Probabilistic seismic response analysis of coastal highway bridges under scour and liquefaction conditions: does the hydrodynamic effect matter?

Table 1 Selected ground motions for the code-compatible spectrum representing the design level of 10%-50 years

#	Earthquake event	RSN	M_w	R (km)	Scale factor
1	Kern County, 1952	12	7.36	117.8	1.40
2	Kern County, 1952	13	7.36	125.6	1.82
3	Kern County, 1952	15	7.36	38.9	0.87
4	Parkfield, 1966	28	6.19	17.6	2.40
5	Parkfield, 1966	30	6.19	9.6	0.68
6	Borrego Mtn, 1968	40	6.63	129.1	3.51
7	San Fernando, 1971	51	6.61	55.2	3.40
8	San Fernando, 1971	65	6.61	46.8	2.33
9	San Fernando, 1971	68	6.61	22.8	0.61
10	San Fernando, 1971	79	6.61	25.5	1.58
11	San Fernando, 1971	81	6.61	39.0	3.23
12	San Fernando, 1971	83	6.61	52.6	3.11
13	San Fernando, 1971	85	6.61	108.0	3.32
14	San Fernando, 1971	88	6.61	24.9	1.37
15	San Fernando, 1971	93	6.61	39.5	1.82
16	Managua_ Nicaragua-01, 1972	95	6.24	4.1	0.52
17	Managua_ Nicaragua-02, 1972	96	5.20	5.0	0.60
18	Friuli_ Italy-02, 1976	133	5.91	14.5	3.02
19	Tabas_ Iran, 1978	137	7.35	120.8	3.36
20	Tabas_ Iran, 1978	138	7.35	28.8	1.00

Note: RSN-Record sequence number in the PEER West2 Strong Motion Database; M_w-Magnitude; R-Source distance