Seismic hazard studies for Gaziantep city in South Anatolia of Turkey

Natural Hazards

Volumn 44, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 19-50

  Güllü, Hamza ^a   Ansal, Atilla M ^b   Özbay, Aydin ^a  

^a GAZIANTEP UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^b BOGAZICI UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

Attenuation relationship; Deterministic approach; GIS methodology; Seismic hazard assessment; Total probability theorem

Indexed keywords

GIS; HAZARD ASSESSMENT; MAP; PROBABILITY; SEISMIC ATTENUATION; SEISMIC DATA; SEISMIC HAZARD;

EURASIA; GAZIANTEP; TURKEY;

EID: 38649129944     PISSN: 0921030X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11069-007-9140-3     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Abrahamson NA (2000) State of the practice of seismic hazard evaluation. GEOENG 2000 conference proceedings, Melbourne, Australia
2. Algermissen ST, Perkins DM, Thenhaus PC, Hanson SL, Bender BL (1982) Probabilistic estimates of maximum acceleration and velocity in rock in the contiguous United States. Open file report 82-1033. U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, DC
3. Alptekin O (1978) Magnitude-frequency relationships and deformation release for the earthquakes in and around Turkey. Thesis for Promoting to Associate Professor Level, Karadeniz Technical University, 107 pp (in Turkish)
4. Aydan Ö, Sezaki M, Yarar R (1996) The seismic characteristics of Turkish earthquakes. 11th World conference on earthquake engineering. Acapulco, Mexico, CD paper no. 1025
5. Aydan Ö (1997) The seismic characteristics and the occurrence pattern of Turkish earthquakes. Turkish Earthquake Foundation Report No. TDV/TR 97-007, 41 pp
6. Aydan Ö (2001) Comparison of suitability of submerged tunnel and shield tunnel for subsea passage of Bosphorus. Jeol Muhendis 25(1):1-17 (in Turkish)
7. Aydan Ö, Kumsar H, Ulusay R (2002) How to infer the possible mechanism and characteristics of earthquakes from the striations and ground surface traces of existing faults. JSCE, Earthquake Struct Eng Div 19(2):199-208
8. Campbell WK (1988) Predicting strong ground motion in Utah. In: Hays WW, Gori PL (eds) Evaluation of regional and urban earthquake hazard risks in Utah. USGS Professional Paper, pp L1-L31
9. Climent A, Taylor W, Ciudad Real M, Strauch W, Villagran M, Dahle A, Bungum H (1994) Spectral strong motion attenuation in Central America. Technical Report No: 2-17, NORSAR
10. Cornell CA (1968) Engineering seismic risk analysis. Bull Seismol Soc Am 58:1583-1606
11. Demirtaş R, Yilmaz R (2006) Türkiyenin Sismotekniǧi. Afet Işleri Genel Müdürlüǧü, http://angora.deprem.gov.tr/jpg/Turkiye.htm
12. Douglas J (2003) Earthquake ground motion estimation using strong-motion records: A review of equations for the estimation of peak ground acceleration and response spectral ordinates. Earth-Sci Rev 61(1-2):43-104
13. Erdik M, Doyuran V, Gülkan P, Akkas N (1985) A probabilistic assessment of the seismic hazard in Turkey. Tectonophysics 117:295-344
14. Ergin K, Güçlü U, ve Uz Z (1967) Türkiye ve civarinin deprem kataloǧu. ITÜ, Maden Fakültesi yayini
15. Fukushima Y, Tanaka T (1990) A new attenuation relation for peak horizontal ground acceleration of strong ground motion in Japan. Bull Seismol Soc Am 80:757-783
16. General Directorate of Disaster Affairs, Earthquake Research Dept. (2006) http://www.deprem.gov.tr
17. Gülkan P, Kalkan E (2002) Attenuation modeling of recent earthquakes in Turkey. J Seismol 6:397-409
18. Gutenberg B, Richter CF (1944) Frequency of earthquakes in California. Bull Seismol Soc Am 34(4):1985-1988
19. Idriss IM (1990) Response of soft soil sites during earthquakes. H. Bolton seed memorial symposium proceedings, vol 2, May, pp 273-289
20. Inouye U (1965) On the seismicity in the epicentral region and its neighbourhood before the Niigata earthquake. Q J Seismol 29:139-144
21. Inan E, Çolakoǧlu Z, Koç N, Bayülke N, Çoruh E (1996) Earthquake catalogs with acceleration records from 1976 to 1996. General Directorate of Disaster Affairs - Earthquake Research Division, Ankara, Turkey, 98 pp
22. Joyner WB, Boore DM (1981) Peak horizontal acceleration and velocity from strong-motion records including records from the 1979 Imperial Valley, California earthquake. Bull Seismol Soc Am 71:2011-2038
23. Joyner WB, Boore DM (1988) Measurement, characterization, and prediction of strong ground motion. Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics: 2. Recent advances in ground motion evaluation. ASCE, New York, pp 43-102
24. Kandilli Observatory and Earthquake Research Institute (2006) http://www.koeri.boun.edu.tr/sismo
25. Kayabali K (2002) Modeling of seismic hazard for Turkey using the recent neotectonic data. Eng Geol 63:221-232
26. Kayabali K, Akin M (2003), Seismic hazard map of Turkey using the deterministic approach. Eng Geol 69:127-137
27. Kramer SL (1996) Geotechnical earthquake engineering. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, 653 pp
28. Mark RK (1977) Application of linear statistical model of earthquake magnitude versus fault length in estimating maximum expectable earthquakes. Geology 5:464-466
29. McGuire RK, Arabasz WJ (1990) An introduction to probabilistic seismic hazard analysis. In: Ward SH (ed) Geotechnical and environmental geophysics, society of exploration geophysicists, vol 1, pp 333-353
30. Ministry of Public Works and Settlement of Turkey (1996) Seismic Hazard Map of Turkey
31. Öcal N (1968) Türkiye'nin sismisitesi ve zelzele coǧrafyasi, 1850-1960 yillari için zelzele kataloǧu. Kandilli Rasathanesi Yayinlari, No. 8, Istanbul
32. Reiter L (1990) Earthquake hazard analysis-issues and insights. Columbia University Press, New York, 254 pp
33. Sabetta F, Pugliese A (1987) Attenuation of peak horizontal acceleration and velocity from Italian strong motion records. Bull Seismol Soc Am 77:1491-1513
34. Sadigh K, Chang CY, Egan JA, Makdisi F, Youngs RR (1997) Attenuation relationships for shallow crustal earthquakes based on California strong motion data. Seismol Res Lett 1(68):180-189
35. Saroglu F, Emre O, Kuscu I (1992) Active fault map of Turkey. Printed by General Directorate of Mineral Research and Exploration
36. Seed HB, Murarka R, Lysmer J, Idriss IM (1976) Relationship between maximum acceleration, maximum velocity, distance from source and local site conditions for moderately strong earthquakes. Bull Seismol Soc Am 66:323-1342
37. Ulusay R, Tuncay E, Sonmez H, Gokceoglu C (2004) An attenuation relationship based on Turkish strong motion data and iso-acceleration map of Turkey. Eng Geol 74:265-291
38. Walpole RE, Myers RH, Myers SL, Ye K (2002) Probability δ statistics for engineers δ scientists. Prentice Hall, 730 pp
39. Wells DL, Coppersmith KJ (1994) New empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, rupture area, and surface displacement. Bull Seismol Soc Am 4(84):975-1002
40. Zaré M, Bard P-Y (2002) Strong motion dataset of Turkey: Data processing and site classification. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 22:703-718