2003
DOI: 10.1201/9781420039788.ch1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Geotechnical Earthquake Considerations

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
212
0
37

Year Published

2007
2007
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 172 publications
(251 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
2
212
0
37
Order By: Relevance
“…(15), c 1 , c 2 , c 3 , and c 4 are obtained from Raghu Kanth and Iyengar (2007). The normal cumulative distribution function has a value which is most efficiently expressed in terms of the standard normal variables (z) which can be computed for any random variables using transformation as given below (Kramer, 1996):…”
Section: Seismic Hazard Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…(15), c 1 , c 2 , c 3 , and c 4 are obtained from Raghu Kanth and Iyengar (2007). The normal cumulative distribution function has a value which is most efficiently expressed in terms of the standard normal variables (z) which can be computed for any random variables using transformation as given below (Kramer, 1996):…”
Section: Seismic Hazard Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For assessing the seismic hazard the important factors to be considered are: past earthquake data, earthquake source characteristics in the region and the attenuation relationships. Seismic hazard may be analyzed deterministically by considering a particular earthquake scenario, or probabilistically, by considering the uncertainties involved in earthquake size, location, and time of occurrence (Kramer, 1996). In this paper an attempt has been made to estimate seismic hazard at rock level in terms of peak horizontal acceleration (PHA) and spectral acceleration (SA) using probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Hynes-Griffin and Franklin (1984) applied the Newmark sliding block analysis to over 350 accelerograms and studied the correlation between pseudostatic factor of safety and calculated deformation based on sliding block analysis. It was concluded that when the pseudo-static factor of safety is more than unity and horizontal earthquake coefficient, a h = 0.5 a max /g, there will not be significant deformations (Kramer 2003). For the selection of appropriate value of horizontal seismic coefficient, Bureau of Indian Standard (BIS:1893-2002) divided India into four different zones (II to V) and horizontal (a h ) and vertical (a v ) seismic coefficients values are recommended for different zones.…”
Section: Pseudo-static Analysismentioning
confidence: 98%
“…based on the assumption that IM is taken as the base-10 logarithm of a ground-motion parameter such as the peak ground acceleration (PGA) or acceleration response spectral ordinate (S a ) [15]. Note that M =M + ε M and R =R + ε R , so the total prediction error may be expressed as:…”
Section: Uncertainty Analysis Of An Eews Operationmentioning
confidence: 99%