Advertisement

Journal of the Geological Society of India

, Volume 92, Issue 6, pp 661–670 | Cite as

Seismic Cycles and Trend Predictions of Earthquakes in Sumatra–Andaman and Burmese Subduction Zones using Temporal b-value and Hurst Analysis

  • Diptansu Sengupta
  • Basab MukhopadhyayEmail author
  • Om Prakash Mishra
Article
  • 32 Downloads

Abstract

The annual b-value fluctuation patterns in Burmese subduction zone and Andaman–Sumatra subduction zone are evaluated from earthquake data (January 1990 to June 2016; Mw ³ 4.3) to identify seismic cycles with sequential dynamic phases as described in the ‘elastic failure model’ of Main et al. (1989). Two seismic cycles have been identified in Andaman–Sumatra subduction zone, one started in 1990 and ended on 2004 with occurrence of great Sumatra earthquake (Mw 9.0) and the other started in 2005 and continuing till date with the phase of crack coalescence and fluid diffusion (3A&B). Similarly, the subduction zone of Burma shows evidence of one incomplete seismic cycle within 1990–2016 and presently undergoing the crack coalescence and fluid diffusion (3A&B) phase. The analysis has prompted to subdivide the area into thirteen smaller seismic blocks (A to M) to analyse area specific seismic trend and vulnerability analysis employing Hurst Statistics. Hurst plots with the dynamic phases of ‘elastic failure model’ of earthquake generation is compared to assess the blocks with high seismic vulnerability. The analysis suggest that north Andaman zone (block G) and north Burma fold belt (block M) are seismically most vulnerable. Moreover, the seismic vulnerability of Tripura fold belt and Bangladesh plain (block K) is equally high.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Amorese, D., Grasso, J-R. and Rydelek, P.A. (2010) On varying b-values with depth: results from computer-intensive tests for Southern California. Geophys. Jour. Internat., v.180, pp.347–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aki, K. (1965) Maximum likelihood estimate of b in the formula log N = a–bM and its confidence limits. Bull. Earthquake Res. Inst., Tokyo Univ., v.43, pp.237–239.Google Scholar
  3. Chen, C., and Hiscott, R.N. (1999) Statistical analysis of turbidite cycles in submarine fan successions: Tests for short term persistence. Jour. Sediment. Res., v.69, pp.486–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chan, L.S. and Chandler, A.M. (2001) Spatial bias in b-value of the frequency magnitude relation for the Hong Kong region. Jour. Asian Earth Sci., v.20, pp.73–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Curray, J.R. (2005) Tectonics and history of the Andaman Sea region. Jour. Asian Earth Sci., v.25, pp.187–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dasgupta, S., Pande, P., Ganguly, D., Iqbal, Z., Sanyal, K., Venkatraman, N.V., Dasgupta, S., Sural, B., Harendranath, L., Mazumdar, S., Sanyal, S., Roy, A., Das, L.K., Misra, P.S., and Gupta, H. (2000) Seismotectonic Atlas of India and Its Environs. Geol. Surv. India Spec. Publ., Kolkata, India, 87p.Google Scholar
  7. Dasgupta, S. and Mukhopadhyay, M. (1993) Seismicity and plate deformation below the Andaman Arc, Northeast Indian Ocean. Tectonophysics, v.225, pp.529–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dasgupta, S., Mukhopadhyay, M., Bhattacharya, A., and Jana, T.K. (2003) The geometry of the Burmese–Andaman sub-ducting lithosphere. Jour. Seismol., v.7, pp.155–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dasgupta, S., Mukhopadhyay, B. and Acharyya, A. (2007a) Seismotectonics of the Andaman-Nicobar Region: Constraints from Aftershocks within 24 Hours of the Great 26 December 2004 Earthquake, In: Sumatra_Andaman earthquake and Tsunami 26 December 2004 (Ed. Sujit Dasgupta), Geol. Surv. India, Spec. Publ., v.89, pp.95–104.Google Scholar
  10. Dasgupta, S., Mukhopadhyay, B. and Bhattacharya, A. (2007b) Seismicity pattern in north Sumatra-Great Nicobar region: In search of precursor for the 26 December 2004 earthquake. Jour. Earth System Sci., v.116(3), pp.215–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dasgupta, S., Mukhopadhyay, B. and Acharyya, A. (2005) Aftershock propagation characteristics during the first three hours following the 26 December 2004 Sumatra-Andaman Earthquake, Gondwana Res., v.8, pp.585–588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hanks, H.C. and Kanamori,, H. (1979) A moment magnitude scale. Jour. Geophys. Res., v.84, pp.2348–2350. DOI: 10.1029/JB084iB05p02348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hurst, H.E. (1951) Long term storage capacity of reservoirs. T. Amer. Soc. Civil Engg., v.116, pp.770–808.Google Scholar
  14. Hurst, H.E. (1956) Methods of using long-term storage in reservoirs. Proc. Inst. Civil Engg., Part 1, 5, pp.519–590.Google Scholar
  15. Kafka, A.L., and Walcott, J.R. (1998) How well does the spatial distribution of smaller earthquakes forecast the locations of larger earthquakes in the Northeastern United States? Seismol. Res. Lett., v.69, pp.428–440.Google Scholar
  16. Klotz, J., Khazaradze, G., Angermann, D., Reigber, C., Perdomo, R. and Cifuentes, O. (2001) Earthquake cycle dominates contemporary crustal deformation in Central and Southern Andes. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett., v.193, pp.437–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kulhanek, O. (2005) Seminar on b-value. Department of Geophysics, Charles University, December 10–19, 2005, Prague.Google Scholar
  18. Mandelbrot, B., and Hudson, R.L. (2004) The (Mis)Behavior of Markets, A Fractal View of Risk, Ruin and Reward, Basic Books -Business & Economics, Profile Book, London, 329p.Google Scholar
  19. Mansukhani, S. (2012) The Hurst Exponent: Predictability of Time Series, Analytics Magazine, Issue July/August 2012, http://analyticsmagazine.org/the-hurst-exponent-predictability-of-time-series/ Google Scholar
  20. Main, I.G., Meredith, P. and Jones, C. (1989) A reinterpretation of the precursory seismic b-value anomaly from fracture mechanics. Geophys. Jour. Internat., v.96, pp.131–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mcguire, R.K. (2004) Seismic Hazard and Risk Analysis, EERI Monograph 10, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, California, USA.Google Scholar
  22. Mukhopadhyay, B., Chakraborty, P.P. and Paul, S. (2003) Facies clustering in turbidite successions: Case study from Andaman Flysch Group, Andaman Islands, India. Gondwana Res., v.6, pp.918–925. DOI: 10.1016/S1342-937X(05)71036-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mukhopadhyay, B., Acharyya, A., and Dasgupta, S. (2009a) Statistical Analysis on Yearly Seismic Moment Release Data to Demarcate the Source Zone for an Impending Earthquake in the Himalaya. Acta Geophysica, v.57(2), pp.387–399. DOI: 10.2478/s11600-008-0068-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mukhopadhyay, B., Acharyya, A., Bhattacharya, A., Dasgupta, S., and Sengupta, S.R. (2009b) Revisiting the Andaman subduction lithosphere following the 26 December 2004 Sumatra earthquake. Indian Jour. Geosci., v.63(1), pp.1–10.Google Scholar
  25. Mukhopadhyay, B. and Sengupta, D. (2018) Seismic moment release data in earthquake catalogue: application of Hurst Statistics in delineating temporal clustering and seismic vulnerability. Jour. Geol. Soc. India, v.91, pp.15–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nuannin, P. (2006) The potential of b-value variations as earthquake precursors for small and large events, Doctoral dissertation, Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.Google Scholar
  27. Nuannin, P., Kulhánek, O. and Persson, L. (2012) Variations of b-values preceding large earthquakes in the Andaman-Sumatra subduction zone. Jour.Asian Earth Sci., v.61, pp.237–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sandri, L. and Marzocchi, W. (2007) A technical note on the bias in the estimation of the b-value and its uncertainty through the least squares technique. Annals of Geophysics, v.50, pp.329–339Google Scholar
  29. Scordilis, E.M. (2006) Empirical global relations converting MS and mb to moment magnitude. Jour. Seismol., v.10, pp.225–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Shi, Y., and Bolt, B.A. (1982) The standard error of the magnitude-frequency b-value. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Amer., v.721, pp.1677–1687.Google Scholar
  31. Srivastava, K., Rani, S. and Srinagesh, D. (2015) A review of b-value imaging and fractal dimension studies in the Andaman Sumatra subduction. Natural Hazards, v.77(1), pp.97–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Tormann, T., Enescu, B., Woessner, J. and Wiemer, S. (2015) Randomness of megathrust earthquakes implied by rapid stress recovery after the Japan earthquake. Nature Geoscience, v.8(2), pp.152–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Tiwari, R.K. and Krishnaveni, P. (2015) Evidence of self-organization in Sumatra earthquakes: recurrence time and its geodynamical implications. Natural Hazards, v.77, Supplement 1, pp.51–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Uyeda, S. and Kanamori, H. (1979) Back-arc opening and the mode of subduction. Jour.f Geophys. Res., v.84, pp.1049–1061.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wallis, J.R. and Matalas, N.C. (1970) Small sample properties of H and K estimators of Hurst coefficient h. Water Resour. Res., v.6, pp.1583–1594. DOI: 10.1029/WR006i006p01583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wallis, J.R. and Matalas, N.C. (1971) Correlogram analysis revisited. Water Resour. Res., v.7, pp.1448–1459. DOI: 10.1029/WR007i006p01448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wang, K.L., Hu, Y. and He, J.H. (2012) Deformation cycles of subduction earthquakes in a viscoelastic Earth. Nature, v.484, pp.327–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wiemer, S. and Wyss, M. (2000) Minimum magnitude of completeness in earthquake catalogs: example from Alaska, the western United States, and Japan. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Amer., v.90(4), pp.859–869.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Geological Society of India 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Diptansu Sengupta
    • 1
  • Basab Mukhopadhyay
    • 1
    Email author
  • Om Prakash Mishra
    • 2
  1. 1.Geological Survey of IndiaCentral HeadquartersKolkataIndia
  2. 2.ESSO — Ministry of Earth Sciences (MoES)New DelhiIndia

Personalised recommendations