review of gmsm solicitation and methods nicolas luco, on behalf of the peer gmsm program 2 nd annual...

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


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.


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"


"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)


"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)


"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)


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


"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?)


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





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



Individual Records





15?)


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



Individual Records


"CMS Methods" – Objective 3 "CMS Methods" – Objective 3 (45)(45)

Selection: GMs with spectral shape approximating distribution 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)


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"


"Proxy Methods" – "Proxy Methods" – (T1) (T1) (20, 31) (20, 31)

Selection: GMs consistent with given (T1) and M, R

Scaling: Match given Sa(T1)


10-1

100

101

10-2

10-1

100

101

Period [sec]

Spe

ctra

l Acc

eler

atio

n [g

]




Individual Records

e.g., for …(T1) = 1-3M = 6.7-7.3R = 0-42kmS = 215-560m/s


"Proxy Methods" – "Proxy Methods" – (T1) (T1) (20, 31) (20, 31)




10-1

100

101

10-2

10-1

100

101

Period [sec]

Spe

ctra

l Acc

eler

atio

n [g

]




Individual Records


"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


(Source: Shome for Methods #57 & 58)


"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


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


"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)


"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)


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




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


61, 70 "Design Ground Motion Library (DGML)" Power, Youngs, Wang 1 and 2, 2

62 "Conditional Mean Spectrum Selection with Scaling" Baker 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




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



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"


Extra Slides …Extra Slides …


"Proxy Methods" – Objective 3 "Proxy Methods" – Objective 3 (30)(30)


Scaling: To given Sa(T1)


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



Individual Records


Old Presentation …Old Presentation …


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.


Additional GMSM Methods to be Additional GMSM Methods to be ComparedCompared


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?

review of gmsm solicitation and methods nicolas luco, on behalf of the peer gmsm program 2 nd annual...

Documents