Journal of the Korean earth science society (한국지구과학회지)

The Korean Earth Science Society (한국지구과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Uniform Hazard Spectra of 5 Major Cities in Korea

국내 5개 주요 도시에 대한 등재해도 스펙트럼

  • Kim, Jun-Kyoung (Department of Fire Protection Engineering, Semyung University) ;
  • Wee, Soung-Hoon (Earthquake Research Center, Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources) ;
  • Kyung, Jai-Bok (Department of Earth Science Education, Korea national University of Education)
  • Received : 2016.04.20
  • Accepted : 2016.05.29
  • Published : 2016.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Since the Northridge earthquake in 1994 and the Kobe earthquake in 1995 occurred, the concept of performance based design has been introduced for designing various kinds of important structures and buildings. Uniform hazard spectra (UHS), with annual exceedance probabilities, corresponding to the performance level of each structure, are required for performance-based design. The probabilistic seismic hazard analysis was performed using spectral ground motion prediction equations, which were developed from both Korean Peninsula and Central and Eastern US region, and several seismotectonic models suggested by 10 expert panel members in seismology and tectonics. The uniform hazard spectra for 5 highly populated cities in Korea, with recurrence period of 500, 1,000, and 2,500 years using the seismic hazard at the frequencies of 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 5.0, 10.0 Hz and Peak ground acceleration (PGA) were analyzed using the probabilistic seismic hazard analysis. The sensitivity analysis suggests that spectral ground motion prediction equations impact much more on seismic hazard than what seismotectonic models do. The uniform hazard spectra commonly showed a maximum hazard at the frequency of 10 Hz and also showed the similar shape characteristics to the previous study and related technical guides to nuclear facilities.

최근 미국 노스리지 지진(1994)과 일본 고베 지진(1995) 발생 이후 다양한 구조물 및 건축물을 설계할 때 성능 기반 설계 개념이 적극적으로 도입되고 있다. 성능기반 설계가 도입되면서 구조물 각각의 성능에 적합한 연발생빈도의 등재해도 스펙트럼이 요구되고 있다. 10 인의 지진 및 지체구조 전문가가 제시한 국내 및 미국 중동부에서 개발된 스펙트럴 지반진동 감쇠식과 다수의 지진지체구조구 모델을 사용하였다. 인구 밀도가 높은 5개 주요 도시에 대해 확률론적 방법을 이용하여 등지진재해도 스펙트럼을 분석하였다. 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 5.0, 10.0 Hz 및 PGA에 대해 확률론적 지진재해도 결과를 이용하여 500년, 1,000년 및 2,500년의 3개 재현주기에 대해 등재해도 스펙트럼을 분석하였다. 민감도 분석 결과 각각의 고유 진동수에 해당하는 지반진동 감쇠식이 지진지체구조구 모델에 비하여 지진재해도에 보다 커다란 영향을 주었다. 마지막으로 등재해도 스펙트럼은 공통적으로 10 Hz에서 최대값을 보여 주었고, 원자력 관련 기술기준 또는 기존 연구에서 제시된 등지진재해도 스펙트럼과 수준과 모앙 특성에서 유사성을 보여주었다.

