GEOG175_proof ■ 22 June 2017 ■ 1/10

Geodesy and Geodynamics xxx (2017) 1e10

55
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect 56
57
Geodesy and Geodynamics 58
59
journal homepages: www.keaipublishing.com/en/journals/geog; 60
http://www.jgg09.com/jweb_ddcl_en/EN/volumn/home.shtml 61
62
63
64
65
1 Damping modification factors for acceleration response spectra 66
2 67
Heng Li a, b, *, Feng Chen c
3 68
Q4
4 69
a
5 Hubei Key Laboratory of Earthquake Early Warning, Institute of Seismology, China Earthquake Administration, Wuhan 430071, China 70
b
6 Wuhan Institute of Earthquake Engineering, Wuhan 430071, China
c
Tianjin Geological Engineering Prospecting Institute, Tianjin 300191, China
71
7 72
8 73
9 74
10 a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
75
11 76
Article history: DMF (Damping modification factors) are used to modify elastic response spectral values corresponding to
12 Received 15 March 2017 77
damping ratio 5% to other damping levels. The influence of seismological parameters (magnitude,
13 Received in revised form 78
epicentral distances and site conditions) on DMF for acceleration spectra was analysed. The results show
14 25 April 2017
that for a given period as the magnitude or distance increase, the effect of damping on the seismic 79
15 Accepted 26 April 2017
Available online xxx
response will also increase, which indicates the response reduction from the structural damping will 80
16 become more efficient. In the near-field of small earthquakes, the influence of site conditions on DMF is 81
17 obvious, but it does not show a consistent rule. Furthermore, the DMF corresponding to different site 82
Keywords:
18 Damping modification factors
conditions gradually close to unity with increasing magnitude and distance. The influence of the above 83
19 Acceleration response spectra mentioned parameters is related to the relative attenuation of the frequency components of the ground 84
20 Seismic codes motion. The attenuation index alone is sufficient to take into account the influence. Based on these
85
21 Attenuation index features, this paper proposes a formula of DMF for acceleration response spectra.
86
© 2017 Institute of Seismology, China Earthquake Administration, etc. Production and hosting by Elsevier
22 87
B.V. on behalf of KeAi Communications Co., Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND
23 88
license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
24 89
25 90
26 91
27 92
28 93
29 94
30 1. Introduction SDðxÞ uSDðxÞ PSVðxÞ u2 SDðxÞ PSAðxÞ 95
31 DMFd ¼ ¼ ¼ ¼ ¼
SDð5%Þ uSDð5%Þ PSVð5%Þ u2 SDð5%Þ PSAð5%Þ 96
32 DMF (Damping modification factors) are used to adjust the 97
33 (1)
elastic response spectra for 5% damping ratio to other higher or 98
34 lower damping levels. Many previous studies on the DMF based on 99
where u is the angular frequency; SD(x) and SD (5%) are spectral
35 the relative displacement response spectra. According to Eq. (1), the 100
displacements corresponding to x and 5% damping, respectively;
36 results can also be applied to pseudo velocity response spectra and 101
PSV and PSA are pseudo spectral velocities and pseudo spectral
37 pseudo acceleration response spectra. Some achievements of DMF 102
accelerations, respectively.
38 were adopted in seismic codes, e.g., Newmark and Hall [1] equation 103
DMF are various in different seismic codes and most of them
39 was adopted in the ATC-40 [2] and FEMA-356 [3], Bommer [4] 104
often depend on the damping alone and not on the natural period
40 expression was adopted in the EC8 [5] and Ramirez [6] formula- 105
of structure. Nevertheless, the period-dependent nature of DMF is
41 tion was adopted in the NEHRP [7]. 106
considered in Chinese code [8] by adjusting attenuation index (g,
42 107
defined in Eq. (2)) of acceleration spectra corresponding to different
43 108
damping, and the DMF are applied to the absolute spectral accel-
44 * Corresponding author. Hubei Key Laboratory of Earthquake Early Warning, 109
Q1,2 Institute of Seismology, China Earthquake Administration, Wuhan 430071, China. eration [9].
45 110
Q3 E-mail address: hengliok@126.com (H. Li).
46

T2 g
Peer review under responsibility of Institute of Seismology, China Earthquake
111
47 Administration. SAðTÞ ¼ SAðT2 Þ ðT > T2 Þ (2) 112
48 T
113
49 114
50 where SA is spectral acceleration; T is the vibration period of the
115
51 Production and Hosting by Elsevier on behalf of KeAi SDOF system; T2 is the start period of velocity domain of the
116
52 response spectrum; g is the attenuation index.
117
53 118
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geog.2017.04.009
54 1674-9847/© 2017 Institute of Seismology, China Earthquake Administration, etc. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi Communications Co., Ltd. This is an 119
open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Please cite this article in press as: H. Li, F. Chen, Damping modification factors for acceleration response spectra, Geodesy and Geodynamics
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geog.2017.04.009
 GEOG175_proof ■ 22 June 2017 ■ 2/10

2 H. Li, F. Chen / Geodesy and Geodynamics xxx (2017) 1e10

1 Research results show that there is a notable difference between Table 2 66

2 DMF for absolute acceleration spectra and DMF for displacement Statistics of strong-motion records for Dataset 2. 67
3 spectra [10e12]. Furthermore, seismological parameters have Distance codes Distance range (km) Magnitude range Number of records 68
4 different effects on the two DMFs [10,12]. Thus, the DMF studied in R70 55  R  85 6e7 12
69
5 this paper is defined as R120 100  R  140 6e7 28 70
6 R200 180  R  220 6e7 36 71
7 SAðx; TÞ 72
DMF ¼ (3)
8 SAð5%; TÞ 73
9 Table 3 74
10 where SA (x, T) and SA (5%, T) are spectral accelerations corre- Information of sites in Dataset 3. 75
11 sponding to x and 5% damping, respectively. 76
No. Station codes D (m) VS-30 (m/s) Site class Number of records
12 In this paper, the influence of magnitude, epicentral distances 77
1 TCGH17 0 1433 A1 277
13 and site conditions on DMF is analysed. In order to reduce the 78
2 NIGH15 0 686
14 mutual influence of these parameters, data used in this study are 3 NIGH19 0 625 79
15 selected specially. For example, to study the influence of magni- 4 TCGH08 2 723 A2 314 80
16 tude, data recorded at only one station from different earthquakes 5 GNMH07 2 648 81
are used for eliminating the combined influence of site conditions, 6 NIGH12 2 553
17 82
7 FKSH07 4 829 B1 478
18 and the source-to-site distance is restricted in a narrow range to 83
8 NIGH10 4 653
19 avoid the coupling effect of distance. According to the character- 9 FKSH06 5 680 84
20 istics of DMF, this paper proposes an accurate and uniform 10 GNMH09 6 624 85
21 expression to estimate the DMF for acceleration spectra which 11 NIGH06 10 336 B2 304 86
takes the influence of magnitude, distances and site conditions into 12 NGNH29 10 465
22 13 NIGH07 10 528
87
23 account. 14 NIGH09 12 463 88
24 15 GNMH13 20 323 B3 456 89
25 2. Strong-motion data 16 NIGH18 22 311 90
17 TCGH07 22 420
26 91
18 FKSH21 23 365
27 For the aforementioned purpose, strong-motion data recorded 19 NIGH11 56 375 C1 75 92
28 at some stations should be sufficient. Based on the NGA (Next 20 NIGH08 92 327 C2 131 93
29 Generation Attenuation) database, some scholars have studied the 94
30 DMF categorized by the magnitude, distance and site class 95
31 respectively. However, there are not enough data in the NGA corrected acceleration. Third, apply a high-pass Butterworth filter 96
32 database. Thus, in this study, strong-motion records were down- with a corner frequency of 0.08 Hz. Finally, integrate to displace- 97
33 loaded from the KIK-NET database in Japan (http://www.kik.bosai. ment, and delete records which display drift or distortion. The ac- 98
34 go.jp/kik/index_en.shtml) instead of the NGA database. These re- celeration response spectra and DMF are then computed based on 99
35 cords were divided into three Datasets. Dataset 1 is used to study the linear SDOF systems using 11 different damping ratios: 0.5%, 1%, 100
36 the influence of the magnitude; these data were recorded at station 2%, 3.5%, 5%, 7%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 30% and 50%. For each record and 101
37 FKSH17 with similar distances in different earthquakes. The records damping ratio, the DMF are computed for a set of 64 periods of 102
38 in near-field are not enough to statistically analyse, therefore, the vibration from 0.02 to 10 s. 103
39 distance range 160 ± 20 km is chosen (Table 1). The records in 104
40 Dataset 2 are selected to analyse the effect of distance on the DMF. 3. Influence of seismological parameters 105
41 All records were obtained from station MYGH10 in 38 earthquakes 106
42 with magnitude between 6 and 7 (Table 2). To study the influence 3.1. Magnitude 107
43 of site conditions on the DMF, strong-motions recorded at 20 sta- 108
44 tions from 108 earthquakes (4.5  M  9) are collected in Dataset 3. The ground motions in Dataset 1 were all recorded at Station 109
45 These sites are categorised into three different classes according to FKSH17 with very similar distances (160 ± 20 km). Thus, the dif- 110
46 the overburden thickness D (the soil depth with shear wave ve- ferences in the DMF, as shown in Fig. 2, can be attributed to the 111
47 locity of less than 500 m/s) and the equivalent shear wave velocity influence of the magnitude. The left and right parts of Fig. 2 are 112
48 in the upper 30 m (VS-30). Class B is further divided into three sub- approximately symmetrical, with DMF ¼ 1 (for x ¼ 5%) acting as the 113
49 classes; classes A and C are divided into two sub-classes each axis. Therefore, the analysis of the DMF curves in this paper focused 114
50 (Table 3). The distribution of these earthquakes and stations are on the case of x > 5%, and it is not necessary to present results for 115
51 shown in Fig. 1. x < 5%. Fig. 2(b) clearly shows that DMF are strongly dependent on 116
52 Records obtained from the KIK-NET database are all uncorrec- the period of structural vibration. For given damping ratio and 117
53 ted. Therefore, baseline correction and noise elimination are period (T > 0.5 s), the average DMF decreases as the magnitude 118
54 necessary. The specific procedure is as follows. First, subtract the increases. These results are in agreement with previous work 119
55 average of the pre-event portion of the record from the entire [12e15]. The effect of magnitude is the same at other distances and 120
56 original record and integrate to velocity. Second, fit a linear or for different sites. 121
57 quadratic function to the last part of velocity, and then remove the Furthermore, the spectral accelerations for high-damping 122
58 derivative of the linear or quadratic function from the zero-order- gradually exceed those corresponding to lower damping with the 123
59 increase of period. This is particularly obvious for small earth- 124
Table 1
60 Statistics of strong-motion records for Dataset 1.
quakes. Absolute acceleration response denotes the total inertia 125
61 force counterpoised by the elastic force and damping force. As 126
62 Magnitude codes Magnitude range Distance range Number of records 127
damping increases, the elastic force decreases, but the damping
63 M5 4.5  M  5.4 140e180 km 40 force rapidly increases with the vibration period of structure [9]. 128
64 M6 5.5  M  6.4 140e180 km 32 Therefore, structural design methods based on inertial force should 129
M7 6.5  M  7.4 140e180 km 22
65 be limited to appropriate ranges of damping and period. 130

