ATC & SEI 2015 741

Performance-Based Retrofit of School Buildings in British Columbia, Canada:

An Update

C. E. Ventura1; A. Bebamzadeh2; M. Fairhurst3; G. Taylor4; and W. D. L. Finn5

1
Dept. of Civil Engineering, Univ. of British Columbia, 2002-6250 Applied Science
Lane, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4. E-mail: ventura@civil.ubc.ca
2
Dept. of Civil Engineering, Univ. of British Columbia, 2002-6250 Applied Science
Lane, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4. E-mail: armin@civil.ubc.ca
3
Dept. of Civil Engineering, Univ. of British Columbia, 2002-6250 Applied Science
Lane, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4. E-mail: fairhurstmike@gmail.com
4
TGB Seismic Consultants, 1945 Llewellyn Pl, North Saanich, BC V8L 1G4. E-mail:
gwt@tbgsc.bc.ca
5
Dept. of Civil Engineering, Univ. of British Columbia, 2002-6250 Applied Science
Lane, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4. E-mail: finn@civil.ubc.ca

Abstract

In 2004, the Province of British Columbia (B.C.) announced a 10-15 year,

$1.5 billion seismic retrofit program for the province's 750 at-risk public schools. The
purpose of this program is to quantify the seismic risk of the provinces school
buildings and to expedite the seismic upgrading of the most at-risk schools. In order
to provide a safe and cost effective implementation of this program, the Association
of Professional Engineers of British Columbia (APEGBC), in collaboration with the
University of British Columbia (UBC), has developed a performance-based
probabilistic method and guidelines for the seismic risk assessment and retrofit of
low-rise buildings. The guidelines: the Seismic Retrofit Guidelines, (SRG), are
currently moving towards their 3rd edition, to be published in 2016.

This paper summarizes the current state of the province-wide retrofit program
and introduces the performance based methodology that has been used to assess and
retrofit school blocks. Some of the methodology changes that will be implemented in
SRG3 are also introduced. These changes include revisions to the seismic hazard, a
new ground motion selection and scaling procedure, and new retrofit prototypes and
modeling approaches.

© ASCE
ATC & SEI 2015 742

INTRODUCTION

British Columbia (BC), is located on the West Coast of Canada which

is a region of moderate to high seismicity. In 2004, the British Columbia Ministry of
Education (MOE) initiated a $1.5 billion seismic mitigation program to ensure the
safety of all public elementary and secondary schools. This seismic safety program is
being implemented by the BC MOE in collaboration with the Association of
Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia (APEGBC). APEGBC
has been contracted to develop a set of state-of-the-art performance-based technical
guidelines for structural engineers to use in the seismic risk assessment and retrofit
design of school buildings. In undertaking this technical development program, the
University of British Columbia (UBC) has been contracted by APEGBC to draft the
performance-based technical guidelines based on an extensive applied research
program. Each draft of these technical guidelines has been peer reviewed by a BC
peer review committee of experienced local consulting engineers and by an external
peer review committee comprised of prominent California consulting engineers and
researchers.

In total the BC MOE has around 1600 provincial public schools, of which
approximately 1000 are in regions with a high seismic risk. Currently 339 of these
buildings have a high seismic risk and are part of the seismic mitigation program
(SMP). Of these 339 schools, 50% have started or finished seismic mitigation (see
Table 1). Of the remaining high-risk blocks, 47% are concrete (shearwalls or non-
ductile frames), 24% are wood, 23% are masonry, 3% are steel construction, and 3%
are partition walls.

Table 1. SMP Status of BC School Buildings, Mid-2015

Total Count Schools %
Completed 146 43%
Under Construction 15 4% 50%
Proceeding to Construction 9 3%
Supported/Announced 44 13%
Not Supported 125 37%
TOTAL 339 100%

The 3rd edition of the Seismic Retrofit Guidelines (SRG3) will incorporate
several modifications based on recent relevant research. First, the seismic hazard will
be revised to match the seismic hazard proposed for the 2015 National Building Code
of Canada (NBCC), which includes major revisions to the seismic demand along the
West Coast of Canada. Demand will be based on a tri-hazard probabilistic approach,
in which the contribution of all three B.C. seismic sources (crustal, subcrustal, and
subduction sources) is considered. In order to facilitate improved selection and

© ASCE
ATC & SEI 2015 743

scaling of ground motion records, conditional spectra (CS) will replace uniform
hazard spectra (UHS) as a target for record selection and scaling in several high-
hazard locations.

Additionally, many existing prototype models will be improved based on

recent testing program results, which were not previously available. Unnecessary
conservatisms in existing prototype models, which existed in previous versions of the
guidelines, will be removed so that the analytical models best reflect the observed
behaviour of the physical systems. As well, several new retrofit solutions will be
included in order to provide cost-effective retrofit solutions for the new demand
levels, which are significantly higher in many locations. The updated guidelines will
correspond to the changes made to the NBCC seismic demand and will continue to
provide safe, and cost and time efficient retrofit solutions for B.C.’s at-risk school
buildings.

PERFORMANCE-BASED SEISMIC ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY

The SRG methodology is a performance-based methodology which utilizes

sophisticated structural models and nonlinear time history analyses to assess the
probabilistic performance of structures subjected to seismically induced loads. This
methodology uses inelastic deformation, rather than force, to quantify building
performance. In the SRG methodology, life safety performance is obtained by
defining demand requirements that limit the risk of collapse, or excessive
deformation, to an acceptable value in a 50 year period.

Most building codes have implemented traditional, force-based methods, in

which design forces are estimated based on the elastic spectral response at the period
of the structure and the expected degree of ductility. Compared to these methods, a
performance-based approach can provide much more cost efficient solutions and
much more accurate insight into the behavior of the structure during a seismic event
(Ghobarah, 2001; Priestley, 2000; Wen, 2001).

Principal Building Elements

In SRG the five main principal building elements are 1) vertical load-bearing
supports (VLS); 2) lateral deformation resisting systems (LDRSs); 3) partition walls
rocking out-of-plane; 4) diaphragms; and 5) connections.

The most important principal building elements in a heavily damaged building

are the vertical load-bearing supports. To prevent a catastrophic collapse, the vertical
supports must maintain their load-bearing capacity for the full range of inter-storey
drift. The lateral deformation-resisting system (LDRS) is the second most important
principal building element. If the support of the vertical load is maintained throughout
the duration of shaking, the second collapse-prevention requirement is that the LDRS
is sufficiently strong to prevent lateral instability and possible lateral collapse.

Many older low-rise buildings have heavy non load-bearing partition walls
that are constructed of unreinforced masonry. The life safety concern posed by these

© ASCE
ATC & SEI 2015 744

walls is localized out-of-plane collapse. Out-of-plane rocking is a good mechanism

for dissipating energy provided the maximum out-of-plane movement is restricted to
the thickness of the wall.

Excessive deformations in floor and roof diaphragms do not generally

constitute a threat to life safety but the severity of earthquake damage can
substantially increase with poor diaphragm performance. Connections are a key
element for continuity of load path from foundations to the roof. The design of
connections is generally conservative given the modest premium for installing
stronger or more closely spaced connections. Similar to the approach to diaphragm
performance, poor existing connections do not automatically have immediate life
safety implications.

Deformation Based Methodology

One of the key concepts of the SRG methodology is that deformations are
used to estimate the damage and corresponding risk level of a structure. While lateral
strength certainly affects the dynamic response of a structure, it is the inelastic
deformation levels that govern the damage induced in a structure and are used to set
decision limits. This is quite different to force-based methods, typical of design
codes, in which pseudo-static lateral forces are applied to the structure in order to
design members. SRG utilizes interstory drift levels to quantify performance of
structures.

