J. Earth Syst. Sci. (2020) 129:147 Ó Indian Academy of Sciences

https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-020-01407-y (0123456789().,-volV)(0123456789().,-volV)

Site-speciBc probabilistic assessment for proposed smart city,

MOHAMMAD MUZZAFFAR KHAN* and GONAVARAM KALYAN KUMAR Department of Civil , National Institute of Technology, Warangal 506 004, . *Corresponding author. e-mail: [email protected]

MS received 29 November 2018; revised 27 September 2019; accepted 18 March 2020

In the present work, a probabilistic seismic hazard analysis has been performed for the newly formed Warangal Urban , , India. The standard Cornell–McGuire method has been adopted considering different seismic zones. The area of inCuence chosen is having a radius of 500 km with NIT Warangal as the centre. An catalogue for the period 1800–2016 AD has been compiled and homogenized using global empirical relationships. Alternative models have been considered for seismic zoning scenario, completeness analysis of earthquake catalogue, maximum magnitude and ground- prediction equations (GMPEs) in the logic tree approach by assigning normalized weighs to each model, thereby reducing the epistemic uncertainty. Seismic hazard has been presented as the peak ground acceleration (PGA) and pseudo-spectral acceleration (PSA) maps at 5% damping for spectral periods T = 0.05, 0.1, 0.5 and 1 s at 2% and 10% probability of exceedance in 50 yrs period. The results obtained were compared with IS: 1893-1 (2016) (Criteria for earthquake resistance design of structures, Part-I. Bureau of Indian Standard, New , 2016) and NDMA (2011) (Development of probabilistic seismic hazard map of India, Technical Report of the Working Committee of Experts (WCE), National Disaster Man- agement Authority (NDMA). Govt. of India, New Delhi, 2011) and they were found to be in excellent agreement. The proBle of shear wave velocity (VS) was obtained by using the multichannel analysis of (MASW) method. The site was characterized as per NEHRP manual based on VS. The obtained shear wave velocity values are used in performing the 1-D ground response. A higher PGA has been observed at surface level when compared with the PGA values obtained at rock level suggesting ampliBcation due to subsoil condition. Keywords. Warangal Urban District; logic tree; PSHA; peak ground acceleration.

1. Introduction amount of destruction caused by an earthquake in a certain area depends on its magnitude, epicentral are one of the main causes of distance, focus, soil properties and structural destruction all over the world. Every year millions design of infrastructures. The main reason for the of earthquakes occur at several places with differ- huge amount of destruction is due to the lack of ent magnitudes. Some of the earthquakes are so building code enforcement (Das and Sharma 2016) small that they can only be detected by sensitive and poor construction practice in earthquake- seismographs while some earthquakes are so mas- prone areas (Humar et al. 2001). IS 1893-1 (2016) sive that a whole region is shattered with ground broadly classiBed India into four zones depending shaking, landslides, Coods and tsunamis. The on the earthquake intensity. The localized site 147 Page 2 of 18 J. Earth Syst. Sci. (2020) 129:147 behaviour within a zone cannot be predicted away from the epicentre. It is because the average accurately since an earthquake eAect depends on shear wave value (VS30) of New Delhi is varying the site geology and variation of soil properties and from 185 to 495 m/s (Satyam and Rao 2008). site eAects. The catastrophic damages occurred due Anbazhagan et al. (2009) studied the site charac- to earthquakes in the last decade within peninsular terization of Bangalore region using MASW survey India indicated the negligence in the implementa- and classiBed the sites as per NEHRP recommen- tion of risk reduction programs. The seismic hazard dations. Sairam et al. (2011) studied the site assessments are prerequisite to minimize the eAects ampliBcation and site characterization of Gandhi- of destructive earthquakes on human life. Seismic nagar and concluded that an ampliBcation up to hazard assessment is useful for earthquake resis- 4.4 can be observed. Therefore, it is always rec- tant design in the construction industry and risk ommended to consider the local soil aspects and analysis studies. In India, studies on seismic hazard shear wave velocity for assessing the site-speciBc were undertaken by different researchers at the seismic hazard (Mandal et al. 2013). When seismic regional level (Anbazhagan et al. 2017) as well as at waves travel, it gets ampliBed by the soil properties the national level (Nath and Thingbaijam 2012). thereby causes huge destruction. So, there is Some of the recent seismic studies taken for always a potential threat even from far away important cities are Delhi (Mohanty et al. 2007), earthquakes if the area was built over soft soil Krishnagar (Chowdhuri et al. 2008), Bangalore deposits. Choudhury et al. (2015) studied the (Anbazhagan et al. 2009), Kachchh (Singh et al. ground response of Mumbai city and concluded 2011), Gandhinagar (Sairam et al. 2011), Agartala that ampliBcation factor is 1.2–3.5 at different (Chowdhuri et al. 2012), Kolkata (Nath et al. sites. Putti et al. (2019) studied the ground 2014), Mumbai (Desai and Choudhury 2015), response of Vishakhapatnam and observed an Jaipur (Chakrabortty et al. 2018) and Vishakha- ampliBcation of PGA at sites with higher water patnam (Putti et al. 2019). table and the ampliBcation factor is 1.0–1.5. Min- The extent of damage during an earthquake istry of Earth Sciences (MoES) has undertaken a mainly depends on the dynamic response of soil. project entitled ‘Microzonation of 30 cities in India’ The strength characteristics and cyclic nonlinear with an objective to assess the seismic hazard and behaviour of the ground regulate the dynamic vulnerability. In the Brst phase of the project, response during a seismic event. The generated microzonation has been conducted at Jabalpur, seismic waves at a particular site are modiBed by Chandigarh, Sikkim, Chennai, Guwahati, Dehra- the site characteristics and the medium in which dun, Ahmedabad, Bangalore, and Delhi (MoES the earthquake motion progresses. Estimation of 2011). earthquake response for the local site conditions The present study focuses on the assessment of is an important aspect of building design. The probabilistic seismic hazard by accounting the dynamic response of the soil present at a site can local geophysical parameters for Warangal Urban substantially aAect the seismic waves by changing district in Telangana state, India. The study its duration, frequency content, and amplitude. region is located in peninsular India which The intensity of earthquake damage increases includes many active faults and lineaments such when soft sediments cover bedrock. The best as the Kinnerasani–Godavari fault, Kaddam fault, example of site ampliBcation is the Michoacan and Musi lineament, etc. In addition to that, the earthquake occurred in 1985 due to which Mexico study region falls under zone III with a PGA City has experienced catastrophic damage even value of 0.08 g (IS: 1893-1 2016). Although the though the fault rupture was 350 km distant from study region is moderately seismic compared to the city. The ampliBcation of earthquake motion in the northern regions, there is high seismic risk Mexico was primarily due to the presence of soft owing to the poor construction of buildings and deposits (Singh et al. 1988). The 2001 Bhuj earth- dilapidated structures without earthquake resist- quake occurred at Bhuj, but some multi-storey/ ing design, the presence of archaeological sites and high-rise buildings were collapsed at a distance of high population density. Any seismic activity in 225 km away at Ahmedabad city (Rastogi et al. such a densely populated region will have an 2001). Furthermore, the recent 2015 Hindu Kush adverse impact on the economic development of earthquake whose epicentre was at 82 km south- the region. These aspects necessitate the need east of Feyzabad, Afghanistan, the tremors were for an appreciation of seismic hazard studies of felt even at New Delhi which is nearly 1300 km Warangal region. J. Earth Syst. Sci. (2020) 129:147 Page 3 of 18 147

