1 THE NATURE OF SITE RESPONSE DURING EARTHQUAKES Mihailo D. Trifunac Dept. of Civil Eng., Univ. of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089, U.S.A.
2 What is Site Response? The linear (transfer-function) representation of strong ground motion can be viewed in the frequency domain as O(f) = E(f)P(f)S(f) (1) where f is frequency, O(f) and E(f) are, respectively, the Fourier spectra of the motion at a site and at the earthquake source, and P(f) and S(f) are the transfer functions of the propagation path and of the local site effects. This representation (which we find in the early seismological formulations) is meaningful only for epicentral distances that are large relative to the source dimensions, when the earthquake source can be approximated by a point source. In the near field, the small distance between the site and the large area of the rupturing fault results in geometrical nonlinearities, which are caused by the spatial distribution of wave arrivals from different segments of the fault surface. Thus, in the near field, Eq. (1) ceases to be valid because E(f), P(f), and S(f) become complex, geometrically nonlinear functions of the space coordinates. Most studies tend to ignore this and work with Eq. (1) anyway.
3 Where are site conditions important? Understanding of the site conditions is important at all distances, but is particularly needed in the near field where soft surface deposits can experience large and complicated nonlinear behavior. How do we determine the effects of site conditions? It is best to determine the effects of site conditions from recorded data directly. That can be done only at those distances where the recorded data is available and today this is in the range of epicentral distances between about 25 and 100 km. Therefore, most published papers on empirical scaling of the site effects describe the trends in the data only in this distance range. Unfortunately, we often forget this constraint and pretend that our findings are valid at distances smaller than about 25 km, where ground motion can experience nonlinear response. What are the differences between near and far field? Near field is the distance range surrounding the fault and extends to about one source dimension. Far field applies to distances greater than about ten source dimensions. Theoretically, in the far field, only body (1/r) and surface waves exist. In the near field we also have near field terms, in the de Hoop representation theorem, which are large, attenuate like (1/r)² and (1/r²)², and are very powerful contributors to the response of ground and of structures.
4 What should be included in the description of site response? In linear representations: Everything that can contribute significantly to the description of physical nature of S(f). This can involve parts of the propagation path, local geometry of sedimentary deposits, surface topography, properties of sediments and of soil at the site, and their horizontal and vertical dimensions.at preset, the state of the art in the analyses of the site effects is confined only to this view of the problem. In part this is due to the long held view among seismologists that most amplification phenomena can be explained by linear theory. This view started to change following Northridge 1994 and Kobe 1995 earthquakes. In nonlinear representations site response will include different nonlinear and failure mechanisms, such as: Faulting, landslides, liquefaction, settlement, lateral spreads, ground oscillations, flow failures, loss of bearing strength, for example. Each of these will have to be assigned a probability that it will occur and it will have to be characterized by the motions it can produce (e.g. translations, rotations, strains, curvatures, differential displacements, differential rotations, tilts) with transient and permanent components.
5 At present, in most research studies and in engineering design applications the site response and site characteristics are described only in the most elementary (and not satisfactory) fashion in terms of the average shear wave velocity in the top 30 meters. Lee et al. (1995) found that the velocity-type classification (either average shear-wave velocity or the categorical variables A, B, and C) are not significant variables. They concluded that further use of the average shear-wave velocity in the top 30 m of soil, or of the corresponding variables A, B, C, and D, is not indicated, while the Seed s soil-type classification variable is significant and should be included in all regression models of linear strong motion. Novikova and Trifunac (1995) found that the average shear-wave velocity variable, in the top 30 m is not significant for frequencies bellow 2.5 Hz and is significant only for the higher frequencies. Castellaro et al. (2008) concluded that the average shear-wave velocity variable, in the top 30 m in spite of its almost universal adoption as a key parameter in seismic site classification, appears a weak proxy to seismic amplification.
