DEVELOPMENT OF EVALUATION METHODS FOR DURATION

OF EARTHQUAKE MOTIONS

Nobuoto Nojima

ABSTRACT: Recent studies on the evaluation methods for duration of earthquake

motions are introduced. First, as a frequency-dependent duration measure, velocity
response envelope duration spectra are proposed using the envelope waveform of
SDOF oscillator. The method is extended for evaluating the duration of structural
response exceeding the bridge design spectra by employing the bridge design spectra as
a frequency-dependent threshold function. Finally, a method is proposed for evaluating
duration spectra for the long-period earthquake ground motion intensity scale in Japan.
Illustrative examples are shown as practical applications of the proposed methods.

KEYWORDS: duration spectra; strong motion; velocity response; envelope; design

spectra; long-period earthquake ground motion scale

1. INTRODUCTION

Amplitude and frequency content are the main indices to characterize strong ground
motions. In addition, duration is also important characteristics although they are not
explicitly reflected by various intensity measures. A variety of durations are classified
into four categories (Bommer and Martinez-Pereira, 2000; Bommer et al., 2009): 1)
Significant duration: the interval during which a certain portion of the total Arias
intensity is accumulated, 2) Bracketed duration: the interval between the first and last
excursion of a particular threshold amplitude, 3) Uniform duration: the sum of all of the
time intervals during which the amplitude of the record is above a particular threshold, 4)
Structural response duration: one of three definitions 1)-3) above applied to dynamic
response of a specific single-degree-of-freedom (SDOF) oscillator to an input ground
motion, emphasizing on the frequency-dependent nature of duration. The thresholds to
determine to the duration 2)-4) can be either absolute or relative values of the associated
shaking intensity.

The significant duration (Trifunac and Brady, 1975; Kempton and Stewart, 2006) is not
directly associated with absolute amplitude level. When adverse effects of duration to
structural performance during strong shaking are discussed, the duration should be
associated with its absolute amplitude level and with its frequency content as well. With
regard to structural response duration, relatively few study has been done so far (Perez,
1980; Kawashima and Aizawa, 1986). Therefore, the author has been focusing on the
uniform and structural response duration because of the advantage that duration can be
directly associated with arbitrary amplitude levels and frequency contents.

In this paper, recent studies conducted by the author on the evaluation methods for
duration of earthquake motions are introduced. First, as a frequency-dependent duration
measure, velocity response envelope duration spectra are proposed using the envelope
waveform of SDOF oscillator (Nojima, 2015). The method is extended for evaluating the
duration of structural response exceeding the bridge design spectra by employing the
bridge design spectra as a frequency-dependent threshold function (Nojima and
Yamamoto, 2017). Finally, a method is shown for evaluating duration spectra for the
long-period earthquake ground motion intensity scale in Japan (JMA, 2013; Nojima,
2016). Illustrative examples are shown as practical applications of the proposed methods.

2. DURATION SPECTRA OF RESPONSE OVER UNIFORM THRESHOLD

2.1 Velocity response envelope and its duration spectra

For proper evaluation of uniform/absolute/frequency-dependent duration, velocity

envelope defined by the total vibration energy of the oscillator is used. The time history
of the total energy, denoted by Q(t), of a lightly-damped SDOF oscillator with a lumped
mass m and stiffness k at time t is given as a sum of the kinetic energy and the potential
energy (Kameda, 1975).
1 1
Q(t ) my 2 (t ) ky 2 (t ) (1)
2 2
where y(t)=relative displacement response and y (t ) = relative velocity response of the
oscillator at time t. In this study, the envelope waveform (Trifunac, 1971) for relative
velocity response EV(, t) is adopted in order to measure the duration.
Q(t )
EV (T , t ) y 2 (t ) 0 2 y 2 (t ) (2)
m/2
where =(k/m)1/2 [rad/s] is undamped natural angular frequency and T=2/ [s] is
undamped natural period. The uniform/absolute/frequency-dependent duration DVRE (T,
E*) using the velocity response envelope EV(T,t) is calculated as total threshold intervals
of EV(T,t) for a given threshold E* as follows:
DVRE (T , E* ) (T , ti | E * )t (3)
i

1; EV (T , ti ) E *
(T , ti | E * ) (4)
0; EV (T , ti ) E
*

where t=time interval of accerelogram [s] and ti=discrete time step. The duration spectra
SDur-VRE(T, E*) can be obtained by plotting DVRE(T, E*) for various T (Nojima, 2015).

