Comparison of NGA-Sub Ground-Motion Models

Ground-motion models (GMMs) for subduction earthquakes recently developed as part of the NGA-Subduction (NGA-Sub) project are compared in this report. The three models presented in this comparison report are documented in their respective PEER reports. Two of the models are developed for a global version and as well regionalized models. The third model is developed based on earthquakes contain in the NGA-Sub dataset only from Japan and as such is applicable for Japan. As part of the comparisons presented in this report, deterministic calculations are provided for the global and regional cases amongst the models. The digital values and additional plots from these deterministic comparisons are provided as part of the electronic supplement for this report. In addition, ground-motion estimates are provided for currently published subduction GMMs. Two example probabilistic seismic hazard analysis calculations are also presented for two sites located in the Pacific Northwest Region in the state of Washington. Based on the limited comparisons presented in this report, a general understanding of these new GMMs can be appreciated with the expectation that the implementation for a specific seismic hazard study should incorporate similar and additional comparisons and sensitivity studies similar to the ones presented in this report.

[1]  S. Midorikawa,et al.  Development of NGA-Sub Ground-Motion Model of 5%-Damped Pseudo-Spectral Acceleration Based on Database for Subduction Earthquakes in Japan , 2020, PEER Reports.

[2]  K. Campbell.  Proposed methodology for estimating the magnitude at which subduction megathrust ground motions and source dimensions exhibit a break in magnitude scaling: Example for 79 global subduction zones , 2020 .

[3]  E. Field,et al.  The 2018 update of the US National Seismic Hazard Model: Overview of model and implications , 2020 .

[4]  N. Abrahamson,et al.  Central and Eastern North America Ground-Motion Characterization (NGA-East) , 2018 .

[5]  David A. Rhoades,et al.  Ground‐Motion Prediction Equations for Subduction Slab Earthquakes in Japan Using Site Class and Simple Geometric Attenuation Functions , 2016 .

[6]  Nicholas Gregor,et al.  BC Hydro Ground Motion Prediction Equations for Subduction Earthquakes , 2016 .

[7]  Marios Panagiotou,et al.  Seismic Response of a Hybrid Fiber-Reinforced Concrete Bridge Column Detailed for Accelerated Bridge Construction , 2014 .

[8]  Robert R. Youngs,et al.  Update of the Chiou and Youngs NGA Model for the Average Horizontal Component of Peak Ground Motion and Response Spectra , 2014 .

[9]  Linda Al Atik,et al.  Epistemic Uncertainty for NGA-West2 Models: , 2014 .

[10]  Norman A. Abrahamson,et al.  Summary of the ASK14 Ground Motion Relation for Active Crustal Regions , 2014 .

[11]  Jonathan P. Stewart,et al.  Comparison of NGA-West2 GMPEs , 2014 .

[12]  I. M. Idriss.  An NGA-West2 Empirical Model for Estimating the Horizontal Spectral Values Generated by Shallow Crustal Earthquakes , 2014 .

[13]  Jonathan P. Stewart,et al.  NGA-West2 Equations for Predicting PGA, PGV, and 5% Damped PSA for Shallow Crustal Earthquakes , 2014 .

[14]  K. Campbell,et al.  NGA-West2 Ground Motion Model for the Average Horizontal Components of PGA, PGV, and 5% Damped Linear Acceleration Response Spectra , 2014 .

[15]  Gail M. Atkinson,et al.  Predicted Ground Motions for Great Interface Earthquakes in the Cascadia Subduction Zone , 2009 .

[16]  H. Thio,et al.  Attenuation Relations of Strong Ground Motion in Japan Using Site Classification Based on Predominant Period , 2006 .

[17]  Gail M. Atkinson,et al.  Empirical Ground-Motion Relations for Subduction-Zone Earthquakes and Their Application to Cascadia and Other Regions , 2003 .

[18]  The Basics of Seismic Risk Analysis , 1989 .

[19]  A. Frankel,et al.  2018 report on incorporating sedimentary basin response into the design of tall buildings in Seattle, Washington , 2018 .

[20]  Michelle Terese Bensi,et al.  A Bayesian Network Methodology for Infrastructure Seismic Risk Assessment and Decision Support , 2010 .

[21]  Robert E. Kayen,et al.  Reinvestigation of Liquefaction and Nonliquefaction Case Histories from the 1976 Tangshan Earthquake , 2009 .

[22]  Pirooz Kashighandi,et al.  Demand fragility surfaces for bridges in liquefied laterally spreading ground , 2009 .

[23]  C. Kircher,et al.  Seismic Performance Objectives for Tall Buildings A Report for the Tall Buildings Initiatve , 2008 .

[24]  Mark D. Myers.  DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey , 2006 .