Please cite this article in press as: H. Li, F. Chen, Damping modification factors for acceleration response spectra, Geodesy and Geodynamics
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geog.2017.04.009
 GEOG175_proof ■ 22 June 2017 ■ 3/10

H. Li, F. Chen / Geodesy and Geodynamics xxx (2017) 1e10 3

1 66
2 67
3 68
4 69
5 70
6 71
7 72
8 73
9 74
10 75
11 76
12 77
13 78
14 79
15 80
16 81
17 82
18 83
19 84
20 85
21 86
22 87
23 88
24 89
25 90
26 91
27 92
28 93
29 94
30 95
31 96
32 97
33 98
34 99
35 100
36 Fig. 1. Stations and earthquakes used in this paper. 101
37 102
38 103
39 104
40 105
41 106
42 107
43 108
44 109
45 110
46 111
47 112
48 113
49 114
50 115
51 116
52 117
53 118
54 119
55 120
Fig. 2. Variation of mean DMF for x ¼ 2 and 10% with magnitude.
56 121
57 122
58 3.2. Distance results are similar to those of Hao [12], Akkar and Bommer [14], 123
59 Akkar [15] and Bommer and Mendis [16]. Note that the effect of 124
60 Fig. 3 shows the DMF curves of the records in Dataset 2. The distance is the same at other sites and for different magnitude. 125
61 observed difference should be the result of different distances Cameron and Green [17] suggested that the influence of distance on 126
62 because the records were all obtained from the same station and the DMF is very small for x  2% based on the results of simple 127
63 feature similar magnitudes. For given damping ratio and period, the harmonic oscillation tests. They supposed that the bandwidth of 128
64 DMF decreases as the distance increases. It can be seen that the the earthquake motion depends on the magnitude and tectonic 129
65 distance and magnitude have the same influence on the DMF. These setting and is relatively independent of the distance. It is well 130

Please cite this article in press as: H. Li, F. Chen, Damping modification factors for acceleration response spectra, Geodesy and Geodynamics
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geog.2017.04.009
 GEOG175_proof ■ 22 June 2017 ■ 4/10

