Selecting the severest seismic design ground motions for cut-and-cover underground structures

Abstract

This paper proposes an innovative method for selecting the severest design ground motions based on overall damage characterization of underground structures. The selection procedure is elaborated using 4749 ground motions, exemplifying various forms of underground structures in class III sites. Initially, an overall damage index, predicated on dual-parameters of deformation and hysteretic energy dissipation, is proposed as an engineering demand parameter to quantitatively depict the failure state of underground structures. Subsequently, given the inadequacy of a single intensity measure in evaluating the damage of underground structures, composite intensity measures with higher correlation to the index are constructed using partial least squares regression method. The composite intensity measures served as the damage potential characterization parameter for ground motions concerning underground structures. Consequently, alternative databases of severest design ground motions are derived through these composite intensity measures. The ground motions in this alternative database are employed as inputs for nonlinear dynamic analysis of underground structures. The severest design ground motions are identified by ranking the overall damage index to underground structures. Finally, a comparison with traditional selecting method demonstrates that the proposed method yields more accurate results.

Keywords

Underground structures / Severest seismic design ground motions / Overall damage index / Composite intensity measures / Damage potential / Partial least squares regression

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Wei Yu: Writing - review & editing, Writing - original draft, Visualization, Validation, Software, Methodology, Conceptualization. Zhi-Yi Chen: Writing - review & editing, Supervision, Methodology, Conceptualization. Zhi-Qian Liu: Writing - review & editing, Validation, Software, Conceptualization.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgement

This research was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (Grant No. 2022YFE0104400), and the Key Science and Technology Program of Yunnan Province (Grant No. 202402AC080003).

References

[1] Andreotti, G., & Lai, C. G. (2019). Use of fragility curves to assess the seismic vulnerability in the risk analysis of mountain tunnels. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 91, 103008.

[2] Argyroudis, S. A., & Pitilakis, K. D. (2012). Seismic fragility curves of shallow tunnels in alluvial deposits. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 35, 1-12.

[3] Chen, Z. Y., & Liu, Z. Q. (2018). Effects of central column aspect ratio on seismic performances of subway station structures. Advances in Structural Engineering, 21(1), 14-29.

[4] Chen, Z. Y., & Wei, J. S. (2013). Correlation between ground motion parameters and lining damage indices for mountain tunnels. Natural Hazards, 65(3), 1683-1702.

[5] Chen, Z. Y., Yu, W., Zhu, H. H., & Xie, L. L. (2023). Ranking method of the severest input ground motion for underground structures based on composite ground motion intensity measures. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 168, 107828.

[6] China Academy of Building Research (2010). GB 50011-2010: Code for seismic design of buildings. Beijing: China Architecture & Building Press (in Chinese).

[7] Draper, N., & Smith, H. (1998). Applied regression analysis. New York: John Wiley & Sons (pp.115-131).

[8] Frank, I. E., & Friedman, J. H. (1993). A statistical view of some chemometrics regression tools. Technometrics, 35(2), 109-135.

[9] Hashash, Y. M. A., Hook, J. J., Schmidt, B., & Yao, J. I. (2001). Seismic design and analysis of underground structures. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 16(4), 247-293.

[10] Hu, J. J., Lai, Q. H., Li, S., & Xie, L. L. (2021). Procedure for ranking ground motion records based on the destructive capacity parameter. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 25(1), 197-207.

[11] Huang, Z. K., Pitilakis, K., Argyroudis, S., Tsinidis, G., & Zhang, D. M. (2021). Selection of optimal intensity measures for fragility assessment of circular tunnels in soft soil deposits. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 145, 106724.

[12] Iida, H., Hiroto, T., Yoshida, N., & Iwafuji, M. (1996). Damage to Daikai subway station. Soils and Foundations, 36(Supplement), 283-300.

[13] Lai, Q. H., Hu, J. J., Xu, L. J., Xie, L. L., & Lin, S. B. (2022). Method for ranking pulse-like ground motions according to damage potential for reinforced concrete frame structures. Buildings, 12(6), 745.

[14] Lee, J., & Fenves, G. (1998). Plastic-damage model for cyclic loading of concrete structures. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 124(8), 892-900.

[15] Li, C. H., Zhai, C. H., Kunnath, S., & Fajia, D. (2019). Methodology for selection of the most damaging ground motions for nuclear power plant structures. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 116, 345-357.

[16] Liu, J. B., Lan, X. H., & Tan, H. (2019). Comparative study on the seismic performances of underground vs above ground reinforced concrete structure with rectangular cross section. China Earthquake Engineering Journal, 41(2), 271-277 (in Chinese).

