Ganapathy Cutural Site Seismology

8/4/2019 Ganapathy Cutural Site Seismology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/ganapathy-cutural-site-seismology 1/15

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEOMATICS AND GEOSCIENCES

Volume 1, No 3, 2010

© Copyright 2010 All rights reserved Integrated Publishing services

Research article ISSN 0976 – 4380

529

A deterministic seismic hazard analysis for the major cultural heritage

sites of Tamil Nadu, India Ganapathy.G.P

Assistant Professor (Sr), Centre for Disaster Mitigation and Management,VIT University, Vellore 632 014, Tamil Nadu, India

[email protected]

ABSTRACT

As stated in several studies Tamil Nadu is the eleventh largest state in India by area andthe seventh most populous state and also it is the fifth largest contributor to India's GDP

and the most urbanised state in India. The region has been the home of the Tamilcivilization since at least 1500 BC, as attested by numerous archeological sites in and

around Adichanallur . Tamil Nadu is home to many natural resources, grand hindu

temples of Dravidian architecture, hill stations, beach resorts, multi religious pilgrimagesites and eight UNESCO World Heritage Sites . Bureau of Indian Standard (2001)categorized Tamil Nadu under Seismic Zones II and III, representing an area of 73% and

27% respectively. It should also to be noted that the major historical and Heritage siteslike Mahabalipuram, Kamakshi Amman Temple in Kanchipuram, Kapaleshwarar temple

in Chennai are fall in Zone III of Moderate Hazard (Figure 1). In this connection theseheritage sites has to be evaluated for Seismic Risk. As a first step the potential seismic

hazard for these sites evaluated based on deterministic approach.

A catalog of historical/instrumental earthquakes/ earth tremors in the state is prepared and

used in this paper. The seismic sources have been identified using remote sensing imageswith limited ground truth verification. Six near potential seismic sources in the region

delineated as area sources for seismic hazard assessment based on geological,seismological and geophysical information. Shortest distance from the each seismic

source to the major cities of Tamil Nadu measured and the Peak Ground Acceleration(PGA) at bed rock level is calculated for the six sources with their maximum credible

earthquake events using available attenuation relationship formula applicable toPeninsular India. The maximum magnitude associated with these potential seismic

sources is in the range of 6.0 to 5.0 in Richter scale and the estimated of Peak GroundAcceleration at the source is 0.212 to 0.078g. The PGA values are estimated from the

closest potential source for major Cultural heritage sites of Tamil Nadu viz.,Kapaleshwarar Temple, Mahabalipuram Group of Temples, Kamakshi Amman Temple

in Kanchipuram, Chola group of Temples in Thanjavore and the Mountain Railways of Nilgris calculated. The result of the present study reveals that the seismic hazard in

northeastern and western part of the state is closely matching with the Seismic Zonationmap published by the BIS. The Mountain Railways is threat to 0.16g by the Nilgiris fault,

Chola temple is close to the basement fault which can generate 0.145g to the temples andKapaleswarar temple sites shows PGA value of 0.107g. However the other sites show

lesser PGA value. The sites closer to Chennai city are liable to seismic site amplificationthese sites have to be studies in detail in future.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNESCO_World_Heritage_Site

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dravidian_architecture

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adichanallur

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GDP







530

Keywords: Cultural Heritage, Earthquake, Lineament, fault, Peak Ground Acceleration,Seismic Hazard.

1. Introduction

The seismic hazard analysis is concerned with getting an estimate of the strong motion

parameters at a site for the purpose of earthquake resistant design or seismic safetyassessment (Gupta, 2002). For generalized applications, seismic hazard analysis can also

be used to prepare macro or micro zoning maps of an area by estimating the strong motion parameters for a closely spaced grid of sites. Seismic hazard assessment is

essential for carrying out safe and economic design of structures. The deterministicapproach for seismic hazard analysis is not well documented in literature, and it is

practised differently in different parts of the world and even in different application areas.In its most commonly used form, the deterministic method first assesses the maximum

possible earthquake magnitude for each of the seismic sources (important faults or

seismic provinces) within an areas of about 300 km radius around the site of a structureof interest. Then, by assuming each of these earthquakes to occur at a location that placesthe focus at the minimum possible distance to the site, the ground motion is predicted by

using an empirical attenuation relation or some other appropriate technique.

