Geology topics

Sanaz Rezaeian

Publications and source records attributed to Sanaz Rezaeian.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

USGS2024

Developing international standards and guidelines for disseminating and validating simulated ground motions

We are leading an effort to develop international standards and guidelines for curating, disseminating, and validating simulated ground-motion data. This effort is organized as a working group within the Consortium of Organizations for Strong Motion Observation Systems (COSMOS). In 2022 we held online workshops on 7 and 8 June and 20 October. The first workshop focused on curating and disseminating simulated ground-motion data. The second workshop focused on validating simulated ground-motions for engineering applications. About 100 people participated in each of the workshops with strong representation from North America, Europe, and western Asia. In the coming year, we intend to form a technical committee to draft the international guidelines and standards while continuing to engage stakeholders from across the globe through online and in-person meetings. The key points from the workshops include: (1) Numerous groups are generating simulated earthquake ground motions and making them openly available; however there is very little coordination among groups to provide consistent interfaces for searching and retrieving data; (2) Standardizing interfaces for metadata and data access should consider agile approaches that can adapt to changing capabilities and user needs while building upon existing efforts; (3) A distributed architecture is preferred by most participants to allow institutions to host and manage their own data while broadcasting their holdings to a combined catalog; (4) Validation of ground-motion simulations applies to the entire workflow for simulating earthquake ground-motions, including the rupture model, seismic velocity model, and seismic wave propagation software; (5) Metrics to evaluate the validation are application dependent; more research is needed to tie structural response characteristics to ground-motion characteristics; and (6) Validation results should provide a clear, transparent, and quantitative assessment of the simulated ground motions.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2023

The 2023 US 50-State National Seismic Hazard Model: Overview and implications

The US National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) was updated in 2023 for all 50 states using new science on seismicity, fault ruptures, ground motions, and probabilistic techniques to produce a standard of practice for public policy and other engineering applications (defined for return periods greater than ∼475 or less than ∼10,000 years). Changes in 2023 time-independent seismic hazard (both increases and decreases compared to previous NSHMs) are substantial because the new model considers more data and updated earthquake rupture forecasts and ground-motion components. In developing the 2023 model, we tried to apply best available or applicable science based on advice of co-authors, more than 50 reviewers, and hundreds of hazard scientists and end-users, who attended public workshops and provided technical inputs. The hazard assessment incorporates new catalogs, declustering algorithms, gridded seismicity models, magnitude-scaling equations, fault-based structural and deformation models, multi-fault earthquake rupture forecast models, semi-empirical and simulation-based ground-motion models, and site amplification models conditioned on shear-wave velocities of the upper 30 m of soil and deeper sedimentary basin structures. Seismic hazard calculations yield hazard curves at hundreds of thousands of sites, ground-motion maps, uniform-hazard response spectra, and disaggregations developed for pseudo-spectral accelerations at 21 oscillator periods and two peak parameters, Modified Mercalli Intensity, and 8 site classes required by building codes and other public policy applications. Tests show the new model is consistent with past ShakeMap intensity observations. Sensitivity and uncertainty assessments ensure resulting ground motions are compatible with known hazard information and highlight the range and causes of variability in ground motions. We produce several impact products including building seismic design criteria, intensity maps, planning scenarios, and engineering risk assessments showing the potential physical and social impacts. These applications provide a basis for assessing, planning, and mitigating the effects of future earthquakes.

Earthquake Spectra↗

USGS2023

Findings from a decade of ground motion simulation validation research and a path forward

Simulated ground motions have the potential to advance seismic hazard assessments and structural response analyses, particularly for conditions with limited recorded ground motions such as large magnitude earthquakes at short source-to-site distances. However, rigorous validation of simulated ground motions is needed for hazard analysts, practicing engineers, or regulatory bodies to be confident in their use. A decade ago, validation exercises were mainly limited to comparisons of simulated-to-observed waveforms and median values of spectral accelerations for selected earthquakes. The Southern California Earthquake Center (SCEC) Ground Motion Simulation Validation (GMSV) group was formed to increase coordination between simulation modelers and research engineers with the aim of devising and applying more effective methods for simulation validation. Here, we summarize what has been learned in over a decade of GMSV activities, principally reflecting the views of the SCEC research community but also extending our findings and suggestions for a path forward to broader United States and worldwide simulation validation efforts. We categorize different validation methods according to their approach and the metrics considered. Two general approaches are to compare validation metrics from simulations to those from historical records or to those from semi-empirical models. Validation metrics are categorized into ground motion characteristics and structural responses. We discuss example validation studies that have been impactful in the past decade and suggest future research directions. Key lessons learned are that validation is application-specific, our outreach and dissemination need improvement, and much validation-related research remains unexplored.

Earthquake Spectra↗

USGS2023

Sediment thickness map of United States Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Strata, and their influence on earthquake ground motions

With the recent successful accounting of basin depth ground-motion adjustments in seismic hazard analyses for select areas of the western United States, we move toward implementing similar adjustments in the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plains by constructing a sediment thickness model and evaluating multiple relevant site amplification models for central and eastern United States seismic hazard analyses. We digitize and combine existing sediment thickness data sets into a composite surface that delineates the base of Cretaceous sediments under the Atlantic Coastal Plain and the base of Mesozoic sediments under the Gulf Coastal Plain. Amplification models dependent on sediment thickness, site natural period, and source-to-site path length are compared with data sets of observed ground motions to evaluate the ability of the new models to improve ground motion estimates. We find that the amplification models can account for observed trends in sediment-thickness and period-dependent residuals, but some tuning is required. For example, the model of Chapman and Guo requires a reference V S 30 , the time-averaged shear-wave velocity within 30 m of the Earth’s surface, for non-Coastal Plain sites, which we estimate to be between about 1 and 2 km/s. Along with our sediment thickness model, we estimate a velocity profile for application to the Harmon et al. site-natural-period-based model in order to best match the Chapman and Guo period dependence for a broad range of sediment thicknesses. The Next Generation of Attenuation models for the eastern United States Gulf Coast path-based adjustment models can also account for seismic attenuation in the Coastal Plain sediments and reduce the standard deviation of total residuals. If enacted in the U.S. Geological Survey National Seismic Hazard Model, these amplification models will reduce predicted short-period (<1 s) and increase predicted long-period (>1 s) ground motions in the Coastal Plains appreciably.

Earthquake Spectra↗

USGS2023

Stochastic simulation of earthquake ground motions for the seismic assessment of monumental masonry structures: Source-based vs site-based approaches

Earthquakes are among the most destructive natural disasters and have resulted in a massive number of fatalities and economic losses all over the world. Simulated ground motion records are valuable, particularly for regions lacking seismic stations or with a limited history of large-magnitude earthquakes. Notably, a significant percentage of monumental masonry buildings are located in regions with limited access to real records; hence, simulated records play a paramount role in their seismic protection. However, few studies have investigated the structural response of heritage buildings via response history analyses to assess the performance of simulated earthquakes against real ones. To accomplish this, this study simulates the recorded time-series of the 9th of July 1998 Faial earthquake in the Azores (M w = 6.2) at four available stations, using two different simulation approaches, that is, a source-based stochastic finite-fault method and a site-based broadband stochastic method. First, two masonry facades with sidewalls characterized by different slenderness levels are adopted to conduct this research. Moreover, the proposed approach is also applied to an existing monumental structure, that is, São Francisco Church, located at Horta, which was affected by damage during the Faial earthquake. Results demonstrate that both simulation approaches provide similar results in terms of structural response prediction. The proposed framework also demonstrates that a small mismatch in terms of predicted damage patterns can result in a significant relative error in terms of displacement predictions.

Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics↗

USGS2023

Ground motion and seismic hazard in the central and eastern United States

This report describes work carried out under the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Interagency Agreement to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) “Research to Support NRC’s Seismic Hazard Analyses” for Task 3, “Seismic Hazard and Ground Motion Models.” The focus of this work has been on evaluation of the Next Generation Attenuation (NGA)-East groundmotion models (GMMs) with available ground-motion data and evaluation of alternative methods for characterizing epistemic uncertainty for probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA). When the Interagency Agreement commenced, the USGS’s National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) was being updated, and a significant part of the update for the 2018 NSHM included the introduction of new GMMs for the central and eastern United States (CEUS) (Petersen et al., 2020). In addition to the implementation of the then-recently developed NGA-East GMMs (Goulet et al., 2018), the ground-motion characterization for the CEUS in the 2018 NSHM also included a logic-tree branch with weights applied to the updated “adjusted seed” models that were developed as part of the NGA-East process and in updates by the GMM developers. The Statement of Work for Task 3 of the NRC Interagency Agreement to the USGS included the following parts: (1) Describe technically acceptable approaches in combining GMMs for use in PSHA calculations; (2) Evaluate the effect of using different sets of GMMs (NGA-East SSHAC versus NGA-East USGS) on PSHA calculations; (3) Describe the results of the GMM testing against recorded data, and provide a recommendation on the GMMs application for use in the PSHA; (4) Evaluate the impacts of recently updated individual GMMs on the published NGAEast models; and (5) Submit a final Technical Letter Report documenting results of this task. We present results from this work in two sections: (Chapter 1) Updated Central and Eastern United States Ground Motions and Ground-Motion Analyses; and (Chapter 2) Approaches to Combining Ground-Motion Models for Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis in the Central and Eastern United States.

central and eastern United States↗

USGS2022

U.S. Geological Survey coastal plain amplification virtual workshop

In early October of 2020, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) held a virtual workshop to discuss Gulf and Atlantic Coastal Plains site-response models. Earthquake researchers came together to assess (1) research related to proposed Coastal Plains amplification models and (2) USGS plans for implementing these models. Presentations spanned a broad range of topics from Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plains geophysical properties including seismic velocity and attenuation, to ground motion amplification models and their impacts on seismic hazard. Interspersed with these presentations were discussions regarding the definition and extent of the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plains, potential complexities of wave propagation in the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plains, and problems that need to be overcome to implement various proposed site-response models. Based on feedback from this workshop, the USGS working group on Coastal Plain Amplification is considering applying published models that depend on sediment thickness. The working group is also exploring potential application of models that depend on the length of path traversed across the Coastal Plain, including the Gulf Coastal Plain ground-motion model adjustments from the Next Generation Attenuation Relationships for the Eastern United States.

Gulf and Atlantic Coast Plains↗

USGS2022

Evolution of design ground motions in California: NEHRP 2009 to 2020

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) is used in construction codes, such as the National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP) Provisions, to develop ground motions for structural and geotechnical design. When the NSHM is updated (e.g. changes to its earthquake rupture forecast or ground motion models), or the manner in which it is implemented in construction codes changes, design ground motion values can increase or decrease at a given location. This study presents an analysis of 21 sites in California to characterize how design ground motion values (SS, S1, SMS, SM1) have changed from the 2009 to 2015 to 2020 NEHRP Provisions. Four sites are presented in greater detail: two in Southern California and two in Northern California. The results show that significant changes in design ground motion values between NEHRP releases are explained by major changes in the NSHM science (e.g., inclusion of basin effects) and its use (e.g., for a broader range of site classes), but in ways that are difficult to ascertain beforehand. It is therefore likely that design ground motion values may continue to evolve between NSHM and construction code updates as the earthquake science and engineering field's understanding continues to advance.