Incremental Nonlinear Dynamic Analysis (INDA)

In the SRG methodology, the probability of drift exceedance of a structure is

determined utilizing INDA (Vamvatsikos and Cornell, 2002). The INDA involves
scaling ground motions in 10% increments from 10% to 250% of the code based
spectral values (2% in 50 year probability of exceedance) for the considered location.
The INDA comprises 30 different ground motion records from the three types of
seismic events possible in British Columbia: crustal, subcrustal, and subduction
earthquakes. The three hazards are analyzed separately and hazard data from the
Geological Survey of Canada (GSC) is used to combine the results based on the
probability of occurrence of each type of event. This approach permits the probability
of excessive damage (drift) to be determined for a specific building life (e.g. 50 years)
based on the local seismic hazard data.

Additionally, the site conditions are also considered by amplifying the

demands on structures located on softer soils. This method gives insight into the
probabilistic performance of the structure being considered, yet requires an extremely
large number of analyses to gain valuable information.

Nonlinear Models

The SRG performance-based methodology requires much more detailed

nonlinear models compared to the more simple elastic models which can be used in
force-based methods. Performance-based analysis of a structure requires the

© ASCE
ATC & SEI 2015 745

knoowledge of thet elastic an nd inelastic response off the structurre, which alllows for the
modeling of th he post-yiellding behav vior of the structure. T This allows the entire
respponse of th he structure to be cap ptured whenn subjected to significant ground
exccitations. To expedite thee INDA pro ocess, concenntrated plastticity elemennts are used
in the modelin ng of low-rrise school buildings. These elem ments are caalibrated to
phyysical test reesults, wheree available, or other to oother standaards such as ASCE/SEI
41--13 (ASCE/S SEI, 2013).

For exaample, the backbone

b cu
urve of the W W-1 prototyype, used foor modeling
blocked OSB/p plywood shearwalls, wass calibrated tto test resultts performedd at UBC as
illu
ustrated in Fiigure 1.

Figure 1. SRG2 W-1 Backbone Model

M Com
mpared to Cyyclic Test R
Results

New
w Prototypee Models for SRG3

A new addition to SRG3 is more m sophissticated moddels which include the

effeects of cycclic strengthh and stiffnness degraddation. Thesse models have been
dev
veloped for wood shearwalls and flexural conncrete shearrwalls, and have been
caliibrated to a wide
w variety y of physicall test results . One of the benefits of this type off
model is that thhey can use less
l conservaative backboone curves thhen those deeveloped for
SRG G2. The SR RG2 backbon ne curves were
w drawn nnecessarily cconservativee to account
for the fact th he mathemaatical modell did not aaccount for strength annd stiffness
gradation, which
deg w was reepeatedly obbserved in thhe test resullts. An exam mple of the
caliibration of the new wo ood shearwaall prototyppe (W-5) to two differeent loading
pro
otocols is preesented in Figure 2.

© ASCE
ATC & SEI 2015 746

(a) (b)
Fig
gure 2. Wood Shear Waall Modeled
d with Deterrioration Coompared to Test
Ressults: (a) CU
UREE Load ding (Gatto and Uang,
ding and (b)) Near Faultt (NF) Load
200
02)

Also, thhese new models

m better account for the diffference bettween long
durration subduction ground d motions, compared
c to ground mottion records from other
sou
urces. The loonger the mo otion, the mo ore inelastic deformationn cycles the model will
go through. In degrading models,
m thesee large plasttic deformatiion demandss will cause
a seevere loss of
o strength and
a stiffness in longer gground motioons, which w will lead to
higher rates of drift exceeddance and co ollapse. Sevveral studies, such as Raaghunandan
and
d Leil (2013)), Raghunan ndan et al. (22014), and C Chin et al. (22015), have shown that
deg
grading systems are mo ore sensitivee and show wn higher prrobabilities of collapse
wheen subjectedd to long durration groundd motions.

