John Douglas, Sinan Akkar, Gabriele Ameri, Pierre-Yves Bard, Dino Bindi, Julian J. Bommer, Sanjay Singh Bora, Fabrice Cotton, Boumediene Derras, Marcel Hermkes, Nicolas Martin Kuehn, Lucia Luzi, Marco Massa, Francesca Pacor, Carsten Riggelsen, M. Abdullah Sandikkaya, Frank Scherbaum, Peter J. Stafford, Paola Traversa
- This article presents comparisons among the five ground-motion models described in other articles within this special issue, in terms of data selection criteria, characteristics of the models and predicted peak ground and response spectral accelerations. Comparisons are also made with predictions from the Next Generation Attenuation (NGA) models to which the models presented here have similarities (e.g. a common master database has been used) but also differences (e.g. some models in this issue are nonparametric). As a result of the differing data selection criteria and derivation techniques the predicted median ground motions show considerable differences (up to a factor of two for certain scenarios), particularly for magnitudes and distances close to or beyond the range of the available observations. The predicted influence of style-of-faulting shows much variation among models whereas site amplification factors are more similar, with peak amplification at around 1s. These differences are greater than those among predictions fromThis article presents comparisons among the five ground-motion models described in other articles within this special issue, in terms of data selection criteria, characteristics of the models and predicted peak ground and response spectral accelerations. Comparisons are also made with predictions from the Next Generation Attenuation (NGA) models to which the models presented here have similarities (e.g. a common master database has been used) but also differences (e.g. some models in this issue are nonparametric). As a result of the differing data selection criteria and derivation techniques the predicted median ground motions show considerable differences (up to a factor of two for certain scenarios), particularly for magnitudes and distances close to or beyond the range of the available observations. The predicted influence of style-of-faulting shows much variation among models whereas site amplification factors are more similar, with peak amplification at around 1s. These differences are greater than those among predictions from the NGA models. The models for aleatory variability (sigma), however, are similar and suggest that ground-motion variability from this region is slightly higher than that predicted by the NGA models, based primarily on data from California and Taiwan.…
MetadatenAuthor details: | John Douglas, Sinan Akkar, Gabriele Ameri, Pierre-Yves Bard, Dino BindiORCiD, Julian J. Bommer, Sanjay Singh BoraGND, Fabrice CottonORCiDGND, Boumediene Derras, Marcel Hermkes, Nicolas Martin Kuehn, Lucia LuziORCiD, Marco Massa, Francesca Pacor, Carsten Riggelsen, M. Abdullah Sandikkaya, Frank ScherbaumORCiDGND, Peter J. Stafford, Paola Traversa |
---|
DOI: | https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-013-9522-8 |
---|
ISSN: | 1570-761X |
---|
ISSN: | 1573-1456 |
---|
Title of parent work (English): | Bulletin of earthquake engineering : official publication of the European Association for Earthquake Engineering |
---|
Publisher: | Springer |
---|
Place of publishing: | Dordrecht |
---|
Publication type: | Article |
---|
Language: | English |
---|
Year of first publication: | 2014 |
---|
Publication year: | 2014 |
---|
Release date: | 2017/03/27 |
---|
Tag: | Aleatory variability; Epistemic uncertainty; Europe; Ground-motion models; Ground-motion prediction equations; Middle East; Site amplification; Strong-motion data; Style of faulting |
---|
Volume: | 12 |
---|
Issue: | 1 |
---|
Number of pages: | 18 |
---|
First page: | 341 |
---|
Last Page: | 358 |
---|
Funding institution: | SHARE (Seismic Hazard Harmonization in Europe); EC-Research [226967];
SIGMA (Seismic Ground Motion Assessment) |
---|
Organizational units: | Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Fakultät / Institut für Geowissenschaften |
---|
Peer review: | Referiert |
---|