See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: http://www.researchgate.net/publication/263913403

SEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSIS FOR MYANMAR ARTICLE in JOURNAL OF EARTHQUAKE AND TSUNAMI · NOVEMBER 2013 Impact Factor: 0.41 · DOI: 10.1142/S1793431113500292

CITATION

DOWNLOADS

VIEWS

1

22

44

2 AUTHORS, INCLUDING: Santi Pailoplee Chulalongkorn University 23 PUBLICATIONS 19 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE

Available from: Santi Pailoplee Retrieved on: 16 July 2015

3rd Reading June 18, 2013 16:53 WSPC/S1793-4311/238-JET

1350029

Journal of Earthquake and Tsunami Vol. 7, No. 4 (2013) 1350029 (14 pages) c World Scientific Publishing Company
DOI: 10.1142/S1793431113500292

SEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSIS FOR MYANMAR

NANTHAPORN SOMSA-ARD and SANTI PAILOPLEE∗ Earthquake and Tectonic Geology Research Unit (EATGRU ) Department of Geology, Faculty of Science Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok 10330, Thailand ∗[email protected] Received 28 July 2012 Revised 14 December 2012 Accepted 29 April 2013 Published 20 June 2013 In this study, the seismic hazards of Myanmar are analyzed based on both deterministic and probabilistic scenarios. The area of the Sumatra–Andaman Subduction Zone is newly defined and the lines of faults proposed previously are grouped into nine earthquake sources that might affect the Myanmar region. The earthquake parameters required for the seismic hazard analysis (SHA) were determined from seismicity data including paleoseismological information. Using previously determined suitable attenuation models, SHA maps were developed. For the deterministic SHA, the earthquake hazard in Myanmar varies between 0.1 g in the Eastern part up to 0.45 g along the Western part (Arakan Yoma Thrust Range). Moreover, probabilistic SHA revealed that for a 2% probability of exceedance in 50 and 100 years, the levels of ground shaking along the remote area of the Arakan Yoma Thrust Range are 0.35 and 0.45 g, respectively. Meanwhile, the main cities of Myanmar located nearby the Sagaing Fault Zone, such as Mandalay, Yangon, and Naypyidaw, may be subjected to peak horizontal ground acceleration levels of around 0.25 g. Keywords: Earthquake; seismic hazard analysis; deterministic; probabilistic; Myanmar.

1. Introduction Tectonically, Myanmar is situated within one of the seismically active zones in Mainland Southeast Asia. The recent to present-day activity of the Indian–Eurasian Plate Collision has left clear tectonic evidence and seismic activities are still prominent [Kundu and Gahalaut, 2012]. For the last 100 years (1912-present), at least 20 major earthquakes in Myanmar or nearby have been reported (Fig. 1(a)), with the highest magnitude (Mw 8.6) recorded at the Indian–Myanmar border in 1950, and then at Mw 8.0 (1912) at Mandalay and at Mw 7.6 (1931) close to Myitkyina [Brown, 1914; Brown and Leicester, 1933]. Thus, quantitative seismic hazard analysis (SHA) is really needed for Myanmar in order to provide an effective mitigation plan for upcoming earthquakes. ∗Corresponding

author. 1350029-1

(a)

(b)

June 18, 2013 16:53 WSPC/S1793-4311/238-JET

1350029-2

Fig. 1. (Color online) (a) Map of Myanmar and the neighboring area showing the earthquake fault lines [Bender, 1983; Pailoplee et al., 2009] in gray and major earthquakes (red dots) reported during the last 100 years (1912-present). (b) Seismic source zones in Myanmar and the nearby area showing the distribution of main shock earthquakes (blue dots) with a Mw > 4 after the earthquake de-clustering process [Gardner and Knopoff, 1974]. The numbers in this figure are equivalent to the numbers in the column “zone” in Table 1.