Seismic Hazarrd

BC hass a unique seismic

s settiing that includes hazardds from thrree sources:
crustal, which occur
o along shallow faullts in the Eaarth’s crust; ssubcrustal, w
which occur
deeep within teectonic platees; and sub bduction, whhich are caaused by slip between
sub
bducting tecttonic plates. Geophysicaal parameterrs and structtural response can vary
sub
bstantially beetween thesee types of eaarthquakes. TTherefore, thhe definitionn of seismic
hazzards for eaach type of earthquake is an impoortant for thhe selectionn of ground
motions in this seismic risk
k assessmentt project.
The seiismicity in South-Westtern BC, whhich is wheere most off the major
poppulation centters in BC are
a located, is dominatedd by the subbduction of the oceanic
Juaan de Fuca plate beneaath the conttinental Norrth America plate occuurring about
1000km west off Southern Vancouver
V Island – alsso called thee Cascadia Subduction
Zonne. Large mega-thrust
m earthquakes have occurrred at the interface off these two
plattes reaching
g moment magnitudes
m as
a high as 99.0 in the ppast (Goldfiinger et al.,
20112). Subcrusstal earthquaakes can occcur deep bellow the surfface in faultts along the
Juaan de Fuca plate.
p Shallow
w crustal earrthquakes, tyypically lesss than 20km
m deep, have
beeen recorded in the Norrth Americaan plate. Cuurrently, the faulting inn the North
Ammerican and Juan de Fucca plates, wh hich causes these two ty types of eartthquakes, is
not known, but there is pastt evidence th
he proves eitther of themm may occur.

© ASCE
ATC & SEI 2015 747

Gro
ound Motio
on Selection and Scaling

It is bein
ng proposedd to use condditional spec tra (CS) as ttarget spectra for record
seleection and scaling
s in SRG3.
S The three distinnct seismic hhazard sourrces in BC:
crustal, subcru ustal, and subduction,
s have drasttically diffeerent characcteristics in
geoophysical properties (deepths, magniitudes, etc.) and spectraal ordinates and shape.
Beccause of thiss, it was deemmed over-coonservative tto scale recorrds from eacch source to
the same unifo orm hazard spectrum
s (U
UHS). Lowerr scaling facctors and eaasier record
seleection can be introdu uced by developing
d individual CS for eaach source
inddependently, and selectin ng and scalinng records too the properr CS. Additiionally, it is
extrremely unlik kely that a grround motio
on record prooduces specttral accelerattions with a
uniform probab a periods ((say, 2% proobability of exceedance
bility of exceedance at all
at all
a periods),, which makes scaling to a UHS inherently conservativee. Figure 3
illu
ustrates the 2015
2 Victorria, Site Claass C, UHS S compared to a condittional mean
speectrum (CMS S), condition
ned at a periood of 1.0 secconds, for eaach BC seismmic source.

Fig
gure 3. Victo
oria 2% in 50
5 Year UH HS and CMSS for Crustaal, Subcrusttal, and
Sub
bduction Soources Condditioned at 1.0
1 second

From thhis figure, it can be seen that crustal and subducttion records which have
a 1.0 second sp pectral acceeleration witth a low proobability of exceedancee (2% in 50
yeaars) tend to have simillarly high spectral acceelerations att lower perriods, while
speectral accelerrations at hig
gher periods tend to decrrease compaared to the UUHS. This is
typical of lower magnitudee (Mw < 8.0), short distan ance, crustal and subcrusstal records,
whiich tend to have
h high en
nergy in shorrt periods annd less energgy at longer pperiods. On
the other hand d, subductio on records, which typiccally come from large magnitude
eveents (Mw > 8.0)
8 at far disstances, havee more energgy in their loonger periodds. This can
be clearly seen n in the su ubduction CMS,
C whichh has lowerr spectral acccelerations
commpared to th he UHS at shorts period
ds and simillar accelerattions at longger periods.
Thiis means a subduction ev vent that pro
oduces a 2%% in 50 year spectral accceleration at
1.0 second willl likely pro oduce spectrral accelerattions with a similar proobability off
excceedance at longer
l period
ds.

© ASCE
ATC & SEI 2015 748

Selectin
ng and scalinng records to a CS invoolves matchiing the meann spectrum,
but also match hing the vaariance abou ut that meaan. The variiance comes from the
dev
viations of th
he ground motion
m predicction equatioons as well aas the uncerttainty in the
epssilon correlation coefficiients used too develop thhe spectrumm. Because thhe variance
abo
out the mean n spectrum isi accounted d for in the rrecord selecttion, the usee of a CS is
recoommended forf probabiliistic-based methods,
m succh as the SR
RG methodollogy, where
both the mean and
a standard d deviation ofo the structuural responsee are requireed (NEHRP,
20111). Figure 4 illustrates an examplee 10 subducction recordss selected too match the
meaan and variaance of the Victoria,
V Sitee Class C subbduction CS from Figuree 3.

For more informatiion about CMS C and CSS the reader is referred to NEHRP
(20 a b), Baker and Jayraam (2008), and Baker aand Cornell
011), Lin et al. (2013a and
(20
006). For moore details ab
bout the imp plementationn of CS for S
SRG3 the reader should
see the paper by
y Bebamzad deh et al. (20
015).

gure 4. Set of
Fig o 10 Subducction Recorrds Selected d and Scaled
d to Match tthe Mean
and
d Variance ofo the Victo
oria, BC, Sitte Class C S
Subduction CCS

SR
RG3 Tri-hazard Probab
bilistic Dema
and Approaach

Previouus GSC hazaard models (u used in the 22010 NBCC C) combined crustal and
sub
bcrustal hazards prob babilistically
y; the subbduction hhazard wass analyzed
deteerministicallly and checcked separaately. SRG22 applied thhis hazard model and
deteermined riskk by consideering crustall and subcruustal hazardss with a 2% probability
of exceedance
e in
i 50 years.

In the 5th Generattion GSC Hazard

H Moddel, proposedd for the 20015 NBCC
(Haalchuk et al., 2014), all three sourcees are analyzzed and com
mbined probabilistically
to define hazaard levels. Correspond dingly, for SRG3, it iis proposedd to use a
pro
obabilistic trii-hazard app
proach to deetermine riskk. This apprroach will cconsider the
con
ntribution off all three BC
B seismic sources.
s Thee required reesistance forr life safety
will be derived to meet two o conditions:

© ASCE
ATC & SEI 2015 749

1) Probability of Design Drift Exceedance (PDE) ≤ 2% in a period of 50 years.

This requirement ensures that the maximum inelastic drift does not exceed the
appropriate Collapse Drift Limit (CDL) within the acceptable level of risk.
2) Conditional Probability of Drift Exceedance (CPDE) ≤ 25% for near-failure
conditions for the 100% code level of shaking (2% in 50 year level) for the
governing hazard.

The first condition ensures an adequate level of collapse risk in 50 years

considering the complete local seismic setting of the structures, from very low levels
of shaking, to excessive levels, far higher than considered in the NBCC (2% in 50
year probability of exceedance). The second condition guarantees that even under a
large level of shaking (2% in 50 year level), the structure will still have an appropriate
margin against collapse. Because this is a deterministic check (only one particular
shaking scenario is being considered), it is not appropriate to use a probabilistic
combination of ground motions from separate sources – and thus, only the governing
hazard type is considered. This means that the structure is analyzed under each
ground motion suite (crustal, subcrustal, and subduction) at a 2% in 50 year shaking
level, and only checked for the hazard that governs the results.

The annual rate of drift exceedance for each seismic source is calculated by
multiplying the individual CPDE for each level of shaking by its probability of
occurrence and then summing the contributions from all levels of shaking as follows:

λ (dr > Dr ) =  CPDE (dr > Dr Sa )dλ Sa

Where dλSa is the annual frequency of ground motions with intensity Sa, which is
directly calculated from the Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analyses. CPDE is the
conditional probability the drift, dr, exceeds a certain drift limit, Dr (typically the
DDL), at the given intensity, Sa. The total annual rate of drift exceedance is then
calculated by summing up the rates over all three sources of hazards: crustal,
subcrustal, and subduction. The total PDE is estimated using the temporal Poisson
probability model at given time interval, T, as shown below:

 n

PDE(dr > Dr ) = 1 − exp − T  λi 
 i =1 

Where n is the number of earthquake sources.

