Status and needs for seismic instrumentation of structures along the Hayward fault

The inventory of structures in heavily urbanized communities within the greater San Francisco (SF) Bay area that will experience strong ground motions from the rupture of the Hayward Fault includes a variety of types of recent and older structures built with a variety of materials and to different code standards. Those who remember the effects of the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake on structures in the San Francisco Bay area also remember the collapse of one upper-deck segment of the Bay Bridge that halted transportation for approximately five weeks. In order to understand how these structures respond to earthquake motions and to improve building practices to resist these strong motions it is imperative that owners of these structures as well as governmental organizations acquire shaking response data from instrumented (or yet to be instrumented structures) during the forecast events. Within California, such data are acquired mainly by California Geological Survey and the United States Geological Survey. A small number of private owners contribute to this effort. The inventory of existing instrumented structures is much less than 0.1% of the total, and thus statistically it is not sufficient. For example, some of the existing important regular or lifeline structures are not instrumented(e.g. Bart Trans-Bay Tunnel, many segments of the Bart elevated structures in the proximity of the Hayward Fault, the yet to be completed eastern part of San Francisco Bay Bridge, Hetch-Hetchy pipeline system crossing the Hayward Fault)even though attempts and proposals have been developed to do so in the past. This paper presents a critical assessment of the status quo and the future needs for instrumentation of structures in the greater SF Bay area that includes the Hayward Fault. There are many new attempts and successes in instrumentation of structures in this region. Two successful examples are provided here, but more needs to be done. The paper does not present new research results; hence, it should be considered to be a “tutorial” paper.