Earthquake Hazard

Presented by: Stephen Crane, M.Sc. Ph.D. Candidate Earth Science

Lecture Outline
Earthquake intensity Earthquake damage
Mitigation against earthquake hazards

Review
Earthquake Locations: most (but not all) occur along plate boundaries
Seismic waves: body and surface waves Earthquake Size: measured with magnitude scales.

Earthquake Intensity
Intensity: Qualitative description at a location, as evidenced by observed damage and human reactions
vs. Magnitude: Quantitative measure of the size and strength of an earthquake

Qualitative
Uses descriptions from those affected. Can infer intensity from past events with no recordings
1906 San Francisco earthquake, CA; eyewitness account " Of a sudden we had found ourselves staggering and reeling. It was as if the earth was slipping gently from under our feet. Then came the sickening swaying of the earth that threw us flat upon our faces. We struggled in the street. We could not get on our feet. Then it seemed as though my head were split with the roar that crashed into my ears. Big buildings were crumbling as one might crush a biscuit in one's hand. "
Source: http://www.eyewitnesshistory.com/

Intensity Scales
Intensity is measured using a scale: often ranging from not felt to total damage
Several scales used worldwide:
Most english speaking countries: modified Mercalli intensity (MMI) Japan: Japanese Meterological Agency (JMA) Central and Eastern Europe: MedvedevSpoonheuer-Karnik (MSK)

Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale

Originally developed by Mercalli (Italian Sesimologist)
Modified by others, including C. Ricter (American Seismologist), to correspond to California conditions

Ranges from I XII

Isoseismal Maps
Contour map of earthquake intensity Based on damage observed and reports

Did you feel it?

http://www.earthquakescanada.nrcan.gc.ca/dyfi-lavr/known-connu-eng.php

Asks for when, where and how intense was it?

June, 2010 Val-de-Bois Earthquake

Source: Stephen Halchuk, GSC Preliminary report, shown with permission

1935 Temiscaming earthquake (M6.2)

Source: M. Lamontagne, NRCan. Shown with permission.

Other Intensity Maps

Isoseismal maps are good to use but:
They take a while to create Only as good as the records and reports allow

Would like something almost real time, i.e. ShakeMaps:

Created moments after an earthquake, and updated Use recorded values to determine intensity USGS has a ShakeMap generator

Source: USGS Earthquakes. Shown with permission.

Source: USGS Earthquakes. Shown with permission.

Earthquake Damage

Earthquake Damage
Factors include:
Earthquake parameters: magnitude, duration of shaking, epicenter location, depth, etc. Aftershocks Site conditions, ex. rock vs soil Building style and materials

Magnitude
Larger magnitude = higher intensity

Duration of Shaking
Larger magnitude = longer time of strong shaking

Note: there are several magnitude scales are based on the duration

Epicenter Location
Close to populated areas = not good

Hypocenter Depth
Shallower earthquakes produce stronger shaking

Aftershocks
Occur often gradually decreasing over time after a main shock
Can be almost as strong as the main shock Example: 2002, November 3rd M7.9 Denali Earthquake (Alaska)

Source: USGS Earthquakes. Shown with permission.

Distance from Epicenter

Waves attenuate more with distance travelled Can depend on the region: i.e. western N. A. attenuates faster than eastern N. A.

Source: Earthquakes Canada

4th

Ref.: Abbott, P.L. 2004. Natural Disasters. Edition. Fig. 5.16. Shown with permission.

Local Site Conditions

Where you are can strongly influence the intensity of shaking you feel
Top 0-30m can have a large impact on the ground motion
Local site amplification Liquefaction Landslides

Example: Mexico City, 1985

Magnitude 8.1 Subduction zone earthquake 8,000 lives lost Severity of damage related to near-surface conditions
Mexico City built over drained Lake Texcoco
Ground motion of soft lake sediments amplified by surface waves

~370km Rock

Ref.: Abbott, P.L. 2004. Natural Disasters. 4th Edition. Fig. 4.6. Shown with permission.

