Probabilistic seismic hazards assessments of Sabah ...

Journal of Geophysics and Engineering

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Probabilistic seismic hazards assessments of Sabah, east Malaysia: accounting for local earthquake activity near Ranau To cite this article before publication: Amin Esmail Khalil et al 2017 J. Geophys. Eng. in press https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-2140/aa8d51

Manuscript version: Accepted Manuscript Accepted Manuscript is “the version of the article accepted for publication including all changes made as a result of the peer review process, and which may also include the addition to the article by IOP Publishing of a header, an article ID, a cover sheet and/or an ‘Accepted Manuscript’ watermark, but excluding any other editing, typesetting or other changes made by IOP Publishing and/or its licensors” This Accepted Manuscript is © 2017 Sinopec Geophysical Research Institute.

During the embargo period (the 12 month period from the publication of the Version of Record of this article), the Accepted Manuscript is fully protected by copyright and cannot be reused or reposted elsewhere. As the Version of Record of this article is going to be / has been published on a subscription basis, this Accepted Manuscript is available for reuse under a CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 licence after the 12 month embargo period. After the embargo period, everyone is permitted to use copy and redistribute this article for non-commercial purposes only, provided that they adhere to all the terms of the licence https://creativecommons.org/licences/by-nc-nd/3.0 Although reasonable endeavours have been taken to obtain all necessary permissions from third parties to include their copyrighted content within this article, their full citation and copyright line may not be present in this Accepted Manuscript version. Before using any content from this article, please refer to the Version of Record on IOPscience once published for full citation and copyright details, as permissions will likely be required. All third party content is fully copyright protected, unless specifically stated otherwise in the figure caption in the Version of Record. View the article online for updates and enhancements.

This content was downloaded from IP address 202.170.60.244 on 27/09/2017 at 06:53

Page 1 of 29

pt

1

Probabilistic Seismic Hazards Assessments of Sabah, east Malaysia:

3

Accounting for local earthquake activity near Ranau

4

By

5

Amin E. Khalil1,2, Ismail A. Abir1, Hesham E. Abdel Hafiez3, Hanteh Ginsos3 and Sohail Khan4

6

1

7

2

8

3

us cri

2

School of Physics, Univesiti Sains Malaysia, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia, 11800.

Geology Department, Faculty of Science, Helwan University, Helwan, Cairo, Egypt, 11795 National Research Institute of Astronomy and Geophysics, Helwan, Cairo, Egypt, 11421

9

Correspondent Author: Amin E. Khalil email: [email protected]

11

Abstract

an

10

Sabah state in eastern Malaysia, unlike most of the other Malaysian states, is

13

characterized by a common seismological activity; generally a moderate magnitude

14

earthquake is experienced at a roughly 20 years’ interval originating mainly from two

15

major sources, either local source (e.g. Ranau and Lahad Dato) or regional source (e.g.

16

Kalimantan and South Philippines subductions). The seismicity map of Sabah shows

17

the presence of two zones of distinctive seismicity, where these zones are near Ranau

18

(near Kota Kinabalo) and Lahad Dato to the southwest of Sabah. The seismicity record

19

of Ranau starts in 1991, according to the international seismicity bulletins (e.g. USGS

20

and International Seismological Center ISC), and this short record is not sufficient for

21

seismic source characterization. Fortunately, active Quaternary fault systems are

22

delineated in the area. Henceforth, seismicity of the area is thus determined as line

23

sources referring to these faults. Two main fault systems are believed to be the source

24

of such activities; namely, the Mensaban fault zone (MFZ) and the Crocker fault zone

25

(CFZ) in addition to some other faults in their vicinity. Seismic hazard assessments

26

became a very important and needed study for the extensive developing projects in this

27

state especially with the presence of earthquake activities. Probabilistic seismic hazard

28

assessments are adopted for the present work since it can provide the probability of

29

various ground motion levels during expected future large earthquakes. The output

30

results are presented in terms of spectral acceleration curves and uniform hazard

ce

pte

dM

12

Ac

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - JGE-101511.R1


curves for periods of 500, 1000 and 2500 years. Since this is the first time that a

32

complete hazard study has been done for the area, the output will be a base and

33

standard for any future strategic plans in the area.

35

us cri

34

pt

31

Keywords: Sabah seismicity, probabilistic seismic hazards, Ranau.

36

Introduction

38

For regions with documented seismic activities, seismic hazard assessments are an important

39

task for the preparedness and mitigation of their effects. For a developing country like Malaysia,

40

such importance is even more vital to ensure the sustainability of the developing projects both

41

for industries and urbanization purposes. Sabah is currently witnessing a considerable number of

42

development projects due to Malaysia’s government national agenda to transform the country

43

into a high-income nation by the year 2020 (SEDIA, 2015). The Economic Transformation

44

Programme by the government separates Sabah into 6 strategic development areas with each area

45

focusing on a particular aspect of the economy, such as oil & gas, tourism (northwest Sabah) and

46

agriculture (SEDIA, 2015). Furthermore, due to the expected increase in the demand for energy,

47

a coal power plant was proposed to be built in Lahad Datu, Sabah by a local company (Koh and

48

Lim, 2010). This and many more development projects motivated the present study as to

49

determine those expected ground motion levels during future large earthquakes.

50

The probabilistic seismic hazards assessments approach (PSHA) is adopted in the

51

present study, which gives the probability of ground motion levels for various magnitude

52

earthquakes.

53

researchers in various localities all over the globe (e.g. Sokolov et al. (2004); Faenza et

54

al. (2007); Gupta (2007); Primer (2008); El-Hussain et al. (2012); Liu et al. (2013);

55

Ordaz et al. (2014); Zahran et al. (2015); Ezzelarab et al. (2016); Liu et al. (2016)). The

56

seismic hazard is calculated based on the procedure that was introduced by Cornell

pte

dM

an

37

Henceforth, PSHA is receiving an increasing interest by many

ce

Ac

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 2 of 29

57

(1968) and modified by McGuire (1978) and Bender and Perkins (1987).

The

58

probabilistic seismic hazard assessment is calculated using variable data (geological,

Page 3 of 29

seismological and structural) to construct a model of earthquake ground motion at the

60

site of interest. This technique follows four steps; firstly, a complete analysis of the

61

historical and recent seismicity in the area was done, followed by determining and

62

identifying the seismotectonic source model for the area. Secondly, recurrence

63

parameters for seismicity, including the expected maximum earthquake, were estimated

64

for each determined seismic source. Finally, a predictive ground motion is used to

65

describe the expected ground motion as a function of different magnitudes and

66

distances.

67

The region of interest, i.e. Sabah state, is the most seismically active region in Malaysia.

68

Several moderate earthquakes with magnitudes around 6 on the Richter scale shocked

69

the state in the past. These earthquakes caused moderate damage to properties. For

70

Ranau area, damage due to earthquakes is more dangerous. The only life casualties

71

reported are caused by the June 5th, 2015 earthquake with a moment magnitude

72

Mw=6.0. Another event in Ranau area, which took place in 1991, also damaged some

73

buildings. The events near Lahad Dato, on the other hand, are reported to produce

74

moderate damage with no reported life casualties. It is evident that the events near

75

Ranau are more dangerous compared to those near Lahad Dato. The reason may be

76

due to its proximity to Kota Kinabalo which comprises the dense population. Moreover,

77

the only life casualties reported affected the climbers at mount Kinabalo. According to

78

Tjia (2007) and the Meteorological Department of Malaysia (GMDM, 2006), the

79

earthquakes near Ranau are triggered due to the movement of Quaternary active faults

80

in the area. Kundasang-Ranau is located near the intersection of regional fault zones.

81

These faults are namely Crocker fault zone (CFZ) and Mensaban fault zone (MFZ). The

82

widespread mass movements of the Kundasang area can baaine partially attributed to

83

such active movements and intersection. Despite such remarkable fault movements, the

84

seismicity record at the area is short. Previous work conducted in the area (e.g. Leyu et

85

al. (1985); Che Abas (2001); Harith et al. (2014)), used the deterministic seismic

86

hazards approach while considering only the regional sources. Deterministic seismic

87

hazard approach depends on the so-called characteristic earthquake which can be

88

defined as the maximum expected earthquake affecting the site. Hence, the effects of

89

other earthquakes are not considered, which may mask important effects. Furthermore,

ce

pte

dM

an

us cri

pt

59

Ac

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60



their work didn’t consider the local seismicity near Ranau which may have dangerous

91

effects on neighboring sites like Kota Kinabalo.

92

Seismotectonic Setting

93

In general, the region of northern Borneo has a moderate rate of earthquakes

94

influenced by the local tectonics with the biggest reported earthquake occurred in 1923

95

with a magnitude of 6.9 ((Rangin et al. 1999); (Engdahl and Villasenor 2002); (Simons

96

et al. 2007); (Mark Petersen et al. 2007)). The local tectonics of Sabah is controlled

97

mainly by the rifting episodes of the South China Sea generating NE-SW structures and

98

the opening of the Sulu Sea basin generating NW-SE structures (e.g. (Tan and Lamy

99

1990); (Tongkul 1993)). Moreover, Sabah has experienced episodes of compression

100

since Cretaceous, which can be observed from the existence of folds and thrust faults,

101

however, an episode of extension occurred during the late early Miocene which

102

culminates in NE-SW trending normal faults (Tongkul 1993).

103

Such a complex deformation history controlled mainly by the tectonic evolution of the

104

surrounding deep basins which are the south China Sea basin to the north, the Sulu

105

Sea basin to the northeast and the Celebes Sea basin to the southeast (Hall et al,

106

2008). Consequently, three major episodes of compression along the northwestern

107

boundary of Sabah occurred during the Late Eocene, Early Miocene and Late Miocene

108

periods (Balaguru and Hall, 2008). This is mainly due to the subduction of the south

109

China Sea beneath Borneo resulting in thrust faults and folds. The presence of the

110

Crocker-Rajang mountain belt is a clear indication of the compressional environment

111

along the northwest of Sabah ((Franke et al. 2008)). Moreover, the last tectonic event

112

that is probably still ongoing is the formations of sinistral transpressional faulting in the

113

southeast of Sabah, which is believed to be the result of the propagation of deformation

114

from Sulawesi (Balaguru & Hall, 2008). This ongoing transpressional deformation is

115

observed to affect the local seismicity of Sabah.

116

Furthermore, the seismotectonic studies conducted by a number of researchers (e.g.

ce

pte

dM

an

us cri

pt

90

Ac

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 4 of 29

117

(Leyu et al. 1985); (Che Abas 2001); (Wah 2011)) shows that the state of Sabah exhibit

118

clear rate of crustal deformation. Sabah is believed to owe its moderate seismicity to the

Page 5 of 29

active Mensaban and Lobou-Lobou fault zones which have brought about earthquakes

120

that caused light damages to infrastructure

121

According to (Tjia 2007), the Crocker zone is extending to about 170 Km in length

122

comprising the Quaternary structural valleys of Tenom, Keningau, and Tambunan.

123

These valleys are trending N-S to N 20o E. The sense of motion for these family of

124

faults is Normal dip-slip with Sinistral Strike slip component. Surface deformations of

125

tarred roads clearly claim that these faults are still active. An important question arises

126

here as for whether these activities are either seismic or Aseismic (creep). Seismic

127

movements are transient and sudden which characterizes areas of brittle rocks. Creep,

128

on the other hand, ductile rocks regions. In ductile zones, the accumulated strains are

129

dissipated in the form of slow movements. The recorded earthquake activities there

130

(Figure 1) claims these faults may have both seismic movements and creep.

131

In addition to Ranau, two other local activity can be observed from the local seismicity

132

map of Sabah (figure 2).

133

Semporna in the southeast. The seismicity at Semporna may be related to the

134

Kalimantan subduction zone and thus will be treated as such.

135

Regional seismicity is encountered also at the subduction zones either in the south

136

Philippines Sea or in the east Indonesia at Kalimantan. In addition to these, other

137

seismic activities are also present but they are excluded because of the large distances

138

separating them from the investigated area.

139

The tectonics of south Philippines Sea has been studied by several researchers (e.g.

140

(Acharya 1979); (Hori 2006); (Galgana et al. 2007); (Ramos and Tsutsumi 2010); (Lin

141

and Lo 2013)). The distance between the south Philippine Sea seismicity and the state

142

of Sabah is around 600 Km indicating that only large earthquakes of magnitudes greater

143

than 7 can produce some damage specifically on the eastern parts (Figure 3). The

144

tectonic activities of the south Philippine Sea are concentrated along the Manilla trench,

145

the Philippine trench, and the Philippine fault system. Acharya (1979) indicated that the

an

us cri

pt

119

pte

dM

These two zones are theSundakan in the northeast and

ce

Ac

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


146

west Philippine basin has moderate to high seismicity with magnitudes up to 7.9. From

147

historical data, we cannot identify damage in Sabah related to the activity in the

148

southwestern Philippine region.

us cri an

149

dM

Figure 1: Faults and earthquake epicenters around Ranau northwest Sabah.

ce

pte

150

Ac

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 6 of 29

pt


151 152

Figure 2: Local seismicity of Sabah.

Page 7 of 29

Seismicity from south Indonesia is higher due to the subduction of the Indian and

154

Australian plates beneath the Sunda plate (e.g. (Mark Petersen et al. 2007); (Katili

155

1989)). High seismicity is observed along the Sunda subduction, where shortening and

156

strain are accommodated by thrust faults along the collision boundary. However, such

157

activities are so far from the study region that its effect is neglected. Henceforth, south

158

Indonesia sources will not be considered the present seismic hazards assessments.

159

Probabilistic Seismic Hazard

160

The technique was first introduced to the community by (Cornell 1968), who defined the

161

technique as the plot of the relationship between ground motion levels (e.g. intensity,

162

peak ground velocity, and peak ground acceleration) with their average return periods.

163

The concept has been developed over the years by many researchers (e.g. McGuire

164

and Shedlock 1981; Kijko and A. 1992; Kijko and Graham 1999; McGuire R 2001;

165

Mäntyniemi, Tsapanos, and Kijko 2004; McGuire 2008; Gupta 2013; Wong 2013;

166

Pappin et al. 2015).

167

According to the abovementioned definition, earthquake source zones in the

168

neighborhood of the inverstigated site must be defined. The definition involves the

169

determination of the spatial extention, the frequency of earthquakes with a certain size

170

(e.g magnitudes or seismic moments) and their expected return periods. The spatial

171

extention is delineated via numerous information such as the tectonic regeme, focal

172

mechanism, distribution of earthquake foci, Ietc. Within each earthquake source, the

173

seismic activity is assumed to be homogeneous. The frequency of earthquakes and

174

their return period, on the other hand, is derived from the magnitude frequency relation

175

of (Gutenberg and Richter 1944):

us cri

an

dM

pte

ce

176

pt

153

log = −

(1)

177

where n is the number of earthquakes, M is their magnitude range, ‘a’ is a measure of

178

seismicity (rarthquake rate) and ‘b’ is constant related to the tectonic setting. The later

179

has a value ranging generally between 0.8 and 1.2. However, since the original relation

180

doesn’t exhibit a maximum earthquake magnitude, a doubly truncated equation was

Ac

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60



proposed by (Cornell and Vanmarcke 1969). From the frequency-magnitude relation,

182

the return period of each magnitude level can be determined. Such parameter is

183

important for the determination of its probability.

184

After

185

activity

186

must

be

calculated.

187

equations

(GMPE).

188

relating the ground motion at the site to the magnitude and distance of

189

the

190

mathematically in the form (simplified after (Akkar and Bommer 2007):

determination

rates,

the

levels

the

of

their

This

is

ground

done

These

source.

earthquzke

source

zones

and

their

motion

using

the

equations

Such

at

the

ground

are

site

of

motion

prediction

empirically

relation

can

be

interest

generated

represented

an

earthquake

of

us cri

the

pt

181

log =

+ + + + log + + 2 Where A is ground motion parameter, M is the size of the earthquake (i.e magnitude or

192

moment), R is the distance between the earthquake source and the site, S is the soil

193

factor and F is the fault type factor. The parameters bi, where i=1 to 7, is the model

194

parameters to be determined by data fitting. GMPE can also be estimated at certain

195

spectral frequencies of the ground motion to determine the spectra of ground motion at

196

the site. The final stage after the calculations of the ground motion levels from different

197

sources and their respective return periods is to build the probability model that

198

determines the overall probability of exceedance of each level.

199

Earthquake sources:

200

Local

201

Malaysian

202

main

203

Semporna.

204

Kota Kinabalo, the capital city of the state. The Ranau activity is most

205

likely

pte

dM

191

seismicity

206 207

of

territories.

ce

locations.

an

Ac

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 8 of 29

The

Sabah

Moderate

These

first

intraplate

is

is

distinctive

from

earthquakes

locations

are

the

dangerous

more

earthquake

activity

are

near

that

other

experienced Ranau,

as

it’s

resulted

along local quaternary faults (Tjia (2007) and Wah (2011)).

parts

of at

the three

Sandakan, located

from

close

and to

movements

us cri an dM

208

Figure 3: Regional seismicity with possible impacts on Sabah.

