PL EN


Preferencje help
Widoczny [Schowaj] Abstrakt
Liczba wyników
Tytuł artykułu

Modeling of a historical earthquake in Erzincan, Turkey (Ms~7.8, in 1939) using regional seismological information obtained from a recent event

Identyfikatory
Warianty tytułu
Języki publikacji
EN
Abstrakty
EN
Located within a basin structure, at the conjunction of North East Anatolian, North Anatolian and Ovacik Faults, Erzincan city center (Turkey) is one of the most hazardous regions in the world. Combination of the seismotectonic and geological settings of the region has resulted in series of significant seismic activities including the 1939 (Ms~7.8) as well as the 1992 (Mw = 6.6) earthquakes. The devastative 1939 earthquake occurred in the pre-instrumental era in the region with no available local seismograms. Thus, a limited number of studies exist on that earthquake. However, the 1992 event, despite the sparse local network at that time, has been studied extensively. This study aims to simulate the 1939 Erzincan earthquake using available regional seismic and geological parameters. Despite several uncertainties involved, such an effort to quantitatively model the 1939 earthquake is promising, given the historical reports of extensive damage and fatalities in the area. The results of this study are expressed in terms of anticipated acceleration time histories at certain locations, spatial distribution of selected ground motion parameters and felt intensity maps in the region. Simulated motions are first compared against empirical ground motion prediction equations derived with both local and global datasets. Next, anticipated intensity maps of the 1939 earthquake are obtained using local correlations between peak ground motion parameters and felt intensity values. Comparisons of the estimated intensity distributions with the corresponding observed intensities indicate a reasonable modeling of the 1939 earthquake.
Czasopismo
Rocznik
Strony
293--304
Opis fizyczny
Bibliogr. 51 poz.
Twórcy
autor
  • Civil Engineering DepartmentMiddle East Technical University AnkaraTurkey, aaskan@metu.edu.tr
autor
  • Civil Engineering and Earthquake Studies DepartmentsMiddle East Technical University Ankara Turkey
Bibliografia
  • 1. Aagaard BT, Graves RW, Schwartz DP, Ponce DA, Graymer RW (2010) Ground-motion modeling of Hayward fault scenario earthquakes, part i: construction of the suite of scenarios. Bull Seismol Soc Am 100:2927–2944. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120090324
  • 2. Akansel V, Ameri G, Askan A, Caner A, Erdil B, Kale O, Okuyucu D (2014) The 23 October 2011 M W 7.0 Van (Eastern Turkey) earthquake: interpretations of recorded strong ground motions and post-earthquake conditions of nearby structures. Earthq Spectra 30:657–682. https://doi.org/10.1193/012912EQS020M
  • 3. Akkar S, Cagnan Z (2010) A local ground-motion predictive model for Turkey, and its comparison with other regional and global ground-motion models. Bull Seismol Soc Am 100:2978–2995. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120090367
  • 4. Altinok Y, Ersoy S (2000) Tsunamis observed on and near the Turkish coast. Nat Hazards 21:185–205
  • 5. Ambraseys NN (1970) Some characteristic features of the North Anatolian Fault Zone. Tectonophysics 9:143–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/0040-1951(70)90014-4
  • 6. Anderson J, Hough S (1984) A model for the shape of the Fourier amplitude spectrum of acceleration at high frequencies. Bull Seismol Soc Am 74:1969–1993
  • 7. Armijo R, Meyer B, Navarro S, King G, Barka A (2002) Asymmetric slip partitioning in the Sea of Marmara pull-apart: a clue to propagation processes of the North Anatolian Fault. Terra Nova 14:80–86. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-3121.2002.00397.x
  • 8. Askan A, Sisman FN, Ugurhan B (2013) Stochastic strong ground motion simulations in sparsely-monitored regions: a validation and sensitivity study on the 13 March 1992 Erzincan (Turkey) earthquake. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 55:170–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2013.09.014
  • 9. Askan A, Karimzadeh S, Asten M, Kılıç N, Şişman FN, Erkmen C (2015) Assessment of seismic hazard in Erzincan (Turkey) region: construction of local velocity models and evaluation of potential ground motions. Turk J Earth Sci 24:529–565. https://doi.org/10.3906/yer-1503-8
  • 10. Askan A, Karimzadeh S, Bilal M (2017) Seismic intensity maps for North Anatolian Fault Zone (Turkey) based on recorded and simulated ground motion data. In: Cemen Ibrahim, Yilmaz Yucel (eds) Neotectonics and earthquake potential of the Eastern Mediterranean Region, in active global seismology: neotectonics and earthquake potential of the Eastern Mediterranean Region. Wiley, Hoboken
