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

IF 3.1 2区 工程技术 Q2 ENGINEERING, CIVIL
S. Rezaeian, Jonathan P Stewart, N. Luco, C. Goulet
{"title":"Findings from a decade of ground motion simulation validation research and a path forward","authors":"S. Rezaeian, Jonathan P Stewart, N. Luco, C. Goulet","doi":"10.1177/87552930231212475","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"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.","PeriodicalId":11392,"journal":{"name":"Earthquake Spectra","volume":"99 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Earthquake Spectra","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/87552930231212475","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, CIVIL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

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.
十年来地动模拟验证研究的成果和前进之路
模拟地面运动具有推进地震危险性评估和结构响应分析的潜力,特别是在震源到场地距离较短的大震级地震等地面运动记录有限的情况下。然而,需要对模拟地面运动进行严格的验证,以便危害分析人员、执业工程师或监管机构对模拟地面运动的使用有信心。十年前,验证工作主要局限于比较选定地震的模拟与观测波形和频谱加速度的中值。南加州地震中心(SCEC)地面运动模拟验证(GMSV)小组的成立是为了加强模拟建模者和研究工程师之间的协调,目的是设计和应用更有效的模拟验证方法。在这里,我们总结了十多年来GMSV活动中学到的东西,主要反映了SCEC研究界的观点,但也将我们的发现和建议扩展到更广泛的美国和世界范围的模拟验证工作。我们根据它们的方法和考虑的度量对不同的验证方法进行分类。两种一般的方法是比较来自模拟的验证指标与来自历史记录的验证指标或来自半经验模型的验证指标。验证指标分为地震动特性和结构响应。我们讨论了在过去十年中有影响的实例验证研究,并提出了未来的研究方向。关键的经验教训是,验证是特定于应用程序的,我们的扩展和传播需要改进,许多与验证相关的研究仍未探索。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Earthquake Spectra
Earthquake Spectra 工程技术-工程:地质
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
12.00%
发文量
88
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Earthquake Spectra, the professional peer-reviewed journal of the Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (EERI), serves as the publication of record for the development of earthquake engineering practice, earthquake codes and regulations, earthquake public policy, and earthquake investigation reports. The journal is published quarterly in both printed and online editions in February, May, August, and November, with additional special edition issues. EERI established Earthquake Spectra with the purpose of improving the practice of earthquake hazards mitigation, preparedness, and recovery — serving the informational needs of the diverse professionals engaged in earthquake risk reduction: civil, geotechnical, mechanical, and structural engineers; geologists, seismologists, and other earth scientists; architects and city planners; public officials; social scientists; and researchers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信