Seismic hazard assessments produced in a probabilistic form have become the most common in the world in recent decades. Thus, specifically designed for the purpose of detailed engineering and seismic works, methodology for the probabilistic assessment of the potential seismic effects of earthquakes is proposed.
The focus of this paper is probabilistic hazard assessments for the territory of the Republic of North Ossetia-Alania.
The technique involves a set of models to calculate the potential seismic impacts both from certain earthquakes with different magnitude and distance and from the total number of all potentially hazardous earthquakes with different magnitude and distance, taking into account their recurrence.
Specifically designed for the purpose of detailed engineering and seismic works, methodology for the probabilistic assessment of the potential seismic effects of earthquakes is proposed.
The results of calculations are presented in the form of the probability distribution functions optimally suitable for subsequent seismic risk assessments, as well as various soil reactions such as seismogenic liquefaction, seismogenic landslides, subsidence, etc.
Seismic hazard assessments produced in a probabilistic form have become the most common in the world in recent decades. Such assessments allow displaying more adequately the geo-seismic reality, which is characterized by a large number of uncertainties caused by the influence of various uncontrolled natural factors on this hazard, as well as by limited modern knowledge about the processes occurring in the deepest areas of the earth's crust, i.e. where the foci of earthquakes appear and seismic waves are spreading [1A.V. Gorbatikov, E.A. Rogozhin, and M.Y. Stepanova, "The pattern of deep structure and recent tectonics of the Greater Caucasus in the Ossetian sector from the complex geophysical data", Izvestiya, Physics of the Solid Earth, vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 26-37.[http://dx.doi.org/10.1134/S1069351315010073] -3V.B. Zaalishvili, and E.A. Rogozhin, "Assessment of seismic hazard of territory on basis of modern methods of detailed zoning and seismic microzonation", Open Constr. Build. Technol. J., vol. 5, pp. 30-40.[http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1874836801105010030] ]. In this case, forecasting of seismic hazard means estimates of the total seismic potential of the area, which can be realized (in the form of one or several earthquakes) for a sufficiently long period, without specifying the magnitude and location and time of occurrence of each certain earthquake hazardous for a given area. The main predictive element in this case is the degree of possibility (or probability) of the impacts of one or another level. Such a probabilistic approach to the seismic hazard definition is implemented in the territory of the Russian Federation at the normative level upwards 2000 [4V.B. Zaalishvili, and E.A. Rogozhin, "Assessment of seismic hazard of territory on basis of modern methods of detailed zoning and seismic microzonation", Open Constr. Build. Technol. J., vol. 5, pp. 30-40.[http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1874836801105010030] ]. Currently, the seismic hazard of the territory of Russia is regulated by the document [5 [5] Code of Regulations (Rules and regulations) 14.13330.2014. Construction in seismic regions. Building Code II 7-81 * M. Ministry of Construction and housing maintenance and utilities of the Russian Federation, 126, - M.], which reflects the results of general seismic zoning – the Map of GSZ-97 (General Seismic Zoning). Probabilistic hazard assessments for the territory of the Republic of North Ossetia-Alania entirely are also available only in the framework of the Map of GSZ-97 [6 [6] A set of maps of the general seismic zoning of the territory of the Russian Federation GSZ-97. Explanatory note and a list of cities and settlements located in seismic areas, Ministry of Science and Technology, Russian Academy of Sciences, United Schmidt Institute of Physics of the Earth, p 57, - M. - 1999.], i.e. in the very first approximation. As outlined in the methodological manual (teaching aid) [7V.V. Shteinberg, M.V. Saks, and F.F. Aptikaev, Methods for seismic effects assessing (manual)./ Tasks of engineering seismology. N. 34., pp. 5-94.], this Map primarily serves the purpose of site planning on the country, republic and large areas. Too small scale of the Map, in combination with some of the methodological provisions (regulations) laid down in it [8 [8] Development of computational models of seismic impacts for construction design, taking into account the uncertainty and incompleteness of seismological data on the spectral and temporal parameters of seismic soil motions /Scientific adviser Yu.K. Chernov. Research report. State contract No 16-05-06/03 from 10.06.2003 , Stavropol. , 2003. 142., 9 Development of a complex methodology for assessing the potential seismic impacts, seismic hazard and seismic risk (by the example of the regions of the North Caucasus and Sakhalin, / Scientific adviser Yu.K. Chernov. Research report. State contract No 16-06- 31/04 from 11.06.2004 , Stavropol. 2004 p 251.], limits its practical use for the construction design of separate (including responsible) facilities. In this regard, it is often necessary to obtain more accurate and detailed assessments of seismic hazard when solving practical problems, including in the territory of the Republic of North Ossetia-Alania (RNO-Alania). The first step in this direction could be the creation of a probabilistic map of detailed seismic zoning of the territory of the RNO-Alania that satisfies modern requirements. In this paper the first stage of this work is described - the development of an optimal methodology detailed forecasting of probable seismic impacts for the territory of North Ossetia-Alania.
Analysis of the most famous foreign and domestic workings (elaborations) in the field of probabilistic forecasting of seismic impacts and seismic hazard [10Yu.K. Chernov, Strong Ground Motions and Quantitative Assessment of Seismic Hazard of Territories”, Tashkent: Publishing house FAN, p 295, 1989., 11"The Global Seismic Hazard Assessment Program (GSHAP) 1992-1999", Annali di Geofisica, vol. 42, no. 6, pp. 123-94.] shows that it is reasonable to build such assessments on the basis of the total probability calculation, where the conditional probability is given by the distribution function of the considered parameter of seismic impact for a single event (earthquake) with specified characteristics (magnitude, distance, mechanism, etc.), and the unconditional probability describes the uncertainty in the occurrence of such an earthquake in a given place in a specified time interval. At the same time, different authors propose very different practical implementation of such general provision.
There are also simplified schemes, where one of the probabilities (either conditional or unconditional) is taken as a unit. Then the whole probability of impact depends either only on the uncertainty in the occurrence of a given earthquake focus (the characteristics of soil motions are assumed to be deterministic or it is believed that an earthquake will necessarily occur and the whole probability depends only on the uncertainty in predicting the characteristics of seismic motions of the ground. In the first case, there is usually an underestimation of the hazard assessment; in the second case an overestimation is observed [3V.B. Zaalishvili, and E.A. Rogozhin, "Assessment of seismic hazard of territory on basis of modern methods of detailed zoning and seismic microzonation", Open Constr. Build. Technol. J., vol. 5, pp. 30-40.[http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1874836801105010030] ].
Another common limitation is the specificity of the proposed design schemes and their lack of flexibility. So, many of them are heavily oriented towards the use of one type of information (for example, defined by a rigid scheme of parameters of the seismic setting), as well as assessment of certain parameters of seismic impacts (for example, macroseismic intensity or maximum acceleration) and to a lesser extent the use of other characteristics (for example, spectra, durations, periods, time functions, etc.).
Developments where the above issues are resolved are few and often technologically complex and difficult for implementation in a mass practical application, which seems to have affected their insufficient distribution.
Inside these problems there are still a number of more specific questions: the geometric dimensions and spatial arrangement of potentially dangerous earthquake focuses are not sufficiently taken into account in calculations, which is especially important near the seismogenic zones; the influence of local ground and geomorphological conditions is either not taken into account or taken into account in deterministic form; features of recurrence curves in zones with different maximum possible magnitudes are often ignored, etc.
In connection with the abovementioned study, the present investigation put the problem to propose a modern probabilistic methodology for assessing possible seismic impacts, which allows solving effectively all of the problems in relation to the tasks of detailed seismic zoning, taking into account the seismogeological conditions of the territory of the North Ossetia and all available scientific, methodological and available initial data.
Currently, most of the works on Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA) abroad are carried out by the S.A. Cornell method [12C.A. Cornell, "Engineering Seismic Risk Analysis", BSSA, vol. 58, no. 6, pp. 1593-1606.], which is realized in various modifications in several generations of computer programs under the general name of SEISRISK. In the Russian Federation in recent years such assessments have been carried out within the framework of the technology used for GSZ-97.
At the same time, first in the USSR and then in Russia probabilistic technology for assessing seismic impacts and seismic hazards has been developed for more than 30 years especially for engineering purposes; this technology has been successfully used in Detailed Seismic Zoning (DSZ), Seismic Microzonation (SMZ), design of responsible facilities in many seismically active areas of the world (Central Asia, the Far East, the Caucasus, Taiwan North Africa, etc.).
Examples of results obtained with the help of this technology are given in the works (Development ..., 2003, 2004), some extracts from which are given in Fig. (1).
Comparative analysis of the materials described in [8 [8] Development of computational models of seismic impacts for construction design, taking into account the uncertainty and incompleteness of seismological data on the spectral and temporal parameters of seismic soil motions /Scientific adviser Yu.K. Chernov. Research report. State contract No 16-05-06/03 from 10.06.2003 , Stavropol. , 2003. 142.-10Yu.K. Chernov, Strong Ground Motions and Quantitative Assessment of Seismic Hazard of Territories”, Tashkent: Publishing house FAN, p 295, 1989., 13Yu.K. Chernov, ""The Task of Probable Seismic Impacts for Engineering Purposes”,", In: Proceedings of the Vth All-Russian Conference of Prospecting Organizations Prospects for Development of Civil-Engineering Surveys in the Russian Federation, 2009 OJSC PRIESC Production and Research Institute for Engineering Surveys in Construction, pp. 122-127., 14A.Yu. Chernov, Geoecological Assessment of Seismic Hazard and Risk on the Example of Built-up Territories of the Central Ciscaucasia, Diss. for the degree of candidate of technical science”, Funds of FSAEI HE (Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution for Higher Education) "NCFU", Stavropol, p 160, 2016.] shows that the given technology has a number of advantages and is optimal for solving the tasks of DSZ of the territory of the Republic of North Ossetia-Alania taking into account the abovementioned requirements. It is also important to note that, in addition to the fact that this technology allows obtaining objectively more accurate and detailed assessments in comparison with the Map of GSZ-97, this technology at the same time is conceptually compatible with the GSZ-97 technology, which makes it possible to compare correctly the results obtained by means of this two technologies. Fig (2) shows the logic diagram of the generalized model of seismic impact, recommended in accordance with this technology for the purposes of the DSZ of the territory of RNO-Alania.
When solving the task, one should bear in mind that practical use of such complex and multiparameter models as generalized models of seismic impacts, combined with the limited initial data usually observed in practice, leads to the fact that the final results of the assessment of these impacts are subjected to fluctuations that depend on many (including subjective) factors. Such subjective factors include the choice of one or another computational scheme, selection of particular models of PSS zones, models of seismic setting, strong ground motions, selection of definite parameters of these models, etc. In fact, the integral assessment of the potential impact obtained at the output itself is only one of the possible realizations of another, more general random variable. Mechanism, of the randomness of this value is no longer formed by natural uncertainties and limited initial data (traditionally considered in the context of various probabilistic technologies (SEISRISK, GSZ-97, presented in the given paper or some other), but is formed by different concepts of certain authors about optimal methods of calculations, the choice of the design model and their characteristics, etc. And often this choice is made among alternatives almost equal in terms of their validity and reliability. In this formulation, not only the selected specific solutions, but also others “Not Selected” in each specific case alternatives actually represent the practical interest. In recent years the methodology of the “logic tree” is actively used in making the final decision for the purposes of analysis and formalized accounting of both basic and alternative options.
Therefore, it is reasonable to use the methodology of “Logical Tree” in the research on the DSZ of the territory of the RNO-Alania in seismic hazard assessment (parameters of possible seismic impacts - macroseismic intensity, peak amplitudes and spectra of soil acceleration, periods of maximum accelerations, durations of the main phase of vibrations, accelerograms etc.). This methodology makes it possible to characterize explicitly the abovementioned “subjective” uncertainties by means of direct including of alternative models and parameters into probabilistic analysis.
The final results of calculations according to the “Logical Tree” scheme are represented in the form of the most probable values of the estimated parameters of seismic impacts calculated for different levels of probability of non-exceedance. The most probable values are calculated from the total of individual alternative assessments. Certain methods of such calculations will be described in the following publications.
According to the above concept, the probabilistic analysis of seismic hazard in general consists of five main elements: construction of alternative models for the spatial location of zones of possible seismic sources (PSS zones) potentially hazardous for the investigated area; the construction of alternative models of local seismicity or the recurrence of earthquakes in time of all seismic sources that are potentially dangerous for a given section; development of alternative models of strong ground motions during potentially hazardous earthquakes, including the accounting of earthquake magnitude and distance, probabilistic analysis for each alternative model; analysis of various combinations of the results on various alternative models and their combinations.
