Development of Seismic Hazard Maps for the International Building Code

Mark D. Petersen and E.V. Leyendecker (U.S. Geological Survey)

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazmaps/

National Seismic Hazard Mapping Project timeline

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
- IBC 2000 incorporates 1996, 1999, 2000 maps IBC 2006- 2002, 2003 maps

1996 Conterminous U.S.

1999 AK

2000 HI

2002 C U.S.

2003 PR

2005 AK/Pacific
- California

June 2007 C U.S.

Alaska, May 9-10 05 NGA attenuation, Oct 24, 05 Pacific NW, Jan 06 Intermountain West, Mar 06 CEUS source and attenuation, May 06 User workshop, Sept 06
- Review

Uniform methodology across U.S., Regional Considerations, Best available science, map stability

PROBABILISTIC SEISMIC HAZARD METHODOLOGY

a

peak ground acceleration

Earthquake Sources
M7.6 every 250yrs- 0.004 event/yr 250yrs-

Ground motion

Hazard curve
annual rate of exceeding pga

r1 d1 d4 r2
San

d2

M7.6 d3

M 7.6
distance

To calculate the hazard curve (annual rate of exceeding ground motions) we: 1. Determine magnitude, m, and distance, d, of earthquake 2. Calculate ground motion distribution for that m and d. 3. Calculate the product:
annual rate of earthquake *probability that earthquake will exceed certain ground motion level

4. Sum these rates for all earthquakes in the model at each ground motion to get a hazard curve. This curve shows the rate of exceedance of each ground motion.

fa reas And ult

high seismicity zone

r3

peak ground acceleration (pga)

0.25g

0.5g

Seismic Hazard Model

Spatially smoothed seismicity (e.g., in CA M 4 since 1933, M 5 since 1930, and M 6 since 1850 Faults: characteristic earthquake and Gutenberg-Richter with Mmin 6.5, geodetic data Constraints: historic seismicity and plate rate models Attenuation relations

Caribbean Plate
Northern & Eastern margins are Ocean-Ocean plate boundary South-eastern margin Triple junction Eastern margin Subduction Zone >> Volcanism & Inclined plane seismicity Northern margin Subduction, Strike-Slip and spreading zone

Caribbean earthquakes since 1964

Longitude

-85 W 25 N

-80 W

-75 W

-70 W

-65 W

-60 W

25 N

20 N

20 N

Latitude

15 N

15 N

10 N

10 N

-85 W

-80 W

-75 W

-70 W

-65 W

-60 W

In 1964 the UWI Seismic Research Unit in Trinidad began monitoring the region.

Seismic Research Unit The University of the West Indies St. Augustine Trinidad

PEER Next Generation Attenuation Relations

1. Similarity of new NGA relations 2. Difference from 1997 relations in near-field 3. We interpreted 1997 A&S rock as 760 m/s

GSHAP (Global Seismic Hazard Assessment Project; Pga - 10% probability of exceedance in 50 years)

U.S. National Seismic Hazard Map for Puerto Rico

U.S. National Seismic Hazard Map for Puerto Rico

Seismogram selection for dynamic analysis

Deaggregation results can be used to provide a target response spectrum for a site. From target response spectrum one can select seismograms from PEER or other seismogram databases.
2 1.8 1.6 Design Response Spectrum Abrahamson & Silva (1997) Suite of 3 Ground Motions Average of Suite of Motions

Spectral Acceleration ( g)

1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 1.5T 0.2 0 0.2T 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

Period (seconds)

THE PROCESS OF INCLUDING SEISMIC HAZARD MAPS IN INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE

Building Seismic Safety Council and

USGS worked together in an iterative process The end result was a series of USGS probabilistic maps and a series of MCE ground motion maps prepared in response to BSSC requests

Design/Hazard curve tool

CD available, Internet version available about December, 2005

Conclusions
Seismic hazard maps should include fault and seismic information. Seismic hazard maps and provisions for building codes change as more information is obtained. Uniform risk based hazard maps are preferred. Performance based engineering is the future.

MCE MAPS
Maps of Maximum Considered
Earthquake Ground Motion Based on probabilistic maps 2% probability of exceedance in 50 years, firm rock, 0.2s and 1.0 SA.

CONTOUR MAPS
Contours represent the increased
knowledge gained from earthquakes during the last 30 years Ground motions change rapidly close to to known active faulting Minors errors in location are less sensitive compared to zones

PERFORMANCE GOAL

Minimize the risk to occupants, Increase the performance of higher occupancy structures, Improve the capability of essential structures to function, and Ensure a low likelihood of collapse for ground motions in excess of the design levels

PROBABILITIES CONSIDERED
10% P.E. in 50 years 5% P.E. in 50 years 2% P.E. in 50 years

SITE CONDITION OF PROBABILISTIC MAPS

B/C BOUNDARY - FIRM ROCK, shear wave velocity of 760 m/sec in the top 30 m (B/C Boundary)

PARAMETERS CONSIDERED
PGA Spectral
Accelerations 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 sec

WHY 2% P.E. IN 50 YEARS?

HAZARD CURVES FOR SELECTED CITIES

10.0 0.2 sec Spectral Acceleration, %g

1.0

CITIES
10% in 50 Years 5% in 50 Years

0.0 0.10000

0.01000

0.00100

2% in 50 Years

0.1

Los Angeles San Francisco Seattle Salt Lake City New York City Charleston Memphis

0.00010

0.00001

Annual Frequency of Exceedance

UNIFORM HAZARD RESPONSE SPECTRA San Francisco, CA

Spectral Response Acceleration, g
2.0
PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDANCE 2% in 50 years 10% in 50 years

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0 0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

Period, sec

UNIFORM HAZARD RESPONSE SPECTRA Charleston, SC

Spectral Response Acceleration, g
2.0

1.5

PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDANCE 2% in 50 years 10% in 50 years

1.0

0.5

0.0 0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

Period, sec

WHERE DID 2/3 COME FROM ?

Fundamental Design Requirement to Prevent Collapse Collapse Structural Resistance >= Collapse Load Conservative estimate of Collapse Structural Resistance Collapse Structural Resistance >= 1.5 x Code Structural Resistance Estimate of rare but possible ground motion for collapse conditions Collapse Load = 2% PE in 50 yr Ground Motion Substituting into Design Requirement to Prevent Collapse: 1.5 x Code Structural Resistance >= 2% PE in 50 yr Ground Motion Code Structural Resistance >= 1/1.5 x (2% PE in 50 yr GM) >= 2/3 x (2% PE in 50 yr GM)

DETERMINISTIC CONSTRAINTS
In regions of high seismicity, such as coastal California, the hazard is typically controlled by large-magnitude events occurring on a limited number of relatively well defined fault systems Ground shaking calculated at a 2% in 50 years likelihood would be much larger than that which would be expected based on the characteristic magnitude of earthquakes on these active faults, because these faults can produce characteristic earthquakes every few hundred years. General rule is applicable in all regions.

CONSTRAINTS
Near well-defined faults transition
from probabilistic ground motion (GM) to deterministic GM Use the median GM times 1.5 (intended to approximate one sigma) as the deterministic GM for the maps

CONSTRAINTS
Use a plateau equivalent to current
UBC Zone 4 design practice (x 1.5) as a transition from the probabilistic GM to the deterministic GM If the deterministic GM (x 1.5) exceeds the probabilistic GM, retain the probabilistic GM

EXCEPTION FOR LOW-RISE REGULAR-SHAPED BUILDINGS

Regular structures five stories or less in height with T <= 0.5 sec Seismic Design Category D, E, or F Design ground motions (Site Class B) need not exceed T = 0.2 sec Ss = 1.5 g (SDS = 1.0 g) T = 1.0 sec S1 = 0.6 g (SD1 = 0.4 g)

Normalized 0.2 sec Spectral Acceleration, %g

NORMALIZED HAZARD CURVES FOR SELECTED CITIES

10.00

1.00

CITIES
10% in 50 Years 5% in 50 Years 2% in 50 Years

0.10

Los Angeles San Francisco Seattle Salt Lake City New York City Charleston Memphis

0.01 0.10000

0.01000

0.00100

0.00010

0.00001

Annual Frequency of Exceedance

GEOLOGIC DATA

Two multi segment rupture models based on Weldon et al. 2002 From Weldon et al.:

Rupture scenarios for the Southern San Andreas fault. Vertical bars represent the age range of paleoseismic events recognized to date, and horizontal bars represent possible ruptures. Gray shows regions/times without data. In (A) all events seen on the northern 2/3 of the fault are constrained to be as much like the 1857 AD rupture as possible, and all other sites are grouped to produce ruptures that span the southern of the fault; this model is referred to the North Bend/South Bend scenario. In (B) ruptures are constructed to be as varied as possible, while still satisfy the existing age data.

MCE Design Maps