Vol.8, No.

EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND ENGINEERING VIBRATION

March, 2009

Earthq Eng & Eng Vib (2009) 8:1-16

DOI: 10.1007/s11803-009-8155-z

Orientation effect on ground motion measurement for Mexican subduction earthquakes

H.P. Hong1, A. Pozos-Estrada1 and R. Gomez2
1. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Western Ontario, Canada N6A 5B9 2. Institute of Engineering, National Autonomous University of Mexico, Mexico D.F. .

Abstract: The existence of the principal directions of the ground motion based on Arias intensity is well-known. These principal directions do not necessarily coincide with the orientations of recording sensors or with the orientations along which the ground motion parameters such as the peak ground acceleration and the pseudo-spectral acceleration (PSA) are maximum. This is evidenced by the fact that the maximum PSA at different natural vibration periods for horizontal excitations do not correspond to the same orientation. A recent analysis carried out for California earthquake records suggests that an orientation-dependent ground motion measurement for horizontal excitations can be developed. The main objective of this study is to investigate and provide seismic ground motion measurements in the horizontal plane, including bidirectional horizontal ground motions, for Mexican interplate and inslab earthquake records. Extensive statistical analyses of PSA are behavio conducted for the assessment. The analysis results suggest that similar to the case of California records, the average behavior of the ratio of the PSA to the maximum resulting PSA can be approximated by a quarter of an ellipse in one quadrant; and that the ratio can be considered to be independent of the value of the maximum resulting PSA, earthquake magnitude, earthquake bidirection distance and the focal depth. Sets of response ratios and attenuation relationships that can be used to represent a bidirectional horizontal ground motion measurement for Mexican interplate and inslab earthquakes were also developed. Keywords: orthogonal horizontal excitations; bidirectional ground motion measure; attenuation relationship; pseudospectral acceleration (PSA); response ratio; Mexican earthquake

1 Introduction
A strong ground motion record at a site usually includes three mutually orthogonal components, two horizontal and one vertical. Commonly employed attenuation relationships for seismic hazard assessment are developed based on the geometric mean or quadratic mean of two orthogonal horizontal components. The use of these mean values is aimed at averaging the effect of orientations of the recording sensors, which are random. The randomness arises since the angle between the orientation of recording sensors and the main direction of seismic effects is unknown prior to the earthquake occurrence. More recently, an orientation-independent measure, which is based on the probability distribution of the geometric mean considering the random orientation effect, is put forward by Boore et al. (2006).
Correspondence to: H.P. Hong, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, N6A 5B9 Canada Tel: (519) 661-2111 ext. 88315 E-mail: hongh@eng.uwo.ca Professor; PhD Candidate Supported by: Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada, the University of Western Ontario and the National Council of Science and Technology (CONACyT) of Mexico Received December 11, 2008; Accepted January 20, 2009

Their results suggest that the use of the orientationindependent and the geometric mean lead to very similar attenuation relationships. However, earthquake damage patterns may be oriented. The damage patterns and principal direction of seismic excitations have been discussed by Arias (1970, 1996), Penzien and Watabe (1975), and Kubo and Penzien (1979). In these studies, the principal directions are assessed based on the correlation of the Arias intensity tensor of a record in three orthogonal directions. The major, intermediate and minor principal directions are ranked based on the values of the Arias intensity. The assessment of the principal directions was further extended by Kubo and Penzien (1979) by considering segments of strong ground motions in both the time and frequency domain. On the other hand, rather than assess the principal directions, an assessment of the variation of the PSA for the excitations in the horizontal plane was carried out by Hong and Goda (2007) using about 600 California records. They concluded that the maximum PSA value at different natural vibration periods for horizontal excitations do not correspond to the same orientation. This implies that the major principal direction does not necessarily represent the orientation along which the values of the PSA for different vibration periods are maxima. Their analysis also showed that for a

EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND ENGINEERING VIBRATION

Vol.8

given vibration period, if the ratio of the PSA to the maximum PSA (i.e., maximum resulting PSA) for the same vibration period is plotted in the polar coordinate, it varies among three circles. That is, the response ratio is within a circle of radius 1.0 but approximately outside of two inner mutually exclusive small circles of radius 0.5. This phenomenon, which was named the goggle phenomenon in Hong and Goda (2007), holds if the ratios for different vibration periods are plotted in the polar coordinate but with the maximum value of 1.0 aligned at the same point on the large circle. Further, they suggested an empirical equation and a probabilistic model for characterizing the ratio, and attenuation relationships for developing an orientation-dependent ground motion measurement. The orientation-dependent or bidirectional horizontal ground motion measurement can be important for structures that are sensitive to torsional response caused by orthogonal horizontal excitations. The main objectives of the present study are to develop a horizontal ground motion measurement for Mexican subduction earthquakes that could potentially be employed to dene the PSA for two orthogonal horizontal directions, and to assess whether the goggle phenomenon holds for the records of Mexican subduction earthquakes. This bidirectional horizontal ground motion measurement (i.e., the PSA for two orthogonal horizontal directions) is based on the attenuation relationships of the maximum resulting PSA and the characteristics of the goggle phenomenon. A simple comparison of attenuation relationships based on the maximum resulting PSA, the geometric mean and quadratic mean is also presented. The analysis uses the ground motion records considered by Garcia et al. (2005) and Garcia (2006). For the analysis of . the orientation-dependent PSA, the formulation and evaluation procedure given in Hong and Goda (2007) are followed.

Note that for the analysis presented in this study, the vertical component of the ground motion is not considered. This can be justied by noting that one of the principal directions deviates only slightly from the vertical direction (Arias 1970, 1996; Penzien and Watabe 1975; Kubo and Penzien, 1979) and that one is interested in the horizontal excitations for many earthquake engineering problems. To assess the orientationdependent PSA due to horizontal ground excitations, some basic information and symbols needed to dene de the bidirectional horizontal ground motion measurement are given in the following section. This is followed by a statistical analysis of the PSA and its associated response ratio, the development of attenuation relationships, discussion of the results, and conclusions.

Maximum resulting ground measurement and response ratio

motion

For the analysis of orientation-dependent PSA, consider that the recording sensors for two horizontal orthogonal components of a record are oriented along the X0 and Y0 axes (see Fig. 1), and the recorded accelerations (t are denoted by aX0(t) and aY0(t), respectively. Further, X0 Y consider that a linear elastic single-degree-of-freedom (SDOF) system with vibration period Tn and damping ratio equal to 0.05 is oriented and placed such that it can vibrate along the axis. The PSA response of the considered SDOF system, A(Tn, ), for the considered record can be calculated using the ground acceleration a(t, ), a(t , ) = a X 0 (t ) cos + aY 0 (t )sin (1)

where (in degrees) is the angle between the axis X0 and the axis , and is positive if it is counterclockwise. The geometric mean AGM(Tn) and the quadratic mean

AmaxR(Tn) Minor principal axis (Tn,)

Y0

Tn = 0.2 s

Minor principal axis T AmaxR(Tn)

Y0

Tn = 1.0 s

Major principal axis 0

12.62

Major principal axis 0

12.62

(Tn,) X0

X0

(Tn,)

(Tn,)

0.5

1.0

0.5

1.0

Fig. 1 (Tn, ) presented in the polar coordinate for an arbitrarily selected record (major and minor principal axis are determined based on the Arias intensity tensor)

No.1

HP Hong et al.: Orientation effect on ground motion measurement for Mexican subduction earthquakes

AQM(Tn) are obtained from A(Tn, 0) and A(Tn, 90). The maximum resulting PSA, AmaxR(Tn), is dened by, AmaxR (Tn ) = max ( A(Tn , ) )
[ 0 ,180 )

(2)

and the angle between the axis X0 and the axis associated with AmaxR(Tn), , is denoted by 0. The axis is referred to as the major response axis. Note that 0 could vary with Tn, hence, the major response axis vary with Tn as well. The consideration of varying from 0 to 180 is justied because of the periodicity of 180 in A(Tn, ). The variability of A(Tn, ) with respect to can be (T investigated using the ratio (Tn, ) dened as,

(Tn , ) = A(Tn , ) / AmaxR (Tn )

(3)

where = 0. An illustration of (Tn, ) calculated for an arbitrary record selected from the records of Mexican subduction earthquakes is plotted in the polar coordinate in Fig. 1 for Tn = 0.2 and 1.0 s. Note that (Tn, ) is symmetric with respect to the origin because of the periodicity of 180 in A(Tn, ). The gure shows that ) (Tn, ) falls within a circle of radius 1.0 but approximately outside of two inner mutually exclusive small circles of radius 0.5. Note that the value of 0 equals 92 and 120 for Tn = 0.2 and 1.0 s, respectively. The fact that the values of 0 vary for different vibration periods indicates that use of the principal directions of seismic excitations obtained based on the Arias intensity, which are shown in the gure, does not necessarily represent the orientation along which the PSA is maximum. This can be explained by noting that the former emphasizes the importance of the sum of the distributed energy in a range of frequencies whereas the latter is focused on the energy associated with a particular frequency. The preceding analyses indicate that the PSA along any orientation in the horizontal plane is completely dened by (Tn, ) and AmaxR(Tn). That is, the PSA in the any two orthogonal directions are dened by (Tn, ) and AmaxR(Tn). The analyses and characterizations of (Tn, ) and AmaxR(Tn) for Mexican interplate (i.e., interface) and inslab (i.e., intraplate) earthquake records are detailed in the following sections. Note that these analyses can also be extended to the peak ground motion such as the peak ground acceleration (PGA) and the peak ground velocity.

3 Statistical assessment of response ratio and orientation of the major response axis
To investigate the variability of (Tn, ) for Mexican subduction earthquakes, two sets of records for rm soil sites (i.e., site class B according to the NEHRP (BSSC, 2004)) are used. The rst one corresponds to Mexican interplate earthquakes, and was used by Garcia (2006), whereas the second corresponds to Mexican inslab

earthquakes and was used by Garcia et al. (2005). The information on the two sets of records is shown in Table 1. The total number of events for the interplate earthquakes is 40, with earthquake magnitudes ranging from 5 to 8, and focal depths ranging from 8 to 29 km. For the case of inslab earthquakes, there are 16 events with earthquake magnitudes ranging from 5.2 to 7.4 and focal depths ranging from 35 to 138 km. The total number of records with two components for the interplate earthquakes is 418, and 277 for the inslab earthquakes. These records are used to assess (Tn, ) for the PSA and PGA, and to develop attenuation relationships for AmaxR(Tn), AGM(Tn), AQM(Tn), and PGA. Unless otherwise indicated, in all cases the assessment is carried out for the responses at Tn equal to 0.1 to 0.3 s with an increment of 0.05 s, 0.4 to 2.0 s with an increment of 0.1 s, and 2.2 to 3.0 s with an increment of 0.2 s. By considering each of the records of the interplate earthquakes and repeating the analysis for (Tn, ) as presented for a single record in the previous section, the calculated values of (Tn, ) are plotted in Fig. 2(a) for Tn = 0.2 s and Fig. 2(b) for Tn = 1.0 s. It must be emphasized that for such a plot, the major response axes for different records are aligned to the same direction because of the denition of the angle . The above analysis is repeated by considering the records of the inslab earthquakes; the trends of (Tn, ) for Tn = 0.2 s and Tn = 1.0 s are shown in Figs. 3(a) and (b), respectively. Note that the trends of the calculated values of (Tn, ) for other considered Tn values and for the PGA are similar to those shown in Figs. 2 and 3, and are not presented. Figures 2 and 3 suggest that in all cases, the goggle phenomenon (Tn, ) falls within a circle of radius 1.0 but approximately outside of two inner mutually exclusive circles of radius 0.5 still holds. To explain the inner circles, Hong and Goda (2007) noted that if a record has only none zero excitations along the axis and zero excitations in its orthogonal orientation, (Tn, ) is simply equal to cos, which denes the inner circles. de Comparison of the results shown in Figs. 2(a) and (b), and in Figs. 3(a) and (b) suggests that the directionality of ground motions tends to be more signicant as signi Tn increases. To inspect whether the values of (i.e., (Tn, = 90)) are sensitive to AmaxR(Tn), moment magnitude Mw, closest distance to the fault surface R, and focal depth H, plots of versus these variables are presented in Figs. 4 and 5, for the interplate and inslab earthquakes, respectively. Inspection of the plots and the calculated correlation coefcients shown in the gure suggest that as an approximation, can be considered to be independent of AmaxR(Tn), Mw, R and H. These observations are in agreement with those observed from the California records. Since (Tn, ) is symmetric with respect to the origin, it is assumed that on average (Tn, ) is symmetric with respect to the major response axis , only the characteristics of (Tn, ) for between 0 and 90 need to be considered. As an approximation, the equation

EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND ENGINEERING VIBRATION

Vol.8

Table 1 Adopted records for interplate and inslab earthquakes (for details of the records of the interplate earthquakes see Garcia (2006), and of the records of the inslab earthquake see Garcia et al. (2005)) Interplate earthquake No. of Event Date rec. No. 10 21 19980705 8 9 6 10 5 8 6 9 6 12 15 10 9 17 10 12 7 12 10 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 19980711 19980712 20010904 20011110 20011110 20020607 20020607 20020619 20020805 20020827 20020830 20020925 20021108 20021210 20030110 20030122 20040101 20040101 20040206 20040614 Inslab earthquake Mw 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.2 5.4 5.2 5.5 5.3 5.4 5 5.2 5.3 5.2 5.4 5.2 7.5 6 5.6 5.1 5.9 No. of rec. 15 12 14 10 11 10 12 12 7 10 6 15 10 8 15 8 15 11 8 18 Event No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Date 19940223 19940523 19941210 19970111 19970522 19980420 19990615 19990621 19990930 19991229 20000721 20010305 20010306 20020130 20040117 20040420 Mw 5.8 6.2 6.4 7.1 6.5 5.9 6.9 6.3 7.4 5.9 5.9 5.3 5.2 5.9 5.4 5.6 No. of rec. 6 21 16 22 18 15 30 16 26 14 21 21 23 13 9 6

Event No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Date 19850919 19850921 19880208 19890310 19890425 19890502 19900113 19900511 19900531 19930515 19931024 19950914 19960313 19960327 19960715 19960718 19970121 19971216 19980509 19980516

Mw 8 7.6 5.8 5.4 6.9 5.5 5.3 5.5 5.9 5.5 6.6 7.3 5.1 5.4 6.6 5.4 5.4 5.9 5.2 5.2

suggested by Hong and Goda (2007) for (Tn, ) is given by

for the California records is (Hong and Goda, 2007) d1 (1 )1 d2 exp ( d3 (1 )d2 ) for < d5 ( ) = for d5 d 4 (1 ) . (6) where di, i=1,...,5, are the model parameters and are equal to 2, 0.84, 6.4, 250/3 and 0.97. This empirical rule is based on the values of () obtained through a tting exercise using values of (Tn , ) that are associated with [(i 1) / 10, i / 10) , i = 1,,10. By adopting the above equations, the obtained model parameters di, are 2.6, 1.04, 7.2, 529/9 and 0.97 for records of Mexican interplate earthquakes, and 1.72, 0.865, 6, 69 and 0.97 for records of Mexican inslab earthquakes. These values are somewhat different from the California records. However, the differences among the estimated () are not very signicant, as shown in Fig. 7. Note that for a given value of , Eqs. (4) to (6) can be used to predict (Tn, ) approximately. However, is uncertain for a given Tn value as shown in Figs. 2 and 3. Since by denition is bounded within 0 and 1, a beta probability distribution could be assigned to with the probability density function f() given by,

(Tn , ) = x 2 + y 2 ,

= arctan ( y / x )

(4)

where x and y satisfy the following equation of an ellipse, x (1 ( R0 + ( ))) y + =1 R0 + ( ) b

2 2

(5)

in which = (Tn, = 90), R0 = (1 + 2 ) / 2 , b = a / 2a 1 , a = R0 + ( ) and () is to be determined by curve tting based on the average of the observed (Tn, ) whose value equals at = 90. A comparison of the tted and observed (Tn, ) for Tn equal to 0.2 and 1.0 s is illustrated in Fig. 6, which suggests that on average, Eqs. (4) and (5) provide an adequate t. It must be emphasized that Eqs. (4) and (5) only apply for varying from 0 to 90, and to nonnegative x and y values, respectively. In other words, (Tn, ) in its entirety (i.e., for varying from 0 to 360) is not approximated by an elliptical equation. By considering that on average the applicability of Eq. (5) for a given value of is independent of the natural vibration period, a simple empirical rule to calculate

No.1

HP Hong et al.: Orientation effect on ground motion measurement for Mexican subduction earthquakes

f ( ) =

1 1 1 (1 ) 2 1 B( 1 , 2 )

(7)

where B(, ) denotes the beta function, and 1 and 2 are the model parameters of the beta distribution. The tted probability distributions using the maximum likelihood method for values of presented in Figs. 2 and 3 are depicted in Fig. 8, and the model parameters obtained and their corresponding mean and standard deviation are shown in Table 2. The results presented in Fig. 8 suggest that the assigned distribution type can be adopted. The statistics of for other considered vibration periods are also carried out and shown in Table 2. To appreciate the differences among the mean values of for different sets of ground motion records, the statistics of for

the California records (Hong and Goda, 2007) are also included in Table 2. Comparison of the mean values shown in the table suggests that the means of for the records of Mexican interplate earthquakes are generally slightly less than those for the records of Mexican inslab earthquakes, and that those for records of Mexican inslab earthquakes are closer to those for the California records. Also, the standard deviations of for the records of inslab earthquakes are similar to those for the California records. In all cases, the mean of is always greater than about 0.5 for all considered Tn values, and in general as Tn increases, the tted distribution is shifted towards the left and the mean of is decreased. These imply that on average, the response along the minor response axis is greater than about 50% of that along the major response axis, and that as Tn increases, the response (ratio) becomes increasingly dependent on the

0.5

1.0 (a) Tn = 0.2 s

0.5

1.0 (b) Tn = 1.0 s

Fig. 2 (Tn, ) for the records of the interplate earthquakes

0.5

1.0 (a) Tn = 0.2 s

0.5

1.0 (b) Tn = 1.0 s

Fig. 3 (Tn, ) for the records of the inslab earthquakes

EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND ENGINEERING VIBRATION

Vol.8

1.0 0.8 (Tn, = 90) 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0.0001 1.0 0.8 (Tn, = 90) 0.6 0.4 0.2 = 0.21 0 0 100 200 R (km) 300 400 (a) Tn = 0.2 s 1.0 0.8 (Tn, = 90) 0.6 0.4 0.2 = 0.18 0 0.0001 1.0 0.8 (Tn, = 90) (Tn, = 90) 0.6 0.4 0.2 = 0.33 0 0 100 200 R (km) 300 400 (b) Tn = 1.0 s 0.001 0.01 (T AmaxR (Tn) (g) 0.1 1.0 (Tn, = 90) (Tn, = 90) (Tn, = 90) = 0.17 0.001 0.01 AmaxR (Tn) (g) (T 0.1 1

1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 = 0.13 0 4.5 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 = 0.04 0 10 15 20 H (km) 25 30 5.5 6.5 Mw 7.5 8.5

1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 = 0.03 0 4.5 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 10 = 0.00 15 20 H (km) 25 30 5.5 6.5 Mw 7.5 8.5

Fig. 4 versus AmaxR(Tn), M, R and H for the records of the interplate earthquakes

No.1

HP Hong et al.: Orientation effect on ground motion measurement for Mexican subduction earthquakes

1.0 0.8 (Tn, = 90) 0.6 0.4 0.2 = 0.13 0 0.0001 1.0 0.8 (Tn, = 90) 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 = 0.25 0 100 200 R (km) 300 400 (a) Tn = 0.2 s 1.0 0.8 (Tn, = 90) 0.6 0.4 0.2 = 0.16 0 0.0001 1.0 0.8 (Tn, = 90) (Tn, = 90) 0.6 0.4 0.2 = 0.25 0 0 100 200 R (km) 300 400 (b) Tn = 1.0 s 0.001 0.01 (T AmaxR (Tn) (g) 0.1 1.0 (Tn, = 90) (Tn, = 90) 0.001 0.01 0.1 AmaxR (Tn) (g) (T 1.0 10.0 (Tn, = 90)

1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 = 0.16 0 5.0 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 = 0.01 0 30 60 90 H (km) 120 150 5.5 6.0 Mw 6.5 7.0 7.5

1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 5.0 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 30 = 0.00 60 90 H (km) 120 150 5.5 6.0 Mw 6.5 = 0.21 7.5 7.0

Fig. 5 versus AmaxR(Tn), M, R and H for the records of the inslab earthquakes

8 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 (Tn, )

EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND ENGINEERING VIBRATION 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 (Tn, ) 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 Average of observed Predicted ( = 0.20) 10 40 50 60 70 () (a) Interplate earthquakes Tn = 0.2 s 20 30 80 90 0.2 0.1 0 0 10 Average of observed Predicted ( = 0.07) ( 40 50 60 70 () (b) Interplate earthquakes Tn = 1.0 s 20 30 80 Cos

Vol.8

0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 00 Cos

90

1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 (Tn, ) (Tn, ) T Cos Average of observed ( Predicted ( = 0.25) 0 10 20 40 50 60 70 () (c) Inslab earthquakes Tn = 0.2 s 30 80 90 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0

1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 10 Average of observed Predicted ( = 0.15) ( 20 40 50 60 70 () (d) Inslab earthquakes Tn = 1.0 s 30 80 90 Cos

Fig. 6 Comparison of the predicted and observed average values of (Tn, )

3.0 1.5 2.0 () 1.5 1.0 0.5 00 Records for the interplate earthquakes Records for the inslab earthquakes California records

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Fig. 7 Comparison of the estimated () for the records of Mexican subduction earthquakes and California records

orientation. Note that the suggested simple empirical rule shown in Eq. (6) is based on the consideration that the possible dependence of () on the natural vibration period can be ignored. If a signicantly large number of ground motion records is available, a natural vibration period dependent empirical equation could be developed to estimate () . However, such an approach is not pursued since for a given value of Tn, the use of the considered sets of records does not lead to a sufcient number of curves whose value are within a specied interval. For example, if the records for the interplate earthquakes are considered, for Tn equal to 0.2 s there is only one curve whose is within [0.1, 0.2). Using the average of (Tn, ) from one curve to represent the general behavior of (Tn, ) is not convincing from statistical point of view. Note that buildings can have different vibration periods in two orthogonal directions and may be sensitive to bidirectional horizontal excitations. Therefore, it is of interest in assessing the statistics of the orientation

No.1

HP Hong et al.: Orientation effect on ground motion measurement for Mexican subduction earthquakes

2.5 Fitted beta distribution 2.0 Probability density 1.5 1.0 0.5 0 Probability density

2.5 Fitted beta distribution 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0

0.1 0.2

0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 (Tn, = 90) T (a) Tn = 0.2 (s) for the interplate earthquakes

0.3

0.1 0.2

0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 (Tn, = 90) T (b) Tn = 1.0 (s) for the interplate earthquakes,

0.3

2.5 Fitted beta distribution 2.0 Probability density Probability density 1.5 1.0 0.5 0

2.5 Fitted beta distribution 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0

0.1 0.2

0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 (Tn, = 90) T (c) Tn = 0.2 (s) for the inslab earthquakes

0.3

0.1 0.2

0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 (Tn, = 90) T (d) Tn = 1.0 (s) for the inslab earthquakes

