Shaking from the 6 July 2019 Mw 7.1 Ridgecrest, California, mainshock was strongly felt through southern California, but generated relatively minimal structural damage in Ridgecrest. We consider the extent to which a damage proxy map (DPM) generated from satellite‐based Synthetic Aperture Radar images can detect minor damage throughout the town of Ridgecrest. The DPM does not, as expected, detect all minor structural damage to individual structures, nor can it distinguish between structural damage and earthquake‐related movement that is not consequential. However, the DPM does confirm many instances of minor structural damage to larger structures and groups of smaller structures and in some instances suggests minor structural damage that is not apparent upon visual inspection. Although ambiguous identification of minor damage may not be useful to guide earthquake response, the identification of minor, possibly hidden damage is potentially useful for other purposes. Overall, the DPM confirms that structural damage was commensurate with modified Mercalli intensity no higher than 7 throughout Ridgecrest. We consider both instrumental and intensity data to explore further the distribution of near‐field ground motions over the frequency range of engineering concern. Peak ground accelerations and peak ground velocities estimated from “Did You Feel It?” intensity data using the Worden et al. (2012) ground‐motion intensity conversion equation (GMICE) are consistent with recorded instrumental data. Both instrumental and estimated mainshock peak accelerations are further consistent with predictions from both the Boore et al. (2014) ground‐motion prediction equation (GMPE), but lower than predicted by the Atkinson and Wald (2007) and Atkinson et al. (2014) intensity prediction equations (IPEs). A GMPE such as Boore et al. (2014), which is constrained by a large global dataset, together with a well‐constrained GMICE, may thus characterize expected shaking intensities for large earthquakes better than an IPE based on more limited intensity data.

中文翻译：

---

来自2019 Mw 7.1 Ridgecrest，California，Mainshock的近场地面运动和震动：来自仪器，宏观地震烈度和遥感数据的见解

从2019年7月6日的加利福尼亚州里奇克莱斯特Mw 7.1震荡起，整个加利福尼亚南部都强烈感受到了主震，但在里奇克莱斯特产生的结构破坏相对较小。我们考虑了从基于卫星的合成孔径雷达图像生成的损坏代偿图（DPM）在多大程度上可以检测整个Ridgedrest镇的轻微损坏。DPM并没有像预期的那样检测到单个结构的所有轻微结构损坏，也无法区分结构损坏和与地震无关的运动。但是，DPM确实确认了许多对较大结构和较小结构组的轻微结构损坏的情况，并且在某些情况下表明轻微的结构损坏在目视检查中并不明显。尽管对次要损害的模棱两可的识别可能无法指导地震反应，但对次要的，可能是隐藏的损害的识别对于其他目的也可能有用。总体而言，DPM确认，整个Ridgecrest的结构破坏与修正的Mercalli强度不超过7相称。我们同时考虑了仪器数据和强度数据，以进一步探索工程关注频率范围内近场地面运动的分布。根据“您感觉到了吗？”估算出的峰值地面加速度和峰值地面速度 使用Worden等人的强度数据。（2012）地面运动强度转换方程（GMICE）与记录的仪器数据一致。仪器和估计的主震峰值加速度都与Boore等人的预测进一步一致。（2014年）地面运动预测方程（GMPE），但低于Atkinson和Wald（2007年）以及Atkinson等人的预测。（2014）强度预测方程（IPE）。GMPE，例如Boore等。（2014年）受大型全球数据集的约束，加上受到良好约束的GMICE，因此与基于有限强度数据的IPE相比，与IPE相比，其对大地震的预期晃动强度更好。