Abstract
We compared the results of equivalent linear (ELA) and nonlinear site response analyses (NLA) and found that the differences between the values of the peak ground acceleration ( PGA), peak ground velocity ( PGV), Arias intensity ( I a), significant duration ( D5–75), and response spectrum for periods between 0.025 s and 2 s predicted by each method are non-negligible for maximum shear strain values predicted by ELA ( γ max, ELA) greater than 0.04% to 1.0%. As γ max, ELA increases, ELA in general predict smaller shear strain and D5–75 values, and larger PGA, PGV, I a, mean period, and response spectral values for periods less than 0.1 s and periods near the natural site period than NLA. To help researchers and practitioners decide when to use ELA and/or NLA, we developed a model to estimate γ max, ELA before conducting a site response analysis.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
