This article was downloaded by: [Mr F.

Pavel]
On: 16 January 2014, At: 01:59
Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Earthquake Engineering

Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ueqe20

Correlations Between Frequency

Content Indicators of Strong Ground
Motions and PGV
a

F. Pavel & D. Lungu

Department of Reinforced Concrete Structures , Technical

University of Civil Engineering Bucharest , Romania
Accepted author version posted online: 10 Jan 2013.Published
online: 14 Apr 2013.

To cite this article: F. Pavel & D. Lungu (2013) Correlations Between Frequency Content Indicators
of Strong Ground Motions and PGV, Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 17:4, 543-559, DOI:
10.1080/13632469.2012.762957
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2012.762957

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
Content) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditions

Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 17:543559, 2013

Copyright A. S. Elnashai
ISSN: 1363-2469 print / 1559-808X online
DOI: 10.1080/13632469.2012.762957

Correlations Between Frequency Content Indicators

of Strong Ground Motions and PGV
F. PAVEL and D. LUNGU

Downloaded by [Mr F. Pavel] at 01:59 16 January 2014

Department of Reinforced Concrete Structures, Technical University of Civil

Engineering Bucharest, Romania
The frequency content of ground motions seems to be one of the most important parameters to explain
the structural damage experienced during worldwide strong earthquakes. The frequency content of
ground motions can be characterized by various stochastic and/or deterministic indicators: the frequency bandwidth indicator (Cartwright & Longuet-Higgins) related to the power spectral density
function and, respectively, the control (corner) period Tc of the structural response spectra or the
mean period TM . Peak ground velocity (PGV) and the ratio PGA/PGV can be used as either damage potential parameters or frequency content indicators. A comparative analysis of stochastic and
deterministic frequency content indicators and of PGV is applied to a set of 30 strong ground motion
records having peak ground acceleration (PGA) from 0.20.8 g and recorded on 4 continents during
the last 70 years.
Keywords Earthquake Records; Stochastic Modeling; Frequency Content Indicators; Damage
Potential; Response Spectra

1. Introduction
Ground motions records show various frequency content, from wide and/or intermediate
frequency bandwidth ground motions (in hard and/or medium soil conditions) to narrow
frequency band ground motions (in soft soil conditions). The random frequency content
of the recorded strong ground motions generally depends on both magnitude and source
mechanism as well as on local soil conditions and epicentral distance.
Probability-based assessment [Lungu and Cornea, 1987; Lungu et al., 1993] of the frequency content of the ground motion records can be done using the Power Spectral Density
(PSD) and its related indicators: the dimensionless bandwidth indicators (Cartwright
& Longuet-Higgins) and q (Vanmarcke), as well as fractile frequencies f10 , f50 , and f90
(KennedyShinozuka indicators) below which 10%, 50%, and 90% of the total cumulative
power of the PSD occurs.
The best deterministic indicators of the frequency content of the ground motion records
are the control periods of structural response spectra, historically introduced by Newmark
and Hall [1969, 1982]. The evolution of this concept during the years 19782010 is further
described in ATC [3-06, 1978]; Lungu et al. [1997]; Rathje et al. [1998]; Bommer et al.
[2000]; and ASCE [7-10, 2010].
The amplitude of the ground motion can be usually described by the peak ground
acceleration and/or by the peak ground velocity (PGV) which has received less attention
than PGA. Due to the fact that PGV is less sensitive to the high frequency amplitudes
Received 19 June 2012; accepted 23 December 2012.
Address correspondence to F. Pavel, Department of Reinforced Concrete Structures, Technical University
of Civil Engineering Bucharest, Bd. Lacul Tei, 122-124, RO 020396, Romania. E-mail: florin.pavel@utcb.ro

