Seismological and Engineering Demand Misfits for Evaluating Simulated Ground Motion Records

Abstract

Simulated ground motions have recently gained more attention in seismology and earthquake engineering. Since different characteristics of waveforms are expected to influence alternative structural response parameters, evaluation of simulations, for key components of seismological and engineering points of view is necessary. When seismological aspect is of concern, consideration of a representative set of ground motion parameters is imperative. Besides, to test the applicability of simulations in earthquake engineering, structural demand parameters should simultaneously cover a descriptive set. Herein, simulations are evaluated through comparison of seismological against engineering misfits, individually defined in terms of log-scale misfit and goodness-of-fit score. For numerical investigations, stochastically simulated records of three earthquakes are considered: The 1992 Erzincan-Turkey, 1999 Duzce-Turkey and 2009 L’Aquila-Italy events. For misfit evaluation, seismological parameters include amplitude, duration and frequency content, while engineering parameters contain spectral acceleration, velocity and seismic input energy. Overall, the same trend between both misfits is observed. All misfits for Erzincan and Duzce located on basins are larger than those corresponding to L’Aquila mostly placed on stiff sites. The engineering misfits, particularly in terms of input energy measures, are larger than seismological misfits. In summary, the proposed misfit evaluation methodology seems useful to evaluate simulations for engineering practice.

Selection and Scaling Validation of Ground Motions According to Tbec-2018 for the Seismic Assessment of Masonry Structures

“…The dataset of simulated ground motions used in this study consists of 7358 time-series from simulations performed in different regions in Turkey, including Istanbul, Duzce, Van, Afyon, and Erzincan. Among these regions, Duzce, Van, Afyon and Erzincan simulation parameters are validated against previous events [14,[30][31][32] while for Istanbul, the parameters for the hypothetical scenarios are validated against ground motion models [33]. For all regions, three distinct soil types characterised by mean Vs30 values of 255, 310, and 520 m/s were considered in the simulations.…”

Seismic Assessment of Typological Masonry Buildings Using Simulated Ground Motion Records: A Case Study for Azores, Portugal

“…Ozsarac et al [23] employed a stochastic finite-fault method to investigate the potential of simulated records in the probabilistic seismic assessment of reinforced concrete bridges. As proposed by Motazedian and Atkinson [10], Finite-fault stochastic simulations have been tested and verified for various regions of the world from both seismological and engineering perspectives [24,25]. Additionally, the synthetic records can be used in lieu of or in conjunction with recorded accelerograms to perform ground motion selection.…”

Investigating the Use of Natural and Artificial Records for Prediction of Seismic Response of Regular and Irregular RC Bridges Considering Displacement Directions

“…However, limited research is available to investigate the influence of using different types of synthetic ground motion records on the seismic response predictions of structures, particularly for bridges. Some researchers have studied the use of synthetic records for the seismic evaluation of structures (e.g., [1][2][3][4]), while other studies suggest that more research is needed on the use of artificially generated records for the purpose of seismic design and performance assessment of structures due to different results observed from such ground motion records (e.g., [5,6]). This paper illustrates the use of artificial and natural ground motion records for the seismic evaluation of continuous multi-span reinforced concrete (RC) bridges using 2D and 3D non-linear dynamic analyses.…”