Time dependent shake map for Uttarakhand Himalayas, India, using recorded earthquakes

• Autorzy: Mittal Himanshu , Wu Yih-Min , Lin Ting-Li , Legendre Cédric P. , Gupta Sushil , Yang Benjamin M.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.1007/s11600-019-00281-7

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Uttarakhand Himalayas are highly sensitive to seismic hazard with possible occurrence of high-magnitude earthquakes. Fewer waveforms are available from previously recorded earthquakes, which are insufficient for carrying out seismic hazard studies. The recently installed strong motion instrumentation network (SMIN) in India, particularly, in Indian Himalayas is providing useful data. Using recorded data from SMIN, time-dependent peak ground acceleration and observed peak ground velocity shake maps are drawn for two earthquakes widely recorded by SMIN in Uttarakhand region of Indian Himalayan belt. Open-source Earthworm software with new algorithms is used for drawing these shake maps. The source mechanism is computed for April 4, 2011 earthquake using waveform inversion technique to relate it to the trend of shake maps. The computed focal mechanism shows one of the nodal planes in NW–SE, which are consistent with shake maps for the same earthquake. These time-dependent plotted shake maps provide useful information on the initial rupture, as well as the potential directivity of the rupture.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

PGA; PGV; earthworm; shake map; Uttarakhand Himalaya

PL

PGA; PGV

• Wydawca: Instytut Geofizyki PAN ; Springer
• Czasopismo: Acta Geophysica
• Rocznik: 2019
• Tom: Vol. 67, no. 3
• Strony: 753--763
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 52 poz.

Twórcy

autor

Mittal Himanshu

• Department of Earth Sciences, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan 701, Taiwan

autor

Wu Yih-Min

• Department of Geosciences, National Taiwan University, Taipei 10617, Taiwan
• Institute of Earth Sciences, Academia Sinica, Taipei 11529, Taiwan
• NTU Research Center for Future Earth, National Taiwan University, Taipei 10617, Taiwan

autor

Lin Ting-Li

• Department of Earth Sciences, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan 701, Taiwan

autor

Legendre Cédric P.

• Institute of Earth Sciences, Academia Sinica, Taipei 11529, Taiwan

autor

Gupta Sushil

• Risk Modeling and Insurance, RMSI, Noida, India

autor

Yang Benjamin M.

• Department of Geosciences, National Taiwan University, Taipei 10617, Taiwan

Bibliografia

• 1. Allen RM, Brown H, Hellweg M, Khainovski O, Lombard P, Neuhauser D (2009) Real-time earthquake detection and hazard assessment by ElarmS across California. Geophys Res Lett 36:L00B08.
• 2. Bilham R (1995) Location and magnitude of the Nepal earthquake and its relation to the rupture zones of the contiguous great Himalayan earthquakes. Curr Sci 69:101–128
• 3. BIS, IS, 1893–2002 (Part 1) Indian standard criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures, part 1—general provisions and buildings. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi
• 4. Boatwright J, Thywissen K, Seekins L (2001) Correlation of ground motion and intensity for the 17 January 1994 Northridge California Earthquake. Bull Seismol Soc Am 91:739–752
• 5. Borcherdt RD (1970) Effects of local geology on ground motion near San Francisco Bay. Bull Seismol Soc Am 60:29–61
• 6. Chao WA, Zhao L, Wu YM (2011) Centroid fault-plane inversion in three-dimensional velocity structure using strong-motion records. Bull Seismol Soc Am 101(3):1330–1340
• 7. Chen DY, Hsiao NC, Wu YM (2015) The Earthworm based earthquake alarm reporting system in Taiwan. Bull Seismol Soc Am 105:568–579.
• 8. Ekström G, Nettles M, Dziewoński AM (2012) The global CMT project 2004–2010: centroid-moment tensors for 13,017 earthquakes. Phys Earth Planet Inter 200:1–9
• 9. Frohlich C, Apperson KD (1992) Earthquake focal mechanisms, moment tensors, and the consistency of seismic activity near plate boundaries. Tectonics 11(2):279–296
• 10. Gahalaut K, Rao NP (2009) Stress field in the western Himalaya with special reference to the 8 October 2005 Muzaffarabad earthquake. J Seismol 13:371–378
• 11. Gansser A (1964) Geology of the Himalayas. Interscience, New York, p 289
• 12. Gaur VK, Chander R, Sarkar I, Khattri KN, Sinvhal H (1985) Seismicity and state of stress from investigations of local earthquakes in the Kumaun Himalaya. Tectonophysics 118:243–251
• 13. Graves RW (1996) Simulating seismic wave propagation in 3D elastic media using staggered-grid finite differences. Bull Seismol Soc Am 86:1091–1106
• 14. Gupta S, Gupta ID (2004) Prediction of earthquake peak ground acceleration in Koyna region, India. 13 WCEE, Vancouver, Canada, Aug 1–6, 2004, paper no. 1437
• 15. Gupta S, Kumar S, Wason HR, Das R (2012) A statistical analysis of completeness of earthquake data around Dehradun city and its implications for seismicity evaluation. 15WCEE, Lisbon, Portugal, Sept 24–28, 2012, paper no. 3539
• 16. Johnson CE, Bittenbinder A, Bogaert B, Dietz L, Kohler W (1995) Earthworm: a flexible approach to seismic network processing. Inc Res Inst Seismol Newsl 14(4):1–4
• 17. Kanaujia J, Kumar A, Gupta SC (2016) Three-dimensional velocity structure around Tehri region of the Garhwal Lesser Himalaya: constraints on geometry of the underthrusting Indian plate. Geophys J Int 205(2):900–914
• 18. Khattri KN (1999) An evaluation of earthquakes hazard and risk in northern India. Himalayan Geol 20:1–46
• 19. Khattri KN, Chander R, Gaur VK, Sarkar I, Kumar S (1989) New seismological results on the tectonics of the Garhwal Himalaya. Proc Indian Acad Sci (Earth Planet Sci) 98:91–109
• 20. Kumar N, Khandelwal DD (2015) Strong motion data analysis of the 4 April 2011 Western Nepal earthquake (M 5.7) and its implications to the seismic hazard in the Central Himalaya. Curr Sci 109(10):1822–1830
• 21. Kumar N, Sharma J, Arora BR, Mukopadhyay S (2009) Seismotectonic model of the Kangra-Chamba sector of Northwest Himalaya: constraints from joint hypocenter determination and focal mechanism. Bull Seismol Soc Am 99:95–109
• 22. Kumar A, Mittal H, Sachdeva R, Kumar A (2012) Indian Strong Motion Instrumentation Network. Seismol Res Lett 83(1):59–66
• 23. Legendre CP, Deschamps F, Zhao L, Chen QF (2015a) Rayleigh-wave dispersion reveals crust-mantle decoupling beneath eastern Tibet. Sci Rep 5:16644.
• 24. Legendre CP, Zhao L, Chen QF (2015b) Upper-mantle shear-wave structure under East and Southeast Asia from Automated Multimode Inversion of waveforms. Geophys J Int 203(1):707–719.
• 25. Legendre CP, Tseng TL, Mittal H, Hsu CH, Karakhanyan A, Huang BS (2017) Complex wave propagation revealed by peak ground velocity maps in the Caucasus Area. Seismol Res Lett 88(3):812–821
• 26. Liang X, Zhou S, Chen YJ, Jin G, Xiao L, Liu P, Fu Y, Tang Y, Lou X, Ning J (2008) Earthquake distribution in Southern Tibet and its tectonic implications. J Geophys Res 113:B12409.
• 27. Mittal H, Kumar A (2015) Stochastic finite-fault modeling of M w 5.4 earthquake along Uttarakhand-Nepal border. Nat Hazards 75(2):1145–1166
• 28. Mittal H, Gupta S, Srivastava A, Dubey RN, Kumar A (2006) National strong motion instrumentation project: an overview. In: 13th Symposium on earthquake engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee, Dec 18–20, 2006, 107–115, New Delhi: Elite Publishing
• 29. Mittal H, Kumar A, Ramhmachhuani R (2012) Indian national strong motion instrumentation network and site characterization of its stations. Int J Geosci 3(6):1151–1167
• 30. Mittal H, Kumar A, Kumar A (2013a) Site effects estimation in Delhi from the Indian strong motion instrumentation network. Seismol Res Lett 84(1):33–41
• 31. Mittal H, Kamal, Kumar A, Singh SK (2013b) Estimation of site effects in Delhi using standard spectral ratio. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 50:53–61
• 32. Mittal H, Kumar A, Kamal (2013c) Ground motion estimation in Delhi from postulated regional and local earthquakes. J Seismol 17(2):593–605
• 33. Mittal H, Kumar A, Kumar A, Kumar R (2015) Analysis of ground motion in Delhi from earthquakes recorded by strong motion network. Arab J Geosci 8(4):2005–2017
• 34. Mittal H, Wu YM, Chen DY, Chao WA (2016a) Stochastic finite modeling of ground motion for March 5, 2012, Mw 4.6 earthquake and scenario greater magnitude earthquake in the proximity of Delhi. Nat Hazards 82(2):1123–1146
• 35. Mittal H, Kumar A, Wu YM, Kumar A (2016b) Source study of M w 5.4 April 4, 2011 India-Nepal border earthquake and scenario events in the Kumaon-Garhwal Region. Arab J Geosci 9(5):348
• 36. Mittal H, Wu YM, Sharma ML, Yang BM, Gupta S (2018a) Testing the performance of earthquake early warning system in northern India. Acta Geophys 67:59–75.
• 37. Mittal H, Wu YM, Sharma ML, Lin TL, Yang BM (2018b) Shake maps generation for Delhi region using two different algorithms. In: 16th symposium on earthquake engineering, Indian Instiute of Technology, Roorkee, Dec 20–22
• 38. Mozziconacci L, Delouis B, Angelier J, Hu JC, Huang BS (2009) Slip distribution on a thrust fault at a plate boundary: the 2003 Chengkung earthquake, Taiwan. Geophys J Int 177(2):609–623
• 39. Olivieri M, Clinton J (2012) An almost fair comparison between Earth-worm and Seiscomp3. Seismol Res Lett 83:720–727
• 40. Olsen KB (1994) Simulation of three-dimensional wave propagation in the Salt Lake Basin. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
• 41. Seeber L, Armbruster JG (1981) Great detachment earthquakes along the Himalayan arc and long-term forecasting. In: Earthquake prediction: an international review. Maurice Ewing Series 4, American Geophysical Union, Washington, DC, pp 259–277
• 42. Srivastava P, Mitra G (1994) Thrust geometries and deep structure of the outer and lesser Himalaya, Kumaon and Garhwal (India): implications for evolution of the Himalayan fold-and-thrust belt. Tectonics 13(1):89–109
• 43. Valdiya KS (1980) Geology of Kumaun Lesser Himalaya, interim record: Dehradun. Dehradun, Wadia Institute of Himalayan Geology, p 289
• 44. Wald DJ, Quitoriano V, Heaton TH, Kanamori H, Scrivner CW, Worden CB (1999) TriNet “ShakeMaps”: rapid generation of peak ground motion and intensity maps for earthquakes in southern California. Earthq Spectra 15(3):537–555
• 45. Wessel P, Smith WHF (1998) New, improved version of generic mapping tools released. Eos, Trans Am Geophys Union.
• 46. Wu YM (2015) Progress on development of an earthquake early warning system using low cost sensors. Pure appl Geophys 172:2343–2351.
• 47. Wu YM, Hsiao NC, Teng TL (2004) Relationships between strong ground motion peak values and seismic loss during the 1999 Chi-Chi, Taiwan earthquake. Nat Hazards 32:357–373
• 48. Wu YM, Chen DY, Lin TL, Hsieh CY, Chin TL, Chang WY, Li WS, Ker SH (2013) A high density seismic network for earthquake early warning in Taiwan based on low cost sensors. Seismol Res Lett 84:1048–1054.
• 49. Wu YM, Liang WT, Mittal H, Chao WA, Lin CH, Huang BS, Lin CM (2016) Performance of a low-cost earthquake early warning system (P-alert) during the 2016 ML 6.4 Meinong (Taiwan) Earthquake. Seismo Res Lett 87(5):1050–1059.
• 50. Wu YM, Mittal H, Huang TC, Yang BM, Jan JC, Chen SK (2018) Performance of a low-cost earthquake early warning system (P-alert) and shake map production during the 2018 Mw 6.4 Hualien (Taiwan) Earthquake. Seismol Res Lett (accepted)
• 51. Yagi Y, Okuwaki R (2015) Integrated seismic source model of the 2015 Gorkha, Nepal, earthquake. Geophys Res Lett 42(15):6229–6235
• 52. Yang BM, Huang TC, Wu YM (2018) ShakingAlarm: a nontraditional regional earthquake early warning system based on time-dependent anisotropic peak ground-motion attenuation relationships. Bull Seismol Soc Am 108(3A):1219–1230. Zhao L, Chen P, Jordan TH (2006) Strain Green’s tensors, reciprocity and their applications to seismic source and structure studies. Bull Seismol Soc Am 96:1753–1763

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu ze środków MNiSW, umowa Nr 461252 w ramach programu "Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki" - moduł: Popularyzacja nauki i promocja sportu (2020).