Skip to main content

Characterization of shear wave attenuation and site effects in the Garhwal Himalaya, India from inversion of strong motion records

Research highlights

  • The frequency-dependent shear-wave quality factor and site amplification are computed simultaneously for the Garhwal region, NW Himalaya.

  • A regional quality factor relationship of form, Qβ(f) = (102 ± 3.9)f(1.0±0.1) is established for the Garhwal Himalaya.

  • The acceleration records corrected from the obtained site effect are used to develop attenuation relations at each recording station.

  • The close resemblance of obtained Qβ(f) relations and the geology has been observed for the study region.

Abstract

The frequency-dependent shear-wave quality factor (Qβ(f)) and site amplification are computed for the seismically and tectonically active Garhwal Himalaya. The inversion technique of strong motion data is applied to obtain Qβ(f) and site effect at each recording station. The strong motion data of 82 earthquakes recorded in the Garhwal region is used for the present inversion algorithm. The comparison of site effects obtained by the present inversion scheme and well developed H/V technique (H/V is the ratio of Fourier spectra horizontal to vertical components) shows that site effects computed through the inversion technique have close resemblance with these estimates from the H/V technique. Both horizontal components are used to establish the frequency-dependent Qβ(f) relations at each station. The values of ‘Qo’ and ‘n’ at different stations vary from 92 to 112 and 0.9 to 1.1, respectively. The close resemblance of obtained Qβ(f) relations at different stations suggest, the presence of almost similar type of lithology, i.e., hard rock at these stations. A regional quality factor relationship of form, Qβ(f) = (102 ± 3.9)f(1.0±0.1) is established for the Garhwal Himalaya based on modelled Qβ values of each station. This relationship reveals low Qo value (<200) and high n value (>0.8) for the Garhwal Himalaya, which correspond to tectonically and seismically active region.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9

References

  1. Abercrombie R 1995 Earthquake source scaling relationships from 1 to 5 ML using seismograms recorded at 2.5 km depth; J. Geophys. Res. 100 24,015–24,036.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Allmann B B and Shearer P M 2009 Global variations of stress drop for moderate to large earthquakes; J. Geophys. Res. 114 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Anderson J G, Lee Y, Zeng Y and Day S 1996 Control of strong motion by the upper 30 meters; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 86 1749–1759.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Archuleta R, Cranswick E, Mueller C and Spudich P 1982 Source parameters of the 1980 Mammoth Lakes, California, earthquake sequence; J. Geophys. Res. 87 4595–4607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Atkinson G M and Boore D M 1995 Ground-motion relation for eastern North America; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 85 17–30.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Atkinson G M and Boore D M 1998 Evaluation of models for earthquake source spectra in eastern North America; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 88 917–934.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bajaj K and Anbazhagan P 2019 Regional stochastic GMPE with available recorded data for active region – Application to the Himalayan region; Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 126 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Banerjee S and Kumar A 2016 Determination of seismic wave attenuation: A review; Disaster Adv. 9(6) 10–27.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Banerjee S and Kumar A 2017 Determination of seismic wave attenuation for the Garhwal Himalayas, India; Geosci. Res. 2(2) 105–126.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Boatwright J 1994 Regional propagation characteristics and source parameters of earthquakes in northeastern North America; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 84(1) 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Boore D M 1983 Stochastic simulation of high-frequency ground motions based on seismological models of the radiated spectra; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 73 1865–1894.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Boore D M and Atkinson G 1987 Stochastic prediction of ground motion and spectral response parameters at hard-rock sites in eastern North America; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 73 1865–1894.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Boore D M and Bommer J 2005 Processing of strong motion accelerograms: Needs, options and consequences; Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 25 93–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Borkar Y, Kumar A, Gupta S C and Kumar A 2013 Source parameters and scaling relation for local earthquakes in the Garhwal and Kumaun Himalaya, India; Int. J. Adv. Seismol. 1(1) 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Brune J M 1970 Tectonic stress and spectra of seismic shear waves from earthquakes; J. Geophys. Res. 75 4997–5009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Caldwell W B, Klemperer S L, Lawrence J F, Rai S S and Ashish 2013 Characterizing the Main Himalayan Thrust in the Garhwal Himalaya, India with receiver function CCP stacking; Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 367 15–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Campillo M and Plantet J L 1991 Frequency dependence and spatial distribution of seismic attenuation in France: Experimental results and possible interpretations; Phys. Earth Planet. Int. 67 48–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Demets C, Gordon R G, Argus D F and Stein S 1990 Current plate motions; Geophys. J. Int. 101 425–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Fletcher J B 1995 Source parameters and crustal Q for four earthquakes in South Carolina; Seismol. Res. Lett. 66 44–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. GSI 2000 Seismotectonic atlas of India and its environs (eds) Dasgupta S, Pande P, Ganguly D, Iqbal Z, Sanyal E, Venkatraman N V, Dasgupta S, Sural B, Harendranath L, Mazumdar K, Sanyal S, Roy A, Das L K, Mishra P S and Gupta H K, Geol. Soc. India Spec. Publ. 43.

  21. Hassani B, Zafarani H, Farjoodi J and Ansari A 2011 Estimation of site amplification, attenuation and source spectra of S-waves in the East-Central Iran; Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 31 1397–1413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Hough S 1996 Observational constraints on earthquake source scaling: Understanding the limits in resolution; Tectonophys. 261 83–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Humphrey J and Anderson J 1994 Seismic source parameters from the Guerrero subduction zone; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 84(6) 1754–1769.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Israil M, Tyagi D K, Gupta P K and Niwas S 2008 Magnetotelluric investigations for imaging electrical structure of Garhwal Himalayan corridor, Uttarakhand, India; J. Earth Syst. Sci. 117 189–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Johnston D H and Toksöz M N 1981 Seismic wave attenuation; Soc. Explor. Geophys. 2 1–5.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Joshi A 2006a Use of acceleration spectra for determining the frequency dependent attenuation coefficient and source parameters; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 96 2165–2180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Joshi A 2006b Analysis of strong motion data of the Uttarkashi earthquake of 20th October 1991 and the Chamoli earthquake of 28th March 1999 for determining the Q value and source parameters; J. Earthq. Tech. 43(1) 11–29.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Joshi A, Kumar P and Arora S 2014 Use of site amplification, anelastic attenuation for determination of source parameters of the Sikkim earthquake of 18 September, 2011 using far field strong motion data; Nat. Hazards 70 217–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Joshi A, Kumar P, Mohanty M, Bansal A R, Dimri V P and Chadha R K 2012 Determination of Qβ(f) at different places of Kumaon Himalaya from the inversion of spectral acceleration data; Pure Appl. Geophys. 169 1821–1845.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Kastelic V, Kiratzi A, Benetatos C, Živčić M and Bajc J 2010 Shear wave Q determination for the upper crust of western and central Slovenia; Proc. XIX CBGA Congress, Thessaloniki, Greece 99 377–385.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Keilis-Borok V I 1959 On the estimation of the displacement in an earthquake source and of source dimensions; Ann. Geof. 12 205–214.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Khattri K N 1987 Great earthquakes, seismicity gaps and potential for earthquake disaster along the Himalaya plate boundary; Tectonophys. 138 79–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Kim S G and Kraeva N 1999 Source parameter determination of local earthquakes in Korea using moment tensor inversion of single station data; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 89(4) 1077–1082.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Knopoff L 1964 Crustal stresses and seismodynamic characteristics in the upper crust; Rev. Geophys. 2 625–660.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Kumar P, Joshi A, Kumar S, Sandeep and Lal S 2018 Determination of site effect and anelastic attenuation at Kathmandu, Nepal Himalaya region and its use in estimation of source parameters of 25 April 2015 Nepal earthquake Mw = 7.8 and its aftershocks including the 12 May 2015 Mw = 7.3 event; Nat. Hazards 91 1003–1023.

  36. Kumar P, Joshi A, Sandeep and Kumar A 2015b Detailed attenuation characteristics of shear waves in Kumaon Himalaya, India using the inversion of strong motion data; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 105(4) 1836–1851.

  37. Kumar N, Kumar P, Chauhan V and Hazarika D 2017 Variable anelastic attenuation and site effect in estimating source parameters of various major earthquakes including Mw 7.8 Nepal and Mw 7.5 Hindu Kush earthquake by using far-field strong-motion data; Int. J. Earth Sci. 106 2371–2386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Kumar A, Kumar A, Kumar A, Gupta S C, Jindal A K and Mittal H 2012a Source parameters of Uttarkashi Earthquake of 21st Sept 2009; Proc. Fifteenth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal.

  39. Kumar A, Mittal H, Sachdeva R and Kumar A 2012b Indian strong motion instrumentation network; Seismol. Res. Lett. 83(1) 59–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Kumar A, Pandey A D, Sharma M L, Gupta S C, Jindal A K and Jain S K 1997 Contemporary local seismicity of the Garhwal Himalaya; Proc. Workshop on Earthquake Disaster preparedness, pp. 39–47.