6 Other site parameters which were used in several studies Geological Site Conditions At a point, where the measurements are taken, geological site conditions were first studied systematically by Gutenberg (1957). His observations were later confirmed and extended by Trifunac (1976, 1978, 1979). Both used geological site conditions to describe the site conditions as can be determined from geological maps (s = 0 for sites on sediments, and s = 2 for sites on the basement rock). Trifunac and Brady (1976) show examples of how the geological site descriptions can be converted to s = 0 or 2, and to s = 1 for in-between sites, which are near the contact of sediments with basement rock, or which are in a complex setting that does not allow unequivocal and simple site description. Sites on sediments (s = 0) can further be described by their thickness (h) above the basement rock (Trifunac & Lee, 1978, 1979). The nature of the geological site conditions, as described by s and/or h, involves a scale that is measured in kilometers (Trifunac, 1990).
7 In a region containing source and the station and describe the distances to the surface outcrops of basement rocks which can reflect the earthquake waves back towards station. These horizontal geological site variables, first introduced by Novikova and Trifunac (1993), were found to contribute significantly to the duration of strong motion and were therefore adopted as new sitespecific variables in the empirical scaling of the duration of strong shaking. Through prolongation of shaking, these site parameters also affect the spectral amplitudes of strong motion, but the empirical studies for their inclusion in the scaling models of spectral amplitudes have yet to be carried out.
8 Geological propagation path. Between the source and the recording station, the waves encounter different configurations and a number of sedimentary basins. At each interface, reflections and refractions occur, and new waves are generated. To characterize such effects on the amplitudes and on the duration of strong shaking, we can begin by considering the percentage of the wave path, from epicentre to the recording site, covered by the basement rock, for each path type separately. Then, p = 100 represents a path entirely through rock (type 4), and p = 0 is for the path only through sediments (type1). It has been shown that p is a significant variable and that the scaling equations can be developed for a family of different paths (Lee & Trifunac, 1995; Lee et al., 1995; Novikova and Trifunac 1995).
9 Soil-type classification. The soil type classification introduced by Seed et al. (1976) involves four groups: rock (= 0, for sites with a shear-wave velocity of less than 800 m/s and a thickness of less than 10 m), stiff soil sites (= 1, with a shear-wave velocity of less than 800 m/s and a soil thickness of less than 75 to 100 m), deep soil sites (= 2, with a shear-wave velocity of less than 800 m/s and a thickness of between 100 and 200 m), and soft-to-medium clay and sand (= 3) (where the notation 0, 1, 2, 3 is as introduced and used by Trifunac, 1987, and Lee, 1987). Lee et al. (1995), studied the significance of the average shear-wave velocity and of the soil-type classification parameters. They used the student t-statistic and found that the soiltype classification as defined by Seed et al (1976) is significant descriptor of strong motion amplitudes, while the velocity-type classification (either average shear-wave velocity in the top 30 m or the categorical variables A, B, and C) is not significant. They concluded that the soil-type classification should be included in all regression models of linear strong motion. They commented that a physical explanation of why soil type classification is significant and why the average shear-wave velocity is not is that the former included information on the soil depth well beyond the top 30 m.
10 What parameters should be used in empirical scaling models? Repeated significance tests of the regression scaling coefficient functions show that (1) the geological site parameters (classification s, or depth h), (2) the soil type classification parameters, and (3) the geological path type parameter should all be included simultaneously. Some of these parameters in the site database, are correlated because of the nature of the creation, transport and the deposition of soil materials, for example. For the data set used by Trifunac (1987), there were many (33%) deep-soil sites over sediments (s = 0, or h > 0) and 10% rock -soil sites over basement rock (s = 2, or h = 0). There were, however, also many (27%) stiff-soil sites over sediments (s = 0, or h > 0) and 8% rock -soil sites over intermediate geologic sites (s = 1). Consequently, the use of regression models, which describe the site conditions in terms of only soil or only geological site parameters, averages out the dependence upon the site parameter, which is not used in the analysis. This leads to erroneous prediction of the amplification by local site conditions, and, using the distribution of the site conditions in the study by Trifunac (1987) as an illustration, these erroneous predictions occur about 40% of the time. In view of this, it is remarkable how many studies still continue to develop scaling equations using only the soil site classification variables (e.g., Abrahamson & Silva, 1997; Ambraseys et al., 2005a,b; Boore et al., 1997), as if all strong-motion data has been recorded under identical geologic site conditions!
