See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/346434595

Synthetic ground motions of the October 8, 2005 Kashmir earthquake (Mw

7.6): An inference to the site response and seismic hazard of Kashmir basin,
NW Himalaya

Chapter · January 2021

DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-820513-6.00016-3

CITATIONS READS

0 36

1 author:

Hamid Sana
California Institute of Technology
24 PUBLICATIONS 114 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Site Response Analysis of Kashmir Basin, NW Himalaya View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Hamid Sana on 15 March 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 C H A P T E R

1
Synthetic ground motions of the
October 8, 2005 Kashmir earthquake
(Mw 7.6): An inference to the site
response and seismic hazard of
Kashmir basin, NW Himalaya
Hamid Sana
Department of Neotectonics and Thermochronology, Institute of Rock Structure and
Mechanics, Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague, Czech Republic

1.1 Introduction
Kashmir valley is a northwest-southeast directed, Neogene-Quaternary tectonic basin in the
NW Himalaya. Due to the active tectonic set-up in and around this basin, this region has
been struck by various destructive earthquakes (Ambraseys and Douglas, 2004). The
October 8, 2005 Kashmir earthquake (Mw 7.6) was the most recent earthquake that shook the
region. This earthquake caused paramount damage to life and property (Sana and Nath,
2017). Here the synthetic ground motions of this earthquake are presented at engineering bed-
rock and at the surface in the Kashmir basin. Due to the lack of the strong motion data, the
stochastic finite fault element method with dynamic corner frequency was used to simulate
the synthetic ground motions at the bedrock (Motezedin and Atkinson, 2005). The ground
motions at bedrock were later transmitted through the geotechnical standard penetration test
boreholes spread across the Kashmir basin to the surface (Sana et al., 2019).
The Kashmir Himalaya is one of the most tectonically active convergent boundary zones
between Indian and Eurasian plate in the NW Himalayas. The prevailing seismotectonics of
this terrain is discussed in Sana and Nath (2016b). The geodetic studies have revealed that the
India-Eurasia convergence rates are up to 20 mm/year (Mohadjer et al., 2010). The recent

Basics of Computational Geophysics

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-820513-6.00016-3 3 © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
4 1. Synthetic ground motions of the October 8, 2005 Kashmir

FIGURE 1.1 Seismotectonic map in and around the Kashmir basin. ITSZ is Indus Tsangpa Suture Zone, MMT
is Main Mantle Thrust, MBT is Main Boundary Thrust, HTS is Hazara Thrust System, and KT is Karakorum
Thrust, M/J is Murree-Jhelum region, KW is Kishtwar Window, while NPS and HKS stand for Nanga Parbat
Syntaxis and Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis, respectively (Sana and Nath, 2017).

geodetic study shows that the convergence rates in the Kashmir Himalaya is of the order of
13 (61) mm/year (Kundu et al., 2014).
Due to the seismotectonic complexity and geological heterogeneity, this territory is
divided into five seismotectonic zones based on seismicity clustering and prevailing
tectonics, supported by characteristic b-values by Sana and Nath (2017). Theses seismo-
genic zones were used as sources in the probabilistic seismic hazard assessment (PSHA) of
the Kashmir basin by Sana (2019). The PSHA map of the Kashmir basin and synthetic
ground motions at the surface of the October 8, 2005 Kashmir earthquake of Mw 7.6
(Sana et al., 2019) were used as important hazard themes for the seismic microzonation of
the Srinagar city in Kashmir valley (Sana, 2018). The synthetic ground motions of the
October 8, 2005 Kashmir earthquake (Mw 7.6) were also used to evaluate the liquefaction
potential of the Kashmir valley alluvium (Sana and Nath, 2016a). The seismotectonic map
in and around the Kashmir basin is shown in Fig. 1.1.

1.2 Input parameters

The source, path and site parameters are important for generating the synthetic ground
motions of an earthquake.

I. Computation and geophysics applications

 1.3 Methodology 5
TABLE 1.1 Source and path parameters of the October 8, 2005 Kashmir earthquake.
Parameters of October 8, 2005 Kashmir earthquake
Strike 334
Dip 34
Hypocentre 34.38 N/73.47 E

Focal depth (Km) 12

Magnitude (Mw) 7.6
Fault length/Width (Km) 97/32
Stress drop (bar) 91.5
Shear wave velocity (Km/s) 3.12
Crustal density(g/cm3) 3.20

Quality factor (Qs) 253f0.8

K, Kappa (parameter of high-cut filter, in seconds) 0.03

1.2.1 Source and path parameters of the October 8, 2005 Kashmir earthquake
(Mw 7.6)
The source and path parameters of the October 8, 2005 (Mw 7.6) Kashmir Earthquake
from Singh et al. (2006), Mandal et al. (2007) and Raghukanth (2008) are provided in the
Table 1.1 below.

1.2.2 Shear wave velocity (Vs30)

Shear wave velocity (Vs30) is the most important parameter for the site response analy-
sis during an earthquake. Geotechnically, the Vs30 is determined by the standard penetra-
tion test (SPT) blow counts referred to as N values using region or soil type specific
relationships between SPT N values and Vs30 (Castelli et al., 2016). Sana et al. (2019) have
developed soil type specific relationships between SPT N values and Vs30 for the Kashmir
basin soils, shown as Fig. 1.2. A total of 219 SPT boreholes spread across the Kashmir
basin have been used in this study. The obtained Vs30 values of each borehole have been
interpolated to generate a Vs30 map for the Kashmir basin. The Vs30 values have been
classified according to the National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP)
scheme (Fig. 1.3).

1.3 Methodology

The strong ground motion prediction modeling is usually carried out either by the
adopting the Frequency-Wave number integration (F-K) method or the widely used sto-
chastic approach. In the F-K method the ground motion is calculated by an elastodynamic

I. Computation and geophysics applications

6 1. Synthetic ground motions of the October 8, 2005 Kashmir

FIGURE 1.2 Average shear wave velocity to a depth of 30 m (Vs30) versus SPT N value for different soil types
in the Kashmir valley alluvium (Sana et al., 2019).

FIGURE 1.3 Shear wave

velocity (Vs30) map of the
Kashmir basin with NEHRP
site classification (Sana et al.,
2019).

I. Computation and geophysics applications

 1.3 Methodology 7
representation theorem in-which the fault rupture is represented by a slip function on a
fault plane (Aki and Richards, 1980). Although this approach seems to be useful especially
in complex layered geological terrains (Bouchon and Aki, 1977), however, stochastic
method is preferred here due to ease in the compilation of the strong-motion simulation
parameters. The stochastic point source model has been used widely for the observing the
ground motions (Hanks and McGuire, 1981; Boore, 1983, 2003; Boore and Atkinson, 1987;
Toro et al., 1997). This modeling technique was basically introduced by Boore (1983), since
then it has been modified with very useful changes like the finite-fault modeling of
Beresnev and Atkinson (1998) and the dynamic corner frequency approach of Motazedian
and Atkinson (2005). In the finite-fault method a large fault is divided into several sub-
faults, which are considered as point sources, and the contribution from each point source
is summed-up with appropriate time delaying to get the combined effect. The basic frame-
work of this method is to assume that the Fourier amplitude spectrum at the site of inter-
est is produced as a result of the combined effect of the seismic source spectrum, the path
attenuation and the site response. Stochastic finite-fault fault model as represented by
Beresnev and Atkinson (1998) is:

 R
AðωÞ 5 2ðωÞ2 SðωÞ exp 2πkf e2Qβ (1.1)
where, ‘A(ω)’ is the Fourier amplitude site spectrum, ‘S(ω)’ is the seismic source spectrum,
the term ‘exp (2πκf)’ represents the filtering function in terms of spectral decay parameter
‘κ’ (Anderson and Hough, 1984), ‘R’ is the distance between site and source, ‘Q’ is the
quality factor and ‘β’ is the share wave velocity (km/s).
Since, the Beresnev and Atkinson technique (1997) is not sensitive to higher frequencies,
this problem was overcome by the introduction of dynamic corner frequency concept by
Motazedian and Atkinson (2005).
By replacing ‘f’ 5 ω/2π in Eq. (1.1) the acceleration spectrum (Aij) of a shear wave gener-
ated from the (ij th) sub-fault can be described as:
8  9

 98 πfRij

 <CM0ij 2πf 2 =<expð 2πfkÞexp 2 Qβ =
Aij f 5 h i
: 1 1
f 2 ;:
(1.2)
Rij ;
0ij

where ‘C’ is a constant, ‘M0ij’ is seismic moment, ‘f0ij’ is corner frequency, ‘Rij’ is distance
from the observation point. The constant ‘C’ is a collective representation of radiation
pattern (Rθϕ), free surface amplification (F), density (ρ in g/cm3), and is equivalent to Rθϕ
FV/4πρβ 3, ‘V’ represents the division of horizontal into two components. The corner
frequency (f0ij) is given by:
 
Δσ 1=3
f0ij 5 4:9E 1 6β (1.3)
M0ij
where Δσ is stress drop (bars).
The stochastic finite fault element method with dynamic corner frequency was used to
generate the ground motions at the engineering bedrock, corresponding to NEHRP site
class B with Vs30 of 760 m/s, throughout the Kashmir basin.

I. Computation and geophysics applications

8 1. Synthetic ground motions of the October 8, 2005 Kashmir

The synthetic ground motion generated at the bedrock were later transmitted through
the SPT N boreholes using equivalent linear approach on the DEEPSOIL platform,
DEEPSOIL is a 1D site response analysis tool (Hashash et al., 2016).

1.4 Results
1.4.1 Synthetic seismograms at the bedrock level and at surface
The synthetic seismograms of the October 8, 2005 Kashmir earthquake (Mw 7.6) gener-
ated at the bedrock level using stochastic finite fault approach (Motazedian and Atkinson
(2005)) of the four major towns of Anantnag, Baramulla, Kupwara and Srinagar (Sana
et al., 2019) are shown as Fig. 1.4. While as the synthetic seismograms of this earthquake at
the surface generated after transmitting the ground motions from the bedrock via 1D site

FIGURE 1.4 Synthetic ground motions of October 8, 2005 Kashmir earthquake (Mw 7.6) at Anantnag,
Baramulla, Kupwara and Srinagar at the engineering bedrock level (Sana et al., 2019).

I. Computation and geophysics applications

 1.4 Results 9
response analysis (Hashash et al., 2016) of the previously mentioned four major towns of
Kashmir basin (Sana et al., 2019) are shown as Fig. 1.5.

1.4.2 Synthetic ground motions (PGA in g) at the bedrock level and at surface
The synthetic ground motions of the October 8, 2005 Kashmir (Mw 7.6) at the bedrock
were generated at 650 grid points across the Kashmir basin using Motezedin and
Atkinson, 2005. The synthetic ground motions at each grid point were later interpolated in
the GIS environment to produce a synthetic ground motion map (Fig. 1.6) of the October
8, 2005 Kashmir earthquake (Mw 7.6) at the bedrock level for the Kashmir basin (Sana,
2017). The synthetic ground motions at the bedrock level were transmitted through 219
boreholes using 1D site response approach (Hashash et al., 2016) and were interpolated to
generate the ground motion map (Fig. 1.7) of the October 8, 2005 Kashmir earthquake
(Mw 7.6) at the surface level the Kashmir basin (Sana et al., 2019).

FIGURE 1.5 Synthetic ground motions of October 8, 2005 Kashmir earthquake (Mw 7.6) at Anantnag,
Baramulla, Kupwara and Srinagar at the surface level (Sana et al., 2019).

I. Computation and geophysics applications

10 1. Synthetic ground motions of the October 8, 2005 Kashmir

FIGURE 1.6 Synthetic

ground motion map of the
October 8, 2005 Kashmir earth-
quake (Mw 7.6) of the Kashmir
basin at the bedrock level
(Sana, 2017).

FIGURE 1.7 Synthetic

ground motions map of the
October 8, 2005 Kashmir earth-
quake (Mw 7.6) of the Kashmir
basin at the surface level (Sana
et al., 2019).

I. Computation and geophysics applications

 References 11

1.5 Conclusions
The synthetic ground motions of the October 8, 2005 Kashmir earthquake (Mw 7.6) at
bedrock and at the surface are consistent with the reported ground motions and the dam-
age pattern in the Kashmir basin. The synthetic ground motions maps at bedrock and sur-
face of the Kashmir basin give an insight into the deterministic hazard scenario in the
Kashmir basin vis-à-vis October 8, 2005 Kashmir earthquake (Mw 7.6). Also, the synthetic
ground motion map of the basin depicts that the site conditions play an important role in
the ground motion distribution in the Kashmir basin.

References
Aki, K., Richards, P., 1980. Quantitative Seismology: Theory and Methods, Vol. 1 and 2. W. H. Freeman and
Company, San Francisco, CA, p. 948.
Ambraseys, N.N., Douglas, J., 2004. Magnitude calibration of north Indian earthquakes. Geophys. J. Int. 159 (1),
165206.
Anderson, J., Hough, S., 1984. A model for the shape of the Fourier amplitude spectrum of acceleration at high
frequencies. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 74, 19691993.
Beresnev, I., Atkinson, G.M., 1998. FINSIM: a FORTRAN program for simulating stochastic acceleration time his-
tories from finite faults. Seismol. Res. Lett. 69, 2732.
Boore, D.M., 1983. Stochastic simulation of high-frequency ground motions based on seismological models of the
radiated spectra. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 73, 1,8651,894.
Boore, D.M., 2003. Simulation of ground motion using the stochastic method. Pure Appl. Geophys. 160 (34),
635676. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/PL00012553.
Boore, D.M., Atkinson, G.M., 1987. Stochastic prediction of ground motion and spectral response parameters at
hard-rock sites in eastern North America. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 77, 440467.
Bouchon, M., Aki, K., 1977. Discrete wave number representation of seismic source wave fields. Bull. Seismol.
Soc. Am. 67, 259277.
Castelli, F., Cavallaro, A., Grasso, S., Lentini, V., 2016. Seismic microzoning from synthetic ground motion earth-
quake scenarios parameters: the case study of the City of Catania (Italy). Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 88, 307327.
Hanks, T.C., McGuire, R.K., 1981. Character of high frequency ground motion. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 71,
2,0712,095.
Hashash, Y.M.A., Musgrove, M.I., Harmon, J.A., Groholski, D.R., Phillips, C.A., Park, D., 2016. DEEPSOIL 6.1,
user manual. ,http://deepsoil.cee.illinois.edu/Files/DEEPSOIL_User_Manual_v6.pdf..
Kundu, B., Yadav, R.K., Bali, B.S., Chowdhury, S., 2014. Oblique convergence and slip partitioning in the NW
Himalaya: implications from GPS measurements. Tectonics 33, 20132024. Available from: https://doi.org/
10.1002/2014TC003633.
Mandal, P., Chadha, R.K., Kumar, N., Raju, I.P., Satyamurty, C., 2007. Estimation of source parameters of the 8
October 2005 Kashmir earthquake of M w 7.6. Curr. Sci. 93 (5), 660668.
Mohadjer, S., Bendick, R., Ischuk, A., Kuzikov, S., Kostuk, A., Saydullaev, U., et al., 2010. Partitioning of India-
Eurasia convergence in the Pamir-Hindu Kush from GPS measurements. J. Geophys. Res. 37, L04305.
Motezedin, D., Atkinson, G., 2005. Stochastic finite fault modeling based on a dynamic corner frequency. Bull.
Seismol. Soc. Am. 95, 9951010.
Raghukanth, S.T.G., 2008. Ground motion estimation during the Kashmir earthquake of 8th October 2005. Nat.
Hazards 46 (1), 113.
Sana, H., 2017. Synthetic ground motions of the 8 October 2005 Kashmir earthquake (Mw 7.6): a stochastic finite
fault element approach. In: Southern California Earthquake Center Annual Meeting, 2017. Proceedings
Volume XXVII, September 913, 2017. Poster Number 252.
Sana, H., 2018. Seismic microzonation of Srinagar city, Jammu and Kashmir. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 115, 578588.
10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.09.028.

I. Computation and geophysics applications

 12 1. Synthetic ground motions of the October 8, 2005 Kashmir

Sana, H., 2019. A probabilistic approach to the seismic hazard in Kashmir basin. NW Himalaya. Geosci. Lett. 6, 5.
Available from: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40562-019-0136-0.
Sana, H., Nath, S.K., 2016a. Liquefaction potential analysis of the Kashmir valley alluvium, NW Himalaya. Soil.
Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 85, 1118.
Sana, H., Nath, S.K., 2016b. In and Around the Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis: a seismotectonic and seismic hazard
perspective. J. Indian. Geophys. Union. 20 (05), 496505.
Sana, H., Nath, S.K., 2017. Seismic source zoning and maximum credible earthquake prognosis of the Greater
Kashmir Territory, NW Himalaya. J. Seismol. 21 (2), 411424.
Sana, H., Nath, S.K., Gujral, K., 2019. Site response analysis of the Kashmir valley during the 8 October 2005
Kashmir earthquake (Mw 7.6) using a geotechnical dataset. Bull. Eng. Geol. Environ. 78, 25512563.
Singh, S.K., Iglesias, A., Dattatrayam, R.S., Bansal, B.K., Rai, S.S., Perez-Campos, X., et al., 2006. Muzaffarabad
earthquake of 8 October 2005 (Mw 7.6): a preliminary report on source characteristics and recorded ground
motions. Curr. Sci. 91 (5), 689695.
Toro, G.R., Abrahamson, N.A., Schneider, J.F., 1997. Model of strong ground motions from earthquakes in central
and eastern North America: best estimates and uncertainties. Seismol. Res. Lett. 68, 4157.

I. Computation and geophysics applications

View publication stats