Drivers to seismic hazard curve slope

被引:1
|
作者
Cito, Pasquale [1 ]
Iervolino, Iunio [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy
[2] Scuola Univ Super Pavia, IUSS, Pavia, Italy
来源
EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING & STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS | 2024年 / 53卷 / 15期
关键词
ground motion intensity measure; seismic design; seismic risk; CLOSED-FORM SOLUTION; PREDICTION; RISK; DISAGGREGATION; VARIABILITY;
D O I
10.1002/eqe.4226
中图分类号
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号
0813 ;
摘要
The slope of a linear approximation of a probabilistic seismic hazard curve, when it is represented in the log-log scale, is a key parameter for seismic risk assessment based on closed-form solutions, and other applications. On the other hand, it is observed that different hazard models can provide, at the same site, comparable ground shaking, yet appreciably different slopes for the same exceedance return period. Moreover, the slope at a given return period can increase or decrease from low- to high-hazardous sites, depending on the models the probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) is based on. In the study, the sensitivity of the slope to the main model components involved in PSHA was explored, that is: the earthquake rate, the magnitude and source-to-site distance distributions, and the value of the residual of ground motion models (GMM). With reference to a generic site, affected by an ideal seismic source zone, where magnitude follows the Gutenberg-Richter (G-R) relationship, it was found that the local slope of hazard curve increases with the following factors in descending order of importance: (i) increasing distance from the source; (ii) decreasing maximum magnitude and increasing b$b$-value of the G-R model; (iii) increasing rate of earthquakes of interest; (iv) increasing residual of the GMM. These results help explain the systematic differences in hazard curve slopes found in three authoritative hazard models for Italy, and the related impact on simplified risk assessment.
引用
收藏
页码:4497 / 4510
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Insight on seismic hazard studies for Egypt
    Hassan, Hany M.
    Panza, Giuliano F.
    Romanelli, Fabio
    ElGabry, Mohamed N.
    ENGINEERING GEOLOGY, 2017, 220 : 99 - 109
  • [32] Seismic Hazard Assessment: Issues and Alternatives
    Zhenming Wang
    Pure and Applied Geophysics, 2011, 168 : 11 - 25
  • [33] Probabilistic seismic hazard assessment in Namibia
    Kadiri, A. U.
    Sitali, M.
    Midzi, V.
    JOURNAL OF AFRICAN EARTH SCIENCES, 2023, 202
  • [34] Seismic hazard assessment for Mymensingh, Bangladesh
    Sarker, Jiban K.
    Ansary, Mehedi Ahmed
    Rahman, Md. S.
    Safiullah, A. M. M.
    ENVIRONMENTAL EARTH SCIENCES, 2010, 60 (03) : 643 - 653
  • [35] Probabilistic seismic hazard assessment of Sweden
    Joshi, Niranjan
    Lund, Bjorn
    Roberts, Roland
    NATURAL HAZARDS AND EARTH SYSTEM SCIENCES, 2024, 24 (11) : 4199 - 4223
  • [36] The GSHAP Global Seismic Hazard Map
    Giardini, D
    Grünthal, G
    Shedlock, KM
    Zhang, PZ
    ANNALI DI GEOFISICA, 1999, 42 (06): : 1225 - 1230
  • [37] Seismic Hazard Assessment of the Tehran Region
    Wang, J. P.
    Taheri, Hamed
    NATURAL HAZARDS REVIEW, 2014, 15 (02) : 121 - 127
  • [38] On occurrence disaggregation of probabilistic seismic hazard
    Cito, Pasquale
    Iervolino, Iunio
    EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING & STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS, 2022, 51 (14): : 3296 - 3303
  • [39] Updated seismic hazard assessment of Tunisia
    Ksentini, Ahmed
    Romdhane, Najla Bouden
    BULLETIN OF EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING, 2014, 12 (02) : 647 - 670
  • [40] Seismic hazard for the Trans Adriatic Pipeline (TAP). Part 1: probabilistic seismic hazard analysis along the pipeline
    Slejko, D.
    Rebez, A.
    Santulin, M.
    Garcia-Pelaez, J.
    Sandron, D.
    Tamaro, A.
    Civile, D.
    Volpi, V.
    Caputo, R.
    Ceramicola, S.
    Chatzipetros, A.
    Daja, S.
    Fabris, P.
    Geletti, R.
    Karvelis, P.
    Moratto, L.
    Papazachos, C.
    Pavlides, S.
    Rapti, D.
    Rossi, G.
    Sarao, A.
    Sboras, S.
    Vuan, A.
    Zecchin, M.
    Zgur, F.
    Zuliani, D.
    BULLETIN OF EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING, 2021, 19 (09) : 3349 - 3388