Measuring Earthquake Size-1

LECTURE-09
CE-312
ENGINEERING GEOLOGY & SEISMOLOGY
(03 Credit Hours)
Instructor:
Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad
Department of Civil Engineering

University of Engineering & Technology Peshawar
Outlines of the Presentation
1. Earthquake Magnitude
2. Richter’s Local Magnitude
3. Modern Seismic Magnitudes
✓ Surface Wave Magnitude
✓ Body Wave Magnitude
✓ Seismic Moment and Moment Magnitude
4. Energy Magnitude Relationship
5. Conversion between Magnitude Scales
6. Interpretation of Magnitude
7. Global Relations between Seismic Fault Parameters and Moment-
Magnitude of Earthquakes
8. Magnitude Discrepancies
9. Earthquake Intensities
10. Magnitude & Intensity
11. Different Types of Intensity Scales
12. Damage States & Vulnerability Classes
Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 2
Earthquake Magnitude
Magnitude is a number that represents earthquake size or strength no
matter where you are located.
➢ It should handle the smallest earthquake to the largest earthquake.
➢ It is proportional to the elastic energy released by the quake.
➢ It is measured on the basis of the wave amplitude on the seismogram
considering the epicentral distance.
Earthquake magnitude scales originated because of :

➢ The desire for an objective measure of earthquake size
➢ Technological advances > seismometers

Richter’s Local Magnitude
➢ In the 1930's that Charles F. Richter introduced the concept of
earthquake magnitude. His original definition held only for California
earthquakes occurring within 600 km of a particular type of seismograph
(the Woods-Anderson torsion instrument).
➢ In the 1930’s, Wadati in Japan and Richter in California noticed that
although the peak amplitudes on seismograms from different events
differed, the peak amplitudes decreased with distance in a similar
manner for different quakes.

Richter’s Observations

➢ Richter used these observations to
construct the first magnitude scale, ML
(Richter’s Local Magnitude for Southern
California).
➢ He based his formula for calculating the
magnitude on the astronomical brightness
scale, which was logarithmic.
➢ He assumed a reference motion at a
reference distance. To compute the
magnitude at different distances, he
calibrated the attenuation function.
Note: In a logarithmic scale such as magnitude, change in one magnitude unit means a
change of a factor of 10 in the amplitude of ground shaking (Wait! No, this is too
simplistic, and I hope you will know why by the end of the course).



➢ Richter arbitrarily chose a magnitude 0 event to be an earthquake that would show
a maximum combined horizontal displacement of 1 micrometre on a seismogram
recorded using a Wood-Anderson torsion seismometer 100 km from the earthquake
epicenter.
➢ In contrast to the general magnitude formula, ML considers only the maximum
displacement amplitudes but not their periods. Reason: W-A instruments are short-
period and their traditional analog recorders had a limited paper speed. Proper
reading of the period of high-frequency waves from local events was rather difficult.
➢ The smallest events recorded in local micro earthquake studies have negative
values of ML while the largest ML is about 7, i.e., the ML scale also suffers saturation
(see later). Despite these limitations, ML estimates of earthquake size are relevant
for earthquake engineers and risk assessment since they are closely related to
earthquake damage. The main reason is that many structures have natural periods
close to that of the W-A seismometer (0.8s) or are within the range of its pass-band
(about 0.1 -1 s).

Richter’s Nomogram
In addition to amplitude, we must first

determine the distance to the epicenter.
In this example, we draw a line

connecting a distance of 100 km with
an amplitude of 1 mm. The magnitude
on the Richter scale of the earthquake
is given by where this line intersects
the center line of the nomogram.

Richter’s Nomogram (Contd...)
Note that an earthquake of magnitude

4 on the Richter scale at 100 km
distance would have an amplitude of
10 mm, whereas one of magnitude 5 at
the same 100 km distance would have
an amplitude of 100 mm.

➢ Defined for specific attenuation conditions valid for southern California.
➢ Only valid for one specific type of seismometer.
➢ Can be used elsewhere if local attenuation correction is used and simulated
Wood-Anderson response is computed.
➢ Not often used now, although it is a measure of ground shaking at
frequencies of engineering interest.
➢ In many studies, the attenuation function is determined by a parametric
approach where the reference distance and the reference magnitude are
fixed In agreement with the Richter scale.


