4.7 Review

Earthquake ground motion estimation using strong-motion records: a review of equations for the estimation of peak ground acceleration and response spectral ordinates

期刊

EARTH-SCIENCE REVIEWS
卷 61, 期 1-2, 页码 43-104

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/S0012-8252(02)00112-5

关键词

seismology; geologic hazards; seismic risk hazard; earthquake engineering; engineering seismology; attenuation relations

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Engineering seismology is the link between earth sciences and engineering. The main input of engineering seismology in engineering design are loading conditions which must satisfy certain conditions regarding their level and frequency of occurrence during the lifetime of a structure. One method for estimating these loading conditions is through equations based on strong ground motion recorded during previous earthquakes. These equations have a handful of independent parameters, such as magnitude and source-to-site distance, and a dependent parameter, such as peak ground acceleration (PGA) or spectral acceleration, and the coefficients in the equation are usually found by regression analysis. This review examines such equations in terms of data selection, accelerogram processing techniques of the strong-motion records used to construct the equations, the characterisation of earthquake source, travel path and local site used and regression techniques employed to find the final equations. It is found that little agreement has been reached in the past 30 years of ground motion estimation relation studies. Workers have chosen their techniques based on the available data, which varies greatly with geographical region. Also it is noted that there is a need to include more independent parameters into ground motion estimation equations if the large uncertainties associated with such equations are to be significantly reduced. The data required to do this is, unfortunately, scarce. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据