Journal of Seismology

, Volume 4, Issue 2, pp 143–160

Modelling of rupture planes for peak ground accelerations and its application to the isoseismal map of MMI scale in Indian region

  • A. Joshi


The rupture plane for an earthquake has been modelledby using the semi empirical technique of Midorikawa(1993). This technique estimates ground accelerationby modelling the rupture process during an earthquake.Modifications in this technique have been made for itsapplication to the Indian region. This has been tested forthe Uttarkashi earthquake of 20th Oct, 1991, India, whichwas well recorded at thirteen stations of installedstrong motion array in this region. After testingseveral possible rupture models, a final model has beenselected and peak ground acceleration due to thismodel is simulated at thirteen different stations.Dependency of methodology on model parameters, e.g.dip and mode of rupture propagation have also beenstudied in detail.Using this technique synthetic isoseismal maps wereprepared by converting peak ground acceleration intoMMI scale. Dependency of rupture models on syntheticisoseismals has also been studied in detail. Usingthis method, peak ground acceleration for the Laturearthquake of Sept 30, 1993 has been obtained atvarious places within meisoseismal area. Synthetic andfield intensity was compared at various well-knownsites. Since the region was not covered by anyinstrumental array during Latur earthquake, thesimulated peak ground accelerations are expected toserve basis of design criteria in this region.

