18 views

Original Title: AzlanAdnan2002_TheEffectoftheLatest_2

Uploaded by Suzana C. Alih

- p
- Earthquake Facts and Statistics
- project part 3 lithosphere map set
- Badawy2016 Copy
- Elasticity and Elastic Waves 2015
- An Assessment of the Consequences and Preparations for a Catastrophic California Earthquake: Findings and Actions TakenPrepared By Federal Emergency Management Agency by Various
- Taiwan Hsu2007
- Bank Soal b.inggris_dns
- 4. Makrup Vol.17 No.3
- print_paper.pdf
- Palu Earthquake EMSC Report 19-10-2018
- Tsunami Generation Along the Makran Sub Duct Ion Zone
- Seismic Reliability Assessment of a Bridge Ground
- Art Bell After Dark Newsletter 1995-05 - May
- Performance of Intez Tank Under Near Fault And Far Field Earthquake Motion
- Texto Guia de Ingenieria Antisismica
- lbs 405 5e lesson plan with arts integration 1
- A Comparative Study of Seismic Analysis of a.pdf
- Source receiver reciprocity
- Engineering Geology

You are on page 1of 12

2, 2002

EARTHQUAKE TO MALAYSIAN PENINSULAR

Hendriyawan

Structural Earthquake Engineering Research (SEER)

Faculty of Civil Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

Dr. Ir. Masyhur Irsyam

Civil Engineering Department, Institut Teknologi Bandung

ABSTRACT

Although the Malaysian Peninsular is located relatively faraway from the seismic

source zone of Sumatra but the nearest distance of earthquake epicenter from

Malaysia is approximately 350 km. Tremors due to Sumatran earthquakes have

been reported several times. The newest data from the Malaysian Meteorological

Service informed that the newest earthquake near Sumatra on 2 November 2002

had caused tremor in several cities in the Malaysian Peninsular such as Penang,

Port Klang, Selangor and Old Klang, Selangor. The tremor had caused panic

among residents of the high-rise buildings in Penang and thousands were running

out of their buildings.

The objective of this study is to evaluate the effect of the Sumatran Earthquake to

the Malaysian Peninsular. This report includes the following items: 1) tectonic

setting of Sumatra, 2) location, mechanism, and size of recent earthquake, and 3)

analysis of ground acceleration at bedrock for Penang and Kuala Lumpur using

several appropriate attenuation relationships.

at bedrock of Penang and Kuala Lumpur. Analysis is carried out using

deterministic method and using attenuation relationships proposed by Youngs

(1997) Atkinson and Boore (1997) and Petersen (2002). Comparison study using

those three attenuation functions is also conducted in order to evaluate the effect of

selection attenuation function at site location.

INTRODUCTION

JURNAL KEJURUTERAAN AWAM (JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING) Vol. 15 No. 2 2002

frequently. According to data compiled from International Foundations (USGS-

NEIC), about 1000 earthquake events occurred during the year 1900 to 2002 with

magnitudes, Ms > 5.0. The locations of theearthquake epicenters, during these

years can be seen in Figure 1.

NEIC)

The Malaysian Peninsular is located about 350 km away from the nearest fault line

in Sumatra, relatively faraway from seismic source zone. However tremors due to

2

JURNAL KEJURUTERAAN AWAM (JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING) Vol. 15 No. 2 2002

the Sumatra earthquakes had been reported several times. The latest earthquake

event occurred on the 2nd November 2002 at Northern Sumatra. The tremors had

been felt in Penang and Port Klang and reportedly caused cracks on the buildings.

The objective of this study is to evaluate the effect of the Sumatra Earthquake to

the Malaysian Peninsular. This report includes the following items: 1) tectonic

setting of Sumatra, 2) location, mechanism, and size of recent earthquake, and 3)

analysis of ground acceleration at bedrock for Penang and Kuala Lumpur using

several appropriate attenuation relationships.

TECTONIC SETTING

Major tectonic feature of Sumatra area is the Sunda Arc which extends between the

Andaman Island in the northwest and the Banda Arc in the east, resulted from

subduction of the Indo Australian plate beneath the Sunda Shelf, a stable southern

prolongation of the Eurasian plate. The Indo-Australian plate is sliding about 67

mm/year in a northerly direction against the Eurasian plate. The direction of

relative plate motion is oblique to the northwest trend of the plate boundary

(Huchon and Pichon, 1984). The frequency and magnitude of this subduction zone

seismicity is influenced by the age, composition, and rate of convergence of the

subducted plate. The largest thrust-fault earthquakes in the Sumatra subduction

zone in the last two centuries were that of 1833, which had a magnitude of 8.8-9.2,

and that of 1861, which had a magnitude of 8.3-8.5. Tectonic setting of Sumatra is

also influenced by strike-slip faulting as a result of the component of plate-motion

that is parallel to the trend of the plate boundary in the interior of the island of

Sumatra. Tectonic setting of Sumatra can be seen in Figure 2.

3

JURNAL KEJURUTERAAN AWAM (JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING) Vol. 15 No. 2 2002

Sumatra Fault

Subduction Zone

Information Center U.S. Geological Survey (USGS-NEIC), NS2002 was located at

the longitude of 96.18E and latitude of 3.024 N. The depth of the earthquake was

33.0 km and moment magnitude, Mw, of the earthquake was 7.4. The distance of

epicenter from Penang and Kuala Lumpur were approximately 523 km and 600

km, respectively. The location of the earthquake can be seen in Figure 3.

4

JURNAL KEJURUTERAAN AWAM (JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING) Vol. 15 No. 2 2002

523 km

600 km

Based on the report, the earthquake occurred as a result of thrust faulting on the

boundary between the subducting Australian plate and the overriding Sunda block

of the Eurasian plate. In order to verify the mechanism of that earthquake, spatial

distribution of earthquakes nearby NS2002 were constructed from earthquake data

occurred from the year 1900 to 2002. The earthquake data are selected from the

rectangular area shown in Figure 4 with dimensions, 500 km x 1000 km.

The hypocentral profiles can be seen in Figure 5. The 0-km position shown on the

profile is the trench axis. The hypocentral profile reveals downward dipping zone

of seismicity. Based on that figure it can be seen the NS2002 located on subduction

zone.

5

JURNAL KEJURUTERAAN AWAM (JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING) Vol. 15 No. 2 2002

1000 km

500 km

Distance (km)

0.0 100.0 200.0 300.0 400.0 500.0 600.0

0

20

40

60

Depth (km)

80

100 4 < Mw < 5

120 5 < Mw < 6

140 6 < Mw<7

160 Mw > 7

180 Earthq. 2/11/02

200

Figure 5. Hypocentral profile at segment A-A (Source: USGA-NEIC)

caused tremor in several cities in the Malaysian Peninsular such as Penang, Port

Klang, and Old Klang. The tremor caused panic among residents of the high-rise

6

JURNAL KEJURUTERAAN AWAM (JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING) Vol. 15 No. 2 2002

buildings in Penang. Thousands were running out of their buildings. In Port Klang,

Selangor, the tremor was felt in several offices and in Old Klang Road, Selangor, it

was felt by residents in the high-rise buildings. Based on the data, it can be

predicted that the local size of earthquake effect in Penang is approximately V on

MMI scale. There was no report regarding the effect of the earthquake on Kuala

Lumpur City Centre.

SEISMIC ANALYSIS

at the bedrock of Penang and Kuala Lumpur. Analysis is carried out using

deterministic method and using several appropriate attenuation relationships.

Attenuation Relationship

relationship. Since there is no attenuation relationship was derived for Malaysian

region as well as no adequate ground motion recording to develop attenuation

formula, several attenuation functions from other countries are taken.

employed in other region. Therefore the selection of attenuation function is

conducted based on similarity of faulting mechanism between site region and that

in which attenuation formula was derived. After selecting an attenuation formula,

one may verify whether it is appropriate with local site condition. As there are

many uncertainties involved in local site condition, it is safer to use attenuation

relation for estimating expected ground motion at bedrock. Most investigators

derived their formula using peak ground motion recordings at the surface. Hence,

it is too conservative if one applies for corresponding relation at bedrock

necessarily. Since there are only a few attenuation relations derived at true bedrock

sites, a correction factor should be determined to compensate for site condition

difference. It takes much consideration and engineering judgments in determining

the coefficient.