The basic requirement in seismic hazard study is together urban planning, heritage conservation, to recognize the earthquake magnitude recurrence and economic growth thereby emphasizing holistic pattern and the identiBcation of the seismic sources development. Warangal has also been selected in (Kumar et al. 2008). A homogeneous earthquake the Smart City Mission (2016) program by the catalogue was compiled from the available sources Government of India to make a citizen-friendly and that provide valuable data required to understand sustainable city. the seismicity of the study region. A seismotectonic Several sedimentary basins are present in map has been developed using ArcGIS software peninsular India (PI). The sedimentary basins that provides information required to identify the present in the inCuence region are the Godavari potential seismic zones. In this study, two seismic Graben, Cuddapah basin and some parts of East- zoning scenarios have been considered. The seismic ern Ghats. These areas are well-known and can be zones help in identifying vulnerable areas which classiBed as moderate seismic regions from the assist in providing the necessary earthquake resis- history of past seismicity (Gupta 2006). Peninsular tant design (Kumar et al. 2009). In the Brst sce- India, an intra-plate region of Indian plate, was nario, the whole study region is taken as a single considered to be aseismic in nature but the unex- seismic zone whereas, in the second scenario, the pected earthquakes at Koyna (10th December study area is divided into four different zones 1967), Latur (29th September 1993), Jabalpur depending on the geology and spatial variation of (21st May 1997) and Bhuj (26th January 2001) past seismicity. The completeness analysis of emphasized that the intra-plate region is also prone earthquake catalogue and the maximum magni- to deadly earthquakes. The Indian plate moves tude were assessed by considering two alternative towards the Eurasian plate at a velocity of 50 mm methods. A total of four ground-motion prediction per year (Kumar et al. 2007) that results in the equations (GMPEs) were considered to calculate development of Cexural bulge at central India the PGA and PSA values. Different alternative thereby triggering intraplate earthquakes (Bilham models of each input parameter, i.e., the zoning et al. 2003). The seismological and geological data scenario, completeness analysis, maximum magni- identiBes many lineaments and active faults in tude and GMPE were assigned normalized weights different locations of the study region. The location and were incorporated in hazard analysis through and orientation of the linear seismic sources, i.e., the logic tree approach. The seismic hazard has lineaments and faults were identiBed from Seis- been estimated and shown in the form of maps motectonic Atlas of India (Dasgupta et al. 2000). showing the spatial variation of the PGA and PSA These lineaments and faults were digitized using maps at 5% damping for spectral periods T = 0.05, ArcGIS software to develop the seismotectonic 0.1, 0.5 and 1 s. The shear wave velocity has map. Majority of the earthquake epicentres are obtained by conducting the MASW test and the close to the active faults and major lineaments. In site is classiBed as per NEHRP. The shear wave the study region, a total of seventeen active faults velocity was further used to study the ground and six major lineaments have been identiBed with response analysis using DEEPSOIL software. varying lengths.

2. Study region and tectonics 3. Database

The study region considered for seismic hazard An earthquake catalogue of a particular area fea- assessment is the newly formed Warangal Urban tures past earthquake details such as the location, district in Telangana state, India. Warangal is the depth and magnitude, which helps in identifying second-largest city in Telangana after the capital the seismic activity of that region. The earthquake city, , with many ancient monuments catalogue compiled for the current research covers like the , , historical and instrumental seismic events that Kush Mahal and Bhadrakali Temple that makes it have happened in a circular area of 500 km radius, as a historic city. The presence of ancient struc- with NIT Warangal as its centre. The geographical tures favoured Warangal to be chosen for the coordinates of NIT Warangal are 17.98N latitude ‘National Heritage City Development and Aug- and 79.53E longitude. Many researchers have mentation Yojana (HRIDAY)’ scheme by the attempted to compile an earthquake catalogue of Government of India with the aim of bringing peninsular India such as Chandra (1977) compiled 147 Page 4 of 18 J. Earth Syst. Sci. (2020) 129:147

Figure 1. Seismogenic zonation composed of four zones along with digitized faults and of earthquakes.

for the period 1594–1975, Rao and Rao (1984) for earthquakes even in rural areas are also being reported the period 1341–1984, Srivastava and Ramachan- accurately but on different magnitude scales. dran (1985) for the time span 1839–1900, while Guha and Basu (1993) collected earthquake data of magnitude greater than 3.0 for Peninsular India. 4. Catalogue homogenization Recently, Nath et al. (2017) compiled the earth- quake data for the period 1900–2014 for South Asia The instrumental and historical data obtained which includes peninsular India. Along with the from the above-mentioned sources were in differ- published sources, internationally recognized ent magnitude scales. Before measurements by databases of earthquakes stored in digital format instruments became popular, earthquake damage by the International Seismological Centre (ISC) was measured by observing the severity of the (2011), India Meteorological Department (IMD), damage using modiBed Mercalli intensity (MMI) and the United States Geological Survey (USGS) scale ranging from I to XII and Rossi–Forel (National Earthquake Information Center (NEIC) intensity scale (I) with a range of values from I to 2016) have been accessed to compile the earthquake X (Kramer 1996). After the development of seis- catalogue. A total of 325 number of earthquake mographs, earthquakes are being reported in local incidents which consists of foreshocks, aftershocks magnitude (ML), body-wave magnitude (mb), and mainshocks occurred in the period 1800–2016 surface-wave magnitude (Ms), and moment mag- AD were compiled. nitude (Mw) based on the type of seismograph. In India, the Brst seismograph station was Except for moment magnitude, all other magni- established at Alipore, Calcutta in 1898 AD. Some tude scales saturate at certain higher magnitudes. stations were started at Bombay and Kodaikanal Therefore, it seems essential to convert various in 1899 AD (Srivastava and Das 1988). Presently, scales to a convenient scale. The earthquake there are 84 seismological observatories situated at magnitude reported in various scales were chan- various locations in India that are monitored by ged to a moment magnitude scale (Mw) since it the IMD. Before the installation of the seismograph does not have magnitude saturation (Kanamori network in India, small to medium magnitude 1983) and depends on physical parameters of the earthquakes and large earthquakes in the fault (Das et al. 2012). The surface wave magni- rural areas were not reported accurately. In the tude and body wave magnitude are changed to modern era of sophisticated instruments and Mw scale by using Scordilis (2006) equations. The high sensitivity seismographs, smaller magnitude equation given by Heaton et al. (1986) was used J. Earth Syst. Sci. (2020) 129:147 Page 5 of 18 147

Figure 2. Completeness analysis for earthquake data using CUVI method.

to convert the local magnitude scale. The Seismic events (Mw [ 3.0) were considered in the Gutenberg and Richter (1956) equation was used compilation of earthquake catalogue for the period to convert the Intensity scale to Mw scale. The 1800–2016 AD. The seismic events are digitized writer of the paper chose to use the empirical on the previously generated fault map using the equations to obtain a homogeneous magnitude ArcGIS software to obtain the seismotectonic map rather than developing their site-speciBc rela- of the study region, shown in Bgure 1. The seis- tionship because of the fewer number of events in motectonic map obtained provides the basic the study region that make it difBcult to obtain information required to perform the seismic a satisfying relationship (Sawires et al. 2016). hazard analysis for the study region. 147 Page 6 of 18 J. Earth Syst. Sci. (2020) 129:147

