PGA adjustment factors for nonlinear site-response effects on soft soil sites: Application to TS1170.5

The United States Geological Survey (USGS) National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) is the scientific foundation of seismic design regulations in the United States and is regularly updated to consider the best available science and data. The 2018 update of the conterminous US NSHM includes major changes to the underlying ground motion models (GMMs). Most of the changes are motivated by the new multi-period response spectra requirements of seismic design regulations that use hazard results for 22 spectral periods and 8 site classes. In the central and eastern United States (CEUS), the 2018 NSHM incorporates 31 new GMMs for hard-rock site conditions [Formula: see text], including the Next Generation Attenuation (NGA)-East GMMs. New aleatory variability and site-effect models, both specific to the CEUS, are applied to all median hard-rock GMMs. This article documents the changes to the USGS GMM selection criteria and provides details on the new CEUS GMMs used in the 2018 NSHM update. The median GMMs, their weights, epistemic uncertainty, and aleatory variability are compared with those considered in prior NSHMs. This article further provides implementation details on the CEUS site-effect model, which allows conversion of hard-rock ground motions to other site conditions in the CEUS for the first time in NSHMs. Compared with the 2014 NSHM hard-rock ground motions, the weighted average of median GMMs increases for large magnitude events at middle to large distance range, epistemic uncertainty increases in almost all situations, but aleatory variability is not significantly different. Finally, the total effect on hazard is demonstrated for an assumed earthquake source model in the CEUS, which shows an increased ring of ground motions in the vicinity of the New Madrid seismic zone and decreased ground motions near the East Tennessee seismic zone.

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) is the scientific foundation of seismic design regulations in the United States and is regularly updated to consider the best available science and data. The 2018 update of the conterminous U.S. NSHM includes significant changes to the underlying ground motion models (GMMs), most of which are necessary to enable the new multi-period response spectra (MPRS) requirements of seismic design regulations that use hazard results for 22 spectral periods and eight site classes. This article focuses on the GMMs used in the western United States (WUS) and is a companion to a recent article on the GMMs used in the central and eastern United States (CEUS). In the WUS, for crustal and subduction earthquakes, two models used in previous versions of the NSHM are excluded to provide consistency over all considered periods and site classes. To more accurately estimate ground motions at long periods in the vicinity of Los Angeles, San Francisco, Salt Lake City, and Seattle, the 2018 NSHM incorporates deep sedimentary basin depth from local seismic velocity models. The subduction GMMs considered lack basin depth terms and are modified to include an additional scale factor to account for this. This article documents the WUS GMMs used in the 2018 NSHM update and provides detail on the changes to GMM medians, aleatory variability, epistemic uncertainty, and site-effect models. It compares each of these components with those considered in prior NSHMs and discusses their total effect on hazard.

Damage spectra of the mainshock-aftershock ground motions at soft soil sites

A criterion is developed for the simulation of realistic artificial ground motion histories at soft‐soil sites, corresponding to a detailed ground motion record at a reference firm‐ground site. A complex transfer function is defined as the Fourier transform of the ground acceleration time history at the soft‐soil site divided by the Fourier transform of the acceleration record at the firm‐ground site. Working with both the real and the imaginary components of the transfer function, and not only with its modulus, serves to keep the statistical information about the wave phases (and, therefore, about the time variation of amplitudes and frequencies) in the algorithm used to generate the artificial records. Samples of these transfer functions, associated with a given pair of soft‐soil and firm‐ground sites, are empirically determined from the corresponding pairs of simultaneous records. Each function included in a sample is represented as the superposition of the transfer functions of the responses of a number of oscillators. This formulation is intended to account for the contributions of trains of waves following different patterns in the vicinity of both sites. The properties of the oscillators play the role of parameters of the transfer functions. They vary from one seismic event to another. Part of the variation is systematic, and can be explained in terms of the influence of ground motion intensity on the effective values of stiffness and damping of the artificial oscillators. Another part has random nature; it reflects the random characteristics of the wave propagation patterns associated with the different events. The semi‐empirical model proposed recognizes both types of variation. The influence of intensity is estimated by means of a conventional one‐dimensional shear wave propagation model. This model is used to derive an intensity‐dependent modification of the values of the empirically determined model parameters in those cases when the firm‐ground earthquake intensity used to determine these parameters differs from that corresponding to the seismic event for which the simulated records are to be obtained. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

This article summarizes the development of the 2023 New Zealand ground-motion database (NZGMDB). A preceding version was formally used as the central ground-motion database in the ground-motion characterization modeling for the 2022 New Zealand (NZ) National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) revision. The database contains ground motions for events with a moment magnitude greater than ∼3.0 from the years 2000 to the end of 2022. Several challenges associated with NZ earthquake source metadata are explained, including determination of earthquake location, magnitude, tectonic classification, and finite-fault geometry, among others. The site table leverages the site database developed as a part of the 2022 NZ NSHM revision, and several definitions of source-to-site distance are computed for the propagation path table. The ground-motion quality classification was initially assessed using a neural network. Subsequent waveform quality verification was conducted and additional quality criteria were enforced to ensure a sufficiently high-quality database. Standard processing techniques were applied to the ground motions before intensity measure (IM) calculation. IMs in the database include peak ground acceleration, 5%-damped pseudoacceleration response spectra, smoothed Fourier amplitude spectra, and other cumulative and duration-related metrics. The NZGMDB is publicly available and routinely updated as new and higher quality data become available.

As part of the update of the 2018 National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) for the conterminous United States (CONUS), new ground motion and site effect models for the central and eastern United States were incorporated, as well as basin depths from local seismic velocity models in four western US (WUS) urban areas. These additions allow us, for the first time, to calculate probabilistic seismic hazard curves for an expanded set of spectral periods (0.01 to 10 s) and site classes (VS30 = 150 to 1500 m/s) for the CONUS, as well as account for amplification of long-period ground motions in deep sedimentary basins in the Los Angeles, San Francisco Bay, Seattle, and Salt Lake City areas. Two sets of 2018 NSHM hazard data (hazard curves and uniform-hazard ground motions) are available: (1) 0.05°-latitude-by-0.05°-longitude gridded data for the CONUS and (2) higher resolution 0.01°-latitude-by-0.01°-longitude gridded data for the four WUS basins. Both sets of data contain basin effects in the WUS deep sedimentary basins. Uniform-hazard ground motion data are interpolated for 2, 5, and 10% probability of exceedance in 50 years from the hazard curves. The gridded data for the hazard curves and uniform-hazard ground motions, for all periods and site classes, are available for download at the U.S. Geological Survey ScienceBase Catalog ( https://doi.org/10.5066/P9RQMREV ). The design ground motions derived from the hazard curves have been accepted by the Building Seismic Safety Council for adoption in the 2020 National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program Recommended Seismic Provisions.

Uttarakhand, a state of India, is located in seismically active Himalayan region and in the proximity of plate boundaries. The effects of important ground motion parameters like magnitude, distance, and local geology and site conditions on acceleration response spectra are examined in Uttarakhand Himalayas in this work. A total of 447 strong ground motion histories (horizontal and vertical) from 42 earthquakes were selected. The results show that the shape of the acceleration response spectra is influenced by the local site conditions and regional geology. The studies are carried out for two categories of sites, i.e., rock sites and soft soil sites. The maximum average horizontal spectral amplification for rock sites is 2.7 at 0.1 s, while for soft soil sites, it is found to be 3.2 at 0.2 s. In the same way, the maximum average vertical spectral amplification for rock is found to be 2.7 at 0.1 s, while for soft soil, it is found to be 2.95 at 0.1 s. The average spectral amplification in vertical component also shifts from low period (rock) to high period (soft soil). The level of spectra increases with decrease in distance for rock sites as well as soft soil sites. When comparing different magnitude earthquakes in different geological conditions, the response spectra are found to follow each other up to 0.04 s, while for period greater than 0.04 s, the spectra of higher magnitude earthquake is observed on the higher side. For soft soil sites, spectra from different magnitude earthquakes are observed to follow each other up to 0.1 s, beyond which they get separated.

