Here - Stuff
Here - Stuff Here - Stuff
TABLE 2Explanation of JMA seismic intensity scales (http://www.jma.go.jp/) for human perception and reaction; indoor situationsand outdoor situationsSeismicIntensity I jI j < 0.5Human Perception andReaction Indoor Situation Outdoor SituationImperceptible to people, but — —recorded by seismometers.— —keeping quiet in buildings.0.5 ≤ I j < 1.5 Felt slightly by some people1.5 ≤ I j < 2.5 Felt by many people keepingquiet in buildings. Some peoplemay be awoken.2.5 ≤ I j < 3.5 Felt by most people in buildings.Felt by some people walking.Many people are awoken.3.5 ≤ I j < 4.5 Most people are startled. Feltby most people walking. Mostpeople are awoken.4.5 ≤ I j < 5.0 Many people are frightenedand feel the need to hold ontosomething stable.5.0 ≤ I j < 5.5 Many people find it hard tomove; walking is difficult withoutholding onto somethingstable.5.5≤ I j < 6.0 It is difficult to remain standing.6.0 ≤ I j < 6.5 It is impossible to remainstanding or move withoutcrawling. People may bethrown through the air.Hanging objects such as lampsswing slightly.Dishes in cupboards may rattle.Hanging objects such as lampsswing significantly, and dishes incupboards rattle. Unstable ornamentsmay fall.Hanging objects such as lampsswing violently. Dishes in cupboardsand items on bookshelvesmay fall. Many unstable ornamentsfall. Unsecured furnituremay move, and unstable furnituremay topple over.Dishes in cupboards and itemson bookshelves are more likelyto fall. TVs may fall from theirstands, and unsecured furnituremay topple over.Many unsecured furniture movesand may topple over. Doors maybecome wedged shut.Most unsecured furniture moves,and is more likely to topple over.6.5 ≤ I j Most unsecured furniture movesand topples over, or may even bethrown through the air.—Electric wires swing slightly.Electric wires swing significantly.Those driving vehicles may notice thetremor.In some cases, windows may breakand fall. People notice electricitypoles moving. Roads may sustaindamage.Windows may break and fall, unreinforcedconcrete-block walls maycollapse, poorly installed vendingmachines may topple over, automobilesmay stop due to the difficulty ofcontinued movement.Wall tiles and windows may sustaindamage and fall.Wall tiles and windows are more likelyto break and fall. Most unreinforcedconcrete-block walls collapse.Wall tiles and windows are even morelikely to break and fall. Reinforcedconcrete-block walls may collapse.TABLE 3Explanation of JMA seismic intensity scales (http://www.jma.go.jp/) for wooden housesSeismicIntensity High Earthquake Resistance Low Earthquake Resistance4.5 ≤ I j < 5.0 — Slight cracks may form in walls.5.0 ≤ I j < 5.5 — Cracks may form in walls.5.5 ≤ I j < 6.0 Slight cracks may form in walls. Cracks are more likely to form in walls.Large cracks may form in walls.Tiles may fall, and buildings may lean or collapse.6.0 ≤ I j < 6.5 Cracks may form in walls. Large cracks are more likely to form in walls.Buildings are more likely to lean or collapse.6.5 ≤ I j Cracks are more likely to form in walls.Buildings may lean in some cases.Buildings are even more likely to lean or collapse.878 Seismological Research Letters Volume 82, Number 6 November/December 2011
high, but there were no buildings damaged around HPSCand SHLC where the 1–2-second response was low. In particular,there were many heavily damaged buildings, similarto what happened in the Kobe earthquake, that correspondedto the result of the nonlinear seismic response analysis aroundREHS. Thus, our investigation confirmed that the 1–2-secondresponse bore a close relationship to heavy damage to buildings.However, there were no buildings with heavy damagearound PRPC, where the 1–2-second response was almost thesame as that of CCCC, and there were some houses with heavydamage a little away from HVSC seismic station though it wasexpected that ground motions there would not cause heavydamage to houses. We surmise that these results arise becausethe majority of the buildings around the seismic station wereranch houses and thus likely made from masonry, and theperiod corresponding to damage of such buildings is shorterthan 1–2 seconds (Sakai and Nakamura 2004).▲▲Figure 4. Elastic acceleration response spectrum comparedwith the 1995 Kobe earthquake.▲▲Figure 5. Hysteresis models: A) Takeda Model and B) Modified Takeda-Slip Model.TABLE 4Explanation of JMA seismic intensity scales (http://www.jma.go.jp/) for reinforced-concrete buildingsSeismicIntensity High Earthquake Resistance Low Earthquake Resistance5.0 ≤ I j < 5.5 — Cracks may form in walls, crossbeams and pillars.5.5 ≤ I j < 6.0 Cracks may form in walls, crossbeams and pillars. Cracks are more likely to form in walls, crossbeams andpillars.6.0 ≤ I j < 6.5 Cracks are more likely to form in walls, crossbeamsand pillars.6.5 ≤ I j Cracks are even more likely to form in walls,crossbeams and pillars.Ground level or intermediate floors may sustainsignificant damage. Buildings may lean in somecases.Slippage and X-shaped cracks may be seen in walls, crossbeamsand pillars. Pillars at ground level or on intermediatefloors may disintegrate, and buildings may collapse.Slippage and X-shaped cracks are more likely to be seen inwalls, crossbeams and pillars.Pillars at ground level or on intermediate floors are morelikely to disintegrate, and buildings are more likely to collapse.TABLE 5Parameters of the Hysteresis Models.Hysteresis Characteristics Model α y Q c / Q y α β γ δTakeda-Model 0.25 0.30 0.50 0.01 — —Modified Takeda-Slip Model 0.30 0.30 0.50 0.15 3.00 1.00Seismological Research Letters Volume 82, Number 6 November/December 2011 879
- Page 73 and 74: σ 1dσ 3Nuσ 3CM w 7.1dw 6.2u70°M
- Page 75 and 76: Right-lateral Faults(A) Range Front
- Page 77 and 78: DISCUSSIONThe 2010-2011 Canterbury
- Page 79 and 80: Large Apparent Stresses from the Ca
- Page 81 and 82: ▲ ▲ Figure 2. Observed vs. pred
- Page 83 and 84: 10Obs SA(1s)AS1AS+SDAB 2006AB+SDSA(
- Page 85 and 86: Fine-scale Relocation of Aftershock
- Page 87 and 88: −43.25°OXZ0 10 20km−43.5°−4
- Page 89 and 90: A’0 km 4 8−43.5°B’B−43.6°
- Page 91 and 92: REFERENCESAvery, H. R., J. B. Berri
- Page 93 and 94: ▲ ▲ Figure 2. A) shows three-co
- Page 95 and 96: ▲ ▲ Figure 4. Vertical accelera
- Page 97 and 98: 0.8PRPC Z0.40Normalized (Max PGA +
- Page 99 and 100: Near-source Strong Ground MotionsOb
- Page 101 and 102: (A)Magnitude, M w876542009 NZdataba
- Page 103 and 104: Scale0.5 g5 seconds▲▲Figure 4.
- Page 105 and 106: (A)(B)Spectral Acc, Sa (g)North/Wes
- Page 107 and 108: Vertical-to-horizontal PGA ratio543
- Page 109 and 110: (A)(B)Station:CCCCSolid:AvgHorizDas
- Page 111 and 112: REFERENCESAagaard, B. T., J. F. Hal
- Page 113 and 114: ▲ ▲ Figure 1. Shear-wave veloci
- Page 115 and 116: Spectral Acceleration (0.3 s), (g)I
- Page 117 and 118: Spectral Acceleration (3 s), (g)In[
- Page 119 and 120: TABLE 1Mean (μ LLH ) and standard
- Page 121 and 122: Strong Ground Motions and Damage Co
- Page 123: ings and the Modified Takeda-Slip M
- Page 127 and 128: REFERENCES▲▲Figure 8. Heavily d
- Page 129 and 130: (A)(B)(C)(D)(E)▲▲Figure 1. A) M
- Page 131 and 132: (A) (B) (C)▲ ▲ Figure 3. A) Typ
- Page 133 and 134: (A) (B) (C)▲ ▲ Figure 4. A) Typ
- Page 135 and 136: Case StudyKey ParametersTABLE 1Key
- Page 137 and 138: ▲ ▲ Figure 9. Representative bu
- Page 139 and 140: Soil Liquefaction Effects in the Ce
- Page 141 and 142: ▲ ▲ Figure 2. Representative su
- Page 143 and 144: Location of structures illustrated
- Page 145 and 146: Shading indicates areaover which pr
- Page 147 and 148: 1.8 deg15 cmGround cracking due to
- Page 149 and 150: 30 cm17 cm30 cmFoundation beam▲