Besides these models, the results of probabilistic and deterministic assessments of possible seismic impacts performed earlier for the investigated area (GSZ-97 Map, Building Code, etc.) are also considered as alternative assessments. A brief mathematical description of probabilistic models for calculation of possible seismic impacts and long-term seismic hazard, recommended for use for the purposes of the DSZ of the territory of RNO-Alania, is given below. More complete description can be found in [10Yu.K. Chernov, Strong Ground Motions and Quantitative Assessment of Seismic Hazard of Territories”, Tashkent: Publishing house FAN, p 295, 1989.].
Fig. (2) Block diagram of seismic hazard calculation. |
Assessments of the parameters of possible seismic impacts are given in the form of statistically assigned distribution functions of probabilities:
(1) |
where X is a random variable (the value of the parameter of soil motions or another characteristic of the seismic impact), x is the current value of the X.
In accordance with the materials of the previous studies [8 [8] Development of computational models of seismic impacts for construction design, taking into account the uncertainty and incompleteness of seismological data on the spectral and temporal parameters of seismic soil motions /Scientific adviser Yu.K. Chernov. Research report. State contract No 16-05-06/03 from 10.06.2003 , Stavropol. , 2003. 142., 10Yu.K. Chernov, Strong Ground Motions and Quantitative Assessment of Seismic Hazard of Territories”, Tashkent: Publishing house FAN, p 295, 1989.] it is accepted that for the single earthquake with the magnitude M = m, the depth of the focus H = h, at a distance R = r:
(2) |
where x_{i} is the current value of the parameter Х; a is a mathematical expectation of the logarithm of vibration parameters:
(3) |
where a_{ 0} is the mathematical expectation of the logarithms of seismic impact parameters (peak acceleration of the soil – PGA, Fourier spectral acceleration – |S|, periods of peak acceleration-Т, durations of the main phase of vibration – τ) in the near zone of the earthquake; D is a distance to the source; n is the rate of change of the seismic impact parameters with distance in the far zone of the earthquake; r_{ 0} and r'_{ 0} are the boundaries (dimensions) of the near and intermediate earthquake zones; с_{1} and с_{ 0} are coefficients of linear approximation.
The parameters а_{0,}n, r'_{0}, r_{0},с_{1} and с_{0} from the expression (3) are determined during the development of models of strong motions (attenuation functions) for the investigated area.
Expressions (1)-(3) are used for calculation of probable values lg PGA in the range of distances D = 0 – 150 km and for calculation of probable values lg |S| in the range from D = 0 to D = D_{inf}, where D_{inf} (the inflection point in attenuation curves lg |S|(D)) is assumed to be 50 km. For distances D > D_{inf}, the probable values lg |S| are calculated in two stages. First, according to the formula (3), the average value of lg |S| at a distance D = D_{inf} is assessed, then the calculation is repeated according to a formula similar to (3), with the difference that the average value lg |S| is used instead of х_{0}, calculated for D = D_{inf}, - the value D = D_{inf} instead of the value r'_{0} and the rate of change of lg |S| with a distance in the interval D = D_{inf} – 150 km instead of the value а_{1}.
Macroseismic intensity (I) of soil motions during an earthquake (on the 12-point scale MSK) is estimated in two ways.
The first is based on the spectral model of intensity, when the distribution function of probabilities I is calculated through the Fourier spectrum of accelerations according to the method described in the works [8 [8] Development of computational models of seismic impacts for construction design, taking into account the uncertainty and incompleteness of seismological data on the spectral and temporal parameters of seismic soil motions /Scientific adviser Yu.K. Chernov. Research report. State contract No 16-05-06/03 from 10.06.2003 , Stavropol. , 2003. 142.-10Yu.K. Chernov, Strong Ground Motions and Quantitative Assessment of Seismic Hazard of Territories”, Tashkent: Publishing house FAN, p 295, 1989.]. There isused the variant of the technique which assumed that the I value is formed not only by vibrations at the “responsible” frequencies, but also other frequencies of the spectrum contribute in the considered frequency range. For the spectrum specified in the deterministic form, the calculation is carried out according to the formula:
(4) |
In the expression (4), a_{j,f} and σ_{j,f} denote, correspondingly, the values and standards of x = lg |S| assigned I = j at frequencies “responsible” for the intensity of shocks ƒ_{j}, as well as the mean values and standards for x = lg |S|, assigned to the intensity I = i,f at frequencies ƒ greater than the frequency “responsible” for seismic effect of a given force I = j; x_{j,f} is the value of the logarithm of the observed spectrum at frequencies f_{j}, and also at frequencies higher than the frequency “responsible” for the intensity I = j; x_{min} is equal to a_{j,f} – 5σ_{j,f} as well as in the expression (4), k_{f} is the exponent equal to the unit for the frequencies “responsible” for the macroseismic effect I_{j} and less than unity for frequencies greater than the frequency f_{j} for which k_{f} k_{g}/k_{i}, when k_{g} is the empirically determined coefficient of linear regression lg |S| on I for the frequency f_{j}.
