J Seismol
DOI 10.1007/s10950-008-9118-y
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Source study of two small earthquakes of Delhi, India,
and estimation of ground motion from future
moderate, local events
B. K. Bansal · S. K. Singh · R. Dharmaraju ·
J. F. Pacheco · M. Ordaz ·
R. S. Dattatrayam · G. Suresh
Received: 5 December 2007 / Accepted: 30 June 2008
© Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2008
Abstract We study source characteristics of two
small, local earthquakes which occurred in Delhi
on 28 April 2001 (Mw3.4) and 18 March 2004
(Mw2.6). Both earthquakes were located in the
heart of New Delhi, and were recorded in the epi-
central region by digital accelerographs. The
depths of the events are 15 km and 8 km, respec-
tively. First motions and waveform modeling yield
a normal-faulting mechanism with large strike-slip
component. The strike of one of the nodal planes
roughly agrees with NE–SW orientation of faults
B. K. Bansal
Ministry of Earth Sciences, CGO Complex,
Mahasagar Bhavan, Govt. of India,
New Delhi 110003, India
S. K. Singh (B) · J. F. Pacheco
Instituto de Geofísica, UNAM, CU,
04510 México, DF, México
e-mail: krishnamex@yahoo.com
R. Dharmaraju
Central Building Research Institute, Roorkee, India
M. Ordaz
Instituto de Ingeniería, UNAM, CU,
04510 México, DF, México
R. S. Dattatrayam · G. Suresh
India Meteorological Department, Lodhi Road,
New Delhi 110003, India
and lineaments mapped in the region. We use the
recordings of the 2004 event as empirical Green’s
functions to synthesize expected ground motions
in the epicentral region of a Mw5.0 earthquake in
Delhi. It is possible that such a local event may
control the hazard in Delhi. Our computations
show that a Mw5.0 earthquake would give rise to
PGA of ∼200 to 450 gal, the smaller values occur-
ring at hard sites. The estimate of corresponding
PGV is ∼6 to 15 cm/s. The recommended re-
sponse spectra, Sa, 5% damping, for Delhi, which
falls in zone IV of the Indian seismic zoning map,
may not be conservative enough at soft sites for a
postulated Mw5.0 local earthquake.
Keywords Delhi seismicity · Delhi
seismotectonics · Delhi seismic hazard ·
Delhi microzonation
1 Introduction
Delhi, the capital of India, with a present popu-
lation of about 14 millions, is exposed to seismic
hazard from large and great earthquakes along
the Himalayan arc. The closest distance from the
city to the rupture areas of such earthquakes is
about 250 km. Relatively infrequent, moderate
earthquakes also occur at closer distances. A cat-
alog of historical and instrumental seismicity in an
area bounded by 27◦ –29◦ N and 77◦ –79◦ E, which
J Seismol
 J Seismol
 Fig. 1 Top Tectonic map of northern India. Rectangle
outlines the area shown at the bottom. Bottom structural
features of the region surrounding Delhi (modified from
Verma et al. 1995). Rectangle indicates the area shown in
Fig. 2
includes the Delhi region (Figs. 1 and 2), lists
six earthquakes of M ≥ 5 since 1720 (Table 1).
Three of these events have occurred since 1956
(M ≥ 5.8). The epicenter of the 1720 earthquake
(M∼6.5) is uncertain but, apparently, it was in the
vicinity of Delhi (Iyengar and Ghosh 2004). In
Table 1, the 1960 Faridabad earthquake (M6.0)
is the closest instrumentally located event to the
capital.
The tectonics of Delhi and the surrounding
area is complex. Delhi lies on an extension
of the Peninsular shield which is transverse to
the Indo-Gangetic plains (Fig. 1). The region
is dominated by several tectonic features: Hi-
malayan Main Boundary Thrust (MBT), Main
Central Thrust (MCT), Delhi–Hardwar ridge,
Delhi–Lahore ridge, Aravalli–Delhi fold, Sohna
faults, Mathura fault, Rajasthan Great Boundary
fault, and Moradabad fault. Some of these fea-
tures are shown in Fig. 1. Major tectonic features
and lineaments in the region follow a NE–SW
trend (Fig. 1). Delhi and its surrounding area are
seismically quite active at small-magnitude level.
This seismicity is diffused (Shukla et al. 2007).
The seismic network in the region has been and,
still, remains sparse. Thus, the diffused seismicity,
partly, reflects errors in the locations of the earth-
quakes. The scatter may also be caused by a broad
deformation zone. In any case, it is not possible to
relate events with specific tectonic features.
The Ridge Seismological Observatory in Delhi
was established in 1960 by the India Meteoro-
logical Department (IMD). This station is named
NDI. In 1963, it was upgraded and became part of
the World-Wide Seismological Station Network
(WWSSN).
During 2000–2001, IMD established a 16-
element digital telemetered seismic network
(DTSN), with VSAT communication (Shukla
et al. 2007). The Central Receiving Station (CRS)
is located at IMD headquarters in New Delhi. The
network consists of five stations within 50 km of
CRS, four between 50 and 80 km, another four
between 80 and 200 km, and the remaining three
beyond 200 km. Only three of these stations are
in Delhi or its periphery. Clearly, the network
is sparse and the reported locations of events in
Delhi are subject to significant error. Since the
earthquakes are generally small, the first motions
are often uncertain and the waveform modeling is
difficult. As a consequence, the focal mechanisms
of small earthquakes in Delhi and the surround-
ing area, estimated from the data of DSTN, may
not be reliable. The closest earthquake to Delhi
for which a focal mechanism has been reported
from teleseismic and regional first-motion data is
the Moradabad event of 15 August 1966, M5.8
(Molnar et al. 1973, 1977). This earthquake was
located 167 km east of the city (Table 1).
In 1995, an eight-station Digital Strong-Motion
Network (DSMN) became operational in Delhi.
This network is operated by Central Building Re-
search Institute (CBRI), Roorkee. Figure 2 shows
the location of the stations and the surface geology
of Delhi. Table 2 summarizes the site character-
istics of these stations (CBRI Report 1998). We
note that the surface geology in Fig. 2 is not suf-
ficiently detailed so that the locations of some of
the stations in this figure do not correspond with
the site characteristics given in Table 2. Chamoli
earthquake of 28 March 1999 (Mw6.5) was well
recoded by four stations of the network. These
data were analyzed by Singh et al. (2002) to
study site amplification in Delhi and to synthe-
size ground motions in the city from postulated
large/great earthquakes (7.5 ≤ Mw ≤ 8.5) in the
central seismic gap of the Himalayan arc.
The awareness of earthquake vulnerability of
Delhi has led to numerous recent studies deal-
ing with site effect, microzonation, estimation of
ground motion, and seismic hazard in the city
(e.g., Khattri 1999; Iyengar 2000; Singh et al. 2002;
Parvez et al. 2002, 2004, 2006; Nath et al. 2003;
Mukhopadhyay et al. 2002; Sharma et al. 2003;
Iyengar and Ghosh 2004; Mohanty et al. 2007).
Unfortunately, earthquake recordings in Delhi,
except at NDI, are still very limited. As a con-
sequence, the results of some of these studies
are poorly constrained by earthquake record-
ings. This is especially true for local earthquakes
in Delhi. Source characteristics of these earth-
quakes are not known. Also not known is the site
 J Seismol

