Upload
daisy-lang
View
216
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
SCEC Community Modeling Environment (SCEC/CME):
SCEC TeraShake Platform: Dynamic Rupture and Wave Propagation Simulations
Seismological Society of America Meeting18 April 2006
SCEC/CME ProjectGoal: To develop a cyberinfrastructure that can support system-level earthquake science – the SCEC Community Modeling Environment (CME)
Support: 5-yr project funded by the NSF/ITR program under the CISE and Geosciences Directorates
Oct 1, 2001 – Sept 30, 2006
SCEC/ITRProject
NSFCISE GEO
SCECInstitutions
IRIS
USGSISI
SDSCInformation
ScienceEarth
Science
www.scec.org/cme
SCEC/CME – All Hands Meeting
SCEC/CME Focus On Seismic Hazard Analysis
SCEC/CME System aims to extend and enhance geosciences work already performed in the area of seismic hazard analysis.
Metadata for Map:IMT: Peak AccelerationPOE: 10%TimeSpan: 50 YearsIMR: 1) Boore, Joyner, and Fumal (BJF; 1993, 1994a) with later modifications to differentiate thrust and strike-slip faulting (Boore et al., 1994b), 2) Sadigh et al. (1993) and 3) Campbell and Bozorgnia (1994).
ERF: … (and more)
SCEC/CME Computational Pathways
IntensityMeasures
Earthquake Forecast Model
AttenuationRelationship
1
Pathway 1: Standard Seismic Hazard Analysis
AWMGroundMotionsSRM
Unified Structural RepresentationFaults Motions Stresses Anelastic model
2
AWP = Anelastic Wave PropagationSRM = Site Response Model
Pathway 2: Ground motion simulation
RDM
FSM
3
FSM = Fault System ModelRDM = Rupture Dynamics Model
Pathway 3: Physics-based earthquake forecasting
Invert
Other DataGeologyGeodesy
4
Pathway 4: Ground motion inverse problem
SCEC Computational Platform Concept
• Definition– A large-scale implementation of computational pathways
within a specific computational system (hardware + software + expertise) for producing specific knowledge
• Implied components– Validated simulation software and geophysical models– Broadly useful simulation capabilities– Imports from other systems. Exports to other Systems– IT/geoscience collaboration involved in operation– Access to High-performance hardware– May use Workflow management tools
Large Scale Simulation-based Seismic Hazard Computational Platform Development
• 2003– OpenSHA
• 2004– OpenSHA, TeraShake
• 2005– OpenSHA, TeraShake, CyberShake
• 2006– OpenSHA, TeraShake, CyberShake, Earthworks
TeraShake Platform Anelastic Wave Propagation Capabilities
• Investigate ground motion effects for several different large Southern San Andreas ruptures.
SCEC/CME
•TeraShake Simulation area
•600 km x 300 km x 80 km
•dx=200m
•Mesh of 1.8 Billion cubes
•0.011 sec time step, 20,000 time steps: 3 min
Kinematic source: Cajon Creek to Bombay Beach (or back-60 sec source duration-18,886 point sources, each 6,800 time steps in duration
Scenario Earthquake Simulations - TeraShake
TeraShake 1.3 Cumulative PGV and SA 3.0 Maps – Kim Olsen et al (AWM), Amit Chourasia et al (Viz)
Scenario Earthquake Simulations - TeraShake
TeraShake 1.2 and 1.3 Cumulative PGV – Kim Olsen et al (AWM), Amit Chourasia et al (Viz)
Peak Displacements
TeraShake N to S Rupture (left) TeraShake S to N Rupture (right)
Particle Velocities Along N50E Profile
Largest Peak Motions above ridge between SG and LA Basins
Causes of ‘Hotspot’ in Los Angeles– Buildup of forward directivity pulse
– Excitation of guided waves upon striking S.B. basin
– Amplification as sedimentary waveguide narrows between Puente Hills and San Gabriel Mtns.
– Lateral and vertical focusing effects from 2D horizontally incident plane waves produce amplification patterns similar to those from TS1.3 and TS1.4
– Additional effects possibly from Airy phase of Love wave
– Nonlinear effects likely to decrease peak motions
TeraShake Platform Dynamic Rupture Capabilities
• Incorporate more physics into the TeraShake simulations by introduction of a dynamic rupture-based source description.
TeraShake-2 Dynamic Simulations
• RDM run on an inner domain, containing the entire rupture as well as the relevant surrounding environment….So, in addition to rupture physics parameters (yield friction, d0, etc)
• Need to include inhomogeneous crust on either side of rupture– This will require validation of rupture simulations
• Need absorbing boundaries (PML)– To run the rupture to completion, without need for a large inner domain
• Need validation of code coupling scheme– Current plan is to save the rupture and treat it a kinematic source for AWP– This raises issues of rescaling, smoothing, registering– Need to choose a rupture representation format that AWP can ingest
Large Scale Dynamic Rupture Simulations – Terashake 2
TeraShake 2 Simulation Area
Spontaneous Rupture
Simulation Domain
Olsen Dynamic Rupture Simulations
Olsen Dynamic Rupture Simulation Movies
Slip Animation
TeraShake 1 vs TeraShake 2 PGV Map
Planned Application and Development for TeraShake Platform
TeraShake 3 Simulations for 2006
0-3 Hz Deterministic Earthquake Ground Motion Prediction
Grid points along east, north, and up
Grid points (billions)
dh (m)
fmax (Hz) @ Vsmin (m/s)
200 x 200 x 150 0.006 200 0.5 @ 500
400 x 400 x 300 0.048 100 1.0 @ 500, 0.5 @ 250
800 x 800 x 600 0.38 50 2.0 @ 500, 1.0 @ 250, 0.5 @ 125
1,333 x 1,333 x 1,000
1.78 30 3.33 @ 500, 1.67 @ 250, 0.83 @ 125
CMU Hercules Tool chain
Highly scalable AWM software tools that uses new technique called In-situ parallel mesh generation
David O’Hallaron et al (CMU) Etree Mesh RepresentationJacobo Bielak et al (CMU) AWM
Finite Element Dynamic Rupture CodesPeak Surface Velocity Ratio (Topography/No Topography)
Scenario Earthquake Simulations – Puente Hills
Puente Hills Simulation Scenario Earthquake (10 Hz)Robert Graves (AWM), Amit Chourasia et al (Viz)
Velocity Y Component Animation Peak SA 2.0 magnitude Map
Full 3-D Tomography Model (Preliminary)
Po Chen – Inversion-based updates to SCEC CVM3.0 Velocity Model.
SCEC Education and Outreach
Outreach To Geosciences, Computer Sciences, and Public• SC04
•Invited Presentations USC, SDSC Booths• AGU 2004
•Booth, Presentations, Posters• Globus World 2005
• Invited Presentation• SSA 2005
•Booth, Invited Presentations, Posters• GRIDS Workshop 2005
• Invited Presentation• Unavco/IRIS Annual Meeting 2005
• CIG Workshop Presentation, Web Services Workshop, Posters• SCEC Earthquake Spectrum Press Conference 2005• Earthscope Meeting 2005
• Poster, IT Workshop• GEON All Hands Meeting 2005
• Posters• National Forum for Geoscience Information Technology (FGIT) 2005
• Poster• GSA 2005
• Booth, Poster• SC05
•Invited Presentations USC, SDSC, TeraGrid Booths
Computational Platform Concept
Data Intensive Capacity Computing
Data Intensive CapabilityComputing
Capability Computing
CyberShake Platform
PetaShake Platform
Observation Platform
Seismic Hazard (Application)
Large Scale Scenarios(Full Inner/Outer Scales)
New Physics-based Simulations (Validation)
Community Access(Science Gateways)
Validates
Applies
SCEC ScienceSCEC Platforms
Computing Requirements
Cyberinfrastructure Layering
Intelligent services (smart assistants)Intelligent services (smart assistants)
Integrated system tools (workbench/dashboard)Integrated system tools (workbench/dashboard)
Workflow managementWorkflow management
Domain applications (webservices/applications)Domain applications (webservices/applications)
Resource sharing (grids)Resource sharing (grids)
Hardware (computing, networking, storage)Hardware (computing, networking, storage)1
2
3
4
5
6
Vertical
integration
SCEC Community Modeling EnvironmentA grid-enabled collaboratory for system-level earthquake science