Skip to main content
Log in

Efficiency of scalar and vector intensity measures for seismic slope displacements

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Ground motion intensity measures are usually used to predict the earthquake-induced displacements in earth dams, soil slopes and soil structures. In this study, the efficiency of various single ground motion intensity measures (scalar IMs) or a combination of them (vector IMs) are investigated using the PEER-NGA strong motion database and an equivalent-linear sliding-mass model. Although no single intensity measure is efficient enough for all slope conditions, the spectral acceleration at 1.5 times of the initial slope period and Arias intensity of the input motion are found to be the most efficient scalar IMs for flexible slopes and stiff slopes respectively.

Vector IMs can incorporate different characteristics of the ground motion and thus significantly improve the efficiency over a wide range of slope conditions. Among various vector IMs considered, the spectral accelerations at multiple spectral periods achieve high efficiency for a wide range of slope conditions. This study provides useful guidance to the development of more efficient empirical prediction models as well as the ground motion selection criteria for time domain analysis of seismic slope displacements.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Newmark N M. Effects of earthquakes on dams and embankments. Geotechnique, 1965, 15(2): 139–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ambraseys N N, Menu J M. Earthquake-induced ground displacements. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 1988, 16 (7): 985–1006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Jibson R W. Regression models for estimating coseismic landslide displacement. Engineering Geology, 2007, 91(2–4): 209–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Saygili G, Rathje E M. Empirical prediction models for earthquake-induced sliding displacements of slopes. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2008, 134(6): 790–803

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Jibson R W. Predicting earthquake-induced landslide displacements using Newmark’s sliding block analysis. Transportation Research Record, 1993, 1411: 9–17

    Google Scholar 

  6. Romeo R. Seismically induced landslide displacements: a predictive model. Engineering Geology, 2000, 58(3–4): 337–351

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Watson-Lamprey J, Abrahamson N. Selection of ground motion time series and limits on scaling. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2006, 26(5): 477–482

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Rathje E M, Bray J D. Nonlinear coupled seismic sliding analysis of earth structures. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2000, 126(11): 1002–1014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bray J D, Travasarou T. Simplified procedure for estimating earthquake-induced deviatoric slope displacements. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2007, 133(4): 381–392

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Schnabel P B, Lysmer J, Seed H B. SHAKE—A Computer Program for Earthquake Response Analysis of Horizontally Layered Sites, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Report No. UCB/EERC-72/12. University of California, Berkeley, 1972

    Google Scholar 

  11. Chiou B, Darragh R, Gregor N, Silva W. NGA project strongmotion database. Earthquake Spectra, 2008, 24(1): 23–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Vucetic M, Dobry R. Effect of soil plasticity on cyclic response. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 1991, 117(1): 89–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kramer S L. Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, Prentice Hall, 1996

  14. Arias A. A measure of earthquake intensity. In: Seismic Design for Nuclear Power Plants, Hansen RJ, ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1970, 438–483

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kempton J J, Stewart J P. Prediction equations for significant duration of earthquake ground motions considering site and nearsource effects. Earthquake Spectra, 2006, 22(4): 985–1013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Rathje E M, Abrahamson N A, Bray J D. Simplified frequency content estimate of earthquake ground motions. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 1998, 124(2): 150–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Travasarou T, Bray J D. Optimal ground motion intensity measures for assessment of seismic slope displacements. Pacific Conf. on Earthquake Engineering, Christchurch, New Zealand, 2003

    Google Scholar 

  18. Wang G. A ground motion selection and modification method capturing response spectrum characteristics and variability of scenario earthquakes. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2011, 31(4): 611–625

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gang Wang.

Additional information

Gang Wang is an assistant professor in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. He is also Director of ASCE Hong Kong Section, and a registered Civil Engineer in California. He received his B.S. and M.S. in Hydraulic Engineering from Tsinghua University, China in 1997 and 2000, respectively, and his Ph.D. in Civil Engineering from University of California, Berkeley, U.S.A. in 2005. He worked as a consulting engineer at Geomatrix Consultants, Oakland, California in 2007–2008. His research interests include geotechnical earthquake engineering, dynamic soil-structure interaction, numerical analysis of geohazards, and micromechanics of heterogeneous materials.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wang, G. Efficiency of scalar and vector intensity measures for seismic slope displacements. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng. 6, 44–52 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-012-0138-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-012-0138-x

Keywords

Navigation