SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Türkiye Uzaktan Algılama Dergisi / 2026 / Volume: 8

Accuracy of 3D geodetic model for trench-based paleoseismology: A case study from the Gelenbe fault zone

Furkan Şahiner(AFYON KOCATEPE ÜNİVERSİTESİ, FEN BİLİMLERİ ENSTİTÜSÜ, HARİTA MÜHENDİSLİĞİ (YL) (TEZLİ))0000-0002-1679-2204
İbrahim Tiryakioğlu(AFYON KOCATEPE ÜNİVERSİTESİ, MÜHENDİSLİK FAKÜLTESİ, HARİTA MÜHENDİSLİĞİ BÖLÜMÜ, HARİTA MÜHENDİSLİĞİ PR.)0000-0002-4954-7109
Halil İbrahim Solak(AFYON KOCATEPE ÜNİVERSİTESİ, UZAKTAN EĞİTİM MESLEK YÜKSEKOKULU)0000-0001-5286-0369
Çağlar Özkaymak(AFYON KOCATEPE ÜNİVERSİTESİ, MÜHENDİSLİK FAKÜLTESİ, JEOLOJİ MÜHENDİSLİĞİ BÖLÜMÜ, JEOLOJİ MÜHENDİSLİĞİ PR.)0000-0002-0377-1324
Doğukan Mert Özcan(AFYON KOCATEPE ÜNİVERSİTESİ, FEN BİLİMLERİ ENSTİTÜSÜ, JEOLOJİ MÜHENDİSLİĞİ (DR))0000-0002-2693-0789
Volkan Karabacak(ESKİŞEHİR OSMANGAZİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ, MÜHENDİSLİK-MİMARLIK FAKÜLTESİ, JEOLOJİ MÜHENDİSLİĞİ BÖLÜMÜ, JEOLOJİ MÜHENDİSLİĞİ PR.)0000-0003-2581-7984
Ökmen Sümer(DOKUZ EYLÜL ÜNİVERSİTESİ, MÜHENDİSLİK FAKÜLTESİ, JEOLOJİ MÜHENDİSLİĞİ BÖLÜMÜ, JEOLOJİ MÜHENDİSLİĞİ PR.)0000-0003-3168-8728
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-07-03
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

To determine the impact of this spatial error on seismotectonic interpretations, different displacement scenarios were tested, and the results demonstrated that the ±17 mm model error caused a negligible deviation of only ±0.02 magnitude in the calculated moment magnitudes.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In recent years, the rapidly advancing Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) technology has become an important tool in geosciences, particularly in paleoseismology, due to its ability to provide highly accurate topographic data.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this study, trench-based paleoseismological investigations were conducted at two different locations along the Gelenbe Fault Zone within the İzmir–Balıkesir Transfer Zone (İBTZ), as part of the project titled “Determination of the Paleoseismological Characteristics of Active Faults in Turkey” (Project No: 123G020).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:To determine the impact of this spatial error on seismotectonic interpretations, different displacement scenarios were tested, and the results demonstrated that the ±17 mm model error caused a negligible deviation of only ±0.02 magnitude in the calculated moment magnitudes.
🔬Design:Lab & Field Experiment
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Gelenbe fault zone · LiDAR · Palaeoseismology

Abstract

In recent years, the rapidly advancing Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) technology has become an important tool in geosciences, particularly in paleoseismology, due to its ability to provide highly accurate topographic data. In this study, trench-based paleoseismological investigations were conducted at two different locations along the Gelenbe Fault Zone within the İzmir–Balıkesir Transfer Zone (İBTZ), as part of the project titled “Determination of the Paleoseismological Characteristics of Active Faults in Turkey” (Project No: 123G020). Gelenbe Fault Zone is a right-lateral strike-slip fault extending approximately in a NNE–SSW direction between Bigadiç (Balıkesir) and Akhisar (Manisa). Within the zone, the East and West Segments, measuring 35 km and 36 km in length respectively, are approximately parallel to each other. Within the scope of the study, the trench walls excavated across the fault were cleaned, gridded at one-meter intervals, and subsequently scanned using LiDAR technology to obtain high-resolution data. The acquired point clouds were integrated with photogrammetric data and modeled in three dimensions using Agisoft Metashape Professional and CloudCompare software. To evaluate the geometric accuracy of the model, the one-meter grids marked on the trench walls were used as reference points, and the root mean square error was calculated. The analyses revealed that the model’s accuracy value was ±17 mm, consistent with results obtained by similar methods in the literature. To determine the impact of this spatial error on seismotectonic interpretations, different displacement scenarios were tested, and the results demonstrated that the ±17 mm model error caused a negligible deviation of only ±0.02 magnitude in the calculated moment magnitudes. These findings demonstrate the applicability of LiDAR technology for producing high-accuracy Three-Dimensional models in paleoseismological studies and provide a valuable example for preserving refilled trenches as permanent digital archives

🔖

Cite This Article

Şahiner, F., Tiryakioğlu, İ., Solak, H. İ., Özkaymak, Ç., Özcan, D. M., Karabacak, V., Sümer, Ö. (2026). Accuracy of 3D geodetic model for trench-based paleoseismology: A case study from the Gelenbe fault zone. Türkiye Uzaktan Algılama Dergisi, Volume: 8. https://doi.org/10.51489/tuzal.1835652

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (45)

