Estimating Rupture Distances without a Rupture

Research Article| November 21, 2017 Estimating Rupture Distances without a Rupture Eric M. Thompson; Eric M. Thompson aDenver Federal Center, U.S. Geological Survey, P.O. Box 25046, MS 966, Denver, Colorado 80225, emthompson@usgs.gov Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar C. Bruce Worden C. Bruce Worden aDenver Federal Center, U.S. Geological Survey, P.O. Box 25046, MS 966, Denver, Colorado 80225, emthompson@usgs.gov Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (2018) 108 (1): 371–379. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120170174 Article history first online: 21 Nov 2017 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Search Site Citation Eric M. Thompson, C. Bruce Worden; Estimating Rupture Distances without a Rupture. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 2017;; 108 (1): 371–379. doi: https://doi.org/10.1785/0120170174 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Refmanager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentBy SocietyBulletin of the Seismological Society of America Search Advanced Search Abstract Most ground‐motion prediction equations (GMPEs) require distances that are defined relative to a rupture model, such as the distance to the surface projection of the rupture (⁠RJB⁠) or the closest distance to the rupture plane (⁠RRUP⁠). There are a number of situations in which it is either necessary or advantageous to derive rupture distances from point‐source distance metrics, such as hypocentral (⁠RHYP⁠) or epicentral (⁠REPI⁠) distance. For ShakeMap, it is necessary to provide an estimate of the shaking levels for events without rupture models, and before rupture models are available for events that eventually do have rupture models. In probabilistic seismic hazard analysis, it is often convenient to use point‐source distances for gridded seismicity sources, particularly if a preferred rupture orientation is unknown. This avoids the computationally cumbersome task of computing rupture‐based distances for virtual rupture planes across all strikes and dips for each source. We derive average rupture distances conditioned on REPI⁠, magnitude, and (optionally) back azimuth, for a variety of assumed seismological constraints. Additionally, we derive adjustment factors for GMPE standard deviations that reflect the added uncertainty in the ground‐motion estimation when point‐source distances are used to estimate rupture distances. You do not have access to this content, please speak to your institutional administrator if you feel you should have access.