  41. Kumar N, Parvez I A and Virk H S 2004 Estimation of coda waves attenuation for NW Himalayan region using local earthquakes; Research report CM 0404; C MMACS, India.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Kumar D, Sarkar I, Sriram V and Khattri K N 2005 Estimation of the source parameters of the Himalaya earthquake of October 19, 1991, average effective shear wave attenuation parameter and local site effects from accelerograms; Tectonophys. 407 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Kumar A, Sinvhal A, Joshi A, Kumar D and Sandeep Kumar P 2015a Coda wave attenuation characteristics for Kumaon and Garhwal Himalaya, India; Nat. Hazards 75 1057–1074.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Kumar D, Sriram V and Khattri K N 2006 A study of source parameters, site amplification functions and average effective shear wave quality factor Qseff from analysis of accelerograms of the 1999 Chamoli earthquake, Himalaya; Pure Appl. Geophys. 163 1369–1398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Kumar D, Sriram V, Sarkar I and Teotia S S 2008 An Estimate of a Scaling Law of Seismic Spectrum for Earthquakes in Himalaya; Indian Minerals 61(3–4) & 62 (1–4) 83–92.

  46. Kuo C H, Wen K L, Hsieh H H, Lin C M, Chang T M and Kuo K W 2012 Site classification and Vs30 estimation of free-field TSMIP stations using the logging data of EGDT; Eng. Geol. 129–130 68–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Kvamme L B and Havskov J 1989 Q in Southern Norway; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 79(5) 1575–1588.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Lermo J and Chavez-Garcia F 1993 Site effect evaluation using spectral ratios with only one station; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 83 1574–1594.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Mamada Y and Takenaka H 2004 Strong attenuation of shear waves in the focal region of the 1997 northwestern Kagoshima earthquakes, Japan; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 94 464–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Mandal P, Padhy S, Rastogi B K, Satyanarayana V S, Kousalya M, Vijayraghavan R and Srinvasa A 2001 Aftershock activity and frequency dependent low coda Qc in the epicentral region of the 1999 Chamoli earthquake of Mw 6.4; Pure Appl. Geophys. 158 1719–1735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Mittal H, Kumar A and Ramhmachhuani R 2012 Indian national strong motion instrumentation network and site characterization of its stations; Int. J. Geosci. 3 1151–1167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Modiano T and Hatzfeld D 1982 Experimental study of the spectral content for shallow earthquakes; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 72 1739–1758.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Molnar P and Chen P 1983 Focal depths and fault-plane solutions of earthquakes under the Tibetian Plateau; J. Geophys. Res. 88 1180–1196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Monika, Kumar P, Sandeep, Kumar S, Joshi A and Devi S 2020 Spatial variability studies of attenuation characteristics of Qα and Qβ in Kumaon and Garhwal region of NW Himalaya; Nat. Hazards 103 1219–1237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Mori J and Frankel A 1990 Source parameters of aftershocks of the 1986 North Palm Springs earthquake determined using empirical green functions; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 80 278–295.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Nakano K and Kawase H 2019 Source parameters and site amplifications estimated by generalized inversion technique: Focusing on the 2018 Hokkaido Iburi-Tobu earthquake; Earth Planet. Space 71(66) 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Nakata T 1989 Active faults of the Himalaya of India and Nepal; Geol. Soc. Am. Spec. Paper 232 243–264.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Nath S K, Shukla K and Vyas M 2008 Seismic hazard scenario and attenuation model of the Garhwal Himalaya using near-field synthesis from weak motion seismometer; J. Earth Syst. Sci. 117 649–670.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Negi S S, Paul A and Joshi A 2015 Body wave crustal attenuation characteristics in the Garhwal Himalaya, India; Pure Appl. Geophys. 172(6) 1451–1469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Parvez I A, Yadav P and Nagaraj K 2012 Attenuation of P, S and Coda Waves in the NW-Himalayas, India; Int. J. Geosci. 3 179–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Paul A and Kumar N 2010 Estimates of source parameters of M 4.9 Kharsali earthquake using waveform modelling; J. Earth Syst. Sci. 119(5) 731–743.

  62. Polatidisa A, Kiratzia A, Hatzidimitrioua P and Margaris B 2003 Attenuation of shear-waves in the back-arc region of the Hellenic arc for frequencies from 0.6 to 16 Hz; Tectonophys. 367 29–40.

  63. Prasath R A, Paul A and Singh S 2017 Upper crustal stress and seismotectonics of the Garhwal Himalaya using small-to-moderate earthquakes: Implications to the local structures and free fluids; J. Asian Earth Sci. 135 198–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Press W H, Teukolsky S A, Vetterling W T and Flannery B P 1992 Numerical Recipies; Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Rawat G, Arora B R and Gupta P K 2014 Electrical resistivity cross-section across the Garhwal Himalaya: Proxy to fluid-seismicity linkage; Tectonophys. 637 68–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Saikia S, Chopra S, Baruah S, Baidya P R and Singh U K 2016 Crustal imaging of the Northwest Himalaya and its foredeep region from teleseismic events. Geomatics; Nat. Hazard Risk 7(4) 1265–1286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Sandeep, Joshi A, Sah S K, Kumar P, Lal S, Devi S and Monika 2019 Modeling of 2011 IndoNepal earthquake and scenario earthquakes in the Kumaon Region and comparative attenuation study using PGA distribution with the Garhwal Region; Pure Appl. Geophys. 176 4687–4700.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Shakal A F, Huang M J and Graizer V M 2004 CSMIP strong motion data processing; Proc. International workshop on Strong Motion Record Processing, COSMOS, Richmond, California.

