review of gmsm solicitation and methods nicolas luco, on behalf of the peer gmsm program
Post on 02-Jan-2016
33 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Review of GMSM Solicitation and Methods
Nicolas Luco,
On behalf ofThe PEER GMSM Program
2nd Annual PEER Ground Motion Selection & Modification (GMSM) Program Workshop29 October 2007
NSF Year 7 Site Visit
Outline of PresentationOutline of Presentation
Review of GMSM Objectives (Solicited)
List of GMSM Methods for Objectives 3 & 4
Summaries of GMSM Methods for Objectives 3 & 4
List of GMSM Methods for Objectives 1 & 2
NSF Year 7 Site Visit
GMSM ObjectivesGMSM Objectives
Average (or average & dispersion) of structural response for a given response spectrum
Why not? Because probability of exceedance in T years (PE) of response spectrum is not typically known.
Median & probability distribution (CDF) of structural response for a given Sa(T1), M, R (and S, F)*
Why? Because PE of Sa(T1) and associated M, R are typically known (e.g., via PSHA and deaggregation).
Median and probability distribution (CDF) of structural response for a given M, R (and S, F)*
Why? For scenarios or "attenuation relations" for structural response.
* Hereafter M, R, S, & F will be abbreviated to M, R.
NSF Year 7 Site Visit
GMSM Methods for Objectives 3 & GMSM Methods for Objectives 3 & 44
Index # Name Developer(s) Objective(s)
4, 53 "Sa(T1) Scaling" Shome 3 and 4
67 "ATC-58 [35% Draft] -- Near-Field Set" Whittaker et al (Zareian) 3 and 4
9980-9989 "Building Code Selection Mini-Study" Baker 4
16 "Semi-Automated Selection & Scaling …" Rathje & Kottke 4
17 "Building Code (purposefully extreme selection)" Watson-Lamprey 4
10 "Conditional Mean Spectrum Selection w/ Scaling" Baker 4
15 "Genetic Algorithm Selection (based on CMS)" Naeim, Alimoradi 4 or 3?
24 "Semi-Automated Selection & Scaling - to match CMS" Rathje, Kottke 4 or 3?
45 "Design Ground Motion Library (DGML)" Power, Youngs, Wang 3 and 4
20 "Target Spectrum Based on Epsilon Correlations ..." Stewart, Skyers, Goulet 3? and 4
31 "ε Selection with Sde(T1) Scaling" Tothong, Luco 3? and 4
57, 58 "Sa(T1) Scaling Considering Spectral Shape" Shome 3, 4
43, 48 "ATC-63 - Far[/Near]-Field set with the ε correction" Haselton, Kircher 4
6 "Vector of Record Properties Identified by Proxy" Watson-Lamprey 4
11 "Inelastic Response Surface Scaling - Basic set" Shantz 4
26, 27 "Sdi(T1, dy) Scaling" Tothong, Luco 3, 4
34, 35 "IM1I&2E Selection/Scaling" Luco, Tothong 3, 4
51 "Inelastic Response Surface Scaling - With post-processing" Shantz 3
"Sa(T1) Methods"
"Uniform Hazard Spectrum (UHS) Methods"
"Conditional Mean Spectrum (CMS) Methods"
"Spectral Shape Proxy Methods"
"Inelastic Ground Motion Parameter Methods"
NSF Year 7 Site Visit
"Sa(T1) Methods""Sa(T1) Methods" (4 & 53, 67) (4 & 53, 67)
Selection: GMs consistent with given M, R Scaling: Match given Sa(T1)
(Source: ATC-58 35% Draft for Method #67)
NSF Year 7 Site Visit
"Sa(T1) Methods""Sa(T1) Methods" (4 & 53, 67) (4 & 53, 67)
Selection: GMs consistent with given M, R Scaling: Match given Sa(T1)
(Source: Shome for Methods #4 & 53)
NSF Year 7 Site Visit
"UHS Methods""UHS Methods" (9980-9989) (9980-9989)
Selection: GMs with spectral shape similar to UHS, perhaps consistent with given M, R
Scaling: "Closely match" UHS
(Source: Haselton for Method #9980)
NSF Year 7 Site Visit
UHS for our M, R, Sa(T1) ScenarioUHS for our M, R, Sa(T1) Scenario
Suppose that the only fault near the S=400m/s site is F=Strike-Slip at R=10km capable of M=7 every 50yrs
In this case, 2500yr Sa(Ti) is equal to 98%-ile Sa(Ti) for given M, R, S, F (since 1/50yrs*2%=1/2500yrs)
0.01
0.10
1.00
10.00
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00
Period [seconds]
Sa
[g]
Median Spectrum from Attenuation Relation
98%-ile Spectrum from Attenuation Relation
2500yr UHS
NSF Year 7 Site Visit
"CMS Methods" – Objective 4 "CMS Methods" – Objective 4 (10, 15?, (10, 15?, 24?)24?)
Selection: GMs with spectral shape similar to CMS, perhaps consistent with given M, R
Scaling: Match given Sa(T1) (Method #10) or "closely match" CMS (Methods #24,
15?)
(Source: Haselton for Method #10)
10-1
100
101
10-2
10-1
100
101
Period [sec]
Spe
ctra
l Acc
eler
atio
n [g
]
Scenario: M7, Method: 10, Building: C, Record Set: Combined, Obj.: 4
Median + 2 Prediction
Conditional MeanMedian of Rec. Set
Individual Records
NSF Year 7 Site Visit
"CMS Methods" – Objective 4 "CMS Methods" – Objective 4 (10, 15?, (10, 15?, 24?)24?)
Selection: GMs with spectral shape similar to CMS, perhaps consistent with given M, R
Scaling: Match given Sa(T1) (Method #10) or "closely match" CMS (Methods #24,
15?)
(Source: Haselton for Method #15)
10-1
100
101
10-2
10-1
100
101
Period [sec]
Spe
ctra
l Acc
eler
atio
n [g
]
Scenario: M7, Method: 15, Building: C, Record Set: Combined, Obj.: 3,4
Median + 2 Prediction
Conditional MeanMedian of Rec. Set
Individual Records
NSF Year 7 Site Visit
"CMS Methods" – Objective 4 "CMS Methods" – Objective 4 (10, 15?, (10, 15?, 24?)24?)
Selection: GMs with spectral shape similar to CMS, perhaps consistent with given M, R
Scaling: Match given Sa(T1) (Method #10) or "closely match" CMS (Methods #24,
15?)
(Source: Haselton for Method #24)
10-1
100
101
10-2
10-1
100
101
Period [sec]
Spe
ctra
l Acc
eler
atio
n [g
]
Scenario: M7, Method: 24, Building: C, Record Set: Combined, Obj.: 3,4
Median + 2 Prediction
Conditional MeanMedian of Rec. Set
Individual Records
NSF Year 7 Site Visit
"CMS Methods" – Objective 3 "CMS Methods" – Objective 3 (45)(45)
Selection: GMs with spectral shape approximating dis- tribution about CMS (Obj. 3) or similar to
CMS (Obj. 4), and with consistent M, R Scaling: Match given Sa(T1)
(Source: Geomatrix Consultants for Method #45)
NSF Year 7 Site Visit
Review of Conditional Mean Review of Conditional Mean SpectrumSpectrum
CMS ≡ expected spectrum for given Sa(T1), M, R
where = correlation between lnSa(Ti) and lnSa(T1)
],|)1([ln)1(
],|)([ln],),1(|)([ln
RMTSaT
RMTiSaERMTSaTiSaE
(Source: Baker for Method #10)
e.g., …M = 7R = 10kmSa(T1) = "2"
NSF Year 7 Site Visit
"Proxy Methods" – "Proxy Methods" – (T1) (T1) (20, 31) (20, 31)
Selection: GMs consistent with given (T1) and M, R
Scaling: Match given Sa(T1)
(Source: Haselton for Method #20)
10-1
100
101
10-2
10-1
100
101
Period [sec]
Spe
ctra
l Acc
eler
atio
n [g
]
Scenario: M7, Method: 20, Building: C, Record Set: Combined, Obj.: 4
Median + 2 Prediction
Conditional MeanMedian of Rec. Set
Individual Records
e.g., for …(T1) = 1-3M = 6.7-7.3R = 0-42kmS = 215-560m/s
NSF Year 7 Site Visit
"Proxy Methods" – "Proxy Methods" – (T1) (T1) (20, 31) (20, 31)
Selection: GMs consistent with given (T1) and M, R
Scaling: Match given Sa(T1)
(Source: Haselton for Method #31)
10-1
100
101
10-2
10-1
100
101
Period [sec]
Spe
ctra
l Acc
eler
atio
n [g
]
Scenario: M7, Method: 31, Building: C, Record Set: Combined, Obj.: 4
Median + 2 Prediction
Conditional MeanMedian of Rec. Set
Individual Records
NSF Year 7 Site Visit
