emme project_oqrelease

Hazard Modelers: Laurentiu DANCIU, Karin SESETYAN and Mine B. DEMIRCIOGLU,

Project Coordinators: Domenico GIARDINI and Mustafa ERDIK EMME Consortium Condtributing to hazard components:

METU, SAU (TR), IIEES (IR), AUB (LB), YU (JO), Upesh (PK), IJSU (GE), SCI (ARM), ANAS (AZ)

EMME-HAZ-2014: SEISMIC HAZARD MODEL and RESULTS for THE MIDDLE EAST REGION

SEISMIC HAZARD COMPONENTS

OUR MAJOR AIM WAS TO BUILD

A regional consensus model

Homogenized across national boundaries

Target

All steps of the seismic hazard assessment have to be:

– Validated

– Benchmarked

– Reproducible

– Standardized

– Inter-Comparable

– Testable

EQ CatalogHarmonized in terms of MwTotal: 27174 Events

Historical part (-1900) Early and modern instrumental (~2006)Declustering Method:Grunthal (1985)After Declustering10524 Events18 Completeness Super-Zones

Mw>=6.00

EMME14 Catalogue

Completeness Super-Zones

Two fully independent source zonation models:

– Area source model• Active shallow and stable continental areal sources

• Subduction interface modeled as complex fault

• Deep areal sources

– All activity computed from seismicity

– Fault source and background seismicity model• Fault sources in 3D

• Background seismicity

• Subduction interface modeled as complex fault

• Deep seismicity

– Fault activity computed from slip rates

Maximum Magnitude

Upper-bound magnitude to the earthquake recurrence (frequency-magnitude) curve. Maximum Magnitude assessment (Super-Zones)

– Historical seismicity record

– Location uncertainties

– Analogies to tectonic regions

– Added increment (0.30)

Source Model Logic Tree

Area Source Model

Classical area source zones based on the tectonic findings and their correlation and up-to-day seismicity

Derived from seismicity patterns

Ensure the zonation adequately reflect this pattern

Surface projection of identified active faults (capable of generating earthquakes)

Subduction Interface

Deep Seismicity

Shallow Seismicity

Area SourceModel

Three Source Layers224 shallow10 Deep6 Interface

Area Source Model

EMCA source model integration and harmonization

New tectonic regionalization: stable continental regions (yellow)

Source Characterization

Homogeneous, declustered catalogue

Completeness defined for 18 super zones

Maximum likelihood approach (Weichert 1984)

– Truncated Guttenberg-Richter Magnitude Frequency Distribution• 10a – annual number of events of magnitude greater or equal to zero

• b-GR value

Truncated at each assigned maximum magnitude

For each source three magnitude-frequency-distributions were derived

A Matlab* toolbox was developed

• Shallow Sources: Activity

aGR Values

bGR Values

Deep Seismicity - Activity

aGR Values

bGR Values

Depth Distribution (three values and the corresponding weights):

– Active shallow crust

– Nested Deep Seismicity

– Subduction Inslab

Focal Mechanisms

– Rake Angle values (Aki’s definition)

– Percentage weights

Ruptures Orientation

– Strike Angle (Azimuth)

– Dip Angle

Rupture Properties

– Upper and Lower Seismogenic Depth

Area Source [Single Rupture]

Source Parameterization

PGA [g]RP=475yrs

Source Model Logic Tree

Fault source model derived from the faults database collected within WP2

– Total number: 3397 fault segments, total Km: 91551km

EMME Faults Dataset

Fault Sources

Criteria to select “capable” or active faults to be used for hazard assessment:

– Identified active faults [capable of earthquakes]: Northern Anatolian Faults, Marmara Faults, Zagros Transform Faults

– At least 0.10mm/year (1m in 1000years - Neocene)

– Maximum magnitude equal to 6.00

– Fully parameterized:• Geometry

• Slip-rates

– Confidence Classes:• Class A: complete information provided by the compiler

• Class B: partial information provided by compiler

• Class C: limited information provided

• Class D: only top trace available

Deep Seismicity

Active Faults

Subduction Interface

Four SourceLayersFaults

10 Deep

9 Interface

Background Seismicity

Fault SourceModel

Fault Source Model

• 15 km buffer zone around the surface projection of the fault sources

• M>=6.0 in the buffer zones assigned to fault sources

• M<6.0 in the buffer zones from smoothed seismicity

• Smoothed background seismicity outside the buffer zones

Fault Source ModelSlip rate

Fault length / aspect ratio

Maximum Magnitude

Anderson & Luco (1983) Recurrence Model 2

b-value from the completeness super zones

Subduction Interface

Subduction interface Earthquake Recurrence

– From seismicity (area source model)

– From slip rates (fault source model)

Source Parameterization

Depth Distribution

Focal Mechanisms

– Rake Angle values (Aki’s definition)

– Percentage weights

Ruptures Orientation: Strike and Dip Angles

Rupture Properties

– Upper and Lower Seismogenic Depth

Point Source [Single Rupture]

Fault Top Trace

Focal Mechanisms

– Rake Angle values (Aki’s definition)

Ruptures Orientation: Strike and Dip Angles

Rupture Properties

– Upper and Lower Seismogenic Depth

Simple Fault

PGA [g]RP=475yrs

Logic Tree

AS Model only 475 years

AS Model only 2475 years

FS Model only 475 years

FS Model only 2475 years

LOGIC TREE COMBINATION

COMBINED MODEL

AS MODEL

FS MODEL

AS: 60%, FS: 40%, 475 years

AS: 60%, FS: 40%, 2475 years

Hazard Computed for Spectral ordinates

• PGA

• SA (T=0.1 s)

• SA (T=0.15 s)

• SA (T=0.2 s)

• SA (T=0.25 s)

• SA (T=0.3 s)

• SA (T=0.5 s)

• SA (T=0.75 s)

• SA (T=1.0 s)

• SA (T=2.0 s)

Summary

• Building a regional seismic hazard model is a collective effort

• Aim at generating the up-to-date , flexible and scalable database that will permit continuous update, refinement, and analysis.

• Data will be parameterized and input into the database with a specific format.

Thank you!

Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under: creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

Please attribute to the GEM Foundation with a link to -www.globalquakemodel.org