Soft soil sites can amplify the peak acceleration by a factor of 1.5 to 3.5 and exhibit the filtering effect on seismic waves. This effect results in the attenuation of high frequencies, amplification of low frequencies, and extension of the predominant period of ground motion. Consequently, soft soil sites have a more pronounced impact on isolation buildings constructed on them. The seismic isolation structure design typically involves assuming rigid foundation for calculations. However, the soil properties can significantly impact the dynamic response of the structure, affecting factors such as input ground motion, changes in vibration characteristics, radiation energy dissipation, and material damping energy dissipation. Therefore, neglecting these influences and relying solely on the rigid foundation assumption for calculations can lead to significant errors in the final seismic response analysis of the structure. Currently, there are numerous LNG storage tanks, museums, and other isolation buildings constructed on soft soil sites. Therefore, research on seismic isolation measures for soft soil sites holds significant practical importance. In light of this, this paper, firstly, provides a systematic summary of seismic isolation strategies and engineering applications for soft soil sites. Secondly, it further discusses advancements in research on the dynamic interactions of soil–isolated structures, covering analytical methods, numerical investigations, and experimental studies on soft soil sites. Lastly, the paper concludes with insights on current research progress and prospects for further studies.

The recent release of the 2022 national seismic hazard model has highlighted significant changes in the quantified seismic hazard for much of New Zealand that has prompted the development of draft changes to the NZS 1170.5 seismic design provisions. One proposed change is to the shape of the design spectrum, which was previously provided by a spectral shape factor, Ch(T), that is a function of site class only. However, research has shown that spectral shape is strongly affected by several additional factors including earthquake magnitude and shaking intensity. Moreover, the use of fixed spectral shapes that vary only by site class results in significant variability between the functional form of the elastic design response spectrum, C(T), and the direct results from the national seismic hazard model. International loading standards typically include a dependency on intensity and site class in the spectral shape equations and these form the basis for the approach recommended here. The functional form of the design response spectrum is also updated to better represent spectral displacement demands on longer period structures. The proposed new spectral shape equations are compared to the 2022 national seismic hazard model output and the equations used in the previous New Zealand loading standard. Results show that the proposed approach provides a significantly better approximation of the national seismic hazard model results than the current spectral shape across a range of periods, site classes, annual probabilities of exceedance, and locations.

The 2021 US National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) for the State of Hawaii updates the previous two-decade-old assessment by incorporating new data and modeling techniques to improve the underlying ground shaking forecasts of tectonic-fault, tectonic-flexure, volcanic, and caldera collapse earthquakes. Two earthquake ground shaking hazard forecasts (public policy and research) are produced that differ in how they account for declustered catalogs. The earthquake source model is based on (1) declustered earthquake catalogs smoothed with adaptive methods, (2) earthquake rate forecasts based on three temporally varying 60-year time periods, (3) maximum magnitude criteria that extend to larger earthquakes than previously considered, (4) a separate Kīlauea-specific seismogenic caldera collapse model that accounts for clustered event behavior observed during the 2018 eruption, and (5) fault ruptures that consider historical seismicity, GPS-based strain rates, and a new Quaternary fault database. Two new Hawaii-specific ground motion models (GMMs) and five additional global models consistent with Hawaii shaking data are used to forecast ground shaking at 23 spectral periods and peak parameters. Site effects are calculated using western US and Hawaii specific empirical equations and provide shaking forecasts for 8 site classes. For most sites the new analysis results in similar spectral accelerations as those in the 2001 NSHM, with a few exceptions caused mostly by GMM changes. Ground motions are the highest in the southern portion of the Island of Hawai’i due to high rates of forecasted earthquakes on décollement faults. Shaking decays to the northwest where lower earthquake rates result from flexure of the tectonic plate. Large epistemic uncertainties in source characterizations and GMMs lead to an overall high uncertainty (more than a factor of 3) in ground shaking at Honolulu and Hilo. The new shaking model indicates significant chances of slight or greater damaging ground motions across most of the island chain.

We used recordings of the M 6.8 Nisqually earthquake and its M L 3.4 aftershock to study site response and basin effects for 35 locations in Seattle, Washington. We determined site amplification from Fourier spectral ratios of the recorded horizontal ground motions, referenced to a soft-rock site. Soft-soil sites (generally National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program [NEHRP] class E) on artificial fill and young alluvium have the largest 1-Hz amplifications (factors of 3–7) for both the mainshock and aftershock. These amplifications are correlated with areas of higher damage from the mainshock to major buildings and liquefaction. There are several indications of nonlinear response at the soft-soil sites for the mainshock ground motions, despite relatively modest peak accelerations in the S waves of 15%–22% g . First, the mainshock spectral ratios do not show amplification at 2–8 Hz as do the aftershock spectral ratios. Spectral peaks at frequencies below 2 Hz generally occur at lower frequencies for the mainshock spectral ratios than for the aftershock ratios. At one soft-soil site, there is a clear shift of the resonant frequency to a lower frequency for the mainshock compared with the aftershock. The frequency of this resonance increases in the coda of the mainshock record, indicating that the site response during the weaker motions of the coda is more linear than that of the initial S wave. Three of the soft-soil sites display cusped, one-sided mainshock accelerograms after the S wave. These soft-soil sites also show amplification at 10–20 Hz in the S wave, relative to the rock site, that is not observed for the aftershock. The cusped waveforms and 10–20-Hz amplification are symptomatic of nonlinear response at the soft-soil sites. These sites had nearby liquefaction. The largest amplifications for 0.5 Hz occur at soft-soil sites on the southern portion of the Seattle Basin. Stiff-soil sites (NEHRP classes D and C) on Pleistocence-age glacial deposits display similar spectral amplification for the mainshock and aftershock, indicating approximately linear response. The stiff-soil sites generally have moderate amplification (factors of 1.1–2.4) at 0.5 and 1 Hz. Amplifications at 1 and 5 Hz for all sites generally increase with decreasing shear-wave velocity measured in the top 30 m ( V s 30). However, larger amplifications at 0.5 and 1 Hz for sites with similar V s 30 values are observed for sites in the Seattle Basin, illustrating the amplification from the deeper (>30 m) sediments and the contribution from basin surface waves. Record sections for the mainshock and aftershock show that basin surface waves produce the peak velocities for many of the sites in the Seattle Basin and often dominate the amplitude at 1 Hz and lower frequencies.

The rise of performance-based earthquake engineering, in combination with the complexity associated with selecting records for time-history analysis, demonstrates an expressed need for localized default suites of ground motion records for structural designers to use in the absence of site-specific studies. In the current research investigation, deaggregations of probabilistic seismic hazard models (National Seismic Hazard Model, Canterbury Seismic Hazard Model, and Kaikōura Seismic Hazard Model) and the location-specific seismological characteristics of expected ground motions were used to define eight seismic hazard zonations and accompanying suite profiles for the South Island of New Zealand to satisfy the requirements of the New Zealand structural design standard NZS1170.5 for response-history analyses. Specific records, including 21 from the recent Kaikōura, Darfield, and Christchurch earthquakes, were then selected from publicly-available databases and presented as default suites for use in time-history analyses in the absence of site-specific studies. This investigation encompasses seismic hazards corresponding to 500-year return periods, site classes C (shallow soils) and D (deep soils), and buildings with fundamental periods between 0.4 and 2.0 seconds.

