Professional Documents
Culture Documents
2.1 Introduction
An earthquake is a spasm of ground shaking caused by a sudden release of energy
in the earths lithosphere (i.e. the crust plus part of the upper mantle). This energy
arises mainly from stresses built up during tectonic processes, which consist of interaction between the crust and the interior of the earth. In some parts of the world,
earthquakes are associated with volcanic activity. For example, in Guatemala such
earthquakes occur in swarms, with an average duration of three to four months, the
largest having a magnitude normally under 6.5. These events are of shallow focus
and cause considerable damage within a radius of about 30 km from the epicentre.
Human activity also sometimes modifies crustal stresses enough to trigger small or
even moderate earthquakes, such as the swarms of minor tremors resulting from
mining in the Midlands of England, or the sometimes larger events induced by the
impounding of large amounts of water behind dams, such as the earthquakes associated with the construction of the Koyna dam in central India in 1967 (Chopra and
Chakrabarti, 1973).
While the design provisions of this book apply to all earthquakes regardless of origin,
any discussion of earthquakes themselves is generally confined to events derived from
the main cause of seismicity, i.e. tectonic activity.
As most earthquakes arise from stress build-up due to deformation of the earths
crust, understanding of seismicity depends heavily on aspects of geology, which is the
science of the earths crust, and also calls upon knowledge of the physics of the earth
as a whole, i.e. geophysics. The particular aspect of geology which sheds most light on
the source of earthquakes is tectonics, which concerns the structure and deformations
of the crust and the processes which accompany it; the relevant aspect of tectonics is
now often referred to as seismotectonics.
Geology tells us the overall underlying level of seismic hazard which may differ
from the available evidence of historical seismicity, notably in areas experiencing
present day quiescent periods.
16
60
60
60
80
180
Figure 2.1
120
Seismicity map of the world. The dots indicate the distribution of seismic events in the mid-twentieth century (after Barazangi and
Dorman (1969))
Antarctic circle
60
60
20
40
Tropic of capricorn
Equator
20
40
20
20
120
120
40
Tropic of cancer
180
40
Arctic circle
120
60
60
60
80
Global seismotectonics
17
18
EURASIAN
PLATE
EURASIAN PLATE
AMERICAN
PLATE
PACIFIC PLATE
INDIAN
AUSTRALIAN
PLATE
Nazca
plate
AFRICAN
PLATE
ANTARTIC PLATE
Subduction zone
Figure 2.2
Tectonic plate map of the world, showing names of the seven largest plates and
indicating subduction zones and the directions of plate movement (reproduced with
permission from G.R. Stevens, 1980)
Tongariro
Ngauruhoe
Egmont Ruapehu
Indian- A
Australion
plate
0
Hikurangi trench
B
Pacific
plate
100
200
A
300
400
500
200 km
600
km
Figure 2.3
The likely structure of the subduction zone beneath the North Island of
New Zealand inferred from figure 2.4 (reproduced with permission from
G.R. Stevens, 1980)
Global seismotectonics
Egmont
19
Tongariro
Ngauruhoe
Ruapehu
Hikurangi trench
0
300
200
100
100
200
300
Edge of
continental
slope
400
500
200 km
600
km
Figure 2.4
Seismic cross-section through the North Island of New Zealand, showing locations
of earthquake foci (reproduced with permission from G.R. Stevens, 1980)
study (Figure 2.5), which relates the shear strains of the shear belt referred to above
to large historical earthquakes. It is believed that the fault forming the plate boundary
periodically locks together, and this leads to an accumulation of shear and compressional strain until it is in part relieved by a large thrust type of earthquake. The sudden
release of strain (when the shear resistance is overcome) signals the recommencement
of movement of the subducting plate in a further cycle of aseismic slip, then another
locking of the fault leads to the next plate interface earthquake.
As well as the 15 or so main plates shown in Figure 2.2, studies of seismic activity
need to consider the smaller buffer plates or sub-plates which in certain areas tend
to ease the relative movements of the worlds giant plates. Buffer plates have been
recognized in Tibet and China, the western USA, and at the complex junction of the
African, Arabian, Iranian, and Eurasian plates, where eight Mediterranean buffer plates
have been identified (Stevens, 1980).
In the foregoing discussion, tectonic plates have been described as rigid, virtually
undistorted plates and the worlds principal zones of seismicity have been shown to
be associated with the interaction between the plates. However, occasional damaging
intra-plate earthquakes also occur, well within the interior of the plates that clearly
are not associated with plate boundary conditions, and so far their origins are illunderstood. The uncertainties associated with intra-plate seismicity are much greater
than is the case for interplate regions of high seismicity.
20
200
0m
rd
Lo
1995
H
e
ow
R
e
is
1932
>3 x 107/yr
1931 1931 h
c
1843
1863
en
1897
r
T
1904 i
1868
g
1893 1934
n
a
1942
ur
k
1855
i
H
1848
1968
1929
>5 x 107/yr
1994
Strain Rate
40 S
k
oo it
C tra
S
1888
1929
1901
PS
RN
Chatham Rise
AL
TH
U
SO
1938
00
45
20
1993
200 km
1979
1945
170E
Figure 2.5
Campbell
Plateau
180
Generalized shear strain rates and large (MW 6.8) shallow (hC < 50 km) New
Zealand earthquakes from 18402000 (adapted from Walcott, 1981)
21
The cause and nature of earthquakes is the subject of study of the science of seismology, and further background may be obtained from the books by Richter (1958),
Bolt (1999) and Lay and Wallace (1995).
Unfortunately, for non-seismologists at least, understanding the general literature
related to earthquakes is impeded by the difficulty of finding precise definitions of
fundamental seismological terms. For assistance in the use of this book, definitions of
some basic terms are set out below. Further definitions may be found elsewhere in this
book or in the references given above.
The strength of an earthquake is not an official technical term, but is used in the
normal language sense of How strong was that earthquake? Earthquake strength
is defined in two ways: first the strength of shaking at any given place (called the
intensity) and second, the total strength (or size) of the event itself (called magnitude,
seismic moment, or moment magnitude). These entities are described below.
Intensity is a qualitative or quantitative measure of the severity of seismic ground
motion at a specific site. Over the years, various subjective scales of what is often called
felt intensity have been devised, notably the European Macroseismic and the Mercalli
scale, which are very similar. The most widely used in the English speaking world
is the Modified Mercalli scale (commonly denoted MM), which has twelve grades
denoted by Roman numerals IXII. A detailed description of this intensity scale is
given in Appendix A, taken from Dowrick (1996).
Quantitative instrumental measures of intensity include engineering parameters such
as peak ground acceleration, peak ground velocity, the Housner spectral intensity,
and response spectra in general. Because of the high variability of both subjective
and instrumental scales, the correlation between these two approaches to describing
intensity is inherently weak (Figure 4.23).
Magnitude is a quantitative measure of the size of an earthquake, related indirectly
to the energy released, which is independent of the place of observation. It is calculated
from amplitude measurements on seismograms, and is on a logarithmic scale expressed
in ordinary numbers and decimals. Unfortunately several magnitude scales exist, of
which the four most common ones are described here (ML , MS , Mb and MW ).
The most commonly used magnitude scale is that devised by and named after
Richter, and is denoted M or ML . It is defined as
ML = log A log A0
(2.1)
where A is the maximum recorded trace amplitude for a given earthquake at a given
distance as written by a WoodAnderson instrument, and A0 is that for a particular
earthquake selected as standard.
The WoodAnderson seismograph ceases to be useful for shocks at distances beyond
about 1000 km, and hence Richter magnitude is now more precisely called local magnitude (ML ) to distinguish it from magnitude measured in the same way but from
recordings on long-period instruments, which are suitable for more distant events. When
these latter magnitudes are measured from surface wave impulses they are denoted by
MS . Gutenburg proposed what he called unified magnitude, denoted m or mb , which
is dependent on body waves, and is now generally named body wave magnitude (mb ).
This magnitude scale is particularly appropriate for events with a focal depth greater
than c. 45 km. All three scales ML , mb and MS suffer from saturation at higher values.
22
The most reliable and generally preferred magnitude scale is moment magnitude,
MW . This is derived from seismic moment, M0 , which measures the size of an
earthquake directly from the energy released, Wyss and Brune (1968), through the
expression
(2.2)
M0 = AD
where is the shear modulus of the medium (and is usually taken as 3 1010 Nm), A
is the area of the dislocation or fault surface, and D is the average displacement or slip
on that surface. Seismic moment is a modern alternative to magnitude, which avoids
the shortcomings of the latter but is not so readily determined. Up to 1985, seismic
moment had generally only been used by seismologists.
