Journal of the Earthquake Engineering Society of Korea (한국지진공학회논문집)

Earthquake Engineering Society of Korea (한국지진공학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Damage Potential Analysis and Earthquake Engineering-related Implications of Sep.12, 2016 M5.8 Gyeongju Earthquake

2016년 9월 12일 M5.8 경주지진의 데미지 포텐셜 분석 및 내진공학 측면의 시사점

  • Lee, Cheol Ho (Department of Architecture and Architectural Engineering, Seoul National University) ;
  • Park, Ji-Hun (Division of Architecture and Urban Design, Incheon National University) ;
  • Kim, Taejin (Chang Minwoo Structural Consultants) ;
  • Kim, Sung-Yong (Department of Architecture and Architectural Engineering, Seoul National University) ;
  • Kim, Dong-Kwan (SEN Engineering Group)
  • Received : 2016.11.18
  • Accepted : 2016.12.07
  • Published : 2016.12.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This paper investigates seismic damage potential of recent September 12 M5.8 Gyeongju earthquake from diverse earthquake engineering perspectives using the accelerograms recorded at three stations near the epicenter. In time domain, strong motion durations are evaluated based on the accelerograms and compared with statistical averages of the ground motions with similar magnitude, epicentral distance and soil conditions, while Fourier analysis using FFT is performed to identify damaging frequency contents contained in the earthquake. Effective peak ground accelerations are evaluated from the calculated response spectra and compared with apparent peak ground accelerations and the design spectrum in KBC 2016. All these results are used to consistently explain the reason why most of seismic damage in the earthquake was concentrated on low-rise stiff buildings but not quite significant. In order to comparatively appraise the damage potential, the constant ductility spectrum constructed from the Gyeongju earthquake is compared with that of the well-known 1940 El Centro earthquake. Deconvolution analysis by using one accelerogram speculated to be recorded at a stiff soil site is also performed to estimate the soil profile conforming to the response spectrum characteristics. Finally, response history analysis for 39- and 61-story tall buildings is performed as a case study to explain significant building vibration felt on the upper floors of some tall buildings in Busan area during the Gyeongju earthquake. Seismic design and retrofit implications of M5.8 Gyeongju earthquake are summarized for further research efforts and improvements of relevant practice.

Keywords

References

  1. Korea Institute of Geoscience ad Mineral Resources. Preliminary Analysis Report of Gyeongju Event (20:30). Korea Institute of Geoscience ad Mineral Resources; c2006.
  2. U.S. Geological Survey [Internet]. Available from: https://www.usgs.gov/.
  3. Trifunac MD, Brady AG. A study on the duration of strong earthquake ground motion. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America. 1975;65(3):581-626.
  4. Philippacopoulos AJ. Recommendations for resolution of public comments on USI (Unresolved Safety Issues) A-40. Seismic Design Criteria. Upton, New York: Div. of Safety Issue Resolution, Brookhaven National Lab.; c1989.
  5. Kempton JJ, Stewart JP. Prediction equations for significant duration of earthquake ground motions considering site and near-source effects. Earthquake spectra. 2006;22(4):985-1013. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.2358175
  6. Applied Technology Council. Tentative provisions for the development of seismic regulations for buildings. ATC-3-06 (NBS SP-510). Washington, DC: U.S Government Printing Office; c1978.
  7. Lee YW. Derivation of Estimating Formulas for Seismic Strength of RC Frames Designed to Gravity Loads. Journal of the Earthquake Engineering Society of Korea. 2002;6(3):63-71. https://doi.org/10.5000/EESK.2002.6.3.063
  8. Newmark NM, Hall WJ. Earthquake Spectra and Design, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Berkeley, CA; 1982:29-37.
  9. ASCE. Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings. ASCE standard ASCE/SEI 41-13. Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers; c2013.
  10. FEMA, A. 440. Improvement of nonlinear static seismic analysis procedures. FEMA-440, Redwood City: c2005.
  11. Kramer SL. Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering. Prentice Hall; c1996.
  12. Lee SH, Choo YW, Kim DS. Performance of an equivalent shear beam(ESB) model container for dynamic geotechnical centrifuge tests. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering. 2013;44(1): 102-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2012.09.008
  13. Kim DK. Effects of shallow soil deposits and substructures on earthquake response spectrum. Ph. D. Dissertation, Seoul National University; c2013.
  14. AIK. Korean Building Code and Commentary. Seoul: Kimoondang; c2016.
  15. ISO 6897. Guidelines for the evaluation of response of occupants of fixed structures, especially building and off-shore structures, to low-frequency horizontal motion (0.063 Hz to 1 Hz). ISO; c1984.

Cited by

  1. Seismic Performance Evaluation of Building with Piloti using Steel stilt damper vol.30, pp.5, 2018, https://doi.org/10.7781/kjoss.2018.30.5.265
  2. Seismic Response Analysis of Nuclear Power Plant Structures and Equipment due to the Pohang Earthquake vol.22, pp.3, 2018, https://doi.org/10.5000/EESK.2018.22.3.113
  3. Comparative Analysis of Structural Damage Potentials Observed in the 9.12 Gyeongju and 11.15 Pohang Earthquakes vol.22, pp.3, 2018, https://doi.org/10.5000/EESK.2018.22.3.175