California↗

USGS2022

Applicability of the NGA-West2 damping scaling factors to ground motions recorded in France

This paper presents a summary of the applicability of the NGA-West2 damping scaling factors to ground motions recorded in France. In developing ground motion models for response spectra, generally, the damping of the oscillator is set to a reference value of five percent of the critical damping. Damping scaling factors (DSF) are used to translate the predictions of 5%-damped ground motion models to any damping ratio of interest. Rezaeian et al. (2014) developed a DSF model based on the NGA-West2 database, capturing the effect of oscillator period, event magnitude, and source-to-site distance. This paper investigates the applicability of that model for the horizontal component of ground motions recorded in France, using Traversa et al. (2020) database for the analysis.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2022

COSMOS Ground-Motion Simulation Working Group workshops #1 and #2

These 2 workshops were held in response to interest generated from sessions on the use of simulated earthquake ground motions at the 2020 and 2021 Consortium of Organizations for Strong Motion Observation Systems (COSMOS) Technical Sessions. The discussions at the Technical Sessions highlighted desires to promote the use of simulated earthquake ground motions for engineering applications and the need to coordinate efforts to validate and disseminate the data. Our first workshop focused on curating and disseminating simulated earthquake ground-motion data. Our second workshop focused on validating simulated ground-motions for engineering applications. Both workshops included a few invited presentations from providers (ground-motion simulators) and engineering user perspectives followed by open discussions. About 100 people participated in each of the workshops.

Report↗

USGS2022

Sediment thickness and ground motion site amplification along the United States Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plains

Past and present research on earthquake ground motions along the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plains and Mississippi Embayment show significant period-dependent site response that is not presently accounted for in ground motion models. These deviations are strongly correlated with the thickness of Mesozoic and younger syn- and post-rift sediments. With the recent incorporation of deep basin depth measurements in the U.S. Geological Survey National Seismic Hazard Model for select regions in the western United States, we move toward a similar analysis in the greater Coastal Plains region by constructing a sediment thickness model and considering three new site response models conditioned on sediment thickness. As of the preparation of this conference paper, we have performed a preliminary evaluation of the Chapman and Guo model and find that the predicted ratio between pseudo-spectral accelerations for the Coastal Plains relative to the continental interior are broadly consistent with our independent dataset.

Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plains↗

USGS2021

2021 U.S. National Seismic Hazard Model for the State of Hawaii

The 2021 U.S. National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) for the State of Hawaii updates the two-decades-old former model by incorporating new data and modeling techniques to improve the underlying ground shaking forecasts of tectonic-fault, tectonic-flexure, volcanic, and caldera collapse earthquakes. Two earthquake ground shaking hazard models (public policy and research) are produced that differ in how they account for declustered catalogs. The earthquake source model is based on (1) declustered earthquake catalogs smoothed with adaptive smoothing methods, (2) earthquake rate forecasts based on three temporally varying 60-year time periods, (3) maximum magnitude models that extend to larger earthquakes than previously considered, (4) a separate Kīlauea-specific seismogenic caldera collapse model which accounts for clustered event behavior observed during the 2018 eruption, and (5) fault ruptures that consider historic seismicity, GPS-based strain rates, and a new Quaternary fault database. Two new Hawaii-specific ground motion models (GMMs) and five additional global models consistent with Hawaii shaking data are used to forecast ground shaking at 23 spectral periods and peak parameters. Site effects are modeled using western U.S. and Hawaii specific empirical equations and provide shaking forecasts for eight site classes. For most sites the new model results in similar spectral accelerations as those in the 2001 NSHM, with a few exceptions caused mostly by GMM changes. Ground motions are highest in the southern portion of the Island of Hawai‘i due to high rates of forecasted earthquakes on décollement faults. Shaking decays to the northwest where lower earthquake rates result from flexure of the tectonic plate. Large epistemic uncertainties in source characterizations and GMMs lead to an overall high uncertainty (more than a factor of 3) in ground shaking at Honolulu and Hilo. The new shaking model indicates significant chances of slight or greater damaging ground motions across most of the island chain.

Hawai'i↗

USGS2021

NGA-Subduction research program

This article summarizes the Next Generation Attenuation (NGA) Subduction (NGA-Sub) project, a major research program to develop a database and ground motion models (GMMs) for subduction regions. A comprehensive database of subduction earthquakes recorded worldwide was developed. The database includes a total of 214,020 individual records from 1,880 subduction events, which is by far the largest database of all the NGA programs. As part of the NGA-Sub program, four GMMs were developed. Three of them are global subduction GMMs with adjustment factors for up to seven worldwide regions: Alaska, Cascadia, Central America and Mexico, Japan, New Zealand, South America, and Taiwan. The fourth GMM is a new Japan-specific model. The GMMs provide median predictions, and the associated aleatory variability, of RotD50 horizontal components of peak ground acceleration, peak ground velocity, and 5%-damped pseudo-spectral acceleration (PSA) at oscillator periods ranging from 0.01 to 10 s. Three GMMs also quantified “within-model” epistemic uncertainty of the median prediction, which is important in regions with sparse ground motion data, such as Cascadia. In addition, a damping scaling model was developed to scale the predicted 5%-damped PSA of horizontal components to other damping ratios ranging from 0.5% to 30%. The NGA-Sub flatfile, which was used for the development of the NGA-Sub GMMs, and the NGA-Sub GMMs coded on various software platforms, have been posted for public use.

Earthquake Spectra↗

USGS2021

Spectral damping scaling factors for horizontal components of ground motions from subduction earthquakes using NGA-Subduction data

This article develops global models of damping scaling factors (DSFs) for subduction zone earthquakes that are functions of the damping ratio, spectral period, earthquake magnitude, and distance. The Next Generation Attenuation for subduction earthquakes (NGA-Sub) project has developed the largest uniformly processed database of recorded ground motions to date from seven subduction regions: Alaska, Cascadia, Central America and Mexico, South America, Japan, Taiwan, and New Zealand. NGA-Sub used this database to develop new ground motion models (GMMs) at a reference 5% damping ratio. We worked with the NGA-Sub project team to develop an extended database that includes pseudo-spectral accelerations (PSA) for 11 damping ratios between 0.5% and 30%. We use this database to develop parametric models of DSF for both interface and intraslab subduction earthquakes that can be used to adjust any subduction GMM from a reference 5% damping ratio to other damping ratios. The DSF is strongly influenced by the response spectral shape and the duration of motion; therefore, in addition to the damping ratio, the median DSF model uses spectral period, magnitude, and distance as surrogate predictor variables to capture the effects of the spectral shape and the duration of motion. We also develop parametric models for the standard deviation of DSF. The models presented in this article are for the RotD50 horizontal component of PSA and are compared with the models for shallow crustal earthquakes in active tectonic regions. Some noticeable differences arise from the considerably longer duration of interface records for very large magnitude events and the enriched high-frequency content of intraslab records, compared with shallow crustal earthquakes. Regional differences are discussed by comparing the proposed global models with the data from each subduction region along with recommendations on the applicability of the models.

Earthquake Spectra↗

USGS2021

The 2018 update of the US National Seismic Hazard Model: Ground motion models in the western US

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) is the scientific foundation of seismic design regulations in the United States and is regularly updated to consider the best available science and data. The 2018 update of the conterminous U.S. NSHM includes significant changes to the underlying ground motion models (GMMs), most of which are necessary to enable the new multi-period response spectra (MPRS) requirements of seismic design regulations that use hazard results for 22 spectral periods and eight site classes. This article focuses on the GMMs used in the western United States (WUS) and is a companion to a recent article on the GMMs used in the central and eastern United States (CEUS). In the WUS, for crustal and subduction earthquakes, two models used in previous versions of the NSHM are excluded to provide consistency over all considered periods and site classes. To more accurately estimate ground motions at long periods in the vicinity of Los Angeles, San Francisco, Salt Lake City, and Seattle, the 2018 NSHM incorporates deep sedimentary basin depth from local seismic velocity models. The subduction GMMs considered lack basin depth terms and are modified to include an additional scale factor to account for this. This article documents the WUS GMMs used in the 2018 NSHM update and provides detail on the changes to GMM medians, aleatory variability, epistemic uncertainty, and site-effect models. It compares each of these components with those considered in prior NSHMs and discusses their total effect on hazard.

