Advertisement

Analysis of exceedance probabilities for design spectral accelerations from crustal earthquakes in Romania

  • Florin PavelEmail author
  • Radu Vacareanu
Original Article
  • 9 Downloads

Abstract

The seismic hazard of the eastern and southern part of Romania is dominated by the Vrancea intermediate-depth seismic source, while for the western part of Romania the local crustal seismic sources are predominant. The design acceleration response spectrum of the Romanian seismic code is obtained by anchoring the design peak ground acceleration to a spectral shape which takes into account the soil conditions through the control period TC. In this study, we aim to evaluate the exceedance probabilities of the design spectral accelerations in the case of various low- and moderate-magnitude crustal earthquake scenarios. The evaluation is performed using an approach based on a ground motion prediction equation and an approach based on actual ground motion recordings. The results of the analyses show that significant differences in terms of exceedance probabilities of the design spectral ordinates occur between the two applied methodologies for larger magnitude earthquakes and small epicentral distances. Moreover, based on the results obtained, it appears that the minimum earthquake magnitudes causing exceedances of the design peak ground acceleration are quite far from the maximum magnitudes of the considered crustal seismic sources in the western part of Romania.

Keywords

Seismic hazard Ground motion prediction equations Design code Uncertainty 

Notes

References

  1. Ardeleanu L, Grecu B, Raileanu V (2012) Peak ground acceleration, velocity and displacement from moderate magnitude undercrustal earthquakes of Vrancea region. Rom Rep Phys 64(2):555–570Google Scholar
  2. Baker JW (2007) Quantitative classification of near-fault ground motions using wavelet analysis. Bull Seismol Soc Am 97(5):1486–1501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bala A, Raielanu V, Dinu C, Diaconescu M (2015) Crustal seismicity and active fault systems in Romania. Rom Rep Phys 67(3):1176–1191Google Scholar
  4. Cauzzi C, Faccioli E, Vanini M, Bianchini A (2015) Updated predictive equations for broadband (0.01–10 s) horizontal response spectra and peak ground motions, based on a global dataset of digital acceleration records. Bull Earthq Eng 13(6):1587–1612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Craiu A, Craiu M, Diaconescu M, Marmureanu A (2017) 2013 seismic swarm recorded in Galati area, Romania: focal mechanism solutions. Acta Geod Geophys 52(1):53–67Google Scholar
  6. Craiu A, Ghita C, Craiu M, Diaconescu M, Mihai M, Ardeleanu L (2018) The source mechanism of the seismic events during the sequence of the moderate-size crustal earthquake of November 22, 2014 of Vrancea region (Romania). Ann Geophys 61(1):SE666Google Scholar
  7. EN 1998-1 (2004) Design of structures for earthquake resistance – part 1: general rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings. European Committee for Standardization, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  8. Iervolino I, Baltzopoulos G, Chioccarelli E, Suzuki A (2017) Seismic actions on structures in the near-source region of the 2016 Central Italy sequence. Bull Earthq Eng.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-017-0295-3
  9. Iervolino I, Giorgio M, Cito P (2019) Which earthquakes are expected to exceed the design spectra? Eq Spectra 35:1465–1483.  https://doi.org/10.1193/032318EQS066O Google Scholar
  10. Ismail-Zadeh A, Matenco L, Radulian M, Cloetingh S, Panza GF (2012) Geodynamics and intermediate-depth seismicity in Vrancea (the south-eastern Carpathians): current state-of-the art. Tectonophysics 530–531:50–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kijko A (2004) Estimation of the maximum earthquake magnitude, mmax. Pure Appl Geophys 161:1655–1681CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lanzano G, Puglia R, Russo E, Luzi L, Bindi D, Cotton F, D'Amico M, Felicetta C, Pacor F & ORFEUS WG5 (2018). ESM strong-motion flat-file 2018. Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia (INGV), Helmholtz-Zentrum Potsdam Deutsches GeoForschungsZentrum (GFZ), Observatories & Research Facilities for European Seismology (ORFEUS). PID: 11099/ESM_flatfile_2018Google Scholar
