Simulation of Near Fault Ground Motion

in Delhi Region

Hemant Shrivastava, G.V. Ramana and A.K. Nagpal

Abstract Ground motions in the vicinity of the source caused severe damage to
structures as evidenced during the past earthquakes (Loma Prieta 1989; Kobe 1995;
Chi-Chi 1999). Near fault ground motions are characterized by long period velocity
pulse as reported in literature (Somerville, 2005). This pulse type of motion is
produced due to forward directivity where fault rupture propagates towards the site
at a velocity close to shear wave velocity, causing most of the seismic energy to
arrive at the site within a short time. Such impulsive motion subjects structures to
high input seismic energy at the beginning of the record. In this study, near fault
ground motion for Mw 6.0 has been simulated in Delhi region. The high frequency
ground motion has been simulated using specific barrier model, combined with long
period velocity pulse. As reported in literature, strong ground motion with long
period pulse can increase the demand on medium and high rise structures.

Keywords Delhi region
Near fault
Long period velocity pulse

1 Introduction

Delhi, capital city, lies in the northern part of India. It is located between latitude
28o 24′–28o 53′ and longitude 76o 50′–77o 20′. It is centre of major economic and
commercial activities with a very high density of infrastructure. It is situated at
distance of 200–300 km from Himalayan arc region. Moderate/local earthquakes
(Mw 6.0, 1960; Mw 2.6, 2002; Mw 3.4, 2004; Mw 4.1, 2007; Mw 5.0, 2012) were felt
in the Delhi city. The earthquake that occurred on 27th August, 1960, has its
epicentre near Sohna at a distance about 60 km from Delhi city and caused minor
damage to buildings and left around about 50 persons injured [31]. Singh et al. [25]
simulated ground motions in Delhi from possible future large/great earthquakes in

H. Shrivastava (&)
G.V. Ramana
A.K. Nagpal

Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi, India
e-mail: hemant.shrivastava1986@gmail.com

© Springer India 2015 779

V. Matsagar (ed.), Advances in Structural Engineering,
DOI 10.1007/978-81-322-2193-7_61
780 H. Shrivastava et al.

the central seismic gap in Himalayan arc. They have generated ground motion for
magnitude Mw 7.5, 8.0, and 8.5 using stochastic method (point source and finite
source). Rao [23] simulated ground motion for Mw 6.0 and 6.5 earthquakes using
specific barrier model. Bansal et al. [3] studied two local earthquakes (Mw 2.6,
2001; Mw 3.4, 2004) of Delhi and synthesized expected ground motions in the
epicentre region for an Mw 5.0 earthquake in Delhi using EGF. Delhi earthquake of
25 November 2007 (Mw 4.1) was studied by Singh et al. [26] and they provided
source parameters. They compared recorded PGA with attenuation relationship
proposed by Iyengar and Ghosh [11]. The equation was found to overestimates the
PGA for distances greater than 100 km. Kumar et al. [12] studied the effect of two
hypothetical moderate earthquakes of Mw 5.5 and 6.0 for seismic hazard and risk in
NCR (Delhi) region. They simulated earthquake ground motion using composite
source technique at hard soil site and soft soil site. Manisha et al. [16] simulated
strong ground motion at bedrock level in National capital (Delhi) region using semi
empirical technique for Mw 5.5 and 6.0. Mittal et al. [18] simulated strong ground
motion of a local earthquake (Mw 5.5) in Delhi using EGF at bedrock level and at
different soil sites. However, none of the above studies incorporated long period
velocity pulse which is important characteristic of near fault ground motion.
From past earthquakes (Loma Prieta 1989; Landers 1992; Kobe 1995; Chi-Chi
1999) it has been observed that stations located near fault recorded a ground motion
with long period velocity pulse [29]. Bertero et al. [4] has been identified long
period velocity pulse is critical in the design of structures. A coherent long period
velocity pulse is generated by forward directivity effect. Forward directivity occurs
when the fault rupture propagates towards the site at a velocity nearly equal to the
propagation velocity of the shear waves and the direction of fault slip is aligned
with the site and causes the wave front to arrive as a single large pulse [30]. The
near fault pulses can cause very large inelastic deformation demands on a structure.
The effect of long period ground motion on flexible structures has been extensively
reported in the literature [28, 30]. The importance of near fault motions on structural
performance has been reported in several studies [1, 9, 13–15]. The elastic and
inelastic analysis of multi-degree of freedom systems indicates that amplitude and
period of the pulse in the near fault earthquakes are key parameters that control the
performance of structures [1, 4, 9, 24, 33]. A number of studies are available to
characterize the amplitude and period of the pulse for long period ground motion in
the near fault region [2, 7, 10, 17, 30]. The hybrid methodology, consisting of
superimposition of high frequency ground motion and long period velocity pulse
[6, 10, 17], is an efficient and effective method for the simulation of strong ground
motion in near fault region [8, 10].
In the present study, the strong ground motion has been simulated using hybrid
technique for near fault earthquake (Mw 6.0) in Delhi region from local sources. The
specific barrier model has been used for simulating high frequency ground motion
of Mw 6.0 earthquake and the long period velocity pulse model [17] is used for
simulating the low frequency ground motion and these are then superimposed. This
simulation method can be used to generate synthetic ground motion for scenario
Simulation of Near Fault Ground Motion in Delhi Region 781