11 Some observations in the near field Saturation of Peak Amplitudes. We illustrate the saturation of peak amplitudes by the recorded motions during the 1994 Northridge, California earthquake. This figure shows the nonparametric attenuation functions for peak accelerations at soft (C) and hard (A and B) soil sites for horizontal (solid lines) and vertical (dashed lines) peak amplitudes, derived by smooth interpolation through the recorded values and plotted versus shortest distance to the map view of the rupture surface. It shows that the horizontal peak accelerations on soft sites became saturated in the range between 0.4 and 0.6 g for distances less than about 25 km. It also shows that the horizontal peaks at hard sites, as well as the vertical peaks at soft and hard sites, did not reach saturation during this earthquake (Trifunac & Todoovska 1996).
12 Recurrence and Shifting of Predominant Peaks. Trifunac et al., (1999) have shown that one can measure the site-characteristic peaks by analysis of multiple recordings at a station.
13 With peak ground velocity exceeding 10 cm/s, site-characteristic peaks begin to disappear, and as the peak ground velocity approaches and exceeds 100 cm/s, essentially all peaks disappear (Trifunac & Ivanović, 2003a,b). This is consistent with the conclusions of Gao et al. (1996), Hartzell (1996), and Trifunac and Todorovska (2000b) that in the near field, in the presence of nonlinear response, the measured site characteristics by small amplitude events (linear response) cease to be valid.
14 Movement of Soil Blocks. Many observations in the epicentral regions (cracks in the pavement, buckled curbs, and concentrations of breaks in the pipes of the water distribution system) show that the near-surface soil does not move as a continuum but rather as a collection of blocks of material moving one relative to the other. This suggests that a radically different and new approach to modelling the effects of the local soil on strong ground motion and damage and consequently for microzonation of metropolitan areas is needed to predict the effects of damaging earthquakes. In their study of the repetition in the distribution patterns of damaged buildings and of broken water pipes, during San Fernando 1971 and Northridge 1994 earthquakes, Trifunac and Todorovska (2004) showed that the overall trends for both earthquakes appear to be stable, significant, and consistent. The conclusion reached is that the formation of the soil blocks (gray zones) is mainly governed by the local soil and geologic conditions at the site, which do not change significantly during the life of a typical building ( years). The implications of these observations are important, both for the future development of seismic zoning methods and for the characterization of site-specific models, with the goal being the prediction of strong motion in the near field when a local site experiences large, nonlinear deformations.
15 Northridge, 1994: Reported breaks in water pipes Areas with Red-tagged building San Fernando-Sylmar Area 0 1 mi 1 2 km Olive View Sanatorium Veterans Hospital 210 Sylmar 2 Simshaw Roxford Eldridge 3 San Fernando Rd Foothill Blvd. 4 Polk 6 4 Bledsoe Lower Van Norman Reservoir Hubbard Glenoaks Harding San Fernando San Fernando Airport Arroyo S. Fernando, 1971: Service break Shattered main Main break Fault trace Elevation rise in feet Areas with "unsafe" buildings
16 What characterization of site conditions is relevant? An important, often-overlooked principle is that a prediction should be evaluated by a comparison of the actual outcome against a prediction published before the event. Post-facto detailed studies do augment our knowledge, but the only true test is a comparison of the outcome with a prediction made previously (Trifunac, 1989; Trifunac et al., 1994). Thus, a model proposed for prediction of the effects that the local site conditions have on the amplitudes of shaking, or better yet on some measure of structural response, should be evaluated by comparison with some future actual outcome. To illustrate this, we correlate a normalized measure of damage with nonlinear site response and consider different descriptions of the local site properties (measured or postulated), as shown in the following figure. In this figure, we plot the number of red-tagged (solid points represent seriously damaged) and yellow-tagged (open circles represent moderately damaged) buildings per 1,000 housing units, normalized relative to the area average versus the number of pipe breaks per 1,000 housing units per area average. In simple terms, we are plotting a measure of damage versus a measure of the strain amplitude in the local soil, as seen through a filter of surface geology, average shear-wave velocity in the soil, and two different liquefaction criteria.
17 As can be seen from the figure bellow in the near field, for damaging levels of strong motion, local geological and soil site conditions cease to be good predictors of the damage to wood-frame structures, while the composite site characterization in terms of the liquefaction susceptibility, as defined in the maps of Tinsely et al. (1985), works reasonably well.
18 Conclusions I have illustrated some contemporary approaches for inclusion of the effects that local site conditions have on the amplitudes of strong ground motion, and how those approaches have evolved from the linear wave-propagation theory. While this is useful in the far field, it ceases to work in the near field, where the buildings get damaged and where the soil experiences large nonlinear and permanent deformations. Refined site characterizations that correlate with the observed damage (e.g. USGS liquefaction categories) can continue to be developed, but this would still leave us within the traditional linear approach for the scaling of strong-motion amplitudes. To go beyond this linear approach and to predict the nature of strong motion in the near-field region that realistically describes the forces on the engineering structures, we must change the entire approach and formulate a new one. This new approach must include all relevant components in the description of the forces acting on a structure. The first step in this direction will require that we abandon the traditional scaling, which is based on only one scalar quantity (e.g., peak acceleration, amplitude of a response spectrum, peak velocity) to describe the strong-motion effects on the response of structures. To accomplish this goal, we will have to work with multi-parametric representation and include all relevant components of all forces that act in the near field and that contribute significantly to the response. This can be done, but it will require coordinated and advanced research effort involving large scale nonlinear simulations and systematic analyses of past and future data on damage.
SOIL-STRUCTURE INTERACTION, WAVE PASSAGE EFFECTS AND ASSYMETRY IN NONLINEAR SOIL RESPONSE Mihailo D. Trifunac Civil Eng. Department University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA E-mail: email@example.com
ISET Journal of Earthquake Technology, Paper No. 46, Vol. 39, No.4, December, pp. 55-71 EMPIRICAL SCALING OF STRONG EARTHQUAKE GROUND MOTION - PART II: DURATION OF STRONG MOTION V.W. Lee Civil Engineering
Published in Davis, C.A., X. Du, M. Miyajima, and L. Yan (Ed.) International Efforts in Lifeline Earthquake Engineering, ASCE, TCLEE Monograph 38; pp. 592-599; doi: 10.1061/9780784413234.076; Copyright
A GEOTECHNICAL SEISMIC SITE RESPONSE EVALUATION PROCEDURE Adrian RODRIGUEZ-MAREK 1, Jonathan D BRAY 2 And Norman A ABRAHAMSON 3 SUMMARY A simplified empirically-based seismic site response evaluation procedure
Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering by Dr. Deepankar Choudhury Professor Department of Civil Engineering IIT Bombay, Powai, Mumbai 400 076, India. Email: firstname.lastname@example.org URL: http://www.civil.iitb.ac.in/~dc/
CH Earthquakes Section 19.1: Forces Within Earth Section 19.2: Seismic Waves and Earth s Interior Section 19.3: Measuring and Locating Earthquakes Section 19.4: Earthquakes and Society Section 19.1 Forces
Earthquakes Chapter 19 Does not contain complete lecture notes. What is an earthquake An earthquake is the vibration of Earth produced by the rapid release of energy Energy released radiates in all directions
4 th IASPEI / IAEE International Symposium: Effects of Surface Geology on Seismic Motion August 23 26, 2011 University of California Santa Barbara EFFECTS OF LOCAL GEOLOGY ON EARTHQUAKE GROUND MOTIONS:
IDENTIFICATION OF FIXED-BASE AND RIGID BODY FREQUENCIES OF VIBRATION OF SOIL-STRUCTURE SYSTEMS FROM RECORDED RESPONSE WITH MINIMUM INSTRUMENTATION M.I. Todorovska 1 1 Research Professor, Dept. of Civil
- What are Earthquakes? Earthquakes and Earth s Interior - The shaking or trembling caused by the sudden release of energy - Usually associated with faulting or breaking of rocks - Continuing adjustment
Practice Name: Hour: Determining the Earthquake Epicenter: Japan Measuring the S-P interval There are hundreds of seismic data recording stations throughout the United States and the rest of the world.
Earthquake Machine Stick-slip: Elastic Rebound Theory Jerky motions on faults produce EQs Three Fs of earthquakes: forces, faults, and friction. Slow accumulation and rapid release of elastic energy. Three
4 th IASPEI / IAEE International Symposium: Effects of Surface Geology on Seismic Motion August 23 26, 2011 University of California Santa Barbara EFFECTS OF TOPOGRAPHIC POSITION AND GEOLOGY ON SHAKING
Earthquakes http://thismodernworld.com/comic-archive Elastic rebound http://projects.crustal.ucsb.edu/understanding/elastic/rebound.html Elastic rebound Rocks store energy elastically When stored stress
Liquefaction Fundamentals Page 1 Liquefaction Fundamentals Homework Assignment Design Earthquake: All problems below is a M = 7.0 earthquake with pga of 0.63 g and a source distance Rrup = 4 km. 1. Use
EVALUATION OF SEISMIC SITE EFFECTS FOR BANGKOK DEEP BASIN Nakhorn POOVARODOM 1 and Amorntep JIRASAKJAMROONSRI 2 ABSTRACT In this study, seismic site effects of Bangkok focusing on deep basin structures
October -7, 008, Beijing, China A NEW SIMPLIFIED CRITERION FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF FIELD LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL BASED ON DISSIPATED KINETIC ENERGY Y. Jafarian, R. Vakili, A. R. Sadeghi 3, H. Sharafi 4, and
3 th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering Vancouver, B.C., Canada August - 6, 2004 Paper No. 2386 CHARACTERISTICS OF SITE-SPECIFIC AMPLIFIACTION FUNCTIONS MEASURED IN MONTENEGRO Sanja S. IVANOVIC
Duration Characteristics of the Mean Horizontal Component of Shallow Crustal Earthquake Records in Active Tectonic Regions by Simon Ghanat A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
Improvements to the Development of Acceleration Design Response Spectra Nicholas E. Harman, M.S., P.E., SCDOT Thanks Clemson University Dr. Ron Andrus Co-Principal Investigator Dr. Nadarajah Ravichandran
Development of U. S. National Seismic Hazard Maps and Implementation in the International Building Code Mark D. Petersen (U.S. Geological Survey) http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazmaps/ Seismic hazard analysis
Harmonized European standards for construction in Egypt EN 1998 - Design of structures for earthquake resistance Jean-Armand Calgaro Chairman of CEN/TC250 Organised with the support of the Egyptian Organization
2 Approaches To Developing Design Ground Motions There are two basic approaches to developing design ground motions that are commonly used in practice: deterministic and probabilistic. While both approaches
The 4 th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering October 2-7, 28, Beijing, China Root-mean-square distance and effects of hanging wall/footwall Wang Dong and Xie Lili,2 Institute of Engineering Mechanics,
Third International Symposium on the Effects of Surface Geology on Seismic Motion Grenoble, France, 30 August - 1 September 2006 Paper Number: 105 BROADBAND STRONG MOTION SIMULATION OF THE 2004 NIIGATA-
4.2 Land Resources 4.2.1 Alternative A Proposed Action Impact 4.2.1-1: Changes to Existing Topography (Less than Significant) Development of the project site would involve grading and other earthwork as
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS E. GEOLOGY AND SOILS INTRODUCTION This section evaluates potential impacts related to geology, including seismicity, and soils associated with development of the proposed
