1-20 OF 432 RESULTS FOR

Graves-Pitarka generator

Results shown limited to content with bounding coordinates.
Follow your search
Access your saved searches in your account

Would you like to receive an alert when new items match your search?
Close Modal
Sort by
Journal Article
Published: 12 October 2021
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (2021)
... in the GravesPitarka kinematic rupture generation technique. The dynamic ruptures were computed on a surface‐rupturing, planar strike‐slip fault that includes a weak (negative to low‐stress‐drop) zone in the upper 4 km of the crust. Below the weak zone, we placed high‐stress‐drop patches designed to mirror...
FIGURES | View All (17)
Image
Crustal velocity models used by  <b>Graves</b> and <b>Pitarka</b> (2010)  for verificatio...
Published: 01 November 2013
Figure 2. Crustal velocity models used by Graves and Pitarka (2010) for verifications of Northridge and Loma Prieta data and generic rock profile of Boore and Joyner (1997) .
Journal Article
Published: 13 April 2021
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (2021) 111 (3): 1422–1444.
... in surface‐rupturing events. More details about the stochastic slip generator can be found in Graves and Pitarka (2016) . Another fundamental component of the simulation is the crustal velocity structure. In this study, we have used velocity model based on Havenith et al. (2007) that has been developed...
FIGURES | View All (19)
Journal Article
Published: 14 July 2020
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (2020) 110 (4): 1982–1995.
... creates realistic slip patterns with complexities typical of real earthquakes ( Graves and Pitarka, 2014 ). From these scenario ruptures, synthetic waveforms can be generated at the locations of operational seismic instrumentation, providing realistic data for testing operations. Using a deterministic...
FIGURES | View All (11)
Journal Article
Published: 11 August 2020
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (2020) 110 (6): 2862–2881.
... such earthquake to date. Seismic waves were excited by a kinematic rupture following Graves and Pitarka (2016) and obeyed wave propagation in a 3D Earth model with topography from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) assuming a minimum shear wavespeed, V S min , of 500 m / s . We corrected motions for linear...
FIGURES | View All (11)
Journal Article
Published: 01 April 2011
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (2011) 101 (2): 895–907.
... the 4 April 2010 M w 7.2 El Mayor-Cucapah earthquake. The hypothetical ruptures are generated using the methodology proposed by Graves and Pitarka (2010) and require, as inputs, only a general description of the fault location and geometry, event magnitude, and hypocenter, as would be done...
FIGURES | View All (8)
Journal Article
Published: 01 December 2012
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (2012) 102 (6): 2727–2740.
... presented by Graves and Pitarka (2010) . The methodology provides a reliable framework for generating rupture descriptions for future earthquakes, as demonstrated by Graves and Aagaard (2011) . 2 Complete details of the rupture generation procedure are given in Graves and Pitarka (2010) . For each...
FIGURES | View All (12)
Journal Article
Published: 27 February 2019
Seismological Research Letters (2019) 90 (3): 1268–1284.
... to 5 Hz using the SW4 finite‐difference code. We computed motions obeying physics‐based 3D wave propagation at a regional scale with an M w 7.0 kinematic rupture model generated following Graves and Pitarka (2016) . Both plane‐layered (1D) and 3D Earth models were considered, with 3D subsurface...
FIGURES | View All (12)
Journal Article
Published: 15 July 2014
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (2014) 104 (4): 1930–1946.
..., including stochastic finite fault, GravesPitarka hybrid broadband, and a composite source model. In general, each simulation method matches empirical models for some parameters and not others, indicating that all relevant parameters need to be carefully validated. Online Material: Tables of ground‐motion...
FIGURES | View All (34)
Image
Magnitude 7.0 earthquake rupture <b>generated</b> by the method of  <b>Graves</b> and Pit...
Published: 27 February 2019
