2006
DOI: 10.1007/s11069-006-0012-z
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Seismic Hazard Analysis for the Bangalore Region

Abstract: Indian peninsular shield, which was once considered to be seismically stable, is experiencing many earthquakes recently. As part of the national level microzonation programme, Department of Science and Technology, Govt. of India has initiated microzonation of greater Bangalore region. The seismic hazard analysis of Bangalore region is carried out as part of this project. The paper presents the determination of maximum credible earthquake (MCE) and generation of synthetic acceleration time history plot for the … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
33
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 94 publications
(34 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
(11 reference statements)
1
33
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The PHA values in the central region of South India, around Bangalore, are in the range of 0.11 g to 0.16 g. This region also shows higher seismic hazard than the code (BIS-1893(BIS- , 2002) specification. The PHA value for the Bangalore region reported by Sitharam and Anbazhagan (2007) is 0.146 g, which also matches with the present study. Similar results were obtained in the studies by Jaiswal and Sinha (2007) for Koyna region 1.0E-10…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 92%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The PHA values in the central region of South India, around Bangalore, are in the range of 0.11 g to 0.16 g. This region also shows higher seismic hazard than the code (BIS-1893(BIS- , 2002) specification. The PHA value for the Bangalore region reported by Sitharam and Anbazhagan (2007) is 0.146 g, which also matches with the present study. Similar results were obtained in the studies by Jaiswal and Sinha (2007) for Koyna region 1.0E-10…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 92%
“…The shortest and longest distance from each source to the centre of the grid is calculated. The hypocentral distance was calculated by considering a focal depth of 15 km, similar to the one used for DSHA by Sitharam et al (2006) and Sitharam and Anbazhagan (2007). A probable source zone depth of 10 km has been considered by Bhatia et al (1997) in an exercise to develop seismic hazard map of the shield region of India in GSHAP.…”
Section: Seismic Hazard Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…SITHARAM and ANBAZHAGAN (2007) have presented the DSHA method to estimate the ground motion in a site using seismogenic sources and MCE for Bangalore in southern India. The DSHA method to estimate the ground motion at a site is not appropriate because prediction of ground motion in a site with the DSHA method considers just one maximum magnitude scenario earthquake with a shortest source to site (BOMMER and ABRAHAMSON, 2006) and neglected the other sources surrounding the site.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, only a limited number of recorded acceleration time histories, especially for India and China, are available for carrying out site response analyses. For regions having limited or no seismic record, synthetic ground motion or ground motions from similar tectonic regions may be considered a viable alternative (Sitharam and Anbazhagan 2007). Seismological models developed by Boore (1983Boore ( , 2003 have been widely used for the generation of synthetic acceleration time histories (Atkinson and Boore 1995;Hwang and Huo 1997).…”
Section: Earthquake Ground Motion Records For Site Response Studymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Seismological models developed by Boore (1983Boore ( , 2003 have been widely used for the generation of synthetic acceleration time histories (Atkinson and Boore 1995;Hwang and Huo 1997). To carry out site response analyses under moderate earthquake ground motions, a synthetic ground motion generated by Sitharam and Anbazhagan (2007) using a seismological modeling approach has been used in this study. In Fig.…”
Section: Earthquake Ground Motion Records For Site Response Studymentioning
confidence: 99%