  • 11. Atkinson G, Assatourians K, Boore DM (2009) A guide to differences between stochastic point-source and stochastic finite-fault simulations. Bull Seismol Soc Am 99:3192–3201. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120090058
  • 12. Avsar U, Turkoglu E, Unsworth M, Caglar I, Kaypak B (2013) Geophysical images of the North Anatolian Fault Zone in the Erzincan Basin, Eastern Turkey, and their tectonic implications. Pure Appl Geophys 170:409–431. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-012-0521-5
  • 13. Barka A (1992) The North Anatolian Fault Zone. Ann Tecton 6:164–195
  • 14. Barka A (1993) The tectonics of Erzincan basin and 13 March 1992 Erzincan earthquake. In: Proceedings of the 2nd Turkish national earthquake engineering conference, 259–270, Istanbul Technical University Structures and Earthquake Applications-Research Center, (in Turkish)
  • 15. Barka A (1996) Slip distribution along the North Anatolian fault associated with the large earthquakes of the period 1939 to 1967. Bull Seismol Soc Am 86:1238–1254
  • 16. Beresnev I, Atkinson G (1997) Modeling finite-fault radiation from the ωn spectrum. Bull Seismol Soc Am 87:67–84
  • 17. Bernard P, Gariel JC, Dorbath L (1997) Fault location and rupture kinematics of the magnitude 6.8, 1992 Erzincan earthquake, Turkey, from strong ground motion and regional records. Bull Seismol Soc Am 87:1230–1243
  • 18. Bilal M, Askan A (2014) Relationships between felt ıntensity and recorded ground-motion parameters for Turkey. Bull Seismol Soc Am 104:484–496. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120130093
  • 19. Boore DM (1983) Stochastic simulation of high-frequency ground motions based on seismological models of the radiated spectra. Bull Seismol Soc Am 73:1865–1894
  • 20. Boore DM (2009) Comparing stochastic point-source and finite-source ground-motion simulations: SMSIM and EXSIM. Bull Seismol Soc Am 99:3202–3216. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120090056
  • 21. Boore DM, Atkinson GM (2008) Ground-motion prediction equations for the average horizontal component of PGA, PGV, and 5% damped PSA at spectral periods between 0.01 sand 10.0s. Earthquake Spectra 24:99–138. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.2830434
  • 22. Boore DM, Joyner WB (1997) Site amplifications for generic rock sites. Bull Seismol Soc Am 87:327–341
  • 23. Castro RR, Rovelli A, Cocco M, Di Bona M, Pacor F (2001) Stochastic simulation of strong-motion records from the 26 September 1997 (Mw 6), Umbria–Marche (central Italy) earthquake. Bull Seismol Soc Am 91:27–39. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120000011
  • 24. Erberik MA (2008a) Generation of fragility curves for Turkish masonry buildings considering in-plane failure modes. Earthq Eng Struct D 37:387–405. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.760
  • 25. Erberik MA (2008b) Fragility-based assessment of typical mid-rise and low-rise RC buildings in Turkey. Eng Struct 30:1360–1374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2007.07.016
  • 26. Frankel A (1993) Three-dimensional simulations of the ground motions in the San Bernardino valley, California, for hypothetical earthquakes on the San Andreas fault. Bull Seismol Soc Am 83:1020–1041
  • 27. Ghofrani H, Atkinson GM, Goda K, Assatourians K (2013) Stochastic finite-fault simulations of the 2011 Tohoku, Japan, earthquake. Bull Seismol Soc Am 103:1307–1320. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120120228
  • 28. Gursoy H, Tatar O, Akpınar Z, Polat A, Mesci L, Tunçer D (2013) New observations on the 1939 Erzincan Earthquake surface rupture on the Kelkit Valley segment of the North Anatolian Fault Zone, Turkey. J Geodyn 6:259–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jog.2012.06.002
  • 29. Hartzell S, Harmsen S (1999) Calculation of broadband time histories of ground motion: comparison of methods and validation using strong-ground motion from the 1994 Northridge earthquake. Bull Seismol Soc Am 89:1484–1504
  • 30. Hisada Y (2008) Broadband strong motion simulation in layered half-space using stochastic Green’s function technique. J Seismol 12:265–279
  • 31. Kamae K, Irikura K, Pitarka A (1998) A technique for simulating strong ground motion using hybrid Green’s function. Bull Seismol Soc Am 88:357–367