2.2 Numerical example

Examples of spectral representation of duration (h=5%) are shown using two strong
motions representative of a shallow crustal earthquake (the Hyogoken-Nambu
Earthquake, Japan, January 17 1995, Mw=6.8) and an off-shore inter-plate earthquake (the
2011 off the Pacific Coast of Tohoku Earthquake, Japan, March 11, 2011, Mw=9.0).
Figure 1 compares accelerograms of the NS component observed at JMA (Japan
Meteorological Agency) Kobe Marine Observatory (KOB) in the 1995 event and the EW
component observed at K-NET (National Research Institute for Earth Science and
Disaster Prevention) Tsukidate station (MYG004) in the 2011 event. If low amplitude
level is focused on, duration of KOB is around 20s, while that of MYG004 is longer than
120s.

In Figure 2, velocity response spectra SV (h=5%) is shown by the solid line. In addition,
the maximum value EVmax(T) of velocity response envelope EV(T,t) throughout the entire
waveform is shown by the dashed line. In KOB, the predominant period is around T=0.8-
0.9s and SV exceeds 100cm/s in wide range of T=0.3-3s. On the other hand, in MYG004,
sporadic peaks can be seen at several natural periods such as T=0.2, 0.4, 0.6 and 3s.
Figure 3 shows velocity response envelope spectra EV(T,t).

(a) JMA KOB (1995) (b) K-NET MYG004 (2011)

Figure 1. Accelerograms for numerical examples

(a) JMA KOB (1995) (b) K-NET MYG004 (2011)

Figure 2. Velocity response spectra SV and maxima of velocity response envelope
Emax (h=5%)

Figure 4 shows velocity response envelope duration spectra, SDur-VRE for various values of
E*=5-200cm/s. Durations of long period such as T=4-5s become longer with decreasing
threshold, which implies the effect of surface waves. Velocity response durations of
MYG004 substantially exceeds those of KOB for E*20cm/s as inferred from the
accelerograms shown in Figure 1. For E*=50cm/s, however, partially opposite tendency
can be observed. Furthermore, velocity response envelope duration of MYG004 becomes
extremely short for E*100cm/s and KOB substantially exceeds MYG004. These results
reveal the frequency-dependent and threshold-dependent nature of durations which cannot
be understood from visual inspection of Figure 1.

The horizontal dashed lines in Figure 4 represent frequency-independent significant

duration D5-95 calculated from cumulative power of accelerograms. While the significant
duration is evaluated as D5-95=8.4s for KOB, that for MYG004 is D5-95=84.7s. Although
these values of D5-95 are visually consistent with accelerograms in Figure 1, they cannot
be related to either frequency content or amplitude level. On the other hand, black solid
lines in Figure 4 represent frequency-dependent significant duration D5-95 calculated from
cumulative power of velocity response, whose equivalent thresholds are inconsistent
throughout the range of natural period. As opposed to this, the velocity response envelope
duration spectra SDur-VRE is prescribed by a consistent threshold E*.

Time [s] Time [s]

(a) JMA KOB (1995) (b) K-NET MYG004 (2011)
Figure 3. Velocity response envelope spectra EV (h=5%)

(a) JMA KOB (1995) (b) K-NET MYG004 (2011)

Figure 4. Velocity response envelope duration spectra SDur-VRE according to uniform
definition of duration (h=5%)
3. DURATION SPECTRA OF RESPONSE OVER BRIDGE DESIGN SPECTRA

3.1 Duration over frequency-dependent thresholds

The method mentioned in the previous chapter can be extended to evaluate duration DX
during which the relative velocity response exceeds various performance limits, denoted
by an event X, under strong motions (Nojima, 2017). For that purpose, the uniform
threshold E* in Equations (3) and (4) are replaced by arbitrary threshold E*(T) as a
function of natural period. Namely, Equations (5) and (6) below are applied instead of
Equations (3) and (4).
DX ( E* (T )) (ti | E * (T ))t (5)
i

1; E (ti ) E * (T )
(ti | E (T ))
*
(6)
0; E (ti ) E (T )
*

The equivalent number of cycles NX can be evaluated using the following equation.
D ( E * (T ))
N X ( E * (T )) X (7)
T

