Site amplification models for Central and Eastern North America are developed from simulation results presented in a companion paper. Linear and nonlinear amplification functions are developed for response spectral (RS) accelerations and smoothed Fourier amplitude spectra (FAS). Linear RS model components include ground motion scaling with 30 m time-averaged shear wave velocity (VS30 scaling) and the effects of site period and sediment depth. These models are modular and can be used with or without period or depth terms. Including these terms, especially site period, is desirable and improves model estimation. Modularity also allows linear and nonlinear amplification terms to be developed and combined with linear amplification models without bias. Nonlinear RS models reduce linear amplification as VS30 decreases and the intensity of rock outcrop motions increases. Linear FAS models are tabulated amplification values as functions of VS30 and depth; nonlinear FAS models are analogous to those for the RS. A linear model for correcting a VS30 = 760 m/s rock condition to VS = 3,000 m/s is produced.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbrahamsonN. A., and SilvaW. J., 1997. Empirical response spectral attenuation relations for shallow crustal earthquakes, Seismological Research Letters68, 94–127.
2.
Al NomanM. N., and CramerC. H., 2015. Empirical ground-motion prediction equations for Eastern North America, in NGA-East: Median Ground-Motion Models for the Central and Eastern North America Region, PEER Rep. No. 2015/04, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, CA, 193–212.
3.
BooreD. M., and CampbellK. W., 2016. Adjusting Central and Eastern North America ground-motion intensity measures between sites with different reference-rock site conditions, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America107, 132–148.
4.
BooreD. M., JoynerW. B., and FumalT. E., 1997. Equations for estimating horizontal response spectra and peak acceleration from Western North American earthquakes: A summary of recent work, Seismological Research Letters68, 128–153.
5.
BooreD. M., StewartJ. P., and AtkinsonG. M., 2014. NGA-West2 equations for predicting PGA, PGV, and 5% damped PSA for shallow crustal earthquakes, Earthquake Spectra30, 1057–1085.
6.
BoraS. S., ScherbaumF., KuehnN., and StaffordP., 2014. Fourier spectral- and duration models for the generation of response spectra adjustable to different source-, propagation-, and site conditions, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering12, 467–493.
7.
Building Seismic Safety Council (BSSC), 2015. NEHRP Recommended Seismic Provisions for New Buildings and Other Structures, FEMA P-1050-1, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC, 515 pp.
8.
CampbellK. W., and BozorgniaY., 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.
9.
ChiouB. S. -J., and YoungsR. R., 2008. NGA Model for Average Horizontal Component of Peak Ground Motion and Response Spectra, PEER Rep. No. 2008/09, Pacific Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, CA.
10.
ChiouB. S. J., and YoungsR. R., 2014. Update of the Chiou and Youngs NGA model for the average horizontal component of peak ground motion and response spectra, Earthquake Spectra30, 1117–1153.
11.
ChoiY., and StewartJ. P., 2005. Nonlinear site amplification as function of 30 m shear wave velocity, Earthquake Spectra21, 1–30.
12.
DarraghR. B., AbrahamsonN. A., SilvaW. J., and GregorN., 2015. Development of hard rock ground-motion models for Region 2 of Central and Eastern North America, in NGA-East: Median Ground-Motion Models for the Central and Eastern North America Region, PEER Rep. No. 2015/04, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, CA, 51–69.
13.
FrankelA., MuellerC., BarnhardT., PerkinsD., LeyendeckerE. V., DickmanN., HansonS., and HopperM., 1996. National Seismic-Hazard Maps: Documentation June 1996, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA, 110 p.
14.
GouletC. A., BozorgniaY., KuehnN., Al AtikL., YoungsR. R., GravesR. W., and AtkinsonG. M., 2017. NGA-East Ground-Motion Models for the U.S. Geological Survey National Seismic Hazard Maps, PEER Rep. No. 2017/03, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, CA.
15.
GouletC. A., KishidaT., AnchetaT. D., CramerC. H., DarraghR. B., SilvaW. J., HashashY. M. A., HarmonJ. A., StewartJ. P., WooddellK. E., and YoungsR. R., 2014. PEER NGA-East Database, PEER Rep. No. 2014/17, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, CA.
