Journal of Earth System Science

, Volume 124, Issue 7, pp 1429–1443 | Cite as

Determining the site effects of 23 October 2011 earthquake (Van province, Turkey) on the rural areas using HVSR microtremor method

  • İsmail Akkaya
  • Ali Özvan
  • Mücip Tapan
  • M Alper Şengül


A magnitude of 7.1 Mw earthquake struck Van city on October 23, 2011. Although, construction practices of all rural housing units are similar in the region, the earthquake caused massive damage to villages located on soft soils in northern region of the city. In this study, the effects of soil conditions on damaged housing units were determined by conducting horizontal to vertical spectral ratios of microtremor (HVSR) measurements. The level of damage in the villages that are settled on lacustrine and stream sediments has verified that the damage correlates well with comparatively high HVSR peak period and HVSR peak amplitude values in the range of 0.2–1.6 s and 4–10, respectively. The HVSR peak period and HVSR peak amplitude levels on rock units are in the range of 0.1–0.2 s and 1.5–2, respectively. It is important to note that hillside effect is found to be another key factor that increased the level of damage to the housing units in some villages.


Van-Turkey rural areas earthquake ambient noise HVSR soil conditions 



This study was financially supported by the Scientific Research Projects Office of Yüzüncü Yıl University (YYU-BAP, Project No. 2012-HIZ-MİM002). The authors would like to thank Dr. Ünal Dikmen and Dr. Yavuz Özdemir for their support and guidance. They also thank Mesut BOR, for his help during the field studies. The manuscript proofreading was done by Blue Tower Educational Services. The authors are grateful to the reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions.


  1. Acarlar M, Bilgin E, Elibol E, Erkal T and Gedik İ 1991 Van Gölü Doğu ve Kuzeyinin Jeolojisi; MTA Jeoloji Etütler Dairesi, Derleme No: 1061, Ankara.Google Scholar
  2. AFAD (Disaster and Emergency Management Directorate) 2011 About October 23, 2011 Van Earthquake report,, December 2011, 98p.
  3. Akın M, Özvan A, Akın M and Topal T 2013 Evaluation of liquefaction in Karasu river flood plain after the October 23, 2011, Van (Turkey) earthquake; Nat. Hazards, doi:  10.1007/s11069-013-0763-2.Google Scholar
  4. Akkaya İ 2015 The application of HVSR microtremor survey method in Yüksekova (Hakkari) region, eastern Turkey; J. African Earth Sci., doi:  10.1016/j.jafrearsci.2015.05.018.
  5. Akkaya İ and Köse O 2002 Van Gölü Havzası’nda Depremselliğin Periyodik Tekrarlanma Olasılığı, 55. Türkiye Jeoloji Kurultayı, TMMOB Jeoloji Mühendisleri Odası, Bildiri Özleri Kitabı, 12, 2002, Ankara (in Turkish).Google Scholar
  6. Aksoy E and Tatar Y 1990 Van İli doğu-kuzeydoğu yöresinin stratigrafisi ve tektoniği; TÜBİTAK Doğa Dergisi 14 628–644.Google Scholar
  7. Ansal A 1999a Strong ground motions and site amplification; Theme lecture, In: 2nd Int. Conf. on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering (ed.) Pinto P S, Balkema, Rotterdam 3 879–894.Google Scholar
  8. Ansal A 1999b The cyclic behavior of soils and effects of geotechnical factors during 17 August 1999 Kocaeli earthquake; Earthquake Hazard and Risk in the Mediterranean Region, Nicosia 1 89–104.Google Scholar
  9. Asten W M 2006 On bias and noise in passive seismic data from finite circular array data processed using SPAC methods; Geophysics 71 (6) V153—V162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Asten M W, Askan A, Ekincioğlu E E, Sisman N F and Uğurhan B 2014 Site characterization in northwestern Turkey based on SPAC and HVSR analysis of microtremor noise; Exploration Geophysics, doi:  10.1071/EG12026.Google Scholar
  11. Bard P Y 1998 Microtremor measurements: A tool for site effect estimation; Proceedings of 2nd International Symposium on the Effect of Surface Geology on Seismic Motion, 1–3 December, Yokohama, Japan.Google Scholar
  12. Bard P Y 2008 The H/V technique: Capabilities and limitations based on the results of the SESAME project; Foreword. Bull. Earthq. Eng. 6 1–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bonnefoy-Claudet S, Cotton F and Bard P -Y 2006 The nature of noise wavefield and its applications for site effects studies: A literature review; Earth-Sci. Rev. 79 205–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Çiftci Y, Selcuk L, Özvan A, Akkaya İ, Sengül M A and Aras B 2004 Seismic risk analysis for the settlements in the basin of Lake Van, Turkey; In: Proceedings of 5th International Symposium on Eastern Mediterranean Geology, Thessaloniki, Greece, 2 964–966.Google Scholar
  15. Degens E T, Wong B K, Kutman F and Finckh P 1978 The Geology of Lake Van; MTA Publishing, No: 169, 147– 158.Google Scholar
  16. Dikmen Ü and Mirzaoğlu M 2005 The seismic microzonation map of Yenisehir-Bursa, NW of Turkey by means of ambient noise measurements; Balkan Geophys. Soc. 8 (2) 53–62.Google Scholar
  17. Eskişar T, Özyalın Ş, Kuruoğlu M and Yılmaz H R 2013 Microtremor measurements in the northern coast of İzmir Bay, Turkey to evaluate site-specific characteristics and fundamental periods by H/V spectral ratio method; J. Earth Syst. Sci. 122 (1) 123–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fah D, Kind F and Giardini D 2001 A theoretical investigation of average H/V ratios; Geophys. J. Int. 145 535–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Field E H and Jacob K H 1995 A comparison and test of various site-response estimation techniques, including three that are not reference-site dependent; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 85 (4) 1127–1143.Google Scholar
  20. Gitterman Y, Zaslavsky Y, Shapira A and Shtivelman V 1996 Empirical site response evaluations: Case studies in Israel; Soil Dyn. Earthq. Engg. 15 447– 463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Göncüoğlu M C and Turhan N 1984 Geology of the Bitlis metamorphic belt; In: Geology of the Taurus Belt (eds) Tekeli O and Göncüoğlu M C, Proceedings of the International Symposium on the Geology of the Taurus Belt, 26–29.9.1983, Ankara, pp. 237–244.Google Scholar
  22. Güner Y 1984 Nemrut yanardağının jeolojisi, jeomorfolojisi ve volkanizmasının evrimi; Jeomorfoloji Dergisi 12 23–65 (in Turkish).Google Scholar
  23. Hasancebi N and Ulusay R 2006 Evaluation of site amplification and site period using different methods for an earthquake-prone settlement in western Turkey; Eng. Geol. 87 85–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kanai K and Tanaka T 1954 On microtremors I; Bull. Earthq. Res. Inst. 32 199–209.Google Scholar
  25. Kanai K and Tanaka T 1961 On microtremors VIII; Bull. Earthq. Res. Inst., University of Tokyo 39 97– 114.Google Scholar
  26. Ketin İ 1977 A short explanation about the results of observations made in the region between Lake Van and Iranian border; Bull. Geol. Soc. Turk. 20 79–85 (in Turkish).Google Scholar
  27. Konno K and Ohmachi T 1998 Ground-motion characteristics estimated from spectral ratio between horizontal and vertical components of microtremor; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 88 228–241.Google Scholar
  28. Koçyiğit A, Yilmaz A, Adamia S and Kulashvili S 2001 Neotectonics of East Anatolian Plateau (Turkey) and Lesser Caucasus: Implication for transition from thrusting to strike-slip faulting; Geodinamica Acta 14 177– 195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Koçyiğit A, Deveci Ş and Kaplan M 2011 Van Depremleri Raporu, 23 Ekim-30 Kasım 2011; Ortadoğu Teknik Ünivesitesi, Aktif Tektonik ve Deprem Araştırma Lab. Yayını, Ankara, Türkiye, 22p.Google Scholar
