Advertisement

Pure and Applied Geophysics

, Volume 176, Issue 11, pp 4687–4700 | Cite as

Modeling of 2011 IndoNepal Earthquake and Scenario Earthquakes in the Kumaon Region and Comparative Attenuation Study Using PGA Distribution with the Garhwal Region

  • Sandeep
  • A. Joshi
  • S. K. Sah
  • Parveen KumarEmail author
  • Sohan Lal
  • Sonia Devi
  • Monika
Article
  • 118 Downloads

Abstract

Kumaon and Garhwal regions are the chief terrains of Uttarakhand Himalaya. The present article simulates the strong ground motion of the 2011 IndoNepal earthquake in the Kumaon region using modified semi empirical technique (MSET). Acceleration records at ten stations in the near field region have been simulated which validates well with actual records and therefore confirms the reliability of MSET. In addition, MSET has been used to simulate strong motion records of future scenario earthquakes (Mw 7.0 and Mw 8.0) in Kumaon region by assuming the earthquake location same as that of 2011 IndoNepal earthquake. Isoacceleration maps are also provided, which reveals more than 400 gal value of PGA at epicentral distances less than 25 kms for an earthquake of magnitude 8.0. The comparison of isoacceleration map of future scenario earthquake (Mw 7.0) in Kumaon region has been done with isoacceleration map of 1991 Uttarkashi earthquake (Mw 6.8) in Garhwal region which suggests distinct attenuation characteristics of these two regions.

Keywords

Kumaon Himalaya Garhwal Himalaya semi empirical scenario earthquake PGA 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research work is a product of sponsored projects from Science and Engineering Research Board, DST, with project reference no. ECR/2016/000737.The data used from project MoES/P.O.(Seismo)/1(42)/2009, http://www.pesmos.in and USGS is thankfully acknowledged. Author Dr. Sandeep sincerely thanks Dr. Himanshu Mittal and Dr. Preeti for their valuable suggestions. The authors sincerely thank Department of Geophysics, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi and Earth Sciences department, IIT Roorkee. Author PK sincerely acknowledged Director, Wadia Institute of Himalayan Geology, Dehradun.

References

  1. Aki, K. (1967). Scaling law of seismic spectrum. Journal of Geophysical Research,72, 1217–1231.Google Scholar
  2. Antoniou, S., & Pinho, R. (2010). SeismoSignal. SeismoSoft, Pavia, Italy. Available at: http://www.seismosoft.com.
  3. Bilham, R., Gaur, V. K., & Molnar, P. (2001). Himalayan seismic hazard. Science,293, 1442–1444.Google Scholar
  4. Boore, D. M. (1983). Stochastic simulation of high frequency ground motion based on seismological models of radiated Spectra. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America,73, 1865–1894.Google Scholar
  5. Boore, D. M., & Bommer, J. (2005). Processing of strong motion accelerograms: needs, options and consequences. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering,25, 93–115.Google Scholar
  6. Brune, J. N. (1970). Tectonic stress and spectra of seismic shear waves from earthquakes. Journal of Geophysical Research,75, 4997–5009.Google Scholar
  7. Chopra, S., Kumar, V., Suthar, A., & Kumar, P. (2012). Modeling of strong ground motions for 1991 Uttarkashi, 1999 Chamoli earthquakes, and a hypothetical great earthquake in Garhwal-Kumaun Himalaya. Natural Hazards,64, 1141–1159.Google Scholar
  8. Dasgupta, S., Pande, P., Ganguly, D., Iqbal, Z., Sanyal, K., Venkatraman, N. V., Dasgupta, S., Sural, B., Harendranath, L., Mazumdar, K., Sanyal, S., Roy, A., Das, L. K., Misra, P. S. & Gupta, H. (2000). Seismotectonic atlas of India and its environs. Kolkata: Geological Survey of India.Google Scholar
  9. Gupta, S. C., & Kumar, A. (2002). Seismic wave attenuation characteristics of three Indian regions: a comparative study. Current Sciences,82, 407–413.Google Scholar
  10. Gupta, S. C., Singh, V. N., & Kumar, A. (1995). Attenuation of Coda Waves, in the Garhwal Himalaya, India. Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors,87, 247–253.Google Scholar
  11. Irikura, K., Kagawa, T., & Sekiguchi, H. (1997). Revision of the empirical Green’s function method by Irikura, 1986. Programme and Abstracts, The Seismological Society of Japan,2, B25.Google Scholar
  12. Irikura, K., & Kamae, K. (1994). Estimation of strong ground motion in broad-frequency band based on a seismic source scaling model and an Empirical Green’s function technique. Annals of Geophysics XXXVII, 6, 1721–1743.Google Scholar
  13. IS:1893. (2002). Indian Standard Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures. New Delhi: Bureau of Indian Standards.Google Scholar
  14. Joshi, A. (2001a). Strong motion modeling of the source of the Chamoli earthquake of March 29, 1999 in the Garhwal Himalaya, India. Journal of Seismology,5, 499–518.Google Scholar
  15. Joshi, A. (2001b). Strong motion modeling of the source of the Chamoli earthquake of March 29, 1999 in the Garhwal Himalaya, India. Journal of Seismology,5, 499–518.Google Scholar
  16. Joshi, A. (2004a). A simplified technique for simulating wide band strong ground motion for two recent Himalaya earthquakes. Pure Applied Geophysics,161, 1777–1805.Google Scholar
  17. Joshi, A. (2004b). A simplified technique for simulating wide band strong ground motion for two recent Himalaya earthquakes. Pure and Applied Geophysics,161, 1777–1805.Google Scholar
  18. Joshi, A. (2006). Use of acceleration spectra for determining the frequency dependent attenuation coefficient and source parameters. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America,96, 2165–2180.Google Scholar
  19. Joshi, A., Kumar, P., Mohanty, M., Bansal, A. R., Dimri, V. P., & Chadha, R. K. (2012a). Determination of Qβ(f) at different places of Kumaon Himalaya from the inversion of spectral acceleration data. Pure and Applied Geophysics,169, 1821–1845.Google Scholar
  20. Joshi, A., Kumar, B., Sinvhal, A., & Sinvhal, H. (1999). Generation of synthetic accelerograms by modeling of rupture plane. Journal of Earthquake Technology,36, 43–60.Google Scholar
  21. Joshi, A., Kumari, P., Sharma, M. L., Ghosh, A. K., Agarwal, M. K., & Ravikiran, A. (2012b). A strong motion model of the 2004 great Sumatra earthquake: simulation using a modified semi-empirical method. Journal of Earthquake and Tsunami,6, 1–29.Google Scholar
  22. Joshi, A., Kumari, P., Singh, S., & Sharma, M. L. (2012c). Near-field and far-field simulation of accelerograms of Sikkim earthquake of September 18, 2011 using modified semi-empirical approach. Natural Hazards,64, 1029–1054.Google Scholar
  23. Joshi, A., Kuo, C. H., Dhibar, P., Sandeep, A., Sharma, M. L., Wen, K. L., et al. (2015). Simulation of the records of the 27th March 2013, Nantou Taiwan earthquake using modified semi-empirical approach. Natural Hazard,78, 995–1020.Google Scholar
  24. Joshi, A., & Midorikawa, S. (2004a). A simplified method for simulation of strong ground motion using rupture model of the earthquake source. Journal of Seismology,8, 467–484.Google Scholar
  25. Joshi, A., & Midorikawa, S. (2004b). A simplified method for simulation of strong ground motion using rupture model of the earthquake source. Journal of Seismology,8, 467–484.Google Scholar
  26. Joshi, A., Mohanty, M., Bansal, A. R., Dimri, V. P., & Chadha, R. K. (2010). Use of strong-motion data for frequency-dependent shear wave attenuation studies in the Pithoragarh region of Kumaon Himalaya. Journal of Earthquake Technology,47(1), 25–46.Google Scholar
  27. Joshi, A., & 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
  28. Joshi, A., Sandeep, & Kamal, (2014). Modeling of strong motion generation areas of the 2011 Tohoku, Japan earthquake using modified semi-empirical technique. Natural Hazards,71, 587–609.Google Scholar
  29. Joshi, A., Singh, S., & Giroti, K. (2001). The Simulation of ground motions using envelope summations. Pure Applied Geophysics,158, 877–901.Google Scholar
  30. Kameda, H., Sugito, M. (1978). Prediction of strong earthquake motions by evolutionary process model. In Proceedings of the Sixth Japan Earthquake Engineering Symposium (pp. 41–48).Google Scholar
  31. Kanamori, H., & Anderson, D. L. (1975). Theoretical basis of some empirical relations in seismology. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America,65, 1073–1095.Google Scholar
  32. Khattri, K. N., & Tyagi, A. K. (1983). Seismicity patterns in the Himalayan Plate Boundary and identification of areas of high seismic potential. Tectonophysics,96, 281–297.Google Scholar
  33. Kumar, P., Joshi, A., Sandeep, Kumar, A., & Chadha, R. K. (2015a). Detailed attenuation characteristics of shear waves in Kumaon Himalaya, India using the inversion of strong motion data. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America,105, 1836–1851.Google Scholar
  34. Kumar, N., Kumar, P., Chauhan, V., & Hazarika, D. (2017). Variable anelastic attenuation and site effect in estimating source parameters of various major earthquakes including Mw 7.8 Nepal and Mw 7.5 Hindu kush earthquake by using far-field strong-motion data. International Journal of Earth Sciences,106, 2371–2386.Google Scholar
  35. Kumar, A., Mittal, H., Sachdeva, R., & Kumar, A. (2012). Indian Strong Motion Instrumentation Network. Seismological Research Letters,83(1), 59–66.Google Scholar
  36. Kumar, A., Sinvhal, A., Joshi, A., Kumar, D., Sandeep, & Kumar, P. (2015b). Coda wave attenuation characteristics for Kumaon and Garhwal Himalaya, India. Natural Hazards,75, 1057–1074.Google Scholar
  37. Kumar, D., Teotia, S. S., & Khattari, K. N. (1997). The representation of attenuation charactersticks of strong ground motion observed in the 1996 Dharamshala and 1991 Uttarkashi earthquakes by available Empirical relations. Current Science,73, 543–548.Google Scholar
  38. Mahesh, P., Rai, S. S., Sivaram, K., Paul, A., Gupta, S., Sarma, R., et al. (2013). One dimensional reference velocity model and precise locations of earthquake hypocenters in the Kumaon-Garhwal Himalaya. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America,103, 328–339.Google Scholar
  39. Midorikawa, S. (1993). Semi empirical estimation of peak ground acceleration from large earthquakes. Tectonophysics,218, 287–295.Google Scholar
  40. Negi, S. S., Paul, A., Joshi, A., & Kamal. (2015). Body Wave Crustal Attenuation Characteristics in the Garhwal Himalaya, India. Pure and Applied Geophysics,172, 1451–1469.Google Scholar
  41. Ni, J., & Barazangi, M. (1984). Seismotectonics of the Himalayan collision zone: geometry of the under thrusting Indian plate beneath the Himalaya. Journal of Geophysical Research,89, 1147–1163.Google Scholar
  42. Paul, A., Gupta, S. C., & Pant, C. (2003). Coda Q estimates for Kumaon Himalaya. Proceedings of Indian Academic Science (Earth Planetary Science),112, 569–576.Google Scholar
  43. Sandeep, Joshi, A., Kumari, P., Lal, S., Vandana, Kumar, P., et al. (2017a). Emergence of the semi-empirical technique of strong ground motion simulation: A review. Journal of the Geological Society of India,89, 719–722.Google Scholar
  44. Sandeep, Joshi, A., Lal, S., Kumar, P., & Sah, S. K. (2017b). Simulation of strong ground motion of the 2009 Bhutan Earthquake using modified semi-empirical technique. Pure and Applied Geophysics,174(12), 4343–4356.Google Scholar
  45. Sandeep, Joshi, A., Sah, S. K., Kumar, P., Lal, S., & Singh, R. S. (2017c). Source model estimation of the 2005 Kyushu Earthquake, Japan using modified semi empirical technique. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences,147, 240–253.Google Scholar
  46. Sandeep, A. Joshi, Kamal, P., & Kumar, A. Kumar. (2014a). Effect of frequency dependent radiation pattern in simulation of high frequency ground motion of Tohoku earthquake using modified semi empirical method. Natural Hazards,73, 1499–1521.Google Scholar
  47. Sandeep, A. Joshi, Kamal, P., & Kumar, P. Kumari. (2014b). Modeling of strong motion generation area of the Uttarkashi earthquake using modified semi-empirical approach. Natural Hazards,73, 2041–2066.Google Scholar
  48. Sandeep, A. Joshi, Kamal, P., Kumar, A., & Kumar, P. Dhibar. (2015). Modeling of strong motion generation areas of the Niigata, Japan, earthquake of 2007 using modified semi empirical technique. Natural Hazards,77, 933–957.Google Scholar
  49. Seeber, L., & Armbruster, J. G. (1981). Great detachment earthquakes along the Himalayan arc and long-term forecasting. Earthquake Prediction, An International Review, Maurice Ewing Series 4 (pp. 259–277). Washington, D.C.: American Geophysical Union.Google Scholar
  50. Sharma, J., Chopra, S., & Roy, K. S. (2014). Estimation of source parameters, quality factor (QS), and site characteristics using accelerograms: Uttarakhand Himalaya Region. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America,104(1), 360–380.Google Scholar
  51. Sharma, B., Teotia, S. S., D. Kumar, & P. S. Raju. (2009). Attenuation of P- and S- waves in the Chamoli Region, Himalaya, India. Pure and Applied Geophysics,166, 1949–1966.Google Scholar
  52. Singh, C., Singh, A., Bharathi, V. K. S., Bansal, A. R., & Chadha, R. K. (2012). Frequency-dependent body wave attenuation characteristics in the Kumaon Himalaya. Tectonophysics,524(525), 37–42.Google Scholar
  53. Srivastava, H. N., MithilaVerma, B. K., Bansal, A. K., & Sutar. (2015). Discriminatory characteristics of seismic gaps in Himalaya. Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk,6(3), 224–242.Google Scholar
  54. Wells, L. D., & Coppersmith, K. J. (1994). New empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, rupture area and surface displacement. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America,84, 974–1002.Google Scholar
  55. Yu, G., Khattri, K. N., Anderson, J. G., Brune, J. N., & Zeng, Y. (1995). Strong ground motion from the Uttarkashi, Himalaya, India, earthquake: Comparison of observations with synthetics using the composite source model. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America,85, 31–50.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of GeophysicsBanaras Hindu UniversityVaranasiIndia
  2. 2.Department of Earth SciencesIndian Institute of Technology RoorkeeRoorkeeIndia
  3. 3.Wadia Institute of Himalayan GeologyDehradunIndia

Personalised recommendations