We present an update to our 2008 NGA model for predicting horizontal ground motion amplitudes caused by shallow crustal earthquakes occurring in active tectonic environments. The update is based on analysis of the greatly expanded NGA-West2 ground motion database and numerical simulations. The updated model contains minor adjustments to our 2008 functional form related to style of faulting effects, hanging wall effects, scaling with the depth to top of rupture, scaling with sediment thickness, and the inclusion of additional terms for the effects of fault dip and rupture directivity. In addition, we incorporate regional differences in far-source distance attenuation and site effects between California and other active tectonic regions. Compared to our 2008 NGA model, the predicted medians by the updated model are similar for M > 7 and are lower for M < 5. The aleatory variability is larger than that obtained in our 2008 model.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbrahamsonN. A., and SilvaW. J., 2008. Summary of the Abrahamson and Silva NGA ground motion relations, Earthquake Spectra24, 67–97.
2.
Al AtikL., AbrahamsonN., BommerJ. J., ScherbaumF., CottonF., and KuehnN., 2010. The variability of ground motion prediction models and its components, Seismological Research Letters81, 794–801.
3.
AnchetaT. D., DarraghR. B., StewartJ. P., SeyhanE., SilvaW. J., ChiouB. S.-J., WooddellK. E., GravesR.W., KottkeA. R., BooreD. M., KishidaT., and DonahueJ. L., 2013. PEER NGA-West2 Database, PEER Report 2013/03, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA.
4.
BoatwrightJ., 2007. The persistence of directivity in small earthquakes, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 97, 1850–1861.
5.
BozorgniaY., AbrahamsonN. A., Al AtikL., AnchetaT. D., AtkinsonG. M., BakerJ. W., BaltayA., BooreD. M., CampbellK. W., ChiouB. S.-J., DarraghR., DayS., DonahueJ., GravesR. W., GregorN., HanksT., IdrissI. M., KamaiR., KishidaT., KottkeA., MahinS. A., RezaeianS., RowshandelB., SeyhanE., ShahiS., ShantzT., SilvaW., SpudichP., StewartJ. P., Watson-LampreyJ., WooddellK., and YoungsR., 2014. NGA-West2 research project, Earthquake Spectra30, 973–987.
6.
BragatoP. L., 2004. Regression analysis with truncated samples and its application to ground motion attenuation studies, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am.94, 1369–1378.
7.
CampbellK., 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.
8.
ChiouB. S.-J., DarraghR., GregorN., and SilvaW., 2008. NGA project strong-motion database, Earthquake Spectra24, 23–44.
9.
ChiouB. S.-J., and YoungsR. R., 2008a. An NGA model for the average horizontal component of peak ground motion and response spectra, Earthquake Spectra24, 173–215.
10.
ChiouB. S.-J., and YoungsR. R., 2008b. NGA Model for the Average Horizontal Component of Peak Ground Motion and Response Spectra, PEER Report 2008/10, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA.
11.
ChiouB. S.-J., and YoungsR. R., 2012. Updating the Chiou and Youngs NGA model: regionalization of anelastic attenuation, in Proceedings, 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal.
12.
ChiouB. S.-J., and YoungsR. R., 2013. Update of the Chiou and Youngs NGA Ground Motion Model for Average Horizontal Component of Peak Ground Motion and Response Spectra, PEER Report 2013/07, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA.
13.
ChiouB. S.-J., YoungsR. R., AbrahamsonN. A, and AddoK., 2010. Ground motion attenuation model for small-to-moderate shallow crustal earthquakes in California and its implications on regionalization of ground motion prediction models, Earthquake Spectra26, 907–926.
14.
ClevelandW. S., GrosseE., and ShyuW. M., 1993. Local regression models, Chapter 8, Statistical Models in S, ChambersJ. M. and HastieT. J. (eds.), Wadsworth & Brooks/Cole, 624 pp.
15.
DonahueJ. L., and AbrahamsonN. A., 2014. Simulation-based hanging wall effects, Earthquake Spectra30, 1269–1284.
16.
KaklamanosJ., BaiseL. G., and BooreD. M., 2011. Estimating unknown input parameters when implementing the NGA ground motion prediction equations in engineering practice, Earthquake Spectra27, 1219–1235.
17.
R Development Core Team, 2014. R: A language and environment for statistical computing, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, available at http://www.R-project.org.
18.
SpudichP., BaylessJ. R., BakerJ. W, ChiouB. S.-J., RowshandelB., ShahiS. K., and SomervilleP., 2013. Final Report of the NGA-West2 Directivity Working Group, PEER Report No. 2013/09, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, 129 pp.
19.
SpudichP., and ChiouB. S.-J., 2008. Directivity in NGA earthquake ground motions: analysis using isochrone theory, Earthquake Spectra24, 279–298.
20.
ToroG. R., 1981. Biases in Seismic Ground Motion Prediction, Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 133 pp.
21.
WooddellK. E., and AbrahamsonN. A., 2014. Classification of main shocks and aftershocks in the NGA-West2 database, Earthquake Spectra30, 1257–1267.
