Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Empirical relationships between macroseimic intensity and instrumental ground motion parameters for the intermediate-depth earthquakes of Vrancea region, Romania

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Natural Hazards Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Empirical relationships between MSK macroseismic intensity and several engineering ground motion parameters are developed using the macroseismic and instrumental data available for five significant earthquakes (Mw magnitude 6 and above), which occurred during the past half-century in Vrancea region, Romania. The relations are suitable for the Carpathian bend zone and surroundings, and they are valid for intensity values between 5 and 8; in this range, the MSK intensity is basically defined by the level of structural damage. The capability of the selected ground motion parameters to predict the macroseismic intensity is evaluated by observing the standard deviations associated with the proposed regression models. Generally, the parameters which take into account the ground motion duration appear to be more stable predictors than the parameters based on the peak ground motion. The most reliable damage indicator appears to be the Arias intensity. The proposed regression relationships provide intensity predictions with uncertainty close to one-half unit; therefore, they are reliable tools for rapid loss estimation and emergency response coordination following a strong earthquake of Vrancea region. The derived equations represent also useful instruments for seismic risk assessment by methodologies based on macroseismic intensity, since in current practice the earthquake hazard and seismic impact are mainly given in terms of engineering ground motion parameters.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ambraseys N (1975) The correlation of intensity with ground motion. In: Proceeding 14th conference European seismological commission, Trieste, vol 1, pp 335–341

  • Ambraseys N, Douglas J, Sarma SK, Smit PM (2005) Equations for the estimation of strong ground motions from shallow crustal earthquakes using data from Europe and the Middle East: horizontal peak ground acceleration and spectral acceleration. Bull Earthq Eng 3:1–53

    Google Scholar 

  • Ang AHS (1990) Reliability bases for seismic safety assessment and design. In: Proceedings of the Fourth U.S. National conference on earthquake, Palm Springs, CA, pp 29–45

  • Araya R, Saragoni R (1984) Earthquake accelerogram destructiveness potential factor. In: Proceedings of the eighth world conference on earthquake engineering, San Francisco, CA, vol 2, pp 835–841

  • Ardeleanu L, Neagoe C (2016a) The performance of the stations of the Romanian seismic network in monitoring the local seismic activity. Part I Vrancea subcrustal seismicity. Rom Rep Phys 68:393–415

    Google Scholar 

  • Ardeleanu L, Neagoe C (2016b) The performance of the stations of the Romanian seismic network in monitoring the local seismic activity. Part II Normal depth events. Rom Rep Phys 68:832–852

    Google Scholar 

  • Arias A (1970) A measure of earthquake intensity. In: Hansen RJ (ed) Seismic design for nuclear power plants. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, Cambridge, pp 438–469

    Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson GM, Kaka SI (2007) Relationships between felt intensity and instrumental ground motion in the central United States and California. Bull Seismol Soc Am 97:497–510

    Google Scholar 

  • Boatwright J, Thywissen K, Seekins L (2001) Correlation of ground motion and intensity for the 17 January 1994 Northridge, California earthquake. Bull Seismol Soc Am 91:739–752

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonjer KP, Ionescu C, Sokolov V, Radulian M, Grecu B, Popa M, Popescu E (2008) Ground motion patterns of intermediate-depth Vrancea earthquakes: the October 27, 2004 event. In: Craifaleanu I, Paskaleva I (eds) Zaicenco A Harmonization of seismic hazard in Vrancea zone. NATO Science for Peace and Security Series C Environmental Security. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 47–62

    Google Scholar 

  • Cabanas L, Benito B, Herraiz M (1997) An approach to the measurement of the potential structural damage of earthquake ground motions. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 26:79–92

    Google Scholar 

  • Cancani C (1904) Sur l’emploi d’une double echelle seismique des intensites empirique et absolue. Gerlands Beitrage Geophysik 2:281–283

    Google Scholar 

  • Caprio M, Tarigan B, Worden CB, Wiemer S, Wald D (2015) Ground motion to intensity conversion equations (GMICEs): a global relationship and evaluation of regional dependency. Bull Seismol Soc Am 105:1476–1490

    Google Scholar 

  • Constantin A, Pantea A (2013) Macroseismic field of the October 27, 2004 Vrancea (Romania) moderate subcrustal earthquake. J Seismol 17:1149–1156

    Google Scholar 

  • Danciu L, Tselentis GA (2007) Engineering ground-motion parameters attenuation relationships for Greece. Bull Seismol Soc Am 97:162–183

    Google Scholar 

  • Demetrescu G (1941) Détermination provisoire de l’epicentre du tremblement de terre de Roumanie du 10 Novembre 1940. Observatoire de Bucuresti, Station sismique, p 10

    Google Scholar 

  • Enescu D (1997) Ground movement acceleration-macroseismic intensity relations for Vrancea earthquakes. Considerations of the macroseismic maps of some of these earthquakes. St Cerc Geofizica 35:15–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Faenza L, Michelini A (2010) Regression analysis of MCS intensity and ground motion parameters in Italy and its application in ShakeMap. Geophys J Int 180:1138–1152

