Options
Danciu, Laurentiu
Loading...
13 results
Now showing 1 - 10 of 13
- PublicationOpen AccessDesign displacement for lifelines at fault crossings: the code-based approach for EuropeThe earthquake-resistant design of lifelines, such as pipelines, tunnels and bridges, is based on the reliable representation and estimation of the seismic loading. In the case of lifeline–fault crossings, the design fault displacement is typically derived from estimates based on fault dimensions via empirical fault scaling relations for a given “design” scenario event. This approach comes with an unknown level of safety because the fault productivity and the actual distribution of earthquake events are essentially disregarded. To overcome this challenge, a simplified approach is proposed by statistically analyzing the outcome of probabilistic fault displacement hazard analyses (PFDHAs). A selection of faults from the 2020 European Fault-Source Model is used to build the logic tree and to set the range of parameters considered in the PFDHAs. The methodology allows the (mostly conservative) approximation of the fault displacement corresponding to any given return period based on readily available data, namely fault productivity, fault mechanism, fault length, and lifeline crossing location on the fault. The proposed methodology has been proposed and adopted as an informative Annex in prEN 1998-4:2022.
168 26 - PublicationOpen AccessFault displacement hazard estimation at lifeline–fault crossings: A simplified approach for engineering applicationsLifelines, such as pipelines, roads, and tunnels, are critical infrastructure and when crossing active tectonic faults, a reliable estimation of the fault displacement in case of an earthquake is required. The first and simplest approach is to use empirical fault scaling relations to compute the design fault displacement, but this may result in an unknown level of safety. Thus, the probabilistic fault displacement hazard analysis (PFDHA) is the appropriate tool to assess the fault displacement hazard within a performance-based framework. Based upon an established PFDHA model, we present a simplified approach for engineering applications focusing on the lifeline–fault crossing along with appropriate simplifications and assumptions to extend its applicability to numerous faults. The aim is to provide a structure-independent approach of PFDHA that can be used when a site-specific study is not required, not possible (e.g., absence of recent sediments for dating past events), or too cumbersome, e.g., for lifeline route selection. Additionally, an in-depth investigation is presented on the key parameters, such as maximum earthquake magnitude, fault length, recurrence rate of all earthquakes above a minimum magnitude, and lifeline-fault crossing site, and how they affect the hazard level. This approach will be the basis for deriving hazard-consistent expressions to approximate fault displacement for use within the Eurocodes. The latter is intended to serve as a compromise between hazard-agnostic fault scaling relations and a comprehensive PFDHA, which requires detailed calculations and site-specific seismological data.
198 34 - ProductOpen AccessEuropean Fault-Source Model 2020 (EFSM20): online data on fault geometry and activity parameters(2022-10-25)
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;; ; ; ; ; ; ;; ; ;; ;76 222 - PublicationOpen AccessThe 2020 European Seismic Hazard Model: Milestones and Lessons Learned(Springer Nature, 2022-08-25)
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;The 2020 update of the European Seismic Hazard Model (ESHM20) is the most recent seismic hazard model of the Euro-Mediterranean region. It was built upon unified and homogenized datasets including earthquake catalogues, active faults, ground motion recordings and state-of-the-art modelling components, i.e. earthquake rates forecast and regionally variable ground motion characteristic models. ESHM20 replaces the 2013 European Seismic Hazard Model (ESHM13), and it is the first regional model to provide two informative hazard maps for the next update of the European Seismic Design Code (CEN EC8). ESHM20 is also one of the key components of the first publicly available seismic risk model for Europe. This chapter provides a short summary of ESHM20 by highlighting its main features and describing some lessons learned during the model’s development.64 83 - PublicationOpen AccessCoordinated and Interoperable Seismological Data and Product Services in Europe: the EPOS Thematic Core Service for Seismology(2022-04-29)
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;; ; ; ; ; ; ;; ; ; ;In this article we describe EPOS Seismology, the Thematic Core Service consortium for the seismology domain within the European Plate Observing System infrastructure. EPOS Seismology was developed alongside the build-up of EPOS during the last decade, in close collaboration between the existing pan-European seismological initiatives ORFEUS (Observatories and Research Facilities for European Seismology), EMSC (Euro-Mediterranean Seismological Center) and EFEHR (European Facilities for Earthquake Hazard and Risk) and their respective communities. It provides on one hand a governance framework that allows a well-coordinated interaction of the seismological community services with EPOS and its bodies, and on the other hand it strengthens the coordination among the already existing seismological initiatives with regard to data, products and service provisioning and further development. Within the EPOS Delivery Framework, ORFEUS, EMSC and EFEHR provide a wide range of services that allow open access to a vast amount of seismological data and products, following and implementing the FAIR principles and supporting open science. Services include access to raw seismic waveforms of thousands of stations together with relevant station and data quality information, parametric earthquake information of recent and historical earthquakes together with