2013 Progress and Planning Workshop
From GMSV Wiki
- Organizers: Nico Luco & Sanaz Rezaeian
- Date: Sunday, September 8, 2013 (13:00-17:00)
- Location: Hilton Palm Springs Resort, Palm Springs, CA
- Participants: 142 registrants (view list)
- Webpage: http://www.scec.org/workshops/2013/gmsv/index.html
Background & Objectives
The SCEC Ground Motion Simulation Validation (GMSV) Technical Activity Group (TAG) focuses on developing and implementing, via collaboration between ground motion modelers and engineering users, testing/rating methodologies for the use of ground motion simulations in engineering applications. The purpose of this half-day workshop at the SCEC Annual Meeting was to:
- Share recent progress on GMSV TAG projects, such as those coordinated for the broader SCEC Software Environment for Integrated Seismic Modeling (SEISM) project; and
- Discuss plans for future GMSV TAG projects, such as those that will support the SCEC Committee for Utilization of Ground Motion Simulations (UGMS).
This workshop was preceded by a half-day workshop of the SCEC Broadband Platform validation project, which is a separate but coordinated GMSV effort.
Presentation slides may be downloaded by clicking each title. PLEASE NOTE: Slides are the author's property. They may contain unpublished or preliminary information and should only be used while viewing the talk.
Summary of Outcomes
- GMSV-SEISM efforts need even more coordination. Monthly webconferences were discussed.
- GMSV TAG projects of Lin et al and Rathje et al also need to be tightly coordinated with the GMSV SEISM efforts.
- In particular, validation using the simple ground motion parameters that are common amongst the projects (e.g., significant duration) should be very tightly coordinated. In fact, calculation of these parameters should be added to the Broadband Platform (BBP). Validation figures analogous to those currently generated on the BBP for elastic spectral acceleration could also be generated for the additional simple parameters.
- Click here for a preliminary candidate list of "simple" (and other) ground motion parameters for which validation could be added to the BBP.
- A bullet should be added to the Science Collaboration Plan for comparisons of simulated versus recorded ground motions for different models of the regional geologic structure.
- An organized effort to incorporate geotechnical site response into SCEC ground motion simulations should be encouraged in the Science Collaboration Plan. Perhaps a separate Technical Activity Group should be established for this effort.
- Validation of CyberShake in support of the UGMS Committee is needed and important, and a few investigators have already begun this, but at this stage a group effort that is analogous to the BBP validation project is likely premature. For now, additional individual but coordinated projects on the topic should be encouraged in the Science Collaboration Plan. In particular, investigations of observed vs. simulated region-specific path effects for small-magnitude earthquakes should be encouraged. Ground motions for many small-magnitude earthquakes can be found in the Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER) NGA-West2 database.