SEISMIC HAZARD AND SEISMIC DESIGN REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ARABIAN PENINSULA REGION

Similar documents
Development of Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis for International Sites, Challenges and Guidelines

SEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSIS. Instructional Material Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples Seismic Hazard Analysis 5a - 1

Deterministic Seismic Hazard Assessment of Quetta, Pakistan

Peak Ground Acceleration on Bedrock and Uniform Seismic Hazard Spectra for Different Regions of Golpayegan, Iran

An Approach for Seismic Design in Malaysia following the Principles of Eurocode 8

Updating the Chiou and YoungsNGAModel: Regionalization of Anelastic Attenuation

Seismic hazard modeling for Bulgaria D. Solakov, S. Simeonova

THE EFFECT OF THE LATEST SUMATRA EARTHQUAKE TO MALAYSIAN PENINSULAR

Vertical to Horizontal (V/H) Ratios for Large Megathrust Subduction Zone Earthquakes

Ground-motion simulation for the eastern province of Saudi Arabia using a stochastic model

NGA-Subduction: Development of the Largest Ground Motion Database for Subduction Events

PRELIMINARY REPORT. July 21th 2017 Bodrum Offshore Earthquake (Muğla-Turkey) Mw=6.5.

DIRECT HAZARD ANALYSIS OF INELASTIC RESPONSE SPECTRA

Eleventh U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering Integrating Science, Engineering & Policy June 25-29, 2018 Los Angeles, California

Usability of the Next Generation Attenuation Equations for Seismic Hazard Assessment in Malaysia

EARTHQUAKE CLUSTERS, SMALL EARTHQUAKES

The Ranges of Uncertainty among the Use of NGA-West1 and NGA-West 2 Ground Motion Prediction Equations

PSHA Study Using EZ-Frisk Software Case Study Baychebaq Dam Site

! " 89: ?+ XM - .8M- J " j! G _k EZ-FRISK.

UPDATED PROBABILISTIC SEISMIC HAZARD MAPS FOR TURKEY

Hazard Feedback using the. current GMPEs for DCPP. Nick Gregor. PG&E DCPP SSHAC Study. SWUS GMC Workshop 2 October 22, 2013

EARTHQUAKE HAZARD ASSESSMENT IN KAZAKHSTAN

3D Simulation of Long- period Seismic Waves in United Arab Emirates from Distant Large Earthquakes

IGC. 50 th INDIAN GEOTECHNICAL CONFERENCE PROBABILISTIC SEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSIS FOR WARANGAL CONSIDERING SINGLE SEISMOGENIC ZONING

Deterministic seismic hazard assessment for Sultanate of Oman

Seismic Design Criteria for the South Sinai Red Sea Rift Zone. A. I Salama Lecturer, Faculty ofengineering ofshoubra Zagazig University Egypt.

Uniform Hazard Spectrum(UHS) for performance based seismic design

RECORD OF REVISIONS. Page 2 of 17 GEO. DCPP.TR.14.06, Rev. 0

PROBABILISTIC SEISMIC HAZARD MAPS AT GROUND SURFACE IN JAPAN BASED ON SITE EFFECTS ESTIMATED FROM OBSERVED STRONG-MOTION RECORDS

Damping Scaling of Response Spectra for Shallow CCCCCCCCCrustalstallPaper Crustal Earthquakes in Active Tectonic Title Line Regions 1 e 2

GMPEs for Active Crustal Regions: Applicability for Controlling Sources

SEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSIS

DUBAI SEISMIC NETWORK (DSN)

Development of Seismic Hazard Zoning Map for Iran,

SEISMIC HAZARD ASSESSMENT IN A MODERATE SEISMICITY REGION, HONG KONG

Ground Motion Prediction Equation Hazard Sensitivity Results for Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station Site (PVNGS)

PSHA results for the BSHAP region

Regional Workshop on Essential Knowledge of Site Evaluation Report for Nuclear Power Plants.

