QUAKE - ProShake Comparison

GEO-SLOPE International Ltd, Calgary, Alberta, Canada www.geo-slope.
com
QUAKE/W – ProShake Comparison

1 Introduction
ProShake is a commercially available software product for doing one-dimensional ground response
analyses. It was developed and is being maintained under the guidance of Professor Steven L. Kramer at
Washington State University at Pullman, Washington, who is also the author of the book, Geotechnical
Earthquake Engineering.
ProShake is being marketed by EduPro Civil Systems, Inc, Sammamish, WA, USA. Their website is:
http://www.proshake.com
ProShake is a useful tool for checking the performance of QUAKE/W, since it is an independently
developed product, and since it is based on a completely different formulation than that used in
QUAKE/W. Comparison of results from these two entirely different products is a good way of validating
the QUAKE/W formulation and implementation.
This example gives the results of a comparison study for three different earthquake records.
2 Formulations
ProShake is based on a frequency domain formulation. It is basically a mode superposition method. This
method uses a Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) to convert the input motion from a time domain into a
Fourier series frequency domain. The response at any location in the frequency domain can be obtained
by using the input motion together with a transfer function. After computing the response in the frequency
domain, the method uses an inverse FFT to transform the solution back to a time domain.
QUAKE/W, on the other hand, is based on a finite element formulation with a direct integration scheme
in the time domain. “Direct integration” means no transformation of the equations into the frequency
domain is required. Stated another way, the motion equations are solved directly using a finite-difference
time-stepping procedure.
3 Problem configuration and setup

ProShake comes with an example problem that replicates the example soil profile used in the original
SHAKE user’s manual. SHAKE was a computer program developed at the University of California at
Berkeley in the 1970’s. A later version was known as SHAKE91. Today, a version with a Windows
interface is available as SHAKE2000 (www.shake2000.com). ProShake uses this profile to compare the
results from ProShake with SHAKE91. By having been around for so long, this soil profile has become a
standard of sorts for this type of verification.
The soil profile in SHAKE and ProShake must be defined as layers with constant properties. The layers
allow for some variation in properties with depth.
The SHAKE profile consists of an upper 30-foot (9 m) layer of sand. Below the sand from a depth of 30 ft
down to 70 feet (21 m) is a clay layer, and under the clay is sand down to 150 feet below the ground
surface. The bedrock is at the 150-foot (45 m) level. For analysis, this profile is divided into 17 layers.
The upper 10 feet (3m) is divided into two 5-foot (1.5m) layers. The remaining layers are all 10 feet (3 m)
in thickness. In ProShake, the bedrock is considered as a layer (#17) and is deemed to extend down a
great undefined distance.
QUAKE/W Example File: QUAKE-ProShake comparison.doc (pdf) (gsz) Page 1 of 27

GEO-SLOPE International Ltd, Calgary, Alberta, Canada www.geo-slope.com
The watertable is 10 feet below the ground surface (the watertable actually does not come into play, since
all material properties are specified as constant for each layer; that is, they are not a function of the
effective overburden stress).
The ProShake problem definition can be simulated in QUAKE/W with a column of elements, as shown in
Figure 1. There are 16 regions with one element per region.
The base of the column is fixed. This has the effect of the earthquake motion being applied at the column
base. Another way to look at this is that the bedrock is infinitely stiff and the full earthquake motion is felt
at the base of the column.
The sides of the column are fixed in the vertical direction, which ensures that all the motion is in the
horizontal direction only, an assumption inherent in the ProShake 1D formulation.
To make a comparison between ProShake and QUAKE/W, it is vitally important to uncheck all outcrop options in
ProShake and to apply the earthquake motion at the top of the rock; that is, do not use the outcrop options in
ProShake.
180
1
2
170
3
160
4
150 Earthquake response
5 of level ground
140
6
130
7
Distance - feet
120
8
110
9
100
10
90
11
80
12
70
13
60
14
50
15
40
16
30
Figure 1 The SHAKE soil profile defined in QUAKE/W