3.2 Bridge specification in Japan

The design spectra for bridge design in Japan (Japan Road Association, 2012) are
employed for frequency-dependent threshold functions. The bridge design spectrum is
generally represented by S CZ CD S0 , where S: acceleration response spectrum, S0:
standard acceleration response spectrum, CZ: zoning factor (correction coefficient for
reginal seismic zoning), and CD: damping correction factor (correction coefficient for
damping ratio). With regard to standard S0, two levels of strong ground motion are
prescribed.
Level 1 (L1): Ground motions that are expected to be experienced with high
probability during the design working life
Level 2 (L2): Ground motions that are expected to be experienced with low
probability during the design working life but are so intensive and may
be destructive to bridges (Type I: Off-shore plate boundary earthquake,
Type II: Inland crustal earthquake)
Three classes of ground are specified in order to consider the ground condition of the
bridge construction site: Ground class I (G-I): stiff diluvial ground or rock, Ground class
II (G-II): diluvial or alluvial ground that is not categorized into G-I or III, Ground class III
(G-III): soft alluvial ground. The zoning factor CZ is prescribed for each type of
earthquake. The coefficient is three-fold in consideration of seismicity around the bridge
construction site: Level 1: CZ = {1.0, 0.85, 0.7}, Level 2, Type II: CZ = {1.0, 0.85, 0.7}.
The damping correction factor CD is given as a function of damping ratio as
CD 1.5 / 40h 1 0.5 . Since the duration is evaluated in terms of velocity response, the
acceleration spectra are converted to the pseudo velocity spectra by dividing by natural
angular frequency .
3.3 Numerical example

Strong ground motions recorded at observation sites of K-NET and KiK-net (NIED) in
Kumamoto Prefecture are used (Nojima, 2017). The design spectra for L1 and L2-Type II
ground motions are applied. In this paper, KiK-net Mashiki station (KMMH16, G-II),
which is the closest station to the fault rupture, is focused on for demonstration. The
zoning factor in Kumamoto Prefecture is mainly CZ=0.85. However, the zoning factor is
uniformly set to CZ=1.0 herein. The influence of the zoning factor is examined
afterwards.

Figure 5 shows the accelerogram and response velocity spectra compared with the
pseudo design spectra for all ground classes. Figure 6 shows the duration spectra and the
number of cycles spectra. The velocity response spectra exceeds 100 cm/s at a wide range
of natural period between 0.3-4s. The velocity response spectra exceed the L1 design
spectra for G-II at all range of natural period. The longest duration exceeding the L1
design spectra is 17.3s at natural period T=2.9s and the maximum number of cycles is
62.0 cycles at T=0.23s. The velocity response spectra partially exceed the L2 design
spectra mainly at short period up to T=0.83s, especially around T=0.2-0.4s. The longest
duration exceeding the L2 design spectra is 1.6s at T=0.33s and the maximum number of
cycles is 4.9 cycles at T=0.32s.

The actual zoning factor assigned to the station KMMH16 is CZ=0.85. In Figures 5 and 6,
the results are shown for CZ=1.0. Here, the effect of CZ is examined by comparing the
results for CZ=1.0, 0.85, 0.7. The small value of the zoning factor CZ gives low design
spectra, thus lengthening the duration spectra consistently. Figure 7 shows the result.
Duration of velocity response over L1 design spectra is not lengthened at mid period
range. However, in short and long period, duration becomes sensitive to CZ, especially at
T>3s. As for L2-Type II design spectra, CZ affects the duration at T<1s.

(a) Accelerogram (NS component) (b) Response velocity spectra and pseudo design
spectra
Figure 5 Accelerogram and response velocity spectra (KiK-net Mashiki, KMMH16,
G-II) and pseudo design spectra

(c) Duration spectra (d) Number of cycles spectra

Figure 6 Duration spectra and number of cycles spectra (KMMH16, G-II)

(a) Level 1 (b) Level 2, Type II

Figure 7 The effects of the zoning factor CZ on duration over design spectra
(KMMH16, G-II)

4. DURATION SPECTRA FOR LONG PERIOD GROUND MOTION INTENSITY

4.1 Definition of long period ground motion intensity

In 2013, Japan Meteorological Agency started to issue information on the long-period

earthquake ground motion intensity scale (JMA, 2013, 2015). It is a four-fold scale
representing the shaking intensity in association with the degree of difficulty in human
behavior in response to strong shaking, and that of damage such as moving or toppling of
furniture and equipment inside high-rise buildings with natural period around 1-2s to 7-
8s. With this regard, a method was proposed for evaluating frequency-dependent,
bracketed and uniform duration defined for four absolute thresholds corresponding to the
long-period earthquake ground motion intensity scale (Nojima, 2016).

