Geology Reports⌕ Search

Geology topics

Nico Luco

Publications and source records attributed to Nico Luco.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
USGS2021

The 2018 update of the US National Seismic Hazard Model: Ground motion models in the central and eastern US

The United States Geological Survey (USGS) National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) is the scientific foundation of seismic design regulations in the United States and is regularly updated to consider the best available science and data. The 2018 update of the conterminous US NSHM includes major changes to the underlying ground motion models (GMMs). Most of the changes are motivated by the new multi-period response spectra requirements of seismic design regulations that use hazard results for 22 spectral periods and 8 site classes. In the central and eastern United States (CEUS), the 2018 NSHM incorporates 31 new GMMs for hard-rock site conditions ( V S 30 = 3000 m / s ) "> ( V S 30 = 3000 m / s ) (VS30=3000m/s) , including the Next Generation Attenuation (NGA)-East GMMs. New aleatory variability and site-effect models, both specific to the CEUS, are applied to all median hard-rock GMMs. This article documents the changes to the USGS GMM selection criteria and provides details on the new CEUS GMMs used in the 2018 NSHM update. The median GMMs, their weights, epistemic uncertainty, and aleatory variability are compared with those considered in prior NSHMs. This article further provides implementation details on the CEUS site-effect model, which allows conversion of hard-rock ground motions to other site conditions in the CEUS for the first time in NSHMs. Compared with the 2014 NSHM hard-rock ground motions, the weighted average of median GMMs increases for large magnitude events at middle to large distance range, epistemic uncertainty increases in almost all situations, but aleatory variability is not significantly different. Finally, the total effect on hazard is demonstrated for an assumed earthquake source model in the CEUS, which shows an increased ring of ground motions in the vicinity of the New Madrid seismic zone and decreased ground motions near the East Tennessee seismic zone.

Earthquake Spectra↗
USGS2021

The 2018 update of the US National Seismic Hazard Model: Where, why, and how much probabilistic ground motion maps changed

The 2018 US Geological Survey National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) incorporates new data and updated science to improve the underlying earthquake and ground motion forecasts for the conterminous United States. The NSHM considers many new data and component input models: (1) new earthquakes between 2013 and 2017 and updated earthquake magnitudes for some earlier earthquakes; (2) two updated smoothed seismicity models to forecast earthquake rates; (3) two suites of new central and eastern US (CEUS) ground motion models (GMMs) to translate ground shaking for various earthquake sizes and source-to-site distances considered in the model; (4) two CEUS GMMs for aleatory variability; (5) two CEUS site-effect models that modify ground shaking based on alternative shallow site conditions; (6) more advanced western US (WUS) lithologic and structural information to assess basin site effects for selected urban regions; and (7) a more comprehensive range of outputs (22 periods and 8 site classes) than in previous versions of the NSHMs. Each of these new datasets and models produces changes in the probabilistic ground shaking levels that are spatially and statistically analyzed. Recent earthquakes or changes to some older earthquake magnitudes and locations mostly result in probabilistic ground shaking levels that are similar to previous models, but local changes can reach up to +80% and −60% compared to the 2014 model. Newly developed CEUS models for GMMs, aleatory variability, and site effects cause overall changes up to ±64%. The addition of the WUS basin amplifications causes changes of up to +60% at longer periods for sites overlying deep soft soils. Across the conterminous United States, the hazard changes in the model are mainly caused by new GMMs in the CEUS, by sedimentary basin effects for long periods (≥1 s) in the WUS, and by seismicity changes for short (0.2 s) and long (1 s) periods for both areas.

Earthquake Spectra↗
USGS2021

A subset of CyberShake ground-motion time series for response-history analysis

This manuscript describes a subset of CyberShake numerically simulated ground motions that were selected and vetted for use in engineering response-history analyses. Ground motions were selected that have seismological properties and response spectra representative of conditions in the Los Angeles area, based on disaggregation of seismic hazard. Ground motions were selected from millions of available time series and were reviewed to confirm their suitability for response-history analysis. The processes used to select the time series, the characteristics of the resulting data, and the provided documentation are described in this article. The resulting data and documentation are available electronically.

