USGS Science⌕ Search

USGS · 70191692

Relations between some horizontal‐component ground‐motion intensity measures used in practice

Abstract

Various measures using the two horizontal components of recorded ground motions have been used in a number of studies that derive ground‐motion prediction equations and construct maps of shaking intensity. We update relations between a number of these measures, including those in Boore et al. (2006) and Boore (2010) , using the large and carefully constructed global database of ground motions from crustal earthquakes in active tectonic regions developed as part of the Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center–Next Generation Attenuation‐West2 project. The ratios from the expanded datasets generally agree to within a few percent of the previously published ratios. We also provide some ratios that were not considered before, some of which will be useful in applications such as constructing ShakeMaps. Finally, we compare two important ratios with those from a large central and eastern North American database and from many records from subduction earthquakes in Japan and Taiwan. In general, the ratios from these regions are within several percent of those from crustal earthquakes in active tectonic regions.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

David M. Boore, Tadahiro Kishida. 2016-12-27. Relations between some horizontal‐component ground‐motion intensity measures used in practice. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120160250

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↗