Master Course

Basics of Seismology and Seismic Hazard

Assessment

MAGNITUDE Mercalli Richter

(Richter scale) scale scale
Instrumental scale I
measuring the not
2.
I felt
amplitude of the
ground motion II
Increasing frightening
recorded by a of people, objects 3.
I
seismograph. V falling down, no damage
It’s proportional to V
4.
the energy released
V 0
slight
INTENSITY VII
5.
(Mercalli scale)
VIII
Empirical scale
measuring the effects IX collapse and 6.
of an earthquake on X
increasing
the environment, destruction of
people, and buildings X
7.
XII historically never reached

[Link]
[Link]@[Link]

4. Magnitude and intensity.

Macroseismic scales
World and Caribbean seismicity
Earthquakes losses and economy

April 2026
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

MEASURING THE SIZE OF AN EARTHQUAKE: INTENSITY AND MAGNITUDE ................................. 3

MAGNITUDE SCALES ............................................................................................................ 3

Richter (Local) magnitude ML ...................................................................................................... 3
Body and surface waves magnitude ........................................................................................... 4
Moment magnitude ........................................................................................................................ 5
Summary of different types of magnitude .................................................................................. 6
Relationship between moment magnitude and various magnitude scales ........................... 6
Magnitude and energy .................................................................................................................. 7
Magnitude and fault rupture length ............................................................................................. 8

MACROSEISMIC INTENSITY ................................................................................................... 9

European Macroseismic Scale EMS (Grünthal, 1998) ............................................................. 12
....................................................................................................................................................... 19
Magnitude – Intensity correlations ............................................................................................ 19

WORLD SEISMICITY.............................................................................................................20
Some of the most damaging events of the last century .......................................................... 21
Largest devastating earthquakes and tsunami in the last 10 years....................................... 25

EARTHQUAKES IN THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC ......................................................................27

WORLD SEISMICITY AND LOSSES .........................................................................................31

THE SEISMIC ISSUE IN ITALY ................................................................................................34

Amatrice sequence 2016............................................................................................................. 36
Recent Italian earthquakes comparison ................................................................................... 39

Seismology tutorials on the WEB .............................................................................................. 39

F. Sabetta 4.2
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

Measuring the size of an earthquake: Intensity and

magnitude

An approximate correlation can be established between epicentral intensity (Io-MCS)

and Richter magnitude

Magnitude scales
Richter (Local) magnitude ML

F. Sabetta 4.3
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

In case of strong and close earthquakes the high sensitivity of the seismometers will often
cause the record traces to go off scale (saturation or clipping). In such cases, the
magnitude is often derived from the length of the wave train and such measures are called
duration magnitudes, MD

ML is limited in its application because it’s calibrated specifically for southern California, is
based on the Wood-Anderson seismograph and is limited to distances less than 1,000
km.
However ML is a very useful scale, particularly for the Engineers, because it’s
correlated to short period waves (Wood-Anderson T0 = 0.8 sec) and the extent of
earthquake damage is closely related to ML.

Body and surface waves magnitude

The disadvantages of ML are overcome by the use of teleseismic magnitude scales which
are based on the maximum ratio of the amplitude A of the recorded trace to the period T of
the ground motion and are independent of the type of seismograph employed. There are two
main teleseismic magnitude scales.

F. Sabetta 4.4
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

The first is based on the first few cycles of the P-wave arrival and is called body waves
magnitude:
mb= log(A/T) + Q(Δ°,h)
The second, surfaces waves magnitude, is based on surfaces waves (dominating, with a
period of about 20 sec., seismograms of shallow earthquakes at distances beyond 600 km):
MS= log(A/T) + 1.66 log (Δ°) + 3.3 + Ci (Prague formula)
The correction for distance and depth Q(Δ°, h) and the station calibration coefficient Ci are
determined empirically.
Empirical relationships exist between different scales. Caution should be used in the
application because standard deviations are significant. Unless correction is made for depth,
Ms values for deep earthquakes (which produce weak surface waves) will be much lower
than mb
9 9
Camassi_Stucchi 1996 =0.21 Camassi_Stucchi 1996
8 8
Ambraseys-Bommer 1990 Ambraseys-Bommer 1990
7 7
=0.27 =0.52
6 6
MS

MS
5 5
4 4
3 Ms=1.25ML - 1.39 Ms=1.16mb - 0.89
3
Ms= 1.41ML - 2.07 Ms= 1.74mb - 3.82
2
=0.22
2
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
ML mb

