California ShakeCast Users Meeting

Meeting Resources

  • Documents and presentations are on anonymous ftp for now: ftp://ftpext.usgs.gov//pub/cr/co/golden/wald/POLB%20ShakeCast (please let me know if is not OK to share your slides, Loren, Robert & David).

  • ShakeMap Manual: Revised online ShakeMap Manual is prototype for a forthcoming, more dynamic, ShakeCast Manual. See info therein about finding scenarios, Atlas and realtime ShakeMaps.

Meeting Notes

  1. National Bridge Inventory (NBI) -> ShakeCast: There was some more interest in the NBI -> ShakeCast tool & there was a request to see some more documentation. Wan & Daniel talked about incorporating this function into the workbook and& maybe that’s a good direction to go since we’ll (hopefully) be working with some more DOTs in the future anyway.

  2. Potential Impact: Everyone seemed to prefer this wording over “inspection priority”.

  3. Documentation: Patrick brought up how he’d be interested in seeing some more documentation (graphics) that describe what the application is doing and how it’s built. We already have some graphics (the famous “mostly a database” graphic), but maybe I could put together some fresh ones — Daniel worked on this a little bit about 6 months ago, but Patrick’s right about this need. This will be considered for V4, for sure. Specific needs of users would be good to know.

  4. Application Test Message: Richard Guy, Caltech, asked about how the ability to have ShakeCast periodically test itself and send the results in an email could be useful.

  5. V2 admin controls: Scott mentioned missing the ability to send a message to message to his users. Noted.

  6. Sending Updated ShakeMaps: Users didn’t sound totally satisfied with the way updated ShakeMaps are sent out. While there’s always a tradeoff between simplicity & functionality, this could be a case where we could just adjust the default settings to satisfy more users.

  7. Static Displacement: Ken reiterated the need for permanent static displacements in ShakeMap/Cast. I think the time is right to start working this out. ShakeMap V4 could accommodate such data/calculations, if we plan accordingly. We’ll discuss with Ken.

  8. Capacity Spectrum—>fragilities. Erol pointed out the need for structure directionality considerations. We hope to get Erol out to Golden for a visit to discuss fragilities in general.

  9. Rover: National Earthquake Conference (FEMA) and others discussed need to renew connection of ROVER (FEMA-154 structure evaluation) with ShakeCast. We’ll plan for V4 ShakeCast, and work with FEMA. LAUSD maybe a primary beneficiary of such a strategy for improving inventory/fragilities.

  10. ShakeCast Community: Multiple requests we expressed to be part of a ShakeCast community. We can facilitate communications, but better if an SC leader takes ownership of this great idea.

[]: