Multi-criteria seismic hazard evaluation for Bangalore city, India

Different seismic hazard components pertaining to Bangalore city,namely soil overburden thickness, effective shear-wave velocity, factor of safety against liquefaction potential, peak ground acceleration at the seismic bedrock, site response in terms of amplification factor, and the predominant frequency, has been individually evaluated. The overburden thickness distribution, predominantly in the range of 5-10 m in the city, has been estimated through a sub-surface model from geotechnical bore-log data. The effective shear-wave velocity distribution, established through Multi-channel Analysis of Surface Wave (MASW) survey and subsequent data interpretation through dispersion analysis, exhibits site class D (180-360 m/s), site class C (360-760 m/s), and site class B (760-1500 m/s) in compliance to the National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP) nomenclature. The peak ground acceleration has been estimated through deterministic approach, based on the maximum credible earthquake of M-W = 5.1 assumed to be nucleating from the closest active seismic source (Mandya-Channapatna-Bangalore Lineament). The 1-D site response factor, computed at each borehole through geotechnical analysis across the study region, is seen to be ranging from around amplification of one to as high as four times. Correspondingly, the predominant frequency estimated from the Fourier spectrum is found to be predominantly in range of 3.5-5.0 Hz. The soil liquefaction hazard assessment has been estimated in terms of factor of safety against liquefaction potential using standard penetration test data and the underlying soil properties that indicates 90% of the study region to be non-liquefiable. The spatial distributions of the different hazard entities are placed on a GIS platform and subsequently, integrated through analytical hierarchal process. The accomplished deterministic hazard map shows high hazard coverage in the western areas. The microzonation, thus, achieved is envisaged as a first-cut assessment of the site specific hazard in laying out a framework for higher order seismic microzonation as well as a useful decision support tool in overall land-use planning, and hazard management. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

[1]  Jayan S Vinod,et al.  Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis for Bangalore , 2009 .

[2]  S. Raghukanth,et al.  Attenuation of Strong Ground Motion in Peninsular India , 2004 .

[3]  K. Valdiya.  Late Quaternary Movements and Landscape Rejuvenation in Southeastern Karnataka and Adjoining Tamil Nadu in Southern Indian Shield , 1998, Journal Geological Society of India.

[4]  S. Hartzell.  Site response estimation from earthquake data , 1992, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America.

[5]  D. Wells,et al.  New empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, rupture area, and surface displacement , 1994, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America.

[6]  Khemraj Shukla,et al.  Earthquake hazard zonation of Sikkim Himalaya using a GIS platform , 2008 .

[7]  T. G. Sitharam,et al.  Mapping of Average Shear Wave Velocity for Bangalore Region: A Case Study , 2008 .

[8]  K. K. S. Thingbaijam,et al.  Earthquake hazard in Northeast India — A seismic microzonation approach with typical case studies from Sikkim Himalaya and Guwahati city , 2008 .

[9]  K. S. Thingbaijam,et al.  Ground Motion Synthesis and Seismic Scenario in Guwahati City—A Stochastic Approach , 2009 .

[10]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  Multicriteria Decision Making: The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation , 1990 .

[11]  E. Field,et al.  Earthquake site response estimation: A weak-motion case study , 1992, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America.

[12]  T. Saaty,et al.  The Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1985 .

[13]  William T. Holmes,et al.  The 1997 NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures , 2000 .

[14]  Robin K. McGuire,et al.  Deterministic vs. probabilistic earthquake hazards and risks , 2001 .

[15]  S. K. Acharyya,et al.  Seismotectonic atlas of India and its environs , 2000 .

[16]  B. Rastogi.  Seismotectonics inferred from earthquakes and earthquake sequences in India during the 1980s , 1992 .

[17]  Armen Der Kiureghian,et al.  STANDARD PENETRATION TEST-BASED PROBABILISTIC AND DETERMINISTIC ASSESSMENT OF SEISMIC SOIL LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL , 2004 .

[18]  Kanan Thakkar,et al.  Evaluation of Liquefaction Potential of Soils , 2007 .

[19]  T. G. Sitharam,et al.  Liquefaction Hazard Mapping of Chennai Using SPT Data , 2009 .

[20]  W. F. Marcuson,et al.  Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils , 2001 .

[21]  Pijush Samui,et al.  Spatial Variability of Rock Depth in Bangalore Using Geostatistical, Neural Network and Support Vector Machine Models , 2008 .

[22]  T. G. Sitharam,et al.  Spatial Variability of the Depth of Weathered and Engineering Bedrock using Multichannel Analysis of Surface Wave Method , 2009 .

[23]  T. G. Sitharam,et al.  Seismic Microzonation of Bangalore , 2007 .

[24]  T. Sitharam,et al.  Use of remote sensing and seismotectonic parameters for seismic hazard analysis of Bangalore , 2006 .

[25]  Keiiti Aki,et al.  Local Site Effects on Strong Ground Motion , 1988 .

[26]  T. G. Sitharam,et al.  Seismic Microzonation: Principles,Practices and Experiments , 2008 .

[27]  William K. Mohanty,et al.  First Order Seismic Microzonation of Delhi, India Using Geographic Information System (GIS) , 2007 .

[28]  T. G. Sitharam,et al.  Site Characterization and Site Response Studies Using Shear Wave Velocity , 2008 .

[29]  Raymond B. Seed,et al.  New Site Coefficients and Site Classification System Used in Recent Building Seismic Code Provisions , 2000 .

[30]  T. G. Sitharam,et al.  Site classification and estimation of surface level seismic hazard using geophysical data and probabilistic approach , 2009 .

[31]  G. Lothian,et al.  Spectral Analysis , 1971, Nature.

[32]  I. M. Idriss,et al.  SIMPLIFIED PROCEDURE FOR EVALUATING SOIL LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL , 1971 .

[33]  Ali Ismet Kanli,et al.  VS30 mapping and soil classification for seismic site effect evaluation in Dinar region, SW Turkey , 2006 .

[34]  D. Boore.  Stochastic simulation of high-frequency ground motions based on seismological models of the radiated spectra , 1983 .

[35]  Mario Ordaz,et al.  A spectral analysis of the 21 May 1997, Jabalpur, India, earthquake (Mw = 5.8) and estimation of ground motion from future earthquakes in the Indian shield region , 1999, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America.

[36]  T. G. Sitharam,et al.  Seismic hazard analysis with site effects for Bangalore , 2007 .

[37]  A. Elgamal,et al.  Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering , 1981 .

[38]  H. Bolton Seed,et al.  Evaluation of Liquefaction Potential Using Field Performance Data , 1983 .

[39]  T. G. Sitharam,et al.  Seismic microzonation of Bangalore, India , 2008 .

[40]  H. Bolton Seed,et al.  Ground Motions and Soil Liquefaction During Earthquakes , 1982 .