Validation and Utilization of Physics-Based Simulated Ground Motions for Bridge Performance Assessment

Investigators: Jawad Fayaz1, Sarah Azar2, Mayssa Dabaghi2 and Farzin Zareian1

1Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California, Irvine2Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, American University of Beirut, Lebanon

Sim #1

Sim #2

Sim #100

20

15

10

5

0

0.15

0.10

0.05

0.0

-0.05

-0.10

-0.15

0 1 2 3 4 5

GM History

Zero Level

Zero Level Crossing

Cumulative Zero Level Crossings

2nd Order Polynomial

0 1 2 3 4 5

NGAWest2 Recorded GMs Physics-Based GMs (Cybershake 15.12)

𝐥𝐧(𝑬𝑫𝑷)= 𝒇𝒎𝒂𝒈 + 𝒇𝒅𝒊𝒔 + 𝒇𝒇𝒍𝒕 + 𝒇𝒉𝒏𝒈+ 𝒇𝒔𝒊𝒕𝒆 + 𝒇𝒔𝒆𝒅 + 𝒇𝒉𝒚𝒑 + 𝒇𝒅𝒊𝒑

𝐥𝐧(𝑹𝒁𝒁)= 𝒇𝒎𝒂𝒈 + 𝒇𝒅𝒊𝒔 + 𝒇𝒇𝒍𝒕 + 𝒇𝒉𝒏𝒈+ 𝒇𝒔𝒊𝒕𝒆 + 𝒇𝒔𝒆𝒅 + 𝒇𝒉𝒚𝒑 + 𝒇𝒅𝒊𝒑

RZZ Parameters

Engineering Demand Parameters (EDP)

𝐥𝐧 𝑬𝑫𝑷

= 𝒇𝑰𝒂,𝒎𝒂𝒋+ 𝒇𝑰𝒂,𝒎𝒊𝒏

+ 𝒇𝒇𝒎𝒊𝒅,𝒎𝒂𝒋+ 𝒇𝒇𝒎𝒊𝒅,𝒎𝒊𝒏

+ 𝒇𝒇′𝒎𝒂𝒋+ 𝒇𝒇′𝒎𝒊𝒏

+ 𝒇𝑻𝒎𝒊𝒅,𝒎𝒂𝒋+ 𝒇𝑻𝒎𝒊𝒅,𝒎𝒊𝒏

Rot50CDR

Acc YAcc X

CyberShake 15.12

(All Sites)

Recorded GM Sites

Selected CyberShake

Sites

CB14 Form CB14 FormLinear Regression Fitted Normal Distribution

100 CyberShake Simulations

Recorded GMs

𝐄𝐯𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬 (𝑴,𝑹, 𝑽𝒔𝟑𝟎) 𝐑𝐙𝐙 𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬 (𝑰𝒂, 𝒇𝒎𝒊𝒅, 𝑫𝟓−𝟗𝟓) 𝐄𝐃𝐏(𝑹𝒐𝒕𝟓𝟎𝑪𝑫𝑹)

Goal: Compare and Validate

Simulated GMs against the

Recorded GMs using statistical

relationships between the

corresponding Event parameters,

RZZ parameters, and EDP of

Bridge structures.

Conclusions:

1. RZZ parameters can be too

stringent to perform validation of

simulated ground motions.

2. Relations between the Event

parameters and EDP, and RZZ

parameters and EDP for

recorded and simulated GMs

tend to be statistically similar.