Modern Seismic Magnitudes
➢ Today seismologists use different seismic waves to compute magnitudes.
➢ These waves generally have lower frequencies than those used by Richter.
➢ These waves are generally recorded at distances of 1000s of kilometers

instead of the 100s of kilometers for the Richter scale.

Teleseismic MS and mb
Two commonly used modern magnitude scales are:
➢ MS, Surface-wave magnitude (Rayleigh Wave)
➢ mb, Body-wave magnitude (P-wave)

MS (Surface Wave Magnitude)
➢ Gutenberg (1945) developed the MS scale for surface wave at teleseismic
distances:
➢ It is based on the maximum horizontal ground motion of surface waves with

period T= (20±2)s. The calibration functions σs(∆) was provided by Richter
(1958) as a table:

MS (Surface Wave Magnitude) Contd…
➢ The Gutenberg further developed to account for the maximum velocity
(A/T)max. This allowed to link the scale to the energy.
➢ Collaboration between research teams in Prague, Moscow and Sofia

resulted in the proposal of a new MS scale and calibration function, termed
Moscow-Prague formula, by Karniket al. (1962):
for epicentral distances 2°< ∆< 160°and source depth h < 50 km. The IASPEI Committee on
Magnitudes recommended at its Zürich meeting in 1967 the use of this formula as standard for
Ms determination for shallow seismic events (h ≤50 km)
Note: Also MS suffers saturation (see later…)

mb (Body Wave Magnitude)
➢ Gutenberg (1945b and c) developed a magnitude relationship for
teleseismic body waves such as P, PP and S in the period range 0.5 s to
12 s.
mb= log (A/T)max + Q(∆, h)
➢ These calibration functions are correct when ground displacement

amplitudes are measured in intermediate-period records and given in
micrometers (1 µm= 10-6 m).
➢ T is the corresponding period (in seconds)
➢ Q(D,h) is a correction factor that is a function of distance, D (degrees),

between epicenter and station and focal depth, h (in kilometers), of the
earthquake.
In general, the mb magnitude is less reliable than the Ms magnitude as a

means of yielding the relative "size" of a shallow-focus earthquake.

Seismic Moment (Mo)
The Seismic Moment represents the final strength of the earthquake and was
first determined by Aki (1966) for the 1964 Niigata Earthquake. It is one of the
most important measures of the size of an earthquake since;
➢ It has a physical basis
➢ It does not saturate for great earthquakes
➢ It can be determined relatively easier and accurately for recent events from the modern
seismic instrumentations
➢ The rate of moment release is directly related to the geologically determined fault slip rate
Mo controls the amplitudes of radiated seismic waves and can be determined

from seismogram. Total static (scalar) moment of an earthquake is;
where, A is the fault area (length L times width W), D is the average final slip and μ is
the shear modulus of the rocks involved in the earthquake, typically 30 Gpa.
Note: dyne-cm = 10-7 Nm

Seismic Moment (Mo) (Contd…)
Radiation from a shear dislocation with slip D over area A in material with
rigidity μ is identical to that from a double couple with strength μAD.

Seismic Moment (Mo) (Contd…)
(units stress*area*displacement, but

stress = force/area, so units =
force*displacement = a couple =
work = energy)

Moment Magnitude (Mw)
Hanks and Kanamori (1979) proposed the Moment Magnitude Mw scale by:
The two largest reported moments :

2.5 X 1030 dyn·cm for the 1960 Chile earthquake (MS 8.3; MW 9.5)
7.5 X 1029 dyn·cm for the 1964 Alaska earthquake (MS 8.3; MW 9.2).
Note: Use Mo in dyne.cm in the above expression.

Why Use Moment Magnitude (Mw) ?
Because of the limitations of all three magnitude scales ML, mb, and MS, a
new, more uniformly applicable extension of the magnitude scale, known as
moment magnitude, or “Mw,” was developed. It is one of the most important
measures of the size of an earthquake since;
➢ It is the best single measure of overall earthquake size. In particular, for

very large earthquakes moment magnitude gives the most reliable estimate
of earthquake size.
➢ It does not saturates.
➢ It can be estimated from geological observations and FAS.
➢ It can be estimated from paleoseismology studies.
➢ It can be tied to plate motions and recurrence relations.

