This article develops a methodology for selecting, scaling, and orienting three orthogonal components of ground motion (GM) when conducting intensity-based assessments of structures. Target spectra for selecting multicomponent GMs are critically examined and strategies for selecting hazard-consistent GMs are investigated. The Conditional Mean Spectrum–Uniform Hazard Spectrum (CMS-UHS) Composite Spectrum is proposed as an alternative to several Conditional Mean Spectra for selecting multicomponent GMs when conducting intensity-based assessments of complex three-dimensional (3D) structures. To ensure hazard consistency, multicomponent GMs should be selected using (a) the target spectrum for the vertical component of GM, (b) a wide range of vibration periods, and (c) scale factors that are constrained. With constrained scale factors, all three components of a GM can be reasonably scaled either by the same scale factor or by different scale factors.
AkkarSSandkkayaMAyB (2014) Compatible ground-motion prediction equations for damping scaling factors and vertical-to-horizontal spectral amplitude ratios for the broader Europe region. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering12: 517–547.
2.
Al AtikLAbrahamsonN (2010) An improved method for nonstationary spectral matching. Earthquake Spectra26: 601–617.
3.
American Society of Civil Engineers (2016) Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures. Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers.
4.
Applied Technology Council (2012) Seismic performance assessment of buildings, volume 1—methodology. Technical Report FEMA P-58-1, December2018. Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency.
5.
BakerJW (2011) Conditional mean spectrum: Tool for ground-motion selection. Journal of Structural Engineering-ASCE137: 322–331.
6.
BakerJWCornellCA (2005) A vector-valued ground motion intensity measure consisting of spectral acceleration and epsilon. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics34: 1193–1217.
7.
BakerJWCornellCA (2006a) Correlation of response spectral values for multicomponent ground motions. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America96: 215–227.
8.
BakerJWCornellCA (2006b) Spectral shape, epsilon and record selection. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics35: 1077–1095.
9.
BakerJWCornellCA (2006c) Which spectral acceleration are you using?Earthquake Spectra22: 293–312.
10.
BakerJWJayaramN (2008) Correlation of spectral acceleration values from NGA ground motion models. Earthquake Spectra24: 299–317.
11.
BernierCMonteiroRPaultreP (2016) Using the conditional spectrum method for improved fragility assessment of concrete gravity dams in eastern Canada. Earthquake Spectra32: 1449–1468.
12.
BeyerKBommerJJ (2006) Relationships between median values and between aleatory variabilities for different definitions of the horizontal component of motion. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America96: 1512–1522.
13.
BommerJJAkkarSKaleÖ (2011) A model for vertical-to-horizontal response spectral ratios for Europe and the Middle East. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America101: 1783–1806.
14.
BooreDM (2010) Orientation-independent, nongeometric-mean measures of seismic intensity from two horizontal components of motion. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America100: 1830–1835.
15.
BooreDMKishidaT (2017) Relations between some horizontal-component ground-motion intensity measures used in practice. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America107: 334–343.
16.
BooreDMWatson-LampreyJAbrahamsonNA (2006) Orientation-independent measures of ground motion. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America96: 1502–1511.
17.
BozorgniaYAbrahamsonNAAtikLA, et al. (2014) NGA-West2 research project. Earthquake Spectra30: 973–987.
18.
BozorgniaYCampbellKW (2016a) Ground motion model for the vertical-to-horizontal (V/H) ratios of PGA, PGV, and response spectra. Earthquake Spectra32: 951–978.
19.
BozorgniaYCampbellKW (2016b) Vertical ground motion model for PGA, PGV, and linear response spectra using the NGA-West2 database. Earthquake Spectra32: 979–1004.
20.
BrownjohnJMXiaP-Q (2000) Dynamic assessment of curved cable-stayed bridge by model updating. Journal of Structural Engineering126: 252–260.
21.
BrownjohnJMLeeJCheongB (1999) Dynamic performance of a curved cable-stayed bridge. Engineering Structures21: 1015–1027.
22.
CampbellKWBozorgniaY (2014) NGA-West2 ground motion model for the average horizontal components of PGA, PGV, and 5% damped linear acceleration response spectra. Earthquake Spectra30: 1087–1115.
23.
ChopraAK (2017) Dynamics of Structures: Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering. 5th ed.Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
24.
FieldEHGuptaNGuptaV, et al. (2005) Hazard calculations for the WGCEP-2002 earthquake forecast using OpenSHA and distributed object technologies. Seismological Research Letters76: 161–167.
