The Design Ground Motion Library (DGML) is an interactive tool for selecting earthquake ground motion time histories based on contemporary knowledge and engineering practice. It was created from a ground motion database that consists of 3,182 records from shallow crustal earthquakes in active tectonic regions rotated to fault-normal and fault-parallel directions. The DGML enables users to construct design response spectra based on Next-Generation Attenuation (NGA) relationships, including conditional mean spectra, code spectra, and user-specified spectra. It has the broad capability of searching for time history record sets in the database on the basis of the similarity of a record's response spectral shape to a design response spectrum over a user-defined period range. Selection criteria considering other ground motion characteristics and user needs are also provided. The DGML has been adapted for online application by the Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER) and incorporated as a beta version on the PEER database website.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbrahamsonN. A. and SilvaW. J.2008. Summary of the Abrahamson & Silva NGA ground-motion relations, Earthquake Spectra24, 67–97.
2.
AkkarS.YazganU. and GulkanP.2005. Drift estimates in frame buildings subjected to near-fault ground motions, Journal of Structural Engineering131, 1014–1024.
3.
AlaviB. and KrawinklerH.2001. Effects of Near-Fault Ground Motions on Frame Structures, Blume Center Report #138, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
4.
AMEC Geomatrix, 2009. Design Ground Motion Library, Report and Software Package, Oakland, CA.
5.
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2006. Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE 7-05, Reston, Virginia.
6.
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2010. Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE 7-10, Reston, Virginia.
7.
AnchetaT. D.DarraghR. B.StewarJ. P.SeyhanE.SilvaW. J.ChiouB. S.-J.WooddellK. E.GravesR. W.KottkeA. R.BooreD. M.KishidaT. and DonahueJ. L.2013. PEER NGA-West2 Database, PEER Report 2013/03, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley.
8.
BakerJ. W.2007. Quantitative classification of near-fault ground motions using wavelet analysis, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America97, 1486–1501.
9.
BakerJ. W.2011. Conditional mean spectrum: Tool for ground motion selection, Journal of Structural Engineering137, 322–331.
BakerJ. W. and CornellC. A.2005. A vector-valued ground motion intensity measure consisting of spectral acceleration and epsilon, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics34, 1193–1217.
12.
BakerJ. W. and CornellC. A.2006. Spectral shape, epsilon and record selection, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics35, 1077–1095.
13.
BakerJ. W. and JayaramN.2008. Correlation of spectral acceleration values from NGA ground motion models, Earthquake Spectra24, 299–317.
14.
BerteroV.MahinS. and HerreraR.1978. Aseismic design implications of near-fault San Fernando earthquake records, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics6, 31–42.
15.
BooreD. M. and AtkinsonG. M.2008. Ground-motion prediction equations for the average horizontal component of PGA, PGV, and 5% damped PSA at spectral periods between 0.01s and 10.0s, Earthquake Spectra24, 99–138.
16.
BrayJ. D. and Rodriguez-MarekA.2004. Characterization of forward-directivity ground motions in the near-fault region, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering24, 815–828.
17.
Building Seismic Safety Council of the National Institute of Building Sciences, 2009. NEHRP Recommended Seismic Provisions for New Buildings and Other Structures, FEMA Report P-750, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.
18.
Building Seismic Safety Council of the National Institute of Building Sciences, 2012. NEHERP Recommended Seismic Provisions: Design Examples, FEMA Report P-751, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.
19.
CampbellK. W. and BozorgniaY.2008. NGA ground motion model for the geometric mean horizontal component of PGA, PGV, PGD, and 5% damped linear elastic response spectra for periods ranging from 0.01s to 10.0s, Earthquake Spectra24, 139–171.
20.
ChiouB.DarraghR.GregorN. and SilvaW.2008. NGA project strong-motion database, Earthquake Spectra24, 23–44.
21.
ChiouB. S. J. and YoungsR. R.2008. Chiou-Youngs NGA ground motion relations for the geometric mean horizontal component of peak and spectral ground motion parameters, Earthquake Spectra24, 173–215.
22.
CornellC. A.2006. Should uniform hazard spectra be used for design? How should design response spectra be determined considering uniform hazard spectra from design maps and hazard deaggregation data?presentation to the Third ATC-35/USGS National Earthquake Ground Motion Mapping Workshop, 7–8 December 2006, San Mateo, CA.
23.
FuQ. and MenunC.2004. Seismic-environment-based simulation of near-fault ground motions, in Proceedings, 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Paper No. 332, 1–6 August 2004, Vancouver, Canada.
24.
GrigoriuM.2011. To scale or not to scale seismic ground-acceleration records, Journal of Engineering Mechanics137, 284–293.
25.
HallJ. F.HeatonT. H.HallingM. W. and WaldD. J.1995. Near-source ground motion and its effects on flexible buildings, Earthquake Spectra11, 569–605.
26.
HancockJ.BommerJ. J. and StaffordP. J.2008. Numbers of scaled and matched acceler-ograms required for inelastic dynamic analyses, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics37, 1585–1607.
27.
HaseltonC. B. (ed.), 2009. Evaluation of Ground Motion Selection and Modification Methods: Predicting Median Interstory Drift Response of Buildings, PEER Report 2009/01, Ground Motion Selection and Modification Working Group, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley.
28.
IdrissI. M.2008. An NGA empirical model for estimating the horizontal spectral values generated by shallow crustal earthquakes, Earthquake Spectra24, 217–242.
29.
International Code Council (ICC), 2006. International Building Code, Washington, D.C.
30.
JayaramN.LinT. and BakerJ. W.2011. A computationally efficient ground-motion selection algorithm for matching a target response spectrum mean and variance, Earthquake Spectra27, 797–815.
31.
KalkanE. and ChopraA. K.2011. Modal-pushover-based ground-motion scaling procedure, Journal of Structural Engineering137, 298–310.
32.
LucoN. and BazzurroP.2007. Does amplitude scaling of ground motion records result in biased nonlinear structural drift responses?Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics36, 1813–1835.
33.
LucoN. and CornellC. A.2007. Structure-specific scalar intensity measures for near-source and ordinary earthquake ground motions, Earthquake Spectra23, 357–392.
34.
MakrisN. and BlackC.2003. Dimensional analysis of inelastic structures subjected to near fault ground motions, EERC 2003-05, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, California.
35.
MavroeidisG. P.DongG. and PapageorgiouA. S.2004. Near-fault ground motions, and the response of elastic and inelastic single-degree-of-freedom (SDOF) systems, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics33, 1023–1049.
36.
MavroeidisG. P. and PapageorgiouA. S.2003. A mathematical representation of near-fault ground motions, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America93, 1099–1131.
37.
Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER), 2012a. NGA Database, available at http://peer.berkeley.edu/nga/ (last accessed 30 January 2015).
PowerM.ChiouB.AbrahamsonN.BozorgniaY.SchantzT. and RobleeC.2008. An overview of the NGA project, Earthquake Spectra24, 3–21.
40.
ReyesJ. C. and ChopraA. K.2012. Modal pushover-based scaling of two components of ground motion records for nonlinear RHA of structures, Earthquake Spectra28, 1243–1267.
41.
ReyesJ. C. and KalkanE.2012. Should Ground-motion Records Be Rotated to Fault-Normal/Parallel or Maximum Direction for Response History Analysis of Buildings? Open-File Report 2012–1261, USGS, Menlo Park, CA.
42.
ShomeN.CornellC. A.BazzurroP. and CarballoJ. E.1998. Earthquake records and nonlinear response, Earthquake Spectra14, 469–500.
43.
SomervilleP. G.2003. Magnitude scaling of the near fault rupture directivity pulse, Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors137, 12.
44.
SomervilleP. G.SmithN. F.GravesR. W. and AbrahamsonN. A.1997. Modification of empirical strong ground motion attenuation relations to include the amplitude and duration effects of rupture directivity, Seismological Research Letters68, 199–222.
45.
WangG.2011. A ground motion selection and modification method capturing response spectrum characteristics and variability of scenario earthquakes, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering31, 611–625.
46.
Watson-LampreyJ. and AbrahamsonN.2006. Selection of ground motion time series and limits on scaling, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering26, 477–482.
