The ShakeOut earthquake scenario: Verification of three simulation sets

被引:105
作者
Bielak, Jacobo [1 ]
Graves, Robert W. [2 ]
Olsen, Kim B. [3 ]
Taborda, Ricardo [1 ]
Ramirez-Guzman, Leonardo [1 ]
Day, Steven M. [3 ]
Ely, Geoffrey P. [4 ]
Roten, Daniel [3 ]
Jordan, Thomas H. [4 ,5 ]
Maechling, Philip J. [5 ]
Urbanic, John [6 ]
Cui, Yifeng [7 ]
Juve, Gideon [4 ]
机构
[1] Carnegie Mellon Univ, Dept Civil Engn, Computat Seismol Lab, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA
[2] URS Corp, Pasadena, CA 91101 USA
[3] San Diego State Univ, Dept Geol Sci, San Diego, CA 92182 USA
[4] Univ So Calif, Dept Earth Sci, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
[5] So Calif Earthquake Ctr, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
[6] Pittsburgh Supercomp Ctr, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA
[7] San Diego Supercomp Ctr, La Jolla, CA 92093 USA
关键词
Time series analysis; Numerical solutions; Numerical approximations and analysis; Earthquake ground motions; Seismic attenuation; Computational seismology; LOS-ANGELES BASIN; SEISMIC-WAVE PROPAGATION; SAN-FRANCISCO EARTHQUAKE; PERFECTLY MATCHED LAYER; SPECTRAL ELEMENT METHOD; PLANAR FREE-SURFACE; FINITE-DIFFERENCE; GROUND-MOTION; 3-DIMENSIONAL SIMULATION; VELOCITY MODEL;
D O I
10.1111/j.1365-246X.2009.04417.x
中图分类号
P3 [地球物理学]; P59 [地球化学];
学科分类号
0708 ; 070902 ;
摘要
P>This paper presents a verification of three simulations of the ShakeOut scenario, an M-w 7.8 earthquake on a portion of the San Andreas fault in southern California, conducted by three different groups at the Southern California Earthquake Center using the SCEC Community Velocity Model for this region. We conducted two simulations using the finite difference method, and one by the finite element method, and performed qualitative and quantitative comparisons between the corresponding results. The results are in good agreement with each other; only small differences occur both in amplitude and phase between the various synthetics at ten observation points located near and away from the fault-as far as 150 km away from the fault. Using an available goodness-of-fit criterion all the comparisons scored above 8, with most above 9.2. This score would be regarded as excellent if the measurements were between recorded and synthetic seismograms. We also report results of comparisons based on time-frequency misfit criteria. Results from these two criteria can be used for calibrating the two methods for comparing seismograms. In those cases in which noticeable discrepancies occurred between the seismograms generated by the three groups, we found that they were the product of inherent characteristics of the various numerical methods used and their implementations. In particular, we found that the major source of discrepancy lies in the difference between mesh and grid representations of the same material model. Overall, however, even the largest differences in the synthetic seismograms are small. Thus, given the complexity of the simulations used in this verification, it appears that the three schemes are consistent, reliable and sufficiently accurate and robust for use in future large-scale simulations.
引用
收藏
页码:375 / 404
页数:30
相关论文
共 92 条
  • [1] Ground-motion modeling of the 1906 San Francisco earthquake, part I: Validation using the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake
    Aagaard, Brad T.
    Brocher, Thomas M.
    Dolenc, David
    Dreger, Douglas
    Graves, Robert W.
    Harmsen, Stephen
    Hartzell, Stephen
    Larsen, Shawn
    Zoback, Mary Lou
    [J]. BULLETIN OF THE SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA, 2008, 98 (02) : 989 - 1011
  • [2] Ground-motion modeling of the 1906 San Francisco earthquake, part II:: Ground-motion estimates for the 1906 earthquake and scenario events
    Aagaard, Brad T.
    Brocher, Thomas M.
    Dolenc, David
    Dreger, Douglas
    Graves, Robert W.
    Harmsen, Stephen
    Hartzell, Stephen
    Larsen, Shawn
    McCandless, Kathleen
    Nilsson, Stefan
    Petersson, N. Anders
    Rodgers, Arthur
    Sjoegreen, Bjoern
    Zoback, Mary Lou
    [J]. BULLETIN OF THE SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA, 2008, 98 (02) : 1012 - 1046
  • [3] ADRION WR, 1982, COMPUT SURV, V14, P159, DOI 10.1145/356876.356879
  • [4] Akcelik V., 2003, SC 03, P8
  • [5] Aki K., 1980, Quantitative seismology: Theory and methods, DOI DOI 10.1515/9780691216157
  • [6] ALTERMAN Z, 1968, B SEISMOL SOC AM, V58, P367
  • [7] Anderson J G., 2004, 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, P243
  • [8] ARCHULETA RJ, 1980, B SEISMOL SOC AM, V70, P671
  • [9] ARCHULETA RJ, 1978, B SEISMOL SOC AM, V68, P541
  • [10] BALCI O, 1994, 1994 WINTER SIMULATION CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS, P215, DOI 10.1007/BF02136828