Selection and ranking of groundmotion models for the 2018 National Seismic Hazard Assessment of Australia: summary of ground-motion data, methodology and outcomes

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Ghasemi ◽  
T. Allen
Keyword(s):  
Seismic Hazard ◽  
Ground Motion ◽  
Hazard Assessment ◽  
Seismic Hazard Assessment ◽  
Motion Data ◽  
Selection And Ranking

scholarly journals Neo-deterministic seismic hazard assessment of Corsica-Sardinia block

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Enrico Brandmayr ◽  
Franco Vaccari ◽  
Giuliano Francesco Panza
Keyword(s):  
Seismic Hazard ◽  
Ground Motion ◽  
Hazard Assessment ◽  
Seismic Hazard Assessment ◽  
Earthquake Ground Motion ◽  
Earthquake Catalog ◽  
Hazard Maps ◽  
Source Information ◽  
Deterministic Seismic Hazard ◽  
Seismogenic Nodes

AbstractThe Corsica-Sardinia lithospheric block is commonly considered as a region of very low seismicity and the scarce reported seismicity for the area has till now precluded the reliable assessment of its seismic hazard. The time-honored assumption has been recently questioned and the historical seismicity of Sardinia has been reevaluated. Even more, several seismogenic nodes capable of M5 + have been recognized in the Corsica-Sardinia block exploiting the morphostructural zonation technique, calibrated to earlier results obtained for the Iberian peninsula, which has structural lithospheric affinities with the Corsica-Sardinia block. All this allows now for the computation of reliable earthquake hazard maps at bedrock conditions exploiting the power of Neo Deterministic Seismic Hazard Assessment (NDSHA) evaluation. NDSHA relies upon the fundamental physics of wave generation and propagation in complex geologic structures and generates realistic time series from which several earthquake ground motion parameters can be readily extracted. NDSHA exploits in an optimized way all the available knowledge about lithospheric mechanical parameters, seismic history, seismogenic zones and nodes. In accordance with continuum mechanics, the tensor nature of earthquake ground motion is preserved computing realistic signals using structural models obtained by tomographic inversion and earthquake source information readily available in literature. The way to this approach has been open by studies focused on continental Italy and Sicily, where the agreement between hazard maps obtained using seismogenic zones, informed by earthquake catalog data, and the maps obtained using only seismogenic nodes are very good.

scholarly journals What is the impact of the August 24, 2016 Amatrice earthquake on the seismic hazard assessment in central Italy?

2016 ◽  
Vol 59 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maura Murru ◽  
Matteo Taroni ◽  
Aybige Akinci ◽  
Giuseppe Falcone
Keyword(s):  
Seismic Hazard ◽  
Ground Motion ◽  
Hazard Assessment ◽  
Central Italy ◽  
Seismic Hazard Assessment ◽  
Motion Prediction ◽  
Ground Motion Prediction Equations ◽  
Prediction Equations ◽  
Ground Motion Prediction ◽  
The Impact

<p>The recent Amatrice strong event (M<sub>w</sub>6.0) occurred on August 24, 2016 in Central Apennines (Italy) in a seismic gap zone, motivated us to study and provide better understanding of the seismic hazard assessment in the macro area defined as “Central Italy”. The area affected by the sequence is placed between the M<sub>w</sub>6.0 1997 Colfiorito sequence to the north (Umbria-Marche region) the Campotosto area hit by the 2009 L’Aquila sequence M<sub>w</sub>6.3 (Abruzzo region) to the south. The Amatrice earthquake occurred while there was an ongoing effort to update the 2004 seismic hazard map (MPS04) for the Italian territory, requested in 2015 by the Italian Civil Protection Agency to the Center for Seismic Hazard (CPS) of the Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia INGV. Therefore, in this study we brought to our attention new earthquake source data and recently developed ground-motion prediction equations (GMPEs). Our aim was to validate whether the seismic hazard assessment in this area has changed with respect to 2004, year in which the MPS04 map was released. In order to understand the impact of the recent earthquakes on the seismic hazard assessment in central Italy we compared the annual seismic rates calculated using a smoothed seismicity approach over two different periods; the Parametric Catalog of the Historical Italian earthquakes (CPTI15) from 1871 to 2003 and the historical and instrumental catalogs from 1871 up to 31 August 2016. Results are presented also in terms of peak ground acceleration (PGA), using the recent ground-motion prediction equations (GMPEs) at Amatrice, interested by the 2016 sequence.</p>

From Ergodic to Region- and Site-Specific Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment: Method Development and Application at European and Middle Eastern Sites

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 1433-1453 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sreeram Reddy Kotha ◽  
Dino Bindi ◽  
Fabrice Cotton
Keyword(s):  
Seismic Hazard ◽  
Ground Motion ◽  
Hazard Assessment ◽  
Method Development ◽  
Site Response ◽  
Seismic Hazard Assessment ◽  
Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment ◽  
Probabilistic Seismic Hazard ◽  
Site Specific ◽  
Aleatory Variability

The increasing numbers of recordings at individual sites allows quantification of empirical linear site-response adjustment factors ( δS2 S s) from the ground motion prediction equation (GMPE) residuals. The δS2 S s are then used to linearly scale the ergodic GMPE predictions to obtain site-specific ground motion predictions in a partially non-ergodic Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment (PSHA). To address key statistical and conceptual issues in the current practice, we introduce a novel empirical region- and site-specific PSHA methodology wherein, (1) site-to-site variability ( φ S2 S) is first estimated as a random-variance in a mixed-effects GMPE regression, (2) δS2 S s at new sites with strong motion are estimated using the a priori φ S2 S, and (3) the GMPE site-specific single-site aleatory variability σ ss,s is replaced with a generic site-corrected aleatory variability σ0. Comparison of region- and site-specific hazard curves from our method against the traditional ergodic estimates at 225 sites in Europe and Middle East shows an approximate 50% difference in predicted ground motions over a range of hazard levels—a strong motivation to increase seismological monitoring of critical facilities and enrich regional ground motion data sets.

A New State‐of‐the‐Art Platform for Probabilistic and Deterministic Seismic Hazard Assessment

2019 ◽  
Vol 90 (6) ◽  
pp. 2262-2275 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriel Candia ◽  
Jorge Macedo ◽  
Miguel A. Jaimes ◽  
Carolina Magna‐Verdugo
Keyword(s):  
Seismic Hazard ◽  
Ground Motion ◽  
Hazard Assessment ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
Ground Motions ◽  
Tectonic Setting ◽  
Source Parameters ◽  
Seismic Hazard Assessment ◽  
Hazard Evaluation ◽  
Benchmark Solutions

ABSTRACT A new computational platform for seismic hazard assessment is presented. The platform, named SeismicHazard, allows characterizing the intensity, uncertainty, and likelihood of ground motions from subduction‐zone (shallow interface and intraslab) and crustal‐zone earthquakes, considering site‐specific as well as regional‐based assessments. The platform is developed as an object‐oriented MATLAB graphical user interface, and it features several state‐of‐the‐art capabilities for probabilistic and deterministic (scenario‐based) seismic hazard assessment. The platform integrates the latest developments in performance‐based earthquake engineering for seismic hazard assessment, including seismic zonation models, ground‐motion models (GMMs), ground‐motion correlation structures, and the estimation of design spectra (uniform hazard spectra, classical conditional mean spectrum (CMS) for a unique tectonic setting). In addition to these standard capabilities, the platform supports advanced features, not commonly found in existing seismic hazard codes, such as (a) computation of source parameters from earthquake catalogs, (b) vector‐probabilistic seismic hazard assessment, (c) hazard evaluation based on conditional GMMs and user‐defined GMMs, (d) uncertainty treatment in the median ground motions through continuous GMM distributions, (e) regional shaking fields, and (f) estimation of CMS considering multiple GMMs and multiple tectonic settings. The results from the platform have been validated against accepted and well‐documented benchmark solutions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document