Attenuation relation Envelope function Rupture plane Semi empirical method 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Abrahamson, N.A. and Litehiser, J.J., 1989, Attenuation of vertical peak acceleration, Bulletin of Seismological Society America 79, 549–580.Google Scholar
  2. Araya, R. and Kiureghiann, A.D., 1988, Seismic hazard analysis: improved models, uncertainties and sensitivities, Report no. EERC, 90/11, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, C.A.Google Scholar
  3. Boore, D.M., Joyner, W.B. and Fumal, T.E., 1993, Estimation of response spectra and peak accelerations from western North American earthquakes: an interim report, United States Geological Survey Open File Report 93–509, 72 pp.Google Scholar
  4. Campbell, K.W., 1981, Near source attenuation of peak horizontal acceleration, Bulletin of Seismological Society of America 71, 2036–2070.Google Scholar
  5. Chandrasekaran, A.R. and Das, J.D., 1992, Analysis of strong ground motion accelerogram of Uttarkashi Earthquake of October 20, 1991, Bulletin of Indian Society of Earthquake Technology 29, 35–55.Google Scholar
  6. Chandrasekaran, A.R. and Das, J.D., 1991, Analysis of strong ground motion accelerograms of Uttarkashi Earthquake of October 20, 1991, Report No. EQ 91–10, Department of Earthquake Engineering, University of Roorkee, India.Google Scholar
  7. Coats, D.A., Kanamori, H. and Houston, H., 1984, Simulation of strong ground motion from the 1964 Alaskan earthquake (abs), Earthquake Notes 55, 18.Google Scholar
  8. Dziewonski, A.M., Ekstrom, G. and Saganik, M.P., 1992, Centriod moment tensor solution for October Dec 1991, Physics of Earth and Planetary Interior 74, 89–100.Google Scholar
  9. Esteva, L. and Rosenblueth, E., 1964, Espectros De temblores a distancias moderadas y grandes, Bo. Society Mex. Ing. Sism. 2(1), 1–18.Google Scholar
  10. Evernden, J.F., Hibbard, R.R. and Schneider, J.F., 1973, Interpretation of seismic intensity data, Bulletin of Seismological Society of America 63, 399–422.Google Scholar
  11. Fukuyama and Irikura, 1986, Rupture process of the 1983 Japan sea (Akita-Oki) earthquake using a waveform inversion method, Bulletin of Seismological Society of America 76, 1623–1640.Google Scholar
  12. Gupta, H.K., Mohan, Indira, Rastogi, B.K., Rao, M.N. and Ramakrishana Rao, 1993, A quick look at the Latur earthquake of 30 September, 1993, Current Science 65, 517–520.Google Scholar
  13. Gupta, H., 1994, Introduction; v–xiii, in Latur Earthquake, Editor H. Gupta, Memoir 35, Geol. Soc. Ind.Google Scholar
  14. Hartzell, S.H., 1978, Earthquake aftershocks as green functions, Geophysical Research Letters 5, 1–4.Google Scholar
  15. Hartzell, S.H., 1982. Simulation of ground accelerations for May 1980 Mammoth Lakes, California earthquakes, Bulletin of Seismological Society of America 72, 2381–2387.Google Scholar
  16. Hadley, D.M. and Helmberger, D.V., 1980. Simulation of strong ground motions, Bulletin of Seismological Society of America 70, 617–610.Google Scholar
  17. Hadley, D. M., Helmberger, D.V. and Orcutt, J.A., 1982, Peak acceleration scaling studies, Bulletin of Seismological Society of America 72, 959–979.Google Scholar
  18. Heaton T.H. and Hartzell, S.H., 1986, Estimation of strong ground motions from hypothetical earthquakes on the Cascadia subduction zone, Pacific Northwest, U.S. Geol. Surv. Open file Rep., pp. 86–328.Google Scholar
  19. Houston, H. and Kanamori, H., 1984, The effect of asperities on short period seismic radiation with application on rupture process and strong motion, Bulletin of Seismological Society of America 76, 19–42.Google Scholar
  20. Howell, B.F. and Schultz, T.R., 1975, Attenuation of modified Mercalli intensity with distance from epicenter, Buletin Seismological Society of America 65, 615–665.Google Scholar
  21. Hutchings, L., 1985, Modelling earthquakes with empirical green's functions (abs), Earthquake Notes 56, 14 pp.Google Scholar
  22. Imagawa, K., Mikami, N. and Mikumo, T., 1984, Analytical and semi empirical synthesis of near field seismic waveforms for investigating the rupture mechanism of major earthquakes, Journal of Physics of Earth 32, 317–338.Google Scholar
  23. Irikura, K., 1983, Semi empirical estimation of strong ground motion during large earthquakes, Bulletin of Disaster Prevention Research Insttitute (Kyoto Univ.) 33, 63–104.Google Scholar
  24. Irikura, K., 1986, Prediction of strong acceleration motion using empirical Green's function, Proceedings of 7th Japan Earthquake Engineering Sym, 151–156.Google Scholar
  25. Irikura, K. and Muramatu, I., 1982, Synthesis of strong ground motions from large earthquakes using observed seismograms of small events, Proceedings of 3rd International Earthquake Microzonation Conference, Seattle, 447–458.Google Scholar
  26. Jain, A.K. and Chander, R., 1995, Geodynamic models for Uttarkashi earthquake of October 20, 1991, Uttarkashi Earthquake, Geological Society of India, 225–233.Google Scholar
  27. Joshi, A., 1994, Strong motion modelling of rupture plane along an identified probable causative fault, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Roorkee, Roorkee, 476 pp.Google Scholar
  28. Joshi, A., 1997, Modelling of peak ground accelerations for Uttarkashi earthquake of 20th Oct, 1991, Bulletin of Indian Society of Earthquake Technology 34, 75–96.Google Scholar
  29. Joshi, A., 1998, Study of Uttarkashi earthquake in terms of rupture model and isoseismals, Journal of Geophysics 14, 133–140.Google Scholar
  30. Joshi, A. and Patel, R.C., 1997, Modelling of active lineaments for predicting a possible earthquake scenario around Dehradun, Garhwal Himalaya, India, Tectonophysics 283, 289–310.Google Scholar
  31. Joyner, W. B. and Boore, D.M., 1988, Measurement, characterization and prediction of strong ground motion, Proceedings of Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics II, Utah, June 27–30, 43–100.Google Scholar
  32. Kamble, V.P., 1992a, Parameters of Uttarkashi earthquake of October 20th 1991. (Abst.), in Synthesis of the Uttarkashi earthquake Data, 20th Oct, 1991 and Seismotectonics of Garhwal-Kumaon Himalaya, New Delhi.Google Scholar
  33. Kamble, V.P., 1992b, Aftershocks sequence of Uttarkashi earthquake of October 20, 1991 (Abst.), in Synthesis of the Uttarkashi earthquake Data, 20th Oct, 1991 and Seismotectonics of Garhwal-Kumaon Himalaya, New Delhi. Google Scholar
