Ground-motions site and event specificity: Insights from assessing a suite of simulated ground motions in the San Francisco Bay Area

Abstract

This article presents the results of a research that is part of a larger collaborative effort between the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and the Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, funded by the US Department of Energy Office of Cybersecurity, Energy Security and Emergency Response. The main objective of this study is to assess a suite of near and far-field simulated ground motions obtained from 20 realizations of an M7 Hayward Fault earthquake in the San Francisco Bay Area, California USA, and inform the selection of rupture simulation parameters leading to strong motions. To this aim, comparisons are conducted with NGA-W2 and directivity ground-motion models and a selected population of records. An archetypal steel moment-resisting frame is utilized to assess infrastructure response distributions. The analyses carried out for each simulated event and subdomain with consistent properties in terms of shallow shear-wave velocity proved to be instrumental for better interpreting the differences between simulated motions and empirical models. The main reasons identified for variances between simulations and empirical relationships included (1) directivity effects fully captured by the simulations across the full breadth of rupture models; (2) site vicinity to ruptures that incorporate large-slip patches, particularly if these are in the forward-directivity direction; and (3) presence of geologic structures that can “trap” seismic waves and produce ground motions with large amplitude and long signal duration. The analyses carried out in this work provide a path for interpreting ground-motion site and event specificity obtained from a suite of physics-based simulations, differing only in the rupture model characterization, to inform the selection of simulation scenarios for site-specific engineering analyses under strong excitations. Evidence from this work points to the possibility that current hazard models may underestimate ground-motion intensities in areas where the combined effect of directivity and site conditions results in large ground-motion amplitudes.