Understanding single-station ground motion variability and uncertainty (sigma): lessons learnt from EUROSEISTEST

被引:32
|
作者
Ktenidou, Olga-Joan [1 ,2 ,7 ]
Roumelioti, Zafeiria [3 ]
Abrahamson, Norman [4 ]
Cotton, Fabrice [2 ,5 ]
Pitilakis, Kyriazis [3 ]
Hollender, Fabrice [6 ]
机构
[1] Univ Greenwich, Dept Engn Sci, Medway Campus,Cent Ave, Chatham ME4 4TB, Kent, England
[2] GFZ German Res Ctr Geosci, Helmholtz Ctr Potsdam, Helmholtzstr 6-7,Bldg H 6, D-14467 Potsdam, Germany
[3] Aristotle Univ Thessaloniki, Dept Civil Engn, Lab Soil Mech Fdn & Geotech Earthquake Engn, POB 424, Thessaloniki 54124, Greece
[4] Pacific Gas & Elect Co, 245 Market St, San Francisco, CA 94105 USA
[5] Univ Potsdam, Inst Earth & Environm Sci, Karl Liebknecht Str 24-25, D-14476 Potsdam, Germany
[6] CEA Cadarache, F-13108 St Paul Les Durance, France
[7] Univ Grenoble 1, ISTerre, CNRS, F-38041 Grenoble, France
关键词
Ground motion; Variability; Uncertainty; Single station sigma; Site response; AVERAGE HORIZONTAL COMPONENT; PREDICTION EQUATIONS; STANDARD-DEVIATION; MODEL; ACCELERATION; EARTHQUAKE; DATABASE; RECORDS; VALLEY; SITE;
D O I
10.1007/s10518-017-0098-6
中图分类号
P5 [地质学];
学科分类号
0709 ; 081803 ;
摘要
Accelerometric data from the well-studied valley EUROSEISTEST are used to investigate ground motion uncertainty and variability. We define a simple local ground motion prediction equation (GMPE) and investigate changes in standard deviation (sigma) and its components, the between-event variability (tau) and within-event variability (phi). Improving seismological metadata significantly reduces tau (30-50%), which in turn reduces the total sigma . Improving site information reduces the systematic site-to-site variability, phi(S2S) (20-30%), in turn reducing phi, and ultimately, sigma. Our values of standard deviations are lower than global values from literature, and closer to path-specific than site-specific values. However, our data have insufficient azimuthal coverage for single-path analysis. Certain stations have higher ground-motion variability, possibly due to topography, basin edge or downgoing wave effects. Sensitivity checks show that 3 recordings per event is a sufficient data selection criterion, however, one of the dataset's advantages is the large number of recordings per station (9-90) that yields good site term estimates. We examine uncertainty components binning our data with magnitude from 0.01 to 2 s; at smaller magnitudes, tau decreases and phi(SS) increases, possibly due to kappa and source-site trade-offs Finally, we investigate the alternative approach of computing phi(SS) using existing GMPEs instead of creating an ad hoc local GMPE. This is important where data are insufficient to create one, or when site-specific PSHA is performed. We show that global GMPEs may still capture phi(SS), provided that: (1) the magnitude scaling errors are accommodated by the event terms; (2) there are no distance scaling errors (use of a regionally applicable model). Site terms (phi(S2S)) computed by different global GMPEs (using different site-proxies) vary significantly, especially for hard-rock sites. This indicates that GMPEs may be poorly constrained where they are sometimes most needed, i.e., for hard rock.
引用
收藏
页码:2311 / 2336
页数:26
相关论文
共 18 条
  • [1] Understanding single-station ground motion variability and uncertainty (sigma): lessons learnt from EUROSEISTEST
    Olga-Joan Ktenidou
    Zafeiria Roumelioti
    Norman Abrahamson
    Fabrice Cotton
    Kyriazis Pitilakis
    Fabrice Hollender
    Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 2018, 16 : 2311 - 2336
  • [2] Single-Station Sigma for the Iranian Strong Motion Stations
    H. Zafarani
    M. R. Soghrat
    Pure and Applied Geophysics, 2017, 174 : 4077 - 4099
  • [3] Single-Station Sigma for the Iranian Strong Motion Stations
    Zafarani, H.
    Soghrat, M. R.
    PURE AND APPLIED GEOPHYSICS, 2017, 174 (11) : 4077 - 4099
  • [4] Single-Station Sigma for Italian Strong-Motion Stations
    Luzi, L.
    Bindi, D.
    Puglia, R.
    Pacor, F.
    Oth, A.
    BULLETIN OF THE SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA, 2014, 104 (01) : 467 - 483
  • [5] Improvement of the Quantification of Epistemic Uncertainty Using Single-Station Ground-Motion Prediction Equations
    Sung, Chih-Hsuan
    Lee, Chyi-Tyi
    BULLETIN OF THE SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA, 2019, 109 (04) : 1358 - 1377
  • [6] Update of the single-station sigma analysis for the Italian strong-motion stations
    Lanzano, Giovanni
    D'Amico, Maria
    Felicetta, Chiara
    Luzi, Lucia
    Puglia, Rodolfo
    BULLETIN OF EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING, 2017, 15 (06) : 2411 - 2428
  • [7] Update of the single-station sigma analysis for the Italian strong-motion stations
    Giovanni Lanzano
    Maria D’Amico
    Chiara Felicetta
    Lucia Luzi
    Rodolfo Puglia
    Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 2017, 15 : 2411 - 2428
  • [8] Site term from single-station sigma analysis of S-waves in western Turkey
    Nihal Akyol
    Journal of Seismology, 2018, 22 : 1037 - 1057
  • [9] Site term from single-station sigma analysis of S-waves in western Turkey
    Akyol, Nihal
    JOURNAL OF SEISMOLOGY, 2018, 22 (04) : 1037 - 1057
  • [10] Ground-Motion Prediction Models for Arias Intensity and Cumulative Absolute Velocity for Japanese Earthquakes Considering Single-Station Sigma and Within-Event Spatial Correlation
    Foulser-Piggott, Roxane
    Goda, Katsuichiro
    BULLETIN OF THE SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA, 2015, 105 (04) : 1903 - 1918