Earthquake Ground Motion

Nicolas Luco, Ph.D.

Charlie Kircher, P.E., Ph.D.
C.B. Crouse, P.E., Ph.D.
Finley Charney, Ph.D.
Curt B. Haselton, P.E., Ph.D.
Jack W. Baker, Ph.D.
Reid Zimmerman, P.E.
John D. Hooper, S.E.
William McVitty, MS
Andy Taylor, Ph.D., P.E.

Disclaimer
Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples
 Topics Covered

• Intro to Ground Motion Intensity Measures

• USGS Uniform Hazard Maps
• Risk Targeted Maps
• 2014 NEHRP & 7-16 Seismic Maps
• Determination of Ground Motion Values
• Horizontal Response Spectra
• Vertical Response Spectra
• Peak Ground Acceleration
• Site Specific Response Spectra
• Selection and Scaling of Ground Motions

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Topics Covered

• Intro to Ground Motion Intensity Measures

• USGS Uniform Hazard Maps
• Risk Targeted Maps
• 2014 NEHRP & 7-16 Seismic Maps
• Determination of Ground Motion Values
• Horizontal Response Spectra
• Vertical Response Spectra
• Peak Ground Acceleration
• Site Specific Response Spectra
• Selection and Scaling of Ground Motions

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Earthquake Damage - What Matters?
Ground Motions Characteristics:
Intensity - Strength of Shaking
Frequency Content of Shaking (site conditions)
Duration of (Strong) Shaking
Building Properties (new buildings):
Configuration (height, irregularity, etc.)
Structural system (ductility, durability, etc.)
Strength of building (relative to strength of shaking)
Dynamic response properties (relative to frequency content
of ground motions)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Example Earthquake Ground Motions (two records that look similar)
Acceleration (g's)
0.8
0.4
0
-0.4
1994 Northridge - Sylmar (122)
-0.8
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Time (Seconds)
Acceleration (g's)

0.8
0.4
0
-0.4 1989 Loma Prieta - Corraltios (128)
-0.8
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Time (Seconds)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Example Earthquake Time History Response
1989 Loma Prieta - Corralitos 1994 Northridge - Sylmar

Peak Displacement  5 in. Peak Displacement  20 in.

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Example Earthquake Acceleration Response Spectra

3
1994 Northridge - Sylmar (122)
Spectral Acceleration (g's)

2.5
1989 Loma Prieta - Corralitos (128)
2
Peak Acceleration of
1.5 a 2-Second System

0.5

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Period (seconds)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Example Earthquake Displacement Response Spectra
Spectral Displacement (inches) 30
1994 Northridge - Sylmar (122)
25
1989 Loma Prieta - Corralitos (128)
20
Peak Displacement
15 of 2-Second System

10

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Period (seconds)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

1985 Mexico City Earthquake – Collapse of 6 – 15-Story Buildings

Mexico City

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Earthquake Ground Motion Characterization

Ground Motion Time Histories

Acceleration (including PGA)

Shaking
Velocity (including PGV)
Time
Displacement (including (PGD)
• Elastic Response Spectra
SA
– Peak response of a collection of linear
single-degree-of-freedom systems with 5%
viscous damping
– “Smooth” spectra used for design (to
represent many different possible ground SD
motion time histories)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Example Ground Motion Records – 1994 Northridge Earthquake
(Shakal et al., “Recorded Ground and Structure Motions,” Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 11, No. S2, April 1995)

Figure 2-15a – Distribution of ground motions for selected strong-motion stations: north
component of acceleration. Time histories are plotted close to the associated site. Time and
amplitude scales are shown to the right. Shaded areas represent alluvial basins and valleys.

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Example Recorded Values of PGA - 1994 Northridge Earthquake
(Shakal et al., “Recorded Ground and Structure Motions,” Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 11, No. S2, April 1995)

Figure 2-16 Maximum horizontal acceleration versus distance for the Northridge earthquake. Distance is from the
surface projection of the aftershock zone, as defined by Joyner and Boore (1988). Largest of the two horizontal
components is plotted. Bold line is the median curve of Joyner and Boore (1988) for a M6.7 earthquake. Light lines
indicate ±1 and ±2 standard deviations. Circle indicate CSMIP stations; triangles indicate USGS stations.

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

A Couple of Ground Motion Response and Design Spectra References

Newmark & Hall (EERI 1982) Housner & Jennings (EERI 1982)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Example Smooth Design Spectra and Response Spectra of a 1971 San
Fernando Earthquake Record (Housner & Jennings, EERI 1982)
Smooth Design Spectra (0%, Response Spectra (0%,
2%, 5%, 10%, 20% Damping) 2%, 5%, 10%, 20% Damping)

SV (in/s) = (386.4/2p) T SA(g)

SD (in) = (386.4/4p2) T2 SA (g)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Example Early Design Spectra for Different Site Conditions
(Fig. 24, Seed & Idriss, EERI 1982, from Seed, Ugas Lymer, BSSA 66:1,
1976)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Example Design Spectra - Deterministic MCER Ground Motions (ASCE 7-16)
PEER NGA West2 GMPEs (M7.0 at Rx = 6 km, Site Class boundaries)

2.5
Site Class AB - vs,30 = 5,000 fps
Site Class BC - vs,30 = 2,500 fps
2.0 Site Class CD - vs,30 = 1,200 fps
Site Class DE - vs,30 = 600 fps
Spectral Acceleration (g)

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0
Period (seconds)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Site Classification and Shear Wave Velocity (vs,30) Criteria
(Table 20.3-1 of ASCE 7-05, ASCE 7-10 and ASCE 7-16)

Site Class vs N or Nch su

A. Hard rock >5,000 ft/s NA NA

B. Rock 2,500 to 5,000 ft/s NA NA
C. Very dense soil and soft rock 1,200 to 2,500 ft/s >50 >2,000 psf
D. Stiff soil 600 to 1,200 ft/s 15 to 50 1,000 to 2,000 psf
E. Soft clay soil <600 ft/s <15 <1,000 psf
Any profile with more than 10 ft of soil having the
following characteristics:
—Plasticity index PI > 20,
—Moisture content w  40%,
—Undrained shear strength su < 500 psf
F. Soils requiring site response analysis See Section 20.3.1
in accordance with Section 21.1

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Example Design Spectra - Deterministic MCER Ground Motions (ASCE 7-16)
PEER NGA West2 GMPEs (M7.0 at Rx = 6 km, Site Class boundaries)
0.5s 1s 2s
2.5
Site Class AB - vs,30 = 5,000 fps
Site Class BC - vs,30 = 2,500 fps
2.0 Site Class CD - vs,30 = 1,200 fps
Spectral Acceleration (g)

Site Class DE - vs,30 = 600 fps

1.5 SV (in/s) = (386.4/2p) T SA(g)

SD (in) = (386.4/4p2) T2 SA (g)
1.0 SD (in) = 9.8 T2 SA (g)

4s
0.5

0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Spectral Displacement (inches)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Example Design Spectra - Deterministic MCER Ground Motions (ASCE 7-16)
PEER NGA West2 GMPEs (M7.0 at Rx = 6 km, Site Class boundaries)
0.25s 0.5s 1s 2s
2.500
Spectral Acceleration (g)

4s

0.250

8s
Site Class AB - vs,30 = 5,000 fps
Site Class BC - vs,30 = 2,500 fps
Site Class CD - vs,30 = 1,200 fps
Site Class DE - vs,30 = 600 fps
0.025
0.1 1.0 10.0 100.0
Spectral Displacement (inches)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Example Design Spectra - Deterministic MCER Ground Motions (ASCE 7-16)
PEER NGA West2 GMPEs (M7.0 at Rx = 6 km, Site Class boundaries)
2.5
Site Class AB - vs,30 = 5,000 fps
Site Class BC - vs,30 = 2,500 fps
2.0 Site Class CD - vs,30 = 1,200 fps
Site Class DE - vs,30 = 600 fps
Spectral Acceleration (g)

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0
0.1 1.0 10.0
Period (seconds)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Ground Motion Intensity Parameters

Pure Ground Motions Intensity Parameters:

Peak ground acceleration (PGA) – Most commonly used intensity parameter
worldwide
Derived Ground Motions Intensity Parameters:
5%-Damped Response Spectral Acceleration at Period of Interest
Other – Cumulative Average Velocity (CAV), Arias Intensity, etc.
Consideration of Response in the Horizontal Plane
Maximum of two horizontal components – USGS ShakeMaps
Geomean of two horizontal components – typical intensity parameter of
older attenuation functions
Median (RotD50) response – typical intensity parameter of newer
attenuation functions (i.e., PEER GMPEs)
Maximum (RotD100) response – Intensity parameter of ASCE 7-16

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Ground Motion Intensity Parameters
Geomean response spectral acceleration:

d ir e c t io n ( g )
0 .5

A c c . in F P
SQRT [Sa(X)*Sa(Y)]
0 .4
Not physically possible
0 .3
Varies with orientation of X-Y axes (e.g.,
orientation of recording unit) 0 .2

Median (RotD50) Definition (PEER NGA): 0 .1

Complex definition/calculation
0
About equal to Geomean -0 .5 -0 .4 -0 .3 -0 .2 -0 .1 0 0 .1 0 .2 0 .3 0 .4 0 .5
-0 .1 A c c . in F N
Maximum (RotD100) Definition (ASCE 7): d ir e c tio n ( g )
-0 .2
Simple definition
Peak X-Y resultant response -0 .3

Independent of orientation of X-Y axes (e.g., -0 .4

orientation of recording unit
-0 .5

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Attenuation Functions
Predict ground motions as function of:
Source parameters (e.g., magnitude)
Distance from source to site of interest
Site conditions
Ground motions predicted in terms of:
Median values
Variability (e.g., plus/minus 1 sigma)
Methods used to develop attenuation functions:
Western United States (WUS) – Primarily based on statistical analysis
of earthquake records (data rich region)
Central and Eastern United States (CEUS) – Primarily based on
theoretical ground motion models (data poor regions)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 PEER NGA Ground Motion Predictive Equations (GMPEs)
(the equations formerly known as attenuation functions)

West 1/West 2 GMPEs are based on statistical analysis of response spectra

of earthquake records of PEER NGA West1/West2 databases
Multiple GMPEs developed for each seismic region (and PEER project):
Four West1 GMPEs – AS08, BA08, CB08 and CY08
Five West2 GMPEs – ASK14, BSSA14, CB14, CY14 and I14
Response Spectral Acceleration (g) is “predicted” as a function:
Earthquake magnitude (M)
Distance from the site to fault rupture plane (RX, RRUP and RJB)
Site conditions defined in terms of site shear wave velocity (vs,30)
Fault type (strike-slip/normal, reverse/trust)
Fault geometry (ZTOR, W and Dip angle)
Basin depth terms (Z1.0 and Z2.5)
Response “predicted” for 20 Periods from T = 0.01 (s) to T = 10 (s)
Spectra may be calculated using PEER NGA GMPE spreadsheets:
West1 (Al Atik 2009) - average of 3 GMPEs (ASCE 7-10 WUS sites)
West2 (Seyhan 2014) – average of 4 GMPEs (ASCE 7-16 WUS sites)
Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples
Definitions of Distance from Site to Fault Rupture Plane
and Fault Parameters of the
PEER NGA West 1 and West 2 GMPEs

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 PEER NGA Earthquake Databases and GMPEs
(Bozorgnia et al., Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 30, No. 3, August 2014, EERI)

NGA-West1 Database – 3,550 Records NGA-West2 Database – 21,332 Records

(West1 GMPEs used for ASCE 7-10 maps) (West2 GMPEs used for ASCE 7-16 maps)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Example Comparison of Deterministic MCER Ground Motions
NGA West1 and NGA West2 GMPEs (M7.0 at Rx = 6 km, Site Class boundaries)

2.4
West2 is 27% greater West1 - vs,30 = 5,000 fps
2.2 than West1 at 0.3s West2 is 45% greater West1 - vs,30 = 2,500 fps
(vs,30 = 1,200 fps) than West1 at 0.5s West1 - vs,30 = 1,200 fps
2.0
(vs,30 = 600 fps) West1 - vs,30 = 600 fps
1.8 West2 - vs,30 = 5,000 fps
West2 - vs,30 = 2,500 fps
1.6
West2 - vs,30 = 1,200 fps
Spectral Acceleration (g)

1.4 West2 - vs,30 = 600 fps

1.2
1.0

0.8
0.6

0.4
0.2
0.0
0.1 1.0 10.0
Period (seconds)

PEER NGA GMPE spreadsheet calculations: West1 based on Al Atik, 2009, West2 based on Seyhan, 2014)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Probabilistic Ground Motions
Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA) methods:
Original (relatively simple) concepts developed by Cornell (1968)
Current methods typically use complex “logic trees” to incorporate inherent
uncertainties of seismic source parameters and GMPEs
MCER design values maps of Chapter 22 of ASCE 7-16 are based on
probabilistic ground motions developed by the United States Geological
Survey National Seismic Hazard Map Program (NSHMP) (USGS 2014)
Earthquake models are region-specific – Continental U.S. regions include:
Western United States (WUS) – 5 GMPEs
Pacific Northwest (PNW) – 5 GMPEs (WUS) + 5 GMPEs (deep events)
Central and Eastern United States (CEUS) – 9 GMPEs
Caution! - ASCE 7-16 MCER ground motions and NSHMP ground motions have
different probabilistic definitions and intensity measures:
ASCE 7-16 MCER - 1% probability of collapse in 50 yrs. – RotD100 intensity
NSHMP – 2% probability of exceedance in 50 yrs. – RotD50 intensity

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

A Couple of Probabilistic Ground Motion References

McGuire (EERI 2004) USGS 2014 National Seismic

Hazard Maps
Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples
 Map of the United States showing Seismic Sources
(Moschetti et al., EERI Earthquake Spectra Vol. 31, S1, December 2015)

Figure 1. Summary of seismic sources in the NSHM-SSC. Source, regional, and zone boundaries are
indicated by the figure legend. Place names corresponding to source zones are given by italicized
text. WUS faults are plotted with thin black lines. New Madrid seismic zone (NMSZ)is both an area
source and a zone of modified rates. Abbreviators include potential induced earthquakes (PIE);
eastern Tennessee seismic zone (ETSZ); California (CA); Oregon (OR); Washington (WA).

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Notional Illustration of the Primary Components of
Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Example Hazard Curves
Riverside CA - Site Class CD
(USGS, 2008, http://geohazards.usgs.gov/deaggint/2008/)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Example 2% - 50-Year Uniform Hazard Spectra (UHS)
Riverside CA - Site Classes BC/CD
(USGS, 2008, http://geohazards.usgs.gov/deaggint/2008/)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Example 0.2s and 1s De-Aggregation of PSHA Results
Riverside CA, Site Class CD
(USGS, 2008, http://geohazards.usgs.gov/deaggint/2008/)

1s Response

0.2s Response

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Example 0.3s Uniform Hazard Map of the United States

Figure1. Map showing 2014 3 Hz (0.3s) spectral acceleration for 2% probability of exceedance in
50years and V530 site condition for 760 m/s (B/C boundary condition).The USGS NSHM Program
(NSHMP) team in Golden, CO, provided the 2014 map data on 3 Hz (0.3 s) spectral acceleration.

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Topics Covered

• Intro to Ground Motion Intensity Measures

• USGS Uniform Hazard Maps
• Risk Targeted Maps
• 2014 NEHRP and ASCE 7-16 Seismic Maps
• Determination of Ground Motion Values
• Horizontal Response Spectra
• Vertical Response Spectra
• Peak Ground Acceleration
• Site Specific Response Spectra
• Selection and Scaling of Ground Motions
Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples
 USGS Maps

• Probabilistic
• Uniform Hazard (e.g. 2% in 50 year probability)
• Spectral Contours (T=0, 0.1, 0.2 sec…)
• 5 % Damping
• Site Class B/C Boundary
• Geomean Values

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Risk-Targeted Design Maps

Consistent with site-specific procedures (Ch. 21) of ASCE 7-16 &

2015 NEHRP …
Probabilistic ground motion
Method 1: Uniform-hazard GM x Risk Coefficient
Method 2: Risk-targeted probabilistic GM directly
Deterministic ground motion
84th-%ile GM, but not < 1.5Fa or 0.6Fv / T

MCER GM = min( Prob. GM, Det. GM)

All GMs are max-direction spectral accel.’s
Ground motions computed by USGS
Ground motions converted from geomean to maximum direction

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Probabilistic Ground Motions
From site-specific procedures (Chapter 21) of ASCE 7-16 &
2015 NEHRP Provisions …

21.2.1, Probabilistic Ground Motion: The probabilistic spectral response accelerations shall be
taken as the spectral response accelerations in the direction of maximum horizontal response
represented by a 5 percent damped acceleration response spectrum that is expected to achieve
a 1 percent probability of collapse within a 50-yr. period.
Probabilistic Ground Motion = Risk-Targeted GM
21.2.1.2, Method 2: At each spectral response period for which the acceleration is computed, ordinates of
the probabilistic ground motion response spectrum shall be determined from iterative integration of a site-
specific hazard curve with a lognormal probability density function representing the collapse fragility (i.e.,
probability of collapse as a function of spectral response acceleration). The ordinate of the probabilistic
ground-motion response spectrum at each period shall achieve a 1 percent probability of collapse within a
50-yr. period for a collapse fragility having (i) a 10 percent probability of collapse at said ordinate of the
probabilistic ground-motion response spectrum and (ii) a logarithmic standard deviation values of 0.6.

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Risk-Targeted Ground Motions

Calculated iteratively by combining …

Building Fragility Curves GM Hazard Curves
defined by Project ‘07 (e.g., from USGS)
Risk Target
defined by Project ‘07
Prob. of Collapse
in 50 yrs = 1%

… via “Risk Integral” (e.g. ATC 3-06), i.e., …

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Risk-Targeted Ground Motions
“Guess” RTGM
For a given location …

Generate fragility curve as a function of RTGM

Integrate fragility & hazard curves to calculate risk

P[Collapse] in 50yrs
= 1%? No

Yes
RTGM Calculated

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Risk-Targeted GMs – Example
GM hazard curves from USGS …

Notes:
The SA values from USGS
have been factored by
1.1 for 0.2s or 1.3 for 1.0s
to convert (approximately)
to max direction.
Conventional “2500-yr” GMs are
interpolated from such hazard
curves.

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Risk-Targeted GMs – Example
Generic fragility curves assuming, for our 1st iteration, that
RTGMs = 2500-yr GMs …

Generic fragility curve equation:

where

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Risk-Targeted GMs – Example

Ris k Integration:

Risk Fragility Hazard

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Risk-Targeted GMs – Example
Hazard

Ris k Integration:
Fragility
Risk

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Risk-Targeted GMs – Example
Hazard

Ris k Integration:
Fragility
Risk

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Risk-Targeted GM (RTGM) Maps

These intermediate (to MCER GM) maps are not

included in ASCE 7-10 or 2009 NEHRP
Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples
 Risk-Targeted Ground Motions
From site-specific procedures (Chapter 21)
of ASCE 7-10 & 2009 NEHRP Provisions …

21.2.1, Probabilistic Ground Motion: The probabilistic spectral response accelerations shall be
taken as the spectral response accelerations in the direction of maximum horizontal response
represented by a 5 percent damped acceleration response spectrum that is expected to achieve
Probabilistic
a 1 percent Ground
probability of collapse within aMotion
50-yr. period.= Risk-Targeted GM

21.2.1.1, Method 1: At each spectral response period for which the acceleration is computed,
ordinates of the probabilistic ground motion response spectrum shall be determined as the
product of the risk coefficient, CR, and the spectral response acceleration from a 5 percent
damped acceleration response Risk-Targeted GM probability
spectrum having a 2 percent = of exceedance within a
50-yr. period. The valueUniform-Hazard
of the risk coefficient, CR(2500-yr) GM using values of CRS and
, shall be determined
CR1 from Figs. 22-3 and 22-4, respectively. …
x Risk Coefficient

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Risk Coefficients
• Conventional uniform-hazard (2500-yr) GMs
interpolated from hazard curves

Risk-Targeted GMs
• Risk Coefficients =
Uniform-Hazard GMs
• e.g., SFBA Location MMA Location
Risk-Targeted GM 1.38g 0.96g
Uniform-Hazard GM 1.29g 1.18g
Risk Coefficient 1.07 0.82

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Risk Coefficient Maps

These intermediate maps are included

in ASCE 7-10 (for Ch. 21) and 2009 NEHRP
Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples
 Risk Coefficient Maps
Risk-Targeted (1% in 50yrs,  = 0.8)  Uniform-Hazard (2% in 50yrs) ; 0.2sec SA

50 
N

45 
N

40 
N

35 
N

30 
N

25 
N
125   W
W 65
120  
W 7 0 W
115  W 
110  W 
75 W
105 W 80 W
100 W 95 W 90 W 8 5 W

0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Risk Coefficient Maps
Risk-Targeted (1% in 50yrs,  = 0.8)  Uniform-Hazard (2% in 50yrs) ; 0.2sec SA

50 
N

45 
N

40 
N

35 
N

30 
N

25 
N
125   W
W 65
120  
W 7 0 W
115  W 
110  W 
75 W
105 W 80 W
100 W 95 W 90 W 8 5 W

< 0.85
0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Risk Coefficient Maps
Risk-Targeted (1% in 50yrs,  = 0.8)  Uniform-Hazard (2% in 50yrs) ; 0.2sec SA

50 
N

45 
N

40 
N

35 
N

30 
N

25 
N
125   W
W 65
120  
W 7 0 W
115  W 
110  W 
75 W
105 W 80 W
100 W 95 W 90 W 8 5 W

> 1.15
0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Summary: Probabilistic GMs
Probabilistic GMs = Risk-Targeted GMs
Risk-Targeted GMs calculated from …
GM hazard curves (from USGS)
Building fragility curves (def. by Project ’07)
Risk target (defined by Project ‘07)

Risk-Targeted GMs
Risk Coefficients =
Uniform-Hazard GMs
Risk Coeff. Maps included in ASCE 7-10 for combination
with site-specific UHGMs

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Deterministic Ground Motions
From site-specific procedures (Chapter 21) of ASCE 7-10 &
2009 NEHRP Provisions …

21.2.2, Deterministic Ground Motion: The deterministic spectral response acceleration at each
period shall be calculated as an 84th-percentile 5 percent damped spectral response
acceleration in the direction of maximum horizontal response computed at that period. … the
Deterministic
ordinates of the deterministic ground GM
motions response = shall not be taken as lower
spectrum
than the corresponding ordinates of the response spectrum determined in accordance with Fig.
21.2-1, … max( 84 th
-%ile GM, 1.5Fa ) for 0.2s
max( 84th-%ile GM, 0.6Fv ) for 1.0s
(a max-direction GM, like Probabilistic GM is)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Median Ground Motions
USGS produces median (50th-%ile) GMs maps, e.g., …

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Deterministic Ground Motions
As decided by Project ‘07 …
84th-%ile GMs ≈ 1.8 x Median GMs
For max-direction GMs, also factor by …
1.1 for 0.2s
1.3 for 1.0s

Since Fa=1 and Fv=1 for Site Class B, …

Det. GM = max( 1.1 x 1.8 x Med. GM, 1.5g ) for 0.2s

Det. GM = max( 1.3 x 1.8 x Med. GM, 0.6g ) for 1.0s

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Deterministic Maps

These intermediate maps are not included

in ASCE 7-10 but are in 2009 NEHRP
Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples
 MCER Ground Motions
From site-specific procedures (Chapter 21) of ASCE 7-10 &
2009 NEHRP Provisions …

21.2.2, Site-Specific MCER: The site-specific MCER spectral response acceleration at any period,
SaM, shall be taken as the lesser of the spectral response accelerations from the probabilistic
MCER GM = min ( Prob. GM, Det. GM )
ground motions of Section 21.2.1 and the deterministic ground motions of Section 21.2.2.

