Difference between revisions of "UCVM Users Guide"

From SCECpedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
 
(244 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
Unified California Velocity Model (UCVM) is a proposed California state-wide 3D velocity model. One important use of UCVM is in high resolution 3D wave propagation simulations for California. UCVM development is an interdisciplinary research collaboration involving geoscientists and computer scientists. UCVM geoscience research includes identification and assembly of existing California velocity models into a state-wide model and improvements to existing velocity models. UCVM computer science research includes definition of a easy-to-use CVM query interface, integration of regional 3D and geotechnical models, and automated CVM evaluation processing capabilities.
+
Unified Community Velocity Model (UCVM) software framework is a collection of software tools designed to provide standard interface to multiple, alternative, California 3D velocity models. One important use of UCVM is in high resolution 3D wave propagation simulations for California. UCVM development is an interdisciplinary research collaboration involving geoscientists and computer scientists. UCVM geoscience research includes identification and assembly of existing California velocity models into a state-wide model and improvements to existing velocity models. UCVM computer science research includes definition of a easy-to-use CVM query interface, integration of regional 3D and geotechnical models, and automated CVM evaluation processing capabilities.
  
−
== Existing Model Coverage ==
+
[[File:UCVM_Coverage_Region.png|356px|thumb|right|Coverage region for UCVM 2D maps (cyan) overlayed upon regions of various California 3D velocity models (CVM-S4: red, CVM-H: blue, LinThurber: yellow, Thurber NoCal: green, USGS Bay Area: white)]]
  
−
UCVM is trying to move forward on a statewide seismic velocity model for CA suitable for ground-motion modeling. Current concept is that this model would not be a single model but a seamless combination of models covering various regions of the state. The tricky part of course is the transition from one model to another and the use of background models to fill in the gaps.
+
== Current UCVM Software Distributions  ==
 +
The current version of UCVM is available on from a github repository [http://www.scec.org/research/ucvm UCVM]. UCVM v15.10 is no longer supported and we do not recommend working with this version of the code.
 +
<!--
 +
'''Includes CVM-H 15.1, CCA05, CVM-S4.26, CVM-S4.26.GTL, CVM-S4, and other California Velocity Models''' - Released October, 2015. This is the recommended version:
 +
*[[UCVM 15.10.0]]
 +
*[[UCVM 15.10.0 Release Notes]]
 +
*[http://scec.usc.edu/scecpedia/UCVM_14.3.0_User_Guide UCVM Users Guide]
 +
*[http://scec.usc.edu/scecpedia/UCVM_14.3.0_Advanced_User_Guide Advanced Users Guide]
 +
*[http://scec.usc.edu/scecpedia/UCVM_14.3.0_Tutorial UCVM Introduction Tutorial]
 +
*[[SCEC-ERI_Workshop_2014 | Grad Student Workshop using UCVM]]
 +
-->
  
−
As a first step, we want to put together a map of the coverage:
+
== Supported Seismic Velocity Models ==
−
+
#[[CCA]] - Latest Version: CCA06 - Preliminary Central California Area (CCA) Velocity Model (Min Vs 900m/s - No GTL)
−
'''Current detailed seismic velocity models'''  
+
#[[CVM-H]] - Latest Version: CVM-H 15.1 - Unified Structural Representation-based CVM with consistent Fault Geometries, Basins, and Velocity Model (no GTL)
 +
#[[CVM-S4]] - Latest Version: CVM-S4  - Rule-based arbitrary precision southern California CVM with Geotechnical Layer from Kohler, Magistrale, and Clayton.
 +
#[[CVM-S4.26]] - Latest Version: CVM-S4.26 - 500m tomographic results from 0.2Hz CVM-S4 iteration 26 (Min Vs 900m/s - No GTL)
 +
#[[CVM-S4.26.M01]] - Latest Version: CVM-S4.26.M01 - 500m tomographic results from 0.2Hz CVM-S4 iteration 26 with rules for adding GTL to top 350m
 +
#[http://earthquake.usgs.gov/data/3dgeologic/documentation.php Cencal CVM] - USGS Bay Area Model
 +
#Carl Tape's Great Central Valley Model
 +
#Robert Graves' Cape Mendocino Region Model, Graves (1994)
 +
#[[UCVM Utah]] [http://geology.utah.gov/about-us/geologic-programs/geologic-hazards-program/for-consultants-and-design-professionals/community-velocity-model-cvm-and-other-geophysical-data/community-velocity-model-cvm/ Harold Magistrale's Wasatch Front Model (Utah)]
  
−
#SCEC CVM-4 [[CVM-S]]
+
=== Background Tomographic Models ===
−
#SCEC CVM-H [[CVM-H]]
+
#Moschetti Surface Wave Models
−
#USGS Bay Area Model [http://earthquake.usgs.gov/regional/nca/3Dgeologic/documentation.php cencalvm]
+
#Parkfield regional model, Thurber et al (2006)
−
#Carl's Great Valley Model
+
#San Francisco area regional model, Thurber et al (2007)
−
#Rob Graves' Cape Mendocino Region Model [[File:Cape_mendocino-19941027.pdf]]
+
#Northern California Regional 3D P-wave Velocity Model, Thurber et al (2009) [http://earthquake.usgs.gov/research/external/reports/05HQGR0067.pdf USGS Thurber Report (pdf)]
 +
#Egill Hauksson regional southern CA model
 +
#California Statewide 3D Velocity Model, Lin et al (2010). wiki: [[Lin Thurber CVM]] website: [http://www.rsmas.miami.edu/personal/glin/Home.html Guoqing Lin's website]
 +
 
 +
== Summary of Coverage Regions ==
 +
 
 +
[[File:Simulation regions ibath0.png|256px|thumb|right|Coverage regions of various California 3D velocity Models (Figure by Carl Tape )]]
 +
 
 +
CVM models typically provide Vp, Vs, rho, with constant attenuation above the basement surface (in the basins). The yellow dashed line is the target simulation goal for planned San Joaquin and Sierra model and simulations. The red box is CVMH 15.1.0. The inner red box is the high-res Los Angeles region of the CVM-H model.
 +
 
 +
*California CVM regions [http://hypocenter.usc.edu/research/ucvm/CVM_Coverage_Regions.kml CVM Boundaries in KML format]
 +
 
 +
== Model List ==
 +
 
 +
=== SCEC CVM-H ===
 +
 
 +
This southern California model is described at [[CVM-H]]. The current version is v15.1
 +
 
 +
=== SCEC CVM-S4 ===
  
−
'''Background tomographic models'''
+
This southern California model is described at [[CVM-S4]]. This is the latest rule-based SCEC velocity model that provides low Vs values in the top 500m.
−
#Moschetti Surface Wave Models
+
 
−
#Thurber et al - regional northern CA model,
+
=== SCEC CVM-S4.26 ===
−
#Egill's regional southern CA model,
+
 
−
#[[Lin Thurber CVM]]
+
This southern California model is described at [[CVM-S4.26]]. This is a tomography improved version of CVM-S4. It is delivered on a 500m x 500m x 500m mesh, and material properties between mesh points are calculated and returned using linear interpolation. The tomography set a minimum Vs value of about 900m/s, so this model does not return low Vs values.
−
##[http://www.rsmas.miami.edu/personal/glin/Statewide.html Lin et al Web Site]
+
 
 +
=== SCEC CVM-S4.26-M01 ===
 +
 
 +
This southern California model is described at [[CVM-S4.26-M01]]. This is a version of CVM-S4.26 that combines results with the CVM-S4 geotechnical layer when queried for points in the top 500m, based on the rules described in the entry at [[CVM-S4.26-M01]]. This version is used when creating simulation mesh for higher frequency wave propagation simulations that want more realistic low Vs values that are not available in the unmodified tomography results in the CVM-S4.26 version. This is the version of the CVM-S4 that was used in the CyberShake 15.4 simulations.
 +
 
 +
=== USGS Bay Area (cencalvm) ===
 +
 
 +
This northern California model is described at [http://earthquake.usgs.gov/data/3dgeologic/documentation.php USGS Bay Area Model cencalvm].
 +
 
 +
=== CCA ===
 +
 
 +
This central California model is described at [[CCA]]. This is the newest California velocity model.
 +
 
 +
=== Northern California Regional 3D P-wave Velocity Model ===
 +
 
 +
Here is info on the first of four of our regional-scale 3D P-wave velocity models that I will provide.  This is for our Northern California model, published in Thurber et al (2009).
 +
 
 +
Formally, the bounding rectangle is approximately given below however, the western edge realistically is the California coastline, and the northern edge is not quite to the Oregon border.
 +
<pre>
 +
42.60, -122.32
 +
40.34, -126.27
 +
37.74, -117.88
 +
35.62, -121.71
 +
</pre>
 +
*The bottom nodes of the model are at 36 km.
 +
*Node spacing is mostly 10 or 15 km in the NE-SW direction and is uniformly 20 km in the NW-SE direction.  Actual model resolution based on checkerboard tests is nominally ~twice the node spacing.
 +
*Vp model provided.
 +
 
 +
=== Cape Mendocino Region Model ===
 +
 
 +
This manuscript describes some 3D modeling of the Eel River basin which is in the Cape Mendocino region at the northern end of the San Andreas. Robert Graves did this work as part of the development of the 3D FD methodology and published as a USGS external grant report in Graves (1994).
 +
 
 +
=== Parkfield Regional Model ===
 +
Parkfield regional model, published in Thurber et al. (2006). Bounding box corners:
 +
<pre>
 +
TOP:
 +
35.918339 -121.412085
 +
36.6838908 -120.320581
 +
 
 +
BOTTOM:
 +
35.0996582 -120.542912
 +
35.86521 -119.45284
 +
</pre>
 +
 
 +
The model is fully documented in the supplementary information for the paper Thurber et al (2006).
 +
 
 +
=== San Francisco Regional Model ===
 +
 
 +
A higher-resolution model for the San Francisco Bay area, published in Thurber et al (2007). It covers a smaller region than our northern California model.
 +
 
 +
=== Wasatch Front Model (Utah) ===
 +
 
 +
[[UCVM Utah]] This is a Utah Geological Survey velocity model for NE Utah, developed by Harold Magistrale and described at [http://geology.utah.gov/about-us/geologic-programs/geologic-hazards-program/for-consultants-and-design-professionals/community-velocity-model-cvm-and-other-geophysical-data/community-velocity-model-cvm/ wfcvm].
 +
 
 +
== Overview of CVM Models ==
 +
These posters and presentations may contain information about earlier versions of CVM-H. This information may be useful to some users.
 +
*[http://hypocenter.usc.edu/research/UCVM/Small_et_al_UCVM_Jan_2015.pdf Computer Science Journal Article describing UCVM Software and Architecture]
 +
*[http://hypocenter.usc.edu/research/UCVM/Maechling_UCVM_Fairbanks_2013_v5.ppt Maechling UCVM Overview Presentation 2013 (50Mb ppt)]
 +
*[http://hypocenter.usc.edu/research/UCVM/scec_ucvm_sw_design.ppt Patrick Small UCVM Software Description Presentation 2013 (5Mb ppt) ]
 +
*[http://hypocenter.usc.edu/research/ucvm/CVM_H_11.2_summary.pptx Overview of CVM-H 11.2 (1Mb powerpoint file) ]
 +
*[http://hypocenter.usc.edu/research/ucvm/CVM_H_11.1_summary.ppt Overview of CVM-H 11.1 (1Mb powerpoint file) ]
 +
*[http://hypocenter.usc.edu/research/ucvm/Plesch_CVMH_PetaSHA_08.ppt Andreas Plesch Overview of CVM-H (2008) (7.4Mb powerpoint file)]
 +
*[http://hypocenter.usc.edu/research/ucvm/CVM_H_scec2008poster.pdf CVM-H Poster SCEC Annual Meeting (2008) (1.8Mb pdf file) ]
 +
*[http://hypocenter.usc.edu/research/ucvm/USR_Descriptions.pptx Overview of SCEC Unified Structure Representation (USR) Developments (4.2Mb powerpoint file) ]
 +
 
 +
== UCVM Software ==
  
−
'''Description of each model should include the following information:'''
+
A software framework has been developed to support a state-wide model. The framework contains a command-line query tool and a C API for querying any supported velocity model.
  
−
#the bounding polygon for each models,
+
=== Coverage Region and Projection ===
−
#the depth extent
 
−
#a brief description of the resolution, and
 
−
#the physical properties it includes (i.e., density, Vp, Vs, Qp, Qs).
 
  
−
== Summary of Regions ==
+
==== Projection for 2D Maps ====
 +
The following is the coverage region and projection for the included 2D elevation and Vs30 maps. The entire state of California is included, along with portions of Oregon, Nevada, Arizona, and northern Mexico.[[File:UCVM_Coverage_Region.png|256px|thumb|right|Coverage region for UCVM 2D maps (cyan) overlayed upon regions of various California 3D velocity models (CVM-S: red, CVM-H: blue, LinThurber: yellow, Thurber NoCal: green, USGS Bay Area: white)]]
 +
<pre>
 +
Origin: -129.75 DD, 40.75 DD
 +
Projection: Azimuthal Equidistant (Proj.4 projection string "+proj=aeqd +lat_0=36.0 +lon_0=-120.0 +x_0=0.0 +y_0=0.0")
 +
Rotation Angle: 55.0 D
 +
Dimensions: 1800km x 900km
 +
</pre>
  
−
[[File:Simulation regions ibath0.png|256px|thumb|right|Coverage regions of various California 3D velocity Models (Figure by Carl Tape )]]
+
*UCVM 2D map versus regional CVM coverage areas [http://hypocenter.usc.edu/research/ucvm/UCVM_Coverage_Regions.kml UCVM 2D Map Boundaries in KML format]
 +
*[http://hypocenter.usc.edu/research/ucvm/UCERF2_bounds.kml Extremes of UCERF 2.0 ruptures we would like to include (kml)]
  
−
Tape is working on a new socal mesh (black) of CVMH6.3 will cover somewhat west and north of the current CVMH model. This is the m16 model region from my thesis, which was based on an older CVMH model. Eventually it will contain the entire CVMH6.3 model, including to the south. All CVMH6.3 simulations are Vp, Vs, rho, with constant attenuation above the basement surface (in the basins). CVMH goes down a couple hundred kms, but the portion I use is upper 60 km,
+
=== Statewide Data Sets ===
−
and the local earthquake inversion sensitivity is dominantly upper 25 km.
 
  
−
*The yellow dashed line is the target simulation goal for San Joaquin and Sierra model and simulations. Andreas, John, and Carl have developed several surfaces within this region (including to the continental shelf), and we have lots of velocity data in the San Joaquin basin, which is our focus. (Andreas loaded the Lin-Thurber CA model as well.)
+
==== DEM ====
  
−
*The red box is CVMH6.3
+
A statewide DEM for the proposed coverage region is included within UCVM. Elevation data has been sampled from USGS NED 1 arcsec dataset (~30 m), and bathymetric data from the NOAA ETOPO1 1' dataset (~1.5 km). This DEM is currently sampled at a resolution of approximately 220m but this may be increased. The elevation data is stored as a fixed resolution Etree for the entire 1800 x 900 km region. The elevation at a particular point is smoothed using bilinear interpolation of the surrounding four elevation octants.
−
*The inner red box as the high-res LA model.
 
  
−
Boundary boxes point data files will be posted shortly
+
[[File:UCVM_DEM.png|256px|thumb|right|UCVM Digital Elevation Model, with elevation set to 0.0 m outside of coverage region. The distortion is caused by differences in the DEM projection (Az-equi) and the plot projection (cylindrical).]]
  
−
== Northern California Regional 3D P-wave Velocity Model ==
+
==== Vs30 Maps ====
  
−
Here is info on the first of four of our regional-scale 3D P-wave velocity models that I will provide.  This is for our Northern California model, published in
+
Two statewide Vs30 maps for the proposed coverage region are included within UCVM:
  
−
[http://hypocenter.usc.edu/research/UCVM/BSSA_2010_Lin_3Dvel_state.pdf Thurber, C., H. Zhang, T. Brocher, and V. Langenheim, Regional three-dimensional seismic velocity model of the crust and uppermost mantle of northern California, J.Geophys. Res., 114, B01304, doi:10.1029/2008JB005766, 2009]
+
* Wills-Wald Vs30 map (default): Vs30 data for the California landmass has been sampled from the Wills (2006) dataset at approx 0.0002197 D resolution, and out-of-state/ocean areas have been sampled from the Wald (2007) dataset at 0.0083333 D resolution.  
 +
* Yong-Wald Vs30 map (optional): Vs30 data for the California landmass has been sampled from the Yong (2011) dataset at approx 0.013 D resolution, and out-of-state/ocean areas have been sampled from the Wald (2007) dataset at 0.0083333 D resolution.  
  
−
#Formally, the bounding rectangle is approximately given below however, the western edge realistically is the California coastline, and the northern edge is not quite to the Oregon border.
+
These maps are currently sampled at a resolution of approximately 220m but this may be increased. The Vs30 data is stored as a fixed resolution Etree for the entire 1800 x 900 km region. The Vs30 value at a particular point is smoothed using bilinear interpolation of the surrounding four map octants.
−
*42.60, -122.32
 
−
*40.34, -126.27
 
−
*37.74, -117.88
 
−
*35.62, -121.71
 
−
#The bottom nodes of the model are at 36 km.
 
−
#Node spacing is mostly 10 or 15 km in the NE-SW direction and is uniformly 20 km in the NW-SE direction. Actual model resolution based on checkerboard tests is nominally ~twice the node spacing.
 
−
#Just Vp.
 
  
−
== Cape Mendocino Region Model ==
+
[[File:UCVM_Vs30.png|256px|thumb|right|UCVM Wills-Wald Vs30 map, with Vs30 set to 0.0 km/s outside of coverage region.]]
  
−
This manuscript describes some 3D modeling of the Eel River basin which is in
+
==== Geotechnical Layer ====
−
the Cape Mendocino region at the northern end of the San Andreas. Rob Graves did this work as part of the development of the 3D FD methodology and published as a USGS external grant report.
 
  
−
*[[File:Cape_mendocino-19941027.pdf]]
+
A statewide GTL for the proposed coverage region is included within UCVM. This is based on the Vs30-derived GTL method developed by Ely (2010). Interpolation between this GTL and the underlying crustal models is accomplished with the interpolation method described in that same publication. The z range over which interpolation is performed is configurable, as is the interpolation method used. The Ely method takes its input Vs30 value from the Vs30 map included within UCVM (described in the previous section).
  
−
== Prototype UCVM API ==
+
[[File:UCVM_GTL_Vs_Depth0.png|256px|thumb|right|UCVM Vs map at depth 0.0 m, showing the Ely GTL overlayed on the 1D background.]]
−
A prototype API for a state-wide model has been developed and is described in this document: [[UCVM API]].
 
  
−
== Combined Models ==
+
Additionally, UCVM is able to support any number of other user-defined GTLs. It will combine them in a manner analogous to how the crustal models are combined. Each GTL may also have its own user-defined interpolation function that is used to blend it with the underlying crustal models. If no interpolation method is specified, linear interpolation is assumed.
−
More details on how we plan to construct a UCVM by combining models is described on the UCVM page. Here is an example showing the velocity differences at 0.0km depth.
 
  
−
[[File:test_ucvm_depth_0.0.png|256px|thumb|right| 0.0km depth Vp values from Aagaard Central California Model and CVM-S 4.0 embedded in Hadley-Kanamori background model(Figure by Patrick Small)]]
+
[[File:GTL_Example.png|256px|thumb|right|These shows how velocity model material properties delivered by a 3D velocity model depend on how the velocity model is queried and whether the model considers elevation, or whether the earth is modeled as a flat region.]]
  
 +
==== Hydrology Map ====
  
−
=== CenCal/CVM-S ===
+
A statewide hydrology map for the proposed coverage region will be included within UCVM. This map will provide the surface elevations of bodies of water such as oceans, lakes, and seas. No source dataset has been identified as of yet. This map will allow water information to be returned when UCVM is queried by elevation.
  
−
A set of plots showing the interface betwen USGS CenCal and CVM-S from depths 0-20km can be downloaded here: [http://earth.usc.edu/~patrices/downloads/tiling_cencal_cvms.tar tiling_cencal_cvms.tar]
+
=== Documention ===
  
−
{| class="wikitable" | border="0"
+
The user guide is available at [[UCVM User Guide]].
−
|-
 
−
|-
 
−
| [[Image:tile_cencal_cvms_0.png|256px|thumb|right|Fig 1: CenCal + CVM-S Vs 0km depth ]]
 
−
| [[Image:tile_cencal_cvms_1000.png|256px|thumb|right|Fig 2: CenCal + CVM-S Vs 1km depth]]
 
−
| [[Image:tile_cencal_cvms_2000.png|256px|thumb|right|Fig 3: CenCal + CVM-S Vs 2km depth]]
 
−
| [[Image:tile_cencal_cvms_3000.png|256px|thumb|right|Fig 4: CenCal + CVM-S Vs 3km depth]]
 
−
| [[Image:tile_cencal_cvms_4000.png|256px|thumb|right|Fig 5: CenCal + CVM-S Vs 4km depth]]
 
−
| [[Image:tile_cencal_cvms_5000.png|256px|thumb|right|Fig 6: CenCal + CVM-S Vs 5km depth]]
 
−
|}
 
  
−
{| class="wikitable" | border="0"
+
== UCVM Issue Tracking System ==
−
|-
+
Users can report issues, bugs, and request features using the UCVM Trac system. Requires a SCEC login.
−
|-
+
*[http://northridge.usc.edu/trac/ucvm UCVM Trac System]
−
| [[Image:tile_cencal_cvms_6000.png|256px|thumb|right|Fig 7: CenCal + CVM-S Vs 6km depth]]
 
−
| [[Image:tile_cencal_cvms_7000.png|256px|thumb|right|Fig 8: CenCal + CVM-S Vs 7km depth]]
 
−
| [[Image:tile_cencal_cvms_8000.png|256px|thumb|right|Fig 9: CenCal + CVM-S Vs 8km depth]]
 
−
| [[Image:tile_cencal_cvms_9000.png|256px|thumb|right|Fig 10: CenCal + CVM-S Vs 9km depth]]
 
−
| [[Image:tile_cencal_cvms_10000.png|256px|thumb|right|Fig 11: CenCal + CVM-S Vs 10km depth]]
 
−
|}
 
  
 +
== UCVM Beyond California ==
  
−
{| class="wikitable" | border="0"
+
The UCVM code base has no specific dependencies upon the state of California. UCVM may be quickly configured for a new region given digital elevation data, Vs30 data, and one or more velocity models. As a proof of concept, this was done for northern Utah (see [[UCVM Utah]]) using the Utah Geological Survery Wasatch Front velocity model.
−
|-
 
−
|-
 
−
| [[Image:tile_cencal_cvms_11000.png|256px|thumb|right|Fig 12: CenCal + CVM-S Vs 11km depth ]]
 
−
| [[Image:tile_cencal_cvms_12000.png|256px|thumb|right|Fig 13: CenCal + CVM-S Vs 12km depth]]
 
−
| [[Image:tile_cencal_cvms_13000.png|256px|thumb|right|Fig 14: CenCal + CVM-S Vs 13km depth]]
 
−
| [[Image:tile_cencal_cvms_14000.png|256px|thumb|right|Fig 15: CenCal + CVM-S Vs 14km depth]]
 
−
| [[Image:tile_cencal_cvms_15000.png|256px|thumb|right|Fig 16: CenCal + CVM-S Vs 15km depth]]
 
−
| [[Image:tile_cencal_cvms_16000.png|256px|thumb|right|Fig 17: CenCal + CVM-S Vs 16km depth]]
 
−
|}
 
  
−
{| class="wikitable" | border="0"
+
== Future Models to be Integrated ==
−
|-
+
*[http://earthquake.usgs.gov/research/cus_seisvelmodel/ Central United States CVM]
−
|-
+
*Allam_Zigone_Ben-Zion_etal_2015
−
| [[Image:tile_cencal_cvms_17000.png|256px|thumb|right|Fig 3: CenCal + CVM-S Vs 17km depth]]
 
−
| [[Image:tile_cencal_cvms_18000.png|256px|thumb|right|Fig 3: CenCal + CVM-S Vs 18km depth]]
 
−
| [[Image:tile_cencal_cvms_19000.png|256px|thumb|right|Fig 3: CenCal + CVM-S Vs 19km depth]]
 
−
| [[Image:tile_cencal_cvms_20000.png|256px|thumb|right|Fig 3: CenCal + CVM-S Vs 20km depth]]
 
−
|}
 
  
 +
== Previous Software Versions ==
 +
*[[UCVM 14.3.0 ]]
 +
** This version includes CVM-H 14.3, and CVM-S4 California Velocity Models - Released March, 2014. This version is available as a reference only, if needed to reproduce results that used this earlier version. The recommended version is the most recent version available at the top of this page [[UCVM]].
  
 
== Related Entries ==
 
== Related Entries ==
 +
*[[UCVM User Guide]]
 
*[[UCVM API]]
 
*[[UCVM API]]
 +
*[[UCVM Visualization]]
 
*[[CVM-H]]
 
*[[CVM-H]]
 
*[[CVM-S]]
 
*[[CVM-S]]
 +
*[[UCVM Utah]]
 +
*[[UCVM 15.10.0]]
 +
*[[UCVM 14.3.0]]
 +
*[[CVM-S5]]
 +
*[[CVM-SI]]
 
*[[Community Velocity Model]]
 
*[[Community Velocity Model]]
 +
*[http://hypocenter.usc.edu/research/ucvm/SCEC_CVM_Archives.zip Collection of Presentations about CVM-S and CVM-H (56Mb ppt file)]
  
 
== See Also ==
 
== See Also ==
−
*[http://www.data.scec.org/3Dvelocity/ SCEC CVM]
+
*[[BlueWaters Etrees]]
 +
*[http://structure.harvard.edu/ Harvard Structural Geology & Earth Resources Group]
 
*[http://earth.usc.edu/~gely/vs30gtl/ Geoff Ely Vs30 geotechnical layer implementation]
 
*[http://earth.usc.edu/~gely/vs30gtl/ Geoff Ely Vs30 geotechnical layer implementation]
 
*[http://www.physics.utoronto.ca/~liuqy/research.html Qinya Liu Tomography Research]
 
*[http://www.physics.utoronto.ca/~liuqy/research.html Qinya Liu Tomography Research]
Line 135: Line 214:
 
*[[Main Page]]
 
*[[Main Page]]
 
*[http://www.scec.org SCEC Home Page]
 
*[http://www.scec.org SCEC Home Page]
 +
 +
== References ==
 +
#'''Ely, G., T. H. Jordan, P. Small, P. J. Maechling (2010)''', A Vs30-derived Near-surface Seismic Velocity Model Abstract S51A-1907, presented at 2010 Fall Meeting, AGU, San Francisco, Calif., 13-17 Dec. [[http://hypocenter.usc.edu/research/ucvm/Ely2010-AGU-Vs30-GTL.pdf Ely2010-AGU.pdf]]
 +
#''' Graves, R. (1994)''', Rupture History and Strong Motion Modeling of the 1992 Cape Mendocino Earthquake, USGS External Grant Report [[File:Cape_mendocino-19941027.pdf]]
 +
#'''Lin, G., C. H. Thurber, H. Zhang, E. Hauksson, P. Shearer, F. Waldhauser, T. M. Brocher, and J. Hardebeck (2010)''', A California statewide three-dimensional seismic velocity model from both absolute and differential Times, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 100, in press. [http://www.seismosoc.org/publications/BSSA_html/bssa_100-1/2009028-esupp/index.html supplemental]
 +
#'''Taborda R., López J., O'Hallaron D., Tu T. and Bielak J. (2007)''', A review of the current approach to CVM-Etrees, SCEC Annual Meeting, Palm Springs, CA, USA, September 8–12. [http://www.ce.cmu.edu/~rtaborda/publications/html/abstract_2007b.html]
 +
# '''Thurber, C., H. Zhang, F. Waldhauser, J. Hardebeck, A. Michael, and D. Eberhart-Phillips (2006)''', Three-dimensional compressional wavespeed model, earthquake relocations, and focal mechanisms for the Parkfield, California, region, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 96, S38-S49, 2006. [http://www.seismosoc.org/publications/BSSA_html/bssa_96-4b/05825-esupp/index.html supplemental]
 +
# '''Thurber, C., T. Brocher, H. Zhang, and V. Langenheim (2007)''', Three-dimensional P-wave velocity model for the San Francisco Bay region, California, J. Geophys. Res., 112, B07313, doi:10.1029/ 2006JB004682, 2007.
 +
#'''Thurber, C., H. Zhang, T. Brocher, and V. Langenheim (2009)''', Regional three-dimensional seismic velocity model of the crust and uppermost mantle of northern California, J.Geophys. Res., 114, B01304, doi:10.1029/2008JB005766, 2009.
 +
#'''Wald, D. J., and T. I. Allen (2007)''', Topographic slope as a proxy for seismic site conditions and amplification, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 97 (5), 1379-1395, doi:10.1785/0120060267.
 +
#'''Wills, C. J., and K. B. Clahan (2006)''', Developing a map of geologically defined site-condition categories for California, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 96 (4A), 1483-1501, doi:10.1785/0120050179.
 +
#'''Yong, A., Hough, S.E., Iwahashi, J., and A. Braverman (2012)''', A terrain-based site conditions map of California with implications for the contiguous United States, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., Vol. 102, No. 1, pp. 114–128, February 2012, doi: 10.1785/0120100262.

Latest revision as of 00:29, 12 November 2017

Unified Community Velocity Model (UCVM) software framework is a collection of software tools designed to provide standard interface to multiple, alternative, California 3D velocity models. One important use of UCVM is in high resolution 3D wave propagation simulations for California. UCVM development is an interdisciplinary research collaboration involving geoscientists and computer scientists. UCVM geoscience research includes identification and assembly of existing California velocity models into a state-wide model and improvements to existing velocity models. UCVM computer science research includes definition of a easy-to-use CVM query interface, integration of regional 3D and geotechnical models, and automated CVM evaluation processing capabilities.

Coverage region for UCVM 2D maps (cyan) overlayed upon regions of various California 3D velocity models (CVM-S4: red, CVM-H: blue, LinThurber: yellow, Thurber NoCal: green, USGS Bay Area: white)

Current UCVM Software Distributions

The current version of UCVM is available on from a github repository UCVM. UCVM v15.10 is no longer supported and we do not recommend working with this version of the code.

Supported Seismic Velocity Models

  1. CCA - Latest Version: CCA06 - Preliminary Central California Area (CCA) Velocity Model (Min Vs 900m/s - No GTL)
  2. CVM-H - Latest Version: CVM-H 15.1 - Unified Structural Representation-based CVM with consistent Fault Geometries, Basins, and Velocity Model (no GTL)
  3. CVM-S4 - Latest Version: CVM-S4 - Rule-based arbitrary precision southern California CVM with Geotechnical Layer from Kohler, Magistrale, and Clayton.
  4. CVM-S4.26 - Latest Version: CVM-S4.26 - 500m tomographic results from 0.2Hz CVM-S4 iteration 26 (Min Vs 900m/s - No GTL)
  5. CVM-S4.26.M01 - Latest Version: CVM-S4.26.M01 - 500m tomographic results from 0.2Hz CVM-S4 iteration 26 with rules for adding GTL to top 350m
  6. Cencal CVM - USGS Bay Area Model
  7. Carl Tape's Great Central Valley Model
  8. Robert Graves' Cape Mendocino Region Model, Graves (1994)
  9. UCVM Utah Harold Magistrale's Wasatch Front Model (Utah)

Background Tomographic Models

  1. Moschetti Surface Wave Models
  2. Parkfield regional model, Thurber et al (2006)
  3. San Francisco area regional model, Thurber et al (2007)
  4. Northern California Regional 3D P-wave Velocity Model, Thurber et al (2009) USGS Thurber Report (pdf)
  5. Egill Hauksson regional southern CA model
  6. California Statewide 3D Velocity Model, Lin et al (2010). wiki: Lin Thurber CVM website: Guoqing Lin's website

Summary of Coverage Regions

Coverage regions of various California 3D velocity Models (Figure by Carl Tape )

CVM models typically provide Vp, Vs, rho, with constant attenuation above the basement surface (in the basins). The yellow dashed line is the target simulation goal for planned San Joaquin and Sierra model and simulations. The red box is CVMH 15.1.0. The inner red box is the high-res Los Angeles region of the CVM-H model.

