2009
DOI: 10.1029/2008gl036832
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

ShakeOut‐D: Ground motion estimates using an ensemble of large earthquakes on the southern San Andreas fault with spontaneous rupture propagation

Abstract: We simulate ground motion in southern California from an ensemble of 7 spontaneous rupture models of large (Mw7.8) northwest‐propagating earthquakes on the southern San Andreas fault (ShakeOut‐D). Compared to long‐period spectral accelerations from the Next Generation Attenuation (NGA) empirical relations, ShakeOut‐D predicts similar average rock‐site values (i.e., within roughly their epistemic uncertainty), but significantly larger values in Los Angeles and Ventura basins due to wave‐guide focusing effects. … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
78
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 114 publications
(82 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
4
78
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The dynamic rupture simulations are carried out with the 4th order staggered-grid 3D-FD code of Olsen et al (2006Olsen et al ( , 2008Olsen et al ( , and 2009), which solves the velocity-stress wave equation explicitly. The code uses the highly accurate staggered-grid split node (SGSN) fault representation method for dynamic rupture simulations developed by Dalguer and Day (2007).…”
Section: Stochastic Dynamic Rupture Modelsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The dynamic rupture simulations are carried out with the 4th order staggered-grid 3D-FD code of Olsen et al (2006Olsen et al ( , 2008Olsen et al ( , and 2009), which solves the velocity-stress wave equation explicitly. The code uses the highly accurate staggered-grid split node (SGSN) fault representation method for dynamic rupture simulations developed by Dalguer and Day (2007).…”
Section: Stochastic Dynamic Rupture Modelsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The predictions by the NGA relations are far lower [ Figure 10c]. The large red blob in the ShakeOut motions, attributed to a wave-guide through Whittier-Narrows by [66], cannot be found in the NGA predictions. Rupture directivity and wave-guide focusing, that clearly may have a strong influence on ground motions, are not explicitly accounted for in the NGA relations.…”
Section: Ground Motion Simulationmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…While dynamic source models may better characterize earthquake source physics, the theory is more complex and less mature when compared with kinematic source modeling (e.g., the state of stress in the earth and the fault friction law are not known; they are not as well-constrained as kinematic source parameters such as slip). Simulating ground motion reliably by combining dynamic rupture models with seismic-wave propagation (e.g., Graves et al, 2008;Olsen et al, 2008;Olsen et al, 2009) would be hard to achieve near real-time using the present state of knowledge and computational tools. Because of this, kinematic source models are currently more suitable for application to the rapid response estimation problem.…”
Section: Source Model Generationmentioning
confidence: 99%