Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T10:06:06.207Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Seismic hazard analysis results for the Lower Rhine Graben and the importance of paleoseismic data

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2016

K. Atakan ,
A. Ojeda ,
T. Camelbeeck  and
M. Meghraoui
K. Atakan
Affiliation:
Institute of Solid Earth Physics, University of Bergen Allégt. 41, N-5007 Bergen, Norway
A. Ojeda
Affiliation:
Institute of Solid Earth Physics, University of Bergen Allégt. 41, N-5007 Bergen, Norway
T. Camelbeeck
Affiliation:
Geodynamics Department, Royal Observatory of Belgium, Brussels, Belgium
M. Meghraoui
Affiliation:
EOST, Institut de Physique du Globe, Strasbourg, France

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Seismic hazard in low seismicity areas of Europe has traditionally been considered insignificant. However, in the light of the recently conducted paleoseismic studies along the Rhine Graben, a revision is required. Previously applied standard probabilistic seismic hazard assessment (PSHA) methods, using Poissonian approach for the earthquake occurrence, can now be substituted by renewal models where fault parameters such as the maximum magnitude, recurrence interval and the elapsed time since the last occurrence of a large earthquake, can be utilized. In this study, the application and the influence of the available paleoseismic data in the Lower Rhine Graben to seismic hazard analysis is demonstrated. The resulting hazard maps, when compared to the standard PSHA using Poissonian approach, indicate a more precise geographical distribution of the estimated seismic hazard levels. The influence of the paleoseismic data seem to be less important for return periods less than a 1000 years. Among the different input models, the highest values reach to 170 cm/sec2 for a 1000 year return period using a combination of Poissonian and renewal models.

Keywords

Seismic hazardpaleoseismologyuncertaintiesLower Rhine Graben
Type
Research Article
Information
Netherlands Journal of Geosciences , Volume 80 , Issue 3-4 , December 2001 , pp. 305 - 314
Copyright
Copyright © Stichting Netherlands Journal of Geosciences 2001

References

Ambraseys, N.N., Simpson, K.A. & Bommer, J., 1996. Prediction of horizontal response spectra in Europe. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, vol. 25: 371–400.Google Scholar
Atakan, K., Midzi, V., Toirán, B.M., Vanneste, K., Camelbeeck, T. and Meghraouij, M., 2000a. Seismic hazard in regions of present day low seismic activity: Uncertainties in paleoseismic investigations in the Bree fault scarp (Roer Graben, Belgium). Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Vol.20, No. 5–8: 415–427.Google Scholar
Atakan, K., Ojeda, A. & PALEOSIS Working Group, 2000b. Seismic hazard and the long term seismic activity in Europe: A case study from the Lower Rhine Embayment. In: Camelbeeck, T. (Ed.), Proceedings of the Workshop on the ‘Evaluation of the potential for large earthquakes in present-day low seismic activity regions of Europe’ 13–17 March 2000, Han-sur-Lesse, Belgium: 9–12.Google Scholar
Bender, B. & Perkins, D.M., 1987. SEISRISK III: A computer program for seismic hazard estimation. United States geological Survey, Bulletin 1772: 24p.Google Scholar
Berger, N., 1994. Attenuation of seismic ground motion due to the 1992 Roermond earthquake, the Netherlands (extended abstract). Geologie en Mijnbouw 73: 309–313.Google Scholar
Camelbeeck, T. & van Eck, T., 1994. The Roer Valley graben earthquake of 13 April 1992 and its seismotectonic setting. Terra Nova 6: 291.Google Scholar
Camelbeeck, T. & Meghraoui, M., 1996. Large earthquakes in northern Europe more likely than once thought. EOS, Transaction SyAm. Geophys. Union, Vol.77, No.42: 405–409.Google Scholar
Camelbeeck, T. & Meghraoui, M., 1998. Geological and geophysical evidence for large paleoearthquakes with surface faulting in the Roer Graben (Northwest Europe). Geophysical Journal International 132: 347–362.Google Scholar
Cornell, C.A., 1968. Engineering seismic risk analysis. Bull. Seism. Soc.Am., 58: 1583–1606.Google Scholar
Crone, A.J., Machete, M.N. & Bowman, J.R., 1992. The episodic nature of earthquake activity in stable continental regions. US Geol. Surv. Bull. 2032-A: 51 p.Google Scholar
De Crook, Th., 1993. Probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for the Netherlands. Geologie en Mijnbouw 72: 1–13.Google Scholar
De Crook, Th., 1996. A seismic zoning map conforming to Eu-rocode 8, and practical earthquake parameter relations for the Netherlands. Geologie en Mijnbouw 75: 11–18.Google Scholar
Gariel, J.C., Horrent, C., Jongmans, D. And Camelbeeck, T., 1994. Strong ground motion computation of the 1992 Roermond earthquake, the Netherlands, from linear methods using locally recorded aftershocks. Geologie en Mijnbouw 73: 315–321.Google Scholar
Griinthal, G., & the GSHAP Region 3 Working Group, 1999. Seismic hazard assessment for Central, North and Northwest Europe: GSHAP Region 3. Annali di Geofisica 42: 999–1011.Google Scholar
McGuire, R.K., 1976. EQRISK: Evaluation of earthquake risk to site. United States Geological Survey, Open File Report 76–67: 69p.Google Scholar
McGuire, R.K., 1993. Computations of seismic hazard. Annali di Geofisica, Vol.XXXVl, No3–4: 181–200.Google Scholar
Meghraoui, M., Camelbeeck, T., Vanneste, K. & Brondeel, M., 2000. Active faulting and paleoseismology along the Bree fault, lower Rhine graben, Belgium. J. Geophys. Res., 105: 13, 809–13, 841.Google Scholar
Ordaz, M., 1999. CRISIS99. A computer program to compute seismic hazard. Authonomous University of Mexico (UNAM).Google Scholar
Rosenhauer, W. & Ahorner, L., 1994. Seismic hazard assessment for the Lower Rhine Embayment before and after the 1992 Roermond earthquake. Geol. Mijnbouw, 73: 415.Google Scholar
Schwartz, D.P. 1988. Geologic characterization of seismic sources: moving into the 1990’s. Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics II Proceedings. GT Div., ASCE, Park City, Utah, USA, June 1988:42p.Google Scholar
Schwartz, D.P. & Coppersmith, K.J., 1984. Fault behaviour and characteristic earthquakes – Examples from the Wasatch and San Andreas fault zones. J. Geophys. Res. 89: 5681–5698.Google Scholar
Sieh, K., 1978. Slip along the San Andreas Fault associated with the great 1857 earthquake. Ball Seismol. Soc. Am. 68: 1421–1448.Google Scholar
Spudich, P., Fletcher, J.B., Hellweg, M., Boatwright, J., Sullivan, C., Joyner, W.B., Hanks, T.C., Boore, D.M., McGarr, A., Baker, L.M., & Lindh, A.G., 1997. SEA96 – A new predictive relation for earthquake ground motions in extensional tectonic regimes. Seismological Research Letters, 68: 190–198.Google Scholar
Van Eck, T. and Davenport, C.A., 1994. Seismotectonics and seismic hazard in the Roer Valley Graben: an overview. Geologie en Mijnbouw 73: 95–98.Google Scholar
Vanneste, K., Meghraoui, M. & Camelbeeck, T., 1999, Late Quaternary earthquake related soft-sediment deformation along the Belgian portion of the Feldbiss fault. Lower Rhine Graben System. Tectonophysics 309 (1–4): 57–59.Google Scholar
Wallace, R.E., 1970. Earthquake recurrence intervals on the San Andreas Fault. Geol. Soc.Am. Bull 81: 2875–2890.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wells, D.L. & Coppersmith, K.J., 1994. New empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, rupture area, and surface displacements. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 84: 974–1002.Google Scholar
Youngs, R.R. & Coppersmith, K.J., 1985. Implications of fault slip rates and earthquake recurrence models to probabilistic seismic hazard estimates. Bull. Seismol. Soc.Am., 75: 939–964.Google Scholar