environment (i.e. subduction zone and shallow crustal earthquakes) and site

condition. Most relations use qualitative measure to represent site condition, except

for Boore et. al. (1997), which utilizes average shear velocity over the upper 30 m

(VS) to represent site condition. Based on information from USGS, NS2002 was

occurred on subduction zone. Hence in this analysis attenuation relationship for

subduction zone earthquake were used. There are several attenuation relationships

derived for subduction zone earthquake such as Crouse (1991), Youngs (1997),

7

JURNAL KEJURUTERAAN AWAM (JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING) Vol. 15 No. 2 2002

Atkinson and Boore (1997), Petersen (2002). In this analysis, only attenuation

relationships for bedrock are used. Therefore, only attenuations from Youngs

(1997) Atkinson and Boore (1997) and Petersen (2002) are taken. Crouse (1997)

attenuation relationship is omitted because it was derived for shallow firm soil site

in the Pacific Northwest. The attenuations from Youngs (1997) Atkinson and

Boore (1997), and Petersen (2002) are described briefly as follows :-

This relation considers two types of subduction zone earthquakes, i.e. interface

earthquakes and intraslab earthquakes. Subduction zone interface earthquakes are

shallow angle thrust events that occur at the interface between the subducting and

overriding plates, while intraslab events occur within subducting oceanic plate and

are typically high angle; normal faulting events responding to downdip tension in

the subducting plate. Attenuation relations for rock is given as follows:

ln(y) = 0.2418 + 1.414M − 2.552 ⋅ ln(rrup + 1.7818 ⋅ e 0.554M ) + 0.00607 ⋅ H + 0.3846 ⋅ Z t

Where y is PGA in g’s, M is moment magnitude, r is the source to site distance and

Zt is type of earthquake mechanism. This formula is valid to be applied only for

epicenter distance less than 200 km.

This attenuation relationship is derived using a stochastic model to develop

preliminary ground motion relations for eastern North America (ENA), for rock

sites. Attenuation relations for rock is given as follows:

ln( y) = 1.841 + 0.686(M − 6) − 0.123(M − 6) 2 − ln(rhyp ) − 0.00311 ⋅ rhyp

Where, y is PGA in g, M is moment magnitude; rhyp is the source to site distance.

This equation is proposed to use for epicenter distance less than 400 km.

Petersen et al. (2002) had modified the attenuation relationships in order to

calculate PGA for epicenter distances beyond 200 km. They used data from IRIS

DMC and Singapore Network to identify the characteristics of ground shaking at

large distances. The modification of the Youngs et al. (1997) equation for peak

ground acceleration for distances beyond 200 km is given as follows:

ln ymodified(M,x)= ln yyoungs(M,x) + [-0.0038*(x-200)]

Where y is the peak horizontal ground motion in units of g, M is moment

magnitude, and x is distance in kilometers as defined by Youngs et al. (1997).

8

JURNAL KEJURUTERAAN AWAM (JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING) Vol. 15 No. 2 2002

Results of Analysis

The results of the analyses showed that PGA at bedrock for Penang in accordance

with the attenuation relationships from Youngs (1997), Atkinson and Boore (1997)

and Petersen et al. (2002) are 3.89 gal, 4.84 gal, and 1.14 gal, respectively as

shown in Figure 6, Figure 7, and Figure 8. The effect of the earthquake in Kuala

Lumpur is lower about 25% to 31% than Penang. According to the attenuation

relationships from Youngs (1997), Atkinson and Boore (1997), and Petersen et al.

(2002) the PGA at bedrock for Kuala Lumpur are 2.90 gal, 3.32 gal, and 0.63 gal,

respectively.

In order to compare the effect of epicenter distance using those three attenuation

functions, relationship between distance and PGA are calculated. The result can be

seen in The Figure 9. The first vertical line in the figure indicates the distance

limitation for Youngs (1997) and the second line for Atkinson & Boore (1997).

Based on the figure, it can be seen that attenuation formula form Atkinson and

Boore (1997) gives a higher value than the others. For longer distance (more than

400 km) attenuation Youngs (1997) tends to attenuate more slowly than the others.

This attenuation is saturation faster than another because the formula was derived

only for small distance earthquake (less than 200 km). In contrast, after

modification by Petersen (2002), the acceleration of the earthquakes decreased

significantly at the distance beyond 200 km. The value of the difference increases

as the distance increase. The range of the difference is between 17% and 82%.

