A non-ergodic effective amplitude ground-motion model for California

被引:0
|
作者
Grigorios Lavrentiadis
Norman A. Abrahamson
Nicolas M. Kuehn
机构
[1] University of California,Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
[2] Berkeley,Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
[3] University of California,undefined
[4] Los Angeles,undefined
来源
关键词
Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis; Non-ergodic ground-motion model; Effective amplitude spectra; Bayesian regression;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
A new non-ergodic ground-motion model (GMM) for effective amplitude spectral (EAS) values for California is presented in this study. EAS, which is defined in Goulet et al. (Effective amplitude spectrum (eas) as a metric for ground motion modeling using fourier amplitudes, 2018), is a smoothed rotation-independent Fourier amplitude spectrum of the two horizontal components of an acceleration time history. The main motivation for developing a non-ergodic EAS GMM, rather than a spectral acceleration GMM, is that the scaling of EAS does not depend on spectral shape, and therefore, the more frequent small magnitude events can be used in the estimation of the non-ergodic terms. The model is developed using the California subset of the NGAWest2 dataset (Ancheta in PEER NGA-West2 database. Tech. rep., PEER, Berkeley, CA, 2013). The Bayless and Abrahamson (Bull Seismol Soc Am 109(5): 2088-2105, https://doi.org/10.1785/0120190077, 2019b) (BA18) ergodic EAS GMM was used as backbone to constrain the average source, path, and site scaling. The non-ergodic GMM is formulated as a Bayesian hierarchical model: the non-ergodic source and site terms are modeled as spatially varying coefficients following the approach of Landwehr et al. (Bull Seismol Soc Am 106(6):2574-2583. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120160118, 2016), and the non-ergodic path effects are captured by the cell-specific anelastic attenuation attenuation following the approach of Dawood and Rodriguez-Marek (Bull Seismol Soc Am 103(2B):1360-1372, https://doi.org/10.1785/0120120125, 2013). Close to stations and past events, the mean values of the non-ergodic terms deviate from zero to capture the systematic effects and their epistemic uncertainty is small. In areas with sparse data, the epistemic uncertainty of the non-ergodic terms is large, as the systematic effects cannot be determined. The non-ergodic total aleatory standard deviation is approximately 30 to 40%\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$40\%$$\end{document} smaller than the total aleatory standard deviation of BA18. This reduction in the aleatory variability has a significant impact on hazard calculations at large return periods. The epistemic uncertainty of the ground motion predictions is small in areas close to stations and past events.
引用
收藏
页码:5233 / 5264
页数:31
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] From ergodic to non-ergodic chaos in Rosenzweig-Porter model
    Pino, M.
    Tabanera, J.
    Serna, P.
    JOURNAL OF PHYSICS A-MATHEMATICAL AND THEORETICAL, 2019, 52 (47)
  • [32] Modeling the Spatial Correlation of Systematic Source Effects in Non-Ergodic Ground Motion Models for the Ridgecrest Area
    Liu, Chenying
    Macedo, Jorge
    GEO-RISK 2023: HAZARDS AND CLIMATE CHANGE, 2023, 344 : 223 - 233
  • [33] Ground-Motion Attenuation Model for Small-To-Moderate Shallow Crustal Earthquakes in California and Its Implications on Regionalization of Ground-Motion Prediction Models
    Chiou, Brian
    Youngs, Robert
    Abrahamson, Norman
    Addo, Kofi
    EARTHQUAKE SPECTRA, 2010, 26 (04) : 907 - 926
  • [34] Evaluation of empirical ground-motion relations in southern California
    Lee, Y
    Anderson, JG
    Zeng, YH
    BULLETIN OF THE SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA, 2000, 90 (06) : S136 - S148
  • [35] Residual displacement ground-motion model
    Zengin, Esra
    Bozorgnia, Yousef
    Mazzoni, Silvia
    Campbell, Kenneth
    SOIL DYNAMICS AND EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING, 2025, 190
  • [36] Southern California basin and non-basin classification algorithm for ground-motion site amplification model applications
    Nweke, Chukwuebuka C.
    Shams, Rashid
    EARTHQUAKE SPECTRA, 2025, 41 (01) : 908 - 930
  • [37] Macroscopic constitutive model for ergodic and non-ergodic lead-free relaxors
    Streich, Friedemann A.
    Martin, Alexander
    Webber, Kyle G.
    Kamlah, Marc
    JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT MATERIAL SYSTEMS AND STRUCTURES, 2022, 33 (08) : 1002 - 1017
  • [38] A Stochastic Ground-Motion Model for Switzerland
    Edwards, Benjamin
    Faeh, Donat
    BULLETIN OF THE SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA, 2013, 103 (01) : 78 - 98
  • [39] Non-ergodic delocalization in the Rosenzweig-Porter model
    von Soosten, Per
    Warzel, Simone
    LETTERS IN MATHEMATICAL PHYSICS, 2019, 109 (04) : 905 - 922
  • [40] A Ground-Motion Model for GNSS Peak Ground Displacement
    Goldberg, E. Dara
    Melgar, Diego
    Hayes, P. Gavin
    Crowell, W. Brendan
    Sahakian, J. Valerie
    BULLETIN OF THE SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA, 2021, 111 (05) : 2393 - 2407