California↗
USGS2021

Earthquake risk of gas pipelines in the conterminous United States and its sources of uncertainty

Relatively little research has been conducted to systematically quantify the nationwide earthquake risk of gas pipelines in the US; simultaneously, national guidance is limited for operators across the country to consistently evaluate the earthquake risk of their assets. Furthermore, many challenges and uncertainties exist in a comprehensive seismic risk assessment of gas pipelines. As a first stage in a systematic nationwide assessment, we quantify the earthquake risk of gas transmission pipelines in the conterminous US due to strong ground shaking, including the associated uncertainties. Specifically, we integrate the US Geological Survey 2018 National Seismic Hazard Model, a logic tree–based exposure model, three different vulnerability models, and a consequence model. The results enable comparison against other risk assessment efforts, encourage more transparent deliberation regarding alternative approaches, and facilitate decisions on potentially assessing localized risks due to ground failures that require site-specific data. Based on the uncertainties approximated herein, the resulting sensitivity analyses suggest that the vulnerability model is the most influential source of uncertainty. Finally, we highlight research needs such as (1) developing more vulnerability models for regional seismic risk assessment of gas pipelines; (2) identifying, prioritizing, and measuring input pipeline attributes that are important for estimating seismic damage; and (3) better quantifying seismic hazards with their uncertainties at the national scale, for both ground failures and ground shaking.

conterminous United States↗
USGS2021

Multi-period response spectra

Multi-period response spectra (MPRS) are incorporated in the development of seismic design ground motions in the 2020 edition of the NEHRP Recommended Seismic Provisions for New Buildings and Other Structures (2020 NEHRP Provisions) and are approved for adoption in the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Standard, Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE/SEI 7-22). MPRS are incorporated in these design regulations because it was discovered that the standard spectral shape based on two periods and one reference site class was substantially understating spectral response in moderately long period structures located on soft soil sites where ground motion hazard is dominated by large magnitude events. These are the motions that are relevant to tall buildings in the Los Angeles region and of interest to the Los Angeles Tall Buildings Seismic Design Council (LATBSDC). The MPRS incorporation updated Chapters 11, 20, 21, and 22 of the 2020 NEHRP Provisions (a.k.a. FEMA P-2082); changes are described in detail in the commentary of FEMA P-2082. The MPRS also influenced the development of the 2018 U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) for the conterminous U.S. because valid ground motion models for all periods and site classes of interest were required. FEMA P-2082 is complemented by the FEMA P-2078 technical report that provides a procedure for approximating MPRS outside of the conterminous U.S. This paper presents a condensed version of the relevant sections of FEMA P-2082 and FEMA P-2078 that would interest the LATBSDC.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2020

Tall building performance-based seismic design using SCEC broadband platform site-specific ground motion simulations

The scarcity of strong ground motion records presents a challenge for making reliable performance assessments of tall buildings whose seismic design is controlled by large-magnitude and close-distance earthquakes. This challenge can be addressed using broadband ground-motion simulation methods to generate records with site-specific characteristics of large-magnitude events. In this paper, simulated site-specific earthquake seismograms, developed through a related project that was organized through the Southern California Earthquake Center (SCEC) Ground Motion Simulation Validation (GMSV) Technical Activity Group, are used for nonlinear response history analyses of two archetype tall buildings for sites in San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Bernardino. The SCEC GMSV team created the seismograms using the Broadband Platform (BBP) simulations for five site-specific earthquake scenarios. The two buildings are evaluated using nonlinear dynamic analyses under comparable record suites selected from the simulated BBP catalog and recorded motions from the NGA-West database. The collapse risks and structural response demands (maximum story drift ratio, peak floor acceleration, and maximum story shear) under the BBP and NGA suites are compared. In general, this study finds that use of the BBP simulations resolves concerns about estimation biases in structural response analysis which are caused by ground motion scaling, unrealistic spectral shapes, and overconservative spectral variations. While there are remaining concerns that strong coherence in some kinematic fault rupture models may lead to an overestimation of velocity pulse effects in the BBP simulations, the simulations are shown to generally yield realistic pulse-like features of near-fault ground motion records.

California↗
USGS2020

Risk-targeted alternatives to deterministic ground motion caps in U.S. seismic provisions

Since their inception over 20 years ago, the maximum considered earthquake ground motion maps in U.S. building codes have capped probabilistic values with deterministic ground motions from characteristic earthquakes on known active faults. This practice has increasingly been called into question both because of spatially non-uniform risk levels that are produced (risk being higher mainly in coastal California) and practical difficulties in defining characteristic earthquakes from recent earthquake rupture forecast models. We describe two proposals developed to enable phase-out of deterministic caps. One approach modestly increases collapse risk targets nationwide based on recent information on return periods of characteristic earthquakes on major central and eastern U.S. seismic sources; adoption of this approach would remove the perceived need for caps in California. The second approach uses geographically varying collapse risk targets, being higher near the highly active faults in California and unchanged elsewhere. Neither approach was adopted for the 2020 National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program recommended seismic Provisions for new building structures, but they are described in a Part 3 document to accompany the Provisions and Commentary .

Earthquake Spectra↗
USGS2020

Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis at regional and national scale: State of the art and future challenges

Seismic hazard modelling is a multi-disciplinary science that aims to forecast earthquake occurrence and its resultant ground shaking. Such models consist of a probabilistic framework that quantifies uncertainty across a complex system; typically, this includes at least two model components developed from Earth science: seismic-source and ground-motion models. Although there is no scientific prescription for the forecast length, the most common probabilistic seismic hazard analyses consider forecasting windows of 30 to 50 years, which are typically an engineering demand for building code purposes. These types of analyses are the topic of this review paper. Although the core methods and assumptions of seismic hazard modelling have largely remained unchanged for more than 50 years, we review the most recent initiatives which face the difficult task of meeting both the increasingly sophisticated demands of society and keeping pace with advances in scientific understanding. A need for more accurate and spatially precise hazard forecasting must be balanced with increased quantification of uncertainty and new challenges such as moving from time-independent hazard to forecasts that are time-dependent and specific to the time-period of interest. Meeting these challenges requires the development of science-driven models which integrate all information available, the adoption of proper mathematical frameworks to quantify the different types of uncertainties in the hazard model, and the development of a proper testing phase of the model to quantify its consistency and skill. We review the state-of-the-art of the national seismic hazard modeling, and how the most innovative approaches try to address future challenges.

Reviews of Geophysics↗
USGS2020

Procedures for developing multi-period response spectra at non-conterminous United States sites

This study complements proposals to the Provisions Update Committee of the Building Seismic Safety Council that would incorporate multi-period response spectra (MPRS) in the 2020 edition of the NEHRP Recommended Seismic Provisions for New Buildings and Other Structures (2020 NEHRP Provisions) and related proposals to the ASCE 7-22 Seismic Subcommittee of the American Society of Civil Engineers for incorporation of MPRS in ASCE Standard, ASCE/SEI 7-22, Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE 7-22). Ultimately, the intent is that the proposed MPRS and related design requirements of ASCE 7-22 would be adopted, by reference, as part of the 2024 International Building Code. The technical basis and associated methods herein enable the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to develop MPRS for sites in non-conterminous U.S. regions for which seismic hazard analyses have not yet been updated by the USGS to fully define all 22 periods and eight site classes of interest in the MPRS related proposals for the 2020 NEHRP Provisions and ASCE 7-22. These regions include Alaska, Hawaii, Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, and American Samoa. The methods developed can be used to derive MPRS using only the three currently available ground motion parameters S S , S 1 , and T L for all nonconterminous United States regions of interest. The methods include models that characterize generic shapes of Risk-Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE R ) ground motions as a function of these three parameters. For deriving MPRS that represent probabilistic MCE R ground motions, models are based on statistical analyses of large sample sets of probabilistic MCE R response spectra for Western United States (WUS) and Cascadia sites in California, Oregon, Washington (including Puget Sound), Idaho, and Nevada. For deriving MPRS that represent deterministic MCE R ground motions, models are based on sets of deterministic MCE R response spectra calculated using WUS shallow crustal ground motion models for earthquake magnitudes and shaking levels typical of sites governed by deterministic MCE R ground motions.

Alaska, American Samoa, Hawaii, Guam and the North↗
USGS2020

Selecting three components of ground motions from Conditional Spectra for multiple stripe analyses

For complex structures where the seismic response depends appreciably on the vertical (V) component of ground motion (GM) (e.g., base-isolated buildings, long-span bridges, dams, nuclear power plants), incremental dynamic analysis (IDA) is commonly utilized to estimate seismic risk, where the V components of GM are selected and scaled based on the corresponding horizontal (H) components. The resulting seismic risk (e.g., fragility estimates, annual rates of failure) will likely be significantly biased when the scale factors in IDA are very large. As an alternative to IDA, multiple stripe analyses (MSA) with GMs for each stripe selected from the Conditional Spectrum (CS) can be used to estimate the seismic risk; however, the V components are still commonly selected and scaled based on the corresponding H components. Consequently, these V components may still be inconsistent relative to the corresponding target hazard, again yielding biased estimates of seismic risk. To improve the accuracy of seismic risk estimates, we extend the CS to include the V component of GM and present an approach to select multicomponent GMs that are hazard consistent with respect to all three components of GM. Using the target and the GM selection approach developed in this study, we then evaluate typical current practice for selecting and scaling V components of GM. We observe that the latter approach can yield hazard-inconsistent multicomponent GMs, but hazard consistency can be improved by including the V component in the selection process, constraining the scale factors, or widening the period range for selecting GMs.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2020

Assessing the long-term earthquake risk for the US National Bridge Inventory (NBI)

We estimate annualized earthquake loss associated with over 600,000 bridges located throughout the contiguous United States. Each year, the Federal Highway Administration, in partnership with State Departments of Transportation, undertake a massive exercise to update the National Bridge Inventory (NBI) by combining data from states, federal agencies, local jurisdictions, and tribal governments. The NBI captures pertinent details related to individual bridges (e.g., their usage, repairs, or retrofits). We make use of the 2018 NBI that contain the necessary engineering attributes needed to assign the appropriate Hazus bridge class for each bridge, which can then be used for engineering risk analyses. Basic structural data, component dimensions, and regional replacement cost factors are used to develop an economic exposure model. This is a significant improvement over previous replacement costs, and as a result of this study, results are now available within the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Hazus platform. Earthquake hazard is defined using the U.S. Geological Survey’s 2018 National Seismic Hazard Model. For each bridge location, we obtain an earthquake shaking hazard curve defined in terms of spectral acceleration at a vibration period of 1.0 sec, ensuring that it properly reflects the site-specific soil conditions. We then integrate it with the bridge-specific fragility curve to compute annual probabilities of exceeding various damage states. Next, we perform economic loss analyses using the repair costs associated with specific damage states, resulting in an estimate of mean total annual financial loss for each bridge; this long-term measure of seismic risk enables us to illustrate the distribution of overall financial risk with respect to geographical region, era of construction, or type of bridge.

contiguous United States↗
USGS2020

2018 and 2023 U. S. National Seismic Hazard Models

During 2017-2018, the National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) was updated by incorporating (1) new median ground motion models, new estimates of their epistemic uncertainties and aleatory variabilities, and new soil amplification factors for the central and eastern U.S., (2) amplification of long-period ground motions in deep sedimentary basins in the Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle, and Salt Lake City areas, (3) an updated seismicity catalog, which includes new earthquakes that occurred between 2012 and 2017, and (4) improved computer code and implementation details. Results show significantly increased ground shaking in many (but not all) locations across the central and eastern U.S., and increased ground shaking in the four urban areas (listed above) that overlie deep sedimentary basins in the western U.S. During 2019-2023, the NSHM will consider additional updates for the 2023 NSHM including: 3D simulations in urban areas of Los Angeles and Seattle, additional soil amplification models for other urban areas (e.g., eastern and southern coastal plains of the U.S., Reno, and Las Vegas), non-ergodic ground motion models that reconsider epistemic and aleatory uncertainty, topographic amplification, and new geological and geodetic models for faults. These maps will be considered by the Building Seismic Safety Council, American Society of Civil Engineers, and International Building Code committees for inclusion in upcoming building codes. Due to population growth, more people live and work in areas of moderate or high seismic hazard than ever before, leading to higher risk of undesirable consequences from future ground shaking.

conterminous United States↗
USGS2019

The 2018 update of the US National Seismic Hazard Model: Overview of model and implications

During 2017–2018, the National Seismic Hazard Model for the conterminous United States was updated as follows: (1) an updated seismicity catalog was incorporated, which includes new earthquakes that occurred from 2013 to 2017; (2) in the central and eastern United States (CEUS), new ground motion models were updated that incorporate updated median estimates, modified assessments of the associated epistemic uncertainties and aleatory variabilities, and new soil amplification factors; (3) in the western United States (WUS), amplified shaking estimates of long-period ground motions at sites overlying deep sedimentary basins in the Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle, and Salt Lake City areas were incorporated; and (4) in the conterminous United States, seismic hazard is calculated for 22 periods (from 0.01 to 10 s) and 8 uniform V S30 maps (ranging from 1500 to 150 m/s). We also include a description of updated computer codes and modeling details. Results show increased ground shaking in many (but not all) locations across the CEUS (up to ~30%), as well as near the four urban areas overlying deep sedimentary basins in the WUS (up to ~50%). Due to population growth and these increased hazard estimates, more people live or work in areas of high or moderate seismic hazard than ever before, leading to higher risk of undesirable consequences from forecasted future ground shaking.

Earthquake Spectra↗
USGS2019

Seismic loss and damage in light-frame wood buildings from sequences of induced earthquakes

Activities related to oil and gas production, especially deep disposal of wastewater, have led to sequences of induced earthquakes in the central U.S. This study aims to quantify damage to and seismic losses for light-frame wood buildings when subjected to sequences of induced, small to moderate magnitude, events. To conduct this investigation, one and two-story multifamily wood frame buildings are designed, and their seismic response dynamically simulated using three-dimensional (3D) nonlinear models, subjected to ground motion sequences recorded in induced events. Damage is quantified through seismic losses, which are estimated using the FEMA P-58 methodology. Results show that at levels of shaking experienced in recent earthquakes, minor damage, consisting of cracking of interior finishes and nonstructural damage to plumbing and HVAC systems is expected, which is consistent with observed damage in these events. The study also examines how expected losses and building fragility will accumulate and/or change over a sequence of earthquakes. Results indicate that damage quantified in terms of absorbed hysteretic energy tended to accumulate over the sequences; this damage corresponds to elongation or widening of cracks. However, fragility is not significantly altered by damage in a preceding event, meaning structures are not becoming more vulnerable due to existing damage. In addition, sequences of events do not change losses if the building is only repaired once at the end of the sequence, as the worsening of damage does not alter repair actions. If repairs are conducted after each event, though, total seismic losses can increase greatly from the sequence.

Oklahoma↗
USGS2019

Increases in life-safety risks to building occupants from induced earthquakes in the central United States

Earthquake occurrence rates in some parts of the central United States have been elevated for a number of years; this increase has been widely attributed to deep wastewater injection associated with oil and gas activities. This induced seismicity has caused damage to buildings and infrastructure and substantial public concern. In March 2016, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) published its first earthquake ground motion hazard model that accounts for the elevated seismicity, producing a one-year forecast encompassing both induced and natural earthquakes. To assess the potential impacts of the elevated seismicity on buildings and the public, this paper quantifies forecasted risks of a) building collapse and b) falling of nonstructural building components, by combining the 2016 USGS hazard model with fragility curves for generic modern code-compliant buildings. The assessment shows significant increases in both types of risk compared to that due to non-induced earthquakes alone; the magnitudes of the increases vary from a few times to more than a 100 times, depending on location, building period (which is correlated to building height), alternatives for the hazard model, and the type of risk of interest. For exploratory purposes only, we also estimate revised values of the risk-targeted ground motion that are currently used for designing buildings.

Texas, Oklahoma↗
USGS2019

Natural hazards and mineral commodity supply: Quantifying risk of earthquake disruption to South American copper supply

Mineral resources, and their mining and enrichment operations, are not equally distributed across Earth. The concentration of mineral supply in certain regions, owing to the geology or geography of the mineral resource, raises the level of risk related to supply disruption. Where mineral production coincides with areas prone to natural hazards, supply may be especially at risk. However, the level of risk that natural hazards pose to mineral supply has yet to be quantified on a global or regional scale. Using copper in South America as a case study, this paper offers methods for quantifying (i) the coincidence of mineral production and seismic hazards, and (ii) the Expected Annual Disruption (EAD) of the mineral supply from earthquakes. The first of these methods indicates that, of the 101 copper producing facilities in South America considered, 76 are located within an area of high seismic hazard, taken here as the area with>85% chance of exceeding Modified Mercalli Intensity VI earthquake shaking in 50 years. Collectively, the 76 facilities comprise 82%, 87%, and 91% of the 2015 South American mine production, smelter capacity, and refinery capacity, respectively. For each of the 101 facilities, the second method calculates the EAD using a full earthquake shaking hazard forecast at the location, the annualized copper production of the facility, and models of the vulnerability of that production to shaking. The EADs are summed by country, here within South America, as a demonstration of how supply risk could eventually be quantified globally. Consideration of two illustrative vulnerability models shows that future work is needed to determine percentages of disruption to mineral production for different levels of earthquake shaking. Ultimately, the methods presented herein could be applied to other mineral commodities and/or adapted for other natural hazards, and the resulting EADs could be summed. Results from these methods could be used to focus more detailed risk assessments where the risk is highest.

Resources Policy↗
USGS2019

Implications of seismic design values for economic losses

In the U.S., seismic design values are determined mostly through a risk-targeting process, which combines information about the expected collapse fragility of code-designed structures with seismic hazard at a site. However, this target only applies where the risk-targeted ground motions govern the design. In other areas, primarily close to active faults, seismic design values are reduced to values calculated from deterministic seismic hazard analysis, increasing seismic risk for near-fault sites by an unknown quantity. This study investigates the implications of designing buildings using deterministic and probabilistic design values in terms of earthquake-induced economic consequences. This investigation is carried out using a performance-based seismic risk assessment of modern code-designed buildings with various structural systems, following the FEMA P-58 framework. Specifically, structural responses and losses associated with code-designed systems (i.e., reinforced concrete, steel, wood light frame, and precast tilt-up buildings) considering different design values (i.e., risk-targeted, deterministic, and uniform-hazard) are assessed. This study finds that, while risk-targeted design maps specify a uniform collapse risk, they do not provide uniform risk of economic losses to modern buildings across the U.S. and are instead dependent on building type and site properties. Also, for the sites in this study governed by deterministic capping, design values in the current code may be up to 30% lower than design values derived from risk-targeted design maps, resulting in up to 40% higher expected seismic losses.

Conference Paper↗