Figure 5a illustrates the CPDE for CDL = 4% vs. level of shaking curve for
the W-1 - blocked OSB/plywood shearwall - prototype with factored resistance of
20% of the weight of the structure (%W) and a height of 3m. Fig. 5b shows the
hazard curves (annual rate of exceedance vs. level of shaking) for different seismic
sources for Victoria, on Site Class C. In Figure 5, the 100% level of shaking
corresponds to the ground motion with a 2% probability of exceedance in 50 years at
period of one second.

© ASCE
ATC & SEI 2015 750

(a) (b)
Fig
gure 5. (a) CPDE
C vs. Leevel of Shak
king for thee W-1 Protootype with a Height of
3m
m and Factored Resista ance of 20%%W and (b)) Annual R Rate of Exceeedance vs.
Levvel of Shakiing for eachh Earthquaake Source ffor Victoriaa, Site Classs C (100%
leveel of shakin
ng = 2% in 50
5 year haza ard at periood 1.0 sec).

Figure 6 shows the contributionn to the PD E of CDL = 4% from eeach hazard

sou
urce in Victoria, for Sitte Class C, for a wide range of W W-1 prototyppe factored
resiistances. Wee can observ
ve that for alll the resistaance levels, ssubduction eearthquakes
con
ntribute the most
m to driftt exceedancee, or damagee, for this prrototype in V Victoria, on
Sitee Class C. A factored (iincluding th
he NBCC ovverstrength ffactor, Ro) reesistance off
20%%W is requiired to ensu ure that the probability
p oof exceedingg the CDL of 4% drift
doees not exceed 2% in 50 years, whicch ensures thhat the life ssafety requirrements are
fulffilled.

Fig
gure 6. PDEE of CDL = 4%
4 vs. Facttored Resisttance for th
he W-1 Prottotype with
a Height
H of 3m
m.

© ASCE
ATC & SEI 2015 751

SEIISMIC PER
RFORMAN
NCE ANALY
YZER

The Seiismic Perforrmance Ana alyzer, or A nalyzer for short, is thhe principal
anaalytical tool of
o this methodology. Th he tool proviides the engiineer to instaantly access
a highly
h advannced, peer-reeviewed anaalytical dataabase. This aallows the eexperienced
eng
gineer to co ombine his practical
p kn
nowledge annd judgemennt with overr 9 million
INDDA results to o demine thee risk of his//her particulaar building bblock and deevelop cost-
effeective retrofi
fit solutions.

The Annalyzer perm mits the eng gineer to quuickly analyyze the threee principal
building elemeents that hav ve analyticaally complexx behaviour.. These threee principal
building elemen nts are LDRRSs, walls rocking out-off-plane and ddiaphragms For each off
these three building elemeents, the Ana alyzer perforrms a risk aassessment oor a retrofit
dessign. After making
m the basic
b parameetric selectioons (input daata), the engineer clicks
t Analysiss button and the analysiss results are iinstantly displayed (Figuure 7).
on the

Fig
gure 7. Screeenshot of th
he Seismic Performance
P e Analyzer

© ASCE
ATC & SEI 2015 752

CONCLUSION
This paper introduced the SRG methodology including several of the major
changes that will be adopted by the Seismic Retrofit Guidelines, 3rd Edition (SRG3),
for use in the performance-based seismic assessment and retrofit of BC school
buildings. These changes are aimed to allow SRG3 to continue to provide cost-
effective retrofit solutions and user-friendly guidelines while evolving to incorporate
state-of-the-art knowledge of the seismic hazard in BC.
Three of the main components that will help to reach this goal are the
redefinition of target demands from UHS to CS; the adoption of more cost-efficient,
better performing retrofit prototypes with modern modeling techniques; and the
change to a tri-hazard probabilistic approach to replace the previous deterministic
approach in classifying prototype performance. The use of CS will facilitate ground
motion selection and scaling while being consistent with the hazard demands for each
earthquake source. New prototypes will allow engineers to design and benefit from
better retrofit solutions. The more advanced numerical models adopted for these
prototypes will justify the use of larger deformation limits which will increase their
performance.
Finally, the change to a tri-hazard probabilistic CPDE check will make the
guidelines more probabilistically robust and similar to the new GSC hazard model,
which also includes all hazard sources in its probabilistic seismic hazard analysis. The
updated guidelines will continue to provide safe and cost and time efficient retrofit
solutions for BC’s at-risk school buildings.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The methodology described and implemented in this paper is the result of a

highly supportive and collaborative partnership of the following contributors: the
British Columbia Ministry of Education (BC MOE); the Association of Professional
Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia (APEGBC); the University of
British Columbia; the APEGBC Structural Peer Review Committee (BC engineers).
The authors also express their thanks to the external peer reviewers: Drs. Farzad
Naeim, Michael Mehrain and Robert Hanson.

REFERENCES

ASCE/SEI (2013). Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings. American Society of

Civil Engineers, Reston, Ca.
Baker, J. W. and Jayram, N. (2008). “Correlation of spectral acceleration values from
NGA ground motion models.” Earthquake Spectra 24(1) 299-317.
Baker, J. W. and Cornell, A. C, “Spectral shape, epsilon and record selection.”
Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 35(9) 1077-1095.
Bebamzadeh, A., Fairhurst, M., Ventura, C. V., and Finn, W. D. L. (2015) “Selection
and scaling of ground motions for the seismic risk assessment of British
Columbia school buildings for the proposed 2015 NBCC ground motions.”
Proceedings of the 11th Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering.

© ASCE
ATC & SEI 2015 753

Chin, D., Ventura, C. V., Bebamzadeh, A., and Fairhurst, M. “Effects of subduction
ground motions on the probability of collapse of low-rise buildings.”
Proceedings of the 11th Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering.
Gatto, K. and Uang, C. M. (2002) “Cyclic response of woodframe shearwalls: loading
protocol and rate of load effects: CUREE W-13 Report.” Consortium of
Universities for Research in Earthquake Engineering, Richmond, Ca.
Ghobarah, A. (2001). “Performance-based design in earthquake engineering: state of
development.” Engineering Structures, 23(8), 878-884.
Halchuk, S., Allen, S., Adams, J., and Rogers, G. (2014) “Fifth Generation Seismic
Hazard Model Input Files as Proposed to Produce Values for the 2015 National
Building Code of Canada.” Geological Survey of Canada Open File 7576.
Lin, T., Haselton, C. B., Baker, J. W. (2013a) “Conditional spectrum-based ground
motion selection. Part I: Hazard consistency for risk-based
assessments.” Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 42(12) 1847-
1865.
Lin, T., Haselton, C. B., Baker, J. W. (2013b) “Conditional spectrum-based ground
motion selection. Part II: Intensity-based assessments and evaluation of
alternative target spectra.” Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics,
42(12) 1847-1865.
NEHRP Consultants Joint Venture. (2011). “Selecting and scaling earthquake ground
motions for performing response-history analyses.” NIST GCR, 11-917.
Priestley, M. J. N. (2000). “Performance based seismic design.” Bulletin of the New
Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, 33(3) 325-346.
Raghunandan, M., and Liel, A. B. (2013). “Effect of ground motion duration on
earthquake-induced structural collapse.” Structural Safety, 41(1), 119-133.
Raghunandan, M., Liel, A. B., and Luco, N. (2014). “Collapse risk of buildings in the
Pacific Northwest region due to subduction earthquakes.” Earthquake Spectra.
Vamvatsikos, D. and Cornell, A. C. (2002). “Incremental dynamic analysis.”
Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 31(3) 491-514.
Wen, Y. K. (2001). “Reliability and performance-based design.” Structural Safety,
23(4), 407-428.

© ASCE