Ground motion selection for simulation-based seismic hazard and structural reliability assessment

This paper examines four methods by which ground motions can be selected for dynamic seismic response analyses of engineered systems when the underlying seismic hazard is quantified via ground motion simulation rather than empirical ground motion prediction equations. Even with simulation-based seismic hazard, a ground motion selection process is still required in order to extract a small number of time series from the much larger set developed as part of the hazard calculation. Four specific methods are presented for ground motion selection from simulation-based seismic hazard analyses, and pros and cons of each are discussed via a simple and reproducible illustrative example. One of the four methods (method 1 ‘direct analysis’) provides a ‘benchmark’ result (i.e. using all simulated ground motions), enabling the consistency of the other three more efficient selection methods to be addressed. Method 2 (‘stratified sampling’) is a relatively simple way to achieve a significant reduction in the number of ground motions required through selecting subsets of ground motions binned based on an intensity measure, IM. Method 3 (‘simple multiple stripes’) has the benefit of being consistent with conventional seismic assessment practice using as-recorded ground motions, but both methods 2 and 3 are strongly dependent on the efficiency of the conditioning IM to predict the seismic responses of interest. Method 4 (‘GCIM-based selection’) is consistent with ‘advanced’ selection methods used for as-recorded ground motions, and selects subsets of ground motions based on multiple IMs, thus overcoming this limitation in methods 2 and 3

Ground motion selection for simulation-based seismic hazard and structural reliability assessment

This paper examines four methods by which ground motions can be selected for dynamic seismic response analyses of engineered systems when the underlying seismic hazard is quantified via ground motion simulation rather than empirical ground motion prediction equations. Even with simulation-based seismic hazard, a ground motion selection process is still required in order to extract a small number of time series from the much larger set developed as part of the hazard calculation. Four specific methods are presented for ground motion selection from simulation-based seismic hazard analyses, and pros and cons of each are discussed via a simple and reproducible illustrative example. One of the four methods (method 1 ‘direct analysis’) provides a ‘benchmark’ result (i.e. using all simulated ground motions), enabling the consistency of the other three more efficient selection methods to be addressed. Method 2 (‘stratified sampling’) is a relatively simple way to achieve a significant reduction in the number of ground motions required through selecting subsets of ground motions binned based on an intensity measure, IM. Method 3 (‘simple multiple stripes’) has the benefit of being consistent with conventional seismic assessment practice using as-recorded ground motions, but both methods 2 and 3 are strongly dependent on the efficiency of the conditioning IM to predict the seismic responses of interest. Method 4 (‘GCIM-based selection’) is consistent with ‘advanced’ selection methods used for as-recorded ground motions, and selects subsets of ground motions based on multiple IMs, thus overcoming this limitation in methods 2 and 3