USGS Science⌕ Search

Geology topics

Christine A. Goulet

Publications and source records attributed to Christine A. Goulet.

14 recordsLinked to original sources
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↗
USGS2022

Validating predicted site response in sedimentary basins from 3D ground motion simulations

We introduce procedures to validate site response in sedimentary basins as predicted using ground motion simulations. These procedures aim to isolate contributions of site response to computed intensity measures relative to those from seismic source and path effects. In one of the validation procedures, simulated motions are analyzed in the same manner as earthquake recordings to derive non-ergodic site terms. This procedure compares the scaling with sediment isosurface depth of simulated versus empirical site terms (the latter having been derived in a separate study). A second validation procedure utilizes two sets of simulations, one that considers three-dimensional (3D) basin structure and a second that utilizes a one-dimensional (1D) representation of the crustal structure. Identical sources are used in both procedures, and after correcting for variable path effects, differences in ground motions are used to estimate site amplification in 3D basins. Such site responses are compared to those derived empirically to validate both the absolute levels and the depth scaling of site response from 3D simulations. We apply both procedures to southern California in a manner that is consistent between the simulated and empirical data (i.e. by using similar event locations and magnitudes). The results show that the 3D simulations overpredict the depth-scaling and absolute levels of site amplification in basins. However, overall patterns of site amplification with depth are similar, suggesting that future calibration may be able to remove observed biases.

Earthquake Spectra↗
USGS2021

NGA-East Ground-Motion Characterization model part I: Summary of products and model development

In this article, we present an overview of the research project NGA-East, Next Generation Attenuation for Central and Eastern North America (CENA), and summarize the key methodology and products. The project was tasked with developing a new ground motion characterization (GMC) model for CENA. The final NGA-East GMC model includes a set of 17 median ground motion models (GMMs) for peak ground acceleration and velocity (PGA, PGV) and response spectral ordinates for periods ranging from 0.01 to 10 s. The NGA-East GMMs are applicable to horizontal components of ground motions on very hard rock, for the moment magnitude range of 4.0–8.2, and distances of up to 1500 km. The aleatory standard deviations of GMMs are also provided for site-specific analysis (single-station standard deviation) and for general probabilistic seismic hazard analyses (PSHA) applications (ergodic standard deviation). In addition, adjustment factors are provided for source depth and hanging-wall effects, as well as for hazard computations at sites in the Gulf Coast Region. During the course of the project, several innovative technologies were developed and implemented to increase the transparency and repeatability of the GMC building process. This involved expanding on a set of candidate median GMMs to define and capture an appropriate range of epistemic uncertainty in ground motions. We also developed a new approach for modeling the aleatory variability that was completely independent of the median GMMs. The development made extensive use of the CENA database but also borrowed data from other parts of the world when relevant and led to an integrated suite of models. Through this repeatable process, epistemic uncertainty could be quantified more objectively than before, relying less on expert opinion. The NGA-East project went through a comprehensive Seismic Senior Hazard Analysis Committee (SSHAC) Level 3 peer review process before its release.

Earthquake Spectra↗
USGS2021

Selection of random vibration theory procedures for the NGA-East project and ground-motion modeling

Traditional ground-motion models (GMMs) are used to compute pseudo-spectral acceleration (PSA) from future earthquakes and are generally developed by regression of PSA using a physics-based functional form. PSA is a relatively simple metric that correlates well with the response of several engineering systems and is a metric commonly used in engineering evaluations; however, characteristics of the PSA calculation make application of scaling factors dependent on the frequency content of the input motion, complicating the development and adaptability of GMMs. By comparison, Fourier amplitude spectrum (FAS) represents ground-motion amplitudes that are completely independent from the amplitudes at other frequencies, making them an attractive alternative for GMM development. Random vibration theory (RVT) predicts the peak response of motion in the time domain based on the FAS and a duration, and thus can be used to relate FAS to PSA. Using RVT to compute the expected peak response in the time domain for given FAS therefore presents a significant advantage that is gaining traction in the GMM field. This article provides recommended RVT procedures relevant to GMM development, which were developed for the Next Generation Attenuation (NGA)-East project. In addition, an orientation-independent FAS metric—called the effective amplitude spectrum (EAS)—is developed for use in conjunction with RVT to preserve the mean power of the corresponding two horizontal components considered in traditional PSA-based modeling (i.e., RotD50). The EAS uses a standardized smoothing approach to provide a practical representation of the FAS for ground-motion modeling, while minimizing the impact on the four RVT properties ( zeroth moment, m0 ; bandwidth parameter, δ ; frequency of zero crossings, fz ; and frequency of extrema, fe ). Although the recommendations were originally developed for NGA-East, they and the methodology they are based on can be adapted to become portable to other GMM and engineering problems requiring the computation of PSA from FAS.

Earthquake Spectra↗
USGS2021

NGA-East ground-motion characterization model Part II: Implementation and hazard implications

As a companion article to Goulet et al., we describe implementation of the NGA-East ground motion characterization (GMC) model in probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) for sites in the Central and Eastern United States (CEUS). We present extensions to the EPRI/DOE/NRC seismic source characterization (SSC) model for the CEUS needed for full implementation of NGA-East. Comparisons are presented to the EPRI GMC, the currently accepted model by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for hazard assessment at nuclear facilities. Comparisons are presented both in terms of GMC model components and in the resulting seismic hazard assessments for a range of site locations in the CEUS. Illustrations of the effect of various components of the NGA-East GMC on seismic hazard results are also presented. Finally, we present recommendations for application of the NGA-East GMC in PSHA.

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↗
USGS2021

Toward physics-based nonergodic PSHA: A prototype fully-deterministic seismic hazard model for southern California

We present a nonergodic framework for probabilistic seismic‐hazard analysis (PSHA) that is constructed entirely of deterministic, physical models. The use of deterministic ground‐motion simulations in PSHA calculations is not new (e.g., CyberShake), but prior studies relied on kinematic rupture generators to extend empirical earthquake rupture forecasts. Fully dynamic models, which simulate rupture nucleation and propagation of static and dynamic stresses, are still computationally intractable for the large simulation domains and many seismic cycles required to perform PSHA. Instead, we employ the Rate‐State earthquake simulator (RSQSim) to efficiently simulate hundreds of thousands of years of M ≥ 6.5 earthquake sequences on the California fault system. RSQSim produces full slip‐time histories for each rupture, which, unlike kinematic models, emerge from frictional properties, fault geometry, and stress transfer; all intrinsic variability is deterministic. We use these slip‐time histories directly as input to a 3D wave‐propagation code within the CyberShake platform to obtain simulated F max = 0.5 Hz ground motions. The resulting 3 s spectral acceleration ground motions closely match empirical ground‐motion model (GMM) estimates of median and variability of shaking. When computed over a range of sources and sites, the variability is similar to that of ergodic GMMs. Variability is reduced for individual pairs of sources and sites that repeatedly sample a single path, which is expected for a nonergodic model. This results in increased exceedance probabilities for certain characteristic ground motions for a source–site pair, while decreasing probabilities at the extreme tails of the ergodic GMM predictions. We present these comparisons and preliminary fully deterministic physics‐based RSQSim–CyberShake hazard curves, as well as a new technique for estimating within‐ and between‐event variability through simulation.

California↗
USGS2020

Evaluation of seismic hazard models with fragile geologic features

We provide an overview of a 2019 workshop on the use of fragile geologic features (FGFs) to evaluate seismic hazard models. FGFs have been scarcely utilized in the evaluation of seismic hazard models, despite nearly 30 yr having passed since the first recognition of their potential value. Recently, several studies have begun to focus on the implementation of FGFs in seismic hazard modeling. The workshop was held to capture a “snapshot” of the state‐of‐the‐art in FGF work and to define key research areas that would increase confidence in FGF‐based evaluation of seismic hazard models. It was held at the annual meeting of the Southern California Earthquake Center on 8 September 2019, and the conveners were Mark Stirling (University of Otago, New Zealand) and Michael Oskin (University of California, Davis). The workshop attracted 44 participants from a wide range of disciplines. The main topics of discussion were FGF fragility age estimation (age at which an FGF achieved its current fragile geometry), fragility estimation, FGF‐based evaluation of seismic hazard models, and ethical considerations relating to documentation and preservation of FGFs. There are now many scientists working on, or motivated to work on, FGFs, and more types of FGFs are being worked on than just the precariously balanced rock (PBR) variety. One of the ideas presented at the workshop is that fragility ages for FGFs should be treated stochastically rather than assuming that all share a common age. In a similar vein, new studies propose more comprehensive methods of fragility assessment beyond peak ground acceleration and peak ground velocity‐based approaches. Two recent studies that apply PBRs to evaluate probabilistic seismic hazard models use significantly different methods of evaluation. Key research needs identified from the workshop will guide future, focused efforts that will ultimately facilitate the uptake of FGFs in seismic hazard analysis.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2020

Liquefaction and related ground failure from July 2019 Ridgecrest earthquake sequence

The 2019 Ridgecrest earthquake sequence produced a 4 July M 6.5 foreshock and a 5 July M 7.1 mainshock, along with 23 events with magnitudes greater than 4.5 in the 24 hr period following the mainshock. The epicenters of the two principal events were located in the Indian Wells Valley, northwest of Searles Valley near the towns of Ridgecrest, Trona, and Argus. We describe observed liquefaction manifestations including sand boils, fissures, and lateral spreading features, as well as proximate non‐ground failure zones that resulted from the sequence. Expanding upon results initially presented in a report of the Geotechnical Extreme Events Reconnaissance Association, we synthesize results of field mapping, aerial imagery, and inferences of ground deformations from Synthetic Aperture Radar‐based damage proxy maps (DPMs). We document incidents of liquefaction, settlement, and lateral spreading in the Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake US military base and compare locations of these observations to pre‐ and postevent mapping of liquefaction hazards. We describe liquefaction and ground‐failure features in Trona and Argus, which produced lateral deformations and impacts on several single‐story masonry and wood frame buildings. Detailed maps showing zones with and without ground failure are provided for these towns, along with mapped ground deformations along transects. Finally, we describe incidents of massive liquefaction with related ground failures and proximate areas of similar geologic origin without ground failure in the Searles Lakebed. Observations in this region are consistent with surface change predicted by the DPM. In the same region, geospatial liquefaction hazard maps are effective at identifying broad percentages of land with liquefaction‐related damage. We anticipate that data presented in this article will be useful for future liquefaction susceptibility, triggering, and consequence studies being undertaken as part of the Next Generation Liquefaction project.

California↗
USGS2020

Airborne lidar and electro-optical imagery along surface ruptures of the 2019 Ridgecrest earthquake sequence, Southern California

Surface rupture from the 2019 Ridgecrest earthquake sequence, initially associated with the M 6.4 foreshock, occurred on July 4 on a ~17 km long, northeast-southwest oriented, left-lateral zone of faulting. Following the M 7.1 mainshock on July 5 (local time), extensive northwest-southeast-oriented, right-lateral faulting was then also mapped along a ~50 km long zone of faults, including sub-parallel splays in several areas. The largest slip was observed in the epicentral area, and crossing the dry lakebed of China Lake to the southeast. Surface fault rupture mapping by a large team, reported elsewhere, was used to guide the airborne data acquisition reported here. Rapid rupture mapping allowed for accurate and efficient flight line planning for the high-resolution lidar and aerial photography. Flight line planning trade-offs were considered to allocate the medium (25 pulses per square meter, or ppsm) and high resolution (80 ppsm) lidar data collection polygons. The National Center for Airborne Laser Mapping (NCALM) acquired the airborne imagery with a Titan multispectral lidar system and DiMAC aerial digital camera, and USGS acquired GPS ground control data. This effort required extensive coordination with the Navy as much of the airborne data acquisition occurred within their restricted airspace at the China Lake Ranges.

Calilfornia↗
USGS2020

Science plan for improving three-dimensional seismic velocity models in the San Francisco Bay region, 2019–24

This five-year science plan outlines short-term and long-term goals for improving three-dimensional seismic velocity models in the greater San Francisco Bay region as well as how to foster a community effort in reaching those goals. The short-term goals focus on improving the current U.S. Geological Survey San Francisco Bay region geologic and seismic velocity model using existing data. The long-term goals focus on acquiring new data and leveraging better analytic tools to improve the model and characterize the uncertainty. The plan describes opportunities for contributions by members of the community to develop these seismic velocity models, provides current and potential users with general information on where efforts will likely be focused to improve these models and how new versions of the models will be released, and outlines funding needs and obstacles for improving and maintaining such models. Several aspects of this plan, including how to foster a community effort, are independent of the geographic region and apply to other similar efforts.

