（1 广州容柏生建筑结构设计事务所， 广州  510170； 2 中国建筑科学研究院工程抗震研究所， 北京 100013）

［摘要］现行《地震动参数区划图》（GB 18306—2015）明确采用的是地震动峰值加速度PGA，而《建筑抗震设计规范》（GB 50011—2010）中由设计反应谱演化而来的结构时程分析峰值加速度建议值实质上为有效峰值加速度EPA，两者概念不同，容易混淆。分析了PGA与EPA的物理含义、关系与区别及其与设计反应谱的关系。指出结构动力时程分析所用地震动记录调整应基于EPA而非PGA，并给出相应流程。对基于EPA地震动记录调整方法的优缺点进行分析，提出一种与地震动记录特性相适应的分段EPA地震动调整方法，并应用于某588m高地标建筑的时程分析中，取得良好的效果。

［关键词］地震动； 地震动峰值加速度； 有效峰值加速度

中图分类号：TU973, TU312文献标识码：A文章编号：1002-848X(2020)04-0013-05

EPA-based adjustment method of seismic ground motion record and its application

Chang Lei1， Liao Yun1, Wang Yayong2

（1 RBS Architectural Engineering Design Associates， Guangzhou 510170， China；2 Institute of Earthquake Engineering, China Academy of Building Research, Beijing 100013, China）

Abstract:The current Seismic Ground Motion Parameters Zonation Map of China (GB 18306—2015) clearly adopts the peak ground acceleration (PGA), while the peak acceleration value for structural time-history analysis evolved from the design response spectrum in the Code for Seismic Design of Buildings (GB 50011—2010) is actually the effective peak acceleration (EPA). They are two different conceptions and EPA is easily mistaken with PGA in structural seismic analysis. The physical meaning, relationship and difference between PGA and EPA and their relationship with design response spectrum were analyzed. It was pointed out that the adjustment of seismic ground motion records for dynamic time-history analysis of structures should be based on EPA rather than PGA, and the corresponding flow chart was given. Based on the analysis of the merits and demerits of the adjustment method of EPA seismic ground motion records, a segmented EPA seismic ground motion adjustment method was proposed which was suitable for the characteristics of seismic ground motion records, and it was applied to the time-history analysis of a 588m high landmark building, and good results were obtained.

Keywords:seismic ground motion; peak ground acceleration; effective peak acceleration

作者简介：常磊，博士，高级工程师，Email:changlei@gzrbs.com。