The importance of crustal structure in explaining the observed uncertainties in ground motion estimation
- 75 Downloads
In this short article, the possible reduction in the standard deviation of empirical ground motion estimation equations through the modelling of the effect of crustal structure is assessed through the use of ground-motion simulations. Simulations are computed for different source-to-site distances, focal depths, focal mechanisms and for crustal models of the Pyrenees, the western Alps and the upper Rhine Graben. Through the method of equivalent hypocentral distance introduced by Douglas et al. [(2004) Bull Earthquake Eng 2(1): 75–99] to model the effect of crustal structure in empirical equations, the scatter associated with such equations derived using these simulated data could be reduced to zero if real-to-equivalent hypocentral distance mapping functions were derived for every combination of mechanism, depth and crustal structure present in the simulated dataset. This is, obviously, impractical. The relative importance of each parameter in affecting the decay of ground motions is assessed here. It is found that variation in focal depth is generally more important than the effect of crustal structure when deriving the real-to-equivalent hypocentral distance mapping functions. In addition, mechanism and magnitude do not have an important impact on the decay rate.
KeywordsStrong ground motion Attenuation relations Ground-motion models Ground-motion estimation equations Crustal structure France Standard deviation Equivalent hypocentral distance
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Boore DM, Boatwright J (1984) Average body-wave radiation coeffcients. Bull Seismol Soc Am 74(5):1615–1621Google Scholar
- Boore DM, Joyner WB (1997) Site amplifications for generic rock sites. Bull Seismol Soc Am 87(2):327–341Google Scholar
- Campbell KW (1997) Empirical near-source attenuation relationships for horizontal and vertical components of peak ground acceleration, peak ground velocity, and pseudo-absolute acceleration response spectra. Seismol Res Lett 68(1):154–179Google Scholar
- Costa G, Panza GF, Suhadolc P, Vaccari F (1993) Zoning of the Italian territory in terms of expected peak ground acceleration derived from complete synthetic seismograms. J Appl Geophys 30(2):149–160. In: Cassinis R, Helbig K, Panza GF (eds) Geophysical exploration in areas of complex geologyGoogle Scholar
- Douglas J, Aochi H, Suhadolc P, Costa G (2005) The importance ofcrustal structure in explaining the observed uncertainties in ground motion estimation. In Proceedings of Earthquake Engineering in the 21st Century (EE-21C), Aug 2005Google Scholar
- Graves RWJ (1996) Simulating seismic wave propagation in 3D elastic media using staggered-grid finite differences. Bull Seismol Soc Am 86(4):1091–1106Google Scholar
- Laske G, Dziewonski A, Masters G (2005) The reference earth model website. On Internet at: http://mahi.ucsd.edu/Gabi/rem.htmlGoogle Scholar
- Lopes Cardozo GGO (2003) 3-D geophysical imaging and tectonic modelling of active tectonics of the upper Rhine graben region. PhD thesis, L’Université Louis Pasteur - Strasbourg IGoogle Scholar
- Martínez-Pereira A, Bommer JJ (1988) What is the near-field? In: Booth E (ed) Proceedings of the Sixth SECED Conference on Seismic Design Practice into the Next Century, pp 245–252Google Scholar
- Olsen KB (1994) Simulation of three-dimensional wave propagation in the Salt Lake Basin. PhD thesis, University of UtahGoogle Scholar
- Wells DL, Coppersmith KJ (1994) New empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, rupture area, and surface displacement. Bull Seismol Soc Am 84(4):974–1002Google Scholar