Search

As part of the development of a European Seismic Risk Model 2020 (ESRM20), the spatial and temporal evolution of seismic design across Europe has been studied in order to better classify reinforced concrete buildings (which represent more than 30% of the approximately 145 million residential, commercial and industrial buildings in Europe) and map them to vulnerability models based on simulated seismic design. This paper summarises the model that has been developed to assign the years when different seismic design levels (low code, moderate code and high code) were introduced in a number of European countries and the associated lateral forces that were specified spatially within each country for the low and moderate codes for typical reinforced concrete mid-rise buildings. This process has led to an improved understanding of how design regulations evolved across Europe and how this has impacted the vulnerability of the European residential building stock. The model estimates that similar to 60% of the reinforced concrete buildings in Europe have been seismically designed, and of those buildings similar to 60% have been designed to low code, similar to 25% to moderate code and 15% to high code. This seismic design model aims at being a dynamic source of information that will be continuously updated with additional feedback from local experts and datasets. To this end, all of the data has been made openly available as shapefiles on a GitLab repository.

The Seismic Hazard Harmonization in Europe (SHARE) project, which began in June 2009, aims at establishing new standards for probabilistic seismic hazard assessment in the Euro-Mediterranean region. In this context, a logic tree for ground-motion prediction in Europe has been constructed. Ground-motion prediction equations (GMPEs) and weights have been determined so that the logic tree captures epistemic uncertainty in ground-motion prediction for six different tectonic regimes in Europe. Here we present the strategy that we adopted to build such a logic tree. This strategy has the particularity of combining two complementary and independent approaches: expert judgment and data testing. A set of six experts was asked to weight pre-selected GMPEs while the ability of these GMPEs to predict available data was evaluated with the method of Scherbaum et al. (Bull Seismol Soc Am 99:3234-3247, 2009). Results of both approaches were taken into account to commonly select the smallest set of GMPEs to capture the uncertainty in ground-motion prediction in Europe. For stable continental regions, two models, both from eastern North America, have been selected for shields, and three GMPEs from active shallow crustal regions have been added for continental crust. For subduction zones, four models, all non-European, have been chosen. Finally, for active shallow crustal regions, we selected four models, each of them from a different host region but only two of them were kept for long periods. In most cases, a common agreement has been also reached for the weights. In case of divergence, a sensitivity analysis of the weights on the seismic hazard has been conducted, showing that once the GMPEs have been selected, the associated set of weights has a smaller influence on the hazard

With the aim of improving seismic ground-motion models in Europe and reducing associated uncertainties, the compilation of a high-quality database of seismic-motion recordings and associated metadata is of primary importance. SIGMA research and development project, devoted to the improvement of seismic hazard estimates, methods and data for France and nearby regions, has been funding the implementation of RESORCE (Reference databaSe fOR seismiC ground-motion in Europe, Akkar et al., 2014).

The Seismic Hazard Harmonization in Europe (SHARE) project, which began in June 2009, aims at establishing new standards for probabilistic seismic hazard assessment in the Euro-Mediterranean region. In this context, a logic tree for ground-motion prediction in Europe has been constructed. Ground-motion prediction equations (GMPEs) and weights have been determined so that the logic tree captures epistemic uncertainty in ground-motion prediction for six different tectonic regimes in Europe. Here we present the strategy that we adopted to build such a logic tree. This strategy has the particularity of combining two complementary and independent approaches: expert judgment and data testing. A set of six experts was asked to weight pre-selected GMPEs while the ability of these GMPEs to predict available data was evaluated with the method of Scherbaum et al. (Bull Seismol Soc Am 99:3234-3247, 2009). Results of both approaches were taken into account to commonly select the smallest set of GMPEs to capture the uncertainty in ground-motion prediction in Europe. For stable continental regions, two models, both from eastern North America, have been selected for shields, and three GMPEs from active shallow crustal regions have been added for continental crust. For subduction zones, four models, all non-European, have been chosen. Finally, for active shallow crustal regions, we selected four models, each of them from a different host region but only two of them were kept for long periods. In most cases, a common agreement has been also reached for the weights. In case of divergence, a sensitivity analysis of the weights on the seismic hazard has been conducted, showing that once the GMPEs have been selected, the associated set of weights has a smaller influence on the hazard