Topographic effects on the seismic responses of slopes A. Messaoudi Ecole Polytechnique d Architecture et d Urbanisme (EPAU), El Harrach, Algeria N. Laouami & N. Mezouer National Earthquake Engineering
Ground Motion Prediction Equations: Past, Present, and Future The 2014 William B. Joyner Lecture David M. Boore As presented at the SMIP15 meeting, Davis, California, 22 October 2015 The William B. Joyner
Finding an Earthquake Epicenter Measuring the Size of Earthquakes Two measurements that describe the size of an earthquake are: 1. Intensity a measure of the degree of earthquake shaking at a given locale
SOME OBSERVATIONS RELATED TO LIQUEFACTION SUSCEPTIBILITY OF SILTY SOILS Upul ATUKORALA 1, Dharma WIJEWICKREME 2 And Norman MCCAMMON 3 SUMMARY The liquefaction susceptibility of silty soils has not received
Updating the Chiou and YoungsNGAModel: Regionalization of Anelastic Attenuation B. Chiou California Department of Transportation R.R. Youngs AMEC Environment & Infrastructure SUMMARY: (10 pt) Ground motion
ANALYSIS OF THE CORRELATION BETWEEN INSTRUMENTAL INTENSITIES OF STRONG EARTHQUAKE GROUND MOTION J.Enrique Martinez-Rueda 1, Evdokia Tsantali 1 1 Civil Engineering & Geology Division School of Environment
Lecture 8 - Ground Response Analyses Page 1 1D Ground Response Analysis 1. 2. 3. Dynamic behavior of soils is quite complex and requires models which characterize the important aspects of cyclic behavior,
NEAR-FAULT GROUND MOTIONS: Outstanding Problems APOSTOLOS S. PAPAGEORGIOU University of Patras Outline Characteristics of near-fault ground motions Near-fault strong ground motion database A mathematical
The Earthquake Cycle Chapter :: n/a A German seismogram of the 1906 SF EQ Image courtesy of San Francisco Public Library Stages of the Earthquake Cycle The Earthquake cycle is split into several distinct
EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2007; 36:1275 1301 Published online 27 February 2007 in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com)..679 Prediction of elastic
New site classification system and response spectra in Korean seismic code *Dong-Soo Kim 1), Satish Manandhar 2) and Hyung-Ik Cho 3) 1) Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, KAIST, Daejeon
Geotechnical Extreme Events Reconnaissance Report: The Performance of Structures in Densely Urbanized Areas Affected by Surface Fault Rupture During the August 24, 2014 M6 South Napa Earthquake, California,
Paper No. M-4 CHARACTERISTICS OF STRONG GROUND MOTION FROM THE 2011 GIGANTIC TOHOKU, JAPAN EARTHQUAKE Saburoh MIDORIKAWA 1, Hiroyuki MIURA 2 and Tomohiro ATSUMI 3 SUMMARY The 2011 Tohoku earthquake (Mw9.0)
PEAK GROUND MOTION CHARACTERISTICS OF 995 KOBE EARTHQUAKE AND AN EXTRACTED SIMPLE EVALUATION METHOD J EJIRI, Y GOTO And K TOKI 3 SUMMARY It was pointed out that the peak horizontal ground accelerations(phga)
4.9 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND SEISMICITY 4.9.1 Introduction Information about the geological conditions and seismic hazards in the study area was summarized in the FEIR, and was based on the Geotechnical Exploration
New Design Spectral Acceleration of Soft and Deep Deposits in Bangkok N. Poovarodom & A. Jirasakjamroonsri Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Thammasat University, Thailand email@example.com
Proceedings of the Tenth Pacific Conference on Earthquake Engineering Building an Earthquake-Resilient Pacific 6-8 November 015, Sydney, Australia Frequency-dependent Strong Motion Duration Using Total
