Seismic Ground Response Estimation Based on Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN)
One of the purposes of earthquake engineering is to mitigate the damages in buildings and infrastructures and, therefore, reduce the impact of earthquakes on society. Seismic ground response analysis refers to the process of evaluating the ground surface motions based on the bedrock motion. On the o...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
MDPI AG
2021
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/d573fc207a6247b0a7536e9dfa7b713c |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | One of the purposes of earthquake engineering is to mitigate the damages in buildings and infrastructures and, therefore, reduce the impact of earthquakes on society. Seismic ground response analysis refers to the process of evaluating the ground surface motions based on the bedrock motion. On the other hand, deep learning techniques have been developing fast, and they are establishing their application in the civil engineering field. This study proposes two convolutional neural network (CNN) models to estimate the seismic response of the surface based on the seismic motion measured at 100 m level beneath the surface, and selected the one which outperforms the other as the main model. The performances of the main model are compared with those of a physical software SHAKE2000. Twelve sites that include 100 earthquake datasets, whose moment magnitude is higher than 6 and PGA is higher than 0.1 g, were selected. In addition, the corresponding earthquake datasets are used for the CNN model. Whereas the conventional software overestimated the values of the amplitudes for most of the sites, the proposed CNN model predicts fairly well both the values of the amplitudes and the natural periods where responses amplify the most with few exceptions. The proposed model especially outperforms the conventional software when the natural periods range from 0.01 to 0.3 s. For specific sites, the average mean squared errors of the proposed model are even dozens of times lower than those of the conventional physical software. |
|---|