Evaluation of Acceleration Time-Histories for Design of Nuclear Facilities at Kalpakkam (India)

PROBABILISTIC HAZARD ASSESSMENT OF FAULT DISPLACEMENTS

Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis of Nepal considering Uniform Density Model

GEM-PEER Global GMPEs Project Guidance for Including Near-Fault Effects in Ground Motion Prediction Models

Next Generation Attenuation (NGA) Projects

L. Danciu, D. Giardini, J. Wößner Swiss Seismological Service ETH-Zurich Switzerland

ATTENUATION FUNCTION RELATIONSHIP OF SUBDUCTION MECHANISM AND FAR FIELD EARTHQUAKE

Updated NGA-West2 Ground Motion Prediction Equations for Active Tectonic Regions Worldwide

Overview of Seismic PHSA Approaches with Emphasis on the Management of Uncertainties

NEXT GENERATION ATTENUATION (NGA) EMPIRICAL GROUND MOTION MODELS: CAN THEY BE USED IN EUROPE?

7 Ground Motion Models

Seismic hazard map around Taiwan through a catalog-based deterministic approach

Knowledge of in-slab earthquakes needed to improve seismic hazard estimates for southwestern British Columbia

Representative ground-motion ensembles for several major earthquake scenarios in New Zealand

Selection of Ground Motion Records for Two Dam Sites in Oregon

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OPTIMIZATION IN CIVIL ENGINEERING Int. J. Optim. Civil Eng., 2011; 4:

Preliminary probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for the Nuclear Power Plant Bohunice (Slovakia) site

Epistemic Uncertainty in Seismic Hazard Analysis for Australia

Estimation of Strong Ground Motion: Aleatory Variability and Epistemic Uncertainty

Comparison of response spectra from Australian earthquakes and North American attenuation models

INFLUENCE OF LOCAL SOIL CONDITIONS ON GROUND RESPONSE: SITE AMPLIFICATION IN SHARJAH, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES

Recent Advances in Development of Ground Motion Prediction Equations

The effect of bounds on magnitude, source-to-site distance and site condition in PSHA-based ground motion selection

A STUDY OF CRUSTAL DEFORMATION ALONG THE RED SEA REGION USING GEODETIC AND SEISMIC DATA FROM EGYPT AND YEMEN

A Test of the Applicability of NGA Models to the Strong Ground-Motion Data in the Iranian Plateau

A hybrid probabilistic seismic hazard analysis of a low and moderate seismic region: Sri Lanka a case study

On seismic hazard analysis of the two vulnerable regions in Iran: deterministic and probabilistic approaches

Occurrence of negative epsilon in seismic hazard analysis deaggregation, and its impact on target spectra computation

Comparison of earthquake source spectra and attenuation in eastern North America and southeastern Australia

Paleo and New Earthquakes and Evaluation of North Tabriz Fault Displacement in Relation to Recurrence Interval of Destructive Earthquakes

Prediction of elastic displacement response spectra in Europe and the Middle East

CONSIDERATION OF EARTHQUAKES IN THE DESIGN OF THE MACAU TOWER

AN OVERVIEW AND GUIDELINES FOR PROBABILISTIC SEISMIC HAZARD MAPPING

Probabilistic Earthquake Risk Assessment of Newcastle and Lake Macquarie Part 1 Seismic Hazard.

ACCOUNTING FOR SITE EFFECTS IN PROBABILISTIC SEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSIS: OVERVIEW OF THE SCEC PHASE III REPORT

Seismic Displacement Demands for Performance-Based Design and Rehabilitation of Structures in North America

Ground-Motion Prediction Equations (GMPEs) from a Global Dataset: The PEER NGA Equations

CYPRUS STRONG MOTION DATABASE: RESPONSE SPECTRA FOR SHORT RETURN PERIOD EVENTS IN CYPRUS

The Indian Ocean. Copyright 2010 LessonSnips

Codal provisions of seismic hazard in Northeast India

Estimation of Peak Ground Acceleration for Delhi Region using Finsim, a Finite Fault Simulation Technique

Development of U. S. National Seismic Hazard Maps and Implementation in the International Building Code

Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering

Model Uncertainties of the 2002 Update of California Seismic Hazard Maps

THE RESPONSE SPECTRUM

A NEW PROBABILISTIC SEISMIC HAZARD MODEL FOR NEW ZEALAND

Advanced Workshop on Evaluating, Monitoring and Communicating Volcanic and Seismic Hazards in East Africa.

RELOCATION OF THE MACHAZE AND LACERDA EARTHQUAKES IN MOZAMBIQUE AND THE RUPTURE PROCESS OF THE 2006 Mw7.0 MACHAZE EARTHQUAKE

Comment on Why Do Modern Probabilistic Seismic-Hazard Analyses Often Lead to Increased Hazard Estimates? by Julian J. Bommer and Norman A.

5. Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis

PGV, and Spectral Accelerations in Europe, the Mediterranean Region, and the Middle East

ISC: SERVING EARTHQUAKE ENGINEER COMMUNITY Gaspà Rebull, O. 1, Gibson G. 2 and Storchak D. A. 1. International Seismological Centre, UK 2

VALIDATION AGAINST NGA EMPIRICAL MODEL OF SIMULATED MOTIONS FOR M7.8 RUPTURE OF SAN ANDREAS FAULT

SEISMIC HAZARD CHARACTERIZATION AND RISK EVALUATION USING GUMBEL S METHOD OF EXTREMES (G1 AND G3) AND G-R FORMULA FOR IRAQ

FINITE FAULT MODELING OF FUTURE LARGE EARTHQUAKE FROM NORTH TEHRAN FAULT IN KARAJ, IRAN

Persian Gulf Fault: New Seismotectonic Element on Seabed

Ground-Motion Attenuation Relationships for Subduction- Zone Earthquakes in Northern Taiwan

USU 1360 TECTONICS / PROCESSES

Sensitivity of seismic hazard results to alternative seismic source and magnitude-recurrence models: a case study for Jordan

A note on ground motion recorded during Mw 6.1 Mae Lao (Northern Thailand) earthquake on 5 May 2014

Uncertainties in a probabilistic model for seismic hazard analysis in Japan

Ground Motion Prediction Equations: Past, Present, and Future

Transcription:

SEISMIC HAZARD AND SEISMIC DESIGN REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ARABIAN PENINSULA REGION V. Pascucci 1, M.W. Free 2 and Z.A. Lubkowski 2 1 Seismic Engineer, Arup, London W1T 4BQ, UK 2 Associate Director, Arup, London W1T 4BQ, UK ABSTRACT : Email: matthew.free@arup.com This paper presents the results of a regional seismic hazard assessment undertaken for the Arabian Peninsula region. This area includes a number of major regional tectonic features including the Zagros and Makran regions to the north and east, the Dead Sea and Red Sea to the west and the Gulf of Aden and Owen Fracture Zone to the south and southeast, with the stable continental Arabian Plate in the centre of the region. An earthquake catalogue has been compiled and critically reviewed for this region and seismic source zones and their associated magnitude recurrence parameters defined. Attenuation relationships have been selected based on the tectonic character of the source zones. The uncertainty in each element of the hazard assessment has been included in the assessment using logic tree methodology. The seismic hazard results are presented in the form of peak ground motions and uniform hazard response spectra for selected cities in the region. The paper also discusses how these results compare with design values typically used for seismic design purposes in the region. KEYWORDS: seismic hazard, ground motion, Arabia, United Arab Emirates 1. INTRODUCTION Until quite recently, the seismic hazard in the Arabian Gulf states was considered to be negligible. For example, UBC (1997) and Al-Haddad et al. (1994) classify Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Bahrain and Doha to be in Zone 0, i.e. no seismic design requirements. In contrast, the publication of the Global Seismic Hazard Assessment Program (GSHAP) map (Shedlock et al., 2000) as well as the recent occurrence of locally felt earthquakes, such as the March 11, 2002 Masafi event, have led to a perceived need for revision of this assessment. There are currently no well established seismic code requirements for structures in the Arabian Peninsula states. However, both the Abu Dhabi and Dubai Municipalities recommend that for buildings of five or more storeys the Zone 2A design criteria in UBC 1997 should be employed. Further recommendations on seismic hazard levels in the Arabian Peninsula can be found in the Guide to Design of Concrete Structures in the Arabian Peninsula prepared by the Concrete Society (2007) which indicates moderately low seismic hazard for most of the cities in the Arabian Gulf region. A seismic hazard assessment has therefore been undertaken to determine seismic ground-motion parameters for seismic design of facilities located in the Arabian Gulf region. This study represents an update to that produced by Peiris et al. (2006). The study area for this assessment extends from 10 N to 35 N and 35 E to 65 E. This area is centred on the stable continental Arabian Plate with major active tectonic features forming the boundaries to this stable plate; the Zagros Fold Belt and Makran subduction zone to the north and northeast, the Red Sea Rift and Dead Sea Rift to the northwest and west and the Gulf of Aden and Owen Fracture Zone to the south and southeast.

