Should Ground-Motion Records be Rotated to 

Fault-Normal/Parallel or Maximum Direction for 

Response History Analysis of Buildings? 

By Juan C. Reyes and Erol Kalkan

Open-File Report 2012–1261

U.S. Department of the Interior 

U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Department of the Interior

KEN SALAZAR, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Marcia K. McNutt, Director 

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2012

For product and ordering information: 

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod/ 

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, 

its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment: 

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/ 

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

Suggested citation: Reyes, J.C., and Kalkan, E., 2012, Should ground-motion records be 

rotated to fault-normal/parallel or maximum direction for response history analysis of 

buildings?: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2012–1261, 89 p. 

Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply 

endorsement by the U.S. Government.

Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual 

copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted material contained within this report.
iii

Contents

Abstract ............................................................................................................................................. 1

Introduction........................................................................................................................................ 1

Ground Motions Selected.................................................................................................................. 3

Description of Structural Systems and Computer Models................................................................. 6

Single-Story Symmetric- and Asymmetric-Plan Buildings ............................................................. 6

Multistory Symmetric- and Asymmetric-Plan Buildings ................................................................. 7

Evaluation Methodology .................................................................................................................... 9

Results .............................................................................................................................................. 9

Single-Story Symmetric- and Asymmetric-Plan Buildings ............................................................. 9

Multistory Symmetric- and Asymmetric-Plan Buildings ............................................................... 11

Conclusions..................................................................................................................................... 13

Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................... 15

References Cited............................................................................................................................. 15

Tables

Table 1. Selected near-fault ground motion records........................................................... 18

Table 2. Natural periods of vibration obtained from the peak-picking (PP) method, 

the combined deterministic-stochastic subspace (DSS) method, and the computer 

model for the nine-story symmetric-plan building. ........................................................ 19

Figures

Figure 1. Distribution of magnitude (Mw) and closest fault distance (Rrup) for the 30 near-fault 

ground-motion records selected.............................................................................................. 19

Figure 2. A, Reference axes for the fault and the instrument with relevant angles noted. B, 

Reference axis for the building................................................................................................ 20

Figure 3. Response spectra of 30 near-fault ground motions and their geometric-mean used 

as design spectrum for single-story systems: fault parallel (strike parallel) components 

(left top panel), fault normal (strike normal) components (right top panel), comparison of 

median spectra of fault normal and fault parallel components (bottom panel). Damping 

ratio is 5 percent. g, acceleration due to gravity; sec, seconds............................................... 21

Figure 4. Trace of deformation (u) orbit of a two-degrees-of-freedom system (elastic 

vibration period, Tn = 1 second) with direction-independent stiffness and damping 

subjected to the fault-normal/fault parallel (FN/FP) components of a ground motion. ............ 22

Figure 5. For 30 near-fault ground-motion pairs listed in table 1, polar plots of spectral 

accelerations as a function of the rotation angle, θx, are shown for elastic single-degreeof-freedom (SDF) systems with vibration period (Tn) equal to 0.2, 1, 2, 3, and 5 seconds 

(damping ratio 5 percent). The red lines represent the median spectral acceleration value 

(An) ± one standard deviation (σn). The blue points correspond to pairs of maximum 

direction angle θm and spectral acceleration values Am. The blue circles represent the 

median spectral acceleration value ± σm in the maximum direction. Note that except for 

short-period SDF systems (Tn = 0.2 seconds), An values are generally polarized with faultnormal (90°) direction; however, θm shows large scattering with no correlation with fault-
iv

normal direction; also spectral acceleration values, Am, corresponding to the maximum 

direction angle, θm, are generally higher than median spectral acceleration value, An........... 23

Figure 6. Polar plots of identified velocity pulse periods and spectral acceleration (acc.) 

values as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for ground-motion (GM) pairs 1 to 15 (see 

table 1). The red dots show the directions in which velocity pulses are identified with 

their corresponding pulse periods. The filled gray area shows range of θx in which velocity 

pulses are observed. The dashed blue lines show spectral acceleration values for the 

maximum identified pulse period (damping ratio 5 percent). The blue line identifies the 

maximum direction. Numerical values for maximum pulse periods and maximum spectral 

accelerations are presented in the upper right corner of each subplot. Empty polar plot 

indicates that no velocity pulse is identified. ........................................................................... 24

Figure 7. Polar plots of identified velocity pulse periods and spectral acceleration (acc) 

values as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for ground-motion (GM) pairs 16 to 30 (see 

table 1). The red dots show the directions in which velocity pulses are identified with 

their corresponding pulse periods. The filled gray area shows range of θx in which velocity 

pulses are observed. The dashed blue lines show spectral acceleration values for the 

maximum identified pulse period (damping ratio 5 percent). The blue line identifies the 

maximum direction. Numerical values for maximum pulse periods and maximum spectral 

accelerations are presented in the upper right corner of each subplot. Empty polar plot 

indicates that no velocity pulse is identified. ........................................................................... 25

Figure 8. Schematic isometric and plan views of the selected single-story structural systems 

with three-degrees-of-freedom noted; buckling-restrained braced frames are highlighted..... 26

Figure 9. Constitutive model used for the buckling-restrained braces (BRBs)............................ 27

Figure 10. Periods and modes of vibration of the single-story three-degrees-of-freedom 

systems (Tn = elastic vibration period for the nth mode). ......................................................... 27

Figure 11. Effective modal masses, Mn*, of the plan-A (symmetric-plan) and plan-B 

(asymmetric-plan) buildings. %, percent. ................................................................................ 28

Figure 12. Nine-story symmetric-plan building in Aliso Viejo, California. A, three-dimensional 

computer model. B, Photograph of the building looking to north elevation. ............................ 28

Figure 13. West elevation (A) and typical floor plan (B) of symmetric-plan building. .................. 29

Figure 14. Locations of sensors shown with red arrows in symmetric-plan building. A, Plan 

view. B, south elevation. ......................................................................................................... 30

Figure 15. Floor total accelerations recorded by the sensors shown in figure 14 during the 

2008 magnitude 5.4 Chino Hills southern California earthquake. ........................................... 31

Figure 16. Comparison of normalized natural vibration modes identified by the deterministicstochastic subspace (DSS) method with modes of the computer model for symmetric-plan 

building (*WF = west frame; **EW = east frame). ................................................................... 32

Figure 17. First triplet of periods and modes of vibration of symmetric-plan building (only roof 

motion is shown), (Tn = elastic vibration period for the nth mode)............................................ 32

Figure 18. Effective modal masses, Mn*, for symmetric-plan building. %, percent. .................... 33

Figure 19. Comparison of recorded and computed floor displacements at the sensor 

locations (fig. 14) of symmetric-plan building. Recorded data is from the 2008 

magnitude 5.4 Chino Hills southern California earthquake. .................................................... 34

Figure 20. Nine-story asymmetric-plan building. A, three-dimensional computer model. B, 

plan view. ................................................................................................................................ 35
v

Figure 21. Trilinear force-deformation relations considering in-cycle strength deterioration 

(strength loss). ........................................................................................................................ 35

Figure 22. Krawinkler model for panel zones adapted from Computers and Structures, 

Inc. (2006). .............................................................................................................................. 36

Figure 23. First six natural periods and modes of vibration of asymmetric-plan building; xlateral, y-lateral and torsional motions are shown in the three columns. ................................ 36

Figure 24. First triplet of periods and modes of vibration of asymmetric-plan building (only 

roof motion is shown), (Tn = elastic vibration period for the nth mode). ................................... 37

Figure 25. Effective modal masses, Mn*, for asymmetric-plan building. %, percent. .................. 37

Figure 26. Displacement, ux, at the center of mass (red line) as a function of the rotation 

angle, θx, for single-story symmetric-plan systems with elastic first-mode vibration period 

(Tn) = 2, 3, and 5 seconds subjected to ground motions (GM) with velocity pulse period 

close to Tn. The filled gray area shows values of θx in which velocity pulses are identified. 

Angles θx = 0o and 90o correspond to the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions, 

respectively. ............................................................................................................................ 38

Figure 27. Floor total accelerations, üt

x, at the center of mass (red line) as a function of the 

rotation angle, θx, for single-story symmetric-plan systems with elastic first-mode vibration 

period (Tn) = 2, 3, and 5 seconds subjected to ground motions (GM) with velocity pulse 

period close to Tn. The filled gray area shows values of θx in which velocity pulses are 

identified for each record. Angles θx = 0o and 90o correspond to the fault-parallel and faultnormal directions, respectively................................................................................................ 39

Figure 28. Force in bracing b1 (red line) as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for singlestory symmetric-plan systems with elastic first-mode vibration period (Tn) = 2, 3, and 5 

seconds subjected to ground motions (GM) with velocity pulse period close to Tn. The 

filled gray area shows values of θx in which velocity pulses are identified for each record. 

Angles θx = 0o and 90o correspond to the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions, 

respectively. ............................................................................................................................ 40

Figure 29. Plastic deformation in bracing b1 (red line) as a function of the rotation angle, θx, 

for single-story symmetric-plan systems with elastic first-mode vibration period (Tn) = 2, 3, 

and 5 seconds subjected to ground motions (GM) with velocity pulse period close to Tn. 

The filled gray area shows values of θx in which velocity pulses are identified for each 

record. Angles θx = 0o and 90o correspond to the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions, 

respectively. ............................................................................................................................ 41

Figure 30. Displacement, ux, at the center of mass (red line) as a function of the rotation 

angle, θx, for single-story asymmetric-plan systems with elastic first-mode vibration period 

(Tn) = 2, 3, and 5 seconds subjected to ground motions (GM) with velocity pulse period 

close to Tn. The filled gray area shows values of θx in which velocity pulses are identified 

for each record. Angles θx = 0o and 90o correspond to the fault-parallel and fault-normal 

directions, respectively............................................................................................................ 42

Figure 31. Displacement, ux, at corner p2 (red line) as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for 

single-story asymmetric-plan systems with elastic first-mode vibration period (Tn) = 2, 3, 

and 5 seconds subjected to ground motions (GM) with velocity pulse period close to Tn. 

The filled gray area shows values of θx in which velocity pulses are identified for each 
vi

record. Angles θx = 0o and 90o correspond to the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions, 

respectively. ............................................................................................................................ 43

Figure 32. Floor total accelerations, üt

x, at corner p2 (red line) as a function of the rotation 

angle, θx, for asymmetric-plan buildings with elastic first-mode vibration period (Tn) = 2, 3, 

and 5 seconds subjected to ground motions (GM) with velocity pulse period close to Tn. 

The filled gray area shows values of θx in which velocity pulses are identified for each 

record. Angles θx = 0o and 90o correspond to the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions, 

respectively. ............................................................................................................................ 44

Figure 33. Force in bracing b3 (red line) as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for singlestory asymmetric-plan systems with elastic first-mode vibration period (Tn) = 2, 3, and 5 

seconds subjected to ground motions (GM) with velocity pulse period close to Tn. The 

filled gray area shows values of θx in which velocity pulses are identified for each record. 

Angles θx = 0o and 90o correspond to the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions, 

respectively. ............................................................................................................................ 45

Figure 34. Plastic deformation in bracing b3 (red line) as a function of the rotation angle, θx, 

for single-story asymmetric-plan systems with elastic first-mode vibration period (Tn) = 2, 

3, and 5 seconds subjected to ground motions (GM) with velocity pulse period close to Tn. 

The filled gray area shows values of θx in which velocity pulses are identified for each 

record. Angles θx = 0o and 90o correspond to the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions, 

respectively. ............................................................................................................................ 46

Figure 35. Median displacements, ux, at the center of mass as a function of the rotation 

angle, θx, for single-story symmetric-plan systems with elastic first-mode vibration period 

(Tn) = 0.2, 1, 2, 3, and 5 seconds subjected to bidirectional loading. The red lines 

represent the median displacement ux ± σ. The blue circles represent the median 

displacement, uxm ± σ, for the systems subjected to bidirectional ground motions in the 

maximum direction. Solid lines are 50th and dashed lines are16th and 84th percentile 

engineering demand parameters (EDPs). MD, maximum direction........................................ 47

Figure 36. Median total-accelerations, üt

x, at the center of mass as a function of the rotation 

angle, θx, for single-story symmetric-plan systems with elastic first-mode vibration period 

(Tn) = 0.2, 1, 2, 3, and 5 seconds subjected to bidirectional loading. The red lines 

represent the median displacement, üt

x ± σ. The blue circles represent the median totalacceleration, üt

xm ± σ, for the systems subjected to bidirectional ground motions in the 

maximum direction. Solid lines are 50th and dashed lines are16th and 84th percentile 

engineering demand parameters (EDPs). MD, maximum direction........................................ 48

Figure 37. Median force q1 in bracing b1 as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for singlestory symmetric-plan systems elastic first-mode vibration period (Tn) = 0.2, 1, 2, 3, and 5 

seconds subjected to bidirectional loading. The red lines represent the median force, q1 ±

σ. The blue circles represent the median force, q1 ± σ, for the systems subjected to 

bidirectional ground motions in the maximum direction. Solid lines are 50th and dashed 

lines are16th and 84th percentile engineering demand parameters (EDPs). MD, maximum 

direction................................................................................................................................... 49

Figure 38. Median displacements, ux, at the center of mass as a function of the rotation 

angle, θx, for single-story asymmetric-plan systems with elastic first-mode vibration period 

(Tn) = 0.2, 1, 2, 3, and 5 seconds subjected to bidirectional loading. The red lines 
vii

represent the median displacement ux ± σ. The blue circles represent the median 

displacement uxm ± σ for the systems subjected to bidirectional ground motions in the 

maximum direction. Solid lines are 50th and dashed lines are16th and 84th percentile 

engineering demand parameters (EDPs). MD, maximum direction........................................ 50

Figure 39. Median displacements, ux, at corner p2 as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for 

single-story asymmetric-plan systems with elastic first-mode vibration period (Tn) = 0.2, 1, 

2, 3, and 5 seconds subjected to bidirectional loading. The red lines represent the median 

displacement, ux ± σ. The blue circles represent the median displacement, uxm ± σ, for 

the systems subjected to bidirectional ground motions in the maximum direction. Solid 

lines are 50th and dashed lines are16th and 84th percentile engineering demand 

parameters (EDPs). MD, maximum direction.......................................................................... 51

Figure 40. Median total-accelerations, üt

x, at corner p2 as a function of the rotation angle, θx, 

for single-story asymmetric-plan systems with elastic first-mode vibration period (Tn) = 

0.2, 1, 2, 3, and 5 seconds subjected to bidirectional loading. The red lines represent the 

median displacement, üt

x ± σ. The blue circles represent the median total-acceleration, 

üt

xm ± σ, for the systems subjected to bidirectional ground motions in the maximum 

direction. Solid lines are 50th and dashed lines are16th and 84th percentile engineering 

demand parameters (EDPs). MD, maximum direction............................................................ 52

Figure 41. Median force, q1, in bracing b3 as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for singlestory asymmetric-plan systems with elastic first-mode vibration period (Tn) = 0.2, 1, 2, 3, 

and 5 seconds subjected to bidirectional loading. The red lines represent the median 

force, q1 ± σ. The blue circles represent the median force, q1 ± σ, for the systems 

subjected to bidirectional ground motions in the maximum direction. Solid lines are 50th 

and dashed lines are16th and 84th percentile engineering demand parameters (EDPs). 

MD, maximum direction. ......................................................................................................... 53

Figure 42. Story drifts, floor total accelerations, and internal forces as a function of the 

rotation angle, θx, for the linear nine-story symmetric-plan building (first-mode elastic 

vibration period, T1 = 1.51 seconds) subjected to ground-motion (GM) no. 9, which has 

maximum velocity pulse period of 1.9 seconds. The filled gray area shows values of θx in 

which velocity pulses are identified. Angles θx = 0o and 90o correspond to the fault-parallel 

and fault-normal directions, respectively................................................................................. 54

Figure 43. Height-wise distribution of median and dispersion values of story drift in the x and 

y directions for the linear nine-story symmetric-plan building. The gray, red, and blue lines 

show median and dispersion values of story drift due to bidirectional ground motions in 

arbitrary orientations in the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions (FN-FP) and in the 

maximum direction (MD), respectively. %, percent; disp., displacement. ............................... 55

Figure 44. Height-wise distribution of median and dispersion values of floor total 

acceleration in the x and y directions for the linear nine-story symmetric-plan building. The 

gray, red, and blue lines show median and dispersion values of floor total accelerations 

due to bidirectional ground motions in arbitrary orientations in the fault-parallel and faultnormal directions (FN-FP) and in the maximum direction (MD), respectively. %, percent; 

disp., displacement. ................................................................................................................ 56

Figure 45. Height-wise distribution of median and dispersion values of moments at the 

beams highlighted in figure 13 for the linear nine-story symmetric-plan building. The gray, 

red, and blue lines show median and dispersion values of beam moments due to 
viii

bidirectional ground motions in arbitrary orientations in the fault-parallel and fault-normal 

directions (FN-FP) and in the maximum direction (MD), respectively. %, percent; disp., 

displacement. .......................................................................................................................... 57

Figure 46. Height-wise distribution of median and dispersion values of moments at the 

columns highlighted in figure 13 for the linear nine-story symmetric-plan building. The 

gray, red, and blue lines show median and dispersion values of beam moments due to 

bidirectional ground motions in arbitrary orientations in the fault-parallel and fault-normal 

directions (FN-FP) and in the maximum direction (MD), respectively. %, percent; disp., 

displacement. .......................................................................................................................... 58

Figure 47. Median values of story drifts, floor total accelerations, and internal forces in the x

direction as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for the linear nine-story symmetric-plan 

building subjected to bidirectional loading. The red lines represent the median 

engineering demand parameter (EDP) values ± σ. The blue circles represent the median 

EDP values ± σ for the building subjected to bidirectional ground motions in the maximum 

direction. Solid lines are 50th and dashed lines are16th and 84th percentile EDPs............... 59

Figure 48. Median values of story drifts, floor total accelerations, and internal forces in the y

direction as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for the linear nine-story symmetric-plan 

building subjected to bidirectional loading. The red lines represent the median 

engineering demand parameter (EDP) values ± σ. The blue circles represent the median 

EDP values ± σ for the building subjected to bidirectional ground motions in the maximum 

direction. Solid lines are 50th and dashed lines are16th and 84th percentile EDPs............... 60

Figure 49. Story drifts, floor total accelerations, and internal forces as a function of the 

rotation angle, θx, for the linear nine-story asymmetric-plan building (elastic first-mode 

vibration period, T1 = 2.5 seconds) subjected to ground motion (GM) 2, which has 

maximum velocity pulse period of 2.4 seconds. The filled gray area shows values of θx in 

which velocity pulses are identified. Angles θx = 0o and 90o correspond to the fault-parallel 

and fault-normal directions, respectively................................................................................. 61

Figure 50. Height-wise distribution of median and dispersion values of story drift at the 

corner highlighted in figure 20 in the x and y directions for the linear nine-story 

asymmetric-plan building. The gray, red, and blue lines show median and dispersion 

values of story drift due to bidirectional ground motions in arbitrary orientations in the 

fault-parallel and fault-normal directions (FN-FP) and in the maximum direction (MD), 

respectively. %, percent; disp., displacement. ........................................................................ 62

Figure 51. Height-wise distribution of median and dispersion values of floor total 

acceleration in the x and y directions for the linear nine-story asymmetric-plan building. 

The gray, red, and blue lines show median and dispersion values of floor total 

accelerations due to bidirectional ground motions in arbitrary orientations in the faultparallel and fault-normal directions (FN-FP) and in the maximum direction (MD), 

respectively. %, percent; disp., displacement. ........................................................................ 63

Figure 52. Height-wise distribution of median and dispersion values of moments at the 

beams highlighted in figure 20 for the linear nine-story asymmetric-plan building. The 

gray, red, and blue lines show median and dispersion values of beam moments due to 

bidirectional ground motions in arbitrary orientations in the fault-parallel and fault-normal 

directions (FN-FP) and in the maximum direction (MD), respectively. %, percent; disp., 

displacement. .......................................................................................................................... 64
ix

Figure 53. Height-wise distribution of median and dispersion values of moments at the 

columns highlighted in figure 20 for the linear nine-story asymmetric-plan building. The 

gray, red, and blue lines show median and dispersion values of beam moments due to 

bidirectional ground motions in arbitrary orientations in the fault-parallel and fault-normal 

directions (FN-FP) and in the maximum direction (MD), respectively. %, percent; disp., 

displacement. .......................................................................................................................... 65

Figure 54. Median values of story drifts at the corner, floor total accelerations, and internal 

forces in the x direction as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for the linear nine-story 

asymmetric-plan building subjected to bidirectional loading. The red lines represent the 

median engineering demand parameter (EDP) values ± σ. The blue circles represent the 

median EDP values ± σ for the building subjected to bidirectional ground motions in the 

maximum direction. Solid lines are Solid lines are 50th and dashed lines are16th and 84th 

percentile EDPs. ..................................................................................................................... 66

Figure 55. Median values of story drifts, floor total accelerations, and internal forces in the y

direction as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for the linear nine-story asymmetric-plan 

building subjected to bidirectional loading. The red lines represent the median 

engineering demand parameter (EDP) values ± σ. The blue circles represent the median 

EDP values ± σ for the building subjected to bidirectional ground motions in the 

maximum–direction. Solid lines are 50th and dashed lines are16th and 84th 

percentile EDPs. ..................................................................................................................... 67

Figure 56. Story drifts, total chord rotations, and internal forces as a function of the rotation 

angle, θx, for the nonlinear nine-story symmetric-plan building (first-mode elastic vibration 

period, T1 = 1.51 seconds) subjected to ground motion (GM) 9, which has maximum 

velocity pulse period of 1.9 seconds. The filled gray area shows values of θx in which 

velocity pulses are identified. Angles θx = 0o and 90o correspond to the fault-parallel and 

fault-normal directions, respectively........................................................................................ 68

Figure 57. Height-wise distribution of median+σ and dispersion values of story drift in the x

and y directions for the nonlinear nine-story symmetric-plan building. The gray, red, and 

blue lines show median+σ and dispersion values of story drift due to bidirectional ground 

motions in arbitrary orientations in the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions (FN-FP) 

and in the maximum direction (MD), respectively. %, percent; disp., displacement. .............. 69

Figure 58. Height-wise distribution of median+σ and dispersion values of total chord rotation 

in the x and y directions for the nonlinear nine-story symmetric-plan building. The gray, 

red, and blue lines show median+σ and dispersion values of floor total accelerations due 

to bidirectional ground motions in arbitrary orientations in the fault-parallel and faultnormal directions (FN-FP) and in the maximum direction (MD), respectively. %, percent; 

disp., displacement. ................................................................................................................ 70

Figure 59. Height-wise distribution of median+σ and dispersion values of moments at the 

beams highlighted in figure 13 for the nonlinear nine-story symmetric-plan building. The 

gray, red, and blue lines show median+σ and dispersion values of beam moments due to 

bidirectional ground motions in arbitrary orientations in the fault-parallel and fault-normal 

directions (FN-FP) and in the maximum direction (MD), respectively. %, percent; disp., 

displacement. .......................................................................................................................... 71
x

Figure 60. Height-wise distribution of median+σ and dispersion values of moments at the 

columns highlighted in figure 13 for the nonlinear nine-story symmetric-plan building. The 

gray, red, and blue lines show median+σ and dispersion values of beam moments due to 

bidirectional ground motions in arbitrary orientations in the fault-parallel and fault-normal 

directions (FN-FP) and in the maximum direction (MD), respectively. %, percent; disp., 

displacement. .......................................................................................................................... 72

Figure 61. Median values of story drifts, total chord rotations, and internal forces in the x

direction as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for the nonlinear nine-story symmetricplan building subjected to bidirectional loading. The red lines represent the median 

engineering demand parameter (EDP) values ± σ. The blue circles represent the median 

EDP values ± σ for the building subjected to bidirectional ground motions in the maximum 

direction. Solid lines are 50th and dashed lines are16th and 84th percentile EDPs.................. 73

Figure 62. Median values of story drifts, total chord rotations, and internal forces in the y

direction as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for the nonlinear nine-story symmetricplan building subjected to bidirectional loading. The red lines represent the median 

engineering demand parameter (EDP) values ± σ. The blue circles represent the median 

EDP values ± σ for the building subjected to bidirectional ground motions in the maximum 

direction. Solid lines are 50th and dashed lines are16th and 84th percentile EDPs.................. 74

Figure 63. Story drifts, total chord rotations, and internal forces as a function of the rotation 

angle, θx, for the nonlinear nine-story asymmetric-plan building (T1 = 2.5 s) subjected to 

ground motion 2, which has maximum velocity pulse period of 2.4 seconds. The filled 

gray area shows values of θx in which velocity pulses are identified. Angles θx = 0o and 

90o correspond to the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions, respectively......................... 75

Figure 64. Height-wise distribution of median+σ and dispersion values of story drift at the 

corner highlighted in figure 20 in the x and y directions for the nonlinear nine-story 

asymmetric-plan building. The gray, red, and blue lines show median+σ and dispersion 

values of story drift due to bidirectional ground motions in arbitrary orientations in the 

fault-parallel and fault-normal directions (FN-FP) and in the maximum direction (MD), 

respectively. %, percent; disp., displacement. ........................................................................ 76

Figure 65. Height-wise distribution of median+σ and dispersion values of total chord rotation 

in the x and y directions for the nonlinear nine-story asymmetric-plan building. The gray, 

red, and blue lines show median+σ and dispersion values of floor total accelerations due 

to bidirectional ground motions in arbitrary orientations in the fault-parallel and faultnormal directions (FN-FP) and in the maximum direction (MD), respectively. %, percent; 

disp., displacement. ................................................................................................................ 77

Figure 66. Height-wise distribution of median+σ and dispersion values of moments at the 

beams highlighted in figure 20 for the nonlinear nine-story asymmetric-plan building. The 

gray, red, and blue lines show median+σ and dispersion values of beam moments due to 

bidirectional ground motions in arbitrary orientations in the fault-parallel and fault-normal 

directions (FN-FP) and in the maximum direction (MD), respectively. %, percent; disp., 

displacement. .......................................................................................................................... 78

Figure 67. Height-wise distribution of median+σ and dispersion values of moments at the 

columns highlighted in figure 20 for the nonlinear nine-story asymmetric-plan building. 

The gray, red, and blue lines show median+σ and dispersion values of beam moments 
xi

due to bidirectional ground motions in arbitrary orientations in the fault-parallel and faultnormal directions (FN-FP) and in the maximum direction (MD), respectively. %, percent; 

disp., displacement. ................................................................................................................ 79

Figure 68. Median values of story drifts at the corner, total chord rotations, and internal 

forces in the x direction as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for the nonlinear nine-story 

asymmetric-plan building subjected to bidirectional loading. The red lines represent the 

median engineering demand parameter (EDP) values ± σ. The blue circles represent the 

median EDP values ± σ for the building subjected to bidirectional ground motions in the 

maximum direction. Solid lines are 50th and dashed lines are16th and 84th 

percentile EDPs. ..................................................................................................................... 80

Figure 69. Median values of story drifts, total chord rotations, and internal forces in the y

direction as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for the nonlinear nine-story asymmetricplan building subjected to bidirectional loading. The red lines represent the median-EDP 

values ± σ. The blue circles represent the median-EDP values ± σ for the building 

subjected to bidirectional ground motions in the maximum direction. Solid lines are 50th

and dashed lines are16th and 84th percentile EDPs. ............................................................... 81
This page intentionally left blank
Should Ground-Motion Records be Rotated to FaultNormal/Parallel or Maximum Direction for Response 

History Analysis of Buildings? 

By Juan C. Reyes1 and Erol Kalkan2

Abstract

In the United States, regulatory seismic codes (for example, California Building Code) 

require at least two sets of horizontal ground-motion components for three-dimensional (3D) 

response history analysis (RHA) of building structures. For sites within 5 kilometers (3.1 miles) 

of an active fault, these records should be rotated to fault-normal and fault-parallel (FN/FP) 

directions, and two RHAs should be performed separatelywhen FN and then FP direction are 

aligned with transverse direction of the building axes. This approach is assumed to lead to two 

sets of responses that envelope the range of possible responses over all nonredundant rotation 

angles. The validity of this assumption is examined here using 3D computer models of singlestory structures having symmetric (torsionally stiff) and asymmetric (torsionally flexible) layouts 

subjected to an ensemble of near-fault ground motions with and without apparent velocity pulses. 

In this parametric study, the elastic vibration period is varied from 0.2 to 5 seconds, and yieldstrength reduction factors, R, are varied from a value that leads to linear-elastic design to 3 and 5. 

Further validations are performed using 3D computer models of 9-story structures having 

symmetric and asymmetric layouts subjected to the same ground-motion set. The influence of the 

ground-motion rotation angle on several engineering demand parameters (EDPs) is examined in 

both linear-elastic and nonlinear-inelastic domains to form benchmarks for evaluating the use of 

the FN/FP directions and also the maximum direction (MD). The MD ground motion is a new 

definition for horizontal ground motions for use in site-specific ground-motion procedures for 

seismic design according to provisions of the American Society of Civil Engineers/Seismic 

Engineering Institute (ASCE/SEI) 7-10. The results of this study have important implications for 

current practice, suggesting that ground motions rotated to MD or FN/FP directions do not 

necessarily provide the most critical EDPs in nonlinear-inelastic domain; however, they tend to 

produce larger EDPs than as-recorded (arbitrarily oriented) motions.

Introduction

In the United States, both the International Building Code (ICBO, 2009) and the 

California Building Code (CBC2010) (ICBO, 2010) refer to American Society of Civil 

Engineers/Seismic Engineering Institute (ASCE/SEI) 7-05 chapter 16 (ASCE, 2006) when 

response history analysis (RHA) is required for design verification of building structures. These 

 

1

Universidad de los Andes, Bogota, Colombia. 2

U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, California. 
2

guidelines require at least two sets of horizontal ground-motion components for threedimensional (3D) RHA of structures. According to section 1615A.1.25 of the California 

Building Code, at sites within 5 kilometers (km) (3.1 miles, mi) from an active fault that 

dominates the earthquake hazard, each pair of ground-motion components shall be rotated to the 

fault-normal and fault-parallel (FN/FP) directions (also called the strike-normal and strikeparallel directions) for 3D RHAs. It is believed that the angle corresponding to the FN/FP

directions will lead to the most critical structural response. This assumption is based on the fact 

that, in the proximity of an active fault system, ground motions are significantly affected by the 

faulting mechanism, direction of rupture propagation relative to the site, as well as the possible 

static deformation of the ground surface associated with fling-step effects (Bray and RodriguezMarek, 2004; Kalkan and Kunnath, 2006), and these near-source effects cause most of the 

seismic energy from the rupture to arrive in a single coherent long-period pulse of motion in the 

FN/FP directions (Mavroeidis and Papageorgiou, 2003; Kalkan and Kunnath, 2007, 2008). Thus, 

rotating ground-motion pairs to FN/FP directions is assumed to be a conservative approach, 

appropriate for design verification of new structures. 

The provision for rotating ground-motion records to FN/FP directions in the CBC2010 is 

absent in the ASCE/SEI 7-05 guidelines. However, this modification is now included in the most 

recent ASCE/SEI 7-10 (ASCE, 2010) standards, which have additional proposed changes to be 

incorporated in the new generation of the building codes. Two of the changes are the use of 

maximum direction (MD) ground motion and a revised definition of horizontal ground motions 

used in site-specific ground-motion procedures for seismic design (chapter 21 of ASCE/SEI 7-

10). The MD is the direction of the rotated ground-motion pair that results in maximum linearelastic response quantity of a single lumped mass oscillator (free to vibrate in both horizontal 

directions) over exhaustive record rotation. The assumptions behind the MD ground motions are

that the structural properties including stiffness and strength are identical in all directions, and

the azimuth of the MD ground motion coincides with the structure’s principal axes (Singh and 

others, 2011). Although the first assumption may be true for purely symmetric-plan structures

(such as silos, oil tanks, communication poles, elevated water tanks, and guyed towers), it may 

not be valid for other systems whose response is dominated by modes of vibration along specific 

axes. The second assumption on the other hand refers to ground motions with a lower probability 

of occurrence—it is very unlikely that ground-motion incidence angle (angle of attack) with 

respect to the building’s transverse direction is same as its MD. In chapter 21 of the ASCE/SEI 

7-10, the concept of MD is used to develop a MD response spectrum to be used for seismic 

design. In the MD spectrum, spectral ordinates at each period can be in a different orientation 

because the maximum motion varies with the period of the oscillator. Because of these issues, 

use of MD ground motions for seismic design is found to be controversial, and it is argued that it 

would result in 10 to 30 percent overestimation of design ground-motion level (Stewart and 

others, 2011). 

The idea of rotating ground-motion pairs to certain axes, critical for response, is not new; 

it has been studied previously in various contexts. Penzien and Watabe (1975) defined the 

principal axes of a pair of ground motions as the angle or axis along which the two horizontal 

components are uncorrelated. The principal axis is independent of the vibration period (Goda, 

2012) and is not correlated with the MD (Hong and Goda, 2010). Using this idea of principal 

axis, the effects of seismic rotation angle, defined as the angle between the principal axes of the 

ground-motion pair and the structural axes along which structural response was studied 

(Fernandez-Davilla and others, 2000; MacRae and Matteis, 2000; Tezcan and Alhan, 2001; 
3

Khoshnoudian and Poursha, 2004; Rigato and Medina, 2007; Lagaros, 2010; Goda, 2012), 

previous studies demonstrate that the rotation angle of ground motions influences the structural 

response significantly and that the angle that yields the peak response over all possible 

nonredundant angles, called θcritical (or θcr) depends on the seismic excitation level and character 

of shaking. A formula for deriving θcr was proposed by Wilson (1995). Other researchers have 

improved on the closed-form solution of Wilson (1995) by accounting for the statistical 

correlation of horizontal components of ground motion in an explicit way (Lopez and Tores, 

1997; Lopez and others, 2000). However, the Wilson (1995) formula is based on concepts from 

response spectrum analysis—an approximate procedure used to estimate structural responses in 

the linear-elastic domain. Focusing on linear-elastic multi-degree-of-freedom symmetric- and 

asymmetric-plan structures, Athanatopoulou (2004) investigated the effect of the rotation angle 

on structural response using linear RHAs and provided formulas for determining the maximum 

response over all rotation angles given the linear-elastic response histories for two orthogonal 

orientations. The analysis results have shown that, for the records used, the critical value of an 

EDP can be as much as 80 percent larger than the usual response produced when the groundmotion components are applied along the structural axes. Athanatopoulou (2004) also concluded 

that the critical angle corresponding to peak response over all angles varies not only with the 

ground-motion pair under consideration but also with the response quantity of interest. These 

findings are confirmed in Kalkan and Kwong (2012 and in press) where the impacts of groundmotion rotation angle including FN/FP directions on several different EDPs have been examined 

using a linear-elastic 3D computer model of a multistory building. 

Previous studies investigated response behavior of either linear-elastic multi-degree-offreedom buildings or nonlinear-inelastic single-degree-of-freedom systems. Because there is still

a lack of research addressing bidirectional nonlinear response of multi-degrees-of-freedom 

systems considering ground-motion directionality effects, this study systematically evaluates 

whether ground motions rotated to MD or FN/FP directions lead to the most critical estimates of 

EDPs from RHAs. For this purpose, 3D computer models of single and multistory structures 

having symmetric (torsionally stiff) and asymmetric (torsionally flexible) layouts are subjected 

to an ensemble of bidirectional near-fault ground motions with and without apparent velocity 

pulses. Also investigated are the rotation angle of an apparent velocity pulse and its correlation 

with the MD and FN/FP directions. At the end, this study provides recommendations regarding

the use of MD and FN/FP directions to rotate ground-motion records for RHA of building 

structures. 

Ground Motions Selected

For this investigation, 30 near-fault strong-motion pairs of records, listed in table 1, were 

selected from nine shallow crustal earthquakes (see fig. 1) compatible with the following 

scenario:

• Moment magnitude: Mw = 6.7±0.2 

• Closest-fault distance3: 0.1≤Rrup≤15 km4

• Record highest usable period5 ≥ 6 seconds 

 

3 Rrup=closest fault distance from a site to a coseismic rupture plane. 4 Although code requires ground motions to be rotated for sites within 5 km of fault only, due to lack of 

available records within this distance range, we selected records from as far as15 km. 
4

These ground motions were rotated to fault-normal (FN) and fault-parallel (FP) 

orientations using the following transformation equations: 

 (1) 

 , (2) 

where β1 = αstrike− α1, β2 = αstrike− α2, αstrike is the strike of the fault, α1 and α2 are the azimuths 

of the instrument axes as shown in figure 2A. Shown in figure 3 are the 5-percent-damped 

geometric-mean (termed “median” here after) response spectra for the FN and FP components of 

the ground motions. Figure 3 also shows the response spectra of the records. As expected, the 

ordinates of median spectra of FN components are larger than those of FP components, because 

the FN components of near-fault ground motions are generally stronger. The median spectrum of 

30 FN records is taken as the target spectrum for design of single-story symmetric and 

asymmetric structures to be used in a parametric study. 

The ground motions (acceleration time series) were additionally rotated θx away from the 

FP axis as shown in figure 2B. The angle θx varies from 5° to 360° every 5° in the clockwise 

direction. These rotations were conducted using equations (1) and (2) with the following 

modifications: (1) α1 and α2 were changed by θx and θy, respectively, and (2) β1 and β2 were 

redefined as β1 = αstrike−α1−θx and β2 = αstrike−α2−θy. The x- and y-axis as well as the angles θx

and θy are shown in figure 2B. 

Figure 4 shows the response of a two-degrees-of-freedom system with equal stiffness and 

damping ratio in the x and y axes subjected to the FN/FP components of a ground motion (that is,

θx = 0). The maximum deformation of this system occurs at an angle θm away from the FP axis. 

This new orientation for the response quantity of interest will be called in this research maximum 

direction (MD). 

In the near-field of an active fault, seismic waves from the earthquake source are affected 

by forward-directivity and fling-step effects. These near-source effects cause most of the seismic 

energy from the rupture to arrive in a single coherent long-period velocity pulse. Ground motions 

having such a distinct pulse-like character arise in general at the beginning of the seismogram, 

and their effects tend to increase the spectral acceleration in the long-period part of the spectrum 

(Golesorkhi and Gouchon, 2002). Baker (2007) developed a numerical procedure to identify and 

characterize velocity pulses in ground-motion time series. We use his procedure to identify 

velocity pulses in rotated motions whose rotation angle is varied from 5° to 360° at an interval of 

5° in the clockwise direction. Results of this analysis are shown in figures 5 thru 7. For 30 nearfault ground-motion pairs, figure 5 shows the polar plots of spectral acceleration values as a 

function of the rotation angle (θx) for elastic single-degree-of-freedom (SDF) systems with 

vibration period (Tn) equal to 0.2, 1, 2, 3, and 5 seconds (s). In this figure, the red lines represent 

the median spectral acceleration value ± σn (that is, 16th, 50th, and 84th percentile), and the blue 

points correspond to pairs of maximum direction angle (θm) and spectral acceleration values 

(Am). The blue circles represent the median spectral acceleration value ± σm in the MD. Except 

 5 Low-cut corner frequency of the Butterworth filter applied; because the highest usable period is greater 

than 6 seconds, records in table 1 have enough long-period content to compute their spectra reliably up to 

5 seconds.
5

for short-period system (Tn = 0.2 seconds), median spectral acceleration values (An) (red lines) 

are polarized with the fault-normal (θx = 90°) direction. Spectral acceleration values (Am), 

corresponding to the maximum direction angle (θm,) are generally higher than median spectral 

acceleration value (An), although they get closer as the period (Tn) increases.

Studies of ground-motion directionality have shown that the azimuth of the MD ground 

motion is arbitrary for fault distances (Rrup) larger than approximately 3–5 km (Campbell and 

Bozorgnia, 2007, Watson-Lamprey and Boore, 2007). At closer fault distances (Rrup < 3–5 km), 

however, the azimuth of the maximum direction motion tends to align with the strike-normal 

direction (Watson-Lamprey and Boore, 2007; Huang and others, 2009). In contrast, θm in figure

5 shows large scattering with no visible correlation with the FN direction for records taken 

within 5 km of the fault. This finding indicates that the azimuth of the maximum direction

motion does not necessarily align with the strike-normal direction even at closer fault distances 

(Rrup < 3–5 km). 

The next set of figures (figs. 6 and 7) show the polar plot of identified velocity pulse 

periods and spectral accelerations as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for 30 ground-motion

pairs in two groups (first 15 records are shown in fig. 6, and the remaining 15 records are shown 

in fig. 7). In these plots the red dots indicate (1) pulse periods scaled in polar coordinates and (2) 

directions in which the velocity pulses are identified. The filled gray area shows the range of θx

with velocity pulses. The dashed blue lines show spectral acceleration values computed for SDF 

system with Tn equal to the maximum pulse period of the ground-motion (GM) pair at 5 percent

damping ratio (for example, for GM1 dashed blue lines correspond to spectral accelerations 

computed for SDF system with Tn = 4.9 seconds under bidirectional excitation). The light blue 

line identifies the maximum direction angle, θm. The numerical values for maximum pulse 

periods and maximum spectral accelerations are presented in the upper right corner of each 

subplot. An empty polar plot indicates that no velocity pulse is identified for a given groundmotion pair. 

These two figures present important findings. First, let us consider the GM1 pair (fig. 6).

This polar plot indicates that rotated motions have a maximum pulse period of 4.9 seconds. The 

apparent pulse is identified for θx in between 40°–80° and 130°–170°, and it disappears at other 

angles including 90° (fault-normal direction). For this record, maximum direction angle, θm, is at 

45° and 135°, and the velocity pulse is also identified. Lastly, the maximum spectral acceleration 

of 0.2 g (g = gravity) is observed at θm. In the FN direction, maximum spectral acceleration is

decreased by 30 percent. Examinations of polar plots of all records permit the following 

observations: 

1. Among 30 near-fault ground-motion records, velocity pulses are identified only for 75 

percent of the records. For records with identified velocity pulses, one third of them have 

no pulses in the FN direction, indicating that FN direction does not always have an 

apparent velocity pulse. 

2. For almost all GM pairs (except for GM 29), maximum direction angle, θm, is in the 

direction where the velocity pulse is identified. This strong correlation shows that the 

maximum spectral acceleration almost always occurs in the direction at which the 

velocity pulse is observed. 

3. FN direction and maximum direction angle, θm, coincide (within ±5°) for 40 percent of 

the records having velocity pulses. For records with apparent velocity pulses, this finding 
6

indicates that 60 percent of the time, maximum spectral acceleration takes place in

directions other than the FN direction. 