Figure 2. Magnitude 7.0 earthquake rupture generated by the method of Graves and Pitarka (2010 , 2015 , 2016) . The panels show (a) slip, (b) duration, and (c) rake. The hypocenter is indicated by the star. Contours of rupture time (interval 3.0 s) are shown in each panel. Rake vectors
Image
The    z   ‐score (equation  3 ) distributions (gray histograms) of all rup...
Published: 05 January 2021
line. (a) RSQSim rupture ground motions simulated with BBP and a 1D velocity structure. (b) RSQSim rupture ground motions simulated with the SCEC CyberShake platform and a 3D velocity structure. (c) UCERF2 ruptures extended with the Graves and Pitarka (2014) kinematic rupture generator simulated
Image
This workflow diagram shows how a BBL XML workflow specification defines a ...
Published: 17 December 2014
boxes. The SDSU method uses the rupture generator and low‐frequency components of the Graves and Pitarka ( GP ) method but also includes its own high‐frequency component that generates broadband seismograms. Output validation data products produced by the BBP are produced using software that is shared
Image
Kinematic, stochastic slip distribution imposed for the ShakeOut Scenario, ...
Published: 26 October 2021
Figure 6. Kinematic, stochastic slip distribution imposed for the ShakeOut Scenario, generated using the Graves and Pitarka (2010) rupture model. Contours represent 3 seconds of elapsed time. The location of the rupture plane is shown on the right. The normal‐fault symbol shows the location
Journal Article
Published: 07 September 2021
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (2021)
... and a stochastic approach for calculating the high‐frequency part of the ground motion. Typically, the hybrid methods (e.g., Pitarka et al. , 2000 ; Graves and Pitarka, 2016 ; Pischiutta et al. , 2021 ) are successful at predicting the general characteristics of ground motion. However, the stochastic part...
FIGURES | View All (21)
Journal Article
Published: 01 November 2013
Earthquake Spectra (2013) 29 (4): 1495–1519.
...Figure 2. Crustal velocity models used by Graves and Pitarka (2010) for verifications of Northridge and Loma Prieta data and generic rock profile of Boore and Joyner (1997) . ...
FIGURES | View All (15)
Journal Article
Published: 17 December 2014
Seismological Research Letters (2015) 86 (1): 81–88.
... using a simultaneous amplitude‐ and phase‐matching algorithm ( Mai and Beroza, 2003 ). In the validation exercise, the LF s are generated using 50 source realizations from the kinematic source generator module by Graves and Pitarka (2015) on the SCEC BBP , through the standard rupture format ( SRF...
FIGURES | View All (5)
Journal Article
Published: 01 August 2017
Earthquake Spectra (2017) 33 (3): 809–835.
... , Graves and Pitarka 2015 , Olsen and Takedatsu 2015 ). Such kinematic methods are however generally pseudo-dynamic in that they are informed by on-going research into rupture dynamics. The crustal model provides the 3-D variation of geophysical and geotechnical parameters that are required...
FIGURES | View All (5)
Journal Article
Published: 01 September 2013
Seismological Research Letters (2013) 84 (5): 785–795.
... motion prediction and seismic‐hazard assessment. In an effort to develop a methodology for simulating strong ground motion from intraslab earthquakes we tested the broadband ground‐motion simulation technique of Graves and Pitarka (2010) in modeling ground motion recorded from the M  6.5 2010 Ferndale...
FIGURES | View All (11)
Journal Article
Published: 01 May 2020
Earthquake Spectra (2020) 36 (2): 673–699.
... analysis and earthquake engineering applications. This article presents a comprehensive validation of the commonly used Graves and Pitarka hybrid broadband ground motion simulation methodology with a recently developed three-dimensional (3D) Canterbury Velocity Model. This is done through simulation of 148...
FIGURES | View All (15)
Journal Article
Published: 01 May 2021
Earthquake Spectra (2021) 37 (2): 707–735.
... ground motion prediction equations (GMPEs), as well as direct comparisons with a large number of crustal earthquakes in California and Japan ( Graves and Pitarka, 2010 , 2016 ; Pitarka et al., 2020 ). Figure 7. Kinematic rupture model for an M6.7 crustal earthquake generated with GP2016 using...
FIGURES | View All (20)