Natural Hazards

, Volume 43, Issue 1, pp 129–146 | Cite as

A deterministic approach for preparation of seismic hazard maps in North East India

Original Paper


A method of seismic zonation based on deterministic modeling of rupture plane is presented in this work. This method is based on the modeling of finite rupture plane along identified lineaments in the region using the semi-empirical technique, of Midorikawa [(1993) Tectonophysics 218:287–295]. The modeling procedure follows ω2 scaling law, directivity effects, and other strong motion parameters. The technique of zonation is applied for technoeconomically important NE part of Brahmaputra valley that falls in the seismic gap region of Himalaya. Zonation map prepared for Brahmaputra valley for earthquakes of magnitude M > 6.0 show that approximately 90,000 km2 area fall in the highly hazardous zone IV, which covers region that can have peak ground accelerations of order more than 250 cm/s2. The zone IV covers the Tezu, Tinsukia, Dibrugarh, Ziro, North Lakhimpur, Itanagar, Sibsagar, Jorhat, Golaghat, Wokha, Senapati, Imphal, and Kohima regions. The Pasighat, Daring, Basar, and Seppa region belong to zone III with peak ground accelerations of the order 200–250 cm/s2. The seismic zonation map obtained from deterministic modeling of the rupture is consistent with the historical seismicity map and it has been found that the epicenter of many moderate and major earthquakes fall in the identified zones.


Acceleration Zonation Rupture Lineament Seismicity Deterministic modeling 



This work has been done under sponsored project No. DST/23(373)/SU/2003 from the Department of Science and Technology (DST), Government of India. Authors also thank Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra for supporting this research work.


  1. Abrahamson NA, Litehiser JJ (1989) Attenuation of vertical peak acceleration. Bull Seismol Soc Am 79:549–580Google Scholar
  2. Anon. (1974) Geology and mineral resources of the states of India-Assam and adjoining states. Geol Surv India Misc Publ 20:1–24Google Scholar
  3. Araya R, Kiureghian AD (1988) Seismic hazard analysis, improved models, uncertainties and sensitivities; Report no. EERC-90/11. Earthquake Engineering Research Center University of California, Berkeley, CA, 155 ppGoogle Scholar
  4. Boore DM (1983) Stochastic simulation of high frequency ground motion based on seismological models of radiated spectra. Bull Seismol Soc Am 73:1865–1894Google Scholar
  5. Boore DM, Joyner WB (1991) Estimation of ground motion at deep soil sites in eastern north America. Bull Seismol Soc Am 81:2167–2185Google Scholar
  6. Bhatia SC, Ravi Kumar M, Gupta HK (1999) A probabilistic hazard map of India and adjoining regions. Ann Geofisica 42:1153–1164Google Scholar
  7. Chandrasekaran AR, Das JD (1992) Strong motion arrays in India and analysis of data from Shillong array. Curr Sci 62:233–249Google Scholar
  8. Coats DA, Kanamori H, Houston H (1984) Simulation of strong ground motion from the 1964 Alaskan earthquake (abs), Earthquake Notes 55, p 18Google Scholar
  9. Das JD (1992) The Assam basin: tectonic relation to the surrounding structural features and Shillong plateau. J Geol Soc India 39:303–311Google Scholar
  10. Dasgupta S, Pande P, Ganguly D, Iqbal Z, Sanyal K, Roy A, Das LK, Mishra PS, Gupta H (2000) Seismotectonic atlas of India and its environs. Geological Survey of India, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  11. Evans P (1964) The tectonic framework of Assam. J Geol Soc India 5:80–96Google Scholar
  12. Fukuyama E, Irikura K (1986) Rupture process of the 1983 Japan sea (Akita-Oki) earthquake using a waveform inversion method. Bull Seismol Soc Am 76:1623–1640Google Scholar
  13. Hadley DM, Helmberger DV (1980) Simulation of strong ground motions. Bull Seismol Soc Am 70:617–610Google Scholar
  14. Hadley DM, Helmberger DV, Orcutt JA (1982) Peak acceleration scaling studies. Bull Seismol Soc Am 72:959–979Google Scholar
  15. Hanks TC, McGuire RK (1981) Character of high frequency ground motion. Bull Seismol Soc Am 71:2071–2095Google Scholar
  16. Hartzell SH (1978) Earthquake aftershocks as green functions. Geophys Res Lett 5:1–4Google Scholar
  17. Hartzell SH (1982) Simulation of ground accelerations for May 1980 Mammoth Lakes, California earthquakes. Bull Seismol Soc Am 72:2381–2387Google Scholar
  18. Heaton TH, Hartzell SH (1986) Estimation of strong ground motions from hypothetical earthquakes on the Cascadia subduction zone, Pacific Northwest. US Geol Surv Open file Rep 86–328, p 40Google Scholar
  19. Housner GW, Jennings PC (1964) Generation of artificial earthquakes. Proc ASCE 90:113–150Google Scholar
  20. Houston H, Kanamori H (1984) The effect of asperities on short period seismic radiation with application on rupture process and strong motion. Bull Seismol Soc Am 76:19–42Google Scholar
  21. Hutchings L (1985) Modeling earthquakes with empirical green’s functions (abs). Earthquake Notes 56, p 14Google Scholar
  22. Imagawa K, Mikami N, Mikumo T (1984) Analytical and semi empirical synthesis of near field seismic waveforms for investigating the rupture mechanism of major earthquakes. J Phys Earth 32:317–338Google Scholar
  23. Irukara K (1983) Semi empirical estimation of strong ground motion during large earthquakes. Bull Disaster Prev Res Inst 33:63–104Google Scholar
  24. Irikura K, Muramatu I (1982) Synthesis of strong ground motions from large earthquakes using observed seismograms of small events. In Proc of 3rd Int. Microzonation Conf. 1, Seattle, pp 447–458Google Scholar
  25. IS 1893 (part1) (2002) Indian standards code of practice for earthquake resistant Design of Structures, Indian Standards Institution, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  26. Jain SK, Roshan AD, Arlekar JN, Basu PC (2000) Empirical attenuation relationships for the Himalayan earthquakes based on Indian strong motion data. In Proc of 6th Int Conf on Seismic ZonationGoogle Scholar
  27. Joshi A (1997) Modeling of peak ground acceleration for Uttarkashi earthquake of 20th October, 1991. Bull Ind Soc Earthquake Tech 34:75–96Google Scholar
  28. Joshi A (2000) Modelling of rupture planes for peak ground accelerations and its application on the isoseismal map of MMI scale in Indian region. J Seismol 4:143–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Joshi A (2001) Strong motion modeling of the source of the Chamoli earthquake of March 29,1999 in the Garhwal Himalaya, India. J Seismol 5:499–518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Joshi A (2003) Predicting strong motion parameters for the Chamoli earthquake of 28th March, 1999,Garhwal Himalaya, India from simplified finite fault model. J Seismol 7:11–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Joshi A (2004) A simplified technique for simulating wide band strong ground motion for two recent Himalaya earthquakes. Pure Appl Geophys 161:1777–1805CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Joshi A, Midorikawa S (2004) A simplified method for simulation of strong ground motion using finite rupture model of the earthquake source. J Seismol 8:467–484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Joshi A, Midorikawa S (2005) Attenuation characteristics of ground motion Intensity from earthquakes of intermediate depth. J Seismol 9:23–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Joshi A, Patel RC (1997) Modelling of active lineaments for predicting a possible earthquake scenario around Dehradun, Garhwal Himalaya, India. Tectonophysics 283:289–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Joshi A, Singh S, Kavita G (2001) The simulation of ground motion using envelope summation. Pure Appl Geophys 158:877–901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Joyner WB, Boore DM (1988) Measurement, characterization and prediction of strong ground motion. In Proc of Earthq Eng and Soil Dyn II, Utah, June 27–30, pp 43–100Google Scholar
