|Title||Ground-motion prediction equations 1964-2010|
|Institution||Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER)|
|Publisher||University of California, Berkeley|
This report summarizes all empirical ground-motion prediction equations (GMPEs), to estimate earthquake peak ground acceleration (PGA) and elastic response spectral ordinates, published between 1964 and 2010 (inclusive). This report replaces: the Imperial College London report of Douglas (2004a), which provided a summary of all GMPEs from 1964 until the end of 2003; the BRGM report of Douglas (2006), which summarized all GMPEs from 2004 to 2006 (plus some earlier models); and the report of Douglas (2008), concerning GMPEs published in 2007 and 2008 (plus some earlier models). In addition, this report lists published GMPEs derived from simulations, although details are not given since the focus here is on empirical models. Studies that only present graphs are only listed as are those nonparametric formulations that provide predictions for different combinations of distance and magnitude because these are more difficult to use for seismic hazard analysis than those which give a single formula. Equations for single earthquakes or for earthquakes of approximately the same size are excluded due to their limited usefulness. Those relations based on conversions from macroseismic intensity are only listed.
This report was compiled as part of Task 2 (Compilation of list of candidate GMPEs) of the Global Component on GMPEs coordinated by the Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER) for the Global Earthquake Model (GEM) and Workpackage 4 (Strong ground motion modeling) of the Seismic Hazard Harmonization in Europe (SHARE) project of the Seven Framework Programme of the European Commission (grant agreement no. 226769).
This report summarizes, in total, the characteristics of 289 empirical GMPEs for the prediction of PGA and 188 empirical models for the prediction of elastic response spectral ordinates. In addition, many dozens of simulation-based models to estimate PGA and elastic response spectral ordinates are listed but no details are given.
It should be noted that the size of this report means that it may contain some errors or omissions. No discussion of the merits, ranges of applicability or limitations of any of the relationships is included herein except those mentioned by the authors or inherent in the data used. This report is not a critical review of the models. The GMPEs are generally reported in the form used in the original references.
|1.||Cauzzi and Faccioli (2008)||PGA||ƒ(Vs30, Mw, dh) m/s2||Mw: 5–7.2; h: 2–22 km; Tectonic Setting: Active Shallow, Stable Shallow; FM: Normal, Reverse, Strike-slip; dh: 6–150 km||-||-||-|
|2.||Graizer et al. (2010)||PGA||ƒ(FM, Mw, Vs30, dr) g||Mw: 4.5–7.9; FM: Strike-slip, Normal, Reverse; dr: < 500 km||-||-||-|
|3.||Gregor et al., 2002||PGAh||ƒ(Vs30, FM, Mw, dr) g||Mw: 4.4–7.4; Tectonic Setting: Active Shallow, Stable Shallow; FM: Oblique, Strike-slip, Reverse, Thrust; dr: 0.1–267.3 km||-||-||-|
|4.||Ornthammarath et al. (2010)||PGA||ƒ(Vs30, Mw, df) m/s2||Mw: 5.1–6.5; h: 10–15 km; FM: Strike-slip; df: < 80 km||2||-||-|
|5.||Smit (1998)||PGAh||ƒ(ML, dh) m/s2||-||1||-||-|
|6.||Ulutas and Ozer (2010)||PGA||ƒ(Mw, dr) g||Mw: 4–7.5; h: 2–22 km; FM: Normal, Strike-slip; dr: < 200 km||1||-||-|