Moment magnitude
All of the magnitude scales described so far have a fundamental shortcoming: they are
unable to distinguish the relative size of the largest earthquakes, a phenomenon known as
saturation.
As the dimensions of the rupture grow with the size of the earthquake, the additional energy
released does not continue to cause the growth of amplitudes at relatively short period but
rather generates radiation at longer and longer periods, which is not detected by the
seismographs from which ML, Ms and mb values are calculated.
Seismic moment has the advantage that it does not saturate and therefore it is really the
only suitable measure for the largest earthquakes.
The seismic moment M0 of an earthquake is given by

M 0    A U Newton•m or dyne•cm

Where m is the shear modulus of the material along the fault, A is the area of the fault
rupture (L x W) and U is the average amount of slip on the fault. The seismic moment is
named for its units of force times length and may be considered a measure of the work
done in rupturing the fault and moving the surrounding volume of the Earth crust. It is
generally not calculated from field measurements of U and A, but it is rather determined
from seismograms. This can be done either from Fourier amplitude spectra or obtained
from the Centroid Moment Tensor solution (CMT). Since 1977 Harvard University has
routinely calculated CMT moments and fault plane solutions for earthquakes of magnitude
5.5 and greater.

In order to provide moment values in a format that is more easily interpreted, Hanks &
Kanamori (1979) defined a moment magnitude scale, represented by Mw

Mw = 2/3·log(Mo) -10.73 (Mo in dyne•cm)

F. Sabetta 4.5
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

Summary of different types of magnitude

ML Local magnitude (Richter 1935)

log. of max amplitude (micron) of a seismogram recorded by a Wood-Anderson seismograph
at 100 Km from the epicenter. For different seismographs and distance appropriate
calibrations are used.
ML= log A - log A° (log A° calibration factor) (wave period 0.1-1 sec)

mb Body waves magnitude

mb= log(A/T) + Q(Δ°,h) (wave period 1-5.0 sec)
A/T ratio of max. amplitude and period calculated on body waves;
Q(D°,h,) calibration factor depending on distance D° and depth h of the earthquake.

MS Surface waves magnitude

calculated as a mean of the recordings of several seismographs generally located at large
distances from the epicenter (thousands of km).
MS= log(A/T) + 1.66 log (Δ°) + 3.3 + Ci (wave period ~ 20.0 sec)
A/T ratio of max. amplitude and period calculated on surface waves;
D° epicentral distance in degrees; Ci calibr. station coefficient.

Mw Moment magnitude
the only type of magnitude not affected by saturation problems; calculated on the basis of the
seismic moment Mo derived from the Fourier spectra of the seismometric recordings
Mw = 2/3log(Mo) -10.73

Relationship between moment magnitude and various magnitude scales

• MW moment magnitude
• MS surface magnitude
• MJMA Japan Met. Ag. mag.
• mB long period body-wave mag.
• ML local (Richter) mag.
• mb short period body-wave mag

redrawn from Heaton et al. 1986

F. Sabetta 4.6
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

Magnitude and energy

Remembering that the energy of an earthquake is proportional to A2 and that the magnitude
is proportional to the logarithm of A, empirical relationships (Gutenberg and Richter) can be
established, through a logarithmic scale, between magnitude and energy released at the
focus
log(E)= 1.5Ms + 11.8 (erg)
For each unit of M the amplitude of the ground motion increases by a factor of 10 and
the energy by a factor of 101.5  32

Magnitu Energy Equivalent

de Mw released at the tons of
focus explosive
(x1020 erg)
4 0.006 56
5 0.19 1771
6 6 56,000
7 190 1,771,000
8 6000 56,000,000
9 190000 1,771,000,
000

from Kramer 1996

HONSHU JAPAN 11/03/11

M0= 3.57x 1029 dyne·cm Mw =9 Ms=7.9
Energy ~ 2x1025 erg ~ 32,000 Hiroshima bombs!!
Fault length ~ 700 km!! Max slip on fault ~ 25 m!!

F. Sabetta 4.7
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

Magnitude and fault rupture length

Magnitude is also proportional to the fault rupture length.
Many studies have
Wells & Coppersmith (1994)
produced empirical
subsurface rupture length
1000 regressions between
dimensions of the fault
fault rupture length (km)

rupture, or the slip, and

the earthquake
100 magnitude, most
notably the study of
Wells & Coppersmith
(1994). Such empirical
10 equations are obtained
strike slip by performing
reverse
normal regression of rupture
dimensions or slip on
1 magnitude or vice
4 5 6 7 8 versa.
Mw

M=5.08 + 1.16 log(srl) M= 4.38 + 1.49 log(ssrl)

Wells & Coppersmith (1994) Wells & Coppersmith (1994)
surface rupture length sub-surface rupture length

Slip on the fault surface as a

function of M

SUMATRA 26/12/04
M0= 3.57x 1029 dyne·cm Mw =9 Ms=8.6
Energy ~ 2x1025 erg ~ 32,000 Hiroshima bombs
Fault length ~ 700 km Max slip on fault ~ 25 m

F. Sabetta 4.8
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

Macroseismic Intensity
The concept of macroseismic intensity as a
quantitative measure of the earthquake effects was
firstly introduced by the Italian seismologist Giuseppe
Mercalli in 1902.

