Search

A new approach for creating a non-ergodic pseudo-spectral acceleration (PSA) ground-motion model (GMM) is presented, which accounts for the magnitude dependence of the non-ergodic effects. In this approach, the average PSA scaling is controlled by an ergodic PSA GMM, and the non-ergodic effects are captured with non-ergodic PSA factors, which are the adjustment that needs to be applied to an ergodic PSA GMM to incorporate the non-ergodic effects. The non-ergodic PSA factors are based on the effective amplitude spectrum (EAS) non-ergodic effects and are converted to PSA through Random Vibration Theory (RVT). The advantage of this approach is that it better captures the non-ergodic source, path, and site effects through small-magnitude earthquakes. Due to the linear properties of the Fourier Transform, the EAS non-ergodic effects of the small events can be applied directly to the large magnitude events. This is not the case for PSA, as response spectra are controlled by a range of frequencies, making PSA non-ergodic effects dependent on the spectral shape, which in turn is magnitude-dependent. Two PSA non-ergodic GMMs are derived using the ASK14 (Abrahamson et al. in Earthq Spectra 30:1025–1055, 2014) and CY14 (Chiou and Youngs in Earthq Spectra 30:1117–1153, 2014) GMMs as backbone models, respectively. The non-ergodic EAS effects are estimated with the LAK21 (Lavrentiadis et al. in Bull Earthq Eng) GMM. The RVT calculations are performed with the V75 (Vanmarcke in ASCE Mech Eng Mech Division 98:425–446, 1972) peak factor model, the D a 0.05 - 0.85 estimate of AS96 (Abrahamson and Silva in Apendix A: empirical ground motion models, description and validation of the stochastic ground motion model. Tech. rep.,. Brookhaven National Laboratory, New York) for the ground-motion duration, and BT15 (Boore and Thompson in Bull Seismol Soc Am 105:1029–1041, 2015) oscillator-duration model. The California subset of the NGAWest2 database (Ancheta et al. in Earthq Spectra 30:989–1005, 2014) is used to fit both models. The total aleatory standard deviation of each of the two non-ergodic PSA GMMs is approximately 25 % smaller than the total aleatory standard deviation of the corresponding ergodic PSA GMMs. This reduction has a significant impact on hazard calculations at large return periods. In remote areas, far from stations and past events, the reduction of aleatory variability is accompanied by an increase in epistemic uncertainty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A new non-ergodic ground-motion model (GMM) for effective amplitude spectral (EAS) values for California is presented in this study. EAS, which is defined in Goulet et al. (Effective amplitude spectrum (eas) as a metric for ground motion modeling using fourier amplitudes, 2018), is a smoothed rotation-independent Fourier amplitude spectrum of the two horizontal components of an acceleration time history. The main motivation for developing a non-ergodic EAS GMM, rather than a spectral acceleration GMM, is that the scaling of EAS does not depend on spectral shape, and therefore, the more frequent small magnitude events can be used in the estimation of the non-ergodic terms. The model is developed using the California subset of the NGAWest2 dataset (Ancheta in PEER NGA-West2 database. Tech. rep., PEER, Berkeley, CA, 2013). The Bayless and Abrahamson (Bull Seismol Soc Am 109(5): 2088-2105, https://doi.org/10.1785/0120190077, 2019b) (BA18) ergodic EAS GMM was used as backbone to constrain the average source, path, and site scaling. The non-ergodic GMM is formulated as a Bayesian hierarchical model: the non-ergodic source and site terms are modeled as spatially varying coefficients following the approach of Landwehr et al. (Bull Seismol Soc Am 106(6):2574-2583. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120160118, 2016), and the non-ergodic path effects are captured by the cell-specific anelastic attenuation attenuation following the approach of Dawood and Rodriguez-Marek (Bull Seismol Soc Am 103(2B):1360-1372, https://doi.org/10.1785/0120120125, 2013). Close to stations and past events, the mean values of the non-ergodic terms deviate from zero to capture the systematic effects and their epistemic uncertainty is small. In areas with sparse data, the epistemic uncertainty of the non-ergodic terms is large, as the systematic effects cannot be determined. The non-ergodic total aleatory standard deviation is approximately 30 to 40 % smaller than the total aleatory standard deviation of BA18. This reduction in the aleatory variability has a significant impact on hazard calculations at large return periods. The epistemic uncertainty of the ground motion predictions is small in areas close to stations and past events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents practical approaches for developing design response spectra in a liquefiable site and for evaluating liquefaction-induced ground settlement and lateral deformation for a site development consisting of four main structures, which are up to 12-story high over a two- to three-level parking structure in Marina Del Ray, CA, USA. The site encompasses approximately 6.5-acre (2.63-hectare) area bounded by two channels and is underlain by typical marine soils including soft clay and liquefiable sand. Extensive field exploration and laboratory testing were performed to investigate site-specific geotechnical conditions. After developing site-specific design ground motion parameters, liquefaction potential, liquefaction-induced settlements and lateral spreading were evaluated using the methodologies of the current state of practice. Several site retrofit measures to mitigate liquefaction-induced ground deformations were discussed and recommendations were made. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]