Figure 2 - uploaded by Alessandro Vuan
Content may be subject to copyright.
6 and Tables 2.e-2.f shows the experimental setting defined for all 78 cases. In our convention, the strike direction is always directed to North. In both models, the seismogenic layer is represented by the stiff crustal layer with shear-wave velocity of 3.6 km/s, and the fault bottom does not exceed 30 km of depth. Table 2.g
Similar publications
Citations
... Strasser and Bommer (2005) have examined the variability observed at receivers distributed over a dense grid based on numerical simulations in which the source parameters are varied. The simulations used in this study were carried out at the Osservatorio di Geofisica Sperimentale (OGS) in Trieste, Italy, using the deterministic-stochastic kinematic finite-source model EXWIM (Priolo et al., 2002(Priolo et al., , 2003. This model had previously been used for the estimation of maximum ground motions in the PEGASOS project (Abrahamson et al., 2002). ...
Over the history of instrumental strong-motion recording, the largest amplitudes of ground motions recorded to date have had a significant impact on the perception of the largest amplitudes of ground motion considered physically realizable. However, the length of the instrumental recording history is comparatively short, and instrumental recording networks are relatively sparse, which raises the issue of whether the full range of ground motions has been captured in the current global holdings of strong-motion data. Because the answer to this question is quite obviously negative, a more difficult question then arises: How much greater than the largest currently available observation could future ground motions be? The present article explores this issue, drawing on empirical observations, results from numerical simulations, and a statistical exercise involving the sampling of spatially correlated stochastic ground-motion fields.