Macroseismic intensity has even nowadays a great

importance in Earthquake Engineering for two main
reasons:
• It is the most rapid tool to perform a survey of the
area affected by an earthquake (rescue organiz.,
damage assessment, monetary losses)
• It is the only way to evaluate the intensity of the
historical earthquakes an compile seismic
catalogues

The macroseimic intensity scales are:

• Empirical scales measuring the earthquakes effects on people and structures

• There are several dozen of these but only few are still use

• There are substantial differences in the assignments made by independent

investigators studying the same earthquake

Abbr. Authors Year (issue, Characteristics

modif.)
RF De Rossi Forel 1883 X Degrees - no more used

MM Modified Mercalli 1902, 1931, XII Degrees - U.S.A.

1956 (Richter)
JMA Japan Metereological 1949 VII Degrees - Japan
Agency
MCS Mercalli Cancani 1912, 1931 XII Degrees - no reference to
Sieberg building type - Italy
MSK Medvedev Sponheuer 1964, 1981 XII Degrees - 3 building types
Karnik (A,B,C) - Europe-USA
EMS European 1998 XII Deg. - 6 bld. types
Macroseismic Scale (A,B,C,D,E,F) - Europe

F. Sabetta 4.9
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

Comparison of intensity scales (Reiter, 1990)

Macroseismic Intensity is evaluated either by direct field observations or by questionnaires

sent to the affected areas (the latter only for lower intensity values). When several
observations are available, to take the arithmetic mean value is meaningless, because of the
non-linear and discrete nature of the intensity scales. The value assigned is normally the
modal observation.
The main problem with assessment of intensity is the subjectivity of the evaluations and the
difficulty of covering large areas to determine the lower values. One further complication is
that earthquakes are frequently followed by strong aftershocks and the damage observed in
buildings will reflect the cumulative effect of all of the events.
Intensity it is usually represented by Roman numerals and in fact it is meaningless to write a
value of intensity as a decimal value because it is not a continuous variable. Intensity
between VIII and IX may legitimately be represented as VIII-IX, VIII+ or IX-, but to write 8.5 is
incorrect.
The scales are neither continuous nor linear. The variation from degree to degree is not
gradual, each increase in one degree representing a jump in the level of shaking.
Furthermore, the jumps between different degrees are not equal: the increase in the level of
ground shaking from IV to V is not the same as the increase from VII to VIII.

F. Sabetta 4.10
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

Medvedev
Sponheuer
Karnik
MSK-81

F. Sabetta 4.11
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

European Macroseismic Scale EMS (Grünthal, 1998)

F. Sabetta 4.12
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

F. Sabetta 4.13
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

F. Sabetta 4.14
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

F. Sabetta 4.15
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

F. Sabetta 4.16
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

F. Sabetta 4.17
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

A B

C D

F. Sabetta 4.18
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

Shortcomings in the use of intensity in the Engineering practice

Intensity is widely used by Engineers in damage and loss
M
assessment by means of Damage Probability Matrices (DPM)
e correlating the probability of a given level of damage, for a given
a building vulnerability class, to the macroseismic intensity,
n considered as representative of the ground motion severity.
n This because intensity data are generally more abundant than
o strong ground motion recordings in the sites where damage
r surveys are available.

MCS Intensity

Damage probability matrix for building vulnerability class A

Intensity Damage Level
0 1 2 3 4 5
VI 0,188 0,373 0,296 0,117 0,023 0,002
VII 0,064 0,234 0,344 0,252 0,092 0,014
VIII 0,002 0,020 0,108 0,287 0,381 0,202
IX 0,0 0,001 0,017 0,111 0,372 0,498
X 0,0 0,0 0,002 0,030 0,234 0,734

The employment of the intensity in the DPM as representative of the ground motion severity
has however several drawbacks:
 it is not a physical measurable quantity and its assessment is quite subjective;
 there are several evaluation scales (MSK, EMS….) and the conversion among them
has never been precisely assessed;
 the scale is neither continuous nor linear and you can play only with discrete and
limited values (in engineering practice often only VII, VIII, IX);
 it’s impossible to separate the site amplification effects;
 intensity is, by definition, strictly correlated to building damage (perform regressions
between damage and intensity is statistically meaningless)

