Soran University

Faculty Of Engineering
Department Of Civil Engineering

Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis

for Earthquake-Resistant Design

Prepared By : Supervisor :
Abdulla Hassan Hamad Dr. Mahfouz Rostamzadeh

1|Page
Table of Contents

Introduction ......................................................................................................... 3

What is PSHA ? ................................................................................................... 4

Components of PSHA .......................................................................................... 5

How PSAH contributes to Building Codes ? ...................................................... 7

Advantage of PSHA ............................................................................................ 8

Conclusion ............................................................................................................ 9

Reference ............................................................................................................ 10

2|Page
 Introduction

Imagine: The earth vibrates beneath your feet, buildings around you sway
precariously, the ground cracks, and panic grips the community. Earthquakes, a
terrifying but natural phenomenon, remind us of our vulnerability and the critical
role of earthquake-resistant design in protecting lives and livelihoods. Enter
Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA), a vital tool that doesn't shy away
from uncertainty. Unlike traditional methods that cling to a single "worst-case"
scenario, PSHA delves into the complexities of earthquake occurrence, size, and
location, painting a realistic picture of seismic risk.

Think of it like navigating a treacherous mountain pass. Deterministic methods are

like clinging to a single, potentially treacherous route, hoping it holds. PSHA,
however, equips you with a detailed map, highlighting diverse paths, predicting
potential landslides, and estimating the likelihood of each scenario. With this
knowledge, you can make informed decisions, choosing safer routes and preparing
for unexpected encounters.

This report serves as your guide to PSHA, unveiling its significance in earthquake-
resistant design. We'll delve into its inner workings, exploring how it:

 Unravels the secrets of earthquake sources: Identifying potential fault lines and
understanding their activity becomes a detective game, unlocking clues to future
tremors.
 Predicts the power of the shake: Estimating ground motion intensity isn't a
guessing game; PSHA considers distance, magnitude, and even the ground beneath
our feet to paint a clearer picture of the shaking to come.
 Integrates knowledge, calculates probabilities: With all the pieces
gathered, PSHA employs sophisticated tools to calculate the likelihood of
experiencing different levels of ground shaking, empowering us to prepare for the
future.

But PSHA's impact extends beyond mere calculations. It's a language understood
by engineers, guiding them in designing safer structures that can withstand the
test of a temblor. It informs the development of effective building codes, ensuring
communities are built to endure. And by assessing seismic risk, PSHA empowers
nations to prepare for disasters, mitigating potential damage and saving lives.

3|Page
What is PSHA ?

PSHA stands for Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis. It is a methodology used

in civil engineering, geophysics, and seismology to assess the likelihood of
earthquake ground shaking at a specific location over a certain period. PSHA is a
crucial component in seismic risk assessment and helps in the design of structures
to withstand potential earthquakes.

The process involves considering various seismic sources, fault systems, and their
associated probabilities of generating earthquakes. It also incorporates the
attenuation of seismic waves as they travel from the source to the site of interest.
By combining these elements probabilistically, PSHA produces hazard curves that
represent the likelihood of different levels of ground shaking over a given time
period.

Engineers use the results of PSHA to establish seismic design criteria for structures
and infrastructure projects. This ensures that buildings and other critical facilities
are constructed to withstand the potential seismic forces in a region, enhancing
public safety and minimizing the risk of damage during earthquakes.

4|Page
 Components of PSHA

1. Earthquake Source Modeling: Predicting Tremors yet to Come

Imagine fault lines like ticking clocks. This first step involves identifying potential
earthquake sources (faults, zones) and analyzing their activity rates. Two key
statistical models dominate this realm:

a) Gutenberg-Richter Model:

 Equation: log(N) = ) a – b M ( , where N is the number of earthquakes, M is the

magnitude, and a, b are constants estimated from historical data.
 Meaning: Smaller-magnitude earthquakes are more frequent, while larger ones
occur less often.
 Example: California's San Andreas Fault exhibits this pattern, with frequent small
tremors and the potential for rare, large earthquakes.

b) Characteristic Earthquake Model:

 Equation: This model doesn't use an equation but predicts that a specific magnitude
range, characteristic of the fault zone, dominates the earthquake occurrence.
 Meaning: Certain faults tend to produce earthquakes of a specific size repeatedly.
 Example: Subduction zones often follow this pattern, with recurring large
earthquakes releasing built-up stress.