Model List

SCEC CVM-H

This southern California model is described at CVM-H. The current version is v15.1

SCEC CVM-S4

This southern California model is described at CVM-S4. This is the latest rule-based SCEC velocity model that provides low Vs values in the top 500m.

SCEC CVM-S4.26

This southern California model is described at CVM-S4.26. This is a tomography improved version of CVM-S4. It is delivered on a 500m x 500m x 500m mesh, and material properties between mesh points are calculated and returned using linear interpolation. The tomography set a minimum Vs value of about 900m/s, so this model does not return low Vs values.

SCEC CVM-S4.26-M01

This southern California model is described at CVM-S4.26-M01. This is a version of CVM-S4.26 that combines results with the CVM-S4 geotechnical layer when queried for points in the top 500m, based on the rules described in the entry at CVM-S4.26-M01. This version is used when creating simulation mesh for higher frequency wave propagation simulations that want more realistic low Vs values that are not available in the unmodified tomography results in the CVM-S4.26 version. This is the version of the CVM-S4 that was used in the CyberShake 15.4 simulations.

USGS Bay Area (cencalvm)

This northern California model is described at USGS Bay Area Model cencalvm.

CCA

This central California model is described at CCA. This is the newest California velocity model.

Northern California Regional 3D P-wave Velocity Model

Here is info on the first of four of our regional-scale 3D P-wave velocity models that I will provide. This is for our Northern California model, published in Thurber et al (2009).

Formally, the bounding rectangle is approximately given below however, the western edge realistically is the California coastline, and the northern edge is not quite to the Oregon border. 

42.60, -122.32
40.34, -126.27
37.74, -117.88
35.62, -121.71
  • The bottom nodes of the model are at 36 km.
  • Node spacing is mostly 10 or 15 km in the NE-SW direction and is uniformly 20 km in the NW-SE direction. Actual model resolution based on checkerboard tests is nominally ~twice the node spacing.
  • Vp model provided.

Cape Mendocino Region Model

This manuscript describes some 3D modeling of the Eel River basin which is in the Cape Mendocino region at the northern end of the San Andreas. Robert Graves did this work as part of the development of the 3D FD methodology and published as a USGS external grant report in Graves (1994).

Parkfield Regional Model

Parkfield regional model, published in Thurber et al. (2006). Bounding box corners: 

TOP:
35.918339 -121.412085
36.6838908 -120.320581

BOTTOM:
35.0996582 -120.542912
35.86521 -119.45284

The model is fully documented in the supplementary information for the paper Thurber et al (2006).

San Francisco Regional Model

A higher-resolution model for the San Francisco Bay area, published in Thurber et al (2007). It covers a smaller region than our northern California model.

Wasatch Front Model (Utah)

UCVM Utah This is a Utah Geological Survey velocity model for NE Utah, developed by Harold Magistrale and described at wfcvm.

Overview of CVM Models

These posters and presentations may contain information about earlier versions of CVM-H. This information may be useful to some users.

UCVM Software

A software framework has been developed to support a state-wide model. The framework contains a command-line query tool and a C API for querying any supported velocity model.

Coverage Region and Projection

Projection for 2D Maps

The following is the coverage region and projection for the included 2D elevation and Vs30 maps. The entire state of California is included, along with portions of Oregon, Nevada, Arizona, and northern Mexico.

Coverage region for UCVM 2D maps (cyan) overlayed upon regions of various California 3D velocity models (CVM-S: red, CVM-H: blue, LinThurber: yellow, Thurber NoCal: green, USGS Bay Area: white)
Origin: -129.75 DD, 40.75 DD
Projection: Azimuthal Equidistant (Proj.4 projection string "+proj=aeqd +lat_0=36.0 +lon_0=-120.0 +x_0=0.0 +y_0=0.0")
Rotation Angle: 55.0 D
Dimensions: 1800km x 900km

Statewide Data Sets

DEM

A statewide DEM for the proposed coverage region is included within UCVM. Elevation data has been sampled from USGS NED 1 arcsec dataset (~30 m), and bathymetric data from the NOAA ETOPO1 1' dataset (~1.5 km). This DEM is currently sampled at a resolution of approximately 220m but this may be increased. The elevation data is stored as a fixed resolution Etree for the entire 1800 x 900 km region. The elevation at a particular point is smoothed using bilinear interpolation of the surrounding four elevation octants.

UCVM Digital Elevation Model, with elevation set to 0.0 m outside of coverage region. The distortion is caused by differences in the DEM projection (Az-equi) and the plot projection (cylindrical).

