Journals / Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi Fen ve Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi / 2018 / Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 3

A New Software For Relationships Between Fault Parameters and Earthquake Size: FaultStat

Fay Parametreleri ve Deprem Büyüklüğü Arasındaki İlişkiler İçin Yeni Bir Program: FaultStat

Pages
1089–1101
Publication Date
2022-10-12
DOI
—
🏛️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)

Beside, the software calculates from the data set in its memory, it can also calculate new coefficients for the formulas based upon the new earthquake data entered.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Currently, in order to perform a well seismic risk analysis for a region, firstly it is necessary to know which structural elements have been shaping the seismic deformation pattern in the region.
📊
Key Findings & Data:These approaches are outlined (1) through the instrument of seismic data in geophysical and/or in the light of geodetic data (2) based on the geological observations of the surface deformations which created by historical and/or instrumental earthquakes.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Beside, the software calculates from the data set in its memory, it can also calculate new coefficients for the formulas based upon the new earthquake data entered.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Currently, in order to perform a well seismic risk analysis for a region, firstly it is necessary to know which structural elements have been shaping the seismic deformation pattern in the region. Segmentation of these structures and identification of their geometric and kinematic characteristics also underpin for seismic risk analysis. In this context, in order to calculate maximum earthquake potential, the surface rupture lengths and maximum displacement amounts of these verifying structures, an assessment with specific approaches both deterministic and probabilistic are progressed. These approaches are outlined (1) through the instrument of seismic data in geophysical and/or in the light of geodetic data (2) based on the geological observations of the surface deformations which created by historical and/or instrumental earthquakes. In the scope of this study, over 500 previous studies that presented on the geological observations are compiled and worldwide data set of 224 historical and instrumental earthquakes are composed and interpreted. On this data, a quality ranking classification has been performed in accordance with geological observations date, measurement technique and the compatibility of the data with the different studies. First earthquakes faults are grouped according to their kinematic characteristics, and then a new computer software (FaultStat) has been advanced using parameters such as magnitude-surface rupture length, magnitude-maximum displacement amount are added to the calculations in linear or logarithmic models. Beside, the software calculates from the data set in its memory, it can also calculate new coefficients for the formulas based upon the new earthquake data entered.

Özet

Günümüzde bir bölgenin sismik risk analizlerinin sağlıklı bir şekilde yapılabilmesi için, öncelikle obölgenin sismik deformasyon deseninin hangi yapısal elemanlar tarafından kontrol edildiğinin iyibilinmesi gerekmektedir. Belirlenen yapısal elemanların, kinematik anlamda türleri, geometrileri vesegment yapılarının ortaya çıkartılması ise sismik risk analizlerinin temelini oluşturur. Bu bağlamda,belirlenmiş yapısal elemanların üretebilecekleri maksimum deprem potansiyelleri ile yaratabilecekleriyüzey kırığı uzunluğu ve maksimum yer değiştirme miktarlarının hesaplanabilmesi için, gerekdeterministik gerekse olasılıklar üzerinden belirli yaklaşımlarla bir değerlendirme yapılmaktadır. Buyaklaşımlar ana hatlarıyla (1) jeofiziksel olarak sismik veriler yardımıyla ve/veya jeodezik veriler ışığında(2) tarihsel ve/veya aletsel dönemde meydana gelmiş depremlerin yarattığı yüzey deformasyonlarınınjeolojik gözlemlerine dayanır.Bu çalışma kapsamında, Dünyada meydana gelmiş tarihsel ve aletseldöneme ait depremlerin jeolojik gözlemlerinin sunulduğu 500’ün üzerinde çalışma derlenerek toplamda224 adet depreme ait bir veri seti oluşturulmuş ve değerlendirilmiştir. Bu veriler üzerinde, jeolojikgözlemlerin yapıldığı zaman, ölçüm tekniği ve verinin kendi içinde farklı çalışmalardaki uyumluluğudikkate alınarak belirli bir kalite sınıflaması yapılmıştır. Depremleri üreten faylar kinematik özelliklerinegöre gruplandırılmış ve daha sonra büyüklük (M w )-yüzey kırığı uzunluğu, büyüklük (M w ) -maksimumatım miktarı gibi parametreler hesaba katılarak lineer ya da logaritmik modelleri oluşturularak FaultStatisimli yeni bir bilgisayar programı üretilmiştir. Program hafızasındaki veri setinden hesaplamayapmasının yanında, girilen yeni deprem verilerinden yola çıkarak formüller için yeni katsayılar dahesaplayabilmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

KARAGÖZ, O., ALAK, A., SÜMER, Ö. (2022). A New Software For Relationships Between Fault Parameters and Earthquake Size: FaultStat. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi Fen ve Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 3, 1089–1101. https://ajindex.com/articles/429991

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Acharya, H. K., 1979. Regional variations in the rupture- length magnitude relationships and their dynamical significance. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America,69(6), 2063-2084.
  2. Ambraseys, N. N. and Jackson, J. A., 1998. Faulting associated with historical and recent earthquakes in the Eastern Mediterranean region. Geophysical Journal International, 133(2), 390-406.
  3. Anderson, J. G., Wesnousky, S. G. and Stirling, M. W., 1996. Earthquake size as a function of fault slip rate. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 86(3), 683-690.
  4. Arrowsmith, J. R., Crosby, C. J., Korzhenkov, A. M., Mamyrov, E., Povolotskaya, I., Guralnik, B. and Landgraf, A. (2017). Surface rupture of the 1911 Kebin (Chon–Kemin) earthquake, Northern Tien Shan, Kyrgyzstan. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 432(1), 233-253.
  5. Arya, A.K., Pandey, V.K., Gupta, A., Mishra, A. (2016). Seismological Trends in Indian Subcontinent. International Research Journal of Earth Sciences, 4(5), 11-17.
  6. Baize, S. and Scotti, O., 2015.
  7. The Napa Earthquake, California (M= 6, 24/08/2014). Post-seismic survey report, with special focus on surface faulting. IRSN Technical Report, 28. Barka, A. and Eyidoǧan, H., 1993. The Erzincan earthquake of 13 March 1992 in eastern Turkey. Terra Nova, 5(2), 190-194. Båth, M. (1981). Earthquake magnitude—recent research and current trends. Earth-Science Reviews, 17(4), 315-398.
  8. Bent, A. L., 1994. The 1989 (Ms 6.3) Ungava, Quebec, earthquake: A complex intraplate event. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 84(4), 1075- 1088. Bolt, B. (2005). Earthquakes: 2006 centennial update-the 1906 big one. Fifth Edition. 320 p., W. H. Freeman & Company: New York. Bonilla, M. G.,and Buchanan, J. M. (1970). Interim report on worldwide historic surface faulting. U.S. Geological Survey open-file report 1611, 32 p., US Department of the Interior, Geological Survey. Bonilla, M. G., Mark, R. K., and Lienkaemper, J. J., 1984. Statistical relations among earthquake magnitude, surface rupture length, and surface fault displacement. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 74(6), 2379-2411.
  9. Branner, J.C. (1911). Suggested organization for seismologic work on the Pacific Coast Suggestions. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 1(1), 5-8.
  10. Cabrera, J. and Sébrier, M., 1998. Surface rupture associated with a 5.3-mb earthquake: The 5 April 1986 Cuzco earthquake and kinematics of the Chincheros-Quoricocha faults of the High Andes, Peru. B