  37. Joyner WB, Boore DM (1981) Peak horizontal acceleration and velocity from strong motion records including records from the 1979 Imperial valley, California earthquake. Bull Seismol Soc Am 71:2011–2038Google Scholar
  38. Kaila KL, Narain H (1971) A new approach for preparation of quantitative seismicity maps as applied to Alpide belt-Sunda and adjoining areas. Bull Seismol Soc Am 61:1275–1291Google Scholar
  39. Kaila KL, Gaur VK, Narain H (1972) Quantitative seismicity map of India. Bull Seismol Soc Am 62:1119–1132Google Scholar
  40. Kameda H, Sugito M (1978) Prediction of strong earthquake motions by evolutionary process model. In Proc. 6th Japan Earthq Eng Symp, pp 41–48Google Scholar
  41. Kanamori H (1979) A semi empirical approach to prediction of long period ground motions from great earthquakes. Bull Seismol Soc Am 69:1645–1670Google Scholar
  42. Kanamori H, Anderson DL (1975) Theoretical basis of some empirical relation in seismology. Bull Seismol Soc Am 65:1073–1095Google Scholar
  43. Kayal JR (1998) Seismicity of northeast India and surroundings—Development over the past 100 years. J Geophys 19:9–34Google Scholar
  44. Kayal JR, Zhao D (1994) Three-dimensional seismic structure beneath Shillong Plateau and Assam valley, northeast India. Bull Seismol Soc Am 88:667–676Google Scholar
  45. Khattri KN (1987) Great earthquakes, seismicity gaps and potential for earthquake disaster along Himalayan plate boundary. Tectonophysics 138:79–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kumar D, Teotia SS, Khattri KN (1997) The representation of attenuation characteristics of strong ground motions observed in the 1986 Dharamsala and 1991 Uttarkashi earthquakes by available empirical relations. Curr Sci 73:543–548Google Scholar
  47. Kumar G (1997) Geology of Arunachal pradesh. Geological Society of India, 217 ppGoogle Scholar
  48. Lai SP (1982) Statistical characterization of strong motions using power density spectral function. Bull Seismol Soc Am 72:259–274Google Scholar
  49. Lay T, Wallace TC (1995) Modern global seismology. Academic Press, California, 521 ppGoogle Scholar
  50. McGuire RK, Becker AM, Donovan NC (1984) Spectral estimates of seismic shear waves. Bull Seismol Soc Am 74:2167–2185Google Scholar
  51. Mathur LD, Evans P (1964) Oil in India, 22nd Int. Geol. Congress, India New Delhi, p 85Google Scholar
  52. Midorikawa S (1989) Synthesis of ground acceleration of large earthquakes using acceleration envelope waveform of small earthquake. J Struct Construct Eng 398:23–30Google Scholar
  53. Midorikawa S (1993) Semi empirical estimation of peak ground acceleration from large earthquakes. Tectonophysics 218:287–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Mikumo T, Irikura K, Imagawa K (1981) Near field strong motion synthesis from foreshock and aftershock records and rupture process of the main shock fault (abs), IASPEI 21st General Assembly, London, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  55. Muguia L, Brune JM (1984) Simulations of strong ground motions for earthquakes in the Mexicali-Imperial valley. In Proceedings of workshop on strong ground motion simulation and earthquake engineering applications Pub. 85- 02 Earthquake Eng Res Inst, Los Altos, California, 21-1-21-19Google Scholar
  56. Mukhopadhyay S, Chander R, Khattri KN (1997) Crustal properties in the epicentral tract of the great 1897 Assam Earthquake, northeastern India. Tectonophysics 283:311–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Nagrajan R (2001) Rapid assessment procedure to demarcate areas susceptible to earthquake - induced ground failures for environment management - a case study from parts of northeast India. Bull Eng Geol Environ 61:99–119Google Scholar
  58. Nandy DR (1976) The Assam syntaxis of the Himalaya — A reinterpretation. Geol Surv Ind Misc Publ 24(II):363–367Google Scholar
  59. Nandy DR (1980) Tectonic patterns in northeast India. Ind J Earth Sci 7(I):103–107Google Scholar
  60. Ravi Kumar M, Bhatia SC (1999) A new seismic hazard map for the Indian plate region under the global seismic hazard assessment programme. Curr Sci 77:447–453Google Scholar
  61. Sato R (ed) (1989) Handbook of Fault parameters of Japanese earthquakes. Kajima, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  62. Sharma ML (2000) Attenuation relationship for estimation of peak ground vertical acceleration using data from strong motion arrays in India. In Proc of 12th World Conf Earthq Eng. Paper No. 1964Google Scholar
  63. Shinozuka M, Sato Y (1967) Simulation of nonstationary random processes, Proc. ASCE 93:11–40Google Scholar
  64. Singh S, Malhotra G (1983) A note on the basic volcanics of Siang valley, Arunachal Himalaya. Indian Minerals 41(4):60–63Google Scholar
  65. Thakur VC, Jain AK (1975) Some observations on deformation, metamorphism and tectonic significance of the rocks of some parts of the Mishmi Hills, Lohit district (NEFA), Arunachal Pradesh. Himalayan Geol 5:339–363Google Scholar
  66. Yu G, Khattri KN, Anderson JG, Brune JN, Zeng Y (1995) Strong ground motion from the Uttarkashi earthquake, Himalaya, India, earthquake: comparison of observations with synthetics using the composite source model. Bull Seismol Soc Am 85:31–50Google Scholar
  67. Yu G (1994) Some aspects of earthquake seismology: slip portioning along major convergent plate boundaries: composite source model for estimation of strong motion and non linear soil response modeling. Ph.D. thesis, University of NevadaGoogle Scholar
  68. Zeng Y, Anderson JG, Su F (1994) A composite source model for computing realistic synthetic strong ground motions. Geophys Res Lett 21:725–728CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of GeophysicsKurukshetra UniversityKurukshetraIndia

Personalised recommendations