Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2007
Vincenzo Convertito, Iunio Iervolino, Aldo Zollo, Gaetano Manfredi
The development and implementation of an earthquake early warning system (EEWS), both in regional or on-site configurations can help to mitigate the losses due to the occurrence of moderate-to-large earthquakes in densely populated and/or industrialized areas. The capability of an EEWS to provide real-time estimates of source parameters (location and magnitude) can be used to take some countermeasures during the earthquake occurrence and before the arriving of the most destructive waves at the site of interest. However, some critical issues are peculiar of EEWS and need further investigation: (1) the uncertainties on earthquake magnitude and location estimates based on the measurements of some observed quantities in the very early portion of the recorded signals; (2) the selection of the most appropriate parameter to be used to predict the ground motion amplitude both in near- and far-source ranges; (3) the use of the estimates provided by the EEWS for structural engineering and risk mitigation applications.
In the present study, the issues above are discussed using the Campania–Lucania region (Southern Apennines) in Italy, as test-site area. In this region a prototype system for earthquake early warning, and more generally for seismic alert management, is under development. The system is based on a dense, wide dynamic accelerometric network deployed in the area where the moderate-to-large earthquake causative fault systems are located.
The uncertainty analysis is performed through a real-time probabilistic seismic hazard analysis by using two different approaches. The first is the Bayesian approach that implicitly integrate both the time evolving estimate of earthquake parameters, the probability density functions and the variability of ground motion propagation providing the most complete information. The second is a classical point estimate approach which does not account for the probability density function of the magnitude and only uses the average of the estimates performed at each seismic station.
Both the approaches are applied to two main towns located in the area of interest, Napoli and Avellino, for which a missed and false alarm analysis is presented by means of a scenario earthquake: an M 7.0 seismic event located at the centre of the seismic network.
Concerning the ground motion prediction, attention is focused on the response spectra as the most appropriate function to characterize the ground motion for earthquake engineering applications of EEWS.
*Notice: This is an electronic version of an article published in Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering: complete citation information for the final version of the paper, as published in the print edition of Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, is available on the Elsevier online delivery service, accessible via the journal's website at http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/422924/description#description