Plans for the Demonstrations of the Efficacy of the BBP Validation Gauntlets for Building Response Analysis Applications 2016 SCEC Project

Transcription

1 Plans for the Demonstrations of the Efficacy of the BBP Validation Gauntlets for Building Response Analysis Applications 2016 SCEC Project EERI Seminar SCEC GMSV on Next TAG Virtual Generation Coordination Attenuation WorkshopModels Nicolas Luco & Sanaz Rezaeian, USGS (Golden, CO) Gregory Deierlein & Nenad Bijelic, Stanford Farzin Zareian, UC Irvine Ting Lin, Marquette Fabio Silva & Philip Maechling, USC/SCEC

2 2016 Demonstrating Validation of Simulated BBP Ground Motions for Engineering Applications 1. Communicating to engineering users of simulations need and motivation for simulated ground motions knowledge and confidence in simulation technologies effective and appropriate use of simulations solicit feedback and suggestions 2. Gauntlet validations for engineering purposes simulated vs recorded records of past earthquakes simulated motions vs PSHA targets of larger earthquakes applicability of gauntlet metrics to CS/duration selection & scaling (?) 3. Engineering application studies informing PSHA hazard analyses and mapping NLRHA of tall buildings (MCE-level design validations) performance-based building assessment (damage and collapse risk) SCEC GMSV TAG Virtual Coordination Workshop Plans for the Demonstrations of the Efficacy of the BBP Validation Gauntlets Project N. Luco (USGS) et al Sept. 11, 2016

3 Participants and Tasks Task 1 Process latest BBP simulations through newlyimplemented validation gauntlets (Silva & Maechling) Task 2 Compare building responses to simulated ground motions from Task 1 against recorded ground motions (Deierlein & Zareian) Task 3 Demonstrate correlation between results of validation gauntlets and comparisons of building responses (Lin) Task 4 Convene a workshop with engineering practitioners and ground motion modelers (Rezaeian & Luco) SCEC GMSV TAG Virtual Coordination Workshop Plans for the Demonstrations of the Efficacy of the BBP Validation Gauntlets Project N. Luco (USGS) et al Sept. 11, 2016

4 Engineering Applications Strategy Illustrative Engineering Applications ASCE 7: nonlinear dynamic analysis, MCE R collapse & performance assessment (SDR, PFA) Buildings: 9 & 20 concrete MRF, 40 shear wall, 2 to 20 steel MRF, 40 BRBF and Dual System Hazard Characterization & Ground Motions PSHA targets & disaggregation Ground motions: recorded, BBP (plus CyberShake BB?) Selection/Scaling: CS + causal features (M,R) CS + duration Site effects: selective studies w/graves model (+ others) Interpretation of Results recorded versus simulated screening/correlation to gauntlet parameters SCEC GMSV TAG Virtual Coordination Workshop Plans for the Demonstrations of the Efficacy of the BBP Validation Gauntlets Project N. Luco (USGS) et al Sept. 11, 2016

5 Candidate Sites for Illustrative Applications LA Downtown high density building multiple faults (M6~7) CyberShake site (LADT) soil site San Bernardino high hazard San Andreas (M8) CyberShake site (SBSM) soil (or rock) site? SF Downtown (Tentative) high density building northern CA San Andreas (M8) soil site (Transbay) SCEC GMSV TAG Virtual Coordination Workshop Plans for the Demonstrations of the Efficacy of the BBP Validation Gauntlets Project N. Luco (USGS) et al Sept. 11, 2016

6 Ground Motion (Gauntlet) Parameters SCEC GMSV TAG Virtual Coordination Workshop Plans for the Demonstrations of the Efficacy of the BBP Validation Gauntlets Project N. Luco (USGS) et al Sept. 11, 2016

7 Process latest BBP simulations & gauntlet parameters Update ground motion simulations to v Part A Past Events: process additional validation events (e.g., 1989 Loma Prieta, 1987 Whittier Narrows, 1992 Landers, 1986 North Palm Springs) and stations Part B GMPE s: site scenarios to be determined (larger M s) BBP site response modules Graves s model Asimaki s model (?) EERI SCEC Seminar GMSV TAG on Next Virtual Generation Coordination Attenuation Workshop Models Plans for the Demonstrations of the Efficacy of the BBP Validation Gauntlets Project N. Luco (USGS) et al Sept. 11, 2016

8 Building Analysis Example 20/50 2/50 Sa (g) 1 50/30 20-story RC moment frame, T 1 = 2.60s 2 T (s) T 1 San Jose 50/30 PSHA to determine CS and Duration targets Source: Google Earth CDF 20/50 2/50 Significant duration, 5-75% (s)

9 Building Analysis Example BBP Past Earthquakes used for Gauntlet Validation Scenario Magnitude (Mw) Loma Prieta (BBP run 13.5) 6.9 Northridge (BBP run 13.5) 6.7 Whittier Narrows (BBP run 13.5) 6.0 North Palm Springs (BBP run 13.6) 6.1 Landers (BBP run 13.5) 7.3 Number of ground motions ~ 22,000 Ground motion model GP (Graves and Pitarka, 2015) SDSU (Olsen and Takedatsu, 2015) EXSIM (Atkinson and Assatourians, 2015) GP BBP simulations SJ target spectra Comparison of BBP motion spectra to CMS target spectra

10 Building Analysis Example ASCE 7-16 Building Code Application (DBE, MCEr): Selection/Scale Sets of 100 motions

11 Building Analysis Example Collapse Analyses: P(Collapse) NGA SDSU GP EXSIM Sa(T 1 ) [g] ρ(t a,t) Sa correlation across periods - EXSIM much higher than NGA set Baker and Jayaram, 2008 NGA GP SDSU EXSIM T a = 5s T(s)

12 Building Analysis Example Collapse Analyses: P(Collapse) NGA SDSU GP EXSIM Sa(T 1 ) [g] ρ(t a,t) Sa correlation across periods - EXSIM much higher than NGA set Baker and Jayaram, 2008 NGA GP SDSU EXSIM T a = 5s T(s)

13 Building Analysis Example P(Collapse) NGA SDSU GP EXSIM Sa(T 1 ) [g] Sa(T) [g] CMS target NGA; mean, all ground motions NGA; mean, non-collapses only individual spectra individual spectra, collapsed NGA set T (s) 10 1 GP set 10 1 EXSIM set Sa(T) [g] 10 0 Sa(T) [g] CMS target GP; mean, all ground motions GP; mean, non-collapses only individual spectra individual spectra, collapsed Period (s) CMS target EXSIM; mean, all ground motions EXSIM; mean, non-collapses only individual spectra individual spectra, collapsed T (s)

14 Building Analysis Example Gauntlet Parameter Comparisons (record sets) Arias Intensity (Ia) Mid-frequency (w mid ) Parameter

15 Building Analysis Example Gauntlet Parameter Comparisons (between simulated and recorded record sets) Two-sample two-sided KS test p-values Ia Da5-75% Ds5-95% Ia/Da5-75% Ia/Da5-95% tmid,rel wmid w' zeta GP SDSU EXSIM Story NGA GP SDSU EXSIM rejection region SDR Story Drift (2%/50 yr) P(Collapse) NGA SDSU GP EXSIM Sa(T 1 ) [g] Collapse Fragility

16 Engineering Participants Workshop SCEC Utilization of Ground Motion Simulations Committee BSSC Project 17 Next Generation Seismic Design Maps 2015 SCEC Site Effects Workshop Other enthusiasts (e.g., tall building designers) Ground motion modelers Workshop Agenda Background/Overview of Simulations Related Activities (Gauntlet Validations, UGMS mapping) Engineering Applications Observations and Implications Discussion, suggestions for next steps Date TBD. January or April 2017 EERI SCEC Seminar GMSV TAG on Next Virtual Generation Coordination Attenuation Workshop Models Plans for the Demonstrations of the Efficacy of the BBP Validation Gauntlets Project N. Luco (USGS) et al Sept. 11, 2016

17 Potential Outcomes Increased interest and buy-in from engineering practitioners Initiatives to facilitate use of BBP Simulated Motions improvement of gauntlets & screening (pass/fail?) vetted database of simulated motions (high M, small R) guidelines on use of simulated (BBP) motions and tools testbed applications (index buildings, distributed infrastructure systems ) other? Feedback to earthquake modelers what are the concerns of practitioners? what are the pressing needs from practice? Future utilization opportunities with 3D simulations EERI SCEC Seminar GMSV TAG on Next Virtual Generation Coordination Attenuation Workshop Models Plans for the Demonstrations of the Efficacy of the BBP Validation Gauntlets Project N. Luco (USGS) et al Sept. 11, 2016