Keywords

References

  1. Abrahamson, N. and Silva, W., 2008, Summary of the Abrahamson & Silva NGA ground-motion relations. Earthquake Spectra, 24, 67-97. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.2924360
  2. Atkinson, G.M. and Boore, D.M., 1997, Some comparisons between recent ground motion relations. Seismological Research Letters, 68, 24-40. https://doi.org/10.1785/gssrl.68.1.24
  3. Atkinson, G.M. and Silva, W., 2000, Stochastic modeling of california ground motions. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 90, 255-274. https://doi.org/10.1785/0119990064
  4. Boore, D.M. and Atkinson, G.M., 2008, Ground-motion prediction equations for the average horizontal component of PGA, PGV, and 5%-damped PSA at spectral periods between 0.001 s and 10.0 s. Earthquake Spectrum, 24, 99-138. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.2830434
  5. Boore, D.M. and Atkinson, G.M., 2011, Modifications to existing ground-motion prediction equations in light of new data. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 101, 121-1135.
  6. Campbell, K.W., 2003, Prediction of strong ground motion using the Hybrid Empirical Method and its use in the development of ground-motion (attenuation) relations in Eastern North America. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 93, 1012-1033. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120020002
  7. Cornell, C.A., 1968, Engineering seismic risk analysis. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 58, 1583-1606.
  8. Gutenberg, B. and Richter, C.F., 1944, Frequency of earthquakes in California. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 34, 164-176.
  9. Hahm, D.G., Seo, J.M., Choi, I.K., and Rhee, H.M., 2012, Uniform hazard spectrum evaluation method for nuclear power plants on soil sites based on the hazard spectra of bedrock sites. Jorunal of the Earthquake Engineering Society of Korea, 16, 35-42.
  10. ICBO, 1997, 1997 Uniform Building Code, Volume 2-Structural Engineering Design Provisions, International Conference of Building Officials.
  11. International Building Code, 2000, International Code Council.
  12. Jo, N.D. and Baag, C.E., 2003, Estimation of spectrum decay parameter and stochastic prediction of strong ground motions in southeastern Korea. Journal of the Earthquake Engineering Society of Korea, 7, 59-70.
  13. KIGAM (Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources), 2012, Active fault map and seismic hazard map (the 3rd year report). NEMA-science-2009-24, 900 (in Korean).
  14. KMA (Korea Meteorological Agency), 2012, Historical earthquake records in Korea (2-1904). Vol. I and II (in Korean).
  15. Lee, J.M., 2002, A study on the characteristics of strong ground motions in southern Korea. KINS/HR-422, Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety, Daejeon.
  16. Lee, K., and Yang, W., 2006, Historical seismicity of Korea, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 96, 846-855. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120050050
  17. Ministry of Construction & Transportation, 1997, Research of Seismic Design Code (II). Earthquake Engineering Society of Korea (in Korean).
  18. Noh, M.H. and Lee, K.H., 1995, Estimation of peak ground motions in the southeastern part of the Korean Peninsula (II): Development of predictive equations. Journal of Geological Society of Korea, 31, 175-187.
  19. Silva, W.J., Li, S., Darragh, R.B., and Cregor, N., 1999, Surface geology based strong motion amplification factors for the San Francisco Bay and Los Angeles areas: APEARL report to PG&E/CEC/CalTrans, Award No.SA212059652.
  20. Toro, G.R., Abrahamson, N.A., and Schneider, J.F., 1997, Model of strong ground motions from earthquakes in Central and Eastern North America: Best estimates and uncertainties. Seismological Research Letters, 68, 41-57. https://doi.org/10.1785/gssrl.68.1.41
  21. USNRC, 1973, Design response spectra for seismic design of nuclear power plants, Revision 1, Regulatory Guide 1.60, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Washington.
  22. USNRC, 1997, Identification and characterization of seismic sources and determination of safe shutdown earthquake ground motion, Regulatory Guide 1.165, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington.
  23. USNRC, 2007, Evaluation of the seismic design criteria in ASCE/SEI standard 43-05 for application to nuclear power plants, NUREG/CR-6926.
  24. USNRC, 2007, A performance-based approach to define the site-specific earthquake ground motion, Regulatory Guide 1.208, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington.
  25. USNRC, 2007, Recomendations for porbablistic seismic hazard analysis: guidance on uncertainty and use of expert, NUREG/CR-6372.
  26. USNRC, 2012, Practical implementation guidelines for SSHAC level 3 and 4 hazard studies NUREG-2117.
  27. Yun K.H., Park, D.H., Choi, W.H., Chang, C.J., and Lee, D.S., 2005, Development of site-specific ground-motion attenuation relations for Nuclear Power Plant sites and study on their characteristics. Jorunal of the Earthquake Engineering Society of Korea fall workshop, 418-430.