USGS Science⌕ Search

USGS · 70189758

Adding fling effects to processed ground‐motion time histories

Abstract

Fling is the engineering term for the effects of the permanent tectonic offset, caused by a rupturing fault in the recorded ground motions near the fault. It is expressed by a one‐sided pulse in ground velocity and a nonzero final displacement at the end of shaking. Standard processing of earthquake time histories removes some of the fling effects that may be required for engineering applications. A method to parameterize the fling‐step time history and to superimpose it onto traditionally processed time histories has been developed by Abrahamson (2002) . In this paper, we first present an update to the Abrahamson (2002) fling‐step models, in which the fling step is parameterized as a single cycle of a sine wave. Parametric models are presented for the sine‐wave amplitude ( D site ) and period ( T f ). The expressions for D site and T f are derived from an extensive set of finite‐fault simulations conducted on the Southern California Earthquake Center broadband platform (see Data and Resources). The simulations were run with the Graves and Pitarka (2010) hybrid simulation method and included strike‐slip and reverse scenarios for magnitudes of 6.0–8.2 and dips of 30 through 90. Next, an improved approach for developing design ground motions with fling effects is presented, which deals with the problem of double‐counting intermediate period components that were not removed by the standard ground‐motion processing. Finally, the results are validated against a set of 84 empirical recordings containing fling.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Ronnie Kamai, Norman A. Abrahamson, Robert Graves. 2014-07-08. Adding fling effects to processed ground‐motion time histories. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120130272

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Re-evaluation of shaking, dynamic strain, and the source of the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake

As the largest historical event in the eastern United States, the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake, plays a prominent role in our nation’s seismological and human history and an outsized role in our probabilistic ground‐motion hazard estimates, affecting building codes, insurance rates, and geophysical monitoring. Thus, constraining the characteristics of the 1886 earthquake source, as well as the nature of its shaking distribution and impacts to the extent possible, is essential. Given its vintage, however, societal, geological, and geophysical datasets are limited compared with those used in modern seismological analyses. Because of these limitations, some characteristics of the rupture model are fundamentally nonunique. Still, by re‐evaluating all available data, I can constrain several key aspects of this earthquake. I show that several interpretations in recent analyses are inconsistent regarding the inferred source; shaking; ground failure; and, particularly, railway impacts. Importantly, I have shown that although dynamic strain caused the ground failure that led to track deformation, without the intermediate liquefaction step, dynamic strain alone was unlikely to be the source of rail deformation, contrary to earlier studies. Had earlier pronouncements that dynamic strain is a real concern for bending railways held true, there would be serious ramifications for railway engineering as well as for other above‐ and below‐ground linear infrastructure.

South Carolina↗

ETAS-positive: Extracting unbiased epidemic-type aftershock models from incomplete earthquake catalogs

Earthquake catalogs are inherently incomplete, and short-term fluctuations in catalog completeness can strongly bias estimates of seismicity parameters. Here, we extend the positive statistics framework recently introduced for estimating Gutenberg–Richter a and b values to the Epidemic-Type Aftershock Sequence (ETAS) model. The approach focuses on complete magnitude–time intervals defined by pairs of earthquakes in which the second event is larger than the first. Comprehensive synthetic tests demonstrate that the proposed ETAS + method retrieves nearly unbiased parameter estimates even from highly incomplete catalogs, whereas parameters obtained using classical estimation approaches are strongly biased. Application to Southern California reveals a similar trend, with the productivity scaling parameter α approaching the b value, consistent with self-similar earthquake triggering within estimation uncertainties. Owing to its robustness against catalog incompleteness and computational efficiency, the ETAS + method provides a powerful new tool for seismicity analysis and earthquake forecasting.

California↗