Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis of Punasa Dam Site in India

  • Nikunj BinnaniEmail author
  • Rakesh Kumar Khare
  • Vasily I. Golubev
  • Igor B. Petrov
Conference paper
Part of the Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies book series (SIST, volume 133)


Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA) is the evaluation of annual frequencies of exceedance of ground motion levels. Probabilistic seismic hazard for the site specific Punasa dam has been estimated. Punasa dam is located in the Khandwa district on the life line river Narmada of Madhya Pradesh state of India. The PSHA of the Punasa dam site has been estimated considering the seismically active faults out of the total faults available in the area. Effects of all the faults, which can produce earthquake equal to or more than 3.5 magnitudes has been considered. The fault considered in the present work consists of 35 active faults out of total 126 faults, for which a minimum amount of information was available (i.e. length, maximum magnitude, etc.). For this purpose, an area of radius 500–550 km is selected. There are 154 earthquakes (moment magnitude 3.5–6.6) occurred in this region during last 210 years from 1808 to 2017. Completeness of this data is checked by Stepp’s method. For this data Gutenberg-Richter (G-R) parameters (a and b values) are estimated by regression analysis. Results are presented in a form of Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) and seismic hazard curves.


Seismic hazard Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis Peak ground acceleration 


  1. 1.
    GSI, Seismo-tectonic atlas of India and its environs (SEISAT) Geological Survey of India (2000)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    IS-1893 Indian standard criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures. Fifth Revision, Part-1, Bureau of Indian Standard, New Delhi (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Raghu Kanth, S.T.G., Iyengar, R.N.: Estimation of seismic hazard in Penisular India. J. Earth Syst. Sci. 116(3), 199–214 (2007)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Aochi, H., Ulrich, T., Ducellier, A.: Finite difference simulations of seismic wave propagation for understanding earthquake physics and predicting ground motions: advances and challenges. J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 454, 1–9 (2013)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Beklemysheva, K.A., Vasyukov, A.V., Golubev, V.I.: On the estimation of seismic resistance of modern composite oil pipeline elements. Dokl. Math. 97, 184 (2018)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Favorskaya, A., Petrov, I., Golubev, V., Khokhlov, N.: Numerical simulation of earthquakes impact on facilities by grid-characteristic method. Procedia Comput. Sci. 112, 1206–1215 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    McGuire, R.K.: Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis: early history. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dynam. 37, 329–338 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    ISC Bulletin: event catalogue search. International seismological Centre (ISC), Accessed 03 Oct 2018
  9. 9.
    USGS Earthquake catalogues. US Geological Survey (USGS), Accessed 03 Oct 2018
  10. 10.
    Stepp, J.C.: Analysis of completeness of the earthquake sample in the Puget sound area and its effect on statistical estimates of earthquake hazard. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Microzonation, vol. II, pp. 897–909 (1972)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Iyenger, R.N., Raghukanth, S.T.G.: Attenuation of strong ground motion in peninsular India. Seismol. Res. Lett. 75(4), 530–540 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kramer, S.L.: Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering. Prentice Hall, NJ, USA (1996)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nikunj Binnani
    • 1
    Email author
  • Rakesh Kumar Khare
    • 1
  • Vasily I. Golubev
    • 2
  • Igor B. Petrov
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Civil Engineering and Applied MechanicsSGSITSIndoreIndia
  2. 2.Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology (MIPT)DolgoprudnyRussian Federation

Personalised recommendations