4 H. Li, F. Chen / Geodesy and Geodynamics xxx (2017) 1e10

1 66
2 67
3 68
4 69
5 70
6 71
7 72
8 73
9 74
10 75
11 76
12 77
13 78
14 79
15 80
16 81
17 82
18 83
Fig. 3. Variation of mean DMF for x ¼ 2 and 10% with distance.
19 84
20 85
21 known that high-frequency motions are attenuated faster with the increase of distance. In addition, for the same damping ratio, 86
22 increasing distance than low-frequency motions. the DMF curves in Fig. 5(a) are lower than their counterparts in 87
23 According to Figs. 2 and 3, the differences of DMF curves cor- Fig. 4(b). This is consistent with the previous conclusion about the 88
24 responding to different magnitude or distance mainly appear in the influence of distance. In addition, strong motions recorded at very 89
25 decline (for x < 5%)/ascent (for x > 5%) portion; the peak (for x < 5%)/ far sites in very large earthquake (e.g., M ¼ 9.0, R ¼ 300e400 km) 90
26 trough (for x > 5%) values of the DMF have little difference, but are used as shown in Fig. 5(b). The DMF curves in Fig. 5(b) are 91
27 periods of their counterparts are dissimilar. This may be related to similar to one another and approximately flat. 92
28 acceleration domain of the response spectrum. It can be concluded that site conditions have an effect on the 93
29 DMF in the near-field, especially for small earthquakes, whereas 94
30 3.3. Site conditions site conditions have little effect on the DMF for large earthquakes in 95
31 the far field. This result is consistent with that of Hao [12]. 96
32 Because the locations of the stations in Dataset 3 are relatively 97
33 concentrated, the diversity of the propagation media can be 98
34 ignored. The DMF curves shown in Fig. 4 are derived from near-field 4. Controlling factor of DMF 99
35 (10e30 km) records of small (a, M4.5e4.9) and large (b, M6.0e6.9) 100
36 earthquakes, respectively. DMF curves of different site conditions The above conclusions, in terms of the influence of the magni- 101
37 are different. The differences also increase as the period increases. tude, distance and site conditions on the DMF, are only observa- 102
38 Unfortunately, it is difficult to devise a consistent rule for the site tions. What is the root cause of the influence? Hatzigeorgiou [11] 103
39 condition-dependent variations of the DMF. For the same damping considered that these effects occur due to the equivalent number of 104
40 ratio, the DMF curves in Fig. 4(b) are lower than those in Fig. 4(a). cycles of the ground motion. Some researchers have ascribed the 105
41 This also corroborates the previous conclusion about the influence influence of magnitude and distance on the DMF to the duration of 106
42 of magnitude. In Fig. 5(a), records are obtained from the same the ground motion which increases with magnitude and distance 107
43 earthquakes as Fig. 4(b), but they are recorded at far-field [14,16]. However, Cameron and Green [17] believed that, for x  2%, 108
44 (130e150 km). It can be seen from Figs. 4(b) and 5(a) that the this effect has little to do with the duration and is mainly controlled 109
45 differences corresponding to different site conditions decrease with by the frequency components. 110
46 111
47 112
48 113
49 114
50 115
51 116
52 117
53 118
54 119
55 120
56 121
57 122
58 123
59 124
60 125
61 126
62 127
63 128
64 129
Fig. 4. Variation of mean DMF for x ¼ 10% with site conditions for R ¼ 10e30 km: (a) M ¼ 4.5e4.9 and (b) M ¼ 6.0e6.9.
65 130

Please cite this article in press as: H. Li, F. Chen, Damping modification factors for acceleration response spectra, Geodesy and Geodynamics
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geog.2017.04.009
 GEOG175_proof ■ 22 June 2017 ■ 5/10

H. Li, F. Chen / Geodesy and Geodynamics xxx (2017) 1e10 5

1 66
2 67
3 68
4 69
5 70
6 71
7 72
8 73
9 74
10 75
11 76
12 77
13 78
14 79
15 80
16 81
17 82
18 Fig. 5. Variation of mean DMF for x ¼ 10% with site conditions: (a) M ¼ 6.0e6.9, R ¼ 130e150 km and (b) M ¼ 9.0, R ¼ 300e400 km.
83
19 84
20 85
21 86
22 87
23 88
24 89
25 90
26 91
27 92
28 93
29 94
30 95
31 96
32 97
33 98
34 99
35 100
36 101
37 102
38 103
Fig. 6. Artificial earthquake records test: (a) acceleration response spectra of records for various attenuation indices g and (b) the corresponding DMF for x ¼ 10%.
39 104
40 105
41 Figs. 2e5 show that the average values of DMF curves in the attenuation of the low-frequency components of the ground mo- 106
42 lowest flat sections show only a slight variation but display tion. The authors try to demonstrate that the attenuation index 107
43 different shapes in the longer periods. In this section, the effect of alone is sufficient to take into account the influence of the above 108
44 magnitude, distance and soil condition is related to the relative mentioned parameters. To do this, artificial accelerograms are used 109
45 110
46 111
47 112
48 113
49 114
50 115
51 116
52 117
53 118
54 119
55 120
56 121
57 122
58 123
59 124
60 125
61 126
62 127
63 128
64 129
65 Fig. .7. Artificial earthquake records test: (a) acceleration response spectra of records for various characteristic period T2 and (b) the corresponding DMF for x ¼ 10%. 130

Please cite this article in press as: H. Li, F. Chen, Damping modification factors for acceleration response spectra, Geodesy and Geodynamics
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geog.2017.04.009
 GEOG175_proof ■ 22 June 2017 ■ 6/10

6 H. Li, F. Chen / Geodesy and Geodynamics xxx (2017) 1e10

1 66
2 67
3 68
4 69
5 70
6 71
7 72
8 73
9 74
10 75
11 76
12 77
13 78
14 79
15 80
16 81
17 82
18 83
19 84
20 85
21 86
22 87
23 88
24 89
25 90
26 91
27 92
28 93
29 94
30 95
31 96
32 97
33 98
34 99
35 100
36 101
37 102
38 103
39 104
40 105
41 106
42 107
43 108
44 109
45 110
46 111
47 112
48 113
49 114
50 115
51 116
52 117
53 118
54 119
55 120
56 121
57 122
58 123
59 124
60 125
61 126
62 127
63 128
64 129
65 130
Fig. 8. Example of the fitting ability of the power function model (for x < 5%).

Please cite this article in press as: H. Li, F. Chen, Damping modification factors for acceleration response spectra, Geodesy and Geodynamics
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geog.2017.04.009
 GEOG175_proof ■ 22 June 2017 ■ 7/10

H. Li, F. Chen / Geodesy and Geodynamics xxx (2017) 1e10 7

1 and the relation between the attenuation index and the recovery 66
2 speed (c, defined in Eq. (4)) is investigated. However, artificial re- 67
3 cords lead to different DMF in comparison with natural ground 68
4 motions. This difference, which can be related to the greater 69
5 number of cycles of artificial records, was also found by Hatzi- 70
6 georgiou [11]. 71
7
c 72
8 T 73
DMFðTÞ ¼ DMFðT2 Þ þ log
9 T2 74
10
 75
T
11 ¼ DMFðT2 Þ þ c log ðT > T2 Þ (4) 76
T2
12 77
13 The iterative method of trigonometric series [18] was applied for 78
14 the artificial motions to match the given acceleration response 79
15 spectra. The duration and time step are the same for all artificial 80
16 records. For a comparative analysis, two scenarios were considered. 81
17 The acceleration response spectra are the same when T < 2 s and 82
18 different when T > 2 s (g is equal to 1.0, 1.5, 2.0 or 2.5) as shown in 83
19 Fig. 6(a). In contrast, as shown in Fig. 7(a), as g is constant for all 84
20 acceleration response spectra, changes in the ending period of the Fig. 9. Effect of polynomial fitting between coefficient a and damping ratio x. 85
21 constant-acceleration region (T2 in Fig. 7) to 0.4, 0.6 and 0.8 s results 86
22 in a different absolute value of the acceleration spectra. For various 87
23 situations, 50 artificial waves were synthesised, and the average 88
24 DMF were computed. As shown in Figs. 6 and 7, the shape of the 89
25 DMF curve is related to the g value but has no relationship with the 90
26 absolute value of the acceleration response spectra. 91
27 In conclusion, the relative ratio of the frequency components of 92
28 the ground motion is the main factor controlling the DMF curve. 93
29 This can be used to explain the observations shown in Figs. 2e5. 94
30 The magnitude and distance have effects on both the duration of 95
31 the ground motion and the relative ratios between the frequency 96
32 components. For example, with an increase in the magnitude and 97
33 distance, the low-frequency components of ground-motion 98
34 become more dominant, i.e., the g values decrease and the DMF 99
35 curves slowly converge. Local site conditions amplify the ground 100
36 motion within a certain frequency band (related to specific sites) in 101
37 the near-field. The relative ratios of entire frequency bands are 102
38 changed and result in the differences displayed in the DMF curves. 103
39 However, in the far-field, the high-frequency components of the 104
40 seismic waves are damped due to the medium effect at long dis- 105
41 tances, and the amplification effect of the local site conditions is 106
Fig. 10. Effect of polynomial fitting between coefficient b and damping ratio x.
42 small. Therefore, the differences between the DMF curves are small. 107
43 108
44 5. Proposed DMF for acceleration spectra 109
domain of the response spectrum, respectively; and T3 is the period
45 110
where the DMF reach to the fLim. The following sections is pre-
46 According to the analysis outlined above, we propose the 111
sented to establish the relationship between c and g and to deter-
47 following DMF expression suited to the seismic code. 112
mine the basic value f0.
48 8 113
49 >
> 1 þ ðf0  1ÞT=T1 0  T < T1 114
< 5.1. Relationship between c and g
50 f0 T1  T < T2 115
DMF ¼ c (5)
51 >
> f0 þ logðT=T 2Þ T2  T < T3 116
:
52 fLim T  T3 Eq. (3) is used in this study to obtain the attenuation index g by 117
53 non-linear fitting. Similarly, Eq. (4) is used to fit the DMF curve to 118
54 where f0 is the basic value, i.e., the peak/drop of the DMF curve; fLim obtain the parameter c. In order to establish the relationship be- 119
55 is the limit value (e.g., 1); c is the rising (x > 5%) or falling (x < 5%) tween c and g, various c and g corresponding to different damping 120
56 index of the curve related to the attenuation index g of the accel- ratios are plotted in Fig. 8 (the observed data are related to the 121
57 eration response spectra; T is the vibration period of the structure; records of Dataset from 1 to 3). Based on several tests using 122
58 T1 and T2 are the initial and terminal periods of the acceleration different models, the power function (Eq. (6)) was found to be 123
59 124
60 Table 4
125
61 Coefficients of the relationship in Eq. (6). 126
62 127
x (%) 50 30 20 15 10 7 3.5 2 1 0.5
63 128
64 a 0.7076 0.4005 0.2496 0.1698 0.0973 0.0469 0.0509 0.1468 0.2909 0.4485 129
b 2.7516 2.7529 2.7518 2.7410 2.6050 2.4162 2.0466 1.7323 1.4334 1.2630
65 130

Please cite this article in press as: H. Li, F. Chen, Damping modification factors for acceleration response spectra, Geodesy and Geodynamics
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geog.2017.04.009
 GEOG175_proof ■ 22 June 2017 ■ 8/10

8 H. Li, F. Chen / Geodesy and Geodynamics xxx (2017) 1e10

1 66
2 67
3 68
4 69
5 70
6 71
7 72
8 73
9 74
10 75
11 76
12 77
13 78
14 79
15 80
16 81
17 82
18 83
19 84
20 85
21 Fig. 11. Comparison of f0 obtained from this study with codes. 86
Fig. 12. Average acceleration spectra of strong-motion records from the Wenchuan
22 earthquake.
87
23 88
24 suitable for expressing the relationship between c and g. The co- 89
25 efficients a and b derived from fitting are listed in Table 4. 5.2. Basic value of DMF (f0) 90
26 91
27 c ¼ agb (6) To match Eq. (5), the procedure for determining f0 is as follows: 92
28 first, observe each acceleration spectrum and obtain the initial 93
29 The coefficient a changes monotonically with variations in the 94
period (T1) and terminal period (T2) of the constant-acceleration
30 damping ratios, and can be expressed by a simple function of x. 95
region; then, compute the average DMF within the period range.
31 Considering the non-linear relation between a and x, the conver- 96
Figs. 2e5 in this paper reveal the relative stability of the basic value
32 sion expressed by Eq. (7) was performed to satisfy the condition 97
f0, which is consistent with Hao [12]. It is found from Fig. 11 dis-
33 that a ¼ 0 if x ¼ 5%. Then the relationship between a and x can be 98
tance, in some extent, influences the basic value. Thus, the data of f0
established by a polynomial function with the constant term being
34 are grouped by distance and plotted in Fig. 11. For x < 5%, f0 of far- 99
zero (Eq. (8)). The fitting effect is shown in Fig. 9.
35 field records (R > 150 km) are markedly larger than f0 of near-field 100
36 records (R < 30 km). However, the range of f0 for series R30e150 km 101
37
x ¼ logðx=5Þ (7) 102
includes most of the samples. Therefore, the median values of f0
38 (defined in Eq. (11)) for series R30e150 km are suggested for use in 103
4 3 2
39 a ¼ 0:1894ðlogðx=5ÞÞ þ 0:2671ðlogðx=5ÞÞ  0:0598ðlogðx=5ÞÞ the prediction expression. If replace the median values by mean 104
40 values, the records should be uniformly distributed from 30 km to 105
þ 0:3106 logðx=5Þ
41 150 km. The median values of f0 for x ¼ 0.5e50% are listed in 106
42 (8) Table 5. 107
43 108
The coefficient b also changes monotonically with the damping
44 109
ratio, but when x > 15%, b is nearly unchanged. After several testing, maxðf0 Þ þ minðf0 Þ
45 medianðf0 Þ ¼ (11) 110
Eq. (9) is used to establish the relationship between b and x, and the 2
46 111
result is expressed by Eq. (10). The fitting ability of Eq. (10) is shown
47 For the convenience of use, Eq. (12) is used to calculate f0 ac- 112
in Fig. 10.
48 cording to x. The values from this formula are shown in Table 5. 113
49 114
x ¼ logðx þ 2:6Þ (9)
50 8
115
0:4
51 >
> 0:057 116
2 >
< ðx < 0:05Þ
52 b ¼  1:5590ðlogðx þ 2:6ÞÞ þ 4:6849 logðx þ 2:6Þ  0:6773 x þ 0:007 117
53 f0 (12) 118
 2:75 >
> 0:05  x
54 >
:1 þ ðx > 0:05Þ 119
55
(10) 0:075 þ 1:56x 120
56 121
57 122
58 123
59 Table 5 124
Basic value f0 from the datasets considered in this study.
60 125
61 x (%) 0.5 1 2 3.5 5 7 10 15 20 30 50 126
62 max (f0) 2.167 1.764 1.422 1.152 1.000 0.912 0.823 0.729 0.668 0.594 0.540 127
63 min (f0) 1.678 1.478 1.273 1.103 1.000 0.871 0.748 0.628 0.555 0.473 0.413 128
64 Median (f0) 1.922 1.621 1.348 1.127 1.000 0.891 0.785 0.678 0.611 0.534 0.477 129
Eq. (12) 1.865 1.622 1.348 1.130 1.000 0.891 0.784 0.676 0.612 0.540 0.474
65 130