An earthquake catalogue extending back over 2000 years has been compiled and critically reviewed for the study area. A seismic source model has been developed based on the regional geology and tectonics, the historical and recent seismicity, and taking into consideration hazard models developed by other researchers for the region. The Next Generation of Attenuation (NGA) equations have been used for those seismic sources characterized by shallow crustal earthquakes. The results of the seismic hazard assessment are presented in terms of peak ground acceleration (PGA) and uniform hazard response spectra (UHRS) for 475 year (10% probability of exceedance in 50 years) and 2475 year (2% probability of exceedance in 50 years) return periods for rock sites (Vs 760 m/s). Seismic ground-motion parameters are presented for the cities of Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Kuwait City, Bahrain, Doha, Muscat and Jeddah. It is also illustrated how the ground motion parameters determined compare with those in a range of current international building codes; the Uniform Building Code 1997, Eurocode 8 and the International Building Code 2005. 2. REGIONAL TECTONIC SETTING The study area is centred on the Arabian Plate which is considered to be a stable continental region (EPRI, 1994). The Arabian Plate is currently separating from Africa at a rate of approximately 10 to 20 mm/year. This separation is due to the spreading along the Dead Sea transform fault zone and the opening of the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden with Arabia rotating anticlockwise toward the north-northeast. In addition, Africa is moving north relative to Eurasia at a rate of approximately 15 to 20 mm/year. The Arabia-Eurasia convergence is almost entirely absorbed within the broad deformation zone extending from the Makran subduction zone through the Zagros Fold Belt and through Iran and up to Turkey in the northwest. To the south-east, the Arabian Plate is separated from the Indian Plate along the Owen Fracture Zone (see Figure 1a). 35 30 4.0-4.5 4.5-5.0 5.0-5.5 25 5.5-6.0 6.0-6.5 Lat N 6.5-7.0 >7.0 20 15 (a) 10 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 Lon E (b) 3. SEISMICITY Figure 1 (a) Regional tectonic map (Johnson, 1998); (b) Earthquake catalogue 3.1. Earthquake Catalogue The study area for compilation of the earthquake catalogue is bounded by latitudes 10 N to 35 N and longitudes 49 E to 55 E (see Figure 1b). The earthquake data comprises historical and instrumental data from various sources. Historical data has been obtained from Ambraseys & Melville (1982), Ambraseys & Adams (1986), Ambraseys et al. (1994), Ambraseys & Jackson (1998), the National Earthquake Information Center

(NEIC) and the Iranian Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES). These catalogues present all the known historical events that have occurred in the past 2000 years. Instrumental earthquake data has been obtained from Ambraseys & Melville (1982), Ambraseys & Adams (1986), Ambraseys et al. (1994), Ambraseys & Jackson (1998), Ambraseys (2001), Engdahl & Villasenor (2002), the Global Seismic Hazard Assessment Program (GSHAP) East African Rift (1999), the International Seismological Centre (ISC) and the National Earthquake Information Center (NEIC). 3.2. Catalogue Processing The reliability and quality of earthquake data sources have been investigated and considered for the catalogue compilation when conflicting information and duplicates have been encountered. Foreshock and aftershock sequences have been removed from the catalogue using the windowing procedure proposed by Gardner & Knopoff (1974). 3.3. Magnitude Scale The moment magnitude scale M w has been used for the catalogue. For events for which a surface wave magnitude (M s ) is reported, the following equations proposed by Ambraseys (2001) have been used: Log M o = 19.08 + M s for M s 6.0 Log M o = 16.07 + 1.5*M s for M s > 6.0 Where M w = 2/3*log M o - 10.73 (Kanamori, 1977) For events with a reported body-magnitude (m b ) the following conversion equations have been adopted: for events in Europe and Middle East: M w = 1.203*m b 1.14 (Ambraseys, 1990) for events in Iran: M w = 0.62*m b +2.3 (Ambraseys & Melville, 1982) 3.4. Catalogue Completeness The earthquake catalogue dates back approximately 2000 years but cannot be considered to be statistically complete due to inconsistent reporting of earthquake data of different magnitudes over different time intervals. The statistical completeness of the catalogue has been assessed using two methods: the conventional magnitude recurrence relationship proposed by Gutenberg and Richter (1965); and the Stepp (1972) methodology (see Figure 2). Based on these two methods, the earthquake catalogue has been considered complete for the following time periods and corresponding minimum magnitudes; 1998 to 2006 for MB wb 4.0; 1978 to 2006 for MB wb 4.5; 1964 to 2006 for MB wb 5.0; 1900 to 2006 for MB wb 5.5; 1850 to 2006 for MB wb 6.0. It has not been possible to investigate the completeness of the catalogue within sub-regions. Figure 2 Magnitude completeness 4. SEISMIC HAZARD ASSESSMENT The seismic hazard assessment has been carried out following the probabilistic methodology (Cornell, 1968; Reiter, 1990) using the program SISMIC. This methodology combines seismic source zoning, earthquake recurrence and ground motion attenuation to produce hazard curves in terms of ground motion and an associated annual frequency of exceedance.

4.1. Seismic Source Zones The analysis has been undertaken using a seismic source model based upon the distribution of historical and recent seismicity and the interpretation of regional tectonics (see Figure 3). The area zone boundaries are generally consistent with the existing model for Saudi Arabia by Al-Haddad et al. (1994) and the model for Iran developed for the GSHAP by Tavakoli and Ghafory-Ashtiany (2006). In addition, a fault model is defined to represent the subduction within the Makran zone. The rate of occurrence of earthquakes is described in terms of truncated exponential distributions of magnitude recurrence. 35 30 Dead Sea Jordan Nor th Iran Bas in Zagros Folded Belt Central Iran Basin High Zagros Mesopotamian Fault Foredeep Zagros Main Recent Fault Western Lut Block Eastern Iran NE Iran Zendan Fault Zone SE Iran/SW Pakistan 4.0-4.5 25 North Red Sea Saudi Arabia Zagros Foredeep Makran 4.5-5.0 5.0-5.5 Lat N Om an Mountains 5.5-6.0 6.0-6.5 20 South Red Sea Ow en Fracture Zone 6.5-7.0 >7.0 15 Yemen Eas t African Rift Gulf of Aden 10 Afar 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 Lon E Figure 3 Seismic Source Model Table 4.1 shows the a and b values and maximum magnitude values derived for each seismic source zone. The maximum magnitude of each zone has been determined by rounding the largest recorded magnitude upward to half a magnitude unit. A minimum magnitude of 4.0 M w has been adopted. Table 4.1 Magnitude-recurrence and maximum magnitudes for each source zone Source Zone Area Name Activity rate, a b-value Maximum Magnitude Area (N>4.0/year) (km 2 ) Actual Assumed Mean Recorded Assumed Mean Mean ± SD SE Iran/SW Pakistan 166,810 0.80 1.70 6.7 Eastern Iran 180,117 0.76 2.30 7.6 Western Lut Block 194,090 0.91 4.32 7.6 Iran Northern Iran Basin 80,773 1.07 0.90±0.15 1.40 6.4 8.00±0.3 NE Iran 50,081 0.81 0.26 7.6 Central Iran Basin 161,105 1.14 0.90 6.4 Zendan Fault Zone 47,497 1.06 3.69 6.7 Zagros Folded Belt 215,281 1.10 30.92 7.0 High Zagros Fault 70,822 1.11 6.96 7.0 Zagros 1.00±0.15 7.50±0.3 Zagros Main Recent 81,400 1.06 3.28 7.3 Fault Oman Mountains 119,997 0.65 0.16 6.4 Gulf Region Zagros Foredeep 82,566 0.64 0.85±0.15 1.12 6.7 7.00±0.3 Mesopotamian Foredeep 194,305 0.92 0.71 6.4 Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia 3,092,926 1.02 1.00 2.42 6.4 6.50 North Red Sea 147,225 1.64 1.14 6.7 South Red Sea 211,252 0.98 3.62 6.7 East African Rift 293,312 0.92 3.94 6.7 Rift Zones Afar 72,521 0.78 1.00±0.15 2.32 6.7 7.50±0.3 Yemen 133,416 1.09 1.06 6.4 Gulf of Aden 387,702 0.93 17.32 6.7 Owen Fracture Zone 292,682 0.74 3.50 7.0 Dead Sea & Dead Sea 86,116 1.07 3.12 7.0 1.00±0.15 Jordan Jordan 131,982 0.83 2.74 7.3 7.50±0.3 Makran (Shallow) Accretion Zone 153,595 0.93 0.90±0.15 0.69 6.50 8.06 Makran (Fault) Subduction Zone 180,689-1.00 0.69 8.50

