24 Ocak 2020 Sivrice (Türkiye) Depremi (Mw 6.8): Yer Hareketi Tahmin Denklemlerinin Değerlendirilmesi ve Mikrotremor Çalışmaları

Abstract

Doğu Anadolu Fay Zonu’nda (DAFZ) 24 Ocak 2020 tarihinde meydana gelen Mw 6.8 büyüklüğündeki deprem can ve mal kayıplarına sebep olmuştur. Yapısal hasarların zemin açısından araştırılması amacı ile üç farklı hasar gören yapının çevresinde mikrotremor ölçümleri alınmıştır. Bu ölçümler sonucu elde edilen zeminin frekans ve büyütme faktörleri kullanılarak ampirik bağıntılar yardımıyla Vs30, hasar görebilirlik indisi (Kg) ve zemin deformasyon tahmini gibi parametreler elde edilmiştir. Mikrotremor ölçümlerinden elde edilen zemin hâkim frekans ve büyütme faktörü değerleri Kesrik, Elazığ ve Sivrice için sırasıyla ~1.75 Hz; ~0.55 Hz ve ~1.4 Hz olarak elde edilirken büyütme faktörü değerleri ise ~5.1, ~4.2 ve ~2.3 olarak hesaplanmıştır. En yüksek hasar görebilirlik indisi Elazığ Merkez’de en düşük değer ise Sivrice’de elde edilmiştir. Ayrıca gözlenen en büyük yer ivmesi değerleri ile beş farklı yer hareketi tahmin denklemi karşılaştırılmış ve en iyi uyum sağlayan model belirlenmiştir.

Keywords

• Yer Hareketi Tahmini
• Mikrotremor
• Hasar İndeksi
• Vs30
• Sivrice depremi

January 24, 2020 Sivrice (Turkey) Earthquake (Mw 6.8): Evaluation of Ground-Motion Prediction Equations and Microtremor Studies

Abstract

The Mw 6.8 January 24, 2020, earthquake has occurred on the Eastern Anatolian Fault Zone (EAFZ) caused loss of life and property. Microtremor measurements have been applied near three different damaged buildings to investigate structural damages in terms of soil features. The parameters such as Vs30, vulnerability index, and soil deformation estimation are obtained with the help of empirical relations using the soil dominant frequency and soil amplification factors calculated as a result of these survey measurements. The soil dominant frequencies have been obtained as ~1.75 Hz; ~0.55 Hz and ~1.4 Hz while the amplification factor values have been calculated as ~5.1, ~4.2, and ~2.3 for Kesrik, Elazig, and Sivrice; respectively. The highest vulnerability index is obtained in Elazig City center and the lowest value is observed in Sivrice. In addition, five different ground-motion prediction equations are compared with the observed peak ground acceleration values, and the best fitted model has been determined.

Keywords

• Ground-Motion Prediction Equations
• Microtremor
• Vulnerability Index
• Vs30
• Sivrice Earthquake

References

1. Abrahamson N.A., Silva W.J., Kamai R., 2014. Summary of the ASK14 ground motion relation for active crustal regions, Earthquake Spectra 30 (3), 1025-1055
2. AFAD, 2020. 24 Ocak 2020 Sivrice (Elazig) Mw 6.8 Depremi Raporu, Ankara. Erişim adresi: https://deprem.afad.gov.tr/depremdokumanlari/1831
3. Akkar S., Bommer J.J., 2010. Empirical equations for the prediction of PGA, PGV, and spectral accelerations in Europe, the Mediterranean region, and the Middle East, Seismological Research Letters 81(2), 195-206
4. Akkar S., Sandikkaya M.A., Bommer J.J., 2014. Empirical ground-motion models for point-and extended-source crustal earthquake scenarios in Europe and the Middle East, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 12 (1), 359-387
5. Aksoy E., Inceoz M., Kocyigit A., 2007. Lake Hazar basin: A negative flower structure on the east anatolian fault system (EAFS), SE Turkey, Turkish Journal of Earth Sciences 16(3), 319-338
6. Ambraseys N.N., Simpson K.U., Bommer J.J., 1996. Prediction of horizontal response spectra in Europe, Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 25(4), 371-400
7. ATA-DAM, 2020. 24 Ocak 2020 (20:55 TS) Mw=6.8 Elazığ-Sivrice Depremi Değerlendirme Raporu, Erişim adresi: https://atauni.edu.tr/yuklemeler/6e78326bb6db9ebe8d4c82123bfbc62c.pdf
8. Ateş E., 2021. Mikrotremor, Deprem ve Yüzey Dalgalarının Çok Kanallı Analiz Yöntemi Kayıtları Kullanılarak Zemin Özelliklerinin Belirlenmesi: AFAD Kampüsünden Örnek Bir Uygulama, Doğal Afetler ve Çevre Dergisi 7(2), 240-251