Vs30 Maps

Two statewide Vs30 maps for the proposed coverage region are included within UCVM:

  • Wills-Wald Vs30 map (default): Vs30 data for the California landmass has been sampled from the Wills (2006) dataset at approx 0.0002197 D resolution, and out-of-state/ocean areas have been sampled from the Wald (2007) dataset at 0.0083333 D resolution.
  • Yong-Wald Vs30 map (optional): Vs30 data for the California landmass has been sampled from the Yong (2011) dataset at approx 0.013 D resolution, and out-of-state/ocean areas have been sampled from the Wald (2007) dataset at 0.0083333 D resolution.

These maps are currently sampled at a resolution of approximately 220m but this may be increased. The Vs30 data is stored as a fixed resolution Etree for the entire 1800 x 900 km region. The Vs30 value at a particular point is smoothed using bilinear interpolation of the surrounding four map octants.

UCVM Wills-Wald Vs30 map, with Vs30 set to 0.0 km/s outside of coverage region.

Geotechnical Layer

A statewide GTL for the proposed coverage region is included within UCVM. This is based on the Vs30-derived GTL method developed by Ely (2010). Interpolation between this GTL and the underlying crustal models is accomplished with the interpolation method described in that same publication. The z range over which interpolation is performed is configurable, as is the interpolation method used. The Ely method takes its input Vs30 value from the Vs30 map included within UCVM (described in the previous section).

UCVM Vs map at depth 0.0 m, showing the Ely GTL overlayed on the 1D background.

Additionally, UCVM is able to support any number of other user-defined GTLs. It will combine them in a manner analogous to how the crustal models are combined. Each GTL may also have its own user-defined interpolation function that is used to blend it with the underlying crustal models. If no interpolation method is specified, linear interpolation is assumed.

These shows how velocity model material properties delivered by a 3D velocity model depend on how the velocity model is queried and whether the model considers elevation, or whether the earth is modeled as a flat region.

Hydrology Map

A statewide hydrology map for the proposed coverage region will be included within UCVM. This map will provide the surface elevations of bodies of water such as oceans, lakes, and seas. No source dataset has been identified as of yet. This map will allow water information to be returned when UCVM is queried by elevation.

Documention

The user guide is available at UCVM User Guide.

UCVM Issue Tracking System

Users can report issues, bugs, and request features using the UCVM Trac system. Requires a SCEC login.

UCVM Beyond California

The UCVM code base has no specific dependencies upon the state of California. UCVM may be quickly configured for a new region given digital elevation data, Vs30 data, and one or more velocity models. As a proof of concept, this was done for northern Utah (see UCVM Utah) using the Utah Geological Survery Wasatch Front velocity model.

Future Models to be Integrated

Previous Software Versions

  • UCVM 14.3.0
    • This version includes CVM-H 14.3, and CVM-S4 California Velocity Models - Released March, 2014. This version is available as a reference only, if needed to reproduce results that used this earlier version. The recommended version is the most recent version available at the top of this page UCVM.

Related Entries

See Also

References

  1. Ely, G., T. H. Jordan, P. Small, P. J. Maechling (2010), A Vs30-derived Near-surface Seismic Velocity Model Abstract S51A-1907, presented at 2010 Fall Meeting, AGU, San Francisco, Calif., 13-17 Dec. [Ely2010-AGU.pdf]
  2. Graves, R. (1994), Rupture History and Strong Motion Modeling of the 1992 Cape Mendocino Earthquake, USGS External Grant Report Cape mendocino-19941027.pdf
  3. Lin, G., C. H. Thurber, H. Zhang, E. Hauksson, P. Shearer, F. Waldhauser, T. M. Brocher, and J. Hardebeck (2010), A California statewide three-dimensional seismic velocity model from both absolute and differential Times, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 100, in press. supplemental
  4. Taborda R., López J., O'Hallaron D., Tu T. and Bielak J. (2007), A review of the current approach to CVM-Etrees, SCEC Annual Meeting, Palm Springs, CA, USA, September 8–12. [1]
  5. Thurber, C., H. Zhang, F. Waldhauser, J. Hardebeck, A. Michael, and D. Eberhart-Phillips (2006), Three-dimensional compressional wavespeed model, earthquake relocations, and focal mechanisms for the Parkfield, California, region, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 96, S38-S49, 2006. supplemental
  6. Thurber, C., T. Brocher, H. Zhang, and V. Langenheim (2007), Three-dimensional P-wave velocity model for the San Francisco Bay region, California, J. Geophys. Res., 112, B07313, doi:10.1029/ 2006JB004682, 2007.
  7. Thurber, C., H. Zhang, T. Brocher, and V. Langenheim (2009), Regional three-dimensional seismic velocity model of the crust and uppermost mantle of northern California, J.Geophys. Res., 114, B01304, doi:10.1029/2008JB005766, 2009.
  8. Wald, D. J., and T. I. Allen (2007), Topographic slope as a proxy for seismic site conditions and amplification, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 97 (5), 1379-1395, doi:10.1785/0120060267.
  9. Wills, C. J., and K. B. Clahan (2006), Developing a map of geologically defined site-condition categories for California, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 96 (4A), 1483-1501, doi:10.1785/0120050179.
  10. Yong, A., Hough, S.E., Iwahashi, J., and A. Braverman (2012), A terrain-based site conditions map of California with implications for the contiguous United States, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., Vol. 102, No. 1, pp. 114–128, February 2012, doi: 10.1785/0120100262.
Retrieved from "https://strike.scec.org/scecwiki/index.php?title=UCVM_Users_Guide&oldid=19384"