Author:
Visini F.,Carafa M. M. C.,Valentini A.,Di Naccio D.,Kastelic V.,Doglioni C.
Abstract
AbstractWe propose an innovative methodology for seismic emergency planning and earthquake risk mitigation in central Italy by integrating three prototypal earthquake scenarios. The different scenarios derive maximum earthquake magnitudes from different input data. The first scenario utilizes local rheological, geological, and geophysical conditions; the second scenario considers the study area fault characteristics, while the third scenario relies on the cluster analysis of historical and instrumental earthquake records. The magnitudes and related uncertainties are combined using a conflation method to derive the expected ground motions for a grid of sites in central Italy. The resulting scenarios include peak ground acceleration and spectral ordinates, presented as maps and spectra for two selected localities. The vertical component of ground motion is also presented, because it is essential for accurately assessing the response of short-period structures. Our methodology complements the more classic seismic hazard analyses, offering additional insights for earthquake contingency planning and loss analysis. The proposed methodology is flexible; multiple models and ongoing advancements in scenario practice (near-field effects, vertical ground motion, and the choice of ground motion models) can be easily incorporated, increasing the effectiveness of seismic scenario modeling in seismic emergency planning and risk mitigation.
Funder
Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference89 articles.
1. Ambraseys NN, Douglas J (2003) Near-field horizontal and vertical earthquake ground motions. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 23:1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0267-7261(02)00153-7
2. ANCOLD (n.d.) Guidelines for design of dams and appurtenant structures for earthquake (2019). ANCOLD. https://ancold.org.au/product/guidelines-for-design-of-dams-and-appurtenant-structures-for-earthquake-july-2019/ (accessed 9.21.23).
3. Baltzopoulos G, Baraschino R, Chioccarelli E, Cito P, Iervolino I (2023) Preliminary engineering report on ground motion data of the Feb. 2023. Turkey seismic sequence V2.5 – 25/02/2023
4. Barba S, Carafa MMC, Boschi E (2008) Experimental evidence for mantle drag in the Mediterranean. Geophys Res Lett 35:L06302. https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GL033281
5. Berge-Thierry C, Cushing E, Scotti O, Bonilla F (2004) Determination of the seismic input in France for the nuclear power plants safety: regulatory context, hypothesis and uncertainties treatment. Presented at the OECD, Tsukuba