This is a Preprint and has not been peer reviewed. The published version of this Preprint is available: https://doi.org/10.1177/87552930231206399. This is version 2 of this Preprint.
Downloads
Authors
Abstract
The 22 September 2021 (AEST) Mw 5.9 Woods Point earthquake occurred in an intraplate setting (southeast Australia) approximately 130 km East Northeast of the central business district of Melbourne (pop. ∼5.15 million). A lack of seismic instrumentation and a low population density in the epicentral region resulted in a dearth of near-source instrumental and “felt” report intensity data, limiting evaluation of the near-source performance of ground motion models (GMMs). To address this challenge, we first surveyed unreinforced masonry chimneys following the earthquake to establish damage states and develop fragility curves. Using Bayesian inference, and including pre-earthquake GMM weightings as Bayesian priors, we evaluate the relative performance of GMMs in predicting chimney observations for different fragility functions and seismic velocity profiles. At the most likely VS30 (760 m/s), the best performing models are AB06, A12, and CY08SWISS. GMMs that were preferentially selected for utility in the Australian National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHA18) prior to the Woods Point earthquake outperform other GMMs. The recently developed NGA-East GMM performs relatively well in the more distal region (e.g. >50 km) but is among the poorest performing GMMs in the near-source region across the range of VS30. Our new method of combining analysis of engineered features (chimneys) with Bayesian inference to evaluate the near-source performance of GMMs may have applicability in diverse settings worldwide, particularly in areas of sparse seismic instrumentation.
DOI
https://doi.org/10.31223/X5D653
Subjects
Earth Sciences, Engineering, Physical Sciences and Mathematics, Probability, Statistics and Probability
Keywords
earthquake, Seismology, Ground Motion Models, Bayesian, URM Fragility Curve
Dates
Published: 2022-11-15 03:10
Last Updated: 2023-11-03 10:09
Older Versions
License
CC0 1.0 Universal - Public Domain Dedication
Additional Metadata
Conflict of interest statement:
None
Data Availability (Reason not available):
All Data used in this manuscript is in the appendices
There are no comments or no comments have been made public for this article.