Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Seismic site characterization of Battalgazi in Malatya, Turkey

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Arabian Journal of Geosciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Earthquakes on the East Anatolian Fault (EAFZ), one of Turkey’s main tectonic structures, have caused damages resulting in significant loss of life and property. The earthquake that occurred in the Sivrice district of Elazig province (Mw = 6.8) on January 24, 2020 was felt in all nearby provinces, especially in Elazig and Malatya, and had devastating consequences. The historical seismic activity in the region indicates that the fault segments on the EAFZ have similar and larger earthquake generating capacities. Therefore, seismic site characterization in earthquake-prone areas is crucial for decision-makers. The aim of this study is to examine the effects of local soil conditions on seismic wave propagation in the Battalgazi central district of Malatya province. The amplification potential of soil is examined through site response analyzes. The commonly applied methods, the total stress-based model of equivalent linear analysis (ELA) in the frequency domain and the effective stress-based model of nonlinear (NLA) analysis in the time domain, are performed under 1999 Kocaeli and 2020 Sivrice earthquakes. The outcomes are evaluated in terms of peak ground accelerations (PGA), peak ground displacement (PGD), and spectral accelerations (Sa). The results revealed that the surface responses were significantly amplified in regions that alluvial units are deposited (i.e., 7.5 g) and deamplified (i.e., 0.94 g) in the regions where mostly volcanic rocks are deposited. Additionally, the liquefaction potential of the site was investigated using standard penetration test (SPT) data. The liquefaction potential and site amplification maps were produced by the inverse distance weighting (IDW) method which can be used efficiently for land use planning and urban development in 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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Not applicable.

References

  • Adampira M, Alielahi H, Panji M et al (2015) Comparison of equivalent linear and nonlinear methods in seismic analysis of liquefiable site response due to near-fault incident waves: a case study. Arab J Geosci 8:3103–3118. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-014-1399-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Afacan KB, Brandenberg SJ, Stewart JP (2014) Centrifuge modeling studies of site response in soft clay over wide strain range. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 140. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001014

  • Akin MK, Topal T, Kramer SL (2013) A newly developed seismic microzonation model of Erbaa (Tokat, Turkey) located on seismically active eastern segment of the North Anatolian Fault Zone (NAFZ). Nat Hazards 65(3):1411–1442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson JG, Bodin P, Brune J et al (1986) Strong ground motion and source mechanism of the Mexico earthquake of September 19, 1985. Science 233:1043–1049

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ansal A, Kurtulus A. Tonuk, G (2014) Site response from Istanbul vertical arrays and strong motion network. 2nd International Symposium on Strong-motion Earthquake Effects (2ISSEE) Reykjavik, Iceland

  • Ansal A, Fercan Ö, Kurtuluş A, Tönük G (2017) 2D site response analysis of the Istanbul rapid response network. Theme Lecture, PBD III, Vancouver

  • Arpat E, Şaroğlu F (1972) The east Anatolian fault system: thoughts on it’s development. Min Res Expl Inst Turkey Bull 78:33–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Arpat E, Şaroğlu F (1975) Türkiyedeki bazı önemli genç tekntonik olaylar. Bull Geol Soc Turkey 18:91–101 (In Turkish)

    Google Scholar 

  • Arslan H, Siyahi B (2006) A comparative study on linear and nonlinear site response analysis. Environ Geol 50:1193–1200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00254-006-0291-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asakereh A, Tajabadiur M (2018) AUT Journal of Civil Engineering Analysis of Local Site Effects on seismic ground response under various earthquakes. AUT Journal Civ Eng 2:227–240. https://doi.org/10.22060/ajce.2018.13696.5253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Behrou R, Haghpanah F, Foroughi H (2017) Seismic site effect analysis for the city of Tehran using equivalent linear ground response analysis. Int J Geotech Eng 14:16–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/19386362.2017.1395998

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beyhan G, Keskinsezer A, Öztürk S (2016) Soil properties and applications review with NERA (nonlinear earthquake site response analyses) in İstanbul-MARMARAY Project between Kazliçeşme to Sirkeci. Environ Earth Sci 75:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-015-4783-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cabalar AF, Karabas B, Mahmutluoglu B et al (2021) An IDW-based GIS application for assesment of geptechnical characterization in Erzincan Turkey. Arab J Geosci 14:2129. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-021-08481-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castro-Cruz D, Régnier J, Bertrand E et al (2020) A new parameter to empirically describe and predict the nonlinear seismic response of sites derived from the analysis of Kik-Net database. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 128:105833

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen S, Zhuang H, Quan D et al (2019) Shaking table test on the seismic response of large-scale subway station in a loess site: A case study. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 123:173–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2019.04.023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darendeli, BM (2001) Development of a new family of normalized modulus reduction and material damping curves. PhD dissertation, University of Texas at Austin, TX

  • De Alba P, Seed HB, Chan CK (1976) Sand liquefaction in large-scale simple shear tests. J Geotech Engrg Div, ASCE, No. GT9, Paper 12403, 102:909–927. AFAD, The Disaster and Emergency Management Authority. Available at: http://www.deprem.gov.tr/sarbis/Shared/Default.aspx. Accessed Dec 2021

  • Dewey JF, Hempton MR, Kidd WSF et al (1986) Shortening of continental lithosphere: the neotectonics of Eastern Anatolia - a young collision zone. Geol Soc Spec Publ 19:1–36. https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.SP.1986.019.01.01

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Douglas J, Aochi H (2008) A survey of techniques for predicting earth- quake ground motions for engineering purposes. Surv Geophys 29(3):187–220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10712-008-9046-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edinçliler A, Calikoglu M (2016) Comparison of site response of unimproved and ımproved soils using DEEPSOIL. 12th International Congress on Advances in Civil Engineering, Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey

  • Edinçliler A, Tuncay GS (2018) Nonlinear and equivalent linear site response analysis for the Bodrum region. Eurasian J Civ Eng Archit 2(2):59–68

    Google Scholar 

  • GDDA (2019) General Directorate of Disaster Afairs, Ministry of Public Works and Settlement of Turkey Seismic Hazard Map of Turkey, Ankara

  • Groholski DR, Hashash YMA, Kim B et al (2016) Simplified model for small-strain nonlinearity and strength in 1-D seismic site response analysis. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hashash YMA, Park D (2001) Nonlinear one-dimensional seismic ground motion propagation in the Mississippi embayment. Eng Geol 62(1–3):185–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hashash YMA, Park D (2002) Viscous damping formulation and high frequency motion propagation in nonlinear site response analysis. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 22(7):611–624

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hashash YMA, Phillipes C, Groholski D (2010) Recent advances in nonlinear site response analysis. Fifth International Conference on Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics, San Diego, California, 1–21

  • Hashash YMA, Dashti S, Romero MI et al (2015) Evaluation of 1-D seismic site response modeling of sand using centrifuge experiments. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 78:19–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2015.07.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hashash YMA, Musgrove MI, Harmon JA, et al (2020) DEEPSOIL 7.0, User Manual. Urbana, IL, Board of Trustees of University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

  • Idriss IM (1990) Response of soft soil sites during earthquakes, Proceedings, Memorial Symposium to honor Professor Harry Bolton Seed, Berkeley, California, Vol. II, May, pp: 273–289

  • Idriss IM, Seed HB (1968) Seismic response of horizontal soil layers. Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE, (94). No 4:1003–1031

    Google Scholar 

  • Idriss IM, Sun JI (1992) User’s manual for SHAKE91: a computer program for conducting equivalent linear seismic response analyses of horizontally layered soil deposits. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California, Center for Geotechnical Modeling

    Google Scholar 

  • Idriss IM, Boulanger, RW (2008) Soil liquefaction during earthquakes. Monograph MNO-12, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, CA, pp 261

  • Ishibashi I, Zhang X (1993) Unified dynamic shear moduli and damping ratios of sand and clay. Soils Found 33–1:182–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ishihara K (1996) Soil behaviour in earthquake geotechnics. Clarendon Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Iyisan R (1996) Correlations between shear wave velocity and in- situ penetration test results. Teknik Dergi-Tmmob Insaat Muhendisleri Odasi 7:371–374

    Google Scholar 

  • Jennings PC, Bielak J (1973) Dynamics of building soil interaction. Bull Seismol Soc Am 63:9–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jia Q, Wang D, Zhai F, Liu X (2020) 1D seismic site response analysis for a soil deposit at Baoding city. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci 526. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/526/1/012032

  • Kim B, Hashash YMA (2013) Site response analysis using downhole array recordings during the March 2011 Tohoku-Oki earthquake and the effect of long-duration ground motions. Earthq Spectra 29:37–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim B, Hashash YMA, Stewart JP et al (2016) Relative differences between nonlinear and equivalent-linear 1-D site response analyses. Earthq Spectra 32:1845–1865. https://doi.org/10.1193/051215EQS068M

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolat C, Ulusay R, Suzen ML (2012) Development ofgeotechnical microzonation model for Yenisehir (Bursa Turkey) located at a seismically active region. Eng Geol 127:36–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kondner RL, Zelasko JS (1963) A hyperbolic stress–strain formulation for sands, Proc. 2nd Pan-American Conf. Soil Mech Found Eng I:289–324

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer SL (1996) Geotechnical earthquake engineering, In Prentice Hall international series in civil engineering and engineering mechanics. Prentice-Hall New Jersey

  • Masing G (1926) Eigenspannungen und Verfestigung beim Messing, Proc. 2nd Int. Cong. Applied Mechanics, pp 332–335

  • Matasovic N (1992) Seismic response of composite horizontally-layered soil deposits, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles

  • Matasovic N, Vucetic M (1993) Cyclic characterization of liquefiable sands. J Geotech Eng ASCE 119:1805–1822

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matasovic N, Hashash Y (2012) NCHRP428: practices and procedures for site-specific evaluations of earthquake ground motions (a synthesis of highway practice), National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C

  • Meite R, Wotherspoon L (2019) Influence of parametric nonlinear soil models on site response predictions, 7th Intenational Conference on earthquake Geotechnical Engineering, 17–20 June 2019, Rome Italy pp: 3845–3852

  • Park D, Hashash YMA (2004) Soil dampingformulation in nonlinear time domain site response analysis. J Earthq Eng 8:249–274. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363246904001420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park D, Hashash YMA (2008) Rate-dependent soil behavior in seismic site response analysis. Can Geotech J 45:454–469. https://doi.org/10.1139/T07-090

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramberg W, Osgood, WR (1943) Description of stress-strain curves by three parameters. Tech. Note 902, National Advisory Committee on Aeronautics

  • Rathje EM, Kottke AR, Trent WL (2010) Influence of input motion and site property variabilities on seismic site response analysis. J Geotech Geoenviron 136:607–619

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schnabel PB, Lysmer J, Seed HB (1972) SHAKE: a computer program for earthquake response analysis of horizontally layered sites. Report no. UCB/EERC-72/12, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkele

  • Seed HB (1979) Soil liquefaction and cyclic mobility evaluation for level ground during earthquakes. J. Geotech. Engrg. Div. ASCE, 105, No. GT2, February, pp 201–255

  • Seed HB, Idriss IM (1969) The influence of soil conditions on ground motions during earthquakes. J Soil Mech Found Div ASCE 94:93–137

    Google Scholar 

  • Seed HB, Idriss IM (1970) Soil moduli and damping factors for dynamic response analyses. Report No. EERC 70/10, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, Calif. https://ntrl.ntis.gov/NTRL/dashboard/searchResults/titleDetail/PB197869.xhtml