Moment magnitude is a relatively recent magnitude scale from Kanamori (1977)
and Hanks and Kanamori (1979), which overcomes the above-mentioned saturation
problem of other magnitude scales by incorporating seismic moment into its definition,
such that moment magnitude
MW =
2
log M0 6.03 (M0 in Nm)
3
(2.3)
(2.4)
The regression explains only 59% of the variance and has a residual standard error of
0.31. The ML scale as estimated in other parts of the world, as well as New Zealand,
is similarly unreliable.
The relation between moment magnitude MW , surface-wave magnitude MS and
centroid depth hc , using data restricted to modern MW determinations (i.e. from 1964
March 8 onwards), is shown in Figure 2.7. For earthquakes of hc 30 km, MS and MW
are close to being equal above magnitude 6.5. At lower magnitudes MS is consistently
smaller than MW , and is as much as a quarter-unit smaller between magnitude 5.0
and 5.5. Depth also influences the discrepancy between MS and MW ; for deep New
Zealand earthquakes (hc > 50 km) MS is about a half-unit smaller than MW between
magnitude 5.0 and 5.5. This results from the tendency for MS to decrease with depth
for earthquakes of a given seismic moment. Karnik (1969) first dealt with this effect
by proposing a focal depth correction term for MS in relation to mb for various parts
of Europe, while Ambraseys and Free (1997) more recently estimated a focal depth
correction term for in relation to log M0 for European earthquakes. Considering the
New Zealand data (Figure 2.7) Dowrick and Rhoades (1998) found the best fit for
finding MW in terms of MS and hc was the quadratic expression:
MW = 1.27[0.16] + 0.80(0.03]MS + 0.087[0.031](MS 6)2 + 0.0031
[0.0006](hc 25)
(2.5)
Figure 2.6
23
The above expression explains 93% of the variance. In Eq. (2.5) it can be seen that the
quadratic term contributes significantly to the regression because the coefficient of this
term is more than twice its standard error. It is of interest to note that, although their
expression is different from ours, Ambraseys and Free obtained a coefficient for their
depth term of 0.0036, which is very similar to the coefficient of 0.003 in Eq. (2.5).
Also shown in Figure 2.7 is the relation of Ekstrom and Dziewonski (1988), derived
from global data, between log MO and MS for events with h < 50 km. In terms of MW ,
this relation is
2
MS < 5.3
2.13 + 3 MS
(2.6)
MW = 9.40 41.09 5.07MS
5.3 MS 6.8
0.03 + MS
MS > 6.8
As seen in Figure 2.7, there is no great difference between this relation and the linear
and quadratic fits for shallow New Zealand events over the magnitude range of the
data, but the latter also describe the effect of depth.
24
Figure 2.7
References
Ambraseys NN and Free MW (1997) Surface-wave magnitude calibration for European region
earthquakes. J Earthq Eng 1(1): 122.
Barazangi M and Dorman J (1969) World seismicity map of ESSA coast and geodetic survey
epicentre data for 196167. Bull Seism Soc Amer 59: 36980.
Bolt B (1999) Earthquakes. WH Freeman & Co, New York, 4th Edn.
Chopra AK and Chakrabarti P (1973) The Koyna earthquake and damage to Koyna dam. Bull
Seism Soc Amer 63(2): 38197.
Dowrick DJ (1996) The Modified Mercalli earthquake intensity scaleRevisions arising from
recent studies of New Zealand earthquakes. Bull NZ Nat Soc Earthq Eng 29(2): 92106.
Dowrick DJ and Rhoades DA (1998) Magnitudes of New Zealand earthquakes, 19011993.
Bull NZ Soc Earthq Eng 31(4): 26080.
Ekstrom G and Dziewonski AM (1988) Evidence of bias in estimations of earthquake size.
Nature 332: 319323.
Hanks TC and Kanamori H (1979) A moment magnitude scale. J Geophys Res B 84: 234850.
Kanamori H (1977) The energy release in great earthquakes. J Geophys Res 82: 298187.
References
25
Karnik V (1969) Seismicity of the European Area, Part 1. Reidel, Dordrecht, Holland.
Lay T and Wallace TC (1995) Modern Global Seismology. Academic Press, San Diego.
Richter CF (1958) Elementary Seismology. Freeman, San Francisco.
Stevens GR (1980) New Zealand Adrift. AH & AW Reed, Wellington.
Walcott RI (1981) The gates of stress and strain. In: Large Earthquakes in New Zealand. The
Royal Society of New Zealand, Miscellaneous Series No 5.
Wyss M and Brune J (1968) Seismic moment, stress and source dimensions. J Geophys Res 73:
468194.