  34. Kameda, H. and Sugito, M., 1978, Prediction of strong earthquake motions by evolutionary process model, Proceedings of 6th Japan Earthquake Engineering Symp, 41–48.Google Scholar
  35. Kanamori, H., 1979, A semi empirical approach to prediction of long period ground motions from great earthquakes, Bulletin of Seismological Society of America 69, 1645–1670.Google Scholar
  36. Kanamori, H. and Anderson, D.L., 1975, Theoretical basis of some empirical relation in seismology, Bulletin of Seismological Society of America 65, 1073–1095.Google Scholar
  37. Kasahara, K., 1981, Earthquake Mechanics, Cambridge university press, Cambridge earth science series, 248 pp.Google Scholar
  38. Kayal, J.R., 1994, Long term seismicity, foreshocks and aftershocks of the Uttarkashi earthquake – October 20, 1991 at Garhwal Himalaya, Abst in Group discussion on Geological hazards in Himalayan region: Assesment and mitigation, Dehradun, pp. 17–18.Google Scholar
  39. Kayal, J.R., Kamble, V.P. and Rostogi, B.K., 1992, Aftershock sequence of Uttarkashi earthquake October 20, 1991, Geological Society of India Special Publication 30, 203–217.Google Scholar
  40. Kayal, J.R., Reena De, Das, D. and Chowdhury, S.N., 1996, Aftershocks Monitoring and Focal Mechanism Studies, Killari Earthquake, GSI Special Publication 37, 165–185.Google Scholar
  41. McGuire, R.K., 1978, Seismic ground motion parameter relations, Journal of Geotech Engineering Division, ASCE 104, 481–490.Google Scholar
  42. McGuire, R.K., 1977, Seismic design spectra and mapping procedures using hazard analysis based directly on oscillator response, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 8, 211–234.Google Scholar
  43. Mendoza, C. and Hartzell, S., 1988, Inversion for slip distribution using teleseismic P waveforms, North Palm Springs, Borah Peak, and Michoacan earthquakes, Bulletin of Seismological Society of America 78, 1092–1111.Google Scholar
  44. Midorikawa, S., 1993, Semi empirical estimation of peak ground acceleration from large earthquakes, Tectonophysics 218, 287–295.Google Scholar
  45. Mikumo T., Irikura, K. and Imagawa, K., 1981, Near field strong motion synthesis from foreshock and aftershock records and rupture process of the main shock fault (abs.), IASPEI 21st General Assembly, London, July 2030.Google Scholar
  46. Mugnuia, L. and Brune, J.M., 1984, Simulations of strong ground motions for eathquakes in the Mexicali-Imperial valley, Proc. Of workshop on strong ground motion simulation and earthquake engineering applications, Pub. 85–02 Earthquake Engineering Research Institue, Los Altos, California, 21-1-21-19.Google Scholar
  47. Ni, J. and Barazangi, M., 1984, Seismotectonics of the Himalayan Collision zone: Geometry of the Underthrsuting In dian plate beneath the Himalaya, Journal of Geophysical Research 89, 1147–1163.Google Scholar
  48. Neumann, F., 1954, Earthquake intensity and related ground motion, University of Washington, 93 pp.Google Scholar
  49. PDE, 1991, Preliminary determination of epicenters, No. 42–91, U.S. department of interior, geological survey.Google Scholar
  50. Ramakrisnan, M., Viswanathan, K.D., Murthy, B.S.R. and Harendranath, L. (eds.), 1995, Geological Survey of India Special Publication No. 27, 271 pp.Google Scholar
  51. Ramalingeswara Roa, Prakasa Rao, T.K.S. and P. Sitapathi Rao, 1982, A relationship of intensity, epicentral distance, focal depth, magnitude and acceleration, Geophysical Research Bulletin 20, 191–204.Google Scholar
  52. Reiter, L., 1990, Earthquake hazard analysis – Issues and insights, Columbia University Press, New York, 254 pp.Google Scholar
  53. Richter, C.F., 1958, Elementary Seismology, W.H. Freeman, San Francisco, 768 pp.Google Scholar
  54. Sato, R. (ed.), 1989, Handbook for fault parameters of Japanese earthquakes, Kajima, Tokyo, 390 pp (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  55. Seeber, L., Jain, S.K., Murthy, C.V.R. and Chandak, N, 1993, Surface rupture and damage pattern in the M s – 6.4, Sept 29, 1993 Killari (Latur) earthquake in Central India, NCEER Bull, 12 pp.Google Scholar
  56. Seeber, L., Armbruster, J.G. and Quittmeyer, R.C., 1981, Seismicity and continental subduction in the Himalayan arc, in Gupta, H.K. and Delany, F.M. (eds.), Zagros – Hindukush – Himalaya – Geodynamical Evolution, America Geophys. Un. Geodyn. Ser. 3, 215–242.Google Scholar
  57. Sinvhal, A., Sinvhal, H., Jain, A.K., Manickavasagam, Rm., Joshi, A. and Joshi, G., 1992, Modelling of Uttarkashi earthquake of October 20, 1991 in terms of seismic microzonation and causative fault. (Abst.), in Synthesis of the Uttarkashi earthquake Data, 20th Oct, 1991 and Seismotectonics of Garhwal-Kumaon Himalaya, New Delhi, 42–43.Google Scholar
  58. Sinvhal, A., Sinvhal, H., Joshi, A. and Bose, P.R., 1995, Abstract published in: Workshop on Indian Shield Seismicity and Latur Earthquake of September 30, 1993, 63.Google Scholar
  59. Sinvhal, A., Bose, P.R. and Dubey, R.N., 1994, Damage report of Latur – Osmanabad Earthquake of September 30, 1993, Bulletin. Indian Society of Earthquake Technology 31, 15–54.Google Scholar
  60. Somerviller, P., Irikura, K., Graves, R., Sawada, S., Wald, D., Abrahamson, N., Iwasaki, Y., Kagawa, T., Smith, N. and Kowada, A., 1998, Characterizing earthquake slip models for the prediction of strong ground motion, Seismological Research Letter (in Press).Google Scholar
  61. Trifunac, M.D. and Brady, A.G., 1975, A study on the Duration of Strong Earthquake Ground Motion, Bulletin of Seismological Society of America 65, 581–627.Google Scholar
  62. Woods, H.O. and Neumann, F., 1931, Modified Mercalli scale of 1931, Bulletin of Seismological Society of America 21, 277–283.Google Scholar
  63. Yu, G., Khattri, K.N., Anderson, J.G., Brune, J.N. and Zeng, Y., 1995, Strong ground motion from the Uttarkashi earthquake, Himalaya, India, Earthquake: Comparison of Observations with Synthetics Using the composite source model, Bulletin of Seismological Society of America 85, 31–50.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Joshi
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Earth SciencesKurukshetra UniversityKurukshetraIndia

Personalised recommendations