Seismic design spectra for different soil classes

  • Rajesh P. Dhakal University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5524-5919
  • Sheng-Lin Lin University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
  • Alexander K. Loye University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
  • Scott J. Evans University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand

Abstract

This paper investigates the validity of the soil class dependent spectral shape factors used to calculate seismic design actions in the New Zealand seismic design standard NZS1170.5, which currently specifies seismic design spectra corresponding to five different soil classes. According to the current provisions stipulated in NZS1170.5, for all natural periods, the seismic demand for structures on soft soil is either equal to or greater than that for structures on hard soil. This is opposite to the basic structural dynamics theory which suggests that an increase in stiffness of a system results in an increase in the acceleration response. In this pretext, a numerical parametric study is undertaken using a nonlinear site response analysis tool in order to capture the effect of soil characteristics on structural seismic demand and to scrutinize the validity of the current site specific seismic design spectra. It is identified that the level of input ground motion intensity and shear stiffness of the soil deposit (represented by its shear wave velocity Vs) greatly affect the maximum acceleration and frequency content of the surface motion. The study found some shortfalls in the way the current code defines seismic design demand, in particular the hierarchy of soil stiffness at low structural periods. It was found that stiff soils generally tend to have a higher spectral acceleration response in comparison to soft soils although this trend is less prominent for high intensity bed rock motions. It was also found that for medium to hard soils the spectral acceleration response at short period is grossly underestimated by the current NZS1170.5 provisions. Based on the outcomes of the parametric numerical analyses, a revised strategy to determine structural seismic demand for different soil classes is proposed and its application is demonstrated through an example.

References

Cubrinovski, M. and McCahon, I. (2011), “Foundations on deep alluvial soils”. Technical Report Prepared for the Canterbury Earthquakes Royal Commission, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.

Darendeli, M.B. (2001), “Development of a New Family of Normalized Modulus Reduction and Material Damping Curves”. Department of Civil, Architectural and Environmental Engineering, University of Texas, Austin, TX, USA.

Hashash, Y.M.A, Groholski, D.R., Phillips, C.A. and Park, D. (2011), “DEEPSOIL 5.0, user Manual and Tutorial”. University of Illinois, Urbana, IL, USA.

Hashash, Y.M.A. and Park, D. (2001), "Non-linear one-dimensional seismic ground motion propagation in the Mississippi embayment". Engineering Geology, 62(1-3), 185-206. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0013-7952(01)00061-8

McVerry, G.H. (2003), “From hazard maps to code spectra for New Zealand”, Proceedings of the 2003 Pacific Conference on Earthquake Engineering. 13-15 February 2003, Christchurch, New Zealand.

McVerry, G.H., Gerstenberger, M.C., Rhoades, D.A. and Stirling, M.W. (2012), “Spectra and Pgas for the Assessment and Reconstruction of Christchurch”, Proceedings of the 2012 New Zealand Society Earthquake Engineering Conference. 13-15 April 2012, Christchurch, New Zealand.

Royal Commission. (2012), “Seismicity, Soils and the Seismic Design of Buildings”, Canterbury Earthquake Royal Commission final report, Wellington, New Zealand.

Somerville, P., Smith, N., Punyamurthula, S. and Sun, J. (1997), “Development of ground motion time histories for phase 2 of the FEMA/SAC steel project”. SAC/BD-97/04, SAC Joint Venture. Sacramento, CA, USA.

SNZ. (2004), “NZS 1170.5:2004, Structural Design Actions and Commentary, Part 5, Earthquake Actions”. Wellington, New Zealand.

Seed, R.B., Dickenson, S.E., Riemer, M.F., Bray, J.D., Sitar, N., Mitchell, J.K., Idriss, I.M., Kayen, R.E., Kropp, A., Harder, Jr. L.F. and Power, M.S. (1990), “Preliminary Report on the Principal Geotechnical Aspects of the October 17, 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake”. Report No. UCB/EERC-90/05. Earthquake Engineering Research Center, CA, USA.

Dobry, R. and Vucetic, M. (1987), “Dynamic Properties and Seismic Response of Soft Clay Deposits”. Proceedings of International Symposium on Geotechnical Engineering of Soft Soils. 13-14 August, 1987, Mexico City, Mexico.

Seed, H.B., Ugas, C. and Lysmer, J. (1976), “Site-dependent Spectra for Earthquake-esistant Design”. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America. 66(1), 221-243.

ICC. (2011). “ICC IBC-2012: 2012 International Building Code”. International Code Council, Country Club Hills, IL, USA.

Published
2013-06-30
How to Cite
Dhakal, R. P., Lin, S.-L., Loye, A. K., & Evans, S. J. (2013). Seismic design spectra for different soil classes. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, 46(2), 79-87. https://doi.org/10.5459/bnzsee.46.2.79-87
Section
Articles

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>