1 / 35

An Overview of the Southern California Earthquake Center

An Overview of the Southern California Earthquake Center. Thomas H. Jordan Director. Seismic Hazard in the United States. U.S. Geological Survey National Seismic Hazard Map. Specifies maximum intensity of shaking expected at a site during a fixed time interval

adrianac
Download Presentation

An Overview of the Southern California Earthquake Center

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. An Overview of the Southern California Earthquake Center Thomas H. Jordan Director

  2. Seismic Hazard in the United States U.S. Geological Survey National Seismic Hazard Map • Specifies maximum intensity of shaking expected at a site during a fixed time interval • High hazard is concentrated along the active plate boundary • Highest hazard is in Southern California Peak ground acceleration with 2% probability of exceedance in 50 years

  3. Seismic Risk in the United States “HAZUS’99 Estimates of Annual Earthquake Losses for the United States”, FEMA, September, 2000 • U.S. annualized earthquake loss (AEL) is about $4.4 billion/yr. • For 25 states, AEL > $10 million/yr • 49% of the total is concentrated in Southern California • 25% is in Los Angeles County alone

  4. Faulting, shaking, landsliding, liquifaction Extent & density of built environment Structural fragility Risk Analysis: A System-Level Problem Risk = Probable Loss (lives & dollars) = Hazard  Exposure  Fragility

  5. Southern California: a Natural Laboratory for Understanding Seismic Hazard and Managing Risk • Tectonic diversity • Complex fault network • High seismic activity • Excellent geologicexposure • Rich data sources • Large urban population with densely built environment  high risk • Extensive research program coordinated by Southern California Earthquake Center (SCEC) under NSF and USGS sponsorship

  6. SCEC History • Founded in 1991 as NSF Science & Technology Center, jointly sponsored by the USGS • Motivation: lack of effort on Southern California earthquake problem • Goal: to develop a “master model” of earthquake hazards • Organized through a series of focused studies • Phase I: Future Seismic Hazards in Southern California, Implications of the 1992 Landers Earthquake Sequence • Phase II: Seismic Hazards in Southern California: Probable Earthquakes, 1994 to 2024 • Phase III: Accounting for Site Effects in Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analyses of Southern California • Phase IV: Regional Earthquake Likelihood Models • In 1998, unsuccessfully proposed to extend to California Earthquake Research Center • In 2002, “graduated” from STC Program and reconfigured at a free-standing center under a 5-year NSF/USGS collaborative agreement (SCEC2)

  7. How Is SCEC2 Different? • Explicit mission to advance physics-based seismic hazard analysis • Broadened, more open collaboration • Interdisciplinary focus groups for system-level integration and development of community models • Emphasis on simulation and model-based inference • Major effort to create a Community Modeling Environment (CME) based on advanced IT — the SCEC Collaboratory • Enhanced Communication, Education, and Outreach (CEO) Program • Explicit Implementation Interface for management of knowledge transfer and partnership efforts

  8. SCEC Mission • To gather all types of information about earthquakes in Southern California • To integrate this information into a comprehensive, physics-based, predictive understanding of earthquake phenomena • To communicate this understanding to end-users and the people of Southern California as useful knowledge for reducing earthquake risks

  9. The SCEC Collaboration • An open, but structured, collaboration • Open to any individuals and institutions that seek to collaborate on the science of earthquakes in Southern California • Structured to achieve specific objectives in Southern California • Resources are assigned based potential contributions to these objectives • An institution-based organization • Core institutions provide major, sustained commitment to SCEC objectives • Participating institutions are nominated through participation of individual scientists

  10. SCEC Institutions Core Institutions (14) University of Southern California (lead) California Institute of Technology Columbia University Harvard University Massachusetts Institute of Technology San Diego State University Stanford University U.S. Geological Survey, Golden U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park U.S. Geological Survey, Pasadena University of California, Los Angeles University of California, San Diego University of California, Santa Barbara University of Nevada, Reno Participating Institutions (30) Arizona State University; Boston University; Brown University; Cal-State, Fullerton; Cal-State, Northridge; Cal-State, San Bernardino; California Geological Survey; Carnegie Mellon University; Central Washington University; CICESE; ETHZ; Jet Propulsion Laboratory; Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory; Oregon State University; Pennsylvania State University; Rice University; SUNY Stony Brook; Texas A&M University; University of California, Berkeley; University of California, Davis; University of California, Irvine; University of California, Riverside; University of California, Santa Cruz; University of Colorado; University of Massachusetts; University of New Mexico; University of Oregon; Utah State University; URS Corporation; Whittier College

  11. Geology Committee Geodesy Committee Seismology Committee FARM Committee SCEC OrganizationChart SCEC Director Board of Directors External Advisory Council Science Planning Committee CEO Planning Committee SCIGN Coord. Com. Structural Rep. Focus Group Implementation Interface SCEC/ITR Project Fault Systems Focus Group Education Borderlands Working Group Eqk Physics Focus Group Public Outreach Ground Motion Focus Group Diversity Task Force SHA Focus Group CEO Activities Special Projects & Operations Disciplinary Committees Focus Groups

  12. Robert Smith (Chair/ U. Utah) Jeff Freymueller (U. Alaska) Raul Madariaga (Ecole Normale Superieure) Jack Moehle (PEER) Farzad Naeim (John A. Martin & Associates) Garry Rogers (Geological Survey of Canada) Chris Rojahn (Applied Technology Council) Haresh Shah (RMS, Inc.) Sean Solomon (Carnegie Institution of Washington) Ellis Stanley (LA Emergency Preparedness Department) Susan Tubbesing (EERI) Geology Committee Geodesy Committee Seismology Committee FARM Committee Advisory Council SCEC Director Board of Directors External Advisory Council Science Planning Committee CEO Planning Committee SCIGN Coord. Com. Structural Rep. Focus Group Implementation Interface SCEC/ITR Project Fault Systems Focus Group Education Borderlands Working Group Eqk Physics Focus Group Public Outreach Ground Motion Focus Group Diversity Task Force SHA Focus Group

  13. Geology Committee Geodesy Committee Seismology Committee FARM Committee Planning Committee SCEC Director Board of Directors External Advisory Council • Chaired by Deputy Director • Develops SCEC science plans • Advised by BoD and AC • coordinates with USGS • Reviews project proposals and formulates coherent science program consistent with short-term objectives and long-term goals • Makes recommendations to Board of Directors regarding project funding Science Planning Committee CEO Planning Committee SCIGN Coord. Com. Structural Rep. Focus Group Implementation Interface SCEC/ITR Project Fault Systems Focus Group Education Borderlands Working Group Eqk Physics Focus Group Public Outreach Ground Motion Focus Group Diversity Task Force SHA Focus Group

  14. Seismology Committee Geodesy Committee Geology Committee FARM Committee Disciplinary Committees SCEC Director Board of Directors External Advisory Council Science Planning Committee CEO Planning Committee • Seismology • Broadband, high dynamic range sensors • Seismic information systems • Seismic imaging systems • Tectonic Geodesy • Strainmeters • GPS • InSAR • Earthquake Geology • Neotectonics • Paleoseismology • Fault and Rock Mechanics • Laboratory studies • Field studies SCIGN Coord. Com. Structural Rep. Focus Group Implementation Interface SCEC/ITR Project Fault Systems Focus Group Education Borderlands Working Group Eqk Physics Focus Group Public Outreach Ground Motion Focus Group Diversity Task Force SHA Focus Group

  15. Geodesy Disciplinary Committee Crustal Motion Map, V3.0 • 833 crustal velocity estimates at 762 points • Co-seismic offsets for the Landers, Northridge & Hector Mine earthquakes • Data from SCIGN

  16. Dolan et al. [2003] Fold scarp on Trojan Way, Bellflower Geology Disciplinary Committee Puente Hills Blind Thrust • Four large earthquakes have occurred on the Puente Hills blind thrust in the last 11,000 years. • This fault is capable of producing an earthquake of M > 7 beneath downtown Los Angeles • The ground motions from such an event might severely damage even the best-designed buildings

  17. Displacement Pulse from a M 7.0 Blind-Thrust Earthquake Beneath Los Angeles Simulation by Hall, Heaton, Wald, and Halling

  18. Geology Committee Geodesy Committee Seismology Committee FARM Committee Focus Groups SCEC Director Board of Directors External Advisory Council Science Planning Committee CEO Planning Committee SCIGN Coord. Com. Structural Rep. Focus Group Implementation Interface SCEC/ITR Project Fault Systems Focus Group Education Borderlands Working Group Eqk Physics Focus Group Public Outreach Ground Motion Focus Group Diversity Task Force SHA Focus Group

  19. USR Structural Representation Focus Group Objective:a unified 3-D representation of active faults and anelastic structure in Southern California Community Fault Model (CFM) Community Velocity Model (CVM) Magistrale et al., (2001) Plesch & Shaw (2003)

  20. From Fault Models to Block Models mblock model of LA Fault representation on FEM mesh Carl Gable, LANL

  21. Geology Committee Geodesy Committee Seismology Committee FARM Committee Communication, Education & Outreach SCEC Director Board of Directors External Advisory Council • SCEC Community Development and Resources • SCEC scientists and students • Implementation Interface • Scientists, engineers, practicing professionals, public officials, risk managers, business & industry • Public Outreach • News media, civic groups and the general public • Education • Students and educators at K-12 and College levels Science Planning Committee CEO Planning Committee SCIGN Coord. Com. Structural Rep. Focus Group Implementation Interface SCEC/ITR Project Fault Systems Focus Group Education Borderlands Working Group Eqk Physics Focus Group Public Outreach Ground Motion Focus Group Diversity Task Force SHA Focus Group

  22. E-Cube Collaboration Goal:To develop a web-basedElectronic Encyclopedia of Earthquakes (E-Cube) Partners: • Consortium of Universities for Research in Earthquake Engineering (CUREE) • Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology (IRIS) Funding:$650K grant over 2 yrs from NSF/NSDL program (EHR Directorate)

  23. Geology Committee Geodesy Committee Seismology Committee FARM Committee Implementation Interface SCEC Director Board of Directors External Advisory Council Science Planning Committee CEO Planning Committee SCIGN Coord. Com. Structural Rep. Focus Group Implementation Interface SCEC/ITR Project Fault Systems Focus Group Education Borderlands Working Group Eqk Physics Focus Group Public Outreach Ground Motion Focus Group Diversity Task Force SHA Focus Group

  24. Current Implementation Activities

  25. Geology Committee Geodesy Committee Seismology Committee FARM Committee Special Projects SCEC Director Board of Directors External Advisory Council Science Planning Committee CEO Planning Committee SCIGN Coord. Com. Structural Rep. Focus Group Implementation Interface SCEC/ITR Project Fault Systems Focus Group Education Borderlands Working Group Eqk Physics Focus Group Public Outreach Ground Motion Focus Group Diversity Task Force SHA Focus Group

  26. NSF SCEC/ITR Project SDSC USGS Information Science Earth Science ISI IRIS SCEC Institutions SCEC/ITR Project Goal:To develop a Community Modeling Environment that can support system-level earthquake science – the SCEC Collaboratory Funding:$10M grant over 5 yrs from NSF/ITR program (CISE and Geoscience Directorates) Start date: Oct 1, 2001

  27. SCEC Community Modeling EnvironmentAn information infrastructure for system-level earthquake science KNOWLEDGE REPRESENTATION & REASONING Knowledge Server Knowledge base access, Inference Translation Services Syntactic & semantic translation Knowledge Base Ontologies Curated taxonomies, Relations & constraints Pathway Models Pathway templates, Models of simulation codes DIGITAL LIBRARIES Navigation & Queries Versioning, Topic maps Mediated Collections Federated access KNOWLEDGE ACQUISITION Acquisition Interfaces Dialog planning, Pathway construction strategies Pathway Assembly Template instantiation, Resource selection, Constraint checking Code Repositories FSM RDM AWM SRM Users Data & Simulation Products Data Collections GRID Pathway Execution Policy, Data ingest, Repository access Grid Services Compute & storage management, Security Pathway Instantiations Storage Computing

  28. Pathway 4: Ground motion inverse problem Pathway 3: Physics-based earthquake forecasting Pathway 2: Ground motion simulation Other Data Geology Geodesy Unified Structural Representation Invert 4 Faults Motions Stresses Anelastic model Ground Motions FSM RDM AWM SRM 3 2 Earthquake Forecast Model Attenuation Relationship Intensity Measures 1 AWP = Anelastic Wave Propagation SRM = Site Response Model FSM = Fault System Model RDM = Rupture Dynamics Model Computational Pathways Pathway 1: Standard Seismic Hazard Analysis

  29. Pathway 1: OpenSHA Time Span OpenSHA A Community Modeling Environment for Seismic Hazard Analysis Earthquake- Rupture Forecast IM Rupn,i Site Type, Level Sourcei Intensity-Measure Relationship Field, Jordan & Cornell, 2003

  30. Pathway 4: Unified Approach to the Inverse of Regional Waveform Data for Source and Earth Structure • Seismology Disciplinary Committee • Waveform data from regional earthquakes • Structural Representation and Fault System Focus Groups • Model parameterization using Community Block Model • Ground Motion Focus Group • 3D waveform simulations • SCEC/CME Project • Data and computational grids for inversion of large data sets

  31. SCEC/CME Undergraduate Intern Program

  32. Questions About SCEC’s Future • As we reach the midway point of SCEC2, how should we focus our research program to achieve our key 5-year objectives? • What are the best strategies to increase the funding for the interdisciplinary research that fuels the SCEC collaboration? • In particular, where we will find the resources to pursue major initiatives in exciting areas like fault and rock mechanics, investigations of the southern San Andreas fault and the California Borderland, and the NGA project? • How can SCEC work colleagues in N. California and elsewhere to advance earthquake science? • How can SCEC improve its interface with the NSF earthquake engineering research centers and the NEES program? • How should SCEC activities be coordinated with EarthScope activities? What SCEC initiatives should be put forward under the banner of EarthScope?

  33. Summary SCEC provides Southern California with • a focus on the serious problem of urban vulnerability to earthquakes • a framework for coordinating the activities of many organizations representing different approaches to earthquake risk reduction • an engine for transforming raw earthquake information into useful knowledge and practical understanding • an organization effective in educating the public about earthquake hazards and risk reduction

More Related