Skip navigation

Understanding single-station ground motion variability and uncertainty (sigma) – Lessons learnt from EUROSEISTEST

Understanding single-station ground motion variability and uncertainty (sigma) – Lessons learnt from EUROSEISTEST

Ktenidou, Olga-Tzoan, Roumelioti, Zafeiria, Abrahamson, Norman, Cotton, Fabrice, Pitilakis, Kyriazis and Hollender, Fabrice (2017) Understanding single-station ground motion variability and uncertainty (sigma) – Lessons learnt from EUROSEISTEST. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering. ISSN 1570-761X (doi:10.1007/s10518-017-0098-6)

[img]
Preview
PDF (Publisher's PDF - Open Access)
16249 KTENIDOU_Ground_Motion_Variability_2017.pdf - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (4MB) | Preview

Abstract

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 (σ) and its components, the between-event variability (τ) and within-event variability (φ). Improving seismological metadata significantly reduces τ (30-50%), which in turn reduces the total σ. Improving site information reduces the systematic site-to-site variability, φS2S (20-30%), in turn reducing φ, and ultimately, σ. 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, τ decreases and φSS increases, possibly due to κ and source-site trade-offs Finally, we investigate the alternative approach of computing φSS 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 φSS, 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 (φS2S) 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.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: © The Author(s) 2017. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
Uncontrolled Keywords: Ground motion; Variability; Uncertainty; Single station sigma; Site response
Subjects: T Technology > TA Engineering (General). Civil engineering (General)
Faculty / Department / Research Group: Faculty of Engineering & Science
Faculty of Engineering & Science > Department of Engineering Science
Last Modified: 05 Sep 2017 14:37
URI: http://gala.gre.ac.uk/id/eprint/16249

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

View more statistics