2. Ground Motion Prediction Models: Forecasting the Fury of the Shake

Now we know where earthquakes might occur, but

how strong will the shaking be? Enter ground
motion prediction models, considering factors like:

 Earthquake magnitude: Larger earthquakes

naturally cause stronger shaking.
 Distance from source: Ground motion weakens
with increasing distance due to wave attenuation.
 Local soil conditions: Soft soils amplify shaking,
while firm rocks dampen it. While these models employ complex equations,
simplified versions can illustrate their essence:

5|Page
 Abrahamson & Silva Model: Considers magnitude, distance, and site conditions
to estimate peak ground acceleration (PGA).
 Boore & Atkinson Model: Similar to Abrahamson & Silva, but also incorporates
factors like fault type and rupture mechanism.

Example: Imagine a magnitude 7 earthquake 10 km away from your location.

Based on these models, you can estimate the expected PGA and spectral
acceleration on different soil types, helping engineers design structures to
withstand the forces.

3. Site Effects Evaluation: The Ground Speaks, PSHA Listens

The ground beneath our feet isn't just an observer; it actively

influences earthquake shaking. PSHA incorporates:

 Soil Type & Properties: Soft soils amplify shaking, while

firm rocks dampen it.
 Site Response Analysis: Techniques like equivalent linear
or nonlinear analysis estimate this amplification or de-
amplification.

Simplified Equation: Consider the amplification factor "F",

depending on soil properties and frequency of ground
motion.

Example: If your building sits on soft soil, PSHA accounts for potential
amplification, prompting engineers to design for stronger shaking compared to
buildings on rock.

4. Integration and Probability Calculation: Weaving the Pieces Together:

Now, we have information on earthquake sources, shaking intensity, and site
effects. But how likely is a specific ground motion level? PSHA utilizes:

 Numerical Integration Methods: Techniques like Monte Carlo simulation

combine the information from each component,
accounting for uncertainties. Example: Imagine
simulating 10,000 earthquake scenarios for your location,
considering different magnitudes, distances, and soil
conditions. The probability of exceeding a specific ground
motion level is then calculated based on the frequency of
scenarios exceeding that level the simulation.
6|Page
 How PSAH contributes to Building Codes ?

 Ground Motion Parameter Estimates: PSHA helps determine the expected

intensity of ground shaking (peak ground acceleration, spectral acceleration) for
different return periods (e.g., 50 years, 100 years, 250 years). These estimates are
crucial for setting design ground motions in building codes.
 Spatial Variability: PSHA can account for variations in ground motion intensity
across a region due to factors like distance from fault lines and local soil
conditions. This information helps establish zoning maps within building
codes, specifying different design requirements for areas with diverse seismic
risks.
 Performance-Based Design: PSHA facilitates the adoption of performance-based
design approaches in building codes. By linking ground motion levels to expected
building performance (e.g., life-safety, collapse prevention), codes can be tailored
to achieve specific performance objectives in different seismic zones.
 Data-Driven Updates: PSHA provides a framework for incorporating new
earthquake data, improved ground motion prediction models, and evolving
scientific understanding. This enables building codes to be periodically revised and
stay up-to-date with advancements in seismic hazard assessment.

Benefits of using PSAH for Building Codes:

 Safer Structures: PSHA-informed building codes help ensure structures can

withstand anticipated ground shaking, reducing earthquake damage and casualties.
 Targeted Design: Codes can be tailored to specific seismic risks in different
regions, optimizing cost-effectiveness and resource allocation.
 Performance-Based Approach: Emphasis on building performance objectives
leads to more resilient structures that can better withstand earthquakes.
 Data-Driven Decisions: Codes can be regularly updated based on new scientific
knowledge and data, ensuring they remain effective and relevant.

Challenges and limitations:

 Uncertainty in earthquake occurrence: PSHA cannot predict individual

earthquakes but estimates probabilities. Building codes need to account for this
inherent uncertainty.
 Data scarcity: In some regions, limited historical earthquake data can pose
challenges for accurate PSHA.
 Complexity: Implementing PSHA results in building codes requires technical
expertise and careful consideration of various factors.

7|Page
Advantage of PSHA

PSHA offers several advantages over other methods for assessing seismic hazard:

1. Accounts for Uncertainty: Unlike deterministic methods that focus on a single

"worst-case" scenario, PSHA acknowledges the inherent uncertainties in
earthquake occurrence, size, and location. This leads to more realistic and nuanced
hazard estimates.

2. Informs Decision-Making: PSHA provides probabilistic estimates of exceeding

specific ground motion levels at a given location over a specific time period. This
information is crucial for engineers, policymakers, and individuals to make
informed decisions about earthquake-resistant design, building codes, and
preparedness measures.

3. Flexible and Adaptable: PSHA can be easily adapted to incorporate new data,
improved ground motion prediction models, and evolving scientific understanding
of earthquake processes. This ensures that hazard estimates remain up-to-date and
reflect the latest knowledge.

4. Spatial Variability: PSHA can account for the spatial variability of ground
motion across a region, recognizing that different locations will experience
different levels of shaking for the same earthquake. This is important for assessing
risk across geographically diverse areas.

5. Site-Specific Analysis: PSHA allows for the incorporation of site-specific

information, such as soil conditions, which can significantly influence ground
motion intensity. This enables more accurate hazard assessments for individual
locations.

7. Standardized Methodology: PSHA follows standardized methodologies and

utilizes readily available software tools, making it a transparent and easily
reproducible process. This ensures consistency and facilitates communication
between different stakeholders.

8. Global Application: PSHA can be applied in various tectonic settings and

geographic regions, making it a versatile tool for global seismic hazard assessment.

8|Page
Conclusion

In the realm of earthquake-resistant design, Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis

(PSHA) stands as a cornerstone, offering a nuanced and realistic approach to
seismic risk assessment. As we've explored its intricacies—from unraveling the
secrets of earthquake sources to influencing building codes—PSHA emerges not
just as a methodology but as a language that bridges the gap between scientific
understanding and practical application.

PSHA's role in earthquake-resistant design transcends traditional deterministic

methods by acknowledging and navigating uncertainty. Its probabilistic nature
provides decision-makers with a comprehensive understanding of seismic hazards,
enabling the creation of structures that are resilient against a spectrum of potential
earthquakes.

Through a detailed examination of PSHA's components, this report has unveiled

the complexity involved in predicting ground shaking—considering earthquake
sources, ground motion intensity, site-specific factors, and integrating knowledge
for probability calculations. PSHA, like a skilled investigator, pieces together the
puzzle of seismic risk, offering a holistic perspective on potential hazards.

The symbiotic relationship between PSHA and building codes is crucial. PSHA
informs crucial aspects of building codes, from ground motion parameter estimates
to spatial variability considerations and the adoption of performance-based design
approaches. This partnership ensures that building codes evolve with the latest
scientific understanding, leading to structures that are not just compliant but
resilient. Despite challenges such as uncertainty in earthquake occurrence and data
scarcity, the advantages of PSHA—its adaptability, global applicability, and
capacity to account for spatial variability—solidify its place as an indispensable
tool in seismic hazard assessment.

As we look to the future, PSHA remains at the forefront of seismic science,

adapting to new data, improved models, and refined methodologies. This
adaptability ensures its continued relevance, shaping the landscape of earthquake-
resistant design for years to come. In conclusion, PSHA is more than a scientific
tool; it is a guiding force steering us towards a future where structures are not just
built to withstand earthquakes, but where communities are fortified against the
uncertainties that lie beneath the Earth's surface. In embracing the principles of
PSHA, we stride towards a safer and more resilient tomorrow.

9|Page
Reference

1. Building Seismic Codes and Standards:

- American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) 2017, ASCE/SEI 7-16 Minimum

Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE,
Reston, VA.

2. Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA) Methods:

- Cornell, CA 1968, 'Engineering seismic risk analysis', Bulletin of the

Seismological Society of America, vol. 58, no. 5, pp. 1583-1606. - McGuire, RK
1976, 'FORTRAN computer programs for seismic risk analysis of single
structures', U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report, 76-67.

3. Ground Motion Prediction Equations (GMPEs):

- Abrahamson, NA & Silva, WJ 2008, 'Summary of the Abrahamson & Silva NGA
ground-motion relations', Earthquake Spectra*, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 67-97. - Boore,
DM & Atkinson, GM 2008, 'Ground-motion prediction equations for the average
horizontal component of PGA, PGV, and 5%-damped PSA at spectral periods
between 0.01 s and 10.0 s', Earthquake Spectra, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 99-138.

4. Site Effects and Soil Amplification:

- Kramer, SL 1996, Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, Prentice Hall.- Seed,

HB & Idriss, IM 1970, 'Soil moduli and damping factors for dynamic response
analysis', Report No. EERC 70-10, Earthquake Engineering Research Center,
University of California, Berkeley.

5. Performance-Based Design:

- FEMA P-695 2009, Quantification of Building Seismic Performance Factors,

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). - Chopra, AK & Goel, RK
2002, 'A modal pushover analysis procedure for estimating seismic demands for
buildings', Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, vol. 31, no. 3, pp.
561-582.

10 | P a g e