Objective assessment of the seismic response of engineering systems is achievable through estimating the rate of exceedance (risk) of the engineering-demand parameters (EDPs), which are usually obtained by performing dynamic analyses with incrementally scaled seed ground motions. However, assigning rates of occurrence to such EDPs is difficult because the input ground motions are inconsistent with those that go into the hazard estimation. The Conditional Scenario Spectra (CSS) are a set of realistic ground-motion spectra with assigned rates of occurrence that reproduce the hazard at a site over various hazard levels and over a period range. The CSS methodology is an improvement over the CS method in that it includes the additional step of adjusting the rates to ensure the consistency of the target hazard. In this article, a step-by-step procedure for estimating the CSS is presented. The analysis of a structural system illustrates the uses of the CSS set for assessing EDPs over a wide range of demand intensity so that the estimation of the risk of these EDPs can be accomplished with ease.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbrahamsonN. A., 2019. Conditional Scenario Spectra, GitHub Database, available at https://github.com/abrahamson/css (last accessed 11 January 2019).
2.
AbrahamsonN. A., and Al AtikL., 2010. Scenario spectra for design ground motions and risk calculation, in Proceedings of 9th U.S. National and 10th Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, CA.
3.
AbrahamsonN. A., SilvaW. J., and KamaiR., 2014. Summary of the ASK14 ground motion relation for active crustal regions, Earthquake Spectra30, 1025–1055.
4.
AbrahamsonN. A., and YunatciA. A., 2010. Ground motion occurrence rates for scenario spectra, Paper No. 10, in Fifth International Conferences on Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics, Missouri University of Science and Technology, Rolla, MO.
5.
American Concrete Institute Committee 318, 2011. Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary ACI 318-11, ACI, Farmington Hills, MI.
6.
American Society of Civil Engineers, 2010. Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE/SEI 7-10, Reston, VA.
ArtetaC. A., MazzoniS., and AbrahamsonN. A., 2018. Evaluating ground-motion modification procedures with the Conditional Scenario Spectra, in Proceedings, 11th National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 25–29 June, 2018, Los Angeles, CA.
9.
BakerJ. W., 2011. Conditional mean spectrum: Tool for ground-motion selection, Journal of Structural Engineering137, 322–331.
10.
BakerJ. W., 2015. Efficient analytical fragility function fitting using dynamic structural analysis, Earthquake Spectra31, 579–599.
11.
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., 2006a. Vector-Valued Ground Motion Intensity Measures for Probabilistic Seismic Demand Analysis, PEER Report 2006/08, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, CA.
13.
BakerJ. W., and CornellC. A., 2006b. Which spectral acceleration are you using?, Earthquake Spectra22, 293–312.
14.
BakerJ. W., and CornellC. A., 2008. Vector-valued intensity measures incorporating spectral shape for prediction of structural response, Journal of Earthquake Engineering12, 534–554.
15.
BakerJ. W., and JayaramN., 2008. Correlation of spectral acceleration values from NGA ground motion models, Earthquake Spectra24, 299–317.
16.
BooreD. M., StewartJ. P., SeyhanE., and AtkinsonG. M., 2014. NGA-West2 equations for predicting PGA, PGV, and 5% damped PSA for shallow crustal earthquakes, Earthquake Spectra30, 1057–1085.
17.
BradleyB. A., 2010. A generalized conditional intensity measure approach and holistic ground-motion selection, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics39, 1321–1342.
18.
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.
19.
CarltonB., and AbrahamsonN., 2014. Issues and approaches for implementing conditional mean spectra in practice, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America104, 503–512.
20.
ChandramohanR., BakerJ. W., and DeierleinG. G., 2016. Quantifying the influence of ground motion duration on structural collapse capacity using spectrally equivalent records, Earthquake Spectra32, 927–950.
21.
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.
22.
ChopraA. K., and McKennaF., 2016. Modeling viscous damping in nonlinear response history analysis of buildings for earthquake excitation, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics45, 193–211.
EadsL., MirandaE., KrawinklerH., and LignosD. G., 2013. An efficient method for estimating the collapse risk of structures in seismic regions, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics42, 25–41.
25.
GouletC. A., HaseltonC. B., Mitrani-ReiserJ., BeckJ. L., DeierleinG. G., PorterK. A., and StewartJ. P., 2007. Evaluation of the seismic performance of a code-conforming reinforced-concrete frame building—From seismic hazard to collapse safety and economic losses, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics36, 1973–1997.
26.
HaindlM., HubeM., and ArtetaC. A., 2015. Seismic performance assessment of a reinforced concrete shear wall house, in VII Congreso Nacional de Ingenieria Sismica, 27–29 May, 2015, Bogotá, Colombia.
27.
IdrissI. M., 2014. An NGA-West2 empirical model for estimating the horizontal spectral values generated by shallow crustal earthquakes, Earthquake Spectra30, 1155–1177.
28.
JalayerF., and CornellC. A., 2009. Alternative non-linear demand estimation methods for probability-based seismic assessments, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics38, 951–972.
29.
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.
30.
KrawinklerH., and MirandaE., 2004. Performance-based earthquake engineering, in Earthquake Engineering: From Engineering Seismology to Performance-Based Engineering (BozorgniaY. and BerteroV. V., eds.), CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 561–635.
31.
KwongN. S., ChopraA. K., and McGuireR. K., 2015a. Evaluation of ground motion selection and modification procedures using synthetic ground motions, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics44, 1841–1861.
32.
KwongN. S., ChopraA. K., and McGuireR. K., 2015b. A ground motion selection procedure for enforcing hazard consistency and estimating seismic demand hazard curves, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics44, 2467–2487.
33.
LinT., HarmsenS. C., BakerJ. W., and LucoN., 2013a. Conditional spectrum computation incorporating multiple causal earthquakes and ground-motion prediction models, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America103, 1103–1116.
34.
LinT., HaseltonC. B., and BakerJ. W., 2013b. Conditional spectrum-based ground motion selection. Part I: Hazard consistency for risk-based assessments, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics42, 1847–1865.
35.
McGuireR. K., 2004. Seismic Hazard and Risk Analysis, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, CA, 240 pp.
36.
McKennaF., FenvesG. L., ScottM. H., and JeremicB., 2000. Open System for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (OpenSees), Version 2.4.3, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, CA, http://opensees.berkeley.edu/index.php.
37.
MoehleJ. P., and DeierleinG. G., 2004. A framework methodology for performance-based earthquake engineering, Paper No. 679, in 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 1–6 August, 2004, Vancouver, Canada.
38.
PanzaG. F., IrikuraK., KoutevaM., PeresanA., WangZ., and SaragoniR., 2011. Advanced seismic hazard assessment, Pure and Applied Geophysics168, 1–9.
39.
RaghunandanM., and LielA. B., 2013. Effect of ground motion duration on earthquake-induced structural collapse, Structural Safety41, 119–133.
40.
RenaultP., and KurmannD., 2013. Comparison of uniform hazard spectra and conditional spectra approach in the framework of fragility curve development, in 22nd International Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology, 18–23 August, 2013, San Francisco, CA.
41.
ScottM. H., and FenvesG. L., 2006. Plastic hinge integration methods for force-based beam-column elements, Journal of Structural Engineering132, 244–252.
42.
VamvatsikosD., and CornellC. A., 2002. Incremental dynamic analysis, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics31, 491–514.
