1 / 13

# GMSM Methodology and Terminology - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

GMSM Methodology and Terminology. Christine Goulet, UCLA GMSM Core Members. Plan. Methodology overview Method Objectives Solicitation Information Terminology. Methodology. Propose scenarios (M, r) M=7, r=10 km, m +2 s = + 2 e M=7.5, r=10 km, m +1 s = + 1 e

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.

## PowerPoint Slideshow about 'GMSM Methodology and Terminology' - declan

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

### GMSM Methodologyand Terminology

Christine Goulet, UCLA

GMSM Core Members

• Methodology overview

• Method Objectives

• Solicitation Information

• Terminology

• Propose scenarios (M, r)

• M=7, r=10 km, m+2s = +2e

• M=7.5, r=10 km, m+1s = +1e

• Select a series of structures (buildings) to be analyzed

• Select pertinent Engineering Demand Parameters (EDPs)

• Maximum Inter-Story Drift Ratio (MIDR)

• Others considered, to be discussed:

• Peak Floor Acceleration

• Base shear

• Request ground motion suites for each method of GMSM

• Perform the nonlinear dynamic analyses (NLDA)

• Compute the distribution of the selected EDP response

POC

Median

EDP(=MIDR)

Methodology

• Compute the Point of Comparison (POC)

• Rerun structural simulations

• Based on larger set of records corresponding to the scenario

• Perform the nonlinear dynamic analyses (NLDA)

• Compute the distribution of the selected EDP response

• Analysis of results, observations and conclusions

• Compare results of suites with POC

• Draw conclusions and recommendations

POC

PDF

Method Y

Method Z

EDP

• … Repeat the whole procedure for other structures and scenarios …

MIDR for a given M, r, S, and F

1. Full distribution

2. Median only

MIDR for a given M, r, S, F and Sa(T1)

3. Full distribution

4. Median only

• Applications:

• Earthquake scenarios

• PSHA-type integration for building response

• Applications:

• Design of new buildings

• Rehabilitation of existing buildings

• Performance-Based evaluation

46 variants

Solicitation this year

Objectives 3 & 4: predict the maximum interstory drift

• Building B, scenario M7 and M7.5

• Buildings C and D, scenario M7

• Building A, scenario M7

• Four sets of 7 records

• To match building code requirements (7)

• To allow larger suites for statistics and research purposes (28)

Median

Nomenclature – EDP distributions

• Median: 50 % of entries above, 50% below

• Mean: sum of all entries divided by the number of entries

PDF

Median

Mean

EDP

EDP

Normal distribution

Skewed distribution

CDF

0.5

PDF

0

Nomenclature – EDP distributions

Probability

EDP

Skewed (lognormal) distribution

Median

Median + 1 Standard Dev.

Sa(g)

M=7

R=10 km

Soil

98th

percentile

T (s)

T1

m + s

m + 2s

Nomenclature – ground motions

• Standard deviation s, and Epsilon e

PDF

Median, 

Standard

Deviation, s

m

Sa(T1)

e = 0

e = 1

e = 2

• M 7-7.5 within 20 km often controls the hazard in urban CA

• Why +2e?

• To push the structures well in the NL range

• It is not unreasonable

• East Bay

• 2% in 50 average: 1.6

• 0.5% in 50 average: 2.1

Relative Contribution

10%

0%

e< -2

-2 < e < -1

-1 < e < -0.5

-0.5 < e < 0

0-10

8.0-8.5

10-20

7.5-8.0

20-30

30-40

7.0-7.5

40-50

6.5-7.0

50-60

60-70

6.0-6.5

70-80

Magnitude

5.5-6.0

80-90

5.0-5.5

Legend

90-100

100-1000

Distance (km)

0 < e < 0.5

0.5 < e < 1

1 < e < 2

2 < e

Seismic Hazard

Disaggregation

Sa(1s) = 0.55g

10% in 50 years (475)