EARTHQUAKE INTENSITY

ASSESSMENT –CASE STUDIES

SUBMITTED BY
FIFINA FAIZAL P
ROLL NO :06
GCETCR

1
EARTHQUAKE INTENSITY
 qualitative measure of the strength of an earthquake
 gives gradation of strength of earthquake using observed damage to structures, ground and reaction of
humans to the earthquake shaking
 way of measuring or rating the effects of an earthquake at different sites
 does not require any instrumental records.
 can be assigned based on visual observations and interviews of residents or based on evaluation of
questionnaires completed by residents of that area.
 Represented by roman capital numerals.
 development of seismic risk map of a region or country.
 determination of historic seismicity of a region.

2
MAGNITUDE OF EARTHQUAKE
 measure of the amount of energy released during an earthquake
 only one magnitude per earthquake
 quantitative measure of the actual size or strength of the earthquake.
 based on direct measurements of the size (amplitude) of seismic waves, made with recording
instruments.
 The total energy released by an earthquake can be calculated from the amplitude of the waves
and the distance from the epicentre.
 reported using the Richter magnitude scale.
 A magnitude number is assigned to an earthquake on the basis of the amount of ground
displacement or vibration it produces, as measured by a seismograph

3
 Isoseismal Map
• A contour on a map bounding areas of equal
intensity is an isoseismal
• a map having different isoseismals for a particular
earthquake is an isoseismal map
• strongest near the earthquake epicentre and
decreases with distance
• The numbers on the map represent relative shaking
strength and can be qualitatively interpreted.
• Isoseismal maps of past earthquakes help us to
understand the nature of the earthquakes in a
particular region.

Fig 1 : Isoseismal map of bhuj earthquake

4
 INTENSITY SCALES
1. Rossi-Forel intensity scale : developed in the late 19th century - describing intensities with degrees
ranging from I to X .

2. Medvedev-Spoonheuer-Karnik (MSK) intensity scale (1964 ) : 12 stages of intensity

3. Modified Mercali intensity scale (MMI) :

4. European Macroseismic Scale (EMS )

5. Environmental Seismic Intensity Scale ( ESI )

5
MSK MMI EMS ESI

• 1964 • 1902 • 1992 • 2007

• 12 stages of intensity • Modified in 1931 • XII degree seismic intensity • based only on environmental effects
• based on • earthquake severity classified scale utilized in countries of • Revised version of INQUA scale
1. type of structures in twelve stages-I to XII Europe. • developed by International Union for
( A,B&C) • Factors considered • Updated as EMS-98 Quaternary Research (INQUA).
2. percentage of damage to 1. Earthquake Environmental • elaborate manual containing • 12 degree macroseismic intensity scale
each type of structure effects guidelines, application • Method - post earthquake survey
3. grade of damage to 2. Effects on human population examples, charts, figures and • Factors
different type of 3. Effects on artificial tables. 1. surface faulting
structures (G1 to G5) structures. • field surveys, study of aerial 2. landslides
• Varies from MMI in • intensity value directly images and by analysis of 3. liquefactions
details proportional to the distance macroseismic data. 4. ground cracks
from the epicenter • Mainly depent on • more suitable for areas having low human
vulnearability of building population or abandoned areas.
• Rockfalls were a major EEE • effective in determining epicentral
intensity.

6
Mercali intensity scale

7
EARTHQUAKE ENVIRONMENT EFFECTS
(EEES)
EARTHQUAKE
ENVIRONMENT
EFFECTS

primary secondary

Subsidence Surface Faulting Liquefaction of soil Landslides Tsunami

8
 1999 Athens Earthquake
• EEEs like landslides, surface faulting, hydrological anomalies and other factors like human
casualties, structural damage were considered for intensity assessment.
• Earthquake magnitude 5.9
• The cycle of seismic events in the area sustained for two months

• The intensity value assigned by INQUA scale were lower than that assessed by MM scale. The
probable reason for this underestimation could be that very few ground damages occurred during
the earthquake, which are extensively considered in INQUA scale

9
1998 Elia Earthquake
• The earthquake had magnitude Ms =9.

• The intensity value assigned by INQUA scale were higher than that assessed by MM scale.

• The probable reason could be that more ground damages like liquefaction, ground cracks, rock falls were

observed which is broadly considered in case of assessment by INQUA scale .

• In the two compared areas we find that the intensity values are almost same.

10
 August 14th, 2003 Lefkada earthquake
• Building damage was reported mainly at the town of
Lefkada (northern part of the island),

• many port facilities were damaged in the whole

island.

• Intensity values in the range between V and VIII

(EMS and MM scales)

• EMS and MM scales underestimate the effects of

ground damage like liquefaction, rockfall, ground
cracks as compared to the INQUA scale where
ground failure parameters are extensively used for
intensity assessment.

Fig 2 : (a), (b) Liquefaction surface manifestations at the town of Lefkada and (c),
(d) cracks on the pavement and settlement of the quay, respectively, at the town of
Lefkada due to the liquefaction of the sub layer.

