مقایسه‌ی رکوردهای زلزله به دست آمده از شتاب‌نگار و لرزه نگار و مقایسه‌ی پاسخ سازه تحت اثر آنها

نوع مقاله : Articles

نویسندگان

1 دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد هشتگرد، دانشکده فنی و مهندسی، البرز

2 پژوهشکده مهندسی سازه، پژوهشگاه بین‌المللی زلزله شناسی و مهندسی زلزله، تهران

چکیده

در تحلیل­های دینامیکی عموماً شتاب زمین به‌عنوان ورودی به سیستم در نظر گرفته می­شود و معادله‌ی حرکت متناسب با شتاب در هر لحظه حل و تلاش اعضا و تغییر مکان نسبی طبقات سازه در هر لحظه محاسبه می‌شود. با توجه به اینکه عموماً لرزه‌نگارها و شتاب‌نگارها به‌طور هم‌زمان در یک نقطه نصب نمی‌شوند در برخی موارد رکوردهای زلزله تنها توسط لرزه‌نگارها ثبت    می­گردد. اگر نگاشت ثبت­شده توسط این دستگاه پس از تصحیح، سرعت واقعی زمین باشد بر اساس اصول دینامیک باید از روی آن بتوان شتاب را با مشتق‌گیری از رکورد سرعت محاسبه و نگاشت‌های لرزه و شتاب را به یکدیگر تبدیل نمود. صحت چنین فرضی در این تحقیق مورد ارزیابی قرار می‌گیرد. به همین منظور پس از زلزله‌ی 27 مرداد 1393 به‌منظور ثبت پس‌لرزه‌ها، یک شتاب‌نگار و یک لرزه‌نگار از یک نوع در منطقه‌ی مورموری استان ایلام و در یک مختصات جغرافیایی نصب گردید. برای بررسی این موضوع، از میان رکوردهای به‌دست‌آمده چهار رکورد انتخاب شده است. در ابتدا هر دو نوع رکورد کالیبره و تصحیح می‌شوند و سپس برخی از ویژگی­های آنها مورد مقایسه قرار می­گیرند. نتایج به‌دست‌آمده از مقایسه­های صورت گرفته حاکی از آن است که دو نوع رکورد شباهت زیادی دارند و به‌خصوص در تحلیل سازه­های با دوره‌ی تناوب کمتر از یک ثانیه استفاده از هرکدام امکان­پذیر است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Comparing Accelerograms and Seismograms of Earthquakes and their Effects on Structures

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mohammad Mehdi Izadi 1
  • Majid Mohammadi 2
1 Hashtgerd Branch, Islamic Azad University, Alborz, Iran
2 International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES), Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

Seismometers and accelerometers pick up velocity and acceleration of seismic events and have different applications, which are mostly used by seismologists and engineers, respectively. Therefore, they are not regularly installed in the same location. It is believed that acceleration and velocity records can be calculated by each other, regarding that acceleration is the derivative of velocity. However, this belief has not been confirmed yet. For example, calculated acceleration, through the derivative of the seismometer record, has not been validated by comparing with the recorded accelerograms. This paper tries to find an answer for this challenge by having a comparison between the recorded accelerograms and the one calculated from seismometer records. For this, an accelerometer and a seismometer, both from the same factory, were installed in Mormori after the main earthquake of this city on August 18, 2014, to record aftershocks. Four events with considerable accelerations were selected among the events and recorded by these two instruments. All recorded data were corrected, and then the recorded accelerograms are compared with those obtained from differentiating of the corresponding seismograms. Some quantitative parameters, as well as response spectrum and Fourier amplitude spectrum have been used for the comparison. The parameters indicate that there are some ignorable differences between the records; the average of the parameters, Cave, is greater than 9.0 for all records; therefore, there is an excellent fit between the compared records.
Response spectrums of the recorded accelerograms and the one obtained by differentiating respective seismograms are almost consistent for Tn<1.0 sec; however, they are different for longer vibrational periods. Therefore, for structures with a natural period of vibration (Tn) less than 1 sec, the required acceleration records for time history analysis can be calculated by differentiating the recorded seismograms. However, for structures with a longer natural period of vibration, accelerograms should be applied, and it is better not to rely on the acceleration record calculated by seismograms.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Accelerogram
  • Seismogram
  • Mormori Earthquake
  • SDOF Response

مراجع

  1. Baker, J.W. and Allin Cornell, C. (2006) Spectral shape, epsilon and record selection. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 35(9), 1077-1095.
  2. Shome, N., Cornell, C.A., Bazzurro, P., and Carballo, J.E. (1998) Earthquakes, records, and nonlinear responses. Earthquake Spectra, 14(3), 469-500.
  3. Iervolino, I. and Cornell, C.A. (2005) Record selection for nonlinear seismic analysis of structures. Earthquake Spectra, 21(3), 685-713.
  4. Iervolino, I., Maddaloni, G., and Cosenza, E. (2009) A note on selection of time-histories for seismic analysis of bridges in Eurocode 8. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 13(8), 1125-1152.
  5. Naeim, F., Alimoradi, A., and Pezeshk, S. (2004) Selection and scaling of ground motion time histories for structural design using genetic algorithms. Earthquake Spectra, 20(2), 413-426.
  6. Katsanos, E.I., Sextos, A.G., and Manolis, G.D. (2010) Selection of earthquake ground motion records: A state-of-the-art review from a structural engineering perspective. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 30(4), 157-169.
  7. Iervolino, I., Galasso, C., and Cosenza, E. (2010) REXEL: computer aided record selection for code-based seismic structural analysis. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 8(2), 339-362.
  8. Jayaram, N., Lin, T., and Baker, J.W. (2011) A computationally efficient ground-motion selection algorithm for matching a target response spectrum mean and variance. Earthquake Spectra, 27(3), 797-815.
  9. Ghafory‐Ashtiany, M., Mousavi, M., and Azarbakht, A. (2011) Strong ground motion record selection for the reliable prediction of the mean seismic collapse capacity of a structure group. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 40(6), 691-708.
  10. Foulser-Piggott, R. and Goda, K. (2014) New prediction equations of Arias intensity and cumulative absolute velocity for Japanese earthquakes. 2nd European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Istanbul, Turkey.
  11. Beauval, C., Tasan, H., Laurendeau, A., Delavaud, E., Cotton, F., Gueguen, P., and Kuehn, N. (2012) On the testing of ground‐motion prediction equations against small‐magnitude data. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 102(5), 1994-2007.
  12. Massa, M., Morasca, P., Moratto, L., Marzorati, S., Costa, G., and Spallarossa, D. (2008) Empirical ground-motion prediction equations for northern Italy using weak-and strong-motion amplitudes, frequency content, and duration parameters. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 98(3), 1319-1342.
  13. Anderson, J.G. (2004) Quantitative measure of the goodness-of-fit of synthetic seismograms. 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering Conference Proceedings, Vancouver, Canada, Paper (Vol. 243).
  14. Zare, M., Farzanegan, E., Shahvar, M., Kamalian, E., and Saeidi, A.R. (2014) Mormori (Ilam) SW Iran's Earthquake of 18 August 2014, Mw6.2: A Preliminary Reconnaissance Report. https://www. eeri.org/wp-content/uploads/Mormori_Reconn_ Rep_20_9_2014.pdf.
  15. Mostafazadeh, M., Motaghi, AS., Davoodi, M., and Kalantari, A. (2014) Immediate Report of Visit to the Affected Areas Mormori Earthquake 27 Shahrivar 1393 (Abdanan-Dehloran). International Institute of Seismology and Earthquake Engineering (in Persian).
  16. Guralp, C.M. CMG-6TD Digital seismograph system: User’s Guide
  17. Askari, F., Azadi, A., Davoodi, M., Ghayamghamian, M.R., Haghshenas, E., Hamzehloo, H., and Sohrabi-Bidar, A. (2004) Preliminary seismic microzonation of Bam. Journal of Seismology and Earthquake Engineering, 5, 69-80.
  18. Guralp, C.M. CMG-5TD Digital Accelerograph System: User’s Guide
  19. Brownjohn, J.M. and Koo, K.Y. (2010) Vibration Serviceability of Tall Buildings Due to Wind Loads: Prediction, Measurement, and Evaluation of Damping. Structures Congress 2010 (2961-2971). ASCE.
  20. Chopra, A.K. (1995) Dynamics of Structures (Vol. 3). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
  21. Mohammadi, M. and Izadi, M.M. (2015) effects of the multi-support excitation on linear response of one-story buildings. 7th International Conference on Seismology and Earthquake Engineering (SEE7), Tehran, Iran.
  22. Kramer, S.L. (1996) Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering. Pearson Education India.

فایل ها

سابقه مقاله

  • تاریخ دریافت: 09 آبان 1394
  • تاریخ بازنگری: 01 اسفند 1399
  • تاریخ پذیرش: 06 دی 1399

اشتراک گذاری

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار