Buradasınız

Anasayfa » Content

GUTENBERG-RICHTER BAĞINTISINDAKİ b DEĞERİNİN TESPİTİİÇİN ALTERNATİF BİR METOT VE GÜNEYBATI TÜRKİYE’DE BİR UYGULAMASI

AN ALTERNATIVE METHOD FOR THE ESTIMATION OF b-VALUE IN THE GUTENBERG-RICHTER RELATION WITH AN APPLICATION IN SOUTHWEST OF TURKEY

Journal Name:

  • Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Mühendislik Fakültesi Fen ve Mühendislik Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2006

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
In this study, the spatial distribution of seismicity and seismic hazard is undertaken for the Southwest of Turkey. For this purpose, the earthquakes of magnitude of M≥4 which were occurred between 1964 - 2002 were used in Southwest of Turkey. For the estimation of seismicity parameters and its mapping, Southwest of Turkey is divided into 169 rectangular subregions. The b value from the Gutenberg-Richter frequency-magnitude distributions is calculated by least squares method with a new alternative method and compared with the results directly calculated by least squares method. The a value in the Gutenberg-Richter frequency-magnitude distributions is taken a constant value in the new alternative method. The b value shows different distributions along the Southwest of Turkey for both techniques. From the new technique, low b-values are dominant in the western part of the studying region, while higher b-values are present in the eastern part. Finally, the return period and occurrence probability risk of M≥6 earthquakes in 75 years were calculated using Poisson model for both techniques. Maps of the occurrence probability risk and return period showed a better consistency with the b parameters seismicity maps calculated from new method. Moreover, the return period and occurrence probability risk maps calculated from both techniques showed a better consistency,with each other. The occurrence probability risk and return period of M≥6 earthquake were calculated as %90-95 and 15-30 years, respectively, from the Poisson model in the western part of the studying region.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Çalışmada Güneybatı Türkiye’nin sismik riski ve sismisitesinin uzaysal dağılımı ele alınmıştır. Bu amaç için 1964–2002 yılları arasında bölgede meydana gelen M≥4 olan 722 adet deprem verisi kullanılmıştır. Sismisite parametrelerinin belirlenebilmesi ve haritalanması için çalışılan alan 169 alt bölgeye ayrılmıştır. Her bir alt bölge için, Gutenberg-Richter magnitüd-frekans bağıntısındaki b değeri en küçük kareler tekniği ve yeni bir alternatif metotla hesaplanarak doğrudan en küçük karelerden elde edilen sonuçlar ile karşılaştırılmıştır. Yeni alternatif metotta Gutenberg-Richter bağıntısındaki a parametresi sabit alınmıştır. Güneybatı Türkiye boyunca her iki teknik içinde b değeri farklı değişim göstermiştir. Yeni alternatif metot ile Güneybatı Türkiye’nin Doğusu yüksek b değeri gösterirken, Batı kanadında düşük b değerleri baskın olarak bulunmuştur. Son olarak, her iki teknikle de Poisson modeli kullanılarak çalışma alanı içerisinde M≥6 depremin 75 yıllık bir süreçte oluşma riski ve dönüş periyotları hesaplanarak haritalanmıştır. Her iki teknikle oluşturulan risk ve dönüş periyodu haritaları alternatif metotla oluşturulan b parametresi sismisite haritalarıyla oldukça uyumlu olarak bulunmuştur. Ayrıca, her iki teknikle de elde edilen risk ve dönüş periyotları bir biri ile tamamen uyumludur. Çalışma alanının Batı kanadında M≥6 bir depremin oluşma riski %90–95 ve dönüş periyodu da 15– 30 yıl olarak elde edilmiştir.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastrmx_31877_8_pp_67-78.pdf
  • 2
67-78
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

Allen C.R., Amand P., Richter C.F., Nordquist J.M. (1965):“Relation Between Sismicity and
Geological Structure In The S. California Region”, Bull. Seismol. Soc. 55, 752-797.
Bath M. (1983): “Earthquake Magnitude-Recent Research and Current Trends”, Earth. Sci.
Rev. 17, 315-398.
Evernden J.F. (1970): “Study of Regional Seismicity and Associated Problems”, Bull.
Seismol. Soc. Am., 60, 393-446.
Frohlich C., Davis S. (1993): “Teleseismic b-Values: or, Much Abouth 1.0”, J. Geopyhys.
Res., 98, 631- 644.
Gutenberg B., Richter C.F. (1944): “Frequency of Earthquakes in California”, Bull. Seismol.
Soc. Am., 34, 185-188.
Hazidimitriou P.M., Papadimitriou E.E., Mountrakis D.M., Papazachos B.C. (1985):”The
Seismic Parameter B of The Frequency-Magnitude Relation and Its Association with The
Geological Zones In The Area of Greece”, Tectonophysics, 120, 141-151.
IRIS (Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology) www.iris.edu.
Ishomoto M., Lida K. (1939): “Observations of Earthquakes Registered with The
Microseismograph Constructed Recently”, Bull. Earthq. Res. Inst., 17, 443-478.
Kijko A. (1988): “Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Gutenberg-Richter B Parameter For
Uncertain Magnitudes Values”, Pure Appl. Geophys., 127, 573-579.
Kiremidjian A.S., Shah H.C. (1975): “Seismic Hazard Mapping of California”, The John A.
Blume Earthquake Eng. Center, Report No.21, Dept. of Civil Engr., Stanford Univ.
Manakou M.V., Tsapanos T.M. (2000): “Seismicity and Seismic Hazard Parameters
Evaluation in The Island of Crete and Surrounding Area Inferred from Mixed Data Files”,
Tectonophysics, 321, 157-178.
Miyamura S. (1962): “Magnitude-Frequency Relations and Its Bearing to Geotectonics”,
Proc. Japan. Acad., 38, 27-30.
Mogi K. (1967): “Earthquakes and Fractures”, Tectonophysics, 5, 35-55.
Mori J., Abercrombie R.E. (1997): “Depth Dependence of Earthquake Frequency-Magnitude
Distributions in California”, J. Geopyhys. Res., 102, 15081-15090.
Olsson R. (1999): “An Estimation of Maximum b-Value in the Gutenberg-Richter Relation”,
Journal of Geodynamics, 27, 547-552.
Pacheco J.F., Scholz C.H., Sykes L.R. (1992): “Changes in Frequency-Size Relationship from
Small to Large Earthquakes”, Nature, 355, 71-73.
Papazachos B.C. (1974): “Dependence of the Seismic Parameter B on the Magnitude Range”,
Pure Appl. Geophys., 112, 1059-1065.
Papazachos B.C. (1999): “An Alternative Method for A Reliable Estimation of Seismicity
with an Application in Greece and the Surrounding Area”, Bull. Seismo. Soc., 89, 111-
119.
Scholz C.H. (1968): “The Frequency-Magnitude Relation of Microfracturing In Rock And Its
Relation To Earthquakes”, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 58, 399-415.
Shi Y., Bolt B.A. (1982): “The Standard Error of the Magnitude-Frequency B-Value”, Bull.
Seismol. Soc. Am., 72, 1677-1687.
Tsapanos T.M., Galanopoulos D.G., Burton P.W. (1994): “Seismicity in the Hellenic
Volcanic Arc: Relation between Seismic Parameters and the Geophysical Fields in the
Region”, Geopyhys. J. Int., 117, 677-694.
Turcotte D.L. (1986): “A Fractal Model of Crustal Deformation”, Tectonophy, 132, 261-269.
USGS (United States Geological Survey) www.usgs.gov
Wang J.H. (1988): “B-Values of Shallow Earthquakes in Taiwan”, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am.,
78, 1243-1254.
Wang J.H. (1994): “On The Correlation of Observed Gutenberg-Richter’s B-Value and
Omori's P-Value for Aftershocks”, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 84, 2008-2011.
Wiemer S., Mcnutt S.R., Wyss M. (1998): “Temporal and Three-Dimensional Spatial
Analysis of the Frequency-Magnitude Distributions Near Long Valley Caldera,
California”, Geopyhys. J. Int., 134, 409-421.
Wiemer S., Wyss M. (1997): “Mapping The Frequency-Magnitude Distributions in
Asperities: An Improved Technique to Calculate Recurrence Times”, J. Geopyhys. Res.,
102, 15115-15128.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com