543

Downloaded by [Mr F. Pavel] at 01:59 16 January 2014

544

F. Pavel and D. Lungu

of the ground motion, it can be used to characterize the damage potential of the seismic
record. PGV has been linked [Akkar and Ozen, 2005] to the earthquake magnitude, strong
ground motion duration, frequency content of ground motions, and inelastic deformation
demands in SDOF (single degree of freedom) systems. Based on their results the authors
consider PGV as a stable candidate for ground motion intensity measure in simplified
seismic assessment methods. Yakut and Yilmaz [2007] presented a series of analyses on
MDOF (multiple degree of freedom) systems from which it appears that PGA is a better
GMI (ground motion intensity) indicator than PGV. However, the conclusion of the authors
is Since PGA and PGV do not reflect the characteristics of the structure they appear to be
inadequate intensity parameters. Fajfar et al. [1990] introduced a damage potential indicator for intermediate period structures based on PGV and strong ground motion duration,
while Bommer and Alarcn [2006] and Booth [2007] introduced relations for estimating
PGV using random vibration theory. The relation between the Modified Mercalli Intensity
(MMI) and the peak ground acceleration PGA and peak ground velocity was studied in
Wald et al. [1999].The ratio PGA/PGV can be used both as a frequency content indicator
of the strong ground motion and as a damage indictor as outlined in Zhu et al. [1988].
Elnashai and Di Sarno [2008] divided the ratio into 3 categories from low ratio (PGA/PGV
< 0.8) to high ratio (PGA/PGV > 1.2). The lower bound for potentially damaging PGV
was established in Bommer and Martinez-Pereira [2000] at a value of 20 cm/s.
In the present article, a comparative analysis of stochastic and deterministic frequency
content indicators is applied to a set of 30 strong ground motion records having PGA from
0.20.9 g. Also, the relation between PGV and the spectral acceleration (SA) of the selected
ground motion is analyzed. Finally, the relation between PGV and the ratio PGA/PGV on
one hand and a series of frequency content indicators is considered.

2. Characterization of the Ground Motion Frequency Content

2.1. Stochastic Indicators for the Frequency Content of Seismic Records
The definition of the stochastic frequency content indicators of the ground motion records
are based on modeling the strong phase of the recorded accelerogram as a stationary
stochastic process.
The duration D of the stationary part of the motion may be selected as the time interval
in which a significant fraction (say 70%, 80% or 90%) of the total cumulative power of the
accelerogram a(t) is released, i.e. D0.9 = t0.05 t0.95 , D0.8 = t0.10 t0.90 , etc.:

Cum. Power =

[a(t)]2 dt.

(1)

Consequently, the power spectral density (PSD) of accelerograms considered in the present
study was determined for the stationary part of the record modeled to be within the time
interval t0.10 t0.90 .
The dimensionless indicator proposed by Cartwright & Longuet-Higgins and defined
in Clough and Penzien [2003] as a function of the spectral moments of the PSD for the
stationary process of the ground acceleration:

0=

22
1,
0 4

(2)

Frequency Indicators and Ground Motions Correlation

545

where i is the i-th moment of the PSD and

+

i = i Sx () d.

(3)

The guidance values for indicator in the case of actual ground motion accelerograms
might be [Clough and Penzien, 2003]:

Downloaded by [Mr F. Pavel] at 01:59 16 January 2014

2/3 < < 0.85 for a wide frequency band process (white noise or band-limited
white noise);
0.85 < < 0.90 for an intermediary band process;
> 0.90 for narrow frequency band processes (very high-frequency low-amplitude
signal associated with a low-frequency band-limited signal).

Several representative examples of ground motions from Romania are: the narrowest frequency band ground motions ever recorded in Romania at INCERC station in Bucharest
(the NS comp. of the 1977 and 1986 seismic events) and the broadest frequency band
ground motions recorded at Carcaliu in Dobrogea during the 1986 and 1990 Vrancea earthquakes. Another interesting series of seismic motions was recorded at Cernavoda City Hall
during the same 1986 and 1990 events; these represent ground motions with a very stable
predominant period.
In the epicentral area of the Vrancea earthquakes and in the East of the Carpathian
Mountains (Moldova), the recorded ground motions are characterized by wide frequency
bandwidth: the maximum ordinates of the response spectra are in the range T = 0 0.6 s.
In the Bucharest region, the recorded ground motions can be divided into two categories
[Lungu et al., 1992]:

seismic records characterized by spectral peaks in the long period range (T > 1.0 s)
and specific to narrow frequency bandwidth processes; or
seismic records having the maximum spectral peaks in the short period range (T <
0.6 s), characteristic to wide frequency bandwidth processes.