4.2. Ground-Motion Prediction Equations The ground motion prediction equations have been selected according to the tectonic regime associated with the earthquakes in each source zone. The model of Youngs et al. (1997) has been used for the Makran subduction zone. Akkar & Bommer (2007) and Campbell & Bozorgnia (2007) have been used for active shallow crustal sources (i.e. Iran, Zagros, Gulf Region, Dead Sea & Jordan, shallow Makran seismicity). The Campbell & Bozorgnia (2007) attenuation equation is one of the Next Generation of Attenuation (NGA) equations. Although the NGA database includes earthquakes recorded worldwide, the majority of the data is from earthquakes in Western North America. However, a study by Stafford et al. (2007) demonstrated, through comparisons of the NGA model of Boore & Atkinson (2007) and the European model of Akkar and Bommer (2007) that, for spectral ordinates and peak ground velocity, the NGA equations provide suitable predictive equations for a database of European earthquake records. The Atkinson & Boore (2006) model has been used for stable continental region (i.e. Saudi Arabia). The attenuation equation of Spudich et al. (1999) has been used for extensional zones in the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean. 4.3. Logic Tree Uncertainties in the b value, maximum magnitude and slip rate of each source zone have been taken into account by assigning weights of 60% and 20% to the mean and to the mean ± 1 standard deviation values, respectively. The logic tree framework also incorporates the alternative ground motion models for those seismic sources associated to more than one ground motion model. 5. SEISMIC HAZARD ASSESSMENT RESULTS 5.1. Peak Ground Acceleration Bedrock horizontal peak ground accelerations (PGA) for rock sites (V s 760m/s) have been derived from the probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for two return periods (475 years and 2475 years) for various cities in the Arabian Peninsula: Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Kuwait City, Bahrain, Doha, Muscat and Jeddah. Figure 4 shows the best estimate hazard curves for these cities. The hazard curves and PGA values (see Table 5.1) indicate a generally low seismic hazard in the Arabian Peninsula, with slightly higher hazard for cities close to the subduction Makran source and more seismically active zones. Return Period (years) 100 1000 10000 100000 0 0.1 0.2 PGA (g) 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 Dubai Abu Dhabi Kuwait City Bahrain Doha Muscat Jeddah 0.7 Figure 4 Best estimate hazard curves for PGA (rock site) for cities in the Arabian Peninsula 5.2. Uniform Hazard Response Spectra Values of horizontal spectral acceleration (5% damping) for 0.2s (short period), 1.0s and 2.0s (long period) are presented in Table 5.1 for 475 year and 2475 year return periods for the selected cities in the Arabian Peninsula.

As for the PGA values, higher spectral accelerations are expected for those cities close to the Makran subduction zone or to the more seismically active regions. Figure 5 compares the bedrock horizontal uniform hazard response spectra (UHRS) for 475 year and 2475 year return periods for rock site in Dubai with the UHRS presented fro Dubai in Peiris et al. (2006). The updated probabilistic seismic model indicates spectral accelerations at short periods higher than those obtained in the Peiris et al. model, whereas slightly lower spectral accelerations are observed at longer periods. Table 5.1 PGA and spectral accelerations at 0.2s, 1.0s and 2.0s for 475 year and 2475 year return periods PGA (g) 0.2s SA (g) 1.0s SA (g) 2.0s SA (g) Location 475year 2475year 475year 2475year 475year 2475year 475year 2475year Dubai 0.06 0.11 0.160 0.277 0.056 0.097 0.022 0.041 Abu Dhabi 0.04 0.07 0.102 0.173 0.039 0.068 0.015 0.028 Kuwait City 0.05 0.08 0.113 0.186 0.044 0.070 0.017 0.028 Bahrain 0.04 0.06 0.092 0.149 0.037 0.057 0.013 0.023 Doha 0.04 0.06 0.090 0.145 0.045 0.056 0.013 0.022 Muscat 0.05 0.15 0.125 0.338 0.045 0.118 0.017 0.054 Jeddah 0.07 0.15 0.182 0.374 0.041 0.102 0.020 0.049 0.4 Acceleration (g) 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 475 year (Peiris et al., 2006) 2475 year_(peiris et al., 2006) 475 year (This study, 2008) 2475 year (This study, 2008) 0.1 0.05 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 Period (s) Figure 5 Bedrock UHRS for Dubai (5% damping) for 475 year and 2475 year return periods 7. SEISMIC DESIGN REQUIREMENTS There are no specific seismic code requirements for building structures in the Arabian Peninsula states. However, the Abu Dhabi and Dubai Municipalities currently specify UBC97 Zone 2A design criteria for buildings of five or more storeys. A comparison between the seismic hazard assessment results in terms of UHRS and the internationally used seismic design codes is presented for Dubai in Figure 6. It can be observed that all codes are conservative both at short and long periods. In particular, UBC97 Zone 2A design spectrum is highly conservative with values far greater than both the 475 year and 2475 year UHRS accelerations. The EC8 gives a good match to the 475 year UHRS, in particular beyond 1.0s spectral period, i.e. in the long period range; whereas, a good match can be observed at short as well as long periods between the IBC2005 (MCE) spectrum and the 2475 year UHRS accelerations. A discussion of seismic site response and appropriate requirements for consideration at site specific ground conditions and other related seismic hazards is not provided in this paper due to limitation of space.

0.4 0.35 0.3 475 year (Arup, 2008) 2475 year (Arup, 2008) UBC1997_Zone 1 UBC1997_Zone 2A IBC 2005 (MCE) EC8 Acceleration (g) 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 0 1 2 3 4 Period (s) Figure 6 Comparison Code Spectra with UHRS for Dubai (rock site, 5% damping) 8. CONCLUSIONS Results of a probabilistic seismic hazard assessment undertaken for the Arabian Peninsula region are presented in terms of ground motions in rock and spectral accelerations at short and long periods for various cities in the region. Uncertainties in seismic sources and ground motion models have been incorporated in the seismic hazard model using a logic-tree framework. The study shows that the seismic hazard level is low with expected bedrock horizontal PGA in the range 0.04 to 0.06g for 475 year return period and 0.06 to 0.11g for 2475 year return period with slightly higher values for those cities close to the more seismically active regions. These results generally agree with recent seismic hazard studies carried out for the Arabian Gulf region (e.g. Peiris et al., 2006; Aldama-Bustos et al., 2007). REFERENCES Aldama, G., J. Bommer & C. Fenton. (2006). Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis for three sites in the United Arab Emirates. Proceedings of the 1st European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Geneva, Paper No. 662. Aldama-Bustos, G., Bommer, J.J., Fenton, C.H. & Stafford, P.J. (2007). Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis for the cities of Abu Dhabi, Dubai and Ras Al-Khaymah, United Arab Emirates. Al-Haddad, M., Siddiqi, R., Al-Zaid, R., Arafah, A., Necioglu, A. and Turkelli, N. (1994). A Basis for Evaluation of Seismic Hazard and design Criteria for Saudi Arabia, Earthquake Spectra, 10, No. 2. Ambraseys, N.N. & Melville, C.P. (1982). A History of Persian Earthquakes, Cambridge University Press, pp 219. Ambraseys, N.N. & R.D. Adams (1986). Seismicity of the Sudan, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, Vol. 76, No.2, pp 483-493. Ambraseys, N.N. & J.A. Jackson (1998). Faulting associated with historical and recent earthquakes in the Eastern Mediterranean region, Geophysical Journal International, Vol. 133, pp 390-406. Ambraseys, N.N. (1990). Uniform magnitude re-evaluation of European earthquakes associated with strong motion records, Proceedings of the Ninth European Conference on earthquake Engineering, Vol. A, Moscow. Ambraseys, N.N. (2001). Reassessment of Earthquakes, 1900-1999, in the Eastern Mediterranean and Middle East, Geophysical Journal International, Vol. 145, No.2, pp 471-485. Akkar, S. & J.J. Bommer (2007b). Prediction of elastic displacement response spectra in Europe and the Middle East. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 36, pp 1275-1301. Atkinson, G.M. & Boore, D. M. (2006). Earthquake Ground-Motion Prediction Equations for Eastern North America. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 96, 2181-2205.

