See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/282588347

Deterministic Seismic Hazard Analysis for the State of Haryana, India

Article  in  Indian Geotechnical Journal · June 2016

DOI: 10.1007/s40098-015-0167-1

CITATIONS READS

21 793

2 authors:

Nitish Puri Ashwani Jain

AECOM National Institute of Technology, Kurukshetra
17 PUBLICATIONS   61 CITATIONS    31 PUBLICATIONS   98 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Seismic Hazard Analysis of Punjab View project

Prediction of Geotechnical Parameters Using Machine Learning Techniques View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Nitish Puri on 10 January 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Indian Geotech J (April–June 2016) 46(2):164–174
DOI 10.1007/s40098-015-0167-1

ORIGINAL PAPER

Deterministic Seismic Hazard Analysis for the State of Haryana,

India
Nitish Puri1 • Ashwani Jain1

Received: 4 March 2015 / Accepted: 21 September 2015 / Published online: 5 October 2015
Ó Indian Geotechnical Society 2015

Abstract The Indian state of Haryana is in a phase of ther used to quantify seismic loading for designing earth-
rapid industrial development. In order to help engineers quake resistant structures in Haryana.
and town planners in designing earthquake resistant
structures, it is necessary to carry out site specific seismic Keywords Deterministic seismic hazard analysis 
hazard analysis and plan mitigation measures. It is appre- Peak ground acceleration (PGA)  Response spectrum 
hended that Indian Code generalises the design peak Fault characterization  Attenuation relationship 
ground acceleration values which may underestimate the Seismogenic source
seismic loading in high seismicity regions. Therefore, it is
necessary to develop regional seismic hazard scenario in
List of symbols
line with the local seismotectonic setting which is consis-
C1–C8 Site coefficients
tent with other seismic codes worldwide. In all, 12 seis-
DSHA Deterministic seismic hazard analysis
mogenic sources have been identified in the seismic study
GBF Great Boundary Fault
area. The maximum magnitude has been assigned to each
GMPE Ground motion prediction equation
seismogenic source considering regional rupture character.
JMT Jwala Mukhi Thrust
Ground motion prediction equation developed for Indo-
KFS Kaurik Fault System
Gangetic region by National Disaster Management
MBT Main Boundary Thrust
Authority of India has been used. The peak ground accel-
MCT Main Crustral Thrust
eration along with response spectrum for A-type sites for
MDF Moradabad Fault
the state have been estimated using state of the art in
MDSSF Mahendragarh-Dehradun Sub Surface Fault
deterministic seismic hazard analysis methodology. These
MF Mathura fault
determined strong motion parameters have been compared
Mmax Maximum magnitude potential
with the values given in Indian Standard for criteria for
MObs Maximum observed magnitude
earthquake resistant design of structures to validate them
Mw Moment magnitude
for further practical use. The prepared spectra can be fur-
PFR Percentage fault rupture
PGA Peak ground acceleration
PGAmax PGA at a grid point corresponding to controlling
earthquake
PSHA Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis
& Nitish Puri PSA Peak spectral acceleration
nitishpuri.ce.89@gmail.com r Hypocentral distance
Ashwani Jain RLD Subsurface rupture length
ashwani.jain@rediffmail.com RT Ramgarh Thrust
SA Spectral acceleration Sga
1
Department of Civil Engineering, National Institute of SHA Seismic hazard analysis
Technology, Kurukshetra, Haryana 136119, India

123
Indian Geotech J (April–June 2016) 46(2):164–174 165

SLDR Sargodha-Lahore-Delhi-Ridge Therefore, it is necessary to develop regional seismic

SNF Sundar Nagar Fault hazard scenario in line with the local seismotectonic setting
SSF Sardar Shahar Fault which is also consistent with other seismic codes world-
TFL Total fault length wide.
In the present study, 12 seismogenic sources have been
identified in the seismic study area. The maximum mag-
nitude has been assigned to each seismogenic source con-
sidering regional rupture character. For this purpose,
Introduction seismic data have been collected for a period of 509 years
from Indian Meteorological Department (IMD) and an
More than 60 % land area of India is prone to moderate to earthquake catalogue has been compiled for the study
severe earthquakes [1]. The damage inflicted to life and region. Ground motion prediction equation (GMPE)
property by earthquakes in the last decade has necessitated developed for Indo-Gangetic region by National Disaster
evaluation of seismic hazard in advance. Seismic hazard is Management Authority of India (NDMA) [1] has been used
defined as any physical phenomenon such as ground for the prediction of strong motion characteristics. The
shaking or ground failure which is associated with an peak ground acceleration along with response spectrum for
earthquake and which may produce adverse effect on A-type sites for the state have been estimated using state of
human activities. The main factors affecting seismic hazard the art in deterministic seismic hazard analysis (DSHA)
at a location are earthquake magnitude, source to site dis- methodology. These determined strong motion parameters
tance, return period and duration of ground shaking. The have been compared with the specifications of IS:
purpose of a seismic hazard analysis (SHA) is to quantify 1893-Part1 to validate them for further practical use. A
potential damage and loss due to future earthquakes. It seismic hazard map has been prepared for the state of
involves quantitative estimation of ground shaking hazard Haryana based on estimated PGA values.
at a particular site. SHA can be used to prepare regional
macro or micro zoning maps which are useful for the
improvement of earthquake-resistant building design and
construction, land use planning, emergency plan and esti- Methodology
mation of possible economic loss.
Seismic hazard may be analyzed deterministically Deterministic seismic hazard analysis has been carried out
(DSHA) where a particular earthquake scenario is considering all the potential seismogenic sources present in
assumed, or probabilistically (PSHA), in which uncertain- the seismic study area. The procedure adopted in carrying
ties in earthquake size, location and time of occurrence are out DSHA is as follows:
explicitly considered.
1. An area covering 300 km radius around Haryana (25°–
Deterministic Seismic Hazard Analysis (DSHA) is the
33° N and 72°–81° E) has been considered as seismic
earliest, easiest and simplified approach to carry out seis-
study area. Maps on pages 4, 5, 6, 8, 9 and 10 of
mic hazard analysis. For a worst case scenario, DSHA is
Seismotectonic Atlas of India and its Environs
more useful. To evaluate seismic hazard deterministically
(SEISAT) [11] have been scanned with the help of
for a particular site or region, all possible sources of seis-
very high resolution scanners. All these pages have
mic activity must be identified and their potential for
been merged to prepare a single map which represents
generating strong ground motion must be evaluated. Many
tectonic setting of the seismic study area.
investigators have prepared seismic hazard maps for Indian
2. Earthquake catalogue for the study region has been
region using this approach [2–4]. It is used widely for
prepared for a period from January 1505 to June 2013
nuclear power plants, large dams, large bridges, hazardous
(*509 years).
waste containment facilities and also as a ‘cap’ for PSHA.
3. All the tectonic features likely to generate significant
It is apprehended by many investigators that Indian Code
ground motions in the study area have been identified.
generalises the design peak ground acceleration (PGA)
4. The maximum magnitude potential of seismogenic
values which may underestimate the seismic loading in
sources has been estimated considering regional rup-
high seismicity regions [3, 5–8]. IS: 1893-Part1 has clas-
ture character.
sified India into four seismic zones, i.e. Zone II, III, IV and
5. A grid of 0.1° 9 0.1° has been considered to cover the
V with specified PGA as 0.10, 0.16, 0.24 and 0.36 g
entire area of the state of Haryana.
respectively [9]. Such a broad zoning is unscientific,
6. The distance of grid point to each seismogenic source
because seismic hazard is known to have considerable
has been computed.
spatial variability even at shorter wavelengths [10].

123
166 Indian Geotech J (April–June 2016) 46(2):164–174

7. Recently developed GMPE by NDMA [1] has been An area covering 300 km radius around Haryana (25°–
used to predict the ground motion parameters. 33° N and 72°–81° E) has been considered as seismic study
8. For computation of hazard at a grid point, ground area. Earthquake catalogue has been prepared for a period
motion parameters have been computed with respect to from January 1505 to June 2013 (*509 years). A total of
various seismogenic sources and the source causing 3263 earthquakes have occurred during this period. For this
maximum ground motion at the point of interest has purpose, data have been collected from Indian Meteoro-
been identified. The maximum magnitude potential of logical Department (IMD), Delhi. Table 1 shows earth-
that seismogenic source has been considered as the quake catalogue of the study area for Mw C 6.
controlling earthquake for the grid point under The tectonic features for the region have been identified
consideration. considering Seismotectonic Atlas of India and its Environs
9. Response spectrum for the controlling source has been (SEISAT) [11]. In order to identify the tectonic features
plotted. likely to generate significant ground motions in the study
area, all the earthquake events which have occurred in past
509 years in the study region (Fig. 1a) have been super-
imposed on the tectonic map (Fig. 1b). There exist a total
Seismotectonics of the Study Area
of 25 tectonic features in the seismic study area out which
12 features have been selected as potential seismogenic
Haryana is a landlocked state in North India with its capital
sources. Table 2 shows various faults along which seismic
at Chandigarh. It is a moderate sized state having an area
activities have been observed.
of 44,212 km2, which is 40 times the area of state of Delhi.
It lies between 27°390 and 30°350 N latitude and 74°280 and
77°360 E longitude. The state is covered by three Seismic
Estimation of Maximum Magnitude Potential
Zones, II, III and IV [9], making it prone to low to mod-
(Mmax)
erate damage from earthquakes. Greater intensity of
earthquakes has been experienced in Jhajjar and Rohtak
Maximum magnitude potential of various seismogenic
districts as compared to other areas of study region [12].
sources has been estimated considering the regional rup-
Moreover, damage has been reported to structures in these
ture character. The method used in the study has been
areas during earthquakes. The potential seismic hazard in
developed by P. Anbazhagan et al. [20]. The values of
Haryana and adjoining areas is attributed to fault system of
Mmax determined by this method are function of rupture
Delhi Fold Belt. The Delhi Fold Belt is bounded by two
character instead of the seismicity parameters. Also,
strike slip faults, Mahendragarh–Dehradun Subsurface
maximum magnitude values predicted by this method are
Fault and Great Boundary Fault [13–15]. Srivastava and
reported to have less standard error as compared to other
Somayajulu [16] have discussed the geological setting and
methods.
seismicity of the study region. The study suggests that the
Damaging earthquakes of magnitude (Mw) of 5 and
Sonipat-Delhi-Sohna dislocation is also responsible for
above have been identified and sub-surface rupture lengths
frequent tremors in the region. Prakash and Shrivastava
(RLD) have been estimated using the well-recognized
[17] have investigated and concluded that majority of
relation proposed by Wells and Coppersmith [21] which is
seismic activities occur close to Sonipat-Rohtak Belt. They
as follows:
have also concluded that National Capital Region (NCR)
and adjoining areas, inspite of being intra-plate domain, logðRLDÞ ¼ 0:59Mw  2:44 ð1Þ
can possess high seismicity due to activation of faults The total fault length (TFL) of various sources in
present in Delhi Fold Belt by Himalayan Thrust System. Himalayan region have been taken from available literature
Furthermore, the Indian Plate is pushing into the Asian [1, 5, 10] and length of lineaments and faults for the
Plate at a high rate of 15–20 cm/year. As a direct result of remaining regions have been determined using Bhuvan 2D,
this collision, stress in the Indian Plate is becoming high, a web mapping service application developed by Indian
which in turn increases hazard due to earthquakes, partic- Space Research Organisation, ISRO [22]. The ratio of RLD
ularly in Northern India along Himalayan region [18, 19]. to total fault length (TFL) expressed in percentage is
Hence, the threat perception also increases due to prox- defined as percentage fault rupture (PFR) which has been
imity of the area to active Himalayan plate boundary calculated for the past earthquakes. PFR values so
region. Thus, seismic hazard of the state is controlled by determined have been plotted against total fault length
two different tectonic regimes viz., the Himalayan Thrust (TFL). PFR follows a unique trend with total length of
System and the Delhi Fold Belt. source and is referred to as the rupture character of the

123
Indian Geotech J (April–June 2016) 46(2):164–174 167

Table 1 Earthquake catalogue of the study area for Mw C 6

Year Month Day Origin Latitude (°N) Longitude (°E) Depth (km) Magnitude (Mw)
H Min Sec

1720 7 15 0 0 0 28.37 77.1 – 6.5

1803 9 1 0 0 0 27.5 77.7 – 6.8
1803 0 0 0 0 0 30 80 – 6.5
1809 0 0 0 0 0 30 79 – 6
1816 5 26 0 0 0 30 80 – 6.5
1827 9 24 0 0 0 31.6 74.4 – 6.5
1883 5 30 0 0 0 29.4 79.6 – 6
1902 6 16 0 0 0 31 79 – 6
1905 4 4 0 50 0 32.3 76.25 – 8
1905 9 26 1 26 9 29 74 – 7.1
1906 2 28 0 0 0 32 77 – 7
1906 6 13 0 0 0 31 79 – 6
1916 8 28 6 29 30 30 81 – 7.5
1926 7 27 7 23 36 30.5 80.5 – 6
1927 10 8 10 34 28 30.5 80.5 – 6
1945 6 4 12 8 55 30.3 80 – 6.5
1945 6 22 18 0 51 32.6 75.9 – 6.5
1947 7 10 10 19 20 32.6 75.9 – 6.2
1955 6 27 10 14 9 32.5 78.6 – 6
1956 10 10 15 31 36 28.15 77.67 – 6.7
1958 12 28 5 34 38 30.01 79.94 – 6.3
1958 12 31 3 45 15 30.09 79.86 – 6
1959 5 12 0 35 46 32.5 79 – 6.3
1960 8 27 15 58 59.2 28.2 77.4 109 6
1966 3 6 2 15 57.2 31.49 80.5 50 6
1966 6 27 10 41 8.1 29.62 80.83 33 6
1966 6 27 10 59 18.1 29.71 80.89 36 6
1975 1 19 8 1 57.7 32.38 78.5 1 6.2
1991 10 19 21 23 15 30.75 78.86 13 6.6
1999 3 28 19 5 13.3 30.41 79.42 21 6.8

region. Figure 2 shows the typical plot of PFR with respect The estimated values of Mmax have been reported in
to the total fault length (TFL). Table 3.
In Fig. 2, the rupture value (solid line) developed using It has been observed that average PFR for the seismic
power law is the average rupture characteristic for the study area ranges from 1.2 to 13.7 %. However, for the
region corresponding to different TFLs. Based on the trend, estimation of Mmax, worstcase scenario PFR has been used
average and worstcase PFR values have been estimated. and it ranges from 6 to 68.5 percent. The Mmax values in
Selection of average or worstcase PFR is based on impo- terms of moment magnitude estimated for the seismic
ratnce of structure and level of safety required. For the study area range from 6.73 to 7.52.
present study, PFR for the worstcase scenario has been
taken as ten times the average PFR for Himalayan Thrust
System, which is more than the maximum reported PFR Strong Motion Attenuation
considering its past seismicity. For rest of the seismogenic
sources, it has been taken as five times the average PFR. The seismic design of any engineering structure is based on
RLD value for the worstcase PFR has been calculated for an estimate of expected strong ground motion. There is
determination of maximum magnitude potential (Mmax) for rarely sufficient number of strong ground motion record-
each seismogenic source. ings near seismic study area to allow a direct empirical

123
168 Indian Geotech J (April–June 2016) 46(2):164–174

Fig. 1 a Epicentral map of

seismic study area. b Major
tectonic features in seismic
study area

123
Indian Geotech J (April–June 2016) 46(2):164–174 169

Table 2 List of active seismogenic sources

Tectonic feature no. Name of tectonic feature Abbreviation used Length (km) Maximum observed
magnitude (MObs)

4 Sargodha-Lahore-Delhi-Ridge SLDR 605 6.5

6 Sardar Shahar Fault SSF 272 7.1
9 Mathura fault MF 100 6.8
10 Great Boundary Fault GBF 320 5.5
11 Moradabad Fault MDF 165 6.7
13 Mahendragarh-Dehradun Sub Surface Fault MDSSF 300 6.5
16 Jwala Mukhi Thrust JMT 277 5.5
17 Main Boundary Thrust MBT 450 8
20 Kaurik Fault System KFS 137 5.8
18 Sundar Nagar Fault SNF 104 7
19 Main Crustral Thrust MCT 350 7.5
22 Ramgarh Thrust RT 88 6

50
Site coefficients for Indo-Gangetic Region have been
Percentage Fault Rupture (PFR)

45 Percentage

40
Fault Ruprure used to estimate ground motion at grid points in seismic
35
Trend Line study area. The attenuation relationship is given by
30
Eq. (2):
 
25 Sa

ln ¼ C1 þ C2 M þ C3 M 2 þ C4 r þ C5 ln r þ C6 eC7 M
20 g
15 þ C8 logðr ÞfO þ lnðÞ
10
ð2Þ
5
0 where f0 = max [ln (r/100), 0] here Sa is the spectral
0 200 400 600 800
acceleration, M is the moment magnitude, r is the
Total Fault Length, TFL (km)
hypocentral distance in kilometer. For the calculation of r,
Fig. 2 Regional rupture character epicentral distance between source and site have been
determined using Bhuvan 2D [22]. For calculation of
estimation of the motion expected for a design earthquake.
spectral acceleration, site coefficients (C1–C8) in the
In this study, attenuation model developed by National
attenuation relationship have been taken from NDMA
Disaster Management Authority of India has been used for
report [1] as reported for Indo-Gangetic region.
seismic hazard assessment of Haryana [1].

