An evaluation of the applicability of current ground-motion models to the South and Central American subduction zones

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America

Volumn 102, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 143-168

  Arango, M C ^a   Strasser, F O ^b,g   Bommer, J J ^a   Cepeda, J M ^c   Boroschek, R ^d   Hernandez, D A ^e   Tavera, H ^f  

^a IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b Western Cape Regional Office   (South Africa)

^c NORWEGIAN GEOTECHNICAL INSTITUTE   (Norway)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CHILE   (Chile)

^e Dirección General Del Observatorio Ambiental DGOA Ministerio de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales   (El Salvador)

^f INSTITUTO GEOFÍSICO DEL PERÚ   (Peru)

^g ARUP   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

GROUND-MOTION; GROUND-MOTION MODELS; GROUND-MOTION PREDICTION EQUATIONS; LOCAL DATA; LOGIC TREE; MAXIMUM-LIKELIHOOD APPROACH; PREDICTIVE EQUATIONS; QUALITY CRITERIA; RESIDUAL DISTRIBUTION; SEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSIS; SEISMIC HAZARDS; STRONG-MOTION; SUBDUCTION ZONES;

METADATA;

IGNITION;

EARTHQUAKE MECHANISM; EARTHQUAKE PREDICTION; EARTHQUAKE RECURRENCE; GROUND MOTION; MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD ANALYSIS; MODEL TEST; NUMERICAL MODEL; SEISMIC HAZARD; SEISMIC ZONE; SUBDUCTION ZONE; TECTONIC SETTING;

CENTRAL AMERICA; CHILE; PERU;

EID: 84857205289     PISSN: 00371106     EISSN: 19433573     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1785/0120110078     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Akkar, S., and Z. Çaǧnan (2010). A local ground-motion predictive model for Turkey, and its comparison with other regional and global ground-motion models, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 100, 2978-2995.
2. Al Atik, L., N. Abrahamson, J. J. Bommer, F. Scherbaum, F. Cotton, and N. Kuehn (2010). The variability of ground-motion prediction models and its components, Seismol. Res. Lett. 81, 794-801.
3. Alfaro, C. S., A. S. Kiremidjian, and R. A. White (1990). Seismic zoning and ground motion parameters for El Salvador, Report No. 93. The John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California.
4. Arango, M. C., F. O. Strasser, J. J. Bommer, R. Boroschek, and D. Comte (2011). Strong ground motions from the Peru-Chile subduction zone, J. Seismol. 15, 19-41.
5. Arango, M. C., F. O. Strasser, J. J. Bommer, D. A. Hernandez, and J. M. Cepeda (2011). A strong-motion database from the Central American subduction zone, J. Seismol. 15, 261-294.
6. Arroyo, D., D. García, M. Ordaz, M. A. Mora, and S. K. Singh (2010). Strong ground-motion relations for Mexican interplate earthquakes, J. Seismol. 14, 769-785.
7. Atkinson, G. M., and D. M. Boore (1997). Stochastic point-source modeling of ground motions in the Cascadia region, Seismol. Res. Lett. 68, 74-85.
8. Atkinson, G. M., and D. M. Boore (2003). Empirical ground-motion relations for subduction-zone earthquakes and their application to Cascadia and other regions, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 93, 1703-1729.
9. Atkinson, G. M., and D. M. Boore (2008). Erratum to empirical groundmotion relations for subduction-zone earthquakes and their application to Cascadia and other regions, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 98, 2567-2569.
10. Atkinson, G., and R. Casey (2003). A comparative study of the 2001 Nisqually, Washington and Geiyo, Japan in-slab earthquakes, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 93, 1823-1831.
11. Atkinson, G. M., and M. Macias (2009). Predicted ground motions for great interface earthquakes in the Cascadia subduction zone, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 99, 1552-1578.
12. BC Hydro (2010). PSHA for Western Canada: Volume 3-Ground Motion Models, BC Hydro Report E658, July, BC Hydro, Vancouver, Canada.
13. Beyer, K., and J. J. Bommer (2006). Relationships between median values and aleatory variabilities for different definitions of the horizontal component of motion, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 96, 377-389.
14. Bindi, D, L. Luzi, F. Pacor, G. Franceschina, and R. R. Castro (2006). Ground-motion predictions from empirical attenuation relationships versus recorded data: The case of the 1997-1998 Umbria-Marche, central Italy, strong-motion data set, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 96, 984-100.
15. Bommer, J. J. (2006). Empirical estimation of ground motion: Advances and issues, Proc. 3rd Int. Symp. on the Effects of Surface Geology on Seismic Motion, Paper No. KN8, Grenoble, France, 29 August-1 September 2006.
16. Bommer, J. J., J. Douglas, F. Scherbaum, F. Cotton, H. Bungum, and D. Fäh (2010). On the selection of ground-motion prediction equations for seismic hazard analysis, Seismol. Res. Lett. 81, 783-793.
17. Bommer, J. J., D. A. Hernández, J. A. Navarrete, and W. M. Salazar (1996). Seismic hazard assessments for El Salvador, Geofís. Int. 35, 227-244.
18. Bommer, J. J., F. Scherbaum, H. Bungum, F. Cotton, and F. Sabetta (2005). On the use of logic trees for ground-motion prediction equations in seismic hazard analysis, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 95, 377-389.
19. Bommer, J. J., P. Stafford, J. E. Alarcón, and S. Akkar (2007). The influence of magnitude range on empirical ground-motion prediction, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 97, 2152-2170.
20. Boore, D. M., W. B. Joyner, and T. E. Fumal (1993). Estimation of response spectra and peak accelerations from western North American earthquakes: An interim report, U.S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 93-509, 72 pp.
21. Boore, D. M., A. Skarlatoudis, B. Margaris, C. Papazachos, and C. Ventouzi (2009). Along-arc and back-arc attenuation, site response, and source spectrum for the intermediate-depth 8 January 2006 M 6.7 Kythera, Greece, earthquake, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 99, 2410-2434.
22. Cepeda, J. M., M. B. Benito, and E. A. Burgos (2004). Strong-motion characteristics of January and February 2001 earthquakes in El Salvador, in Rose, W. I., J. J. Bommer, D. L. López, M. J. Carr, and J. J. Major (Editors), Special Paper 375: Natural Hazards in El Salvador Geological Society of America, Boulder, Colorado, 405-421.
23. Climent, A.W., Taylor, M., Ciudad Real, W., Strauch, M., Villagran, A., Dahle, and H. Bungum (1994). Spectral strong motion attenuation in Central America, NORSAR Technical Report No. 2-17, 46 pp.
24. Contreras, V. A. (2009). Curvas de atenuación espectrales para sismos chilenos, Graduate Degree Dissertation, Civil Engineering Department, University of Chile, 215 pp. (in Spanish).
25. Cotton, F., F. Scherbaum, J. J. Bommer, and H. Bungum (2006). Criteria for selecting and adjusting ground-motion models for specific target regions: Application to central Europe and rock sites, J. Seismol. 10, 137-156.
26. Crouse, C. B. (1991). Ground-motion attenuation equations for earthquakes on the Cascadia subduction zones, Earthq. Spectra 7, 201-236.
27. Crouse, C. B., Y. K. Vyas, and B. A. Schell (1988). Ground motion from subduction-zone earthquakes, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 78, 1-25.
28. Douglas, J. (2007). On the regional dependence of earthquake response spectra, ISET J. Earthq. Technol. 44, 71-99.
29. Douglas, J., and R. Mohais (2009). Comparing predicted and observed ground motions from subduction earthquakes in the Lesser Antilles, J. Seismol. 13, 577-587.
30. Douglas, J., D. Bertil, A. Roullé, P. Dominique, and P. Jousset (2006). A preliminary investigation of strong-motion data from the French Antilles, J. Seismol. 10, 271-299.
31. Drouet, S., F. Scherbaum, F. Cotton, and A. Souriau (2007). Selection and ranking of ground motion models for seismic hazard analysis in the Pyrenees, J. Seismol. 11, 87-100.
32. García, D., and D. J. Wald (2010). Do strong ground motions in subduction zones show regional dependence? Abstract No. S51B- 1933, American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting 2010, San Francisco, California.
33. García, D., S. K. Singh, M. Herráiz, M. Ordaz, and J. F. Pacheco (2005). Inslab earthquakes of Central Mexico: Peak ground-motion parameters and response spectra, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 95, 2272-2282.
34. Gregor, N., W. Silva, I. Wong, and R. Youngs (2002). Ground motion attenuation relationships for Cascadia subduction zone megathrust earthquakes based on a stochastic finite-fault model, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 92, 1923-1932.
35. Gupta, I. D. (2010). Response spectral attenuation relations for in-slab earthquakes in Indo-Burmese subduction zone, Soil Dynam. Earthq. Eng. 30, 368-377.
36. Hintersberger, E., F. Scherbaum, and S. Hainzl (2007). Update of likelihoodbased ground-motion model selection for seismic hazard in western central Europe, Bull. Earthq. Eng. 5, 1-16.
37. Kanno, T., A. Narita, N. Morikawa, H. Fujiwara, and F. Yoshimitsu (2006). A new attenuation relation for strong ground motion in Japan based on recorded data, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 96, 879-897.
38. Lin, P., and C. Lee (2008). Ground-motion attenuation relationships for subduction-zone earthquakes in northeastern Taiwan, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 98, 220-240.
39. Macias, M., G. Atkinson, and D. Motazedian (2008). Ground motion attenuation, source and site effects for the September 26, 2003, M 8.1 Tokachi-Oki earthquake sequence, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 98, 1947-1963.
40. Martín, A. (1990). Hacia una nueva regionalización y cálculo del peligro sísmico en Chile. Civil Engineering Degree Dissertation, Department of Physical Sciences and Mathematics, University of Chile, Santiago, Chile (in Spanish).
41. McVerry, G., J. Zhao, N. Abrahamson, and P. Somerville (2006). New Zealand acceleration response spectrum attenuation relations for crustal and subduction zone earthquakes, Bull. New Zeal. Natl. Soc. Earthq. Eng. 39, 1-58.
42. Medina, M. (1998). Análisis comparativo de métodos de regresión de atenuación de aceleración máxima, Civil Engineering Degree Dissertation, Department of Physical Sciences and Mathematics, University of Chile, Santiago, Chile (in Spanish).
43. Megawati, K., and T. C. Pan (2010). Ground-motion attenuation relationship for the Sumatran megathrust earthquakes, Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dynam. 39, 827-845.
44. Megawati, K, T. C. Pan, and K. Koketsu (2005). Response spectral attenuation relationships for Sumatran-subduction earthquakes and the seismic hazard implications to Singapore and Kuala Lumpur, Soil Dynam. Earthq. Eng. 25,11-25.
45. National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP; 1997). Recommended provisions for seismic regulations for new buildings and other structures, FEMA Report 303, U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C., 366 pp.
46. Ruiz, S, and G. Saragoni (2005). Attenuation equations for subduction-zone earthquakes in Chile considering two seismogenic mechanisms and site effects, Paper No. A01-15, Proc., IX Jornadas Chilenas de Sismología e Ingeniería Antisísmica, Concepción, Chile, 16-19 November 2005 (in Spanish).
47. Saragoni, G. R., M. Astroza, and S. Ruiz (2004). Comparative study of subduction earthquake ground motion of north, central and south America, Paper No. 104, Proc. 13th World Conf. on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, Canada, 1-6 August 2004.
48. Scherbaum, F., F. Cotton, and P. Smit (2004). On the use of response spectral- reference data for the selection and ranking of ground-motion models for seismic-hazard analysis in regions of moderate seismicity: The case of rock motion, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 94, 2164-2185.
49. Schmidt, V., A. Dahle, and H. Bungum (1997). Costa Rican spectral strong motion attenuation, Technical Rept. NORSAR, Norway, 1997, Reduction of Natural Disasters in Central America Earthquake Preparedness and Hazard Mitigation Phase II: 1996-2000, Part 2, 45 pp.
50. Singh, S. K., A. Iglesias, D. García, J. F. Pacheco, and M. Ordaz (2007).Q of Lg waves in the Central Mexican volcanic belt, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 97, 1259-1266.
51. Stafford, P. J., F. O. Strasser, and J. J. Bommer (2008). An evaluation of the applicability of the NGA models to ground-motion prediction in the Euro-Mediterranean region, Bull. Earthq. Eng. 6, 149-177.
52. Strasser, F. O., M. C. Arango, and J. J. Bommer (2010). Scaling of the source dimensions of interface and intraslab subduction-zone earthquakes with moment magnitude, Seismol. Res. Lett. 81, 941-950.
53. Takahashi, T., A. Asano, T. Saiki, H. Okada, K. Irikura, J. X. Zhao, J. Zhang, H. K. Thio, P. G. Somerville, Y. Fukushima, and Y. Fukushima (2004). Attenuation models for response spectra derived from Japanese strong-motion records accounting for tectonic source types, Paper No. 1271, Proc. 13th World Conf. on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, Canada, 1-6 August 2004.
54. Youngs, R. R., S. J. Chiou, W. J. Silva, and J. R. Humphrey (1997). Strong ground motion attenuation relationships for subduction zone earthquakes, Seismol. Res. Lett. 68, 58-77.
55. Zhao, J. X., J. Zhang, A. Asano, Y. Ohno, T. Oouchi, T. Takahashi, H. Ogawa, K. Irikura, H. K. Thio, P. G. Somerville, and Y. Fukushima (2006). Attenuation relations of strong ground motion in Japan using site classification based on predominant period, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 96, 898-913.