Estimation of Non-linear Seismic Site Effects for Deep Deposits of the Mississippi Embayment Duhee Park, Ph.D. Post Doctoral Researcher Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering University of Illinois
SECED 2015 Conference: Earthquake Risk and Engineering towards a Resilient World 9-10 July 2015, Cambridge UK PROBABILISTIC LIQUEFACTION HAZARD ANALYSIS IN JAPAN Tetsushi KURITA 1 and Sei ichiro FUKUSHIMA
IN SITU TESTING TECHNOLOGY FOR FOUNDATION & EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING Wesley Spang, Ph.D., P.E. AGRA Earth & Environmental, Inc. Portland, Oregon In situ testing of soil, which essentially consists of evaluating
1 Introduction QUAKE/W Comparison is a commercially available software product for doing one-dimensional ground response analyses. It was developed and is being maintained under the guidance of Professor
The significance of site effect studies for seismic design and assessment of industrial facilities Corinne Lacave, Martin G. Koller Pierino Lestuzzi, and Christelle Salameh Résonance Ingénieurs-Conseils
ESTIMATION OF INPUT SEISMIC ENERGY BY MEANS OF A NEW DEFINITION OF STRONG MOTION DURATION I.M. Taflampas 1, Ch.A. Maniatakis and C.C. Spyrakos 3 1 Civil Engineer, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Laboratory
Earthquakes Ch. 12 Dangerous tsunami threat off U.S. West Coast Earthquakes What is an Earthquake? It s the shaking and trembling of the Earth s crust due to plate movement. The plates move, rocks along
Liquefaction and Foundations Amit Prashant Indian Institute of Technology Gandhinagar Short Course on Seismic Design of Reinforced Concrete Buildings 26 30 November, 2012 What is Liquefaction? Liquefaction
Chapter 19 Earthquakes Shake, Rattle & Roll 19.1 Forces within OBJECTIVES Define stress and strain as they apply to rocks. Distinguish among the three different fault types. Contrast three types of seismic
Module 5 LOCAL SITE EFFECTS AND DESIGN GROUND MOTIONS (Lectures 23 to 26) TOPICS 5.1 INTRODUCTION 5.2 EFFECTS OF LOCAL SITE CONDITIONS ON GROUND MOTION 5.2.1 Evidence from Theoretical Ground Response Analysis
Istanbul Bridge Conference August 11-13, 2014 Istanbul, Turkey IZMIT BAY BRIDGE SOUTH APPROACH VIADUCT: SEISMIC DESIGN NEXT TO THE NORTH ANATOLIAN FAULT A. Giannakou 1, J. Chacko 2 and W. Chen 3 ABSTRACT
RESPONSE SPECTRA RECOMMENDED FOR AUSTRALIA Malcolm Somerville, Kevin McCue and Cvetan Sinadinovski Australian Geological Survey Organisation, Canberra SUMMARY Response spectra suitable for intraplate regions
Lecture 1 Page 1 Learning Objectives Saturday, August 22, 2009 5:05 PM LO1-1 Know the characteristics of the major types of earthquakes hazards. 1. Strong motion and structural collapse 2. Fault rupture
EARTHQUAKE HAZARD ASSESSMENT IN KAZAKHSTAN Dr Ilaria Mosca 1 and Dr Natalya Silacheva 2 1 British Geological Survey, Edinburgh (UK) firstname.lastname@example.org 2 Institute of Seismology, Almaty (Kazakhstan) email@example.com
Elastic rebound theory Focus epicenter - wave propagation Dip-Slip Fault - Normal Normal Fault vertical motion due to tensional stress Hanging wall moves down, relative to the footwall Opal Mountain, Mojave
Multi-station Seismograph Network Background page to accompany the animations on the website: IRIS Animations Introduction One seismic station can give information about how far away the earthquake occurred,
Forces Within Earth Objectives Define stress and strain as they apply to rocks. Distinguish among the three types of faults. Contrast three types of seismic waves. Vocabulary stress strain fault primary
Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries Interpretive Map Series 24 Geologic Hazards, Earthquake and Landslide Hazard Maps, and Future Earthquake Damage Estimates for Six Counties in the Mid/Southern
EG-25 COMPARING QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE METHOD TO DETERMINE EARTHQUAKE SUSCEPTIBILITY LEVEL AT KULON PROGO, YOGYAKARTA by: Deasy Rimanda Cahyaningtyas (1), Prof. Dr. Kirbani Sri Brotopuspito (2) Salahuddin
6 th International Conference on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering -4 November 25 Christchurch, New Zealand Evaluation of -D Non-linear Site Response Analysis using a General Quadratic/Hyperbolic Strength-Controlled
1 Lecture # 6 Geological Structures ( Folds, Faults and Joints) Instructor: Dr. Attaullah Shah Department of Civil Engineering Swedish College of Engineering and Technology-Wah Cantt. 2 The wavy undulations
Seismic site response analysis for Australia Anita Amirsardari 1, Elisa Lumantarna 2, Helen M. Goldsworthy 3 1. Corresponding Author. PhD Candidate, Department of Infrastructure Engineering, University
ENGINEERING GROUND MOTION PARAMETERS ATTENUATION RELATIONSHIPS FOR GREECE Laurentiu Danciu and G-Akis Tselentis 1 SUMMARY Engineering ground motion parameters can be used to describe the damage potential
STUDY OF THE BEHAVIOR OF PILE GROUPS IN LIQUEFIED SOILS Shin-Tower Wang 1, Luis Vasquez 2, and Lymon C. Reese 3, Honorary Member,, ASCE ABSTRACT : 1&2 President & Project Manager, Ensoft, Inc. Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
General Geologic Setting and Seismicity of the FHWA Project Site in the New Madrid Seismic Zone David Hoffman University of Missouri Rolla Natural Hazards Mitigation Institute Civil, Architectural & Environmental
20th International Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology (SMiRT 20) Espoo, Finland, August 9-14, 2009 SMiRT 20-Division 5, Paper 1740 Amplification of Seismic Motion at Deep Soil Sites
Identification of the Subsoil Profile Characteristics at the Coyote Creek Outdoor Classroom (CCOC), San José, from Microtremor Measurements - A Contribution to the CCOC Blind Comparison Experiment By D.H.
A NEW DEFINITION OF STRONG MOTION DURATION AND RELATED PARAMETERS AFFECTING THE RESPONSE OF MEDIUM-LONG PERIOD STRUCTURES I.M. Taflampas 1, C.C. Spyrakos 2 and Ch.A. Maniatakis 3 1 Civil Engineer, Dept.
Proceedings of the Ninth Pacific Conference on Earthquake Engineering Building an Earthquake-Resilient Society 14-16 April, 2011, Auckland, New Zealand Modelling Strong Ground Motions for Subduction Events
The first surface-rupturing earthquake in 20 years on a HERP major active fault: Mw=6.2 2014 Nagano, Japan, event along the Itoigawa-Shizuoka Tectonic Line is not characteristic S. Toda, S. Okada, D. Ishimura,
ES 104 Laboratory # 5 EARTHQUAKES: Epicenter Determination, Seismic Waves, and Hazards Introduction Earthquakes are vibrations of Earth caused by large releases of energy that accompany volcanic eruptions,
Proceedings of the Ninth Pacific Conference on Earthquake Engineering Building an Earthquake-Resilient Society 14-16 April, 2011, Auckland, New Zealand Development of Ground Motion Time Histories for Seismic
GEOL 0820 Ramsey Natural Disasters Spring, 2018 LECTURE #8: Earthquake Disasters: Monitoring & Mitigation Date: 1 Feb 2018 (lecturer: Dr. Shawn Wright) I. Exam I - Reminder Feb 6 th next class details: