Chiou and Youngs PEER-NGA Empirical Ground Motion Model for ...
Chiou and Youngs PEER-NGA Empirical Ground Motion Model for ... Chiou and Youngs PEER-NGA Empirical Ground Motion Model for ...
PATH SCALING Near-Source Distance Scaling: The scaling or attenuation of ground motion amplitude with distance from the earthquake rupture involves a number of issues. Foremost of interest for engineering application in active tectonic regions is the effect of extended sources that leads to magnitude-dependent attenuation rates at least within the distance range of 0 to 100 km. The consequence of this effect is what has been termed near-source saturation – less magnitude scaling at small source-site distances than at large source-site distances. There are four functional forms that have been used to model this effect in empirical ground motion models. These forms are shown on Figure 10 in terms of recent applications. The form that has been used for many years by Ross Sadigh and also by Ken Campbell is defined by Equation (3): ln( y) ∝ C M + C 2 c( M) = C 5 4 × ln exp [ R + c( M) ] { C M} In this form, magnitude-dependence is introduced by making parameter c a function of magnitude. Campbell (1993) introduced a modified version of Equation (3): ln( y) ∝ C M + C 2 4 c( M) = C 5 × ln exp C&Y2006 Page 17 6 2 2 [ R + c( M) ] { C M} Campbell and Bozorgnia (2003) further modified Equation (4) to introduce a quadratic magnitude term in defining c(M). The forms defined by Equations (3) and (4) introduce magnitude dependence through the parameter c(M). An alternative approach is to incorporate magnitude-dependence in the “slope” term. Idriss (1991) introduced the form ln( 2 4 5 6 [ R c] y ) ∝ C M + ( C + C M) × ln + (5) Abrahamson and Silva (1997) introduced a modified version of (5): 2 4 5 2 2 [ R ] ln( y ) ∝ C M + ( C + C M) × ln + c (6) The attenuation behavior of the four models shown on Figure 10 can be illustrated by plotting the attenuation rate, defined as ∂ ln( y) / ∂ ln( R) , versus distance. Figure 11 shows R + , the rate of attenuation approaches the value of the parameter C4 or C4+C5M at relatively short distances, allowing an interpretation of its value as an estimate of the rate of geometric spreading. For those ln R + c , the attenuation rate approaches the value of C4 or 2 2 the results. For those models that use the term ln[ c ] models that use the term [ ] (3) (4)
C4+C5M slowly and the value of the parameter cannot be interpreted as an estimate of the rate of geometric spreading at distances less that 50 km. Figure 10: Illustration functional forms used to capture magnitude-dependence of distance attenuation for distances less than 100 km. All plots are for rupture distance to a vertical strike-slip fault rupturing the surface and the values for Campbell and Bozorgnia (2003) were computed using a minimum RSEIS of 3 km. Figure 11: Plots of the instantaneous slope of the attenuation curve for the four ground motion models shown in Figure 10. The attenuation rate is defined as ∂ ln( pga) / ∂ ln( R) . C&Y2006 Page 18
- Page 1 and 2: Chiou and Youngs PEER-NGA Empirical
- Page 3 and 4: data are consistent with strong mot
- Page 5 and 6: Figure 1: Magnitude-distance-region
- Page 7 and 8: Figure 2: Empirical ground motion d
- Page 9 and 10: EQID Earthquake M Table 3: Inferred
- Page 11 and 12: Site Average Shear Wave Velocity: A
- Page 13 and 14: Figure 6: Relationship between VS30
- Page 15 and 16: 1 ) ∝ C2 × M + ( C2 − C ) × l
- Page 17: Figure 9: Peak acceleration data fr
- Page 21 and 22: allows the interpretation of the co
- Page 23 and 24: Figure 13: Coefficients resulting f
- Page 25 and 26: the top of rupture located at x = 0
- Page 27 and 28: Figure 18: Intra-event residuals fo
- Page 29 and 30: Figure 21: Variation of HW* with ma
- Page 31 and 32: The interpretation of the parameter
- Page 33 and 34: to the PEER-NGA pga data selected f
- Page 35 and 36: EFFECT OF DATA TRUNCATION The initi
- Page 37 and 38: term [ 1 Φ( y ( θ ) + τ ⋅ z ,
- Page 39 and 40: Table 4: Estimate of Anelastic Atte
- Page 41 and 42: data truncated at a maximum distanc
- Page 43 and 44: faulting earthquakes at long period
- Page 45 and 46: Slope -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 0.
- Page 47 and 48: C&Y2006 Page 46 Table 5: Coefficien
- Page 49 and 50: c1 of T0.010S c1 of T1.000S MODEL R
- Page 51 and 52: esid 1 0 -1 -2 resid resid 1 0 -1 -
- Page 53 and 54: esid resid resid 1 0 -1 -2 1 0 -1 -
- Page 55 and 56: esid 2 1 0 -1 -2 SCEC Version 2 0 2
- Page 57 and 58: Amplification w.r.t. Vs30 = 1130 m/
- Page 59 and 60: Sa(g) Sa(g) 10 1 0.1 0.01 10 1 0.1
- Page 61 and 62: Sa (g) Sa (g) 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.00
- Page 63 and 64: Sa (g) Sa (g) 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 1 0.
- Page 65 and 66: EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS FORTRAN routin
- Page 67 and 68: Table 6: Example Calculations Perio
PATH SCALING<br />
Near-Source Distance Scaling: The scaling or attenuation of ground motion amplitude with<br />
distance from the earthquake rupture involves a number of issues. Foremost of interest <strong>for</strong><br />
engineering application in active tectonic regions is the effect of extended sources that leads<br />
to magnitude-dependent attenuation rates at least within the distance range of 0 to 100 km.<br />
The consequence of this effect is what has been termed near-source saturation – less<br />
magnitude scaling at small source-site distances than at large source-site distances. There are<br />
four functional <strong>for</strong>ms that have been used to model this effect in empirical ground motion<br />
models. These <strong>for</strong>ms are shown on Figure 10 in terms of recent applications. The <strong>for</strong>m that<br />
has been used <strong>for</strong> many years by Ross Sadigh <strong>and</strong> also by Ken Campbell is defined by<br />
Equation (3):<br />
ln( y)<br />
∝ C M + C<br />
2<br />
c(<br />
M)<br />
= C<br />
5<br />
4<br />
× ln<br />
exp<br />
[ R + c(<br />
M)<br />
]<br />
{ C M}<br />
In this <strong>for</strong>m, magnitude-dependence is introduced by making parameter c a function of<br />
magnitude. Campbell (1993) introduced a modified version of Equation (3):<br />
ln( y)<br />
∝ C M + C<br />
2<br />
4<br />
c(<br />
M)<br />
= C<br />
5<br />
× ln<br />
exp<br />
C&Y2006 Page 17<br />
6<br />
2<br />
2<br />
[ R + c(<br />
M)<br />
]<br />
{ C M}<br />
Campbell <strong>and</strong> Bozorgnia (2003) further modified Equation (4) to introduce a quadratic<br />
magnitude term in defining c(M).<br />
The <strong>for</strong>ms defined by Equations (3) <strong>and</strong> (4) introduce magnitude dependence through the<br />
parameter c(M). An alternative approach is to incorporate magnitude-dependence in the<br />
“slope” term. Idriss (1991) introduced the <strong>for</strong>m<br />
ln( 2<br />
4 5<br />
6<br />
[ R c]<br />
y ) ∝ C M + ( C + C M)<br />
× ln +<br />
(5)<br />
Abrahamson <strong>and</strong> Silva (1997) introduced a modified version of (5):<br />
2<br />
4<br />
5<br />
2 2 [ R ]<br />
ln( y ) ∝ C M + ( C + C M)<br />
× ln + c<br />
(6)<br />
The attenuation behavior of the four models shown on Figure 10 can be illustrated by<br />
plotting the attenuation rate, defined as ∂ ln( y) / ∂ ln( R)<br />
, versus distance. Figure 11 shows<br />
R + , the rate of attenuation<br />
approaches the value of the parameter C4 or C4+C5M at relatively short distances, allowing<br />
an interpretation of its value as an estimate of the rate of geometric spreading. For those<br />
ln R + c , the attenuation rate approaches the value of C4 or<br />
2 2<br />
the results. For those models that use the term ln[ c ]<br />
models that use the term [ ]<br />
(3)<br />
(4)