Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Insights on the June 21, 2022, Khost earthquake, Afghanistan

  • Published:
Sādhanā Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Afghanistan is situated close to the area where the Indian, Arabian, and Eurasian tectonic plates converge. The consequent seismic hazard causes the region to be repeatedly struck by major earthquakes. However, there is a lack of seismic instrumentation in the region, and only limited historical ground motions are available thus presenting a challenge for structural designers. Due to the absence of information and a database of ground motions, buildings in the region are often built without guidance from seismic codes. Consequently, the earthquakes in the region continue to cause enormous destruction to the built environment of the region. On 22 June 2022, the southeastern region of the country was struck by a major Mw 6.2 earthquake having a maximum modified Mercalli intensity of IX. In this study, synthetic ground motions are obtained using the modified stochastic finite fault methodology for Khost and Kabul cities in the region. The results from simulations obtained in the current study are observed to compare well with the available records of the earthquake. The obtained findings are reported as simulated accelerograms, acceleration response spectra, and Fourier response spectra, which will be immensely beneficial in understanding the behavior of the built environment of the region.

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

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
Figure 10
Figure 11
Figure 12

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. United States of Geological Survey (USGS) 2022 accessed July 10, 2022 https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/us7000hj3u/executive

  2. Shnizai Z, Talebian M, Valkanotis S and Walker R 2022 Multiple factors make Afghan communities vulnerable to earthquakes. Temblor. https://doi.org/10.32858/temblor.266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Waseem M, Lateef A, Ahmad I, Khan S and Ahmed W 2019 Seismic hazard assessment of Afghanistan. J. Seismol. 23: 217–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Khalil U, Aslam B and Maqsoom A 2021 Afghanistan earthquake 2015 aftershocks analysis for a better understanding of the seismicity behavior for future assessment. Acta Geophys. 69: 1189–1197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Nasiry N Z and Aydan O 2019 Ground motion estimation at Kabul city for Mw 7.5 Hindu Kush earthquake, Rock Dynamics Summit, London, CRC Press

  6. Yeats R S and Madden C 2003 Damage from the Nahrin, Afghanistan, earthquake of 25 March 2002. Seismol. Res. Lett. 74: 305–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Majale M 2017 Afghanistan housing profile report, Minister of Urban Development and Housing of the Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan

  8. Barfield T 2022 Afghanistan: a cultural and political history. Princeton University Press

  9. ANSA 2012 Afghan Structural Code (ASC), ABC/079, Afghan Building Code, Afghanistan National Standards Authority, Kabul, Afghanistan

  10. Shareq A 1981 Geological observations and geophysical investigations carried out in Afghanistan over the period of 1972–1979. Zagros Hindu Kush Himalaya Geodyn. Evol. 3: 75–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Boyd O S, Mueller C S and Rukstales K S 2007 Preliminary earthquake hazard map of Afghanistan. United States Geol. Sur. Open-File Rep. 1137

  12. Ismail N and Khattak N 2019 Observed failure modes of unreinforced masonry buildings during the 2015 Hindu Kush earthquake. Earthq. Eng. Eng. Vib. 18: 301–314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Wheeler R L, Bufe C G, Johnson M L, Dart R Land Norton G A 2005 Seismo-tectonic map of Afghanistan, with annotated bibliography, United States Department of the Interior, United States Geological Survey

  14. Anggraeni D 2010 Modelling the impact of topography on seismic amplification at regional scale. University of Twente Faculty of Geo-Information and Earth Observation (ITC)

  15. Dhabu A, Dhanya J and Raghukanth S T G 2018 Effect of Topography on Earthquake Ground Motions. Lect. Notes Civ. Eng. 107–117

  16. Veeraraghavan S, Coleman J L and Bielak J 2020 Simulation of site and topographic effects on ground motion in Los Alamos, NM mesas. Geophys. J. Int. 220: 1504–1520

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Imperatori W and Mai P M 2013 Broad-band near-field ground motion simulations in 3-dimensional scattering media. Geophys. J. Int. 192: 725–744

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Lee S J, Komatitsch D, Huang B S and Tromp J 2009 Effects of topography on seismic-wave propagation: an example from northern Taiwan. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 99: 314–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Lee S J, Chen H W, Liu Q, Komatitsch D, Huang B S and Tromp J 2008 Three-dimensional simulations of seismic-wave propagation in the Taipei basin with realistic topography based upon the spectral-element method. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 98: 253–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Mohan K, Dugar S, Pancholi V, Dwivedi V, Chopra S and Sairam B 2021 Micro-seismic hazard assessment of Ahmedabad city, Gujarat (Western India) through near-surface characterization/soil modeling. Bull. Earthq. Eng. 19: 623–656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology (IRIS) 2022 accessed August 07, 2022 Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology, http://ds.iris.edu/wilber3/find_stations/11571439

  22. Magenes G and Calvi G M 1997 In-plane seismic response of brick masonry walls. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 26: 1091–1112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Mai P M and Beroza G C 2003 A hybrid method for calculating near-source, broadband seismograms: application to strong motion prediction. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 137: 183–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Graves R, and Pitarka A 2004 Broadband time history simulation using a hybrid approach. In: Proceedings of the 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Canada, Paper No. 1098

  25. Guatteri M, Mai P M and Beroza G C 2004 A pseudo-dynamic approximation to dynamic rupture models for strong ground motion prediction. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 94: 2051–2063

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Liu P, Archuleta R J and Hartzell S H 2006 Prediction of broadband ground-motion time histories: Hybrid low/high-frequency method with correlated random source parameters. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 96: 2118–2130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Graves R W, Aagaard B T, Hudnut K W, Star L M, Stewart J P and Jordan T H 2008 Broadband simulations for Mw 7.8 southern San Andreas earthquakes: Ground motion sensitivity to rupture speed. Geophys. Res. Lett. 35: 1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Ghofrani H, Atkinson G M, Goda K and Assatourians K 2013 Stochastic finite-fault simulations of the 2011 Tohoku, Japan, earthquake. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 103: 1307–1320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Aki K 1967 Scaling law of seismic spectrum. J. Geophys. Res. 72: 1217–1231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Hartzell S 1978 Earthquake aftershocks as Green’s functions. Geophys. Res. Lett. 5: 1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Beresnev I A and Atkinson G M 1998 Stochastic finite-fault modeling of ground motions from the 1994 Northridge, California, earthquake. I. Validation on rock sites. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 88: 1392–1401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Motazedian Dand Atkinson G M 2005 Stochastic finite-fault modeling based on dynamic corner frequency. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 95: 995–1010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Chopra S, Kumar V and Suthar Aand Kumar P 2012 Modeling of strong ground motions for 1991 Uttarkashi, 1999 Chamoli earthquakes, and a hypothetical great earthquake in Garhwal-Kumaun Himalaya. Nat. Haz. 64: 1141–1159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Vemuri J, Kolluru S and Chopra S 2018 Surface level synthetic ground motions for M7.6 2001 Gujarat earthquake. Geosci. J. 8: 429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Anderson J and Hough S A 1984 Model for the shape of the Fourier amplitude spectrum of acceleration at high frequencies. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 74: 1969–1993

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Rajeev Gandhi Memorial College of Engineering and Technology, Nandyal, 518 501, India

    Rajaram Chenna

  2. Department of Civil Engineering, Anil Neerukonda Institute of Technology and Sciences, Visakhapatnam, 531 162, India

    Neelima Patnala

  3. Department of Civil Engineering, Mahindra University, Hyderabad, 500 043, India

    Jaya Prakash Vemuri

  4. Earthquake Engineering Research Centre, International Institute of Information Technology, Hyderabad, 500 032, India

    Pradeep Kumar Ramancharla

  5. CSIR-Central Building Research Institute, Roorkee, 247 667, India

    Pradeep Kumar Ramancharla

Authors
  1. Rajaram Chenna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Neelima Patnala
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jaya Prakash Vemuri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Pradeep Kumar Ramancharla
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rajaram Chenna.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chenna, R., Patnala, N., Vemuri, J.P. et al. Insights on the June 21, 2022, Khost earthquake, Afghanistan. Sādhanā 48, 144 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12046-023-02215-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12046-023-02215-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation