Near-field earthquake ground motions characterized by strong velocity pulses can cause extensive damage to buildings and structures. Such pulses were identified during the Mw 7.8 and Mw 7.5 earthquake doublet of the 2023 Turkey seismic sequence, potentially contributing to the extensive damage it caused. Therefore, a better understanding and characterization of pulse properties (e.g. period and amplitude) and their underlying physical factors are crucial for earthquake-resistant design. In this study, we characterize the velocity pulses reported in observed records and synthetic waveforms generated by a three-dimensional (3D) dynamic rupture simulation of the Mw 7.8 event. We observed significant variability in the pulse properties of the observed records in near-fault regions, particularly regarding their orientations. This variability was not fully captured by the dynamic rupture simulation. Our results indicate that directivity effects are not the only factors influencing pulse characteristics in this earthquake doublet. While site effects (e.g. basin effects) may influence pulse characteristics at some stations, local heterogeneities in slip amplitude, orientations, and fault geometries can be critical in generating or influencing pulse properties in this earthquake doublet.
BaltzopoulosGBaraschinoRChioccarelliECitoPVitaleAIervolinoI (2023) Near-source ground motion in the M7.8 Gaziantep (Turkey) earthquake. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics52(12): 3903–3912.
3.
Ben-ZionYZhangSMengX (2024) Isotropic high-frequency radiation in near-fault seismic data. Geophysical Research Letters51(17): e2024GL110303.
4.
BindiDMassaMLuziLAmeriGPacorFPugliaRAuglieraP (2014) Pan-European ground-motion prediction equations for the average horizontal component of PGA, PGV, and 5 %-damped PSA at spectral periods up to 3.0 s using the RESORCE dataset. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering12(1): 391–430.
5.
BrayJDRodriguez-MarekA (2004) Characterization of forward-directivity ground motions in the near-fault region. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering24(11): 815–828.
6.
BüyükakpınarPAktarMMaria PetersenGKöseoğluA (2021) Orientations of broadband stations of the KOERI seismic network (Turkey) from two independent methods: P- and Rayleigh-wave polarization. Seismological Research Letters92(3): 1512–1521.
7.
ChioccarelliEIervolinoI (2010) Near-source seismic demand and pulse-like records: A discussion for L’Aquila earthquake. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics39(9): 1039–1062.
8.
ChopraAKChintanapakdeeC (2001) Comparing response of SDF systems to near-fault and far-fault earthquake motions in the context of spectral regions. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics30(12): 1769–1789.
9.
DregerDHurtadoGChopraALarsenS (2011) Near-field across-fault seismic ground motions. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America101(1): 202–221. DOI: 10.1785/0120090271
10.
DumanTYEmreÖ (2013) The East Anatolian Fault: Geometry, segmentation and jog characteristics. Geological Society, London, Special Publications372(1): 495–529.
11.
ErdikMTümsaMBDPınarAAltunelEZülfikarAC (2023) A preliminary report on the February 6, 2023 earthquakes in Türkiye. Available at: http://doi.org/10.32858/temblor.297
12.
ErtuncayDCostaG (2024) Analysis of impulsive ground motions from the February 2023 Kahramanmaraş earthquake sequence. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering. Epub ahead of print 2 April. DOI: 10.1007/s10518-024-01897-x.
13.
GabrielAUlrichTMarchandonMBiemillerJRekoskeJ (2023) 3D dynamic rupture modeling of the 6 february 2023, Kahramanmaraş, Turkey Mw 7.8 and 7.7 earthquake doublet using early observations. The Seismic Record3(4): 342–356.
14.
GüneşNUlucanZÇ (2019) Nonlinear dynamic response of a tall building to near-fault pulse-like ground motions. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering17(6): 2989–3013.
15.
GüvercinSEKarabulutHKoncaAÖDoğanUErgintavS (2022) Active seismotectonics of the East Anatolian Fault. Geophysical Journal International230(1): 50–69.
16.
Hacettepe University, Department of Civil Engineering (2023) 06 February 2023—Kahramanmaraş Pazarcık (Mw=7.7) and Kahramanmaraş Elbistan (Mw=7.6) report on the investigation of earthquakes. Hacettepe University Department of Civil Engineering Report. Available at: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1u8LYtSvkks53iVImuflrzw1weHEDKZhk/view?pli=1
17.
HeatonTHHallJFWaldDJHallingMW (1995) Response of high-rise and base-isolated buildings to a hypothetical Mw 7.0 blind thrust earthquake. Science267(5195): 206–211.
18.
HisadaYTanakaS (2021) What is fling step? Its theory, simulation method, and applications to strong ground motion near surface fault ruptures. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America111(5): 2486–2506.
19.
JiaZJinZMarchandonMUlrichTGabrielA-AFanWShearerPZouXRekoskeJBulutFGaragonAFialkoY (2023) The complex dynamics of the 2023 Kahramanmaraş, Turkey, Mw 7.8-7.7 earthquake doublet. Science381(6661): 985–990.
20.
KamaiRAbrahamsonNGravesR (2014) Adding fling effects to processed ground-motion time histories. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America104(4): 1914–1929. DOI: 10.1785/0120130272
21.
KanekoYGotoH (2022) The origin of large, long-period near-fault ground velocities during surface-breaking strike-slip earthquakes. Geophysical Research Letters49(10): e2022GL098029.
22.
KobayashiHKoketsuKMiyakeH (2019) Rupture process of the 2018 Hokkaido Eastern Iburi earthquake derived from strong motion and geodetic data. Earth, Planets and Space71(1): 63.
23.
LinY-YKanamoriHZhanZMaK-FYehT-Y (2020) Modelling of pulse-like velocity ground motion during the 2018 Mw 6.3 Hualien earthquake, Taiwan. Geophysical Journal International223(1): 348–365.
24.
LuziLLanzanoGFelicettaCD’AmicoMCRussoESgobbaSPacorF; ORFEUS Working Group 5 (2020) Engineering Strong Motion Database (ESM) (Version 2.0). Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia (INGV). Available at: https://doi.org/10.13127/ESM.2
25.
MaiPMAspiotisTAquibTACanoEVCastro CruzDEspindola CarmonaALiBLiXLiuJMatrauRNobileAPalgunadiKHRibotMParisiLSuhendiCTangYBoraYAvşarUKlingerYJónssonS (2023) The destructive earthquake doublet of 6 February 2023 in South-Central Türkiye and Northwestern Syria: Initial observations and analyses. The Seismic Record3(2): 105–115.
26.
MenaBMaiPM (2011) Selection and quantification of near-fault velocity pulses owing to source directivity. Georisk: Assessment and Management of Risk for Engineered Systems and Geohazards5(1): 25–43.
27.
MiyakeHKoketsuKHikimaKShinoharaMKanazawaT (2010) Source fault of the 2007 Chuetsu-oki, Japan, Earthquake. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America100(1): 384–391.
28.
PaolucciRPacorFPugliaRAmeriGCauzziCMassaM (2011) Record processing in ITACA, the New Italian strong-motion database. Earthquake Data in Engineering Seismology, Geotechnical, Geological, and Earthquake Engineering14: 99–113.
29.
PetersenGMBüyükakpinarPVera SanhuezaFOMetzMCescaSAkbayramKSaulJDahmT (2023) The 2023 Southeast Türkiye seismic sequence: Rupture of a complex fault network. Seismic Record3(2): 134–143.
30.
PoiataNMiyakeHKoketsuK (2017) Mechanisms for generation of near-fault ground motion pulses for dip-slip faulting. Pure and Applied Geophysics174: 3521–3536.
31.
PoulosAMirandaE (2023) Effect of style of faulting on the orientation of maximum horizontal earthquake response spectra. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America113(5): 2092–2105.
32.
Rodriguez-MarekABrayJD (2006) Seismic site response for near-fault forward directivity ground motions. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering132(12): 1611–1620.
33.
SchliwaNGabrielA (2023) Equivalent near-field corner frequency analysis of 3D dynamic rupture simulations reveals dynamic source effects. Seismological Research Letters95(2A): 900–924.
34.
SengörAMCGorurNSarogluF (1985) Strike-slip faulting and related basin formation in Zoneszones of tectonic escape: Turkey as a case study. Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists, Special Publication37: 227–264.
35.
ShahiSKBakerJW (2011) An empirically calibrated framework for including the effects of near-fault directivity in probabilistic seismic hazard analysis. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America101(2): 742–755.
36.
ShahiSKBakerJW (2014) An efficient algorithm to identify strong-velocity pulses in multicomponent ground motions. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America104(5): 2456–2466.
37.
SomervillePG (2003) Magnitude scaling of the near fault rupture directivity pulse. Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors137(1): 201–212.
38.
SomervillePGSmithNFGravesRWAbrahamsonNA (1997) Modification of empirical strong ground motion attenuation relations to include the amplitude and duration effects of rupture directivity. Seismological Research Letters68(1): 199–222.
39.
StrasserFOBommerJJ (2009) Review: Strong ground motions—have we seen the worst?Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America99(5): 2613–2637.
40.
TatarOPiperJDAGürsoyHHeimannAKoçbulutF (2004) Neotectonic deformation in the transition zone between the dead sea transform and the East Anatolian Fault Zone, Southern Turkey: A palaeomagnetic study of the Karasu Rift Volcanism. Tectonophysics385(1-4): 17–43.
41.
TürkerEYenMPilzMCottonF (2023) Significance of pulse-like ground motions and directivity effects in moderate earthquakes: The example of the Mw 6.1 Gölyaka-Düzce earthquake on 23 november 2022. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America114(2): 955–964.
42.
WangYDaySM (2020) Effects of off-fault inelasticity on near-fault directivity pulses. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth125(7): e2019JB019074.
43.
YenM-Hvon SpechtSLinY-YCottonFMaK-F (2022) Within- and between-event variabilities of strong-velocity pulses of moderate earthquakes within dense seismic arrays. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America112(1): 361–380.
44.
ZhuLRiveraLA (2002) A note on the dynamic and static displacements from a point source in multilayered media. Geophysical Journal International148(3): 619–627.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