2.2. Deterministic Indicators for the Frequency Content of Seismic Records

The deterministic analysis of the frequency content of ground motions is related to the
maximum response of a SDOF (single degree of freedom) system to the recorded ground
motion. According to the Romanian seismic design code P100-1/2006 [2006], the control
period of response spectra TC represents the border between the maximum acceleration
branch and the maximum velocity branch of the response spectra. The control period of
response spectra TD is the border between the maximum velocity branch and the maximum
displacement branch of the response spectra.
Table 1 presents various definitions for control periods TC and TD given in Newmark
and Hall [1969, 1982], ATC 3-06 [1978], Lungu et al. [1997], and Bommer et al. [2000] as
well as resulting from the data in ASCE 7-10 [2010]. There are two categories of definitions
for TC :

definitions based on the spectral values: acceleration, velocity, and displacement

given in ATC 3-06 [1978], Lungu et al. [1997], and ASCE 7-10 [2010];
definitions based on the peak values of the seismic ground motion [Newmark and
Hall, 1969, 1982; Bommer et al., 2000].

546

EPV
EPA

SV 0.81.2s
2.5

EPD
EPV

EPV
EPA

EPD =

EPV =

V PGV
=
A PGA

TD = 8

TC = 5

PGD
PGV

PGV
PGA

Bommer et al.
[2000]

PGA peak ground acceleration

PGV peak ground velocity
PGD peak ground displacement

PGD
1.39 PGD
= 5.29
= 2
1.65 PGV
PGV

V PGD
=
A PGV

PGV
1.65 PGV
= 4.89
2.12 PGA
PGA

TD = 2

= 2

TC = 2

Newmark and Hall [1969, 1982]

(1) Definitions based on a fixed period window for computing EPA (0.10.5 s) and EPV (0.81.2 s).
(2) Definitions based on a mobile period window (of 0.4 s width) for getting maximum effective values.

max SV 0.4
2.5
max SD0.4
2.5

(2)
SA0.4
EPA = max2.5

TD = 2

TC = 2

Lungu et al. [1997]

EPA effective peak acceleration

EPV effective peak velocity
EPD effective peak displacement

EPV =

SA0.10.5s
EPA =
2.5

(1)

TC = 2

ATC 3-06 [1978]

TABLE 1 Definitions of control periods TC and TD of the structural response spectra

Downloaded by [Mr F. Pavel] at 01:59 16 January 2014

SD1
SDS

SDS design spectral

response acceleration
parameter at short periods
(0.2 s) given by code;
SD1 design spectral response
acceleration parameter at
1.0 s given by code

TC =

ASCE 7-10 [2010]

Frequency Indicators and Ground Motions Correlation

547

3.0

Amplification factor

2.5
2.0
1.5

1.0
0.5
0.0

TB = 0.1 TC

TC

TD

Downloaded by [Mr F. Pavel] at 01:59 16 January 2014

Period, s

FIGURE 1 Code spectral shape from the Romanian seismic code P100-1/2006 [2006].

The definitions in ATC 3-06 [1978] and Lungu et al. [1997] are based on the spectral values
and use the effective peak acceleration, velocity, and displacement which represent averaged values, while the American Code [ASCE 7-10, 2010] uses the spectral acceleration
values at two periods corresponding to the short period range (0.2 s) and to the medium
period range (1.0 s).
Figure 1 shows an example of a code spectrum from the Romanian seismic code P1001/2006 [2006]. The control period T B is taken equal to 0.1T C .
The mean period T M is computed based on the relations given in Rathje et al. [1998]:
 2
C /fi
TM =  i 2 ,
Ci

(5)

where Ci represent the Fourier amplitudes of the entire accelerogram and fi are the discrete
Fourier transform frequencies between 0.25 20 Hz.

3. Strong Motion Dataset

In this study, a dataset of 30 seismic records are used from earthquakes in: Armenia,
Chile, Greece, India, Iran, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Montenegro, New Zealand, Romania,
San Salvador, Turkey, and the U.S. The peak ground acceleration (PGA) of the earthquake records varies between 0.2 g (e.g., Muradiye 2011 NS) and 0.8 g (e.g., Kobe JMA
1995 NS). The strong ground motion records are bordered by several narrow frequency
band records - Mexico-City SCT 1985 ( = 0.99) and by some of the broadest frequency
band records Ancona 1972 ( = 0.70).
The distribution of the earthquake magnitude MW and earthquake depth, h with PGA
for the 30 analyzed records is, respectively, given in Figs. 2 and 3.
The distribution of the number of analysed records with PGA, PGV, MW , h, epicentral
distance of recording station, and earthquake occurrence year are given in Figs. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8,
and 9, respectively. The values of the stochastic and of the deterministic frequency content
indicators for the 30 strong ground motions selected in the dataset and computed using the
definitions given in Cap. 2 are shown in Table 2.