Table 3 Values of Mmax corresponding to various seismogenic sources

Faults TFL (km) Average Worstcase scenario Worstcase Mmax
PFR (%) PFR (%) RLD
(km)

Sargodha-Lahore-Delhi-Ridge 605 1.2 6 36.3 6.78

Sardar Shahar Fault 272 2.66 13.3 36.176 6.78
Mathura fault 100 7 35 35 6.75
Great Boundary Fault 320 2.42 12.1 38.72 6.83
Moradabad Fault 165 4.5 22.5 37.125 6.80
Mahendragarh-Dehradun Sub Surface Fault 300 2.5 12.5 37.5 6.80
Jwala Mukhi Thrust 277 2.65 13.25 36.7025 6.79
Main Boundary Thrust 450 2.2 22 99 7.52
Kaurik Fault System 56 13.7 68.5 38.36 6.82
Sundar Nagar Fault 104 6.5 32.5 33.8 6.73
Main Crustral Thrust 350 2.4 24 84 7.40
Ramgarh Thrust 88 8.6 43 37.84 6.81

123
170 Indian Geotech J (April–June 2016) 46(2):164–174

The contours for peak ground accelerations (PGA) have points ranges from 0.023 g to 0.514 g. The severe-most
been drawn for 0.1° 9 0.1° grid area within the state using hazard in terms of PGA (g), peak spectral acceleration,
nearest neighbour interpolation model as shown in Fig. 3. PSA (Sa/g) at T = 0.1 s and T = 1.0 s corresponding to
On the basis of maximum PGA values estimated for each seismic zone have been reported in Table 4.
different seismogenic sources, the study region has been It has been observed that border area between Faridabad
divided into six seismogenic zones which have been and Noida regions of Uttar Pradesh falls in Seismogenic
delineated in Fig. 3. Zone A of the developed DSHA map (Fig. 3). This area is
distant from active seismogenic sources and is less vul-
Seismogenic Zone A: Moradabad Fault Zone
nerable to earthquakes. A maximum PGA value of 0.085 g
Seismogenic Zone B: Sardar Shahar Fault Zone
has been calculated for this region. Though, a value of
Seismogenic Zone C: Jwala Mukhi Thrust Zone
0.24 g has been reported in IS Code [9] for this areas as it
Seismogenic Zone D: Main Boundary Thrust Zone
falls in Zone IV of Seismic Zoning Map of India. Sirsa and
Seismogenic Zone E: Mathura Fault Zone
Fatehabad districts fall under Seismogenic Zone B. It has
Seismogenic Zone F: Mahendragarh-Dehradun Sub Sur-
been observed that for this zone, the maximum PGA value
face Fault Zone
is 0.098 g. Though, values of 0.1 and 0.16 g have been
The effect of remaining six seismogenic sources in reported in IS Code as these areas fall in Zone II and Zone
terms of seismic hazard has been observed to be negligible III of Seismic Zoning Map. Border area between Panchkula
at each grid point. Hence, seismic zonation has been done and Solan regions of Himachal Pradesh falls in Seismo-
considering six seismogenic sources only. PGA value for genic Zone C. A maximum PGA value of 0.479 g has been
the controlling earthquake at a grid point has been con- calculated for this region. Though, a value of 0.24 g has
sidered in order to prepare seismic hazard map. The con- been reported in IS Code for this area as it falls in Zone IV
tour map shows the maximum value of PGA which this of Seismic Zoning Map. Also, maximum PGA values
region will experience due to combined effect of all these calculated for most of the areas in Seismogenic Zone D, E
seismogenic sources. The value of PGAmax for all the grid and F are much higher than the PGA values reported in IS

Fig. 3 Seismic hazard map

showing the spatial variation of
PGAmax (g) for Haryana

123
Indian Geotech J (April–June 2016) 46(2):164–174 171

Table 4 Comparison of calculated hazard parameters of the present study with IS: 1893-Part1
Calculated hazard parameters of the present study IS:1893-Part 1
Seismogenic Corresponding seismogenic PGAmax PSAmax (Sa/g) Controlling earthquake Seismic Zone factors
zone source (g) (Mw) zone (g)
T = 0.1 s T = 1 s

