Project report

Project Azure I

Submitted by
Stalin Patricio Ibez Snchez
Matriculation number: 116300

BAUHAUS-UNIVERSITT WEIMAR
Faculty of Civil Engineering

Table of Contents
page
Declaration .................................................................................................................................II
1
2

Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1
Identification of primary input parameters. ........................................................................ 2
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7

Ground Motion Prediction Equation (GMPE) ................................................................... 8

3.1

Target Site .................................................................................................................. 2

Seismic activity .......................................................................................................... 2
Seismic zonification ................................................................................................... 3
Geology of Santiago ................................................................................................... 4
Topografy of Santiago ................................................................................................ 4
Type of spectrum ........................................................................................................ 5
Subsoil classification .................................................................................................. 5
GMPE for chilean subducting zone. .......................................................................... 8

Ground motion data and records ...................................................................................... 10

4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5

Data collection.......................................................................................................... 10
Data selected for the project ..................................................................................... 10
Elaboration of data and records ................................................................................ 12
Application of ground motion model ....................................................................... 16
Application of code spectrum .................................................................................. 17

4.5.1
4.5.2
4.6
5

National seimic code (NCh 433 of 1996, mod 2009) ...................................... 17

Eurocode........................................................................................................... 18

Comparison between spectrums ............................................................................... 20

Conclusions ...................................................................................................................... 22

List of Figures .......................................................................................................................... 23

List of Tables ............................................................................................................................ 24
Bibliography ............................................................................................................................. 25
Appendix .................................................................................................................................. 26

Declaration
Hereby, I declare that I worked on this Report independently and using only the specified
sources and programs which are referred.

Weimar, 14.02.2016

Stalin Ibez
___________________

II

Project Azure I

Introduction

The current project is developed in the frame of the class Primary Hazards and Risks. The
main target of the project is to train the students in the handling and development of response
spectra from real data of earthquakes.
To apply the knowledge obtained during the lectures, the student had to find real data from
earthquakes and develop the spectra. To do so, it was necessary to contact national institutions
and ask for time history data of earthquakes. The institutions contacted during this project
were the CSN (National seismology center) and University of Chile.
The response spectra were done for a specific site and earthquake. Santiago was defined as
target site, the capital city of Chile. The main reason to choose this city is due to its high
population. Another important factor is that in Santiago, the main industries are located. As
the earthquake, the selection was done for a recent event; Illapel 2015 which was one of the
biggest earthquakes from last year. This incident caused an enormous damage to Illapel,
mainly for the tsunami which took place after the event. This earthquake was felt in Santiago
as well, but no severe damages were registered.
The outcomes of this project are the spectra from the national code, from the Euro code, from
the earthquake and from the ground motion prediction equation, considering absolute values
and normalized. Also, a comparison of these results was done and its discussions are here
presented.

Project Azure I

Identification of primary input parameters.

The criterion is here analyzed for the selection of the site and the earthquake to study. A brief
description of the soil classification is made; also an overview of the seismic action of the
zone is shown.

2.1

Target Site

Santiago of Chile is chosen as target site. Santiago is located in the central zone of Chile,
specifically in the Metropolitan Region. The main reasons of choosing Santiago as a target
site are:
1. Santiago is the capital of Chile; the main economical industries are located here.
2. In Santiago live more than a third of the population, as shown in the Figure - 1.
3. Santiago is located in a highly seismic region and so are the regions close to Santiago.
Figure - 1 Population density of Chile

2.2

Seismic activity

In general, Chile is a highly active concern to seismic activity. The main reason is the sub
ducting failure that surrounds the country. Analysing the seismic history of the country, it is
possible to notice that in more than one occasion, earthquakes with magnitude greater than 7.0
[Ms] have hit the country.
In the next map, the history of earthquakes greater than 7.25 [Ms] are shown.

Project Azure I
Figure - 2 History earthquakes

The capital has been affected in more than one occasion by the earthquakes that occurred in
the neighbor regions.