11
Bhuj Earthquake, January 26, 2001
• Region – kutch, Gujarat

• Magnitude -7.7

• Intensity- IX

• The epicentre of this earthquake was located near

Bhachau (latitude 23.40 °N and longitude 70.28 °E)

• The major cities affected by the earthquake were

Bhuj, Anjar, Bhachau, Gandhidham, Kandla Port,
Morbi, Ahmedabad, Rajkot, Sundernagar, etc.,

• People died -13800

• People injured – 1,67,000

• House damage-1200000
Fig 3 : (a and b) Collapse of the corner zone (c) Out-of-plane collapse of a wall, in
presence of an r.c. tie beam and a rigid slab(d) Overturning of the wall (e) Collapse
of roof (f) No damage due to horizontal bands.

12
Fig 4 :Isoseismal map of bhuj earthquake

13
 Chamoli Earthquake, March 29, 1999
• magnitude 6.8
• rocked Chamoli area of Kumaon Garhwal
Himalayan region at 00:35 hrs on March 29,
1999
• Duration : 6 to 30 sec
• People died :103
• People injured : 400
• House damaged :4500
• The epicentre of this earthquake was close to
Chamoli
• maximum intensity observed was VIII on MSK
scale Fig 5 :(a) Overturning of wall (b) & (c) Out-of-plane
failures of wall due to lack of connection between wall and floor.
• The most affected area by the earthquake was
the Chamoli and Rudraprayag district

14
Fig6 :Isoseismal map of Chamoli earthquake

15
Jabalpur Earthquake, May 22, 1997
• magnitude (Mb) 6.0
• occurred at 4.21 hrs on May 22, 1997.
• The epicentre of the earthquake was near to the
city of Jabalpur.
• The maximum intensity VIII on MMI scale was
observed around Jabalpur city in a radius of about
15 km
• region of Jabalpur, Seoni, Mandla and other towns FIG Typical failure of masonry wall (a) Out-of-plane (flexure) failure
in the Narmada belt of Madhya Pradesh and of wall
adjoining district of Uttar Pradesh and (b) Diagonal (shear failure), and (c) Failure at connection.
Maharashtra.
• People died :55
• People injured : 1000
• House damaged :45000+

16
Fig7 : Isoseismal map of Jabalpur earthquake

17
•
Killari Earthquake, September 30, 1993
magnitude Mb = 6.3 occurred on September
30, 1993
• epicentre close to Killari.
• The earthquake caused strong ground
shaking in the region of Latur, Osmanabad,
Sholapur, Gulbarga and Bidar.
• There was a heavy damage in the localised
area of 15 km close to Killari which is on the
northern side of river Tarna.
• The maximum intensity in the epicentral
track was VIII+ on MM
FIG8: (a) Out of-plane failure (b) Corner failure and
• People died :10000 (c) Diagonal shear failure.
• People injured : 20000
• House damaged :20000+

18
Fig 9 : Isoseismal map of killari earthquake

19
Uttarkashi Earthquake, October 20, 1991
• October 20, 1991
• earthquake having Mb = 6.6
• Garhwal region of Uttar Pradesh
• duration 45 seconds
• enormous destruction of houses and loss of life
• The affected area lies in known seismic zones IV and V.
• The epicentre of earthquake was at a place called Agora.
• The area affected by the earthquake is Uttarkashi, Tehri
and Chamoli regions.
• The maximum intensity in epicentral track was VIII+ on
MMI Scale.
• People died :760
FIG 10 (a) and (b) Out-of-plane of external walls (c) Out-of-
• People injured : 5000 plane collapse of outer leaf (d) Shear failure of walls (GIS,
1992).
• House damaged :80000+
20
Fig 11 :Isoseismal map of Uttarkashi earthquake
21
 Bihar-Nepal Earthquake, August 21, 1988
• 04:40 on August 21, 1988,
• strong earthquake of magnitude 6.6 on Richter
scale
• epicentre close to Bihar-Nepal border occurred.
• Intensity VI to VII on MMI scale
• The most affected towns of Nepal were Dharan,
Biratnagar, Dhankuta, Sunsari district, Panchthar,
Therathum, Ilam
• Northern Bihar were Madhubani, Darbhanga,
Muzaffarpur, Munghyer, Barauni, Bhagalpur, Bihar
Sherif, Nalanda, Saharsa and Patna FIG 12 : (a) and (b) Out-of-plane failure of wall and arches
(c) Failure of columns and roof.
• People died :1000
• People injured : 9000
• House damaged :250000
22
Fig 13 : Isoseismal map of Bihar- Nepal earthquake

23
 References
1. S.K. Duggal , “Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures”,2007

2. Pankaj Agarwal and Manish Shrikhande , “Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures”,

2011.

3. George Papathanassiou, Spyros Pavlides , “Using the INQUA scale for the assessment of
intensity: Case study of the 2003 Lefkada (Ionian Islands), Greece earthquake”, Quaternary
International 173–174 (2007) 4–14

4. Mainak Choudhury, Sajal Verma, Purnachandra Saha, “Effects of earthquake on the

surrounding environment: an overview”, Proceedings of International Conference on
Recent Advances in Mechanics and Materials (ICRAMM-2016) December 17-18, 2016

5. R. E. TATEVOSSIAN, E. A. ROGOZHIN, S. S. AREFIEV & A. N. OVSYUCHENKO,

“Earthquake intensity assessment based on environmental effects: principles and case
studies”, The Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 316, 73– 91

24
THANK YOU

25