Tamil Nadu experienced moderate earthquakes in the past earthquake history of 200

years is well evident from the published literatures. Twelve earthquakes of M>5.0 haveoccurred in the State for the known history. Bureau of Indian Standard (2002) categorized

Tamil Nadu under Seismic Zones II and III, representing an area of 73% and 27%respectively. The major Cultural heritage sites of Tamil Nadu viz., Kapaleshwarar

Temple, Mahabalipuram Group of Temples, Kamakshi Amman Temple in Kanchipuram,

Chola group of Temples in Thanjavore and the Mountain Railways of Nilgris wereconsidered for the present study. Among the five sites four sites are fall under seismicZone III (Moderate) in Seismic Hazard Map of India (Figure 1). It is very much essential

to know the potential seismic hazard of these sites. The present study aims at producingseismic hazard maps in terms of Peak Ground Acceleration for these cultural heritage

sites.

2. Cultural Heritage Sites of Tamil Nadu

The State of Tamil Nadu has a great tradition of heritage and culture that developed over 2,000 years ago and still continues to flourish. This great cultural heritage of the state of

Tamil Nadu evolved through the rule of dynasties that ruled the state during various phases of history. Many of those rulers were very fond of art and architecture and gave

generous patronage to men of letters, sculptors, architects and artists. This saw the Tamilland becoming a hub of many beautiful and amazing monuments, which attract tourists

from all over the world to this day. These monuments speak volumes about the artisticskills and excellence of the sculptors and architects of that period. The temples with their

towering gopurams and the rock cut temples leave the connoisseurs speechless.







531

Figure 1: Map showing the location of the Cultural Heritage Sites of Tamil Nadu State







532

2.1 Group of Monuments in Mahabalipuram

This group of sanctuaries, founded by the Pallava kings, was carved out of rock along theCoromandel Coast in the 7th and 8th centuries. It is known especially for its rathas

(temples in the form of chariots), mandapas (cave sanctuaries), giant open air reliefs suchas the famous 'Descent of the Ganges', and the temple of Rivage, with thousands of

sculptures to the glory of Shiva.

2.2 Chola Temple in Thanjavore

The Great Living Chola Temples were built by kings of the Chola Empire, whichstretched over all of south India and the neighbouring islands. The site includes three

great 11thand 12 thcentury Temples: the Brihadisvara Temple at Thanjavur, theBrihadisvara Temple at Gangaikondacholisvaram and the Airavatesvara Temple at

Darasuram. The Temple of Gangaikondacholisvaram, built by Rajendra I, was completedin 1035. Its 53 m vimana (sanctum tower) has recessed corners and a graceful upward

curving movement, contrasting with the straight and severe tower at Thanjavur. TheAiravatesvara temple complex, built by Rajaraja II, at Darasuram features a 24 m vimana

and a stone image of Shiva. The temples testify to the brilliant achievements of the Cholain architecture, sculpture, painting and bronze casting (UNESCO 2010).

2.3 Mountain railways of Nilgiris

The construction of the Nilgiri Mountain Railway, a 46 km long metre gauge single track

railway in Tamil Nadu State was first proposed in 1854, but due to the difficulty of themountainous location the work only started in 1891 and was completed in 1908. This

railway, scaling an elevation of 326 m to 2,203 m, represented the latest technology of the time (UNESCO, 2010).

2.4 Kamakshi Amman Temple in Kancheepuram

Kanchipuram, one of the holiest cities of India is famous for its ancient temples. The

grand architecture of these ancient temples clearly indicates towards the south Indianstyle of temple architecture (Dravidian style). The temples of Kanchipuram were built by

different dynasties, each enriching and refining the architecture further. There is a ancienttemple dedicated to Goddess Parvati in Kanchipuram. The majestic temple is known as

the Kamakshi Amman Temple. Goddess Parvati is worshipped here in the form of

Kamakshi or the goddess of Love. The sanctum sanctorum of this temple can be reached

by passing through a large mandapam (hall) with decorated pillars (www.kanchikamakshi.com).

The Pallava kings were great lovers of art, architecture and learning. Therefore, it was

their reign, under which the first south Indian ancient stone temples were built atMahabalipuram. The evolution of the south Indian style is clearly visible in the temples at

Mahabalipuram. Later, the Cholas, Chalukyas and Vijaynagar rulers ruled Kanchi. They

http://www.kanchikamakshi.com/







533

also built many temples and thus taking forward the building activities started by thePallava dynasty. The later kings built new temples, and renovated the old ones.

The ancient temples in Kanchipuram belong to the south Indian style of temple

architecture. The ancient city of Kanchipuram greets visitors with a cluster of templeshikharas (prominent roofs that surmount the sanctum sanctorum of the temples) and

gopurams (tall). There are many elaborately carved temple gateways also, belonging tothe typical south Indian style of building temples.

2.5 Kapaleshwarar Temple

Kapaleashwarar Temple is an abode of Shiva, located in Mylapore, Chennai, Tamil Nadu.

The Pallava Nayanamars built this temple around the 7th century CE. Nayanmars singhymns in this temple. According to the Puranas, Shakthi worshipped Shiva, in the form

of the peacock, which is why the name Mylai was given to the area that developedaround the temple, as 'Mayil' means Peacock in Tamil.

The age of the temple is the source of much debate. The commonly held view is that the

temple was built in the 7th century CE by the ruling Pallavas, based on references to thetemple in the hymns of the Nayanmars (which however place it at the shore). It is an

example of the beautiful architecture of Pallavas. Further, the architecture of the templeappears to be 300–400 years old. The scholarly view that accounts for the discrepancies

is that the original temple was built on the shore at the location of the current SanthomeChurch but was destroyed by the Portuguese, and the current temple (which is 1 1.5 km

from the shore) was built more recently. A small minority of people believe that theoriginal temple was indeed on the beach, but that the sea has receded over centuries. (

http://en.wikipedia/wiki/kapaleshwarar_Temple).

3. Seismo tectonic set up of Tamil Nadu

Detailed knowledge of geology, active faults/lineaments and associated seismicity isrequired to quantify seismic hazard. The information on past earthquakes gives an idea of

the seismic status of a place or region. The study requires a variety of geological andseismological information such as details of epicentres, origin time, focus, depth, and

magnitude and fault systems to identify the currently active faults (Tandon 1992).Seismotectonic details have been collected for the study area lies between latitudes

08o00’00”N and 13

o30’00”N and longitudes 76

o15’ 00”E and 80

o18’ 00” E.

3.1 Geology of the Study Area

The Geology of Tamil Nadu State represents a shield inland (85%) and 15% is the basement of the Cauvery basin in the east coast of Tamil Nadu forms the present study

area. The shield area of Tamil Nadu consists of charnockites and gneisses with intrusivecomplexes viz., carbonatite, dolerite, syenite and granite. The Cauvery basin has thick

successions of sedimentary formations of Mesozoic to Cenozoic eras. The basin came

http://en.wikipedia/wiki/kapaleshwarar_Temple

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santhome_Church

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pallava

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayanmars


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peacock

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayanmars

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nayanamars&action=edit&redlink=1


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_Nadu

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chennai

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mylapore

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiva







534

into being in the above region as a pull apart following the rift along the easterncontinental margin of the Indian sub continent in the early Mesozoic era (Kumar 1983).

3.2 Lineaments and Tectonics

Based on the satellite imagery, 257 lineaments have been identified. On the basis of

distribution of lineaments Tamil Nadu has been broadly classified into North and SouthBlocks in the inland area and Coastal Block in the east coast. The Cauvery river course is

the boundary in the inland area between the North and South Blocks (Figure 2).Amongst the selected 257 lineaments, 85% fall in the North Block and 15 % in the South

Block (Ganapathy and Rajarathnam ,2010).

