF STRONG GROUND MOTION X. Goula and T. Susagna Institut Cartogràfic de Catalunya. Barcelona, Spain 3.1. Introduction A seismic risk mitigation strategy has two main technical legs: to construct performing buildings and other structures using an aseismic design and to prepare emergency plans using realistic seismic scenarios. Both technical actions need a precise definition of the seismic action of potentially damaging earthquakes by means of measurable parameters related to shear stresses and strains affecting structures, which are ground motion acceleration and displacement. An important challenge for seismic risk mitigation is thus to develop methodologies for seismic hazard analysis, and to assess vulnerability of structures and cost functions in terms of ground motion parameters. In recent decades much progress was made in the study of strong ground motion produced by earthquakes and its application to earthquake engineering. New data and analysis have given us more and more accurate and reliable empirical estimations of strong ground motion for future earthquakes. In parallel, the development of theoretical methods led to the proposition of new explanatory models of the seismic strong ground motions. In this chapter, after remarking on new advances in instrumentation and its capacity to measure and disseminate strong ground motion data, we describe the main parameters and factors useful in characterizing ground motion. The main components of these more useful predictive methods of ground motion for future earthquakes are analysed. Finally, different formal aspects concerning the definition of seismic actions from the predicted strong ground motion are discussed.