The 6th Generation seismic hazard model of Canada is being developed to generate seismic design values for the 2020 National Building Code of Canada (NBCC2020). Ground-motion models (GMMs) from the Next Generation Attenuation (NGA)-West 2 and NGA-East programs are used and epistemic uncertainty in ground-motion models is captured through the use of a classical weighted logic tree framework. For the first time, seismic hazard is computed directly on primary (e.g. A-E) seismic site classes from their time-averaged shear wave velocities in the upper 30 m of the crust (VS30). This approach simplifies the way end users will determine seismic design values for a given location and site class, while having other technical advantages such as capturing epistemic uncertainty in site amplification models. It will remove the need for separate site amplification look-up tables in the building code, enabling users to simply supply their location and site class to determine seismic design values. In general, the new ground- motion models predict higher hazard in most Canadian localities due to a variable combination of changes in median ground motions, site amplification and aleatory uncertainty.

Geoscience Australia has produced a draft National Seismic Hazard Assessment (NSHA18), together with contributions from the wider Australian seismology community. This paper provides an overview of the provisional peak ground acceleration (PGA) hazard values and discusses rationale for changes in the proposed design values at the 1/500-year annual exceedance probability (AEP) level relative to Standards Australia’s AS1170.4–2007 design maps. The NSHA18 update yields many important advances on its predecessors, including: consistent expression of earthquake magnitudes in moment magnitude; inclusion of epistemic uncertainty through the use of third-party source models; inclusion of a national fault-source model; inclusion of epistemic uncertainty on fault-slip-model magnitude-frequency distributions and earthquake clustering; and the use of modern ground-motion models through a weighted logic tree framework. In general, the 1/500-year AEP seismic hazard values across Australia have decreased relative to the earthquake hazard factors the AS1170.4–2007, in most localities significantly. The key reasons for the decrease in seismic hazard factors are due to: the reduction in the rates of moderate-to-large earthquakes through revision of earthquake magnitudes; the increase in b-values through the conversion of local magnitudes to moment magnitudes, particularly in eastern Australia, and; the use of modern ground-motion attenuation models. Whilst the seismic hazard is generally lower than in the present standard, we observe that the relative proportion of the Australian landmass exceeding given PGA thresholds is consistent with other national hazard models for stable continental regions. Abstract presented at the 2017 Australian Earthquake Engineering Society (AEES) Conference

An updated National Seismic Hazard Assessment of Australia was released in 2018 (the NSHA18). This assessment leveraged off advances in earthquake-hazard science in Australia and analogue tectonic regions to offer many improvements over its predecessors. The outcomes of the assessment represent a significant shift in the way national-scale seismic hazard is modelled in Australia, and so challenged long-held notions of seismic hazard amongst the Australian seismological and earthquake engineering community. The NSHA18 is one of the most complex national-scale seismic hazard assessments conducted to date, comprising 19 independent seismic source models (contributed by Geoscience Australia and third-party contributors) with three tectonic region types, each represented by at least six ground motion models each. The NSHA18 applied a classical probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) using a weighted logic tree approach, where the model weights were determined through two structured expert elicitation workshops. The response from the participants of these workshops was overwhelmingly positive and the participants appreciated the opportunity to contribute towards the model’s development. Since the model’s publication, Geoscience Australia has been able to reflect on the choices made both through the expert elicitation process and through decisions made by the NSHA18 team. The consequences of those choices on the production of the final seismic hazard model may not have been fully appreciated prior to embarking on the development of the NSHA18, nor during the expert elicitation workshops. The development of the NSHA18 revealed several philosophical challenges in terms of characterising seismic hazard in regions of low seismicity such as Australia. Chief among these are: 1) the inclusion of neotectonic faults, whose rupture characteristics are underexplored and poorly understood; 2) processes for the adjustment and conversion of historical earthquake magnitudes to be consistently expressed in terms of moment magnitude; 3) the relative weighting of different seismic-source classes (i.e., background, regional, smoothed seismicity, etc) for different regions of interest and exceedance probabilities; 4) the assignment of Gutenberg-Richter b-values for most seismic source models based on b-values determined from broad neotectonic domains, and; 5) the characterisation and assignment of ground-motion models used for different tectonic regimes. This paper discusses lessons learned through the development of the NSHA18, identifies successes in the expert elicitation and modelling processes, and explores some of the abovementioned challenges that could be reviewed for future editions of the model. Abstract presented at the 17th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering (17WCEE )

<div>One of the key challenges in assessing earthquake hazard in Australia is understanding the attenuation of ground-motion through the stable continental crust. There are now a small number of ground-motion models (GMMs) that have been developed specifically to estimate ground-motions from Australian earthquakes. These GMMs, in addition to models developed outside Australia, are considered here for use in the updated national seismic hazard assessment of Australia. An updated and extended suite of ground-motion data from small-to-moderate Australian earthquakes are used to assess the suitability of the candidate models for use in the Australian context. Recorded spectral intensities are compared with those predicted by the GMMs. Both qualitative and quantitative approaches are considered for such comparisons. The goodness-of-fit results vary significantly among different GMMs, spectral periods and distance ranges; however, overall, the Australian-specific GMMs seem to perform reasonably well in estimating the level of ground shaking for earthquakes in Australia. This paper was presented to the 2022 Australian Earthquake Engineering Society (AEES) Conference 24-25 November (https://aees.org.au/aees-conference-2022/)

The 22 September 2021 (AEST) moment magnitude MW 5.9 Woods Point earthquake was the largest in the state of Victoria’s recorded history. The ground motions were felt throughout the state of Victoria and into neighbouring states New South Wales and South Australia. Minor damage was reported in the city of Melbourne and in some regional towns close to the epicentre. This event was captured on many high-quality recorders from multiple sources, including private, university, and public stations. These recordings provide a rare opportunity to test the validity of some ground motion models thought to be applicable to the southeast region of Australia. This paper presents spectral acceleration and attenuation comparisons of the Woods Point earthquake event to some ground motion models. The results of this paper provide further evidence that the attenuation characteristics of southeastern Australia may be similar to that in central and eastern United States, particularly at shorter distances to the epicentre. This paper was presented at the Australian Earthquake Engineering Society 2021 Virtual Conference, Nov 25 – 26.