In accordance with the recommendation [8 [8] Development of computational models of seismic impacts for construction design, taking into account the uncertainty and incompleteness of seismological data on the spectral and temporal parameters of seismic soil motions /Scientific adviser Yu.K. Chernov. Research report. State contract No 16-05-06/03 from 10.06.2003 , Stavropol. , 2003. 142.], a simplified version of accounting for “non-responsible” frequencies is adopted in realization of calculations. For the assessment of macroseismic intensities in the range I ≤ 7 MSK points, the calculation is performed not for all the “non-responsible” frequencies f_{j} but only for one “representative” frequency (which has the smallest total dispersion of the value lg |S|), f = 3.6 Hz, for which k_{f} ≈0.50 is assumed.
When the vibration spectrum is given not in a deterministic form, but in the form of a set of some distribution functions of the spectral densities at the considered frequencies, the distribution functions of the shocks` intensity are given by the expression:
(5) |
where Р[x = x_{j,f}] is the probability that the level of soil motions spectrum at frequency f_{j} and at frequencies “on the right” from it falls within the range of values with the center lg|S|.
This probability under the assumption that lg |S| are distributed according to the normal law, is estimated as:
(6) |
In expressions (5)-(6), a_{j,f}^{’}, σ_{j,f}^{’}are the mean values and standards for x=lg |S| preset spectral distributions at frequencies “responsible” for the effect with the load I = j and at frequencies “on the right” or greater than the frequency f_{j} (see the expression (4). δх_{j,f} value is equal to the half of an interval of the considered range of the values lg |S|. Usually, this value was taken equal to ≈ 0.3σ_{j,f}.
The other nomenclature in the equations (5)-(6) have the same meaning as in the equation (6). Accounting of “non-responsible” or more precisely, “less important” frequencies of the spectrum are not realized for all frequencies “on the right”, but only for one “representative” frequency f = 3.6 Hz just as in the case of deterministic task of the spectrum.
The second method is to estimate the traditional damping functions of probable values I (M, D), developed with taking into account the regional conditions of the Central and Northern Caucasus [13Yu.K. Chernov, ""The Task of Probable Seismic Impacts for Engineering Purposes”,", In: Proceedings of the Vth All-Russian Conference of Prospecting Organizations Prospects for Development of Civil-Engineering Surveys in the Russian Federation, 2009 OJSC PRIESC Production and Research Institute for Engineering Surveys in Construction, pp. 122-127., 15Yu.K. Chernov, Reconstruction of probable soil vibration spectra during strong earthquakes in the Northern Caucasus by their macroseismic field /Geological and geophysical studies of the deep structure of the Caucasus: geology and geophysics of the Caucasus: Modern challenges and methods of research., 16Yu.K. Chernov, and A.Yu. Chernov, "Probabilistic Models of Seismic Impacts for Seismic Hazard Forecasting for Engineering Purposes", Geo Geophysic South Russia, vol. 3, pp. 117-124.].
The task of forecasting of possible seismic impacts is not exhausted by the estimates of the characteristics of soil vibrations from a single, particular, potentially hazardous earthquake. It is necessary to take the probability of such an earthquake occurrence into account quantitatively, and in general - the probability of the occurrence of all potentially hazardousearthquakes for a given area and for sufficiently long period of time.
Distribution functions of the parameters of seismic impacts for a single earthquake with preset values of M, H and D are given by the expressions (1-3). If the depth of the source H is precisely unknown in advance, and it can be determined only in a certain interval, then:
(7) |
where P_{M=m}[H = h] is the probability that the depth H of the center of gravity of the earthquake source with М= mwill be equal to h.