Recall, …
Prob. GM = Risk-Targeted GM
Det. GM = max( 84th-%ile GM, 1.5Fa or 0.6Fv / T)
Both are max-direction GMs

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Preparation of New Design Maps

To relate back
to conventional
uniform-hazard
(2500-yr) GMs …

─ In ASCE 7-10
─ In 2009 NEHRP

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 2014 NEHRP Maps

• Probabilistic / Deterministic (Separate Maps)

• Uniform Risk (Separate Maps)
• Spectral Contours (PGA, 0.1, 0.2 sec)
• 5 % Damping
• Site Class B/C Boundary
• Maximum Direction Values

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

2014 NEHRP Probabilistic Maps
T=0.2 Seconds • Probabilistic / Deterministic (Separate
Maps)
• Uniform Risk (Separate Maps)
• Spectral Contours (PGA, 0.1, 0.2 sec)
• 5 % Damping
• Site Class B/C Boundary
• Maximum Direction Values

T=1.0 Seconds

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Maximum Direction Conversion
To convert from USGS
T=0.2 Seconds Geomean to NEHRP Maximum
Direction Multiply 0.2 Sec.
values by 1.1
Multiply 1.0 Sec. values by 1.3

T=1.0 Seconds

For Lat = 47.65

Lon = -122.3
2% in 50 year
Max Direction
Values:
0.2 sec=1.186
x 1.1 =
Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples
 Reasons for Updated Design Maps
1) 2014 USGS National Seismic 2) Fragility curve b = 0.8  b = 0.6, for
Hazard Model (including NGA- consistency with the site-specific
West2, UCERF3, CEUS-SSC) ground motion chapter (Ch. 21) of
ASCE 7-10
1

0.9  = 0.8
 = 0.6

P [ Collapse | SA = a ]
0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0 -1 0 1
10 10 10
Spectral Acceleration (1.0 sec), a [g]

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 USGS Hazard Model Updates
Project Name Lead(s) Duration Sponsors
Central & Eastern US Seismic 2008- US DOE, EPRI,
Source Characterization for Consultants
2011 US NRC
Nuclear Facilities (CEUS-SSC)
Uniform California Earthquake USGS, CGS,
2010-
Rupture Forecast, Version 3 SCEC CEA
2013
(UCERF3) (WGCEP)
Next Generation Attenuation
Relations for Western US, Version PEER 2010- CEA, Caltrans,
2013 PG&E
2 (NGA-West2)

Others listed in Chapter 22 Commentary and explained in

December 2015 Special Issue of Earthquake Spectra journal

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Fragility b=0.8  b=0.6 Update
• For 2009 NEHRP Provisions
MCER ground motions & site-
specific ground motion chapter
(Ch. 21), the BSSC Seismic
Design Procedures
Reassessment Group settled on
b = 0.8
• For 2010 ASCE 7 Standard Ch. 21
(but not MCER maps), the
Seismic Subcommittee (SSC) Ad-
Hoc Ground Motion Committee
updated to b = 0.6, based on …

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Changes at 34 High-Risk Locations
City and Location of Site County or Metropolitan Statistical Area
Region
Name Latitude Longitude Name Population
Los Angeles 34.05 -118.25
Century City 34.05 -118.40
Los Angeles 9,948,081
Southern California Northridge 34.20 -118.55
Long Beach 33.80 -118.20
Irvine 33.65 -117.80 Orange 3,002,048
Riverside 33.95 -117.40 Riverside 2,026,803
San Bernardino 34.10 -117.30 San Bernardino 1,999,332
San Luis Obispo 35.30 -120.65 San Luis Obispo 257,005
San Diego 32.70 -117.15 San Diego 2,941,454
Santa Barbara 34.45 -119.70 Santa Barbara 400,335
Ventura 34.30 -119.30 Ventura 799,720
Total Population - S. California 22,349,098 Population - 8 Counties 21,374,778
Oakland 37.80 -122.25 Alameda 1,502,759
Concord 37.95 -122.00 Contra Costa 955,810
Northern California

Monterey 36.60 -121.90 Monterey 421,333

Sacramento 38.60 -121.50 Sacramento 1,233,449
San Francisco 37.75 -122.40 San Francisco 776,733
San Mateo 37.55 -122.30 San Mateo 741,444
San Jose 37.35 -121.90 Santa Clara 1,802,328
Santa Cruz 36.95 -122.05 Santa Cruz 275,359
Vallejo 38.10 -122.25 Solano 423,473
Santa Rosa 38.45 -122.70 Sonoma 489,290
Total Population - N. California 14,108,451 Population - 10 Counties 8,621,978 …

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 N o r S t h o e u r t nh e C r an l i C f o a r l n i f io a r n i a
Changes at 34 High-Risk Locations
Ci ty a nd Loca ti on o f Si te County or Me tropol i ta n S ta ti sti c a l Are a
Re gi on
Na me La ti tud e Long i tude Na me P opul a ti on
Los Ange les 3 4.0 5 -1 18 .25
Cent u ry Cit y 3 4.0 5 -1 18 .40
Los Ange les 9,9 48,0 81
Nort hri dge 3 4.2 0 -1 18 .55
Lon g Bea ch 3 3.8 0 -1 18 .20
Irvin e 3 3.6 5 -1 17 .80 Ora nge 3,0 02,0 48
Riversi de 3 3.9 5 -1 17 .40 Riversi de 2,0 26,8 03
San B e rnard ino 3 4.1 0 -1 17 .30 San B e rnard ino 1,9 99,3 32
San L uis Ob isp o 3 5.3 0 -1 20 .65 San L uis Ob isp o 257 ,005
San Die go 3 2.7 0 -1 17 .15 San Die go 2,9 41,4 54
Santa Barba ra 3 4.4 5 -1 19 .70 Santa Barba ra 400 ,335
Vent u ra 3 4.3 0 -1 19 .30 Vent u ra 799 ,720
Tota l P opul a ti on - S. Ca l i forni a 2 2,34 9,09 8 P opul a ti on - 8 Counti e s 2 1,37 4,77 8
Oa kla nd 3 7.8 0 -1 22 .25 A lam eda 1,5 02,7 59
Conc ord 3 7.9 5 -1 22 .00 Cont ra Cost a 955 ,810
Mon tere y 3 6.6 0 -1 21 .90 Mon tere y 421 ,333
Sacra men to 3 8.6 0 -1 21 .50 Sacra men to 1,2 33,4 49
San Fra nci sco 3 7.7 5 -1 22 .40 San Fra nci sco 776 ,733
San M ateo 3 7.5 5 -1 22 .30 San M ateo 741 ,444
San Jos e 3 7.3 5 -1 21 .90 Santa Clara 1,8 02,3 28
San ta Cruz 3 6.9 5 -1 22 .05 San ta Cruz 275 ,359
Vall ejo 3 8.1 0 -1 22 .25 Sola no 423 ,473
Santa Rosa 3 8.4 5 -1 22 .70 Sono ma 489 ,290
Tota l P opul a ti on - N. Ca l i forni a 1 4,10 8,45 1 P opul a ti on - 1 0 Counti e s 8,6 21,9 78

… Seattle 47.60 -122.30 King WA 1,826,732

Northwest

Tacoma 47.25 -122.45 Pierce WA 766,878

Pacific

Everett 48.00 -122.20 Snohomish WA 669,887

Portland 45.50 -122.65 Portland Metro OR (3) 1,523,690
Total Population - OR and WA 10,096,556 Population - 6 Counties 4,787,187
Salt Lake City 40.75 -111.90 Salt Lake UT 978,701
Other WUS

Boise 43.60 -116.20 Ada/Canyon ID (2) 532,337

Reno 39.55 -119.80 Washoe NV 396,428
Las Vegas 36.20 -115.15 Clarke NV 1,777,539
Total Population - ID/UT/NV 6,512,057 Population - 5 Counties 3,685,005
St. Louis 38.60 -90.20 St. Louis MSA (16) 2,786,728
Memphis 35.15 -90.05 Memphis MSA (8) 1,269,108
CEUS

Charleston 32.80 -79.95 Charleston MSA (3) 603,178

Chicago 41.85 -87.65 Chicago MSA (7) 9,505,748
New York 40.75 -74.00 New York MSA (23) 18,747,320
Total Population - MO/TN/SC/IL/NY 48,340,918 Population - 57 Counties 32,912,082

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Changes in MCER & MCEG Values
1.8
SS (MCER)

Charleston
San Diego
Santa Barbara

Las Vegas
1.7
S1 (MCER)
Proposed  ASCE 7-10 Ground Motion

1.6 PGA (MCEG)

1.5 Irvine

1.4

1.3

1.2

1.1

0.9

0.8

0.7 Southern California Northern California PacNW IMW CEUS

0.6
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34
City Location #

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Underlying Components of SS and S1
• As laid out in the 2009 NEHRP Provisions (& Ch. 21) …
11.4.3 Site Coefficients, Risk Coefficients, and Risk-targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE R) Spectral
Response Acceleration Parameters. The spectral response acceleration for short periods (S s),adjusted for the target
risk of collapse, shall be determined as the lesser value of Equations 11.4-1 and 11.4-2

… and the spectral response acceleration at the period of 1 second (S 1), adjusted for the target risk of collapse, shall
be determined as the lesser value of Equations 11.4-3 and 11.4-4

Where
SSD = mapped deterministic, 5% damped, spectral response acceleration parameter at short periods as defined in
Section 11.4.1
SSUH = mapped uniform-hazard, 5% damped, spectral response acceleration parameter at short periods as defined in
Section 11.4.1
CRS = mapped value of the risk coefficient at short periods as defined in Section 11.4.1

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Changes in USGS Uniform-Hazard Values
1.8
SSUH

San Diego
Santa Barbara

Las Vegas
1.7
S1UH
Proposed  ASCE 7-10 Ground Motion

1.6 "PGAUH"
1.5

1.4

1.3

1.2

1.1

0.9

0.8

0.7 Southern California Northern California PacNW IMW CEUS

0.6
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34
City Location #

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Changes at Las Vegas Location
• In ASCE 7-10 maps, rate of
earthquakes on Eglington fault is
~1/14,000yrs.
• Based on recent publications
(references in dePolo et al, 2013),
…
• Nevada Bureau of Mines &
Geology recommended, in effect, a
rate of ~1/600yrs.
• Through additional communication
with USGS, all agreed on
~1/2,100yrs.