Please cite this article in press as: H. Li, F. Chen, Damping modification factors for acceleration response spectra, Geodesy and Geodynamics
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geog.2017.04.009
 GEOG175_proof ■ 22 June 2017 ■ 9/10

H. Li, F. Chen / Geodesy and Geodynamics xxx (2017) 1e10 9

1 66
2 67
3 68
4 69
5 70
6 71
7 72
8 73
9 74
10 75
11 76
12 77
13 78
14 79
15 80
16 81
17 82
18 83
19 84
20 85
21 86
22 87
23 88
24 89
25 90
26 91
27 Fig. 13. Proposed DMF versus actual spectra and existing achievements. 92
28 93
29 6. Discussion response spectrum increases with the magnitude and 94
30 epicentral distance. For given damping ratio (x > 5%) and 95
31 In Fig. 11, the basic values of f0 of the DMF were compared with period, the DMF decreases with increasing magnitude or 96
32 the seismic codes such as EC8 [5], NEHRP [19], Chinese code [8] and epicentral distance. This indicates that the response reduc- 97
33 Japanese code for buildings [20]. Values of the Japanese code are tion by the damping of structure becomes more effective 98
34 the lowest which result in underestimation of seismic response for with increasing magnitude or distance. 99
35 damping ratio higher or lower 5%. For x > 5%, f0 in Chinese code [8] (2) In the near-field of small earthquakes, the differences in the 100
36 are closest to the results in this paper; for x < 5%, the proposed basic DMF due to different site conditions are obvious, but it is 101
37 values are greater than others. difficult to identify a consistent law. Moreover, these differ- 102
38 To examine the DMF proposed in this study, a group of strong- ences gradually diminish with increasing magnitude and 103
39 motion records (R ¼ 60e120 km) from the 2008 Wenchuan distance. 104
40 earthquake (M ¼ 7.9) are chosen and processed by the method of Li (3) The influence of magnitude, distance and soil condition is 105
41 [21]. The average acceleration response spectrum of these records related to the relative attenuation of the frequency compo- 106
42 is shown in Fig. 12, suits the conditions that T1 ¼ 0.1 s, T2 ¼ 0.4 s, nents of the ground motion. The attenuation index alone is 107
43 g ¼ 1.0. Fig. 13 shows a comparison of the actual DMF curves (for sufficient to take into account the influence of the above 108
44 x ¼ 2% and 10%) and various prediction formulae and codes. The mentioned parameters. 109
45 comparison between the actual DMF curve and the proposed DMF 110
46 for x ¼ 20% is also shown in Fig. 13. The DMF proposed in this paper The proposed formula for the DMF depends on the parameters 111
47 best matches the actual curves. The Hatzigeorgiou [11] formula of the acceleration response spectrum in seismic code, such as the 112
48 underestimated the effect of damping on the acceleration response boundary periods of acceleration, velocity and displacement do- 113
49 in all periods. The Lin and Chang [10] expression seems to be more mains and attenuation indices. Since the effects of magnitude, 114
50 applicable for g > 1.0. The seismic force given by ATC-40 [2] and distance and soil condition on the ground motions are considered 115
51 Japanese code [20] will be excessively underestimated for struc- in seismic codes, the proposed DMF has the ability of reflecting the 116
52 tures with an higher damping (x > 5%), especially for structures influence of these parameters on DMF. 117
53 with long natural periods. For x ¼ 10%, the DMF proposed by Chi- 118
54 nese code [8] are close to the DMF suggested in this paper and the Acknowledgements 119
55 DMF derived form strong motions. 120
56 This work is supported by spark program of earthquake sciences 121
57 7. Conclusions (XH15027). The strong-motion seismograph networks of National 122
58 Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Resilience is 123
59 This paper studied the effects of magnitude, epicentral distances appreciated for providing free data. 124
60 and site conditions on the DMF for absolute acceleration response 125
61 spectra and proposed a new formula for the DMF suited to seismic References 126
62 codes. The main conclusions are as follows: 127
63 [1] N.M. Newmark, W.J. Hall, Earthquake Spectra and Design EERI Monograph 128
Series, Earth Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, CA, 1982.
64 (1) The DMF is strongly dependent on the period of structural [2] ATC-40, Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete Buildings, Applied 129
65 vibration. The effect of damping ratio on the acceleration Technology Council, Redwood City, CA, 1996. 130