9. Aydin U., Pamuk E., Ozer C., 2021. Investigation of soil dynamic characteristics at seismic stations using H/V spectral ratio method in Marmara Region, Turkey, Natural Hazards 1-20
10. Bayrak E., Yilmaz Ş., Softa M., Turker T., Bayrak Y., 2015. Earthquake hazard analysis for East Anatolian fault zone, Turkey, Natural Hazards 76(2), 1063-1077
11. Bommer J.J., Douglas J., Strasser F.O., 2003. Style-of-faulting in ground-motion prediction equations, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 1(2), 171-203
12. Bonilla L.F., Steidl J.H., Lindley G.T., Tumarkin A.G., Archuleta R.J., 1997. Site amplification in the San Fernando Valley, California: variability of site-effect estimation using the S-wave, coda, and H/V methods, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 87(3), 710-730
13. Boore D.M., Atkinson G.M., 2008. Ground-motion Prediction Equations for the Average Horizontal Component of PGA, PGV and 5% Damped PSA at Spectral Periods Between 0.01 s and 10 s, Earthquake Spectra 24(1), 99-138
14. Borcherdt R.D., Wentworth C.M., Glassmoyer G., Fumal T., Mork P., Gibbs J., 1991. On the observation and predictive GIS mapping of ground response in the San Francisco Bay region, California. In Fourth International Conference on Seismic Zonation, Stanford, California Procs., Earth. Eng. Res. Inst. 3, 545-552
15. Burchfiel B.C., Stewart J.H., 1966. “Pull-apart” origin of the central segment of Death Valley, California, Geological Society of America Bulletin 77(4), 439-442
16. Campbell K.W., 1997. Empirical Near-Source Attenuation Relationships for Horizontal and Vertical Components of Peak Ground Acceleration, Peak Ground Velocity, and Pseudo-Absolute Acceleration Response Spectra, Seismological Research Letters 68(1), 154-179
17. Campbell K.W., 2003. Strong-motion attenuation relations, International Geophysics Series 81(B), 1003-1012
18. Campbell K.W., Bozorgnia Y., 2014. NGA-West2 ground motion model for the average horizontal components of PGA, PGV, and 5% damped linear acceleration response spectra, Earthquake Spectra 30(3), 1087-1115
19. Cetin H., Guneyli H., Mayer L., 2003. Paleoseismology of the Palu-Lake Hazar segment of the East Anatolian fault zone, Turkey, Tectonophysics 374 (3-4), 163-197
20. Cetin K.O., Cakir E., Ilgac M., Can G., Soylemez B., Elsaid A., Cuceoglu F., Gulerce Z., Askan A., Aydin S., Gör M., 2021. Geotechnical aspects of reconnaissance findings after 2020 January 24th, M6. 8 Sivrice-Elazig-Turkey earthquake, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 1-45
21. Cheloni D., Akinci A., 2020. Source modelling and strong ground motion simulations for the 24 January 2020, M w 6.8 Elazig earthquake, Turkey, Geophysical Journal International 223 (2), 1054-1068
22. Coban K.H., Sayil N., 2020. Different probabilistic models for earthquake occurrences along the North and East Anatolian fault zones, Arabian Journal of Geosciences 13(18), 1-16
23. Dikmen Ü., Hasançebi N., Arısoy M.Ö., Demirci İ., 2016. Estimation of source, path and site effect from S-waves of local earthquakes in Izmir, western Turkey, Jeofizik 18, 14-35
24. Dogru A., Bulut F., Yaltirak C., Aktug B., 2021. Slip distribution of the 2020 Elazig Earthquake (Mw 6.75) and its influence on earthquake hazard in the Eastern Anatolia, Geophys. J. Int. 224:389-400, https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggaa471
25. Duman T.Y., Emre O., 2013. The East Anatolian Fault: geometry, segmentation and jog characteristics, Geological Society London, Special Publications, 372, 495-529
26. Emre O., Duman T.Y., Ozalp S., Elmaci H., Olgun Ş., Saroglu F., 2013. Active Fault Map of Turkey with an Explanatory Text. 1:1,250,000 Scale, General Directorate of Mineral Research and Exploration, Special Publication Series-30, Ankara-Turkey. ISBN: 978-605-5310-56-1
27. Emre O., Duman T.Y., Ozalp S., Saroglu F., Olgun S., Elmaci H., Can T., 2018. Active fault database of Turkey, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 16(8), 3229-3275
