Overview of Seismic PHSA Approaches with Emphasis on the Management of Uncertainties

Similar documents
5. Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis

EARTHQUAKE HAZARD ASSESSMENT IN KAZAKHSTAN

Development of Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis for International Sites, Challenges and Guidelines

The Ranges of Uncertainty among the Use of NGA-West1 and NGA-West 2 Ground Motion Prediction Equations

Uniform Hazard Spectrum(UHS) for performance based seismic design

Deterministic Seismic Hazard Assessment of Quetta, Pakistan

Damping Scaling of Response Spectra for Shallow CCCCCCCCCrustalstallPaper Crustal Earthquakes in Active Tectonic Title Line Regions 1 e 2

Regional Workshop on Essential Knowledge of Site Evaluation Report for Nuclear Power Plants.

SEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSIS. Instructional Material Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples Seismic Hazard Analysis 5a - 1

AN OVERVIEW AND GUIDELINES FOR PROBABILISTIC SEISMIC HAZARD MAPPING

UPDATE OF THE PROBABILISTIC SEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSIS AND DEVELOPMENT OF SEISMIC DESIGN GROUND MOTIONS AT THE LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY

Seismic hazard map around Taiwan through a catalog-based deterministic approach

Development of U. S. National Seismic Hazard Maps and Implementation in the International Building Code

Arthur Frankel, William Stephenson, David Carver, Jack Odum, Robert Williams, and Susan Rhea U.S. Geological Survey

DIRECT HAZARD ANALYSIS OF INELASTIC RESPONSE SPECTRA

RECORD OF REVISIONS. Page 2 of 17 GEO. DCPP.TR.14.06, Rev. 0

Site specific seismic hazard assessment a case study of Guanyin offshore wind farm 場址特定地震危害度評估 - 以觀音離岸風力發電廠為例

Selection of Ground Motion Records for Two Dam Sites in Oregon

Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering

RESPONSE SPECTRA RECOMMENDED FOR AUSTRALIA

CHARACTERIZATION OF EARTHQUAKE SHAKING EFFECTS

Preliminary probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for the Nuclear Power Plant Bohunice (Slovakia) site

(Seismological Research Letters, July/August 2005, Vol.76 (4): )

Seismic Hazard Assessment for Çetin Dam

Actual practices of seismic strong motion estimation at NPP sites

Treatment of Epistemic Uncertainty in PSHA Results

Seismic Hazard & Risk Assessment

Seismic Source Characterization in Siting New Nuclear Power Plants in the Central and Eastern United States

Scenario Earthquakes for Korean Nuclear Power Plant Site Considering Active Faults

Unique Site Conditions and Response Analysis Challenges in the Central and Eastern U.S.

WP2: Framework for Seismic Hazard Analysis of Spatially Distributed Systems

ACCOUNTING FOR SITE EFFECTS IN PROBABILISTIC SEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSIS: OVERVIEW OF THE SCEC PHASE III REPORT

DCPP Seismic FAQ s Geosciences Department 08/04/2011 GM1) What magnitude earthquake is DCPP designed for?

I N T R O D U C T I O N T O P R O B A B I L I S T I C S E I S M I C H A Z A R D A N A LY S I S

SEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSIS

DEVELOPMENT OF DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRAL SHAPES FOR CENTRAL AND EASTERN U.S. (CEUS) AND WESTERN U.S. (WUS) ROCK SITE CONDITIONS*

Eleventh U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering Integrating Science, Engineering & Policy June 25-29, 2018 Los Angeles, California

2 Approaches To Developing Design Ground Motions

Effects of Surface Geology on Seismic Motion

Introduction to Strong Motion Seismology. Norm Abrahamson Pacific Gas & Electric Company SSA/EERI Tutorial 4/21/06

Non-Ergodic Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analyses

Understanding Seismic Hazard Needs for Infrastructure Risk Analysis: Lessons from SYNER-G

ROSE SCHOOL AN INVESTIGATIVE STUDY ON THE MODELLING OF EARTHQUAKE HAZARD FOR LOSS ASSESSMENT

Probabilistic Tsunami Hazard Analysis. Hong Kie Thio AECOM, Los Angeles

Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis of Nepal considering Uniform Density Model

