Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Engineering-oriented ground-motion model for Israel

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study presents a response-spectral Ground Motion Model (GMM) for Israel, called KYB22 herein and derived with practical applications in mind. This model is based on the former work by Maiti et al. (Bull Seismol Soc Am 111: 2177–2194, 2021), who derived a suite of nine Fourier amplitude spectra GMMs, using both empirical data and calibrated point-source simulations. In this study, a weighted average of the Maiti et al. (Bull Seismol Soc Am 111: 2177–2194, 2021) FAS models is computed and a synthetic database is created. Next, this database is converted to the Response spectral domain using the random vibration theory and a new GMM is regressed, constraining the magnitude and distance scaling on the synthetic response-spectral data. Site scaling is represented by VS30 and is a combination of empirical scaling with other considerations which are discussed in the text. Nonlinear site response is constrained from a global model, as are finite-fault effects, such as hanging-wall, mechanism and top of rupture—which cannot be constrained from the data because it does not contain enough large magnitude data. State-wide hazard is then computed using KYB22, comparing results with other GMM combinations. It is found that the hazard results obtained by using KYB22 as a backbone model are comparable to results obtained using other popular combinations of GMMs in the logic tree. Therefore, we recommend using the new GMM as one of the branches within the ground-motion logic tree when conducting seismic hazard calculations for Israel.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

PyRVT v0.7.2 was used to convert the synthetic dataset from Fourier amplitude spectra to response-spectra. PyRVT is an open-access Python library and command-line application for using random vibration theory to transform between acceleration Fourier amplitude spectrum and acceleration response spectrum. It was developed by Albert Kottke and is available on GitHub at: https://zenodo.org/badge/latestdoi/5086299. Last accessed August 2020. NSHMP-haz v1 was used for state-wide hazard runs. It is developed and maintained by the National Seismic Hazard Mapping Project within the USGS and is available on Github at: https://github.com/usgs/nshmp-haz, last accessed July 2022.

References

  • Abrahamson NA (1990) Uncertainty in numerical strong motion predictions. Proc Fourth U S Nat Conf Earthq Eng 1:407–416

    Google Scholar 

  • Abrahamson NA, Bommer JJ (2005) Probability and uncertainty in seismic hazard analysis. Earthq Spectra 21:603–607

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abrahamson NA, Silva WJ, Kamai R (2014) Summary of the ask14 ground motion relation for active crustal regions. Earthq Spectra 30:1025–1055

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Afshari K, Stewart JP (2016) Physically parameterized prediction equations for significant duration in active crustal regions. Earthq Spectra 32:2057–2081

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akkar S, Sandıkkaya MA, Bommer JJ (2014) Empirical ground-motion models for point- and extended-source crustal earthquake scenarios in Europe and the Middle East. Bull Earthq Eng 12:359–387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al Atik L, Youngs RR (2014) Epistemic uncertainty for NGA-West2 models. Earthq Spectra 30:1301–1318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson GM, Adams J (2013) Ground motion prediction equations for application to the 2015 Canadian national seismic hazard maps. Can J Civ Eng 40:988–998

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson GM, Bommer JJ, Abrahamson NA (2014) Alternative Approaches to modeling epistemic uncertainty in ground motions in probabilistic seismic-hazard analysis. Seismol Res Lett 85:1141–1144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Avital M, Kamai R, Davis M, Dor O (2018) The effect of alternative seismotectonic models on PSHA results—a sensitivity study for two sites in Israel. Nat Hazard 18:499–514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baram A, Yagoda-Biran G, Kamai R (2019) Evaluation of generic reference rock site conditions for Israel. Seismol Res Lett 90:1584–1591

    Google Scholar 

  • Baram A, Yagoda-Biran G, Kamai R (2020) Evaluating proxy-based site response in Israel. Bull Seismol Soc Am 110:2953–2966

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bayless J, Abrahamson NA (2019) Summary of the BA18 ground-motion model for fourier amplitude spectra for crustal earthquakes in California. Bull Seismol Soc Am 109:2088–2105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bindi D, Massa M, Luzi L, Ameri G, Pacor F, Puglia R, Augliera P (2014) Pan-European ground-motion prediction equations for the average horizontal component of PGA, PGV, and 5%-damped PSA at spectral periods up to 3.0 s using the RESORCE dataset. Bull Earthq Eng 12:391–430

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boore DM, Joyner WB (1984) A note on the use of random vibration theory to predict peak amplitudes of transient signals. Bull Seismol Soc Am 74:2035–2039

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boore DM (2003) Simulation of ground motion using the stochastic method. Pure Appl Geophys 160:635–676

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boore DM, Stewart JP, Seyhan E, Atkinson GM (2014) NGA-West2 equations for predicting PGA, PGV, and 5% damped PSA for shallow crustal earthquakes. Earthq Spectra 30:1057–1085

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bora SS, Scherbaum F, Kuehn N, Stafford P, Edwards B (2015) Development of a response spectral ground-motion prediction equation (GMPE) for seismic-hazard analysis from empirical fourier spectral and duration models. Bull Seismol Soc Am 105:2192–2218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell KW (2003) Prediction of strong ground motion using the hybrid empirical method and its use in the development of ground-motion (attenuation) relations in eastern North America. Bull Seismol Soc Am 93:1012–1033

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell KW, Bozorgnia Y (2008) NGA ground motion model for the geometric mean horizontal component of PGA, PGV, PGD and 5% damped linear elastic response spectra for periods ranging from 0.01 to 10 s. Earthq Spectra 24:139–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell KW, Bozorgnia Y (2014) NGA-West2 ground motion model for the average horizontal components of PGA, PGV, and 5% damped linear acceleration response spectra. Earthq Spectra 30:1087–1115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cauzzi C, Faccioli E, Vanini M, Bianchini A (2015) Updated predictive equations for broadband (0.01–10 s) horizontal response spectra and peak ground motions, based on a global dataset of digital acceleration records. Bull Earthq Eng 13:1587–1612

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiou BS-J, Youngs RR (2014) Update of the Chiou and Youngs NGA model for the average horizontal component of peak ground motion and response spectra. Earthq Spectra 30:1117–1153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donahue JL, Abrahamson NA (2014) Simulation-based hanging wall effects. Earthq Spectra 30:1269–1284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Douglas J (2018) Calibrating the backbone approach for the development of earthquake ground motion models, In: Best practice in physics-based fault rupture models for seismic hazard assessment of nuclear installations: issues and challenges towards full seismic risk analysis, Cadarache-Chateau, France

  • Goulet CA, Bozorgnia Y, Kuehn N, Al Atik L, Youngs RR, Graves RW, Atkinson GM (2021) NGA-East ground-motion characterization model part I: summary of products and model development. Earthq Spectra 37:1231–1282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gülerce Z, Kargoığlu B, Abrahamson NA (2016) Turkey-adjusted NGA-W1 horizontal ground motion prediction models. Earthq Spectra 32:75–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamai R, Abrahamson NA, Silva WJ (2014) Nonlinear horizontal site amplification for constraining the NGA-West2 GMPEs. Earthq Spectra 30:1223–1240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kottke AR, Rathje EM (2008) Technical manual for Strata, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center Berkeley, California

  • Kowsari M, Ghasemi S, Farajpour Z, Zare M (2020) Capturing epistemic uncertainty in the Iranian strong-motion data on the basis of backbone ground motion models. J Seismolog 24:75–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuehn NM, Abrahamson NA (2018) The effect of uncertainty in predictor variables on the estimation of ground-motion prediction equationsthe effect of uncertainty in predictor variables on the estimation of GMPEs. Bull Seismol Soc Am 108:358–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee J, Green RA (2014) An empirical significant duration relationship for stable continental regions. Bull Earthq Eng 12:217–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lior I, Ziv A (2018) The relation between ground motion, earthquake source parameters, and attenuation: implications for source parameter inversion and ground motion prediction equations. J Geophys Res Solid Earth 123:5886–5901

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maiti SK, Kamai R (2020) Interaction between fault and off-fault seismic sources in hazard analysis – a case study from Israel. Eng Geol 274:105723. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0013795220304117

  • Maiti SK, Yagoda-Biran G, Kamai R (2021) A suite of alternative ground-motion models (GMMs) for Israel. Bull Seismol Soc Am 111:2177–2194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meirova T, Hofstetter R, Ben-Avraham Z, Steinberg D, Malagnini L, Akinci A (2008) Weak-motion-based attenuation relationships for Israel. Geophys J Int 175:1127–1140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seyhan E, Stewart JP (2014) Semi-empirical nonlinear site amplification from NGA-West 2 data and simulations. Earthq Spectra 30:1241–1256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shahjouei A, Pezeshk S (2016) Alternative hybrid empirical ground-motion model for central and eastern North America using hybrid simulations and NGA-West2 models. Bull Seismol Soc Am 106:734–754

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 Earthq Eng 6:149–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weatherill G, Kotha SR, Cotton F (2020) A regionally-adaptable “scaled backbone” ground motion logic tree for shallow seismicity in Europe: application to the 2020 European seismic hazard model. Bull Earthq Eng 18:5087–5117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yagoda-Biran G, Maiti SK, Wetzler N, Nof RN, Pashcur Y, Kamai R (2021) A new seismo-engineering ground-motion database for Israel with its corresponding point-source parameters, Seismol Res Lett

  • Yenier E, Atkinson GM (2015) Regionally adjustable generic ground-motion prediction equation based on equivalent point-source simulations: application to central and eastern North America. Bull Seismol Soc Am 105:1989–2009

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Peter Powers is thanked for his help with the NSHMP-haz code, and with very useful suggestions for hazard runs. Norman Abrahamson is thanked for his many helpful comments and suggestions during model development. Jeff Bayless and one more anonymous reviewer are thanked for their helpful comments and suggestions.

Funding

The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beersheba, Israel

    Ronnie Kamai

  2. Geological Survey of Israel, 32 Yeshayahu Leibowitz St, Jerusalem, Israel

    Gony Yagoda-Biran

Authors
  1. Ronnie Kamai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gony Yagoda-Biran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ronnie Kamai.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kamai, R., Yagoda-Biran, G. Engineering-oriented ground-motion model for Israel. Bull Earthquake Eng 21, 3199–3220 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-023-01651-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-023-01651-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation