Earthquake hazard in Marmara Region, Turkey

Erdik, Mustafa; Demircioğlu, M. B.; Şeşetyan, Karin; Durukal, E.; Siyahi, Bilge

doi:10.1016/j.soildyn.2004.04.003

Cited by 170 publications

(121 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

112

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For several years the evaluation of seismic hazard has largely relied on area source models (Grünthal et al 1998;Sleijko et al 1998;Grünthal and GSHAP Working Group Region 3 1999;Musson 1999;Sleijko et al 1999;Grünthal and Wahlström 2000;Musson 2000;Jimenez et al 2001;Demircioglu et al 2004;Meletti et al 2008;Wiemer et al 2009b;Papaioannou and Papazachos 2010), both in Europe and worldwide (e.g. Giardini 1999).…”

Section: Area Source Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

The 2013 European Seismic Hazard Model: key components and results

Woessner

Danciu

Giardini

et al. 2015

Bull Earthquake Eng

486

330

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The 2013 European Seismic Hazard Model (ESHM13) results from a community-based probabilistic seismic hazard assessment supported by the EU-FP7 project "Seismic Hazard Harmonization in Europe" (SHARE, 2009(SHARE, -2013. The ESHM13 is a consistent seismic hazard model for Europe and Turkey which overcomes the limitation of national borders and includes a through quantification of the uncertainties. It is the first completed regional effort contributing to the "Global Earthquake Model" initiative. It might serve as a reference model for various applications, from earthquake preparedness to earthquake risk mitigation strategies, including the update of the European seismic regulations for building design (Eurocode 8), and thus it is useful for future safety assessment and improvement of private and public buildings. Although its results constitute a reference for Europe, they do not replace the existing national design regulations that are in place for seismic design and construction of buildings. The ESHM13 represents a significant improvement compared to previous efforts as it is based on (1) the compilation of updated and harmonised versions of the databases required for probabilistic seismic hazard assessment, (2) the adoption of standard procedures and robust methods, especially for expert elicitation and consensus building among hundreds of European experts, (3) the multi-disciplinary input from all branches of earthquake science and engineering, (4) the direct involvement of the CEN/TC250/SC8 committee in defining output specifications relevant for Eurocode 8 and (5)

show abstract

Section: Area Source Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

The 2013 European Seismic Hazard Model: key components and results

Woessner

Danciu

Giardini

et al. 2015

Bull Earthquake Eng

486

330

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An unresolved but fundamental scientific problem concerns the nature of the earthquake scenario to consider. In the current hazard assessment plans, various earthquake scenarios are adopted in a deterministic way (e.g., Erdik et al, 2004;Pulido et al, 2004), but the likelihood of each scenario is never quantitatively assessed. After a few decades of seismological studies on various earthquakes, we know that most earthquake source processes are heterogeneous and complex rather than a simple model with a uniform fault displacement along a fault plane (e.g., Mai and Beroza, 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Probable Earthquake Scenario near Istanbul Determined from Dynamic Simulations

Aochi¹,

Ulrich²

2015

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To cite this version:Hideo Aochi, Thomas Ulrich. A probable earthquake scenario near Istanbul determined from dynamic simulations. the North Anatolian fault in the Sea of Marmara, which poses a high risk to the nearby city of Istanbul. Several fault geometry models, nucleation points, and initial stress states are tested. The likelihood of each earthquake scenario is evaluated, and a probabilistic assessment of the ground-motion estimation is proposed. The simulation results suggest that the fault geometrical configuration is not favorable for producing an earthquake of magnitude 6-7, as no scenario is found. On the contrary, the probability of occurrence of an earthquake of magnitude greater than 7 is high. Most of these large events are characterized by epicenters located in the central or eastern parts of the Sea of Marmara. However, the possibility of a western-initiated rupture propagating eastward, the worst scenario for the Istanbul region, cannot be ruled out. Many simulations led to supershear ruptures, as observed for the nearby 1999 İzmit earthquake, and this significantly influences ground-motion prediction in the region.

show abstract

“…Seismic hazard in Istanbul has previously been estimated using probabilistic methods (Atakan et al, 2002;Erdik et al, 2004). For future risk mitigation and city planning, a detailed estimate of the seismic hazard in Istanbul is needed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%