Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 45

EXSIM_V3 Program Simulati

on of May 20, 1986


Hualien Earthquake
Focusing on Time Domain a
nd Frequency Domain
Characteristics
ASST. PROF. KRISTIAN AZUL
INSTITUTE OF CIVIL ENGINEERING
BEATRIZ BASA – ALTURA PROFESSORIAL
CHAIR IN CIVIL ENGINEERING
INTRODUCTION
Introduction
Earthquakes are unique events such that
an earthquake from the same fault varies
greatly. This poses a question of whether
historical records are enough to be used
for designing structures or making design
codes.
May 20 1986 Hualien
Event
Mw 6.3
May 20, 1986 at 5:25 GMT
24.082°N, 121.592°E (located by Taiwan Telemetered
Seismographic Network or TTSN), around 10 km north of
Hualien City.
May 20 1986 Hualien
Event
May 20 1986 Hualien
Event
May 20 1986 Hualien
Event
Hualien Input
EXSIM_V3
EXSIM_V3 uses Stochastic Finite-Fault
Modeling (SFFM) to predict ground motions
based on the characteristics of the source,
path and site effects.
Point Source Modelling

FAULT PLANE SITE


Finite-Fault Modelling

FAULT PLANE SITE


SFFM
SFFM is applicable in predicting
moderate to large earthquakes and
it has been used in studies related to
ground motion and in ground motion
prediction equations (GMPE’s)
(Crane & Motazedian, 2013).
Stochastic Methods
Stochastic methods incorporate
randomness of motion with the
identified earthquake
parameters to generate possible
effects (Crane & Motazedian,
2013).
Process
(Assumed Bedrock Type A)
1. EXSIM Simulation
on outcrop

3. Up through 2. Down
soil layer to to
surface bedrock
Test Cases
Test Case Remarks
Uses the Filter Function that aims to correct for the
01
division of subfaults by the program.
Uses the Empirical Function but with a multiplier of 1 in a
non-existent frequency range (0.10 – 0.10)
02
Serves as our guide in amplifying the frequency content
for the next test cases.
Uses the Empirical Function to approximate the EW
03
record Fourier Amplitude Spectrum (FAS)
Uses the Empirical Function to approximate the NS
04
record Fourier Amplitude Spectrum (FAS)
Uses the Empirical Function to approximate the EW and
05
NS record Absolute Acceleration Response Spectrum
Uses the Empirical Function to envelope the EW and NS
06
record Absolute Acceleration Response Spectrum
Hualien A Test Case 01
Hualien A Test Case 01
Hualien A Test Case 02
Hualien A Test Case 02
01 vs 02
Hualien A Test Case 01
Hualien A Test Case 02
Hualien A Test Case 03
Hualien A Test Case 03
Hualien A Test Case 04
Hualien A Test Case 04
Hualien A Test Case 05
Hualien A Test Case 05
Hualien A Test Case 06
Hualien A Test Case 06
Hualien A Comparison
PGA (g)
Residual in % Residual in %
Test Cases Value (Normalized by EW (Normalized by NS
Actual Value) Actual Value)
EW Actual 0.16
NS Actual 0.21
Test Case 01 0.08 48.48 60.90
Test Case 02 0.07 57.18 67.50
Test Case 03 0.08 50.59 62.50
Test Case 04 0.09 40.53 54.87
Test Case 05 0.09 43.97 57.48
Test Case 06 0.17 7.18 18.67
Hualien A Comparison
Arias Intensity (m/s)
Residual in % Residual in %
Test Cases Value (Normalized by EW (Normalized by NS
Actual Value) Actual Value)
EW Actual 0.29
NS Actual 0.25
Test Case 01 0.16 43.24 34.60
Test Case 02 0.15 48.65 40.84
Test Case 03 0.26 10.87 2.69
Test Case 04 0.29 1.46 16.89
Test Case 05 0.34 18.79 36.86
Test Case 06 0.95 230.98 281.33
Hualien A Comparison
Area under Smoothed Fourier Amplitude Spectrum (Whole)
Residual in % Residual in %
Test Cases Value (Normalized by EW (Normalized by NS
Actual Value) Actual Value)
EW Actual 36.75
NS Actual 37.99
Test Case 01 36.69 0.15 3.41
Test Case 02 36.76 0.04 3.23
Test Case 03 34.73 5.48 8.57
Test Case 04 39.42 7.27 3.77
Test Case 05 37.16 1.12 2.18
Test Case 06 56.40 53.48 48.47
Hualien A Comparison
Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) between Untransformed Smoothed Mean Absolute Error (MAE) between Untransformed Smoothed
Fourier Amplitude Spectrum Fourier Amplitude Spectrum
Against EW Actual Against NS Actual Against EW Actual Against NS Actual
Test Cases Test Cases
Record Record Record Record
Test Case 01 1.15 0.92 Test Case 01 0.22 0.22
Test Case 02 1.23 1.01 Test Case 02 0.25 0.25
Test Case 03 0.66 0.77 Test Case 03 0.14 0.17
Test Case 04 0.82 0.74 Test Case 04 0.16 0.18
Test Case 05 0.72 0.79 Test Case 05 0.14 0.17
Test Case 06 2.06 1.96 Test Case 06 0.33 0.32

Coefficient of Determination (Pearson) R2 between Untransformed


Smoothed Fourier Amplitude Spectrum
Against EW Actual Against NS Actual
Test Cases
Record Record
Test Case 01 0.59 0.70
Test Case 02 0.53 0.64
Test Case 03 0.86 0.79
Test Case 04 0.80 0.82
Test Case 05 0.86 0.83
Test Case 06 0.62 0.71
Conclusion
Simulation is possible using the EXSIM_V3
program, however, certain limitations must
be kept in mind;
Limitations encountered:
◦ Earthquake shape
◦ Data availability
Conclusion
Due to the encountered challenge, the
simulation had t target key parameters in
each test case to get an acceptable
simulation.
Recommendation
Explore other key parameters for
comparison
Explore other methods that may be used in
conjunction with the program –
specifically, the inclusion of site effect into
the process.
Acknowledgements
I would like to acknowledge and thank Dr. Win-Gee Huang and
Institute of Earth Science, Academia Sinica for providing the data I
worked with for the May 20, 1986 Hualien earthquake.
I would like to thank Ms. Li-Mei Chen, senior librarian of Institute of Earth
Science of Academia Sinica, for helping me obtain precious and very
vital journal papers for my research.
I would like to acknowledge and thank the Office of the Chancellor of
the University of the Philippines Diliman through the Office of the Vice
Chancellor for Research and Development, for funding support
through the Thesis and Dissertation Grant.
I would like to acknowledge and thank the Commission on Higher
Education for funding support through the Thesis Grant Program.
I would like to acknowledge and thank the Engineering Research and
Development for Technology (ERDT) for support through the Faculty
Research Grant to cover acquisition of key equipment for the
research.
Professorial Chair Award:

Beatriz Basa – Altura


Professorial Chair in Civil
Engineering
THANK YOU
FOR LISTENING
References
Anderson, D. G., 1993. Geotechnical Synthesis Report for the Lotung Large-Scale Seismic Experiment (Rep. No.
TR_102362), Palo Alto, Calif.: Electrical Power Research Institute.

Archuleta, R. & Ji, C., 2016. Moment Rate Scaling for Earthquakes 3.3<=M<=5.3 with Implications for Stress Drop.
Geophysical Research Letters, pp. 12004 - 12011.

Atkinson, G. M. & Boore, D. M., 1995. New Ground Motion Relations for Eastern North America. Bulleting of the
Seismological Society of America, Volume 85, pp. 17 - 30.

Atkinson, G. M. & Boore, D. M., 2006. Earthquake Ground-Motion Prediction Equations for Eastern North America. Bulletin
of Seismological Society of America, 96(6), pp. 2181-2205.

Bardet, J. P., Ichii, K. & Lin, C. H., 2000. EERA: A Computer Program for Equivalent-Linear Earthquake Site Response
Analyses of Layered Soil Deposits, s.l.: Department of Civil Engineering - University of Southern California.

Boore, D. M., 2003. Simulation of Ground Motion Using the Stochastic Method. Pure and Applied Geophysics, pp. 635-676.

Campbell, K. W., 1985. Strong Motion Attenuation Relations: A Ten-Year Perspective. Earthquake Spectra, 1(4), pp. 759-
804.

Chen, K.-C. & Wang, J.-H., 1986. The May 20, 1986 Hualien Taiwan Earthquake and its Aftershocks. Bulletin of the Institute
of Earth Sciences, Academia Sinica, Volume 6, pp. 1-13.

