Selecting and scaling ground motion time histories according to Eurocode 8 and ASCE 7-05

  • Ergun, Mustafa (Karadeniz Technical University, Department of Civil Engineering) ;
  • Ates, Sevket (Karadeniz Technical University, Department of Civil Engineering)
  • Received : 2012.07.10
  • Accepted : 2013.05.23
  • Published : 2013.08.07


Linear and nonlinear time history analyses have been becoming more common in seismic analysis and design of structures with advances in computer technology and earthquake engineering. One of the most important issues for such analyses is the selection of appropriate acceleration time histories and matching these histories to a code design acceleration spectrum. In literature, there are three sources of acceleration time histories: artificial records, synthetic records obtained from seismological models and accelerograms recorded in real earthquakes. Because of the increase of the number of strong ground motion database, using and scaling real earthquake records for seismic analysis has been becoming one of the most popular research issues in earthquake engineering. In general, two methods are used for scaling actual earthquake records: scaling in time domain and frequency domain. The objective of this study is twofold: the first is to discuss and summarize basic methodologies and criteria for selecting and scaling ground motion time histories. The second is to analyze scaling results of time domain method according to ASCE 7-05 and Eurocode 8 (1998-1:2004) criteria. Differences between time domain method and frequency domain method are mentioned briefly. The time domain scaling procedure is utilized to scale the available real records obtained from near fault motions and far fault motions to match the proposed elastic design acceleration spectrum given in the Eurocode 8. Why the time domain method is preferred in this study is stated. The best fitted ground motion time histories are selected and these histories are analyzed according to Eurocode 8 (1998-1:2004) and ASCE 7-05 criteria. Also, characteristics of both near fault ground motions and far fault ground motions are presented by the help of figures. Hence, we can compare the effects of near fault ground motions on structures with far fault ground motions' effects.


