Seismic Hazard Analysis - Spring 2013, 2014
My goal is to contribute to the
improvement of our understanding of seismic hazard
and loss in the central U.S., the nation, and the
world, and to credibly communicate this
understanding to earth science professionals,
engineers, emergency response planners, private
industry, and the general public.
Probabilistic and Scenario Seismic Hazard and Risk
Earthquake Strong Ground Motion and Site Effects
Uncertainty in Hazard and Loss Estimates
Magnitudes of Historic Earthquakes from Intensity
Seismology, including Downhole Seismology
Current and Recent
Strong- and Weak-Motion
Comparisons at Turkey Flat Site Effects Array,
Ground Motion Intensity
Modeling for the 1811-1812 New Madrid Earthquakes
Memphis, TN, St. Louis,
MO, and Charleston, SC, Urban Seismic Hazard Mapping
Effect of the Upper
Mississippi Embayment on Seismic Hazard Modeling
CEUS ground motion
database for soil and rock (various soil conditions)
Q boundary and regional
Q studies in ENA
Current and Recent Grad
Allison Shumway - Focal
Mechanisms for the Northeast New Madrid Seismic Zone
Jerry Kutliroff -
Seismic Hazard of the Middle East, Israel
Donny Dangkua - ENA
intensity vs ground motion, In Situ Soil
Md. Nayeem Al Noman -
ENA Attenuation and Regional Q
Mahesh Dhar - Seismic
response of the Kathmandu Valley, Nepal and
Philip Ogweno - GMPE
model bias with respect to the NGA East database
Mostafa Mousavi - Q
estimates for easternmost Canada
Monsurul Huda - Site
response in the Mississippi Embayment
C.H., and O.S. Boyd, 2013, Why the New Madrid
Earthquakes are M7-8 and the Charleston Earthquake is
M7, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., accepted.
Dangkua, D.T., and C.H. Cramer, 2011, Felt Area versus
Instrumental Ground Motion: A Difference between
California and Eastern North America?, Bull. Seism.
Soc. Am. 101, 1847-1858.
Cramer, C.H., G. Rix, and K. Tucker, 2008,
Probabilistic liquefaction hazard maps for Memphis,
Tennessee, Seis. Res. Lett. 79, 416-423.
Cramer, C.H., J.S. Gomberg, E.S. Schweig, B.A.
Waldron, and K. Tucker, 2006, First USGS urban seismic
hazard maps predict the effects of soils, Seism. Res.
Lett. 77, 23-29.
Cramer, C.H., 2006, An assessment of the impact of the
EPRI (2003) ground motion prediction models on the
USGS national seismic hazard maps, Bull. Seism. Soc.
Am. 96, 1159-1169.
Cramer, C.H., 2006, Quantifying the uncertainty in
site amplification modeling and its effects on
site-specific seismic-hazard estimation in the
Mississippi embayment and adjacent areas, Bull. Seism.
Soc. Am. 96, 2008-2020.