Chen, K.-C. & Wang, J.-H., 1988. A Study on Aftershocks and Focal Mechanisms of Two 1986 Earthquakes in Hualien,
Taiwan. s.l., s.n., pp. 65-72.

Crane, S. & Motazedian, D., Unpublished. A Guide for Using EXSIM_V3: A Stochastic Finite-Fault Modelling Technique with
Low-Frequency Scaling, s.l.: s.n.
References
Dobry, R., Whitman, R. V. & Roesset, J. M., 1971. Soil Properties and the One-Dimensional Theory of Earthquake
Amplification, Cambridge, Mass.: School of Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), 1989. Proceedings: EPRI/NRC/TPC workshop on Seismic Soil-Structure
Interaction Analysis Techniques Using Data from Lotung , Taiwan, Palo Alto: Electric Power Research Institute.

Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), 1993. Guidelines for Determining Design Basis Ground Motions. Vol 1:
Method and Guidelines for Estimating Earthquake Ground Motion in Eastern North America, Palo Alto, Calif.:
Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI).

Elgamal, A. -W., Zeghal, M., Tang, H. T. & Stepp, J. C., 1995. Lotung Downhole Array. I: Evaluation of Site
Dynamic Properties. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, pp. 350-362.

Glaser, S. D. & Leeds, A. L., 1996. Preliminary Processing of the Lotung LSST Data, Gaithersburg, MD 20899:
Building and Fire Research Laboratory, National Institute of Standards and Technology.

Glaser, S. D., Ni, S.-H. & Ko, C.-C., 2008. System Identification of Soil Behavior from Vertical Seismic Arrays. Smart
Structures and Systems, pp. 727-740.

Google, 2015. Google Earth Pro (Version 7.1.5.1557) [Computer Program]. s.l.:s.n.

Huang, H.-C., Shieh, C.-S. & Chiu, H.-C., 2001. Linear and Nonlinear Behaviors of Soft Soil Layers Using Lotung
Downhole Array in Taiwan. Terrestrial Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, pp. 503 - 524.

Kramer, S. L., 1996. Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc..

Liu, C., 2006. Finite Fault Stochastic Modelling of the 1999 Chi-Chi Taiwan Earthquake. Ottawa(Ontario): s.n.
References
Moghaddam, H., Fanaie, N. & Motazedian, D., 2010. Estimation of Stress Drop for Some Large Shallow Earthquakes Using
Stochastic Point Source and Finite Fault Modelling. Scientia Iranica, 17(3), pp. 217-235.

Moh and Associates, 1988. Report for he Installation os Settlement Monitoring Instruments for Lotung Seismic Experiment
Station, s.l.: s.n.

Pezzopane, S. K. & Wesnousky, S. G., 1989. Large Earthquakes and Crustal Deformation near Taiwan. Journal of
Geophysical Research, 94(B6), pp. 7250-7264.

Richart, F. E., Hall, J. R. & Woods, R. D., 1970. Vibrations of Soils and Foundations. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.

Schnabel, P. B., Lysmer, J. & Seed, H. B., 1972. SHAKE: A Computer Program for Earthquake Response Analysis of
Horizontally Layered Sites, Berkeley: Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California.

Silva, W. et al., 2004. Validation of One-Dimensional Site Response Methodologies. Earthquake Spectra, pp. 1 - 62.

Sokolov, V., Loh, C.-H. & Jean, W.-Y., 2006. Strong Ground Motion Source Scaling and Attenuation Models for Earthquakes
Located in Different Source Zones in Taiwan. Taipei, Taiwan, ICEE.

Sokolov, V., Loh, C.-H. & Wen, K.-L., 2001. Site-dependent Design Input Ground Motion Estimations for the Taipei Area: A
Probabilistic Approach. Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics 16, pp. 177-191.

Tsai, C.-C. P., 1997. Relationships of Seismic Source Scaling in the Taiwan Region. Terrestrial, Atmospheric and Oceanic
Sciences, 8(1), pp. 49-68.

Wen, K.-L., 1994. Non-linear Soil Response in Ground Motions. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Volume
23, pp. 599 - 608.

Zeghal, M., Elgamal, A. -W., Tang, H. T. & Stepp, J. C., 1995. Lotung Downhole Array. II:Evaluation of Soil Nonlinear
Properties. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, pp. 363-378.