2001 2004

Fig. 2 Surface geology, faults, and lineaments in Delhi. and their focal mechanisms are shown. Focal mechanisms
Triangles strong-motion stations, dots land marks. The epi- indicate first motions (dot compression, circle dilatation)
centers of the two local earthquakes analyzed in this study

response during such events. Is the amplification recordings of regional earthquakes roughly valid
in Delhi strongly dependent on the source dis- for local earthquakes also? Finally, it is not pos-
tance as suggested by numerical modeling (Parvez sible to reliably predict ground motions in Delhi
et al. 2006)? Are the site effects estimated from from future moderate, local earthquakes.
J Seismol

Table 1 Significant Date Lat Long M Region Distance from MMI MMI
earthquakes in and
(◦ N) (◦ E) Delhi, km epicentral Delhi
around Delhi since 1720
15/07/1720 28.37 77.10 6.5 Delhi 27 X X
01/09/1803 27.50 77.70 6.8 Mathura 129 IX VII
Distance from Delhi 16/01/1842 27.00 78.00 5.0 Near Mathura 192 – –
measured from India
10/10/1956 28.15 77.67 6.7 Near Bulandshahar 65 VIII VII
Meteorological
27/08/1960 28.20 77.40 6.0 Near Faridabad 46 VII VII
Department, Lodhi Road,
New Delhi 15/08/1966 28.67 78.93 5.8 Near Moradabad 167 – –

In this paper, we analyze two small, local
earthquakes which occurred in Delhi on 28 April
2001 (Mw3.4) and 18 March 2004 (Mw2.6). These
earthquakes were well recorded in the epicentral
region by DSMN. Our analysis of this dataset
is a step towards addressing the lacuna in our
knowledge of local earthquakes in Delhi and the
associated seismic hazard.
2 Data and analysis
The earthquake of 2001 was recorded by four
accelerographs of the DSMN: NDI, CSIR, IHC,
CPCB (CPCB was later moved to a nearby site
and renamed DVB, Fig. 2). The 2004 event was
recorded at all eight stations of the network as
well as by an accelerograph operated by IMD at
its headquarters on Lodhi Road in New Delhi.
The station, named LDR, is situated close to the
station IHC (Fig. 2). Based on the inspection of
Fourier spectra, the accelerograms of 2001 and
2004 earthquakes were bandpass-filtered between
0.5–40 Hz and 1–40 Hz, respectively. The data of
the second event at NPL was highly contaminated
by noise at 50 Hz. This recording was filtered
twice in the bandwidth of 1–20 Hz. Only the fil-
tered traces were used in further analysis. These

Table 2 Site characteristics of strong-motion stations of Delhi

Station Siting Near-surface geology
NDI (some times named IMD) Basement of Ridge Observatory, Top 1 m: sandy silt with gravel; next 4 m:
a two-floor construction weathered rock; below 5 m: hard rock
IHC Basement of an eight-storey building Sandy silt with kankar and clay up to a depth
of at least 55 m. Nearby 80-m deep drill
hole did not reach bedrock
CSIR Basement of a three-storey building Top 1 m: sandy silt; next 59 m: clayey sandy
silt. Bedrock at depth >60 m
INSD Basement of a five-storey building Top ∼1 m: sandy silt; next ∼5 m: sandy
silt with clay and kankar; below 35 m: clayey,
sandy, silt. Nearby tube wells reveal
bedrock at a depth of 80 m
NPL Basement of four-storey building Top 2 m: dry, sandy silt with gravel; next
∼5 m: weathered rock; Hard and compact
bedrock below 7 m depth
CRRI Free field Probably similar to NDI and NPL
CPWD Basement of four-storey building Top 30 m: sandy silt layer followed by
alternate layers of sandy silt and sandy silt
with kankar. Nearby 80-m deep drill holes
did not reach bedrock
DVB (moved to the present Basement of four-storey building Top 40 m: sandy silt layer followed by silt with
site from CPCB which is alternate layers of sandy kankar and
close by) sandy silt. Nearby 60-m deep drill holes
did not reach bedrock
LDR Floor of one-storey building Presumably similar to IHC
 J Seismol

Fig. 3 Z component of
velocity during the
earthquakes of 28 April,
2001 (left) and 18 March,
2004 (right)

traces were integrated to obtain velocities and
displacements.
Figure 3 illustrate the Z component of the
velocity seismograms of the two events. We note
that the first motion is clear at all stations. The
earthquakes were located using data from the
strong-motion stations and, in the case of the 2001
event, from some of the stations of DSTN. For the
2001 event, we could reliably read first motions at
only three stations of DSTN. The 2004 earthquake
was located using accelerograms only. The crustal
structure of the Delhi region is poorly known.
Tests using different, reasonable crustal models
suggest that the epicentral location and the depth
of the 2001 event may be in error by about 4 km.
Due to larger number of local stations and a better
azimuthal coverage, the location of the 2004 event
is more accurate than that of the 2001 event. For
the 2004 event, no first motions could be reliably
read on the stations of DSTN. The locations of the
two earthquakes are shown in Fig. 2 and listed in
Table 3.
We note that neither of the two nodal planes
of the 2001 earthquake is constrained by first-
motion data. However, for the 2004 earthquake,
the NE trending steeply dipping nodal plane is
well constrained (Fig. 2). To determine the fo-
cal mechanisms of the two events, we performed
waveform inversion of the displacement traces
at NDI. The inversion assumes that the event

Table 3 Source parameters of two Delhi earthquakes analyzed in this study

Date Hours:minutes:seconds Lat (◦ N) Long (◦ E) Depth (km) M0 (N m) Mw Strike Dip Rake
2001/04/28 03:06:28.0 28.629 77.153 14.6 1.8 × 1014 3.4 65◦ 60◦ −21◦
1.0 × 1014 – – –
2004/03/18 07:52:33.2 28.627 77.226 7.9 1.1 × 1013 2.6 45◦ 85◦ −110◦
9.4 × 1012 – – –
The first and second estimates of M0 are from waveform modeling and S-wave spectrum, respectively.
Mw is the average value from the two estimates of M0 .
J Seismol

Fig. 4 Observed
(continuous curves) and
synthetic displacements
(dashed curves) at NDI
during 2001 and 2004
earthquakes. Synthetic
displacements correspond
to the focal mechanisms
and the seismic moments
obtained from the
inversion (see text)

may be approximated by a point-source shear
dislocation. Synthetic seismograms include near-
and intermediate-field contributions (Singh et al.
2000). The effect of free surface is approximately
taken into account by multiplying infinite-space
synthetics by two. This approximation is accept-
able if the epicentral distance, , is smaller than
the depth, h. No violation of first-motion data was
allowed in the inversion. Figure 4 shows the fit
between the observed and synthetic seismograms.
The focal mechanisms and the seismic moments
of the two earthquakes are listed in Table 3. Both
events have a normal-faulting mechanism with a
large strike-slip component. In both cases, the
strike of one of the nodal planes roughly agrees
with NE–SW orientation of faults and lineaments
mapped in the region (Figs. 1 and 2). Presum-
ably, this is the fault plane. We note that these
mechanisms are distinct from that of the Morad-
abad earthquake of 1966. The T axis of the 1966
earthquake was perpendicular to the Himalayan
arc. Molnar et al. (1973, 1977) interpreted the
1966 earthquake to be a consequence of stretching
of the upper part of the lithosphere as it thrusts
under the Himalayas. The two small Delhi events
may have resulted from local stress concentration
so that they may not reflect general stress regime
of the region (Tables 4 and 5).
3 Source spectra
The source displacement and acceleration spectra
• •
of the two earthquakes, M0 ( f ) and f 2 M0 ( f ),
were estimated from the analysis of the S-wave
recorded at hard sites (NDI for the 2001 event,
and NDI and CRRI for the 2004 event). The
method is described elsewhere (Singh et al. 1999);
here we give a brief description. The Fourier
acceleration spectral amplitude of the intense
part of the ground motion at a station may be
written as
•
A ( f, R) = C f 2 M0 ( f ) G (R) e−π f R/β Q( f ) (1)
where,
 
C = FPRθ ϕ (2π)2 4πρβ 3 . (2)

