Response spectrum shapes implied by earthquakes in Turkey: comparisons with design spectra

IF 1.6 4区 地球科学 Q3 GEOCHEMISTRY & GEOPHYSICS
H. Polat Gülkan, Vesile Hatun Akansel, Erol Kalkan
{"title":"Response spectrum shapes implied by earthquakes in Turkey: comparisons with design spectra","authors":"H. Polat Gülkan,&nbsp;Vesile Hatun Akansel,&nbsp;Erol Kalkan","doi":"10.1007/s10950-023-10155-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Design spectrum shape in many recent standards and codes is defined by spectral accelerations for two periods, T<sub>s,(~0.2s)</sub> and T<sub>1,(~1 s)</sub>, modified by multiplicative factors that account for the site class and strength of the ground shaking. This article draws attention to apparent discord between spectra from actual recordings at a number of stations of the national strong motion network of Turkey with the design spectra for the same location and site characteristics as given by the national seismic hazard map. We find that, for deep basins with Site Class D or E profiles, the design spectrum seems not to recognize consistently the constant velocity and longer period demand. If this conjecture is true, it may foreshadow unsafe designs for the building stock in Turkey in similar environments. Many more earthquake recordings than are currently at hand are needed to verify the applicability of using the two-point design spectrum that is embedded in the regulation. This is not a unique problem only to the Turkey Building Earthquake Regulation (TBER 2018). The recently recorded strong ground motion records from the 06 February 2023, M 7.7 and M 7.5 Kahramanmaraş, earthquakes support the conjecture of this study and provide strong evidence for a need to revise the corner periods of the design spectrum in the Regulation.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":16994,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Seismology","volume":"27 4","pages":"681 - 692"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Seismology","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10950-023-10155-7","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GEOCHEMISTRY & GEOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Design spectrum shape in many recent standards and codes is defined by spectral accelerations for two periods, Ts,(~0.2s) and T1,(~1 s), modified by multiplicative factors that account for the site class and strength of the ground shaking. This article draws attention to apparent discord between spectra from actual recordings at a number of stations of the national strong motion network of Turkey with the design spectra for the same location and site characteristics as given by the national seismic hazard map. We find that, for deep basins with Site Class D or E profiles, the design spectrum seems not to recognize consistently the constant velocity and longer period demand. If this conjecture is true, it may foreshadow unsafe designs for the building stock in Turkey in similar environments. Many more earthquake recordings than are currently at hand are needed to verify the applicability of using the two-point design spectrum that is embedded in the regulation. This is not a unique problem only to the Turkey Building Earthquake Regulation (TBER 2018). The recently recorded strong ground motion records from the 06 February 2023, M 7.7 and M 7.5 Kahramanmaraş, earthquakes support the conjecture of this study and provide strong evidence for a need to revise the corner periods of the design spectrum in the Regulation.

Abstract Image

土耳其地震隐含的反应谱形状:与设计谱的比较
在许多最近的标准和规范中,设计频谱形状是由两个周期的频谱加速度来定义的,Ts,(~0.2s)和T1,(~ 1s),并通过考虑场地类别和地面震动强度的乘法因子进行修改。本文提请注意,土耳其国家强震网多个台站实际记录的频谱与国家地震危险图给出的同一位置和场地特征的设计频谱之间存在明显的不一致。我们发现,对于Site类D或E剖面的深盆地,设计谱似乎不一致地识别恒定速度和更长的周期需求。如果这一推测是正确的,它可能预示着土耳其在类似环境下的建筑库存设计不安全。需要比目前更多的地震记录来验证使用嵌入在规则中的两点设计谱的适用性。这不仅仅是土耳其建筑地震法规(TBER 2018)独有的问题。最近记录的2023年2月6日的强烈地面运动记录,7.7级和7.5级kahramanmaraku地震支持了本研究的猜想,并为需要修改法规中设计谱的拐角期提供了强有力的证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Seismology
Journal of Seismology 地学-地球化学与地球物理
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
67
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Seismology is an international journal specialising in all observational and theoretical aspects related to earthquake occurrence. Research topics may cover: seismotectonics, seismicity, historical seismicity, seismic source physics, strong ground motion studies, seismic hazard or risk, engineering seismology, physics of fault systems, triggered and induced seismicity, mining seismology, volcano seismology, earthquake prediction, structural investigations ranging from local to regional and global studies with a particular focus on passive experiments.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信