- Page 151 and 152: Comparison of Liquefaction Features
- Page 153 and 154: (A)(B)▲▲Figure 2. A) Simplified
- Page 155 and 156: (A)Acceleration (Gal)6004002000-200
- Page 157 and 158: (A)(B)▲▲Figure 7. Distribution
- Page 159 and 160: (A)(B)▲▲Figure 10. Damage to a
- Page 161 and 162: (A)(B)▲ ▲ Figure 14. A) Subside
- Page 163 and 164: ▲▲Figure 17. A trench in a resi
- Page 165 and 166: Ambient Noise Measurements followin
- Page 167 and 168: ▲▲Figure 1. Location of the noi
- Page 169 and 170: ▲▲Figure 5. Site N20 showing HV
- Page 171 and 172: ▲▲Figure 8. Comparison between
- Page 173 and 174: Use of DCP and SASW Tests to Evalua
TABLE 2Explanation of JMA seismic intensity scales (http://www.jma.go.jp/) for human perception and reaction; indoor situationsand outdoor situationsSeismicIntensity I jI j < 0.5Human Perception andReaction Indoor Situation Outdoor SituationImperceptible to people, but — —recorded by seismometers.— —keeping quiet in buildings.0.5 ≤ I j < 1.5 Felt slightly by some people1.5 ≤ I j < 2.5 Felt by many people keepingquiet in buildings. Some peoplemay be awoken.2.5 ≤ I j < 3.5 Felt by most people in buildings.Felt by some people walking.Many people are awoken.3.5 ≤ I j < 4.5 Most people are startled. Feltby most people walking. Mostpeople are awoken.4.5 ≤ I j < 5.0 Many people are frightenedand feel the need to hold ontosomething stable.5.0 ≤ I j < 5.5 Many people find it hard tomove; walking is difficult withoutholding onto somethingstable.5.5≤ I j < 6.0 It is difficult to remain standing.6.0 ≤ I j < 6.5 It is impossible to remainstanding or move withoutcrawling. People may bethrown through the air.Hanging objects such as lampsswing slightly.Dishes in cupboards may rattle.Hanging objects such as lampsswing significantly, and dishes incupboards rattle. Unstable ornamentsmay fall.Hanging objects such as lampsswing violently. Dishes in cupboardsand items on bookshelvesmay fall. Many unstable ornamentsfall. Unsecured furnituremay move, and unstable furnituremay topple over.Dishes in cupboards and itemson bookshelves are more likelyto fall. TVs may fall from theirstands, and unsecured furnituremay topple over.Many unsecured furniture movesand may topple over. Doors maybecome wedged shut.Most unsecured furniture moves,and is more likely to topple over.6.5 ≤ I j Most unsecured furniture movesand topples over, or may even bethrown through the air.—Electric wires swing slightly.Electric wires swing significantly.Those driving vehicles may notice thetremor.In some cases, windows may breakand fall. People notice electricitypoles moving. Roads may sustaindamage.Windows may break and fall, unreinforcedconcrete-block walls maycollapse, poorly installed vendingmachines may topple over, automobilesmay stop due to the difficulty ofcontinued movement.Wall tiles and windows may sustaindamage and fall.Wall tiles and windows are more likelyto break and fall. Most unreinforcedconcrete-block walls collapse.Wall tiles and windows are even morelikely to break and fall. Reinforcedconcrete-block walls may collapse.TABLE 3Explanation of JMA seismic intensity scales (http://www.jma.go.jp/) for wooden housesSeismicIntensity High Earthquake Resistance Low Earthquake Resistance4.5 ≤ I j < 5.0 — Slight cracks may form in walls.5.0 ≤ I j < 5.5 — Cracks may form in walls.5.5 ≤ I j < 6.0 Slight cracks may form in walls. Cracks are more likely to form in walls.Large cracks may form in walls.Tiles may fall, and buildings may lean or collapse.6.0 ≤ I j < 6.5 Cracks may form in walls. Large cracks are more likely to form in walls.Buildings are more likely to lean or collapse.6.5 ≤ I j Cracks are more likely to form in walls.Buildings may lean in some cases.Buildings are even more likely to lean or collapse.878 Seismological Research Letters Volume 82, Number 6 November/December 2011