2.3

Seismic zonification

The national code divides the country in three categories: 1, 2 and 3. The next map shows the
division of the country according to NCh 433, of 1996 (Chilean Code).
Figure - 3 Zoning of the code 25[3]

The categories have the maximal peak ground accelerations shown in the next table:

Project Azure I
Table - 1 Seismic zoning and PGA [3]
Seismic Zone
1
2
3

A0
0.2 g
0.3 g
0.4 g

The target site is divided into the three categories. However, the specific station chosen for
obtaining the data is located in zone II.

2.4

Geology of Santiago

In the next map, the geology of Santiago is shown as follows.

Figure - 4 Santiago's Geology

2.5

Topografy of Santiago

In the next map, the topography of Santiago is shown. It is important to notice the big
mountain chain that surrounds the country. That is because of the subduction of the Nazca
plate under the South American plate. That fail is the one that produces big and constant
earthquakes in Chile.

Project Azure I
Figure - 5 Santiago's topography

2.6

Type of spectrum

As will be mentioned in chapter 4.2 the earthquake from Illapel (2015-09-16) is to be chosen.
The Eurocode 8 classifies the earthquake activity into two categories: Type I and Type II.
Type II is more adequate for seismic action of surface magnitude smaller than 5.5, while Type
I is suitable for earthquakes greater than that limit. Illapels earthquake, with a magnitude of
8.4 [Mw] (According to [8]), corresponds to the type I classification in the Eurocode 8.

2.7

Subsoil classification

The station where the data was acquired is MT05 (Latitude: -33.3919 Longitude: -70.7381).
See map below (underline in contour):
Figure - 6 Santiago's stations

Project Azure I
The shear wave velocity map shows that the velocity of the site corresponds to approximately
500 [m/s].
Figure - 7 Santiago's Vs30 map

In the Chilean Code the soil where the station is located belongs to type B, and in the
Eurocode is type B as well.
Table - 2 Soil classification Chilean Code [3]

Project Azure I
Table - 3 Soil classification Eurocode [7]

Project Azure I

Ground Motion Prediction Equation (GMPE)

Ground motion prediction equations (GMPE) are empirical tools that help with the prediction
of response spectrum and peak ground acceleration (PGA). These equations use earthquake
parameters such as; magnitude, distance to the source, fault mechanism, soil conditions and
others.
Several GMPE have been developed during the last 60 years [1] however, no every GMPE is
suitable for every site. Hence, in this project the GMPE developed by Boroscheck and
Contreras [2] has been chosen.

3.1

GMPE for chilean subducting zone.

The 2010 Earthquake was one of the biggest telluric movements produced by the earth.
Therefore, many studies have been conducted after that event. One of those is the GMPE
developed by Boroscheck. Here is presented the methodology of application.
This GMPE was developed based in the Chilean earthquakes from 1985 until 2010 (including
Maule -2010). In total, 13 events where used. All the events are subducting interface type,
because of the location of them. The next map shows the events and the stations used.
Figure - 8 Map of north and central Chile showing epicentres (listed circles) of earthquakes used in
the study. Red circles correspond to main events and orange circles correspond to aftershocks. The
circles size is proportional to the magnitudes. Grey triangles represent the strong motion stations [2].

The equation developed is:

( )

( )

Where,
Y
Mw

:
:

PGA or 5% damped Spectral Acceleration (Sa)

Moment Magnitude
8

Project Azure I
H

Focal depth [Km]

Given by

Rrup
D
g
Z
Ci

:
:
:
:
:

The closest distance to the rupture surface [Km]

near-source saturation term, given by
Geometrical spreading coefficient, given by
0 for Rocks and 1 for soils. Rock is defined by Vs30 > 900 m/s
Coefficients determined by regression analysis (i from 1 to 9)

Table - 4 Regression Coefficients [2]

Project Azure I

Ground motion data and records

The collection of data for investigation purposes is really important therefore, the way in
which the data was obtained and processed is described in this chapter.

4.1

Data collection

In Chile there are three main institutions handling data concerning ground motion. These
institutions are:
1.
2.
3.