4 Material Properties
The material properties used for each of the layers are summarized in the following table:
Layer Material Thickness Unit Gmax Vs Poisson’s Modulus Damping
Number Name (m) Weight (MPa) (m/sec) Ratio Curve Curve
(kN/m3) QUAKE/W
1 Sand 1.52 19.64 185.87 304.8 0.45 Sand (Seed Sand (Idriss
and Idriss 1990)
1970)
and Idriss 1990)
1970)
and Idriss 1990)
1970)
and Idriss 1990)
1970)
5 Clay 3.05 19.64 185.87 304.8 0.45 Clay (Seed and Clay (Idriss
Sun 1989) 1990)
Sun 1989) 1990)
Sun 1989) 1990)
Sun 1989) 1990)
and Idriss 1990)
1970)
and Idriss 1990)
1970)
and Idriss 1990)
1970)
and Idriss 1990)
1970)
and Idriss 1990)
1970)
and Idriss 1990)
1970)
and Idriss 1990)
1970)
and Idriss 1990)
1970)
17 Rock infinite 21.99 3333.49 1219.2 0.01

The G reduction functions and Damping Ratio functions for the sand and clay are shown in Figure 2 and
Figure 3.
Sand (Seed and Idriss 1970) Sand (Idriss 1990)

0.4
1.0
0.8 0.3
Damping Ratio
G / Gmax
0.6
0.2
0.4
0.1
0.2
0.0 0.0
Cyclic Shear Strain (%) Cyclic Shear Strain (%)
Figure 2 Property functions for the sand
clay (Seed and Sun 1989) Clay (Idriss 1990)

1.0 0.4
0.9
0.8
0.3
Damping Ratio
0.7
G / Gmax
0.6
0.2
0.5
0.4
0.1
0.3
0.2
0.1 0.0
Cyclic Shear Strain (%) Cyclic Shear Strain (%)
Figure 3 Property functions for the clay
5 Input Motions
The comparisons are done here for three different earthquake time-history records. The prime motivation
in selecting these records was to include records with difference frequency contents. The predominant
frequencies of the selected motions vary from 1.2 Hz to 12 Hz.
The records are referred to here as:
• The Treasure Island Earthquake

• The El Centro Earthquake
• The Saguenay Earthquake
The Treasure Island and El Centro Earthquakes were in California, USA. The Saguenay Earthquake was
in Quebec, Canada.

0.15
0.10
Acceleration ( g )
0.05
0.00
-0.05
-0.10
-0.15
-0.20
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0
time ( sec )
Figure 4 The Treasure Island Earthquake
0.40
0.30
Acceleration ( g )
0.20
0.10
0.00
-0.10
-0.20
-0.30
-0.40
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0
time ( sec )
Figure 5 The El Centro Earthquake
0.15
0.10
Acceleration ( g )
0.05
0.00
-0.05
-0.10
-0.15
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0
time ( sec )
Figure 6 The Saguenay Earthquake

6 Comparison graphs
The data from both QUAKE/W and ProShake were taken into EXCEL to create graphs, so that the results
from both pieces of software are on the same graph.
All the graphs are self-explanatory as to the variable that is being compared.
There are two types of graphs. One group shows the variation with time at the top of the column. The
other group shows the peak values on a depth profile.
7 The Treasure Island Earthquake

The Loma Prieta Earthquake (M 6.9) occurred on October 17, 1989. The epicenter was near the Loma
Prieta Peak in the Santa Cruz Mountains in California to the south-east of the San Francisco Bay area.
The time-history record used here was obtained from a nearby recording station on the Treasure Island
Military Base. The predominant period for this record is about 0.64 seconds.
The following figures (Figure 7 to Figure 19) give the QUAKE/W – ProShake comparisons.
0.60
Quake
0.40
Acceleration ( g )
ProShake
0.20
0.00
-0.20
-0.40
-0.60
-0.80
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0
time ( sec )
Figure 7 Treasure Island surface ground accelerations
3.00
Quake
2.00
ProShake
Velocity ( ft/sec )
1.00
0.00
-1.00
-2.00
-3.00
-4.00
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0
time ( sec )
Figure 8 Treasure Island surface velocities

