Is There a Near-Field for Small-to-Moderate Magnitude Earthquakes?

Bommer, Julian J.; Georgallides, George; Tromans, Iain J.

doi:10.1080/13632460109350399

Cited by 31 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the truncated Gutenberg-Richter models of both BG-I and BG-II, the minimum earthquake magnitude is set equal to 4.5 because earthquakes with smaller magnitude than this are judged not to cause damage to buildings and structures (Bommer et al 2001). The maximum (upper bound) magnitude is set to 7.5 for BG-II to account for many large earthquakes that have been observed in this zone, as shown in Fig.…”

Section: Modelling Of Earthquake Sourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for Thailand

Ornthammarath

Warnitchai

Worakanchana

et al. 2010

Bull Earthquake Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A set of probabilistic seismic hazard maps for Thailand has been derived using procedures developed for the latest US National Seismic Hazard Maps. In contrast to earlier hazard maps for this region, which are mostly computed using seismic source zone delineations, the presented maps are based on the combination of smoothed gridded seismicity, crustal-fault, and subduction source models. Thailand's composite earthquake catalogue is revisited and expanded, covering a study area limited by 0 • -30 • N Latitude and 88 • -110 • E Longitude and the instrumental period from 1912 to 2007. The long-term slip rates and estimates of earthquake size from paleoseismological studies are incorporated through a crustal fault source model. Furthermore, the subduction source model is used to model the megathrust Sunda subduction zones, with variable characteristics along the strike of the faults. Epistemic uncertainty is taken into consideration by the logic tree framework incorporating basic quantities, such as different source modelling, maximum cut-off magnitudes and ground motion prediction equations. The ground motion hazard map is presented over a 10 km grid in terms of peak ground acceleration and spectral acceleration at 0.2, 1.0, and 2.0 undamped natural periods and a 5% critical damping ratio for 10 and 2% probabilities of exceedance in 50 years. The presented maps give expected ground motions that are based on more extensive data sources than applied in the development of previous maps. The main findings are that northern and western Thailand are subjected to the highest hazard. The largest contributors to short-and long-period ground motion hazard in the Bangkok region are from the nearby active faults and Sunda subduction zones, respectively.T. Ornthammarath (B) ROSE School,

show abstract

Section: Modelling Of Earthquake Sourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for Thailand

Ornthammarath

Warnitchai

Worakanchana

et al. 2010

Bull Earthquake Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, near-fault strong motions exhibit large incremental velocities which can give rise to large inelastic deformations of the structure regardless of the peak ground acceleration [10]. In addition, features of near-field ground motions such as directivity, can significantly enhance the destructive potential in small to moderate magnitude events [11]. The near-field directivity effects can result in high spectral ordinates at longer periods and their amplifying effects are not a monotonically increasing function with period but rather a narrow band effect at a period that increases with earthquake magnitude [12].…”

Section: The Near Field Seismic Inputmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although the existing seismic codes consider near-fault shaking effects in the development of elastic response spectra, they do not currently consider the increased inelastic demands that may occur during near-fault ground motion [11]. At Present, Eurocode 8 [14] does not give specific guidelines to take into account the effects of near-fault ground motions in the design of brittle structures.…”

Section: The Near Field Seismic Inputmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sensitivity Analysis of the Seismic Response of Brittle Structural Elements Under Near-Field Seismic Input Effects

Pineda¹,

Navarro-Rubio²,

Gil-Martí³

2015

Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering (COM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Concerning any potential structural damage, it is important to notice, that within the frame of a probabilistic seismic hazard analysis for engineering purposes, it is common practice to specify a lower bound of magnitude 5.0, on the basis that smaller events are not likely to be of engineering significance (Bommer, Georgallides, and Tromans, 2001). Humans, nevertheless, can feel seismic events of lower magnitude already.…”

Section: Structural Damage and Perceptibilitymentioning

confidence: 99%