  30. KOERİ 2011 Probabilistic assessment of the seismic hazard for the Lake Van basin, October, 23 2011;
  31. Lachet C and Bard P Y 1994 Numerical and theoretical investigations on the possibilities and limitations of Nakamura’s technique; J. Phys. Earth 42 377–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lachet C, Hatzfeld D, Bard P Y, Theodulidis N, Papaioannou C and Savvaidis A 1996 Site effects and microzonation in the city of Thessaloniki (Greece); Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 86 1692–1703.Google Scholar
  33. Lermo J and Chavez-Garcia F J 1993 Site effect evaluation using spectral ratios with only one station; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 83 1574–1594.Google Scholar
  34. Lermo J and Chavez-Garcia F J 1994 Are microtremors useful in site response evaluation? Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 84 1350–1364.Google Scholar
  35. Lunedei E and Albarello D 2010 Theoretical HVSR curves from full wavefield modelling of ambient vibrations in a weakly dissipative layered earth; Geophys. J. Int. 181 1093–1108, doi:  10.1111/j.1365-246X.2010.04560.x.Google Scholar
  36. Mucciarelli M 1998 Reliability and applicability of Nakamura’s technique using microtremors: An experimental approach; J. Earthq. Engg. 4 625–638.Google Scholar
  37. MTA 2007 Van İlinin Yer Bilim Verileri, Ankara.Google Scholar
  38. MTA 2008 Van K50 Paftası Jeoloji Haritası, Ankara.Google Scholar
  39. Nakamura Y 1989 A method for dynamic characteristics estimation of subsurface using microtremor on the ground surface; Quarterly Report of Railway Technical Research Institute (RTRI) 30 25–33.Google Scholar
  40. Nakamura Y 2008 On the H/V Spectrum; The 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, October 12–17, 2008, Beijing, China.Google Scholar
  41. Ozel O, Sasatani T, Kudo K, Okada H, Kano T, Tsuno S, Yoshikawa M, Noguchi S, Miyahara M and Goto H 2004 Estimation of S-wave velocity structures in Avcilar Istanbul from array microtremor measurements; J. Fac. Sci. Hokkaido Uni. Series VII (Geophysics) 12 (2) 115–129.Google Scholar
  42. Özvan A, Akkaya İ, Tapan M and Şengül M A 2005 Van yerleşkesinin deprem tehlikesi ve olasıbir depremin sonuçları, Deprem Sempozyumu Kocaeli 2005, 23–25 Mart 2005, Kocaeli.Google Scholar
  43. Pilz M, Parolai S, Leyton F, Campos J and Zschau J 2009 A comparison of site response techniques using earthquake data and ambient seismic noise analysis in the large urban areas of Santiago de Chile; Geophys. J. Int. 178 (2) 713–728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Poyraz S A, Şengül M A and Pınar A 2011 23 Ekim 2011 Van-Tabanlı Depremi Kaynak Mekanizmasıve Sismotektonik Yorumu; İstanbul Yerbilimleri Dergisi 24 (2) 129–139.Google Scholar
  45. SESAME 2004 Site effects assessment using ambient excitations: Final Report, European Commission Research General Directorate, Project EVG1-CT-2000-00026 SESAME.Google Scholar
  46. Şaroğlu F and Güner Y 1981 Doğu Anadolu’nun jeomorfolojik gelişimine etki eden ögeler: Jeomorfoloji, tektonik, volkanizma ilişkileri; Türkiye Jeol. Kur. Bült. 24 39–50.Google Scholar
  47. Şengör A M C and Kidd W S F 1979 Post-collisional tectonics of the Turkish–Iranian plateau and a comparison with Tibet; Tectonophys. 55 361–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Suzuki T, Adachi Y and Tanaka M 1995 Application of microtremor measurements to the estimation of earthquake ground motions in Kushiro City during the Kushiro-Oki earthquake of 15 January 1993; Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 24 595–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Tapan M, Cömert M, Demir C, Sayan Y, Orakcal K and Ilki A 2013 Failures of structures during the October 23, 2011 Tabanlı (Van) and November 9, 2011 Edremit (Van) earthquakes in Turkey; Engineering Failure Analysis, doi:  10.1016/j.engfailanal.2013.02.013.Google Scholar
  50. Ternek Z 1953 Geological study of southeastern region of Lake Van; Geol. Soc. Turkey Bull. 4 (2) 1–32.Google Scholar
  51. Theodulidis N, Bard P Y, Archuleta R and Bouchon M 1996 Horizontal-to-vertical spectral ratio and geological conditions: The case of Garner valley downhole in southern California; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 68 767–779.Google Scholar
  52. Yılmaz Y, Dilek Y and Işık H 1981 Gevaş (Van) ofiyolitinin jeolojisi ve sinkinematik bir makaslama zonu; Türkiye Jeoloji Kurumu Bülteni 24 37–44.Google Scholar
  53. Yılmaz Y, Şaroğlu F and Güner Y 1987 Initiation of the Neomagmatism in East Anatolia; Tectonophys. 134 177–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Zaslavsky Y, Sapira A and Arzi A 2000 Amplification effects from earthquakes and ambient noise in the Dead Sea rift (Israel); Soil Dyn. Earthq. Engg. 20 187– 207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Indian Academy of Sciences 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • İsmail Akkaya
    • 1
  • Ali Özvan
    • 2
  • Mücip Tapan
    • 3
    • 4
  • M Alper Şengül
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of Geophysical EngineeringYüzüncü Yıl UniversityVanTurkey
  2. 2.Department of Geological EngineeringYüzüncü Yıl UniversityVanTurkey
  3. 3.Department of Civil EngineeringYüzüncü Yıl UniversityVanTurkey
  4. 4.Disaster Management and Earthquake Research and Application CenterYüzüncü Yıl UniversityVanTurkey
  5. 5.Department of Geological EngineeringIstanbul UniversityİstanbulTurkey

Personalised recommendations