advanced event-specific products like moment tensors or source models and further ancillary services, and comprehensive seismic hazard and risk information, covering latest European scale models and their underlying data. The services continue to be available on the well-established domain-specific platforms and websites, and are also consecutively integrated with the interoperable central EPOS data infrastructure. EPOS Seismology and its participating organizations provide a consistent framework for the future development of these services and their operation as EPOS services, closely coordinated also with other international seismological initiatives, and is well set to represent the European seismological research infrastructures and their stakeholders within EPOS.577 12 - PublicationOpen AccessThe 2020 update of the European Seismic Hazard Model: Model Overview. EFEHR Technical Report 001, v1.0.0(2021-11-16)
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;; ; ;; ; ; ; ; ;Executive Summary The 2020 European Seismic Hazard Model (ESHM20) provides an update of the earthquake hazard assessment of the Euro-Mediterranean region. ESHM20 has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No.s 730900 of the SERAProject (www.sera-eu.org) The ESHM20 follows the same principles as the ESHM13, with state-of-the art procedures homogeneously applied for the entire pan-European region, without the country-borders issues. The model was built upon recently compiled datasets (i.e. earthquake catalogues, active faults, ground shaking recordings), information (tectonic and geological) and models (seismogenic sources, ground shaking). A fully probabilistic framework was adopted in the hazard model implementation and all datasets and inputs are fully cross-border harmonized. The newly developed seismogenic source model encompass fully harmonized and cross borders seismogenic sources following the recent national earthquake hazard models. The inherent uncertainties in characterizing the earthquake rupture forecast are handled by a complex logic tree, consisting of two main models (branches): an area source-based model and a hybrid fault-smoothed seismicity model. The ground motion characteristic model is built upon the most complete ground shaking recordings in Europe and aims at capturing the effects of source and attenuation path of the expected ground shaking at a site. The regional variability of the ground shaking as constrain by observations is captured by a novel approach of spatial clustering and the overall uncertainties are handled in a backbone logic tree. The master logic tree combines the earthquake rate forecast with the backbone ground motion models into a computational model for assessing the earthquake ground shaking at across the entire Euro- Mediterranean region. Full sets of hazard results (i.e. hazard curves and maps, uniform hazard spectra) for various combinations of return periods and descriptive statistics (mean, median and quantiles) are available. The ESHM20 development process involved several regional workshops where the scientists and experts were consulted and their feedback was acknowledged and considered on the model outcome. Finally, ESHM20 provides the basis to derive informative hazard maps for two key engineering parameters defining the anchoring points of the seismic design spectra for the next version of the European Seismic Design Code (CEN-EC8). The European Facilities for Earthquake Hazard and Risk (EFEHR) will maintain and further develop this model in collaboration with the GEM Foundation and the European Plate Observing System (EPOS). The source data, input models, software and outputs of ESRM20 are thus being openly released with a Creative Commons CC-BY International 4.0 license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This license allows re-users to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format, so long as attribution is given to the creator. The license allows for commercial use. Each product is released with a clear notice on how it should be cited in order to abide by the license. ESHM20 is online available at the www.hazard.EFEHR.org.406 1479 - PublicationOpen AccessInsights on the European Fault-Source Model (EFSM20) as input to the 2020 update of the European Seismic Hazard Model (ESHM20)(2020-05)
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;The H2020 Project SERA (WP25-JRA3; http://www.sera-eu.org) is committed to updating and extending the 2013 European Seismic Hazard Model (ESHM13; Woessner et al., 2015, Bull. Earthquake Eng.) to form the basis of the next revision of the European seismic design code (CEN-EC8). Following the probabilistic framework established for ESHM13, the 2020 update (ESHM20) requires a continent-wide seismogenic model based on input from earthquake catalogs, tectonic information, and active faulting. The development of the European Fault-Source Model (EFSM20) fulfills the requirements related to active faulting. EFSM20 has two main categories of seismogenic faults: crustal faults and subduction systems. Crustal faults are meant to provide the hazard model with seismicity rates in a variety of tectonic contexts, including onshore and offshore active plate margins and plate interiors. Subduction systems are meant to provide the hazard model with both slab interface and intraslab seismicity rates. The model covers an area that encompasses a buffer of 300 km around all target European countries (except for Overseas Countries and Territories, OTCs), and a maximum of 300 km depth for slabs. The compilation of EFSM20 relies heavily on publicly available datasets and voluntarily contributed datasets spanning large regions, as well as solicited local contributions in specific areas of interest. The current status of the EFSM20 compilation includes 1,256 records of crustal faults for a total length of ~92,906 km and four subduction systems, namely the Gibraltar Arc, Calabrian Arc, Hellenic Arc, and Cyprus Arc. In this contribution, we present the curation of the main datasets and their associated information, the criteria for the prioritization and harmonization across the region, and the main strategy for transferring the earthquake fault-source input to the hazard modelers. The final version of EFSM20 will be made available through standard web services published in the EFEHR (http://www.efehr.org) and EPOS (https://www.seismofaults.eu) platforms adopting FAIR data principles. The SERA project received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No.730900.106 21 - PublicationOpen AccessProbabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis at Regional and National Scales: State of the Art and Future Challenges(2020-03-10)