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Changes at Santa Barbara Location

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Changes at Santa Barbara Location
• ASCE 7-10 maps are based on • ASCE 7-10 maps are based on
UCERF2 in California. NGA-West1 for Western U.S.
• UCERF3 includes more multi- crustal earthquakes.
fault earthquakes (like 2011 • NGA-West2 includes recent data
M7.2 El Mayor-Cucapah), in from 2009 M6.3 L’Aquila, 2008
part to remove UCERF2 over- M7.9 Wenchuan & 5 other
prediction of M6.5-7 earthquakes on dipping faults, as
earthquakes. well as 130,000 ground motion
• This, in effect, lowers rate of simulations.
earthquakes that dominate • The effect was to decrease best
hazard in Santa Barbara. estimates of ground motions
over reverse faults near Santa
Barbara.

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Changes in Risk Coefficients
1.8
CRS
1.7
CR1
Proposed  ASCE 7-10 Risk Coefficient

1.6

1.5

1.4

1.3

1.2

1.1

0.9

0.8

0.7 Southern California Northern California PacNW IMW CEUS

0.6
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34
City Location #

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Changes in Deterministic Values
1.8
SSD
1.7
S1D
Proposed  ASCE 7-10 Ground Motion

1.6 "PGAD"
1.5

1.4

1.3

1.2

1.1

0.9

0.8

0.7 Southern California Northern California PacNW IMW CEUS

0.6
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34
City Location #

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Deterministic Earthquakes
• UCERF3 includes multi-fault ruptures (M8+), in part to
remove UCERF2 overprediction of M6.5-7 earthquakes.

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Deterministic Earthquakes
• UCERF3 also includes low-activity-rate faults, e.g., …

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Deterministic Earthquakes
From ASCE 7-10 site-specific • For 2015 NEHRP Provisions,
ground motion chapter (Ch. 21): characteristic earthquakes from
UCERF2 (& ASCE 7-10) have
21.2.2 Deterministic (MCER) Ground Motions
been updated and used in lieu
The deterministic spectral response acceleration at each
period shall be calculated as an 84th percentile 5 percent of UCERF3 multi-fault ruptures,
damped spectral response acceleration in the direction and …
of maximum horizontal response computed at that
period. The largest such acceleration calculated for the
characteristic earthquake on all known active faults • “Active” faults have been
within the region shall be used. For the purposes of this
standard, the ordinates of the deterministic ground defined as those with Holocene
motion response spectrum shall not be taken as lower (last ~12K years)
than the corresponding ordinates of the response
spectrum determined in accordance with Figure 21.2.1, displacement/slip, or with slip
where Fa and Fv are determined using Tables 11.4.1 and
11.4.2, respectively, with the value of Ss taken as 1.5 rate > 0.1 mm/year. All other
and the value of S1 taken as 0.6. faults have been excluded.

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Previous Changes in MCE(R) Values
1.8
ASCE 7-10  ASCE 7-05 , SS
1.7
ASCE 7-10  ASCE 7-05 , S1
1.6
ASCE 7-05  ASCE 7-98 , SS
1.5 ASCE 7-05  ASCE 7-98 , S1
Ground Motion Ratio

1.4

1.3

1.2

1.1

0.9

0.8

0.7 Southern California Northern California PacNW IMW CEUS

0.6
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34
City Location #

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Changes in Seismic Design Categories

Seismic Design
Category (SDC)
A
B
C
D

Default Site Class E

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Changes in Seismic Design Categories

SDC changes
A → B
B → A

SDC changes
B → C
C → B

Default Site Class

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Changes in Seismic Design Categories

SDC changes
A → B
B → A

SDC changes
B → C
C → B

Default Site Class

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Changes in Seismic Design Categories

SDC changes
C → D
D → C

SDC changes
D → E
E → D

Default Site Class

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Changes in Seismic Design Categories

SDC changes
C → D
D → C

SDC changes
D → E
E → D

Default Site Class

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Updated Design Maps Web Tool

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/designmaps/beta/us/

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Updated Design Maps Web Tool

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Updated Design Maps Web Tool

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Updated Design Maps Web Tool

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Updated Design Maps Web Tool

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Updated Design Maps Web Tool

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Updated Design Maps Web Tool

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Topics Covered
• Intro to Ground Motion Intensity Measures
• USGS Uniform Hazard Maps
• Risk Targeted Maps
• 2014 NEHRP & 7-16 Seismic Maps
• Determination of Ground Motion Values
• Horizontal Response Spectra
• Vertical Response Spectra
• Peak Ground Acceleration
• Site Specific Response Spectra
• Selection and Scaling of Ground Motions
Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples
Development of Design Spectrum

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Development of Design Spectrum
SDS=0.860g
SD1=0.433g

1.2

Spectral Acceleration,
1.0
MCER spectrum

0.8

TL=6 s (from map) 0.6

0.4

g
design
0.2 spectrum TL

T0 TS
0.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Period, T (s)

Sa @ T=0= 0.4(SDS)=0.4(0.860)=0.344g

Fig. 22-7 Long Period Transition Maps

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Vertical Response Spectra
• New Chapter 23 of NEHRP Provisions
• Not incorporated into ASCE 7 specifically for
nonbuilding structures
Spectrum has Four Braches:

Sav
4
1

Period, TV, sec.

0.025 0.150 2.0
0.050

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Vertical Response Spectra

For current example SS=1.389g, SDS=0.859g, Site Class D

Sav

0.796

0.298

0.114

Period, TV, sec.

0.025 0.150 2.0
0.050

Note: This is the DBE

Spectra. Multiply all accelerations
Interpolation gives Cv=1.158 by 1.5 to obtain MCE Spectra

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Peak Ground Acceleration

Section 11.8.3 of ASCE 7-10:

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Peak Ground Acceleration
Results from USGS Design Maps Utility
(Detailed Report) for Seattle Location

PGA=0.521 g

FPGA=1.0

PGAM = FPGAPGA = 1.0 x 0.521 = 0.521g

Note: This is the MCE PGA. Design
PGA (where used) = (2/3) PGAM
Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples
 Topics Covered
• Intro to Ground Motion Intensity Measures
• USGS Uniform Hazard Maps
• Risk Targeted Maps
• 2014 NEHRP & 7-16 Seismic Maps
• Determination of Ground Motion Values
• Horizontal Response Spectra
• Vertical Response Spectra
• Peak Ground Acceleration
• Site Specific Response Spectra
• Selection and Scaling of Ground Motions
Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples
 Course Introduction

3
Earthquake Ground Motions
Section 3.3 - Site-Specific Ground
Motion Spectra
Slide set created by Charles A. Kircher, Ph.D., P.E.

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Site Specific Response Spectra
Summary of ASCE 7-16 Requirements for Site-Specific Analysis

Chapter 11
Section 11.4.7 – Defines site conditions and structural criteria for which the
site-specific ground motion analysis procedures of Chapter 21 are required
(with exceptions that permit ELF/MRSA using conservative values of design
coefficients)
Chapter 21
Section 21.1 – Provides requirements for site response analysis calculations
(e.g., Shake analyses, etc.) – Same as ASCE 7-10
Section 21.2 – Provides requirements for developing site-specific MCER
ground motions – Same as ASCE 7-10
Section 21.3 – Provides requirements for developing site-specific design basis
ground motions from MCER ground motions including lower-bound limits –
Same as ASCE 7-10
Section 21.4 – Provides requirements for developing values of SDS and SD1 from
site-specific design ground motions
Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples
Design Response Spectrum
(Figure 11.4-1, ASCE 7-05, ASCE 7-10
or ASCE 7-16 with annotation)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Background - Map of TL Regions (and Relationship
to Earthquake Magnitude)
(Chapter 22, ASCE 7-05, ASCE 7-10 and ASCE 7-16)

M Tc (sec)
6.0-6.5 4
6.5-7.0 6
7.0-7.5 8
7.5-8.0 12
8.0-8.5 16
8.5-9.0+ 20

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 New Values of the Site Coefficient, Fa (Table 11.4-1 of ASCE7-16)
(shown as proposed changes to ASCE 7-10)
Table 11.4-1 Site Coefficient, Fa

Mapped Risk-Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER) Spectral Response

Acceleration Parameter at Short Period
Site
Class SS  0.25 SS = 0.5 SS = 0.75 SS = 1.0 SS = 1.25 SS ≥ 1.5

A 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8

B 1.0 0.9 1.0 0.9 1.0 0.9 1.0 0.9 1.0 0.9 0.9
C 1.2 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.1 1.2 1.0 1.2 1.0 1.2 1.2
D 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.0
E 2.5 2.4 1.7 1.2 1.3 0.9 1.1 See
0.9 1.0 Section 0.8
11.4.7
F See Section 11.4.7

Note: Use straight-line interpolation for intermediate values of SS. At the Site Class B-C boundary, Fa = 1.0 for all Ss levels. If site
classes A or B is established without the use of on-site geophysical measurements of shear wave velocity, use Fa = 1.0.
Note – Site Class B is no longer the “reference” site class of MCE R ground motion parameters Ss
and S1 (i.e., new coefficients reflect Site Class BC boundary of 2,500 f/s) and Site Class D is no
longer the “default” site class (since Site Class C amplification is greater in some cases)
Note – Site-Specific analysis is required for Site Class E sites where S S ≥ 1.0

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 New Values of the Site Coefficient, Fv (Table 11.4-2 of ASCE7-16)
(shown as proposed changes to ASCE 7-10)
Table 11.4-2 Site Coefficient, Fv

Mapped Risk-Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE R)

Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter at 1-s Period
Site
Class S1  0.1 S1 = 0.2 S1 = 0.3 S1 = 0.4 S1 = 0.5 S1  0.6

A 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8

B 1.0 0.8 1.0 0.8 1.0 0.8 1.0 0.8 1.0 0.8 0.8
C 1.7 1.5 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.5 1.3 1.5 1.4
D 2.4 2.0 2.2 1.8 2.0 1.6 1.9 1.5 1.8 1.7
E 3.5 4.2 3.2 3.3 2.8 2.4 2.4 2.2 2.0
F See Section 11.4.7

Note: Use straight-line interpolation for intermediate values of S1. At the Site Class B-C boundary, Fv = 1.0 for all S1 levels. If site
classes A or B are established without the use of on-site geophysical measurements of shear wave velocity, use Fv = 1.0.

Note – Site Class B is no longer the “reference” site class of MCE R ground motion
parameters Ss and S1 (i.e., new coefficients reflect Site Class BC boundary of 2,500 f/s).
Note – Site-Specific analysis required for Site Class D sites where S 1 ≥ 0.2 w/Exceptions
Site-Specific analysis required for Site Class E sites where S 1 ≥ 0.2 w/o Exception

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Site-Specific Requirements of Section
11.4.7 of ASCE 7-10 (ASCE 7-16)

Site-specific ground motion procedure permitted for:

Chapter 21 procedures are permitted for any structure

Site-specific ground motion procedures required for:

Section 21.1 procedures are required for structures on Site Class F sites (i.e.,
soil failure)
Section 21.2 procedures are required for isolated or damped structures when
S1 ≥ 0.6 g

•Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 New (Additional) Site-Specific Requirements of
Section 11.4.7 of ASCE 7-16

Site-specific ground motion procedures required for:

structures on Site Class E sites with SS greater than or equal to 1.0.
structures on Site Class D and E sites with S1 greater than or equal to 0.2.

