Sensitivity of seismic hazard estimates to the use of historical site data

  • M. Mucciarelli
  • D. Albarello
  • M. Stucchi
Part of the Advances in Natural and Technological Hazards Research book series (NTHR, volume 6)

Abstract

At 4 sites in Italy, a set of comparative seismic hazard estimates was performed with the aim to assess the sensitivity of each estimate to the use of different data sets. Estimates of expected average return periods for strong earthquakes have been carried out using a new approach based on probabilistic counting and logistic-type attenuation models. The different data sets used were:

the National Catalogue of Italian Earthquakes of epicentral data from 1000 until 1980 (Postpischl, 1985);

a new catalogue prepared considering all available results of recent researches on historical seismicity carried out in the framework of GNDT (National protection Against Earthquake of the National Council of Research)

data base of observed intensities compiled by the same research group.

Significant differences were found which, in particular, show the importance of observed site intensities for a reliable hazard assessment.

Keywords

Seismic Hazard Earthquake Catalogue Attenuation Function Attenuation Relationship Macroseismic Intensity 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Boschi E., Pantosti D. and Valensise G., 1994, L’identificazione geologica delle faglie sismogenetiche, Le Scienze, 310, 36–49Google Scholar
  2. Cornell C.A., 1968. Engineering seismic risk analysis. Bull. Seis. Soc. Am., 58, 1583–1606Google Scholar
  3. ENEL, 1978, Catalogue of Italian Earthquakes, Open FileGoogle Scholar
  4. Epstein B. and Lomnitz C., 1966. A model for the occurrence of large earthquakes. Nature, 211, 954–956CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Grandori G., Guagenti E. and Petrini V., 1984. On the use of Renewal processes in seismic hazard analysis. Proc. 8th World conf. on Earthquake Engineering, 1, S.Francisco, 287–294Google Scholar
  6. Magri L., Mucciarelli M. and Albarello D., 1994. Estimates of site seismicity rates using ill-defined macroseismic data. PAGEOPH, 135, 4, 617–632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. McGuire R.K., 1976. Fortran computer program for seismic risk analysis. U.S.G.S. open file Report 76–67, 92 pp.Google Scholar
  8. Mulargia F., Gasperini P. and Tinti S., 1987. A procedure to identify objectively active seismotectonic structures. Boll. Geofis. Teor. Appi., XXIX, 114, 147–164Google Scholar
  9. Postpischl D., ed., 1985, Catalogo dei terremoti italiani dall’anno 1000 al 1980, CNR-PFGGoogle Scholar
  10. Postpischl D., ed., 1985 b, Atlas of isoseismal maps of the Italian area, CNR-PFG.Google Scholar
  11. Stucchi M., Camassi R. and Monachesi G,.1993, Il catalogo di lavoro del GNDT. CNR GNDT GdL “Macrosismica”, Rapporto interno, Milano, 89 pp.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Mucciarelli
    • 1
  • D. Albarello
    • 2
  • M. Stucchi
    • 3
  1. 1.ISMESBergamoItaly
  2. 2.Dip. Scienze della TerraUn. SienaItaly
  3. 3.IRRS-CNRMilanoItaly

Personalised recommendations