3rd Reading

1350029

N. Somsa-ard & S. Pailoplee

3rd Reading June 18, 2013 16:53 WSPC/S1793-4311/238-JET

1350029

Seismic Hazard Analysis for Myanmar

Based on literature reviews, some researchers have attempted to examine the seismic hazard situation in the Myanmar region. Zhang et al. [1999], in the Global Seismic Hazard Assessment Program (GSHAP) in Continental Asia, proposed a SHA map for Asia including the high hazard region of Myanmar. However, this approximate investigation was mainly based on the assumptions, models and SHA’s resolution from a global scale. After the Sumatra–Andaman earthquake (Mw-9.0) in 2004, Martin [2005] and Petersen et al. [2007] modified the SHA maps for Mainland Southeast Asia. Although the Myanmar area is excluded in this SHA, the maps of Thailand showed SHA results in some parts of Myanmar. The most up-to-date SHA established specifically for Myanmar is that of Htwe and Wenbin [2010]. However, they proposed the SHA maps only for Yangon, and not for the country as a whole. This study, therefore, aims to contribute directly the SHA maps for the whole country of Myanmar based on the most up-to-date data and suitable models with the world-wide accepted SHA methodology [Kramer, 1996].

2. Seismotectonic Due to the continued Northward subduction of the Indian Plate underneath the Burma Platelet (which is the Western part of the Eurasian Plate) and the Northward movement of the Burma Platelet from a spreading center in the Andaman sea [Bertrand and Rangin, 2003; Curray, 2005], earthquakes in Myanmar have resulted from three major seismotectonic regimes as follows; (i) Sumatra–Andaman Subduction Zone to the West of the Myanmar coast. In detailed classification, three separate portions of seismotectonic setting can be distinguished (see also Fig. 1(b) and Table 1), as follows. (a) The Sumatra– Andaman Inter Plate where shallow-focus earthquakes are normally generated along the trench, (b) the Sumatra–Andaman Intra Slab that is bounded by the occurrence of intermediate to deep-focus earthquakes underneath the Western fold belt of Myanmar [Paul et al., 2001], and (c) the portion of the Western fold belt that we call the “Arakan Yoma Thrust Range” [Curray, 2005] where compressive tectonic activity, that is, reverse faulting, usually causes shallowfocus earthquakes. (ii) Major active strike-slip fault along the Central lowlands of Myanmar. Beside the Sumatra–Andaman Subduction Zone, Myanmar has a great strike-slip active fault zone called the “Sagaing Fault Zone” [Bertrand and Rangin, 2003; Htwe and Wenbin, 2009]. This 1,200 km-long fault trends roughly North–South and moves right-laterally with a velocity of 23 mm/yr [Bertrand and Rangin, 2003]. As a result, Myanmar is subjected to major earthquakes from this fault (Fig. 1(a)). (iii) Regional shear zone in the highlands of Eastern Myanmar. This seismotectonic regime is continuous with the earthquake zones in Southern China, North– Western Laos and the Northern and Western part of Thailand (Fig. 1(b)). 1350029-3

Sumatra–Andaman Inter Plate Sumatra–Andaman Intra Slab Arakan Yoma Thrust Range Sagaing Fault Zone Hsenwi–Nanting Fault Zone Western Thailand Jinghong–Mengxing Fault Zone Northern Thailand–Dein Bein Fhu Red River Fault Zone

— — 340 944 359 259 174 177 407

SRL 9.0 9.0 8.0 8.5 8.0 7.9 7.7 7.7 8.1

Mmax

Af 93972 93972 6391 18754 6760 4781 3151 3208 7715

S 47 47 25 23 1 2 4.8 2 4

197 153 377 203 187 129 250 146 201

Events 5.50 4.06 4.21 3.44 3.10 3.29 2.62 3.65 3.23

a 1.07 0.77 0.77 0.66 0.65 0.71 0.52 0.76 0.74

b

Seismicity data

4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

Mmin

Reference for S Paul et al. [2001] Paul et al. [2001] Curray [2005] Bertrand and Rangin [2003] Lacassin et al. [1998] Fenton et al. [2003] Lacassin et al. [1998] Zuchiewicz et al. [2004] Duong and Feigl [1999]

June 18, 2013 16:53 WSPC/S1793-4311/238-JET

1350029-4

Note: SRL is the surface rupture length (km), Mmax is maximum earthquake magnitude, Af is rupture area (km2 ), S is slip rate (mm/yr). The values a and b are constants representing entire seismicity rate and seismicity potential, respectively, in the Gutenberg–Richter relationship. Mmin is the considered minimum magnitude.

Earthquake source

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Paleoseismological data

Summary of the earthquake potential parameters of the nine earthquake sources for the country of Myanmar.

Zone

Table 1.

