Chiou and Youngs PEER-NGA Empirical Ground Motion Model for ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Rupture Depth, Strike, Dip, and Rake: The PEER-NGA database contains 41 earthquakes with missing parameters defining the characteristics of the earthquake rupture. These earthquakes are listed in Table 3 along with estimated values for the missing parameters. The missing values were estimated from other associated events such as the main shock or other aftershocks, or from the tectonic environment. For those earthquakes unassociated with other events, fault dips were assigned based on known or inferred mechanisms as follows, 90º for strike-slip, 40º for reverse (based on average value reported by Sibson and Xie, 1998), and 55º for normal (generic value for normal faults and close to the average of 54º for the normal mechanisms with known dips in the PEER-NGA data base). Where fault strike could not be inferred, it was assumed to be random. The comments in Table 3 indicated the basis for each estimate. EQID Earthquake M Table 3: Inferred Mechanisms, Hypocenter Depths and Fault Dips Inferred Mechanism 1,2 Inferred Depth 1 Inferred Strike 1 Inferred Dip 1 Comments 0002 Helena, Montana-02 6 SS 6 268 75 Values assumed equal to event 0001 Strike-slip mechanism and nominal 0003 Humbolt Bay 5.8 SS 10 Random 90 depth of 10 km assumed for offshore Gorda plate earthquakes 0004 Imperial Valley-01 5 SS 90 Strike-slip assumed for Imperial Valley earthquakes 0005 Northwest Calif-01 5.5 SS 10 Random 90 Strike-slip mechanism and nominal depth of 10 km assumed for offshore Gorda plate earthquakes 0007 Northwest Calif-02 6.6 SS 10 Random 90 Strike-slip mechanism and nominal depth of 10 km assumed for offshore Gorda plate earthquakes 0008 Northern Calif-01 6.4 SS 10 Random 90 Strike-slip mechanism and nominal depth of 10 km assumed for offshore Gorda plate earthquakes 0009 Borrego 6.5 8 Random Assumed similar to event 0028 0010 Imperial Valley-03 5.6 9.5 Average depth of other Imperial Valley earthquakes 0011 Northwest Calif-03 5.8 SS 10 Random 90 Strike-slip mechanism and nominal depth of 10 km assumed for offshore Gorda plate earthquakes 0013 Northern Calif-02 5.2 SS 10 Random 90 Strike-slip mechanism and nominal depth of 10 km assumed for offshore Gorda plate earthquakes 0014 Southern California 6 SS 10 Random 90 Assumed similar to event 25 0015 Imperial Valley-04 5.5 SS 9.5 Random 90 Strike-slip assumed for Imperial Valley earthquakes, depth average of similar events Assumed SS similar to other 0016 Central Calif- 01 5.3 SS 7.4 Random 90 Hollister earthquakes and depth taken as average of values for events 0034 and 0098 0017 Northern Calif-03 6.5 SS 10 Random 90 Strike-slip mechanism and nominal depth of 10 km assumed for offshore Gorda plate earthquakes 0018 Imperial Valley-05 5.4 SS 9.5 Random 90 Strike-slip assumed for Imperial Valley earthquakes, depth average of similar events Assumed SS similar to other 0021 Central Calif- 02 5 SS 7.4 Random 90 Hollister earthquakes and depth taken as average of values for events 0034 and 0098 0022 Northern Calif-04 5.7 SS 10 Random 90 Strike-slip mechanism and nominal depth of 10 km assumed for offshore Gorda plate earthquakes 0023 Hollister-01 5.6 SS 7.4 Random 90 Assumed SS similar to other Hollister earthquakes and depth C&Y2006 Page 7
EQID Earthquake M Table 3: Inferred Mechanisms, Hypocenter Depths and Fault Dips Inferred Mechanism 1,2 Inferred Depth 1 Inferred Strike 1 Inferred Dip 1 0024 Hollister-02 5.5 SS 7.4 Random 90 0026 0027 Northern Calif-05 Northern Calif-06 5.6 10 5.2 SS 7.4 Random 90 0032 Managua, Nicaragua- 02 5.2 SS 40 80 0034 Hollister-03 5.14 Random 0042 Fruili, Italy- 03 5.5 RV 233 16 Comments taken as average of values for events 0034 and 0098 Assumed SS similar to other Hollister earthquakes and depth taken as average of values for events 0034 and 0098 Nominal depth of 10 km assumed for offshore Gorda plate earthquakes Assumed SS similar to other Hollister earthquakes and depth taken as average of values for events 0034 and 0098 Values assumed equal to event 0031 Average of values for events 0040 and 0043 0044 Izmir, Turkey 5.3 NM Random 55 Mechanism based on environment 0060 Mammoth Lakes-05 5.7 SS 16 60 Average of values for events 0058- 0065 in sequence 0065 Mammoth Lakes-09 4.85 SS Random 67.5 Average for other SS Mammoth earthquakes 0066 Almiros, Greece 5.2 NM Random 55 Assumed normal based on environment 0070 Irpinia, Italy- 03 4.7 NM Random 65 Assumed normal similar to events 0068 and 0069, dip average for those events 0089 New Zealand-01 5.5 NM Random 55 Assumed normal based on environment 0092 Veroia, Greece 5.3 NM Random 55 Assumed normal based on environment 0093 Pelekanada, Greece 5 NM Random 55 Assumed normal based on environment 0095 Taiwan SMART1(33) 5.8 NM Random 61.5 