4.2 Procedure for evaluation of duration spectra

First, absolute velocity response spectra Sva are evaluated for single-degree-of-freedom
systems with 32 kinds of natural period ranging T=1.67.8s with 0.2s step for damping
ratio h=5%. The four-fold intensity scale 1, 2, 3 or 4 is then assigned if the maximum
among the 32 values of response spectra exceeds thresholds 5, 15, 50 or 100cm/s,
respectively. In this study, two kinds of duration DB and DU (subscript B stands for
Bracketed and U does for Uniform, respectively) are evaluated and represented in
spectral form. The procedure for evaluation are as follows (Nojima, 2016):
1) Iterate the step 2)-5) below for a set of SDOF systems with 32 kinds of natural
period ranging Ti=1.67.8s with 0.2s step for damping ratio h=5%.
2) Input orthogonal horizontal two components of ground acceleration Ax (t ) and
Ay (t ) [cm/s2] into the set of SDOF systems defined above, and calculate the
outputs of absolute velocity response Vxi (t ) and Vyi (t ) [cm/s], where t [s] represents
the time.
3) Synthesize the two components of waveforms by use of vector composition
Vi (t ) Vxi 2 (t ) Vyi 2 (t ) [cm/s].
4) Evaluate the bracketed duration DBij [s] as the duration starting from the first
upward excursion to the last downward excursion of Vi (t ) over four kinds of
thresholds V j* ( j 1, 2,3, 4) .
5) Calculate response envelope VEi (tw ; t ) of Vi (t ) by keeping the peak value during the
prescribed window width tw [s], and then evaluate the the uniform duration
DUij (tw ) [s] as the total intervals of VEi (tw ; t ) over thresholds V j* ( j 1, 2,3, 4) .
6) Draw duration spectra representing the relationship between time period Ti and
DBij or DUij (tw ) .
In evaluating uniform duration, a peak-hold method is employed (Nojima, 2016). A
moving time window of rectangular shape with time width tw [s] is applied to the original
waveform of absolute velocity response. The peak-hold waveform is obtained by
adopting the maximum value within the time window. As for the time width, a half width
of natural period tw =T/2 has been found to be optimum.

4.3 Numerical example

Illustrative examples are shown using accelerograms recorded at K-NET Sendai station
(MYG013) in the 2011 Off the Pacific Coast of Tohoku Earthquake, Japan. Figure 8(a)
shows the EW component of accelerogram. Figure 8(b) shows the ground velocity and
relative velocity responses of SDOF with h=5%, T=4s. By summing them, the absolute
velocity responses are obtained as shown in Figure 8(c). The time history of the
amplitude of vector composition of the horizontal two components of absolute velocity
responses is shown in Figure 8(d). It should be noted that the peak-to-peak interval in
Figure 8(d) is approximately T/2, while that in Figure 8(c) is approximately T [s]. As for
the window width tw for calculation of the response envelopes, five values are compared:
tw=t, 1, T/2, T, 10s. Here, t [s] represents the time step of strong motion records and
response time series. Figure 9 compares response envelopes using different window
width for SDOF with T=4s. Small fluctuations remain even after applying the moving
window with tw=1s. It implies that peak hold is not enough. On the contrary, the values
tw=10s and tw=T=4s give too long peak hold. The most appropriate response envelope that
best represents the transition of waveforms is given by tw=T/2=2s which corresponds to
the approximate peak-to-peak interval in Figure 8(d). On this basis, tw=T/2 has been
adopted in this study.

Figure 10(a) shows the relative velocity response spectra Sv and the absolute velocity
response spectra Sva. In this case, the latter is smaller than the former at all range of
natural period. Figure 10(a) also shows the duration spectra for the long period ground
motion intensity scale. In general, DB takes on longer value than DU. The absolute
velocity response spectra Sva reaches intensity 2 ( V2* 15 ) at all range of natural period,
intensity 3 ( V3* 50 ) at T < 4s and intensity 4 ( V4* 100 ) at T < 2s. Figure 10(b) and (c)
show the results for K-NET Odawara station (KNG013) in the 2011 Off the Pacific Coast
of Tohoku Earthquake and K-NET Tomakomai (HKD129) station in the 2003 Tokachi-
oki Earthquake. Duration of intensity 4 appears only around corresponding predominant
period. Durations of intensity 3 are longer than 50s in a wide range of period in HKD129.
As for intensity 1 and 2, DB and DU reach as long as a few minutes, which is considered
as the characteristics of a huge meta-thrust earthquake.