3rd Reading

1350029

N. Somsa-ard & S. Pailoplee

3rd Reading June 18, 2013 16:53 WSPC/S1793-4311/238-JET

1350029

Seismic Hazard Analysis for Myanmar

Pailoplee et al. [2009] proposed a large number of possible active fault zones in this area. For instance, the Hsenwi–Nanting Fault Zone in the Eastern Myanmar–Southern China border area [Lacassin et al., 1998], the zone of right-lateral strike-slip faults in Western Thailand which spread out from the Sagaing Fault System [Fenton et al., 2003], and the Dein Bein Fhu Fault Zone [Zuchiewicz et al., 2004] that includes the Red River Fault Zone [Duong and Feigl, 1999] in Vietnam. Based on tectonic environments, regional geomorphology, and the orientation of earthquake fault lines, including the epicentral distribution of earthquakes, Pailoplee and Choowong [2012] demarcated 13 seismic source zones for investigating the characteristics of earthquake occurrences in Mainland Southeast Asia. Nine of these 13 zones were defined as being earthquake sources that might affect the Myanmar region. These selected sources are centered inside and around Myanmar with a radius of about 300 km, in accord with that suggested by Gupta [2002] for an effective SHA study. The boundary of each individual zone is illustrated in Fig. 1(b) and described in detail in Table 1.

3. Seismicity Based on the survey data, the international catalogues that have captured earthquake events in and around Myanmar during 1967–2012 are the Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology (IRIS), the U.S. Geological survey (USGS), and the global Centroid-Moment-Tensor catalogue (CMT). These various catalogues have both advantages and disadvantages in terms of the continuity and time span of their records. Hence, we prepared a new composite earthquake catalogue for this SHA according to the procedure suggested by Caceres and Kulhanek [2000]. All obtained earthquake catalogues (i.e. IRIS, USGS, and CMT), including the reported major earthquakes mentioned in Fig. 1(a) were merged. The merged catalogue was then checked for duplicate entries and, where they existed, one representative earthquake event was retained. 3.1. Earthquake magnitude conversion The new merged catalogue contained a variety of earthquake magnitude scales: body wave magnitude (Mb ), surface wave magnitude (Ms ) and moment magnitude (Mw ), which were derived by a specific analytical method. For the SHA performed here, the Mw value was used because it directly represents the physical properties of an earthquake source [Ottemoller and Havskov, 2003]. Since the CMT catalogue provides Mb , Ms , and Mw magnitudes for individual earthquake events, we, therefore, contribute the relationship of Ms to Mw and Mb to Mw (Fig. 2) which formulated in Eqs. (1) and (2). Thereafter, all earthquakes reported in Mb or Ms 1350029-5

3rd Reading June 18, 2013 16:53 WSPC/S1793-4311/238-JET

1350029

N. Somsa-ard & S. Pailoplee

(a) Fig. 2.

(b)

Empirical relationships between (a) Ms − Mw , and (b) Mb − Mw .

are converted to Mw according to these proposed equations. Mw = 0.1749Ms2 − 1.3396Ms + 7.6876,

(1)

Mw = 0.2674Mb2 − 1.8983Mb + 7.9123.

(2)

3.2. Earthquake de-clustering For the SHA, earthquake records require de-clustering by filtering the main shocks from the foreshocks and aftershocks [Kramer, 1996]. We applied the model of Gardner and Knopoff [1974] to de-cluster the earthquake events. By using the ZMAP software package [Wiemer, 2001], we distinguished 1463 clusters from 27,355 earthquake events. Of these events, a total of 24,386 events (89%) are classified as foreshocks or aftershocks and were, therefore, eliminated. This derived main-shock catalogue (Fig. 1(b)) was then used to evaluate the earthquake parameters needed for the SHA as described in Sec. 3.3. 3.3. Earthquake parameters The earthquake parameters considered for each seismic source zone are the expected maximum earthquake magnitude (Mmax ), considered minimum earthquake magnitude (Mmin ), rupture area (Af ) and the slip rate (S), including the earthquake activity which are represented by values a and b of the Gutenberg–Richter (G–R) relationship [Gutenberg and Richter, 1944]. Mmax is the most important parameter because the highest magnitude contributes the most to the analysis. To determine Mmax , the relationship between Mw and the surface rupture length of the fault (SRL) proposed by Wells and 1350029-6

3rd Reading June 18, 2013 16:53 WSPC/S1793-4311/238-JET

1350029

Seismic Hazard Analysis for Myanmar

Coppersmith [1994] was demonstrated. The SRL used for the Mmax calculation was taken from the length of the longest fault segment in each fault zone (Table 1). Moreover, the Af value was also determined using the relationship of the obtained Mw and Af [Wells and Coppersmith, 1994]. For Mmin, it was taken as 4.0 for all earthquake source zones. Below this lower threshold magnitude it is assumed that there is no significant earthquake hazard on engineering structures [Kramer, 1996]. 1. Sumatra–Andaman Inter Plate

2. Sumatra–Andaman Intra Slab

3. Arakan Yoma Thrust Range

4. Sagaing Fault Zone

5. Hsenwi–Nanting Fault Zone

6. Western Thailand

7. Jinghong–Mengxing Fault Zone

8. Northern Thailand–Dein Bein Fhu

9. Red River Fault Zone

Fig. 3. G–R relationships of the nine seismic source zones recognized in this SHA. Triangles indicate the number of earthquakes of each magnitude; squares represent the cumulative number of earthquakes equal to or larger than each magnitude. Solid lines are the lines of best fit according to Woessner and Wiemer [2005]. Mc is defined as the magnitude above which all earthquakes are considered to be fully reported. 1350029-7

3rd Reading June 18, 2013 16:53 WSPC/S1793-4311/238-JET

1350029

N. Somsa-ard & S. Pailoplee

In addition, the S value of individual fault zones were cited in previous publications mentioned in Table 1. The earthquake activities are quantified using the G–R relationship, shown in Eq. (3). log(n(M )) = a − bM,

(3)

where n(M ) is the annual frequency of earthquakes with magnitude M or larger, and a and b are constants that represent the entire seismicity rate and seismicity potential, respectively. This relationship is a key element in estimating the probability that an earthquake with magnitude M or larger will occur within a specific time interval. Thus, the obtained main-shock events were captured by the boundary of individual earthquake source. The number of earthquake events from each source were shown in Table 1. Thereafter, the number of events with a magnitude equal to or larger than M , denoted by n(M ), is plotted (Fig. 3). The optimal values of a and b to yield the G–R relationship are evaluated according to Woessner and Wiemer [2005]. All earthquake parameters representing the earthquake potential of each earthquake source, finally, are summarized in Table 1.

4. Attenuation Models As well as clarification of the earthquake source, strong ground-motion attenuation models are also essential for SHA. In this study, we classified the nine earthquake sources into two categories on the basis of seismotectonic setting; the subductionrelated earthquake zones for the Sumatra–Andaman region (zones 1 and 2 in Table 1), and the shallow crustal earthquake zones (inland active fault zone) (zones 3–9 in Table 1). For the subduction-related earthquakes, Chintanapakdee et al. [2008] compared 55 strong ground-motion data with some candidate attenuation models and concluded that the model of Crouse [1991], shown in Eq. (4), was the most suitable relationship for the Sumatra–Andaman Subduction Zone. ln yCrouse (M, R) = p1 + p2 M + p4 ln(R + p5 e(p6 M) ) + p7 h,

(4)

where y is the peak horizontal ground acceleration or PGA (cm/s2 ), M is the moment magnitude (Mw ), R is the source-to-site distance (km), p1 = 6.36, p2 = 1.76, p4 = −2.73, p5 = 1.58, p6 = 0.608, p7 = 0.00916, the focal depth, h, varies between 0 and 238 km, and the standard deviation (σ) = 0.773. For the earthquakes generated by inland active faults, Htwe and Wenbin [2010] analyzed the SHA for Yangon (Central Myanmar) according to the attenuation relationship of Boore et al. [1997], which is represented by ln yBoore (M, R) = b1 + b2 (M − 6) + b3 (M − 6)2 + b4 R + b5 log(R) + b6 Gb + b7 Gc , 1350029-8

(5)

3rd Reading June 18, 2013 16:53 WSPC/S1793-4311/238-JET

1350029

Seismic Hazard Analysis for Myanmar

where y, M , and R are as defined in Eq. (4), for a randomly-oriented horizontal component (or geometrical mean) b1 = 0.105, b2 = 0.229, b3 = 0, b4 = 0, b5 = −0.778, b6 = 0.162, b7 = 0.251, GB = 1, GC = 0, and σ = 0.23. Consequently for this SHA, we selected the strong ground-motion attenuation model of Boore et al. [1997] for shallow crustal earthquakes and the model of Crouse [1991] for the Sumatra–Andaman Subduction Zone. 5. Seismic Hazard Analysis For the SHA, the MATLAB-based software that employs an algorithm to calculate the PGA (in g unit) was used assuming the rock site condition. A real sources of subduction zones 1 and 2 and earthquake fault lines delineated in zones 3–9 (Fig. 1) were converted systematically to 0.05◦ × 0.05◦ points. All parameters needed to define the potential of each earthquake source were added in, including the suitable attenuation models. The SHA was calculated for 0.2◦ × 0.2◦ grid cells covering the whole country of Myanmar. Both deterministic SHA (DSHA) and probabilistic SHA (PSHA) were employed. For the DSHA [Krinitzsky, 2003], the Mmax determined for each earthquake source was assumed to be generated within the source at the shortest distance from source to site. Using this worst-case scenario, the attenuation relationships of ground shaking were applied to estimate the PGA, and the obtained PGA values were then contoured to construct the DSHA map, as shown in Fig. 4. This DSHA map illustrates that Myanmar has a chance of ground shaking up to the 0.45 g level, particularly for the Western part along the Arakan Yoma Thrust Range. Meanwhile, in Central and Eastern Myanmar, DSHA indicates a possible ground shaking between 0.25–0.35 g at the area nearby the faults and 0.1–0.2 g for the other regions. In contrast to the DSHA, the PSHA [Cornell, 1968] considers the likelihood of an earthquake (i.e. both magnitudes and locations) and the uncertainty of ground shaking attenuation. The probability density functions of magnitudes are demonstrated according to the characteristic earthquake model [Youngs and Coppersmith, 1985] recognizing the paleoseismological data (i.e. Mmax , Af and S). The magnitudes of interest were subdivided equally into 10 case studies between Mmax and Mmin (Fig. 5(a)). Meanwhile, the source-to-site distances were subdivided equally into 50 portions ranging from the shortest to the longest possible distances (Fig. 5(b)). In addition, using the selected attenuation models, the hazard curves, plotted as the PGA (X-axis) against the probability of exceedance (POE) (Y-axis) were evaluated for each SHA grid cell (Fig. 5(c)). For instance from Fig. 5(c), the hazard curves indicate that Hakha city, situated near the West coast of Myanmar, is located in the most earthquake-prone area. Ground shaking equal to or larger than 0.16 g occurs around 0.001 times per year (once every 1000 years). The hazard level decreases for the cities of Myitkyina, Naypyidaw, Sittwe, Mandalay, Bago, Yangon, Taunggyi, and Dawei. 1350029-9

3rd Reading June 18, 2013 16:53 WSPC/S1793-4311/238-JET

1350029

N. Somsa-ard & S. Pailoplee

Fig. 4.

(Color online) DSHA map of Myanmar showing the distribution of PGA values.

PSHA can be presented in maps that depict the PGA with a fixed POE (%) in a finite-time period of interest [Kramer, 1996]. In the PSHA of this study for Myanmar, four maps with a different POEs (2 and 10%) and time periods (50 and 100 years) were created (Fig. 6). The highest hazard levels were observed in the Western part of Myanmar, the same as that predicted by the DSHA. In this area, the maximum PGA values for a 2% POE are between 0.35 and 0.45 g for time periods of 50 and 100 years, respectively, whereas in Central and Eastern Myanmar, the SHA levels ranged from 0.05 to 0.25 g. With respect to a 10% POE, the relative distribution of hazard levels are similar to those at a 2% POE, but the PGA values for the 10% POE are approximately 0.5 times larger than that for the 2% POE. The highest ground motion, at around 0.1–0.2 g, was found in the Western part of Myanmar, whereas in some regions in the Central and Eastern part of Myanmar it drops down to 0–0.05 g (Fig. 6). 6. Conclusions and Recommendations In this study, both DSHA and PSHA maps were formed for the whole country of Myanmar. DSHA is strongly recommended for a critical project in a specific area 1350029-10

3rd Reading June 18, 2013 16:53 WSPC/S1793-4311/238-JET

1350029

Seismic Hazard Analysis for Myanmar

Fig. 5. (a) Probability density function of the Sagaing fault zone (zone 4) according to the characteristic earthquake model, (b) the probability distribution of source-to-site distances measured from Mandalay city to the Sagaing fault zone, and (c) the hazard curves of various cities of Myanmar calculated in this SHA.

