1 / 15

ShakeMap Now

ShakeMap Now. ShakeMap now uses statistics instead of geology and physics. 2008 Wells ShakeMap averages through network and effects data: creates bulls-eyes. Put in Geology and Physics. Wells, NV M6.0 2/21/2008 Requires extensive geological data sets

kassia
Télécharger la présentation

ShakeMap Now

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ShakeMapNow • ShakeMap now uses statistics instead of geology and physics. • 2008 Wells ShakeMap averages through network and effects data: creates bulls-eyes.

  2. Put in Geology and Physics • Wells, NV M6.0 2/21/2008 • Requires extensive geological data sets • Plus intensive computation of PDE solutions

  3. Wells,Computed Shaking Map • Geologic basins channel quake waves

  4. Wells, Computed Shaking Match to Data • With correct fault scenario (orange), physics and geology match data (red).

  5. 4/25/08 M5.0 Mogul MainshockShakeMap Anomalously high shaking in hills north of Reno In Reno-Carson we lack critical geological constraints: parcel mapping; and the fault network.

  6. Reno-Area Basin Geological Data UNR researchdevelopeda transect and map of <100 shallow measurements- far short of parcel mapping. UNR and Washoe County have been investigating the basin geology.

  7. Mogul, Computed Shaking Map • The physics is OK, the faulting is simple, and the geology is the best we know, but…

  8. Mogul, Computed Shaking Matches to Data • Our geological knowledge can’t yet explain the highest shaking!

  9. Las Vegas Computed Shaking Maps Two Death Valley event scenarios and 2006 geological data

  10. 2006 Geological Data Doesn’t Explain High Shaking Uncertainty in PGV

  11. Initial 6 Months of Clark Co. Parcel Mapping 1265 sites by March 2008 ~9000 sites by July 2010 completion NEHRP B-C boundary is clearly defined; C-D is hard to predict.

  12. Detailed Surface Geology Makes a Difference • ShakeMap-type statistical prediction (left) for Las Vegas. • Physics-based prediction (right) has spotty, large ground motions. 73% predicted for 2-4 Hz Up to 213% computed for 0.5 Hz

  13. SW Reno- Which Fault is the Real One? MNZA

  14. SW Reno- Surveys Assess Faults ? ?

  15. Nevada Can Lead the US to theNext Level of ShakeMap: for Reno/Carson • $1.0M to define the fault network • Seismic surveys and fault trenching in the basins • $0.5M for shallow measurements • Earthquake-hazard mapping by measurement, not extrapolation • $1.0M to develop a ShakeMap based on physics and geology • Computed 5 min. after the earthquake, guiding emergency response • Validated with new monitoring instrumentation

More Related