Earthquakes recurrence is taken into account by changing from the distribution function for one earthquake with a given M and D to the distribution function for at least one earthquake with a given M and D:
(8) |
Here P_{M=m}[N=n] is the probability that the number N of earthquakes with M = m in a given time interval will be equal to n. It is calculated under the assumption that N is distributed according to the Poisson's law:
(9) |
where λ_{m} is the average number of earthquakes with M = m per unit time; t is the considered time interval, n is the expected number of earthquakes (it is chosen in the way that P[N = n] – P[N = ∞] is sufficiently small.) At a given distance for all potentially hazardous earthquakes from M_{min} to M_{max}:
(10) |
And, finally, for all potentially hazardous distances from D = 0 (near zone) to D = D_{max}:
(11) |
The average period of the recurrence of impacts higher than this level can be estimated from the expression:
(12) |
assuming that the number of such influences also follows the Poisson's law with the parameter γ_{x}. Thus parameter γ_{x} characterizes an average frequency of the excesses, and the average period of such excesses, accordingly, will be equal to the reciprocal of γ_{x}.
The computational scheme which were described above make it possible torealize calculations for point and dispersed (linear and area) objects. When assessing the seismic effect on a particular area, the investigated area is divided into quasi-homogeneous elementary regions or into elementary volumes taking into account the thickness of the seismogenic layer. Each elementary area of the territory is characterized by the following parameters taking into account the depth of the seismogenic layer:
For the whole considered territory, the dimensions of the elementary regions on the surface of the earth are assumed to be the same and equal to 5 km×5 km, which provides sufficient detail level and accuracy of calculations for the purpose of detailed seismic zoning [9 Development of a complex methodology for assessing the potential seismic impacts, seismic hazard and seismic risk (by the example of the regions of the North Caucasus and Sakhalin, / Scientific adviser Yu.K. Chernov. Research report. State contract No 16-06- 31/04 from 11.06.2004 , Stavropol. 2004 p 251.]. Assessment sare made as calculations of the cumulative impact of earthquake focus, which can occur both directly under this “Elementary” area, and under all “Elementary” areas surrounding the calculation point.
The listed characteristics are the necessary initial data for subsequent calculations. Since they are closely related to both regional and local seismicity and seismic geology of the investigated area, it is necessary to build before the calculations a number of models describing these characteristics taking into account all available seismological, geological, geophysical and engineering-geological information for the area. These models are divided into two groups: seismic activity models and models of strong ground motions. These groups of models are considered in the following publications.
The above calculation methods and their results are denoted as Variant 1 (basic computational scheme) at the next stages of the study.
Besides the calculation of the expected seismic impacts of Variant 1, there are provided calculations based on the recommendations of regulatory documents, as well as on the results of previously performed work, including the work on seismic hazard assessment of the considered territory.
So the intensity I of ground shocks during an earthquake is estimated according to the recommendations of the GSZ-97 Map [6 [6] A set of maps of the general seismic zoning of the territory of the Russian Federation GSZ-97. Explanatory note and a list of cities and settlements located in seismic areas, Ministry of Science and Technology, Russian Academy of Sciences, United Schmidt Institute of Physics of the Earth, p 57, - M. - 1999.] and the current Building Code [5 [5] Code of Regulations (Rules and regulations) 14.13330.2014. Construction in seismic regions. Building Code II 7-81 * M. Ministry of Construction and housing maintenance and utilities of the Russian Federation, 126, - M., 17V.B. Zaalishvili, and E.A. Rogozhin, "Assessment of seismic hazard of territory on basis of modern methods of detailed zoning and seismic microzonation", Open Constr. Build. Technol. J., vol. 5, pp. 30-40.[http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1874836801105010030] ].
These (additional) assessments are also included explicitly in the formalized analysis using the “logical tree” methodology and are denoted as Variants 2, 3, etc.
In Variant 2, for example, shocks` intensitiestaken from [5 [5] Code of Regulations (Rules and regulations) 14.13330.2014. Construction in seismic regions. Building Code II 7-81 * M. Ministry of Construction and housing maintenance and utilities of the Russian Federation, 126, - M., 17V.B. Zaalishvili, and E.A. Rogozhin, "Assessment of seismic hazard of territory on basis of modern methods of detailed zoning and seismic microzonation", Open Constr. Build. Technol. J., vol. 5, pp. 30-40.[http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1874836801105010030] ] can be recalculated into peak accelerations according to the ratios that generalize the recommendations of regulatory documents [6 [6] A set of maps of the general seismic zoning of the territory of the Russian Federation GSZ-97. Explanatory note and a list of cities and settlements located in seismic areas, Ministry of Science and Technology, Russian Academy of Sciences, United Schmidt Institute of Physics of the Earth, p 57, - M. - 1999., 17V.B. Zaalishvili, and E.A. Rogozhin, "Assessment of seismic hazard of territory on basis of modern methods of detailed zoning and seismic microzonation", Open Constr. Build. Technol. J., vol. 5, pp. 30-40.[http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1874836801105010030] ]:
(13) |
PGA (I) ratios obtained in the work [8 [8] Development of computational models of seismic impacts for construction design, taking into account the uncertainty and incompleteness of seismological data on the spectral and temporal parameters of seismic soil motions /Scientific adviser Yu.K. Chernov. Research report. State contract No 16-05-06/03 from 10.06.2003 , Stavropol. , 2003. 142.] are also used.
(14) |
(15) |
recommendations from [18F.F. Aptikaev, Strong ground motions during earthquakes (seismic impacts) / Author’s abstract for the degree of Doctor of Science. UIPE RAS: Moscow, 2001]:
(16) |
(17) |
and also the functional that we modernized from [10Yu.K. Chernov, Strong Ground Motions and Quantitative Assessment of Seismic Hazard of Territories”, Tashkent: Publishing house FAN, p 295, 1989.]:
(18) |
In the expressions (13) - (18): I is macroseismic intensity in MSK points; PGA, a_{max} and A is peak ground acceleration in cm/s^{2}; ^{Т}_{а}is the period of the peak amplitudes of the acceleration of soil vibrations in c; τ_{0.3} and τ_{0.5} are duration of vibrations with amplitudes greater than 0.30 and 0.50 peak accelerations in s, correspondingly.
The ratios and recommendations from the works [19D.J. Wald, V. Quitoriano, T.N. Heaton, M. Eeri, and H. Kanamori, "Relationships between Peak Ground Acceleration, Peak Ground Velocity, and Modified Mercalli", Intens. California. Earthquake Spectra, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 557-564.-21G.M. Atkinson, and E. Sonley, "Empirical Relationships between Modified Mercalli Intensity, and Response Spectra", BSSA, vol. 90, no. 2, pp. 533-544.] can be used in the same Variant.
Variant 3 can be built, for example, on the recommendations of GSZ-97 of the territory of the Russian Federation.
Summarizing the research results, we can resume the following:
Not applicable.
The authors declare no conflict of interest, financial or otherwise.
Declared none.
[1] | A.V. Gorbatikov, E.A. Rogozhin, and M.Y. Stepanova, "The pattern of deep structure and recent tectonics of the Greater Caucasus in the Ossetian sector from the complex geophysical data", Izvestiya, Physics of the Solid Earth, vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 26-37.[http://dx.doi.org/10.1134/S1069351315010073] |
[2] | V.B. Zaalishvili, N.I. Nevskaya, L.N. Nevskii, and A.G. Shempelev, "Geophysical Fields Above Volcanic Edifices in the North Caucasus", J. Volcanology Seismology, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 333-338. |
[3] | V.B. Zaalishvili, and E.A. Rogozhin, "Assessment of seismic hazard of territory on basis of modern methods of detailed zoning and seismic microzonation", Open Constr. Build. Technol. J., vol. 5, pp. 30-40.[http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1874836801105010030] |
[4] | V.B. Zaalishvili, and E.A. Rogozhin, "Assessment of seismic hazard of territory on basis of modern methods of detailed zoning and seismic microzonation", Open Constr. Build. Technol. J., vol. 5, pp. 30-40.[http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1874836801105010030] |
