Top Banner
Site Classification Derived From Spectral Clustering of Empirical Site Amplification Functions Sreeram Reddy Kotha with Fabrice Cotton & Dino Bindi Section 2.6: Seismic Hazard and Stress Field GFZ Potsdam
15

Site Classification Derived From Spectral Clustering of ...

Dec 12, 2021

Download

Documents

dariahiddleston
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Site Classification Derived From Spectral Clustering of ...

Site Classification Derived From Spectral Clustering of Empirical Site Amplification Functions

Sreeram Reddy Kotha

with Fabrice Cotton & Dino Bindi Section 2.6: Seismic Hazard and Stress Field

GFZ Potsdam

Page 2: Site Classification Derived From Spectral Clustering of ...

EUROSEISTEST

Courtesy: Olga Ktenidou

soft soil

deep soil

stiff soil

rock

Courtesy: Olga Ktenidou

WORKU, A. Soil-structure-interaction provisions: A potential tool to consider for economical seismic design of buildings?. J. S. Afr. Inst. Civ. Eng. [online]. 2014, vol.56, n.1 , pp.54-62.

soft soil

deep soil

stiff soil

rock

9/12/2017 2

Site Amplification

Site effects: “The effect of ‘local site conditions’ on ‘ground motion’”

Page 3: Site Classification Derived From Spectral Clustering of ...

9/12/2017 3

What are the issues?

1. Traditionally, site classes are defined a priori: Vs30, SPT, PI ranges etc.

2. Within each site class, the site-to-site variability of amplification is large

What is our plan?

1. Use a rich strong motion dataset

2. Derive empirical site amplification functions for well-recorded sites

3. Use machine learning techniques to identify and cluster similar sites

4. Evaluate site response proxies that explain the new site classes

Outline

Page 4: Site Classification Derived From Spectral Clustering of ...

𝒍𝒏 𝑮𝑴𝒆,𝒔 = 𝑭𝑴 𝑴𝒆 + 𝑭𝑫 𝑹𝒆,𝒔,𝑴𝒆 + 𝑭𝑺 𝜽𝒔 + 𝜹𝑩𝒆 + 𝜹𝑺𝟐𝑺𝒔 + 𝜹𝑾𝑺𝒆,𝒔

Ground Motion Prediction Equations (GMPE)

Observations Predictor functions Random effects Residuals

Empirical Site Amplification Functions : δS2Ss(T)

49/12/2017

Page 5: Site Classification Derived From Spectral Clustering of ...

δS2Ss

Empirical Site Amplification Functions : δS2Ss(T)

59/12/2017

Stations with enough strong motion data

AQV: Site in Aquila valley in Central Italy

@PGA, eδS2Ss = 1.43 ~ 43% amplification

Page 6: Site Classification Derived From Spectral Clustering of ...

Data distribution

GMPE for GM of H - components of Response Spectra for Shallow Crustal events

~16000 records : M3.4-M7.5, 0km < RJB < 600km, T = 0.01s – 7s

~ 500 sites with more than 10 records

(Dawood, Rodriguez-Marek et al. 2016)

9/12/2017 6

Strong Motion Dataset: KiK-Net

Page 7: Site Classification Derived From Spectral Clustering of ...

High frequency δS2Ss shows a weak trend with VS30

9/12/2017 7

~500 sites

GMPE Random Effects and Residual Analysis

T = 0.01s T = 1s

Page 8: Site Classification Derived From Spectral Clustering of ...

Sites with similar δS2Ss(T)

9/12/2017 8

Spectral Clustering of δS2Ss vectors

Page 9: Site Classification Derived From Spectral Clustering of ...

K-mean clusters Clustered δS2Ss(T)

K-mean clustering of sites with similar response δS2Ss(T)

9/12/2017 9

Cluster Amplification Functions

Page 10: Site Classification Derived From Spectral Clustering of ...

Means of clustered δS2Ss(T)

Scale w.r.t reference site δS2Ss(T), and then eδS2Ss(T)

9/12/2017 10

Empirical Site Amplification Functions

Cluster 5 shows a flat response with no relative

amplification : Reference Site

Cluster 4 shows strong amplification at long

periods: Soft site

Amplification functions

Page 11: Site Classification Derived From Spectral Clustering of ...

Physical meaning of cluster specific δS2Ss(T)

9/12/2017 11

Amplification functions

Site Conditions

VS30(m/s)

H8

00(m

)

Site conditions

H800 = 100mVS30 = 280m/s

H800 = 12mVS30 = 652m/s

Page 12: Site Classification Derived From Spectral Clustering of ...

Reference ‘rock’ site conditions?

9/12/2017 12

Site Conditions and Proxies

Amplification functions

VS30(m/s)

H8

00(m

)

Site conditions

H800 = 12mVS30 = 652m/s

H800 = 10mVS30 = 679m/s

H800 = 100mVS30 = 280m/s

Page 13: Site Classification Derived From Spectral Clustering of ...

VS30(m/s)

H8

00(m

)

VS30 and H800

VS30 based classification may not be efficient

ABCDEC8

9/12/2017 13

Site Response Proxies

VS10 and H800

Vs10 is better in distinguishing stiff sitesH8

00(m

)

VS10(m/s)

H800 = 12mVS10 = 425m/s

H800 = 10mVS10 = 367m/s

Page 14: Site Classification Derived From Spectral Clustering of ...

φS2S

Amplification functions Site-to-site variability

Within cluster site-to-site response variability ~ 50% smaller

9/12/2017 14

Site Amplification Functions: Mean and Variability

~ 50%

Page 15: Site Classification Derived From Spectral Clustering of ...

What were the key issues?

1. Pre-defined sites classes based on VS30 may not be efficient

2. Large site-to-site variability within VS30 based classes

What we tried?

1. Site-specific random effects δS2Ss(T) as empirical site AFs

2. Unsupervised machine learning techniques to cluster sites with similar response

What we found?

1. VS10 - H800 is an optimal proxy to classify 6 site clusters

2. ~ 50% smaller within-cluster site-to-site variability

What next?

1. The tools are open-source and easy to use… more sophistication is needed?

2. With a pan-European dataset, we may expect very different results!!!

9/12/2017 15

…Thank you… review?

Summary