On 21 May 2021, a 6.4-magnitude earthquake occurred in Yangbi County, Yunnan Province, China. To reproduce the ground motion characteristics of this earthquake, the stochastic finite-fault method was adopted. The ground motion records were analyzed to determine the source, path, and site parameters. Based on the optimization algorithm, the stress drop was set to 10 bar. The S-wave attenuation relation (QS = 122.7f0.44) was calculated by the spectral decay method. For the site effect, the site amplification was corrected using the horizontal-to-vertical spectral ratio method, and the zero-distance kappa filter had a value of 0.0328 s. To verify the reliability of the input parameters, the simulated 5%-damped pseudo-spectral acceleration, time history, and Chinese instrumental intensity were compared with those observed at six stations and finding acceptable consistency. Furthermore, the fitted model was used to simulate the ground motion of 2279 nodal points in the area, and the seismic intensity contours were obtained. Finally, the earthquake damage assessment was performed in the Yangbi County, and the difference between the designed spectral acceleration and that simulated at a specific period was regarded as the degree of earthquake damage. It was found that the reinforced concrete structures near the epicenter have sufficient safety reserves, and the earthquake damage was not serious. In summary, the stochastic finite-fault method with calibrated parameters could effectively synthesize the ground motion of specific sites, thus providing a basis for the earthquake damage assessment of engineering buildings.
AkiK (1967) Scaling law of seismic spectrum. Journal of Geophysical Research72: 1217–1231.
2.
AkiKChouetB (1975) Origin of coda waves: Source, attenuation, and scattering effects. Journal of Geophysical Research80(23): 3322–3342.
3.
AndersonJG (1991) A preliminary descriptive model for the distance dependence of the spectral decay parameter in southern California. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America81(6): 2186–2193.
4.
AndersonJGHoughSE (1984) A model for the shape of the Fourier amplitude spectrum of acceleration at high frequencies. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America74: 1969–1993.
5.
AndersonJGQuaasR (1988) The Mexico earthquake of September 19, 1985—Effect of magnitude on the character of strong ground motion: An example from the Guerrero, Mexico strong motion network. Earthquake Spectra4: 635–646.
6.
AtkinsonGMBooreDM (2006) Earthquake ground-motion prediction equations for eastern North America. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America96(6): 2181–2205.
7.
AtkinsonGMMereuRF (1992) The shape of ground motion attenuation curves in southeastern Canada. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America82(5): 2014–2031.
8.
BeresnevIAAtkinsonGM (1997) Modeling finite-fault radiation from the ωn spectrum. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America87: 67–84.
9.
BeresnevIAAtkinsonGM (1998) Stochastic finite-fault modeling of ground motions from the 1994 Northridge, California, earthquake. I. Validation on rock sites. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America88: 1392–1401.
10.
BeresnevIAAtkinsonGM (2002) Source parameters of earthquakes in eastern and western North America based on finite-fault modeling. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America92: 695–710.
11.
BooreDM (1983) Stochastic simulation of high-frequency ground motions based on seismological models of the radiated spectra. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America73: 1865–1894.
12.
BooreDM (2003) Simulation of ground motion using the stochastic method. Pure and Applied Geophysics160: 635–676.
13.
BooreDM (2009) Comparing stochastic point-source and finite-source ground-motion simulations: SMSIM and EXSIM. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America99: 3202–3216.
14.
BruneJN (1970) Tectonic stress and the spectra of seismic shear waves from earthquakes. Journal of Geophysical Research75: 4997–5009.
15.
CarvalhoAReisCValesD (2016) Source and high-frequency decay parameters for the Azores region for stochastic finite-fault ground motion simulations. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering14: 1885–1902.
16.
ChangZFChangHZhangYDaiBY (2016) Recent active features of Weixi-Qiaohou fault and its relationship with the Honghe fault. Journal of Geomechanics22(3): 517–530 (in Chinese).
17.
ChenCTChangSCWenKL (2017) Stochastic ground motion simulation of the 2016 Meinong, Taiwan earthquake. Earth Planets and Space69: 62.
18.
DaiBHTaoZXuGLLiHXWuL (2021) Investigation of seismic damage to rural houses in the epicenter area of Yangbi Ms 6.4 earthquake in Yunnan. World Earthquake Engineering37(3): 9–18 (in Chinese).
19.
DangPFLiuQF (2020) Stochastic finite-fault ground motion simulation for the Mw 6.7 earthquake in Lushan, China. Natural Hazards100: 1215–1241.
20.
DengQDChengSPMaJDuP (2014) Seismic activities and earthquake potential in the Tibetan Plateau. Chinese Journal of Geophysics57(7): 2025–2042 (in Chinese).
21.
DengQDZhangPZRanYKYangXPMinWChenLC (2003) Active tectonics and earthquake activities in China. Earth Science Frontiers10(S1): 66–73 (in Chinese).
GB/T 17742-2020 (2020) The Chinese seismic intensity scale.
24.
GravesRWPitarkaA (2010) Broadband ground-motion simulation using a hybrid approach. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America100: 2095–2123.
25.
HanksTCMcGuireRK (1981) The character of high-frequency strong ground motion. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America71: 2071–2095.
26.
HartzellSH (1978) Earthquake aftershocks as Green’s functions. Geophysical Research Letters5: 1–4.
27.
HassaniHZZafaraniHFarjoodiJAnsariA (2011) Estimation of site amplification, attenuation and source spectra of S-waves in the East-Central Iran. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering31(10): 1397–1413.
28.
HeathDCWaldDJWordenCBThompsonEMSmoczykGM (2020) A global hybrid VS30 map with a topographic slope–based default and regional map insets. Earthquake Spectra36(3): 1570–1584.
29.
HuangFG (2009) Research on the Seismicity in Yunnan, China. Hefei, China: University of Science and Technology of China (in Chinese).
30.
HuangJYWenKLLinCMKuoC-HChenC-TChangS-C (2017) Site correction of a high-frequency strong-ground-motion simulation based on an empirical transfer function. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences138: 399–415.
31.
HusidP (1967) Gravity effects on the earthquake response of yielding structures. PhD Thesis, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA.
32.
JiangJZLiJFuH (2019) Seismicity analysis of the 2016 Ms5.0 Yunlong earthquake, Yunnan, China and its tectonic implications. Pure and Applied Geophysics176(3): 1225–1241.
33.
JoynerWB (1987) Strong-motion seismology. Reviews of Geophysics25(6): 1149–1160.
34.
KamaeKIrikuraKPitarkaA (1998) A technique for simulating strong ground motion using hybrid Green’s function. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America88: 357–367.
35.
KlimisNSMargarisBNKoliopoulosPK (1999) Site-dependent amplification functions and response spectra in Greece. Journal of Earthquake Engineering3(2): 237–240.
36.
KtenidouOJGélisCBonillaLF (2013) A study on the variability of kappa (κ) in a borehole: Implications of the computation process. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America103(2A): 1048–1068.
37.
KumaravelVSangodeSJKumarRSiddaiahNS (2005) Magnetic polarity stratigraphy of Plio-Pleistocene Pinjor formation (type locality), Siwalik Group, NW Himalaya, India. Current Science88: 1453–1461.
38.
LiDNMaZBXuWFGaoYMaHXuY (2016) Study of non-elasticity attenuation and site response in Yunnan. Journal of Geodesy and Geodynamics36(12): 1041–1046 (in Chinese).
39.
LiSXieLL (2007) Progress and trend on near-field problems in civil engineering. Acta Seismologica Sinica29(1): 102–111 (in Chinese).
40.
LongFQiYPYiGXWuWWWangGMZhaoXYPangGL (2021) Relocation of the Ms6.4 Yangbi earthquake sequence on May 21, 2021 in Yunnan Province and its seismogenic structure analysis. Chinese Journal of Geophysics64(8): 2631–2646 (in Chinese).
41.
LuYKZhangJGZhangFHDuHGYangLW. (2021) The characteristic of the seismic intensity and damage of the 2021 Yangbi, Yunnan Ms6.4 earthquake. Journal of Seismological Research44(3): 429–438 (in Chinese).
42.
LuoRFGuoXAlata WangBQiFYDongXY (2021) Investigation and analysis of seismic damage to side corridor school buildings in M 6.4 Yangbi earthquake. World Earthquake Engineering37(4): 53–63 (in Chinese).
43.
MotazedianDAtkinsonGM (2005) Stochastic finite-fault modeling based on a dynamic corner frequency. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America95: 995–1010.
44.
NakamuraY (1989) A method for dynamic characteristics estimation of subsurface using microtremor on the ground surface. Quarterly Report of Railway Technical Research30: 25–33.
45.
PitarkaASomervillePFukushimaYUetakeTIrikuraK (2000) Simulation of near-fault strong-ground motion using hybrid Green’s functions. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America90(3): 566–586.
46.
QiangSGWangHWWenRZLiCGRenYF (2021) Three-dimensional ground motion simulations by the stochastic finite-fault method for the Yangbi, Yunnan Ms6.4 earthquake on May 21, 2021. Chinese Journal of Geophysics64(12): 4538–4547 (in Chinese).
47.
RenYFWenRZHiroakiYKashimaT (2013) Site effects by generalized inversion technique using strong motion recordings of the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration12(2): 165–184.
SinghSKGarciaDPachecoJFValenzuelaRBansalBKDattatrayamRS (2004) Q of the Indian shield. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America94: 1564–1570.
50.
SuYJLiuJZhengSHLiuLFFuHXuY (2006) Q value of anelastic S wave attenuation in Yunnan region. Acta Seismologica Sinica28(2): 206–212.
51.
SunJZYuYXLiYQ (2018) Stochastic finite-fault simulation of the 2017 Jiuzhaigou earthquake in China. Earth Planets and Space70: 128.
52.
TanırcanGNecmioğluSY (2020) Simulation of the strong ground motion for the 20 July 2017 (Mw. 6.6) Bodrum–Kos earthquake. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering18: 5807–5825.
53.
TianWTDongJHYangB (2021) Basic characteristics of the three elements of strong ground motion of the Yangbi Ms6.4 earthquake in Yunnan Province. China Earthquake Engineering Journal43(4): 760–766 (in Chinese).
54.
TrifunacMDBradyAG (1975) A study on the duration of strong earthquake ground motion. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America65: 581–626.
55.
WangSJLiuYHShanXJQuCYZhangGHXieZDZhaoDZFanXRHuaJLiangSMZhangKLDaiCL (2021) Coseismic surface deformation and slip models of the 2021 Ms6.4 Yangbi (Yunnan, China) earthquake. Seismology and Geology43(3): 692–705 (in Chinese).
56.
WenRZRenYFQiWHLuTYangZYShanZDWangYL (2013) Maximum acceleration recording from Lushan earthquake on April 20, 2013. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University48(5): 783–791 (in Chinese).
57.
XiangHFHanZJGuoSMZhangWXChenLC (2004) Large-scale dextral strike-slip movement and associated tectonic deformation along the Red-River fault zone. Seismology and Geology26(4): 597–610 (in Chinese).
58.
ZhangBLiXJLinGLRongMSYuYXWangYSFuL (2021a) Analysis of strong ground motion characteristics and directivity effect in the near-field for the May 21, 2021 Ms6.4 Yangbi earthquake. Chinese Journal of Geophysics64(10): 3619–3631 (in Chinese).
59.
ZhangKLGanWJLiangSMXiaoGRDaiCLWangYBLiZJZhangLMaGQ (2021b) Coseismic displacement and slip distribution of the 2021 May 21, Ms6.4, Yangbi Earthquake derived from GNSS observations. Chinese Journal of Geophysics64(7): 2253–2266 (in Chinese).
60.
ZhangLChenGQWuYQJiangH (2016) Stochastic ground-motion simulations for the 2016 Kumamoto, Japan, earthquake. Earth Planets and Space68: 184.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