Figure 2: Seismic prone lineaments of Tamil Nadu State, India







535

In the Coastal Block of Tamil Nadu, the boundary fault recognized on surface separates

Crystalline and Sedimentary formations and all others in the Block are of the horst andgraben systems. These are identified mainly from gravity and reflection seismic

geophysical data. Evidences from drilled wells by Oil and Natural Gas Corporation(ONGC) confirm their presence also. The regional alignment of the tectonic features is

NE SW, parallel to the Eastern Ghat trend. The sediment thickness in the depressionsvaries from 4000 to 7000 metres. The ridges have sediments in the range of 1000 to 2000

metres. The maximum thickness of 7000 metres is in the Ariyalur Pondicherrydepression (Kumar, 1983). These fault systems have commenced developing in Late

Proterozoic period with the initiation of the breakup of Gondwana land and characterized by large scale vertical movements (Gopalakrishnan, 1996).

3.3 Spatial Distribution of earthquakes

The information on past earthquakes gives an idea of the seismic status of a place or

region. The study requires a variety of geological and seismological information such asdetails of epicentres, origin time, focus, depth, and magnitude and fault systems to

identify the currently active faults (Tandon 1992).

In order to understand the seismicity of Tamil Nadu, data regarding past earthquakesM>3.0 have been collected for a period of around 200 years (1807 – 2009) from various

sources (Seismic Array of Gauribindanur, Babha Atomic Research Centre (BARC),Karnataka State, National Geophysical Research Institute (NGRI), Hyderabad, India

Meteorological Department (IMD), New Delhi, Bansal and Gupta 1998, Chandra 1976and 1977, Srivastava and Ramachandran 1985). The details of micro tremors with

magnitude of 2.0 3.0 from BARC publications are incorporated for 12 years from 1977 to1988 (Gangrade et al 1987 and 1989). The maximum number of earthquakes identified

from these sources for the present study is 103. Out of the total 103 earthquakes/earthtremors 48, 23, 21, 10 and 1 event have been in the magnitude range of 2.0 – 2.9, 3.0 –

3.9, 4.0 – 4.9, 5.0 – 5.9 and >6.0 respectively. 52 earthquakes (51% of overall) are of M>3 in the past 200 years of seismic history.

The available seismic data have been plotted over a map representing 257 lineaments and

the major percentage of the epicentres is aligned along with the NE SW and NW SEtrend of lineaments. A few of them fall on the E W and N S trend of lineaments. The

spatial association of epicenters with lineaments is categorised as seismic prone

lineaments. The length of those lineaments is ranged from 10km to 315km.

4. Seismic Hazard Analysis

Seismic Hazard analysis models the occurrence of earthquakes on seismic sources.

These sources may range from broad aerially distributed source zones to discrete three dimensional units. The basic algorithm for seismic hazard analysis is created on the

premise that the earthquake would occur randomly within a seismic source. The distance







536

from the seismic source to the site is obviously important because attenuation woulddepend on it. In search of the seismic source, the first consideration goes to mapping the

known faults or those which could be inferred to exist. Since the faults are spatiallydistributed in three dimensions, their detailed mapping is critically important for faults

close to a site. Spatial pattern of seismicity will help link seismic source zones withfaults.

The study on Seismic Hazard Assessment for the major cultural heritage sites of Tamil

Nadu carried out based on Deterministic Approach. The present study involving three principal tasks 1) Identification of potential seismic sources, 2) Estimation of maximum

magnitude (Mmax) and iii) Estimation Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) at each site. Themethodology involved is detailed in the following paragraphs.

4.1 Identification of Potential Seismic Sources

The present study prefers the model potential seismic sources as areas in which

configuration of each source zone is controlled, mainly by the fault extent, seismogeniccrust (a part of the earth crust in which large earthquakes usually nucleates), and

mechanism of earthquake faulting or type of active faults.

The potential seismic sources of Tamil Nadu are delineated based on the geophysical andgeological characteristics of the seismic sources along with the prevailing fault systems in

the region. The association of cumulative number of epicentres of earthquakes or higher magnitude earthquakes on the respective active lineaments/faults has also been

considered. Six potential sources have been identified for the present study. These sixseismic sources have generated earthquakes in the magnitude range of 5.0 to 6.0 (sources

A to G). The details are given in Table 1.

Table 1: Seismic Potential Sources of Tamil Nadu State

Source Name of the Potential seismic sources L C.E Mw PGA

A Lineament on the Northern boundary of Palghat

gap (EW) – (No.47)

86 5 6.0 0.212

B Nilgiris lineament (NE) – (No.44) 56 1 5.7 0.160

C Basement fault following the western boundary

of Thanjavore Tranquebar depression (NE -

SW) – (No. 50)

315 5 5.6 0.145

D Adayar fault (EW) – (No.31) 42 1 5.3 0.107

E Chengam – Alangayam Gudiyattam lineament

(NNE – SSW) – (No .21)

160 3 5.0 0.078

F Adanur Thirukovilur Ponnaiyar lineament(NE SW) – (No.26)

45 3 5.0 0.078

Note: For details on fault number in bracket, refer Figure 1.

L : Length of the seismic potential source in Km







537

CE : Cumulative Number of EarthquakesMw: Magnitude observed from the historic/instrumental earthquake

PGA: Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) in g determined using Mmax

For the present study the rupture width of 20 km was considered assuming that the faultextended to the base of the seismogenic crust. Using create buffer tool in the Arc GIS

software buffer was created for a 20km width to the identified 6 seismic sources (Figure3).

Figure 3: Identified potential seismic sources for the Cultural Heritage Sites of Tamil Nadu







538

4.2 Prognosis of Most Credible Earthquake

In deterministic analysis, it is more common to define the maximum earthquake which is

reasonably expected as the maximum credible earthquake. This earthquake is based onan evaluation of the processes, which are reasonably expected to be associated with an

earthquake source. The maximum magnitude is an important variable in calculating theseismic hazard because it determines the strain energy released in larger earthquakes.

For the sources with the record of large earthquakes (M> 6.0), if the largest earthquake

has occurred in a historical time period, the observed largest magnitude is taken as theupper bound magnitude directly, or an increment of 0.5 to 1.0 magnitude unit is added

based on frequency and accuracy of earthquake records in the source zone (Mirzaei et al1999).

In the present study for the largest earthquake which occurred in a historical/ instrumental

time period with good accuracy of the recorded event was considered as maximum possible magnitude in the potential seismic sources (Table 1 and Figure 3).

4.3 Estimation of Peak Ground Acceleration

The Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) for Tamil Nadu due to the identified potential

sources A,B,C,D,E,& F has been calculated using the attenuation relation developed for South India by Iyengar and Raghukanth (2004). The attenuation relation used to calculate

PGA is given below:

ln y = c1+c2(M 6)+c3(M 6) 2ln R –c4 R + ln Є (1)

Where y refer to Peak Ground acceleration (PGA) in g, M refer to magnitude and R refer to Hypocentral distance. Since PGA is known to be attributed nearly as a lognormal

random variable ln y would normally distributed with the average of (ln Є) being almostzero. Hence with e= I, coefficients for the southern region are (Iyengar and Raghukanth,

2004):

c1=1.7816; c2 = 0.9205; c3 = 0.0673; c4 = 0.0035; (ln Є) = 0.3136 (taken as zero)

The determined PGA value for the identified six seismic potential sources of Tamil Nadu

is in the range of 0.212g to 0.078g. The maximum PGA of 0.212 would be caused by the

lineament on the northern boundary of Palghat Gap (Figure 3). The source is about 20kmfrom the Coimbatore City. This lineament has been associated with 5 earthquake

incidences in the past 200 year earthquake history and the Maximum magnitude (Mmax)so far generated is 6.0. The trend of the source in east west direction running with a

length of 86 km starting from northern part of Kerala state and entering the western partof the Tamil Nadu (Figure 3). The details of PGA for the 6 potential sources are given in

Table 1. The estimated PGA at major Cultural heritage sites viz., Kapaleshwarar Temple,







539

Mahabalipuram Group of Temples, Kamakshi Amman Temple in Kanchipuram, Cholagroup of Temples in Thanjavore and the Mountain Railways of Nilgris due to the six

seismic sources are given in Table 2.