Please cite this article in press as: H. Li, F. Chen, Damping modification factors for acceleration response spectra, Geodesy and Geodynamics
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geog.2017.04.009
 GEOG175_proof ■ 22 June 2017 ■ 10/10

10 H. Li, F. Chen / Geodesy and Geodynamics xxx (2017) 1e10

1 [3] FEMA-365, NEHRP Pre-standard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabili- [18] R. Scanlan, H.K. Sachs, Earthquake time histories and response spectra, J. Eng. 32
tation of Buildings, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC., Mech. Div. ASCE 100 (1974) 635e655.
2 33
2000. [19] National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP), NEHRP Recom-
3 [4] J.J. Bommer, A.S. Elnashai, A.G. Weir, Compatible acceleration and displace- mended seismic Provisions for New Buildings and Other Structures, Federal 34
4 ment spectra for seismic design codes, in: Proceedings of the 12th World Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC., 2009. 35
5 Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland, 2000. [20] JPN, Ministry of Vehicle, Infrastructure and Transport, Guidelines for Calcu- 36
[5] Eurocode 8, Design of structures for earthquake resistanceePart 1, in: General lation Procedure and Technical Standard on Seismically Isolated Structures,
6 Rules, Seismic Actions and Rules for Buildings, EN 2004-1-1, CEN, Brussels, 2004. Building Center of Japan, Tokyo, 2001 (in Japanese). 37
7 [6] O.M. Ramirez, M.C. Constantinou, A.S. Whittaker, C.A. Kircher, [21] H. Li, J.C. Wu, Y.S. Yao, X.J. Qin, Baseline correction for near-fault ground 38
8 C.Z. Chrysostomou, Elastic and inelastic seismic response of buildings with motion recordings of the 2008 Wenchuan Ms8.0 earthquake, Geodesy. Geo- 39
damping systems, Earthq. Spectra 18 (3) (2002) 531e547. dyn. 3 (2012) 60e70.
9 [7] National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP), NEHRP Recom-
40
10 mended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other 41
11 Structures, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC., 2003. 42
[8] GB 50011, Code for Seismic Design of Buildings, China Architecture and Heng Li, born in 1980, Associate professor, works in
12 Building Press, Beijing, 2010 (in Chinese). Department of Earthquake Engineering, Institute of
43
13 [9] K.H. Luo, Y.Y. Wang, Researches about the response spectra with different Seismology, China Earthquake Administration. 44
14 damping ratio, Build. Struct. 41 (11) (2011) 16e21 (in Chinese). Phone number: þ86-135 17126420, E-mail address: 45
[10] Y.Y. Lin, K.C. Chang, Effects of site classes on damping reduction factors, liheng@eqhb.gov.cn
15 46
J. Struct. Eng. 130 (11) (2004) 1667e1675.
16 [11] G.D. Hatzigeorgiou, Damping modification factors for SDOF systems subjected Education 47
17 to near-fault, far-fault and artificial earthquakes, Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 39 48
(2010) 1239e1258. Jul. 2004eJun. 2007: M.S. in Disaster Prevention and
18 49
[12] A.M. Hao, D.Y. Zhou, Y.M. Li, H. Zhang, Effects of moment magnitude, site Reduction Engineering and Protective Engineering,
19 conditions and closest distance on damping modification factors, Soil Dyn. Institute of Seismology, China Earthquake Admin- 50
20 Earthq. Eng. 31 (2011) 1232e1247. istration, Wuhan, China. 51
21 [13] S.V. Tolis, E. Faccioli, Displacement design spectra, J. Earthq. Eng. 3 (1) (1999) Sep. 1998eJun. 2002: B.S. in Reconnaissance Tech- 52
107e125. nology and Engineering, China University of Geo-
22 [14] S. Akkar, J.J. Bommer, Prediction of elastic displacement response spectra in sciences, Wuhan, China. 53
23 Europe and the Middle East, Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 36 (2007) 1275e1301. 54
24 [15] S. Akkar, M.A. Sandikkaya, B.O. Ay, Compatible ground-motion prediction Research interests 55
equations for damping scaling factors and vertical-to-horizontal spectral
25 amplitude rations for the broader Europe region, Bull. Earthq. Eng. 12 (1)
56
26 (2014) 517e547.
(1) Seismic hazard assessment of engineering site 57
27 [16] J.J. Bommer, R. Mendis, Scaling of spectral displacement ordinates with (2) Strong earthquake ground motion 58
damping ratios, Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 34 (2005) 145e165. (3) Geological hazard monitoring and early warning
28 [17] W.I. Cameron, R.A. Green, Damping correction factors for horizontal ground-
59
29 (4) Structural response monitoring of earthquake 60
motion response spectra, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 97 (3) (2007) 934e960.
30 61
31 62

Please cite this article in press as: H. Li, F. Chen, Damping modification factors for acceleration response spectra, Geodesy and Geodynamics
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geog.2017.04.009