earthquakes in Delhi region and it can further be used in the damage evaluation and
seismic assessment of structures.

2 Simulation of High Frequency Ground Motion

For the simulation of strong ground motion, stochastic method described by Boore
[5] is adopted here. The Fourier amplitude spectrum of S-wave portion of strong
ground motion, Y(Mo, r, f), at an distance R from an source, can be expressed as

Y ðMo ; R; f Þ ¼ EðMo ; f ÞGðRÞAn ðf ÞPðf Þ ð1Þ

E ðMo ; f Þ ¼ c  SðMo ; f Þ ð2Þ

where, c is constant, S(Mo, f) is source spectrum, G(R) is path effects, An(f) is path
attenuation term, P(f) is site terms, Mo is the seismic moment, f is the frequency and
R represent distance in km.
The specific barrier model has been used to simulate the source spectrum
[20, 21]. It composed of subevents that rupture randomly and independently in
time. The subevents are modelled as identical circular cracks and the acceleration
source spectrum [22] may be expressed as follows
( "
 #)12
2 sinðpfT Þ 2
SðMo ; f Þ ¼ ð2pf Þ N 1 þ ð N  1Þ Moi ð f Þ ð3Þ
ðpfT Þ

Moi
Moi ð f Þ ¼  2 ð4Þ
1 þ ff2

where, Moi(f) is the acceleration source spectrum of the individual subevent, N is the
total number of subevents that compose the rupture.

3 Simulation of Long Period Velocity Pulse

In the case of near fault ground motion, most of the elastic energy arrives coherently
in a single, intense, relatively long period pulse at the beginning of the record,
representing the cumulative effect of almost all the seismic radiation from the fault.
The phenomenon is even more pronounced when the direction of slip on the fault
782 H. Shrivastava et al.

plane points towards the site as well. Mavroeidis and Papageorgiou [17] proposed
an analytical expression for near fault velocity pulse given as

( h    i
1 þ cos c p ðt  t0 Þ cos 2pfp ðt  t0 Þ þ m ; t0  2fcp  t  t0 þ 2fcp
2pf
A
with c [ 1
v ðt Þ ¼ 2
0; otherwise
ð5Þ
8 2
 3
>
> 2pfp  
>
> sin ð t  t Þ cos 2pf ðt  t Þ þ t
< Apfp 6
> 7
0 p 0
6 c 7
c 6

 7; t  2fcp  t  t0 þ 2fcp with c [ 1
aðtÞ ¼ 4   2pf 5
>
> þ c sin 2pfp ðt  t0 Þ þ t 1 þ cos
p
ðt  t0 Þ
>
> c
>
:
0; otherwise
ð6Þ

Here, parameter A controls amplitude of the signal, fP is for prevailing frequency, t

is phase of amplitude modulated harmonic, c is a parameter that defines the
oscillatory character of the signal and t0 specifies the epoch of the envelope’s peak.
The pulse duration, pulse amplitude, as well as the number and phase of half cycles
are the key parameters that define the waveform characteristics of near fault velocity
pulses. The prevailing frequency (fp = 1/TP) of the signal is the inverse of the
duration of the pulse. The pulse period and the moment magnitude are related
through empirical relationship given by Mavroeidis and Papageorgiou [17].

