FEASIBILITY OF ONE MINUTE SEISMIC ALERT FOR DELHI

Y. Pandey and P.K.S. Chauhan

Central Building Research Institute
Roorkee 247 667 (Uttaranchal)
ABSTRACT
Delhi falls in the zone IV of Seismic Zoning Map of India and has a
prolonged seismic history. The Himalayan Seismic zone, Delhi-Haridwar Ridge
zone, Moradabad Fault zone, Rajasthan Great Boundary Fault zone, Mathura Fault
zone and Sohna Fault zone may contribute seismic risk for Delhi. Himalayan Seismic
zone is approximately 300 km away from Delhi. The effect of the earthquakes
originating from Himalaya was clearly seen in Delhi in past. The attenuation relations
developed for this region reveals that any earthquake of magnitude 8.0 in Himalayas
will generate PGA of the order of 75 140 cm/sec2 in Delhi. CBRI has established
Delhi Strong Motion Accelerograph (DSMA) Network in Delhi region to collect the
strong motion data generated in the region in 1996. It has recorded 22 earthquakes
including Jabalpur, Chamoli and Bhuj earthquakes. Chamoli earthquake was recorded
by DSMA network and 10.7 15 cm/sec2 PGA was recorded in Delhi for this 6.8 M
earthquake.
The phase data of Chamoli earthquake show that the S wave took more than a
minute to reach Delhi. This time can be utilized to give alarm to minimize at least the
loss of human lives. This is only possible if a Seismic Alert System is devised for
Delhi region. Establishment of such a robust and reliable system is not easy task and
no. of disciplines and parameters come into picture. But our studies strongly prove
the feasibility of one minute Delhi Seismic Alert System meant for major Himalayan
earthquakes.
INTRODUCTION
Indian subcontinent has been worst hit by the natural disasters like earthquakes,
floods, cyclones and landslides. As far as the causalties are concerned, earthquakes
top the list. The human loss estimated for major Indian earthquakes is given in
Table1. Besides this, the property loss due to these earthquakes is too high to be
estimated. It is estimated that a M 8.0 hypothetical earthquake in Kangra may have
destroyed 1,36,339 houses killing 65,000 people if no earthquake substantially
reduced when earthquake resistant measures are properly taken - destruction of 8,298
houses may have still killed about 12,000 people in 1991 (Arya 2000). An early
earthquake warning has potential to save all the precious human lives. In the light of
the present knowledge base, it is safe to say that we are far away from any earthquake
predictive tool. However, present technology in seismic instrumentation and
telecommunication permits the implementation of an alert system based on the realtime measurement of ground motions. Such systems are capable of providing a
warning of several seconds before the arrival of the strong ground tremors caused by
a large earthquake. Such systems are successfully operational in many countries of

the world like Japan, America, Mexico, Taiwan, Turkey etc. In a country like India
where earthquakes are taking heavy toll of our human lives and property, SEISMIC
ALERT NETWORK may prove to be very important step in natural hazard
mitigation strategy.
Table 1. Number of Casualties during major Indian earthquakes.
Date

Area

Magnitude

Intensity

16/06/1819 Gujrat (Kutch)

8.0

XI

12/06/1897 Assam (Shilong)

Himachal Pradesh
04/04/1905
(Kangra)
15/01/1934 Bihar Nepal
15/08/1950 Assam (NE)
21/08/1988 Bihar Nepal
30/09/1993 Maharashtra (Latur)
26/01/2001 Gujarat (Bhuj)

8.7

XII

Deaths
Many
thousands
1, 600

8.0

XI

20, 000

8.3
8.6
6.6
6.3
7.6

XI
14, 000
XII
1, 500
VIII
1, 003
VIII
7, 928
XI
20,000
(Modified after, Arya 2000)

SEISMIC ALERT NETWORK

Seismic Alert Network (SAN) has the potential of the optimum benefit as it
can provide the critical alarms and information needed (i) to minimize the loss of
lives and property, (ii) to direct rescue operations, and (iii) to prepare for recovery
from earthquake damage. Seismic Alert Network may help us to give an alarm before
the destructive earthquake waves reach to a populated place. As soon as an
earthquake occurs, compressional primary (P) waves start travelling into the crust.
This is the first measurable parameter of an earthquake. Secondary shear (S) waves
follow P waves as they travel with slower speed, but in most of the cases structural
damages are caused by these slow moving S-waves. In general, we take P wave
velocity as 3 times the S-wave velocity. In the upper crust, lower crust & subcrustal
layer P wave velocity is usually taken as 6 km/sec, 6.5 km/sec & 8 km/sec
respectively. The time which may be available varies for different probable sources
generating the earthquakes. If any earthquake epicentre is about 300 km away from
the alarming site, the alarm time (S-wave arrival after the earthquake triggers) will be
more than one minute. This time gap helps in evacuation of buildings in urban areas,
shutting down the critical systems like nuclear reactors and chemical plants, stopping
of high speed trains and other modes of human transportation, shutting down the
elevators etc.
SUCCESSFUL SEISMIC ALERT NETWORKS
There are few Seismic Alert Networks in operation in different parts of the
globe which are being used for civilian purpose. Some of them are discussed here in
brief.

1)

Urgent Earthquake Detection And Alert System (UrEDAS) in Japan

In this system, which consists of five stations and a central facility, earthquake
epicenter is calculated by measuring initial P-wave motion on horizontal
accelerometer components. Epicentral estimates are computed within 3 second after
initial P-wave arrival at each station. Central station receives all the parameter
estimates and an integrated earthquake parameter is estimated within 1 minute.
Acceleration threshold for giving an alarm is set to 40 cm/sec2 (Nakamura, 1989).
2)
Seismic Alert System (SAS) for Mexico City
Most of the large earthquakes, which are likely to cause damage to Mexico
City have their source in the subduction zone of the Pacific coast at a distance of
about 320 Km. S-waves took about 58-74 seconds after initiation of a major
earthquake to reach Mexico City. This gave this clue for a dedicated SAS in this
seismically active city. Initially it started with 12 digital strong motion field stations
(presently 30 stations) located around 300 kms stretch of Guerrero coast between
Acapulco and Zihuatanejo ports. The system has been operating since August 1991.
Here AM / FM radio transmission is used for communication covering 4.4 million
people during peak hours. This system spreads General Alert > M = 6.0, and
Restricted Alert < M = 6.0. Highlight of the Mexico City SAS is that there was no
casualty in Mexico City since its inception, in spite of several major earthquakes
including one of M 7.4. More than 1500 earthquakes have been detected, with only
one false alarm (Espinosa Aranda, 1996).
3)
USGS Earthquake Alert System
A three seismometer array was installed soon after October 1989 Loma Prieta
earthquake for aftershock warning to rescue workers. One 100 km distant 4.4
magnitude aftershock could be detected 11 seconds prior to P-wave arrival and 23
seconds prior to S-wave arrival at Cypress (Bakun, 1990).
4)
Earthquake Alert System (EAS) for Romanian Capital
Romanian capital Bucharest has the most seismically active zone about 130
km away with focal depth varying between 100 150km. It has been estimated that
time delay in S-wave arrival in Bucharest will be 26 sec after earthquake occurs
(Wenzel, 2001).
5)
Early warning system for Turkey capital
10 Strong Motion Accelerographs are installed near most active Great
Marmara fault on line data transmission mode where radio modem system is used.
Whenever an earthquake occurs and 2 or 0 (selectable) station crosses the trigger
threshold within selectable time interval, the first alarm is declared. The early
warning information (consisting of three alarm levels) communicates to the servo
shut down systems of strategic facilities. Depending on the location of the earthquake
and the recipient facility alarm time may be as high as about 8 seconds (Erdik, 2003).
6)
Real time Seismic Monitoring in Taiwan
Taiwan Central Weather Bureaus Telemetered Seismic Network (CWBSN)
has achieved the generation of intensity map, epicenter and magnitude within 1
minute of the occurrence of a large earthquake, with the help of its worlds densest
seismic network. They aim to further reduce this time gap to 30 second, so that 100
km far earthquake may be studied within 20 seconds and 10 seconds may be made
available for activation of emergency response measure (Teng, 1997)

FEASIBILITY OF SEISMIC ALERT NETWORK IN DELHI

Delhi falls in the zone IV of Seismic Zoning Map of India and has prolonged
seismic history. Cracks on the wall of Qutab Minar tell the story of these past
earthquakes. 1720 earthquake of intensity VIII-IX and the 1803 earthquake of
intensity VIII are often mentioned in scientific literature. It has been highlighted time
and again that Delhi region might face an earthquake of magnitude 7 in future. After
experiencing the effects of the 29th March 1999 Chamoli earthquake in some parts of
Delhi- particularly in trans Yamuna area- there is a heightened level of awareness
among the public to natural disasters in urban areas. As far as seismic vulnerability of
Delhi is concerned, there are six seismic source zones, which may affect Delhi region
(Sharma, 2003). They are
1. Himalayan Seismic zone
2. Delhi-Haridwar Ridge zone
3. Moradabad Fault zone
4. Rajasthan Great Boundary Fault zone
5. Mathura Fault zone
6. Sohna Fault zone
The most active among them is the Himalayan Seismic zone, which is situated
approximately 300 km away from Delhi. Delhi, being the socio-political and
economic nerve center of the country, demands much more attention from the angle
of disaster preparedness.
Occurrence of two recent strong earthquakes of Uttarkashi (1991) and the
Chamoli (1999) in the Himalayan zone raises concern about the seismogenic potential
of the region. It is observed from the historic and recent seismicity that 13
earthquakes of Mb > 6.0 have occurred in Kumaon-Garhwal region in the last 96
years (Table2). This shows that the periodicity of the occurrence of strong
earthquakes in this region is about 8 years (Dimri, 2003).
Table 2. Earthquakes of M > 6.0 in Garhwal and Kumaon region
Sr.
Date
Lattitude
Longitude
Depth
Magnitude
No.
(km)
N
E
1.
01/09/1803
30.3
78.8
8.0
2.
26/05/1816
30.9
79.0
6.5
3.
06/06/1902
31.0
79.0
6.0
4.
27/07/1926
30.4
80.4
6.0
5.
08/10/1927
30.5
80.5
6.0
6.
05/03/1935
29.7
80.2
6.0
7.
04/06/1945
30.0
80.0
60
6.5
8.
28/12/1958
29.5
80.0
6.2
9.
31/12/1958
30.1
80.7
6.0
10.
26/09/1964
29.6
80.9
50
6.2
11.
27/06/1966
29.6
80.9
36
6.0
12.
19/10/1991
30.75
78.86
12
6.6
13.
29/03/1999
30.01
79.42
21
6.8

Central Gap in the Himalayan seismic zone sandwitched between the epicenters of
1905 Kangra & 1934 Bihar-Nepal earthquakes have the potential of two future great
earthquakes (Khattri, 1999). Bilham (2001) has concluded that out of ten regions in
Himalaya six have accumulated energy equivalent to at least one 1934 Bihar-Nepal
earthquake exposing 50 million people including metropolitans like Delhi, Kolkata,
Islamabad, Dhaka, Kathmandu etc. at great risk. Singh (2002) has calculated the
values of PGA in Delhi for Probable M 8.0 and M 8.5 earthquakes 96 140 cm / sec2
and 174 218 cm / sec2 respectively. It has also been highlighted that during the
earthquake
Amplifications may go up to 20 times at certain pockets.
Large scale liquefaction may take place.
EAST OF YAMUNA may prove to be most vulnerable area in Delhi.
CBRI has established Delhi Strong Motion Accelerograph (DSMA) Network
in Delhi region with DST support in 1996. This network is collecting strong motion
data generated in the region. The network consists of 16 strong motion stations to
cover the region within a radius of 200 km. Out of these 16 instruments, 8
instruments are deployed in Delhi and remaining 8 stations are located outside Delhi
city. 22 no. of earthquakes (local & distant) have been recorded on DSMA since
1997. Recognising the valuable role played by DSMA network in Delhi region, DST
has approved Augmented DSMA Network with 12 additional SMAs in Delhi city.
Here we take few earthquakes recorded on DSMA network as live examples
showing that ample alert time is available for the safety of Delhi.
29th March 1999 Chamoli Earthquake:
This earthquake was widely recorded on Strong Motion accelerographs
maintained by CBRI and IIT Roorkee (erstwhile UOR, Roorkee). On the basis of
recorded data, an attenuation relationship was formulated which has good match with
other prominent relationships developed by different researchers (Fig-1) (Pandey,
2001).
Indian Meteorological Deptt. (IMD) have recorded this earthquake on their
seismological stations located near the epicentre and the phase data made available by
them shows that the S-wave took 72.8 second to reach Delhi after the killer
earthquake triggered in distant Himalaya. The same earthquake was recorded on
Strong Motion Accelerographs of DSMA network, but P and S waves could not be
recorded on all the stations due to higher values of the trigger threshold set at that
time and the distance from the epicentre. Only surface waves could be recorded in
Delhi citys SMAs. S-waves recorded at Roorkee and Panipat are following the
similar trend in time gap recording. Fig-2 clearly shows that any major Himalayan
earthquake may take more than a minute to reach Delhi and this available time gap is
vital relief to policy makers, managers and administrators in particular and public in
general.
25th Feb. 2001 Hindukush Earthquake:
Just after 26th Jan 2001 Bhuj earthquake when trigger threshold of few DSMA
instruments was lowered with an intention to record aftershocks, this distant