28. Gallovic F., Zahradnik J., Plicka V., Sokos E., Evangelidis C., Fountoulakis I., Turhan F., 2020. Complex rupture dynamics on an immature fault during the 2020 Mw 6.8 Elazig earthquake, Turkey, Communications Earth & Environment 1(1), 1-8
29. Graizer V.M., Kalkan E., 2015. Update of the Graizer-Kalkan ground-motion prediction equations for shallow crustal continental earthquakes (p. 79), US Department of the Interior, US Geological Survey.
30. Hempton M.R., Dunne L.A., 1984. Sedimentation in pull-apart basins: active examples in eastern Turkey, The Journal of Geology 92(5), 513-530
31. Hubert-Ferrari A., Lamair L., Hage S., Schmidt S., Cagatay M.N., Avsar U., 2020. A 3800 yr paleoseismic record (Lake Hazar sediments, eastern Turkey): Implications for the East Anatolian Fault seismic cycle, Earth and Planetary Science Letters 538, 116152
32. Ishihara K., 1996. Soil behaviour in earthquake geotechnics, Oxford Engineering Science Series.
33. Jamalreyhani M., Buyukakpinar P., Cesca S., Dahm T., Sudhaus H., Rezapour M., Isken M.P., Asayesh B.M., Heimann S., 2020. Seismicity related to the eastern sector of Anatolian escape tectonic: the example of the 24 January 2020 Mw 6.77 Elazig-Sivrice earthquake, Solid Earth Discussions 1-22
34. Kalkan E., Gulkan P., 2004. Site-dependent spectra derived from ground motion records in Turkey, Earthquake Spectra 20(4), 1111-1138
35. Konno K., Ohmachi T., 1998. Ground-Motion Characteristics Estimated from Spectral Ratio between Horizontal and Vertical Components, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 88, 1, 228-241
36. Lermo J., Chavez-Garcia F.J., 1993. Site effect evaluation using spectral ratios with only one station, Bulletin of the seismological society of America 83(5), 1574-1594
37. Louie J.N., 2001. Faster, better: shear-wave velocity to 100 meters depth from refraction microtremor arrays, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 91(2), 347-364
38. Moreno D.G., Hubert‐Ferrari A., Moernaut J., Fraser J.G., Boes X., Van Daele M., Avsar U., Cagatay N., De Batist M., 2011. Structure and recent evolution of the Hazar basin: A strike‐slip basin on the East Anatolian fault, eastern Turkey, Basin Research 23(2), 191-207
39. Nakamura Y., 1989. A method for dynamic characteristics estimation of subsurface using microtremor on the ground surface. Railway Technical Research Institute, Quarterly Reports, 30(1)
40. Nakamura, Y., 1996. Real-time information systems for seismic hazards mitigation UrEDAS, HERAS and PIC. Quarterly Report-Rtri, 37(3), 112-127
41. Nakamura Y., 1997. Seismic vulnerability indices for ground and structures using microtremor, In World Congress on Railway Research in Florence, Italy
42. Nakamura Y., 2000. Clear identification of fundamental idea of Nakamura’s technique and its applications, In Proceedings of the 12th world conference on earthquake engineering, New Zealand: Auckland, 24, 25-30
43. Nakamura Y., 2019. What Is the Nakamura Method?, Seismological Research Letters 90(4), 1437-1443
44. Nalbant S.S., McCloskey J., Steacy S., Barka A.A., 2002. Stress accumulation and increased seismic risk in eastern Turkey, Earth and Planetary Science Letters 195(3-4), 291-298
45. Okada H., 2003. The microseismic survey method: Society of Exploration Geophysicists of Japan, Geophysical Monograph Series, 12
46. Ozer C., 2019. Investigation of the local soil effects of Erzurum and its surroundings using SSR and HVSR methods, DEU Faculty of Engineering Journal of Science and Engineering 21(61), 247-257
47. Ozer C., 2021. 4-D tomographic change of Vp and Vp/Vs structure before destructive earthquakes: a case study of the Sivrice-Elazig earthquake (mw= 6.8), Eastern Turkey, Natural Hazards 108, 1901-1917
48. Ozer C., Ozyazicioglu M., Gok E., Polat O., 2019. Imaging the crustal structure throughout the East Anatolian fault zone, Turkey, by local earthquake tomography, Pure and Applied Geophysics, 176(6), 2235-2261
49. Pamuk E., Ozdag O.C., Ozyalin S., Akgun M., 2017. Soil characterization of Tinaztepe region (İzmir/Turkey) using surface wave methods and Nakamura (HVSR) technique, Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration 16(2), 447-458
50. Pamuk E., Ozer Ç., 2020. The Site Effect Investigation with Using Horizontal-to-Vertical Spectral Ratio Method on Earthquake Data, South of Turkey, Geotectonics 54(4), 563-576
51. Park C.B., Miller R.D., Xia J., 1999. Multichannel analysis of surface waves, Geophysics 64(3), 800-808
52. Parolai S., 2012. Investigation of site response in urban areas by using earthquake data and seismic noise. In New manual of seismological observatory practice 2 (NMSOP-2), 1-38
53. Pousse‐Beltran L., Nissen E., Bergman E.A., Cambaz M.D., Gaudreau E., Karasozen E., Tan F., 2020. The 2020 M w 6.8 Elazig (Turkey) earthquake reveals rupture behavior of the East Anatolian Fault, Geophysical Research Letters 47, e2020GL088136
54. Ragon T., Simons M., Bletery Q., Cavalie O., Fielding E., 2021. A stochastic view of the 2020 Elazig Mw 6.8 earthquake (Turkey), Geophysical Research Letters 48, e2020GL090704
55. Sadigh K., Chang C.Y., Egan J.A., Makdisi F., Youngs R.R., 1997. Attenuation relationships for shallow crustal earthquakes based on California strong motion data, Seismological research letters 68(1), 180-189
56. Sertçelik F., 2012. Estimation of coda wave attenuation in the east Anatolia fault zone, Turkey, Pure and applied Geophysics 169(7), 1189-1204
57. Stanko D., Markusic S., 2020. An empirical relationship between resonance frequency, bedrock depth and VS30 for Croatia based on HVSR forward modelling, Natural Hazards 103(3), 3715-3743
58. Subasi O., Hasal M.E., Ozaslan B., Iyisan R., 2019. Yamanaka, H., Chimoto, K., Bir Boyutlu Dinamik Analiz ve Mikrotremor Ölçüm Sonuçlarının Karşılaştırılması, Teknik Dergi 30(5), 9459-9481
59. Şahin Ş., Öksüm E., 2021. The Relation of Seismic Velocity and Attenuation Pattern in the East Anatolian Fault Zone with Earthquake Occurrence: Example of January 24, 2020 Sivrice Earthquake, Maden Tetkik ve Arama Dergisi 164, 1-26
60. Şaroglu F., Emre O., Kusçu I., 1992. The East Anatolian fault zone of Turkey, Annales Tectonicae 99-125 (Special Issue-Supplement to Volume VI)
61. TADAS, 2020. Türkiye İvme Veritabanı ve Analiz Sistemi, AFAD. Erişim adresi: https://tadas.afad.gov.tr
62. Taymaz T., Ganas A., Yolsal-Cevikbilen S., Vera F., Eken T., Erman C., Keles D., Kapetanidis V., Valkaniotis S., Karasante I., Tsironi V., Gaebler P., Melgar D., Ocalan T., 2021. Source Mechanism and Rupture Process of the 24 January 2020 Mw 6.7 Doganyol-Sivrice Earthquake obtained from Seismological Waveform Analysis and Space Geodetic Observations on the East Anatolian Fault Zone (Turkey), Tectonophysics 804, 228745
63. TBDY, 2018. Türkiye Bina Deprem Yönetmeliği, Afet ve Acil Durum Yönetimi Başkanlığı, Ankara.
64. TDTH, 2018. Türkiye Deprem Tehlike Haritaları İnteraktif Web Uygulaması. Erişim adresi: tdth.afad.gov.tr
65. Wathelet M., Chatelain J.L., Cornou C., Di Giulio G., Guillier B., Ohrnberger M., Savvaidis A., 2020. Geopsy: A User-Friendly Open-Source Tool Set for Ambient Vibration Processing, Seismological Research Letters 91(3), 1878-1889
66. Xu J., Liu C., Xiong X., 2020. Source Process of the 24 January 2020 Mw 6.7 East Anatolian Fault Zone, Turkey, Earthquake, Seismological Society of America 91(6), 3120-3128
67. Yalcinkaya E., Alptekin O., 2005. Site effect and its relationship to the intensity and damage observed in the June 27, 1998 Adana-Ceyhan earthquake, Pure and Applied Geophysics 162(5), 913-930
68. Zülfikar A.C., 2020. 24 Ocak 2020. Elazığ Depreminin Kuvvetli Yer Hareketi Verilerinin Değerlendirilmesi, Çukurova Üniversitesi Mühendislik-Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi 35(3), 821-834