Abstract
It is common practice to use ground-motion models, often developed by regression on recorded accelerograms, to predict the expected earthquake ground motions at sites of interest. An important consideration when selecting these models is the possible dependence of ground motions on geographical region, i.e., are median ground motions in the (target) region of interest for a given magnitude and distance the same as those in the (host) region where a ground-motion model is from, and are the aleatory variabilities of ground motions also similar? In this brief article, some of the recent literature with relevance to these questions is summarized. It is concluded that although some regions seem to show considerable differences in shaking it is currently more defensible to use well-constrained models, possibly based on data from other regions, rather than use local, often poorly-constrained, models. In addition, it is noted that the presence of “pseudo-regional dependency ” due to differences in, for example, focal depth s, average shear-wave velocity profiles or focal mechanisms can lead to apparent variations between areas when these variations could be captured in well-characterized ground-motion prediction equation s.
John Douglas is also at BRGM, Orléans, France.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abrahamson N, Atkinson G, Boore D, Bozorgnia Y, Campbell K, Chiou B, Idriss IM, Silva W, Youngs R (2008) Comparisons of the NGA ground-motion relations. Earthquake Spectra 24(1):45–66. doi: 10.1193/1.2924363
Allen TI, Atkinson GM (2007) Comparison of earthquake source spectra and attenuation in eastern North America and Southeastern Australia. Bull Seismol Soc Am 97(4):1350–1354. doi: 10.1785/0120060206
Allen TI, Dhu T, Cummins PR, Schneider JF (2006) Empirical attenuation of ground-motion spectral amplitudes in Southwestern Western Australia. Bull Seismol Soc Am 96(2):572–585. doi: 10.1785/0120040238
Allen TI, Wald DJ (2009) Evaluation of ground-motion modeling techniques for use in Global ShakeMap – A critique of instrumental ground-motion prediction equations, peak ground motion to macroseismic intensity conversions, and macroseismic intensity predictions in different tectonic settings. US Geological Survey Open-File Report 2009-1047, 114p
Atkinson GM, Morrison M (2009) Observations on regional variability in ground-motion amplitudes for small-to-moderate earthquakes in North America. Bull Seismol Soc Am 99(4):2393–2409. doi: 10.1785/0120080223
Bakun WH, McGarr A (2002) Differences in attenuation among the stable continental regions. Geophys Res Lett 29(23):2121. doi:10.1029/2002GL015457
Baqer S, Mitchell BJ (1998) Regional variation of Lg coda Q in the continental United States and its relation to crustal structure and evolution. Pure Appl Geophys 153:613–638
Bommer JJ, Douglas J, Strasser FO (2003) Style-of-faulting in ground-motion prediction equations. Bull Earthquake Eng 1(2):171–203
Bommer JJ, Stafford PJ, Akkar S (2010) Current empirical ground-motion prediction equations for Europe and their application to Eurocode 8. Bull Earthquake Eng 8(1):5–26. doi: 10.1007/s10518-009-9122-9. doi: 10.1785/0120080133
Bommer JJ, Stafford PJ, Alarcón JE, Akkar S (2007) The influence of magnitude range on empirical ground-motion prediction. Bull Seismol Soc Am 97(6):2152–2170. doi: 10.1785/0120070081
Boore DM, Atkinson GM (2008) Ground-motion prediction equations for the average horizontal component of PGA, PGV, and 5%-damped PSA at spectral periods between 0.01s and 10.0s. Earthquake Spectra 24(1):99–138. doi: 10.1193/1.2830434
Bragato PL (2009) Assessing regional and site-dependent variability of ground motions for ShakeMap implementation in Italy. Bull Seismol Soc Am 99(5):2950–2960. doi: 10.1785/0120090020
Campbell KW (1989) The dependence of peak horizontal acceleration on magnitude, distance, and site effects for small-magnitude earthquakes in California and eastern North America. Bull Seismol Soc Am 79(5):1311–1346
Chiou B, Youngs R, Abrahamson N, Addo K (2010) Ground-motion attenuation model for small-to-moderate shallow crustal earthquakes in California and its implications on regionalization of ground-motion prediction models. Earthquake Spectra 26(4):907–926. doi: 10.1193/1.3479930
Cotton F, Pousse G, Bonilla F, Scherbaum F (2008) On the discrepancy of recent European ground-motion observations and predictions from empirical models: analysis of KiK-net accelerometric data and point-sources stochastic simulations. Bull Seismol Soc Am 98(5):2244–2261. doi: 10.1785/0120060084
Douglas J (2003a) Earthquake ground motion estimation using strong-motion records: a review of equations for the estimation of peak ground acceleration and response spectral ordinates. Earth Sci Rev 61(1):43–104
Douglas J (2003b) A note on the use of strong-motion data from small magnitude earthquakes for empirical ground motion estimation. Skopje Earthquake 40 Years of European Earthquake Engineering (SE-40EEE)
Douglas J (2004) An investigation of analysis of variance as a tool for exploring regional differences in strong ground motion. J Seismol 8(4):485–496
Douglas J (2007) On the regional dependence of earthquake response spectra. ISET J Earthquake Tech 44(1):77–99
Douglas J (2010) Consistency of ground-motion predictions from the past four decades. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 8(6):1515–1526. DOI 10.1007/s10518-010-9195-5
Drouet S, Scherbaum F, Cotton F, Souriau A (2007) Selection and ranking of ground motion models for seismic hazard analysis in the Pyrenees. J Seismol 11(1):87–100. doi: 10.1007/s10950-006-9039–6
Hanks TC, Johnston AC (1992) Common features of the excitation and propagation of strong ground motion for north American earthquakes. Bull Seismol Soc Am 82(1):1–23
Hintersberger E, Scherbaum F, Hainzl S (2007) Update of likelihood-based ground-motion model selection for seismic hazard analysis in western central Europe. Bull Earthquake Eng 5(1):1–16. doi: 10.1007/s10518-006-9018–x
Mooney WD, Laske G, Masters TG (1998) CRUST 5.1: a global crustal model at 5 degrees × 5 degrees. J Geophys Res 103:727–747
Scasserra G, Stewart JP, Bazzurro P, Lanzo G, Mollaioli F (2009) A comparison of NGA ground-motion prediction equations to Italian data. Bull Seismol Soc Am 99(5):2961–2978
Scherbaum F, Cotton F, Smit P (2004) On the use of response spectral-reference data for the selection and ranking of ground-motion models for seismic-hazard analysis in regions of moderate seismicity: the case of rock motion. Bull Seismol Soc Am 94(6):2164–2185
Stafford PJ, Strasser FO, Bommer JJ (2008) An evaluation of the applicability of the NGA models to ground-motion prediction in the Euro-Mediterranean region. Bull Earthquake Eng 6(2):149–177
Acknowledgments
I thank Landsvirkjun and the University of Iceland for funding my 1-year visiting professorship at the Earthquake Engineering Research Centre, University of Iceland. Also I thank the organizers of the Second Euro-Med iterranean meeting on Accelerometric Data Exchange and Archiving for the invitation to present at this meeting. This article has benefited from participation in discussions during the PEGASOS Refinement Project and the EC-funded Seventh Framework Programme project SHARE and with Teraphan Ornthammarth.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Douglas, J. (2011). Investigating Possible Regional Dependence in Strong Ground Motions. In: Akkar, S., Gülkan, P., van Eck, T. (eds) Earthquake Data in Engineering Seismology. Geotechnical, Geological, and Earthquake Engineering, vol 14. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0152-6_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0152-6_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-0151-9
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-0152-6
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)