Current seismic design requirements were established considering mainly (almost exclusively) ground motions caused by shallow crustal earthquakes, hence they might lead to different-from-intended risk levels when applied at locations prone to large-magnitude subduction (i.e. megathrust) earthquakes. In this study, the seismic behavior of 40 modern steel special moment frames (SSMFs) subjected to both megathrust and crustal ground motions is evaluated. Three analyses are performed: (1) a hazard-consistent analysis; (2) a comparative collapse risk evaluation; and (3) a performance evaluation following the approach indicated in Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) P695. Results indicate that the collapse probability of mid- and high-rise SSMFs subjected to megathrust ground motions is indeed larger than that under crustal ground motions. Modifications to the current design criteria are then suggested, intended not only for United States but also for countries, such as Ecuador, where the US seismic design requirements for steel structures were adopted and seismic ground motions are actually caused by megathrust earthquakes.
AfshariKStewartJ (2016) Physically parameterized prediction equations for significant duration in active crustal regions. Earthquake Spectra32: 2057–2081.
3.
Al AtikL (2011) Correlation of spectral acceleration values for subduction and crustal models. In: COSMOS Technical Session, Emeryville, CA, 4 November.
4.
American Institute for Steel Construction (AISC) (2016) Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, ANSI/AISC 341-16. Chicago, IL: American Institute for Steel Construction.
5.
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) (2011) Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE/SEI 7-10. Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers.
6.
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) (2017) Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE/SEI 7-16. Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers.
Applied Technology Council (ATC) (2010) ATC 72-1, Modeling and Acceptance Criteria for Seismic Design and Analysis of Tall Buildings. Redwood City, CA: Applied Technology Council.
9.
AriasA (1970) A measure of earthquake intensity. In: HansenRJ (ed.) Seismic Design for Nuclear Power Plants. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 438–483.
10.
BakerJ (2011) Conditional mean spectrum: Tool for ground-motion selection. Journal of Structural Engineering137: 322–331.
11.
BakerJBradleyB (2017) Intensity measure correlations observed in the NGA-West2 database, and dependence of correlations on rupture and site parameters. Earthquake Spectra33: 145–156.
12.
BakerJCornellC (2005) A vector-valued ground motion intensity measure consisting of spectral acceleration and epsilon. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics34: 1193–1217.
BernalDDöhlerMKojidiSKwanKLiuY (2015) First mode damping ratios for buildings. Earthquake Spectra31: 367–381.
15.
BommerJAcevedoA (2004) The use of real earthquake accelerograms as input to dynamic analysis. Journal of Earthquake Engineering8: 43–91.
16.
BommerJStaffordPAlarcónJ (2009) Empirical equations for the prediction of the significant, bracketed, and uniform duration of earthquake ground motion. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America99: 3217–3233.
17.
BooreDBommerJ (2005) Processing of strong-motion accelerograms: Needs, options and consequences. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering25: 93–115.
18.
BradleyB (2010) A generalized conditional intensity measure approach and holistic ground motion selection. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics39: 1321–1342.
19.
BradleyB (2013) A critical examination of seismic response uncertainty analysis in earthquake engineering. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics42: 1717–1729.
20.
CampbellKBozorgniaY (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.
21.
ChandramohanR (2016) Duration of earthquake ground motion: Influence on structural collapse risk and integration in design and assessment practice. PhD Dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
22.
ChandramohanRBakerJDeierleinG (2016a) Impact of hazard-consistent ground motion duration in structural collapse risk assessment. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics45: 1357–1379.
23.
ChandramohanRBakerJDeierleinG (2016b) Quantifying the influence of ground motion duration on structural collapse capacity using spectrally equivalent records. Earthquake Spectra32: 927–950.
24.
CruzCMirandaE (2016) Evaluation of damping ratios for the seismic analysis of tall buildings. Journal of Structural Engineering143: 04016144.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2009) Quantification of Building Seismic Performance Factors. FEMA P695, 1 June, Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency.
27.
FisherJKloiberL (2006) Base Plate and Anchor Rod Design (Steel Design Guide Series No 1). 2nd ed.Chicago, IL: American Institute of Steel Construction Inc.
28.
GrilliD (2015) Seismic response of embedded column base connections and anchorages. PhD Dissertation, University of California, Davis, CA.
29.
GuptaAKrawinklerH (2000) Dynamics P-delta effects for flexible inelastic steel structures. Journal of Structural Engineering126: 145–154.
30.
HartloperA (2016) Updates to the ASCE-41-13 nonlinear modeling provisions for performance-based seismic assessment of new and existing steel moment resisting frames. Master Dissertation, McGrill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
31.
HartloperALignosD (2017) Updates to the ASCE-41-13 provisions for the nonlinear modeling of steel wide-flange columns for performance-based earthquake engineering. In: Proceedings of Eurosteel 2017, Copenhagen, 13–15 September.
32.
HaseltonCBakerJLielADeierleinG (2011) Accounting for ground-motion spectral shape characteristics in structural collapse assessment through an adjustment for epsilon. Journal of Structural Engineering137: 332–344.
33.
Instituto Nacional de Normalizacion (INN) (2009) Diseño Sísmico de Edificios NCh433. of 96 modificada 2009. Santiago: Instituto Nacional de Normalizacion.
34.
JalayerF (2003) Direct probabilistic seismic analysis: Implementing non-linear dynamics assessments. PhD Dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
35.
KanvindeAGrilliDZareianF (2012) Rotational stiffness of exposed column base connections: Experiments and analytical models. Journal of Structural Engineering138: 549–560.
36.
KemptonJStewartJ (2006) Prediction equations for significant duration of earthquake ground-motions considering site and near-source effects. Earthquake Spectra22: 985–1013.
37.
LielALucoNRaghunandanMChampionC (2015) Modifications to risk-targeted seismic design maps for subduction and near-fault hazards. In: 12th international conference on applications of statistics and probability in civil engineering (ICASP12), Vancouver, BC, Canada, 12–15 July.
38.
LignosDKrawinklerH (2011) Deterioration modeling of steel components in support of collapse prediction of steel moment frames under earthquake loading. Journal of Structural Engineering137: 1291–1302.
39.
McKennaFFenvesGScottM (2006) OpenSees: Open System for Earthquake Engineering Simulation. Berkeley, CA: Pacific Earthquake Engineering Center, University of California. Available at: http://opensees.berkeley.edu (accessed March 2017).
40.
MarafiNEberhardMBermanJWirthEFrankelA (2017) Effects of deep basins on structural collapse during large subduction earthquakes. Earthquake Spectra33(3): 963–997.
41.
MarafiNLiTSenABermanJEberhardMLehmanDRoederC (2018) Accounting for demand variability of braced frames with a combined intensity measure. In: 11th national conference on earthquake engineering, Los Angeles, CA, 25–29 June.
42.
Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER) (2017) Guidelines for performance based design of tall buildings. PEER 2017/06, 18 May. Berkeley, CA: University of California.
43.
Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER) (2018) Update of the BC hydro subduction ground-motion model using the NGA-subduction dataset. PEER 2018/02, 12 July. Berkeley, CA: University of California.
44.
RaghunandanMLielALucoN (2015) Collapse risk of buildings in the Pacific northwest region due to subduction earthquakes. Earthquake Spectra31: 2087–2115.
45.
RahnamaMKrawinklerH (1993) Effect of Soft Soils and Hysteresis Model on Seismic Demands. Vol. 108. Stanford, CA: John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Stanford University.
SuzukiYLignosD (2015) Large scale collapse experiment of wide flange steel beam-columns. In: 8th international conference on behavior of steel structures in seismic areas, STESSA12. Shangai, China, 1–3 July.
48.
Torres-RodasPZareianFKanvindeA (2017) Rotational stiffness of deeply embedded column–base connections. Journal of Structural Engineering143: 04017064.
49.
TrifunacMBradyA (1975) A study on the duration of strong earthquake ground motion. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America65: 581–626.
ZareianFKanvindeA (2013) Effect of column base flexibility on the seismic safety of steel moment resisting frames. Earthquake Spectra29: 1–23.
53.
ZareianFMedinaR (2010) A practical method for proper modeling of structural damping in inelastic plane structural systems. Computers & Structures88: 45–53.
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.