  69. Sharma B, Gupta A K, Devi K, Kumar D, Teotia S S and Rastogi B K 2008 Attenuation of high frequency seismic waves in Kachchh region, Gujrat, India; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 98 2325–2340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Sharma B, Teotia S S, Kumar D and Raju P S 2009 Attenuation of P- and S-waves in the Chamoli Region, Himalaya, India; Pure Appl. Geophys. 166 1949–1966.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Sharma B, Teotia S S and Kumar D 2007 Attenuation of P, S and coda waves in Koyna region, India; J. Seismol. 11 327–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Sharma J, Chopra S and Roy K S 2014 Estimation of source parameters, quality factor (QS), and site characteristics using accelerograms: Uttarakhand Himalaya Region; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 104(1) 360–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Sharma M L and Wason H R 1994 Occurrence of low stress drop earthquakes in the Garhwal Himalaya region; Phys. Earth Planet. Int. 34 159–172.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Singh C, Singh A, Bharathi V K S, Bansal A R and Chadha R K 2012 Frequency-dependent body wave attenuation characteristics in the Kumaon Himalaya; Tectonophys. 524–525 37–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Singh R, Paul A, Kumar A, Kumar P and Sundriyal Y P 2018 Estimation and applicability of attenuation characteristics for source parameters and scaling relations in the Garhwal Kumaun Himalaya region, India; J. Asian Earth Sci. 159 42–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Singh S K, Mena E, Anderson J G, Quaas R and Lermo J 1990 Source spectra and RMS acceleration of Mexican subduction zone earthquakes; Pure Appl. Geophys. 133 447–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Singh S K, Ordaz M, Dattatrayam R S and Gupta H K 1999 A spectral analysis of the 21 May 1997, Jabalpur, India, earthquake (Mw = 5.8) and estimation of ground motion from future earthquakes in the Indian shield region; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 89(1) 620–630.

  78. Tajima R and Tajima F 2007 Seismic scaling relations and aftershock activity from the sequences of the 2004 mid Niigata and the 2005 west off Fukuoka earthquakes (Mw 6.6) in Japan; J. Geophys. Res. 112(B10302) 1–14.

  79. Valdiya K S 1980 Geology of Kumaon Lesser Himalaya; Wadia Institute of Himalayan Geology, Dehradun.

  80. Vandana, Kumar A and Gupta S C 2016 Attenuation characteristics of body-waves for the Bilaspur Region of Himachal Lesser Himalaya; Pure Appl. Geophys. 173 447–462.

  81. Venkataraman A and Kanamori H 2004 Observational constraints on the fracture energy of subduction zone earthquakes; J. Geophys. Res. 109 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Wason H R and Sharma M L 2000 Source parameters study of local earthquakes in the Garhwal Himalaya based on the digital broadband data; 12WCEE 1776 1–6.

  83. Zollo A, Orefice A and Convertito V 2014 Source parameter scaling and radiation efficiency of microearthquakes along the Irpinia fault zone in southern Apennines, Italy; J. Geophys. Res. 119 3256–3275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank the Director, Wadia Institute of Himalayan Geology (WIHG), Dehradun, for providing permission to publish and supporting this research work. Authors sincerely acknowledge the strong motion data provided by the WIHG, Earthquake Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee, India and website www.pesmos.in. Drs Chhavi P Pandey, Sandeep Chabak and Mr H C Pandey are being acknowledged for maintaining seismological network of WIHG. The present work is an outcome of a sponsored project funded by Science and Engineering Research Board, DST, with Grant No. ECR/2017/000367.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

The author PK carried out the computation of the quality factors, site effects and compilation of results. Monika was involved in the data preparation and processing. The author Sandeep contributed to manuscript writing, interpretation and other calculations. SK provided the data of WIHG network. RK helped in manuscript preparation. The author DK helped in the processing of data, which is downloaded from the pesmos website. NK was involved in the data acquisition of WIHG network from the seismographs installed in the field.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sandeep.

Additional information

Communicated by Munukutla Radhakrishna

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kumar, P., Monika, Sandeep et al. Characterization of shear wave attenuation and site effects in the Garhwal Himalaya, India from inversion of strong motion records. J Earth Syst Sci 130, 186 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-021-01677-0

Download citation

Keywords

  • Quality factor
  • site effect
  • strong motion
  • inversion