Project 17 Development of Next-Generation Seismic Design Value Maps

THE RESPONSE SPECTRUM

7 Ground Motion Models

L. Danciu, D. Giardini, J. Wößner Swiss Seismological Service ETH-Zurich Switzerland

BC HYDRO SSHAC LEVEL 3 PSHA STUDY METHODOLOGY

SEISMIC INPUT FOR CHENNAI USING ADAPTIVE KERNEL DENSITY ESTIMATION TECHNIQUE

Uncertainties in a probabilistic model for seismic hazard analysis in Japan

Vertical to Horizontal (V/H) Ratios for Large Megathrust Subduction Zone Earthquakes

SITE RESPONSE ANALYSIS FOR SEISMIC DESIGN OF A 48-STOREY TOWER BUILDING IN JAKARTA

Seismic Hazard Epistemic Uncertainty in the San Francisco Bay Area and its Role in Performance-Based Assessment

Discussing SHARE PSHA results for France

Seismic site response analysis for Australia

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY

The effect of bounds on magnitude, source-to-site distance and site condition in PSHA-based ground motion selection

PSHA results for the BSHAP region

THE EFFECT OF DIRECTIVITY ON THE STRESS PARAMETER DETERMINED FROM GROUND MOTION OBSERVATIONS

Estimation of Strong Ground Motion: Aleatory Variability and Epistemic Uncertainty

IGC. 50 th INDIAN GEOTECHNICAL CONFERENCE PROBABILISTIC SEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSIS FOR WARANGAL CONSIDERING SINGLE SEISMOGENIC ZONING

log 4 0.7m log m Seismic Analysis of Structures by TK Dutta, Civil Department, IIT Delhi, New Delhi. Module 1 Seismology Exercise Problems :

Amplification of Seismic Motion at Deep Soil Sites

Module 7 SEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSIS (Lectures 33 to 36)

Deterministic Generation of Broadband Ground Motions! with Simulations of Dynamic Ruptures on Rough Faults! for Physics-Based Seismic Hazard Analysis

NEODETERMINISTIC SEISMIC HAZARD ASSESSMENT. Seismic hazard in Asia Trieste 4-8 December 2006

Synthetic Near-Field Rock Motions in the New Madrid Seismic Zone

Ground Motion and Seismicity Aspects of the 4 September 2010 Darfield and 22 February 2011 Christchurch Earthquakes

Updated NGA-West2 Ground Motion Prediction Equations for Active Tectonic Regions Worldwide

Estimation of hazard assessment by FINSIM for west coast and son narmada faults

The investigation of the design parameters of the Iranian earthquake code of practice based on hazard analysis

Maximum Direction to Geometric Mean Spectral Response Ratios using the Relevance Vector Machine

ANALYSIS OF THE CORRELATION BETWEEN INSTRUMENTAL INTENSITIES OF STRONG EARTHQUAKE GROUND MOTION

ENGINEERING GROUND MOTION PARAMETERS ATTENUATION RELATIONSHIPS FOR GREECE

EFFECTS OF RUPTURE DIRECTIVITY ON PROBABILISTIC SEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSIS. Norman A. Abrahamson 1

Assessment and Mitigation of Ground Motion Hazards from Induced Seismicity. Gail M. Atkinson

Epistemic Uncertainty in Seismic Hazard Analysis for Australia

Occurrence of negative epsilon in seismic hazard analysis deaggregation, and its impact on target spectra computation

Probabilistic Earthquake Risk Assessment of Newcastle and Lake Macquarie Part 1 Seismic Hazard.

Japan Seismic Hazard Information Station

Between Seismology and Seismic Design

Characterization and modelling of seismic action

EARTHQUAKE CLUSTERS, SMALL EARTHQUAKES

EARTHQUAKE HAZARD ANALYSIS: MUSKRAT DAMSITE, LOWER CHURCHILL, LABRADOR. Draft Report: May 22, 2014

A NEW PROBABILISTIC SEISMIC HAZARD MODEL FOR NEW ZEALAND

I N T R O D U C T I O N T O P R O B A B I L I S T I C S E I S M I C H A Z A R D A N A LY S I S

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION March 2007 REGULATORY GUIDE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH

GROUND MOTION TIME HISTORIES FOR THE VAN NUYS BUILDING

PROBABILISTIC SURFACE FAULT DISPLACEMENT HAZARD ANALYSIS (PFDHA) DATA FOR STRIKE SLIP FAULTS

Seismic Microzonation via PSHA Methodology and Illustrative Examples

Evaluation of Acceleration Time-Histories for Design of Nuclear Facilities at Kalpakkam (India)

GROUND MOTION SUITE SELECTION FOR BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS ABSTRACT

Tectonic Hazard Evaluations for Korean Nuclear Sites

EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE FROM THE NORTHRIDGE EARTHQUAKE FOR SITE- SPECIFIC AMPLIFICATION FACTORS USED IN US BUILDING CODES

Seismic Issues for California's Nuclear Power Plants. Norman Abrahamson University of California, Berkeley

New developments in the evaluation of seismic hazard for Romania

NEXT GENERATION ATTENUATION (NGA) EMPIRICAL GROUND MOTION MODELS: CAN THEY BE USED IN EUROPE?

Model Uncertainties of the 2002 Update of California Seismic Hazard Maps

Transcription:

H4.SMR/1645-29 "2nd Workshop on Earthquake Engineering for Nuclear Facilities: Uncertainties in Seismic Hazard" 14-25 February 2005 Overview of Seismic PHSA Approaches with Emphasis on the Management of Uncertainties K. Campbell EQECAT USA

IAEA/ICTP Workshop on Earthquake Engineering for Nuclear Facilities - Uncertainties in Seismic Hazard Assessment Overview of Seismic PSHA Approaches With Emphasis on the Management of Uncertainties Trieste, Italy, 14 25 February 2005 Unit 22 - K. Campbell, USA

Contents of the Presentation Introduction Uncertainties PSHA components Seismic hazard calculation Seismic hazard results Lessons learned and conclusions Summary of the presentation References and glossary

Introduction

Seismic Hazard Analysis (SHA) Deterministic SHA (DSHA) No consideration of earthquake recurrence rate Probabilistic SHA (PSHA) Explicit inclusion of earthquake recurrence rate

DSHA Methodology Select finite set of earthquake scenarios (M,R) Select site where hazard is to be estimated Estimate median ground motion for each scenario (y m,r) Select largest value of y (y max ) Select desired exceedance probability of y max : P[Y>y max m,r] Calculate fractile (percentile) of y max : x = 1 P[Y>y max m,r] Determine standard normal variate of x (z x ) Compute xth-percentile value of y max : log y max,x = log y max + z x σ a logy Repeat for all sites of interest

PSHA Methodology Select all possible earthquake scenarios (M,R) Select site where hazard is to be estimated Estimate median ground motion for each scenario (y m,r) Specify recurrence frequency of each scenario (ν m,r) Specify ground-motion value of interest (y) Calculate value of z x associated with y: z x = (log y log y ) / σ a logy Calculate ground-motion probability of y: P[Y>y m,r] = 1 x Calculate exceedance frequency of y: ν P[Y>y m,r] Sum exceedance frequencies over all scenarios (M,R) Repeat for different values of y and for all sites of interest

Seismic Hazard Equation ν(y>y) = Σ src M R ν P[Y>y m,r] f R (r m) f M (m) dr dm where, ν(y>y) ν = ν m,r M,m R,r f M (m) f R (r m) P[Y>y m,r] = annual exceedance frequency = recurrence frequency of m, r = earthquake magnitude = source-to-site distance = probability that M = m = probability that R = r given m = probability of Y>y given m,r

Uncertainties

Types of Uncertainties Aleatory Generally modeled using standard error of individual relationships or random (stochastic distribution of a parameter Epistemic Generally modeled using multiple relationships or error in median or mean value of a parameter

Aleatory Uncertainties They are random in nature For all practical purposes, they cannot be known in detail or cannot be reduced They are susceptible to analysis concerning their origin, their magnitude, and their role in PSHA They are used to calculate a single estimate of annual exceedance frequency (seismic hazard) using the seismic hazard equation

Epistemic Uncertainties The quantify the lack-of-knowledge arising because our scientific understanding is imperfect for the present They are of a character that in principle are reducible through further research and gathering of more and better earthquake data They are used to calculate the mean and fractiles (statistics) of seismic hazard

PSHA Components

Model Components Seismotectonic model Source zonation Earthquake recurrence Ground-motion model Attenuation law Site amplification PSHA calculation

Schematic of PSHA Components

Source Zonation Faults Area sources Gridded seismicity

Example Source Zonation Model Turkey

Example Source Zonation Model California

Source Zonation Aleatory Uncertainties Location of epicenters within an area source or in a zone of gridded seismicity Location of hypocenters on a fault Location of rupture centroids on a fault Rupture dimensions (random part) Distribution of focal depths

Fault Rupture Model A 3D 3D model model enables proper calculation of of distance & ground motion Surface Fault Trace (The orientation of fault is known as the Azimuth) Fault Dip (The angle from horizontal) Fault Plane (Defines fault surface) Epicenter (Point on the surface directly above the hypocenter) Rupture Surface (Area that moves in EQ) Hypocenter (Point at which rupture starts)

Source Zonation Epistemic Uncertainties Type of source (fault, area, grids) Size and configuration of sources Location, shape and size of area sources Fault length, width, depth and dip Segment or multi-segment ruptures (fault cascading) Rupture dimensions (epistemic part) Style of faulting Strike slip, reverse or thrust Source activity

Fault cascading

Earthquake Recurrence Characteristic earthquake relation Gaussian magnitude-frequency distribution Uniform magnitude-frequency distribution Gutenberg-Richter law Exponential magnitude-frequency distribution log N = a bm; m min M m max Characteristic recurrence relation Combination of characteristic and exponential Could also be treated as epistemic uncertainty

Example EQ Recurrence Relations

Earthquake Recurrence Aleatory Uncertainties Selected magnitude-frequency distribution Maximum magnitude (random part) Characteristic magnitude (random part)

Earthquake Recurrence Epistemic Uncertainties Type of recurrence relation Minimum magnitude Maximum magnitude (epistemic part) Gutenberg-Richter a- and b-values (correlated) Fault slip rate or seismic moment rate Other fault parameters Area Shear rigidity

Ground Motion (Attenuation) Attenuation laws Uniform site condition Uniform tectonic environment Ground-motion parameter Intensity (MSK, MMI) Peak ground acceleration (PGA) Spectral acceleration (S a )

Ground Motion (Attenuation) Aleatory Uncertainties Standard error of relationship (sigma) Lognormal distribution (Gaussian on log Y) Parameter conversion (random part) Dispersion in Intensity to PGA relationship Dispersion in PGA to S a relationship

Ground Motion (Attenuation) Epistemic Uncertainties Type of tectonic environment Attenuation law (epistemic part) Functional form Database selection criteria Characterization of site conditions Method of analysis Parameter conversion (epistemic part) Multiple Intensity to PGA relationships Multiple PGA to S a relationships

Site Amplification Site classification criteria Geological site categories NEHRP site categories (V s30 ) Shear-wave velocity (V s30 ) Shear-wave velocity (1/4 wavelength) Site amplification factors Intensity PGA S a

Example NEHRP Site Map

Site Amplification Aleatory Uncertainties Typically considered as part of attenuation law Additional uncertainty might be needed Epistemic Uncertainties Site classification criteria Site category Conversion factors Reference site condition (e.g., V s30 =760 m/s) Reference ground-motion parameter

Effect of Site Amplification on S a 1 5%-Damped Horizontal Acceleration (g) 0.1 Hard Rock Soft Rock Firm Soil Soft Soil 0.01 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 Period (sec)

Seismic Hazard Calculation

Hazard Calculation Components Aleatory component Epistemic component Logic tree Epistemic calculation PSHA results

Aleatory Component ν(y>y) = Σ src M R ν P[Y>y m,r] f R (r m) f M (m) dr dm where, ν(y>y) ν = ν m,r M,m R,r f M (m) f R (r m) P[Y>y m,r] = annual exceedance frequency = recurrence frequency of m,r = earthquake magnitude = source-to-site distance = probability that M = m = probability that R = r given m = probability of Y>y given m,r

Epistemic Component Logic tree Modeled as a decision tree structure of epistemic uncertainties Each path through logic tree (branch) represents one possible combination of models/parameters A sub-branch is selected at each node of logic tree along with is assigned probability (weight) Each branch is assigned a probability equal to the product of the probabilities (weights) of the various sub-branches

Example Logic Tree

Epistemic Calculation Evaluate logic tree using seismic hazard equation Full enumeration (evaluate every possible branch) Monte Carlo simulation (N-trials) N min = 10 / (1 x) For x = 0.05, N min = 200 Rank by decreasing exceedance frequencies Calculate weighted mean exceedance frequency Weight by branch probabilities (full enumeration method) Weight by 1 / N-trials (Monte Carlo method) Calculate desired fractals exceedance frequencies Typically 5th-, 15th-, 50th-, 85th- and 90th-percentile

Seismic Hazard Results Seismic hazard Annual exceedance frequency: ν(y>y) Return period (RP): 1 / ν(y>y) Exceedance probability: 1 exp[ ν(y>y) t] (t = time period of interest; can be 1 year) Seismic hazard curve Plot of seismic hazard vs. ground-motion parameter (y) Uniform hazard response spectra (UHRS, UHS) Plot of spectral response, S a, vs. period for specified value of seismic hazard (e.g., 10,000-year mean RP)

Example PGA Seismic Hazard Curve 10 4 Peak Ground Acceleration - Site Class=C - Soft Rock 10 3 Return Period (years) 10 2 Mean 5th% 16th% 50th% 84th% 95th% 10 1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 Horizontal Acceleration (g)

Example 5%-Damped UHRS

Lessons Learned and Conclusions Uncertainty is a critical element in PSHA Uncertainty is composed of aleatory (randomness) and epistemic (knowledge) uncertainties All appropriate and relevant aleatory and epistemic uncertainties should be included in the PSHA calculation Aleatory and epistemic uncertainties are modeled using different methods

Summary of the Presentation Aleatory uncertainty is incorporated using the seismic hazard equation Epistemic uncertainty is incorporated using full enumeration or Monte Carlo sampling of logic tree Seismic hazard is calculated based on aleatory uncertainties and is typically displayed as a seismic hazard curve (e.g., RP vs. ground motion) Mean and fractile seismic hazard is calculated based on epistemic uncertainties and is displayed as a series of hazard curves for the mean and selected fractiles of seismic hazard (e.g., RP)

References and Glossary McGuire, R.K. (2004). Seismic hazard and risk analysis, Engineering Monographs on Miscellaneous Earthquake Engineering Topics, MNO-10, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, California, 221 p. Kramer, S.L. (1996). Seismic hazard analysis, In Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, Chap. 4, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, p. 106 142. Reiter, L. (1990). Earthquake hazard analysis: Issues and insights. Columbia University Press, New York, 254 p. Somerville, P. and Moriwaki, Y. (2003). Seismic risk and risk assessment in engineering practice. In International Handbook of Earthquake and Engineering Seismology, Part B, Chap. 65, Ed. W.H.K. Lee, H. Kanamori, P.C. Jennings and K. Kisslinger, Academic Press, San Diego, p. 1065 1080.

References and Glossary Senior Seismic Hazard Analysis Committee (SSHAC) (1997). Recommendations for probabilistic seismic hazard analysis: Guidance on uncertainty and use of experts. Prepared by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, NUREG/CR-6372, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. Thenhaus, P.C. and Campbell, K.W. (2003). Seismic hazard analysis. In Earthquake Engineering Handbook, Chap. 8, Ed. W.F. Chen and C. Scawthorn, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, 50 p.