    Google Scholar 

  • Fajfar P, Vidic T, Fischinger M (1990) A measure of earthquake motion capacity to damage medium-period structures. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 9:236–242

    Google Scholar 

  • Gama Garcia A, Gomez Bernal A (2008) Relationships between instrumental ground motion parameters, and modified Mercalli intensity in Guerrero, Mexico. In: Proc 14th World Conference Earthquake Engineering Beijing, China

  • Gutenberg B, Richter CF (1942) Earthquake magnitude, intensity, energy, and acceleration. Bull Seismol Soc Am 32:163–191

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanks TC (1979) b-values and ω-γ source models: implications for tectonic stress variations along crustal fault zones and the estimation of high frequency strong ground motions. J Geophys Res 84:2235–2242

    Google Scholar 

  • Hershberger J (1956) A comparison of earthquake accelerations with intensity ratings. Bull Seismol Soc Am 46:317–320

    Google Scholar 

  • Housner GW, Jennings PC (1977) The capacity of extreme earthquake motions to damage structures. In: Hall WJ (ed) Structural and geotechnical mechanics: a volume honoring N M. Newmark. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliff, pp 102–116

    Google Scholar 

  • Ishimoto M (1932) Echelle d' intensite sismique et acceleration maxima. Bull Earthq Res Inst Tokyo Univ 10:614–626

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaka SI, Atkinson GM (2004) Relationships between instrumental ground-motion parameters and modified Mercalli intensity in Eastern North America. Bull Seismol Soc Am 94:1728–1736

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanasewich ER (1981) Time sequence analysis in geophysics. The University of Alberta Press, Edmonton

    Google Scholar 

  • Koliopoulos PK, Margaris BN, Klims NS (1998) Duration and energy characteristics of Greek strong motion records. J Earthq Eng 2:391–417

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer SL (1996) Geotechnical earthquake engineering. Prentice Hall, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Kronrod T, Radulian M, Panza G, Popa M, Paskaleva I, Radovanovich S, Gribovszki K, Sandu I, Pekevski L (2013) Integrated transnational macroseismic data set for the strongest earthquakes of Vrancea (Romania). Tectonophysics 590:1–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Leydecker G, Busche H, Bonjer KP, Schmitt T, Kaiser D, Simeonova S, Solakov D, Ardeleanu L (2008) Probabilistic seismic hazard in terms of intensities for Bulgaria and Romania—updated hazard maps. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 8:1431–1439

    Google Scholar 

  • Linkimer L (2008) Relationship between peak ground acceleration and Modified Mercalli Intensity in Costa Rica. Rev Geol Amér Central 38:81–94

    Google Scholar 

  • Margottini C, Molin D, Serva L (1992) Intensity versus ground motion: a new approach using Italian data. Eng Geol 33:45–58

    Google Scholar 

  • McCann MW, Boore D (1983) Variability in ground motions: root mean square acceleration and peak acceleration for the 1971 San Fernando, California, earthquake. Bull Seismol Soc Am 73:615–632

    Google Scholar 

  • McCann MW, Shah HC (1979) RMS acceleration for seismic risk analysis: an overview. In: Proceedings 2nd U.S. National Conference Earthquake Engineering, Stanford, CA, pp 883–897

  • Mw McCann, Sauter F, Shah HC (1980) A technical note on PGA -intensity relations with applications to damage estimation. Bull Seismol Soc Am 70:631–637

    Google Scholar 

  • Molchan GM, Kronrod TL, Panza GF (2002) Shape analysis of isoseismals based on empirical and synthetic data. Pure Appl Geoph 159:1229–1251

    Google Scholar 

  • Mortgat CP (1979) A probabilistic definition of effective acceleration. In: Proceedings 2nd U.S. National Conference Earthquake Engineering, Stanford, CA, pp 743–751

  • Murphy JR, O’Brien LJ (1977) The correlation of peak ground acceleration amplitude with seismic intensity and other physical parameters. Bull Seismol Soc Am 67:877–915

    Google Scholar 

  • Neagoe C, Ionescu C (2009) Toward a dense real-time seismic network in Romania. Rom Rep Phys 61:359–366

    Google Scholar 

  • Neagoe C, Manea LM, Ionescu C (2011) Romanian complex data center for dense seismic network. Ann Geophys 54:9–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Oncescu MC, Mârza VI, Rizescu M, Popa M (1999) The Romanian earthquake catalogue between 984–1996. In: Wenzel F, Lungu D, Novak O (eds) Vrancea earthquakes: tectonics, hazard and risk mitigation. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp 43–49

    Google Scholar 

  • Panza GF, Romanelli F, Vaccari F, Decanini L, Moliaioli F (2002) Seismic ground motion modelling and damage earthquake scenarios, a bridge between seismologists and seismic engineers. The Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics, Miramare—Trieste, Preprint IC/2002/82, July 2002, www.ictp.trieste.it/~pub_off

  • Radu C, Utale A (1989) A new version of the March 4, 1977 Vrancea earthquake. Report CFPS 30.86.3/1989, II, A4, Bucharest, pp 31–32 (in Romanian)

