CyberShake Study 15.12: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 94: | Line 94: | ||
|} | |} | ||
=== | === Vs values v2.0 === | ||
For the stochastic, we continued to use vref=865, and changed to Vs30 = 30 / Sum (1/(Vs sampled from [0.5,29.5] in 1 meter increments)). | For the stochastic, we continued to use vref=865, and changed to Vs30 = 30 / Sum (1/(Vs sampled from [0.5,29.5] in 1 meter increments)). | ||
| Line 139: | Line 139: | ||
|} | |} | ||
=== Vs values v3.0 === | |||
We modified the vref calculation further, to: | We modified the vref calculation further, to: | ||
Revision as of 17:12, 6 November 2015
CyberShake Study 15.10 takes the deterministic results from CyberShake Study 15.4 and adds broadband components.
Initial tests
We performed initial tests by using the Graves code from the current version of the BBP to synthesize stochastic seismograms, along with applying site amplification from CB2014. We used the Vs30 value taken from the same velocity model as the deterministic seismograms (CVM-S 4.26). We also applied site amplification from CB2014 to the deterministic seismograms. Then the deterministic seismograms were low-pass filtered at 1.0 Hz, and the stochastic seismograms were high-pass filtered at 1.0 Hz, and the results were combined. From this broadband seismogram we calculated PSA and RotD values.
Sample Seismogram
Below is a seismogram for PAS, source 273, rupture 69, rupture variation 50, comparing the 1 Hz seismogram (blue) to the 10 Hz seismogram (green). Mostly, the 10 Hz seismogram looks sharper.
Deterministic Site Amplification
We ran PAS and LADT with and without deterministic site amplification (using CB 2014, and Vs30 values from CVM-S4.26). Here are the results:
Vs values v2.0
For the stochastic, we continued to use vref=865, and changed to Vs30 = 30 / Sum (1/(Vs sampled from [0.5,29.5] in 1 meter increments)).
For the deterministic, we switched to use vref = Vs @ Z=0 * Vs30 / Vs50 (50 is half the grid spacing of 100m).
For PAS, this means the LF vref went from 865 to 422.4, and the Vs30 went from 821.3 to 838.8.
For LADT, this means the LF vref went from 865 to 436.1, and the Vs30 went from 359.1 to 365.4.
Here are comparison curves for PAS and LADT.
Vs values v3.0
We modified the vref calculation further, to:
vref_LF_eff = Vs30 * [ VsD5H / Vs5H ]
with Vs30 determined from the CVM as before (averaging over 1 meter increments). The other parameters are determined based on the grid spacing used in the calculation, given by H:
Vs5H = travel time averaged Vs computed from CVM in 1 meter increments down to a depth of 5*H VsD5H = discrete travel time averaged Vs computed from 3D velocity mesh used in the SGT calculation over the upper 5 grid points
So, for H=100m Vs5H would be:
Vs500 = 500 / ( Sum ( 1 / Vs sampled from [0.5,499.5] in 1 meter increments ))
And then VsD5H is given by:
VsD500 = 5/{ 0.5/Vs(Z=0m) + 1/Vs(Z=100m) + 1/Vs(Z=200m) + 1/Vs(Z=300m) + 1/Vs(Z=400m) + 0.5/Vs(Z=500m) }
srf2stoch_lite
To reduce the memory requirements of srf2stoch, Rob Graves created a new version, srf2stoch_lite, with much smaller memory requirements. The differences in hazard curves can be seen here, for PAS. Since srf2stoch is only used in the high frequency, we are only looking at high frequency curves. Blue is with srf2stoch, black is with srf2stoch_lite.















































