To calculate hazard in the area, a grid is formed dividing each degree of latitude andlongitude in to three parts. Arc GIS layout tool is used to perform the grid analysis.

Each intersection of the grid is measured from the different seismic sources and usingMicrosoft Excel the PGA value each point is calculated. By using this method a database

was prepared for each seismic source, and contours were plotted for all six seismic source.

To evaluate the combined seismic hazard of Tamil Nadu for the cultural heritage sitesdue to the potential sources, an attempt was made in Arc GIS Spatial Analyst Software.

The PGA of each potential source plotted over the State Digital Administrative Boundaryof Tamil Nadu and interpolated for the assigned value to bring out the combined seismic

hazard for the Cultural heritage sites (Figure 4).

Figure 4: Map showing the seismic hazard in terms of Peak Ground Acceleration for the

Cultural Heritage Sites of Tamil Nadu







540

Table 2: Estimated Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) values at major cultural heritagesites of Tamil Nadu by the different potential seismic sources

5. Discussions

From the available ground truths and literature published so far, the occurrences of various intrusive complexes and 103 epicenters of earthquakes (Magnitudes 2.0 3.0, 3.0

4.0, 4.0 4.9, 5.0 5.9, 6.0 and above) were plotted on those lineament map and 59seismic prone lineaments/faults were delineated out of the identified 257 lineaments of

Tamil Nadu. The N 30050 0 E, N 10040 0 W and east west lineaments are prominentlineament directions.

Out of 59 seismic prone lineaments, 43 lineaments/faults have spatial association with 91

epicentres of earthquakes and the 16 lineaments closely spaced with epicentres. The balance 12 epicentres fall in blind faults zones, so those areas need to be studied in detail.

This indicates a positive correlation between distribution of lineament and earthquakeoccurrences. The distribution of lineaments, epicentres of earthquakes and intrusive

complexes confirm that the northern part of Tamil Nadu has a higher seismic activity

than the southern part of the State.

The present study involves computation of Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) at bedrock

level, using the deterministic approach to understand the seismic hazard assessment of Tamil Nadu. The study area was divided into six seismic sources (Table 1 and Figure 4)

for which seismic hazard analysis was carried out using the seismicity data of the areafrom 1807 to 2004.







541

The six sources have generated earthquakes in the magnitude range of 5.0 to 6.0 (SourcesA to F). Among the six seismic sources, the lineament on the northern boundary of

Palghat Gap (Source A) and the Nilgiris lineament (Source B) are capable of producingthe observed magnitude 6.0 and 5.7 based on the fault rupture area.

The ground motions were calculated in terms of Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) at

bedrock level. The estimated maximum PGA from the six seismic sources was in therange of 0.212g to 0.078g (Table 1 and Figure 4). The PGA values are estimated from

the closest potential sources for major cultural heritage sites of Tamil Nadu. Themountain railways of Nilgiris will have the highest PGA value of 0.16g due to the

Nilgiris fault and the site Thanjavore Chola temples exposed to 0.145g by the basementfault. The site kapaleswarar temple have a PGA value of 0.104g and it is situated in the

loose soil sediments.

6. Conclusions

The results of the present study reveal the facts that the seismic hazard north eastern andwestern part of Tamil Nadu is closely matching with the regional seismic zonation

prepared by Bureau of Indian Standard, 2002. However the east southeastern andnorthern part of the state show higher value because of the adequate earthquake data used

until the year 2004 and the frequent earthquake activity in the northern part of the state.The southern part of state shows lower seismic hazard than the other parts of the Tamil

Nadu state.

The resultant combined seismic hazard due to the identified seismogenic sources of thestate reveals that there would be an extra attention required in for the east southeastern

and northern part of Tamil Nadu in the future research studies. The major cultural sitesmountain railways of Nilgiris, Chola Temple of Thanjavore and Kapaleswarar temple of

Chennai have higher peak ground acceleration values. The Kapaleswarar temple situatedin the thick alluvial sediment, this site may have higher amplification during even

moderate earthquake, a detailed micro seismic zonation study is required for this site.

