On Parallel Time Domain Finite Difference Computation of the Elastic Wave Equation and Perfectly Matched Layers (PML) Absorbing Boundary Conditions (With.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
NG-CHC Northern Gulf Coastal Hazards Collaboratory Simulation Experiment Integration Sandra Harper 1, Manil Maskey 1, Sara Graves 1, Sabin Basyal 1, Jian.
Advertisements

SCEC/ITR All-Hands Meeting October 11, 2002 Introduction by Tom Jordan.
CyberShake Project and ShakeMaps. CyberShake Project CyberShake is a SCEC research project that is a physics-based high performance computational approach.
1 USC INFORMATION SCIENCES INSTITUTE Modeling and Using Simulation Code for SCEC/IT Yolanda Gil Varun Ratnakar Norm Tubman USC/Information Sciences Institute.
10/09/2007CIG/SPICE/IRIS/USAF1 Broadband Ground Motion Simulations for a Mw 7.8 Southern San Andreas Earthquake: ShakeOut Robert W. Graves (URS Corporation)
1 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Earthquake Monitoring and Reporting through the Advanced National Seismic System Briefing for.
Faults in Focus: Earthquake Science Accomplishments Thomas H. Jordan Director, Southern California Earthquake Cente r 28 February 2014.
Session: Computational Wave Propagation: Basic Theory Igel H., Fichtner A., Käser M., Virieux J., Seriani G., Capdeville Y., Moczo P.  The finite-difference.
IMW Strategic Planning August 14, “Options for Political Activism to Get Increased Funding” John G. Anderson Director, Nevada Seismological Laboratory.
1 High Performance Computing at SCEC Scott Callaghan Southern California Earthquake Center University of Southern California.
The use of risk in design: ATC 58 performance assessment procedure Craig D. Comartin.
March 7, 2008NGA-East 2nd Workshop1 RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN STRONG MOTION SIMULATIONS FOR CEUS Paul Somerville and Robert Graves URS Pasadena MOTIVATION:
SCEC Annual Meeting - ITR 09/17/021 Numerical Modeling Using Finite Difference Techniques.
Characterization of Ground Motion Hazard PEER Summative Meeting - June 13, 2007 Yousef Bozorgnia PEER Associate Director.
NSF Investments in Engineering Research Centers Vilas Mujumdar, P.E., S.E. Program Director Engineering Research Centers National Science Foundation Summative.
11/02/2007PEER-SCEC Simulation Workshop1 NUMERICAL GROUND MOTION SIMULATIONS: ASSUMPTIONS, VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION Earthquake Source Velocity Structure.
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Earthquake Sources Based on a lecture by James Mori of the Earthquake Hazards Division, Disaster.
Outline: Lecture 4 Risk Assessment I.The concepts of risk and hazard II.Shaking hazard of Afghanistan III.Seismic zone maps IV.Construction practice What.
Southern California Earthquake Center Toward a Collaboratory for System-Level Earthquake Science Tom Jordan Southern California Earthquake Center University.
ASSESSING THE LOCAL EARTHQUAKE RISK Justin Czarka, Lehman College, CUNY – May 2013 Agung Swastika/AFP/Getty Images.
S OUTHERN C ALIFORNIA E ARTHQUAKE C ENTER Southern California: A Natural Laboratory for Earthquake Science SCEC annual meeting, 2000.
Jeroen Tromp Computational Seismology. Governing Equations Equation of motion: Boundary condition: Initial conditions: Earthquake source: Constitutive.
Finite Differences Finite Difference Approximations  Simple geophysical partial differential equations  Finite differences - definitions  Finite-difference.
S OUTHERN C ALIFORNIA E ARTHQUAKE C ENTER Data collection, synthesis, and products Kenneth W. Hudnut U. S. Geological Survey SCEC 2000 Meeting SCEC Highlights.
1 USC INFORMATION SCIENCES INSTITUTE Modeling and Using Simulation Code for SCEC/IT Yolanda Gil Jihie Kim Varun Ratnakar Marc Spraragen USC/Information.
10/03/ An Overview of the Southern California Earthquake Center Thomas H. Jordan Director.
Large-scale 3-D Simulations of Spontaneous Rupture and Wave Propagation in Complex, Nonlinear Media Roten, D. 1, Olsen, K.B. 2, Day, S.M. 2, Dalguer, L.A.
Michael Hodges, Chris Kohlenberger, Nolan Mattox, and Christian Vanderwall Seismic Hazard Map Plugin Improvement of ShakeMap Plugin Custom Color Maps Team.
Earthquake Vulnerability and Exposure Analysis Session 2 Mr. James Daniell Risk Analysis Earthquake Risk Analysis 1.
IMPLEMENTATION OF SCEC RESEARCH IN EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING ONGOING PROJECTS SCEC PROPOSAL TO NSF SCEC 2004 RFP.
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Natural Hazards Science – Reducing the World’s.
LBNLGXTBR FY2001 Oil and Gas Recovery Technology Review Meeting Diagnostic and Imaging High Speed 3D Hybrid Elastic Seismic Modeling Lawrence Berkeley.
1 SCEC Broadband Platform Development Using USC HPCC Philip Maechling 12 Nov 2012.
Estimation of Future Earthquake Annualized Losses in California B. Rowshandel, M. Reichle, C. Wills, T. Cao, M. Petersen, and J. Davis California Geological.
Southern California Earthquake Center - SCEC SCEC/CME Tom Jordan (USC) Bernard Minster (SIO) Carl Kesselman (ISI) Reagan Moore (SDSC) Phil Maechling (USC)
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey USGS Earthquake Hazards Program Earthquakes 101.
Remarks: 1.When Newton’s method is implemented has second order information while Gauss-Newton use only first order information. 2.The only differences.
Some Thoughts on IMW And Opportunity We represent a big area of the ANSS national program Bob Smith Univ. of Utah.
Simulations of Large Earthquakes on the Southern San Andreas Fault Amit Chourasia Visualization Scientist San Diego Supercomputer Center Presented to:
OPENQUAKE Mission and Vision It is GEM’s mission to engage a global community in the design, development and deployment of state-of-the-art models and.
System Level Science and System Level Models Ian Foster Argonne National Laboratory University of Chicago Improving IAM Representations of a Science-Driven.
LESSONS FROM PAST NOTABLE EARTHQUAKES. Part IV Walter Hays, Global Alliance for Disaster Reduction, Vienna, Virginia, USA.
Fig. 1. A wiring diagram for the SCEC computational pathways of earthquake system science (left) and large-scale calculations exemplifying each of the.
Loss-Estimation Modeling of Earthquake Scenarios for Each County in Nevada Using HAZUS-MH Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology Open-File Report 06-1 University.
SCEC Community Modeling Environment (SCEC/CME): SCEC TeraShake Platform: Dynamic Rupture and Wave Propagation Simulations Seismological Society of America.
Philip Maechling Southern California Earthquake Center
GRIDS Center Middleware Overview Sandra Redman Information Technology and Systems Center and Information Technology Research Center National Space Science.
SIG: Synthetic Seismogram Exchange Standards (formats & metadata) Is it time to establish exchange standards for synthetic seismograms? IRIS Annual Workshop.
Validation of physics-based ground motion earthquake simulations using a velocity model improved by tomographic inversion results 1 Ricardo Taborda, 1.
CISN: Draft Plans for Funding Sources: OES/FEMA/ANSS/Others CISN-PMG Sacramento 10/19/2004.
2004 CAS RATEMAKING SEMINAR INCORPORATING CATASTROPHE MODELS IN PROPERTY RATEMAKING (PL - 4) PRICING EARTHQUAKE INSURANCE DAVE BORDER, FCAS, MAAA.
GEOSCIENCE NEEDS & CHALLENGES Dogan Seber San Diego Supercomputer Center University of California, San Diego, USA.
06/22/041 Data-Gathering Systems IRIS Stanford/ USGS UNAVCO JPL/UCSD Data Management Organizations PI’s, Groups, Centers, etc. Publications, Presentations,
Visualizing TERASHAKE Amit Chourasia Visualization Scientist Visualization Services San Diego Supercomputer center Geon Visualization Workshop March 1-2,
Southern California Earthquake Center SCEC Collaboratory for Interseismic Simulation and Modeling (CISM) Infrastructure Philip J. Maechling (SCEC) September.
UCERF3 Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast (UCERF3) 14 Full-3D tomographic model CVM-S4.26 of S. California 2 CyberShake 14.2 seismic hazard.
1 1.Used AWP-ODC-GPU to run 10Hz Wave propagation simulation with rough fault rupture in half-space with and without small scale heterogeneities. 2.Used.
Southern California Earthquake Center SI2-SSI: Community Software for Extreme-Scale Computing in Earthquake System Science (SEISM2) Wrap-up Session Thomas.
High Risk 1. Ensure productive use of GRID computing through participation of biologists to shape the development of the GRID. 2. Develop user-friendly.
SCEC: An NSF + USGS Research Center Focus on Forecasts Motivation.
PEER 2003 Meeting 03/08/031 Interdisciplinary Framework Major focus areas Structural Representation Fault Systems Earthquake Source Physics Ground Motions.
Forecasting Earthquake Ground Motions Using Large-Scale Numerical Simulations Philip J. Maechling Information Technology Architect Southern California.
INTRODUCTION TO XSEDE. INTRODUCTION  Extreme Science and Engineering Discovery Environment (XSEDE)  “most advanced, powerful, and robust collection.
TOWARDS A NEW NORTHRIDGE AFTER THE JANUARY 17, 1994 EARTHQUAKE
Meeting Objectives Discuss proposed CISM structure and activities
Scott Callaghan Southern California Earthquake Center
SCEC Community Modeling Environment (SCEC/CME)
High-F Project Southern California Earthquake Center
Philip J. Maechling (SCEC) September 13, 2015
High-Performance Computing (HPC) IS Transforming Seismology
Presentation transcript:

On Parallel Time Domain Finite Difference Computation of the Elastic Wave Equation and Perfectly Matched Layers (PML) Absorbing Boundary Conditions (With Some SCEC Perspectives) Kim Olsen and Carey Marcinkovich Institute for Crustal Studies University of California at Santa Barbara UTAM Meeting 2003 University of Utah, February 13

Expansion of urban centers in tectonically active areas is driving an exponential increase in earthquake risk. Growth of Earthquake Risk Growth of cities Source: National Geographic Increasing Loss

Structural vulnerability Risk Equation Risk = Probable Loss (lives & dollars) = Hazard  Exposure  Fragility Faulting, shaking, landsliding, liquifaction Extent & density of built environment

The FEMA 366 Report “HAZUS’99 Estimates of Annual Earthquake Losses for the United States”, September, 2000 U.S. annualized earthquake loss (AEL) is about $4.4 billion/yr. For 25 states, AEL > $10 million/yr 74% of the total is concentrated in California 25% is in Los Angeles County alone

1994 Northridge When: 17 Jan 1994 Where: San Fernando Valley Damage: $20 billion Deaths: 57 Injured: >9000

Southern California Earthquake Center Consortium of 14 core institutions and 26 other participating organizations, founded as an NSF STC in 1991 Co-funded by NSF and USGS under the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) Mission: –Gather all kinds of data on earthquakes in Southern California –Integrate information into a comprehensive, physics-based understanding of earthquake phenomena –Communicate understanding to end-users and the general public to increase earthquake awareness, reduce economic losses, and save lives Core Institutions California Institute of Technology Columbia University Harvard University Massachusetts Institute of Technology San Diego State University Stanford University U.S. Geological Survey (3 offices) University of California, Los Angeles University of California, San Diego University of California, Santa Barbara University of Nevada, Reno University of Southern California (lead)

SCEC/ITR Project Goal: To develop a cyberinfrastructure that can support system-level earthquake science – the SCEC Collaboratory Funding: $10M grant over 5 yrs from NSF/ITR program (CISE and Geoscience Directorates) Start date: Oct 1, 2001 SCEC/ITR Project NSF SCEC Institutions IRIS USGS ISI SDSC Information Science Earth Science

ITR Goals Develop an information infrastructure for system-level earthquake science that can: –Capture and manipulate the knowledge that will permit a variety of users with different levels of sophistication to configure complex computational pathways. –Enable execution of physics-based simulations and data inversions that incorporate advances in fault-system dynamics, rupture dynamics, wave propagation, and non-linear site response. –Manage large, distributed collections of simulation results, as well as the large sets of geologic, geodetic and seismologic data required to validate the simulations and constrain parameter values. –Provide access to SHA products and methodologies to practicing engineers, emergency managers, decision-makers, and the general public.

Computational Pathways Intensity Measures Earthquake Forecast Model Attenuation Relationship 1 Pathway 1: Standard Seismic Hazard Analysis AWM Ground Motions SRM Unified Structural Representation Faults Motions Stresses Anelastic model 2 AWM = Anelastic Wave Model SRM = Site Response Model Pathway 2: Ground motion simulation RDMFSM 3 FSM = Fault System Model RDM = Rupture Dynamics Model Pathway 3: Physics-based earthquake forecasting Invert Other Data Geology Geodesy 4 Pathway 4: Ground motion inverse problem

Short-Term Objectives Development and verification of the computational modules Standardization of data structures and interfaces needed for interoperability Development of object classes, control vocabularies, and ontologies for knowledge management and interoperability Construction of computational and data grid testbeds Development of user interfaces for knowledge ingest and acquisition, code execution, and visualization Incorporating Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR&R)

Validation of AWM’s Before After Sampling of academic and Industry codes Uniform halfspace test

No-memory-variable formulation (Maxwell) Coarse memory-variable Formulation (8 relaxations) Reference Solution (FK) in red

Fourth-order Staggered–grid Finite Differences

T(n+1/2) T(n+1) stresses T(n) stresses velocities Fourth-order staggered-grid finite difference modeling method velocity-stress formulation of Hooke’s and Newton’s laws

Perfectly Matched Layers (PML) Absorbing Boundary Conditions

PML Discretization Split wave equation up in to parallel and perpendicular components Apply damping to perpendicular component Add up components

Double-couple Point Source versus Reference

Spectral Performance

PML(20) versus PML(5) versus Cerjan(20) PML(5) PML(20 ) Cerjan(20)

PML(20) Versus Cerjan(20)

Extended Fault Rupture (lot’s of low frequencies)

3D Velocity Model PML(10) Cerjan(20)

PML Efficiency Scheme Cerjan et al. (20) PML(5) PML(10) PML(20) Memory (Norm) Cpu-time (Norm)

PML Stability Only problems encountered for heterogeneous 3D models ||Grad(v)|| >~5 Smoothing inside PML usually restores stability

Short-Term Objectives Development and verification of the computational modules Standardization of data structures and interfaces needed for interoperability Development of object classes, control vocabularies, and ontologies for knowledge management and interoperability Construction of computational and data grid testbeds Development of user interfaces for knowledge ingest and acquisition, code execution, and visualization Incorporating Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR&R)

Computational Grid (1)Scientist issues a request (compute or data retrieval) to "Job Manager" (2) Job Manager talks to a Testbed computer via GRID service communication protocals. (3) Testbed computer performs the requested actions.

Scaling as a Function of Subdomain Configuration Layers Columns Cubes

Short-Term Objectives Development and verification of the computational modules Standardization of data structures and interfaces needed for interoperability Development of object classes, control vocabularies, and ontologies for knowledge management and interoperability Construction of computational and data grid testbeds Development of user interfaces for knowledge ingest and acquisition, code execution, and visualization Incorporating Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR&R)

Parallel I/O (MPI IO)