"Proxy Methods" – Sa(Ti) Vector "Proxy Methods" – Sa(Ti) Vector (57 (57 & 58)& 58)
Selection: GMs consistent with expected (Obj. 4) or distribution of (Obj. 3) Sa(0.5T1) & Sa(2T1) for given Sa(T1), M, R, and consistent with given M, R
Scaling: Match given Sa(T1)
(Source: Shome for Methods #57 & 58)
NSF Year 7 Site Visit
"Inelastic Methods" – Obj. 4 "Inelastic Methods" – Obj. 4 (6) (6)
Selection: GMs with expected Sdi(T1,R)/Sde(T1) consistent with that and DurUNI, PGV, Sa(2T1) for given Sa(T1), M, R
Scaling: Match given Sa(T1)
DurUNI, PGV, Sa(2T1) from available ground motion prediction equations (a.k.a., attenuation relations)
Expected Sdi(T1,R)/Sde(T1) for DurUNI, PGV, Sa(T1), Sa(2T1) computed as part of method
NSF Year 7 Site Visit
"Inelastic Methods" – Obj. 4 "Inelastic Methods" – Obj. 4 (11) (11)
Selection: GMs with Inelastic Displacement Surface similar to that expected for given Sa(T1), M, R
Scaling: Optimal fit to expected (i.e., target) IDS
1 2 3 4 5Periods 2
4
6
8
2
4
6
Dmaxcm
1 2 3 4 5Periods
(Source: Shantz for Method #11)
CMS x CR(R,T,)
Sdi(T,R)/Sde(T)
NSF Year 7 Site Visit
"Inelastic Methods" – Obj. 4 "Inelastic Methods" – Obj. 4 (27, 35) (27, 35)
Selection: Random Scaling: Match expected Sdi(T1,dy) (Method #27)
or IM1I&2E (Method #35) for given Sa(T1), M, R
dy from Nonlinear Static Pushover curve
Expected Sdi(T1,dy) from Tothong & Cornell (2006)
Expected IM1I&2E from expected Sdi(T1,dy) and Tothong & Cornell (2006)
222
2112&1 )]([)],([ TSPFdTSPFIM deydiEI
(Luco, 2002)
NSF Year 7 Site Visit
Selection: Random Scaling: Approximate distribution of Sdi(T1,dy)
(Method #26) or IM1I&2E (Method #34) for given Sa(T1), M, R
Distribution of Sdi(T1,dy) or IM1I&2E also from Tothong & Cornell (2006)
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 40
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
# Std. Dev. from Mean of ln(IM)
PD
F o
f ln
(IM
)
"Inelastic Methods" – Obj. 3 "Inelastic Methods" – Obj. 3 (26, 34) (26, 34)
10
GM
s
7 G
Ms
7 G
Ms
2 G
Ms
2 G
Ms
0 G
Ms
0 G
Ms
NSF Year 7 Site Visit
GMSM Methods for Objectives 1 & GMSM Methods for Objectives 1 & 22
Index # Name Developer(s) Objective(s)
3 "Bin Selection with Scaling by Elastic GMPE" Stewart (Tothong) 1 and 2
5, 25 "Sdi(T1, dy) Scaling" Tothong, Luco 1 and 2, 2
22 "Malhotra 2007 Method" Malhotra 1 and 2
28, 29 "ε Selection with Sde(T1) Scaling" Tothong, Luco 1 ans 2, 2
32, 33 "IM1I&2E Selection/Scaling" Luco, Tothong 1 and 2, 2
36 "Bin Selection with no Scaling" Tothong 1 and 2
41 "Building Code …" Baker 2
49, 50 "ATC-63 - Far[/Near]-Field set with the ε correction" Haselton, Kircher 1 and 2
52, 56 "Sa(T1) Scaling Considering Spectral Shape" Shome 1 and 2, 2
54, 55 "Sa(T1) Scaling" Shome 1 and 2, or 2
59 "Vector of Record Properties Identified by Proxy" Watson-Lamprey 2
61, 70 "Design Ground Motion Library (DGML)" Power, Youngs, Wang 1 and 2, 2
62 "Conditional Mean Spectrum Selection with Scaling" Baker 2
63 "Inelastic Response Surface Scaling - Basic set" Shantz 2