Table 4 PGA, PGV, and peak ground displacement (PGD) during 28 April 2001 (Mw3.4; h = 14.6 km) Delhi earthquake
Station Distance PGA, cm/s2 PGV, cm/s PGD, cm
R, km NS EW Z NS EW Z NS EW Z
CSIR 14.9 10.1 9.6 6.3 2.7e − 1 2.5e − 1 1.4e − 1 1.3e − 2 8.5e − 3 4.2e − 3
IHC 15.6 4.2 7.5 5.9 1.1e − 1 1.6e − 1 1.2e − 1 5.1e − 3 8.3e − 3 5.9e − 3
NDI 16.4 3.5 4.3 1.9 4.7e − 2 7.1e − 2 3.1e − 2 1.4e − 3 2.0e − 3 1.7e − 3
Accelerograms were bandpass-filtered between 0.5 and 40 Hz before measuring PGA. The filtered accelerograms were then
integrated to obtain velocity and displacement traces.
 J Seismol

Table 5 PGA, PGV, and peak ground displacement (PGD) during 18 March 2004 (Mw2.6; h = 7.9 km) Delhi earthquake
Station Distance PGA, cm/s2 PGV, cm/s PGD, cm
R, km NS EW Z NS EW Z NS EW Z
CSIR 8.1 4.9 6.9 4.0 6.9e − 2 6.9e − 2 4.2e − 2 1.8e − 3 1.7e − 3 1.2e − 3
CPWD 8.1 7.1 9.3 19.3 7.5e − 2 7.7e − 2 9.2e − 2 1.6e − 3 2.9e − 3 1.0e − 3
IHC 9.0 2.9 2.9 5.8 2.3e − 2 3.4e − 2 5.4e − 2 5.6e − 4 8.2e − 4 9.5e − 4
LDR 9.0 5.0 4.7 4.6 6.0e − 2 4.3e − 3 3.9e − 2 1.1e − 3 7.8e − 4 5.1e − 4
NPL 9.5 (3.5) (3.0) (5.3) (6.6e − 2) (3.8e − 2) (6.1e − 2) (1.6e − 3) (6.6e − 4) (8.0e − 4)
NDI 10.1 5.8 8.7 6.0 4.5e − 2 6.3e − 2 2.9e − 2 6.2e − 4 1.2e − 3 4.4e − 4
DVB 11.0 7.0 9.7 4.8 9.4e − 2 1.0e − 1 5.4e − 2 2.6e − 3 2.1e − 3 1.3e − 3
CRRI 12.4 6.2 7.8 6.7 5.4e − 2 6.9e − 2 4.8e − 2 5.9e − 4 9.2e − 4 5.4e − 4
INSD 13.2 9.0 7.8 4.0 7.9e − 2 5.8e − 2 3.2e − 2 1.1e − 3 1.0e − 3 4.8e − 4
Accelerograms were bandpassed between 1 and 40 Hz before measuring PGA. These traces were then integrated to obtain
velocity and displacement traces (see text). In the case of NPL, the accelerograms were bandpass-filtered twice between 1
and 20 Hz

•
In equations above, M0 ( f ) is the moment rate
•
spectrum so that M0 ( f ) → M0 as f →0, R =
hypocentral distance, Rθφ = average radiation pat-
tern (0.55), F = free surface amplification (2.0), P
takes into account the partitioning
 √ofenergy in the
two horizontal components 1/ 2 , β = shear-
wave velocity at the source (taken 3.5 and 3.3 km/s
for the 2001 and 2004 earthquakes, respectively),
ρ = density in the focal region (taken 2.9 and
2.8 g/cm3 for the 2001 and 2004 earthquakes),
and Q( f ) = quality factor, which includes both
anelastic absorption and scattering. The geomet-
rical spreading term, G(R), in Eq. 1 was taken as
1/R. Taking logarithms of Eq. 1 we obtain
   
log A ( f, R) =log C + log G (R)
•
2004 earthquakes, respectively. The correspond-
ing corner frequencies and stress drops are 5.4 and
15.6 Hz and 3.4 and 10 MPa. Our estimation of
the frequency, fmax , above which the acceleration
spectrum rapidly falls off at NDI is ∼35 Hz. This
estimation is based on recordings of four local
earthquakes. Thus, an ω2 -model would predict a
source acceleration spectrum at NDI that is flat
at frequencies between the corner frequency and
35 Hz. This is true for the spectrum of the 2004
earthquake (Fig. 6). The spectrum of the 2001
earthquake, however, shows a step at about 13 Hz
(Fig. 5). We attribute the step to deviation of the
source from the simple ω2 -model. We emphasize
that there is large uncertainty in the estimated
stress drops since they have been obtained from
one or two hard-site recordings only. Right frames

+ log f 2 M0 ( f ) −1.36 fR/β Q ( f ). in Figs. 5 and 6 illustrate source spectra retrieved