  • Seed HB, Idriss IM (1971) Simplified procedure for evaluating soil liquefaction potential. J Soil Mech Found Div 97:1249–1273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seed HB, Idriss IM, Arango I (1983) Evaluation of liquefaction potential using field performance data J. Geotech. Engrg., ASCE, Vol. 109, No. 3, March, pp 458–482

  • Seed HB, Wong RT, Idriss IM et al (1984) Moduli and damping factors for dynamic analysesof cohesionless soils. Report No.EERC University of California, Berkeley, pp 84–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Seed HB, Tokimatsu K, Harder LF, et al (1985) Influence of SPT procedures in soil liquefaction resistance evaluations. J Geotech Engrg ASCE 111(12 December) 1425–1445

  • Seed HB, Wong RT, Idriss IM et al (1986) Moduli and damping factors for dynamic analyses of cohesionless soils. J Geotech Eng Div ASCE 112(11):1017–1032

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Selçuk L, Çiftçi Y (2007) Microzonation of the Plio-Quaternary soils: a study of the liquefaction risk potential in the Lake Van Basin. Turkey Bull Eng Geol Environ 66(2):161–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Şengör AMC, Görür N, Şaroglu F (1985) Strike-slip faulting and related basin formation in zones of tectonic escape: Turkey as a case study. SEPM Spec Publ 37:227–264

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart JP, Afshari K, Hashash YMA (2014) Guidelines for performing hazard- consistent one-dimensional ground response analysis for ground motion prediction, PEER Report 2014/16. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, p 120

    Google Scholar 

  • Şaroğlu F, Emre Ö, Kuşçu İ (1992) The east Anatolian fault zone of Turkey. Annal Tecton 6:99–125

    Google Scholar 

  • Westaway R (1994) Present-day kinematics of the middle east and eastern Mediterranean. J Geophys Res 99:12071–12090

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xiaohui W, Xiaojun L, Aiwen L et al (2020) Seismic analysis of soil-structure system of nuclear power plant on non-rock site via shaking table test. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 136:106209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2020.106209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang J, Yan XR (2009) Factors affecting site response to multi-directional earthquake loading. Eng Geol 107:77–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2009.04.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang J, Sato T (2000) Interpretation of seismic vertical amplification observed at an array site. Bull Seismol Soc Am 90(2):275–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yıldız Ö (2021) Nonlinear and equivalent linear site response analysis of Istanbul soils. NATURENGS MTU J Eng Nat Sci Mal Turgut Ozal Univ 1:88–101. https://doi.org/10.46572/naturengs.895283

  • Youd TL, Idriss IM, Andrus RD et al (2001) Liquefaction resistance of soils: summary report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF workshops on evaluation of liquefaction resistance of soils. J Geotech Geo-Environ Eng ASCE 127:817–832

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zerva A, Stephenson WR (2011) Stochastic characteristics of seismic excitations at a non-uniform (rock and soil) site. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 31:1261–1284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2011.05.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou YG, Chen J, Chen YM et al (2017) Centrifuge modeling and numerical analysis on seismic site response of deep offshore clay deposits. Eng Geol 227:54–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2017.01.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author would like to express his appreciation to Malatya Municipality for their helps.

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Civil Engineering Department, Malatya Turgut Özal University, Malatya, Turkey

    Özgür Yıldız

Authors
  1. Özgür Yıldız
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

This is a single author paper, and the author, O. Yildiz, solely made the study conception, analysis, and manuscript preparation. The author read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Özgür Yıldız.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

The manuscript complies with all the ethical requirements and was not published in any journal.

Consent to participate and for publication

Not applicable.

Conflicts of interests

The author declares that he has no competing interests.

Additional information

Responsible Editor: Zeynal Abiddin Erguler

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yıldız, Ö. Seismic site characterization of Battalgazi in Malatya, Turkey. Arab J Geosci 15, 867 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-022-10170-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-022-10170-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation