Natural Hazards

, 59:639 | Cite as

Evaluation of spatial variation of peak horizontal acceleration and spectral acceleration for south India: a probabilistic approach

Original Paper

Abstract

In this work, an attempt has been made to evaluate the spatial variation of peak horizontal acceleration (PHA) and spectral acceleration (SA) values at rock level for south India based on the probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA). These values were estimated by considering the uncertainties involved in magnitude, hypocentral distance and attenuation of seismic waves. Different models were used for the hazard evaluation, and they were combined together using a logic tree approach. For evaluating the seismic hazard, the study area was divided into small grids of size 0.1° × 0.1°, and the hazard parameters were calculated at the centre of each of these grid cells by considering all the seismic sources within a radius of 300 km. Rock level PHA values and SA at 1 s corresponding to 10% probability of exceedance in 50 years were evaluated for all the grid points. Maps showing the spatial variation of rock level PHA values and SA at 1 s for the entire south India are presented in this paper. To compare the seismic hazard for some of the important cities, the seismic hazard curves and the uniform hazard response spectrum (UHRS) at rock level with 10% probability of exceedance in 50 years are also presented in this work.

Keywords

Earthquake hazard Seismotectonic atlas PSHA Logic tree PHA SA and UHRS 

References

  1. Aki K (1965) Maximum likelihood estimate of b in the formula log N = a-bm and its confidence limits. Bull Earthq Res Inst Univ Tokyo 43:237–239Google Scholar
  2. Anbazhagan P, Vinod JS, Sitharam TG (2009) Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis for Bangalore. J Nat Hazards 48(2):145–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Atkinson GM, Boore DM (2006) Earthquake Ground-Motion prediction equations for Eastern North America. Bull Seismol Soc Am 96(6):2181–2205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bender B (1983) Maximum likelihood estimation of b values for magnitude grouped data. Bull Seismol Soc Am 73:831–851Google Scholar
  5. Bhatia SC, Ravi Kumar M, Gupta H.K (1999) A probabilistic seismic hazard map of India and adjoining regions. Annali De Geofisica 1154–1164Google Scholar
  6. BIS-1893 (2002) Indian standard criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures. Part 1—general provisions and buildings. Bureau of Indian Standards, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  7. Bommer JJ, Scherbaum F, Bungum H, Cotton F, Sabetta F, Abrahamson NA (2005) On the use of logic trees for ground-motion prediction equations in seismic hazard analysis. Bull Seismol Soc Am 95:377–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Budnitz RJ, Apostolakis G, Boore DM, Cluff LS, Coppersmith KJ, Cornell CA, Morris PA (1997) Recommendations for probabilistic seismic hazard analysis: guidance on uncertainty and use of experts. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Report, NUREG/CR- 6372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Campbell KW, Bozorgnia Y (2003) Updated near-source ground motion (attenuation) relations for the horizontal and vertical components of peak ground acceleration and acceleration response spectra. Bull Seismol Soc Am 93:314–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cornell CA (1968) Engineering seismic risk analysis. Bull Seismol Soc Am 58:1583–1606Google Scholar
  11. Cramer CH, Kumar A (2003) 2001 Bhuj, India, earthquake engineering seismoscope recordings and Eastern North America ground motion attenuation relations. Bull Seismol Soc Am 93:1390–1394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Earthquakeinfo (2007) http://www.earthquakeinfo.org/Catalog_Data.htm. Last accessed May 2007
  13. Frankel A (1995) Mapping seismic hazard in the Central Eastern United States. Seismol Res Lett 66(4):8–21Google Scholar
  14. Ganesha Raj K, Nijagunappa R (2004) Major lineaments of Karnataka state and their relation to seismicity remote sensing based analysis. J Geol Soc India 63:430–439Google Scholar
  15. Gangrade BK, Arora SK (2000) Seismicity of the Indian peninsular shield from regional earthquake data. Pure Appl Geophys 157:1683–1705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gutenberg B, Richter CF (1944) Frequency of earthquakes in California. Bull Seismol Soc Am 34:185–188Google Scholar
  17. Heaton Tajima TF, Mori AW (1986) Estimating ground motions using recorded Accelerograms. Surv Geophys 8:25–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. IMD (2007) http://www.imd.ernet.in. Last accessed March 2007
  19. IRIS (2007) http://www.iris.edu/. Last accessed May 2007
  20. Iyengar RN, Ghosh S (2004) Microzonation of earthquake hazard in greater Delhi area. Curr Sci 87:1193–1202Google Scholar
  21. Jaiswal K, Sinha R (2008) Spatial-temporal variability of seismic hazard in peninsular India. J Earth Syst Sci 117(S2):707–718CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kijko A, Sellevoll MA (1989) Estimation of earthquake hazard parameters from incomplete data files. Part I: utilization of extreme and complete catalogs with different threshold magnitudes. Bull Seismol Soc Am 79:645–654Google Scholar
  23. Kiran KST, Nath SK, Yadav A, Raj A, Walling MY, Mohanty WK (2008) Recent seismicity in Northeast India and its adjoining region. J Seismol 12:107–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kiureghian DA, Ang AHS (1977) A fault-rupture model for seismic risk analysis. Bull Seismol Soc Am 67(4):1173–1194Google Scholar
  25. Kumar P, Yuan X, Ravi Kumar M, Kind R, Li X, Chadha RK (2007) The rapid drift of Indian tectonic plate. Nature 449:894–897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. McGuire PK, Arabasz WJ (1990) An introduction to probabilistic seismic hazard analysis. In: Ward SH (ed). Geotechnical and environmental geophysics, society of exploration geophysicist 1:333–353Google Scholar
  27. Nath SK (2006) Seismic hazard and microzonation atlas of the Sikkim Himalaya, published by department of science and technology. Government of India, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  28. Nath SK, Thingbaijam KK, Singh RajA (2008) Earthquake hazard in the Northeast India—a seismic microzonation approach with typical case studies from Sikkim Himalaya and Guwahati city. J Earth Syst Sci 117(S2):809–831CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. RaghuKanth STG, Iyengar RN (2006) Seismic hazard estimation for Mumbai city. Curr Sci 91(11):1486–1494Google Scholar
  30. RaghuKanth STG, Iyengar RN (2007) Estimation of seismic spectral acceleration in peninsular India. J Earth Syst Sci 116(3):199–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ramalingeswara Rao B (2000) Historical seismicity and deformation rates in the Indian peninsular shield. J Seismol 4:247–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rastogi BK, Gupta HK, Mandal Prantik, Satyanarayana HVS, Kousalya M, Raghavan R, Jain Richa, Sarma ANS, Kumar N, Satyamurty C (2001) The deadliest stable continental region earthquake occurred near Bhuj on 26 January 2001. J Seismol 5:609–615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Regulatory Guide 1.165 (1997) Identification and characterization of seismic sources and determination of safe shutdown earthquake ground motion. Published by U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, USAGoogle Scholar
  34. Reiter L (1990) Earthquake hazard analysis: issues and insights. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  35. Scordilis EM (2006) Empirical global relations converting ms and mb to moment magnitude. J Seismol 10:225–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Seeber L, Armbruster JG, Jacob KH (1999) Probabilistic assessment of seismic hazard for Maharashtra. Government of Maharashtra, Maharashtra (Unpublished Report)Google Scholar
  37. SEISAT (2000) Seismotectonic Atlas of India. Published by geological survey of IndiaGoogle Scholar
  38. Sitharam TG, Anbazhagan P (2007) Seismic hazard analysis for the Bangalore region. J Nat Hazards 40:261–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sitharam TG, Anbazhagan P, Ganesha Raj K (2006) Use of remote sensing and seismotectonic parameters for seismic hazard analysis of Bangalore. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 6:927–939CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sridevi J (2004) Estimates of plate velocity and crustal deformation in the Indian subcontinent using GPS geodesy. Curr Sci 86:1443–1448Google Scholar
  41. Stepp JC, Wong I, Whitney J, Quittemeyer R, Abrahamson N, Toro G, Youngs R, Coppersmith K, Savy J, Sullivan T (2001) Yucca mountain PSHA project members, probabilistic seismic hazard analyses for ground motions and fault displacements at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Earthq Spectra 17:113–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. USGS (2007) http://earthquake.usgs.gov/regional/neic/. Last accessed May 2007
  43. Utsu T (1965) A method for determining the value of b in the formula log N = a − bM showing the magnitude–frequency relation for the earthquakes. Geophy Bull Hokkaido Univ 13:99–103Google Scholar
  44. Utsu T (1999) Representation and analysis of the earthquake size distribution: a historical review and some new approaches. Pure Appl Geophys 155:509–535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Vipin KS, Anbazhagan P, Sitharam TG (2009) Estimation of peak ground acceleration and spectral acceleration for South India with local site effects: probabilistic approach. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 9:865–878CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wiemer S (2001) A software package to analyze seismicity: zmap. Seismol Res Lett 72(2):374–383Google Scholar
  47. Wiemer S, Wyss M (2000) Minimum magnitude of complete reporting in earthquake catalogs: examples from Alaska, the Western United States, and Japan. Bull Seismol Soci Am 90:859–869CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringIndian Institute of Science (IISc)BangaloreIndia

Personalised recommendations