Geology topics

Mehmet Celebi

Publications and source records attributed to Mehmet Celebi.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2024

Performance-based earthquake early warning for tall buildings

The ShakeAlert Earthquake Early Warning (EEW) system aims to issue an advance warning to residents on the West Coast of the United States seconds before the ground shaking arrives, if the expected ground shaking exceeds a certain threshold. However, residents in tall buildings may experience much greater motion due to the dynamic response of the buildings. Therefore, there is an ongoing effort to extend ShakeAlert to include the contribution of building response to provide a more accurate estimation of the expected shaking intensity for tall buildings. Currently, the supposedly ideal solution of analyzing detailed finite element models of buildings under predicted ground-motion time histories is not theoretically or practically feasible. The authors have recently investigated existing simple methods to estimate peak floor acceleration (PFA) and determined these simple formulas are not practically suitable. Instead, this article explores another approach by extending the Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER) performance-based earthquake engineering (PBEE) to EEW, considering that every component involved in building response prediction is uncertain in the EEW scenario. While this idea is not new and has been proposed by other researchers, it has two shortcomings: (1) the simple beam model used for response prediction is prone to modeling uncertainty, which has not been quantified, and (2) the ground motions used for probabilistic demand models are not suitable for EEW applications. In this article, we address these two issues by incorporating modeling errors into the parameters of the beam model and using a new set of ground motions, respectively. We demonstrate how this approach could practically work using data from a 52-story building in downtown Los Angeles. Using the criteria and thresholds employed by previous researchers, we show that if peak ground acceleration (PGA) is accurately estimated, this approach can predict the expected level of human comfort in tall buildings.

Earthquake Spectra↗

USGS2024

The new self-anchored suspension (SAS) San Francisco Bay Bridge- Its response to a small earthquake

This paper presents a summary of previously published work (Celebi 2023) related to the new Self-Anchored Suspension (SAS) bridge that went into service within the last decade as a replacement for the older truss bridge spanning between Yerba Buena Island and Oakland, California, within the San Francisco Bay Area. During the October 19, 1989 M6.9 Loma Prieta earthquake, which occurred ~100 km south of the Bay Bridge, a section of the upper deck of the truss bridge fell onto the lower deck – thus closing this important lifeline between San Francisco and Oakland. The SAS is unique, self-anchored, and suspended by a single tower that is pivotal in trafficking the cable and hanger system to support the decks. The SAS bridge is extensively instrumented by the California Geological Survey’s Strong Motion Instrumentation Program (CSMIP). There are approximately 85 channels of accelerometers in the seismic monitoring system that recorded the October 14, 2019 Mw4.6 Pleasant Hill earthquake. The data allow a complex but identifiable coupled response of the deck, tower, and cable system. Both acceleration and displacement time-history data are used to extract significant frequencies using system identification methods, including spectral analyses. Results are compared to those from finite-element-model (FEM) analyses carried out during the design and analysis process of the bridge in 2002 (Nader et al. 2002). There are differences between FEM analyses results and those from the low amplitude shaking caused by a seismic event. An apparent frequency (period) of the SAS bridge is assessed (approximately 5.2 seconds). In a plot of deck length versus period, there is an almost linear relationship with periods of other regular suspension bridges, such as the Golden Gate Bridge and the Carquinez Bridge, both in the San Francisco Bay.

California↗

USGS2023

The new Self Anchored Suspension (SAS) Bridge of the San Francisco Bay Bridge System: A preliminary study of its response and behavior during a small earthquake

Seismic behavior and performance of the new Self- Anchored Suspension (SAS) Bridge of the San Francisco Bay Bridge System is studied using response data recorded during the October 14, 2019, 𝑀𝑤⁢4.6 Pleasant Hill earthquake. The new bridge went into service within the last decade as a replacement for the older truss bridge that spanned between Yerba Buena Island and East Bay. During the October 19, 1989, M6.9 Loma Prieta earthquake, which occurred ∼100 km away from the Bay Bridge, a section of the upper deck of the old truss bridge fell onto the lower deck—thus closing this important lifeline between San Francisco and East Bay. The new SAS Bridge (as well as the rest of the Bay Bridge) is instrumented by the California Strong Motion Instrumentation Program (CSMIP). The unique SAS Bridge is suspended by a single tower that is pivotal in trafficking the cable and hanger system to support the eastbound (E) and westbound (W) decks. At both the west and east ends of the SAS, there is a hinge system that connects the W and E decks to the skyways leading to highways. For the west side, the SAS is led to a tunnel at Yerba Buena Island. The response data analyses highlight the complex and yet identifiable coupled response of the deck, tower, and cable system. Using system identification methods including spectral analyses of both acceleration and displacement time history data, the fundamental frequencies (periods) and critical damping percentages are extracted for the main components (tower, deck, and cables) of the bridge where the sensors are deployed. Frequencies (periods) are then compared with the values computed during the design and analysis process of the bridge. The analyses in this paper showed that there is strong evidence of a beating effect attributed to low critical damping percentages and coupled modes. A possible correlation of fundamental periods of such suspension bridges with their span lengths is discussed. The beating effect and period versus span length can be significant topics for further research.

California↗

USGS2022

Quantifying modeling uncertainty in simplified beam models for building response prediction

The use of simple models for response prediction of building structures is preferred in earthquake engineering for risk evaluations at regional scales, as they make computational studies more feasible. The primary impediment in their gainful use presently is the lack of viable methods for quantifying (and reducing upon) the modeling errors/uncertainties they bear. This study presents a Bayesian calibration method wherein the modeling error is embedded into the parameters of the model. The method is specifically described for coupled shear-flexural beam models here, but it can be applied to any parametric surrogate model. The major benefit the method offers is the ability to consider the modeling uncertainty in the forward prediction of any degree-of-freedom or composite response regardless of the data used in calibration. The method is extensively verified using two synthetic examples. In the first example, the beam model is calibrated to represent a similar beam model but with enforced modeling errors. In the second example, the beam model is used to represent the detailed finite element model of a 52-story building. Both examples show the capability of the proposed solution to provide realistic uncertainty estimation around the mean prediction.

Structural Control and Health Monitoring↗

USGS2022

Earthquake early warning for estimating floor shaking levels of tall buildings

This article investigates methods to improve earthquake early warning (EEW) predictions of shaking levels for residents of tall buildings. In the current U.S. Geological Survey ShakeAlert EEW system, regions far from an epicenter will not receive alerts due to low predicted ground‐shaking intensities. However, residents of tall buildings in those areas may still experience significant shaking due to the acceleration amplification caused by tall buildings’ dynamic behavior, as recently experienced by residents of the 52‐story building in downtown Los Angeles (DTLA) during the 2019 M 7.1 Ridgecrest earthquake. Using more than 400 recorded response data acquired from 77 instrumented buildings in California, here we compare the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) P‐58 and American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) 7‐16 simplified equations for peak floor acceleration (PFA), finding that the ASCE estimation is close to the median of data recorded in large and long‐distance events, whereas the current FEMA estimation is not suitable. In the second part of this article, four instrumented tall buildings in DTLA are extensively studied, and the performance of the simplified and response spectrum (RS) methods giving both an estimation of the free‐field horizontal peak ground acceleration (PGA) and pseudospectral acceleration is evaluated. The results show that the RS method is as accurate as the response history analysis as long as the ground‐motion RS is accurate, whereas the ASCE 7‐16 prediction is conservative. However, when ground‐motion RS or PGA is estimated for DTLA using a ground‐motion model (GMM), the performance of the RS method significantly degrades due to underestimation by the GMM at long periods. The results of this study imply that a nonergodic GMM, which may give more accurate prediction in Los Angeles, could improve the results for PFA when the building’s behavior is dominated by a few long‐period fundamental modes, as is the case for the 52‐story building in DTLA.

California↗

USGS2022

Seismic monitoring solutions for buildings

This chapter introduces seismic monitoring of structural systems for buildings and begins with a historical background of this topic in the United States. After providing the historical context, the chapter reviews common seismic instrumentation issues such as utilization of data, code versus extensive instrumentation, free-field instrumentation, record synchronization requirements and more. Recent developments in damage detection is examined including damage detection based on changes in natural frequencies, permanent deformations, and interstory drift. Finally, applications in Europe, the Middle East, and Japan of seismic monitoring of structural systems for buildings are discussed.