5. Declustering of events 6. Catalogue completeness

The main earthquake shocks are independent Statistical analysis of earthquake catalogue using events that follow a Poisson distribution. The incomplete data will result in unsatisfactory out- foreshocks and aftershocks depend on the main comes (Khan and Kumar 2018). The completeness earthquake event and follow a different probability analysis of an earthquake catalogue is essential in distribution than the main earthquake event PSHA. The catalogue completeness is investigated (Gardner and KnopoA 1974). The earthquake cat- for the seismic scenario I (single seismic zone) as alogue should be entirely independent of foreshocks well as for seismic scenario II (four seismic zones) and aftershocks for accurate assessment of seis- individually. The catalogue completeness was micity parameters. In-order to have the Poisson analysed by adopting Stepp’s (1972) and the distribution, foreshock and aftershock earthquakes cumulative visual inspection (CUVI) methods are discarded from the earthquake catalogue. Sev- (Mulargia and Tinti 1985). eral methods have been proposed to decluster an The CUVI is a graphical method to analyse the earthquake catalogue by adopting different catalogue completeness proposed by Mulargia and approaches (Gardner and KnopoA 1974; Reasen- Tinti (1985). In this method, a graph between the berg 1985; Molchan and Dmitrieva 1992). Gardner cumulative number of earthquakes and time and KnopoA (1974) proposed a dynamic windowing duration has to be plotted. The catalogue is con- technique which is a simple method extensively sidered to be complete for the time period where used in declustering of aftershock and foreshock the rate of earthquake occurrence is constant. In events. The earthquake catalogue was declustered the present study, the completeness analysis was by utilizing the windowing method proposed by performed after the earthquake catalogue was Uhrhammer (1986) which is an extension of the divided into magnitude intervals starting from method given by Gardner and KnopoA (1974). In the magnitude 3.0 with an increment of 0.5. The plots windowing method, the temporal and spatial win- of completeness analysis for the single-zone model dows depend on the earthquake magnitude. Equa- are shown in Bgure 2. The results of the com- tion (1) was used to identify the spatial and temporal pleteness period for scenario I is provided in window for declustering earthquake catalogue. table 1. Similarly, the completeness analysis for the four seismic zones has also been performed indi- 0:804MÀ1:024 Distance; R ðkmÞ¼e and vidually and the completeness time period is listed ð1Þ Time; t ðdaysÞ¼e1:235MÀ2:87: in table 2. In Stepp’s (1972) method, the earthquakes were After declustering, the study region had 288 grouped into a magnitude range of 0.5 starting events with Mw C 3.0 from 1800–2016 AD. from a magnitude of 3.0. The complete time interval for a particular magnitude class is the period (T) in which the average rate of occurrence Table 1. Completeness period for the scenario 1. remains constant.pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi The standard deviationffiffiffiffi of the Magnitude interval CUVI method Stepp’s method p mean, rm,(¼ m=T) follows the 1= T behaviour 3.0 B Mw \ 3.5 1972–2016 1967–2016 in the complete time interval. The completeness 3.5 B Mw \ 4.0 1969–2016 1967–2016 period plot for seismic scenario I is shown in 4.0 B Mw \ 4.5 1968–2016 1957–2016 Bgure 3 and completeness interval is listed in 4.5 B Mw \ 5.0 1968–2016 1957–2016 table 1. The completeness period for the seismic 5.0 B Mw \ 5.5 1876–2016 1837–2016 scenario II has also been assessed and the results M C 5.5 1843–2016 1817–2016 w are given in table 3.

Table 2. Completeness period for the scenario 2 by CUVI method.

Magnitude interval Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4

3.0 B Mw \ 3.5 1995–2016 1972–2016 1968–2016 1967–2016

3.5 B Mw \ 4.0 1975–2016 1939–2016 1948–2016 1959–2016

4.0 B Mw \ 5.0 1968–2016 1936–2016 1946–2016 1927–2016

Mw C 5.0 1862–2016 1876–2016 1843–2016 1850–2016 J. Earth Syst. Sci. (2020) 129:147 Page 7 of 18 147

In olden times, only large earthquake events considered to be uniform within each zone. The were reported; subsequently, with the increase in recurrence relationship reported by Gutenberg and seismograph network and its sensitivity, smaller Richter (1944) was used to predict the annual earthquakes were also being reported implying that earthquake occurrence rate and the relationship is the completeness level of small to moderate mag- given in equation (2). nitude earthquakes has been attained in the era of instruments which can be observed from the log10ðÞ¼kM aÀbM; ð2Þ completeness period. kM is the mean annual rate of exceedance of magnitude M; a and b are the constants depend on 7. Seismicity parameters site. The constants a and b have been evaluated by the least square regression analysis using seismic The key element in seismic hazard assessment is data. The values of a and b vary from region to estimation of the recurrence interval for earth- region. The following are the steps to calculate quakes of different magnitudes. The spatial varia- a and b values: The catalogue was grouped into tion of seismicity parameters has been investigated magnitude bin of DMw = 0.5 starting from magni- for various regions across the globe (Ali 2016; tude 3.0, then the annual rate of earthquake Amaro-Mellado et al. 2017). Schorlemmer and occurrence was calculated for each magnitude Wiemer (2005) proposed that the seismicity range. A regression analysis between the cumula- parameter (b-value) can be used as stressmeters for tive annual rate of earthquake occurrence and the Earth’s crust to predict the location of the rupture mean of the magnitude range is used to obtain area and magnitude of the earthquake event. In a and b values. The recurrence relationship plot for this study, the control region is partitioned into the seismic scenario I is shown in Bgure 4, and various zones and the seismicity parameters are table 4 shows the seismicity values. For seismic scenario II, the Gutenberg–Richter (G–R) parameters a and b for all seismic zones were evaluated after sorting out events falling within each zone using the established catalogue. The G–R recurrence relationship for the seismic scenario II has been evaluated in a similar way adopted for seismic scenario I and the seismicity parameters are listed in table 4.

8. Maximum magnitude (mmax)

The maximum magnitude (mmax) is an essential parameter for the insurance industry, disaster management agencies and seismologists. Kijko (2004)deBned mmax as ‘the upper limit of earth- quake magnitude, i.e., the maximum possible earthquake in the area or zone.’ In the present study, mmax value has been determined by using two methods. The Brst method is the Kijko– Figure 3. Completeness analysis earthquake data using Sellevoll–Bayes (K–S–B; Kijko and Graham 1998) Stepp’s method. method which was Brst proposed by Kijko and

Table 3. Completeness period for the scenario 2 by Stepp’s method.

Magnitude interval Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4

3.0 B Mw \ 3.5 1987–2016 1967–2016 1957–2016 1967–2016

3.5 B Mw \ 4.0 1967–2016 1937–2016 1947–2016 1957–2016

4.0 B Mw \ 5.0 1967–2016 1937–2016 1947–2016 1927–2016

Mw C 5.0 1837–2016 1837–2016 1837–2016 1837–2016 147 Page 8 of 18 J. Earth Syst. Sci. (2020) 129:147

Figure 4. Gutenberg–Richter recurrence relationship for single zone scenario.

Table 4. Seismicity parameters using CUVI and Stepp’s Table 5. Estimation of maximum magnitude for different method. zones using Gupta (2002) and Kijko et al. (2016) method.

Seismicity Gupta Kijko et al. obs Zone scenario parameter CUVI Stepp’s mmax (2002) (2016) Single zone b-value 0.82 0.85 Single zone 6.23 6.73 6.64 ± 0.46 a-value 3.33 3.40 Zone 1 6.23 6.73 6.65 ± 0.46 Zone 1 b-value 0.73 0.71 Zone 2 5.23 5.73 5.50 ± 0.34 a-value 2.56 2.43 Zone 3 5.67 6.17 6.02 ± 0.40 Zone 2 b-value 0.82 0.85 Zone 4 5.00 5.50 5.18 ± 0.27 a-value 2.68 2.78 Zone 3 b-value 0.72 0.72 a-value 2.45 2.44 where mobs is the maximum observed magnitude, Zone 4 b-value 0.97 0.98 max a-value 3.20 3.23 d = nCb, b = b ln(10), Cb is the normalizing coef- Bcient of b, C(.,.) is the complementary incomplete gamma function, n is the recorded magnitudes, r = Sellevoll (1989, 1992), later enhanced by Kijko  2 p/(p+mmax – mmin), p = b/(rb) , rb is the standard et al. (2016). This method accounts for the   2 incompleteness of the earthquake catalogue, deviation, b is the mean value, q =(b/rb) . uncertainty in earthquake magnitude and earth- In this study, the earthquake catalogue was quake-occurrence model. The determination of categorised into two parts: historical part earthquake magnitude without error is not possi- (1800–1967 AD) and instrumental part (1968–2016 ble. Usually, the magnitude determined using AD). The uncertainty of the magnitude in the good-quality instrument has an uncertainty of incomplete historical part is assumed to be 0.3 up to 0.2 magnitude units (Musson 2012). The magnitude, while for the instrumental part it is uncertainty of historical earthquake events can be assigned 0.2 magnitude (Thingbaijam and Nath up to 0.5 magnitude units. The procedure considers 2008). The uncertainty in the earthquake-occur- the complete part as well as the incomplete part of rence model parameters is considered to be 25%. the earthquake catalogue and the uncertainty of A MATLAB program (HA3) written by Kijko b-value in the estimation of the maximum magni- et al. (2016) has been utilised to estimate the maximum magnitude. The mmax values obtained tude (mmax). The earthquake events are considered to follow the Poisson law. The equation used for for considered seismic zones are listed in table 5. the estimation of m is given in equation (3). The second method to estimate mmax value max proposed by Gupta (2002), was considered. In 1=qþ2 this method, the largest earthquake magnitude d exp½n:rq=ðފ1 À rq m ¼ mobs þ observed in a particular region was increased by 0.5 max max b ð3Þ magnitude. It is a simple method which has been q  ½ŠCðÞÀÀ1=q; d:r CðÞÀ1=q; d ; adopted by Bahuguna and Sil (2018) and Bashir J. Earth Syst. Sci. (2020) 129:147 Page 9 of 18 147

Figure 5. Comparison of GMPEs with strong motion data of the 1997 Jabalpur earthquake and the 2001 Bhuj aftershock.

and Basu (2018) for seismic hazard analysis of Table 6. Strong-ground motion records (Singh et al. 2003). Assam and Gujarat regions, respectively. The m max a (g) values obtained using Gupta (2002) method for the Distance max considered seismic zones are listed in table 5. Station (km) NE z

The 2001 Bhuj aftershock of magnitude Mw 5.7 BHUJ 101 0.0075 0.0079 0.0042 9. Ground motion prediction equation DGA 249 0.0017 0.0013 0.0011 BOM 576 0.0003 0.0002 0.0002 Ground motion prediction equation (GMPE) is the PUNE 654 0.0001 0.0001 0.0002 basic component in the seismic hazard analysis of a The 1997 Jabalpur earthquake of magnitude Mw 5.8 speciBc region. GMPE predicts the ground motion BLSP 237 0.0125 0.0116 0.0042 parameter at a particular site by relating it to the BHPL 271 0.006 0.0086 0.0048 magnitude of the earthquake, the distance between BOKR 600 0.0007 0.0009 0.0004 site and source and other variables like local soil AJMR 665 0.0006 0.0006 0.0005 conditions. Generally, PGA and PSA at different structural periods are considered as the parameters to deBne strong ground motion. The selection of an The compatibility of the selected GMPEs for appropriate GMPE for a particular region is a crit- the study region has been assessed by comparing ical task in PSHA (Anbazhagan et al. 2016). It is it with strong-ground motion records available generally preferable to choose region-speciBc for the earthquake which occurred in PI, i.e., the GMPEs in any seismic hazard studies (Muthuga- 2001 Bhuj aftershock and the 1997 Jabalpur neisan and Raghukanth 2016). In the absence of earthquake both of magnitude Mw 5.7 (Singh region-speciBc GMPEs, the GMPEs developed for et al. 2003). The strong-ground motion records at other regions having similar seismotectonic feature different stations for the Bhuj aftershock and can be adopted (Patil et al. 2018). The GMPEs Jabalpur earthquake are listed in table 6. The developed for shallow crustal earthquakes have been comparison of the selected GMPEs with the selected, considering the tectonic setting of the strong motion record is shown in Bgure 5. study region, where most of the seismic activities The ASK14, BSSA14 and CB14 match well with occur at shallow depths. In the present study, four the 2001 Bhuj aftershock values whereas the GMPEs have been selected, these being: (i) Abra- NDMA11 matches the 1997 Jabalpur earthquake hamson et al. (2014) (abbreviated as ‘ASK14’), (ii) strong motion records. Four GMPEs were used in Boore et al. (2014), ‘BSSA14’, (iii) Campbell and the seismic hazard computation using the logic Bozorgnia (2014), ‘CB14’ and (iv) National Disaster tree approach by assigning normalized weights to Management Authority (2011), ‘NDMA11’. each GMPE. 147 Page 10 of 18 J. Earth Syst. Sci. (2020) 129:147

10. Seismic hazard computation developed exclusively for the Peninsular India region whereas ASK14, BSSA14 and CB14 were The seismic zones, recurrence parameters, developed using global strong motion data. maximum magnitude and GMPE that have been The classical Cornell–McGuire approach which discussed previously were incorporated in the was Brst proposed by Cornell (1968)andlater analysis of seismic hazard by adopting the logic enhanced by McGuire (1976)wasusedintheseismic tree approach. The alternative models for different hazard analysis. The probability of exceedance (PoE) input parameters were branched and normalized of ground motion in a given time period of 50 yrs has weights were allotted to all input parameters based been evaluated for Warangal district, Telangana, on the conBdence level of each model. The nor- India. Most of the earthquakes in peninsular India malized weights of alternative models for each occur at a shallow depth of 10–20 km (Ashish et al. input parameter should add up to unity. The nor- 2016). The focal depth was assumed to be at a depth malized weights assigned to different alternative of 10 km considering the worst-case scenario. The models based on the conBdence of a particular numerical calculations for seismic hazard were per- model are shown in Bgure 6. The alternative formed by considering the area source model in models considered for seismic zoning scenario, CRISIS2015 (Aguilar-Melendez et al. 2017) software. completeness analysis, maximum magnitude and The PGA and PSA have been estimated at the GMPEs built a total of 32 branches in the logic bedrock level considering the shear wave velocity tree. The ground have been estimated by (VS30) as 1500 m/s. considering all 32 branches. The alternative models for the seismic scenarios and the maximum mag- nitudes were given equal weightage of 0.5 since 11. Seismic site characterization there is no supremacy of one over the other. The completeness analysis by CUVI method was given The strength characteristics and cyclic nonlinear a weightage of 0.6 whereas Stepp’s method was behaviour of the ground regulate the dynamic given a weightage of 0.4 since Stepp’s method gives response during a seismic event. The generated the completeness period at an interval of 10 yrs seismic waves at a particular site are modiBed by whereas CUVI method gives speciBc value. The the medium in which the earthquake motion pro- GMPE suggested by NDMA11 was given a gresses and the site characteristics. The intensity of weightage of 0.4 whereas ASK14, BSSA14 and earthquake damage increases when soft sediments CB14 were assigned a weightage of 0.2 each. cover bedrock. The VS30 is an essential criteria NDMA11 was given a higher weightage since it was used for site classiBcation. The 30 m soil proBle has

Figure 6. Parameters and weighting factors adopted in the logic tree for the horizontal ground-motion component. J. Earth Syst. Sci. (2020) 129:147 Page 11 of 18 147

Figure 7. Spatial variation of PGA at bedrock level for (a) 475 yrs return period and (b) 2475 yrs return period. been considered for site characterization since most Because of this phenomenon, different wavelengths of the engineering site investigation like borings travel at a different speed when there is velocity ranges up to a depth of 30 m. The VS used as a variation with respect to depth. This is known as proxy for site characterization, evaluation of site dispersion. As a result, different wavelength or fre- ampliBcation and is more cost-effective than other quencies arrive at different times on a seismic record. geophysical techniques considering the data anal- The process of producing a VS proBle comprises three ysis Beld, operation and overall cost. Seismic design phases: generation of seismic waves, development of procedures suggested by NEHRP categorize a phase velocity vs. frequency plot (dispersion curve) region/area into six classes by analyzing the sub- and inverse computation of VS proBle from the surface soil proBles. To study the eAect of seismic developed dispersion curve. waves, i.e., ampliBcation or de-ampliBcation, and for seismic site characterization, VS30 has been estimated by conducting multi-channel analysis of 12. Ground response analysis surface wave (MASW) test at National Institute of Technology Warangal (NITW) campus. The soil strata above the bedrock alter the MASW is a universally accepted technique adop- frequency content of the seismic waves (amplify or ted for analysis of VS30,classiBcation of subsurface attenuate) depending on the arrangement of soil material, and calculation of dynamic soil properties. layers, their depth and geotechnical properties. The The MASW test considers the Rayleigh waves in the eAect of the localized soil strata on the bedrock analysis of shear wave velocity (VS)proBles. The VS motion has been addressed by the ground response of the subsurface is attained by Rayleigh wave dis- analysis. InCuence of near-surface geological condi- persion curves (Xia et al. 1999). The elasticity of tions in the form of sediment ampliBcation or site Rayleigh waves and dispersion curve are governed by response is apparent from the damage distribution subsurface velocity structure. The basic fundamental of many destructive earthquakes. The magnitude of to attain the shear wave velocity is to invert the earthquake, degree of shaking and destruction dispersion curve. The surface propagates dispersive caused is dependent on numerous factors like the when the wave propagation experiences velocity source, path and site. The earthquake magnitude is variation in the proBle. The surface waves also proportional to the energy release which may attenuate with depth. The seismic waves of smaller attenuate or amplify as it travels away and when wavelengths are regulated by the ground character- spread over a larger province. The degree of shaking istics of shallow depth whereas; the deeper part of the of ground relies on the matching of the fundamental earth aAects the seismic waves of larger wavelengths. frequency of the ground and the building. 147 Page 12 of 18 J. Earth Syst. Sci. (2020) 129:147

Figure 8. Spatial variation of PSA at bedrock level for 475 yrs return period for (a) T = 0.05 s, (b) 0.1 s, (c) 0.5 s, and (d)1s.

The ground response analysis at NIT Warangal et al. 2019). The 1-D ground response analysis campus has been carried out after obtaining the considering the equivalent linear approach has shear wave velocity proBle by conduction of the been performed using DEEPSOIL software. MASW test. Coyote earthquake of magnitude 5.7 is considered as input motion since the study area 13. Results is moderately seismic. The input motion is scaled to 0.077 g (PGA value obtained for 475 yrs return The output in the probabilistic seismic hazard period). Equivalent linear method of analysis has analysis involves developing hazard maps and been considered in the analysis owing to its sim- hazard curves of peak ground acceleration (PGA) plicity and accuracy. The modulus reduction and or pseudo-spectral acceleration (PSA) against the damping curves given by Seed et al. (1986) are mean annual rate of exceedance. The hazard values adopted for sands whereas for clays, Vucetic and were calculated at the center of the grid of size Dobry (1991) relationship was used since both the 0.05° 9 0.05° stretching all over the study region. proposed equations are widely preferred in site The hazard maps for PGA and PSA for 5% response studies (Roy and Sahu 2012; El-Hussain damping at spectral period, T = 0.05, 0.1, 0.5 and et al. 2013; Pallav et al. 2015; Bandyopadhyay 1 s were developed to understand the seismic J. Earth Syst. Sci. (2020) 129:147 Page 13 of 18 147

Figure 9. Spatial variation of PSA at bedrock level for 2475 yrs return period for (a) T=0.05 s, (b) 0.1 s, (c) 0.5 s, and (d)1s. hazard intensity at different structural periods. The obtained PGA for 475 and 2475 yrs return periods spatial variation of PGA at hard stratum for 475 yrs were in good agreement with IS: 1893-1 (2016) return period (10% probability of exceedance in whereas NDMA (2011) suggests a lower value 50 yrs) and 2475 yrs return period (2% probability which may be due to the consideration of broad of exceedance in 50 yrs) for the Warangal district is seismic zones. The PSA values at spectral period shown in Bgure 7. The pseudo-spectral acceleration T = 0.05, 0.1, 0.5 and 1 s are comparable to NDMA map at 5% damping for spectral period of 0.05, 0.1, (2011) whereas the IS: 1893-1 (2016) suggests a 0.5 and 1 s for 10% and 2% PoE in 50 yrs is shown in reasonably higher value since the IS code considers Bgures 8 and 9, respectively. a deterministic approach. The results obtained are The PGA and PSA values obtained for NIT comparable to previous seismic hazard studies Warangal are compared with NDMA (2011) and carried out for Peninsular India by Jaiswal and IS: 1893-1 (2016) in table 7. As per IS: 1893-1 Sinha (2007), Sitharam and Vipin (2011) and (2016), Warangal comes under zone III with Ashish et al. (2016). expected PGA for design basis earthquake (DBE) The average shear wave velocity of top 30 m being 0.08 g and maximum credible earthquake (VS30) is calculated from time taken by the seismic (MCE) being 0.16 g. It is observed that the waves to travel from the ground surface to 30 m 147 Page 14 of 18 J. Earth Syst. Sci. (2020) 129:147

Table 7. Comparison of PGA and PSA values with NDMA (2011) and IS 1893 code.

Present study NDMA (2011) IS 1893-1 (2016) PGA PSA PSA PSA PGA PSA PSA PSA PGA PSA PSA PSA Return period T=0 0.2 0.5 1 T=0 0.2 0.5 1 T=0 0.2 0.5 1 475 0.077 0.092 0.037 0.010 0.06 – 0.025 – 0.08 0.2 0.16 0.08 2475 0.176 0.224 0.092 0.041 0.12 0.13 0.06 0.01 0.16 0.4 0.32 0.16

Figure 10. Shear wave velocity proBle at NITW. below the ground surface. The 30 m depth level acceleration of 0.202 g has obtained at ground level inCuences the frequency of vibration and ampliB- for the scaled input motion given at bedrock. As cation of seismic waves. The VS30 obtained by the top layers of the site comprises soft soils which conducting MASW test at NIT Warangal site is results in amplifying the response. The locally 446.3 m/s. The site was characterized as Class C available soil alters the bedrock motion which based on the recommendation given by NEHRP depends upon local geology, the arrangement of soil which suggests soft rock to very dense soil. The layers (Borcherdt and Glassmoyer 1992; Sharma VS30 proBle for the site NITW is shown in Bgure 10 et al. 2017). where the VS varies from 138 m/sec at the upper level to 1127 m/sec at the bottom level. The site characterization carried out for southern India 14. Discussion and conclusions (Chennai) by Maheswari et al. (2010) concluded that study region falls in site class D, C and B. The primary objective of this work was to estimate The obtained results are in good agreement with the seismic hazard for the newly formed Warangal previous studies. district in the state of Telangana, India by adopt- It is observed from the soil strata proBle that the ing the probabilistic method of analysis incorpo- top layers of the site consist of clay. A peak rating the logic tree approach and local site eAects. J. Earth Syst. Sci. (2020) 129:147 Page 15 of 18 147

An earthquake events catalogue was developed for data. Based on VS30 proBle, the site was classiBed the study area having 500 km radius with centre as as class C as per NEHRP recommendations. Bore- NIT Warangal from the period 1800–2016 AD. The hole data for the site gives a better understanding earthquake data was collected from the available of seismic hazard analysis, when available can be national and international earthquake reporting incorporated. organisations and the published catalogues. The Site-speciBc ground response analysis has been catalogue contains the origin time, location coor- performed by using an equivalent linear approach dinates, epicentral depth and moment magnitude. at NITW site. The strong motion data of Coyote Temporal heterogeneity of the earthquake data has earthquake of magnitude 5.7 is taken as the input been observed until 1966 AD. Stable earthquake motion which was scaled to 0.077 g. A peak records were seen from the year 1967 AD. The acceleration of 0.202 g has been obtained at the earthquake catalogue was standardized in terms of ground level yielding an ampliBcation factor of magnitude by using global empirical equations. A 2.62. total of 288 intraplate earthquakes at shallow The outcomes of this study can be used in civil depths with Mw C 3.0 were identiBed after engineering construction and design. Important declustering for foreshocks and aftershocks. To structural projects can be selected based on the quantify the seismic activity, two scenarios were results obtained. It may not be possible to control considered. In scenario I, the whole study region or predict an earthquake accurately, but these was taken as a single zone. On the other hand, in studies help in reducing the impact on human life. the second scenario, the study area was divided The seismic hazard assessment and the hazard into four zones taking into account the geology and maps need to be updated periodically with the the seismicity. The completeness analysis of development of new methodology and the addition earthquake catalogue was performed for two seis- of seismotectonic data of a region. mic scenarios using CUVI and Stepp’s method. The maximum magnitude has been determined by using the incremental and statistical methods for Acknowledgements each seismotectonic zone. The mmax value for dif- ferent seismic zones suggests that all the zones in The authors are grateful to IMD, ISC, NEIC and the considered area are capable of triggering USGS for providing the required earthquake data. moderate magnitude earthquakes. The lowest and The author is thankful to Andrzej Kijko and Mario Ordaz for sharing the MATLAB code ‘m ’ and highest mmax values were observed in zone 4 and max zone 1, respectively. A total of four GMPEs have CRISIS2015 program, respectively, which were been considered to predict the ground motion used in the work present in the paper. The author parameters; three GMPEs have been developed would also like to thank Raja Vishwanathan for using worldwide shallow crustal earthquake data revising the English grammar. Funding has been whereas one GMPE has been developed using provided to the Brst author by MHRD, Govt. earthquake data of Peninsular India. The GMPEs of India for doctoral fellowship is gratefully considered are checked with the strong motion acknowledged. This work was supported in part by records of earthquakes happened in Peninsular funding from the Ministry of Human Resource India. The input parameters for alternative models Development of India (Grant no. 715008). were used by adopting the logic tree approach and assigning normalized weight to each model. The References seismic hazard calculations were performed using CRISIS2015 code that generated the output in Abrahamson N A, Silva W J and Kamai R 2014 Summary of terms of hazard maps at different spectral periods. the ASK14 ground motion relation for active crustal The average shear wave velocity up to 30 m regions; Earthq. Spectra 30(3) 1025–1055. depth (VS30) has been calculated by using MASW Aguilar-Melendez A, Ordaz Schroeder M G, De la Puente J, technique which is based on seismic refraction Gonzalez-Rocha S N, Rodriguez-Lozoya H E, Cordova- method. MASW technique is a non-destructive Ceballos A, Garcıa-Elıas A, Calderon-Ram on C, Escalante- geophysical method that’s well suited for subsoil Martınez J E, Laguna-Camacho J R and Campos-Rıos A 2017 Development and validation of software CRISIS to investigations. The seismic refraction method used perform probabilistic seismic hazard assessment with to obtain the VS variation proBle after post-pro- emphasis on the recent CRISIS2015; Computacion y cessing (inversion of dispersion curve) of MASW Sistemas 21(1) 67–90. 147 Page 16 of 18 J. Earth Syst. Sci. (2020) 129:147