(3)
We used Q( f ) = 253 f 0.80 previously estimated
for the Himalayan-arc region (Singh et al. 2004).
We solved Eq. 3 in the least-squares sense to
•
hard ones.
obtain log f 2 M0 ( f ) . The source spectra of the
two events are shown in Figs. 5 and 6. We in-
terpret the hard-site spectra (left frames in the
figures) by an ω2 -source model and obtain an
estimation of the seismic moment (M0 ) and corner
frequency ( fc ). The stress drop (σ ) is computed
using the Brune model (Brune 1970). The low-
•
frequency level of M0 ( f ) at hard sites gives M0
of 1.0 × 1014 and 9.4 × 1012 N m for the 2001 and
from soft-site recordings and the spectra based on
ω2 -source model which fits the hard-site record-
ings. The deviation of the observed spectra from
the ω2 -spectra illustrates the average amplification
of S waves at the soft sites with respect to the
3.1 Site effect in Delhi during local earthquakes
In recent years, vigorous effort has been made to
study site effect in Delhi. These studies are based
on (a) earthquake recordings (Singh et al. 2002;
Nath et al. 2003), (b) analysis of microtremors
(e.g., Mukhopadhyay et al. 2002), (c) data on
J Seismol
Fig. 5 Source displacement (continuous curves) and accel-
•  •
eration spectra (dashed curves), M0 ( f ) and f 2 M0 ( f ) ,
of 28 April, 2001 earthquake. Median and ± one standard
deviation curves are shown. Data from NDI, a hard site
standard penetration test in drill holes (Iyengar
and Ghosh 2004), and (d) numerical modeling of
wave propagation (e.g., Parvez et al. 2006).
As mentioned earlier, Singh et al. (2002) used
recordings from the Chamoli earthquake of 28
March, 1999 (Mw6.5), located in the central
Himalayan arc, about 290 km from Delhi, to es-
timate site effect at three locations (CPCB, IHC,
and CSIR, Fig. 2) with respect to the hard site of
NDI. These results have been used for the vali-
dation of site effect estimated from microtremors
(Mukhopadhyay et al. 2002) and numerical mod-
eling (Parvez et al. 2006). Nath et al. (2003)
Fig. 6 Same as Fig. 7 but
for 18 March, 2004
earthquake. The left
frame, now, includes data
from hard sites of NDI
and CRRI; the spectra
can be fit by an ω2 -source
model with M0 = 9.4 ×
1012 N m and a corner
frequency of 15.6 Hz
(left) . The spectra are reasonably well fit by an ω2 -source

model with M0 = 1.0 × 1014 N m and a corner frequency of
5.4 Hz (smooth curves). This is not the case for the spectra
at soft sites (right) indicating local site effect at these
sites
estimated site effect at stations of Delhi Seismic
Telemetered Network (DSTN). We recall that
only three stations of this network fall in Delhi:
NDI, AYAN, and BHGR. Of these three sta-
tions, the latter two are located at the periphery
of Delhi. Site effects at AYAN and BHGR with
respect to NDI provide little information on what
to expect in the rest of Delhi. Thus, the necessity
to record earthquakes and to estimate site effect
at many more locations in Delhi can hardly be
overemphasized. Here, we estimate site amplifica-
tion using the recordings of the events of 2001 and
2004.

Standard spectral ratios (SSRs) with respect to
the hard NDI site are shown in Figs. 7, 8 and 9.
We note that the wave paths and the radiation
patterns from these local events to the stations
differ. Also, the stations are not in the free field.
Thus, the differences in the spectra of a given
event at different sites are not only due to local
site effects. However, as we show below, it seems
reasonable to assume that the superficial geology
is the major factor causing the difference.
Figure 7 shows SSRs at CSIR and IHC where
the Chamoli earthquake and both of the local
ones were recorded. The SSRs during the Chamoli
and the 2001 earthquakes are quite similar, except
for the EW component at IHC during the latter
event. For the 2004 earthquake, the SSR at CSIR
is similar to those for the Chamoli and 2001 earth-
quakes. However, the SSR at IHC for the 2004
earthquake is generally smaller than during the
Fig. 7 SSRs at CSIR and IHC with respect to NDI for
the 1999 Chamoli earthquake and the local earthquakes
of 2001 and 2004. SSRs at CSIR for the three earthquakes
J Seismol
other events, especially in the 1–3-Hz range. The
difference in the focal mechanism and the depth
may be responsible for the observed difference
in the SSRs at IHC for the two shallow earth-
quakes. The limited data, nevertheless, suggests
that SSRs computed from the recordings of far
sources may also provide a reasonably reliable
estimation of SSRs from close and intermediate-
distance sources. There are other cases where rel-
atively invariant SSRs, irrespective of hypocentral
distance, have been reported (see, e.g., Gutierrez
and Singh 1992).
Figure 8 (top) illustrates SSRs during the 2004
earthquake at IHC and LDR sites which are sepa-
rated by ∼500 m. LDR may be considered a free-
field site. IHC, on the other hand, is located in the
basement of an eight-storey building (Table 2).
The SSRs at LDR is somewhat greater than at
IHC. This can also be seen in the SSRs at LDR
are similar. The SSRs are similar for the Chamoli and 2001
earthquakes at IHC but less so for the 2004 earthquake
J Seismol
Fig. 8 Standard spectral ratios (SSRs) at LDR and IHC
with respect to NDI for the 18 March 2004 earthquake
(top). LDR and IHC sites are 500 m apart. IHC station is
located in the basement of an eight-storey building while
with respect to IHC (Fig. 10, bottom). The dif-
ference in the SSRs may be due to variable site
effect and/or possible soil–building interaction at
IHC. The difference, however, is not large and, to
a first order, it seems justified to assume that the
soil–building interaction at IHC is small. We note
that all other stations of DSMN are situated on
the ground floor or basement of shorter buildings
(≤five storeys tall, Table 2). Henceforth, we shall
assume that soil–building interaction is small at all
locations.
Figure 9 illustrates SSRs at five remaining
sites for the 2004 earthquake and at CPCB for
the Chamoli earthquake (modified from Singh
et al. 2002). There are some features worth noting
in this figure: (1) the SSRs of the Z components
are similar to those for the two horizontal com-
LDR is in the free field. Similarity of the SSRs suggest that
soil–building interaction at IHC is small and the site effects
at IHC and LDR are roughly equal. SSRs at LDR with
respect to IHC (bottom)
ponents. This is contrary to the assumption that
the vertical components are free of site effect.
This assumption forms the basis for the estimation
of site effect using horizontal to vertical spectral
ratio at the same station, the so called Nakamura
method; (2) SSRs at the hard sites of CRRI and
NPL deviate significantly from one, reflecting the
effect of focal mechanism and/or near-surface ge-
ology; (3) generally, SSRs are much less than one
at frequencies greater than about 20 Hz (see also
Figs. 7 and 8). This may be attributed to greater
attenuation in the near-surface material at soft
sites than at NDI.
Iyengar and Ghosh (2004) estimated amplifi-
cation at 17 drill-hole sites in Delhi using results
of standard penetration test (SST). These authors
report an amplification of 2 to 3 at the natural

Fig. 9 SSRs at CPWD, CRRI, INSD, DVB (earlier CPCB) and NPL for the 2004 earthquake, and at CPCB during the
Chamoli earthquake. CRRI and NPL are hard sites
frequency of the sites, which varies between 0.5
and 6.0 Hz. SSRs in Figs. 7, 8 and 9, however,
show an amplification of about 10 at soft sites. This
difference of a factor of three to five emphasizes
the need for earthquake recordings at some of the
bore-hole sites and comparison of SSRs with the
amplification inferred from the SST data.
3.2 Ground motion in Delhi from a local Mw5.0
earthquake
Table 1 suggests that earthquakes of magnitude
6.5 may occur in Delhi. This, of course, does not
mean that the seismic hazard in Delhi at some
reasonable return period will be dominated by
such an extreme event. A probabilistic seismic
hazard analysis (PSHA) of Delhi has been carried
out by Iyengar and Ghosh (2004). In the study,
the earthquakes which occurred during the period
J Seismol
1720–2001 within a radius of 300 km of the city
(278 events) were assigned to 13 regional faults
and seven faults in the Himalayan arc. One of the
faults (7 km long), called the Delhi fault, passes
through a city. The study associated each of the
278 epicenters to the nearest fault. The authors
conclude that peak ground acceleration (PGA)
in Delhi with 2% probability of exceedance in
50 years (about 0.2 g) is dominated by a NE–SW
trending fault. The closest distance of this fault
to the city is about 30 km. The hazard, locally,
peaks above the Delhi fault. This PSHA study,
while rigorous, suffers from a poor data base. The
recent study by Shukla et al. (2007) shows two
broad trends in seismicity oriented in NNE–SSW
and NW–SE directions. The seismicity, however,
is too diffused to be assigned to specific faults.
As mentioned earlier, in part, this must be due
to error in location of the events as the seismic
J Seismol
Fig. 10 Synthesized PGA and PGV at different sites in
Delhi as function Mw. Recordings of the 18 March, 2004
earthquake have been used as empirical Green’s functions.
network in the region remains sparse. The scatter
in the epicenters may also be due to existence of
broad zones of deformation rather than simple
planar faults. Furthermore, the regional seismic-
ity rate used in the study of Iyengar and Ghosh
(2004) is a factor of ∼10 less than that reported
by Shukla et al. (2007). Clearly, our knowledge
of the seismicity of the region and its relation to
active faults is poor. Thus, at present, we do not
know which earthquake would dominate the seis-
mic hazard in Delhi at a prescribed return period.
Circle NS, dot EW, cross Z . Dashed lines show 100-gal and
10-cm/s level in PGA and PGV plots, respectively
It may, nevertheless, be of interest to study ground
motion in Delhi from a local Mw5.0 earthquake.
If we use Gutenberg–Richter’s relation reported
in Shukla et al. (2007) for the region and assume
homogeneous seismicity, then a M ≥ 5.0 event
will have a recurrence period of about 130 years
in Delhi (area ∼1,500 km2 ).
We synthesize ground motions in the city from
a scenario Mw5.0 earthquake using empirical
Green’s function (EGF) technique. The record-
ings of the 2001 and 2004 events provide adequate

EGFs to synthesize ground motion from the
scenario earthquake. We prefer to use the record-
ings of the 2004 event as the EGFs for two rea-
sons. First, this earthquake was more extensively
recorded than the 2001 event. Second, it provides
a more conservative estimate of the expected
ground motion because of its larger stress drop
than the 2001 event (10 MPa versus 3.4 MPa).
For synthesis of the ground motions, we use a
random summation scheme of EGF proposed by
Ordaz et al. (1995). The method assumes that far-
field and point-source approximations are valid.
The summation scheme obeys the ω2 -source scal-
ing law at all frequencies and produces realistic
time histories. The method requires specification
of only the seismic moments and the stress drops
of the EGF and the target event. We take stress
Fig. 11 Recorded
accelerograms (NS
component) during the
2004 earthquake and
samples of synthesized
accelerograms for a
scenario, local Mw5.0
earthquake. Note that the
2004 traces have been
multiplied by 10
J Seismol
drop of 10 MPa for both the target and the EGF
event. We use bandpass-filtered accelerograms
(1–40 Hz) and the velocity traces obtained by their
direct integration.
Figure 10 shows the expected PGA and peak
ground velocity (PGV) as a function of Mw.
We note that an Mw5.0 earthquake in Delhi
(h ∼8 km), may give rise to PGA of ∼200 to
450 cm/s2 in the epicentral region, the smaller
values occurring at hard sites. The corresponding
estimate of PGV is ∼6 to 15 cm/s. Figure 11
shows the EGFs and synthesized accelerograms
(NS component) from one of the simulations.
Strictly speaking, the results of Figs. 10 and
11 would be valid if the larger, postulated earth-
quakes were to recur at the same focus as the 2004
event. The results may, however, be reasonable
J Seismol
Fig. 12 Horizontal Sa
(5% damping)
corresponding to Zone IV
of the current Indian
seismic zoning map
[IS1893 (Part 1): 2002],
and predicted Sa in Delhi
for postulated, local
Mw5.0 earthquake
(continuous curves). Also
shown are Sa from
postulated Mw = 7.5, 8.0,
and 8.5 earthquakes in
the Himalayan arc
(dashed curves). Left hard
site, right soft site
in the epicentral region of an Mw5.0 earthquake
(with stress drop of ∼10 MPa) located elsewhere
below Delhi. We note, however, that a scenario
earthquake of a larger magnitude will require
other simulation techniques since point-source
and far-field approximations will not be valid.
4 Response spectra in Delhi
The current Indian seismic zoning map [IS1893
(Part 1): 2002IS1893 (2002)] defines four zones,
from II to V. Zone V is exposed to most severe
seismic hazard. Delhi falls in zone IV. In Fig. 12
the horizontal response spectra, Sa, 5% damping,
for zone IV are compared with those from the
scenario, local Mw5.0 earthquake. Estimated Sa
at sites NDI and CRRI are grouped together and
are compared with Sa for rocky or hard-soil site
in zone IV (left frame). Sa of all other Delhi sites
are compared with the corresponding Sa for soft-
soil site in zone IV (right frame). The figure also
gives Sa for postulated Mw = 7.5, 8.0, and 8.5
earthquakes in the Himalayan arc estimated at
NDI (left frame) and CPCB (which was located
near the present site of DVB; right frame) taken
from Singh et al. (2002). With respect to the pos-
tulated local and Himalayan-arc earthquakes, the
rocky or hard-soil site, zone IV response spectra
is conservative (left frame). The soft-site, zone IV
response spectra, on the other hand, is exceeded
at all soft sites for the postulated local earthquake
and at CPCB (and, presumably, at other trans-
Yamuna sites) for a postulated Mw8.5 earthquake
in the Himalayan arc.
5 Conclusions
Although there is general awareness of seismic
hazard faced by Delhi from local earthquakes, our
knowledge of their source characteristics (includ-
ing depth and focal mechanism), the site ampli-
fication in the near-source region, and expected
ground motion in the epicentral region during
future, moderate (Mw∼5) earthquakes is very
poor. In this context, our analysis of the two local
earthquakes of 2001 (Mw3.4) and 2004 (Mw2.6)
provides valuable new information.
The earthquakes were located at depths of
15 km and 8 km, respectively. They had a normal-
faulting focal mechanism with significant strike-
slip component; one of the nodal planes had a
NE–SW trend which coincides with faults and
lineaments mapped in the region.
Several of the strong-motion stations, whose
data form the basis of this study, are located in the
basement of buildings. Thus, the recordings are
likely to be contaminated by soil–building inter-
action. We have assumed that this contamination
is small. Some support for this assumption comes
from the analysis of the 2004 event which was re-
corded at IHC, a station located in the basement
of an eight-storey building (the highest in

Table 2), and at LDR, a free-field station located
∼500 m from IHC. Based on this assumption, we
have computed standard spectral ratios (SSRs)
with respect to the hard site of NDI during the
two local earthquakes. The limited data suggests
that, to a first order, the SSRs from far-distance
sources may be considered similar to those from
the close-distance sources. A comparison of SSRs
with amplification inferred from standard pene-
tration test at horehole sites reveals a factor of
three to five difference. A careful validation of the
amplification estimated for SST data is warranted
by recording earthquakes at some of the same
sites.
Our synthesis of ground motion in the epicen-
tral region of a postulated Mw5.0 earthquake in
Delhi (depth∼8 km) predicts PGA and PGV of
∼200 to 450 cm/s2 and ∼6 to 15 cm/s, respectively,
the smaller values occurring at hard sites. The
recommended response spectra, Sa, 5% damping,
for zone IV of the Indian seismic zoning map
(IS1893 2002), which is valid for Delhi, is conser-
vative for rocky or hard-soil sites with respect to
the Mw5.0 local earthquake. It also seems true
for scenario Mw ≤ 8.5 earthquakes in the central
Himalayan arc. However, the recommended Sa
for zone IV is exceeded in Delhi at all soft sites
for the postulated local earthquake and at CPCB
(and, presumably, at other trans-Yamuna sites
which are underlain by recent fluvial deposits) for
a postulated Mw8.5 earthquake in Himalayan arc.
The conclusions above are based on limited
data and, hence, are necessarily preliminary. For
example, the choice of stress drop of 10 MPa,
which critically affects the PGA and PGV from
the scenario, local earthquake, is poorly con-
trolled by data. More seismic stations and re-
cordings in Delhi are urgently needed to reach
definitive conclusions.
Acknowledgements We are grateful to Central Building
Research Institute (CBRI), Roorkee and India Meteoro-
logical Department for providing us with recordings of the
local Delhi earthquakes. We thank W. K. Mohanty who
generously provided us with some figures. Comments from
J Seismol
two anonymous reviewers were useful in improving the
manuscript. Research was partially supported by DGAPA,
UNAM Project IN110207.
References
Brune JN (1970) Tectonic stress and the spectra of seis-
mic shear waves from earthquakes. J Geophys Res
75:4997–5009
CBRI Report (1998) Strong motion seismic instrumenta-
tion in and around Delhi region, CBRI Report No. G
(S) 012, Roorkee
Gutierrez C, Singh SK (1992) A site effect study in
Acapulco, Guerrero, Mexico: comparison of results
from strong motion and microtremor data. Bull Seism
Soc Am 82:642–659
IS1893 (Part 1) (2002) Indian standard criteria for earth-
quake resistant design of structures, part 1, general
provisions and buildings (Fifth Revision), Bureau of
Indian Standards, New Delhi 110002, 42pp
Iyengar RN (2000) Seismic status of Delhi megacity. Curr
Sci 78:568–574
Iyengar RN, Ghosh S (2004) Microzonation of earthquake
hazard in greater Delhi area. Curr Sci 87:1193–1202
Khattri KN (1999) An evaluation of seismic hazard and risk
in northern India. Himalayan Geology 20:1–46
Mohanty WK, Walling MY, Nath SK, Pal I (2007) First
order seismic zonation of Delhi, India using geograph-
ical information system (GIS). Nat Hazard 40:245–260
Molnar P, Fitch TJ, Wu FT (1973) Fault plane solutions
of shallow earthquakes and contemporary tectonics in
Asia. Earth Planet Sci Lett 16:101–112
Molnar P, Chen WP, Fitch TJ, Tapponier P, Warsi WEK,
Wu FT (1977) Structure and tectonics of Himalayas:
a brief summary of relevant geophysical observations,
In: Himalaya, Sciences de la Terre, Editions du Centre
National de la recherché Scientific, Paris, pp 269–294
Mukhopadhyay S, Pandey Y, Dharmaraju R, Chauhan
PKS, Singh P, Dev A (2002) Seismic microzonation
of Delhi for ground-shaking site effects. Curr Sc 87:
877–881
Nath SK, Sengupta P, Srivastav SK, Bhattacharya SN,
Dattatrayam RS, Prakash R, Gupta HV (2003) Esti-
mation of S-wave site response in and around Delhi
region from weak motion data. Proc Indian Acad Sci
(Earth Plant Sci) 112:441–463
Ordaz M, Arboleda J, Singh SK (1995) A scheme of
random summation of an empirical Green’s function
to estimate ground motions from future large earth-
quakes. Bull Seism Soc Am 85:1635–1647
Parvez IA, Panza GF, Gusev AA, Vaccari F (2002) Strong-
motion amplitudes in the Himalayas and a pilot study
J Seismol
for the deterministic first-order microzonation in a
part of Delhi city. Curr Sci 82:158–166
Parvez I, Vaccari F, Panza GF (2004) Site-specific mi-
crozonation study in Delhi metropolitan city by 2-d
modeling of SH and P-SV waves. Pure Appl Geophys
161:1165–1185
Parvez IA, Vaccari F, Panza GF (2006) Influence of source
distance on site-effect in Delhi city. Curr Sci 91:
827–835
Sharma ML, Wason HR, Dimri R (2003) Seismic zonation
of the Delhi region for bedrock ground motion. Pure
Appl Geophys 160:2381–2398
Shukla AK, Prakash R, Singh RK, Mishra PS,
Bhatnagar AK (2007) Seismotectonics implications
of Delhi region through fault plane solutions of some
recent earthquakes. Curr Sci 93:1848–1853
Singh SK, Ordaz M, Dattatrayam RS, Gupta HK (1999)
A spectral analysis of the May 21, 1997, Jabalpur,
India earthquake (Mw = 5.8) and estimation of ground
motion from future earthquakes in the Indian shield
region. Bull Seism Soc Am 89:1620–1630
Singh SK, Ordaz M, Pacheco JF, Courboulex F (2000)
A simple source inversion scheme for displacement
seismograms recorded at short distances. J Seismol 4:
267–284
Singh SK, Mohanty WK, Bansal BK, Roonwal GS (2002)
Ground motion in Delhi from future large/great earth-
quakes in the central seismic gaps of the Himalayan
arc. Bull Seism Soc Am 92:555–569
Singh SK, Garcia D, Pacheco JF, Valenzuela R, Bansal BK,
Dattatrayam RS (2004) Q of the Indian shield. Bull
Seism Soc Am 94:1564–1570
Verma RK, Roonwal GS, Kamble VP, Mohanty WK,
Datta U, Gupta Y, Chatterjee D, Kumar N, Chauhan
PKS (1995) Seismicity of Delhi and the surrounding
region. J Himalayan Geology 6:75–82