Should ground-motion records be rotated to fault-normal/parallel or maximum direction for response history analysis of buildings?

Abstract

seismic design according to provisions of the American Society of Civil Engineers/Seismic Engineering Institute (ASCE/SEI) 7-10. The results of this study have important implications for current practice, suggesting that ground motions rotated to MD or FN/FP directions do not necessarily provide the most critical EDPs in nonlinear-inelastic domain; however, they tend to produce larger EDPs than as-recorded (arbitrarily oriented) motions.

Significance of Rotating Ground Motions on Behavior of Symmetric- and Asymmetric-Plan Structures: Part I. Single-Story Structures

“…For the asymmetric-plan systems, plots for displacements at corner c2 (Figure 5) are depicted in Figure 11. Median values of other EDPs are shown in Reyes and Kalkan (2012). These figures provide an overall statistical examination to generalize the observations previously made based on individual records in Figures 7 thru 9.…”

“…The parameters, k and q y , are the same for all BRBs of a building. Plots of mode shapes and effective modal masses presented in Reyes and Kalkan (2012) permit the following observations: (1) Lateral displacements dominate motion of the A-plan (symmetric-plan) buildings in modes 1 and 2, whereas torsion dominates motion in the third mode. This indicates weak coupling between lateral and torsional components of motion.…”

Design Ground Motion Library: An Interactive Tool for Selecting Earthquake Ground Motions

“…More detailed results and documentation of analyses can be found in Baker (2014). It is interesting that, even though velocity pulses may not seem apparent in some records in the FN or the FP direction, they may be present in other directions (Reyes and Kalkan 2012). However, the pulse records identified in the DGML are only for FN and FP components.…”

Typology of NSPA pushover curves and surfaces for 3D performance-based seismic response of structures

“…Konstrukcija i generisanje pushover površi sprovodi se integracijom nelinearnih odgovora datih preko individualnih pushover krivih za razli ite uglove i za multikomponentalno dejstvo zemljotresa [4]. Prethodno je potrebno generisati multikomponentalne akcelerograme i spektre odgovora za razli ite uglove u odnosu na komponentu upravno na pravac pružanja raseda (fault normal) i komponentu paralelno pravcu pružanja raseda (fault parallel) [24], [25]. Pošto je primena pushover površi u prezentaciji i razmatranju perfomansi konstrukcija još u inicijalnoj fazi, otvorena su brojna pitanja, kao što su: detaljnija matemati ka formulacija, tipologija, aspekti primene na realnim modelima konstrukcija, specijalni slu ajevi pushover površi, prednosti i nedostaci u prikazivanju performansi primenom pushover površi, itd.…”

“…Construction and generation of the pushover surface is implemented by integrating the nonlinear responses given by individual pushover curves for different angles and multicomponent earthquake actions [4]. First, it is necessary to generate multicomponent accelerograms and response spectra for different angles relative to the component perpendicular to direction of the fault (fault normal) and a component in parallel to direction of the fault (fault parallel) [24], [25]. Since the application of the pushover surface in the presentation and consideration of structural performance is still at the initial stage, there are a number of questions which should be answered, such as: a more detailed mathematical formulation, typology, aspects of the application on real models of structures, special cases of pushover surfaces, advantages and disadvantages of using the pushover surface for presentation of seismic response, etc.…”