Vol.12, No.

4 EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND ENGINEERING VIBRATION December, 2013

Earthq Eng & Eng Vib (2013) 12: 577-586 DOI: 10.1007/s11803-013-0191-z
Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis in Nepal
Thapa Dilli Ram

and Wang Guoxin

State Key Laboratory of Coastal and Offshore Engineering, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116024, China
Abstract: The seismic ground motion hazard for Nepal has been estimated using a probabilistic approach. A catalogue
of earthquakes has been compiled for Nepal and the surrounding region (latitude 26 N and 31.7 N and longitude 79 E
and 90 E) from 1255 to 2011. The distribution of catalogued earthquakes, together with available geological and tectonic
information were used to delineate twenty-three seismic source zones in Nepal and the surrounding region. By using the
seismic source information and probabilistic earthquake hazard parameters in conjunction with a selected ground motion
prediction relationship, peak ground accelerations (PGAs) have been calculated at bedrock level with 63%, 10%, and 2%
probability of exceedance in 50 years. The estimated PGA values are in the range of 0.070.16 g, 0.210.62 g, and 0.381.1 g
for 63%, 10%, and 2% probability of exceedance in 50 years, respectively. The resulting ground motion maps show different
characteristics of PGA distribution, i.e., high hazard in the far-western and eastern sections, and low hazard in southern Nepal.
The quantied PGA values at bedrock level provide information for microzonation studies in different parts of the country.
Keywords: seismic hazard assessment; peak ground acceleration; earthquake; Nepal Himalaya
Correspondence to: Thapa Dilli Ram,

State Key Laboratory
of Coastal and Offshore Engineering, Dalian University of
Technology, Dalian 116024, China
Tel: +86-411-84707364; Fax: +86-411-84708501
E-mail: drthapa4@gmail.com

PhD Candidate;

Professor
Supported by: National Natural Science Foundation of China
under Grant No. 51121005 and Grant No. 51378092
Received November 1, 2012; Accepted March 27, 2013
1 Introduction

Nepal occupies the ~800 km-long central segment
of the Himalayan seismic belt and is one of the most
earthquake-prone countries in the world. The Himalaya
region has a long history of frequent strong earthquakes
and has been shaken by four great earthquakes (M
w
=
8.7, 1897; M
w
= 8.1, 1905; M
w
= 8.4, 1934; and M
w
= 8.7,
1950) in the past two centuries (Seeber and Armbruster,
1981). Historically, Nepal has experienced ve
earthquakes (1255, 1408, 1505, 1833, and 1934) with
magnitudes exceeding 7.5 since 1255. Among them,
the 1934 Bihar-Nepal earthquake (M
w
= 8.4) is the most
catastrophic historical seismic event, which caused many
casualties (> 8000 deaths) with widespread damage and
countless economic loss in Nepal. In the last two
decades of the 20th century, two strong earthquakes (M
s

