Advertisement

Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering

, Volume 17, Issue 5, pp 2363–2380 | Cite as

Intensity-dependent site amplification factors for Vrancea intermediate-depth earthquakes

  • Florin PavelEmail author
  • Radu Vacareanu
  • Kyriazis Pitilakis
Original Research
  • 98 Downloads

Abstract

This paper focuses on the evaluation of intensity dependent site amplification factors for Vrancea intermediate-depth earthquakes to be used in the seismic hazard assessment of Romania in the light of the future revision of Eurocode 8. The site conditions for more than 120 sites in Romania are evaluated using as parameter the fundamental site period T0 obtained using horizontal-to-vertical spectral ratio. Next, the period- and intensity-dependent site amplification factors to be used for design purposes are derived based on ground motion recordings from Vrancea intermediate-depth earthquakes and considering the nonlinear soil effects, as well. The results show considerable differences, especially for site class D sites when compared with the values proposed for crustal earthquakes.

Keywords

Horizontal-to-vertical spectral ratio Soil class Response spectra Seismic design code Eurocode 8 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors deeply acknowledge the valuable constructive comments and suggestions from two anonymous reviewers that considerably improved the quality of the original manuscript.

References

  1. Abrahamson NA, Gregor N, Addo K (2016) BC Hydro ground motion prediction equations for subduction earthquakes. Earthq Spectra 32(1):23–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. CEN (2004) Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance—part 1: general rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings. European Standard EN 1998-1:2004. CEN, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  3. EFEHR database. http://www.efehr.org/en/hazard-data-access/hazard-spectra/. Last accessed Aug 2018
  4. Konno K, Ohmachi T (1998) Ground-motion characteristics estimated from spectral ratio between horizontal and vertical components of mircrotremor. Bull Seismol Soc Am 88:228–241Google Scholar
  5. Lin PS, Lee CT (2008) Ground-motion attenuation relationships for subduction-zone earthquakes in Northeastern Taiwan. Bull Seismol Soc Am 98(1):220–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Lungu D, Cornea T, Aldea A, Zaicenco A (1997) Basic representation of seismic action. In: Lungu D, Mazzolani F, Savidis S (eds) Design of structures in seismic zones: Eurocode 8—worked examples, (TEMPUS PHARE CM Project 01198: implementing of structural Eurocodes in Romanian civil engineering standards, Bridgeman Ltd., Timisoara, Romania), pp 1–60Google Scholar
  7. Nakamura Y (1989) A method for dynamic characteristics estimation of subsurface using microtremor on the ground surface. Q Rep Railw Tech Res Inst 30(1):25–33Google Scholar
  8. P100-1/2013 (2013) Code for seismic design—part I—design prescriptions for buildings. Ministry of Regional Development and Public Administration, BucharestGoogle Scholar
  9. Pavel F, Vacareanu R (2017) Ground motion simulations for seismic stations in southern and eastern Romania and seismic hazard assessment. J Seismol 21(5):1023–1037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Pavel F, Vacareanu R, Douglas J, Radulian M, Cioflan C, Barbat A (2016) An updated probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for Romania and comparison with the approach and outcomes of the SHARE project. Pure appl Geophys 173(6):1881–1905CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Pitilakis K, Riga E, Anastasiadis A (2012) Design spectra and amplification factors for Eurocode 8. Bull Earthq Eng 10(5):1377–1400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Pitilakis K, Riga E, Anastasiadis A (2013) New code site classification, amplification factors and normalized response spectra based on a worldwide ground-motion database. Bull Earthq Eng 11(4):925–966CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Pitilakis K, Riga E, Anastasiadis A, Fotopoulou S, Karafagka S (2018) Towards the revision of EC8: proposal for an alternative site classification scheme and associated intensity dependent spectral amplification factors. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.03.030 Google Scholar
  14. Rey J, Faccioli E, Bommer JJ (2002) Derivation of design soil coefficients (S) and response spectral shapes for Eurocode 8 using the European strong-motion database. J Seismol 6:547–555CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. ROMPLUS Catalogue. https://web.infp.ro/#/romplus. Last accessed 28 Aug 2018
  16. Seyhan E, Stewart JP (2014) Semi-empirical nonlinear site amplification from NGA-West2 data and simulations. Earthq Spectra 30(3):1241–1256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Theodoulidis N, Cultrera G, De Rubeis V, Cara F, Panou A, Pagani M, Teves-Costa P (2008) Correlation between damage distribution and ambient noise H/V spectral ratio: the SESAME project results. B Earthq Eng 6:109–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Vacareanu R, Pavel F, Aldea A (2013) On the selection of GMPEs for Vrancea subcrustal seismic source. Bull Earthq Eng 11(6):1867–1884CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Vacareanu R, Marmureanu G, Pavel F, Neagu C, Cioflan CO, Aldea A (2014) Analysis of soil factor S using strong ground motions from Vrancea subcrustal seismic source. Rom Rep Phys 66(3):893–906Google Scholar
  20. Vacareanu R, Radulian M, Iancovici M, Pavel F, Neagu C (2015) Fore-arc and back-arc ground motion prediction model for Vrancea intermediate depth seismic source. J Earthq Eng 19:535–562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Wald DJ, Allen TI (2007) Topographic slope as a proxy for seismic site conditions and amplification. Bull Seismol Soc Am 97:1379–1395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Yamanaka H, Aldea A, Fukumoto S, Poiata N, Albota E (2007) Results from single-station and array microtremor measurements in Bucharest, Romania. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on earthquake geotechnical engineering, Thessaloniki, Greece, paper no. 1522Google Scholar
  23. Youngs RR, Chiou SJ, Silva WJ, Humphrey JR (1997) Strong ground motion attenuation relationships for subduction zone earthquakes. Seismol Res Lett 68(1):58–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Zhao J, Zhang J, Asano A, Ohno Y, Oouchi T, Takahashi T, Ogawa H, Irikura K, Thio H, Somerville P, Fukushima Y, Fukushima Y (2006) Attenuation relations of strong ground motion in Japan using site classification based on predominant period. Bull Seismol Soc Am 96(3):898–913CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019
corrected publication 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Florin Pavel
    • 1
    Email author
  • Radu Vacareanu
    • 1
  • Kyriazis Pitilakis
    • 2
  1. 1.Seismic Risk Assessment Research CentreTechnical University of Civil Engineering BucharestBucharestRomania
  2. 2.Laboratory of Soil Mechanics, Foundations and Geotechnical Earthquake EngineeringAristotle University of ThessalonikiThessalonikiGreece

Personalised recommendations