Hindukush earthquake was recorded in Delhi about 1000 kms away from the
epicentre. S-wave arrival time in Delhi is about 230 seconds.
13th Sept, 2001 local earthquake on UP Haryana Border:
This earthquake, which occurred near Sonepat was recorded at Sonepat,
Baghpat and Meerut SMA stations, and the S-wave arrival time is 12.79 sec, 13.58
sec, 16.05 sec respectively after its occurrence (Fig 3). Though all the recording
stations are very near to the epicenter and the alarm time is too small to act, but it
proves the effectiveness of a seismic alert network.
Above cited examples were taken from CBRI SMA database and many more
examples may be cited. As the DSMA network has been designed with different
objectives and not with seismic alert in mind, so its present configuration may not be
appropriate to have the maximum advantage for giving an alarm. In the light of the
above recorded earthquakes, the authors have strong conviction that sufficient alarm
time may be available if suitable Seismic Alert Network is designed for Delhi, which
may be dedicated to detect exclusively major Himalayan earthquakes.
A hybrid Seismic Alarm Network for Delhi may be planned keeping two
pronged strategy:
(i) (a) Two Tier System: Himalayan Seismic gap (lying between the epicenters of
1905 Kangra & 1934 Bihar Nepal EQs) along the MCT may be considered as the
most potential seismic source for Delhi. To study the seismic activities of this gap, a
network of SMAs may be installed near MCT as most of the major Himalayan
earthquakes in recent past occurred near MCT. Field SMAs may pick the P waves as
soon as an earthquake occurs and transfer the data to Central Station located in Delhi
in real time. S waves may take about a minute to reach Delhi. This vital time gap may
be utilized to give an appropriate alarm to the target population & installations and
suitable strategy may be devised at Central Station. For this purpose all the
computations were done on the basis of 29th March 1999 Chamoli Earthquake
recorded by seismological networks operating in the region. It has been proved on the
basis of instrumental records that the alarm time for Himalayan earthquakes, time gap
between S wave arrival in Delhi with respect to P wave arrival at Himalayan field
stations near MCT will be of the order of about 70 seconds.
(b) Single Tier System: If we do not go for field stations near MCT in Himalaya, S
P arrival time in Delhi for Chamoli earthquake comes out to be of the order of 30
seconds (Fig 4). This may be taken as alarm time, when only one tier Seismic Alert
Network is put in Delhi. In this case, we will have to compromise with the alert time.
If we have a time efficient communication network and a suitable alarm algorithm
in place, then shorter S-P time gap may also be effectively utilized for Seismic Alert
Network.
(ii) Continuous study of local seismicity of Delhi is clear indication that moderate
earthquakes may occur in Delhi region. In this case, Seismic Alert Network may pick
up the near source ground motion collected by the existing 16 SMA network.
Appropriate alarm strategy with lesser time gap in hand, may be devised at Central
Station. In any case, instrumentation network may consist of a judicious mixture of
Strong Motion & Weak Motion seismic recording instruments in this case, as with

higher trigger threshold SMAs located in Delhi may not pick up P & S waves of
Himalayan earthquakes. Hence, the system may have to be hybrid.
In this paper an attempt has been made to compute the alarm time, attenuation
pattern of PGA and the feasibility of such seismic alert network for Delhi. This is
only a feasibility study and may not be taken as a blue print, as it requires much more
vigorous brainstorming on various diverse aspects. The real data used in the paper
gives a higher degree of confidence in this people oriented welfare concept. But as
other public issues, it has its own risks and we will have to put lot of technical input
before the concept is translated into reality.
REFERENCES
Arya, A. S., (2000), Recent Developments Towards Earthquake Risk Reduction in
India, Current Science, 79, No. 9.
Bakun B (1990), Early Warning Alert System, USGS Public Affairs Memo
Battis, J., (1981). Regional Modification of Acceleration Functions. Bull. Seis. Soc.
Am., 71.
Bilham, R., Gaur, V.K. and Molnar, P., (2001), Himalayan Seismic Hazard. Science,
293, 24 August 2001.
Bolt, B.A. and Abrahamson, N.A., (1982), New Attenuation Relations For Peak And
Expected Accelerations Of Strong Ground Motion. Bull. Seis. Soc. Am., 72.
Dimri, V.P., (2003). Earthquake Hazard Assesment of Kumaon Garhwal Himalaya
through the application of fractal technique. 9th IGC Foundation lecture, Dehradun.
Erdik M et al (2003), Istanbul Earthquake Rapid Response and the Early Warning
System, Proc. 2nd Intl Symp New technologies for Urban Safety of Mega Cities in
Asia, Oct 2003
Espinosa-Aranda JM et al (1996), Results of the Mexico City Early Warning System,
Proc. 11th World Conf. EQ Engg, Mexico.
Joyner, W.B. and Boore, D.M., (1981), Peak Horizontal Acceleration and Velocity
from Strong-Motion Records Including Records from the 1979 Imperial Valley,
California earthquake. Bull. Seis. Soc. Am., 71.
Khattri K.N. (1999), an Evaluation of Earthquake Hazard and Risk in Northern India.
Himalayan Geology, 20 (1).
Nakamura Y (1989), Earthquake Alarm System for Japan Railways, Japanese
Railway Engg, 28 (4)
Orphal, D.L. and Lahoud, J.A., (1974), Prediction of Peak Ground Motion From
Earthquakes. Bull. Seis. Soc. Am., 64.
Pandey Y., Chauhan P.K.S., Dharmaraju R. & Srivastava S.K., (2001). Attenuation
Relationship for 29th March 1999 Chamoli Earthquake, India, ICCE-2001 July 23-25,
2001, IISC, Bangalore.
Sharma, M.L., Wason, H.R. & Dimri, R., (2003). Seismic Zonation of Delhi Region
For Bed Rock Ground Motion, Pure And Applied Geophysics (PAGEOPH), 160.
Singh, S.K., (2002), Ground Motion in Delhi from Future Large/Great Earthquakes in
the Central Seismic Gap of the Himalayan Arc. BSSA, 92; (2).
Teng T et al (1997), One Minute Agter Strong Motion Map, Effective Epicenter and
Effective Magnitude, BSSA, Vol. 87, No. 5.
Wenzel et al., (2001), Potential of Earthquake Early Warning System, Natural
Hazard, 23.

800

600

PGA cm/sec*sec

<===== (Battis, 1981)

400
<============ Chamoli Earthquake data
<========== (Bolt & Abrahamson, 1982)
<========== (Joyner & Boore, 1981)

200

<====== (Orphal & Lahoud, 1974)

0
0

100

200

300

Distance in km.

Fig. 1. Attenuation Curve for Chamoli Earthquake

120

S Time (Theo.)
S Time (Chamoli)

100

108.23

S Time SMA(Chamoli)
AlarmTime in sec.

83.51
Panipat

80

78.2 Bahadurgarh
72.8 Delhi
58.77

60
Roorkee

40

42.0 Lohaghat
32.88

34.5 Dehradun

20
4.46

0
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Epicentral distance in km.

Fig. 2. Alarm Time for Two Tier System for Himalayan Earthquake

29.4

13.09.01

SONEPAT

29.0

(12.79 sec)
BAGHPAT

(13.58 sec)
28.8

DELHI
28.6

MEERUT

(16.05 sec)

28.4
76.6

77.0

76.8

77.4

77.2

77.6

Longitude (E)

Fig. 3. Alarm time for local earthquake

60

S -P Time (Theo.)

50

47.50

S- P Time (Chamoli)
Alarm Time S- P (Sec)

Lattitude (N )

29.2

S-P Time SMA(Chamoli)

40

36.53
35.0

Bahadurgarh

31.0

30

25.54

Delhi

20.5
Roorkee
Lohaghat

20

13.87

15.0

Dehradun

10
1.87
0
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Epicentral Distance (km)

Fig. 4. Alarm time for Single Tier System for Himalayan Earthquake

10