210

Seismological data of Ranau shows that the earliest earthquake in this region started by

211

the early 1990’s. From the temporal point of view, three clusters can be identified. The

212

first took place on May 26th, 1991 represented by four events with magnitudes ranging

213

from 4.6 to 5.4. Another event took place in 1995 with magnitude mb of 4.1. Afterwards,

214

the area was quite until 2015 when a large earthquake with magnitude Mw=6.0 shocked

215

the region. The lack of earthquake data before 1991 is odd and may be interpreted as

216

being related to the distribution of seismological stations in the region. Thus, local

217

seismicity prior 1991 maybe either not detected or misallocated. Accordingly, the

218

earthquake data is clearly not sufficient for determining the basic parameters for such

219

seismic source characterization. Alternatively, Wells and Coppersmith (1994) proposed

220

an alternative source description based on the data driven from active faults.

ce

pte

209

Ac

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


pt

Page 9 of 29

221

Fortunately, the quaternary active faults in the area were investigated by Tjia (2007).

222

From Figure 1 above, the distribution of recorded seismicity and quaternary faults in the


region are presented. The seismicity of this area will be related to the lengths of the

224

active faults there.

225

A similar situation prevails in Sandakan region. Seismicity there is scarce and too few

226

for the fitting of the frequency magnitude relation. Henceforth, it is not possible to

227

determine the recurrence of seismic activity there. Unlike Ranau, no information about

228

active faulting is available. This makes the delineation of required seismic source

229

parameters an uneasy task. Hence, the activity there is omitted for the present study.

230

Activity at Semporna region, on the other hand, is considered as belonging to

231

Kalimantan subduction zone of east Indonesia. Semporna is closely located near

232

Kalimatan with seismicity covering the entire region without identifiable borders.

233

Henceforth, it will be dealt with as part of regional seismicity rather than local one.

234

From the seismotectonic discussion in the previous section, it is identified that we have

235

two potential regional sources that may cause the considerable shaking level to Sabah.

236

These sources are the South Philippines and Kalimantan subduction zone. The

237

identification of seismic sources adopted in the present work was taken from the work of

238

(Irsyam et al. 2010). The needed parameters for the seismic hazards calculations is

239

shown in figure 4. Sources considered are those at distances less than 600 km that are

240

expected to have considerable effects on Sabah.

241

Attenuation model

242

There are several GMPE that can be can be categorized in terms of their tectonic

243

environment (i.e. subduction zone and shallow crustal earthquakes). Henceforth. the

244

selection of an appropriate attenuation relationship is one of the critical factors in PSHA.

245

As the tectonic environments near Sabah comprise both abovementioned types,

246

different forms of GMPE will be used. For subduction zone earthquakes, several

247

attenuation relationships are derived such as (Crouse 1991), (Youngs et al. 1997),

248

(Atkinson and Boore 1997), (Petersen et al. 2004), whereas for shallow crustal

249

earthquakes, attenuation relationships developed by (Campbell 1997); (Campbell

250 251

ce

pte

dM

an

us cri

pt

223

Ac

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 10 of 29

2003), (Toro, Abrahamson, and Schneider 1997) are frequently used.

us cri an

252

Figure 4: Earthquake source definitions in the region around the area under

254

investigation (after Irsyam et. al., 2010)

255

Previous works assumed that the damage of the earthquake in Sabah Borneo was

256

triggered solely by the large earthquakes from Sulawesi, Indonesia, and Southern

257

Philippines which are all subduction zones. Hence, previous studies (e.g. Harith et al.

258

(2014) and Adnan and Marto (2008)) have used the GMPE model for subduction zone.

259

The later used Campbell (2003) for calculation of distant earthquake while (Sadigh et al.

260

1997) and (Boore, Joyner, and Fumal 1997) for short distance earthquake. Sabah is

261

located on the stable continent of Sunda Plate and there’s no GMPE which have been

262

derived specifically for this area. As an alternative approach, attenuation models had

263

been developed from analogous regions which were considered to possess similar

264

seismo-tectonics and geological conditions. Therefore, in this study, a GMPE which

265

derived for the stable continent for another region was applied. For subduction zone, on

266

the other hand, such as the Philippines and Sulawesi megathrust Young et al. (1997) is

267

applied because it possesses a similar unit and covers the same range of spectral

268

response period with GMPE for the stable continent as mentioned above.

ce

pte

dM

253

Ac

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


pt

Page 11 of 29

269


Result Interpretation

271

Probabilistic seismic hazard assessments were conducted for six cities belonging to the

272

state of Sabah. For each site, the results are represented in terms of a uniform hazard

273

curves for the return periods of 500, 1000 and 2500 years. Moreover, the exceedance

274

probability curves of expected intensity (acceleration in cm/s2) are also presented for

275

the periods of 0.01, 1.0 and 2.0 seconds (figures 5 thru 10). Finally, the spectral

276

intensity (acceleration) is also mapped for the next 500, 1000 and 2500 years at the

277

periods of 0.5s, 1s, 2s, and 3s (figures 11, 12 and 13.)

278

The results showed that the expected ground motion levels at both Ranau and Lahad

279

Dato are the highest, with the later showing the highest expected ground motion levels

280

in the return periods considered in the present work. The reason for this is the proximity

281

of both sites to active earthquake sources. Compared to previous studies (e.g (Adnan

282

and Marto 2008)) shown in figure 14 here, the results for Ranau deduced from the

283

present study show higher level of expected ground shaking. This is a direct impact of

284

considering local seismic sources for the present work.

285

The results for Ranau (figure 5), shows generally lower annual probability of

286

occurrences (panels a, b and c) compared to their respective in both Tawau and Lahad

287

Dato (figures 7 and 9). This is a consequence of lower rate of local seismicity at Ranau

288

compared to that of the Kalimantan subduction zone. The uniform hazard curve (panel d

289

in the figures), on the other hand, illustrates that the spectral acceleration near Ranau is

290

the second highest after Lahad Dato.

291

Other cities considered in the present study, show the relatively lower level of expected

292

ground motions. However, the magnitude of ground motion shows a general decrease

293

from southeast to the northwest until Ranau and Kota Kinabalo where local seismicity

294

produces anomalous ground motion trend.

us cri

an

dM

pte

ce

295

pt

270

Ac

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 12 of 29

Ranau 1.0 Sec

1.00E+01 1.00E-01 1.00E-03 1.00E-05 1.00E-07 1.00E+00

2.50E+03

1.00E-08 1.00E-11

c. 296

1.00E+02

302

hazard curve is shown at d)

pte

301

1.00E+04

d.

Fig. 5. Spectral acceleration for Ranau at periods of a) 0.01s, b) 1s and c) 2s. Uniform

ce

300

1.00E+02

an

1.00E-05

dM

Annual Prob. of Exceedance

1.00E-02

Spectral Acceleration (cm/sec2)

299

1.00E-10

Spectral Acceleration (cm/s2)

b.

1.00E-14 1.00E+00

298

1.00E-07

1.00E+00

(cm/s2)

Ranau 2 S

297

1.00E-04

1.00E-13

5.00E+01

Spectral Acceleration

a.

1.00E-01

us cri

Annual propability of exceedance

Annual propability of exceedance

Ranau (0.01 sec)

Ac

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


pt

Page 13 of 29

1.00E-04 1.00E-06 1.00E+02

Spectral

1.00E+04

Acceleration (cm/s2)

b.

a.

1.00E+00 1.00E-03 1.00E-06 1.00E-09 1.00E-12 1.00E-15 1.00E+00 1.00E+01 1.00E+02 1.00E+03

c. 303 304 305

Uniform hazard curve is shown at d)

pte

309

ce

308

1.00E-07 1.00E-10

1.00E-13 1.00E+00

1.00E+02

1.00E+04


Fig. 6. Spectral acceleration for Kota Kinabalo at periods of a) 0.01s, b) 1s and c) 2s.

306 307

1.00E-04

d.

dM

Spectral acceleration (cm/s2)

1.00E-01

an


Kota Kinabalo 2 S

pt

1.00E-02

us cri

1.00E+00

1.00E-08 1.00E+00

Page 14 of 29

Kota Kinabalo 1 S Annual Prob. of Exceedance

Kota Kinabalo 0.01 S

Ac

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Annual prob. of exceedane


a


1.00E+00 1.00E-02 1.00E-04 1.00E-06 1.00E-08 1.00E+02

1.00E+04

b

Spectral

1.00E+02

310

1.00E-09 1.00E-11

1.00E-13 1.00E+00

1.00E+02

1.00E+04

d

Fig. 7. Spectral acceleration for Tawau at periods of a) 0.01s, b) 1s and c) 2s. Uniform

pte

hazard curve is shown at d)

ce

314

1.00E-07

1.00E+04

Acceleration (cm/s2)

c

313

1.00E-05

an

1.00E+01 1.00E-01 1.00E-03 1.00E-05 1.00E-07 1.00E-09 1.00E-11 1.00E-13 1.00E-15 1.00E+00

dM


Tawau 2 S

312

1.00E-03


1.00E-10 1.00E+00


311

1.00E-01

us cri


Tawau 1 S

Tawau 0.01 S

Ac

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


pt

Page 15 of 29


Sandakan 0.01 S

pt

Sandakan 1 S

1.00E-02

1.00E-05

1.00E-08

1.00E-11 1.00E+00

1.00E+02

b

1.00E-03 1.00E-06 1.00E-09 1.00E-12 1.00E-15 1.00E-01

1.00E+01

1.00E-12

1.00E+02

1.00E+04

1.00E+03


c 315

d

pte

Fig. 8. Spectral acceleration for Sandakan at periods of a) 0.01s, b) 1s and c) 2s. Uniform hazard curve is shown at d)

ce

319

1.00E-09

an

1.00E+00

dM


Sandakan 2 S

318

1.00E-06


a

317

1.00E-03

1.00E-15 1.00E+00

1.00E+04


316

1.00E+00

us cri



1.00E+01

Ac

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 16 of 29

Lahad Dato 1 S

Lahad Dato 0.01 S 1.00E+00 1.00E-01 1.00E-02 1.00E-03 1.00E-04 1.00E-05 1.00E-06 1.00E+00 1.00E+01 1.00E+02 1.00E+03 1.00E+04

b

1.00E-01

1.00E-09

1.00E+02

1.00E+04

1.00E-04 1.00E-07 1.00E-10 1.00E-13 1.00E-16

1.00E+00

dM


1.00E-07

an

Lahad Dato 2 S

1.00E+02

1.00E+04


pte

c

d

Fig. 9. Spectral acceleration for Lahad Dato at periods of a) 0.01s, b) 1s and c) 2s. Uniform hazard curve is shown at d)

ce

322

1.00E-05


a

321

1.00E-03

1.00E-11 1.00E+00


320

1.00E-01

us cri

Annual Prob.of Exceedance

Annual prob. of Exceedance

1.00E+01

Ac

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


pt

Page 17 of 29


1.00E+00 1.00E-01 1.00E-03 1.00E-05 1.00E-07 1.00E-09 1.00E-11 1.00E+00

1.00E+02

1.00E+04

1.00E-02 1.00E-04 1.00E-06

us cri



pt

Keningau 1 S

Keningau 0.01 S

1.00E-08 1.00E-10 1.00E-12 1.00E-14 1.00E-16

1.00E+00


a

1.00E+02

1.00E+04


b

an

1.00E-01 1.00E-03 1.00E-05 1.00E-07 1.00E-09 1.00E-11 1.00E-13

dM


Keningau 2 S

1.00E-15 1.00E+00 1.00E+01 1.00E+02 1.00E+03 Spectral Acceleration (cm/s2)

c

325 326

d

Fig. 10. Spectral acceleration for Keningau at periods of a) 0.01s, b) 1s and c) 2s. Uniform hazard curve is shown at d)

ce

324

pte

323

Ac

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 18 of 29

us cri an dM 329 330 331

pte

328

Fig. 11 Spectral ground motion at Sabah for 2500 years return Period at the periods a) 0.5 s, b) 1 s, c) 2 s and d) 3 s.

ce

327

Ac

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


pt

Page 19 of 29

332


335 336 337 338

Fig. 12. Spectral ground motion at Sabah for 2500 years return Period at the periods a) 0.5 s, b) 1 s, c) 2 s and d) 3 s.

ce

334

pte

dM

an

us cri

pt

333

Ac

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 20 of 29

339

us cri an 342 343

pte

dM 341

ce

340

Fig 13. Spectral ground motion at Sabah for 2500 years return Period at the periods a) 0.5s, b) 1s, c) 2s. and d) 3s.

Ac

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


pt

Page 21 of 29

345 346

us cri an

344

Figure 14: Peak ground acceleration (PGA) maps for 500 years and 2500 years (after (Adnan and Marto 2008))

dM

347

Conclusion

349

Probabilistic seismic hazard assessments are applied for six cities in Sabah state, east Malaysia.

350

The study is fueled by two main reasons. First, Sabah shows extraordinary earthquake activities

351

compared to other regions of Malaysia. Second, the occurrence of a moderate earthquake with

352

magnitude Mw=6.0 in June 2015 which produce some damages to the building and caused a

353

death of some tourists near the Kinabalo mountain. Previous seismic hazard assessments were

354

mostly deterministic and ignored the local earthquake sources near Ranau. The present study,

355

on the other hand, is designed to overcome these limitations of the previous ones.

356

The earthquake records of local seismicity near Ranau is extremely short with the earliest activities

357

dated in 1991. Since then, few events occurred until the largest one took place in June 2015. Such

358

seismic data is insufficient to characterize the source parameters near Ranau. Fortunately, geologic

359

studies revealed that earthquake activities are related to Quaternary active faults. The lengths of the

360

delineated faults are adopted using (Donald L. Wells and Coppersmith 1994) model to characterize the

ce

pte

348

Ac

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 22 of 29

pt


361 362

local seismic activity there.

Page 23 of 29

Furthermore, adopting the PSHA technique was not carried out in Sabah before this work. The

364

advantage is to define the effects of different ground motion levels rather than the maximum

365

earthquake alone. This will change the measures to design earthquake resistant structure considerably.

366

Moreover, the results obtained showed that the ground motion levels estimated for return periods of

367

500, 1000 and 2500 years, are largest near Lahad Dato and decrease in the northwest direction until

368

Ranau. Around Ranau, the ground motion levels show an anomalous increase due to the local activities

369

there. This ground motion anomaly was omitted in the previous studies. Henceforth, the ground motion

370

levels obtained here is more realistic than previous ones. The new assessments maybe useful for both

371

preparedness and mitigation of earthquakes in the state of Sabah.

372

References

373

Acharya, H. K. 1979. “Seismicity of the Southern Philippine Sea.” Marine Geology 29(1–

376 377

us cri

an

375

4):25–32.

Adnan, A. and Aminaton, M.. 2008. “Development of Seismic Hazard Maps of East Malaysia.” Advances in Earthquake Engineering Applications 1–17.

dM

374

pt

363

Akkar, S. and Bommer, J. 2007. “Empirical Prediction Equations for Peak Ground Velocity Derived from Strong-Motion Records from Europe and the Middle East.”

379

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 97(2):511–30. Retrieved August

380

11, 2017

381

(https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Sinan_Akkar/publication/228372953_Empiric

382

al_Prediction_Equations_for_Peak_Ground_Velocity_Derived_from_Strong-

383

Motion_Records_from_Europe_and_the_Middle_East/links/0046351ea73d483ad50

384

00000.pdf).

386 387

Atkinson, Gail M. and David M. Boore. 1997. “Some Comparisons Between Recent Ground-Motion Relations.” Seismological Research Letters 68(1):24–40. Retrieved

ce

385

pte

378

(http://srl.geoscienceworld.org/content/68/1/24).

388

Balaguru, Allagu and Robert Hall. 2008. “Tectonic Evolution and Sedimentation of

389

Sabah, North Borneo, Malaysia.” American Association of Petroleum "

Ac

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


390

30084(1990):1–7. Retrieved

391

(http://www.searchanddiscovery.com/documents/2009/30084balaguru/images/bala


393

guru).

pt

392

Boore, D. M., W. B. Joyner, and T. E. Fumal. 1997. “Equations for Estimating Horizontal Response Spectra and Peak Acceleration from Western North American

395

Earthquakes: A Summary of Recent Work.” Seismological Research Letters

396

68(1):128–53.

397

us cri

394

Campbell, Kenneth W. 1997. “Empirical Near-Source Attenuation Relationships for Horizontal and Vertical Components of Peak Ground Acceleration, Peak Ground

399

Velocity, and Pseudo-Absolute Acceleration Response Spectra.” Seismological

400

Research Letters 68(1):154–79. Retrieved

401

(http://srl.geoscienceworld.org/content/68/1/154).

402

an

398

Campbell, Kenneth W. 2003. “Prediction of Strong Ground Motion Using the Hybrid Empirical Method and Its Use in the Development of Ground-Motion (Attenuation)

404

Relations in Eastern North America.” Bulletin of the Seismological Society of

405

America 93(3):1012–33. Retrieved April 25, 2017

406

(http://www.ce.memphis.edu/7137/PDFs/attenuations/USGS2008/Campbell2003.p

407

df).

dM

403

Che Abas, M. R. 2001. “Earthquake Monitoring in Malaysia.” Seismic Risk Seminar.

409

Cornell, A. 1968. “Engineering Seismic Risk Analysis.” BSSA 58(5):1583–1606.

410

Cornell, C. A. and E. H. Vanmarcke. 1969. “The Major Influences on Seismic Risk.” Pp.

411

69–83 in Proc. of the 4th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Retrieved

412

August 11, 2017 (http://www.iitk.ac.in/nicee/wcee/article/4_vol1_A1-69.pdf).

413

Crouse, C. B. 1991. “Ground‐Motion Attenuation Equations for Earthquakes on the

415

Cascadia Subduction Zone.” Earthquake Spectra 7(2):201–36. Retrieved

ce

414

pte

408

(http://dx.doi.org/10.1193/1.1585626).

416 417 418

EL-HUSSAIN, I., DEIF, A., AL-JABRI, K., TOKSOZ, N., EL-HADY, S., AL-HASHMI, S., AL-TOUBI, K., AL-SHIJBI, Y., AL-SAIFI, M. & KULELI, S. 2012. Probabilistic seismic hazard maps for the sultanate of Oman. Natural Hazards, 64, 173-210.

419 420

Engdahl, E. R. and A. Villasenor. 2002. “Global Seismicity: 1900-1999.” Retrieved

Ac

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 24 of 29

Page 25 of 29

(https://earthquake.usgs.gov/data/centennial/centennial.pdf).

pt

421

EZZELARAB, M., SHOKRY, M. M. F., MOHAMED, A. M. E., HELAL, A. M. A., MOHAMED, A. A. & EL-HADIDY,

423

M. S. 2016. Evaluation of seismic hazard at the northwestern part of Egypt. Journal of African Earth

424

Sciences, 113, 114-125.

us cri

422

425 426 427 428 429

FAENZA, L., HAINZL, S., SCHERBAUM, F. & BEAUVAL, C. 2007. Statistical analysis of time-dependent earthquake occurrence and its impact on hazard in the low seismicity region Lower Rhine Embayment. Geophysical Journal International, 171, 797-806.

430

Franke, Dieter, Udo Barckhausen, Ingo Heyde, Mark Tingay, and Nordin Ramli. 2008. “Seismic Images of a Collision Zone Offshore NW Sabah / Borneo.” Marine and

432

Petroleum Geology 25:606–24. Retrieved April 24, 2017

433

(https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mark_Tingay/publication/236011871_Seismic

434

_images_of_a_collision_zone_offshore_NW_SabahBorneo/links/0046353a187d49f

435

f33000000.pdf).

dM

436

an

431

Galgana, Gerald, Michael Hamburger, Robert McCaffrey, Ernesto Corpuz, and Qizhi

437

Chen. 2007. “Analysis of Crustal Deformation in Luzon, Philippines Using Geodetic

438

Observations and Earthquake Focal Mechanisms.” Tectonophysics 432(1–4):63–

439

87.

441 442

Gupta, I. D. 2013. “Source-to-Site Distance Distributions for Area Type of Seismic Sources Used in PSHA Applications.” Natural Hazards 66(2):485–99.

pte

440

Gutenberg, B. and C. F. Richter. 1944. “Frequency of Earthquakes in California.” Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 34:185–188. Retrieved August 10,

444

2017 (http://authors.library.caltech.edu/47734/1/185.full.pdf).

445 446 447

ce

443

Hall, Robert, Marco W. A. van Hattum, and Wim Spakman. 2008. “Impact of India-Asia Collision on SE Asia: The Record in Borneo.” Tectonophysics 451(1–4):366–89.

HARITH, N. S. H., ADNAN, A. & SHOUSHTARI, A. V. 2014. Estimation of peak ground acceleration map of

Ac

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


448

Sabah Based on deterministic seismic hazards analysis. National Seminar on Civil Engineering

449

Research (SEPKA). Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), Johor Bahru, Skudai, Malaysia


Hori, Sadaki. 2006. “Seismic Activity Associated with the Subducting Motion of the

pt

450 451

Philippine Sea Plate beneath the Kanto District, Japan.” Tectonophysics 417(1–

452

2):85–100. Retrieved (http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2005.08.027).

Irsyam, M. et al. 2010. “Development of Seismic Hazard and Risk Maps for New

us cri

453 454

Seismic Building and Infrastructure Codes in Indonesia.” Pp. 1–8 in The 6th Civil

455

Engineering Conference in Asia Region: Embracing the Future through

456

Sustainability.

458 459

Katili, John A. 1989. “Review of Past and Present Geotectonic Concepts of Eastern Indonesia.” Netherlands Journal of Sea Research 24(2–3):103–29.

Kijko, Andrzej and Sellovel M. A. 1992. “Estimation of Earthquake Hazard Parameters

an

457

460

from Incomplete Data Files. Part II. Incorporation of Magnitude Heterogeneity.”

461

Bulletin of the seismological soceity of America 82(1):120–34. Kijko, A. and Graham, G. 1999. “‘“Parametric-Historic”’ Procedure for Probabilistic

dM

462 463

Seismic Hazard Analysis Part II: Assessment of Seismic Hazard at Specified Site.”

464

Pure and applied Geophysics 154:1–22.

Koh, S. L. and Lim, Y. S. 2010. Meeting energy demand in a developping economy

466

without damaging the environment- A case study in Sabah, Malaysia, from

467

technical, environmental and economic perspective. Energy Policy, 38 (8), 4719-

468

4728.

469

pte

465

Leyu, Chong-Hua et al. 1985. Series on Seismology, Volume III -MALAYSIA. edited by

470

E. P. Arnold. SOUTHEAST ASIA ASSOCIATION OF SEISMOLOGYAND

471

EARTHQUAKF ENGINEERINC. LIU, J., WANG, Z., XIE, F. & LV, Y. 2013. Seismic hazard assessment for greater North China from historical intensity observations. Engineering Geology, 164, 117-130.

474 475

LIU, J., XIE, F. & LV, Y. 2016. Seismic hazard assessments for the Ordos Block and its periphery in China.

476

ce

472 473

Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 84, 70-82.

Ac

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 26 of 29

477 478

Lin, Jing Yi and Chung Liang Lo. 2013. “Earthquake-Induced Crustal Gravitational Potential Energy Change in the Philippine Area.” Journal of Asian Earth Sciences

479

66(November 2011):215–23. Retrieved

480

(http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jseaes.2013.01.009).

481

Mäntyniemi, Päivi, Theodoros M. Tsapanos, and Andrzej Kijko. 2004. “An Estimate of Probabilistic Seismic Hazard for Five Cities in Greece by Using the Parametric-

483

Historic Procedure.” Engineering Geology 72(3–4):217–31.

484

us cri

482

Mark Petersen et al. 2007. “Documentation for the Southeast Asia Seismic Hazard

485

Maps.” 67. Retrieved (http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/1383f/Circ1383-F.pdf).

486

McGuire, R. K. and K. M. Shedlock. 1981. “STATISTICAL UNCERTAINTIES IN

SEISMIC HAZARD EVALUATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES.” BSSA 71(4):1287–

488

1308.

490 491 492 493

McGuire, R. K. 2008. “Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis: Early History.” Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 37(3):329–38.

McGuire R. 2001. “Deterministic vs. Probabilistic Earthquake Hazards and Risks.” Soil

dM

489

an

487

Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 21(5):377–84. ORDAZ, M. G., CARDONA, O.-D., SALGADO-GÁLVEZ, M. A., BERNAL-GRANADOS, G. A., SINGH, S. K. &

494

ZULOAGA-ROMERO, D. 2014. Probabilistic seismic hazard assessment at global level. International

495

Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 10, 419-427.

Pappin, J. W. et al. 2015. “A Rigorous Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Model for Southeast

pte

496 497

China: A Case Study of Hong Kong.” Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering

498

13(12):3597–3623.

499

Petersen, Mark D. et al. 2004. “Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis for Sumatra, Indonesia and across the Southern Malaysian Peninsula.” Tectonophysics 390(1–

501

4):141–58. Retrieved

502 503 504

ce

500

(http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0040195104002689).

Ramos, Noelynna T. and Hiroyuki Tsutsumi. 2010. “Evidence of Large Prehistoric Offshore Earthquakes Deduced from Uplifted Holocene Marine Terraces in

Ac

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


pt

Page 27 of 29

505

Pangasinan Province, Luzon Island, Philippines.” Tectonophysics 495(3–4):145–

506

58. Retrieved (http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2010.08.007).


508

Rangin, C. et al. 1999. “Cenozoic Pull-Apart Basins in Central Myanmar: The Trace of

pt

507

the Path of India along the Western Margin of Sundaland.” Terra Abstr 4.

Sadigh, K., C. Y. Chang, J. A. Egan, F. Makdisi, and R. R. Youngs. 1997. “Attenuation

510

Relationships for Shallow Crustal Earthquakes Based on California Strong Motion

511

Data.” Seismological Research Letters 68(1):180–89. Retrieved April 25, 2017

512

(http://courses.ce.metu.edu.tr/ce5603/wp-content/uploads/sites/25/2015/03/Sadigh-

513

et.al_.-1997.pdf).

515 516

SEDIA (Sabah Economic Development and Investment Authority) Annual report (2015): http://www.sedia.com.my/SEDIA_AR2015.pdf

Simons, W. J. F. et al. 2007. “A Decade of GPS in Southeast Asia: Resolving

an

514

us cri

509

517

Sundaland Motion and Boundaries.” Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth

518

112(B6):n/a--n/a. Retrieved (http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2005JB003868). SOKOLOV, V., BONJER, K.-P. & WENZEL, F. 2004. Accounting for site effect in probabilistic assessment of seismic hazard for Romania and Bucharest: a case of deep seismicity in Vrancea zone. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 24, 929-947.

524

Tan, Denis N. K. and J. M. Lamy. 1990. “Tectonic Evolution of the NW Sabah

dM

519 520 521 522 523

Continental Margin since the Late Eocene.” Geol. Soc. Malaysia, Bulletin 27:241–

526

60.

pte

525

527

Tjia, H. D. 2007. “Kundasang (Sabah) at the Intersection of Regional Fault Zones of

528

Quaternary Age.” Geological Society of Malaysia, Bulletin, 53 (Jun) 59–66.

530 531 532 533

Tongkul, F. 1993. “Tectonic Control on the Development of the Neogene Basins in Sabah, East Malaysia.” Bulletin of the Geological Society of Malaysia 33:95–103.

ce

529

Retrieved April 24, 2017 (http://www.gsm.org.my/products/702001-101020PDF.pdf).

Toro, Gabriel R., Norman A. Abrahamson, and John F. Schneider. 1997. “Model of

Ac

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 28 of 29

534

Strong Ground Motions from Earthquakes in Central and Eastern North America:

535

Best Estimates and Uncertainties.” Seismological Research Letters 68(1):41–57.

Page 29 of 29

537

Wah, Alexander Yan Sze. 2011. “Geological Assessments of the Earthquake Sources and Hazard in Malaysia.” Seminar Teknikal Gempabumi.

us cri

538 539

pt

Retrieved (http://srl.geoscienceworld.org/content/68/1/41).

536

Wells, Donald L. and Kevin J. Coppersmith. 1994. “New Empirical Relationships among

540

Magnitude, Rupture Length, Rupture Width, Rupture Area, and Surface

541

Displacement.” Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 84(4):974–1002.

542

Wong, Ivan G. 2013. “How Big, How Bad, How Often: Are Extreme Events Accounted for in Modern Seismic Hazard Analyses?” Natural Hazards.

543 544

Youngs, R. R., S. .. J. Chiou, W. Silva, and J. R. Humphrey. 1997. “R. R. Youngs, S. -J. Chiou, W. J. Silva and J. R. Humphrey, 1997, Strong Ground Motion Attenuation

546

Relationships for Subduction Zone Earthquakes, , Vol. 68, No. 1, 58-73.”

547

Seismological Research Letters 68(1):58–73.

an

545

549

dM

548

.

550 551

554 555 556 557

ce

553

pte

552

Ac

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