0.80
Quake
0.60
ProShake
Displacement ( ft )
0.40
0.20
0.00
-0.20
-0.40
-0.60
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0
time ( sec )
Figure 9 Treasure Island surface displacements
3.5
Quake
3.0 ProShake
2.5
Acceleration ( g )
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0
Period ( sec )
Figure 10 Treasure Island surface spectral accelerations

12.0
Quake
10.0 ProShake
Velocity ( ft/sec )
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
0.0
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0
Period ( sec )
Figure 11 Treasure Island surface spectral velocities
1.4
Quake
1.2 ProShake
Displacement ( ft )
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0
Period ( sec )
Figure 12 Treasure Island surface spectral displacements

190
Quake
170 ProShake
150
130
Y ( ft )
110
90
70
50
30
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80
Peak Acceleration ( g )
Figure 13 Treasure Island peak acceleration profile
190
Quake
170 ProShake
150
130
Y ( ft )
110
90
70
50
30
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00
Peak Velocity ( ft/sec )
Figure 14 Treasure Island peak velocity profile

190
Quake
170 ProShake
150
130
Y ( ft )
110
90
70
50
30
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80
Peak Displacement ( ft )
Figure 15 Treasure Island peak displacement profile
190
Quake
170
ProShake
150
130
Y ( ft )
110
90
70
50
30
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
Peak Shear Stress ( psf )
Figure 16 Treasure Island peak shear stress profile

190
Quake
170 ProShake
150
130
Y ( ft )
110
90
70
50
30
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40
Peak Shear Strain ( % )
Figure 17 Treasure Island peak shear strain profile
190
Quake
170 ProShake
150
130
Y ( ft )
110
90
70
50
30
0 2000 4000 6000 8000
Equivalent Shear Modulus G ( ksf )
Figure 18 Treasure Island equivalent shear modulus profile

190
Quake
170 ProShake
150
130
Y ( ft )
110
90
70
50
30
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0
Equivalent Damping Ratio ( % )
Figure 19 Treasure Island equivalent damping ratio profile

8 The El Centro Earthquake

The El Centro time-history record is from the Imperial Valley Earthquake (M 7.1) that occurred in May
1940. The shock caused 40 miles of surface faulting on the Imperial Fault, which is part of the San
Andreas system in southern California. The predominant period for this record is about 0.85 seconds.
0.8
0.6 Quake
ProShake
Acceleration ( g )
0.4
0.2
0.0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
-1.0
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0
time ( sec )
Figure 20 El Centro ground surface accelerations
3.0
Quake
2.0
ProShake
Velocity ( ft/sec )
1.0
0.0
-1.0
-2.0
-3.0
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0
time ( sec )
Figure 21 El Centro ground surface velocity

0.4
Quake
0.2
ProShake
Displacement ( ft )
0.0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
-1.0
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0
time ( sec )
Figure 22 El Centro ground surface displacements
3.5
Quake
3.0 ProShake
Spectral Acceleration ( g )
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Period ( sec )
Figure 23 El Centro spectral ground surface accelerations

12.0
Quake
10.0 ProShake
Spectral Velocity ( ft/sec )
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Period ( sec )
Figure 24 El Centro spectral ground surface velocity
1.4
Spectral Displacement ( ft )
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2 Quake
ProShake
0.0
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0
Period ( sec )
Figure 25 El Centro spectral ground surface displacement

190
Quake
170 ProShake
150
130
Y ( ft )
110
90
70
50
30
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
Figure 26 El Centro peak acceleration profile
190
Quake
170 ProShake
150
130
Y ( ft )
110
90
70
50
30
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Figure 27 El Centro peak velocity profile

190
Quake
170
ProShake
150
130
Y ( ft )
110
90
70
50
30
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
Figure 28 El Centro peak displacement profile
190
Quake
170
ProShake
150
130
Y ( ft )
110
90
70
50
30
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
Figure 29 El Centro peak shear stress profile

190
Quake
170
ProShake
150
130
Y ( ft )
110
90
70
50
30
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Figure 30 El Centro peak shear strain profile
190
Quake
170
ProShake
150
130
Y ( ft )
110
90
70
50
30
0 2000 4000 6000 8000
Figure 31 El Centro peak shear modulus profile

190
Quake
170
ProShake
150
130
Y ( ft )
110
90
70
50
30
0 5 10 15 20 25
Figure 32 El Centro peak damping ratio profile
9 The Saguenay Earthquake

The Saguenay Earthquake (M 5.9) occurred in Quebec, Canada on November 25, 1988. This record is of
interest because of its high frequency content. The predominant period for this record is about 0.084
seconds.
0.3
0.2 ProShake
Acceleration ( g )
0.1
0.0
-0.1
-0.2
-0.3
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0
time ( sec )
Figure 33 Saguenay ground surface acceleration

0.3
0.2 Quake
Acceleration ( g )
0.1
0.0
-0.1
-0.2
-0.3
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0
time ( sec )
Figure 34 Saguenay ground surface acceleration
0.25
0.20
ProShake
Velocity ( ft/sec )
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
-0.05
-0.10
-0.15
-0.20
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0
time ( sec )
Figure 35 Saguenay ground surface velocity

0.25
0.20
Quake
0.15
Velocity ( ft/sec )
0.10
0.05
0.00
-0.05
-0.10
-0.15
-0.20
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0
time ( sec )
Figure 36 Saguenay ground surface velocity
0.35
0.30
Displacement ( ft )
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
ProShake
0.00
-0.05
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0
time ( sec )
Figure 37 Saguenay ground surface displacements

0.35
0.30
Displacement ( ft )
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00 Quake
-0.05
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0
time ( sec )
Figure 38 Saguenay ground surface displacements
1.2
Quake
Spectral Acceleration ( g )
1.0 ProShake
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Period ( sec )
Figure 39 Saguenay spectral ground surface accelerations

1.4
Quake
1.2
Spectral Velocity ( ft/sec )
ProShake
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Period ( sec )
Figure 40 Saguenay spectral ground surface velocities
0.10
Quake
Spectral Displacement ( ft )
ProShake
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.00
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Period ( sec )
Figure 41 Saguenay spectral ground surface displacements

190
Quake
170 ProShake
150
130
Y ( ft )
110
90
70
50
30
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30
Figure 42 Saguenay peak acceleration profile
190
Quake
170 ProShake
150
130
Y ( ft )
110
90
70
50
30
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25
Figure 43 Saguenay peak velocity profile

190
Quake
170 ProShake
150
130
Y ( ft )
110
90
70
50
30
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35
Figure 44 Saguenay peak displacement profile
190
Quake
170 ProShake
150
130
Y ( ft )
110
90
70
50
30
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Figure 45 Saguenay peak shear stress profile

190
170
150
130
Y ( ft )
110
90
70
Quake
50
ProShake
30
0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02
Figure 46 Saguenay peak shear strain profile
190
Quake
170 ProShake
150
130
Y ( ft )
110
90
70
50
30
0 2500 5000 7500 10000 12500 15000
Figure 47 Saguenay equivalent shear modulus profile

190
170
150
130
Y ( ft )
110
90
70
Quake
50
ProShake
30
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

Figure 48 Saguenay equivalent damping ratio profile
10 Concluding remarks
The agreement between the QUAKE/W and ProShake results is remarkably close, especially when
considering the vastly different theories and formulations on which the two products are based.
The one exception where there is some noticeable difference is in the shear stress profile. This is
understandable. In QUAKE/W, the base is fixed, and so very slight changes in the motion could cause
significant changes in the shear stress. In ProShake, the base is not fixed, and so is slightly more flexible,
which could cause the shear stress to be different. When considering that the boundary conditions are so
entirely different, it is surprising that the shear stress profiles are as close as they actually are.
The close agreement in the comparisons lends credence to the conclusion that both products are
formulated and implemented in accordance with the theory.
Where there are differences, it is not possible to say which product is more correct.
In the end, the comparative study here provides strong evidence that the QUAKE/W formulation and
implementation is correct.

QUAKE - ProShake Comparison

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

QUAKE - ProShake Comparison

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

GEO-SLOPE International Ltd, Calgary, Alberta, Canada www.geo-slope.

QUAKE/W – ProShake Comparison

3 Problem configuration and setup

QUAKE/W Example File: QUAKE-ProShake comparison.doc (pdf) (gsz) Page 1 of 27

Figure 1 The SHAKE soil profile defined in QUAKE/W

QUAKE/W Example File: QUAKE-ProShake comparison.doc (pdf) (gsz) Page 2 of 27

QUAKE/W Example File: QUAKE-ProShake comparison.doc (pdf) (gsz) Page 3 of 27

Sand (Seed and Idriss 1970) Sand (Idriss 1990)

Figure 2 Property functions for the sand

clay (Seed and Sun 1989) Clay (Idriss 1990)

Figure 3 Property functions for the clay

• The Treasure Island Earthquake

QUAKE/W Example File: QUAKE-ProShake comparison.doc (pdf) (gsz) Page 4 of 27

Figure 4 The Treasure Island Earthquake

Figure 5 The El Centro Earthquake

Figure 6 The Saguenay Earthquake

QUAKE/W Example File: QUAKE-ProShake comparison.doc (pdf) (gsz) Page 5 of 27

7 The Treasure Island Earthquake

Figure 7 Treasure Island surface ground accelerations

Figure 8 Treasure Island surface velocities

QUAKE/W Example File: QUAKE-ProShake comparison.doc (pdf) (gsz) Page 6 of 27

Figure 9 Treasure Island surface displacements

Figure 10 Treasure Island surface spectral accelerations

QUAKE/W Example File: QUAKE-ProShake comparison.doc (pdf) (gsz) Page 7 of 27

Figure 11 Treasure Island surface spectral velocities

Figure 12 Treasure Island surface spectral displacements

QUAKE/W Example File: QUAKE-ProShake comparison.doc (pdf) (gsz) Page 8 of 27

Figure 13 Treasure Island peak acceleration profile

Figure 14 Treasure Island peak velocity profile

QUAKE/W Example File: QUAKE-ProShake comparison.doc (pdf) (gsz) Page 9 of 27

Figure 15 Treasure Island peak displacement profile

Peak Shear Stress ( psf )

Figure 16 Treasure Island peak shear stress profile

QUAKE/W Example File: QUAKE-ProShake comparison.doc (pdf) (gsz) Page 10 of 27

Figure 17 Treasure Island peak shear strain profile

Figure 18 Treasure Island equivalent shear modulus profile

QUAKE/W Example File: QUAKE-ProShake comparison.doc (pdf) (gsz) Page 11 of 27

Figure 19 Treasure Island equivalent damping ratio profile

QUAKE/W Example File: QUAKE-ProShake comparison.doc (pdf) (gsz) Page 12 of 27

8 The El Centro Earthquake

Figure 20 El Centro ground surface accelerations

Figure 21 El Centro ground surface velocity

QUAKE/W Example File: QUAKE-ProShake comparison.doc (pdf) (gsz) Page 13 of 27

Figure 22 El Centro ground surface displacements

Figure 23 El Centro spectral ground surface accelerations

QUAKE/W Example File: QUAKE-ProShake comparison.doc (pdf) (gsz) Page 14 of 27

Figure 24 El Centro spectral ground surface velocity

Figure 25 El Centro spectral ground surface displacement

QUAKE/W Example File: QUAKE-ProShake comparison.doc (pdf) (gsz) Page 15 of 27

Figure 26 El Centro peak acceleration profile

Figure 27 El Centro peak velocity profile

QUAKE/W Example File: QUAKE-ProShake comparison.doc (pdf) (gsz) Page 16 of 27

Figure 28 El Centro peak displacement profile

Figure 29 El Centro peak shear stress profile

QUAKE/W Example File: QUAKE-ProShake comparison.doc (pdf) (gsz) Page 17 of 27

Figure 30 El Centro peak shear strain profile

Figure 31 El Centro peak shear modulus profile

QUAKE/W Example File: QUAKE-ProShake comparison.doc (pdf) (gsz) Page 18 of 27

Figure 32 El Centro peak damping ratio profile

9 The Saguenay Earthquake

Figure 33 Saguenay ground surface acceleration

QUAKE/W Example File: QUAKE-ProShake comparison.doc (pdf) (gsz) Page 19 of 27

Figure 34 Saguenay ground surface acceleration