Campbell, K.W. & Bozorgnia, Y. (2007). Campbell-Bozorgnia NGA Ground Motion Relations for the Geometric Mean Horizontal Component of Peak and Spectral Ground Motion Parameters. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, http://peer.berkeley.edu/ngaeast/index.html. EC8 (1998). Eurocode 8: Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance, EN 1998-1: 2004, European Committee of Standardization. Engdahl & Villaseñor (2002b). http://earthquake.usgs.gov/research/data/centennial.php. EPRI (1994). The Earthquakes of Stable Continental Regions, Volume1: Assessment of Large Earthquake Potential, Report prepared for Electric Power Research Institute by Johnston, A. C., Coppersmith, K. J., Kanter, L. R. and Cornell C. A. Gardner, J.K. and Knopoff, L. (1974). Is the Sequence of Earthquakes in Southern California, with Aftershocks Removed, Poissonian?, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, Vol. 64, No 5, pp 1363-1367. GSHAP (1999). Earthquake catalogue for GSHAP East African Rift Test Area, http://www.seismo.ethz.ch/gshap/earift/. Gutenberg, B. & Richter, C.F. (1965). Seismicity of the Earth and Associated Phenomena. IBC (2005). International Building Code, International Conference of Building Officials, Whittier, California. Johnson, P. R. (1998). Tectonic map of Saudi Arabia and adjacent areas, Technical Report USGS-TR-98-3 (IR 948), Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. IIEES (2001). Seismic Hazard and Geotechnical Hazard Zonation of Assaluyeh (910 Hectare Area), Summary Report for Petrochemical Industries Development Company, International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology. International Seismological Centre (ISC) website: http://www.isc.ac.uk/index.html. Kanamori, H. (1977). The energy release in great earthquakes, J. Geophys. Res., Vol. 82, pp 2981-2987. National Earthquake Information Center (NEIC) website: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/regional/neic/. Peiris, N., M. Free, Z. Lubkowski & A.T. Hussein. Seismic hazard and seismic design requirements for the Arabian Gulf region. Proceedings of the 1st European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Geneva, September 2006, Paper No. 1121. Shedlock, K.M., Giardini, D., Grünthal, G., Zhang, P. (2000). The GSHAP Global Seismic Hazard Map. Seismological Research Letters, 71-6, pp 679-686. Spudich, P., Joyner, W. B., Lindh, A. G., Boore, D M., Margaris and Fletcher, J. B. (1999). SEA99: A Revised Ground Motion Prediction Relation for Use in Extensional Tectonic Regimes, Bulletin of Seismological Society of America, 89, 5, pp 1156-1170. Stepp, J.C. (1972). Analysis of Completeness of the Earthquake Sample in the Puget Sound Area and its effects on Statistical Estimates of Earthquake Hazard, Proceedings of the International Conference on Micro-zonation for Safer Construction, Research and Application, Vol. 2, pp 897-909, Seattle. Tavakoli, B. and Ghafory-Ashtiany, M. (2006). Seismic Hazard Assessment of Iran, International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES), Tehran, Iran, www.seismo.ethz.ch/gshap/iran. The Concrete Society. (2008). Guide to the Design of Concrete Structures in the Arabian Peninsula. UBC (1997). Uniform Building Code, International Conference of Building Officials, Whittier, California. Youngs, R.R., Chiou, S. -J., Silva, W. J. & Humphrey, J. R. (1997). Strong Ground Motion Attenuation Relationships for Subduction Zone Earthquakes, Seismological Research Letters, 68 (1), pp 58-73.