4. For a given GM pair, rotation angle, θx, may alter the maximum pulse period 

significantly (for example GM 6); showing that the pulse period of rotated components 

varies with θx.

Description of Structural Systems and Computer Models

The test-bed systems used are the 3D computer models of single-story and multistory 

symmetric- and asymmetric-plan buildings. Descriptions of their structural systems and 

computer models are discussed below. 

Single-Story Symmetric- and Asymmetric-Plan Buildings

The first set of test-bed structures are 30 single-story buildings with three-degrees-offreedom. Their vibration periods, Tn, are equal to 0.2, 1, 2, 3, and 5 seconds. The yield strength 

reduction factors, R, are equal to 3, 5, and a value that leads to linear-elastic design. The lateralload resisting system of the buildings consists of buckling-restrained braced frames with nonmoment-resisting beam-column connections. The plan shapes and bracing layouts are shown in 

figure 8. The buildings are identified by the letters A and B depending on the plan shape; plan A 

is rectangular with two axes of symmetry (torsionally stiff), whereas plan B is asymmetric 

(torsionally flexible) about both the x and y axes. The design spectrum was taken as the 

geometric mean of the 5 percent damped spectral acceleration response spectra of the FN

components of the records (fig. 3). The earthquake design forces were determined by 

bidirectional linear response spectrum analysis (RSA) of the building with the design spectrum 

reduced by a response modification factor R. 

The constitutive model used for the buckling restrained braces (BRBs) is the simplified 

trilinear model shown in figure 9. This model was obtained based on experimental results 

(Merritt and others, 2003). The parameters k and qy are the same for all BRBs of a building. Plots 

of mode shapes and effective modal masses presented in figures 10 and 11 permit the following 

observations: 

• Lateral displacements dominate motion of the A-plan (symmetric-plan) buildings in modes 1 

and 2, whereas torsion dominates motion in the third mode. This indicates weak coupling 

between lateral and torsional components of motion. Additionally, the period of the 

dominantly torsional mode is much shorter than the period of the dominantly lateral modes, a 

property representative of buildings with lateral-load resisting systems located along the 

perimeter of the plan.

• Coupled lateral-torsional motions occur in the first and third modes of the B-plan

(asymmetric plan) buildings, whereas lateral displacements dominate motion in the second 

mode. According to the ASCE/SEI 7-05 (ASCE, 2006), plan B presents an extreme torsional 

irregularity on the basis of difference between the center of gravity and center of rigidity on 

plan. 

• The higher-mode contributions to response are expected to be significant for the B-plan 

buildings because the effective mass of the first lateral modes is less than 40 percent of the 

total mass.
7

Multistory Symmetric- and Asymmetric-Plan Buildings

The second set of test-bed structures is nine-story symmetric- and asymmetric-plan 

buildings. The symmetric-plan structure is an existing steel building, located in Aliso Viejo, 

California (fig. 12). Its west elevation and the plan of floors 3 to 8 are shown in figure 13. The 

lateral load resisting system consists of two ductile steel moment frames in the longitudinal and 

transverse directions (fig. 13B); all structural members are standard I-sections, and the typical 

floors are made-up of 3 inch metal deck with 3-1⁄4 inch thick light weight concrete fill. The 

building façade consists of concrete panels and glass (fig. 12B), and there is a heliport on the 

roof (fig. 13A). Designed as an office building according to 2001 California Building Code for 

seismic zone 4 and National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP) soil profile D, the 

earthquake forces were determined by linear RSA for the code design spectrum reduced by a 

response modification factor of 8.5. 

Analyzed by the PERFORM-3D computer program (Computers and Structures, Inc. 

(CSI), 2006), the building was modeled as follows: 

• Beams and columns were modeled by a linear element with trilinear plastic hinges at the 

ends of the elements that can include in-cycle strength deterioration but not cyclic stiffness 

degradation; the beam stiffness was modified to include the effect of the slab, and the axial 

load-moment interaction for the columns was based on plasticity theory; 

• The braces below the heliport were modeled using fiber sections to model buckling behavior; 

• Panel zones were modeled as four rigid links hinged at the corners with a rotational spring 

that represents the strength and stiffness of the connection; 

• The tab connections were modeled using rigid perfectly plastic hinges that can include incycle and cyclic degradation; 

• The contribution of nonstructural elements was modeled by adding four shear columns 

located close to the perimeter of the building, with their properties obtained from simplified 

models of the façade and partitions; nonlinear behavior of these elements was represented 

using rigid-plastic shear hinges; 

• Ductility capacities of girders, columns, and panel zones were specified according to the 

ASCE/SEI 41-06 (ASCE, 2007) standard; 

• Columns of moment resisting frames and the gravity columns were assumed to be clamped at 

the base; and 

• Effects of geometric nonlinearity were approximated by a standard P−∆ formulation. 

Figure 14 shows the location and orientation of the 15 motion sensors (accelerometers) 

installed in the building. The 2008 magnitude (Mw) 5.4 Chino-Hills earthquake—centered at a 

distance of 40 km—did not cause any observable damage, and reliable data were recorded by all 

eight sensors in the y direction, but only by sensors 9 and 13 in the x direction. The acceleration 

records indicate that the peak acceleration of 0.026 g at the ground was amplified to 0.042 g at 

the roof of the building (fig. 15).

Vibration properties—natural periods, natural modes and modal damping ratios—of the 

building were determined from recorded motions shown in figure 15 by applying two systemidentification methods. These are the combined deterministic-stochastic subspace (DSS) method 

(Van Overshee and De Morre, 1996) and the peak-picking (PP) method. Remarkably close 

agreement between the calculated (from the computer model) and identified values of vibration 

periods and modes from the recorded motions was achieved. Table 2 demonstrates the periods 

identified by both methods, and the natural vibration modes identified by the DSS method are 
8

presented in figure 16. As expected, the translational and torsional motions of this symmetricplan building are uncoupled (figs.17 and 18). The DSS method also led to the modal damping 

ratios of 4.3, 3.3, 3.96, and 3.22 percent for the first, third, fourth, and sixth modes of vibration. 

Based on these data, energy dissipation in the building was modeled by Rayleigh damping, with 

its two constants selected to give 4.3 percent and 3.96 percent damping ratio at the vibration 

periods of the first and fourth modes, respectively. The resulting damping ratios for the first nine 

vibration modes of the buildings ranged from 3.7 percent to 7.4 percent. 

The computer model accurately represented the properties of the building as 

demonstrated by the excellent agreement between the computed and recorded responses. RHA of 

the computer model subjected to the recorded ground motion led to the displacements (relative to 

the ground) at floors 2, 5, 6, and 9 shown in figure 19, where these computed responses were 

compared with the motions recorded by sensors 6, 8, 10, 11, 14, and 15 (see fig. 14); the 

agreement between the two is very good. 

The asymmetric-plan structure considered is a nine-story steel building with ductile 

frames designed according to the 1985 Uniform Building Code (UBC85), which allows for 

significant plan irregularity. The plan shape and frame layout are shown in figure 20, where 

moment resisting frames are highlighted in the plans. The building has a span length of 30 feet 

and story height 13 feet with a plan asymmetry about both x and y axes. Design code forces for 

the building, assumed to be located in Bell, California (33.996° N, 118.162° W), were 

determined, but their member sizes were governed by drift instead of strength requirements. 

The building was modeled for nonlinear RHA, implemented in the 3D computer 

program, with the following features: 

• Beams and columns were modeled by a linear element with trilinear plastic hinges at the 

ends of the elements that include in-cycle strength deterioration but not cyclic stiffness 

degradation (fig. 21). Axial load-moment interaction in columns is represented by plasticity 

theory; 

• Panel zones were modeled as four rigid links hinged at the corners with a rotational spring 

that represents the strength and stiffness of the connection (fig. 22) (Krawinkler, 1978); 

• Ductility capacities of girders, columns, and panel zones were specified according to the 

ASCE/SEI 41-06 standard (ASCE, 2007); 

• At the base level, columns of moment resisting frames were assumed to be fixed, whereas 

gravity columns were considered pinned; 

• The geometric nonlinear effects were considered by a standard P−∆ formulation for both 

moment and gravity frames; and 

• Damping was modeled by Rayleigh damping, with its two constants selected to give 2-

percent damping ratio at the fundamental period of vibration, T1, and a period of 0.2 T1. The 

damping ratios for the first nine vibration modes range from 1.5 to 2.5 percent. 

Figure 23 shows the natural periods and modes of vibration; xcm denotes the distance from 

the center of mass (C.M.) to a corner of the building. Figure 24 shows the motion of the roof in 

plan. The effective modal masses for the first nine modes of vibration are presented in figure 25. 

These figures indicate that torsional rotations dominate motion in the first and fourth modes, 

whereas lateral displacements dominate motion in the second and fifth modes, indicating weak 

coupling between lateral and torsional motions for these two sets of modes. Because the periods 

of the dominantly torsional modes are longer than those of the dominantly lateral modes, this 

system is said to be “torsionally flexible.” Also, the higher-mode contributions to response are 
9

expected to be significant because the effective mass of the first lateral mode is less than 50

percent of the total mass. 

Evaluation Methodology

The following steps were implemented for evaluating the significance of the groundmotion rotation angle on linear-elastic and nonlinear inelastic behavior of single-story and 

multistory buildings with symmetric- and asymmetric-plan located in near fault sites: 

1. For each of the 30 records selected for this investigation, calculate rotated ground-motion

components by varying θx from 0° to 360° at every 5° in the clockwise direction (fig.

2B). The motions for θx = 0° and 90° correspond to the FP and FN components of the 

record, respectively. In addition, calculate rotated ground-motion components for θx = θm

and θx = θm + 90°. For estimating maximum direction angle θm for single-story systems, 

use periods equal to 0.2, 1, 2, 3, and 5 s, and for multistory structures, use fundamental 

periods of the buildings. 

2. Calculate the 5-percent damped response spectrum A(T) for the FN-component of the 30 

records at 300 logarithmically spaced periods T over the period range from 0.001 to 6 

seconds. 

3. Implement an iterative procedure for designing the 30 single-story systems described 

previously using the median spectrum of 30 FN components of step 2 as the design 

spectrum. At the end of this step, values for the parameters k and qy are obtained for each 

BRB. Recall that the single-story systems have vibration periods, Tn, equal to 0.2, 1, 2, 3, 

and 5 seconds and yield strength reduction factors R equal to 3, 5, and a value that leads 

to linear-elastic design.

4. Conduct linear and nonlinear RHAs of the 30 single-story symmetric- and asymetric-plan 

systems subjected to bidirectional rotated components of ground motion obtained in step 

1. For each RHA, obtain floor displacements, floor total accelerations, BRB plastic 

deformations, and BRB forces. This step involves more than 34,000 RHAs. 

5. Conduct linear and nonlinear RHAs of the multistory buildings subjected to bidirectional, 

rotated components of ground motions obtained in step 1. For each RHA, obtain floor 

displacements, floor total accelerations, total chord rotations, and moments of beams and 

columns. This step involves 2,400 RHAs. 

Results

Linear and nonlinear RHAs were implemented for the single-story and multistory 

systems of this investigation subjected to two horizontal components of ground motions 

following the aforementioned procedure. First, the results for the single-story systems will be 

presented. 

Single-Story Symmetric- and Asymmetric-Plan Buildings

Selected EDPs for single-story systems are displacement (ux,) and floor total acceleration 

(üt

x ) at the center of mass, member force, and plastic deformation of selected BRBs. Figure 26

shows roof displacement, ux, (red line) as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for symmetric-plan 

buildings with Tn = 2, 3, and 5 seconds subjected to ground motions from table 1 with velocity 
10

pulse period close to Tn. The filled gray area shows values of θx in which the velocity pulses are 

identified for each record. Note that angles θx =0° and 90° correspond to the FP and FN 

directions, respectively. Figure 27 displays üt

x at the roof level. The member force and plasticdeformation at bracing b1 (fig. 8) are shown in figures 28 and 29, respectively. For asymmetricplan systems, roof displacements, ux, at the center of mass and at the corner c2 (fig. 8) as a 

function of the rotation angle, θx, are shown in figures 30 and 31, respectively. Figure 32

displays the roof total acceleration, üt

x, at corner c2. The member forces for bracing b3 (fig. 8) as 

a function of θx are shown in figures 33 and 34, respectively. These figures permit the following 

observations: 

• Velocity pulses may appear in directions different than the FN or FP direction. 

• For symmetric-plan systems, the maximum displacement, ux, and floor total acceleration, üt

x, 

over all nonredundant orientations are generally polarized in the direction in which an

apparent velocity pulse with a period close to Tn is observed; although this polarization is 

almost perfect for linear-elastic systems, it vanishes for nonlinear-inelastic systems, and 

leading maximum displacement ux also occurs in the direction different from that of the

velocity pulse (white areas in figs. 26–27 and 30–31); this is attributed to period elongation 

as a result of inelastic action. For asymmetric-plan systems, however, no strong correlation is 

observed between the orientation leading to maximum ux and üt

x and the velocity pulse 

direction even for linear-elastic response. 

• Only for linear-elastic symmetric-plan systems, the maximum force in selected BRBs is 

polarized in the direction in which the pulse is identified. Whereas for all nonlinear-inelastic 

systems, BRB reaches its ultimate capacity quickly without being influenced by the rotation 

angle (fig. 28).

• For symmetric-plan systems, maximum values of EDPs almost always occur in the direction 

at which the velocity pulse is identified. For the asymmetric-plan systems, however, 

maximum values of EDPs also take place in directions without the velocity pulse (fig. 29). 

• EDPs may be underestimated by more than 50 percent if a building is subjected to only 

FN/FP components of a pulse-like ground motion. This is valid for both symmetric- and 

asymmetric-plan systems.

• There is no unique orientation for a given structure; the rotation angle that leads to maximum 

EDPs varies not only with the ground-motion pair selected but also with the period, R, value 

used in the design process of the building and EDP of interest. 

For a selected earthquake scenario, it is commonly assumed that EDPs are log-normally 

distributed (Cornell and others, 2002). For this reason, it is more appropriate to represent the 

“mean” structural response by the median; a conclusion that is widely accepted. Because the 

geometric mean and median of a random variable having a lognormal distribution are the same, 

we decided to employ the term “median” instead of geometric mean, as is commonly done. 

Figure 35 shows median displacements, ux, at the center of mass as a function of the rotation

angle, θx, for symmetric-plan buildings with Tn = 0.2, 1, 2, 3, and 5 sec, and with R = 3, 5, and a 

value that leads to linear-elastic design subjected to 30 bidirectional ground motions. The red 

lines represent the median displacement, ux, plus or minus one standard deviation (σ) computed 

based on peak response values resulting from each ground-motion pair at each nonredundant 

rotation angle. In these figures, the blue circles represent the median MD displacement, umx ± σ, 

(16th and 84th percentile values are compute as umx exp(± σ)) for the systems subjected to 

ground motions only in the MD. Recall that MD stands for maximum direction. Note that for a 

given ground-motion pair, MD changes with period. In figure 35, although the MD-displacement 
11

umx ± σ values correspond to a single value for each system, it is visualized as a full circle to 

facilitate direct comparisons with median displacements, ux ± σ, which is a function of the 

rotation angle, θx. Similarly, median values of other EDPs are shown in figure 36 thru figure 37

for the symmetric-plan systems. For the asymmetric-plan systems, similar plots are depicted in

figures 38 thru 41. These figures provide an overall statistical examination to generalize the 

observations previously made based on individual records in figures 26 thru 34. These general 

observations are: 

• For short period (Tn = 0.2 seconds) linear-elastic symmetric- and asymmetric-plan systems, 

maximum median-displacement values (red lines) are independent of the ground-motion

rotation angle. At longer periods, however, maximum median displacements are influenced 

by the rotation angle, and they are generally polarized with the FN direction. This is more 

pronounced for symmetric-plan systems. For R values of 3 and 5, the effect of the rotation

angle on displacement is significant for all systems. 

• Median values of floor total accelerations and member forces are generally not influenced by 

the ground-motion rotation angle in both linear-elastic and nonlinear-inelastic range for both 

symmetric- and asymmetric-plan buildings. 

• For all systems, it is clear that the R value used in the design process affects the difference 

between the median MD displacement and the maximum median displacement over all 

nonredundant orientations. For linear-elastic systems, maximum values of EDPs are almost 

always smaller than median MD-EDPs—a conclusion drawn by Huang and others, (2008). 

However, for nonlinear-inelastic systems, maximum median-EDPs may be equal or larger 

than MD-EDPs. This is an important finding because it demonstrates that use of MD ground 

motions does not necessarily provide the most critical (or over conservative6

) EDPs for 

systems responding in nonlinear-inelastic range in particular for asymmetric-plan structures. 

• It is evident that conducting nonlinear RHA for ground motions oriented in the FN/FP

directions does not always lead to the peak value of median-displacement over all 

nonredundant rotation angles. However, displacements are not underestimated substantially 

(less than 20 percent) if the system is subjected to only the FN/FP components of a large set 

of ground motions. The underestimation could be as much as 50 percent if a single groundmotion record (not a suite of records) is used for RHA. 

Multistory Symmetric- and Asymmetric-Plan Buildings

Similar to the single-story systems, linear and nonlinear RHAs were implemented for the 

multistory structures subjected to bidirectional excitations following the aforementioned 

evaluation procedure. Figure 42 shows linear-elastic response quantities (story drifts, floor total

accelerations, and beam and column moments) in x direction at the 1st, 3rd, 5th, 7th, and 9th

floors for the 9-story symmetric-plan building (T1 =1.51 seconds) as a function of the rotation 

angle θx subjected to ground motion no. 9 in table 1, which has a maximum velocity pulse 

period of 1.9 seconds. The filled gray area shows values of θx in which the velocity pulses are 

identified. The angles θx =0° and 90° correspond to the FP and FN directions, respectively. The 

record with pulse period close to the fundamental period of the building is selected intentionally, 

because such records impose sudden and intense energy input associated with the velocity pulse 

that should be dissipated within a short period of time. This causes amplified deformation 

demands in structures (Kalkan and Kunnath, 2006, 2007). Figure 42 indicates that maximum 

 

6 The term “conservative” is used here for either peak or close to peak EDP values.
12

values of EDPs generally take place in the same direction, different than the FN direction, with 

the exception of the 9th floor x-column moment. Also, the maximum EDPs are observed in the 

direction in which the velocity pulse is identified. For this particular record, FN direction doesn’t 

contain an apparent velocity pulse, and the EDPs in the FN direction are as much as 20 percent

less than their maxima. 

For a given response quantity of interest and record pair, the FN/FP directions will 

correspond to two values. By comparing these two values with the responses at all other possible 

rotation angles, one can evaluate the level of conservatism in such directions; for example, 

whether the FN/FP rotated ground motions provide an envelope of EDP. If obvious systematic 

benefits of the FN/FP orientations existed, they should be observable by repeating such 

comparisons for several EDPs and record pairs. To do this, figures 43 thru 46 show height-wise 

distribution of the median and dispersion values of EDPs plotted separately in x and y directions. 

In these plots, grey lines represent GMs rotated by 10° increments. The continuous red line is for 

FN direction and the dashed red line is for FP direction. The blue line represents the components 

oriented to MD. Note that each line corresponds to either median or dispersion of RHA results of 

30 ground-motion pairs rotated by θx. 

These figures present interesting results. While the ground motions rotated to the FN

direction yield the largest median EDPs in the x direction, the motions oriented to FP direction

yield the largest median-EDPs in the y direction, thus EDPs due to the FN/FP rotated ground 

motions serve as envelopes for all other nonredundant rotation angles. Note that the x direction

of the building coincides with 0° (FP direction). As opposed to the linear-elastic results based on 

single-story systems, ground motions rotated to MD produce smaller median-EDPs as compared 

those due to FN/FP directions. Dispersions of EDPs are also larger in the FN/FP directions than 

in the MD. 

The results plotted in figures 43 thru 46 are consolidated and depicted as a function of θx 

in figures 47 and 48 for x and y directions of the building, respectively. Viewing the response as 

a function of rotation angle enables us to better understand how the critical angle, θcr, defined as 

the angle corresponding to the largest response over all angles, varies with both EDP and 

ground-motion pair. For this building θcr = 0° and 90° because the maximum median EDPs 

along the x direction are polarized in the FN direction (that is, 90°), and the maximum median

EDPs along the y direction are polarized in the FP direction (that is, 0°). It is evident that 

maximum median EDPs are generally larger than the median MD-EDPs in both x and y

directions indicating that MD ground motions do not necessarily provide the most critical (or 

over conservative) EDPs for systems responding in linear-elastic range. 

Same response quantities are plotted in figures 49 thru 55 for the linear 9-story 

asymmetric-plan building (T1 = 2.5 seconds). As opposed to the symmetric-plan building, it is 

clear from figure 49 that θcr varies significantly with EDPs, and there is no unique angle that 

leads to the peak values for all EDPs simultaneously. Examination of height-wise distributions of 

median and dispersion of EDPs in figures 50 thru 53 demonstrate that neither the FN/FP 

directions nor the MD rotated ground motion produce the maximum median drift and internal 

forces in the x direction. In the y direction, however, ground motions rotated to FN/FP direction

led to the maximum median drift and floor acceleration. For other EDPs in the same direction, 

arbitrary orientations resulted in maximum median values. For almost all EDPs, the maximum 

median values that corresponded to the MD were smaller than those corresponded to the FN/FP

direction. This finding is also evident in figure 54 and figure 55, where the median±σ values of 

EDPs are plotted as a function of θx. These figures once again demonstrate that the maximum 
13

median EDPs (solid red line) are dependent on the rotation angle of the ground motion and that it 

varies with EDP. For the asymmetric-plan building, maximum median-EDPs resulting from the 

MD rotated ground motions are generally smaller than those resulting from the ground motion 

rotated to the FN/FP direction. This is more pronounced for EDPs in the y direction. Similar to 

the symmetric-plan building, the MD rotated ground motions do not necessarily provide the most 

critical results for the asymmetric-plan building. 

So far linear-elastic response quantities were examined for the symmetric- and 

asymmetric-plan 9-story buildings. In the next set of figures, we will examine the nonlinearinelastic response quantities. Nonlinear results for the symmetric-plan building are shown first in 

figures 56 thru 62. Similar plots for the asymmetric-plan building are depicted in figures 63 thru 

69. It is evident that θcr leading to maximum response varies significantly with EDPs for 

nonlinear - systems. While the FN/FP direction rotated ground motions yield the largest value for 

certain EDPs, there is no single θcr that lead to the peak values for all EDPs. Note that the same 

conclusion drawn for linear-elastic systems. Unlike the symmetric-plan building, peak values of 

EDPs also take place in the direction in which no apparent pulse is identified (for example, x

column moment at 9th floor). Examination of height-wise distributions of median and dispersion 

values of EDPs also demonstrates important findings. The ground motions rotated to the MD 

result in the maximum median EDPs in the x direction, whereas same records surprisingly 

produce the minimum median EDPs in the y direction, in which the ground motions oriented to 

the FP direction yield the largest median EDPs. This observation is consistent for all EDPs 

investigated for both symmetric- and asymmetric-plan buildings. 

Ground motions rotated to the FN direction produce the second largest median EDPs 

following the results associated with the MD. Therefore, for nonlinear-inelastic response, the 

MD and FP direction rotated ground motions serve as envelopes for all other nonredundant 

rotation angles. These observations are also evident in figures 61–62 and 68–69, where the 

median±σ values of EDPs are plotted as a function of θx. For nonlinear-inelastic systems, these 

figures prove that the maximum median EDPs (solid red lines) are dependent on the rotation 

angle of the ground motion only for certain EDPs; for example, member forces and plastic 

rotations are not affected by the rotation angle as much as the drift does. For both symmetricand asymmetric-plan buildings, the maximum median EDPs resulting from the MD rotated 

ground motions yield conservative results only for the x direction of the buildings, whereas in the 

other direction ground motions oriented to FP direction provide the most conservative results.

Thus, no consistency in over conservatism of MD rotated ground motions is detected. These 

findings are in close agreement with those derived based on the linear-elastic systems. 

Conclusions

Current seismic design practice in the United States requires as-recorded pairs of ground 

motions to be rotated to fault-normal and fault-parallel (FN/FP) directions before they are used 

as input for three-dimensional (3D) response history analyses (RHAs) of building structures

within 5 km of the active fault. It is assumed that this approach will lead to two sets of responses 

that envelope the range of possible responses over all nonredundant rotation angles. Thus, it is 

considered to be a conservative method appropriate for design verification of new structures. 

Additionally, the site-specific ground-motion procedure, according to the ASCE/SEI 7-10, 

requires that the ground motion to be rotated to the maximum direction (MD) (that is, direction 

of rotated ground-motion pair resulting in peak linear-elastic response quantity of a single 

lumped mass oscillator) when site-response analysis is performed; this new approach has been 
14

found to be controversial (Stewart and others, 2011). Currently, there is a lack of research 

addressing bidirectional nonlinear response of structures considering ground-motion

directionality effects. In this study, the influence that the rotation angle of the ground motion has 

on several engineering demand parameters (EDPs) has been examined systematically in linearelastic and nonlinear-inelastic domains using a suite of 3D computer models of symmetric- and 

asymmetric-plan single-story and multistory buildings subjected to 30 bidirectional near-fault 

ground motions. Also investigated are the rotation angle of an apparent velocity pulse and its 

correlation with the MD and FN/FP directions. 

This investigation has led to the following conclusions: 

• Velocity pulses in near-fault records may appear in directions different than the MD or

FN/FP directions. For the near-fault records examined, MD shows large scattering with no 

visible correlation with the FN/FP directions; this is valid even for motions recorded within 5 

km of the fault. 

• For linear-elastic systems, the maximum displacement occurs when in the direction where

apparent velocity pulse with a period close to the fundamental period of the structure is 

observed. This strong polarization vanishes for nonlinear-inelastic systems due to period 

elongation. For other EDPs (for example, member forces), their linear and nonlinear peak 

values are generally independent of the ground-motion rotation angle. These observations are 

valid for both symmetric- and asymmetric-plan single-story and multistory buildings 

investigated. 

• There is no unique orientation for a given structure maximizing all EDPs simultaneously; 

maximum EDP can happen in any direction different than the direction of the velocity pulse. 

The critical angle θcr corresponding to the largest response over all possible rotation angles 

varies with the ground-motion pair selected, R value used in the design process and the 

response quantity (EDP) of interest. Therefore, it is difficult to determine a “unique” building 

orientation that maximizes demands for all EDPs before conducting a RHA. 

• For a given record, the rotation angle leading to maximum elastic response is different than 

that resulting in maximum inelastic response; therefore, there is no single rotation angle that 

operates effectively in both linear and nonlinear domains. 

• For a given ground-motion pair, MD is not unique; it changes with period and R value of the 

system, as a result, the MD response spectrum becomes an envelope of the maximum 

response spectral accelerations of the ground-motion pair at all possible rotation angles and 

periods. It is therefore argued that the use of MD ground motion for design is an overly 

conservative approach. Although it can be true for linear-elastic systems, conducting 

nonlinear RHA for ground motions oriented in the MD does not always lead to maximum 

EDPs over all orientations in particular for asymmetric-plan buildings. 

• The use of MD or FN/FP directions applied along the structural axes of the building almost 

never guarantees that the maximum response over all possible angles will be obtained. Even 

though this approach may lead to a maximum value for one EDP, it will simultaneously be 

nonconservative for other EDPs. Therefore, if the performance assessment and design 

verification will be conducted against worst-case scenarios, then bidirectional ground 

motions should be applied at various angles with respect to the structural axes to cover all 

possible responses. Although this might not be a practical solution, it could still be worth 

conducting for certain projects. 

• Treating the as-recorded direction as a randomly chosen direction, it is observed that there is 

more than a 50 percent chance for the larger response among the FN and FP values to exceed 
15

the response corresponding to an arbitrary orientation. The latter observation is valid for most 

but not all of the record pairs and response quantities considered. Therefore, compared to no 

rotation at all, use of the larger response of the two values corresponding to the MD or FN/FP

directions is still warranted. 

The results presented herein have important implications for current earthquake 

engineering practice, suggesting that ground motions rotated to MD or FN/FP directions do not 

necessarily provide the most critical estimates of EDPs in nonlinear-inelastic range. For a given 

record, rotation angle leading to maximum elastic response is different than that for maximum 

inelastic response, thus any conclusions drawn based on linear-elastic system will not be 

applicable for nonlinear-inelastic systems. 