65 "Inelastic Response Surface Scaling - With post-processing " Shantz 1 and 2
66 "Genetic Algorithm Selection (based on median spectrum)" Naeim, Alimoradi 1? and 2
68 "ATC-58 - Near-Field Set" Whittaker et al (Zareian) 1 and 2
NSF Year 7 Site Visit
GMSM Methods for Objectives 3 & GMSM Methods for Objectives 3 & 44
Index # Name Developer(s) Objective(s)
4, 53 "Sa(T1) Scaling" Shome 3 and 4
67 "ATC-58 [35% Draft] -- Near-Field Set" Whittaker et al (Zareian) 3 and 4
9980-9989 "Building Code Selection Mini-Study" Baker 4
16 "Semi-Automated Selection & Scaling …" Rathje & Kottke 4
17 "Building Code (purposefully extreme selection)" Watson-Lamprey 4
10 "Conditional Mean Spectrum Selection w/ Scaling" Baker 4
15 "Genetic Algorithm Selection (based on CMS)" Naeim, Alimoradi 4 or 3?
24 "Semi-Automated Selection & Scaling - to match CMS" Rathje, Kottke 4 or 3?
45 "Design Ground Motion Library (DGML)" Power, Youngs, Wang 3 and 4
20 "Target Spectrum Based on Epsilon Correlations ..." Stewart, Skyers, Goulet 3? and 4
31 "ε Selection with Sde(T1) Scaling" Tothong, Luco 3? and 4
57, 58 "Sa(T1) Scaling Considering Spectral Shape" Shome 3, 4
43, 48 "ATC-63 - Far[/Near]-Field set with the ε correction" Haselton, Kircher 4
6 "Vector of Record Properties Identified by Proxy" Watson-Lamprey 4
11 "Inelastic Response Surface Scaling - Basic set" Shantz 4
26, 27 "Sdi(T1, dy) Scaling" Tothong, Luco 3, 4
34, 35 "IM1I&2E Selection/Scaling" Luco, Tothong 3, 4
51 "Inelastic Response Surface Scaling - With post-processing" Shantz 3
"Sa(T1) Methods"
"Uniform Hazard Spectrum (UHS) Methods"
"Conditional Mean Spectrum (CMS) Methods"
"Spectral Shape Proxy Methods"
"Inelastic Ground Motion Parameter Methods"
NSF Year 7 Site Visit
Extra Slides …Extra Slides …
NSF Year 7 Site Visit
"Proxy Methods" – Objective 3 "Proxy Methods" – Objective 3 (30)(30)
Selection: GMs consistent with given (T1) and M, R
Scaling: To given Sa(T1)
(Source: Haselton for Method #30)
10-1
100
101
10-2
10-1
100
101
Period [sec]
Spe
ctra
l Acc
eler
atio
n [g
]Scenario: M7, Method: 30, Building: C, Record Set: Combined, Obj.: 3
Median + 2 Prediction
Conditional MeanMedian of Rec. Set
Individual Records
NSF Year 7 Site Visit
Old Presentation …Old Presentation …
NSF Year 7 Site Visit
GMSM Methods Currently being GMSM Methods Currently being ComparedCompared
Notes: A, B, C = Class of GMSM Method for given Objective.#1D = Adjust resulting variability of EDP for effects of scaling. ( √ √ ) = Median for Objective #2 or 4 obtained via CDF from Objective #1 or 3, respectively.
NSF Year 7 Site Visit
Additional GMSM Methods to be Additional GMSM Methods to be ComparedCompared
NSF Year 7 Site Visit
Summary of Categorization of GMSM Summary of Categorization of GMSM MethodsMethods
4 Objectives
1. CDF of EDP | M, R, S, F2. Median of EDP | M, R, S, F3. CDF of EDP | M, R, S, F and SA(T1)
4. Median of EDP | M, R, S, F and SA(T1)
3 Classes (A, B, C) per objective
30+ specific GMSM Methods under consideration
Any other objectives, classes, specific methods?
top related