Book chapter↗

USGS2022

Response study of a tall San Diego, California building inferred from the M7.1 July 5, 2019 Ridgecrest, California earthquake motions

The shaking of a new 24-story tall building in San Diego, California, was recorded by its seismic monitoring array during the M7.1 Ridgecrest, California earthquake of July 5, 2019. The building is located ~340 km from the epicenter of the event. The building is a special moment framed (SMF) steel structure with reduced beam sections (RBS) and viscous damper systems (DS). Peak accelerations recorded by the array indicate 0.007 g at the basement level and 0.044 g at the roof level. Spectral analyses and system identification methods indicate coupled NS, EW, and torsinal fundamental modes at ~ 0.30 Hz frequency and critical damping percentages < 5%. For the EW and fundamental torsional modes, critical damping percentages are < 2.5%. At the low-level shaking, the computed largest average drift ratio is ~ 0.065%, less than 0.5% of the value considered to be the starting threshold of nonlinear behavior or damage.

California↗

USGS2022

Zoning Verification in Mexico City Using Strong Motions of the M7.1 Puebla-Morelos Earthquake of September 19, 2017

Mexico City suffers extensive damage from large earthquakes that originate at far distances due mainly to densely built areas on a filled lakebed. Seismic design codes in Mexico recognize the site-specific issues in Mexico City by acknowledging zones that represent lakebed as being riskier compared to other Mexico City areas. At the time of the 19 September 1985 M8.1 Michoacán Earthquake, (a) the seismic zoning map comprised only three zones (Hills [now Zone I], Transition [now Zone II] and Lake Zone [now Zone III] and (b) a limited number of permanent strong motion stations (~6) existed. Since, 1985 the seismic zonation maps have evolved: (a) the Lake Zone (now Zone III) into 4 sub-zones (a, b, c and d) and (b) the number of strong motion stations has increased significantly (~25) and recorded the 19 September 2017 M7.1 Puebla-Morelos earthquake. To identify the site frequency [f] (period [T]) at the specific location of a strong motion station within a particular zone or sub-zone (Zone I, II and III a,b,c,d), two well-known methods (H/H and H/V) for determining spectral ratios are employed using these records. The predominant site periods identified by both methods are in good agreement with those interpolated from the zoning-site period maps of Mexico City in the 2004 Seismic Design Code. Such verification is a testament to the benefits of improved zoning and greater distribution of strong motion network stations, and sets a good example for applications in other seismic regions.

Mexico City↗

USGS2022

Preliminary study of correlation of natural periods and damping percentages of tall buildings in several countries

Fundamental periods (T) and critical damping percentages (ζ) of 41 tall buildings in several countries form the basis of this preliminary study. Correlation between building height and fundamental period for steel and reinforced concrete buildings clearly shows a linear variation but with a large standard deviation, most likely due to considerable variation in the designs of structural systems. No credible correlation was attainable for critical damping percentages against the heights of the buildings. However, the main and important trend is that the critical damping percentages are clearly lower than <3%, consistent with recent tall building studies.

California↗

USGS2022

Responses of the Carquinez, California suspension bridge during the MW6.0 South Napa earthquake of August 24, 2014

The behavior of the suspension bridge in Carquinez, CA, during the Mw6.0 24 August 2014 South Napa, CA earthquake is studied using data recorded by an extensive array of accelerometers. Modes, corresponding frequencies and damping are identified and compared with previous studies that used ambient data of the deck only plus mathematical models. Data are systematically analyzed for vertical, transverse and torsional motions of the deck, and transverse, longitudinal and torsional motions of the towers. The transverse and vertical fundamental mode frequencies of the deck are the same (0.17Hz) due to coupling. Higher frequencies for transverse and vertical coupled modes are the same at 0.46Hz and 0.98Hz. Tower translational frequencies are 0.39Hz in the transverse direction and 0.46 Hz in the longitudinal direction, and are coupled with those of the deck. Coupling of torsional modes of the tower and deck are identified. A beating effect is observed, particularly for torsional motions.