Arizona, California, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, N↗

USGS2021

The 2018 update of the US National Seismic Hazard Model: Ground motion models in the central and eastern US

The United States Geological Survey (USGS) National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) is the scientific foundation of seismic design regulations in the United States and is regularly updated to consider the best available science and data. The 2018 update of the conterminous US NSHM includes major changes to the underlying ground motion models (GMMs). Most of the changes are motivated by the new multi-period response spectra requirements of seismic design regulations that use hazard results for 22 spectral periods and 8 site classes. In the central and eastern United States (CEUS), the 2018 NSHM incorporates 31 new GMMs for hard-rock site conditions ( V S 30 = 3000 m / s ) "> ( V S 30 = 3000 m / s ) (VS30=3000m/s) , including the Next Generation Attenuation (NGA)-East GMMs. New aleatory variability and site-effect models, both specific to the CEUS, are applied to all median hard-rock GMMs. This article documents the changes to the USGS GMM selection criteria and provides details on the new CEUS GMMs used in the 2018 NSHM update. The median GMMs, their weights, epistemic uncertainty, and aleatory variability are compared with those considered in prior NSHMs. This article further provides implementation details on the CEUS site-effect model, which allows conversion of hard-rock ground motions to other site conditions in the CEUS for the first time in NSHMs. Compared with the 2014 NSHM hard-rock ground motions, the weighted average of median GMMs increases for large magnitude events at middle to large distance range, epistemic uncertainty increases in almost all situations, but aleatory variability is not significantly different. Finally, the total effect on hazard is demonstrated for an assumed earthquake source model in the CEUS, which shows an increased ring of ground motions in the vicinity of the New Madrid seismic zone and decreased ground motions near the East Tennessee seismic zone.

Earthquake Spectra↗

USGS2021

The 2018 update of the US National Seismic Hazard Model: Where, why, and how much probabilistic ground motion maps changed

The 2018 US Geological Survey National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) incorporates new data and updated science to improve the underlying earthquake and ground motion forecasts for the conterminous United States. The NSHM considers many new data and component input models: (1) new earthquakes between 2013 and 2017 and updated earthquake magnitudes for some earlier earthquakes; (2) two updated smoothed seismicity models to forecast earthquake rates; (3) two suites of new central and eastern US (CEUS) ground motion models (GMMs) to translate ground shaking for various earthquake sizes and source-to-site distances considered in the model; (4) two CEUS GMMs for aleatory variability; (5) two CEUS site-effect models that modify ground shaking based on alternative shallow site conditions; (6) more advanced western US (WUS) lithologic and structural information to assess basin site effects for selected urban regions; and (7) a more comprehensive range of outputs (22 periods and 8 site classes) than in previous versions of the NSHMs. Each of these new datasets and models produces changes in the probabilistic ground shaking levels that are spatially and statistically analyzed. Recent earthquakes or changes to some older earthquake magnitudes and locations mostly result in probabilistic ground shaking levels that are similar to previous models, but local changes can reach up to +80% and −60% compared to the 2014 model. Newly developed CEUS models for GMMs, aleatory variability, and site effects cause overall changes up to ±64%. The addition of the WUS basin amplifications causes changes of up to +60% at longer periods for sites overlying deep soft soils. Across the conterminous United States, the hazard changes in the model are mainly caused by new GMMs in the CEUS, by sedimentary basin effects for long periods (≥1 s) in the WUS, and by seismicity changes for short (0.2 s) and long (1 s) periods for both areas.

Earthquake Spectra↗

USGS2021

A subset of CyberShake ground-motion time series for response-history analysis

This manuscript describes a subset of CyberShake numerically simulated ground motions that were selected and vetted for use in engineering response-history analyses. Ground motions were selected that have seismological properties and response spectra representative of conditions in the Los Angeles area, based on disaggregation of seismic hazard. Ground motions were selected from millions of available time series and were reviewed to confirm their suitability for response-history analysis. The processes used to select the time series, the characteristics of the resulting data, and the provided documentation are described in this article. The resulting data and documentation are available electronically.

California↗