These comparisons show the critical point of selecting an appropriate attenuation

function. This step will influence the results of seismic risk analysis significantly.

Therefore, comprehensive studies in order to select the attenuation function are

needed.

2.4

4.3 2.9

11.8

6.7

23.9 3.5

5.3

115.2 62.4 16.4

8.8

37.0

9

JURNAL KEJURUTERAAN AWAM (JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING) Vol. 15 No. 2 2002

2.6

5.4 3.3

16.8

9.3

34.0 7.0 4.2

179.3 88.6

23.4

12.3

52.3

Figure 7 : PGA Contour using Atkinson & Boore (1997) attenuation relationship

10

JURNAL KEJURUTERAAN AWAM (JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING) Vol. 15 No. 2 2002

60

50

Petersen (2002)

40

Atkinson &

PGA (gal)

Boore (1997)

30

Youngs (1997)

20

10

0

100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700

Distance (km)

CONCLUSION

Seismic analysis had been performed in order to obtain Peak Ground Acceleration

(PGA) at the bedrock of Penang and Kuala Lumpur. Analysis is carried out using

deterministic method and using attenuation relationships proposed by Youngs

(1997) Atkinson and Boore (1997) and Petersen (2002). Those attenuation

relationships were chosen due to the similarity of the tectonic environment

(subduction zone) and site condition where the formula was derived.

The results of the analyses showed that PGA at bedrock for Penang in accordance

with the attenuation relationships from Youngs (1997), Atkinson and Boore (1997)

and Petersen et al. (2002) are 3.89 gal, 4.84 gal, and 1.14 gal, respectively. The

effect of the earthquake in Kuala Lumpur is lower about 25% to 31% than Penang.

According to the attenuation relationships from Youngs (1997), Atkinson and

Boore (1997), and Petersen et al. (2002) the PGA at bedrock for Kuala Lumpur are

2.90 gal, 3.32 gal, and 0.63 gal, respectively.

Comparison study using those three attenuation functions had been conducted. The

results of analysis show the difference value of those three attenuation functions

range between 17% and 82%. These comparisons illustrate that selection of

appropriate attenuation function is one of the critical factors in seismic analysis.

This step will influence the results of seismic risk analysis significantly. Therefore,

comprehensive studies in order to select the attenuation function are needed.

11

JURNAL KEJURUTERAAN AWAM (JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING) Vol. 15 No. 2 2002

REFERENCES

Motions in the Cascadia Region, Seismological Research Letters, Vol. 68,

1997.

Atkinson, G.M. and Boore, D.M., Some Comparisons Between Recent Ground

Motion Relations, Seismological Research Letters, Vol. 68, 1997.

Boore, D.M., Joyner, W.B., and Fumal, T.E., Equation for Estimating Horizontal

Response Spectra and Peak Acceleration from Western North America

Earthquakes, Seismological Research Letters, Vol. 68, No. 1,

January/February 1997, pp. 128-153.

Crouse, C.B., Ground Motion Attenuation Equations for Earthquakes on The

Cascadia Subduction Zone, Earthquake Spectra, 7(2), 1991, pp. 201-236

Huchon, P., and Le Pichon, X., Sunda Strait and Central Sumatra Fault, Geology,

Vol. 12, Nov. 1984, pp. 668-672.

Petersen, M.D., Dewey, J., Hartzell, S., Mueller, C., Harmsen, S., Frankel, A.D.,

Rukstakels, Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis for Sumatra, Indonesia

and Across the Malaysian Peninsula, US Geological Survey, (Unpublished

Journal), 2002.

Youngs, S.J. Chiou, W.L. Silva, and J.R. Humphrey, Strong Ground Motion

Attenuation Relationships for Subduction Zone Earthquakes,

Seismological Research Letters, Vol.68, No. 1, 1997, pp.58-74.

12

- pUploaded bySurapaneni Praneetha
- Earthquake Facts and StatisticsUploaded byPaul Saria
- project part 3 lithosphere map setUploaded byapi-315452688
- Badawy2016 CopyUploaded byMohamed Elsayed
- Elasticity and Elastic Waves 2015Uploaded byChainan Nes Taidamrong
- An Assessment of the Consequences and Preparations for a Catastrophic California Earthquake: Findings and Actions TakenPrepared By Federal Emergency Management Agency by VariousUploaded byGutenberg.org
- Taiwan Hsu2007Uploaded byNabilt Jill Moggiano Aburto
- Bank Soal b.inggris_dnsUploaded byular hitam
- 4. Makrup Vol.17 No.3Uploaded bySuparman Kroco
- print_paper.pdfUploaded byketanbajaj
- Palu Earthquake EMSC Report 19-10-2018Uploaded byaditya rakit
- Tsunami Generation Along the Makran Sub Duct Ion ZoneUploaded byhamanjaloos
- Seismic Reliability Assessment of a Bridge GroundUploaded byMarcel Steolea
- Art Bell After Dark Newsletter 1995-05 - MayUploaded bySnorkledorf
- Performance of Intez Tank Under Near Fault And Far Field Earthquake MotionUploaded byIRJET Journal
- Texto Guia de Ingenieria AntisismicaUploaded byFrancisco Calderon
- lbs 405 5e lesson plan with arts integration 1Uploaded byapi-439925811
- A Comparative Study of Seismic Analysis of a.pdfUploaded byTufan Dalkıran
- Source receiver reciprocityUploaded bymanuelflorez1102
- Engineering GeologyUploaded byZamille Bernardino
- Edge Science #14Uploaded byeddyblog8669
- IRJET- Analysis of Elevated Service Reservoir by using Commercial SoftwareUploaded byIRJET Journal
- HW03-S11Uploaded byPaul Jerick Lara
- TEXT 1.docxUploaded byCsilla Péter
- Nepalese Journal on Geo-informatics Number 16Uploaded byTri Dev Acharya
- 2 1 Earthquakes 1aUploaded byCarlos Andrés Valverde
- Geological ReportUploaded byAaron Rampersad
- Natural HazardsUploaded byslytherinsnake
- Al-Amri et alUploaded byhakim2020
- 204dUploaded byQuyen Hoang

- Specifications for Topographical SurveyUploaded byravichaudhari
- Chemistry for GeologistsUploaded byd1p45
- Rock RippabilityUploaded bydonal
- Geocentric Latitude Correction Tabl;e - Google SearchUploaded byAnonymous ScdwAput
- Introduction Topography Map.docxUploaded byfatra26
- JICA Thematic Guidelines on MiningUploaded byYuri Andrei Garcia
- Topographic Map of Circle Dot RanchUploaded byHistoricalMaps
- Topographic Maps 1Uploaded byElsa Try Julita Sembiring
- Review 2Uploaded bySilvia Dona Sari
- MFFTT600341-EN_5.pdfUploaded byAngga Kurniawan
- Topographic MapUploaded byHotaro Hayama
- Diferencia Entre Wgs84 y ItrfUploaded byalexander1176
- Zare_Amini_Kalafat_2014Recent Developments of the Middle East CatalogUploaded byZ. A. AbdulJaleel
- Earthquakes and Volcanoes NotesUploaded bymceldownea
- Vargas and Mann 2013 Caldas Tear BullSeismSocAmerUploaded byLuisa Callejas
- SeismicWaveBehavior BuildingUploaded byAronjames
- Geoscience Product Catalogue User GuideUploaded byantidemos
- plate tectonic computer activityUploaded byapi-251874912
- Tidal TypeUploaded byMei Handayani
- 131212 Analytics Aquifers Faults and LIghtning Databases Original RoiceUploaded byriparian inc
- Group Assignment Module GeoscienceUploaded byTaufiq Ismu
- Surveys documentation on how to map a piece of landUploaded byZanMai
- Bahasa Inggris Tugas TOEFLUploaded byyully tresnawati basir
- ExcelToKmlDemo.xlsUploaded byZahed Alani
- Semana 16 Calculo okUploaded byYanitza Milagros Porras Fuentes
- DownloadUploaded byRinaldi Oky Setiawan
- Summative Test in SCIENCE VIUploaded bytazzipot
- Comparison of Survey Data using Different Datums in Varying Map ProjectionsUploaded byGabrielLorenzoBueta
- Geodynamics of the Yellowstone hotspot and mantle plume:Uploaded byMichael Janitch
- Dasar Teori Gravitasi BumiUploaded bysingonegaran