  • 32. Karimzadeh S, Askan A, Yakut A, Ameri G (2017a) Assessment of alternative simulation techniques in nonlinear time history analyses of multi-story frame buildings: a case study. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 98:38–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2017.04.004
  • 33. Karimzadeh S, Askan A, Yakut A (2017b) Assessment of simulated ground motions for their use in structural engineering practice; a case study for Duzce (Turkey). Pure Appl Geophys. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-017-1602-2
  • 34. Karimzadeh S, Askan A, Erberik MA, Yakut A (2018) Seismic damage assessment based on regional synthetic ground motion dataset: a case study for Erzincan. Nat Hazards, Turkey. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-018-3255-6
  • 35. Komatitsch D, Liu Q, Tromp J, Süss P, Stidham C, Shaw JH (2004) Simulations of ground motion in the Los Angeles basin based upon the spectral-element method. Bull Seismol Soc Am 94:187–206. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120030077
  • 36. Mai P, Imperatori W, Olsen K (2010) Hybrid broadband ground-motion simulations: combining long-period deterministic synthetics with high-frequency multiple S-to-S backscattering. Bull Seismol Soc Am 100:2124–2142. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120080194
  • 37. Mohammadioun B, Serva L (2001) Stress drop, slip type, earthquake magnitude, and seismic hazard. Bull Seismol Soc Am 91(4):694–707. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120000067
  • 38. Motazedian D, Atkinson GM (2005) Stochastic finite-fault modeling based on a dynamic corner frequency. Bull Seismol Soc Am 95:995–1010. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120030207
  • 39. Motazedian D, Moinfar A (2006) Hybrid stochastic finite fault modeling of 2003, M 6.5, Bam, earthquake (Iran). J Seismol 10:91–103
  • 40. Moustafa S, Takenaka H (2009) Stochastic ground motion simulation of the 12 October 1992 Dahshour earthquake. Acta Geophys 57:636–656. https://doi.org/10.2478/s11600-009-0012-y
  • 41. Musson RMW, Grünthal G, Stucchi M (2010) The comparison of macroseismic intensity scales. J Seismol 14:413–428. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10950-009-9172-0
  • 42. Olsen KB, Archuleta RJ, Matarese JR (1996) Three-dimensional simulation of a magnitude 7.75 earthquake on the San Andreas fault. Science 270:1628–1632
  • 43. Raghukanth S, Somala S (2009) Modeling of strong-motion data in northeastern India: Q, stress drop, and site amplification. Bull Seismol Soc Am 99:705–725. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120080025
  • 44. Sarp G (2015) Tectonic controls of the North Anatolian Fault System (NAFS) on the geomorphic evolution of the alluvial fans and fan catchments in Erzincan pull-apart basin; Turkey. J Asian Earth Sci 98:116–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jseaes.2014.11.017
  • 45. Senel M (1997) Geological maps of Turkey in 1: 250 000 scale: Erzincan sheet, mineral research and exploration directions of Turkey (MTA), Ankara, Turkey
  • 46. Stein RS, Barka A, Dieterich JH (1997) Progressive failure on the North Anatolian fault since 1939 by earthquake stress triggering. Geophys J Int 128:594–604. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.1997.tb05321.xCrossRef
  • 47. Tatar O, Akpinar Z, Gursoy H, Piper JDA, Kocbulut F, Mesci BL, Polat A, Roberts AP (2013) Palaeomagnetic evidence for the neotectonic evolution of the Erzincan Basin North Anatolian Fault Zone, Turkey. J Geodyn 65:244–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jog.2012.03.009
  • 48. Tsereteli N, Askan A, Hamzehloo H (2016) Hybrid-empirical ground motion estimations for Georgia. Acta Geophys 64:1225–1256. https://doi.org/10.1515/acgeo-2016-0048
  • 49. Unal B, Askan A, Selcuk-Kestel AS (2017) Simulation of large earthquakes and its implications on earthquake insurance rates: a case study in Bursa region (Turkey). Nat Hazards 85:215–236. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-016-2578-4
  • 50. Utkucu M, Nalbant SS, McCloskey J, Steacy S, Alptekin O (2013) Slip distribution and stress changes associated with the 1999 November 12, Duzce (Turkey) earthquake (Mw = 7.1). Geophys J Int 153:229–241. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-246X.2003.01904.x
  • 51. Wells D, Coppersmith K (1994) New empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, rupture area, and surface displacement. Bull Seismol Soc Am 84:974–1002
Typ dokumentu
Bibliografia
Identyfikator YADDA
bwmeta1.element.baztech-2c052610-fee8-4bb2-baa1-bedf2ac9cff6
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.