log Tp ¼ 2:9 þ 0:5MW ð7Þ

4 Simulation of Near Fault Earthquake

Delhi region felt an earthquake of maximum Mw 6.0 till now. It occurred between
Delhi cantonment and Gurgaon (epicentre within *5 km of 28.47o N, 77.00o E) at
a shallow depth [19, 27], however, no record of this earthquake is available. To
generate Mw 6.0 earthquake, the fault location is assumed within *5 km of 28.47o
N, 77.00o E [27]. If site is located within distance of 15–25 km from fault and align
in the direction of rupture and slip on the fault. It may cause large damage to site
due to long period velocity pulse. The specific barrier model used for simulating
high frequency ground motion for local sources of Mw 6.0 and the simulation
parameters have been adopted from Rao [23] and are given in Table 1. These
scenario earthquakes generated at the ridge observatory (Delhi).
The input parameters to simulate the long period velocity pulse are as following:
Simulation of Near Fault Ground Motion in Delhi Region 783

Table 1 Seismological source parameters for simulation of scenario earthquake

Input parameters Values
Moment magnitude 6.0
Distance (km) 20
Crustal density (kN/m3) 2.85
Rupture velocity (km/sec) 3.6
Path properties Q(f) = Qoexp(f) 800f 0:42
Geometrical spreading GðRÞ ¼ R1 for R  Rx
GðRÞ ¼ ðRRx Þ1=2 for R [ R
Partition factor 0.71
Radiation factor 0.55
Free surface factor 2.0
fmax 50
ΔσG, ΔσL (bars) 60, 180

(a) Amplitude
For the amplitude of velocity pulse, the attenuation relationship developed by
Somerville [28] between the peak ground velocity, moment magnitude and distance
between fault and site has been adopted in present study. This relationship cannot
be used for distance less than 3 km.

log10 PGV ¼ 1:0 þ 0:5MW  0:5 log10 R ð8Þ

where, R is the closest distance of the site to the fault and Mw is the moment
magnitude.
(b) Number of Pulses
The number of significant pulses in the velocity time history is an important
parameter for structural response. Multiple cycles of motion can dramatically
increase the damage potential of the ground motions. The number of cycle of
motion is defined as the number of half cycles. Somerville et al. [30] suggests that
the number of half cycle sine pulse in the velocity time history might be associated
with the number of asperities in a fault. From the point of view of ground motion
prediction, this implies that prediction of number of significant velocity pulses in a
given earthquake is associated with the determination of slip distribution in the
causative fault. This is difficult to estimate a priori [6]. There are no models cur-
rently available for predicting the number of significant pulses in the velocity time
history. For most, number of pulses will vary between 1 and 3, with number of
pulse equal to 2 being a good general value to use in seismic evaluation [32]. In this
work assumed number of significant pulse equal to 2 (i.e. one full cycle of pulse
type ground motion).
(c) Phase Angle and Epoch of Envelope’s Peak
784 H. Shrivastava et al.

1
10
(a) nu = 150
0 nu = 235
10
Sa (g)

-1
10

-2
10
-2 -1 0
10 10 10
Time (sec)
1
10
(b) t0 = 0.7
0 t0 = 1.5
10
Sa (g)

-1
10

-2
10
-2 -1 0
10 10 10
Time (sec)

Fig. 1 Comparison of response spectra for a phase angle (υ) and b epoch of envelope’s peak (t0)

From literature, it is not clear that what value should be assumed for phase angle
(ν) and epoch of envelope’s peak (t0) to simulate the long period velocity pulse. In
order to study the effect of ν and t0 a sensitivity analysis is carried out. The
parameters amplitude, pulse period and number of pulse value kept constant in
sensitivity analysis. The parameters values for ν and t0 are taken as 150°, 235° and
0.7, 1.5 s respectively. Fifteen random time histories are generated for each ν and t0
values and response spectrum is computed. The mean of response spectrum com-
puted for each ν and t0 value are shown in Fig. 1. It is found that the variation in
response spectra for different t0 and ν is negligible. From the analysis it is clear that
t0 and ν do not affect the simulation of ground motion with long period pulse.
To generate near fault ground motion, the high frequency ground motion is
combined with long period velocity pulse. The input parameters for long period
velocity pulse are given in Table 2. The procedure for combined the high frequency
and low frequency ground motions adopted from Mavaroedis and Papageorgiou
[17] are given below and shown in Fig. 2.

Table 2 Input parameters of

long period velocity pulse Parameters Value
Magnitude 6.0
Amplitude (cm/s) 55.77
γ 1
υ 160
t0 1.3
Simulation of Near Fault Ground Motion in Delhi Region 785

Accl. (cm/sec 2 )
Accl.(cm/sec 2 )
100
500 (1) (2)
0 0
-500 -100
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Time (sec) Time (sec)
FAS(cm/sec)

FAS(cm/sec)
150 60
100 (3) 40 (4)
50 20
0 0
-1 0 1 2 -1 0 1 2
10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Freq.(Hz) Freq.(Hz)
FAS(cm/sec)

Accl.(cm/sec 2 )
150
100 (5) 500 (6)
50 0

0 -1 -500
0 1 2
10 10 10 10
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Freq (Hz)
Time (sec)
FAS(cm/sec)

150 2
100 (7) (8)

Sa(g)
1
50
0 0
-1 0 1 2
10 10 10 10 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Freq.(Hz) Time (sec)

Fig. 2 Simulation of acceleration time history for Mw 6.0 earthquake with long period velocity
pulse at bedrock level

1. Select the moment magnitude (Mw) of the potential earthquake and calculate the
prevailing frequency (fp). For selected values of the parameters A, γ and υ,
generate the long period component of acceleration time history.
2. For the selected fault-station geometry, generate the synthetic acceleration time
histories for the moment magnitude, specified previously.
3. Calculate the Fourier transform of the synthetic acceleration time histories
generated in steps 1 and 2.
4. Subtract the Fourier amplitude spectrum of the synthetic time history generated
in step 1 from the Fourier amplitude spectrum of the synthetic time history
produced in step 2.
5. Construct a synthetic acceleration time history so that (a) its Fourier amplitude
spectrum is the difference of the Fourier amplitude spectra calculated in step 4;
and (b) its phase coincides with the phase of the Fourier transform of the
synthetic time history generated in step 2.
6. Superimpose the time histories generated in step 1 and 5. The near source pulse
is shifted in time so that the peak of its envelope coincides with the time that the
rupture front passes in front of the station.
Finally, the acceleration time history and response spectrum for 5 % damping
with long period velocity pulse for Mw 6.0 are shown in Fig. 2 (6 and 8). In Fig. 3,
response spectra (with and without long period pulse) are compared and the effect
of long period pulse observed at 0.8–2.0 s. From literature [1, 4, 9, 13] it found that
strong ground motion with long period pulse can increase the seismic demand (base
shear, storey drift, ductility) on the medium and high rise building. The width of the
786 H. Shrivastava et al.

1
10
without long pe riod puls e
with long pe riod puls e

0
10
Sa (g)

-1
10

-2
10

-3
10
-2 -1 0 1
10 10 10 10
Tim e (s e c)

Fig. 3 Comparison of response spectra with and without long period pulse

pulse larger than the natural period of the structure can cause more damage. If
building site lying along the direction of fault rupture then forward directivity will
cause long period velocity motion which may lead to higher damage to building.

5 Conclusions

A methodology is proposed to simulate ground motion with long period velocity

pulse in Delhi region. If the site lies along the forward directivity rupture direction
then the ground motion with long period velocity pulse increases the seismic
demand on the mid-rise and high rise building. The seismic demand from Mw 6.0
earthquake with long period pulse can affect the structure having time period range
between 0.8 and 1.5 s at bedrock level. The earthquake of Mw 6.0 with long period
velocity pulse from local sources is likely to be more destructive.

References

1. Anderson JC, Bertero VV (1987) Uncertainties in establishing design earthquakes. J Struct

Eng ASCE 113(8):1709–1724
2. Alavi B, Krawinkler H (2000) Consideration of near fault ground motion effects in seismic
design. In: 12th world conference on earthquake engineering
3. Bansal BK, Singh SK, Dharmaraju R, Pacheco JF, Ordaz M, Dattatrayam RS, Suresh G
(2009) Source study of two small earthquakes of Delhi, India, and estimation of ground
motion from future moderate, local events. J Seismolog 13:89–105
Simulation of Near Fault Ground Motion in Delhi Region 787

4. Bertero VV, Mahin SA, Herrera RA (1978) Aseismic design implications of near fault San
Fernando earthquake records. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 6:31–42
5. Boore DM (2003) Simulation of ground motion using the stochastic model. Pure Appl
Geophys 160:635–676
6. Bray JD, Marek AR (2004) Characterization of forward directivity ground motions in the near
fault regions. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 24:815–828
7. Fu Q, Menun C (2004) Seismic environment based simulation of near fault ground motions.
In: 13th world conference on earthquake engineering, paper no. 332
8. Halldorsson B, Mavroeidis GP, Papageorgiou AS (2011) Near fault and far fault strong ground
motion simulation for earthquake engineering applications using the specific barrier model.
J Struct Eng ASCE 137(3):433–444
9. Hall JF, Heaton TH, Halling MW, Wald DJ (1995) Near source ground motion and its effect
on flexible buildings. Earthq Spectra 11(4):569–605
10. He WL, Agrawal AK (2008) Analytical model of ground motion pulses for the design and
assessment of seismic protective systems. J Struct Eng ASCE 134(7):1177–1188
11. Iyengar RN, Ghosh S (2004) Microzonation of earthquake hazard in greater Delhi area. Curr
Sci 87:1193–1202
12. Kumar D, Sarkar I, Sriram V, Teotia SS (2012) Evaluating the seismic hazard to the National
capital (Delhi) region, India from moderate earthquakes using simulated accelerograms. Nat
Hazards 61:481–500
13. Liao WI, Loh CH, Wan S (2001) Earthquake responses of RC moment frames subjected to
near fault ground motions. Struct Des Tall Spec Build 10:219–229
14. MacRae GA, Morrow DV, Roeder CW (2001) Near fault ground motion effects on simple
structures. J Struct Eng ASCE 127(9):996–1004
15. Malhotra PK (1999) Response of buildings to near fault pulse like ground motion. Earthq Eng
Struct Dyn 28:1309–1326
16. Manisha, Kumar D, Teotia SS (2011) Seismic hazard based on simulated accelerograms due to
moderate/strong earthquakes in National Capital (Delhi) region. J Indian Geophys Union 15
(2):77–84
17. Mavroeidis GP, Papageorgiou AS (2003) A mathematical representation of near fault ground
motions. Bull Seismol Soc Am 93(3):1099–1131
18. Mittal H, Kumar A, Kamal (2012) Ground motion estimation in Delhi from postulated
regional and local earthquakes. J Seismolog 17(2):593–605
19. Nath M, Narain K, Srivastava JP (1960) A report on the Delhi earthquake of 27 August 1960.
Geological Survey of India, Northern Region, Lucknow, 1960
20. Papageorgiou AS, Aki K (1983a) A specific barrier model for the quantitative description on
inhomogeneous faulting and the prediction of strong ground motion. Part I: description of the
model. Bull Seismol Soc Am 73(3):693–722
21. Papageorgiou AS, Aki K (1983b) A specific barrier model for the quantitative description on
inhomogeneous faulting and the prediction of strong ground motion. Part I: applications of the
model. Bull Seismol Soc Am 73(3):693–722
22. Papageorgiou AS (1988) On two characteristics frequencies of acceleration spectra: patch
corner frequency and fmax. Bull Seismol Soc Am 78:509–529
23. Rao HCh (2006) Ground response analyses and liquefaction studies for soils of Delhi. Ph.D.
thesis, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi
24. Sasani M, Bertero V (2000) Importance of severe pulse-type ground motion in performance
based engineering: historical and critical review. In: Proceedings of 12th world conference on
earthquake engineering, Auckland, New Zealand
25. Singh SK, Mohanty WK, Bansal BK, Roonwal GS (2002) Ground motion in Delhi from
future large/great earthquakes in the central seismic gap of the Himalayan arc. Bull Seismol
Soc Am 92:555–569
26. Singh SK, Kumar A, Suresh G, Ordaz M, Pacheo JF, Sharma ML, Bansal BK, Dattatrayam
RS, Reinoso E (2010) Delhi earthquake of 25 November 2007 (MW 4.1): implications for
seismic hazard. Curr Sci 29(7):939–947
788 H. Shrivastava et al.

27. Singh SK, Suresh G, Dattatrayam RS, Shukla HP, Martin S, Havskov J, Perez-Campos X,
Iglesias A (2013) The Delhi 1960 earthquake: epicenter, depth and magnitude. Curr Sci 105
(8):1155–1165
28. Somerville PG (1998) Development of an improved representation of near fault ground
motions. In: SMIP98 seminar on utilization of strong motion data, Oakland
29. Somerville PG (2005) Engineering characterization of near fault ground motions. In: NZSEE
conference
30. Somerville PG, Smith NF, Graves RW, Abrahamson NA (1997) Modification of empirical
strong ground motion attenuation relations to include the amplitude and duration effects of
rupture directivity. Seismol Res Lett 68(1):199–222
31. Srivastava LS, Somayajulu JG (1966) The seismicity of the area around Delhi. In: 3rd
symposium on earthquake engineering, University of Roorkee, Roorkee
32. Stewart JP, Chio SJ, Bray JD, Graves RW, Somerville PG, Abrahmson NA (2001) Ground
motion evaluation procedures for performance based design. PEER report 2001/09, University
of California, Berkeley
33. Zhang Y, Iwan WD (2002) Active interaction control of tall buildings subjected to near field
ground motions. J Struct Eng ASCE 128:69–79