(a) EW component of ground acceleration

(b) Ground velocity (black line) and relative velocity response (green line)
 (c) Absolute velocity response

(d) Amplitude of horizontal (EW and NS) components of absolute velocity response
Figure 8. Process of horizontal components recorded at the K-NET Sendai
(MYG013) (h=5%, T=4s)

Figure 9. Response envelopes using different window width for T=4s

(a) MYG013 Sendai (2011 Tohoku EQ)

 (b) KNG013 Odawara (2011 Tohoku EQ)

(c) HKD129 Tomakomai (2003 Tokachi-oki EQ)

Figure 10. Relative and absolute velocity response spectra, Sv and Sva (h=5%) (left)
and duration spectra (dashed line: DB, solid line: DU) (right)

5. CONCLUSIONS

In this paper, recent studies conducted by the author on the evaluation methods for
duration of earthquake ground motions, structural responses and intensity measures were
introduced. First, on the basis of uniform/absolute/frequency-dependent definition of
duration, velocity response envelope duration spectra SDur-VRE was proposed using the
envelope waveform of velocity response of SDOF oscillator with damping ratio h=5%.
The duration of strong motion for various natural periods and thresholds were visually
represented by a spectral form. Next, a method for evaluating the duration of structural
response exceeding the bridge design spectra and the equivalent number of cycles was
proposed by employing the design spectra prescribed in the bridge design specification as
a frequency-dependent threshold function. Additional information on duration implies
dynamic effect of strong motion to a structure that are not fully evaluated by a simple
comparison of amplitude of response. Finally, a method was proposed for evaluating
duration spectra for bracketed and uniform duration defined for four absolute thresholds
corresponding to the long-period earthquake ground motion intensity scale of Japan
Meteorological Agency. In order to calculate response envelope required for evaluation of
uniform duration, the peak-hold method using moving window with a half width of
natural period was employed. Illustrative examples were shown to demonstrate practical
applications of the proposed methods.
 REFERENCES
Bommer, J. J. and Martinez-Pereira, A. (2000) Strong-motion parameters: Definition, usefulness
and predictability. Proc. of the 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland,
New Zealand, paper No.0206 (on CD-ROM).
Bommer J. J., Stafford P. J. & Alarcn J. E. (2009) Empirical equations for the prediction of the
significant, bracketed, and uniform duration of earthquake ground motion. Bulletin of the
Seismological Society of America, Vol.99(6), 3217-3233.
Japan Road Association (2012) Specifications for highway bridges, Part V, Seismic design. (in
Japanese)

Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) (2013) Long-period ground motion intensity scale and its
explanation table. http://www.data.jma.go.jp/svd/eew/data/ltpgm_explain/about_level.html (in
Japanese)
Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) (2015) Expert committee on information on long-period
ground motion (No.8, Material-3), Improvement of observation information on long-period
ground motion Improvement of the evaluation method. http://www.data.
jma.go.jp/svd/eqev/data/study-panel/tyoshuki_joho_kentokai/kentokai8/siryou3.pdf (in Japanese)
Kameda, K. (1975) Evolutionary spectra of seismogram by multifilter. Journal of the
Engineering Mechanics Division, ASCE, Vol.101(6), 787-801.
Kawashima K. and Aizawa, K. (1986) Earthquake response spectra taking account of number of
response cycles. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol.14(2), 185-197.

Kempton, J. J. and Stewart, J. P. (2006) Prediction equations for significant duration of

earthquake ground motions considering site and near-source effects. Earthquake Spectra,
Vol.22(4), 985-1013.

Nojima, N. (2015) Frequency-dependent strong motion duration using total threshold intervals of
velocity response envelope. Proc. of the 10th Pacific Conference on Earthquake Engineering,
Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Nojima, N. (2016) Duration spectra for long-period earthquake ground motion. Proc. of the 6th
Asian Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Cebu, Philippines, Paper No.A2-46.
Nojima, N. and Yamamoto, T. (2017) Duration of strong motion exceeding bridge design spectra
in the 2016 Kumamoto Earthquake. (Submitted for Journal of Disaster Research)
Perez, V. (1980) Spectra of amplitudes sustained for a given number of cycles: An interpretation
of response duration for strong-motion earthquake records. Bulletin of the Seismological Society
of America, Vol.70(5), 1943-1954.
The National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention (NIED) (2016) K-
NET, KiK-net. http://www.kyoshin.bosai.go.jp/kyoshin/
Trifunac, M. D. (1971) Response envelope spectrum and interpretation of strong earthquake
ground motion. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, Vol.61(2), 343-356.

Trifunac, M. D. and Brady, A. G. (1975) A study on the duration of strong earthquake ground
motion. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, Vol.65(3), 581-626.
 ABOUT THE AUTHORS

The author is a professor of the Department of Civil Engineering, Gifu University, Japan, since
2006. Postal address: Yanagido 1-1, Gifu 501-1193, Japan. Tel/Fax: +81-58-293-2416. E-mail:
nojima@gifu-u.ac.jp

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP26350486. Strong motion records
obtained by K-NET and KiK-net, operated by NIED, were used in this study. The author
gratefully acknowledges the assistance.