0.3

Fig. 8 Fitted beta distribution Table 2 Parameters of tted beta distribution of Tn (s) 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 3.0 Records for Mexican interplate earthquake 1 4.206 3.399 3.371 2.885 2.505 2.518 2.584 2.524 2 1.969 1.797 2.024 2.026 2.226 2.227 2.375 2.452 Mean 0.687 0.659 0.630 0.590 0.525 0.529 0.519 0.505 Std. dev. 0.163 0.181 0.182 0.194 0.198 0.201 0.201 0.200 1 5.665 5.313 4.771 4.554 3.525 3.924 3.490 3.503 Records for Mexican inslab earthquake 2 2.233 2.393 2.271 2.389 2.095 2.330 2.258 2.704 Mean 0.720 0.691 0.681 0.656 0.622 0.625 0.602 0.561 Std. dev. 0.146 0.154 0.162 0.166 0.178 0.176 0.184 0.185 California records Mean 0.717 0.673 0.644 0.622 0.593 0.594 0.603 0.596 Std. dev. 0.142 0.171 0.175 0.181 0.188 0.188 0.202 0.196

of the major response axis. This assessment can also provide an indication on whether the major response axes are oriented in the same direction. To carry out the assessment, let denote the angle between the major response axis for AmaxR (Tn ) (or PGA) and the major response axis for AmaxR (Tn,ref ) (or PGA) for each record. Since the response AmaxR (Tn ) along is the same as the

one along +180, is replaced by 180- if the value of is greater than 90. Given the values of Tn and Tn,ref, the value of for each of the considered records is calculated; the statistics of can then be used to construct an empirical probability density function or histogram which is conditioned on the selected Tn and Tn,ref. A plot of a

10

EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND ENGINEERING VIBRATION

Vol.8

Conditional probability mass function

0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 90 0 Tn for AmaxR (T ) (s) (Tn 60 30 () 0

Conditional probability mass function

0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 90 0 Tn for AmaxR (T ) (s) (Tn 60 30 () 0

(a) Reference ground motion measure: AmaxR (Tn,ref = 0.2 s) (T

(b) Reference ground motion measure: AmaxR (Tn,ref = 1.0 s)

Conditional probability mass function

0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0

3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0 90 Tn for AmaxR (T ) (s) (Tn

Conditional probability mass function

0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0

3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0 90 Tn for AmaxR (T ) (s) (Tn

0 30 60 ()

0 30 ()

60

(c) Reference ground motion measure: AmaxR (Tn,ref = 3.0 s) (T

(d) Reference ground motion measure: AmaxR (Tn,ref = 0.2 s)

Conditional probability mass function

0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 90 0 Tn for AmaxR (T ) (s) (T
n

Conditional probability mass function

0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 90 0 Tn for AmaxR (T ) (s) (T
n

0 30 60 ()

0 30 60 ()

(e) Reference ground motion measure: AmaxR (Tn,ref = 1.0 s) (T

(f) Reference ground motion measure: AmaxR (Tn,ref = 3.0 s)

Fig. 9 Histogram of the angle between the major response axes conditioned on the selected natural vibration periods. (a), (b) & (c) for the interplate earthquakes, (d), (e) & (f) for the inslab earthquakes

series of histograms conditioned on the selected values of Tn and Tn,ref is illustrated in Fig. 9 for the interplate and inslab earthquakes. The gure shows that the major response axes are not oriented in the same direction. The gure also implies that the correlation of the orientations of the major axes is higher if Tn,ref and Tn are close and Tn,ref is relatively large. These observations again are in agreement with those observed for the California records. In general, the results suggest that the PSA should not be represented in the horizontal plane by an ellipse, especially if the responses for different vibration periods

are considered. Furthermore, since the major response axes for different vibration periods do not coincide and fall in the same direction, it may not be adequate in using the principal directions, which are obtained using the Arias intensity tensor, in representing the major and minor response axes in a horizontal plane for engineering applications. Although a statistical assessment of the principal directions, considering the horizontal and vertical excitations with respect to the major response axes, for different vibration periods is of interest, it is beyond the scope of the present study.

No.1

HP Hong et al.: Orientation effect on ground motion measurement for Mexican subduction earthquakes

11

Table 3(a) Attenuation coefcients for the maximum resulting response (i.e., AmaxR(Tn)) considering the records of the interplate earthquakes (c4 is dened in Eq. (9)) Tn (s) 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 1.10 1.20 1.30 1.40 1.50 1.60 1.70 1.80 1.90 2.00 2.20 2.40 2.60 2.80 3.00 PGA c1 3.128 2.873 2.743 2.574 2.395 1.961 1.655 1.403 1.168 1.118 0.986 0.828 0.735 0.629 0.528 0.413 0.289 0.158 0.031 -0.078 -0.142 -0.206 -0.386 -0.527 -0.604 -0.692 -0.802 2.594 c2 0.096 0.128 0.144 0.161 0.179 0.218 0.247 0.270 0.290 0.287 0.299 0.310 0.313 0.323 0.332 0.340 0.349 0.365 0.383 0.395 0.398 0.400 0.420 0.433 0.436 0.440 0.445 0.112 c3 -0.0045 -0.0040 -0.0035 -0.0030 -0.0027 -0.0021 -0.0016 -0.0013 -0.0011 -0.0008 -0.0007 -0.0006 -0.0005 -0.0004 -0.0004 -0.0004 -0.0004 -0.0004 -0.0004 -0.0004 -0.0003 -0.0003 -0.0004 -0.0004 -0.0004 -0.0004 -0.0004 -0.0037 c5 0.0075 0.00825 0.009 0.007 0.005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.0075 c6 0.496 0.4855 0.475 0.4835 0.492 0.504 0.515 0.527 0.512 0.504 0.507 0.509 0.507 0.504 0.501 0.498 0.495 0.494 0.493 0.492 0.49 0.489 0.4892 0.4894 0.4896 0.4898 0.49 0.474 c7 -0.0025 -0.0022 -0.0051 -0.0066 -0.0070 -0.0048 -0.0041 -0.0041 -0.0034 -0.0044 -0.0050 -0.0045 -0.0045 -0.0052 -0.0059 -0.0054 -0.0045 -0.0047 -0.0055 -0.0059 -0.0059 -0.0056 -0.0057 -0.0059 -0.0060 -0.0057 -0.0046 -0.0033 e 0.21 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.18 0.17 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.20 0.21 0.22 0.20 r 0.30 0.30 0.29 0.28 0.28 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.27 0.27 0.28 0.27 0.27 0.26 0.26 0.25 0.25 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.27 0.37 0.35 0.34 0.33 0.33 0.34 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.31 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.31 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.29 0.30 0.31 0.32 0.33 0.33

4 Attenuation relationships
Two functional forms of attenuation relationships, one for interplate earthquakes and the other for inslab earthquakes, are adopted in this study. The adopted attenuation relationship equation for the records of the interplate earthquakes, used by Garcia (2006), is, log10 Y = c1 + c2 M w + c3 R c4 log10 R + c510c6 M w + c7 H +

)
(8)

where Y (cm/s2) represents AmaxR (Tn ) , AGM(Tn), AQM(Tn) or PGA, ci, i = 1,,7, are the model parameters, Mw is the moment magnitude of the earthquake, R (km) is the

closest distance to the fault surface for events with Mw > 6.0, or the hypocentral distance for the rest, H (km) is the focal depth, and is a zero mean error term with standard deviation , = (r2+e2)0.5, where r and e denote the standard deviation due to intra- and interevent variability, respectively. Note that if Y representing AGM(Tn) is considered in Eq. (8), the standard deviation c, which accounts for the random orientation variability (Boore et al., 1997), needs to be considered. This leads to the standard deviation of the total variability, , equals (r2+e2+c2)0.5. However, if AQM(Tn) is employed in Eq. (8), the random orientation effect in estimating is usually not considered. This practice is followed in the present study as well. Note also that in the above equation c4 is considered to be given by the following equation (Garcia 2006),

12

EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND ENGINEERING VIBRATION

Vol.8

Table 3(b) Attenuation coefcients for the maximum resulting response (i.e., AmaxR(Tn)) ) considering the records of the inslab earthquakes (c4 equals 1)

Tn (s) 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 1.10 1.20 1.30 1.40 1.50 1.60 1.70 1.80 1.90 2.00 2.20 2.40 2.60 2.80 3.00 PGA

c1 0.517 0.306 0.116 -0.007 -0.260 -0.519 -0.792 -1.050 -1.215 -1.399 -1.579 -1.706 -1.839 -1.990 -2.111 -2.177 -2.326 -2.441 -2.497 -2.606 -2.697 -2.758 -2.893 -3.086 -3.213 -3.329 -3.423 -0.014

c2 0.543 0.566 0.591 0.608 0.643 0.654 0.685 0.699 0.707 0.736 0.755 0.764 0.775 0.791 0.805 0.810 0.829 0.840 0.841 0.851 0.859 0.862 0.875 0.896 0.907 0.918 0.924 0.562

c3 -0.0041 -0.0040 -0.0037 -0.0037 -0.0034 -0.0028 -0.0025 -0.0022 -0.0019 -0.0020 -0.0018 -0.0017 -0.0016 -0.0016 -0.0016 -0.0015 -0.0015 -0.0015 -0.0014 -0.0014 -0.0013 -0.0013 -0.0012 -0.0011 -0.0010 -0.0009 -0.0009 -0.0039

c5 0.0077 0.0082 0.0069 0.0059 0.0051 0.0048 0.0036 0.0041 0.0041 0.0035 0.0033 0.0031 0.0029 0.0027 0.0023 0.002 0.0017 0.0017 0.0016 0.0016 0.0016 0.0015 0.0013 0.0013 0.0012 0.0008 0.0008 0.0071

e 0.10 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.16 0.14 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.10

r 0.33 0.28 0.26 0.25 0.24 0.25 0.25 0.26 0.27 0.26 0.25 0.26 0.26 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.25 0.24 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.28

0.35 0.31 0.29 0.29 0.28 0.28 0.27 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.29 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.26 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.30

c4 = 1.82 0.16M w

(9)

For the records of the inslab earthquakes, the attenuation relationship used in the present study is the one employed by Garcia et al. (2005), which is expressed as, log10 Y = c1 + c2 M w + c3 R c4 log10 R + c5 H + (10)

where ci, i = 1,,5, are the model parameters to be 2 2 determined by regression analysis, R = Rcld + 0 , Rcld (km) is the closest distance to the fault surface for events with Mw > 6.5, or the hypocentral distance for the rest, 0 = 0.0075 100.507 M w is a near-source saturation term dened by Atkinson and Boore (2003), and Y, Mw, H and are as previously dened.

Using the adopted attenuation relationships and the regression analysis algorithm given by Joyner and Boore (1993), the regression coefcients are shown in Tables 3 coef and 4 for the maximum resulting response and geometric mean, respectively. Note that the regression analysis is also carried out for the quadratic mean. The regression coefcients are in agreement with those reported by Garcia et al. (2005) and Garcia (2006). For comparison and easy reference purposes, Table 5 presents the PSA values for the quadratic mean at Tn equal to 0.1, 0.3, 1.0 and 3.0 (s). The results shown in Tables 4 and 5 suggests that in all cases, the regression coefcients obtained for Y representing the geometric mean are very similar to those obtained for Y representing the quadratic mean. The overall standard deviation obtained by considering the geometric mean is only slightly greater than the

No.1

HP Hong et al.: Orientation effect on ground motion measurement for Mexican subduction earthquakes

13

Table 4(a) Attenuation coefcients for the geometric mean (i.e., AGM(Tn)) considering the records of the interplate earthquakes (c4 is dened in Eq. (9)) Tn (s) 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 1.10 1.20 1.30 1.40 1.50 1.60 1.70 1.80 1.90 2.00 2.20 2.40 2.60 2.80 3.00 PGA c1 3.040 2.769 2.609 2.419 2.256 1.841 1.542 1.288 1.058 1.003 0.866 0.734 0.616 0.526 0.424 0.335 0.214 0.101 -0.028 -0.131 -0.219 -0.314 -0.483 -0.610 -0.688 -0.773 -0.869 2.545 c2 0.091 0.126 0.144 0.161 0.178 0.212 0.238 0.262 0.282 0.278 0.291 0.301 0.308 0.314 0.323 0.328 0.336 0.349 0.366 0.377 0.384 0.391 0.407 0.419 0.424 0.428 0.432 0.108 c3 -0.0045 -0.0040 -0.0034 -0.0030 -0.0026 -0.0020 -0.0015 -0.0012 -0.0009 -0.0007 -0.0006 -0.0005 -0.0004 -0.0003 -0.0003 -0.0002 -0.0002 -0.0002 -0.0002 -0.0002 -0.0002 -0.0002 -0.0002 -0.0003 -0.0003 -0.0003 -0.0003 -0.0037 c5 0.0075 0.00825 0.009 0.007 0.005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.0075 c6 0.496 0.4855 0.475 0.4835 0.492 0.504 0.515 0.527 0.512 0.504 0.507 0.509 0.507 0.504 0.501 0.498 0.495 0.494 0.493 0.492 0.49 0.489 0.4892 0.4894 0.4896 0.4898 0.49 0.474 c7 -0.0020 -0.0017 -0.0041 -0.0047 -0.0058 -0.0036 -0.0030 -0.0034 -0.0029 -0.0042 -0.0048 -0.0050 -0.0047 -0.0052 -0.0058 -0.0057 -0.0049 -0.0054 -0.0056 -0.0059 -0.0057 -0.0052 -0.0053 -0.0055 -0.0059 -0.0058 -0.0049 -0.0024

e
0.22 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.17 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.20

r
0.30 0.30 0.29 0.28 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.27 0.27 0.26 0.26 0.25 0.25 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.25 0.27

c
0.11 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.14 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.10

0.39 0.37 0.36 0.35 0.36 0.37 0.36 0.37 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.35 0.36 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.33 0.33 0.34 0.34 0.35 0.35 0.35

quadratic mean. These observations are applicable to the records of the interplate earthquakes and the records of the inslab earthquakes, and are in agreement with those observed for the California records. For further comparison, attenuation relationships are plotted in Fig. 10 for an interplate earthquake with Mw = 7.5 and 6, R = 200 (km) and H = 15 (km), and for an inslab earthquake with Mw = 6.5 and 5.5, R = 200 (km) and H = 50 (km). As expected and shown in Fig. 10, the predicted response from the attenuation relationship for AmaxR (Tn ) is greater than for AGM(Tn) and AQM(Tn). Note that the differences between the curves for AQM(Tn) and AGM(Tn) are practically indistinguishable. Since the differences between the predicted log10 ( AmaxR (Tn ) ) and log10 ( AGM (Tn ) ) and between

the predicted log10 ( AmaxR (Tn ) ) and log10 ( AQM (Tn ) ) are almost constant and independent of Tn, the ratios of AmaxR (Tn ) / AGM (Tn ) and AmaxR (Tn ) / AQM (Tn ) are approximately constant and independent of Tn. If a single (median) value of AmaxR (Tn ) / AGM (Tn ) and a single (median) value of AmaxR (Tn ) / AQM (Tn ) are of interest, they could be taken as equal to about 1.28, and 1.27, respectively. It must be emphasized that the seismic ground motion measurements advocated in this study for the horizontal plane are dened by the attenuation relationship for AmaxR (Tn ) , the empirical equation for (Tn, ) (see Eqs. 4 to 6), and the probability distribution of (see Eq. (7)). This is in contrast to using the attenuation relationship for AGM(Tn) or AQM(Tn) alone.

14

EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND ENGINEERING VIBRATION

Vol.8

Table 4(b) Attenuation coefcients for the geometric mean (i.e., AGM(Tn)) considering the records of the inslab earthquakes (c4 equals 1)

Tn (s) 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 1.10 1.20 1.30 1.40 1.50 1.60 1.70 1.80 1.90 2.00 2.20 2.40 2.60 2.80 3.00 PGA

c1 0.387 0.191 -0.020 -0.190 -0.355 -0.653 -0.907 -1.148 -1.346 -1.523 -1.748 -1.931 -2.010 -2.154 -2.281 -2.353 -2.468 -2.549 -2.609 -2.708 -2.819 -2.903 -3.075 -3.220 -3.353 -3.468 -3.513 -0.109

c2 0.549 0.570 0.595 0.620 0.640 0.658 0.687 0.699 0.714 0.737 0.763 0.781 0.784 0.798 0.812 0.818 0.831 0.837 0.837 0.846 0.859 0.867 0.884 0.898 0.910 0.919 0.916 0.569

c3 -0.0040 -0.0039 -0.0036 -0.0035 -0.0032 -0.0027 -0.0024 -0.0021 -0.0019 -0.0019 -0.0017 -0.0016 -0.0015 -0.0015 -0.0014 -0.0014 -0.0014 -0.0014 -0.0013 -0.0013 -0.0012 -0.0012 -0.0011 -0.0010 -0.0010 -0.0009 -0.0008 -0.0039

c5 0.0077 0.0080 0.0068 0.0058 0.0048 0.0047 0.0034 0.0039 0.0038 0.0033 0.0031 0.0029 0.0027 0.0025 0.0023 0.0020 0.0017 0.0016 0.0016 0.0015 0.0015 0.0014 0.0012 0.0012 0.0011 0.0009 0.0008 0.0070

e 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.10

r 0.32 0.28 0.25 0.24 0.23 0.23 0.24 0.25 0.26 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.26 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.24 0.24 0.23 0.22 0.22 0.21 0.21 0.28

c 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.07

0.35 0.31 0.30 0.30 0.29 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.30

Table 5(a) Attenuation coefcients for the quadratic mean (i.e., AQM(Tn)) considering the records of the coef interplate earthquakes (c4 is dened in Eq. (9)) Tn (s) 0.10 0.30 1.00 3.00 c1 3.027 2.259 0.735 -0.890 c2 0.098 0.184 0.307 0.440 c3 -0.0045 -0.0026 -0.0005 -0.0003 c5 0.0075 0.005 0.002 0.002 c6 0.496 0.492 0.509 0.49 c7 -0.0025 -0.0067 -0.0048 -0.0046 e 0.21 0.17 0.16 0.21 r 0.29 0.28 0.27 0.24 0.36 0.33 0.31 0.32