548

F. Pavel and D. Lungu

9
Maule 2010
Tarapaca 2005
Kushiro 1993
Michoacan 1985

8.5

Magnitude,Mw

8
7.5

Kobe 1995

7
6.5
6
Kalamata 1986

5.5

Ancona 1972

5
4.5

150

300

450

600

750

900

FIGURE 2. Event moment magnitude, MW vs. PGA.

140
Vrancea 1986
Tarapaca 2005

120

Iwate 2008
Vrancea
Kushiro 1993
1977
India-Myanmar 1988

Depth, km

100
80
60

Miyagi 2003
Maule 2010

40

Manjil 1990
Kobe 1995
Bam 2003

Van-Merkez 2011

20
0

150

300

450
PGA,

600

900

750

cm/s2

FIGURE 3 Earthquake depth, h, vs. PGA.

mean = 391 cm/s2
COV = 0.39

8
7
Number of events

Downloaded by [Mr F. Pavel] at 01:59 16 January 2014

PGA, cm/s2

6
5
4
3
2
1
0
100

200

300

400

500
PGA,

600

700

cm/s2

FIGURE 4 Frequency of recorded PGA.

800

900

Frequency Indicators and Ground Motions Correlation

549

mean = 43 cm/s
COV = 0.56

12

Number of events

10
8
6
4
2

20

40

60
PGV, cm/s

80

100

120

FIGURE 5 Frequency of recorded PGV.

14

Number of events

12
10
8
6
4
2
0
4

Magnitude, MW

FIGURE 6 Frequency of event magnitude, MW .

mean = 36 km
COV = 1.10

14
12
Number of events

Downloaded by [Mr F. Pavel] at 01:59 16 January 2014

10
8
6
4
2
0
0

10

20

30

40

Depth, km

FIGURE 7 Frequency of earthquake depth, h.

40 130

550

F. Pavel and D. Lungu

mean = 69 km
COV = 1.40

12

Number of events

10
8
6
4
2
0
0

20

40

60

80

100 100 400

FIGURE 8 Frequency of recording station epicentral distance.

9
8
7
Number of events

Downloaded by [Mr F. Pavel] at 01:59 16 January 2014

Epicentral distance, km

6
5
4
3
2
1

0
1940 1970

1970

1980

1990

2000

2010

2011

Year

FIGURE 9 Frequency of earthquake occurrence year.

4. PGV Estimation
Another focus of this study is the computation of the ratio PGV/SA for the analyzed ground
motions, as presented in Bommer and Alarcn [2006]. In Booth [2007] are given different
relations for computing PGV based on spectral values and on random vibration theory.
The ratio PGV/SA for the 30 seismic records used in this article and also the mean
ratio PGV/SA are shown in Fig. 10. The values of the coefficient of variation of the ratio
PGV/SA are shown in Fig. 11. The ratio proposed by Bommer and Alarcn [2006] is the
following:
PGV(cm/s) =

SA0.5s (cm/s2 )
.
20

(6)

It is clear from the above 2 figures that the minimum value of the ratio PGV/SA is encountered at a period of around 1.0 s. The minimum value of the coefficient of variation is 0.40.
The correlation between the ratio SA1.0 /8 and PGV is depicted in Fig. 12.

551

Miyagi, Morioka NS
Ancona, Ancona Rocca NS
Iwate, Hachinohe EW
Manjil, Abbar Transv.
Miyagi, Tohno NS
Tarapaca, Cuya Transv.
Umbria Marche, Nocera Umbra NS
Duzce, Duzce IRIGM NS
India-Myanmar, Diphu NS
Van Ercis, Muradiye NS
Bam, Bam N08E
Friuli, Tolmezzo NS
Kushiro, Kushiro JMA N153E
Aegion, Aegion Long.
Imperial Valley, El Centro NS
Kocaeli, Duzce EW
Vrancea, Petresti Focsani NS

Earthquake record
0.66
0.70
0.72
0.74
0.76
0.78
0.79
0.81
0.81
0.82
0.82
0.83
0.85
0.87
0.88
0.88
0.89