Acknowledgments

Juan C. Reyes would like to acknowledge the generous support of Universidad de los 

Andes (Colombia) and the U.S. Geological Survey for providing him the financial support for 

conducting this research. Finally, thanks to Andrew Whittaker, Yahya Kurama, David Boore,

Charlie Kircher, C.B. Crouse, Katsuichiro Goda, and Sanaz Rezaeian for their critical reviews on 

the material presented herein and offering valuable comments and suggestions, which helped in 

improving the technical quality of this report. 

References Cited

American Society of Civil Engineers, 2010, Minimum design loads for buildings and other 

structures, ASCE/SEI 7-10: Reston, Va., American Society of Civil Engineers, 650 p. 

American Society of Civil Engineers, 2006, Minimum Design loads for buildings and other 

structures, ASCE Standard 7-05: Reston, Va., American Society of Civil Engineers, 424 p. 

American Society of Civil Engineers, 2007, Seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings: Reston, 

Va., American Society of Civil Engineers, report no. 41–6, 411 p. 

Athanatopoulou, A.M., 2004, Critical orientation of three correlated seismic components: 

Engineering Structures, v. 27, p. 301–312. 

Baker, J.W., 2007, Quantitative classification of near-fault ground motions using wavelet 

analysis: Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, v. 97, no. 5, p. 1486–1501. 

Bray, J., and Rodriguez-Marek, A., 2004, Characterization of forward-directivity ground motions 

in the near-fault region: Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, v. 24, p. 815–828. 

Campbell, K.W., and Bozorgnia, Y., 2007, Campbell-Bozorgnia NGA ground motion relations 

for the geometric mean horizontal component of peak and spectral ground motion parameters: 

Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, report no. 

2007–02, 238 p. 

Computers and Structures, Inc., 2006, PERFORM 3D, user guide v4, nonlinear analysis and 

performance assessment for 3D structures: Berkeley, Calif., Computers and Structures, Inc.

Cornell, C.A., Jalayer, F., Hamburger, R.O., and Foutch, D.A., 2002, Probabilistic basis for 2000 

SAC Federal Emergency Management Agency steel moment frame guidelines: Journal of 

Structural Engineering, v. 128, no. 4, p. 526–533. 

Fernandez-Davila, I., Comeinetti, S., and Cruz, E.F., 2000, Considering the bidirectional effects 

and the seismic angle variations in building design: Proceedings of the 12th World Conference 

on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland, New Zealand. 

Goda, K., 2012, Comparison of peak ductility demand of inelastic SDOF systems in maximum 

elastic response and major principal directions: Earthquake Spectra, v. 28, p. 385–399. 
16

Golesorkhi, R., and Gouchon, J., 2002, Near-source effects and correlation to recent recorded 

data: Proceedings of the 7th U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Boston, 

Mass. 

Hong, H.P., and Goda, K., 2010. Characteristics of horizontal ground motion measures along 

principal directions: Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibrations, v. 9, p. 9–22. 

Huang, Y., Whittaker, A.S., and Luco, N., 2008, Maximum spectral demands in the near-fault 

region: Earthquake Spectra, v. 24, no.1, p. 319-34. 

International Conference of Building Officials, 2009, International Building Code: Whittier, CA.

International Conference of Building Officials, 2010, Whittier, Calif., California Building Code. 

Kalkan, E., and Kunnath, S.K., 2006, Effects of fling-step and forward directivity on the seismic 

response of buildings: Earthquake Spectra, v. 22, no. 2, p. 367–390. 

Kalkan, E., and Kunnath, S.K., 2007, Effective cyclic energy as a measure of seismic 

demand: Journal of Earthquake Engineering, v. 11, no. 5, p. 725–751. 

Kalkan, E., and Kunnath, S.K., 2008, Relevance of absolute and relative energy content in 

seismic evaluation of structures: Advances in Structural Engineering, v. 11, no. 1, p. 17–34. 

Kalkan, E., and Kwong, N.S., 2012, Evaluation of fault-normal/fault-parallel directions rotated 

ground motions for response history analysis of an instrumented six-story building: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 2012–1058, 30 p., available at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2012/1058/. 

Kalkan, E., and Kwong, N.S., in press, Pros and cons of rotating ground motion records to faultnormal/parallel directions for response history analysis of buildings: Journal of Structural 

Engineering.

Khoshnoudian, F., and Poursha, M., 2004, Responses of three dimensional buildings under 

bidirectional and unidirectional seismic excitations: Proceedings of the 13th World Conference 

on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, Canada. 

Krawinkler, H., 1978, Shear in beam-column joints in seismic design of frames: Engineering 

Journal, v. 15, no. 3, p. 82-91. 

Lagaros, N.D., 2010, Multicomponent incremental dynamic analysis considering variable 

incident angle: Structure and Infrastructure Engeering, v. 6, p. 77–94. 

Lopez, O.A., and Torres, R., 1997, The critical angle of seismic rotation and structural response: 

Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, v. 26, p. 881–894. 

Lopez, O.A., Chopra, A.K., and Hernandez, J.J., 2000, Critical response of structures to 

multicomponent earthquake excitation: Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, v. 

29, p.1759–1778. 

MacRae, G.A., and Mattheis, J., 2000, Three-dimensional steel building response to near-fault 

motions: Journal of Structural Engineering, v. 126, no.1, p.117–126. 

Mavroeidis, G.P., and A.S. Papageorgiou, 2003, A mathematical representation of near-fault 

ground motions: Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, v. 93, no. 3, p. 1099–1131. 

Merritt S., Uang, C.M., and Benzoni, G., 2003, Subassemblage Testing of star seismic buckling 

restrained braces,report no. TR-2003/04; Final report to Star Seismic, LLC: University of 

California, San Diego. 

Penzien, J., and Watabe, M., 1975, Characteristics of 3-dimensional earthquake ground motions: 

Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, v. 3, p. 365–373. 

Rigato, A., and Medina, R.A., 2007, Influence of angle of rotation on the seismic demands for 

inelastic single-storey structures subjected to bidirectional ground motions: Engineering 

Structures, v. 29, no.10, p. 2593–2601. 
17

Singh, J.P., Porter L.D., and Zafir, Z., 2011, A practitioner's perspective of ASCE/SEI 7-10 

maximum direction ground motions: Proceedings of the Annual Convention of Structural 

Engineers Association of California. 

Stewart, J.P., Abrahamson, N.A., Atkinson, G.M., Baker, J., Boore, D.M., Bozorgnia, Y., 

Campbell, K.W., Comartin, C.D., Idriss, I.M., Lew, M., Mehrain, M., Moehle, J.P., Naeim, F., 

and Sabol, T.A., 2011, Representation of bidirectional ground motions for design spectra in 

building codes: Earthquake Spectra, v. 27, no. 3, p. 927–937. 

Tezcan, S.S., and Alhan, C., 2001, Parametric analysis of irregular structures under seismic 

loading according to the new Turkish earthquake code: Engineering Structures, v. 23, p. 600–

609. 

Van Overschee, P., and De Moor, B., 1996, Subspace identification for linear systems: Boston, 

London, and Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers. 

Watson-Lamprey, J., and Boore, D.M., 2007, Beyond SaGMRotI—Conversion to SaArb, SaSN, 

and SaMaxRot: Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, v. 97, p. 1511–1524. 

Wilson, E.L., and Suharwardy, I., 1995, A clarification of the orthogonal effects in a threedimensional seismic analysis: Earthquake Spectra, v. 11, no.4, p. 659–666. 
18

Table 1. Selected near-fault ground-motion records

Record 

sequence 

number

Earthquake name Year Station name

Earthquake 

magnitude 

(Mw) 

Style of 

Faulting

Closest fault 

distance 

(kilometers) 

1 Gazli, USSR 1976 Karakyr 6.8 Thrust 5.5

2 Imperial Valley-06 1979 Aeropuerto Mexicali 6.5 Strike-slip 0.3

3 Imperial Valley-06 1979 Agrarias 6.5 Strike-slip 0.7

4 Imperial Valley-06 1979 Bonds Corner 6.5 Strike-slip 2.7

5 Imperial Valley-06 1979 EC Meloland Overpass FF 6.5 Strike-slip 0.1

6 Imperial Valley-06 1979 El Centro Array #6 6.5 Strike-slip 1.4

7 Imperial Valley-06 1979 El Centro Array #7 6.5 Strike-slip 0.6

8 Irpinia, Italy-01 180 Auletta 6.9 Normal 9.6

9 Irpinia, Italy-01 1980 Bagnoli Irpinio 6.9 Normal 8.2

10 Irpinia, Italy-01 1980 Sturno 6.9 Normal 10.8

11 Nahanni, Canada 1985 Site 1 6.8 Thrust 9.6

12 Nahanni, Canada 1985 Site 2 6.8 Thrust 4.9

13 Nahanni, Canada 1985 Site 3 6.8 Thrust 5.3

14 Superstition Hills-02 1987 Parachute Test Site 6.5 Strike-slip 1.0

15 Superstition Hills-02 1987 Westmorland Fire Sta 6.5 Strike-slip 13.0

16 Loma Prieta 1989 BRAN 6.9 Reverse 10.7

17 Loma Prieta 1989 Gilroy Array #3 6.9 Reverse 12.8

18 Loma Prieta 1989 LGPC 6.9 Reverse 3.9

19 Loma Prieta 1989 San Jose - Santa Teresa Hills 6.9 Reverse 14.7

20 Loma Prieta 1989 Saratoga - Aloha Ave 6.9 Reverse 8.5

21 Loma Prieta 1989 Saratoga - W Valley Coll. 6.9 Reverse 9.3

22 Erzican, Turkey 1992 Erzincan 6.7 Strike-slip 4.4

23 Northridge-01 1994 Jensen Filter Plant Generator 6.7 Reverse 5.4

24 Northridge-01 1994 Newhall - Fire Sta 6.7 Reverse 5.9

25 Northridge-01 1994 Newhall - W Pico Canyon Rd. 6.7 Reverse 5.5

26 Northridge-01 1994 Pacoima Dam (downstr) 6.7 Reverse 7.0

27 Northridge-01 1994 Rinaldi Receiving Sta 6.7 Reverse 6.5

28 Northridge-01 1994 Sylmar - Olive View Med FF 6.7 Reverse 5.3

29 Kobe, Japan 1995 KJMA 6.9 Reverse 1.0

30 Kobe, Japan 1995 Nishi-Akashi 6.9 Reverse 7.1
19

Table 2. Natural periods of vibration obtained from the peak-picking (PP) method, the combined 

deterministic-stochastic subspace (DSS) method, and the computer model for the ninestory symmetric-plan building. 

[-, no data]

 

Figure 1. Distribution of magnitude (Mw) and closest fault distance (Rrup) for the 30 near-fault groundmotion records selected. 

PP method DSS method

1 translational y 1.58 1.53 1.51

2 translational x 1.46 - 1.45

3 torsional 1.08 1.07 1.01

4 translational y 0.55 0.49 0.54

5 translational x 0.50 - 0.50

6 torsional 0.38 0.36 0.36

Mode

Identified Period [sec] Computer Model 

Period [sec] Direction

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Magnitude

Closest distance, km
20

Figure 2. A, Reference axes for the fault and the instrument with relevant angles noted. B, Reference axis 

for the building.

(A) (B)

(A) (B)
21

 

Figure 3. Response spectra of 30 near-fault ground motions and their geometric-mean used as design 

spectrum for single-story systems: fault parallel (strike parallel) components (left top panel), fault 

normal (strike normal) components (right top panel), comparison of median spectra of fault normal and 

fault parallel components (bottom panel). Damping ratio is 5 percent. g, acceleration due to gravity; 

sec, seconds.

0 1 2 3 4 5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

Period, sec

Pseudo-acceleration, g

0 1 2 3 4 5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

Period, sec

0 1 2 3 4 5

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

Period, sec

Pseudo-acceleration, g

Strike Parallel

Strike Normal
22

Figure 4. Trace of deformation (u) orbit of a two-degrees-of-freedom system (elastic vibration period, Tn = 

1 second) with direction-independent stiffness and damping subjected to the fault-normal/fault parallel 

(FN/FP) components of a ground motion. 

u

FP

u

FN major

axis

minor

axis θ m

Linear system

Tn

 = 1 sec.
23

Figure 5. For 30 near-fault ground-motion pairs listed in table 1, polar plots of spectral accelerations as a 

function of the rotation angle, θx, are shown for elastic single-degree-of-freedom (SDF) systems with 

vibration period (Tn) equal to 0.2, 1, 2, 3, and 5 seconds (damping ratio 5 percent). The red lines 

represent the median spectral acceleration value (An) ± one standard deviation (σn). The blue points 

correspond to pairs of maximum direction angle θm and spectral acceleration values Am. The blue 

circles represent the median spectral acceleration value ± σm in the maximum direction. Note that 

except for short-period SDF systems (Tn = 0.2 seconds), An values are generally polarized with faultnormal (90°) direction; however, θm shows large scattering with no correlation with fault-normal 

direction; also spectral acceleration values, Am, corresponding to the maximum direction angle, θm, are 

generally higher than median spectral acceleration value, An.

2g

90°

0°

Tn

=0.2sec.

1g

90°

0°

Tn

=1.0sec.

0.6g

90°

0°

Tn

=2.0sec.

0.4g

90°

0°

Tn

=3.0sec.

0.1g

90°

0°

Tn

=5.0sec.

Median An

 +/- σn

Median Am +/- σ m

(θ m , Am)
24

 

Figure 6. Polar plots of identified velocity pulse periods and spectral acceleration (acc.) values as a 

function of the rotation angle, θx, for ground-motion (GM) pairs 1 to 15 (see table 1). The red dots show 

the directions in which velocity pulses are identified with their corresponding pulse periods. The filled

gray area shows range of θx in which velocity pulses are observed. The dashed blue lines show 

spectral acceleration values for the maximum identified pulse period (damping ratio 5 percent). The 

blue line identifies the maximum direction. Numerical values for maximum pulse periods and maximum 

spectral accelerations are presented in the upper right corner of each subplot. Empty polar plot 

indicates that no velocity pulse is identified.

Direction and 

period of identified

pulse-like motion

Spectral acc. for

maximum pulse-period

Maximum-direction for

maximum pulse-period

4.9sec.

0.2g

90°

0°

GM1 2.4sec.

0.2g

90°

0°

GM2 2.4sec.

0.2g

90°

0°

GM3

1

90°

0°

GM4 4.4sec.

0.2g

90°

0°

GM5 4.2sec.

0.3g

90°

0°

GM6

4.5sec.

0.2g

90°

0°

GM7

1

90°

0°

GM8 1.9sec.

0.2g

90°

0°

GM9

3.6sec.

0.2g

90°

0°

GM10

1

90°

0°

GM11 2.6sec.

0.1g

90°

0°

GM12

1

90°

0°

GM13 3.4sec.

0.3g

90°

0°

GM14

1

90°

0°

GM15
25

Figure 7. Polar plots of identified velocity pulse periods and spectral acceleration (acc) values as a 

function of the rotation angle, θx, for ground-motion (GM) pairs 16 to 30 (see table 1). The red dots 

show the directions in which velocity pulses are identified with their corresponding pulse periods. The 

filled gray area shows range of θx in which velocity pulses are observed. The dashed blue lines show 

spectral acceleration values for the maximum identified pulse period (damping ratio 5 percent). The 

blue line identifies the maximum direction. Numerical values for maximum pulse periods and maximum 

spectral accelerations are presented in the upper right corner of each subplot. Empty polar plot 

indicates that no velocity pulse is identified.

Direction and 

period of identified

pulse-like motion

Spectral acc. for

maximum pulse-period

Maximum-direction for

maximum pulse-period

1

90°

0°

GM16 3.5sec.

0.1g

90°

0°

GM17 4.3sec.

0.3g

90°

0°

GM18

1

90°

0°

GM19 5.1sec.

0.1g

90°

0°

GM20 5.2sec.

0.1g

90°

0°

GM21

3.0sec.

0.3g

90°

0°

GM22 3.7sec.

0.2g

90°

0°

GM23 1.0sec.

1.4g

90°

0°

GM24

2.5sec.

0.5g

90°

0°

GM25 0.6sec.

0.8g

90°

0°

GM26 4.0sec.

0.1g

90°

0°

GM27

3.1sec.

0.4g

90°

0°

GM28 0.8sec.

2.5g

90°

0°

GM29

1

90°

0°

GM30
26

ux

uy

uθ

x

y

b1

b2

b3 b4

b1

b2

b3 b4

ux

uy

uθ

x

y

c1

c2

Plan A: torsionally-stiff buildings

Plan B: torsionally-flexible buildings

Figure 8. Schematic isometric and plan views of the selected single-story structural systems with threedegrees-of-freedom noted; buckling-restrained braced frames are highlighted. 
27

force

deformation

qy

1.1qy 

k

k 3.45

100

 

Figure 9. Constitutive model used for the buckling-restrained braces (BRBs).

Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3

C.M.

T1 T2=T1 T3=0.577T1

T1 T2=0.376T1 T2=0.288T1

Plan A

Plan B

 

Figure 10. Periods and modes of vibration of the single-story three-degrees-of-freedom systems (Tn = 

elastic vibration period for the nth mode). 
28

Figure 11. Effective modal masses, Mn*, of the plan-A (symmetric-plan) and plan-B (asymmetric-plan) 

buildings. %, percent.

 A B

Figure 12. Nine-story symmetric-plan building in Aliso Viejo, California. A, three-dimensional computer 

model. B, Photograph of the building looking to north elevation.

0

20

40

60

80

100

1 2 3 1 2 3

Mn* / Total mass [%]

A-type plan B-type plan

Modes

Traslational X

Traslational Y

Torsional

Translational X

Translational Y
29

 

32’ 30’9” 33’

42’3”

42’3”

31’6”

8@

13’6”

17’

30’9” Helistop N Nref

x

y

y

x-beam

y-column

y-beam

x-column

 A B

Figure 13. West elevation (A) and typical floor plan (B) of symmetric-plan building.
30

 x

y

N Nref

2, 5, 7, 

9, 12, 13

4, 11,15 3, 6, 8, 

10, 14

(a)

 

1 2

5

7

9

12

13

4 3

6

8

11 10

15 14

x

z

(b)

 

Figure 14. Locations of sensors shown with red arrows in symmetric-plan building. A, Plan view. B, south 

elevation. 

(B)

(A)
31

 

Figure 15. Floor total accelerations recorded by the sensors shown in figure 14 during the 2008 magnitude 

5.4 Chino Hills southern California earthquake.

-0.05

0

0.05

ü3

(t) / g

-0.0258

sensor 3

-0.05

0

0.05

ü4(t) / g

-0.0245

sensor 4

-0.05

0

0.05

ü6(t) / g

-0.0234

sensor 6

-0.05

0

0.05

ü8

(t) / g

0.0252 sensor 8

-0.05

0

0.05

ü9

(t) / g

-0.0462

sensor 9

-0.05

0

0.05

ü10(t) / g

-0.0263

sensor 10

-0.05

0

0.05

ü11(t) / g

0.033 sensor 11

-0.05

0

0.05

ü13(t) / g

-0.0259

sensor 13

-0.05

0

0.05

ü14(t) / g

0.0419 sensor 14

25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60

-0.05

0

0.05

ü15(t) / g

0.0354 sensor 15

Time, sec
32

Figure 16. Comparison of normalized natural vibration modes identified by the deterministic-stochastic 

subspace (DSS) method with modes of the computer model for symmetric-plan building (*WF = west 

frame; **EW = east frame). 

Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3

C.M.

T1=1.51 sec. T2=1.45 sec. T3=1.01 sec.

Building 1

Figure 17. First triplet of periods and modes of vibration of symmetric-plan building (only roof motion is 

shown), (Tn = elastic vibration period for the nth mode).
33

Figure 18. Effective modal masses, Mn*, for symmetric-plan building. %, percent.

0

20

40

60

80

100

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Modes

Mn * / Total mass [%]

Traslational X

Traslational Y

Torsional

Translational X

Translational Y
34

Figure 19. Comparison of recorded and computed floor displacements at the sensor locations (fig. 14) of 

symmetric-plan building. Recorded data is from the 2008 magnitude 5.4 Chino Hills southern California 

earthquake.
35

 

Building 2

corner x-beam

y

x

x-column

y-column

y-beam

 A B

Figure 20. Nine-story asymmetric-plan building. A, three-dimensional computer model. B, plan view.

Figure 21. Trilinear force-deformation relations considering in-cycle strength deterioration (strength loss).
36

Figure 22. Krawinkler model for panel zones adapted from Computers and Structures, Inc. (2006).

Figure 23. First six natural periods and modes of vibration of asymmetric-plan building; x- lateral, y-lateral 

and torsional motions are shown in the three columns.
37

T1=2.50 sec T2=2.31 sec T3=2.12 sec

Building 2

Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3

Figure 24. First triplet of periods and modes of vibration of asymmetric-plan building (only roof motion is 

shown), (Tn = elastic vibration period for the nth mode).

Figure 25. Effective modal masses, Mn*, for asymmetric-plan building. %, percent.

0

20

40

60

80

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Modes

Mn * / Total mass [%]

Traslational X

Traslational Y

Torsional

Translational X

Translational Y
38

Figure 26. Displacement, ux, at the center of mass (red line) as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for

single-story symmetric-plan systems with elastic first-mode vibration period (Tn) = 2, 3, and 5 seconds

subjected to ground motions (GM) with velocity pulse period close to Tn. The filled gray area shows 

values of θx in which velocity pulses are identified. Angles θx = 0o and 90o correspond to the faultparallel and fault-normal directions, respectively.

90°

0°

Tn

=2.0 sec.

GM3

Linear

90°

0°

Tn

=2.0 sec.

GM9

90°

0°

Tn

=3.0 sec.

GM17

90°

0°

Tn

=5.0 sec.

GM1

90°

0°

Tn

=5.0 sec.

GM21

90°

0°

R=3

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

R=5

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°
39

Figure 27. Floor total accelerations, üt

x, at the center of mass (red line) as a function of the rotation angle, 

θx, for single-story symmetric-plan systems with elastic first-mode vibration period (Tn) = 2, 3, and 5

seconds subjected to ground motions (GM) with velocity pulse period close to Tn. The filled gray area

shows values of θx in which velocity pulses are identified for each record. Angles θx = 0o and 90o

correspond to the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions, respectively.

90°

0°

Tn

=2.0 sec.

GM3

Linear

90°

0°

Tn

=2.0 sec.

GM9

90°

0°

Tn

=3.0 sec.

GM17

90°

0°

Tn

=5.0 sec.

GM1

90°

0°

Tn

=5.0 sec.

GM21

90°

0°

R=3

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

R=5

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°
40

Figure 28. Force in bracing b1 (red line) as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for single-story symmetricplan systems with elastic first-mode vibration period (Tn) = 2, 3, and 5 seconds subjected to ground 

motions (GM) with velocity pulse period close to Tn. The filled gray area shows values of θx in which 

velocity pulses are identified for each record. Angles θx = 0o and 90o correspond to the fault-parallel 

and fault-normal directions, respectively.

90°

0°

Tn

=2.0 sec.

GM3

Linear

90°

0°

Tn

=2.0 sec.

GM9

90°

0°

Tn

=3.0 sec.

GM17

90°

0°

Tn

=5.0 sec.

GM1

90°

0°

Tn

=5.0 sec.

GM21

90°

0°

R=3

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

R=5

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°
41

Figure 29. Plastic deformation in bracing b1 (red line) as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for singlestory symmetric-plan systems with elastic first-mode vibration period (Tn) = 2, 3, and 5 seconds

subjected to ground motions (GM) with velocity pulse period close to Tn. The filled gray area shows 

values of θx in which velocity pulses are identified for each record. Angles θx = 0o and 90o correspond 

to the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions, respectively.

90°

0°

Tn

=2.0 sec.

GM3

Linear

90°

0°

Tn

=2.0 sec.

GM9

90°

0°

Tn

=3.0 sec.

GM17

90°

0°

Tn

=5.0 sec.

GM1

90°

0°

Tn

=5.0 sec.

GM21

90°

0°

R=3

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

R=5

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°
42

Figure 30. Displacement, ux, at the center of mass (red line) as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for

single-story asymmetric-plan systems with elastic first-mode vibration period (Tn) = 2, 3, and 5 seconds

subjected to ground motions (GM) with velocity pulse period close to Tn. The filled gray area shows 

values of θx in which velocity pulses are identified for each record. Angles θx = 0o and 90o correspond 

to the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions, respectively.

90°

0°

T

n

=2.0 sec.

GM3

Linear

90°

0°

T

n

=2.0 sec.

GM9

90°

0°

T

n

=3.0 sec.

GM17

90°

0°

T

n

=5.0 sec.

GM1

90°

0°

T

n

=5.0 sec.

GM21

90°

0°

R=3

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

R=5

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°
43

Figure 31. Displacement, ux, at corner p2 (red line) as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for single-story 

asymmetric-plan systems with elastic first-mode vibration period (Tn) = 2, 3, and 5 seconds subjected 

to ground motions (GM) with velocity pulse period close to Tn. The filled gray area shows values of θx

in which velocity pulses are identified for each record. Angles θx = 0o and 90o correspond to the faultparallel and fault-normal directions, respectively.

90°

0°

Tn

=2.0 sec.

GM3

Linear

90°

0°

Tn

=2.0 sec.

GM9

90°

0°

Tn

=3.0 sec.

GM17

90°

0°

Tn

=5.0 sec.

GM1

90°

0°

Tn

=5.0 sec.

GM21

90°

0°

R=3

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

R=5

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°
44

Figure 32. Floor total accelerations, üt

x, at corner p2 (red line) as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for

asymmetric-plan buildings with elastic first-mode vibration period (Tn) = 2, 3, and 5 seconds subjected 

to ground motions (GM) with velocity pulse period close to Tn. The filled gray area shows values of θx

in which velocity pulses are identified for each record. Angles θx = 0o and 90o correspond to the faultparallel and fault-normal directions, respectively.

90°

0°

Tn

=2.0 sec.

GM3

Linear

90°

0°

Tn

=2.0 sec.

GM9

90°

0°

Tn

=3.0 sec.

GM17

90°

0°

Tn

=5.0 sec.

GM1

90°

0°

Tn

=5.0 sec.

GM21

90°

0°

R=3

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

R=5

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°
45

Figure 33. Force in bracing b3 (red line) as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for single-story asymmetricplan systems with elastic first-mode vibration period (Tn) = 2, 3, and 5 seconds subjected to ground 

motions (GM) with velocity pulse period close to Tn. The filled gray area shows values of θx in which 

velocity pulses are identified for each record. Angles θx = 0o and 90o correspond to the fault-parallel 

and fault-normal directions, respectively.

90°

0°

Tn

=2.0 sec.

GM3

Linear

90°

0°

Tn

=2.0 sec.

GM9

90°

0°

Tn

=3.0 sec.

GM17

90°

0°

Tn

=5.0 sec.

GM1

90°

0°

Tn

=5.0 sec.

GM21

90°

0°

R=3

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

R=5

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°
46

Figure 34. Plastic deformation in bracing b3 (red line) as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for singlestory asymmetric-plan systems with elastic first-mode vibration period (Tn) = 2, 3, and 5 seconds

subjected to ground motions (GM) with velocity pulse period close to Tn. The filled gray area shows 

values of θx in which velocity pulses are identified for each record. Angles θx = 0o and 90o correspond 

to the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions, respectively.

90°

0°

Tn

=2.0 sec.

GM3

Linear

90°

0°

Tn

=2.0 sec.

GM9

90°

0°

Tn

=3.0 sec.

GM17

90°

0°

Tn

=5.0 sec.

GM1

90°

0°

Tn

=5.0 sec.

GM21

90°

0°

R=3

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

R=5

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°
47

Figure 35. Median displacements, ux, at the center of mass as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for 

single-story symmetric-plan systems with elastic first-mode vibration period (Tn) = 0.2, 1, 2, 3, and 5

seconds subjected to bidirectional loading. The red lines represent the median displacement ux ± σ. 

The blue circles represent the median displacement, uxm ± σ, for the systems subjected to bidirectional

90°

0°

Tn

=0.2 sec.

Linear

90°

0°

Tn

=1.0 sec.

90°

0°

Tn

=2.0 sec.

90°

0°

Tn

=3.0 sec.

90°

0°

Tn

=5.0 sec.

90°

0°

R=3

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

R=5

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

90°

0°

Median displacement +/- one standard deviation due to components rotated θ x

 degrees

Median displacement +/- one standard deviation due to MD components
48

Figure 36. Median total-accelerations, üt

x, at the center of mass as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for 

single-story symmetric-plan systems with elastic first-mode vibration period (Tn) = 0.2, 1, 2, 3, and 5 

seconds subjected to bidirectional loading. The red lines represent the median displacement, üt

x ± σ. 

The blue circles represent the median total-acceleration, üt

xm ± σ, for the systems subjected to 

bidirectional ground motions in the maximum direction. Solid lines are 50th and dashed lines are16th 

and 84th percentile engineering demand parameters (EDPs). MD, maximum direction. 
49

Figure 37. Median force q1 in bracing b1 as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for single-story symmetricplan systems elastic first-mode vibration period (Tn) = 0.2, 1, 2, 3, and 5 seconds subjected to 

bidirectional loading. The red lines represent the median force, q1 ± σ. The blue circles represent the 

median force, q1 ± σ, for the systems subjected to bidirectional ground motions in the maximum

direction. Solid lines are 50th and dashed lines are16th and 84th percentile engineering demand 

parameters (EDPs). MD, maximum direction. 
50

Figure 38. Median displacements, ux, at the center of mass as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for 

single-story asymmetric-plan systems with elastic first-mode vibration period (Tn) = 0.2, 1, 2, 3, and 5 

seconds subjected to bidirectional loading. The red lines represent the median displacement ux ± σ. 

The blue circles represent the median displacement uxm ± σ for the systems subjected to bidirectional 

ground motions in the maximum direction. Solid lines are 50th and dashed lines are16th and 84th 

percentile engineering demand parameters (EDPs). MD, maximum direction. 
51

Figure 39. Median displacements, ux, at corner p2 as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for single-story 

asymmetric-plan systems with elastic first-mode vibration period (Tn) = 0.2, 1, 2, 3, and 5 seconds

subjected to bidirectional loading. The red lines represent the median displacement, ux ± σ. The blue 

circles represent the median displacement, uxm ± σ, for the systems subjected to bidirectional ground 

motions in the maximum direction. Solid lines are 50th and dashed lines are16th and 84th percentile 

engineering demand parameters (EDPs). MD, maximum direction. 
52

Figure 40. Median total-accelerations, üt

x, at corner p2 as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for singlestory asymmetric-plan systems with elastic first-mode vibration period (Tn) = 0.2, 1, 2, 3, and 5 seconds 

subjected to bidirectional loading. The red lines represent the median displacement, üt

x ± σ. The blue 

circles represent the median total-acceleration, üt

xm ± σ, for the systems subjected to bidirectional 

ground motions in the maximum direction. Solid lines are 50th and dashed lines are16th and 84th 

percentile engineering demand parameters (EDPs). MD, maximum direction. 
53

Figure 41. Median force, q1, in bracing b3 as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for single-story 

asymmetric-plan systems with elastic first-mode vibration period (Tn) = 0.2, 1, 2, 3, and 5 seconds

subjected to bidirectional loading. The red lines represent the median force, q1 ± σ. The blue circles 

represent the median force, q1 ± σ, for the systems subjected to bidirectional ground motions in the 

maximum direction. Solid lines are 50th and dashed lines are16th and 84th percentile engineering 

demand parameters (EDPs). MD, maximum direction. 
54

Figure 42. Story drifts, floor total accelerations, and internal forces as a function of the rotation angle, θx, 

for the linear nine-story symmetric-plan building (first-mode elastic vibration period, T1 = 1.51 seconds) 

subjected to ground-motion (GM) no. 9, which has maximum velocity pulse period of 1.9 seconds. The 

filled gray area shows values of θx in which velocity pulses are identified. Angles θx = 0o and 90o

correspond to the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions, respectively. 
55

Figure 43. Height-wise distribution of median and dispersion values of story drift in the x and y directions 

for the linear nine-story symmetric-plan building. The gray, red, and blue lines show median and 

dispersion values of story drift due to bidirectional ground motions in arbitrary orientations in the faultparallel and fault-normal directions (FN-FP) and in the maximum direction (MD), respectively. %, 

percent; disp., displacement. 
56

Figure 44. Height-wise distribution of median and dispersion values of floor total acceleration in the x and y

directions for the linear nine-story symmetric-plan building. The gray, red, and blue lines show median 

and dispersion values of floor total accelerations due to bidirectional ground motions in arbitrary 

orientations in the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions (FN-FP) and in the maximum direction (MD), 

respectively. %, percent; disp., displacement. 
57

Figure 45. Height-wise distribution of median and dispersion values of moments at the beams highlighted 

in figure 13 for the linear nine-story symmetric-plan building. The gray, red, and blue lines show 

median and dispersion values of beam moments due to bidirectional ground motions in arbitrary 

orientations in the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions (FN-FP) and in the maximum direction (MD), 

respectively. %, percent; disp., displacement. 
58

Figure 46. Height-wise distribution of median and dispersion values of moments at the columns highlighted 

in figure 13 for the linear nine-story symmetric-plan building. The gray, red, and blue lines show median 

and dispersion values of beam moments due to bidirectional ground motions in arbitrary orientations in 

the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions (FN-FP) and in the maximum direction (MD), respectively. 

%, percent; disp., displacement. 
59

Figure 47. Median values of story drifts, floor total accelerations, and internal forces in the x direction as a 

function of the rotation angle, θx, for the linear nine-story symmetric-plan building subjected to 

bidirectional loading. The red lines represent the median engineering demand parameter (EDP) values 

± σ. The blue circles represent the median EDP values ± σ for the building subjected to bidirectional 

ground motions in the maximum direction. Solid lines are 50th and dashed lines are16th and 84th 

percentile EDPs. 
60

Figure 48. Median values of story drifts, floor total accelerations, and internal forces in the y direction as a 

function of the rotation angle, θx, for the linear nine-story symmetric-plan building subjected to 

bidirectional loading. The red lines represent the median engineering demand parameter (EDP) values 

± σ. The blue circles represent the median EDP values ± σ for the building subjected to bidirectional 

ground motions in the maximum direction. Solid lines are 50th and dashed lines are16th and 84th 

percentile EDPs. 
61

Figure 49. Story drifts, floor total accelerations, and internal forces as a function of the rotation angle, θx, 

for the linear nine-story asymmetric-plan building (elastic first-mode vibration period, T1 = 2.5 seconds) 

subjected to ground motion (GM) 2, which has maximum velocity pulse period of 2.4 seconds. The 

filled gray area shows values of θx in which velocity pulses are identified. Angles θx = 0o and 90o

correspond to the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions, respectively. 
62

Figure 50. Height-wise distribution of median and dispersion values of story drift at the corner highlighted 

in figure 20 in the x and y directions for the linear nine-story asymmetric-plan building. The gray, red, 

and blue lines show median and dispersion values of story drift due to bidirectional ground motions in 

arbitrary orientations in the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions (FN-FP) and in the maximum 

direction (MD), respectively. %, percent; disp., displacement. 
63

Figure 51. Height-wise distribution of median and dispersion values of floor total acceleration in the x and y

directions for the linear nine-story asymmetric-plan building. The gray, red, and blue lines show median 

and dispersion values of floor total accelerations due to bidirectional ground motions in arbitrary 

orientations in the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions (FN-FP) and in the maximum direction (MD), 

respectively. %, percent; disp., displacement. 
64

Figure 52. Height-wise distribution of median and dispersion values of moments at the beams highlighted 

in figure 20 for the linear nine-story asymmetric-plan building. The gray, red, and blue lines show 

median and dispersion values of beam moments due to bidirectional ground motions in arbitrary 

orientations in the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions (FN-FP) and in the maximum direction (MD), 

respectively. %, percent; disp., displacement. 
65

Figure 53. Height-wise distribution of median and dispersion values of moments at the columns highlighted 

in figure 20 for the linear nine-story asymmetric-plan building. The gray, red, and blue lines show 

median and dispersion values of beam moments due to bidirectional ground motions in arbitrary 

orientations in the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions (FN-FP) and in the maximum direction (MD), 

respectively. %, percent; disp., displacement. 
66

Figure 54. Median values of story drifts at the corner, floor total accelerations, and internal forces in the x

direction as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for the linear nine-story asymmetric-plan building 

subjected to bidirectional loading. The red lines represent the median engineering demand parameter 

(EDP) values ± σ. The blue circles represent the median EDP values ± σ for the building subjected to 

bidirectional ground motions in the maximum direction. Solid lines are Solid lines are 50th and dashed 

lines are16th and 84th percentile EDPs. 
67

Figure 55. Median values of story drifts, floor total accelerations, and internal forces in the y direction as a 

function of the rotation angle, θx, for the linear nine-story asymmetric-plan building subjected to 

bidirectional loading. The red lines represent the median engineering demand parameter (EDP) values

± σ. The blue circles represent the median EDP values ± σ for the building subjected to bidirectional 

ground motions in the maximum–direction. Solid lines are 50th and dashed lines are16th and 84th 

percentile EDPs. 
68

Figure 56. Story drifts, total chord rotations, and internal forces as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for 

the nonlinear nine-story symmetric-plan building (first-mode elastic vibration period, T1 = 1.51 seconds) 

subjected to ground motion (GM) 9, which has maximum velocity pulse period of 1.9 seconds. The 

filled gray area shows values of θx in which velocity pulses are identified. Angles θx = 0o and 90o

correspond to the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions, respectively. 
69

Figure 57. Height-wise distribution of median+σ and dispersion values of story drift in the x and y

directions for the nonlinear nine-story symmetric-plan building. The gray, red, and blue lines show 

median+σ and dispersion values of story drift due to bidirectional ground motions in arbitrary 

orientations in the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions (FN-FP) and in the maximum direction (MD), 

respectively. %, percent; disp., displacement. 
70

Figure 58. Height-wise distribution of median+σ and dispersion values of total chord rotation in the x and y

directions for the nonlinear nine-story symmetric-plan building. The gray, red, and blue lines show 

median+σ and dispersion values of floor total accelerations due to bidirectional ground motions in 

arbitrary orientations in the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions (FN-FP) and in the maximum 

direction (MD), respectively. %, percent; disp., displacement. 
71

Figure 59. Height-wise distribution of median+σ and dispersion values of moments at the beams 

highlighted in figure 13 for the nonlinear nine-story symmetric-plan building. The gray, red, and blue 

lines show median+σ and dispersion values of beam moments due to bidirectional ground motions in 

arbitrary orientations in the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions (FN-FP) and in the maximum 

direction (MD), respectively. %, percent; disp., displacement. 
72

Figure 60. Height-wise distribution of median+σ and dispersion values of moments at the columns 

highlighted in figure 13 for the nonlinear nine-story symmetric-plan building. The gray, red, and blue 

lines show median+σ and dispersion values of beam moments due to bidirectional ground motions in 

arbitrary orientations in the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions (FN-FP) and in the maximum 

direction (MD), respectively. %, percent; disp., displacement. 
73

Figure 61. Median values of story drifts, total chord rotations, and internal forces in the x direction as a 

function of the rotation angle, θx, for the nonlinear nine-story symmetric-plan building subjected to 

bidirectional loading. The red lines represent the median engineering demand parameter (EDP) values 

± σ. The blue circles represent the median EDP values ± σ for the building subjected to bidirectional 

ground motions in the maximum direction. Solid lines are 50th and dashed lines are16th and 84th

percentile EDPs. 
74

Figure 62. Median values of story drifts, total chord rotations, and internal forces in the y direction as a 

function of the rotation angle, θx, for the nonlinear nine-story symmetric-plan building subjected to 

bidirectional loading. The red lines represent the median engineering demand parameter (EDP) values 

± σ. The blue circles represent the median EDP values ± σ for the building subjected to bidirectional 

ground motions in the maximum direction. Solid lines are 50th and dashed lines are16th and 84th

percentile EDPs. 
75

Figure 63. Story drifts, total chord rotations, and internal forces as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for 

the nonlinear nine-story asymmetric-plan building (T1 = 2.5 s) subjected to ground motion 2, which has 

maximum velocity pulse period of 2.4 seconds. The filled gray area shows values of θx in which velocity 

pulses are identified. Angles θx = 0o and 90o correspond to the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions, 

respectively. 
76

Figure 64. Height-wise distribution of median+σ and dispersion values of story drift at the corner 

highlighted in figure 20 in the x and y directions for the nonlinear nine-story asymmetric-plan building. 

The gray, red, and blue lines show median+σ and dispersion values of story drift due to bidirectional 

ground motions in arbitrary orientations in the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions (FN-FP) and in 

the maximum direction (MD), respectively. %, percent; disp., displacement. 
77

Figure 65. Height-wise distribution of median+σ and dispersion values of total chord rotation in the x and y

directions for the nonlinear nine-story asymmetric-plan building. The gray, red, and blue lines show 

median+σ and dispersion values of floor total accelerations due to bidirectional ground motions in 

arbitrary orientations in the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions (FN-FP) and in the maximum 

direction (MD), respectively. %, percent; disp., displacement. 
78

Figure 66. Height-wise distribution of median+σ and dispersion values of moments at the beams 

highlighted in figure 20 for the nonlinear nine-story asymmetric-plan building. The gray, red, and blue 

lines show median+σ and dispersion values of beam moments due to bidirectional ground motions in 

arbitrary orientations in the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions (FN-FP) and in the maximum 

direction (MD), respectively. %, percent; disp., displacement. 
79

Figure 67. Height-wise distribution of median+σ and dispersion values of moments at the columns 

highlighted in figure 20 for the nonlinear nine-story asymmetric-plan building. The gray, red, and blue 

lines show median+σ and dispersion values of beam moments due to bidirectional ground motions in 

arbitrary orientations in the fault-parallel and fault-normal directions (FN-FP) and in the maximum 

direction (MD), respectively. %, percent; disp., displacement. 
80

Figure 68. Median values of story drifts at the corner, total chord rotations, and internal forces in the x

direction as a function of the rotation angle, θx, for the nonlinear nine-story asymmetric-plan building 

subjected to bidirectional loading. The red lines represent the median engineering demand parameter 

(EDP) values ± σ. The blue circles represent the median EDP values ± σ for the building subjected to 

bidirectional ground motions in the maximum direction. Solid lines are 50th and dashed lines are16th

and 84th percentile EDPs. 
81

Figure 69. Median values of story drifts, total chord rotations, and internal forces in the y direction as a 

function of the rotation angle, θx, for the nonlinear nine-story asymmetric-plan building subjected to 

bidirectional loading. The red lines represent the median-EDP values ± σ. The blue circles represent 

the median-EDP values ± σ for the building subjected to bidirectional ground motions in the maximum 

direction. Solid lines are 50th and dashed lines are16th and 84th percentile EDPs.