where the protection is needed against this worst-case situation. We also expect that these PSHA maps will help Myanmar to provide a basis for long-term preparedness for earthquake hazards and to create an International Building Code for improved building design and construction. Based on the obtained SHA results, the most destructive area is the Western side of Myanmar due to the high earthquake activities of the Sumatra–Andaman Subduction Zone. However, it may be less vulnerable than the remote area of Arakan Yoma Thrust Range which is currently sparsely populated. Although the earthquake hazard in Central and Eastern Myanmar is lower than the Western part, the PGA of 0.35 g analyzed from the DSHA, or even the PGA value of 0.25 g derived from the PSHA are enough to impact the important urban areas of Myanmar, and in particular for the cities that are located close to the Sagaing Fault Zone such as Mandalay, Bago, Yangon, and Naypyidaw (the capital city of Myanmar). Although we believe that the SHA presented here can provide more detailed and up-to-date results than that previously available, more work is still needed to refine this analysis. For example, it is important to note that the strong groundmotion attenuation models considered in this study derive the PGA for the rock 1350029-11

3rd Reading June 18, 2013 16:53 WSPC/S1793-4311/238-JET

1350029

N. Somsa-ard & S. Pailoplee

(a) 2% POE in 50 years

(b) 10% POE in 50 years

(c) 2% POE in 100 years

(d) 10% POE in 100 years

Fig. 6. (Color online) PSHA maps of Myanmar showing the distribution of PGA that have a (a, c) 2% or (b, d) 10% POE over a (a, b) 50 or (c, d) 100-year period.

site condition. In areas covered by thick, soft soils the ground shaking will be much more severe than that indicated by our maps. Consequently, more observations of the strong ground-motion in the region are needed and further paleoseismological research should be encouraged. 1350029-12

3rd Reading June 18, 2013 16:53 WSPC/S1793-4311/238-JET

1350029

Seismic Hazard Analysis for Myanmar

Acknowledgments This work was jointly sponsored by the Integrated Innovation Academic Center (IIAC): Chulalongkorn University Centenary Academic Development Project (CU56-CC04), the Higher Education Promotion and National Research University Project of Thailand, Office of the Higher Education Commission (CC508B-56), and The Thai Government Stimulus Package 2 (TKK:2555; PERFECTA). Thanks are also extended to T. Pailoplee for the preparation of the draft manuscript. We thank the Publication Counseling Unit (PCU), Faculty of Science, Chulalongkorn University, for a critical review and improved English. We acknowledge the thoughtful comments and suggestions by the editor-in-chief and anonymous reviewers that enhanced the quality of this manuscript significantly. References Bender, F. [1983] Geol. Burma (Gebr¨ uder Borntr¨ ager, Berlin). Bertrand, G. and Rangin, C. [2003] “Tectonics of the western margin of the Shan plateau (central Myanmar): Implications for the India-Indochina oblique convergence since the Oligocene,” J. Asian Earth Sci. 21, 1139–1157. Boore, D. M., Joyner, W. B. and Fumal, T. E. [1997] “Equations for estimating horizontal response spectra and peak acceleration from western North American earthquakes: A summary of recent work,” Seismol. Res. Lett. 68(1), 128–153. Brown, J. C. [1914] “The Burma earthquake of May 1912,” Memoirs of the Geolog. Survey India 13, 1–147. Brown, J. C. and Leicester, P. [1933] “The Pyu earthquake of 3rd and 4th December, 1930 and subsequent Burma earthquakes up to January 1932,” Memoirs Geolog. Survey India 42, 1–140. Caceres, D. and Kulhanek, O. [2000] “Seismic hazard of Honduras,” Nat. Hazards 22, 49–69. Chintanapakdee, C., Naguit, M. E. and Charoenyuth, M. [2008] “Suitable attenuation model for Thailand,” The 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China, 8 p. Cornell, C. A. [1968] “Engineering seismic risk analysis,” Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 58, 1583–1606. Crouse, C. B. [1991] “Ground-motion attenuation equations for earthquakes on the Cascadia subduction zones,” Earthquake Spectra 7(2), 201–236. Curray, J. R. [2005] “Tectonics and history of the Andaman sea region,” J. Asian Earth Sci. 25, 187–232. Duong, C. C. and Feigl, K. L. [1999] “Geodetic measurement of horizontal strain across the Red River fault near Tha Ba, Vietnam, 1963–1994,” J. Geodesy 73, 298–310. Fenton, C. H., Charusiri, P. and Wood, S. H. [2003] “Recent paleoseismic investigations in Northern and Western Thailand,” Ann. Geophys. 46(5), 957–981. Gardner, J. K. and Knopoff, L. [1974] “Is the sequence of earthquakes in Southern California, with aftershocks removed, Poissonian?,” Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 64(1), 363–367. Gupta, I. D. [2002] “The state of the art in seismic hazard analysis,” ISET J. Earthquake Technol. 39(428), 311–346. Gutenberg, B. and Richter, C. F. [1944] “Frequency of earthquakes in California,” Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 34, 185–188. 1350029-13

3rd Reading June 18, 2013 16:53 WSPC/S1793-4311/238-JET

1350029

N. Somsa-ard & S. Pailoplee

Htwe, Y. M. M. and Wenbin, S. [2009]“Gutenberg-Richter recurrence law to seismicity analysis of Southern segment of the sagaing fault and its associate components,” World Acad. Sci. Eng. Technol. 50, 1026–1029. Htwe, Y. M. M. and Wenbin, S. [2010] “Seismic hazard maps of Yangon and its surrounding areas,” Geo-Spatial Inform. Sci. 13(3), 230–234. Kramer, S. L. [1996] Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering (Prentice Hall Inc., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey). Krinitzsky, E. L. [2003] “How to combine deterministic and probabilistic methods for assessing earthquake hazards,” Eng. Geol. 70, 157–163. Kundu, B. and Gahalaut, V. K. [2012] “Earthquake occurrence processes in the IndoBurmese wedge and Sagaing fault region,” Tectonophys. 524, 525, 135–146. Lacassin, R., Replumaz, A. and Leloup, P. H. [1998] “Hairpin river loops and strike-slip sense inversion of Southeast Asian strike-slip faults,” Geology 26, 703–706. Martin, S. S. [2005] “Intensity distribution from the 2004 Mw 9.0 Sumatra–Andaman earthquake,” Seismol. Res. Lett. 76, 321–330. Ottemoller, L. and Havskov, J. [2003] “Moment magnitude determination for local and regional earthquakes based on source spectra,” Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 93(1), 203–214. Pailoplee, S. and Choowong, M. [2012] “Probabilities of earthquake occurrences in Mainland Southeast Asia,” Arabian J. Geosci, DOI 10.1007/s12517-012-0749-5 (in press). Pailoplee, S., Sugiyama, Y. and Charusiri, P. [2009] “Deterministic and probabilistic seismic hazard analyses in Thailand and adjacent areas using active fault data,” Earth Planets Space 61, 1313–1325. Paul, J., Burgmann, R., Gaur, V. K., Bilham, R., Larson, K. M., Ananda, M. B., Jade, S., Mukal, M., Anupama, T. S., Satyal, G. and Kumar, D. [2001] “The motion and active deformation of India,” Geophys. Res. Lett. 28, 647–650. Petersen, M., Harmsen, S., Mueller, C., Haller, K., Dewey, J., Luco, N., Crone, A., Lidke, D. and Rukstales, K. [2007] “Southeast Asia seismic hazard maps,” Technical report, Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey. Wells, D. L. and Coppersmith, K. J. [1994] “Updated empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture area, and surface displacement,” Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 84, 974–1002. Wiemer, S. [2001] “A software package to analyze seismicity: ZMAP,” Seismol. Res. 72, 373–382. Woessner, J. and Wiemer, S. [2005] “Assessing the quality of earthquake catalogues: Estimating the magnitude of completeness and its uncertainty,” Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 95(2), 684–698. Youngs, R. R. and Coppersmith, K. J. [1985] “Implications of fault slip rates and earthquake recurrence models to probabilistic seismic hazard estimates,” Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 75, 939–964. Zhang, P., Yang, Z., Gupta, H. K., Bhatia, S. C. and Shedlock, K. M. [1999] “Global Seismic Hazard Assessment Program (GSHAP) in continental Asia,” Annuali Di Geofisica 42(6), 1167–1190. Zuchiewicz, W., Cuong, N. Q., Bluszcz, A. and Michalik, M. [2004] “Quaternary sediments in the Dien Bien Phu fault zone, NW Vietnam: A record of young tectonic processes in the light of OSL-SAR dating results,” Geomorphol. 60, 269–302.

1350029-14