8.16
5.99
4.27
6.67
5.49
4.58
5.74
3.47
3.88
2.29
4.55
3.34
3.73
2.29
2.64
1.65
2.18

0.15
0.19
0.16
0.35
0.16
0.17
0.34
0.31
0.22
0.56
0.46
0.39
0.44
0.50
0.65
0.75
0.66

0.16
0.09
0.20
0.52
0.27
0.21
0.32
0.44
0.30
0.74
0.47
0.32
0.32
0.39
0.47
0.75
0.65

0.23
0.20
0.34
0.64
0.38
0.31
0.33
0.40
0.43
0.63
0.75
0.39
0.46
0.53
0.65
0.97
0.84

Lungu
et al.
[1997]
0.16
0.09
0.21
0.53
0.28
0.21
0.33
0.45
0.31
0.75
0.48
0.33
0.33
0.40
0.48
0.76
0.67

Boomer
et al.
[2000]

Control period TC , s

Freq.
Newmark
content Mean freq.
& Hall
indicator, f50 , Hz
ATC 3-06
[1982]

Stochastic indicators

Deterministic indicators

TABLE 2 Stochastic and deterministic indicators for analysis of the frequency content of selected ground motions

Downloaded by [Mr F. Pavel] at 01:59 16 January 2014

0.10
0.05
0.10
0.38
0.09
0.07
0.18
0.19
0.11
0.88
0.27
0.40
0.41
0.56
0.77
0.97
0.70

ASCE
7-10
[2010]

(Continued)

0.16
0.15
0.25
0.30
0.25
0.23
0.21
0.33
0.31
0.58
0.40
0.40
0.32
0.50
0.53
0.87
0.68

Mean period
TM , s
Rathje et al.
[1998]

552

Kalamata, Kalamata N175E

Loma Prieta, Corralitos EW
Kobe, Kobe JMA NS
Maule, Vina del Mar EW
Montenegro, Hotel Olimpic EW
Spitak, Gukasian NS
El Salvador, San Salvador NGI EW
Darfield, Christchurch REHS N02E
Erzincan, Erzincan N09E
Lytlletton, Christchurch Cath. College N64E
Vrancea, Bucharest INCERC NS
Northridge, Newhall Pico Canyon Rd. N46E
Michoacan, Mexico-City SCT EW

Earthquake record

TABLE 2 (Continued)

0.90
0.90
0.91
0.93
0.93
0.94
0.95
0.95
0.96
0.97
0.98
0.98
0.99

1.92
1.45
1.76
1.53
1.61
1.36
1.32
1.64
0.74
0.79
0.58
0.54
0.46

0.40
0.86
0.86
0.92
0.99
0.93
0.97
0.49
1.04
1.02
1.21
1.14
0.81

0.54
0.47
0.49
0.49
0.97
0.72
0.68
0.83
1.30
0.74
1.67
1.02
1.76

0.49
0.74
0.75
0.70
1.41
0.85
0.74
1.04
1.51
1.28
1.49
1.55
2.21

Lungu
et al.
[1997]
0.55
0.48
0.50
0.50
1.00
0.73
0.69
0.85
1.33
0.75
1.70
1.04
1.80

Boomer
et al.
[2000]

Control period TC , s

Freq.
Newmark
content Mean freq.
& Hall
indicator, f50 , Hz
ATC 3-06
[1982]

Stochastic indicators

Deterministic indicators

Downloaded by [Mr F. Pavel] at 01:59 16 January 2014

0.43
0.53
1.48
0.77
1.28
1.06
1.22
0.82
1.25
1.07
1.88
1.44
1.28

ASCE
7-10
[2010]

0.56
0.61
0.64
0.64
0.84
0.74
0.66
0.93
1.32
1.17
1.43
1.54
2.13

Mean period
TM , s
Rathje et al.
[1998]

Frequency Indicators and Ground Motions Correlation

553

PGV/SA, s

0.8
0.6
0.4

0.2
0
0

0.5

1.5

Period, s

FIGURE 10 Ratio PGV/SA for the 30 analyzed ground motions (color figure available
online).
1.2
1

COV

0.8

0.6
0.4

0.2
0
0

0.5

1.5

Period, s

FIGURE 11 Coefficient of variation of the ratio PGV/SA for the 30 analyzed records.
120

r = 0.88

100
SA1.0/8, cm/s2

Downloaded by [Mr F. Pavel] at 01:59 16 January 2014

Mean (30 records)

80
60
40
20

0
0

20

40

60

80

100

PGV, cm/s

FIGURE 12 Correlation between PGV and SA1.0 /8.