Soft lake sediments

~400km

Example: Mexico City, 1985

Example: Mexico City, 1985

Spectral acceleration for UNAM (Rock) and SCT (Clay)

Example: Mexico City, 1985

The damage in Mexico City was in a large part due to COINCIDENCE between the dominant period of the ground shaking and the natural period of vibration of these high-rise structures.
Most severe damage to almost 400 buildings between 7 and 18 storeys in height. (EEFIT, 1986)

Local Site Amplification

Local site effects are built into the NBCC Building design for seismic loading is dependent upon:
Location NEHRP site classification (we will discuss this shortly)

Local Site Amplification

Rocks and Soils have a different response
frequency content amplitude of ground motions

0-30m is a good indicator of site response (measure Vs30)

Local Site Amplification

Local site amplification effects include:
Broadband amplification Resonance amplification Focusing (defocusing) of seismic waves Surface wave generation at basin edges

Broadband Amplification
Seismic waves increase amplitude travelling through softer materials

Source: J. Hunter, GSC

Resonance Amplification
Seismic waves get trapped in an acoustic medium
Certain frequencies have stronger amplifications

Source: J. Hunter, GSC

Focusing (Defocusing)
Waves combine or disperse depending on bedrock topography

Source: J. Hunter, GSC

Surface Wave Generation

Basin edges are known to generate surface waves
Seismic waves are amplified and periods are longer

Source: J. Hunter, GSC

Liquefaction
Liquefaction: phenomenon in which the strength of soil is reduced by rapid and violent shaking
Occurs in saturated soils in which the space between particles is filled with water Liquefied soil behaves like a liquid
Does not have the strength to support a load

1964 Niigata earthquake, Japan

Source: Steinbrugge Collection, EERC

Landslides
Soils or clays along a slope fail and shift downwards
i.e. Force of gravity overcomes the cohesive strength of the soil

Lemieux, Ontario
Settled around 1850 as a milling and farming community
Purchased by South Nation River Conservation Authority and Ministry of Natural Resources for Ontario in 1989

All homes were moved or destroyed by 1991

Lemieux Landslide, 1993

Caused by heavy rainfall Covered 17 hectares Crater dimensions = 680m long by 320m wide by 18m deep 2.5-3.5 million cubic meters of debris

Landslides
Other landslides in the region are thought to be caused from earthquakes
15 landslides dated around 4550 years ago Large deformation of soil and sand areas dated at 7060 years ago

Building Style and Materials

Earthquakes dont kill, buildings do.

Very few people have died as a direct result of an earthquake. Most deaths occur from secondary disasters; i.e. tsunami, fire, building collapse, etc.

Comparison between San Francisco and Messina

Date Time Magnitude Associated disasters Casualities Structures San Francisco Messina California Sicily United States Italy 18 April 1906 28 December 1908 05:13 AM 05:23 AM 8.25 7.5 Tsunami NO NO Fires Burning for 3 days Few small fires Lost lives 700 83000 Survival rate 99.8% 45.0% Wood Masonry

In Messina, houses were predominantly masonry, with massive stone floors and brick-tile roofs supported by timber set into niches in granite walls"
Example from "Perils of a restless planet"

Building Response
Different building materials behave differently when subjected to external deformation forces
The same material can behave differently depending on the type of external deformation forces
Tension Compression Shear

Types of Stresses
Tension Compression

Shear

Elastic Limit
Materials behave elastically below this limit (i.e. Return to original shape)
Above this limit, two possiblities:
Abrupt failure; stone, brick Plastic deformation; wood, steel

Deformation forces acting on the surface of a body

Failure
Elastic limit

Failure

Deformation
Elastic behavior Plastic behavior

Messina: structures were hard; failed at elastic limit San Francisco: structures were soft; failed after plastic behavior

Building Response
Resonance amplification also affects buildings
Natural frequency Near-surface geology Buildings Bungalow Two-storey building High-rise building (10 Hz) (5 Hz) (1 Hz) Soft sediments (f<1Hz) Hard rock (f>1Hz) Vulnerable Vulnerable

Earthquake Damage
Which type of seismic wave is most damaging to structures?
P-waves (compression, tension) S-waves (shear) Surface waves (tension, compression and shear)

S-waves!
Shearing motion is often most damaging
S-waves tend to be the strongest waves close to the epicenter Tension, compression already accounted for in building design (gravity) Surface waves take some distance to fully develop (not as strong near source)
However these can be stronger away from the source

Mitigation against Seismic Hazards

Steps
1. Classify Seismic Hazard vs. Risk 2. Identify high/low risk areas 3. Determine likelihood of a certain level/type of seismic loading 4. Mitigate the hazard as best as possible!

