24.11.2012 Views

Annual Meeting - SCEC.org

Annual Meeting - SCEC.org

Annual Meeting - SCEC.org

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Poster Abstracts<br />

Results of this study show that, for certain structural systems, simulated accelerograms may produce median inelastic demand<br />

(at a collection of stations for each earthquake) different from a similar estimate using corresponding recorded motions. This<br />

difference is especially observed in the case of degrading and evolutionary systems at high non-linearity levels, and if cyclic<br />

response is of concern. Moreover, simulated records tend to produce nonlinear demands that are generally less heterogeneous<br />

compared to those caused by real records. The amount of this variability reduction depends on the structural period, the nonlinearity<br />

level and the hysteretic model used. Further investigation is needed to prove the statistical significance of these<br />

results and identify their source.<br />

ENGINEERING VALIDATION OF GROUND MOTION SIMULATION: PART 2. MAXIMUM INTERSTORY<br />

DRIFT RATIO AND CRITICAL STORY SPECTRA (B-091)<br />

C. Galasso, F. Zareian, I. Iervolino, and R.W. Graves<br />

The study presented in this poster complement the first one addressing the issue of ground motion simulation engineering<br />

validation in terms of elastic seismic response of multiple degrees of freedom (MDOF) systems. MDOF buildings considered<br />

in this study are modeled as equivalent continuum structures consisting of a combination of a flexural cantilever beam<br />

coupled with a shear cantilever beam (both with uniform mass distribution). Such models are useful tools for approximate<br />

analysis of structures, especially those tall, ranging from moment-resisting frames to shear walls systems and for which the<br />

higher-mode contributions may become important.<br />

In order to study dynamic response of a wide range of buildings, a number of simplified continuum systems were selected<br />

considering: (1) twenty oscillation periods between 0.1s and 10s; (2) three shear to flexural deformation ratios to represent<br />

respectively shear walls structures, dual systems, and moment-resisting frames; (3) two stiffness distribution along the height<br />

of the systems; i.e., uniform and linear. Demand spectra in term of maximum interstory drift (IDR) and critical story (i.e., the<br />

height of maximum interstory drift) were derived for the same four historical earthquakes of the first poster; i.e., 1979 M 6.5<br />

Imperial Valley earthquake, 1989 M 6.8 Loma Prieta earthquake, 1992 M 7.2 Landers earthquake and 1994 M 6.7 Northridge<br />

earthquake. In addition, for same selected case study structures, the IDR distribution over the height and the modal<br />

contributions are obtained and compared for both recorded and simulated time histories.<br />

Some differences between median estimate of IDR demand obtained by using real records and that obtained by simulations<br />

were observed, over a certain frequency range throughout the regions surrounding the event epicenter. These differences vary<br />

with the considered event and the structural period while they are fairly independent of the type of structure. Moreover, the<br />

record-to-record variability of seismic demand produced by simulated and recorded motions may be different. Further<br />

analysis is underway to explain the effect of various ground motion simulation parameters on the discrepancy found and to<br />

prove the statistical significance of these results.<br />

COMPLEXITY OF THE M6.3 2009 L’AQUILA (CENTRAL ITALY) EARTHQUAKE: SLIP INVERSION AND<br />

BROAD-BAND MODELING OF STRONG-GROUND MOTIONS (B-003)<br />

F. Gallovic, J. Zahradnik, G. Ameri, and F. Pacor<br />

Strong ground motion recordings of the M6.3 2009 L’Aquila (central Italy) earthquake are analyzed by a newly proposed<br />

inversion technique. The source model consists of Multiple Finite-Extent (MuFEx) subsources. Each subsource is characterized<br />

by an individual set of trial nucleation positions, rupture velocities and nucleation times. In addition to the best-fitting model,<br />

grid-searching all combinations of the subsource parameters allows also the uncertainty analysis. The MuFEx model requires a<br />

preliminary setup based on a technique free of strong constraints (constant rupture velocity over the whole fault, etc.). Here<br />

we used two published approaches of such a type, the truncated singular value decomposition and the iterative multiplepoint<br />

source deconvolution. Final adjustment of the MuFEX model can be performed by repeating the analysis while varying<br />

the dimensions and locations of the subsources. Both the best-fitting model and the uncertainty analysis of the low-frequency<br />

L’Aquila records suggest that the event consisted of two major episodes, one with the rupture propagating immediately after<br />

the nucleation in the up-dip direction, while the other being delayed by 3-4s and characterized by the dominant propagation<br />

towards SE along the deeper part of the fault. We point out that the data cannot distinguish between a temporal rupture arrest<br />

and a partial slow-down of the rupture, the latter suggested in other published ‘smooth’ models. We also present broad-band<br />

(0.1 - 10 Hz) modeling of strong ground motions constraining the source model by MuFEx inversion. The modeling allows<br />

linking distinct features of the observed wavefield to particular source and propagation effects and provides insights on<br />

strong-motion complexity from this moderate magnitude event. We utilize a hybrid integral-composite approach based on a<br />

k-square kinematic rupture model, combining low-frequency coherent and high-frequency incoherent source radiation and<br />

166 | Southern California Earthquake Center

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!