120

554

F. Pavel and D. Lungu

The value of the correlation coefficient r is around 0.9, so on the basis of the investigation
of 30 ground motion records the approximate relation for the computation of PGV is:
PGV(cm/s) =

SA1.0s (cm/s2 )
.
8

(7)

Several correlations between the control periods TC determined according to the definitions
given by various authors are plotted in Figs. 13ad. The correlation coefficient r in Figs.
13ad may also suggest the definitions to be used in practical design. The large values of
the correlation coefficients prove the fact that the relations used for the computation of the
control period TC yield similar results.
Another correlation which has to be made is between the control period T C and the
mean period T M as shown in Figs. 14a and b.
The values of the correlation coefficients are similar proving the fact that the two
methods for TC and TM based on spectral values and, respectively, based on the Fourier
Amplitude Spectrum (FAS) provide similar results.

6. Correlations Between Control Period T C and PGA/PGV or PGV

Figures 15a and b and Figs. 16ac show the correlations between PGV or PGA/PGV and
various definitions for the control period TC .
We notice that the relationships between the deterministic frequency content and PGV
seem to be linear, while the relationships with the ratio PGA/PGV are clearly nonlinear.
(a)

(b)
r = 0.93

1.5
1
0.5
0

0.5

1.5

2.5s
TC Lungu et al. (1997)

TC ASCE 7-10 (2010)

2s

1.5
1
0.5
0

2s

r = 0.94

TC ATC 3-06 (1978)

0.5

1.5

2.5 s

TC Newmark & Hall (1969, 1982)

(d)

2.5 s

r = 0.94

2
1.5
1
0.5
0

2.5 s
TC Lungu et al. (1997)

(c)
TC Lungu et al. (1997)

Downloaded by [Mr F. Pavel] at 01:59 16 January 2014

5. Correlations Between Control Periods T C Determined by Various

Definitions

1.5
1
0.5
0

0.5

1.5

TC Bommer et al. (2000)

2.5 s

r = 0.81

0.5

1.5

TC ASCE 7-10 (2010)

FIGURE 13 (a)(d) Correlations between various T C definitions.

2.5 s

Frequency Indicators and Ground Motions Correlation

(a)

TC Newmark & Hall (1969, 1982)

(b)
2.5 s

TC Lungu et al. (1997)

555

r = 0.97

2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0

0.5

1.5

2.5 s

2.5 s

r = 0.93

2
1.5
1
0.5
0

0.5

TM

1.5

2.5 s

TM

FIGURE 14 (a)(b) Correlations between TM and several definitions of T C .

2.5 s

r = 0.67
TC ASCE 7-10 (2010)

TC Newmark & Hall (1969, 1982)

(b)
2.5 s
2
1.5
1
0.5

1.5
1
0.5
0

20

40

60

80

100

r = 0.76

0
0

120

20

40

60

80

100

120

PGV, cm/s

PGV, cm/s

FIGURE 15 (a)(b). Correlations between PGV and several T C definitions.

(b)

(a)
2.5 s

2.5 s

r = 0.83

TC Lungu et al. (1997)

TC ATC 3-06 (1978)

2
1.5
1
0.5

1.5
1
0.5
0

r = 0.94

PGA/PGV, gs/m

PGA/PGV, gs/m

(c)
2.5 s

TC ASCE 7-10 (2010)

Downloaded by [Mr F. Pavel] at 01:59 16 January 2014

(a)

r = 0.88

2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0

PGA/PGV, gs/m

FIGURE 16 (a)(c) Correlations between the ratio PGA/PGV and several T C definitions.

F. Pavel and D. Lungu

The above graphs prove the fact that the ratio PGA/PGV is more adequate parameter
for characterizing of the frequency content of ground motions than PGV. The correlation coefficients in Figs. 15 and 16 are in the range 0.670.77 for PGV and in the range
0.830.94 for PGA/PGV.
Figures 17a and b show the correlations between the mean period TM and PGV or the
ratio PGA/PGV.
The same conclusion is valid in the case of correlation of TM with PGV or PGA/PGV.
Moreover, the same conclusion applies in the case of the correlation of the stochastic
dimensionless indicator and PGV or PGA/PGV given in Figs. 18a and b.
Figures 19a and b present the correlation between the shear wave velocity VS,30 and the
mean period TM or the stochastic frequency bandwidths indicator . However, only 20 out
of 30 VS,30 values were obtained from various databases, such as: PEER strong motion
database, European strong motion database, Itaca strong motion database, or strong ground
motion database of Turkiye.
It is clear that there is a correlation between the values of the frequency content indicators and the value of the shear wave velocity VS,30 . However, the values of the correlation
coefficients are not very high and this may suggest that the parameter VS,30 may not adequately represent local site conditions. This is due to the fact that by using only the top
30 m of soil layers, other deeper soil layers are neglected. Furthermore, by constraining the
depth of considered soil layers at 30 m, a part of the layer situated around this depth may
be neglected (the part below 30 m).

(a)

(b)
2.5 s

2.5 s

r = 0.70

1.5

1.5

r = 0.83

TM

TM

0.5

0.5

0
0

20

40

60

80

100

120

PGA/PGV, gs/m

PGV, cm/s

FIGURE 17 (a)(b) Correlations between TM and PGV or the ratio PGA/PGV.

(b)

(a)
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6

r = 0.78
Dimensionless indicator,

Dimensionless indicator,

Downloaded by [Mr F. Pavel] at 01:59 16 January 2014

556

20

40

60
PGV, cm/s

80

100

120

r = 0.87

0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0

PGA/PGV, gs/m

FIGURE 18 (a)(b) Correlations between the dimensionless indicator and PGV or the
ratio PGA/PGV.

Frequency Indicators and Ground Motions Correlation

(b)
2.5 s

r = 0.61

TM

1.5
1
0.5
0

100

200

300

400

500

Vs,30, m/s

600

700

800

1
Dimensionless indicator,

(a)

557

r = 0.61

0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Vs,30, m/s

Downloaded by [Mr F. Pavel] at 01:59 16 January 2014

FIGURE 19 (a)(b) Correlations between the indicator Vs,30 and TM or the dimensionless
indicator .
In the case of Bucharest, in Calarasu [2012], no correlations where observed between
either VS,30 or VS,60 determined for 32 boreholes and the frequency content indicators
TC or .

7. Conclusions

The definitions for the control period of the response spectra TC given by Newmark
and Hall [1969, 1982], Lungu et al. [1997], and Bommer et al. [2000] are clearly
different, but very well correlated.
The mobile window procedure [Lungu et al., 1997] is regarded as the most adequate
instrument for computing the values of the control period TC of response spectra.
The values of the control period TC given by Newmark and Hall [1969, 1982], Lungu
et al. [1997], Bommer et al. [2000], and the values of the mean period TM given by
Rathje et al. [1998] are also well correlated. The value of the coefficient of correlation between TC given by Lungu et al. [1997] and the mean period TM given in
Rathje et al. [1998] is 0.97.
PGV can be approximately estimated from the spectral acceleration at 1.0 s as
(SA1.0 )/8; the ratio SA/PGV seems to be dependent on the frequency content of
the analyzed ground motions.
The ratio PGA/PGV is a better indicator of the frequency content of ground motion
than PGV.
The ratio PGA/PGV is very well correlated both with: (a) the deterministic frequency content indicators TC and TM , as well as with (b) the stochastic frequency
content indicator .

Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the reviewers for their very useful and constructive
opinions and suggestions regarding the article contents.

References
Akkar, S. and Ozen, O. [2005] Effect of peak ground velocity on deformation demands of SDOF
systems, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 34, 15511571.