25.
GoelR (2008) Generalized pushover curves for nonlinear static analysis of three dimensional structures. In: Proceedings of the nonlinear static methods for design/assessment of 3D structures, Lisbon, 5–6 May.
26.
GravesRJordanTHCallaghanS, et al. (2011) CyberShake: A physics-based seismic hazard model for southern California. Pure and Applied Geophysics168: 367–381.
27.
GülerceZAbrahamsonNA (2010) Vector-valued probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for the effects of vertical ground motions on the seismic response of highway bridges. Earthquake Spectra26: 999–1016.
GülerceZKamaiRAbrahamsonNA, et al. (2017) Ground motion prediction equations for the vertical ground motion component based on the NGA-W2 database. Earthquake Spectra33: 499–528.
30.
HarringtonCCLielAB (2016) Collapse assessment of moment frame buildings, considering vertical ground shaking. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics45: 2475–2493.
31.
HaseltonCBBakerJWStewartJP, et al. (2017) Response history analysis for the design of new buildings in the NEHRP provisions and ASCE/SEI 7 standard: Part I—Overview and specification of ground motions. Earthquake Spectra33: 373–395.
32.
HuangY-NWhittakerASLucoN (2008) Maximum spectral demands in the near-fault region. Earthquake Spectra24: 319–341.
33.
KumarMWhittakerASConstantinouMC (2017) Extreme earthquake response of nuclear power plants isolated using sliding bearings. Nuclear Engineering and Design316: 9–25.
34.
KunnathSKAbrahamsonNChaiY, et al. (2008) Development of guidelines for incorporation of vertical ground motion effects in seismic design of highway bridges. Technical Report CA/UCD-SESM-08-01, May2008. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Transportation.
35.
KwongNSChopraAK (2017) A generalized conditional mean spectrum and its application for intensity-based assessments of seismic demands. Earthquake Spectra33: 123–143.
36.
KwongNSChopraAK (2018) Determining bidirectional ground motions for nonlinear response history analysis of buildings at far-field sites. Earthquake Spectra34: 1931–1954.
37.
KwongNSChopraAKMcGuireRK (2014) A framework for the evaluation of ground motion selection and modification procedures. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics44: 795–815.
38.
LeeRBradleyBFranklinM (2013) Characteristics of vertical ground motions in the Canterbury earthquakes. In: Proceedings of the New Zealand Society for earthquake engineering annual conference, Wellington, New Zealand, 14–16 April.
39.
LothCBakerJW (2015) Rational design spectra for structural reliability assessment using the response spectrum method. Earthquake Spectra31: 2007–2026.
40.
LucoNCornellCA (2007) Structure-specific scalar intensity measures for near-source and ordinary earthquake ground motions. Earthquake Spectra23: 357–392.
41.
McGuireRK (2004) Seismic Hazard and Risk Analysis. Oakland, CA: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute.
42.
MalhotraPK (2006) Smooth spectra of horizontal and vertical ground motions. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America96: 506–518.
43.
NEHRP Consultants Joint Venture (2011) Selecting and scaling earthquake ground motions for performing response-history analyses. Technical Report NIST GCR 11-917-15, November. Redwood City, CA: National Institute of Standards and Technology.
44.
Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center: Tall Buildings Initiative (2017) Guidelines for performance-based seismic design of tall buildings. PEER Report 06, November. Berkeley, CA: Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center.
45.
SomervillePThioH (2011) Development of ground motion time histories for seismic design. In: Proceedings of the ninth Pacific conference on earthquake engineering: Building an earthquake-resilient society, Auckland, New Zealand, 14–16 April, pp. 1–8. Auckland, New Zealand: New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering.
46.
StewartJPBooreDMSeyhanE, et al. (2016) NGA-West2 equations for predicting vertical-component PGA, PGV, and 5%-damped PSA from shallow crustal earthquakes. Earthquake Spectra32: 1005–1031.
47.
TrovatoSD’AmoreEYueQ, et al. (2017) An approach for synthesizing tri-component ground motions compatible with hazard-consistent target spectrum: Italian aseismic code application. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering93: 121–134.
48.
WangGYoungsRPowerM, et al. (2015) Design ground motion library: An interactive tool for selecting earthquake ground motions. Earthquake Spectra31: 617–635.
49.
Watson-LampreyJABooreDM (2007) Beyond SaGMRotI: Conversion to SaArb, SaSN, and SaMaxRot. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America97: 1511–1524.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
