Revisiting design earthquake spectra

Summary For several decades, seismologists and engineers have been struggling to perfect the shape of design spectra, analyzing recorded signals, and speculating on probabilities. This research effort produced several improvements, for example, suggesting to adopt more than one period to define a spectral shape or proposing different spectral shapes as a function of the return period of the design ground motion. The spectral shapes recommended in most modern codes are driven by considerations on uniform hazard; however, the basic assumption of adopting essentially three fundamental criteria, ie, constant acceleration at low periods, constant displacement at long periods, and constant velocity in an intermediate period range, has never been really questioned. In this opinion paper, the grounds of a constant velocity assumption is discussed and shown to be disputable and not physically based. Spectral shape based on different logics are shown to be potentially consistent with the experimental evidence and to lead to possible differences of 100% in terms of displacement and acceleration demand in the wide intermediate period range that characterizes the vast majority of structures. In this framework, the historical development of linear and nonlinear spectra is critically revisited, proposing a novel original way of defining seismic demand.