  1. Abellán, A., Oppikofer, T., Jaboyedoff, M., Rosser, N. J., Lim, M., & Lato, M. J. (2014). Terrestrial laser scanning of rock slope instabilities. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 39(1), 80–97. https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.3493
  2. Agisoft. (2026). Retrieved January 10, 2026, from www.agisoftmetashape.com
  3. Aktuğ, B. (2017). Jeodezik deprem tehlike haritası. TMMOB Harita ve Kadastro Mühendisleri Odası Türkiye Harita Bilimsel ve Teknik Kurultayı, Ankara, Türkiye.
  4. Altınok, S., Karabacak, V., Yalçıner, C. Ç., Bilgen, A. N., Altunel, E., & Kıyak, N. G. (2012). Holocene activity of Kütahya fault zone. Geological Bulletin of Turkey, 55(1), 1-18.
  5. Altun, F. (2018). Economic and Social Impacts of Disasters: An Assessment of the example of Turkey. Turkish Journal of Social Work, 2(1), 1-15.
  6. Baltsavias, E. P. (1999). Airborne laser scanning: basic relations ve formulas. ISPRS Journal of photogrammetry ve remote sensing, 54(2-3), 199-214. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0924-2716(99)00015-5
  7. Bistacchi, A., Griffith, W. A., Smith, S. A., Di Toro, G., Jones, R., & Nielsen, S. (2011). Fault roughness at seismogenic depths from LIDAR and photogrammetric analysis. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 168, 2345-2363. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-011-0301-7
  8. Burrato, P., Poli, M. E., Vannoli, P., Zanferrari, A., Basili, R., & Galadini, F. (2008). Sources of Mw 5+ earthquakes in northeastern Italy ve western Slovenia: an updated view based on geological ve seismological evidence. Tectonophysics, 453(1-4), 157-176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2007.07.009
  9. CloudCompare. (2026). Retrieved January 10, 2026. https://www.danielgm.net/cc/
  10. Demirelli, E., Solak, H. İ., & Tiryakioglu, İ. (2023). Earthquake prediction using earthquake catalogs with machine learning algorithm. Gümüşhane University Journal of Science, 13(4), 979-989. https://doi.org/10.17714/gumusfenbil.1268504
  11. Emre, Ö., Duman, T. Y., Olgun, Ş., Elmacı, H., & Özalp, S. (2012). 1: 250.000 Ölçekli Türkiye diri fay haritası Serisi. Antakya (NJ 37-13) paftası serisi, (39).
  12. Emre, Ö., Duman, T. Y., Özalp, S., Şaroğlu, F., Olgun, Ş., Elmacı, H., & Çan, T. (2018). Active fault database of Turkey. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 16(8), 3229-3275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-016-0041-2
  13. Eyübagil, E. E., Solak, H. İ., Kavak, U. S., Tiryakioğlu, İ., Sözbilir, H., Aktuğ, B., & Özkaymak, Ç. (2021). Present day strike-slip deformation within the southern part of the İzmir-BalıkesirTransfer Zone based on GNSS data ve implications for seismic hazard assessment inwestern Anatolia. Turkish Journal of Earth Sciences, 30(2), 143-160. https://doi.org/10.3906/yer-2005-26
  14. Gerim, V., & Erener, A. (2018). Building detection performance evaluation orthophoto images supported by LIDAR data: Istanbul, Küçükçekmece Case. Kocaeli Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, 1(2), 53-61.
  15. Hunter, L. E., Howle, J. F., Rose, R. S., & Bawden, G. W. (2011). LiDAR-assisted identification of an active fault near Truckee, California. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 101(3), 1162-1181. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120090261
  16. KATRU. (2025). Retrieved September 12, 2025, from https://kazatu.edu.kz/en/
  17. KOERI. (2026). Retrieved January 10, 2026, from http://www.koeri.boun.edu.tr/scripts/lst6.asp
  18. Lay, T., & Wallace, T. C. (1995). Modern global seismology. Elsevier.
  19. McCalpin, J. (1996). Paleoseismology. San Diego, California: Academic Press.
  20. Özkaymak, Ç. (2012). Active tectonics and seismicity of the Manisa Basin, Western Anatolia, Turkey (Publication No. 330553) [Doctoral Thesis, Dokuz Eylul University]. YÖK National Thesis Center.
  21. Özkaymak, Ç., Sözbilir, H., Tiryakioğlu, İ., & Baybura, T. (2017). Geologic, geomorphologic and geodetic analyses of surface deformations observed in Bolvadin (Afyon-Akşehir Graben, Afyon) Geological Bulletin of Turkey 60(2), 169-189. https://doi.org/10.25288/tjb.302914
  22. Pantosti, D., De Martini, P. M., Koukouvelas, I., Stamatopoulos, L., Palyvos, N., Pucci, S.,. & Pavlides, S. (2004). Palaeoseismological investigations of the Aigion Fault (Gulf of Corinth, Greece). Comptes Rendus Geoscience, 336(4-5), 335-342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crte.2003.12.005
  23. Pesci, A., Teza, G., Bonali, E., Casula, G., & Boschi, E. (2011). A laser scanning-based method for fast estimation of seismic-induced building deformations. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 66(5), 625–634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2013.02.021
  24. Pierce, I., & Koehler, R. (2023). 3D Paleoseismology from iOS lidar ve structure from motion photogrammetry: A case study on the Dog Valley fault, California. Seismica, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.26443/seismica.v2i1.208
  25. Pierce, I., Guliyev, I., Yetirmishli, G., Muradov, R., Kazimova, S., Javanshir, R.,. & Wordsworth, P. (2024). Surface rupturing earthquakes of the Greater Caucasus frontal thrusts, Azerbaijan. Tectonics, 43(3), e2023TC007758. https://doi.org/10.1029/2023TC007758
  26. Polat, N., & Uysal, M. (2015). Investigating performance of Airborne LiDAR data filtering algorithms for DTM generation. Measurement, 63, 61-68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2014.12.017
  27. Popescu, S. C., & Zhao, K. (2008). A voxel-based lidar method for estimating crown base height for deciduous ve pine trees. Remote sensing of environment, 112(3), 767-781. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2007.06.011
  28. Reutebuch, S. E., Veersen, H. E., & McGaughey, R. J. (2005). Light detection ve ranging (LIDAR): an emerging tool for multiple resource inventory. Journal of forestry, 103(6), 286-292. https://doi.org/10.1093/jof/103.6.286
  29. Shan, J., & Toth, C. K. (Eds.). (2018). Topographic laser ranging and scanning: Principles and processing. CRC press.
  30. Sveers, B. F. (2007). Evaluation of on-line DEMs for flood inundation modeling. Advances in water resources, 30(8), 1831-1843. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2007.02.005
  31. Seyrek, E. C., Narin, Ö. G., & Eroğlu, M. M. (2022). Investigation of cell phone and DSLR camera usage in point cloud generation. Photogrammetry Journal of Turkey, 4(1), 23-29. https://doi.org/10.53030/tufod.1100014
  32. Solak, H. İ., Tiryakioğlu, İ., Yalvaç, S., Yiğit, C. Ö., Aktuğ, B., Özener, H.,. & Şahiner, F. (2024). Monitoring postseismic deformations in Izmir and Its surroundings after the 30 October 2020 Mw:6.9 Samos earthquake. Afyon Kocatepe University – Journal of Science and Engineering, 24(06), 1442-1455. https://doi.org/10.35414/akufemubid.1465489
  33. Solak, H. İ., & Gezgin, C. (2025). Seismic hazard evaluation and strain dynamics in the Simav fault zone: A comprehensive analysis of earthquake recurrence and energy release patterns. Applied Sciences, 15(6), 3039. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15063039
  34. Şaroğlu, F., Emre, Ö., & Boray, A. (1987). Türkiye’nin diri fayları ve depremsellikleri. MTA. Rap, 394.
  35. Solonenko, V. P. (1973). Paleoseismogeology. Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR, Fiz. Zemli, 9, 3-16.
  36. Tiryakioğlu, İ., Umutlu, A. İ., & Poyraz, F. (2019). Determination of earthquake repetition periods by geodetic methods: Alaşehir region case. Afyon Kocatepe University – Journal of Science and Engineering, 19(3), 762-768. https://doi.org/10.35414/akufemubid.605885
  37. Uysal, M., Toprak, A. S., & Polat, N. (2013). Photo realistic 3D modeling with UAV: Gedik Ahmet Pasha Mosque in Afyonkarahisar. The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, 40, 659-662. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprsarchives-XL-5-W2-659-2013
  38. Vosselman, G., & Maas, H. G. (2010). Airborne and terrestrial laser scanning. Whittles Publishing.
  39. Wallace, R. E. (1981). Active faults, paleoseismology, and earthquake hazards in the western United States. Earthquake prediction: an international review, 4, 209-216. https://doi.org/10.1029/ME004p0209
  40. Wells, D. L., & Coppersmith, K. J. (1994). New empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, rupture area, ve surface displacement. Bulletin of the seismological Society of America, 84(4), 974-1002. https://doi.org/10.1785/BSSA0840040974
  41. Yılmaz, M., & Uysal, M. (2015). The effect of airborne LiDAR point cloud to the accuracy of digital elevation model. Electronic Journal of Map Technologies, 7(3), 15-20. https://doi.org/10.15659/hartek.15.12.108
  42. Yilmaz, M., & Uysal, M. (2016). Comparison of data reduction algorithms for Li DAR‐derived digital terrain model generalisation. Area, 48(4), 521-532. https://doi.org/10.1111/area.12276
  43. Pantosti, D., De Martini, P. M., Koukouvelas, I., Stamatopoulos, L., Palyvos, N., Pucci, S.,. & Pavlides, S. (2004). Palaeoseismological investigations of the Aigion Fault (Gulf of Corinth, Greece). Comptes Rendus Geoscience, 336(4-5), 335-342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crte.2003.12.005
  44. Pierce, I., Guliyev, I., Yetirmishli, G., Muradov, R., Kazimova, S., Javanshir, R.,. & Wordsworth, P. (2024). Surface rupturing earthquakes of the Greater Caucasus frontal thrusts, Azerbaijan. Tectonics, 43(3), e2023TC007758. https://doi.org/10.1029/2023TC007758
  45. Solak, H. İ., Tiryakioğlu, İ., Yalvaç, S., Yiğit, C. Ö., Aktuğ, B., Özener, H.,. & Şahiner, F. (2024). Monitoring postseismic deformations in Izmir and Its surroundings after the 30 October 2020 Mw:6.9 Samos earthquake. Afyon Kocatepe University – Journal of Science and Engineering, 24(06), 1442-1455. https://doi.org/10.35414/akufemubid.1465489