The Global Seismic Hazard Assessment Program (Gshap)

Giardini, Domenico; Basham, P. W.; Bery, M.

doi:10.1111/j.1365-3121.1992.tb00609.x

Cited by 51 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Parts of all continents on Earth are at risk of seismic-induced snow avalanches (Fig. 3), as compiled by estimating the spatial extent of areas in which snow avalanches may be triggered by strong ground motion, based on maps showing seismic hazards (Giardini, 1999) and avalanche extent (Kotlyakov, 1997). The total area highlighted in Figure 3 corresponds to approximately 3.1% of the total land area (4.7 Â 10 6 km 2 ), yet despite this large at-risk area, corresponding to half of all avalanche-prone areas, only a few cases of earthquake-induced snow avalanches have been documented or witnessed during the past 110 years.…”

Section: Snow Avalanches and Natural Seismicitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Earthquake-induced snow avalanches: I. Historical case studies

Podolskiy¹,

Nishimura²,

Abe

et al. 2010

J. Glaciol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Strong ground motions caused by earthquakes can induce catastrophic avalanches. Massive snow avalanching has also been observed on slopes near quarries and underground mines where ground motions are produced by explosives. To address a lack of information regarding seismogenic snow avalanches, we have compiled an inventory to document case histories. For the period 1899-2010, 22 cases are identified worldwide, related to natural or artificial seismicity with magnitudes of 1.9 M w 9.2 and source-to-site distances of~0.2-640 km. In the extreme case, many thousands of simultaneously released large-scale avalanches have been reported. The obtained distribution and variety of parameters are discussed and compared with earthquake-induced landslides and ice avalanches; the results are similar among these three types of failure events, although all data derived from statistical analyses (i.e. non-witnessed cases) represent outliers, suggesting a significant reduction in the threshold magnitudes proposed for landslides. This proposal could be verified by the collection of additional data.

show abstract

Section: Snow Avalanches and Natural Seismicitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Earthquake-induced snow avalanches: I. Historical case studies

Podolskiy¹,

Nishimura²,

Abe

et al. 2010

J. Glaciol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…After the collapse of the Soviet Union, several studies improved the probabilistic hazard assessment in Central Asia. Between 1991 and 1997, a new general seismic zoning (GFZ-97) of Northern Eurasia was realized (Ulomov, 1999) and included as contribution to the Global Seismic Hazard Assessment Program (GSHAP; Giardini, 1999). With regard to this last study, it is important to note that the probabilistic hazard for Central Asia was estimated in terms of intensity and then converted to peak ground acceleration (PGA) by Ulomov (1999) using the Aptikaev and Shebalin (1988) relationship.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seismic hazard assessment in Central Asia: Outcomes from a site approach

Bindi

Abdrakhmatov

Parolai

et al. 2012

Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the process of updating existing PSHA maps in Central Asia, a first step is the evaluation of the seismic hazard in terms of macroseismic intensity by applying a data driven method. Following the Site Approach to Seismic Hazard Assessment (SASHA) , the evaluation of the probability of exceedance of any given intensity value over a fixed exposure time, is mainly based on the seismic histories available at different locations without requiring any a-priori assumption about seismic zonation. The effects of earthquakes non included in the seismic history can be accounted by propagating the epicentral information through a Intensity Prediction Equation developed for the analyzed area. In order to comply with existing building codes in the region that use macroseismic intensity instead of PGA, we evaluated the seismic hazard at 2911 localities using a macroseismic catalogue composed by 5322 intensity data points relevant to 75 earthquakes in the magnitude range 4.6-8.3. The results show that for most of the investigated area the intensity having a probability of at least 10% to be exceeded in 50 years is VIII. The intensity rises to IX for some area struck by strong earthquakes in the past, like the Chou-Kemin-Chilik fault zone in northern Tien-Shan, between Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan, or in Gissar range between Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. These values are about one degree less than those evaluated in the Global Seismic Hazard Assessment Program (GSHAP;Ulomov, 1999). Moreover, hazard curves have been extracted for the main towns of Central Asia and the results compared with the estimates previously obtained. A good agreement has been found for Bishkek (Kyrgyzstan) and Dushanbe (Tajikistan), while a lower probability of occurrence of I=VIII has been obtained for Tashkent (Uzbekistan) and a larger one for I=IX in Almaty (Kazakhstan).2

show abstract

“…The influence of the proposed zonation modification on seismic hazard estimates was evaluated by calculating the spatial distribution of a parameter commonly used in hazard assessment (see Giardini, 1999), i.e. the peak ground acceleration having an exceedence probability of 10% in 50 years (PGA 0.10,50 ), which is a usual reference for seismic building codes.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seismogenic zonation and seismic hazard estimates in a Southern Italy area (Northern Apulia) characterised by moderate seismicity rates

Gaudio

Pierri

Calcagnile

2009

Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The northernmost part of Apulia, in Southern Italy, is an emerged portion of the Adriatic plate, which in past centuries was hit by at least three disastrous earthquakes and at present is occasionally affected by seismic events of moderate energy. In the latest seismic hazard assessment carried out in Italy at national scale, the adopted seismogenic zonation (named ZS9) has defined for this area a single zone including parts of different structural units (chain, foredeep, foreland). However significant seismic behaviour differences were revealed among them by our recent studies and, therefore, we re-evaluated local seismic hazard by adopting a zonation, named ZNA, modifying the ZS9 to separate areas of Northern Apulia belonging to different structural domains. To overcome the problem of the limited datasets of historical events available for small zones having a relatively low rate of earthquake recurrence, an approach was adopted that integrates historical and instrumental event data. The latter were declustered with a procedure specifically devised to process datasets of low to moderate magnitude shocks. Seismicity rates were then calculated following alternative procedural choices, according to a "logic tree" approach, to explore the influence of epistemic uncertainties on the final results and to evaluate, among these, the importance of the uncertainty in seismogenic zonation. The comparison between the results obtained using zonations ZNA and ZS9 confirms the well known "spreading effect" that the use of larger seismogenic zones has on hazard estimates. This effect can locally determine underestimates or overestimates by amounts that make necessary a careful reconsideration of seismic classification and building code application.

show abstract

The Global Seismic Hazard Assessment Program (Gshap)

Cited by 51 publications

References 0 publications

Earthquake-induced snow avalanches: I. Historical case studies

Earthquake-induced snow avalanches: I. Historical case studies

Seismic hazard assessment in Central Asia: Outcomes from a site approach

Seismogenic zonation and seismic hazard estimates in a Southern Italy area (Northern Apulia) characterised by moderate seismicity rates

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About