Magnitude – Intensity correlations

Instrumental earthquake recordings, and therefore magnitude data, are available only since
the beginning of the last century.
Compared with the time-scale of the geological processes underlying earthquake generation,
this is a very short period of observation.
All the information relative to historical
earthquakes (covering a period of
500-2000 years, variable according to
the history of different countries) is
available in terms of macroseismic
intensity derived from historical
reports an documents.
As we will see later, the
majority of the ground motion
predictive models used in seismic
hazard assessment, require the
earthquake magnitude as input
parameter.
Therefore, to avoid loose of historical
data, is very important to implement
F. Sabetta 4.19
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

empirical correlations between magnitude and epicentral intensity.

World seismicity

from Lay and Wallace (1995)

Annual number of
worldwide earthquakes
above magnitude 7 in
the last century

Induced fatalities of
worldwide earthquakes
in the last century

F. Sabetta 4.20
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

Some of the most damaging events of the last century

San Francisco-USA 1906

Ms = 7.8
Io = IX MM
750 victims

Messina - Italy, 1908

Ms = 7.2
Io = XI MCS
86.000 victims

F. Sabetta 4.21
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

Mexico City, 1985

Ms = 8.1
9.500 victims

F. Sabetta 4.22
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

Kobe – Japan, 1995

Ms = 7.2
5,500 victims
230,000 homeless
70 billions dollars damage

F. Sabetta 4.23
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

Turkey, Izmit 1999, Ms=7.8, Mw=7.4 about 17,000 victims, about 20,000 missing

F. Sabetta 4.24
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

Largest devastating earthquakes and tsunami in the last 10 years

F. Sabetta 4.25
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

F. Sabetta 4.26
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

Earthquakes in the Dominican Republic

F. Sabetta 4.27
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

F. Sabetta 4.28
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

F. Sabetta 4.29
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

F. Sabetta 4.30
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

World seismicity and losses

Date Region Victims Ms
1970.05.31 Peru 66,000 7.8
1971.02.09 California, [Link] 65 6.5
1972.12.23 Nicaragua, Managua 5,000 6.2
1976.02.04 Guatemala 22,000 7.9
1976.05.06 Italy, Friuli 965 6.5
1976.07.27 Cina, Tangshan 250,000 7.6
1977.03.04 Romania, Vrancea 2,000 7.2
1980.10.10 Algeria, El Asnam 3,500 7.7
1980.11.23 Italy, Irpinia 2,914 6.9
1981.06.11 Southern Iran 3,000 6.9
1982.12.13 Yemen 2,800 6.0
1985.09.19 Mexico, Michoacan 9,500 8.1
1988.12.07 Turkey 25,000 7.0
1989.10.17 California, Loma Prieta 62 7.1
1990.06.20 Iran 50,000 7.7
1994.01.17 California, Northridge 57 6.7
1995.01.17 Japan, Kobe 5,466 7.2
1999.08.17 Turkey, Izmit 17,000 7.8

F. Sabetta 4.31
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

Fatalities and economic losses in earthquakes by country; the numbers in parentheses are
the numbers of earthquakes per country (Coburn & Spence, 1992).

Economic losses due to earthquakes from 1972-1990 (Coburn & Spence, 1992)

F. Sabetta 4.32
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

Trend of worldwide economic losses caused by earthquakes (1950-2000)

Losses increase essentially because exposure (population density) increases

Victims caused in the world by earthquakes of 20th century

F. Sabetta 4.33
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

The seismic issue in Italy

F. Sabetta 4.34
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

F. Sabetta 4.35
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

Amatrice sequence 2016

F. Sabetta 4.36
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

F. Sabetta 4.37
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

Amatrice and Norcia are two small towns affected by the earthquake. In spite of the similar
input ground motion, testified by the recorded response spectra, the damage has been
much larger in Amatrice than in Norcia (3 degrees of Mercalli MCS scale!!!). This is mainly
due to the strengthening works performed on the buildings in Norcia after 1979 an1997
earthquakes.

F. Sabetta 4.38
Basics of Seismology and SHA 4 Magnitude, Intensity, Seismicity

Recent Italian earthquakes comparison

Seismology tutorials on the WEB

[Link]
guage[]=1
[Link] lect 2 6.38 min
[Link] lect 2
[Link] lect 2
[Link]
motion lect 3
[Link]
_s_surface_waves lect 3
[Link] lect 3
[Link] YES
lect 4
[Link] lect 4
5.30 min
[Link]
earthquake
[Link]

F. Sabetta 4.39