Downloaded by [Mr F. Pavel] at 01:59 16 January 2014

558

F. Pavel and D. Lungu

ASCE/SEI 7-10 [2010] Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures ASCE, American
Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia.
ATC 3-06, Special Publication 510/NSF [1978] The tentative provisions for the development of
seismic regulations for buildings, Prepared by ATC (Applied Technology Council) associated
with the Structural Engineers Association of California.
Bommer, J. and Martinez-Pereira, A. [2000] Strong-motion parameters: definition, usefulness and
predictability, Proc. of the 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland. New
Zealand, Paper no. 206.
Bommer, J., Elnashai, A., and Weir, A. [2000] Compatible acceleration and displacement spectra for
seismic design codes, Proc. of the 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland,
New Zealand, Paper no. 207.
Bommer, J. and Alarcn, J. [2006] The prediction and use of peak ground velocity, Soil Dynamics
and Earthquake Engineering 10(1), 131.
Booth, E. [2007] The estimation of peak ground-motion parameters from spectral ordinates,
Journal of Earthquake Engineering 11, 1332.
Calarasu, E. A. [2012] Microzonarea conditiilor locale de teren pentru municipiul Bucuresti si
zona sa metropolitana cu aplicatii in evaluarea hazardului seismic, Ph.D. thesis (in Romanian),
Technical University of Civil Engineering Bucharest, Romania.
Clough, R. and Penzien, J. [2003] Dynamics of Structures, 3rd ed., Computers & Structures Inc.,
Berkeley, California.
Elnashai, A. and Di Sarno, L. [2008] Fundamentals of Earthquake Engineering, John Wiley & Sons
Ltd., Chichester, West Sussex.
European Strong Motion Database. Retrieved from http://www.isesd.hi.is.
Fajfar, P., Vidic, T., and Fischinger, M. [1990] A measure of earthquake ground motion capacity to
damage medium-period structures, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 9(5), 236242.
Itaca - Italiana Accelerometric Archive. Retrieved from http://itaca.mi.ingv.it/ItacaNet/.
Lungu, D., Coman, O., Cornea, T., Demetriu, S., and Muscalu, L. [1993] Structural response spectra to different frequency bandwidth earthquakes, Proc. of the 6th International Conference on
Structural Safety and Reliability, Vol. 2, Innsbruck, Austria, pp. 21632170.
Lungu, D. and Cornea, T. [1987] Power and Response Spectra in Bucharest for Vrancea Earthquakes,
Technical University of Civil Engineering Bucharest, Bucharest.
Lungu, D., Cornea, T., Aldea, A., and Zaicenco, A. [1997] Basic representation of seismic action,
in Design of Structures in Seismic Zones: Eurocode 8 Worked Examples, ed. D. Lungu, F.
Mazzolani, and S. Savidis (TEMPUS PHARE CM Project 01198: Implementiong of structural
Eurocodes in Romanian civil engineering standards, Bridgeman Ltd., Timisoara, Romania), pp.
160.
Lungu, D., Demetriu, S., and Cornea, T. [1992] Frequency bandwidth of Vrancea earthquakes and
the 1991 edition of seismic code in Romania, Proc. of the 10th World Conference on Earthquake
Engineering, Vol. 10, Madrid, Spain, pp. 56335638.
Newmark, N. and Hall, W. J. [1969] Seismic design criteria for nuclear reactor facilities, Proc.
of the 4th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, vol. 2, Santiago de Chile, Chile, pp.
B5.112.
Newmark, N. and Hall, W. J. [1982] Earthquake Spectra and Design, Earthquake Engineering
Research Institute, Berkeley, California.
PEER Strong Motion Database. [2006] Code for seismic design Part I Design prescriptions
for buildings, Ministry of Transports, Constructions and Tourism. Retrieved from http://peer.
berkeley.edu/peer_ground_motion_database.P100-1/2006
Rathje, E., Abrahamson, N., and Bray, J. [1998] Simplified frequency content estimates of earthquake ground motions, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering 124(2),
150159.
Strong ground motion database of Turkiye. http://kyhdata.deprem.gov.tr/2K/kyhdata_v4.php.
Wald, D., Quitoriano, V., Heaton, T., and Kanamori, H. [1999] Relations between peak ground
acceleration, peak ground velocity, and modified Mercalli intensity in California, Earthquake
Spectra 15(3), 557564.

Frequency Indicators and Ground Motions Correlation

559

Downloaded by [Mr F. Pavel] at 01:59 16 January 2014

Yakut, A. and Yilmaz, H. [2007] Evaluation of spectral ground motion intensity parameters,
Proc. of the 8th Pacific Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Singapore, Singapore, Paper
no. 036.
Zhu, T. J., Tso, W., and Heidebrecht, A. [1988] Effect of peak ground A/V ratio on structural
damage, Journal of Structural Engineering 114, 10191037.