Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Delineation of seismic source zones based on seismicity parameters and probabilistic evaluation of seismic hazard using logic tree approach

  • Published:
Journal of Earth System Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

The delineation of seismic source zones plays an important role in the evaluation of seismic hazard. In most of the studies the seismic source delineation is done based on geological features. In the present study, an attempt has been made to delineate seismic source zones in the study area (south India) based on the seismicity parameters. Seismicity parameters and the maximum probable earthquake for these source zones were evaluated and were used in the hazard evaluation. The probabilistic evaluation of seismic hazard for south India was carried out using a logic tree approach. Two different types of seismic sources, linear and areal, were considered in the present study to model the seismic sources in the region more precisely. In order to properly account for the attenuation characteristics of the region, three different attenuation relations were used with different weightage factors. Seismic hazard evaluation was done for the probability of exceedance (PE) of 10% and 2% in 50 years. The spatial variation of rock level peak horizontal acceleration (PHA) and spectral acceleration (Sa) values corresponding to return periods of 475 and 2500 years for the entire study area are presented in this work. The peak ground acceleration (PGA) values at ground surface level were estimated based on different NEHRP site classes by considering local site effects.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
Figure 10
Figure 11
Figure 12
Figure 13
Figure 14
Figure 15
Figure 16
Figure 17
Figure 18
Figure 19
Figure 20

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles and news from researchers in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.

References

  • Agrawal P K and Pandey O P 2004 Unusual lithospheric structure and evolutionary pattern of the cratonic segments of the south Indian shield; Earth Planets Space 56 139–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aki K 1965 Maximum likelihood estimate of b in the formula logN = a − bM and its confidence limits; Bulletin of Earthquake Research Institute, University of Tokyo, 43 237–239.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anbazhagan P, Vinod J S and Sitharam T G 2009 Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis for Bangalore; J. Nat. Hazards 48 145–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson G M and Boore D M 2006 Earthquake ground-motion prediction equations for Eastern North America; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 96(6) 2181–2205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bender B 1983 Maximum likelihood estimation of b values for magnitude grouped data; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 73 831–851.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhatia S, Ravi Kumar M and Gupta H K 1997 A Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Map of India and Adjoining Regions; Annali De Geofisica 42(6) 1154–1164.

    Google Scholar 

  • BIS-1893 2002 Indian Standard Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures, Part 1 – General Provisions and Buildings; Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.

  • Bommer J, Scherbaum F, Bungum H, Cotton F, Sabetta F and Abrahamson N A 2005 On the use of logic trees for ground-motion prediction equations in seismic hazard analysis; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 95 377–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BSSC 2001 NEHRP recommended provisions for seismic regulations for new buildings and other structures, 2000 edn, part 1: Provisions, Report no. FEMA 368, Building Seismic Safety Council for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington D.C., USA.

  • Budnitz R J, Apostolakis G, Boore D M, Cluff L S, Coppersmith K J, Cornell C A and Morris P A 1997 Recommendations for probabilistic seismic hazard analysis: Guidance on uncertainty and use of experts; U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Report NUREG/CR-6372.

  • Chernick M R 1999 Bootstrap methods: A practitioner’s guide; Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics, Wiley, New York.

  • Cornell C A 1968 Engineering seismic risk analysis; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 58 1583–1606.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cramer C H and Kumar A 2003 2001 Bhuj, India, earthquake engineering seismoscope recordings and Eastern North America ground motion attenuation relations; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 93 1390–1394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frank S, Bommer J J, Hilmar B, Fabrice C and Norm A Abrahamson 2005 Composite ground-motion models and logic trees: Methodology, sensitivities, and uncertainties; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 95(5) 1575–1593.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frankel A 1995 Mapping seismic hazard in the Central Eastern United States; Seismol. Res. Lett. 66(4) 8–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ganesha Raj K and Nijagunappa R 2004 Major lineaments of Karnataka state and their relation to seismicity – Remote sensing based analysis; J. Geol. Soc. India 63 430–439.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gangrade B K and Arora S K 2000 Seismicity of the Indian peninsular shield from regional earthquake data; Pure Appl. Geophys. 157 1683–1705.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta I D 2006 Delineation of probable seismic sources in India and neighbourhood by a comprehensive analysis of seismotectonic characteristics of the region; Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 26 766–790.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutenberg B and Richter C F 1944 Frequency of earthquakes in California; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 34 185–188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iyengar R N and Ghosh S 2004 Microzonation of earthquake hazard in greater Delhi area; Curr. Sci. 87 1193–1202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaiswal K and Sinha R 2007 Probabilistic seismic-hazard estimation for peninsular India; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 97(1B) 318–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kijko A and Sellevoll M A 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. 79 645–654.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kijko A and Sellevoll M A 1992 Estimation of earthquake hazard parameters from incomplete data files. Part II: Incorporation of magnitude heterogeneity; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 82 120–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiran K S T, Nath S K, Yadav A, Raj A, Yanger Walling M and Mohanty W K 2008 Recent seismicity in northeast India and its adjoining region; J. Seismol. 12 107–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar P, Xiaohui Yuan, Ravi Kumar M, Rainer Kind, Xueqing Li and Chadha R K 2007 The rapid drift of Indian tectonic plate; Nature 449 894–897.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGuire R K and Arabasz W J 1990 An introduction to probabilistic seismic hazard analysis; In: Geotechnical and Environmental Geophysics (ed.) Ward S H, Society of Exploration Geophysicist 1 333–353.

  • Menon A, Ornthammarath T, Corigliano M and Lai C G 2010 Probabilistic seismic hazard macrozonation of Tamil Nadu in southern India; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 100 1320–1341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nath S K 2006 Seismic hazard and microzonation atlas of the Sikkim Himalaya, Department of Science and Technology, Government of India, India.

  • Raghu Kanth S T G and Iyengar R N 2006 Seismic hazard estimation for Mumbai city; Curr. Sci. 91(11) 1486–1494.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raghu Kanth S T G and Iyengar R N 2007 Estimation of seismic spectral acceleration in peninsular India; J. Earth Syst. Sci. 116(3) 199–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Regulatory Guide 1.165 1997 Identification and characterization of seismic sources and determination of safe shutdown earthquake ground motion; U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

  • Scordilis E M 2006 Empirical global relations converting M s and m b to moment magnitude; J. Seismol. 10 225–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seeber L, Armbruster J G and Jacob K H 1999 Probabilistic Assessment of Seismic Hazard for Maharashtra, Govt. of Maharashtra, Unpublished Report.

  • SEISAT 2000 Seismotectonic Atlas of India, Geological Survey of India, New Delhi.

  • Sridevi J 2004 Estimates of plate velocity and crustal deformation in the Indian subcontinent using GPS geodesy; Curr. Sci. 86 1443–1448.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stepp J C 1972 Analysis of the completeness of the earthquake sample in the Puget Sound area and its effects on statistical estimates of earthquakes hazard; Proceedings of the International Conference on Microzonation, Seattle, Washington 64(4) 1189–1207.

  • Stepp J C, Wong I, Whitney J, Quittemeyer R, Abrahamson N, Toro G, Youngs R, Coppersmith K, Savy J and Sullivan T 2001 Yucca Mountain PSHA Project Members, Probabilistic seismic hazard analyses for ground motions and fault displacements at Yucca Mountain, Nevada; Earthquake Spectra 17 113–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toro G N, Abrahamson N and Schneider J 1997 Model of strong ground motions from earthquakes in central and eastern North America: Best estimates and uncertainties; Seismol. Res. Lett. 68 41–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Utsu T 1965 A method for determining the value of b in a formula logn = a − bM showing the magnitude–frequency relation for earthquakes; Geophys. Bull. Hokkaido Univ. 13 99–103 (in Japanese).

    Google Scholar 

  • Utsu T 1999 Representation and analysis of the earthquake size distribution: A historical review and some new approaches; Pure Appl. Geophys. 155 509–535.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valdiya K S 1973 Tectonic framework of India: A review and interpretation of recent structural and tectonic studies; Geophys. Res. Bull. 11 79–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vipin K S, Anbazhagan P and Sitharam T G 2009 Estimation of peak ground acceleration and spectral acceleration for south India with local site effects: Probabilistic approach; Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 9 865–878.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiemer S 2001 A software package to analyze seismicity: zmap; Seismol. Res. Lett. 72(2) 374–383.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiemer S and Wyss M 2000 Minimum magnitude of complete reporting in earthquake catalogs: Examples from Alaska, the Western United States and Japan; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 90 859–869.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Authors thank ISRO–IISc Space Technology Cell, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, India for funding the project titled ‘Assessment of Seismicity of Peninsular India – Using Remote Sensing and GIS’, (Ref. No. ISTC/CCE/TGS/195 Dated 7 March 2007).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Previously, Post Doctoral Fellow, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, 560 012, India

    K S VIPIN

  2. Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, 560 012, India

    T G SITHARAM

Authors
  1. K S VIPIN
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. T G SITHARAM
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to K S VIPIN.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

VIPIN, K.S., SITHARAM, T.G. Delineation of seismic source zones based on seismicity parameters and probabilistic evaluation of seismic hazard using logic tree approach. J Earth Syst Sci 122, 661–676 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-013-0300-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-013-0300-4

Keywords