A MDF 0.085 0.148 0.034 6.80 IV 0.24

B SSF 0.098 0.170 0.039 6.78 II, III 0.10, 0.16
C JMT 0.479 0.8 0.154 6.79 IV 0.24
D MBT 0.481 0.835 0.193 7.52 III, IV 0.16, 0.24
E MF 0.484 0.807 0.153 6.75 IV 0.24
F MDSSF 0.514 0.860 0.165 6.80 II, III, IV 0.10, 0.16,
0.24

code. Hence, the codal acceleration values are found to be hazard has been estimated for the state. Based on the present
very conservative for the major part of Haryana state. study, following conclusions have been drawn:
Hazard in terms of maximum PGA has also been esti-
1. In order to identify the tectonic features likely to
mated for important cities and towns of Haryana. Table 5
generate significant ground motions in the study area,
shows maximum PGA values, and hypocentral distance
all the earthquake events which occurred in past
(r) from the nearest seismogenic source for important cities
509 years in the study region have been superimposed
and towns of Haryana.
on the tectonic map. There exist a total of 25 tectonic
Response spectrum is one of the useful tools of earth-
features in the seismic study area out which 12 features
quake engineering for analyzing the performance of
have been selected as potential seismogenic sources.
structures especially during earthquakes, since many sys-
2. The maximum magnitude potential of seismogenic
tems behave as single degree of freedom systems. Thus, if
sources has been estimated considering regional rup-
one can find out the natural frequency of the structure, then
ture character using method developed by P. Anbazha-
the peak response of the building can be estimated by
gan et al. [20]. The values of Mmax determined by this
reading the value from the ground response spectrum for
method are function of rupture character instead of the
the appropriate frequency. In most building codes in seis-
seismicity parameters. The regional rupture character
mic regions, this value forms the basis for calculating the
has been established by considering percentage fault
forces that a structure must be designed to resist during
rupture (PFR). PFR for the worstcase scenario earth-
earthquakes. Response spectra have been plotted for vari-
quake has been taken as ten times the average PFR for
ous seismogenic zones for severe-most hazard and have
Himalayan Thrust System, which is more than the
been shown in Fig. 4. Site specific response spectrum can
maximum reported PFR considering its past seismic-
also be plotted using Eq. 2, site coefficients (C1–C8), Mmax
ity. For rest of the seismogenic sources, it has been
from Table 3 and r (hypocentral distance in km) from
taken as five times. It has been observed that Mmax
Table 5 for important cities and towns of Haryana.
values in terms of moment magnitude estimated for the
The spectra presented are for rock sites and it is nec-
seismic study area range from 6.73 to 7.52.
essary to carry out ground response analysis for the sites
3. Attenuation model developed by National Disaster
underlain by soils to compute maximum horizontal ground
Management Authority of India has been used for
acceleration required for the design of earthquake resistant
seismic hazard assessment of Haryana. Site coefficients
structures. Figure 4 also shows response spectra of rock
for Indo-Gangetic Region have been used to estimate
sites for various seismic zones as per IS:1893-Part 1 for
ground motion at grid points in seismic study area.
comparison. More detailed studies are required so that
4. On the basis of maximum values of PGA estimated for
response spectra given in IS Code are suitably revised.
different seismogenic sources, the study region has
been divided into six seismogenic zones. The effect of
remaining six seismogenic sources in terms of seismic
Conclusions
hazard has been observed to be negligible at each grid
point.
In this study, an attempt has been made to evaluate the seismic
5. PGA value for the controlling earthquake at a grid
hazard in terms of peak ground acceleration (PGA) and
point has been considered in order to prepare seismic
spectral acceleration (SA) for rock sites (A-type sites) for the
hazard map. A contour map has been developed which
state of Haryana. Using state of the art in DSHA methodology,

123
172 Indian Geotech J (April–June 2016) 46(2):164–174

Table 5 PGA value and Hypocentral distance for controlling earthquake for important cities and towns of Haryana
Place Latitude (°N) Longitude (°E) PGAmax Seismogenic zone Hypocentral distance, r (km)

Ambala 30.3800 76.7800 0.167 MBT 65.23

Bahadurgarh 28.6800 76.9200 0.258 MDSSF 29.54
Bhiwani 28.7833 76.1333 0.167 MDSSF 42.37
Charkhi Dadri 28.5900 76.2700 0.405 MDSSF 18.59
Dabwali 29.9477 74.7322 0.031 SSF 116.15
Faridabad 28.4211 77.3078 0.086 MF 64.89
Fatehabad 29.520595 75.449494 0.034 SSF 111.07
Gharaunda 29.5400 76.9700 0.237 MDSSF 31.93
Gohana 29.1300 76.7000 0.274 MDSSF 27.98
Gurgaon 28.4700 77.0300 0.131 MDSSF 50.76
Hansi 29.1000 75.9700 0.067 MDSSF 77.60
Hisar 29.1500 75.7000 0.045 MDSSF 96.69
Jagadhari 30.1680 77.3010 0.195 MBT 58.09
Jhajjar 28.6100 76.6600 0.383 MDSSF 19.84
Jind 29.3167 76.3167 0.078 MDSSF 71.07
Kaithal 29.8000 76.3800 0.050 MBT 135.83
Kalka 30.8300 76.9300 0.418 MBT 27.85
Karnal 29.6900 76.9800 0.181 MDSSF 39.85
Kurukshetra 29.9657 76.8370 0.090 MBT 96.54
Loharu 28.4500 75.8200 0.203 MDSSF 36.31
Mahendragarh 28.2800 76.1500 0.474 MDSSF 15.32
Manesar 28.2210 76.5636 0.211 MDSSF 35.26
Mewat 28.1000 77.0000 0.107 MF 56.26
Narnaul 28.0008 76.0018 0.374 MDSSF 20.36
Narwana 29.6167 76.1117 0.040 MDSSF 102.79
Palwal 28.1400 77.3300 0.199 MF 35.78
Panchkula 30.6942091 76.860565 0.319 MBT 37.64
Panipat 29.3900 76.9700 0.304 MDSSF 25.31
Pehowa 29.9800 76.5800 0.075 MBT 108.04
Rewari 28.1800 76.6200 0.151 MDSSF 45.82
Rohtak 28.8909 76.5796 0.325 MDSSF 23.69
Samalkha 29.2300 77.0200 0.388 MDSSF 19.56
Sampla 28.776005 76.770166 0.514 MDSSF 13.68
Shahabad Markanda 30.1600 76.8700 0.137 MBT 74.56
Sirsa 29.5300 75.0000 0.059 SSF 81.70
Sohna 28.2500 77.0700 0.096 MF 60.54
Sonipat 28.9800 77.0200 0.343 MDSSF 22.40
Tohana 29.7000 75.9000 0.028 MBT 177.62
Tosham 28.8800 75.9200 0.095 MDSSF 62.51
Yamunanagar 30.1000 77.2800 0.166 MBT 65.46

shows the maximum values of PGA that this region value of PGAmax for all grid points ranges from 0.023
will experience due to combined effect of all these to 0.514 g.
seismogenic sources. 7. Maximum PGA values calculated for most of the areas
6. The contour map for peak ground accelerations (PGA) are much higher than the PGA values reported in IS
has been drawn for 0.1° 9 0.1° grid size within the code. Hence, codal PGA values need to be suitably
state using nearest neighbour interpolation model. The revised for the major part of the state of Haryana.

123
Indian Geotech J (April–June 2016) 46(2):164–174 173

study region. Authors thank the anonymous reviewers for their

valuable comments towards improving the quality of the manuscript.

References

1. Iyengar RN et al (2011) Development of probabilistic seismic

hazard map of India. Technical report. National Disaster Man-
agement Authority (NDMA), Govt. of India, New Delhi
2. Kolathayar S, Sitharam TG, Vipin KS (2012) Deterministic
seismic hazard macrozonation of India. J Earth Syst Sci
121(5):1351–1364
3. Naik N, Choudhury D (2015) Deterministic seismic hazard
analysis considering different seismicity levels for the state of
Goa. India Nat Hazards 75(1):557–580
4. Shukla J, Choudhury D (2012) Estimation of seismic ground
motions using deterministic approach for major cities of Gujarat.
Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 12:2019–2037
5. Iyengar RN and Ghosh S (2004) Seismic hazard mapping of
Delhi city. In: Proceedings of 13th world conference on earth-
quake engineering. Vancouver, B.C., Canada. Paper No. 180
6. Sitharam TG, Sil A (2014) Comprehensive seismic hazard
assessment of Tripura and Mizoram states. J Earth Syst Sci
123(4):837–857
7. Sharma ML, Wason HR, Dimri R (2003) Seismic zonation of
Delhi region for bedrock ground motion. Pure appl Geophys
160(2):2381–2398
8. Vipin KS, Anbazhagan P, Sitharam TG (2009) Estimation of
peak ground acceleration and spectral acceleration for South
India with local site effects: probabilistic approach. Nat Hazards
Earth Syst Sci 9:865–878
9. IS:1893-Part1 (2002) Indian standard criteria for earthquake
resistant design of structures, Part 1: General provisions and
building. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi
10. Iyengar RN, Ghosh S (2004) Microzonation of earthquake hazard
Fig. 4 Spectral acceleration versus period curves for different in greater Delhi region. Curr Sci 87(9):1193–1202
seismic zones 11. Dasgupta S et al (2000) Seismotectonic atlas of India and its
environs (SEISAT). Geological Survey of India, Calcutta
12. Gupta AK, Chopra S, Prajapati SK, Sutar AK, Bansal BK (2013)
8. Hazard in terms of PGA has also been estimated for Intensity distribution of M4.9 Haryana-Delhi border earthquake.
Nat Hazards 68(2):405–417
important cities and towns of Haryana to help engi- 13. Bansal BK, Verma M (2012) The M4.9 Delhi earthquake of 5
neers and town planners in earthquake resistant March 2012. Curr Sci 102(12):1704–1708
designing of structures. 14. Shukla AK, Prakash R, Singh RK, Mishra PS, Bhatnagar AK
9. Response spectra have been plotted for various seis- (2007) Seismotectonic implications of Delhi region through fault
plane solutions of some recent earthquakes. Curr Sci
mogenic zones for severe-most hazard alongwith those 93(12):1848–1853
given in IS:1893-Part1 for various seismic zones for 15. Singh SK, Kumar A, Suresh G, Ordaz M, Pacheco JF, Sharma
comparison. The spectra presented are for rock sites ML, Bansal BK, Dattatrayam RS, Reinoso E (2010) Delhi
and it is necessary to carry out ground response earthquake of 25 November 2007 (Mw 4.1): implications for
seismic hazard. Curr Sci 99(7):939–947
analysis for the sites underlain by soils to compute 16. Srivastava LS and Somayajulu JG (1966) The seismicity of the
maximum horizontal ground acceleration required for area around Delhi. In: Proceedings of the 3rd symposium on
the design of earthquake resistant structures. More earthquake engineering, vol 1. Roorkee, pp 417–422
detailed studies are required so that response spectra 17. Prakash R, Shrivastava JP (2012) A review of seismicity and
seismotectonics of Delhi and adjoining areas. J Geol Soc India
given in IS Code are suitably revised. 79:603–617
18. Mittal H, Kumar A, Ramhmachhuani R (2012) Indian national
Acknowledgments Authors would like to acknowledge Department strong motion instrumentation network and site characterization
of Science and Technology (DST), Ministry of Science and Tech- of its stations. Int J Geosci 3:1151–1167
nology, India for providing financial assistance to carry out the study 19. Sati D, Nautiyal SP (1994) Possible role of Delhi-Haridwar
under INSPIRE Fellowship Scheme (Candidate Code IF130892). subsurface ridge in generation of Uttarkashi earthquake, Garhwal
Authors are thankful to Indian Meteorological Department (IMD), Himalaya. India Curr Sci 67(1):39–44
Delhi for providing data for preparing earthquake catalogue of the

123
174 Indian Geotech J (April–June 2016) 46(2):164–174

20. Anbazhagan P, Bajaj K, Moustafa Sayed SR, Al-Arifi NSN 22. NRSC Data Centre (2014) Bhuvan 2D. National Remote Sensing
(2015) Maximum magnitude estimation considering the regional Centre, Department of Space, Government of India, Balanagar,
rupture character. J Seismol 19(3):695–719 Hyderabad. http://bhuvan.nrsc.gov.in/map/bhuvannew/bhuvan2d.
21. Wells DL, Coppersmith KJ (1994) New empirical relationships php. Accessed 29 Novemb 2014
among magnitude, rupture length, rupture area, and surface dis-
placement. Bull Seismol Soc Am 84(4):974–1002

123

View publication stats