Acknowledgement

The author acknowledges all facilities provided by Mr.G. Viswanathan, Chancellor, VITUniversity, Vellore, India. The constant encouragement given by Prof.S.K. Sekar,

Director, Centre for Disaster Mitigation and Management, VIT University, Vellore, India

is gratefully acknowledged. The author thankful to Dr.S.Rajarathnam, Director, Centre

for Disaster Mitigation and Management, Anna University, Chennai for his valuableguidance.







542

7. References

1. Bansal B.K., and Gupta S, 1998, A glance through the seismicity of Peninsular

India, Journal of Geological Society of India, Vol. 52, pp.67 80

2. Bureau of Indian Standard (BIS): 1893, 2002, Indian Standard, Criteria for

earthquake resistant design of structures, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi

3. Chandra U, 1976, Focal mechanism of Koyna, India earthquake of 1967

December 10, Geophysics Journal, Vol. 46, pp.247 251.

4. Chandra U, 1977, Earthquakes of Peninsular India – A Seismo Tectonic Study,

Bulletin of the seismological Society of America, Vol.67, No.5, pp. 1387 1413.

5. Ganapathy G.P. and Rajarathnam S, 2010, Use of Remotesensing and

Seismotectonic Parameters to Identify Seismogenic Sources of Tamil Nadu State,International Journal of Applied Engineering Research Volume 1, No1, 2010, pp

59 76.

6. Gangrade B.K., Prasad G.G.V., Unnikrishnan E., Chandrasekar B., Subbaramu

K.R., and Sharma R.D , 1989, Earthquakes from Peninsular India: Data from theGauribindanur seismic array, from the period January 1987 to December 1988,

B.A.R.C. 1454.

7. Gangrade B.K., Prasad G.G.V., and Sharma R.D, 1987, Earthquakes from

Peninsular India: Data from the Gauribindanur seismic array. Bhabha AtomicResearch Centre, Bombay, B.A.R.C., 1347 and 1385.

8. Gopalakrishnan K, 1996, Lineament tectonics and its relation to seismic activityin Tamil Nadu, India, Proceedings of the International Conference on Disasters

and Mitigation, Anna university, Vol. I, pp. A1 19 A1 25

9. Gupta I.D, 2002, The State of the art in seismic Hazard Analysis, ISET journal of

Earthquake Technology, paper no. 428, Vol.39, No.4, December 2002, pp.311 346.

10. Iyengar R.N and Ragukanth S.T.G, 2004, Attenuation strong ground Motion inPeninsular India, Seismological Resaerch Letters, 75, 4, pp 530 540.

11. “Kamakshi Amman temple”, www.kanchikamakshi.com, accessed on 14 October 2010

12. ”Kapaleshwarar Temple”, http://en.wikipedia/wiki/kapaleshwarar_Temple,accessed on 18 October 2010.

http://en.wikipedia/wiki/kapaleshwarar_Temple

http://www.kanchikamakshi.com/







543

13. Kumar S.P, 1983, Geology and hydrocarbon prospects of Krishna, Godavari andCauvery Basins, In: Petroliferous Basins of India, L.L.Bandari and B.S.

Venkatachala, Ruby Kumar S. Nanjunda Swamy, Pomila Gargga andD.C.Srivastava. A Himachal Times Group Publication (Energy Division) Dehra

Dun, Vol. VI, No.4, pp 57 65.

14. Mirzaei N., Mengtan Gao., & Yuntai Chan, 1999, Delineation of potential seismic

sources for seismic sources for seismic zoning of Iran, Journal of Seismology,Vol.3, pp 17 – 30.

15. Srivastava and Ramachandran. K, 1985, New earthquake Catalogue of earthquakes for Peninsular India during 1839 1900 Mausaum 1985,

Meteorological Office Report, New Delhi

16. Tandon A.N. and Srivastava H.N, 1974, Earthquake engineering (Jaikrishna Vol.),

Savita Prakasam, Meerut.

17. UNESCO (2010), http://whc.unesco.org/, accessed during February,2011.

Ganapathy Cutural Site Seismology

Documents

Transcript of Ganapathy Cutural Site Seismology