Exceptions permit ELF (and MRSA) design using

conservative values of seismic coefficients:
Structures on Site Class E sites with SS greater than or equal to 1.0, provided the site
coefficient Fa is taken as equal to that of Site Class C.
Structures on Site Class D sites with S1 greater than or equal to 0.2, provided the
value of the seismic response coefficient Cs is increased by up to 50 percent at
periods greater than Ts (by effectively extending the acceleration domain to 1.5Ts).
Structures on Site Class E sites with S1 greater than or equal to 0.2, provided that T is
less than or equal to Ts and the equivalent static force procedure is used for design.

•Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 New Site-Specific Requirements of Section
21.4 of ASCE 7-16
Section 21.4 – Improved derivation of design acceleration parameters SDS
and SD1 from a site-specific design spectrum:
Base SDS on 90 percent of the peak acceleration of the site-specific
design spectrum (periods of 0.2s to 1s) – ignore 100 percent of the value
at 0.2s
Consistently define domain of constant acceleration in terms of 90
percent of peak acceleration response regardless of the period of peak
response (within the range 0.2s to 1s).
Base SD1 on 100 percent of T x site-specific design spectrum at the period
of peak velocity response (periods 1s to 5s)
Extend period range from 1s to 5s for Site Class D and E sites to avoid
underestimating response in the domain of constant velocity for soil sites

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Illustration of the Criteria of Section 21.4 of ASCE 7-10
Site Class DE, M8 at R = 8.5 km (PEER NGA-West1 Relations)

2.0
MCEr - BC (Vs,30 = 2,500 fps)
ELF “Design Spectrum”
1.8 MCEr - DE (Vs,30 = 600 fps)
Cs x (R/Ie) = min[SDS, SD1/T]
Design DE (Vs,30 = 600 fps)
1.6
ELF DE (Vs,30 = 600 fps)

1.4
Spectral Acceleration (g)

1.2

1.0 SD1 = Max(Sa[T=1.0s], 2 x Sa[T =2.0s])

0.8

0.6
SDS = Max(Sa[T=0.2s], 0.9 x Sa[T = all])
0.4

0.2

0.0
0.1 1.0 10.0
Period (seconds)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Illustration of the New Requirements of Section 21.4 of ASCE 7-16
Site Class DE, M8 at R = 8.5 km (PEER NGA-West1 Relations)
2.0
MCEr - BC (Vs,30 = 2,500 fps)
ELF “Design Spectrum”
1.8 MCEr - DE (Vs,30 = 600 fps)
Cs x (R/Ie) = min[SDS, SD1/T]
Design DE (Vs,30 = 600 fps)
1.6
ELF DE (Vs,30 = 600 fps)

1.4
Spectral Acceleration (g)

1.2

1.0
SD1 = max(T x Sa[1s ≤l T ≤ 5s])
0.8

0.6
SDS = Max(0.9 x Sa[T ≥ 0.2s])
0.4

0.2

0.0
0.1 1.0 10.0
Period (seconds)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Root Cause of the “Problem”
(to the identified short-coming in the seismic design procedures of ASCE 7-10)

Section 11.4 of ASCE 7-10 (ASCE 7-16) - Use of only two response
periods (0.2s and 1.0s) to define ELF (and MRSA) design forces is
not sufficient, in general, to accurately represent response spectral
acceleration for all design periods
Reasonably Accurate (or Conservative) – When peak MCER response
spectral acceleration occurs at or near 0.2s and peak MCER response
spectral velocity occurs at or near 1.0s for the site of interest
Potentially Non-conservative – When peak MCER response spectral
velocity occurs at periods greater than 1.0s for the site of interest
(e.g., soil sites whose seismic hazard is dominated by large magnitude
events)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Example ELF “Design Spectrum” - ASCE 7-16 w/o New Site-Specific Requirements
M7.0 earthquake ground motions at RX = 6.5 km, Site Class C
2.6
MCEr Multi-Period Response Spectrum - Site Class BC
2.4
MCEr Multi-Period Response Spectrum - Site Class C
2.2 Design Multi-Period Response Spectrum - Site Class C
ELF Design Spectrum (Cs x R/Ie) - Current ASCE 7-16 Criteria
2.0
Response Spectral Accelertation (g)

1.8

1.6

1.4

1.2

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0
0.1 1.0 10.0
Period (seconds)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Example ELF “Design Spectrum” - ASCE 7-16 w/o New Site-Specific Requirements
M7.0 earthquake ground motions at RX = 6.5 km, Site Class D
2.6
MCEr Multi-Period Response Spectrum - Site Class BC
2.4
MCEr Multi-Period Response Spectrum - Site Class D
2.2 Design Multi-Period Response Spectrum - Site Class D
ELF Design Spectrum (Cs x R/Ie) - Current ASCE 7-16 Criteria
2.0
Response Spectral Accelertation (g)

1.8

1.6

1.4

1.2

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0
0.1 1.0 10.0
Period (seconds)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Example ELF “Design Spectrum” - ASCE 7-16 w/o New Site-Specific Requirements
M7.0 earthquake ground motions at R X = 6.5 km, Site Class E
2.6
MCEr Multi-Period Response Spectrum - Site Class BC
2.4
MCEr Multi-Period Response Spectrum - Site Class E
2.2 Design Multi-Period Response Spectrum - Site Class E
ELF Design Spectrum (Cs x R/Ie) - Current ASCE 7-16 Criteria
2.0
Response Spectral Accelertation (g)

1.8

1.6

1.4

1.2

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0
0.1 1.0 10.0
Period (seconds)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Short-Term Solution Options
(to the identified short-coming in the seismic design procedures of ASCE 7-10)
Option 1 - Re-formulate seismic parameters to eliminate potential
non-conservatism in ELF (and MRSA) seismic forces
Option 2 - Require site-specific analysis when ELF (and MSRA)
seismic forces could be potentially non-conservative

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Example Site-Specific MCER and Design Ground
Motion Spectra (Section 3.3.3 of FEMA 1051)
Illustration of Section 21.2 Risk Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake
(MCER) Ground Motion Analysis requirements
Section 21.2.1 - Probabilistic (MCER) Ground Motions
Section 21.2.1.1 Method 1 – 2% - 50-Yr UHS factored by the risk coefficient (CR) to
determine 1% - 50-Yr risk-targeted ground motions
Section 21.2.1.2 Method 2 – Iterative integration of site-specific hazard and
idealized collapse fragility curve
Section 21.2.2 Deterministic (MCER) Ground Motions
84th percentile ground motions of characteristic earthquake on the governing
fault(s)
Deterministic lower limit spectrum based on 1.5Fa and 0.6Fv
Section 21.2.3 Site-Specific MCER – Combination (lesser) of probabilistic and
deterministic MCER ground motions
Section 21.3 – Design Response Spectrum
2/3 of MCER spectrum subject to minimum (80% of Section 11.4.5)
Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples
 Google earth map showing location of the example
site (SCEC Site S684) in Riverside California and fault
segments of active fault systems

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

De-aggregation of 2,475-year mean annual return period seismic
hazard at the Riverside site – 0.2s response
(USGS, 2008, http://geohazards.usgs.gov/deaggint/2008/)

San Jacinto Fault

(San Bernardino Segment)

San Andreas Fault

(San Bernardino Segment)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

De-aggregation of 2,475-year mean annual return period seismic
hazard at the Riverside site - 1s response
(USGS, 2008, http://geohazards.usgs.gov/deaggint/2008/)

San Jacinto Fault

(San Bernardino Segment)

San Andreas Fault

(San Bernardino Segment)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

De-aggregation of 2,475-year mean annual return period seismic
hazard at the Riverside site - 5s response
(USGS, 2008, http://geohazards.usgs.gov/deaggint/2008/)

San Jacinto Fault

(San Bernardino Segment)

San Andreas Fault

(San Bernardino Segment)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Summary of seismic design parameters of the 2009 NEHRP Provisions
(ASCE 7-10) and the 2015 NEHRP Provisions (ASCE 7-16) for the
example Riverside site (USGS 2013, Luco 2015)
Parameter 2009 Source or 2009 2015
Parameter Definition
Symbol Equation Value Value
SSUH Uniform-hazard (2% in 50-year) ground motions of
Fig. 22-1 1.660 g 1.659
0.2s response spectral acceleration, Site Class BC
CRS Risk coefficient at 0.2s spectral response period Fig. 22-3 1.106 0.945
CRS x SSUH Uniform-risk (1% in 50-year) ground motions of
Eq. (11.4-1) 1.836 g 1.568
0.2s response spectral acceleration, Site Class BC
SSD Deterministic ground motions of 0.2s response
Fig. 22-5 1.50 g 1.50 g
spectral acceleration, Site Class BC
MCER 0.2s response spectral acceleration, Site Class
SS   1.50 g 1.50 g
BC (minimum of SSD and CRS x SSUH)

S1UH Uniform-hazard (2% in 50-year) ground motions of

Fig. 22-2 0.658 g 0.624 g
1.0s response spectral acceleration, Site Class BC
CR1 Risk coefficient at 1.0s spectral response period Fig. 22-4 1.072 0.919
CR1 x S1UH Uniform-risk (1% in 50-year) ground motions of
Eq. (11.4-3) 0.706 g 0.573 g
1.0s response spectral acceleration, Site Class BC
S1D Deterministic ground motions of 0.2s response
Fig. 22-6 0.60 g 0.60 g
spectral acceleration, Site Class BC
MCER 1.0s response spectral acceleration, Site Class
S1   0.60 g 0.573 g
BC (minimum of SSD and CRS x SSUH)
Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples
Summary of seismic design parameters of the 2009 NEHRP Provisions
(ASCE 7-10) and the 2015 NEHRP Provisions (ASCE 7-16) for the
example Riverside site (USGS 2013, Luco 2015) cont.
Parameter 2009 Source or 2009 2015
Parameter Definition
Symbol Equation Value Value
Fa (C) Short-period (0.2s) site coefficient, Site Class C Table 11.4-1 1.0 1.2
Fa (D) Short-period (0.2s) site coefficient, Site Class D Table 11.4-1 1.0 1.0
Fa (CD) Short-period (0.2s) site coefficient, Site Class CD [Fa(C)+Fa(D)]/2 1.0 1.1
Fv (C) Long-period (1.0s) site coefficient, Site Class C Table 11.4-2 1.3 1.4
Fv (D) Long-period (1.0s) site coefficient, Site Class D Table 11.4-2 1.5 1.7
Fv (CD) Long-period (1.0s) site coefficient, Site Class CD [Fv(C)+Fv(D)]/2 1.4 1.55
MCER 0.2s response spectral acceleration, Site
SMS Eq. (11.4-5) 1.50 g 1.65 g
Class CD (Fa x SS)
MCER 1.0s response spectral acceleration, Site
SM1 Eq. (11.4-6) 0.84 g 0.93 g
Class CD (Fv x S1)
Design 0.2s response spectral acceleration, Site
SDS Eq. (11.4-7) 1.00 g 1.10 g
Class CD (2/3 x SMS)
Design 1.0s response spectral acceleration, Site
SD1 Eq. (11.4-8) 0.56 g 0.62 g
Class CD (2/3 x SM1)
Ts (CD) Short-period transition period (SD1/SDS) Fig. 11.4-1 0.52 s 0.59 s
T0 (CD) ZPA transition period (0.2 x SD1/SDS) Fig. 11.4-1 0.104 s 0.108 s
TL Long-period transition period Fig. 22-7 8s 8s

