H. Polat Gülkan, Vesile Hatun Akansel, Erol Kalkan
{"title":"土耳其地震隐含的反应谱形状:与设计谱的比较","authors":"H. Polat Gülkan, Vesile Hatun Akansel, 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":"{\"title\":\"Response spectrum shapes implied by earthquakes in Turkey: comparisons with design spectra\",\"authors\":\"H. Polat Gülkan, Vesile Hatun Akansel, 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}","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}
Response spectrum shapes implied by earthquakes in Turkey: comparisons with design spectra
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.
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.