California↗
USGS2018

The science, engineering applications, and policy implications of simulation-based PSHA

We summarize scientific methods for developing probabilistic seismic hazard assessments from 3-D earthquake ground motion simulations, describe current use of simulated ground motions for engineering applications, and discuss on-going efforts to incorporate these effects in the U.S. national seismic hazard model. The 3-D simulations provide important, additional information about earthquake ground-shaking, which is critical to proper characterization of potential ground motions. Example uses of these simulations for engineering applications provide alternative approaches to introducing the effects of deep basins on long-period ground motions into design requirements. In Seattle, Washington tall building design includes requirements for accounting for the effect of the Seattle basin, and one method for including this effect relies upon local 3-D simulations. In Los Angeles, California a working group of scientists and engineers is advancing the use of local 3-D simulations for local building codes. In light of the benefit to ground motion characterization from the use of 3-D simulations, similar efforts are underway for national-scale seismic hazard analyses, which seek to make use of the extensive work applied from local efforts; current methods for incorporating these effects on a national-scale are presented.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2014

Validation of the SCEC broadband platform V14.3 simulation methods using pseudo spectral acceleration data

This paper summarizes the evaluation of ground motion simulation methods implemented on the SCEC Broadband Platform (BBP), version 14.3 (as of March 2014). A seven-member panel, the authorship of this article, was formed to evaluate those methods for the prediction of pseudo-­‐spectral accelerations (PSAs) of ground motion. The panel’s mandate was to evaluate the methods using tools developed through the validation exercise (Goulet et al. ,2014), and to define validation metrics for the assessment of the methods’ performance. This paper summarizes the evaluation process and conclusions from the panel. The five broadband, finite-source simulation methods on the BBP include two deterministic approaches herein referred to as CSM (Anderson, 2014) and UCSB (Crempien and Archuleta, 2014); a band-­‐limited stochastic white noise method called EXSIM (Atkinson and Assatourians, 2014); and two hybrid approaches, referred to as G&P (Graves and Pitarka, 2014) and SDSU (Olsen and Takedatsu, 2014), which utilize a deterministic Green’s function approach for periods longer than 1 second and stochastic methods for periods shorter than 1 second. Two acceptance tests were defined to validate the broadband finite‐source ground methods (Goulet et al., 2014). Part A compared observed and simulated PSAs for periods from 0.01 to 10 seconds for 12 moderate to large earthquakes located in California, Japan, and the eastern US. Part B compared the median simulated PSAs to published NGA-­‐West1 (Abrahamson and Silva, 2008; Boore and Atkinson, 2008; Campbell and Bozorgnia, 2008; and Chiou and Youngs, 2008) ground motion prediction equations (GMPEs) for specific magnitude and distance cases using a pass-­‐fail criteria based on a defined acceptable range around the spectral shape of the GMPEs. For the initial Part A and Part B validation exercises during the summer of 2013, the software for the five methods was locked in at version 13.6 (see Maechling et al., 2014). In the spring of 2014, additional moderate events were considered for the Part A validation, and additional magnitude and distance cases were considered for the Part B validation, for the software locked in at version 14.3. Several of the simulation procedures, specifically UCSB and SDSU, changed significantly between versions 13.6 and 14.3. The CSM code was not submitted in time for the v14.3 evaluation and its detailed performance is not addressed in this paper. As described in Goulet et al. (2014) and Maechling et al. (2014), the BBP generates a variety of products, including three-­‐component acceleration time series. A series of post-­‐processing codes were developed to provide individual component PSAs and average median horizontal-­‐component PSA (referred to as RotD50; Boore, 2010) for oscillator periods ranging from 0.01 to 10 seconds, as well as median PSA values computed using the NGA-­‐West 1 GMPEs. The BBP was also configured to provide statistical analysis of simulation results relative to recordings (Part A) and GMPEs (Part B) as described further in sections below. As part of our evaluation, we reviewed documentation provided by each of the developers, which included the technical basis behind the methods and the developer’s self-­‐assessments regarding the extrapolation capabilities (in terms of magnitude and distance ranges) of their methods. Two workshops were held in which methods and results were presented, and the panel was given the opportunity to question the developers and to have detailed technical discussions. A SCEC report (Dreger et al., 2013) describes the results of this review for BBP version 13.6. This paper summarizes that work and presents results for the more recent BBP 14.3 validation.

Seismological Research Letters↗