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; Seismic hazard modeling is a multidisciplinary 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 modeling 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.393 92 - PublicationRestrictedThe 2014 Earthquake Model of the Middle East: seismogenic sources(2018)
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;The Earthquake Model of Middle East (EMME) project was carried out between 2010 and 2014 to provide a harmonized seismic hazard assessment without country border limitations. The result covers eleven countries: Afghanistan, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Cyprus, Georgia, Iran, Jordan, Lebanon, Pakistan, Syria and Turkey, which span one of the seismically most active regions on Earth in response to complex interactions between four major tectonic plates i.e. Africa, Arabia, India and Eurasia. Destructive earthquakes with great loss of life and property are frequent within this region, as exemplified by the recent events of Izmit (Turkey, 1999), Bam (Iran, 2003), Kashmir (Pakistan, 2005), Van (Turkey, 2011), and Hindu Kush (Afghanistan, 2015). We summarize multidisciplinary data (seismicity, geology, and tectonics) compiled and used to characterize the spatial and temporal distribution of earthquakes over the investigated region. We describe the development process of the model including the delineation of seismogenic sources and the description of methods and parameters of earthquake recurrence models, all representing the current state of knowledge and practice in seismic hazard assessment. The resulting seismogenic source model includes seismic sources defined by geological evidence and active tectonic findings correlated with measured seismicity patterns. A total of 234 area sources fully cross-border-harmonized are combined with 778 seismically active faults along with background-smoothed seismicity. Recorded seismicity (both historical and instrumental) provides the input to estimate rates of earthquakes for area sources and background seismicity while geologic slip-rates are used to characterize fault-specific earthquake recurrences. Ultimately, alternative models of intrinsic uncertainties of data, procedures and models are considered when used for calculation of the seismic hazard. At variance to previous models of the EMME region, we provide a homogeneous seismic source model representing a consistent basis for the next generation of seismic hazard models within the region.569 35 - PublicationOpen AccessEPOS Seismology services and their users(European Geosciences Union (EGU), 2017-04)
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; The construction of seismological community services for the European Plate Observing System Research Infrastructure (EPOS) is by now well under way. A significant number of services are already operational, largely based on those existing at established institutions or collaborations like ORFEUS, EMSC, AHEAD and EFEHR, and more are being added to be ready for internal validation by late 2017. In this presentation we focus on a number of issues related to the interaction of the community of users with the services provided by the seismological part of the EPOS research infrastructure. How users interact with a service (and how satisfied they are with this interaction) is viewed as one important component of the validation of a service within EPOS, and certainly is key to the uptake of a service and from that also it’s attributed value. Within EPOS Seismology, the following aspects of user interaction have already surfaced: a) User identification (and potential tracking) versus ease-of-access and openness Requesting users to identify themselves when accessing a service provides various advantages to providers and users (e.g. quantifying & qualifying the service use, customization of services and interfaces, handling access rights and quotas), but may impact the ease of access and also shy away users who don’t wish to be identified for whatever reason. b) Service availability versus cost There is a clear and prominent connection between the availability of a service, both regarding uptime and capacity, and its operational cost (IT systems and personnel), and it is often not clear where to draw the line (and based on which considerations). In connection to that, how to best utilize third-party IT infrastructures (either commercial or public), and what the long-term cost implications of that might be, is equally open. c) Licensing and attribution The issue of intellectual property and associated licensing policies for data, products and services is only recently gaining more attention in the community. Whether at all, and if yes then how to license, is still diversely discussed, while on national level more and more legislative requirements create boundary conditions that need to be respected. Attribution (of service use and of data/product origin) is only one related aspect, but of high importance the scientific world. In EPOS Seismology we attempt to find common approaches to address the above issues, also closely co-ordinated to the developments across the other EPOS domains. In this presentation we discuss the current strategies, potential solutions identified, and remaining open questions.157 25