  13. Lungu D, Cornea T, Aldea A, Zaicenco A (1997) Basic representation of seismic action. In: Lungu D, Mazzolani F, Savidis S (eds) Design of structures in seismic zones: Eurocode 8—worked examples, (TEMPUS PHARE CM Project 01198: implementing of structural Eurocodes in Romanian civil engineering standards, Bridgeman Ltd., Timisoara, Romania), pp 1–60Google Scholar
  14. Moldovan IA, Popescu E, Bazacliu O, Enescu BD, Radulian M (2006) Time, space and size distribution of earthquakes for Fagaras seismogenic region (Romania). Rom J Phys 51(3–4):479–494Google Scholar
  15. Nakamura Y (1989) A method for dynamic characteristics estimation of subsurface using microtremor on the ground surface. Q Rep Railw Tech Res Inst 30(1):25–33Google Scholar
  16. Oros E, Popa M, Diaconescu M (2018) The seismogenic sources from the west and south-eest of Romania. In: Vacareanu R, Ionescu C (eds) Seismic hazard and risk assessment - updated overview with emphasis on Romania. Springer Natural Hazards, pp 53–69Google Scholar
  17. P100–1/2013 (2013) Code for seismic design – part I – design prescriptions for buildings. Ministry of Regional Development and Public Administration, BucharestGoogle Scholar
  18. Pavel F, Vacareanu R, Cioflan C, Iancovici M (2014) Spectral characteristics of strong ground motions from intermediate-depth Vrancea seismic source. Bull Seismol Soc Am 104(6):2842–2850CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Pavel F, Vacareanu R, Douglas J, Radulian M, Cioflan C, Barbat A (2016) An updated probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for Romania and comparison with the approach and outcomes of the SHARE project. Pure Appl Geophys 173(6):1881–1905CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Pavel F, Vacareanu R, Pitilakis K (2019) Intensity-dependent site amplification factors for Vrancea intermediate-depth earthquakes. Bull Earthq Eng 17(5):2363–2380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Pitilakis K, Riga E, Anastasiadis A, Fotopoulou S, Karafagka S (2018) Towards the revision of EC8: proposal for an alternative site classification scheme and associated intensity dependent spectral amplification factors. Soil Dn Earthq Eng.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.03.030
  22. Placinta AO, Popescu E, Borleanu F, Radulian M, Popa M (2016) Analysis of source properties for the earthquake sequences in the south-western Carpathians (Romania). Rom Rep Phys 68(3):1240–1158Google Scholar
  23. Radu C, Toro E (1996) Two strong historical earthquakes in Transylvani (Romania): November 19, 1523 and October 3, 1880. Ann Geophys 34(5):1069–1078Google Scholar
  24. Radulian M, Bala A, Popescu E, Toma-Danila D (2018) Earthquake mechanism and characterization of seismogenic zones in south-eastern part of Romania. Ann Geophys 61(1): S108. ROMPLUS Catalogue. http://www.infp.ro/romplus/. Last accessed 20 May 2019
  25. Shahi SK, Baker JW (2011) An empirically calibrated framework for including the effects of near-fault directivity in probabilistic seismic hazard analysis. Bull Seismol Soc Am 101(2):742–755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Vacareanu R, Radulian M, Iancovici M, Pavel F, Neagu C (2015) Fore-arc and back-arc ground motion prediction model for Vrancea intermediate depth seismic source. J Earthq Eng 19(3):535–562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wald DJ, Allen TI (2007) Topographic slope as a proxy for seismic site conditions and amplification. Bull Seismol Soc Am 97:1379–1395CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Seismic Risk Assessment Research CenterTechnical University of Civil Engineering BucharestBucharestRomania

Personalised recommendations