A Non-ergodic Effective Amplitude Ground-Motion Model for California
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. (2018), is a smoothed rotation-independent Fourier amplitude spectrum of the two horizontal components of an acceleration ti...
Gespeichert in:
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
---|---|
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | 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. (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 et al. (2013). The Bayless and Abrahamson (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. (2016), and the
non-ergodic path effects are captured by the cell-specific anelastic
attenuation attenuation following the approach of Dawood and Rodriguez-Marek
(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
$40\%$ 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. |
---|---|
DOI: | 10.48550/arxiv.2106.07834 |