= 6.6, 1980 and M
s
= 6.8, 1988) have caused signicant
loss of life and property in the country. The most recent
earthquake (M = 6.8, September 18, 2011) occurred
approximately 270 kilometers east of Kathmandu, the
capital of Nepal, near the Nepal-India border, and three
people were killed from a collapsing wall in Kathmandu.
The September 18, 2011 earthquake was felt in ve
countries, namely Bangladesh, Bhutan, China, India,
and Nepal, and killed more than 100 people in the
region. It severely damaged several houses and caused
signicant loss of life and property in Nepal. The loss of
life and damage from earthquakes in Nepal is expected
to rise tremendously in the coming years due to the large
annual growth of population, rapid urbanization, and
construction of infrastructure. Such loss and damage
from future seismic events can only be minimized
through the effective earthquake risk mitigation planning
and aseismic design of new structures in Nepal. Risk
reduction, emergency planning, and aseismic design
require a proper quantitative evaluation of the seismic
hazard in the country.
The seismicity map of Nepal (Fig. 1) indicates
that the epicenter distributions of some of the strong
earthquakes are located at a small distance from the
surface trace of four major E-W trending faults (South
Tibetan Detachment System (STDS), Main Central
Thrust (MCT), Main Boundary Thrust (MBT), and
Main Frontal Thrust (MFT)). Several fault studies (e.g.,
Gansser, 1964; Nakata, 1972, 1982, 1989; Nakata et al.,
1984; Dasgupta et al., 1987; Upreti et al., 2000) have
identied four major longitudinal faults (STDS, MCT,
MBT, and MFT), a longitudinal Bari Gad fault, and a
number of transverse faults as well as their associated
minor faults in Nepal. Among them, the STDS is a normal
fault situated between longitudes 82.585.0 E, whereas
MCT, MBT, and MFT are thrust faults running east-west
throughout the country and have lengths that are greater
than the total length of Nepal (~800 km). Three major
longitudinal thrust faulting networks (MCT, MBT, and
MFT) appear to connect at a depth along the sole thrust
578 EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND ENGINEERING VIBRATION Vol.12
or a decollement zone referred to as the Main Himalayan
Thrust (MHT) (Zhao et al., 1993; Nelson et al., 1996).
The MHT coincides with the MFT in the near-surface
area (Nakata, 1989) and is regarded as a key regional
seismogenic structure that primarily controls the present-
day crustal deformation in this region (e.g., Cattin and
Avouac, 2000; Lav and Avouac, 2000; Avouac, 2003).
The seismicity and crustal deformation of the Nepal
Himalaya is well understood through a combination
of geodetic measurements, seismic monitoring, and
geomorphological investigations (Pandey et al., 1995,
1999; Bilham et al., 1997; Jouanne et al., 1999, 2004;
Larson et al., 1999; Cattin and Avouac, 2000; Lav and
Avouac, 2000; Bollinger et al., 2004; Bettinelli et al.,
2006; Ader et al., 2012). The seismic potential of this
region has become a very important topic in recent years.
In this regard, some considerations have been given
towards prior seismic hazard studies in Nepal (Pandey
et al., 2002; Thapa, 2008). Nevertheless, these studies
have paid less attention to delineation of the seismic
source zones in Nepal and its vicinity. Here, twenty-
three seismic source zones are delineated in Nepal and
the surrounding region through a combination of an
updated earthquake catalogue, together with geological
and tectonic information in order to estimate a reliable
earthquake hazard for Nepal.
In this study, seismic hazard in Nepal at bedrock
level with 63%, 10%, and 2% probability of exceedance
in 50 years is estimated by using the probabilistic
approach after compiling an earthquake catalogue, and
dening twenty-three seismic source zones based on
the available seismological, geological, and tectonic
information. The hazard maps are presented in terms of
peak ground accelerations (PGAs) that provide basic and
important information for the government to establish
city development plans, and for civil engineers to design
and analyze the seismic performance of key engineering
structures (e.g., bridges, buildings, hospitals, schools,
dams, pipelines, powerhouses, tunnels, etc.) in Nepal.
2 Earthquake catalogue
It is well known that catalogues are the most
widely used information to dene seismic sources and
to characterize the seismicity parameters for earthquake
hazard assessment and seismic zoning studies. Since no
complete earthquake catalogue is available for Nepal,
an earthquake catalogue is compiled for the location
between latitude 26 N and 31.7 N and longitude 79 E
and 90 E from 1255 to 2011 by combining earthquake
data from previous studies (Oldham, 1883; Gutenberg
and Richter, 1954; Lee et al., 1976; Chen and Molnar,
1977; Pandey, 1983; Srivastava and Ramachandram,
1985; Chandra, 1992; Pandey and Molnar, 1988;
Bilham, 1995; Ambraseys and Douglas, 2004; Thapa,
2008; Thapa and Wang, 2010) as well as data from the
International Seismological Centre (ISC), the United
States National Earthquake Information Centre (NEIC),
and the National Seismological Center (NSC).
The combined database was carefully analyzed
and foreshocks, aftershocks and duplicated events
were removed. The quality of the database has been
signicantly improved since 1994, when local earthquake
data became available from the National Seismological
Center (NSC) of Nepal. The aggregated seismicity
catalogue consists of different magnitude types (local
magnitudes, body wave magnitudes and surface wave
Fig. 1 Seismic source zones in Nepal and the surrounding region. ITSZ: Indus-Tsangpo Suture Zone; STDS: South Tibetan
Detachment System; MCT: Main Central Thrust; MBT: Main Boundary Thrust; MFT: Main Frontal Thrust; and BGF:
Bari Gad Fault. STDS; MCT; MBT; MFT and BGF in Nepal modied from Amatya and Gnawali (1994), ITSZ and active
normal faults (Red discontinuous lines) in southern Tibet modied from Taylor and Yin (2009). Dots (coloured circles) show
epicenters of earthquakes in the Nepal Himalaya and the surrounding region for the period 1255-2011
31N
30N
29N
28N
27N
26N
80E 82E 84E 86E 88E 90E
Legend
Seismic source zone boundary
International boundary
Magnitude (Ms)
4.04.9 7.07.9
5.05.9 8.0
6.06.9
km
No.4 Thapa Dilli Ram et al.: Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis in Nepal 579
magnitudes) for some of the events recorded after 1900
and only intensity values for some of the events reported
prior to 1900. These datasets are needed to convert a
common magnitude scale to estimate the seismic hazard.
In this regard, the intensity values (I) of 28 earthquakes
were rst converted to moment magnitudes (M
w
) using
the empirical relation M
w
= (2/3) I + 1 (Gutenberg and
Richter, 1956). The moment-magnitudes (M
w
) were then
converted to surface wave magnitude (M
s
) combining
the empirical relations M
w
= (2/3) log M
0
- 10.63 (Hanks
and Kanamori, 1994), and log M
0
= 16.03 + 1.5 M
s
(for
M
s
> 5.94) and log M
0
= 19.38 + 0.93 M
s
(for M
s
5.94)
(Ambraseys and Douglas, 2004). In addition, the local
magnitudes (M
L
) of 273 seismic events and body-wave
magnitudes (M
b
) of 507 earthquakes were converted to
M
s
using the empirical relations M
s
= 0.98 M
L
+ 0.03
(Wang et al., 2010) and M
s
= 1.07 M
b
- 0.63 (Liu et al.,
2007), respectively. The updated catalogue consists of
883 earthquakes with surface wave magnitudes equal
to or greater than 4.0. It contains 709 earthquakes
between magnitude 4.0 and 4.9, 121 earthquakes
between magnitude 5.0 and 5.9, 42 earthquakes between
magnitude 6.0 and 6.9, nine earthquakes between
magnitude 7.0 and 7.9, and two earthquakes greater than
magnitude 8.0. The spatial distribution of earthquakes
for the period 12552011 is shown in Fig. 1. The gure
shows that the highest earthquake activity is in the far-
western and eastern parts of Nepal. Seismic activity is
low in the southern part of the country.
3 Seismic source zones
Nepal is at seismic risk from both local and distant
earthquakes. The seismic source zones dened in
this study are mainly centered in Nepal, and include
some parts of southern Tibet, northern India, northern
Bangladesh, and western Bhutan. The geological
structures of Nepal and the surrounding region is well
documented by several investigators (e.g., Gansser,
1964; Nakata, 1972, 1982, 1989; Nakata et al., 1984;
Armijo et al., 1986; Dasgupta et al., 1987; Amatya and
Gnawali, 1994; Pandey et al., 1995; DeCelles et al.,
1998, 2001; Upreti, 1999; Upreti and Le Fort, 1999;
Upreti et al., 2000; Hodges, 2000; Avouac, 2003;
Garzione et al., 2003; Gehrels et al., 2006; Yin, 2006;
Taylor and Yin, 2009). From north to south the dominant
geological structures in this region are the Indus-Tsangpo
Suture Zone (ITSZ), the Main Central Thrust (MCT),
the Main Boundary Thrust (MBT), and the Main Frontal
Thrust (MFT) (Fig. 1). Among these major geological
structures, the MCT, MBT, and MFT are trending E-W
in eastern Nepal and N120 in western Nepal (Upreti
and Le Fort, 1999). In addition to these major geological
structures, there exist a number of nearly N-S striking
faults and lineaments (Dasgupta et al., 1987), a nearly
E-W running STDS and Bari Gad fault (Nakata, 1989) in
Nepal and its surrounding area, and several N-S trending
grabens in southern Tibet (Armijo et al., 1986). These
geological structures slightly change their orientation
and bend in different locations.
As stated above, the study area is one of the well
identied seismically active regions in the Himalayas
and has experienced several strong earthquakes. Figure 1
shows the spatial distribution of earthquakes and
major faults in Nepal and the surrounding region. The
roughly east-west distributed seismicity shows that
the vast majority of earthquakes are located near the
Main Central Thrust (MCT) in Nepal. Based on this
distribution of earthquakes, fault information, tectonic
features as well as quantitative analysis by the pattern
recognition method (Gelfand et al., 1972), the study
area is divided into twenty-three seismic source zones
(Fig. 1).
Seismic source zones from 1 to 8 occupy mostly
southern Nepal and extend to northern India as well
as northern Bangladesh. The seismic source zones
15 are mainly associated with MBT and MFT. These
source zones are characterized by a relatively low
level of seismic activity. Seismic source zones 1 and
2 are located in southwestern Nepal. Seismic source
zones 1 and 3 are relatively more active than zones 2,
4, and 5. Source zones 1, 2, 4, and 5 have no records
of strong earthquakes, whereas zone 3 has experienced
a strong earthquake in 1969 (M = 6.2). MBT and MFT
are situated very close (< 7 km) in zone 4, whereas they
are located quite far (> 45 km) in zone 5. Source zone 6
is mainly related to the MFT and has generated a strong
earthquake in 1833 (M = 6.3). Seismic source zone 7
is associated with the closely situated MFT, MBT, and
MCT and has produced numerous earthquakes, including
a damaging event in 1988 (M = 6.8). The earthquake
activity in seismic source zone 7 is higher than that of
the other zones situated in the southern part of Nepal.
Seismic source zone 8 is situated in the southeastern part
of Nepal and covers some parts of northeastern India and
northwestern Bangladesh. It is located to the south of the
MFT and there is no record of strong earthquakes.
Seismic source zones 9-18 cover northern Nepal and
extend to some parts of northern India, western Bhutan,
and southern Tibet. The seismic source zones from 9 to
18 are mainly related to the MCT and have experienced
some of the largest Himalayan earthquakes. Source
zones 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, and 18 have produced
at least one strong earthquake in the past. Source zones
9 and 10 are characterized by a high level of seismicity
and are associated with MCT, MBT and MFT. The
seismic source zone 9 is the easternmost zone in the
study region and covers some parts of eastern Nepal,
northern India, western Bhutan, and southern Tibet. It
is one of the seismically active zones in the study area
and has experienced three strong earthquakes (M = 6.3,
1849; M = 7.0, 1852; and M = 6.1, 1980) during the last
200 years. Seismic source zone 10 occupies most parts of
eastern Nepal and has produced two strong earthquakes
(M = 6.1, 1965; and M = 6.8, 2011). Earthquakes in
source zone 11 are frequent and the area has generated
580 EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND ENGINEERING VIBRATION Vol.12
two earthquakes with magnitudes exceeding 7.5 (M =
7.6, 1833; and M = 8.4, 1934) during the last 200 years.
Seismic source zone 12 is associated with STDS, MCT
and MBT and is one of the well studied areas in Nepal.
The seismic source zone 12 occupies the central part of
Nepal and is characterized by a narrow duplex structure
that is different than the duplex structure in far-western
Nepal (Pandey et al., 1995; Gehrels et al., 2006). It has
experienced four large earthquakes (M = 7.6, 1255; M
= 7.6, 1408; M = 7.6, 1681; and M = 7.6, 1810) in the
past. Seismic source zone 13 is related to STDS and
MCT and has produced only moderate earthquakes.
Seismic source zone 14 occupies the southern end of
the Thakkhola graben, the eastern segment of the Bari
Gad fault, and some parts of MCT and STDS. This zone
has experienced two strong earthquakes (M = 7, 1936,
and M = 6.7, 1954) during the past 100 years. Seismic
source zone 15 occupies the western section of the Bari
Gad fault, and some parts of MCT and STDS. Seismic
source zone 15 is relatively less active than other zones
located in the northern part of Nepal, but it has produced
a great earthquake in 1505 (M = 8.1). Seismic source
zone 16 is located in western Nepal and is related to the
MCT and western segment of the STDS. It has generated
only moderate earthquakes. Seismic source zone 17 lies
in far-western Nepal and extends to northern India and
southern Tibet. The source zone 17 is characterized by a
fold-thrust belt with a wide zone of duplex structure and
a series of north dipping thrust faults (Decelles et al.,
1998, 2001). It is the most seismically active source zone
in Nepal and has experienced ve strong earthquakes (M
= 7.3, 1916; M = 6, 1953; M = 6.0, 1964; M = 6.0, 1966,
and M = 6.6, 1980) during the last 100 years. Seismic
source zone 18 covers some parts of northern India and
southern Tibet. It also shows a high level of seismic
activity and has been struck by ve strong earthquakes
(M = 6.7, 1911, M = 6, 1926, M = 6, 1935, M = 6.5, 1945,
and M = 6.3, 1958) within the past 100 years.
Seismic source zones from 19 to 23 are mainly
situated in southern Tibet and nearby region. This region
is related to the Indus-Tsangpo Suture Zone (ITSZ) and
north-south trending grabens. The seismic source zone
19 is the northernmost zone in the study area. This zone
has experienced moderate earthquakes, but there is no
record of strong earthquakes. The seismic source zone
20 includes the northern segment of the Thakkhola
graben and has experienced a strong earthquake in 1913
(M = 6.2). Seismic source zone 21 is seismically less
active than other zones in southern Tibet and there are
no reports of strong earthquakes. Seismic source zones
22 and 23 are relatively productive and have generated
numerous moderate earthquakes. The seismic source
zone 22 contains N-S trending Gyirong graben, and
Kung Ko graben. The seismic source zone 23 consists
of a N-S trending Pum Qu graben and has experienced a
strong earthquake in 1993 (M = 6.4).
The delineated twenty-three seismic source zones
are shown in Fig. 1 and each is assumed to be seismically
homogenous, so that every point within them is assumed
to have an equal possibility of occurrence of an
earthquake in future. These twenty-three seismic source
zones differ from one another in dimensions and hazard
parameters. The earthquake hazard parameters used
in the present analysis are described in the following
subsections.
3.1 Maximum magnitude
The anticipated maximum earthquake magnitude for
each demarcated source zone in the present study was
determined based on both historical and instrumental
earthquakes as well as the largest earthquake that
occurred in adjacent potential zones that have a similar
geology and tectonic environment. The Himalaya of
Nepal has experienced two great earthquakes in 1505
(M
w
= 8.1) and 1934 (M
w
= 8.4, Bihar-Nepal). These
great earthquakes allowed us to determine the expected
largest earthquake magnitudes in the Nepal Himalayan
section. The delineated twenty-three source zones with
expected maximum magnitude earthquakes are listed in
Table 1.
3.2 Minimum magnitude
The Nepal Himalaya and its nearby area is seismo-
tectonically active and small earthquakes are frequent
in this region. These small magnitude earthquakes have
little impact on engineering structures. The minimum
earthquake magnitude was set at surface wave magnitude
4.0 for all the seismic source zones because earthquakes
with a surface wave magnitude of 4.0 may be hazardous
for engineering structures in Nepal.
3.3 Hypocenter depth
Depth distribution of earthquakes in the Nepal
Himalaya and surrounding region (26

31.7

N,
79

90

E) is poorly known for historical earthquakes.

Depth of updated instrumental earthquakes are not
yet sufciently determined to well constrain the focal
depths of earthquakes in this region. However, the depth
distribution of updated unied instrumental earthquakes
in Nepal does indicate that most of the events occur in
the upper crust, and only a small number of events are
located in the lower crust and upper mantle. A hypocenter
depth of 10 km is set in this study for the whole region
based on instrumental records.
3.4 Average annual occurrence rate and b value
The earthquake catalogue of Nepal for the period
12552011 suggests that the database before 1964 is
inadequate to delineate earthquakes with less than surface
wave magnitude 4.0. The database utilized here is more
complete from 1964, when many earthquake records
became available from modern seismic instruments.
Earthquakes with a surface wave magnitude equal to or
greater than 4.0 from 1964 to 2011 were used to estimate
the average annual occurrence rate of earthquakes and b
No.4 Thapa Dilli Ram et al.: Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis in Nepal 581
value. The b value was estimated for the whole region by
using the frequency magnitude relation (Gutenberg and
Richter, 1944)
log N = a bM (1)
where N is the cumulative number of earthquakes
with magnitude equal to or greater than the specied
magnitude M, and a and b represent the Gutenberg and
Richter (G-R) parameters for a particular region. In this
study, the estimated b value is 0.85 for the entire region.
The frequency magnitude distribution of earthquakes
with surface wave magnitude equal to or greater than 4.0
for Nepal and the surrounding area is plotted in Fig. 2.
3.5 Earthquake spatial distribution function
To take into account the effect of source zone size
for earthquake production, the spatial distribution
function was calculated for each seismic source zone
by following the criteria given in the training material
on seismic hazard analysis for engineering sites by the
China Earthquake Administration (CEA, 2005). The
spatial distribution function for the ve magnitude
ranges (4.06.4, 6.56.9, 7.07.4, 7.57.9, and 8.0-
8.4) in each seismic source zone, f
j,mj
, was calculated as
follows:
f
s
s
j,m
i
i
j
=

(2)
where s
i
is the area of the seismic source zone i, and
m
j
is the earthquake magnitude within the jth

interval.
The spatial distribution function for magnitude 7.5 and
greater was adjusted to reect the density of faults and its
relation with the spatial location of earthquakes as well
as background seismicity in each seismic source zone.
The calculated earthquake spatial distribution functions
for individual source zones are shown in Table 1.
4 Attenuation relationship
The choice of an appropriate attenuation relationship
is very important in a probabilistic seismic hazard
Table 1 Expected maximum earthquake magnitudes and spatial distribution functions for seismic source zones
Seismic
Maximum
Number source
magnitude
zone
Spatial distribution functions
M= 4.06.4 M= 6.56.9 M= 7.07.4 M= 7.57.9 M= 8.08.4
1 Z
1
6.5 0.0220 0 0 0 0
2 Z
2
6.5 0.0332 0 0 0 0
3 Z
3
6.5 0.0243 0 0 0 0
4 Z
4
6.5 0.0292 0 0 0 0
5 Z
5
6.5 0.0215 0 0 0 0
6 Z
6
6.5 0.0299 0 0 0 0
7 Z
7
7.0 0.0452 0.0873 0 0 0
8 Z
8
6.5 0.0169 0 0 0 0
9 Z
9
8.0 0.0506 0.0977 0.1071 0.1113 0
10 Z
10
8.5 0.0344 0.0664 0.0727 0.0756 0.1166
11 Z
11
8.5 0.0562 0.1086 0.1190 0.1237 0.1909
12 Z
12
8.0 0.0537 0.1038 0.1137 0.1182 0
13 Z
13
7.5 0.0179 0.0346 0.0379 0 0
14 Z
14
8.5 0.0464 0.0896 0.0982 0.0251 0.0750
15 Z
15
8.5 0.0400 0.0772 0.0846 0.0479 0.0557
16 Z
16
8.5 0.0579 0.1118 0.1225 0.1073 0.0564
17 Z
17
8.5 0.0597 0.1153 0.1263 0.1313 0.2026
18 Z
18
8.0 0.0555 0.1073 0.1175 0.1222 0
19 Z
19
6.5 0.0368 0 0 0 0
20 Z
20
6.5 0.0541 0 0 0 0
21 Z
21
6.5 0.0191 0 0 0 0
22 Z
22
6.5 0.1035 0 0 0 0
23 Z
23
6.5 0.0914 0 0 0 0
Fig. 2 Frequency magnitude relation of earthquakes (M
s

4.0) in Nepal and the surrounding region
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0
4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5
Magnitude
l
o
g

N
b-Value = 0.85
582 EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND ENGINEERING VIBRATION Vol.12
assessment since the ground motion attenuation model
characterizes the propagation and alteration of seismic
ground motion from source to site as a function of both
earthquake magnitude and distance (e.g., Cornell, 1968;
Li et al., 2011). A large strong ground motion database
is generally used to prepare an attenuation model for a
particular region (e.g., Douglas, 2003; Li and Li, 2010).
There is a lack of strong ground motion data in Nepal
to derive an attenuation relationship appropriate for the
Nepal Himalaya and the surrounding area. Therefore, the
attenuation relationship developed by CEA (2005) for
western China is used herein. The elliptical attenuation
model of PGA for the major axis and minor axis can be
expressed as (CEA, 2005):
ln 5.912025 +1.836588 - 2.84658 ln ( 3.400 Exp(0
Ra Ra
+ a M R = ..451 )) M
(3)
and
ln 2.509012 +1.360759 -1.79151 ln ( +1.046 Exp(
Rb Rb
a M R

= 00.451 ) ) M
(4)
where M is the surface wave magnitude, a
Ra
is the peak
ground acceleration (in cm/s
2
) along the major axis, R
Ra
is the hypocenter distance (in km) for the major axis,
a
Rb
is the peak ground acceleration (in cm/s
2
) along the
minor axis and R
Rb
is the hypocenter distance (in km) for
the minor axis.
5 Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis
The probabilistic seismic hazard analysis method
commonly used in the last 45 years was rst established
in the late 1960s by Cornell (1968), which incorporates
the effect of all potential seismic sources with their
specied seismic activity rates. In the last four and half
decades, several investigators (e.g., McGuire, 1976,
1993, 1995; Kramer, 1996; McGuire and Arabasz, 2000)
have adopted the probabilistic method for seismic hazard
assessment in different earthquake regions of the world.
To estimate the seismic hazard in Nepal, the procedure
developed by CEA (2005) is followed. The probability
that a ground motion, A, equal to or greater than a
specic acceleration value, a, at a site can be estimated
using the total probability theorem and is presented as
follows (CEA, 2005):
P A a
2
A
P A a m x y f
k
ki
j ki ki,m
i
N
k
N
j
ks r
( ) 1 exp( ( , ( , ) )
1 1
=

= =

=


j 1
N
k j
k uk
k
m
m m
m m
m x y

exp[ ( )]
1- exp[ ( )]
Sh(-
1
2
)d d
0
0

))
(5)
where v
k
is the average annual rate of occurrence of
earthquakes in the kth

seismic source, A
ki
is the area of the
kth

potential seismic source zone, P A a m , x y
j ki
( ( , ) ) is
the conditional probability of ground motion A equal
to or greater than the specied ground motion a at a
site from an earthquake with jth magnitude interval in
the kth seismic source zone and location (x, y), f
ki,m
j
is
the spatial distribution function, m
u
is the upper bound
earthquake magnitude, m
0
is the lower bound earthquake
magnitude, = b ln10 and m is the change in
earthquake magnitude values. The detailed steps of
this seismic hazard analysis method can be found in
the training material on seismic hazard analysis for
engineering sites (CEA, 2005).
To assess the seismic hazard for Nepal, twenty-
three potential areal seismic sources were delineated
on the basis of earthquake distribution, geological
information, and tectonic features. The seismicity
parameters were assigned and depth was set at 10 km for
the whole area as this depth is normal in this region. A
maximum magnitude, minimum magnitude and spatial
distribution function were assigned to each seismic
source zone. Using the delineated seismic source zones
and probabilistic hazard parameters together with a
selected ground motion prediction relationship, the
seismic hazard was then estimated for the whole area of
Nepal. The PGA values were calculated herein at a grid
of 0.2 0.2 covering Nepal.
6 Results
The seismic hazard in Nepal at bedrock level for
63%, 10%, and 2% probability of exceedance in 50
years has been estimated in this study. The quantied
seismic hazard of Nepal was addressed in terms of PGA.
The estimated PGA values at bedrock level with 63%,
10%, and 2% probability of exceedance in 50 years are
presented in Figs. 3(a)3(c), respectively.
Figure 3(a) displays the PGA distribution for 63%
probability of exceedance in 50 years. The values of
PGA range from 0.07 g to 0.16 g. The highest ground
motions are observed in the far-western and eastern parts
of Nepal, where the value of PGA exceeds 0.15 g. The
PGA value is as low as 0.07 g in southern Nepal. The
estimated PGA in southern Nepal is considerably lower
than in any other part of the country.
Figure 3(b) shows the PGA distribution for 10%
probability of exceedance in 50 years. The PGA values
range between 0.21 g and 0.62 g. The PGA value is as
high as 0.62 g in the far-western and eastern regions
of Nepal, which represent the highest hazard areas in
the country. The value of PGA is less than 0.22 g in
southern Nepal. The PGA values estimated in Nepal for
10% probability of exceedance in 50 years are typically
higher than for 63% probability of exceedance in 50
years.
Figure 3(c) displays the PGA distribution for 2%
probability of exceedance in 50 years. The PGA values
are on the order of 0.38 g to 1.1 g. The highest hazard is
concentrated in the far-western and eastern regions of the
country, where the PGA value exceeds 1.0 g. The PGA
value is less than 0.4 g in southern Nepal, which is the
lowest hazard region in the country. Figures 3(a)3(c)
No.4 Thapa Dilli Ram et al.: Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis in Nepal 583
indicate that the PGA for 2% probability of exceedance
in 50 years are about 1.72.0 times higher than the
values of PGA for 10% probability of exceedance in 50
years and about 6.07.0 times higher than the values of
PGA for 63% probability of exceedance in 50 years. The
highest and the lowest ground motions are observed,
respectively, in the far-western and eastern part, as well
as the southern part of Nepal. However, the distribution
of the highest ground motion is nearly identical in the
eastern region for both 2% and 10% probability of
exceedance in 50 years, whereas the highest ground
motion occurs in a smaller area in the eastern part for
63% probability of exceedance in 50 years.
7 Discussion and conclusion
A seismic hazard analysis for Nepal was performed
herein using the probabilistic approach. The seismic
ground motion hazard for Nepal in terms of PGA was
estimated at bedrock level for 63%, 10%, and 2%
probability of exceedance in 50 years. The estimated
PGA values in this study at 2% probability of
exceedance in 50 years are about 1.72.0 times higher
than at 10% probability of exceedance in 50 years and
about 6.07.0 times higher than at 63% probability of
exceedance in 50 years. The PGA distribution maps
indicate that the highest hazard is in the far-western
and eastern parts of Nepal. Southern Nepal has the
lowest hazard compared to other parts of the country.
The highest PGA values estimated in far-western Nepal
are 0.570.62 g at 10% probability of exceedance in 50
years, and 1.01.1 g at 2% probability of exceedance in
50 years, and are consistent with some recent studies
in India and the surrounding region, e.g., about 0.50 g
for 10% probability of exceedance in 50 years in far-
western Nepal obtained by Mahajan et al. (2010), and
about 0.550.60 g for 10% probability of exceedance in
50 years, and 1.11.2 g for 2% probability of exceedance
in 50 years in far-western Nepal calculated by Nath and
Thingbaijam (2012).
In contrast, the estimated PGA values herein for
the eastern part of Nepal, which are 0.570.62 g at 10%
probability of exceedance in 50 years, and 1.01.1 g
at 2% probability of exceedance in 50 years, are
higher than that of Nath and Thingbaijam (2012), who
obtained PGA values on the order of 0.350.40 g at 10%
probability of exceedance in 50 years, and 0.70-0.80 g at
2% probability of exceedance in 50 years in the eastern
part of Nepal. In addition, there are no strong motion data
records in Nepal to compare with the results presented
herein. However, the PGA distribution correlates well
with the available spatial distribution of earthquakes.
The high hazard regions in far-western and eastern Nepal
are characterized by a high level of seismic activity; the
low hazard southern part of the country corresponds to a
low level of earthquake activity.
For the rst time, seismic hazard has been
systemically estimated in Nepal using a PGA distribution
with three different exceedance probabilities (63%,
10% and 2% probability of exceedance in 50 years)
together with a compilation of earthquake catalogues,
by delineating potential seismic sources, estimating
seismicity parameters, and selecting a PGA attenuation
relationship. The hazard maps provide information for
the government to establish city development plans,
and for civil and structural engineers to locate, design,
and analyze the seismic performance of important
structures such as hospitals, schools, pipelines,
bridges, powerhouses, tunnels, and dams on bedrock
foundations. In addition, the results of the estimated
ground motions provide direct input for microzonation
studies in different locations in Nepal. In this hazard