  • Radu C, Utale A (1990) Vrancea earthquake of 30 May 1990, Intensity distribution. Report CFP/IFA 30.86.3/1990, IV, A2, Bucharest (in Romanian)

  • Radu C, Utale A (1991) Vrancea earthquake of 31 May 1990, Intensity distribution. Report CFP/IFA 30.91.3/1991, Bucharest (in Romanian)

  • Radu C, Utale A, Winter V (1987) The August 30, 1986 Vrancea earthquake. Seismic intensity distribution. Report CFPS 30.86.3/1987, II, A3, Bucharest (in Romanian)

  • Reed JW, Anderson N, Chokshi NC, Kennedy RP, Metevia WJ, Ostrom DK, Stevenson JD (1988). A criterion for determining exceedance of the operating basis earthquake. Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, & Benjamin JR and Associates, Inc., Mountain View, CA, Final report EPRI-NP-5930, United States

  • Schenk V, Mantlik F, Zhizhin MN, Tumarkin AG, Zhizhin MN (1990) Relation between macroseismic intensity and instrumental parameters of strong motions—a statistical approach. Nat Hazards 3:111–124

    Google Scholar 

  • Sørensen MB, Stromeyer D, Grünthal G (2008) Estimation of macroseismic intensity—new attenuation and intensity versus ground motion relations for different parts of Europe. In: Proceedings 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China

  • Souriau A (2006) Quantifying felt events: a joint analysis of intensities, accelerations and dominant frequencies. J Seismol 10:23–38

    Google Scholar 

  • Theodulidis NP, Papazachos BC (1992) Dependence of strong ground motion on magnitude-distance, site geology and macroseismic intensity for shallow earthquakes in Greece: I, peak horizontal acceleration, velocity and displacement. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 11:387–402

    Google Scholar 

  • Trifunac MD, Brady AG (1975a) On the correlation of seismic intensity with peaks of recorded ground motion. Bull Seismol Soc Am 65:139–162

    Google Scholar 

  • Trifunac MD, Brady AG (1975b) A study on the duration of strong earthquake ground motion. Bull Seismol Soc Am 65:581–626

    Google Scholar 

  • Trifunac MD, Lee VW (1974) A note on the accuracy of computed ground displacements from strong-motion accelerograms. Bull Seismol Soc Am 64:1209–1219

    Google Scholar 

  • Trifunac MD, Brady AG, Hudson DE (1973) Strong-motion earthquake accelerograms, corrected accelerograms and integrated ground velocity and displacement curves. In: Earthquake Engineering Research Laboratory, Calif Inst of Tech, Pasadena, CA, Vol II, Part G, EERL, pp 73–52

  • Tselentis GA (2011) Assessment of Arias Intensity of historical earthquakes using modified Mercalli intensities and artificial neural networks. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 11:3097–3105

    Google Scholar 

  • Tselentis GA, Danciu L (2008) Empirical relationships between modified Mercalli intensity and engineering ground-motion parameters in Greece. Bull Seismol Soc Am 98:1863–1875

    Google Scholar 

  • Vacareanu R, Iancovici M, Neagu C, Pavel F (2015a) Macroseismic intensity prediction equations for Vrancea intermediate-depth seismic source. Nat Hazards 79:2005–2031

    Google Scholar 

  • Vacareanu R, Radulian M, Iancovici M, Pavel F, Neagu C (2015b) Fore-arc and back-arc ground motion prediction model for Vrancea intermediate depth seismic source. J Earthq Eng 19:535–562

    Google Scholar 

  • Wald DJ, Quitoriano V, Heaton TH, Kanamori H (1999) Relationships between peak ground acceleration, peak ground velocity, and modified Mercalli intensity in California. Earthq Spectra 15:557–564

    Google Scholar 

  • Worden CB, Gerstenberger MC, Rhoades DA, Wald DJ (2012) Probabilistic relationships between ground-motion parameters and modified Mercalli intensity in California. Bull Seismol Soc Am 102:204–221

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu YM, Teng TI, Shin TC, Hsiao NC (2003) Relationship between peak ground acceleration, peak ground velocity and intensity in Taiwan. Bull Seismol Soc Am 93:386–396

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaré M, Bard PY (2002) Strong motion dataset of Turkey: data processing and site classification. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 22:703–718

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The research was supported by the Romanian Ministry of Research and Innovation, Contract 21N/2016, Project PN 16 35 01 02, and Contract 31N/2019, Projects PN 19 08 01 02 and PN 19 08 02 01. The authors thank the two anonymous reviewers for their comments and recommendations which have helped to improve the paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Institute for Earth Physics, 12 Calugareni Str, P. O. Box MG-2, 077125, Magurele, Ilfov, Romania

    Luminita Ardeleanu, Cristian Neagoe & Constantin Ionescu

Authors
  1. Luminita Ardeleanu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cristian Neagoe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Constantin Ionescu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Luminita Ardeleanu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ardeleanu, L., Neagoe, C. & Ionescu, C. Empirical relationships between macroseimic intensity and instrumental ground motion parameters for the intermediate-depth earthquakes of Vrancea region, Romania. Nat Hazards 103, 2021–2043 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-020-04070-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-020-04070-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation