Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Impact of rupture-plane uncertainty on earthquake hazard: observations from the 30 october 2020 Samos earthquake

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We assess the significance of rupture-plane uncertainty in the estimated ground-motion intensity measures (IMs) by using the centroid moment-tensor and fault-plane solutions as well as the ground-motion recordings of the 30 October 2020 Samos Earthquake. We sampled ground-motion fields using stochastically generated rupture planes by considering the uncertainties imposed from alternative fault-plane solutions to reach our objective. Our observations indicate that the compromise between rupture-plane uncertainty and variability in the predicted ground-motion IMs depends on the modeling complexity of the ground-motion predictive model (GMPM). It also depends on the spatial location of the site relative to the ruptured fault. This conclusive remark is important for modelers who perform regional or site-specific seismic hazard and risk analyses. The presented case studies are also useful for GMPM developers because the ground-motion models contain predictor parameters, the most ubiquitous one is source-to-site distance, that are affected from rupture-plane geometry. Depending on the level of model complexity, the number of predictor parameters affected from rupture-plane geometry can increase and therefore the estimated ground-motion IMs can become more prone to rupture-plane uncertainty. Confined to our case-specific observations, we intend to make some suggestions to hazard, risk, and GMPM modelers for the consideration of rupture-plane uncertainty at the end of the paper.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Strong-motion data, as well as seismological information provided by the seismic networks, are cited in the paper.

Code availability

In-house custom codes written in Matlab are used in the paper. All affiliated universities provide academic Matlab licenses.

Notes

  1. https://www.emsc-csem.org/Earthquake/tensors.php?view=4—last accessed on 24/11/2020.

  2. https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/us7000c7y0/finite-fault—last accessed on 24/11/2020.

  3. https://temblor.net/earthquake-insights/fault-responsible-for-samos-earthquake-identified-12040/.

References

  • Akkar S, Cheng Y (2016) Application of a Monte-Carlo simulation approach for the probabilistic assessment of seismic hazard for geographically distributed portfolio. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn 45:525–541

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akkar S, Sandikkaya MA, Bommer JJ (2014a) Empirical ground-motion models for point- and extended-source crustal earthquake scenarios in Europe and the Middle East. Bull Earthq Eng 12(1):311–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akkar S, Sandıkkaya MA, Şenyurt M, Sisi Azari A, Ay BÖ, Traversa P, Douglas J, Cotton F, Luzi L, Hernandez B, Godey S (2014b) Reference database for seismic ground-motion in Europe (RESORCE). Bull Earthq Eng 12(1):359–387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Altunel E, Pinar A (2020) Kusadasi Gulf earthquake in the frame of active faults of Western Turkey”. Turkish J Earth Sci. https://doi.org/10.3906/yer-2011-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ancheta TD, Darragh RB, Stewart JP, Seyhan E, Silva WJ, Chiou BSJ, Wooddell KE, Graves RW, Kottke AR, Boore DM, Kishida T and Donahue JL (2013). “PEER NGA-West2 Database,” Report No. PEER 2013/03, Pacific Earthquake Research Center, University of California at Berkeley.

  • Atkinson G, Silva W (2000) Stochastic modeling of California ground motions. Bull Seismol Soc Am 90:255–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beresnev IA (2003) Uncertainties in finite-fault slip inversions: to what extent to believe? (a critical review). Bull Seismol Soc Am 93(6):2445–2458

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bommer JJ, Akkar S (2010) Consistent source-to-site distance metrics in ground-motion prediction equations and seismic source models for PSHA. Earthq Spectra 28(1):1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boore DM (2010) Orientation-independent, non geometric-mean measures of seismic intensity from two horizontal components of motion. Bull Seismol Soc Am 100:1830–1835

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boore DM, Sisi Azari A, Akkar S (2012) Using pad-stripped acausally filtered strong-motion data. Bull Seismol Soc Am 102:751–760

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boore DM, Stewart JP, Seyhan E, Atkinson G (2014) NGA-West 2 equations for predicting PGA, PGV, and 5%-damped PSA for shallow crustal earthquakes. Earthq Spectra 30(3):1057–1085

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen Q, Seifried A, Andrade JE, Baker JW (2012) Characterization of random fields and their impact on the mechanics of geosystems at multiple scales. Int J Numer Anal Meth Geomech 36(2):140–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiou BS-J and Youngs RL (2008). “NGA Model for Average Horizontal Component of Peak Ground Motion and Response Spectra,” Report No. PEER 2008/09, Pacific Earthquake Research Center, University of California at Berkeley.

  • Chiou BS-J, Youngs R (2014) Update of the Chiou and Youngs NGA model for the average horizontal component of peak ground motion and response spectra. Earthq Spectra 30(3):1117–1153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawood HM, Rodriguez-Marek A, Bayless J, Goulet C, Thompson E (2016) A Flatfile for the KiK-net database processed using an automated protocol. Earthq Spectra 32:1281–1302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Douglas J, Boore DM (2011) High-frequency filtering of strong-motion records. Bull Earthq Eng 9:395–409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ganas A, Elias P, Briole P, Tsironi V, Valkaniotis S, Escartin J, Karasante I, Efstathiou E (2020) Fault responsible for Samos earthquake identified, Temblor. https://doi.org/10.32858/temblor.134. https://temblor.net/earthquake-insights/fault-responsible-for-samos-earthquake-identified-12040. Accessed 10 April 2020

  • Goda K, Hong HP (2008) Spatial correlation of peak ground motions and response spectra. Bull Seismol Soc Am 98(1):354–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanks TC, Kanamori H (1979) A moment magnitude scale. JGR Solid Earth 84(B5):2348–2350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ji C, Wald DJ, Helmberger DV (2002) Source description of the 1999 Hector Mine, California, Earthquake, Part I: Wavelet domain inversion theory and resolution analysis. Bull Seismol Soc Am 92(4):1192–1207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaklamanos J, Baise LG, Boore DM (2011) Estimating unknown input parameters when implementing the NGA ground-motion prediction equations in engineering practice. Earthq Spectra 27:1219–1235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kale O, Akkar S, Ansari A, Hamzehloo H (2015) A ground-motion predictive model for Iran and Turkey for horizontal PGA, PGV, and 5% damped response spectrum: investigation of possible regional effects. Bull Seismol Soc Am 105(2A):963–980

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kawamoto S, Ohta Y, Hiyama Y, Todoriki M, Nishimura T, Furuya T, Sato Y, Yahagi T, Miyagawa K (2017) REGARD: A new GNSS-based real-time finite fault modeling system for GEONET. J Geophys Res Solid Earth 122:1324–1349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leonard M (2010) Earthquake fault scaling: Self-consistent relating of rupture length, width, average displacement and moment release. Bull Seismol Soc Am 100(5A):1971–1988

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mai PM, Spudich P, Boatwright J (2005) Hypocenter locations in finite-source rupture models. Bull Seismol Soc Am 95(3):965–980

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wills CJ, Silva W (1998) Shear-wave velocity characteristics of geologic units in California. Earthq Spectra 14(3):533–556

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are thankful to Dr. Ganas (National Observatory of Athens) for providing the preliminary version of the fault-plane solution published in Ganas et al. (2020). The authors also thank to Professors Arda Ozacar (Middle East Technical University), Ali Pinar (Bogazici University) and Erhan Altunel (Osmangazi University) for their valuable insights about the Samos earthquake, regional tectonics and our rupture scenarios. We also thank two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments that helped us going over many details in the original submission.

Funding

This research is not supported by a private or state entity.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Kandilli Observatory and Earthquake Research Institute Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey

    Sinan Akkar & N. Merve Çağlar

  2. Department of Civil Engineering, TED University, Ankara, Turkey

    Özkan Kale

  3. Disaster Management Institute, Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey

    Ufuk Yazgan

  4. Department of Civil Engineering, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey

    M. Abdullah Sandıkkaya

Authors
  1. Sinan Akkar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. N. Merve Çağlar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Özkan Kale
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ufuk Yazgan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. M. Abdullah Sandıkkaya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study's conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Sinan Akkar, Özkan Kale, N. Merve Çağlar, Ufuk Yazgan and Mustafa Abdullah Sandıkkaya. The manuscript was written by Sinan Akkar and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sinan Akkar.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author declared that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Akkar, S., Çağlar, N.M., Kale, Ö. et al. Impact of rupture-plane uncertainty on earthquake hazard: observations from the 30 october 2020 Samos earthquake. Bull Earthquake Eng 19, 2739–2761 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-021-01099-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-021-01099-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation