...................................................................................
Earthquake
Intensities
Measuring
Earthquake Intensities Using Seismic Scales
by Andrew Alden
The first measuring tool
invented for eartquakes was the seismic intensity scale.
This is a rough numerical
scale to describe how severe an earthquake is in the place where you're
standing — how bad it is "on a scale of 1 to 10."
It's not hard to come up with
a set of descriptions for intensity 1 ("I could barely feel it") and
10 ("Everything around me fell down!") and the gradations in between.
A scale of this kind, when
it's carefully made and consistently applied, is useful even though it's based
entirely on descriptions, not measurements.
Scales of earthquake magnitude (the total energy of a quake) came later, the
result of many advances in seismometers and decades of data collection.
While seismic magnitude is
interesting, seismic intensity is more important: it's about the strong motions
that actually affect people and buildings.
Intensity maps are prized for
practical things like city planning, building codes, and emergency response.
To Mercalli and Beyond
Dozens of seismic intensity
scales have been devised. The first to be widely used was made by Michele de
Rossi and Francois Forel in 1883, and before seismographs were widespread the
Rossi-Forel scale was the best scientific tool we had. It used roman
numerals, from intensity I to X.
In Japan, Fusakichi Omori
developed a scale based on the types of structures there, such as stone
lanterns and Buddhist temples.
The seven-point Omori scale
still underlies the Japanese Meteorological Agency's official seismic intensity
scale. Other scales came into use in many other countries.
In Italy, a 10-point
intensity scale developed in 1902 by Giuseppe Mercalli was adapted by a
succession of people.
When H. O. Wood and Frank
Neumann translated one version into English in 1931, they called it the
Modified Mercalli scale. That has been the American standard ever since.
The Modifies Mercalli scale consists
of descriptions that range from the innocuous ("I. Not felt except by a
very few") to the terrifying ("XII. Damage total . . . Objects thrown
upward into the air").
It includes the behavior of
people, the responses of houses and larger buildings, and natural phenomena.
For instance, people's
responses range from barely feeling ground motion at intensity I to everyone
running outdoors at intensity VII, the same intensity at which chimneys begin
to break.
At intensity VIII, sand and
mud are ejected from the ground and heavy furniture overturns.
Mapping Seismic Intensity
Turning human reports into
consistent maps happen online today, but it used to be quite laborious. During
the aftermath of a quake, scientists collected intensity reports as fast as
they could.
Postmasters in the United
States sent the government a report every time a quake struck. Private citizens
and local geologists did the same.
If you're into earthquake
preparedness, consider learning more about what quake investigators do by
downloading their official field manual.
With these reports in hand,
investigators of the U.S. Geological Survey then interviewed other expert
witnesses, such as building engineers and inspectors, to help them map zones of
equivalent intensity.
Eventually, a contour map
showing the intensity zones was finalized and published.
An intensity map can show
some useful things. It can delineate the fault that caused the quake. It can
also show areas of unusually strong shaking far from the fault.
These areas of "bad
ground" are important when it comes to zoning, for instance, or disaster
planning or deciding where to route freeways and other infrastructure.
Advances
In 1992, a European committee
set out to refine the seismic intensity scale in the light of new knowledge.
In particular, we have
learned a great deal about how different kinds of buildings respond to shaking —
in effect, we can treat them like amateur seismographs.
In 1995 the European
Macroseismic Scale (EMS) was widely adopted across Europe. It has 12 points,
the same as the Mercalli scale, but it is much more detailed and precise. It
includes many pictures of damaged buildings, for instance.
Another advance was being
able to assign harder numbers to intensities.
The EMS includes specific
values of ground acceleration for each intensity rank. (So does the latest
Japanese scale.)
The new scale cannot be
taught in a single lab exercise, the way the Mercalli scale is taught in the
United States.
But those who master it will
be the best in the world at extracting good data from the rubble and confusion
of an earthquake's aftermath.
Why Old Research Methods Are
Still Important
The study of earthquakes gets
more sophisticated every year, and thanks to these advances the oldest research
methods work better than ever.
The nice machines and clean
data make for good fundamental science.
But one great practical
benefit is that we can calibrate all kinds of earthquake damages against the
seismograph.
Now we can extract good data
from human records where — and when — there are no seismometers.
Intensities can be estimated
for earthquakes all the way through history, using old records like diaries and
newspapers.
Earth is a slow-moving place,
and in many places the typical earthquake cycle takes centuries.
We don't have centuries to
wait, so deriving reliable information about the past is a valuable task.
Ancient human records are
much better than nothing, and sometimes what we learn about past seismic events
is almost as good as having seismographs there.
Andrew Alden
· Professional geologist,
writer, photographer, and geological tour guide
· Thirty-seven years of
experience writing about geological subjects
· Six years as a research guide
with U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
· Member of Geological Society of America (GSA), and American Geophysical Union (AGU)
Experience
Andrew Alden is a former writer for
ThoughtCo who contributed hundreds of articles for more than 17 years. Andrew
works as a geologist, writer, editor, and photographer. He has written on
geological subjects since 1981 and participates actively in his field. For
example, Andrew spent six years as a research guide with the U.S.
Geological Survey, leading excursions on both land land and at
sea. And since 1992, he has hosted the earthquakes conference for the online
discussion platform, The Well, which began as a dialogue between the writers and readers of the Whole
Earth Review.
In addition, Andrew is a longtime member of
the member of the Geological Society of America — an international society that serves members in academia,
government, and industry; and the American Geophysical Union — a community of earth and space scientists that advances
the power of science to ensure a sustainable future.
Andrew lives in Oakland, California; and though
he writes about the whole planet and beyond, Andrew finds his own
city full of interest too and blogs about its geology.
Education
Andrew Alden holds a bachelor's
(B.A.) degree in Earth Science from the University of New Hampshire,
College of Engineering and Physical Sciences, in Durham, N.H.
Awards and Publications
· Assessment of River — Floodplain
Aquifer Interactions (Environmental and Engineering Geoscience, 1997)
· Andrew Alden on Hosting (The Well Group,
Inc., 1995)
ThoughtCo and Dotdash
ThoughtCo is a premier reference site
focusing on expert-created education content. We are one of the top-10
information sites in the world as rated by comScore, a leading Internet
measurement company. Every month, more than 13 million readers seek answers to
their questions on ThoughtCo.
For more than 20 years, Dotdash brands have been helping people find
answers, solve problems, and get inspired. We are one of the top-20 largest
content publishers on the Internet according to comScore, and reach more than
30% of the U.S. population monthly. Our brands collectively have won more than
20 industry awards in the last year alone, and recently Dotdash was named
Publisher of the Year by Digiday, a leading industry publication.
No comments:
Post a Comment