  1. Abrahamson, N.A. (1993), "Non-stationary spectral matching program RSPMATCH", User Manual.
  2. Alavi, B. and Krawinkler, H. (2000), "Consideration of near-fault ground motion effects in seismic design", Proc. of the 12th World Conf. on Earthquake Engineering, Paper No.2665, New Zealand Society of Earthquake Engineering, Silverstream, New Zealand.
  3. American Society of Civil Engineers (2006), "Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures", ASCE/SEI 7-05, USA.
  4. Baez, J.I. and Miranda, E. (2000), "Amplification factors to estimate inelastic displacement demands for the design of structures in the near field", Proc. of the 12th World Conf. on Earthquake Engineering, Paper No. 1561, New Zealand Society of Earthquake Engineering, Silverstream, New Zealand.
  5. Baker, J.W. and Cornell, C.A. (2008), "Vector-valued intensity measures for pulse-like near-fault ground motions", Eng. Struct., 30, 4, 1048-1057.
  6. Bazzurro, P. and Luco, N. (2004), "Parameterization of non-stationary acceleration time histories", Lifelines program project 1G00 addenda, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research (PEER) Center, Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA, 83.
  7. Bolt, B.A. and Gregor, N.J. (1993), "Synthesized strong ground motions for the seismic condition assessment of the eastern portion of the San Francisco bay bridge", Report UCB/EERC-93/12, University of California, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, CA.
  8. Bommer, J.J. and Acevedo, A. (2004), "The use of real earthquake accelerograms as input to dynamic analysis", J. Earthq. Eng., 8(1), 43-91.
  9. Bozorgnia, Y. and Mahin, S.A. (1998), "Ductility and strength demands of near-fault ground structure-specific scalar intensity measures 389 motions of the Northridge earthquake", Proc. of the 6th U.S. National Conf. on Earthquake Engineering, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Seattle.
  10. Chopra, A.K. and Chinatanapakdee, C. (2004), "Inelastic deformation ratios for design and evaluation of structures: single-degree-of-freedom bilinear systems", J. Struct. Eng., 130(9), 1309-1319.
  11. Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance, Eurocode 8-Part 1: General Rules, Seismic Actions and Rules for Buildings.
  12. Fahjan, Y.M. (2008), ''Turkiye Deprem Yonetmeligi (DBYBHY, 2007) Tasarim Ivme Spektrumuna Uygun Gercek Deprem Kayitlarinin Secilmesi ve Olceklenmesi", IMO Teknik Dergi, 4423-4444, Yazi 292.
  13. Fahjan, Y.M. (2010), "Selection, scaling and simulation of input ground motion for time history analysis of structures", Seminar and Lunch on Earthquake Engineering and Historic Masonry.
  14. Hachem, M.M., Mathias, N.J., Wang, Y.Y., Fajfar, P., Tsai, K.C., Ingham, J.M., Oyarzo-Vera, C.A. and Lee, S. (2010), "An international comparison of ground motion selection criteria for seismic design", Joint IABSE-fib Conference, May 3-5, Dubrovnik, Croatia.
  15. Iervolino, I. and Cornell, C.A. (2005), ''Record selection for nonlinear seismic analysis of structures'', Earthq. Spectra, 21(3), 685-713.
  16. Iervolino, I., Cosenza, E. and Galasso, C. (2009), "Shedding some light on seismic input selection in Eurocode 8", Eurocode 8 Perspectives from the Italian Standpoint Workshop, 3-12, Doppiavoce, Napoli, Italy.
  17. Kalkan, E. and Chopra, A.K. (2010), ''Practical guidelines to select and scale earthquake records for nonlinear response history analysis of structures'', U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report, 127p.
  18. Kalkan, E. and Chopra, A.K. (2011), "Modal-pushover-based ground-motion scaling procedure", J. Struct. Eng. -ASCE, 137, 298-310.
  19. Kalkan, E. and Kwong, N.S. (2010), ''Documentation for assessment of modal pushover-based scaling procedure for nonlinear response history analysis of ordinary standard bridges'', U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 58 p.
  20. Kayhan, A.H., Korkmaz, K.A. and Irfanoglu, A. (2011), ''Selecting and scaling real ground motion records using harmony search algorithm'', Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 31, 941-953.
  21. Kurama, Y. and Farrow, K. (2003), ''Ground motion scaling methods for different site conditions and structure characteristics'', Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 32(15), 2425-2450.
  22. Lee, L.H., Lee, H.H. and Han, S.W. (2000), ''Method of selecting design earthquake ground motions for tall buildings'', Struct. Des. Tall Build., 9, 201-213.<201::AID-TAL136>3.0.CO;2-Z
  23. Lilhanand, K. and Tseng, W.S. (1988), ''Development and application of realistic earthquake time histories compatible with multiple-damping design spectra'', Proceedings of 9th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, August 2-9, Tokyo-Kyoto, Japan, II, 819-824.
  24. Luco, N. and Cornell, A.C. (2007), ''Structure-specific scalar intensity measures for near-source and ordinary earthquake ground motions'', Earthq. Spectra, 23(2), 357-392.
  25. Martinez-Rueda, J.E. (1998), ''Scaling procedure for natural accelerograms based on a system of spectrum intensity scales'', Earthq. Spectra, 14(1), 135-152.
  26. Masi, A., Vona, M. and Mucciarelli, M. (2011), ''Selection of natural and synthetic accelerograms for seismic vulnerability studies on reinforced concrete frames'', J. Struct. Eng., 137(3), 367-378.
  27. Morales-Esteban, A., Luis de Justo, J., Martinez-Alvarez, F. and Azanon, J.M. (2012), ''Probabilistic method to select calculation accelerograms based on uniform seismic hazard acceleration response spectra'', Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 43, 174-185.
  28. Mukherjee, S. and Gupta, V.K. (2002), ''Wavelet-based generation of spectrum-compatible time-histories'', Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 22(9), 799-804.
  29. Naeim, F., Alimoradi, A. and Pezeshk, S. (2004), ''Selection and scaling of ground motion time histories for structural design using genetic algorithms'', Earthq.Spectra, 20(2), 413-426.
  30. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research (PEER) Center, PEER Strong Motion Database,, 2006.
  31. Shama, A. (2012), ''Spectrum compatible earthquake ground motions by Morlet wavelet'', 20th Analysis and Computation Specialty Conference, ASCE.
  32. Shome, N. and Cornell, A.C. (1998), ''Normalization and scaling accelerograms for nonlinear structural analysis'', Proc. of the 6th U.S. National Conf. on Earthquake Engineering, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Seattle.
  33. Takewaki, I. and Tsujimoto, H. (2011), ''Scaling of design earthquake ground motions for tall buildings based on drift and input energy demands'', Earthq.Struct., 2(2), 171-187.
  34. Wang, G. (2010), ''A ground motion selection and modification method preserving characteristics and aleatory variability of scenario earthquakes'', 9th US National and 10th Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering, July 25-29.
  35. Wood, R.L. and Hutchinson, T.C. (2012), ''Effects of ground motion scaling on nonlinear higher mode building response'', Earthq.Struct., 3(6), 869-887.

Cited by

  1. Scaled and unscaled ground motion sets for uni-directional and bi-directional dynamic analysis vol.10, pp.3, 2016,
  2. Comparing of the effects of scaled and real earthquake records on structural response vol.6, pp.4, 2014,