Input datasets for annualized earthquake loss (AEL) estimation for California were updated recently by the scientific community, and include the National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM), site‐response model, and estimates of shear‐wave velocity. Additionally, the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s loss estimation tool, Hazus, was updated to include the most recent census and economic exposure data. These enhancements necessitated a revisit to our previous AEL estimates and a study of the sensitivity of AEL estimates subjected to alternate inputs for site amplification. The NSHM ground motions for a uniform site condition are modified to account for the effect of local near‐surface geology. The site conditions are approximated in three ways: (1) by V S 30 (time‐averaged shear‐wave velocity in the upper 30 m) value obtained from a geology‐ and topography‐based map consisting of 15 V S 30 groups, (2) by site classes categorized according to National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) site classification, and (3) by a uniform NEHRP site class D. In case 1, ground motions are amplified using the Seyhan and Stewart (2014) semiempirical nonlinear amplification model. In cases 2 and 3, ground motions are amplified using the 2014 version of the NEHRP site amplification factors, which are also based on the Seyhan and Stewart model but are approximated to facilitate their use for building code applications. Estimated AELs are presented at multiple resolutions, starting with the state level assessment and followed by detailed assessments for counties, metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs), and cities. AEL estimate at the state level is ∼$3.7 billion, 70% of which is contributed from Los Angeles–Long Beach–Santa Ana, San Francisco–Oakland–Fremont, and Riverside–San Bernardino–Ontario MSAs. The statewide AEL estimate is insensitive to alternate assumptions of site amplification. However, we note significant differences in AEL estimates among the three sensitivity cases for smaller geographic units.

This paper summarizes the results of a comprehensive statistical study aimed at evaluating peak lateral inelastic displacement demands of structures with known lateral strength and stiffness built on soft soil site conditions. For that purpose, empirical information on inelastic displacement ratios which are defined as the ratio of peak lateral inelastic displacement demands to peak elastic displacement demands are investigated. Inelastic displacement ratios were computed from the response of single-degree-of-freedom systems having 6 levels of relative lateral strength when subjected to 118 earthquake ground motions recorded on bay-mud sites of the San Francisco Bay Area and on soft soil sites located in the former lake-bed zone of Mexico City. Mean inelastic displacement ratios and their corresponding scatter are presented for both ground motion ensembles. The influence of period of vibration normalized by the predominant period of the ground motion, the level of lateral strength, earthquake magnitude, and distance to the source are evaluated and discussed. In addition, the effects of post-yield stiffness and of stiffness and strength degradation on inelastic displacement ratios are also investigated. It is concluded that magnitude and distance to the source have negligible effects on constant-strength inelastic displacement ratios. Results also indicate that weak and stiffness-degrading structures in the short spectral region could experience inelastic displacement demands larger than those corresponding to non-degrading structures. Finally, a simplified equation obtained using regression analyses aimed at estimating mean inelastic displacement ratios is proposed for assisting structural engineers in performance-based assessment of structures built on soft soil sites. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Several rupture directivity models (DMs) have been developed in recent years to describe the near-source spatial variations in ground-motion amplitudes related to propagation of rupture along the fault. We recently organized an effort toward incorporating these directivity effects into the US Geological Survey (USGS) National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM), by first evaluating the community’s work and potential methods to implement directivity adjustments into probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA). Guided by this evaluation and comparison among the considered DMs, we selected an approach that can be readily implemented into the USGS hazard software, which provides an azimuthally varying adjustment to the median ground motion and its aleatory variability. This method allows assessment of the impact on hazard levels and provides a platform to test the DM amplification predictions using a generalized coordinate system, necessary for consistent calculation of source-to-site distance terms for complex ruptures. We give examples of the directivity-related impact on hazard, progressing from a simple, hypothetical rupture, to more complex fault systems, composed of multiple rupture segments and sources. The directivity adjustments were constrained to strike–slip faulting, where DMs have good agreement. We find that rupture directivity adjustments using a simple median and aleatory adjustment approach can affect hazard both from a site-specific perspective and on a regional scale, increasing ground motions off the end of the fault trace up to 30%–40% and potentially reducing it for sites along strike. Statewide hazard maps of California show that the change in shaking along major faults can be a factor to consider for assessing long-period ( > 1 s ) near-source effects within the USGS NSHM going forward, reaching up to 10%–20%. Finally, we suggest consideration of minimum parameter ranges and baseline requirements as future DMs are developed to minimize single approach adaptations to enable more consistent application within both ground motion and hazard studies.