California↗

USGS2021

Response study of a 51-story-tall Los Angeles, California building inferred from motions of the Mw7.1 July 5, 2019 Ridgecrest, California earthquake

A 51-story building in downtown Los Angeles that is equipped with a seismic monitoring accelerometric array recorded the Mw7.1 Ridgecrest, California earthquake of July 5, 2019. The building is a dual-core reinforced-concrete shear-wall and perimeter-column structure with ~ 80% of floors constructed as post-tensioned flat slabs, which makes it a trending design. Using system identification methods, spectral analyses, and coherence-phase angle computations, the recorded response data allowed the identification of dynamic response characteristics (fundamental frequencies of [NS] 0.21 Hz, [EW] 0.28 Hz, and [Torsional] 0.45 Hz, critical damping percentages < 2.5%, and associated mode shapes), as well as computation of drift ratios with maximum peaks of 0.145% for both NS and EW directions. The critical damping percentages are consistent with those recommended by LATBSDC ( 2017 ). There is no indication from the records that post-tensioned slab design played any role in altering the dynamic characteristics.

California↗

USGS2021

S2HM must be real-time or not?

Seismic structural health monitoring (S 2 HM) has advanced significantly in the last three decades. However, currently there is no consensus on the need for real-time processing of data acquired during an earthquake. Numerous applications exist whereby S 2 HM-equipped systems record valuable seismic response data. A delayed use of the seismic data prohibits timely discovery of hidden damages in a structure which, in turn, possibly increases its vulnerability during events to follow – with increased risk to occupants. Such risks are of particular concern when, for example, there are long-distance/long period effects e.g. for tall buildings and long-span bridges that are significantly affected by events that originate at far distances. These phenomena necessitate near real-time monitored data to make timely data-based informed decisions on the health or performance of the affected structure. The paper discusses criteria for functionality and occupiability thresholds in actual applications.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2021

Seismic response of a typical shear-wall dominated high-rise condominium building during the January 7, 2020 Mw6.4 Indios, Puerto Rico earthquake

Seismic response records were retrieved from the monitored 21-story (53.26-m-tall) typical Puerto Rican reinforced-concrete shear-wall dominated El Castillo Building in Mayaguez, 50 km from the mainshock epicenter of the January 7, 2020, M w 6.4 offshore Indios, Puerto Rico earthquake. The shear-wall-to-floor areas of the building are 0.97 and 3.49 in the longitudinal and transverse directions, respectively, and have a slenderness ratio of 3.0 in the transverse direction. Basement and top-floor peak accelerations were 5% g and 12.8% g, respectively. Additionally, records from a nearby free-field station indicate a site period of 0.16 s. No visible damage was observed in the building after the earthquake. Spectral ratios and system identification allow identification of the transverse, longitudinal, and torsional fundamental periods as 0.97, 0.88, and 0.81 s, respectively, and are consistent with ASCE/SEI 7-16 (2017) formula. Damping percentages are 4.5%, 3.4%, and 2.2%, respectively. The maximum drift ratios are 0.20% and 0.12% in the longitudinal and transverse directions, well below the damage threshold for structural elements of ∼0.5%.

Mayaguez, San Juan↗

USGS2021

Response of an asymmetrical five-story building in Fairbanks, Alaska during the November 30, 2018 M7.1 Anchorage, Alaska earthquake

A recently constructed, five-story, asymmetrical steel building on the campus of the University of Alaska, Fairbanks was equipped with a strong-motion array that recorded the M7.1 Anchorage earthquake of November 30, 2018 at an epicentral distance of 408 km. The largest recorded peak accelerations at the basement and top of the building are 0.021g and 0.071g, respectively. The steel building is designed with several bays that utilize K-shaped buckling restrained braces. The building response records allow identification of fundamental periods (frequencies) as 0.73s (1.4 Hz), 0.63s (1.60 Hz), and 0.56s (1.78 Hz) in the NS, EW, and torsional directions, respectively. System identification computations resulted in estimated critical damping percentages as 7.7% and 4.7 % in the NS and EW directions, respectively. At this low-level of shaking, the building is not expected to (and did not) experience observable damage, which is confirmed with very small average drift ratios. This is the first time a seismic response from this structural array has been analyzed.

