Influence of local seismotectonic and engineering-geological conditions on seismic danger of territories (exemplified by a construction site in Uzhgorod city)

https://doi.org/10.23939/jgd2020.01.029
Received: March 04, 2020
1
Subbotin Institute of geophysics of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
2
Lviv Polytechnic National University
3
Ivan Franko National University of Lviv

Objective. To identify the location of potentially active seismic zones in which local earthquakes may occur. To evaluate the predicted seismic shaking intensity (in MSK-64 scale points) considering impacts associated with the local tectonic and engineering-geological conditions of the study site. Methodology. The totality of data on the correlation between the length and magnitude of associated maximum energy earthquakes established seismotectonic potential of active or potentially seismoactive fault segments (lineaments) cut off by faults of the same or a lower order being transverse to their strike and located within the maximum possible vicinity to the studied site.  Quantitative assessment of the predicted seismic shaking intensity by seismological analogies for the territory was carried out in accordance with the norms regulated by DBN B.1.1-12-2014. Results. Based on the analysis of information on the geodynamic and seismotectonic situation in the vicinity of the projected structures site, we defined the location of potential seismic zones where local earthquakes may occur. The study determined seismotectonic potential of the closest to the site fault segments in terms of their maximum magnitudes which will not be exceeded for the next 50 years with a probability of 99%. Fault segments (1–5) marked on the tectonic map are located in a close proximity to the site. The greatest seismotectonic potentials Мmax = 4.32, Мmax = 4.03 are specific to faults 1 and 4 with lineament lengths L = ~18.91 km, L = ~13.23 km. Faults 2, 3, 5 demonstrate smaller values of seismotectonic potential Мmax = 3.42; 3.60; 3.48. It is known that earthquakes in the Transcarpathian trough are shallow, i.e. they occur at a depth of 2–5 km. Under these conditions, ІRM = 7.27, ІRM = 7.34 for faults 1 and 4 is the highest, the remaining faults 2, 3 and 5 have lower ІRM = 4.38; 5.49; 3.48 values per MSK-64 macroseismic scale and DSTU-B-V.1.1-28_2010 respectively. For the second category soils the evaluation is made in respect of their seismic properties. The maximum predicted impact of local potential earthquakes on the site area is established as IRM = 7.34 points per MSK-64 macroseismic scale and DSTU-B-V.1.1-28:2010. According to the data of engineering-geological surveys, within the limits of a 10-meter layer below a planning mark, the soils of site allocated engineering-geological area are specific for the 2nd category per their seismic properties. The object of reconstruction falls in CC3 class of consequences (responsibility). According to ZSR-2004–C map, the standard (background or input) intensity of seismic shaking within the site is IN = 8 points per the MSK-64 scale. Scientific novelty. Seismic faults within the vicinity of Uzhgorod city were determined; seismotectonic potential and maximum possible impact of local earthquakes on the site territory and designed structures stability was established. Practical relevance. The construction site SMZ gives specified values of seismic impacts in relation to the general seismic zoning of the country. This allows considering possible increase in seismic magnitude at the stage of seismic resistant construction design. Taking into account SMZ results at construction of engineering structures allows avoiding human casualties and reducing economic losses at seismic manifestations.

  1. 1. Bugaev, E. G. (1999). Methods for estimating the maximum potential of platform earthquakes. Izvestiya. Physics of the Solid Earth, 35(2), 118-132. https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=13314125
    2. DBN B.1.1-12: 2014. State building norms of Ukraine. Construction in seismic areas of Ukraine. Kyiv: Ministry of Regional Development of Ukraine, Ukrarkhbudinform, (2014). 110 p
    3. DSTU-B-V.1.1-28: 2010. State standard of Ukraine: "Protection against dangerous geological processes, harmful operational influences, fire. Seismic intensity scale", valid on the territory of Ukraine according to the order of the Ministry of Regional Development of Ukraine of December 23, 2010 N 539 from 2011.
    4. Kendzera, A. V., Starodub, G. P., & Pronyshyn, R. S. (2003). Specification of the seismic intensities in the Ukrainian Carpathian region utilizing synthetic seismograms. In International geophysical conference & exhibition (p. 18). Moscow, Russia: SEG.
    5. Kendzera, O. (2015). Seismic hazard and earthquake protection (practical implementation of developments of the S.I. Subbotin Institute of Geophysics of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine). Bulletin of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, (2), 44-57.
    6. Kramar, M., Isaković, T., & Fischinger, M. (2010). Seismic collapse risk of precast industrial buildings with strong connections. Earthquake engineering & structural dynamics, 39(8), 847-868.
    https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.970
    7. Kuplovsky, B. E., & Brych, T. B. (2018). Comparison of the spectral characteristics of the near-surface layers under the seismic stations "Trosnyk", "Uzhhorod", "Mizhhirya", calculated by the finite element method, with the experimental ones. Geophysical Journal, 40 (6), 115-126. (in Ukrainian).
    https://doi.org/10.24028/gzh.0203-3100.v40i6.2018.151023
    8. Kutas, R. I., Omelchenko, V. D., Kendzera, A. V., Drogitskaya, G. M., & Kalitova, A. I. (2007). Seismicity of the western part of the East European platform within Ukraine. Geophysical Journal, 29 (5), 52-72. (in Ukrainian).
    9. Maksymchuk, V. Yu., Pyrizhok, N. B., Pronyshyn, R. S., & Tymoshchuk, V. R. (2014). Some features of seismicity of Transcarpathians. Geodynamics. (2), 139-149.
    https://doi.org/10.23939/jgd2014.02.139
    10. Martelli, A. (2006). Modern seismic protection systems for civil and industrial structures. Final report RISK-UE-Synthesis of the application to Thessaloniki city. pp 1-28.
    11. Mwafy, A. (2019). Earthquake Risk Management Systems and Their Applications for Building Seismic-Resilient Communities. In Resilient Structures and Infrastructure (pp. 129-157). Springer, Singapore.
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-7446-3_5
    12. Seismic intensity scale: DSTUBV.1.1-28: 2010. Kyiv: Ministry of Regional Development of Ukraine, 2011. 47 p. (in Ukrainian).
    13. Seismic zoning of the USSR. Methodological basis and regional map description 1978. (1980). Editors Bune, V. I., & Gorshkov, G. P. Moscow: Science. (in Russian).
    14. Seismicity and seismic zoning of Northern Eurasia (2-3 ed., Vol. 1). (1995). Moscow: OIFZ RAS. (in Russian).
    15. Shmoilova, R. A., Minashkin, V. G., & Sadovnikova, N. A. (2005). Workshop on the theory of statistics. Moscow: Finance and statistics/ (in Russian).
    16. State geological map of Ukraine scale 1: 200 000, sheets M-34-XXIX (Snina), M-34-XXXV (Uzhhorod). Carpathian series. Explanatory note. (2003) UkrDGRI, Kyiv. (in Ukrainian).
    17. Starodub, G. P., Kendzera, A. V., Pronishin, R., Kuplyovsky, B. Y., Siredzhuk, S. P., & Starodub, H. R. (2003, September). Specification of the seismic intensities in the Ukrainian Carpathian region utilizing synthetic seismograms. In Geophysics of the 21st Century-The Leap into the Future.
    https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609-pdb.38.F305