analysis, ground motions were only estimated at bedrock
level, while soft soil sites in Nepal can cause variations
in the ground motion characteristics. Further study is
needed to account for the geotechnical effect of the soil
conditions at a local scale. In summary, there is a need
Fig. 3 Seismic hazard maps of Nepal showing the peak
ground acceleration distribution at bedrock level: (a)
with 63% probability of exceedance in 50 years; (b)
with 10% probability of exceedance in 50 years; and
(c) with 2% probability of exceedance in 50 years
30N
29N
28N
27N
26N
80E 82E 84E 86E 88E
(a)
0.155
0.145
0.135
0.125
0.115
0.105
0.095
0.085
0.075
0.065
PGA (g)
30N
29N
28N
27N
26N
80E 82E 84E 86E 88E
(b)
0.625
0.575
0.525
0.475
0.425
0.375
0.325
0.275
0.225
0.200
PGA (g)
30N
29N
28N
27N
26N
80E 82E 84E 86E 88E
(c)
1.075
1.000
0.925
0.850
0.775
0.700
0.600
0.500
0.400
0.300
PGA (g)
584 EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND ENGINEERING VIBRATION Vol.12
to derive a suitable PGA attenuation relation for Nepal
in the future. It is suggested that the government and
research institutes studying earthquakes in Nepal should
focus on recording strong motion by installing more
stations throughout the country. Deriving a reliable PGA
attenuation relationship appropriate for Nepal in the
future would useful to improve and upgrade seismic
hazard assessments.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful for the support from
the National Natural Science Foundation of China
under Grant No. 51121005 and Grant No. 51378092.
The authors are also thankful to the editor and three
anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments
and suggestions.
References
Ader T, Avouac JP, Zeng JL, Caen HL, Bollinger L,
Galetzka J, Genrich J, Thomas M, Chanard K, Sapkota
SN, Rajaure S, Shrestha P, Ding L and Flouzat M
(2012), Convergence Rate across the Nepal Himalaya
and Interseismic Coupling on the Main Himalayan
Thrust: Implications for Seismic Hazard, Journal
of Geophysical Research, 117: B04403, doi:10.1029/
2011JB009071.
Amatya KM and Gnawali BN (1994), Geological Map
of Nepal, (1:1000000 Scale), Department of Mines and
Geology, Kathmandu, ICIMOD, CDG, UNEP.
Ambraseys N and Douglas J (2004), Magnitude
Calibration of North Indian Earthquakes, Geophysical
Journal International, 159(1): 165206.
Armijo R, Tapponnier P, Mercier JL and Tonglin H
(1986), Quaternary Extension in Southern Tibet,
Journal of Geophysical Research, 91: 1380313872.
Avouac JP (2003), Mountain Building, Erosion, and
the Seismic Cycle in the Nepal Himalaya, Advances in
Geophysics, 46: doi: 10.1016/ S0065-2687(03)46001-9.
Bettinelli P, Avouac JP, Flouzat M, Jouanne F, Bollinger
L, Willis P and Chitrakar G (2006), Plate Motion of
India and Interseismic Strain in the Nepal Himalaya
from GPS and DORIS Measurements, Journal of
Geodesy, 80: 567589.
Bilham R (1995), Location and Magnitude of the 1833
Nepal Earthquake and Its Relation to the Rupture Zones
of Contiguous Great Himalayan Earthquakes, Current
Science, 69: 101128.
Bilham R, Larson K, Freymueller J and Project Idylhim
members (1997), GPS Measurements of Present-day
Convergence across the Nepal Himalaya, Nature, 386:
6164.
Bollinger L, Avouac JP, Cattin R and Pandey MR (2004),
Stress Buildup in the Himalaya, Journal of Geophysical
Research, 109: doi: 10.129/2003JB002911.
Cattin R and Avouac JP (2000), Modeling Mountain
Building and the Seismic Cycle in the Himalaya of
Nepal, Journal of Geophysical Research, 105: 13389
13407.
Chandra U (1992), Seismotectonics of Himalaya,
Current Science, 62: 4071.
Chen WP and Molnar P (1977), Seismic Moments
of Major Earthquakes and the Average Rate of Slip in
Central Asia, Journal of Geophysical Research, 82(20):
29452969.
China Earthquake Administration (CEA) (2005),
Training Material on Seismic Hazard Analysis for
Engineering Sites (GB17741-2005). (in Chinese).
Cornell CA (1968), Engineering Seismic Risk
Analysis, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of
America, 58: 15831606.
Dasgupta S, Mukhopadhaya M and Nandy DR (1987),
Active Transverse Features of the Central Portion of the
Himalaya, Tectonophysics, 136: 255264.
DeCelles PG, Gehrels GE, Quade J, Ojha TP, Kapp
PA and Upreti BN (1998), Neogene Foreland Basin
Deposits, Erosional Unroong, and the Kinematic
History of the Himalayan Fold-thrust Belt, Western
Nepal, Geological Society of America Bulletin, 110:
221.
DeCelles PG, Robinson DM, Quade J, Ojha TP, Garzione
CN, Copeland P and Upreti BN (2001), Stratigraphy,
Structure, and Tectonic Evolution of the Himalayan
Fold-thrust Belt in Western Nepal, Tectonics, 20:
487509.
Douglas J (2003), Earthquake Ground Motion
Estimation Using Strong-motion Records: a Review
of Equations for the Estimation of Peak Ground
Acceleration and Response Spectral Ordinates, Earth-
Science Reviews, 61: 43104.
Gansser A (1964), Geology of the Himalayas,
Interscience Publisher, New York, pp. 289.
Garzione CN, DeCelles PG, Hodkinson DG, Ojha
TP and Upreti BN (2003), East-west Extension and
Miocene Environmental Change in the Southern Tibetan
Plateau: Thakkhola Graben, central Nepal, Geological
Society of America Bulletin, 115(1): 320.
Gehrels GE, DeCelles PG, Ojha TP and Upreti BN
(2006), "Geologic and U-Pb Geochronologic Evidence
for early Paleozoic Tectonism in the Kathmandu Thrust
Sheet, Central Nepal Himalaya, Geological Society of
America Bulletin, 118: 185198.
Gelfand I, Guberman Sh, Izvekova M, Keilis-Borok V
and Rantsman EYa (1972), Criteria of High Seismicity,
Determined by Pattern Recognition, Tectonophysics,
13: 415422.
Gutenberg B and Richter CF (1944), Frequency of
earthquakes in California, Bulletin of the Seismological
Society of America, 34: 185188.
No.4 Thapa Dilli Ram et al.: Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis in Nepal 585
Gutenberg B and Richter CF (1954), Seismicity of the
Earth and Associated phenomena, 2nd ed, Princeton
Univ. Press, pp. 310.
Gutenberg B and Richter CR (1956), Earthquake
Magnitude, Intensity, Energy and Acceleration, Bulletin
of the Seismological Society of America, 46: 105145.
Hanks TC and Kanamori H (1994), A Moment
Magnitude Scale, Journal of Geophysical Research,
84: 23482350.
Hodges KV (2000), Tectonics of the Himalaya and
Southern Tibet from Two Perspectives, Geological
Society of America Bulletin, 112: 324350.
International Seismological Centre (ISC), Bulletin,
Thatcham, UK, (http://www.isc.ac.uk/Bull).
Jouanne F, Mugnier J, Gamond J, Le Fort P, Pandey MR,
Bollinger L, Flouzat M and Avouac JP (2004), Current
shortening across the Himalayas of Nepal, Geophysical
Journal International, 157: 114.
Jouanne F, Mugnier J, Pandey M, Gamond J, Le
Fort P, Serrurier L, Vigny C and Avouac JP (1999),
Oblique Convergence in the Himalayas of Western
Nepal Deduced from Preliminary Results of GPS
Measurements, Geophysical Research Letters, 26(13):
19331936.
Kramer SL (1996), Geotechnical Earthquake
Engineering, Prentice Hall International Series in Civil
Engineering and Engineering Mechanics, Washington,
106129.
Larson KM, Brgmann R, Bilham R and Freymueller JT
(1999), Kinematics of the India-Eurasia Collision Zone
from GPS Measurements, Journal of Geophysical
Research, 104: 10771093.
Lav J and Avouac JP (2000), Active Folding of
Fluvial Terraces across the Siwaliks Hills, Himalayas of
Central Nepal, Journal of Geophysical Research, 105:
57355770.
Lee WHK, Wu FT and Jacobsen C (1976), A Catalog
of Historical Earthquakes in China, Bulletin of the
Seismological Society of America, 66: 20032016.
Li W and Li S (2010), Generation Methodology of
Isolines of Earthquake Ground Motion, Earthquake
Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 9(4): 473480.
Li W, Li S, Lu J and Zhao Z (2011), An Improved
Method for Fitting Ground Motion Attenuation
Relationship, Applied Mechanics and Materials,
9093: 16391643.
Liu R, Chen Y, Ren X, Xu Z, Sun L, Yang H, Liang
J and Ren K (2007), Comparison between Different
Earthquake Magnitudes Determined by China
Seismograph Networks, Acta Seismologica Sinica, 29:
467476. (in Chinese).
Mahajan AK, Thakur VC, Sharma ML and Chauhan
M (2010), Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Map of NW
Himalaya and Its Adjoining Area, India, Natural
Hazards, 53: 443457.
McGuire RK (1976), FORTRAN Computer Program for
Seismic Risk Analysis, U.S. Geological Survey Open-
File Report, 7667.
McGuire RK (1993), Computations of Seismic
Hazard, Annali Di Geosica, XXXVI: 34.
McGuire RK (1995), Probabilistic Seismic Hazard
Analysis and Design Earthquakes: Closing the Loop,
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 85:
12751284.
McGuire RK and Arabasz WJ (2000), An Introduction
to Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis, Geotechnical
and Environmental Geophysics I: Review and Tutorial.
Nakata T (1972), Geomorphic History and Crustal
Movements of Foothills of the Himalaya, Science
Report, 22: 39177, Tohoku University.
Nakata T (1982), A Photogrammetric Study on Active
faults in the Nepal Himalayas, Journal of Nepal
Geological Society, 2: 6780.
Nakata T (1989), Active Faults of the Himalaya of
India and Nepal, Special Paper-Geological Society of
America, 232: 243264.
Nakata T, Iwata S, Yamanaka H, Yagi H and Maemoku
H (1984), Tectonic Landforms of Several Active Faults
in the Western Nepal Himalayas, Journal of Nepal
Geological Society, 4: 177200.
Nath SK and Thingbaijam KKS (2012), Probabilistic
Seismic Hazard Assessment of India, Seismological
Research Letters, 83(1): 135149.
National Earthquake Information Center (NEIC), United
States Geological Survey, U.S.A, (http://neic.usgs.gov).
National Seismological Centre (NSC), Department of
Mines and Geology, Nepal, (http://seismonepal.gov.np).
Nelson KD, Zhao W, Brown LD, Kuo J, Che J, Liu X,
Klemperer SL, Makovsky Y, Meissner R, Mechie J,
Kind R, Wenzel F, Ni J, Nabelek J, Leshou C, Tan H,
Wei W, Jones AG, Booker J, Unsworth M, Kidd WSF,
Hauck M, Alsdorf D, Ross A, Cogan M, Wu C, Sandvol
E and Edward M (1996), Partially Molten Middle Crust
Beneath Southern Tibet: Synthesis of Project-INDEPTH
results, Science, 276: 16841686.
Oldham T (1883), A Catalogue of Indian Earthquake
from Earliest Time to the End 1869, Memoirs of the
Geological Survey of India, 19: 163215.
Pandey MR (1983), Seismicity of Nepal (A Preliminary
Study), His Majestrys Government of Nepal, Ministry
of Industry, Department of Mines and Geology,
Seismological Laboratory, Kathmandu, Nepal, Internal
Report, 317.
Pandey MR, Chitrakar GR, Kae B, Sapkota SN,
Rajaure S and Gautam UP (2002), Seismic Hazard Map
of Nepal, National Seismological Centre, Kathmandu,
Nepal, 18.
Pandey MR and Molnar P (1988), The Distribution of
Intensity of the Bihar-Nepal Earthquake of 15 January
586 EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND ENGINEERING VIBRATION Vol.12
1934 and Bounds on the Extent of the Rupture Zone,
Journal of Nepal Geological Society, 5(1): 2244.
Pandey MR, Tandukar RP, Avouac JP, Lav J and
Massot JP (1995), Interseismic Strain Accumulation
on the Himalayan Crustal Ramp (Nepal), Geophysical
Research Letters, 22(7): 751754.
Pandey MR, Tandukar RP, Avouac JP, Vergne J and
Hritier Th (1999), Seismotectonics of the Nepal
Himalaya from a Local Seismic Network, Journal of
Asian Earth Sciences, 17: 703712.
Seeber L and Armbruster JG (1981), Great Detachment
Earthquakes along the Himalayan Arc and Long-term
Forecasting, Earthquake Prediction, the American
Geophysical Union, Maurice Ewing Series, 4: 259277.
Srivastava NN and Ramachandram K (1985), A New
catalogue of Earthquakes for Peninsular India during
1839-1900, Mausam, 36(30): 351358.
Taylor MH and Yin A (2009), Active structures of the
Himalayan-Tibetan Orogen and Their Relationships to
Earthquake Distribution, Contemporary Strain Field,
and Cenozoic Volcanism, Geosphere, 5(3): 199214;
doi: 10.1130/GES00217.1.
Thapa DR (2008), Seismic Hazard and Ground Motion
in Nepal, Diploma Dissertation, unpublished, The
Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical
Physics, Trieste, Italy.
Thapa DR and Wang G (2010), Spatial Distribution of
Seismicity and Possible Disaster in the Nepal Himalaya
and Its Surrounding Region, Proceedings of the 9th
International Conference on Civil and Environmental
Engineering, Advances in Civil and Environmental
Engineering, China Architecture and Building Press,
November 1-3, 2010, Dalian, P.R. China. Paper number
2.53.
Upreti BN (1999), An Overview of the Statigraphy
and tectonics of the Nepal Himalaya, Journal of Asian
Earth Sciences, 17: 577606.
Upreti BN and Le Fort P (1999), Lesser Himalayan
Crystalline Nappes of Nepal: Problems of Their Origin,
Special Paper - Geological Society of America, 328:
225238.
Upreti BN, Nakata T, Kumahara Y, Yagi H, Okumura K,
Rockwell TK, Virdi NS and Maemoku H (2000), The
Latest Active Faulting in Southeast Nepal, Proceedings
of the Hokudan International Symposium and School on
Active Faulting, January 17-26, 2000, Japan, 533536.
Wang S, Wang J, Yu Y, Wu Q, Gao A and Gao M (2010),
The Empirical Relationship between M
L
and M
S
Based
on Bulletin of Seismological Observations of Chinese
Stations, Earthquake Research in China, 26(1): 1422.
(in Chinese).
Yin A (2006), Cenozoic Tectonic Evolution of the
Himalayan Orogen as Constrained by Along-strike
Variation of Structural Geometry, Exhumation History,
and Foreland Sedimentation, Earth-Science Reviews,
76: 1131.
Zhao W, Nelson KD, Che J, Quo J, Lu D, Wu C and
Liu X (1993), Deep Seismic Reection Evidence for
Continental Underthrusting beneath Southern Tibet,
Nature, 366: 555559.