Universidad de Chile (University of Chile).

Centro de Sismologia Nacional, CSN (National seismological centre).
Ministerio del interior y seguridad pblica, ONEMI (Interior and public security
ministry).

The author contacted the two first of these institutions, and obtained a positive answer from
the second. They provided a web site [4], in which is possible to get processed data from
earthquakes and information about the location of the stations recording. The information of
the earthquakes is from 2010 until the present date of consultancy.
Also the University of Chile has a website [5], where is possible to obtain data of big
earthquakes between 1994 and 2010. However, data from 2010 until today is not available.
It is important to mention that the website from the University of Chile also has the
information of the location of the station and the soil profile regarding the location of the
stations.
The author didnt contact the ONEMI.
The next image shows the stations from the National seismological centre.
Figure - 9 National seismic stations (CSN)

4.2

Data selected for the project

The earthquake selected for this project corresponds to the one occurred in September 16th,
2015. The reasons for selecting this earthquake are:
1.

This corresponds to a recent event: The author wanted to work with information
from an earthquake that happened recently.
10

Project Azure I
2.
3.

This is an important event: Even when Chile is seismically active, earthquakes

greater than 8.0 are not usual.
Destructive Earthquake: This Earthquake affected several regions in the country,
including the target site.

In the next image, it is possible to notice the location of the earthquake and the station
analysed (which belongs to the National seismology centre). The distance between both is
230.3 [Km].
Figure - 10 Location of station and event

The next image shows the shake map of the earthquake.

11

Project Azure I
Figure - 11 USGS Shake Map [6]

4.3

Elaboration of data and records

Once the data was collected, the elaboration of the records was done. Two important graphs
are analysed: Time-history and response spectra.
The time-history represents the acceleration of the ground during the time the earthquake
happened.
The response spectra represent the maximal response acceleration of different single degree of
freedom system during the earthquake. The plot corresponds to acceleration v/s period (or
frequency). The elaboration of the response spectra was done using the Matlab function
provided by Dip. Ing. Abrahamczyk. This function uses the Duhamel integral to analyse
different single degrees of freedom systems.
This procedure was done only for the station MT05. The next images show the results:

12

Project Azure I
Figure - 12 time history east west component

Figure - 13 time history North South component

Figure - 14 time history Vertical component

13

Project Azure I
Figure - 15 Response spectrum East West component, different damping ratios.

Figure - 16 Response spectrum North South component, different damping ratios.

14

Project Azure I
Figure - 17 Response spectrum Vertical component, different damping ratios.

Figure - 18 Normalized response spectrum - East West component, different damping ratios.

15

Project Azure I
Figure - 19 Normalized Response spectrum North South component, different damping ratios.

Figure - 20 Normalized Response spectrum Vertical component, different damping ratios.

It is important to notice that the highest response is for periods smaller than 0.5 [s]. However,
the vertical component has a significant amplification in higher periods.

4.4

Application of ground motion model

In this chapter the GMPE is applied. First is defined the attenuation curve according to PGA
in units of g.

16

Project Azure I
Figure - 21 Attenuation curve from GMPE and Real data from Earthquake.

Then, the GMPE is applied to determinate the response spectra (detailed in Appendix I-3):
Figure - 22 Response spectra from GMPE.

4.5

Application of code spectrum

In this chapter, the Eurocode 8 and the National Chilean code (NCh 433 of. 1996 mod 2009)
[3] are applied to the target site.
4.5.1

National seimic code (NCh 433 of 1996, mod 2009)

First, it is important to define some parameters to develop the spectrum. The target site is
located in the zone 2, according to the map of Chilean zoning:

17

Project Azure I
Figure - 23 Zoning map (NCh433)

That means that the maximal ground acceleration is 0.3g. The soil is classified as type B, in
the Chilean code (2.7). Then the result for the elastic spectra is (detailed in Appendix I-1):
Figure - 24 Elastic response spectra NCh433

4.5.2

Eurocode

The input parameters to design the spectrum from the Eurocode are established as follows. As
defined before, the maximal ground acceleration is 0.3[g], the ground type soil corresponds to
type B (2.7). Then the result for the elastic spectra is (detailed in Appendix I-2):

18

Project Azure I
Figure - 25 Elastic spectra, horizontal EC-8

Figure - 26 Elastic spectra, vertical EC-8

19

Project Azure I

4.6

Comparison between spectrums

In this chapter, the spectra are compared. The next images show the comparison in absolute
values (in [g] units) and amplification values:
Figure - 27 Comparison between spectra (Absolute values)

Figure - 28 Comparison between spectrums (Amplification values)

20

Project Azure I
Figure - 29 Comparison between vertical spectra (Absolut values)

Figure - 30 Comparison between vertical spectra (Amplification)

21

Project Azure I

Conclusions

In this chapter, the results are discussed and conclusions are presented.
From the comparison between absolute values of the spectra of the Chilean code, Euro code,
GMPE and response, it is possible to observe that GMPE adjust its form to the response
spectra in an acceptable way. Also, it is possible to notice that the absolute values from the
codes spectra are higher than the response from the earthquake. The reason for this is due to
the earthquake is 230 [Km] away.
Based on the comparison between normalized values of the spectra of the Chilean code, Euro
code, GMPE and response, it is possible to observe that GMPE adjust its form almost exactly
with the spectra from the Chilean code. Also is important to mention that the Euro code has a
form close to the Chilean spectra. The differences are in the peak of the response where the
Euro code is lower, but in the higher periods the Euro code spectra is higher than the Chilean
and GMPE. The values from the response spectra are higher that the design spectra, but it is
important to mention that this earthquake is 8.4 [Mw], which is an earthquake that doesnt
occur every year in Chile.
Based on the comparison between absolute values of the vertical spectra of the Euro code and
response, it is possible to observe that Euro code is higher than the response. The reason for
this is due the earthquake is 230 [Km] away.
Based on the comparison between normalized values of the vertical spectra of the Euro code
and response, it is possible to observe that Euro code is no able to cover the response in
periods higher than 0.2 [s]. This can be explained considering that the spectra is not developed
for a typical Chilean earthquake. It is important to mention that the Chilean code doesnt have
vertical spectra for the earthquakes.
Finally, from the results of the attenuation curve and the real data of the earthquake, is
possible to see that the correlation is well done and the PGA is well estimated.

22

Project Azure I

List of Figures
Figure - 1 Population density of Chile ....................................................................................... 2
Figure - 2 History earthquakes ................................................................................................... 3
Figure - 3 Zoning of the code [3] ............................................................................................... 3
Figure - 4 Santiago's Geology .................................................................................................... 4
Figure - 5 Santiago's topography................................................................................................ 5
Figure - 6 Santiago's stations ...................................................................................................... 5
Figure - 7 Santiago's Vs30 map.................................................................................................. 6
Figure - 8 Map of north and central Chile showing epicentres (listed circles) of earthquakes
used in the study. Red circles correspond to main events and orange circles correspond to
aftershocks. The circles size is proportional to the magnitudes. Grey triangles represent the
strong motion stations [2]. ......................................................................................................... 8
Figure - 9 National seismic stations (CSN) .............................................................................. 10
Figure - 10 Location of station and event ................................................................................ 11
Figure - 11 USGS Shake Map [6] ............................................................................................ 12
Figure - 12 time history east west component ....................................................................... 13
Figure - 13 time history North South component ................................................................. 13
Figure - 14 time history Vertical component ........................................................................ 13
Figure - 15 Response spectrum East West component, different damping ratios. ................ 14
Figure - 16 Response spectrum North South component, different damping ratios. ............ 14
Figure - 17 Response spectrum Vertical component, different damping ratios. ................... 15
Figure - 18 Normalized response spectrum - East West component, different damping ratios.
.................................................................................................................................................. 15
Figure - 19 Normalized Response spectrum North South component, different damping
ratios. ........................................................................................................................................ 16
Figure - 20 Normalized Response spectrum Vertical component, different damping ratios. 16
Figure - 21 Attenuation curve from GMPE and Real data from Earthquake. .......................... 17
Figure - 22 Response spectra from GMPE. .............................................................................. 17
Figure - 23 Zoning map (NCh433) .......................................................................................... 18
Figure - 24 Elastic response spectra NCh433 .......................................................................... 18
Figure - 25 Elastic spectra, horizontal EC-8 ............................................................................ 19
Figure - 26 Elastic spectra, vertical EC-8................................................................................. 19
Figure - 27 Comparison between spectra (Absolute values) .................................................... 20
Figure - 28 Comparison between spectrums (Amplification values) ....................................... 20
Figure - 29 Comparison between vertical spectra (Absolut values) ........................................ 21
Figure - 30 Comparison between vertical spectra (Amplification) .......................................... 21

23

Project Azure I

List of Tables
Table - 1 Seismic zoning and PGA [3] ...................................................................................... 4
Table - 2 Soil classification Chilean Code [3] ........................................................................... 6
Table - 3 Soil classification Eurocode [7] .................................................................................. 7
Table - 4 Regression Coefficients [2]......................................................................................... 9

24

Project Azure I

Bibliography
[1] John Douglas, Ground motion prediction equations 1964- 2015.
University of Strathclyde, 20-Aug-2015.
[2] V. C. Rubn BOROSCHEK, Strong Ground Motion From The 2010 Mw
8.8 Maule Chile Earthquake And Attenuation Relations For Chilean
Subduction Zone Interface Earthquakes. International Symposium on
Engineering, 01-Mar-2012.
[3] INN, Norma Chile NCh 433- Diseo ssmico de edificios, of. 1996.
Instituto Nacional de Normalizacin, 1996.
[4] Centro Sismolgico Nacional, Centro Sismolgico Nacional - Data
Base, Data base - CSN. [Online]. Available:http://evtdb.csn.uchile.cl/.
[Accessed: 20-Dec-2015].
[5] Terremotos de Chile / Earthquakes of Chile,Terremotos de Chile /
Earthquakes
of
Chile.
[Online].
Available:http://terremotos.ing.uchile.cl/. [Accessed: 20-Dec-2015].
[6] M8.3
48km
W
of
Illapel,
Chile, USGS.
[Online].
Available:http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/us20003
k7a#impact_shakemap. [Accessed: 25-Jan-2016].
[7] Eurocode 8 - Design of structures for earthquake resistance. 2004.
[8]Grandes Terremotos en Chile, CSN Centro sismolgico nacional.
[Online].
Available: http://www.csn.uchile.cl/sismologia/grandesterremotos-en-chile/. [Accessed: 01-Dec-2015].

25

Project Azure I

Appendix

26

Project Azure I
Appendix I

Appendix Chapter 4.5

Here are presented the calculation for the design spectra.

Appendix I-1

Appendix section 4.5.1

The input data are:

Categoria
I

C
1

Suelo
S
To
T'
n
p

B
1
0.3
0.35
1.33
1.5

Zona Ssm ica

Ao/g

2
0.3

The parameter R* and I depends of the structure, in this case, that is no considered. The
results then are (here are only presented from 0 to 1.15 [s]):
T
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.50
0.55
0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15

alfa
1.000
1.300
1.799
2.303
2.661
2.802
2.750
2.578
2.352
2.118
1.898
1.699
1.525
1.374
1.243
1.130
1.032
0.946
0.871
0.805
0.746
0.694
0.648
0.607

Selastico g
0.30
0.39
0.54
0.69
0.80
0.84
0.83
0.77
0.71
0.64
0.57
0.51
0.46
0.41
0.37
0.34
0.31
0.28
0.26
0.24
0.22
0.21
0.19
0.18

The graph is presented in Figure - 24 Elastic response spectra NCh433.

27

Project Azure I
Appendix I-2

Appendix subsection 4.5.2

The input data are:

Horizontal elastic response spectrum
ag =
Ground type =
Seismic Action Type =
x=

0.3
B
1
5

[g]

S=
TB =

1.2
0.15

[s]
[s]

TC =

0.5

[s]

TD =

[s]

h=

1.00

[%]

And the results are (here presented only from 0 to 0.21 [s]):
T

T < TB

TB < T < TC

TC < T <TD

TD < T < 4[s]

Se(t) [g]

Se(t)/ag

0.00
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.10
0.11
0.12
0.13
0.14
0.15
0.16
0.17
0.18
0.19
0.20
0.21

0.36
0.40
0.43
0.47
0.50
0.54
0.58
0.61
0.65
0.68
0.72
0.76
0.79
0.83
0.86
0.90
0.94
0.97
1.01
1.04
1.08
1.12

0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90

0.00
45.00
22.50
15.00
11.25
9.00
7.50
6.43
5.63
5.00
4.50
4.09
3.75
3.46
3.21
3.00
2.81
2.65
2.50
2.37
2.25
2.14

0.00
9000.00
2250.00
1000.00
562.50
360.00
250.00
183.67
140.63
111.11
90.00
74.38
62.50
53.25
45.92
40.00
35.16
31.14
27.78
24.93
22.50
20.41

0.36
0.40
0.43
0.47
0.50
0.54
0.58
0.61
0.65
0.68
0.72
0.76
0.79
0.83
0.86
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90

1.20
1.32
1.44
1.56
1.68
1.80
1.92
2.04
2.16
2.28
2.40
2.52
2.64
2.76
2.88
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00

The graph is presented in Figure - 25 Elastic spectra, horizontal EC-8.

28

Project Azure I
Appendix I-3

Appendix subsection 4.4

The input parameters are:

Mw =
H=
Rrup =
Z=

8.4
22.4
230.3
1

Mw
Km
Km
(Soil)

The results for the response spectra are:

Period
(sec)
PGA
0.04
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
2

log10(Y)

Response

Norm

0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650

70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69

240.91
240.91
240.91
240.91
240.91
240.91
240.91
240.91
240.91
240.91
240.91
240.91
240.91
240.91
240.91
240.91
240.91
240.91

-1.021
-0.976
-0.790
-0.571
-0.536
-0.574
-0.674
-0.774
-0.839
-0.878
-0.974
-1.052
-1.146
-1.203
-1.238
-1.294
-1.365
-1.532

0.095
0.106
0.162
0.268
0.291
0.266
0.212
0.168
0.145
0.132
0.106
0.089
0.071
0.063
0.058
0.051
0.043
0.029

1.000
1.535
2.539
2.754
2.519
2.002
1.590
1.369
1.251
1.003
0.839
0.675
0.592
0.547
0.480
0.408
0.278

The graph is plotted in Figure - 22 Response spectra from GMPE. For the Attenuation, the
results are:

29

Project Azure I
Rrupt

log10(Y)

PGA

10
15.0
20.0
30.0
45.0
67.5
87.8
114.1
148.3
192.8
212.1
233.3
256.6
282.3
310.5
341.5
375.7
413.3

0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650
0.650

70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69
70.69

71.40
72.27
73.47
76.80
83.80
97.74
112.68
134.20
164.29
205.34
223.54
243.75
266.16
290.98
318.43
348.77
382.28
419.26

-0.447
-0.452
-0.458
-0.475
-0.508
-0.570
-0.630
-0.707
-0.803
-0.919
-0.967
-1.018
-1.072
-1.129
-1.190
-1.255
-1.325
-1.399

0.357
0.353
0.348
0.335
0.310
0.269
0.235
0.196
0.157
0.120
0.108
0.096
0.085
0.074
0.065
0.056
0.047
0.040

From the information of the earthquake we have:

M8.4 Illapel (Real Data)
PGA =
0.627 m/s
Distance =
230.3 Km

0.064 g

(PGA is obtained from time history)

The comparison between the real data and the attenuation is plotted in Figure - 21 Attenuation
curve from GMPE and Real data from Earthquake.

30