• Alaska Earthquake Center Quarterly Technical Report April-June 2021

      Ruppert, Natalia (2021-08)
      This series of technical quarterly reports from the Alaska Earthquake Center (AEC) includes detailed summaries and updates on Alaska seismicity, the AEC seismic network and stations, field work, our social media presence, and lists publications and presentations by AEC staff. Multiple AEC staff members contributed to this report. It is issued in the following month after the completion of each quarter Q1: January-March, Q2: April-June, Q3: July-September, and Q4: October-December.
    • Alaska Earthquake Center Quarterly Technical Report January-March 2021

      Ruppert, Natalia (2021-05)
      This is the first in a series of technical quarterly reports from the Alaska Earthquake Center (AEC). It includes detailed summaries and updates on Alaska seismicity, the AEC seismic network and stations, field work, our social media presence, and lists publications and presentations by AEC staff. Multiple AEC staff members contributed to this report. It is issued in the following month after the completion of each quarter Q1: January-March, Q2: April-June, Q3: July-September, and Q4: October-December.
    • Response of an asymmetrical five-story building in Fairbanks, Alaska during the November 30, 2018 M7.1 Anchorage, Alaska earthquake

      Celebi, Mehmet; Ruppert, Natalia (2021-02)
      A recently constructed, five-story, asymmetrical steel building on the campus of the University of Alaska, Fairbanks was equipped with a strong-motion array that recorded the M7.1 Anchorage earthquake of November 30, 2018 at an epicentral distance of 408 km. The largest recorded peak accelerations at the basement and top of the building are 0.021g and 0.071g, respectively. The steel building is designed with several bays that utilize K-shaped buckling restrained braces. The building response records allow identification of fundamental periods (frequencies) as 0.73s (1.4 Hz), 0.63s (1.60 Hz), and 0.56s (1.78 Hz) in the NS, EW, and torsional directions, respectively. System identification computations resulted in estimated critical damping percentages as 7.7% and 4.7 % in the NS and EW directions, respectively. At this low-level of shaking, the building is not expected to (and did not) experience observable damage, which is confirmed with very small average drift ratios. This is the first time a seismic response from this structural array has been analyzed.