Table 5(b) Attenuation coefcients for the quadratic mean (i.e., AQM(Tn)) considering the records of the inslab earthquakes (c4 equals 1)

Tn (s) 0.10 0.30 1.00 3.00

c1 0.409 -0.314 -1.861 -3.487

c2 0.548 0.638 0.774 0.917

c3 -0.0041 -0.0033 -0.0016 -0.0009

c5 0.0077 0.0049 0.0029 0.0007

e 0.10 0.16 0.10 0.14

r 0.32 0.23 0.26 0.22

0.34 0.28 0.28 0.26

No.1 1000

HP Hong et al.: Orientation effect on ground motion measurement for Mexican subduction earthquakes 1000 AmaxR(Tn) AGM(Tn) AQM(Tn) (b) Interplate earthquakes Mw = 6.0, R = 200 km, H = 15 km 100 PSA (cm/s2) AmaxR(Tn) AGM(Tn) AQM(Tn)

15

PSA (cm/s2)

100

10

10 1 (a) Interplate earthquakes Mw = 7.5, R = 200 km, H = 15 km 1 0.1 1.0 f (Hz) 10.0 0.1 0.1 1.0 f (Hz) 10.0

1000 (c) Inslab earthquakes Mw= 6.5, R = 200 km, H = 50 km

1000 (d) Inslab earthquakes Mw= 5.5, R = 200 km, H = 50 km 100 AmaxR(Tn) AGM(Tn) AQM(Tn)

PSA (cm/s2)

PSA (cm/s2) 1.0 f (Hz) 10.0

100

AmaxR(Tn) AGM(Tn) AQM(Tn)

10

10 1

0.1

0.1

0.1

1.0 f (Hz)

10.0

Fig. 10 Comparison of the attenuation relations

5 Conclusions
A statistical assessment of the pseudo-spectral acceleration (PSA) along an arbitrary orientation is carried out using records from Mexican subduction earthquakes. The assessment is focused on the ratio of the response along an arbitrary direction to the maximum resulting response, (Tn, ), and the attenuation relationship. In general, the statistics of the ratio as well as the observed behavior of the ratio are similar to those reported for the California records, especially for records from Mexican inslab earthquakes. On average, the response along the direction orthogonal to the major response axis is more than 50% of the maximum resulting response. The results suggest that for a given vibration period, the PSA or (Tn,) in the horizontal plane cannot be approximated by a single ellipse, although in each quadrant could be mimicked by an empirical relationship which is a quarter of an ellipse in a quadrant. The results also indicate that the principal directions, which are obtained using the Arias intensity tensor, should not be used to dene the major and minor response axes in the horizontal plane for engineering applications. This is because the principal directions and

the major and minor response axes may not fall along the same direction, which is expected. Regression analysis results indicate that the use of the geometric mean and the quadratic mean leads to very similar attenuation relationships. Also, the attenuation relationships for the maximum resulting response are developed. The predicted PSA based on geometric mean and the quadratic mean is about 80% of the predicted maximum resulting response. The attenuation relationship of the maximum resulting responses together with the proposed empirical relationship for (Tn,) can be used as the seismic ground motion measurement for any direction in a horizontal plane. They can also be used as the orthogonal bidirectional horizontal ground motion measurement.

Acknowledgements
The nancial support of the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada, the University of Western Ontario and the National Council of Science and Technology (CONACyT) of Mexico are gratefully acknowledged. We thank K. Goda for many fruitful

16

EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND ENGINEERING VIBRATION

Vol.8

discussions, constructive comments and suggestions. We are very thankful to S.K. Singh of the Geophysical Institute, UNAM, and D. Garcia for providing the records employed in this study.

References
Arias A (1970), A Measurement of Earthquake Intensity, in Seismic Design for Nuclear Power Plants, Eds. Hansen, R. I., The MIT Press, 438483. Arias A (1996), Local Directivity of Strong Ground Motion, Proc. 11th World Conference on Earthquake Eng., Acapulco, Mexico, Paper No. 1240. , Atkinson GM and Boore DM (2003), Empirical Ground-motion Relationship for Subduction-zone Earthquakes and Their Application to Cascadia and Other Regions, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 93: 17031729. Boore DM, Joyner WB and Fumal TE (1997), Equations for Estimating Horizontal Response Spectra and Peak Acceleration from Western North America, Seism. Res. Lett. 68: 128153. ( for Erratum: see 2005, Seism Res. : Lett. 76: 368369). Boore DM, Watson-Lamprey J and Abrahamson NA (2006), Orientation-independent Measures of Ground Motion, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 96: 15021511. BSSC (Building Seismic Safety Council of the National Institute of Building Sciences) (2004), NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for

New Buildings and Other Structures (FEMA 450), 2003 Edition. Prepared by the BSSC for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C. Available on-line at http://www.bssconline.org/; accessed November 2005. Garcia D (2006), Estimacin de Parmetros del Movimiento Fuerte del Suelo Para Terremotos Interplaca e Intraslab en Mxico Central, Doctoral Thesis, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, Spain. Garcia D, Singh SK, Herraiz M, Ordaz M and Pacheco JP (2005), Inslab earthquakes of Central Mexico: Peak Ground-motion Parameters and Response Spectra, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 95: 22722282. Hong HP and Goda K (2007), Orientation-dependent Ground Motion Measurement for Seismic Hazard Assessment, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 97(5): 15251538. Joyner WB and Boore DM (1993), Methods for Regression Analysis of Strong-motion Data, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 83: 469487. (for errata: see 1994, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 84: 955956) Kubo T and Penzien J (1979), Analysis of ThreeDimensional Strong Ground Motions Along Principal Axes, San Fernando Earthquake, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics. 7: 265278. Dynamics Penzien J and Watabe M (1975), Characteristics of 3Dimensional Earthquake Ground Motions, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics. 3: 365373. Dynamics