Energy Magnitude Relationship
The amount of energy radiated by an earthquake is a measure of the potential
for damage to man-made structures.
Most estimates of energy have historically relied on the empirical relationship
developed by Beno Gutenberg and Charles Richter:
log10E = 1.5MS + 11.8
where energy, E, is expressed in ergs.
A magnitude based on energy radiated by an earthquake, Me, has been
defined,
Me = 2/3 log10E - 2.9
where energy, E, is expressed in Newton-meter.
For every increase in magnitude by 1 unit, the associated seismic energy
increases by about 32 times.
Mw is computed from low-frequency seismic data and is a measure of tectonic
effects of earthquake. Me, computed from high frequency seismic data, is a
measure of seismic potential for damage. Consequently, Mw and Me often do
not have the same numerical value.


Conversion between Magnitude Scales
Empirical relations (or

sometimes theoretical
relations) can be used to
convert between magnitude MS ≈ Mw
scales. This is important in
deriving magnitude
recurrence statistics for a
region or source zone, as all
magnitudes should be first
reported on the same scale
before characterizing their
statistics.
Surface wave magnitude MS

is a close approximation to
Moment Magnitude Mw for
MS 6 to 8 events.

Gutenberg and Richter found the following empirical relationship for MS
……(a)
It is possible to connect the seismic energy to the seismic moment.

Kostrov(1974) showed that the energy released by an earthquake is
proportional to the stress drop.
……(b)
If we assume an average stress drop of 30 bar, equations (a) & (b) provide
This equation provides a simple way to connect the magnitude to the

seismic moment. It is used to define a new magnitude scale called moment
magnitude.

Gutenberg and Richter (1956) deﬁned the following relations connecting the
ML, mb and MS Magnitude scales:
mb = 0.63Ms + 2.5
Ms = 1.27(ML-1) - 0.016ML2
mb = 1.7 + 0.8ML - 0.01ML2
Nuttli (1981) demonstrated that the relationship between the magnitude

scales is the function of seismic environment. He proposed two types of
relationships (See Next Slide):
i) One for the EQ’s along the boundaries of the tectonic plates (inter-
plate EQ’s)
ii) One for EQ’s within the continental regions (intra-plate EQ’s)
Note that more than 100 other empirical relationships have been proposed to
relate the various magnitude scales (Utsu 2002).

Note that the scales ML , mbLg and

mN result in practically the same
numerical values.

Interpretation of Magnitude
➢ The use of different scales to define magnitude of an earthquake can
cause confusion.
➢ Usually, the news media will refer to Richter’s Magnitude Scale without
specifying the type of scale used.
➢ When Richter and Gutenberg proposed their magnitude scales, they hoped
all three ML ,MS and mb would produce the same numerical values for the
same earthquake.
➢ This hypothesis has been proven wrong, as each scale measures the
seismograph amplitude in a specific frequency band, and the amplitude is
not constant throughout the frequency spectrum of any typical earthquake.
➢ Therefore the interpretation of the magnitude of an earthquake depends on
which scale is used.
➢ As the most common magnitude scale in use is MW, especially for medium
to large earthquakes. Therefore when the scale is not mentioned with the
magnitude, it may be taken as MW by default.

Global Relations between Seismic Fault Parameters and
Moment Magnitude of Earthquakes
Strike Slip Faults:
LogL = 0.59 Mw – 2.30, σ= 0.14, 6.0 ≤ Mw ≤ 8.0
LogA = 0.82 Mw – 2.79, σ= 0.19, 6.0 ≤ Mw ≤ 8.0
LogW = 0.23 Mw – 0.49 6.0 ≤ Mw ≤ 8.0 Where,
LogD = 0.68 Mw – 2.59 6.0 ≤ Mw ≤ 8.0
L = Fault Length (in km)
Dip-slip continental faults
LogL = 0.50 Mw – 1.86, σ= 0.13, 6.0 ≤ Mw ≤ 7.5 A = Fault Area (in km2)
LogA = 0.78 Mw – 2.56, σ= 0.21, 6.0 ≤ Mw ≤ 7.5
LogW = 0.28 Mw – 0.70, 6.0 ≤ Mw ≤ 7.5 W = Fault Width (in km)
LogD = 0.72 Mw – 2.82, 6.0 ≤ Mw ≤ 7.5
D = Average Slip (in cm)
Dip-slip faults in subduction regions
LogL = 0.55 Mw – 2.19, σ= 0.18, 6.7 ≤ Mw ≤ 9.3
LogA = 0.86 Mw – 2.82, σ= 0.25, 6.7 ≤ Mw ≤ 9.2
LogW = 0.31 Mw – 0.63, 6.7 ≤ Mw ≤ 9.2
LogD = 0.64 Mw – 2.78, 6.7 ≤ Mw ≤ 9.2

Magnitude Discrepancies
Ideally, you want the same value of magnitude for any one earthquake from
each scale you develop,
i.e. MS= mb= ML = Mw
But this does not always happen (See Slide 33-34):
➢ San Francisco 1906: MS= 8.3, Mw= 7.9
➢ Chile 1960: MS = 8.3, Mw = 9.5
Note: These estimates of MS & Mw were obtained from observations based
on actual reported data.

Why Don’t Magnitude Scales Agree?
Simplest Answer:
➢ Earthquakes are complicated physical phenomena that are not well described by
a single number.
More Complicated Answer:

➢ The distance correction for amplitudes depends on geology.
➢ Deep earthquakes do not generate large surface waves MS is biased low for
deep earthquakes.
➢ Some earthquakes last longer than others, even though the peak amplitude is the
same.
➢ Variations in stress release along fault, for same moment.
➢ Not all earthquakes are self similar (that is, the radiation at different frequencies
can differ---examples: 1999 Chi-Chi compared to “standard” California
earthquake).

Why Don’t Magnitude Scales Agree? (Contd…)
Most Complicated Answer:
➢ Magnitude scales saturate. This means there is an upper limit to magnitude no
matter how “large” the earthquake is. For instance MS (surface wave magnitude)
seldom gets above 8.2-8.3

Saturation of Magnitude Scales
The causes of saturation in different
magnitude scales can be attributed to
the rupture process of the fault.
➢ Small earthquakes rupture small
areas and are relatively depleted
in long-period signals.
➢ Large earthquakes rupture large
areas and are rich in long-period
motions.

Saturation of Magnitude Scales (Contd…)
As an Example of effects of magnitude saturation, both the 1906 San Francisco and
1960 Chille earthquakes produced ground shaking that led to surface wave
magnitudes of 8.3, even though the sizes of their rupture surfaces, illustrated by the
shaded areas in the figure below were vastly different. The great disparity in the
energy release was, however, reflected in the moment magnitudes of the
earthquakes: 7.9 for San Francisco and 9.5 for Chille.

Are Ms & mb still useful?
YES!
➢ Many (most) earthquakes are

small enough that saturation
does not occur.
➢ Empirical relations between
energy release and mb and MS
exist.
➢ The ratio of mb to MS can
indicate whether a given
seismogram is from an
earthquake or a nuclear
explosion (verification
seismology).

Earthquake Intensities
Intensity is an index whose value reflects the strength of the earthquake shaking at a
particular location during an earthquake. Intensity values should always be expressed
in Roman numerals to reinforce the fact that they are indices rather than continuous
variables.
INTENSITY is assessed on the basis of:

➢ What people feel during the earthquake
➢ What happens to the ground
➢ What happens to buildings (i.e. damage)
The following table gives intensities that are

typically observed at locations near the epicenter
of earthquakes of different magnitudes.

Magnitude & Intensity
Intensity Magnitude
How Strong Earthquake Feels to Related to Energy Release.
Observer
✓ Qualitative assessment of the ✓ Quantitative measurement of the
kinds of damage done by an amount of energy released by an
earthquake earthquake by modern
seismograph.
✓ Depends on distance to
earthquake & strength of ✓ Depends on the size of the fault
earthquake that breaks
✓ Determined from the intensity of

shaking and damage from the ✓ Determined from Seismic Records
earthquake

Different Types of Intensity Scales
➢ Modified Mercalli Scale (12 grades):
MMI is the basis for the U.S. evaluation of seismic intensity. It has 12 divisions,
using Roman numerals from I to XII.
➢ The European Macroseismic Scale (EMS, 12 grades):
Most recently updated in 1998, is the basis for evaluation of seismic intensity in
European countries. Unlike earthquake magnitude, which indicates the energy a
quake expends, EMS98 intensity denotes how strongly an earthquake affects a
specific place.
➢ Japanese (JMA) grades (7 grades):
The real-time reports are calculated automatically from measurements of ground
acceleration. The JMA reports based on the ground acceleration, which can be
written in m/s². 7(the strongest) is PGA greater than 4 m/s²
➢ MSK scales: MSK:
A 12-grade Medvedev-Sponheuer-Karnik intensity scale MSK was superseded by
the European Macroseismic Scale in 1998.

MMI INTENSITY SCALE The Modified Mercalli Scale
I. Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable conditions.
II. Felt only by a few persons at rest, especially on upper floors of buildings.
III. Felt quite noticeably by persons indoors, especially on upper floors of buildings.
Many people do not recognize it as an earthquake. Standing motorcars may rock
slightly. Vibrations are similar to those of a passing truck.
IV. Felt indoors by many, outdoors by few during the day. At night, some awakened.
Dishes, windows, doors disturbed; walls make cracking sound. Sensation like heavy
truck striking building. Standing motor cars rocked noticeably.
V. Felt by nearly everyone; many awakened. Some dishes, windows broken.
Unstable objects overturned. Pendulum clocks may stop.
VI. Felt by all, many frightened. Some heavy furniture moved; a few instances of
fallen plaster. Damage slight.
VII. Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction; slight to
moderate in well-built ordinary structures; considerable damage in poorly built or
badly designed structures; some chimneys broken.
MMI INTENSITY SCALE The Modified Mercalli Scale (Contd….)
VIII. Damage slight in specially designed structures; considerable damage in ordinary
substantial buildings with partial collapse. Damage great in poorly built structures.
Fall of chimneys, factory stacks, columns, monuments, and walls. Heavy furniture
overturned.
IX. Damage considerable in specially designed structures; well-designed frame
structures thrown out of plumb. Damage great in substantial buildings, with partial
collapse. Buildings shifted off foundations.
X. Some well-built wooden structures destroyed; most masonry and frame structures
destroyed with foundations. Rails bent.
XI. Few, if any (masonry) structures remain standing. Bridges destroyed. Rails bent
greatly.
XII. Damage total. Lines of sight and level are distorted. Objects thrown into the air.

EMS INTENSITY SCALE The European Macroseismic Scale

Damage States & Vulnerability Classes
EMS (1998) Damage Description

EMS (1998) Vulnerability Classes

Examples about the Damage States & Vulnerability Classes

Examples about the Damage States & Vulnerability Classes

The End

Measuring Earthquake Size-1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Measuring Earthquake Size-1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

LECTURE-09

Department of Civil Engineering

Earthquake magnitude scales originated because of :

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 3

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 4

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 5

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 6

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 7

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 8

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 9

In addition to amplitude, we must first

In this example, we draw a line

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 10

Note that an earthquake of magnitude

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 11

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 12

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 13

➢ Today seismologists use different seismic waves to compute magnitudes.

➢ These waves are generally recorded at distances of 1000s of kilometers

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 14

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 15

➢ It is based on the maximum horizontal ground motion of surface waves with

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 16

➢ Collaboration between research teams in Prague, Moscow and Sofia

Note: Also MS suffers saturation (see later…)

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 17

➢ These calibration functions are correct when ground displacement

➢ T is the corresponding period (in seconds)

➢ Q(D,h) is a correction factor that is a function of distance, D (degrees),

In general, the mb magnitude is less reliable than the Ms magnitude as a

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 18

Mo controls the amplitudes of radiated seismic waves and can be determined

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 19

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 20

(units stress*area*displacement, but

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 21

The two largest reported moments :

Note: Use Mo in dyne.cm in the above expression.

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 22

➢ It is the best single measure of overall earthquake size. In particular, for

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 23

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 25

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 26

Empirical relations (or

Surface wave magnitude MS

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 27

It is possible to connect the seismic energy to the seismic moment.

This equation provides a simple way to connect the magnitude to the

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 28

Nuttli (1981) demonstrated that the relationship between the magnitude

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 29

Note that the scales ML , mbLg and

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 30

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 31

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 32

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 33

More Complicated Answer:

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 34

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 35

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 36

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 37

➢ Many (most) earthquakes are

Measuring Earthquake Size Presented By: Engr. Muhammad Adeel Arshad 38

(units stressareadisplacement, but