2016년 9월 12일 M5.8 경주지진의 데미지 포텐셜 분석 및 내진공학 측면의 시사점
Damage Potential Analysis and Earthquake Engineering-related Implications of Sep.12, 2016 M5.8 Gyeongju Earthquake
2
조회
0
다운로드
5
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
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.
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.
참고문헌 (15)
- Preliminary Analysis Report of Gyeongju Event (20:30), "Korea Institute of Geoscience ad Mineral Resources", Korea Institute of Geoscience ad Mineral Resources, ~ (2006)
- "U.S. Geological Survey"[URL]
- Trifunac MD, "A study on the duration of strong earthquake ground motion", Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 65(3), pp.581~626 (1975)
- Philippacopoulos AJ, "Recommendations for resolution of public comments on USI (Unresolved Safety Issues) A-40. Seismic Design Criteria", Div. of Safety Issue Resolution, Brookhaven National Lab., ~ (1989)
- Kempton JJ, "Prediction equations for significant duration of earthquake ground motions considering site and near-source effects", Earthquake spectra, 22(4), pp.985~1013 (2006)
- Applied Technology Council, "Tentative provisions for the development of seismic regulations for buildings. ATC-3-06 (NBS SP-510)", U.S Government Printing Office, ~ (1978)
- 이영욱, "중력하중에 대하여 설계된 RC 골조의 내진 저항력 추정식의 유도", 한국지진공학회논문집, 6(3), pp.63~71 (2002), 한국지진공학회
- Newmark NM, "Earthquake Spectra and Design", pp.29~37 (1982), Earthquake Engineering Research Institute
- ASCE, "Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings. ASCE standard ASCE", SEI 41-13, 2013
- FEMA, "A. 440. Improvement of nonlinear static seismic analysis procedures. FEMA-440", ~ (2005)
- Kramer SL, "Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering" (1996), Prentice Hall
- Lee SH, "Performance of an equivalent shear beam(ESB) model container for dynamic geotechnical centrifuge tests", Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 44(1), pp.102~114 (2013)
- Kim DK, "Effects of shallow soil deposits and substructures on earthquake response spectrum", 박사, pp.2013
- AIK, "Korean Building Code and Commentary" (2016), Kimoondang
- "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, ~ (1984)