Moe333 - If you are at the San Diego conference this week, you are guaranteed to see sparks.
I understand that Geomotions has disabled the I&B liq'n triggering features in the new version of SHAKE2000(?), which seems like a pretty strong reaction this early after Seed's critique was published. For grownups, I think a large-print warning and link to the critique of the monograph would be enough.
If you looked at my paper, you know that Seed has echoed some of my concerns over estimating Sur by ratio, although a bit more forcefully. The rest of it is so big that I don't think I could get my mind around it without suspending all my project work for 6 months to study all the case histories, response analysis, etc. Maybe we'll see something like the 1996 NCEER conference in the next couple of years, presided over by a moonlighting NHL ref.
Watch for me there. I'm 5'8", medium build, brown hair starting to turn gray, beard that got a head start on it.
David, I will look you up at the conference. There was some pretty personal comments as well as the technical ones in Seed's paper directed to Idriss so I'm expecting there may be some fireworks. I was also surprised that the IB method was yanked from SHAKE2000.
The EERI monograph is very useful and convenient since it's a single source of reference, whose authors are undoubtedly renowned in the specific literature.
On the other hand Seed's report seems to be supported by extensive documentation.
Anyway, if there are any concerns about the degree of underconservativism, good to know that, some level of conservativism may be added in another place to make up for it. I know it's all qualitative, Seed provided some numbers though.
Juggling factors and numbers is part of the job anyway.
