Welcome to the new version of CaltechAUTHORS. Login is currently restricted to library staff. If you notice any issues, please email coda@library.caltech.edu
Published April 2018 | Supplemental Material
Journal Article Open

PRENOLIN: International Benchmark on 1D Nonlinear Site‐Response Analysis—Validation Phase Exercise


This article presents the main results of the validation phase of the PRENOLIN project. PRENOLIN is an international benchmark on 1D nonlinear (NL) site‐response analysis. This project involved 19 teams with 23 different codes tested. It was divided into two phases; with the first phase verifying the numerical solution of these codes on idealized soil profiles using simple signals and real seismic records. The second phase described in this article referred to code validation for the analysis of real instrumented sites. This validation phase was performed on two sites (KSRH10 and Sendai) of the Japanese strong‐motion networks KiK‐net and Port and Airport Research Institute (PARI), respectively, with a pair of accelerometers at surface and depth. Extensive additional site characterizations were performed at both sites involving in situ and laboratory measurements of the soil properties. At each site, sets of input motions were selected to represent different peak ground acceleration (PGA) and frequency content. It was found that the code‐to‐code variability given by the standard deviation of the computed surface‐response spectra is around 0.1 (in log10 scale) regardless of the site and input motions. This indicates a quite large influence of the numerical methods on site‐effect assessment and more generally on seismic hazard. Besides, it was observed that site‐specific measurements are of primary importance for defining the input data in site‐response analysis. The NL parameters obtained from the laboratory measurements should be compared with curves coming from the literature. Finally, the lessons learned from this exercise are synthesized, resulting also in a few recommendations for future benchmarking studies, and the use of 1D NL, total stress site‐response analysis.

Additional Information

© 2018 Seismological Society of America. Manuscript received 26 July 2017; Published Online 16 January 2018. Data and Resources: Time histories used in this study were collected from the KiK‐net website www.kik.bosai.go.jp and http://www.kik.bosai.go.jp/kik/ (last accessed November 2011), and from Port and Airport Research Institute (PARI) in Japan. Some codes used in this work have the following links: Analyse des Structures et Thermo‐mécanique pour des Etudes et des Recherches (ASTER) (http://www.code-aster.org, last accessed October 2015), EPISPEC1D (http://efispec.free.fr, last accessed October 2015), Real Earthquakes, Soils, Structures and their Interaction (ESSI) simulator (http://sokocalo.engr.ucdavis.edu/~jeremic/Real_ESSI_Simulator/ (last accessed October 2015), OpenSees (http://opensees.berkeley.edu/, last accessed October 2015), DEEPSOIL (http://deepsoil.cee.illinois.edu/, last accessed October 2015), and SeismoSoil (http://asimaki.caltech.edu/resources/index.html#software, last accessed October 2015). The unpublished manuscripts by verification and validation exercises: for 2D/3D linear methods (http://www.sismowine.org, last accessed July 2017) and for 1D nonlinear (PRENOLIN) (http://prenolin.org, last accessed July 2017). The author's list contains the first seven organizers of the PRENOLIN project, followed by the participants in alphabetic order.

Attached Files

Supplemental Material - 2017210_esupp.zip


Files (8.1 MB)
Name Size Download all
8.1 MB Preview Download

Additional details

August 19, 2023
October 18, 2023