Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 48
48
Figure 5-14. Comparison between WUS-Rock and CEUS-Rock correlations for
PGV = 30 kmax.
noted that the correlations for other regions (that is, CEUS- 5.2.9 Confidence Level
Soil, WUS-Rock, and WUS-Soil) result in relatively similar
The displacement correlations discussed in previous sec-
displacement levels slightly greater than the Martin-Qiu
tions were based on a mean regression curve on the observed
correlation.
data. For design purposes a higher confidence level than the
Consequently correlations were combined for these data
mean curve (the mean curve corresponds to 50 percent con-
leading to a mean displacement correlation given by:
fidence level) is often selected. A common practice is to use
All data except CEUS-Rock:
the mean curve plus one standard deviation, which approxi-
log ( d ) = -1.51 - 0.74 log ( k y kmax ) + 3.27 log (1 - k y kmax ) mately corresponds to a confidence level of 84 percent. Fig-
ures 5-18 and 5-19 show the 84 percent confidence intervals
-0.80 log ( kmax ) + 1.59 log ( PGV ) (5-8)
for permanent displacement based on site-adjusted peak
with a standard error of 0.23 log10 units. ground acceleration coefficient of 0.3 and PGV = 30 × kmax and
Figure 5-15. Comparison between WUS-Rock and CEUS-Rock correlations for
PGV = 60 kmax.