Ali S M 2016 Statistical analysis of seismicity in Egypt and its assessing site eAects in Krishnagar area and its significance surroundings; Arab. J. Geosci. 9(1) 52. with the damage pattern of Ms 4.3 of the 24th September, Amaro-Mellado J L, Morales-Esteban A, Asencio-Cortes G 1996 earthquake; Indian Mineral., Spec. Issue 61(3–4) and Martınez-Alvarez F 2017 Comparing seismic parame- 183–192. ters for different source zone models in the Iberian Cornell C A 1968 Engineering seismic risk analysis; Bull. Peninsula; Tectonophys. 717 449–472. Seismol. Soc. Am. 58(5) 1583–1606. Anbazhagan P, Bajaj K, Dutta N, Moustafa S S and Al-AriB N Das K K and Sharma N K 2016 Post disaster housing S 2017 Region-speciBc deterministic and probabilistic management for sustainable urban development: A review; seismic hazard analysis of Kanpur city; J. Earth Syst. Sci. Int. J. Geotech. Earthq. Eng. 7(1) 1–18. 126(1) 12. Das R, Wason H R and Sharma M L 2012 Homogenization of Anbazhagan P, Sitharam T G and Vipin K S 2009 Site earthquake catalog for Northeast India and adjoining classiBcation and estimation of surface level seismic hazard region; Pure Appl. Geophys. 169(4) 725–731. using geophysical data and probabilistic approach; J. Appl. Desai S S and Choudhury D 2015 Site-speciBc seismic ground Geophys. 68(2) 219–230. response study for nuclear power plants and ports in Anbazhagan P, Sreenivas M, Ketan B, Moustafa S S R and Mumbai; Nat. Hazard. Rev. 16(4) 04015002. Al-AriB N S 2016 Selection of ground motion prediction El-Hussain I, Deif A, Al-Jabri K, Mohamed A M E, Al-Rawas equations for seismic hazard analysis of peninsular India; G, Toksoz€ M N, Sundararajan N, El-Hady S, Al-Hashmi S, J. Earthq. Eng. 20(5) 699–737. Al-Toubi K and Al-SaiB M 2013 Seismic microzonation for Ashish, Lindholm C, Parvez I A and Kuhn€ D 2016 Proba- Muscat region, Sultanate of Oman; Nat. hazards 69(3) bilistic earthquake hazard assessment for Peninsular India; 1919–1950. J. Seismol. 20(2) 629–653. Dasgupta S, Narula P L, Acharyya S K and Banerjee J 2000 Bahuguna A and Sil A 2018 Comprehensive seismicity, seismic Seismotectonic atlas of India and its environs; Geological sources and seismic hazard assessment of Assam, North Survey of India. East India; J. Earth. Eng. 24(2) 1–44. Gardner J K and KnopoA L 1974 Is the sequence of Bandyopadhyay S, Sengupta A and Reddy G R 2019 Devel- earthquakes in Southern California, with aftershocks opment of correlation between SPT-N value and shear wave removed, Poissonian?; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 64(5) velocity and estimation of non-linear seismic site eAects for 1363–1367. soft deposits in Kolkata city; Geomech. Geoeng., pp. 1–19, Guha S K and Basu P C 1993 Catalogue of earthquakes (=[M https://doi.org/10.1080/17486025.2019.1640898. 3.0) in peninsular India (No. AERB-TD-CSE–1); Atomic Bashir A and Basu D 2018 Revisiting probabilistic seismic Energy Regulatory Board. hazard analysis of Gujarat: An assessment of Indian design Gupta I D 2006 Delineation of probable seismic sources in spectra; Nat. Hazards 91(3) 1127–1164. India and neighbourhood by a comprehensive analysis of Bilham R, Bendick R and Wallace K 2003 Flexure of the seismotectonic characteristics of the region; Soil Dyn. Indian plate and intraplate earthquakes; J. Earth Syst. Earthq. Eng. 26(8) 766–790. Sci. 112(3) 315–329. Gupta I D 2002 The state of the art in seismic hazard Boore D M, Stewart J P, Seyhan E and Atkinson G M 2014 analysis; ISET J. Earthq. Technol. 39(4) 311–346. NGA-West2 equations for predicting PGA, PGV, and 5% Gutenberg B and Richter C F 1944 Frequency of earthquakes damped PSA for shallow crustal earthquakes; Earthq. in California; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 34(4) 185–188. Spectra 30(3) 1057–1085. Gutenberg B and Richter C F 1956 Earthquake magnitude, Borcherdt R D and Glassmoyer G 1992 On the characteristics intensity, energy, and acceleration; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. of local geology and their inCuence on ground motions 46(2) 105–145. generated by the Loma Prieta earthquake in the San Heaton T H, Tajima F and Mori A W 1986 Estimating ground Francisco Bay region, California; Bull. Seismol. Soc. motions using recorded accelerograms; Surv. Geophys. 8(1) Am. 82(2) 603–641. 25–83. Chakrabortty P, Kumar U and Puri V 2018 Seismic site Humar J M, Lau D and Pierre J R 2001 Performance of classiBcation and liquefaction hazard assessment of Jaipur buildings during the 2001 Bhuj earthquake; Can. J. Civil City, India; Indian Geotech. J. 48(4) 768–779. Eng. 28(6) 979–991. Chandra U 1977 Earthquakes of peninsular India – a seismo- Indian Standard, IS 1893 (Part I) 2016 Criteria for earthquake tectonic study; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 67(5) 1387–1413. resistance design of structures, Part-I; Bureau of Indian Campbell K W and Bozorgnia Y 2014 NGA-West2 ground Standard, New Delhi. motion model for the average horizontal components of International Seismological Centre 2011 On-line Bulletin, PGA, PGV, and 5% damped linear acceleration response International Seismological Centre, Thatcham, United spectra; Earthq. Spectra 30(3) 1087–1115. Kingdom, http://www.isc.ac.uk. Choudhury D, Phanikanth V S, Mhaske S Y, Phule R R and Jaiswal K and Sinha R 2007 Probabilistic seismic-hazard Chatterjee K 2015 Seismic liquefaction hazard and site estimation for peninsular India; Bull. Seismol. Soc. response for design of piles in Mumbai city; Indian Geotech. Am. 97(1B) 318–330. J. 45(1) 62–78. Kanamori H 1983 Magnitude scale and quantiBcation of Chowdhuri S N, Mishra O P and Majumdar R K 2012 Oblate earthquakes; Tectonophys. 93(3–4) 185–199. particle motion for high site response characteristics in Kijko A 2004 Estimation of the maximum earthquake mag- Agartala City, India; Indian J. Geosci. 64(4) 225–232. nitude, m max; Pure Appl. Geophys. 161(8) 1655–1681. Chowdhuri S N, Singh O P, Mishra O P and Kayal J R 2008 Kijko A and Graham G 1998 Parametric-historic procedure Microzonation study from ambient noise measurement for for probabilistic seismic hazard analysis. Part I: estimation J. Earth Syst. Sci. (2020) 129:147 Page 17 of 18 147

