Performance-Based Design in the Central and Eastern United States

Judd, Johnn P.; Charney, Finley A.

doi:10.1061/9780784413357.207

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The spectral ratio of the 1,000-year return period to the 100year return period was observed to increase from west to east across the continental United States, reflecting the greater variation between return periods at site locations for the seismic groups in the central and eastern United States. This finding was not unexpected given the previous seismic hazard curve observations (Judd and Charney 2014). The trend of increasing the spectral ratio from west to east correlated most closely with the 2002 Fig.…”

Section: Observationssupporting

confidence: 87%

“…Response spectra for the eastern and central United States could be characterized as having a higher frequency content, on average, than characteristic response spectra for the western United States (Chung and Bernreuter 1981;Judd and Charney 2014). This situation can be explained, in part, by the observed areas of higher attenuation in the western United States and areas with relatively lower attenuation in the central and eastern United States (Benz et al 1997;Chung and Bernreuter 1981;Solomon and Toksöz 1970).…”

Section: Appendix Regional Differences In Seismic Acceleration Respomentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Attenuation has been a factor in both probabilistic and deterministic seismic design, and attenuation rates have been used to estimate ground motions for earthquake design parameters (Campbell 1997). In the central and eastern United States, greater uncertainty in attenuation and response exists because of a relatively low frequency of earthquakes in comparison with the western United States (Judd and Charney 2014). The lower attenuation exhibited in the central and eastern United States, combined with a greater average distance from the event-generating faults, led to seismic hazard curves that were dominated by far-field events, particularly as the spectral period increased (Judd and Charney 2014).…”

Section: Appendix Regional Differences In Seismic Acceleration Respomentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the central and eastern United States, greater uncertainty in attenuation and response exists because of a relatively low frequency of earthquakes in comparison with the western United States (Judd and Charney 2014). The lower attenuation exhibited in the central and eastern United States, combined with a greater average distance from the event-generating faults, led to seismic hazard curves that were dominated by far-field events, particularly as the spectral period increased (Judd and Charney 2014). In 2014, Judd and Charney (2014) observed temporal differences in the seismic hazard curves and found that the average ratio of spectral acceleration for a 72-year return period to the maximum considered event (MCE) was 20% for the western United States and 10% for the eastern United States.…”

Section: Appendix Regional Differences In Seismic Acceleration Respomentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Reduction of Seismic Acceleration Parameters for Temporary Bridge Design

Stucki¹,

Bruneau

2018

J. Bridge Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

No prevailing method is currently available for reducing the seismic response acceleration parameters PGA, S S , and S 1 from the probabilistic seismic hazard values used for permanent bridge design to levels suitable for temporary bridge design. A method of spectral reduction using spectral reduction factors was proposed to reduce the previously published spectral response acceleration parameters, the peak ground acceleration (PGA), the short-period response acceleration coefficient (S s), and the long-period response acceleration coefficient (S 1), from the 1,000-year return period used for permanent bridge design to a return period suitable for temporary bridge design. The proposed spectral reduction factors are the ratios of the return period used for the seismic design of a permanent bridge to the return period used for the seismic design of a temporary bridge. Spectral ratios were obtained for each of the three seismic response acceleration coefficients for 100 locations around the United States. The examination of the short-and long-period response acceleration coefficients are presented in this paper. As a result of this examination, two spectral reduction factors for the seismic design of temporary bridges were proposed: one spectral reduction factor, of 2.5, to reduce each PGA, S S , and S 1 parameter for the western United States, and one spectral reduction factor, of 3.75, to reduce each PGA, S S , and S 1 parameter for the central and eastern United States.

show abstract

Section: Observationssupporting

confidence: 87%

Section: Appendix Regional Differences In Seismic Acceleration Respomentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Appendix Regional Differences In Seismic Acceleration Respomentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Appendix Regional Differences In Seismic Acceleration Respomentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Reduction of Seismic Acceleration Parameters for Temporary Bridge Design

Stucki¹,

Bruneau

2018

J. Bridge Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Differences between seismic ground shaking that occurs more frequently than the MCE are plainly evident in many regions and across a wide range of low-hazard levels [5]. For example, Fig.…”

Section: Performance-based Design In the Central And Eastern United Smentioning

confidence: 99%

Seismic collapse prevention system for steel-frame buildings

Judd

Charney

2016

Journal of Constructional Steel Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents an innovative-collapse prevention‖ system for seismic resistant design in new construction and existing buildings. The collapse prevention system consists of a collapse inhibiting mechanism, such as a pair of slack cables or loose linkages, working in tandem with the main lateral-force resisting system and engaging the gravity framing to avert collapse. In this holistic design approach, the main lateral-force resisting system and gravity framing are used to provide adequate performance under low to moderate level ground motions, and the collapse inhibiting mechanism is deployed as a backup to provide life safety under extreme ground motions. The collapse inhibiting mechanism may be augmented with energy dissipation devices (small viscous fluid or visco-elastic solid dampers) to enhance performance under wind or small seismic events. Analytical performance of archetypical 1-story, 2-story, 4-story, and 8-story steel-frame buildings employing collapse prevention systems indicate that collapse prevention systems substantially reduce the probability of collapse during Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) ground motions, depending on the building and collapse inhibiting mechanism deployed. Seismic hazard data suggests that collapse prevention systems would provide a 1% or less risk of collapse in 50 years in many locations, mostly in the central and eastern United States.

show abstract