Alaska↗

USGS2021

Collaborative recorded data based response studies of four tall buildings in California

Seismic instrumentation, recorded earthquake responses, and collaborative studies of the response records from four tall California buildings are summarized in this summary paper. These buildings include the tallest San Francisco building, the 61-story Salesforce Tower, and the tallest California building, the 73-story Wilshire Grand Tower, as well as a 51-story residential building in Los Angeles and a 24-story government building in San Diego. Various system identification methods are used to analyze the largest earthquake response records retrieved from seismic arrays installed in each of the four buildings. Significant structural dynamics characteristics (fundamental periods and critical damping percentages) are extracted. In general, critical damping percentages for the first mode are <2.5%, consistent with recent studies and recommendations.

California↗

USGS2020

Response study of the tallest California building inferred from the Mw7.1 Ridgecrest, California earthquake of 5 July 2019 and ambient motions

The newly constructed tallest building in California, the 73-story Wilshire Grand in Los Angeles, California, is designed in conformance with performance-based design procedures. The building is designed with concrete core–shear walls, three outriggers with buckling restrained braces (BRBs) located along the height, and two three-story truss-belt structural systems. The building is equipped with a 36-channel accelerometric seismic monitoring array that recorded the recent Mw7.1 Ridgecrest earthquake of 5 July 2019, as well as the Mw6.4 Ridgecrest earthquake of 4 July 2019. In this article, only the Mw7.1 event of 5 July 2019 is studied because of a larger response of the subject building during that earthquake. The earthquake records of 5 July 2019 are specifically studied to determine its dynamic characteristics and building-specific behavior. The structure exhibits torsional behavior most likely due to abrupt asymmetrical changes in the thickness and size in-plan of the core–shear walls. The translational and torsional modes during the earthquake are not closely coupled, which does not lead to a beating effect even though there is an appearance of it in the records. Available ambient records are used only to identify modal frequencies of the building and compare them with those from the Mw7.1 event of 5 July 2019. Due to the relatively low amplitude of shaking during the earthquake, the drift ratios are too small to cause any damage. It is expected that during stronger shaking levels likely to be caused by future events, these characteristics may change and the effect of BRBs can be better assessed.

California↗

USGS2020

Response of the tallest California building during the Mw7.1 July 5, 2019 Ridgecrest, California earthquake

The 73-story Wilshire Grand in downtown Los Angeles is the recently constructed tallest building in California. It is designed in conformance with performance-based design procedures. The lateral load resisting system of the building is designed with concrete core shear walls, three outriggers with buckling restrained braces (BRBs) located along the height and two three-story truss-belt structural systems. The building is equipped with a 36-channel accelerometric seismic monitoring array that recorded the recent Mw7.1 Ridgecrest earthquake of July 5, 2019, as well as the Mw6.4 July 4, 2019 Ridgecrest Earthquake. In this paper, only the Mw7.1 July 5, 2019 event is studied because of a larger response of the subject building during that earthquake. The earthquake records of July 5, 2019 are specifically studied to determine its dynamic characteristics and building specific behavior. The structure exhibits torsional behavior most likely due to abrupt asymmetrical changes in the thickness and size in-plan of the core shear wall system. Modal shapes, frequencies and critical damping percentages of the building are identified. The translational and torsional modes during the earthquake are not closely coupled with fundamental NS, EW and torsional frequencies (periods) of 0.16 (6.25), 0.27(3.70) and 0.42 (2.38) Hz (seconds). This does not lead to a beating effect even though there is an appearance of it in the displacement records. Due to the relatively low amplitude of shaking during the earthquake, the drift ratios are too small to cause any damage. It is expected that during stronger shaking levels likely to be caused by future events, these characteristics may change and the effect of BRB’s can be better assessed.

California↗

USGS2019

Joint system-input identification of bridge structures

This paper presents a novel framework for system identification of bridge structures using recorded earthquake data. Bridge structures are prone to spatial variability of ground motions because they extend over relatively long distances. So, input motion measurement is a challenging task, especially for long bridges with multiple piers. Moreover, direct measurement of the bridge Foundation Input Motions (FIMs) may not be possible due to both inertial and kinematic Soil-Structure Interaction (SSI) effects. In this study, we propose a joint system-input identification solution using sparsely measured earthquake-induced responses. We verify this method and its applicability for real scale problems using simulated data obtained from the Golden Gate Bridge.

California↗