[5] | [5] Code of Regulations (Rules and regulations) 14.13330.2014. Construction in seismic regions. Building Code II 7-81 * M. Ministry of Construction and housing maintenance and utilities of the Russian Federation, 126, - M. |
[6] | [6] A set of maps of the general seismic zoning of the territory of the Russian Federation GSZ-97. Explanatory note and a list of cities and settlements located in seismic areas, Ministry of Science and Technology, Russian Academy of Sciences, United Schmidt Institute of Physics of the Earth, p 57, - M. - 1999. |
[7] | V.V. Shteinberg, M.V. Saks, and F.F. Aptikaev, Methods for seismic effects assessing (manual)./ Tasks of engineering seismology. N. 34., pp. 5-94. |
[8] | [8] Development of computational models of seismic impacts for construction design, taking into account the uncertainty and incompleteness of seismological data on the spectral and temporal parameters of seismic soil motions /Scientific adviser Yu.K. Chernov. Research report. State contract No 16-05-06/03 from 10.06.2003 , Stavropol. , 2003. 142. |
[9] | Development of a complex methodology for assessing the potential seismic impacts, seismic hazard and seismic risk (by the example of the regions of the North Caucasus and Sakhalin, / Scientific adviser Yu.K. Chernov. Research report. State contract No 16-06- 31/04 from 11.06.2004 , Stavropol. 2004 p 251. |
[10] | Yu.K. Chernov, Strong Ground Motions and Quantitative Assessment of Seismic Hazard of Territories”, Tashkent: Publishing house FAN, p 295, 1989. |
[11] | "The Global Seismic Hazard Assessment Program (GSHAP) 1992-1999", Annali di Geofisica, vol. 42, no. 6, pp. 123-94. |
[12] | C.A. Cornell, "Engineering Seismic Risk Analysis", BSSA, vol. 58, no. 6, pp. 1593-1606. |
[13] | Yu.K. Chernov, ""The Task of Probable Seismic Impacts for Engineering Purposes”,", In: Proceedings of the Vth All-Russian Conference of Prospecting Organizations Prospects for Development of Civil-Engineering Surveys in the Russian Federation, 2009 OJSC PRIESC Production and Research Institute for Engineering Surveys in Construction, pp. 122-127. |
[14] | A.Yu. Chernov, Geoecological Assessment of Seismic Hazard and Risk on the Example of Built-up Territories of the Central Ciscaucasia, Diss. for the degree of candidate of technical science”, Funds of FSAEI HE (Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution for Higher Education) "NCFU", Stavropol, p 160, 2016. |
[15] | Yu.K. Chernov, Reconstruction of probable soil vibration spectra during strong earthquakes in the Northern Caucasus by their macroseismic field /Geological and geophysical studies of the deep structure of the Caucasus: geology and geophysics of the Caucasus: Modern challenges and methods of research. |
[16] | Yu.K. Chernov, and A.Yu. Chernov, "Probabilistic Models of Seismic Impacts for Seismic Hazard Forecasting for Engineering Purposes", Geo Geophysic South Russia, vol. 3, pp. 117-124. |
[17] | V.B. Zaalishvili, and E.A. Rogozhin, "Assessment of seismic hazard of territory on basis of modern methods of detailed zoning and seismic microzonation", Open Constr. Build. Technol. J., vol. 5, pp. 30-40.[http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1874836801105010030] |
[18] | F.F. Aptikaev, Strong ground motions during earthquakes (seismic impacts) / Author’s abstract for the degree of Doctor of Science. UIPE RAS: Moscow, 2001 |
[19] | D.J. Wald, V. Quitoriano, T.N. Heaton, M. Eeri, and H. Kanamori, "Relationships between Peak Ground Acceleration, Peak Ground Velocity, and Modified Mercalli", Intens. California. Earthquake Spectra, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 557-564. |
[20] | V.I. Ulomov, " The GSHAP Region 7 Working Group, “Seismic hazard of Northern Eurasia”, “The Global Seismic Hazard Assessment Program (GSHAP), (1992-1999)", Annali di Geofisica, vol. 42, no. 6, pp. 1023-1038. |
[21] | G.M. Atkinson, and E. Sonley, "Empirical Relationships between Modified Mercalli Intensity, and Response Spectra", BSSA, vol. 90, no. 2, pp. 533-544. |
[22] | Yu.K. Chernov, "Experience of seismic hazard definition of different territories in the Stavropol Territory, taking into account the new requirements of the Building Code and world practice", Engineer. Geo., - M. - Num. 1, 1999., pp. 23-35. |