[17] Liu, T., Chen, Z. Y., Yuan, Y., & Shao, X. Y. (2017). Fragility analysis of a subway station structure by incremental dynamic analysis. Advances in Structural Engineering, 20(7), 1111-1124.

[18] Liu, T. T., Lu, D. G., & Yu, X. H. (2019). Development of a compound intensity measure using partial least-squares regression and its statistical evaluation based on probabilistic seismic demand analysis. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 125, 105725.

[19] Liu, T. T., Yu, X. H., & Lu, D. G. (2020). An approach to develop compound intensity measures for prediction of damage potential of earthquake records using canonical correlation analysis. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 24(11), 1747-1770.

[20] Liu, Z. Q., Chen, Z. Y., & Zhao, H. (2021). Characteristics of earthquake input energy of a subway station structure based on probability density evolution method. International Journal of Computational Methods, 18, 2041014.

[21] Lubliner, J., Oliver, J., Oller, S., & Onate, E. (1989). A plastic-damage model for concrete. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 25(3), 299-326.

[22] Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the People's Republic of China (MOHURD) Administration, S., & for Market Regulation (SAMR) (2018). GB/T 51336-2018: Standard for seismic design of underground structures. Beijing: China Architecture & Building Press (in Chinese).

[23] Nguyen, D. D., Park, D., Shamshers, S., Nguyen, V. Q., & Lee, T. H. (2019). Seismic vulnerability assessment of rectangular cut-and-cover subway tunnels. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 86, 247.

[24] Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER) (2013, March 27). PEER NGA-west 2 strong motion databas. Peer Ground Motion Database. https://ngawest2.berkeley.edu/.

[25] Parra-Montesinos, G. J., Bobet, A., & Ramirez, J. A. (2006). Evaluation of soil-structure interaction and structural collapse in Daikai subway station during Kobe earthquake. ACI Structural Journal, 103(1), 113.

[26] Prak, Y., Ang, A., & Wen, Y. (1985). Seismic damage analysis of reinforced-concrete buildings. Journal of Structural Engineering, 111(4), 740-757.

[27] Qiu, D., Ren, W., & Chen, J. (2023). The multi-dimensional fragility analysis of the underground large-scale frame structure based on the internal relationships of different seismic performance evaluating indexes. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 136, 105093.

[28] Sun, B. B., Liu, W. Y., Deng, M. J., Zhang, S. R., Wang, C., Guo, J. J., Wang, J., & Wang, J. Y. (2023). Compound intensity measures for improved seismic performance assessment in cross-fault hydraulic tunnels using partial least-squares methodology. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 132, 104890.

[29] Wang, W., Wang, T., Su, J., Lin, C., Seng, C., & Huang, T. (2001). Assessment of damage in mountain tunnels due to the Taiwan Chi-Chi earthquake. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 16(3), 133-150.

[30] Wold, S., Martens, H., & Wold, H. (2006). The multivariate calibration problem in chemistry solved by The PLS method. Berlin: Springer (pp.286-293)..

[31] Yang, J., Zhuang, H., Zhang, G., Tang, B., & Xu, C. (2023). Seismic performance and fragility of two-story and three-span underground structures using a random forest model and a new damage description method. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 135, 104980.

[32] Ye, L. P., Ma, Q. L., & Miao, Z. W. (2009). Study on earthquake intensities for seismic analysis of structures. Journal of Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 29(4), 9-22 (in Chinese).

[33] Zhang, C. M., Zhao, M., Zhong, Z. L., & Du, X. L. (2023). Optimal intensity measures in probabilistic seismic demand model of subway station. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 142, 105443.

[34] Zhai, C. H., & Xie, L. L. (2004). Study on the severest design ground motions. In 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering Vancouver. British Columbia, Canada.

[35] Zhong, Z. L., Shen, Y. Y., Zhao, M., Li, L., Du, X. L., & Hao, H. (2020). Seismic fragility assessment of the Daikai subway station in layered soil. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 132, 106044.

[36] Zhuang, H. Y., Ren, J. W., Miao, Y., Jing, L. G., Yao, E. L., & Xu, C. J. (2019). Seismic performance levels of a large underground subway station in different soil foundations. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 25(7), 1-26.

[37] Zhuang, H. Y., Yang, J., Chen, S., Dong, Z. F., & Chen, G. X. (2021). Statistical numerical method for determining seismic performance and fragility of shallow-buried underground structure. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 116, 104090.