Search USGS⌕ Search

USGS · 70193109

Ground motion attenuation during M 7.1 Darfield and M 6.2 Christchurch, New Zealand, earthquakes and performance of global predictive models

Abstract

The M 7.1 Darfield earthquake occurred 40 km west of Christchurch (New Zealand) on 4 September 2010. Six months after, the city was struck again with an M 6.2 event on 22 February local time (21 February UTC). These events resulted in significant damage to infrastructure in the city and its suburbs. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the performance of global predictive models (GMPEs) using the strong motion data obtained from these two events to improve future seismic hazard assessment and building code provisions for the Canterbury region. The Canterbury region is located on the boundary between the Pacific and Australian plates; its surface expression is the active right lateral Alpine fault (Berryman et al. 1993). Beneath the North Island and the north South Island, the Pacific plate subducts obliquely under the Australian plate, while at the southwestern part of the South Island, a reverse process takes place. Although New Zealand has experienced several major earthquakes in the past as a result of its complex seismotectonic environment ( e.g. , M 7.1 1888 North Canterbury, M 7.0 1929 Arthur's Pass, and M 6.2 1995 Cass), there was no evidence of prior seismic activity in Christchurch and its surroundings before the September event. The Darfield and Christchurch earthquakes occurred along the previously unmapped Greendale fault in the Canterbury basin, which is covered by Quaternary alluvial deposits (Forsyth et al. 2008). In Figure 1, site conditions of the Canterbury epicentral area are depicted on a V S 30 map. This map was determined on the basis of topographic slope calculated from a 1-km grid using the method of Allen and Wald (2007). Also shown are the locations of strong motion stations. The Darfield event was generated as a result of a complex rupture mechanism; the recordings and geodetic data reveal that earthquake consists of three sub-events (Barnhart et al. 201 1 , page 815 of this issue). The first event was due to rupturing of a blind reverse fault with M 6.2, followed by a second event (M 6.9), releasing the largest portion of the energy on the right-lateral Greendale fault. The third sub-event (M 5.7) is due to a reverse fault with a right-lateral component (Holden et al. 2011). The Christchurch earthquake occurred on an oblique thrust fault. The comparison of spectral acceleration values at stations near Christchurch reveals that the second event produced much larger amplitudes of shaking than the Darfield event due to its proximity to the epicenter. Both events resulted in noticeably large amplitudes of the vertical motion, often exceeding horizontal motion in the near-fault area. The vertical motions, showing asymmetric acceleration traces and pulses, reached 1.26 g during the Darfield earthquake and 2.2 g during the Christchurch event. These events were recorded by more than 100 strong motion stations operated by the Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences (http://www.geonet.org.nz/). Using the processed data from these stations, peak ground acceleration (PGA) and 5%-damped spectral acceleration values at 0.3, 1, and 3 s are used for performance evaluation of the global ground motion predictive equations (GMPEs). The selected GMPEs are the Next Generation Attenuation (NGA) models of Abrahamson and Silva (2008), Boore and Atkinson (2008), Campbell and Bozorgnia (2008), and Chiou and Youngs (2008). The Graizer and Kalkan (2007, 2009) model, which is based on the NGA project database, is also included. These GMPEs are abbreviated respectively as AS08, BA08, CB08, CY08, and GK07. Because they have been used widely for seismic hazard analysis for crustal earthquakes, their performance assessment becomes a critical issue especially for immediate response and recovery planning after major events. The occurrence of aftershocks similar to the Christchurch event will most probably control seismic hazard in the broader area, as confirmed by the recent M 6.0 event on June 13, 2011.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: -45° to -42° latitude; 170.5° to 173.5° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Margaret Segou, Erol Kalkan. 2011-11-01. Ground motion attenuation during M 7.1 Darfield and M 6.2 Christchurch, New Zealand, earthquakes and performance of global predictive models. https://doi.org/10.1785/gssrl.82.6.866

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Amploc: A complete Python workflow for amplitude-based locations

Amplitude‐based locations are well suited for characterizing long‐duration seismic sources that may migrate with time, such as debris flows, avalanches, rockfall, and volcanic tremor. Although amplitude‐based location methods have existed for decades, their adoption in real‐time monitoring systems remains limited. We present a complete Python‐based workflow that includes station corrections, amplitude‐based location algorithms, and interactive review tools that are appropriate for real‐time use. The algorithms themselves are not new; however, Amploc integrates several previously published methods into a unified operational framework. The workflow also introduces a browser‐based graphical interface that allows users to review real‐time location results using formats familiar to many observatories. By integrating calibration, location algorithms, and visualization tools, Amploc lowers the barrier to operational use of amplitude‐based locations and improves characterization of phenomena that inform hazard assessments such as long‐period earthquakes, volcanic tremor, and debris flows.

British Columbia, Oregon, Washington↗

Global seasonal microseism intensity and hemispheric asymmetry

Earth’s microseism wavefield dominates seismic background levels at periods between approximately 4 and 20 s, and reflects periodic and secular variations in ocean swell energy. Ocean wave energy couples to the seismic wavefield via distinct primary microseism and secondary microseism (PM and SM) source mechanisms, which are excited by basal swell tractions and seafloor pressure variations due to crossing seas, respectively. This study examines annual amplitude variations for the globally dominant PM (14–20 s) and SM (4–10 s) period bands. Annual harmonic variations are represented by four‐term Fourier series fits to vertical‐component seasonally smoothed acceleration time series from 73 stations in the Global Seismographic and GEOSCOPE networks with over 20 yr of recording and at least 75% data completeness. These annual periodic functions fit between 14%–95% (PM) and 22%–97% (SM) of signal variance. Station annual peak‐to‐peak variations range between 1.2–14.3 dB (PM) and 1.5–20.6 dB (SM). An asymmetry in microseism features exists between the Northern (NH) and Southern (SH) Hemispheres. High‐latitude NH stations show highly correlated PM and SM annual amplitude variations. This character dominates the wider extratropical NH but diminishes at tropical latitudes, and widespread relative PM–SM decorrelation is observed in the SH. These hemispheric characteristics reflect systematic differences in both extratropical storm activity and ocean wave state. Greater annual variation and seasonal predictability in the NH reflect the influence of the large continental landmasses that enhance both storm intensity seasonality and SM‐generating coastal wave reflection. Notable clusters of low PM–SM correlation stations are also observed in continental Antarctica due to seasonal sea ice influences, and in East Asia, reflecting unusual PM and SM source responses to South Asian monsoonal and tropical cyclone ocean wave influences.

Seismological Research Letters↗

Digitizer Suite: The Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory Digitizer Testing Suite

Laboratory testing of digitizers and seismometers helps ensure that prior to deployment the instrumentation can produce high quality data and is operating within specifications. In this work we detail the software package called: the Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory (ASL) Digitizer Test Suite. This Java software package provides several algorithms to verify various performance parameters of digitizers commonly used for recording analog seismic instruments. The goal of these tests is not to be exhaustive, but to identify common failures that could compromise the integrity of seismic data being recorded on the digitizer. For example, Sandia National Laboratories (e.g., Slad and Merchant, 2018) routinely do comprehensive testing of digitizers for various monitoring missions. While these tests reports are valuable for comprehensively characterizing a recording system, it would be resource intensive to conduct such tests on every seismic recorder used in a network. We focus on tests that include ways to estimate the sensitivity, timing, self-noise, and clip-level of the digitizer, as well as the fidelity of the signal being recorded. The software is publicly available and provides a way for the community to verify the integrity of a digitizer using a minimum amount of outside equipment.

Seismological Research Letters↗