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Factors used to convert RotD50 intensity ground motions to RotD100 intensity
ground motions (for calculation of both probabilistic and deterministic MCE R
ground motions) and factors used to convert median ground motions to 84th
percentile ground motions (for calculation of deterministic MCE R ground motions)
5
B1 - Ratio of Max/Median (RotD100/RotD50) - ASCE 7-10/ASCE 7-16
4.5 B2 - Ratio of RotD100/RotD50 - Shahi&Baker (2013)
D1 - Ratio 84th %ile/Median (assumed) - ASCE 7-10/ASCE 7-16
4
D2 - Ratio 84th %ile/Median - PEER NGA West2 GMPEs
3.5 B1 x D1 - Ratio of Deterministic MCEr to Median RotD50 - ASCE 7-10/16
B2 x D2 - Ratio of Deterministic MCEr to Median RotD50 - S&B/GMPEs
3

2.5
Ratio

1.5

0.5

0
0.1 1 10
Period (seconds)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Probabilistic MCER ground motions - Summary of 2% in 50-year UHS and 1% in 50-year
risk-targeted ground motion (RTGM) spectra provided by SCEC for hypothetical (v s,30 = 762
mps) and “actual” (vs,30 = 366 mps) site conditions of the example Riverside site (Milner
2015) and derived values of site amplification and risk coefficients
2%-50yr 2%-50yr 1%-50yr 1%-50yr Derived Derived
Period UHS UHS RTGM RTGM Site Values of
T (s) RotD100 RotD100 RotD100 RotD100 Amplifi- the Risk
762 mps 366 mps 762 mps 366 mps cation Coefficient
0.01 0.758 0.907 0.746 0.904 1.20 0.997
0.1 1.742 1.725 1.685 1.721 0.99 0.997
0.15 1.923 2.060 1.859 2.055 1.07 0.998
0.2 1.847 2.250 1.789 2.244 1.22 0.997
0.25 1.692 2.349 1.641 2.318 1.39 0.987
0.3 1.545 2.366 1.494 2.318 1.53 0.980
0.4 1.308 2.242 1.264 2.180 1.71 0.973
0.5 1.132 2.054 1.089 1.986 1.81 0.967
0.75 0.828 1.598 0.790 1.527 1.93 0.956
1.0 0.628 1.262 0.595 1.198 2.01 0.950
1.5 0.408 0.850 0.385 0.804 2.08 0.946
2.0 0.300 0.627 0.282 0.589 2.09 0.940
3.0 0.196 0.411 0.183 0.384 2.09 0.935
4.0 0.148 0.303 0.137 0.282 2.05 0.930
5.0 0.124 0.245 0.114 0.226 1.98 0.922
7.5 0.084 0.154 0.077 0.141 1.84 0.915
10 0.056 0.096 0.051 0.088 1.71 0.913

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Probabilistic MCER ground motions - Summary of 2% in 50-year UHS, maximum/geomean and
RotD100/RotD50 ratios, mapped values of risk coefficients and probabilistic MCE R ground
motions calculated from these parameters using Method 1, Section 21.2.1, and probabilistic
MCER ground motions calculated using Method 2, Section 21.2.1 of ASCE 7-16
(A) (B1) (B2) (C) Prob MCER Prob MCER Prob MCER
2%-50yr 2%-50yr
2%-50yr Maximum/ RotD100/ Risk
Period UHS UHS
UHS Geomean RotD50 Coefficient Method 1 Method 1 Method 2
T (s) RotD50 RotD100 366 mps 366 mps 366 mps
RotD50 (ASCE (Shahi & (ASCE
762 mps 762 mps (AxB1xC) (AxB2xC) (SCEC)
366 mps 7-10/16) Baker) 7-16)
0.01 0.635 0.758 0.760 1.10 1.19 0.945 0.790 0.857 0.904
0.1 1.467 1.742 1.453 1.10 1.19 0.945 1.510 1.630 1.721
0.15 1.603 1.923 1.717 1.10 1.20 0.945 1.785 1.947 2.055
0.2 1.532 1.847 1.866 1.10 1.21 0.945 1.940 2.126 2.244
0.25 1.391 1.692 1.931 1.11 1.22 0.943 2.027 2.216 2.318
0.3 1.268 1.545 1.941 1.13 1.22 0.942 2.057 2.228 2.318
0.4 1.064 1.308 1.824 1.15 1.23 0.939 1.969 2.104 2.180
0.5 0.921 1.132 1.671 1.18 1.23 0.935 1.837 1.921 1.986
0.75 0.669 0.828 1.291 1.24 1.24 0.927 1.482 1.482 1.527
1.0 0.506 0.628 1.017 1.30 1.24 0.919 1.215 1.160 1.198
1.5 0.328 0.408 0.684 1.33 1.24 0.919 0.833 0.781 0.804
2.0 0.241 0.300 0.504 1.35 1.24 0.919 0.625 0.576 0.589
3.0 0.157 0.196 0.330 1.40 1.25 0.919 0.424 0.378 0.384
4.0 0.117 0.148 0.240 1.45 1.26 0.919 0.320 0.278 0.282
5.0 0.098 0.124 0.194 1.50 1.26 0.919 0.267 0.225 0.226
7.5 0.065 0.084 0.120 1.50 1.29 0.919 0.165 0.142 0.141
10 0.043 0.056 0.075 1.50 1.29 0.919 0.103 0.089 0.088

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Probabilistic MCER ground motions - Plots of 2% in 50-year UHS for Site Class BC
(hypothetical, reference site conditions) and probabilistic MCER response spectra
for Site Class CD (“actual” site conditions) calculated in accordance with either
Method 1 or Method 2 of Section 21.2.1 of ASCE 7-16 for the Riverside site.

2.50

2.25

2.00
Response Spectral Acceleration (g)

1.75

1.50

1.25

1.00

0.75
2%-50yr UHS RotD50 - Site Class BC
0.50 2%-50yr UHS RotD100 - Site Class BC
MCEr - Site Class CD - Method 1 (ASCE 7-10/16)
0.25 MCEr - Site Class CD - Method 1 (Shahi & Baker)
MCEr - Site Class CD - Method 2 (Shahi & Baker)
0.00
0.05 0.5 5
Period (seconds)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Deterministic MCER ground motions - Summary of 1.8 x median and 84 th percentile RotD50
(geomean) response spectra, maximum/geomean and RotD100/RotD50 ratios, and
deterministic 84th percentile RotD100 (maximum) response spectra at the Riverside site for a
magnitude M7.8 earthquake on the San Jacinto fault at R X = 18 km, and the deterministic MCER
response spectrum based on the lower-limit of deterministic response (Figure 21.2-1)
(A1)
(A0) (A2) M7.8
M7.8 (B1) (B2) M7.8 M7.8 Deter-
M7.8 M7.8 Maximum
RotD50 Maximum/ RotD100/ RotD100 RotD100 ministic
Period RotD50 RotD50 1.8 x
1.8 x Geomean RotD50 84th %ile 84th %ile Lower Limit
T (s) 84th %ile 84th %ile Median
Median (ASCE (Shahi & 366 mps 762 mps (Fig. 21.2-
762 366 366 mps
366 7-10/16) Baker) (A2xB2) (A0xB2) 1)
mps mps (A1xB1)
mps
0.01 0.45 0.51 0.50 1.10 1.19 0.56 0.59 0.53 0.75
0.10 0.88 0.84 0.85 1.10 1.19 0.93 1.01 1.05 1.54
0.15 0.98 1.03 1.03 1.10 1.20 1.13 1.23 1.17 1.65
0.20 0.95 1.14 1.13 1.10 1.21 1.25 1.36 1.15 1.65
0.25 0.88 1.18 1.18 1.11 1.22 1.31 1.44 1.07 1.65
0.30 0.81 1.18 1.21 1.13 1.22 1.33 1.47 0.99 1.65
0.40 0.70 1.11 1.17 1.15 1.23 1.28 1.43 0.86 1.65
0.50 0.61 1.02 1.09 1.18 1.23 1.19 1.33 0.75 1.65
0.75 0.45 0.77 0.85 1.24 1.24 0.95 1.05 0.55 1.24
1.00 0.34 0.61 0.68 1.30 1.24 0.79 0.85 0.42 0.93
1.50 0.23 0.42 0.48 1.33 1.24 0.56 0.59 0.28 0.62
2.00 0.17 0.32 0.36 1.35 1.24 0.43 0.44 0.21 0.47
3.00 0.12 0.21 0.24 1.40 1.25 0.30 0.30 0.14 0.31
4.00 0.09 0.16 0.18 1.45 1.26 0.23 0.23 0.11 0.23
5.00 0.07 0.12 0.14 1.50 1.26 0.18 0.17 0.09 0.19
7.50 0.04 0.07 0.08 1.50 1.29 0.10 0.10 0.05 0.12
10.00 0.03 0.04 0.05 1.50 1.29 0.06 0.06 0.03 0.09

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Deterministic MCER Ground Motions - Plots of 1.8 times median and 84th
percentile ground motion response spectra for a magnitude M7.8 earthquake on
the San Jacinto fault system at a closest distance of RX = 18 km, and the
deterministic MCER response spectrum based on the lower-limit of deterministic
response based on Figure 21.2-1 of ASCE 7-16.
2.50
M7.8 84th %ile Maximum Response - Site Class BC (Shahi & Baker)
2.25 M7.8 1.8*Median Maximum Response - Site Class CD (ASCE 7-10/16)
M7.8 84th %ile Maximum Response - Site Class CD (Shahi & Baker)
2.00
Lower Limit on Deterministic MCEr Spectrum - Site Class CD (Fig. 21.2-1)
Response Spectral Acceleration (g)

1.75

1.50

1.25

1.00

0.75

0.50

0.25

0.00
0.05 0.5 5
Period (seconds)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

MCER and Design Response Spectra - Plots of the probabilistic MCE R response spectrum and
the deterministic MCER response spectrum, the sites-specific MCE R response spectrum
(minimum of probabilistic and deterministic MCE R response spectra) and the site-specific
design response spectrum (2/3 of the MCE R response spectrum, but not less than 80% of the
design response spectrum of Section 11.4.5) for the Riverside site.
2.50
Probabilistic MCEr Spectrum
2.25 Deterministic MCEr Spectrum
Site-Specific MCEr - min[Prob, Det]
2.00
Site-Specific Design (2/3 x MCEr)
Response Spectral Acceleration (g)

Minimum Design Spectrum (80%)

1.75

1.50

1.25

1.00

0.75

0.50

0.25

0.00
0.05 0.5 5
Period (seconds)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Section 21.4 - Summary of site-specific values of the parameters
SDS, SD1, SDS and SM1 of ASCE 7-10 and ASCE 7-16 derived from the
site-specific design spectrum of the Riverside site

Section 21.4 Requirement

Design Section 21.4 Requirement Value Value
ASCE 7-
Parameter ASCE 7-10 (7-10) (7-16)
16
SDS 100% of SaD [T = 0.2s] 1.1 g 90% of SaD [T ≥ 0.2s] 0.99 g
SD1 Max{SaD [T = 1s], 2 x SaD [T = 2s]} 0.62 g Max{T x SaD [1s ≤ T ≤ 5s]} 0.62 g
SMS 1.5 x SDS 1.65 g 1.5 x SDS 1.49 g
SM1 1.5 x SD1 0.93 g 1.5 x SD1 0.93 g

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Sanity Check - Comparison of Probabilistic and Deterministic
MCER Response Spectra - SCEC Riverside Site

SCEC Riverside Site Response Spectra - Vs,30 = 1,200 fps (CD) - RotD100
3.00
MCE Probabilistic - 2%-50yr Uniform Hazard
2.75
MCEr Probabilistic - 1%-50yr Uniform Collapse Risk
SMS
2.50 MCEr Deterministic - 'Lower-Limit' Ground Motions
Response Spectral Acceleration (g)

MCEr Deterministic - M7.8 84th %ile Ground Motions

2.25
Median M7.8 Earthquake Ground Motions at Rx = 18 km
2.00
1.75 Probabilistic MCER ≈
SM1 3 x median response of
1.50
1.25
an M7.8 earthquake
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25 Likely ground motions due to the next M7.8
earthquake on the San Jacinto Fault
0.00
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Period (seconds)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Sanity Check - Comparison of Representative Response Spectra (PEER
NGA West2 Database) and MCER Response Spectra - SCEC Riverside Site

Comparison of All (14) Representative Spectra of the PEER NGA West2 Database
and SCEC Riverside Site MCE Spectra - Vs,30 = 1,200 fps (CD) RotD100
3
Geomean of 14 Records - RotD100
2.75 84th %ile of 14 Records - RotD100
2.5 MCE Probabilistic - 2%-50yr Uniform Hazard
Response Spectral Acceleration (g)

MCEr Probabilistic - 1%-50yr Uniform Collapse Risk

2.25 MCEr Determistic - M7.8 84th % Ground Motions
2 PEER NGA West2 Database Search Criteria
Magnitude Range - M7.5 - M8.5 (avg M7.61)
1.75 Fault Type - All
Distance Range - 15 km - 20 km (avg 17.9 km)
1.5
Vs,30 Range - 200 mps - 600 mps (avg 398 mps)
1.25
1

0.75
0.5

0.25

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Period (seconds)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Topics Covered
• Intro to Ground Motion Intensity Measures
• USGS Uniform Hazard Maps
• Risk Targeted Maps
• 2014 NEHRP & 7-16 Seismic Maps
• Determination of Ground Motion Values
• Horizontal Response Spectra
• Vertical Response Spectra
• Peak Ground Acceleration
• Site Specific Response Spectra
• Selection and Scaling of Ground Motions
Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples
 Selection and Scaling
of Ground Motions
Ground motion accelerations histories required
when using response history analysis
• Chapter 1 Linear Response History
• Chapter 5 Nonlinear Response History
• Chapter 15 and 16 Base Isolation & Supplemental
Damping

All three require different methods be used for ground

motion selection and scaling

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Ground Motion Nomenclature
• An “Event” refers to a given historical earthquake, such as the
1989 Loma Prieta California Earthquake
• A “Record” refers to the recorded ground acceleration histories
at a particular recording station, such as the Saratoga-Aloha Ave.
recording of the Loma Prieta event.
• Each record has (usually) three “Components” consisting of two
(usually) orthogonal components and one vertical component. The
horizontal components are often, but not always, oriented in N-S
and E-W directions. In some cases fault-normal and fault- parallel
values are provided. Records can be transformed to any direction
(e.g. N-S and E-W recordings can be transformed to fault-normal
and fault-parallel given the orientation of the fault.
• A “Suite” of ground motions consist of three or more records.

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Selection of Appropriate Records
• Select from records of events having magnitude,
fault distance, and source mechanisms that control
the maximum considered earthquake (MCE)
• Pertinent information can be obtained from
“Deaggregation” of the seismic hazard

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Deaggregation of Hazard (2.0 sec Accel)
Distant large
magnitude records

Closer lower
magnitude records

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Deaggregation of Hazard (2.0 sec Accel)

Distant large
magnitude records

Closer lower
magnitude records

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Deaggregation of Hazard (0.2 sec Accel)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Spectral Characteristics of
Close and Far Records

mapped

Moderate, close earthquake

source
1
Acceleration

source
2
Large, distant earthquake
Spectral

period T1
range of
interest
Period, T

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Deaggregation of Hazard
(0.2 Sec Accel)

Cascadia Subduction Zone=6.1+19.5=25.6%

Shallow Crustal=17.6+17.5=35.1%
Deep Intraplate=21.7+16.6=48.3%

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Source Mechanisms for Selected Records

T=0.2s

25.6%

35.1%

48.3%

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Example Ground Motion Scale Factors

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Components of the Northridge Earthquake

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Ground Motion Spectra

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Chapter 16
Nonlinear Response History Analysis

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Requirements
• Minimum of 11 records
• Scale maximum direction to target spectra
• Method 1 – MCER Target Spectra
• Method 2 – Scenario Spectra

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example
Example site:
 San Francisco, California, just south of Market Street
 Site is in the transition region of the seismic hazard maps
(where the SS = 1.5g and S1 = 0.6g caps govern most of the
design spectral values)
 Site is considered by ASCE 7-16 to be a near-fault site (because
it is within 15 km of a large fault)
 Some additional details for this site location:
 Site Class: C
 SS = 1.50g, S1 = 0.60g
 SDS = 1.00g, SD1 = 0.52g
 Seismic Design Category: D

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example
Example site:

[Fault data from U.S. Geological Survey and map courtesy of Google]
Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples
 Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example
Example building:
 40-story reinforced concrete
shear wall building
 The fundamental period is
3.75 sec.
 Second mode period is 0.75
sec.
 Lowest period to get 90%
mass participation is 0.15
sec.

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example

Example building:
Decide to use a period
range of 0.15-7.5 sec. to
cover up to 2.0T1 and 90%
mass participation.
Use the Method 2 “scenario
spectrum” with two ground
motion sets anchored at 1st
and 2nd modes (so hazard is
done at 3.75s and 0.75s).

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example
To select and scale the ground motions, we need to
understand the:
 Soil type (Site Class C)
 Site seismicity
 Causal faults and disaggregation
 Near fault information (this site is classified as near-fault)
After that information is established, we can:
 Compute target spectra
 Selection motions
 Scale motions
 Apply motions to structural model

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example
Site seismicity: Disaggregation plots (1.0s period)

[From U.S. Geological Survey.]

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example
Site seismicity: Disaggregation plots (4.0s period)

[From U.S. Geological Survey.]

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example
Site seismicity: Disaggregation tables (1.0s period)

[From U.S. Geological Survey.]

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples
Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example
Site seismicity: Disaggregation tables (4.0s period)

[From U.S. Geological Survey.]

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example
For computing target spectra, we will:
first compute the MCER spectrum using Method 1 (because this is
needed for computing using Method 2), and then,
compute two “scenario spectra” using Method 2.

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example
Method 1 MCER Spectrum:
The following steps illustrate the method of ASCE 7-16
Chapter 21 including consideration of deterministic and
probabilistic hazard, adjustment for risk targeting, and
treatment of maximum direction spectra.

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example
Method 1 MCER Spectrum:
Step 1: Determine Probabilistic Spectra
 Compute site-specific geometric mean uniform hazard spectrum (UHS) - This
is obtained from the USGS disaggregation tool (USGS 2008) based on site
location, Vs30 for Site Class C, and a ground motion level with 2% probability
of exceedance in 50 years.
 Adjust geometric mean to maximum direction UHS - The geometric mean
spectrum of Step 1a is multiplied by the period-dependent maximum
direction scale factors of ASCE 7 Section 21.2. Note that this step may be
omitted if a maximum direction UHS is computed directly.
 Adjust UHS to uniform risk spectrum (URS) - The maximum direction
uniform hazard spectrum of Step 1b is multiplied by the period-dependent
risk coefficients of ASCE 7 Section 21.2.1.1. Note that one could also adjust
from UHS to URS through iterative integration of the hazard curve with a
collapse fragility curve per ASCE 7 Section 21.2.1.2.
Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples
 Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example
Method 1 MCER Spectrum:
Step 2: Determine Deterministic Spectra
 Compute site-specific maximum direction deterministic spectrum - This is
constructed based on the 84th percentile spectral values for the controlling fault. If
the ground motion prediction equations used to compute the 84 th percentile values
for the controlling fault predict geometric mean, then the resulting spectrum must
be adjusted by the maximum direction scale factors (e.g. see Step 1b above).
Adjustment for risk-targeting (i.e. Step 1c above) does not apply to deterministic
spectra.
 Compute transition spectrum - This is constructed based on a code-shape spectrum
having Ss = 1.5g, S1 = 0.6g and corresponding site amplification factors Fa and Fv. It is
often referred to as the transition spectrum since it tends to geographically
transition between deterministically-controlled and probabilistically-controlled sites.
 Define deterministic spectrum - The deterministic spectrum is the larger of the
spectrum from Steps 2a and 2b.

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example
Method 1 MCER Spectrum:

Step 3: Determine Lower Limit Spectrum

Compute lower limit spectrum - The MCER spectrum constructed per
ASCE 7 Section 11.4.5 and 11.4.6 for the site is multiplied by 80% to
define a lower limit on the site-specific values.

Step 4: Determine Target Spectrum

Define MCER target spectrum - The MCER target spectrum used in
design is taken as the period-by-period minimum of the probabilistic
(Step 1c) and the deterministic (Step 2c) but not less than the lower
limit (Step 3).

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example
Method 1 MCER Spectrum:
The table to the right provides the final Method 1
MCER spectrum for this example site.

For this example site, the transition zone spectrum

(second item in Step 2) controls the MCER spectrum
at most periods.

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example
Method 2 Scenario Spectra:
• Scenario spectral are computed for the two periods most
important to this building (first and second modes of 3.75s and
0.75s).
• The scenario spectra in this example are computed using the
Conditional Mean Spectrum (CMS) approach (Baker 2011). To
complete the calculation of the CMS target spectra, a publicly
available tool available from Stanford
(http://web.stanford.edu/~bakerjw/research/epsilon.html), is
used in this example.
• The U.S. Geological Survey also provides a tool to compute CMS
target spectra (USGS 2008, Lin et al. 2013).

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example
Method 2 Scenario Spectra: Resulting Spectra

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example
Method 2 Scenario Spectra:
 If the USGS tool is used, one would find a CMS with spectral
amplitude closest to the target MCER at the conditioning period
(0.75s and 3.75s in this example), and then do some minor
scaling of the resulting spectrum to provide an exact match to
the MCER at the conditioning period.
 Additionally, for this case where the target spectrum is
controlled by the transition-region “capped spectrum”, the CMS
must was modified accordingly to account for the difference
between the uncapped and capped MCER spectra.
 Both of the above modifications are automatically completed in
the software tool used for this example
(http://web.stanford.edu/~bakerjw/research/epsilon.html).
Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples
 Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example
Ground motion selection:
 For each of the two scenario spectra, eleven ground motion time
histories are selected and two separate ground motion sets are
formed.
 The PEER ground motion database is used in this example (Chiou et
al. 2008).
 The selection of recorded motions occurs in two steps.
 Step 1 involves pre-selecting the ground motion records in the database
having reasonable magnitude, fault distance, source mechanisms, site soil
conditions, and range of useable frequencies.
 Step 2 is selection of motions from the candidate set, based on a good match
to the target spectrum.
 In completing the Step 1 pre-selection, it is permissible to use relatively liberal
ranges because Step 2 involves selecting motions that provide good matches
to a target spectrum (which implicitly accounts for many of the above issues).

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example
Ground motion selection: Step 1 (pre-selection) -
 Tectonic Regime: Select recordings from the same tectonic regime as present at the
site. In this example, the seismic sources are shallow crustal events from strike-slip
faults. In the selection, we constrain to shallow crustal events but do not constrain
to only strike-slip.
 Magnitude and Distance: These parameters are obtained from disaggregation of
the hazard (see earlier slides). We selected ground motions having reasonably
similar magnitude and distance in order to provide generally compatible durations
and spectral contents. Since spectral shape criteria are separately enforced in Step
2, the duration compatibility is the principal consideration. Duration is more
related to magnitude than distance, so distance criteria were not made to be strict.
 Site Soil Conditions: Site soil conditions (Site Class) exert a large influence on
ground motions, but are already reflected in the spectral shape used in Step 2. For
Step 1, reasonable limits on site soil conditions are imposed but are not made to be
overly restrictive as to unnecessarily limit the number of candidate motions.

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example
Ground motion selection: Step 1 (pre-selection) -
Useable Frequency of the Ground Motion: Only processed ground
motion records should be considered for RHA. In the selection, the
useable frequencies of the record (after filtering) are checked, to ensure
that the useable period range accommodate the range of frequencies
important to the building response.

Pulse Characteristics (for near-fault sites): For near-fault sites, selection

of pulse motions is an important consideration. Assuming the target
ground motions come from a large Northern San Andreas rupture, we
assume that there is 150 km of rupture between the epicenter and the
closest point on the rupture to the site, the site is 14 km from the closest
point to the rupture, and ‘theta’ angle associated with this geometry is
then 5 degrees, the prediction equation of Shahi and Baker (2014,
equation 23) gives a 67% probability of the ground motion containing a
directivity pulse.
Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples
Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example
Ground motion selection: Step 2 (final selection) -
• Spectral Shape: The shape of the response spectrum should be the primary
consideration when selecting ground motions. Each potential ground motion
is scaled to match the target spectrum on average over the period range of
interest and then sum of squared errors are computed between the ground
motion spectrum and the target spectrum, in order to select motions that
have appropriate spectral shape. The eleven motions which fulfill all of the
selection criteria with the smallest sum of the squared errors are chosen as a
ground motion suite.
• Scale Factor: A scale factor limit of approximately 0.25 to 4.0 is not
uncommon.
• Maximum Motions from a Single Event: Although less important than
spectral shape and scale factor, it is common to limit the number of motions
from a single seismic event to three or four motions when possible.
• Pulse Characteristics: Ground motions are selected to have an appropriate
number of pulse-type motions (approximately 2/3 with pulse, per previous
discussion).

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example
Ground motion selection: Table of selection criteria for ex. -

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example
Ground motion selection: Set #1 (for 0.75s period) -

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example
Ground motion selection: Set #2 (for 3.75s period) -

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example
Ground motion scaling: Overview -
• With the site being near-fault site, this design example utilizes the
amplitude-scaling approach rather than the spectral matching
approach. This avoid complication of demonstrating that the
pulse characteristics are retained and avoids the 10% penalty.
• The maximum direction spectral acceleration spectrum of each
motion is scaled to meet or exceed the target spectrum over the
period range of interest.

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example
Ground motion scaling: Set #1 (for 0.75s period) -

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example
Ground motion scaling: Set #2 (for 3.75s period) -

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example
Ground motion application to the structural model:
• With this example site is characterized as a near-fault
site, the two horizontal ground motion components are
applied to the building in the fault-normal and fault-
parallel orientations.

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Ground Motion for Nonlinear Response-
History Analysis – Design Example
Closing Comments:
This example demonstrated the ground motion selection and scaling
process for an example design of a 40-story reinforced-concrete shear
wall building in San Francisco, California. The balance of the design
example (structural analysis, acceptance criteria, etc.) is provided in
educational materials for Chapter 5.

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Chapters 17 and 18

Seismic Isolation & Supplemental Damping

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Design Steps
1. Determine the site’s
spectral accelerations
using the USGS website.
2. Check §11.4.7: is a site-
specific hazard analysis
required to develop the
response spectrum?
3. If a RHA is likely, also 0.8

select and scale ground

A ccelera tio n co m o p o n(gen) t 1
0.4

motions and determine 0

0 10 20 30 Time (s) 40

proximity to faults. -0.4

-0.8
0.8
t2
A cceleration com p on en(g)

0.4

0
0 10 20 30 Time (s) 40

-0.4

-0.8

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Background

Q1: Is a site-specific hazard analysis required?

 • Yes, for Class A, B, C sites,

where S1 0.6
• Yes, for Class D and E sites,
where S1 0.2
• Yes, for Site Class F
Otherwise use USGS website (ELF)
response spectrum

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Background
Q2: What level of analysis is necessary?

• For ELF and Response Spectrum procedures (elastic methods), simply use
the response spectrum determined by answering Q1.

• For Response History Analysis, also have to select and scale ground
motion records:

0.8 0.8
Acceleration comoponent 1 (g)

0.4 Acceleration component 2 (g) 0.4

0 0
0 10 20 30 Time (s) 40 0 10 20 30 Time (s) 40

-0.4 -0.4

-0.8 -0.8

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Background
Selection of Ground Motions
At least seven earthquakes
Preferably selected from actual earthquake recordings
By ground motion expert experienced with hazards for
the region.

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Background
Scaling of Ground Motions
Two types: Amplitude scaling and Spectral Matching
Scaling depends on proximity to active faults:
Near-fault ≤ 3 miles

• Scale records to meet or Avg. SRSS

Target

exceed target spectrum 2

A ccelera tio n (g)

over a period range of Period Range

interest 1

0
0 1 2 3 4
Period (seconds)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Example
Seismically Isolated Building from Ch15

Site Hazard and Soil Conditions:

• Region of high-seismicity
• Seismic Design Category D
• Soil site class D
• >3 miles from known fault

Spectral Accelerations
• SMS = 1.4
• SM1 = 0.9
• S1 = 0.5

 §11.4.7 Site-specific hazard analysis required

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Example

Seismically Isolated Building from Ch15

Ground Motion Scaling Method: Amplitude Scaling

Period Range of Interest: 0.75TM to 1.25TM

Isolation System Properties

• Upper Bound Effective Period, TM = 1.5 seconds
• Lower Bound Effective Period, TM = 2.1 seconds

Period Range = 1.13 to 2.62 seconds.

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Example

Select and Scale Ground Motions

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Example

Amplitude Scaling Factors for GM3

• Original Measured Record (GM3):
East-West North-South

Amplitude scaled by 1.65:

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Example

Scaled Response Spectrum

GM 3 SRSS spectra of each of the seven

ground motions

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Example
Scaled Response Spectrum

SRSS spectra of each of the SRSS Average vs. Site-

seven ground motions specific target spectrum
3 3

Target GM1 Avg. SRSS

Target
GM2 GM3

2 2
GM4 GM5
Acceleration (g)

Acceleration (g)
Period Range
GM6 GM7

1 1

Exceeds Target
O.K.
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4
Period (seconds) Period (seconds)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Chapter 12 Linear Response History

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Design Steps
1. Determine the site’s
spectral accelerations
using the USGS website.
2. Check §11.4.7: is a site-
specific hazard analysis
required to develop the
response spectrum?
0.8

A ccelera tio n co m o p o n(gen) t 1

3. If a RHA is likely, also 0.4

select and scale ground

0 10 20 30 Time (s) 40

-0.4

motions and determine

-0.8
0.8
t2
A cceleration com p on en(g)

proximity to faults.
0.4

0
0 10 20 30 Time (s) 40

-0.4

-0.8

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Background

Q1: Is a site-specific hazard analysis required?

 • Yes, for Class A, B, C sites,

where S1 0.6
• Yes, for Class D and E sites,
where S1 0.2
• Yes, for Site Class F
Otherwise use USGS website
(ELF) response spectrum

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Background

Q2: What level of analysis is necessary?

• For ELF and Response Spectrum procedures (elastic methods), simply use the
response spectrum determined by answering Q1.

• For Response History Analysis, also have to select and scale ground motion
records:

0.8 0.8
Acceleration comoponent 1 (g)

0.4 Acceleration component 2 (g) 0.4

0 0
0 10 20 30 Time (s) 40 0 10 20 30 Time (s) 40

-0.4 -0.4

-0.8 -0.8

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

Background

Selection of Ground Motions

At least seven earthquakes
Preferably selected from actual earthquake recordings
By ground motion expert experienced with hazards for
the region.

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Background

Scaling of Ground Motions

Two types: Amplitude scaling and Spectral Matching
Scaling depends on proximity to active faults:
Near-fault ≤ 3 miles
3

Avg. SRSS

• Scale records to meet or Target

A ccelera tio n (g)

exceed target spectrum Period Range

over a period range of 1

interest
0
0 1 2 3 4
Period (seconds)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Example

Seismically Isolated Building from Ch15

Site Hazard and Soil Conditions:
• Region of high-seismicity
• Seismic Design Category D
• Soil site class D
• >3 miles from known fault

Spectral Accelerations
• SMS = 1.4
• SM1 = 0.9
• S1 = 0.5

 §11.4.7 Site-specific hazard analysis required

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Example

Seismically Isolated Building from Ch15

Ground Motion Scaling Method: Amplitude Scaling

Period Range of Interest: 0.75TM to 1.25TM

Isolation System Properties

• Upper Bound Effective Period, TM = 1.5 seconds
• Lower Bound Effective Period, TM = 2.1 seconds

Period Range = 1.13 to 2.62 seconds.

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Example

Select and Scale Ground Motions

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Example

Amplitude Scaling Factors for GM3

• Original Measured Record (GM3):
East-West North-South

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Example
Scaled Response Spectrum
SRSS spectra of each of
GM 3
the seven ground motions

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Example

Scaled Response Spectrum

SRSS spectra of each of the seven SRSS Average vs. Site-specific
ground motions target spectrum
3 3

Target GM1 Avg. SRSS

Target
GM2 GM3

2 2
GM4 GM5
Acceleration (g)

Acceleration (g)
Period Range
GM6 GM7

1 1

Exceeds Target
O.K.
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4
Period (seconds) Period (seconds)

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 Questions

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples

 DISCLAIMER
NOTICE: Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations
expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of
the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Additionally, neither
FEMA nor any of its employees make any warranty, expressed or
implied, nor assume any legal liability or responsibility for the
accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, product or
process included in this publication.
The opinions expressed herein regarding the requirements of the
NEHRP Recommended Seismic Provisions, the referenced
standards, and the building codes are not to be used for design
purposes. Rather the user should consult the jurisdiction’s building
official who has the authority to render interpretation of the code.
Any modifications made to the file represent the presenters' opinion
only.

Instructional Material Complementing FEMA P-1051, Design Examples