of maximum regional magnitude m max; Pure Appl. Nath S K, Adhikari M D, Maiti S K, Devaraj N, Srivastava N Geophys. 152(3) 413–442. and Mohapatra L D 2014 Earthquake scenario in West Kijko A and Sellevoll M A 1989 Estimation of earthquake Bengal with emphasis on seismic hazard microzonation of hazard parameters from incomplete data Bles. Part I. the city of Kolkata, India; Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Utilization of extreme and complete catalogs with different Sci. 14(9) 2549– 2575. threshold magnitudes; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 79(3) Nath S K, Mandal S, Adhikari M D and Maiti S K 2017 A 645–654. uniBed earthquake catalogue for South Asia covering the Kijko A and Sellevoll M A 1992 Estimation of earthquake period 1900–2014; Nat. Hazards 85(3) 1787–1810. hazard parameters from incomplete data Bles. Part II. Nath S K and Thingbaijam K K S 2012 Probabilistic seismic Incorporation of magnitude heterogeneity; Bull. Seismol. hazard assessment of India; Seismol. Res. Lett. 83(1) Soc. Am. 82(1) 120–134. 135–149. Kijko A, Smit A and Sellevoll M A 2016 Estimation of NDMA 2011 Development of probabilistic seismic hazard map earthquake hazard parameters from incomplete data Bles. of India, Technical Report of the Working Committee of Part III. Incorporation of uncertainty of earthquake-occur- Experts (WCE), National Disaster Management Authority rence model; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 106(3) 1210–1222. (NDMA), Govt. of India, New Delhi, India. Khan M M and Kumar G K 2018 Statistical Complete- Pallav K, Raghukanth S T G and Singh K D 2015 Estimation ness Analysis of Seismic Data; J. Geol. Soc. India 91(6) of seismic site coefBcient and seismic microzonation of 749–753. Imphal City, India, using the probabilistic approach; Acta Kramer S L 1996 Geotechnical ; In: Geophys. 63(5) 1339–1367. Prentice–Hall international series in civil engineering and Patil S G, Menon A and Dodagoudar G R 2018 Proba- engineering mechanics; Prentice-Hall, New Jersey. bilistic seismic hazard at the archaeological site of Gol Kumar G K, Sreedhar U and Dodagoudar G R 2008 A note on Gumbaz in Vijayapura, south India; J. Earth Syst. probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for Chennai, India; Sci. 127(2) 16. J. Struct. Eng. 35(4) 308–317. Putti S P, Devarakonda N S and Towhata I 2019 Estimation of Kumar G K, Sreedhar U and Dodagoudar G R 2009 Proba- ground response and local site eAects for Vishakhapatnam, bilistic seismic hazard analysis for low seismicity region; India; Nat. Hazards 97(2) 555–578. Indian Geotech. J. 39 288–316. Rao B R and Rao P S 1984 Historical seismicity of peninsular Kumar P, Yuan X, Kuma, M R, Kind R, Li X and Chadha R India; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 74(6) 2519–2533. K 2007 The rapid drift of the Indian tectonic plate; Rastogi B K, Gupta H K, Mandal P, Satyanarayana H V S, Nature 449(7164) 894. Kousalya M, Raghavan R, Jain R, Sarma A N S, Kumar N Maheswari R U, Boominathan A and Dodagoudar G R 2010 and Satyamurty C 2001 The deadliest stable continental Seismic site classiBcation and site period mapping of region earthquake occurred near Bhuj on 26 January Chennai City using geophysical and geotechnical data; 2001; J. Seismol. 5(4) 609–615. J. Appl. Geophys. 72(3) 152–168. Reasenberg P 1985 Second-order moment of central California Mandal H S, Shukla A K, Khan P K and Mishra O P 2013 A seismicity, 1969–1982; J. Geophys. Res.-Sol. Ea. 90(B7) new insight into probabilistic seismic hazard analysis for 5479–5495. central India; Pure Appl. Geophys. 170(12) 2139–2161. Roy N and Sahu R B 2012 Site speciBc ground motion McGuire R K 1976 EQRISK: FORTRAN computer program simulation and seismic response analysis for microzonation for seismic risk. of Kolkata; Geomech. Eng. 4(1) 1–18. MoES 2011 Seismic microzonation handbook; Geoscience Sairam B, Rastogi B K, Aggarwal S, Chauhan M and Bhonde division, Ministry of Earth Science, Government of India, U 2011 Seismic site characterization using Vs30 and site New Delhi. ampliBcation in Gandhinagar region, Gujarat, India; Curr. Molchan G M and Dmitrieva O E 1992 Aftershock identiB- Sci. 100(5) 754–761. cation: Methods and new approaches; Geophys. J. Int. Satyam D N and Rao K S 2008 Seismic site characterization in 109(3) 501–516. Delhi region using multi channel analysis of shear wave Mohanty W K, Walling M Y, Nath S K and Pal I 2007 First velocity (MASW) testing; Electr. J. Geotech. Eng. 13 order seismic microzonation of Delhi, India using geo- 167–183. graphic information system (GIS); Nat. Hazards 40(2) Sawires R, Pelaez J A, Fat-Helbary R E and Ibrahim H A 2016 245–260. An earthquake catalogue (2200 BC to 2013) for seismotec- Muthuganeisan P and Raghukanth S T G 2016 Site-speciBc tonic and seismic hazard assessment studies in Egypt; In: probabilistic seismic hazard map of Himachal Pradesh, Earthquakes and their impact on society, pp. 97–136. India. Part II. Hazard estimation; Acta Geophys. 64(4) Schorlemmer D and Wiemer 2005 Earth science: Microseis- 853–884. micity data forecast rupture area; Nature 434(7037) 1086. Mulargia F and Tinti S 1985 Seismic sample areas deBned Scordilis E M 2006 Empirical global relations converting Ms from incomplete catalogues: An application to the Italian and mb to moment magnitude; J. Seismol. 10(2) 225–236. territory; Phys. Earth Planet In. 40(4) 273–300. Seed H B, Wong R T, Idriss I M and Tokimatsu K 1986 Musson R M 2012 The eAect of magnitude uncertainty on Moduli and damping factors for dynamic analyses of earthquake activity rates; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 102(6) cohesionless soils; J. Geotech. Eng.-ASCE 112(11) 1016– 2771–2775. 1032. National earthquake Information center (NEIC) 2016 Sharma B, Chingtham P, Sharma V, Kumar V, Mandal H S Online earthquake catalogue (http://earthquake.usgs.gov/ and Mishra O P 2017 Characteristic ground motions of the earthquakes). 25th April 2015 Nepal earthquake (Mw 7.9) and its 147 Page 18 of 18 J. Earth Syst. Sci. (2020) 129:147

implications for the structural design codes for the border Srivastava H N and Das S K 1988 Historical Seismicity areas of India to Nepal; J. Asian Earth Sci. 133 12–23. and Earthquake Catalogues for the Indian Region; Singh A P, Mishra O P, Rastogi B K and Kumar D 2011 3-D Historical Seismograms and Earthquakes of the World; seismic structure of the Kachchh, Gujarat, and its impli- pp. 335–348. cations for the earthquake hazard mitigation; Nat. Srivastava H N and Ramachandran K 1985 New catalogue of Hazards 57(1) 83–105. earthquakes for peninsular India during 1839–1900; Mau- Singh S K, Bansal B K, Bhattacharya S N, Pacheco J F, sam 36(3) 351–358. Dattatrayam R S, Ordaz M and Hough S E et al. 2003 Stepp J C 1972 Analysis of completeness of the earthquake Estimation of ground motion for Bhuj (26 January 2001; sample in the Puget Sound area and its eAect on statistical Mw 7.6) and for future earthquakes in India; Bull. Seismol. estimates of earthquake hazard; In: Proc. Int. Conf. on Soc. Am. 93(1) 353–370. Microzonazion, Seattle 2 897–910. Singh S K, Mena E A and Castro R 1988 Some aspects of Thingbaijam K K S and Nath S K 2008 Estimation of source characteristics of the 19 September 1985 Michoacan maximum earthquakes in northeast India; Pure Appl. earthquake and ground motion ampliBcation in and near Geophys. 165(5) 889–901. Mexico City from strong motion data; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Uhrhammer R A 1986 Characteristics of northern and central Am. 78(2) 451–477. California seismicity; Earthq. Notes 57(1) 21. Sitharam T G and Vipin K S 2011 Evaluation of spatial Vucetic M and Dobry R 1991 EAect of soil plasticity variation of peak horizontal acceleration and spectral on cyclic response; J. Geotech. Eng.-ASCE 117(1) acceleration for south India: A probabilistic approach; Nat. 89–107. Hazards 59(2) 639. Xia J, Miller R D and Park C B 1999 Estimation of near- Smart City Mission 2016 Ministry of Urban Development, surface shear-wave velocity by inversion of Rayleigh Government of India (2015). waves; Geophysics 64(3) 691–700.

Corresponding editor: N V CHALAPATHI RAO