Search for: All records

Studies of recorded ground motions and simulations have shown that deep sedimentary basins can greatly increase the damage expected during earthquakes. Unlike past earthquake design provisions, future ones are likely to consider basin effects, but the consequences of accounting for these effects are uncertain. This article quantifies the impacts of basin amplification on the collapse risk of 4- to 24-story reinforced concrete wall building archetypes in the uncoupled direction. These buildings were designed for the seismic hazard level in Seattle according to the ASCE 7-16 design provisions, which neglect basin effects. For ground motion map frameworks that do consider basin effects (2018 USGS National Seismic Hazard Model), the average collapse risk for these structures would be 2.1% in 50 years, which exceeds the target value of 1%. It is shown that this 1% target could be achieved by: (1) increasing the design forces by 25%, (2) decreasing the drift limits from 2.0% to 1.25%, or (3) increasing the median drift capacity of the gravity systems to exceed 9%. The implications for these design changes are quantified in terms of the cross-sectional area of the walls, longitudinal reinforcement, and usable floor space. It is also shown that the collapse risk increases to 2.8% when the results of physics-based ground motion simulations are used for the large-magnitude Cascadia subduction interface earthquake contribution to the hazard. In this case, it is necessary to combine large changes in the drift capacities, design forces, and/or drift limits to meet the collapse risk target.

Studies of recorded ground motions and simulations have shown that deep sedimentary basins can greatly increase the intensity of earthquake ground motions within a period range of approximately 1–4 s, but the economic impacts of basin effects are uncertain. This paper estimates key economic indicators of seismic performance, expressed in terms of earthquake‐induced repair costs, using empirical and simulated seismic hazard characterizations that account for the effects of basins. The methodology used is general, but the estimates are made for a series of eight‐ to 24‐story residential reinforced concrete shear wall archetype buildings in Seattle, WA, whose design neglects basin effects. All buildings are designed to comply with code‐minimum requirements (i.e., reference archetypes), as well as a series of design enhancements, which include (a) increasing design forces, (b) decreasing drift limits, and (c) a combination of these strategies. As an additional reference point, a performance‐based design is also assessed. The performance of the archetype buildings is evaluated for the seismic hazard level in Seattle according to the 2018 National Seismic Hazard Model (2018 NSHM), which explicitly considers basin effects. Inclusion of basin effects results in an average threefold increase in annualized losses for all archetypes. Incorporating physics‐based ground motion simulations to represent the large‐magnitude Cascadia subduction interface earthquake contribution to the hazard results in a further increase of 22% relative to the 2018 NSHM. The most effective of the design strategies considered combines a 25% increase in strength with a reduction in drift limits to 1.5%.