Journals / Anadolu Üniversitesi Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi :A-Uygulamalı Bilimler ve Mühendislik / 2004 / Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 2

Eskişehir'in deprem riskinin tahmini

The estimation of earthquake risk in Eskişehir

Pages
279–283
Publication Date
2022-10-11
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)

It is estimated that the probability of the occurrence of the earthquake whose magnitude equals to 4.5 or higher within 10 years is approximately found 0,97.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, the earthquakes data which were obtained from Earthquake Investigation Department Director-ship of Seismic Division and occurred in the area coordinated 39-40 North and 29-30.5 east (Turkey-Eskişehir) between 1900-1999 and whose magnitudes equal 4.5 or higher were used.
📊
Key Findings & Data:For the risk analysis, Weibull distribution with two parameters is used.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It is estimated that the probability of the occurrence of the earthquake whose magnitude equals to 4.5 or higher within 10 years is approximately found 0,97.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

In this study, the earthquakes data which were obtained from Earthquake Investigation Department Director-ship of Seismic Division and occurred in the area coordinated 39-40 North and 29-30.5 east (Turkey-Eskişehir) between 1900-1999 and whose magnitudes equal 4.5 or higher were used. For the risk analysis, Weibull distribution with two parameters is used. The parameter estimation of the distribution is calculated through the "less than..." and median order values approaches by using the Least Squares Method (LSM). It is estimated that the probability of the occurrence of the earthquake whose magnitude equals to 4.5 or higher within 10 years is approximately found 0,97.

Özet

Çalışmada Deprem Araştırma Dairesi Sismoloji Şube Müdürlüğü'nden alınan veriler kullanılmıştır. Söz konusu veriler 1900-1999 yılları arasında 39-40 Kuzey ve 29-30.5 Doğu koordinatları arasında yer alan Eskişehir bölgesinde 4.5 ve daha büyük depremlerden oluşmaktadır. Risk analizi için iki parametreli Weibull dağılımı kullanılmıştır. Parametre tahminleri "den az" ve medyan sıra değerleri yaklaşımlarıyla En Küçük Kareler Tekniği kullanılarak hesaplanmıştır. Sonuçta söz konusu inceleme bölgesinde 10 yıl içinde 4.5 ve daha büyük şiddette deprem meydana gelme olasılığı 0,97 olarak tahmin edilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

YILMAZ, V., ÇELİK, H. (2022). Eskişehir'in deprem riskinin tahmini. Anadolu Üniversitesi Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi :A-Uygulamalı Bilimler ve Mühendislik, Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 2, 279–283. https://ajindex.com/articles/438442

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Bath, M, (1979) Seismic Risk in Fennoscandia. Tectono-Physics., 57, 285-295. Bury K.V., (1975). Statistical Models in Applied Sci­ence Chapter 12, the Weibull Model, S.405. Sons-Wiley J: Caputo, M., (1974). Analysis of Seismic Risk. Engi­neering Seismology and Earthquake Engineer­ing, NATO Advanced Study Institutes Series, Series E: Applied Sciences, 3, Pp. 55-86
  2. Cluff, Ls., Patwardham As. and Copper-Smith K. (1980) Estimating the Probability of Occurrence Of Surface Faulting Earthquakes On The Wa-satch Fault Zone Utah. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am, 70,463-478.
  3. Cornell, Ca. (1968) Engineering Seismic Risk Analy­sis, Bull. Seismol. Sec. Am. 58, 1583-1606.
  4. Hagiwara, Y. (1974) Probability of Earthquake Occur­rence As Obtained From a Weibull Distribution Analysis of Crustal Strain. Tectonophysics 23, 323-318. Işıkara A.M., (1984). Istanbul için Deprem Olma Olasılığının Weibull Dağılımından Yararlanarak Elde Edilmesi, Deprem Araştırma Bülteni, 46, 5-13. M. A. Al - Fawzan, (2000). Methods for Estimation the Parameters of The Weibull Distribution, King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology, Saudi Arabia, [email protected]>, s.2 McNally, Kc. and Minster, Cb. (1981) Non Uni-Form Seismic Slip Rates Along the Middle American Trench. J. Geophys. Res, 86, 4949-4959. Nazionale De Geofisica, (1999),
  5. Rome, Italy, 22-25.
  6. Nıshenko, S. P. ve Buland, R.A., (1987). Generic Recurrence Interval Distribution for Earthquake Forecasting, Bulletin of the Seismological Soci­ety of America 11, 1382-1399.
  7. Rikitake, T., (1974) Probability of an Earthquake Oc­currence as Estimated From Crustal Strain, Tec­tonophysics 23, 299-312.
  8. Sergio, Gf. (2003) Probabilistic-Prediction of the Next Large Earthquake in the Michoacân Fault-Segment of the Mexican Subduction Zone. Insti­tute Of Geophysics (Unam), Ciudad Universi-taria, Mexico City, Mexico Geofısica Interna-cional 42(1), 69-81.
  9. Shah, He. & Movassate, M., (1975) Seismic Risk Analysis of California State Water Project Proc. of the 5 Th European Conf. on Earthquake En­gineering. 10/156, Istanbul. Utsu, T., (1972a) Large Earthquakes Near Hokkaido And The Expectancy of The Occurrence Of A Large Earthquake of Nemuro: Report of The Coordinating Committee For Earthquake Predic­tion, 7, 7-13.
  10. Utsu, T., (1972b) Aftershocks and Earthquake Statis­tics (IV). Journal of the Faculty of Science, Hokkaido University Series Vıı Geophysic, 4, 1-42
  11. Utsu, T., (1984) Estimation of Parameters for Recur­rence Models Of Earthquakes. Bulletin of the Earthqua