Average for focal mechanism planes 0104 Chalfant Valley-03 5.65 SS Random 90 Assumed SS similar to events 0102 and 0103 0106 Kalamata, Greece-01 6.2 NM Random 55 Assumed normal based on environment 0107 Kalamata, Greece-02 5.4 NM Random 55 Assumed normal based on environment 0112 New Zealand-03 5.8 NM Random 55 Assumed normal based on environment 0124 New Zealand-04 5.7 NM Random 55 Assumed normal based on environment 0132 Kozani, Greece-03 5.3 NM Random 42 Assumed normal based on environment 0147 Northridge- 02 6.05 RV Random 40 Assumed mechanism similar to main shock event 127 and other aftershocks 0148 Northridge- 03 5.2 RV Random 40 Assumed mechanism similar to main shock event 127 and other aftershocks 1 Values not listed are know for specific event 2 SS – strike-slip, RV – reverse, NM – normal faulting C&Y2006 Page 8
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: Figure 2: Empirical ground motion d
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 and 18: Figure 9: Peak acceleration data fr
Page 19 and 20: C4+C5M slowly and the value of the
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
Page 69 and 70:
REFERENCES Abrahamson, N.A., and Si
Page 71 and 72:
Frankel, A., A. McGarr, J. Bicknell
Page 73 and 74:
Appendix A Recordings from PEER-NGA
Page 75 and 76:
RSN EQID Earthquake M Station No, S
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Appendix B Estimation of Distance a
Page 123 and 124:
Figure B-2: Data for aspect ratio v
Page 125 and 126:
Probability . 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0
Page 127 and 128:
Appendix C Estimation of Vs30 at CW
Page 129 and 130:
Percent of Total 50 40 30 20 10 0 G
Page 131 and 132:
Vs30 (m/sec) 1400 1200 1000 800 600
Page 133 and 134:
Figure D-1. Epicenter distribution
Page 135 and 136:
PSA (g) 10^-1 10^-2 10^-3 10^-4 10^
Page 137 and 138:
PSA (g) 10^-1 10^-2 10^-3 10^-4 10^
Page 139 and 140:
PSA (g) 10^-1 10^-2 10^-3 10^-4 10^
Page 141 and 142:
PSA (g) 10^-1 10^-2 10^-3 10^-4 10^
Page 143 and 144:
PSA (g) 10^-1 10^-2 10^-3 10^-4 10^
Page 145 and 146:
PSA (g) 10^-1 10^-2 10^-3 10^-4 10^
Page 147 and 148:
T0.010S 1 0.1 0.01 1 0.1 0.01 1130
Page 149 and 150:
T0.010S 1 0.1 0.01 1 0.1 0.01 1130
Page 151 and 152:
T0.010S 1 0.1 0.01 1 0.1 0.01 1130
Page 153 and 154:
T0.010S 1 0.1 0.01 1 0.1 0.01 1130
Page 155 and 156:
T0.010S 1 0.1 0.01 1 0.1 0.01 1130
Page 157 and 158:
T0.010S 1 0.1 0.01 1 0.1 0.01 1130
Page 159 and 160:
T0.010S 1 0.1 0.01 1 0.1 0.01 1130
Page 161 and 162:
T0.010S 1 0.1 0.01 1 0.1 0.01 1130
Page 163 and 164:
T0.010S 1 0.1 0.01 1 0.1 0.01 1130
Page 165 and 166:
T0.010S 1 0.1 0.01 1 0.1 0.01 1130
Page 167 and 168:
T0.200S 1 0.1 0.01 1 0.1 0.01 1130
Page 169 and 170:
T0.200S 1 0.1 0.01 1 0.1 0.01 1130
Page 171 and 172:
T0.200S 1 0.1 0.01 1 0.1 0.01 1130
Page 173 and 174:
T0.200S 1 0.1 0.01 1 0.1 0.01 1130
Page 175 and 176:
T0.200S 1 0.1 0.01 1 0.1 0.01 1130
Page 177 and 178:
T0.200S 1 0.1 0.01 1 0.1 0.01 1130
Page 179 and 180:
T0.200S 1 0.1 0.01 1 0.1 0.01 1130
Page 181 and 182:
T0.200S 1 0.1 0.01 1 0.1 0.01 1130
Page 183 and 184:
T0.200S 1 0.1 0.01 1 0.1 0.01 1130
Page 185 and 186:
T0.200S 1 0.1 0.01 1 0.1 0.01 1130
Page 187 and 188:
T1.000S 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 1 0.1 0.01
Page 189 and 190:
T1.000S 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 1 0.1 0.01
Page 191 and 192:
T1.000S 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 1 0.1 0.01
Page 193 and 194:
T1.000S 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 1 0.1 0.01
Page 195 and 196:
T1.000S 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 1 0.1 0.01
Page 197 and 198:
T1.000S 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 1 0.1 0.01
Page 199 and 200:
T1.000S 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 1 0.1 0.01
Page 201 and 202:
T1.000S 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 1 0.1 0.01
Page 203 and 204:
T1.000S 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 1 0.1 0.01
Page 205 and 206:
T1.000S 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 1130 m/s 5
Page 207 and 208:
T3.000S 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.1 0.01 0.0
Page 209 and 210:
T3.000S 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.1 0.01 0.0
Page 211 and 212:
T3.000S 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.1 0.01 0.0
Page 213 and 214:
T3.000S 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.1 0.01 0.0
Page 215 and 216:
T3.000S 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.1 0.01 0.0
Page 217 and 218:
T3.000S 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.1 0.01 0.0
Page 219:
T3.000S 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.1 0.01 0.0
show all

Chiou and Youngs PEER-NGA Empirical Ground Motion Model for ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?