Abstract
In order to evaluate the seismic input suitable to be used for the microzonation of the central archaeological area of Rome, two different approaches were used: Probabilistic and Deterministic Seismic Hazard Assessment (PSHA, DSHA). For PSHA, three Uniform Hazard Spectra and three design spectra, derived from the literature and the Italian regulations, were considered. For DSHA two possible design earthquakes were selected: one having a magnitude 5.5 and a distance 20 km and the other having a magnitude 7 and a distance 85 km. The choice of these two scenarios was supported by the analysis of historical and instrumental seismicity, by the study of the surrounding faults, and by the disaggregation of the seismic hazard. The standard PSHA, based on seismogenic zones with uniformly distributed seismicity used for the Italian hazard map and building code, results in higher values with respect to DSHA (PGA of about 0.12 g and spectral maximum of around 0.35 g), unless an appropriate fraction of the standard deviation of the attenuation relationship is considered in the deterministic analysis. Recorded accelerograms, corresponding to the magnitude-distance couples selected using the DSHA were also included in the analysis. The seismic input was represented in terms of acceleration response spectra and time histories.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ambraseys NN, Simpson KA, Bommer JJ (1996) Prediction of horizontal response spectra in Europe. Earth Eng Struct Dyn 25:371–400
Ambraseys NN, Free MW (1997) Surface wave magnitude calibration for European region earthquakes. J Earthq Eng 1:1–22
Basili R, Valensise G, Vannoli P, Burrato P, Fracassi U, Mariano S, Tiberti MM, Boschi E (2008) The database of individual seismogenic sources (DISS), version3.1.1. Tectonophysics, doi:10.1016/j.tecto.2007.04.014. http://diss.rm.ingv.it/diss/
Bazurro P, Cornell CA (1999) Disaggregation of seismic hazard. Bull Seismol Soc Am 89(2):501–520
Bommer JJ (2002) Deterministic vs. probabilistic seismic hazard assessment: an exaggerated and obstructive dichotomy. J Earthq Eng 6(special issue 1):43–73
Bommer JJ, Abrahamson NA (2006) Why do modern probabilistic seismic-hazard analyses often lead to increased hazard estimates? Bull Seismol Soc Am 96(6):1967–1977
De Rita D, Giordano G, Rosa C, Sheridan MF (1995) Volcanic hazard at the Alban Hills and computer simulation. In: Trigila R (ed) The volcano of the Alban hills, Roma, pp 267–283
Decreto (2008) Decreto 14/01/2008 del Ministero delle Infrastrutture: Norme Tecniche per le Costruzioni, GU n.29 del 04/02/2008
Cornell CA (1968) Engineering seismic risk analysis. Bull Seismol Soc Am 58:1583–1606
Esteva L (1970) Seismic risk and seismic design decisions. In: Hansen RJ (ed) Seismic design for nuclear power plants. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 142–182
Faccioli E, Marzocchi W (coordinators) (2010) Project S2: Development of a dynamical model for seismic hazard assessment at national scale. Agreement INGV-DPC 2007–2009 Scientific report. http://nuovoprogettoesse2.stru.polimi.it/
Galadini F, Galli P (1999) The Holocene paleoeartquakes on the 1915 Avezzano earthquake faults (central Italy): implications for active tectonics in the central Apennines. Tectonophysics 308:143–170
Krinitzsky EL (2002) How to obtain earthquake ground motions for engineering design. Eng Geol 65:1–16
Locati M, Camassi R, Stucchi M (eds) (2011) DBMI11, the 2011 version of the Italian Macroseismic Database. Milano, Bologna, http://emidius.mi.ingv.it/DBMI11
Luzi L, Sabetta F, Mele F, Castello B (2010) Italian strong motion database relative to the period 1972–2004: motivations and aims. Bull Earthquake Eng 8(5):1159–1174. doi:10.1007/s10518-009-9140-7
Malagnini L, Herrmann RB, Di Bona M (2000) Ground motion scaling in the Apennines (Italy). Bull Seismol Soc Am 90(4):1062–1081
Meletti C, Galadini F, Valensise G, Stucchi M, Basili R, Barba S, Vannucci G, Boschi E (2008) A seismic source zone model for the seismic hazard assessment of the Italian territory. Tectonophysics 450: 85–108. ISSN 0040–1951: doi:10.1016/j.tecto.2008.01.003
Molin et al (1995) Sismicità di Roma. Memorie descrittive della carta geologica d’Italia, vol L, Cap.VI, pp 331–408, Istituto Poligrafico e Zecca dello Stato
Mucciarelli M, Spinelli A, Pacor F (2004) Un programma per la generazione di accelerogrammi sintetici “fisici” adeguati alla nuova normativa. \(11^{\circ }\) Congresso Nazionale l’Ingegneria Sismica in Italia, Genova 25–29 gennaio 2004
Ordaz M, Aguilar A, Arboleda J (2007) CRISIS2007—A program for computing seismic hazard
Rovida A, Camassi R, Gasperini P, Stucchie M (2011) CPTI11, the 2011 version of the Parametric Catalogue of Italian Earthquakes. Milano, Bologna, http://emidius.mi.ingv.it/CPTI
Sabetta F, e Paciello A (1995) Valutazione della pericolosità sismica. La geologia di Roma- Memorie descrittive della carta geologica d’Italia, vol L, Cap.VIII, Istituto Poligrafico e Zecca dello Stato, pp 443–448
Sabetta F, Pugliese A (1996) Estimation of response spectra and simulation of nonstationary earthquake ground motions. Bull Seismol Soc Am 86(2):337–352
Sabetta F, Lucantoni A, Bungum H, Bommer JJ (2005) Sensitivity of PSHA results to ground-motion prediction relations and logic-tree weights. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 25:317–329
Stucchi M, Akinci A, Faccioli E, Gasperini P, Malagnini L, Meletti C, Montaldo V, Valensise G (2004) Mappa di Pericolosità sismica del territorio Nazionale http://zonesismiche.mi.ingv.it/documenti/rapporto_conclusivo.pdf (in italian)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sabetta, F. Seismic hazard and design earthquakes for the central archaeological area of Rome. Bull Earthquake Eng 12, 1307–1317 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-013-9427-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-013-9427-6