16.
GraizerV., 2015. Ground-motion prediction equations for the Central and Eastern United States, in NGA-East: Median Ground-Motion Models for the Central and Eastern North America Region, PEER Rep. No. 2015/04, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, CA, 213–249.
17.
HarmonJ., HashashY. M. A., StewartJ. P., RathjeE. M., CampbellK. W., SilvaW. J., XuB., MusgroveM., and IlhanO., 2018. Site amplification functions for Central and Eastern North America – Part I: Simulation dataset development, Earthquake Spectra35(2), in press.
18.
HashashY. M. A., KottkeA. R., StewartJ. P., CampbellK. W., KimB., MossC., NikolaouS., RathjeE. M., and SilvaW. J., 2014. Reference rock site condition for Central and Eastern North America, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America104, 684–701.
19.
HassaniB., and AtkinsonG. M., 2015. Referenced empirical ground-motion model for Eastern North America, in NGA-East: Median Ground-Motion Models for the Central and Eastern North America Region, PEER Rep. No. 2015/04, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, CA, 251–272.
20.
HassaniB., and AtkinsonG. M., 2016. Site-effects model for Central and Eastern North America based on peak frequency, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America106, 2197–2213.
21.
HassaniB., and AtkinsonG. M., 2017. Site-effects model for Central and Eastern North America based on peak frequency and average shear-wave velocity, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America108, 338–350.
22.
HollenbackJ., KuehnN., GouletC. A., and AbrahamsonN., 2015. PEER NGA-East median ground-motion models, in NGA-East: Median Ground-Motion Models for the Central and Eastern North America Region, PEER Rep. No. 2015/04, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, CA, 273–309.
23.
International Code Council, 2017. 2018 International Building Code, Country Club Hills, IL.
24.
KamaiR., AbrahamsonN. A., and SilvaW. J., 2014. Nonlinear horizontal site amplification for constraining the NGA-West2 GMPEs, Earthquake Spectra30, 1223–1240.
25.
KimB., HashashY. M. A., StewartJ. P., RathjeE. M., HarmonJ. A., MusgroveM. I., CampbellK. W., and SilvaW. J., 2016. Relative differences between nonlinear and equivalent-linear 1-D site response analyses, Earthquake Spectra32, 1845–1865.
26.
MoonS. -W., HashashY. M. A., and ParkD., 2017. USGS hazard map compatible depth-dependent seismic site coefficients for the Upper Mississippi Embayment, KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering21, 220–231.
27.
Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER), 2015a. NGA-East: Median Ground-Motion Models for the Central and Eastern North America Region, PEER Rep. No. 2015/04, Berkeley, CA.
28.
Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER), 2015b. NGA-East: Adjustments to Median Ground-Motion Models for the Central and Eastern North America Region, PEER Rep. No. 2015/08, Berkeley, CA.
29.
ParkerG. A., StewartJ. P., HashashY. M. A., RathjeE. M., CampbellK. W., and SilvaW. J., 2018. Empirical linear seismic site amplification in Central and Eastern North America, Earthquake Spectra35(2), in press.
30.
SeyhanE., and StewartJ. P., 2014. Semi-empirical nonlinear site amplification from NGA-West2 data and simulations, Earthquake Spectra30, 1241–1256.
31.
StewartJ. P., ParkerG. A., HarmonJ. A., AtkinsonG. M., BooreD. M., DarraghR. B., SilvaW. J., and HashashY. M. A., 2017. Expert Panel Recommendations for Ergodic Site Amplification in Central and Eastern North America, PEER Rep. No. 2017/04, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, CA.
32.
WallingM., SilvaW., and AbrahamsonN., 2008. Nonlinear site amplification factors for constraining the NGA models, Earthquake Spectra24, 243–255.
33.
YenierE., and AtkinsonG. M., 2015. Regionally-adjustable generic ground-motion prediction equation based on equivalent point-source simulations: Application to Central and Eastern North America, in NGA-East: Median Ground-Motion Models for the Central and Eastern North America Region, PEER Rep. No. 2015/04, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, CA, 85–118.
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.