Hazard vs. Risk

Seismic Hazard: shaking irrespective of consequence
Risk = Hazard * Vulnerability Vulnerability: likelihood that a community will suffer injuries, deaths or property damage from a hazardous event

Seismic Hazard
Civilisation exists by geological consent, subject to change without prior notice.
William Durant, historian

Seismic Hazard: the possibility of that consent being withdrawn

Seismic Hazard
Can be found either:
Deterministically: maximum level of shaking possible

Probabilistically: likelihood of above a certain level of shaking over a specified time frame

Seismic Hazard
What do we need to know?
Seismic sources in the area (historical seismicity, paleoseismic studies)

Distance to these sources

Types (or sizes) of earthquakes

Seismicity
Historical Seismicity:
Earthquakes often occur where they have in the past

Plate tectonics:
Earthquakes often occur along plate boundaries

Paleoseismic studies:
has a young fault (<11,000 years old) been found in an area

Other seismic sources:

hotspots, meteor impacts, etc

2010 NBCC Seismic Hazard Map of Canada

Source: Earthquakes Canada, shown with permission

Vulnerability = Population distribution

Source: Earthquakes Canada

Seismic Risk

Source: Earthquakes Canada

Sample of Risk Calculations

City Hazard Exposure
Low High

Risk
Low High

Baffin Island High Vancouver High

Toronto

Low

High

Moderate

Risk by Canadian City

Now we know the high risk areas and the regional hazards, how do we mitigate these hazards?
Low Risk areas: monitor events and indicate areas of possible damage High Risk areas: design and build according to specific hazards

Monitoring
Canadian National Seismograph Network
Network of 160 seismographs

Data telemetered to Ottawa Analysis in near real-time

Canadian National Seismograph Network

3-component Broadband

3-component High Broadband

1-component Extremely Short Period 1-component Short Period

Earthquakes Canada: Early Warning System

"Autoloc" software
Automatic event detection and location

Rapid earthquake alert service (AENEAS)

Issues alerts to railways, dam owners, nuclear power plants
Usually within 8 minutes 2-3 valid notifications/year 1-2 false alarms/year

Rapid alerts help ensure the right actions are taken promptly

Source: J. Adams, Earthquakes Canada

Earthquake Report

Rapport d'un tremblement de terre Time/Heure : 11:22:56 Region : east/est Status : Q018/OTT UT

Date : 2000/01/01 Epicenter : 47.11 -78.74 Magnitude : 5.3 Richter

Alert to railways Proceed at restricted speed

104 KM NE OF NORTH BAY, ONT. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------Action PROCEED AT RESTRICTED SPEED... until inspections have been completed and appropriate speeds established by proper authority

LES TRAINS ET LES LOCOMOTIVES DEVRONT OBLIGATOIREMENT CONTINUER LEUR AVANCE VITESSE DE MARCHE VUE... jusqu' ce que les inspections soient termines et que l'autorit comptente ait dfini les vitesses particulires respecter. From/de To/ Mile/Mille Mile/Mille 6.9 76.5 44.6 276.1 0.0 6.0 0.0 170.5 0.0 61.1 41.5 233.4 0.0 176.4 118.9 257.2 0.0 97.3 0.0 101.2 0.0 5.8

Line ( Station to/ Station )

ALEXANDRIA (DE BEAUJEU to/ OTTAWA) BALA (ZEPHYR to/ CAPREOL) BEACHBURG (OTTAWA to/ FEDERAL) CHAPAIS (BARRAUTE to/ CHAPAIS) MATAGAMI (FRANQUET to/ MATAGAMI) NEWMARKET (BRADFORD to/ YELLEK) RUEL (CAPREOL to/ OATLAND) ST MAURICE (PARENT to/ SENNETERRE) TASCHEREAU (SENNETERRE to/ LA SARRE) VAL D"OR (SENNETERRE to/ NORANDA) WALKLEY LINE (HAWTHORNE to/ WASS)

Track segments affected

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------ACTION: CONFIRM RECEIPT OF THIS MESSAGE TO: EQalert@seismo.nrcan.gc.ca

High Risk Areas

Specify level of hazard at that location
Seismic hazard map of Canada is insufficient for this scale

Geotechnical evaluation of each site

= costly, not very time efficient

Microzonation of high risk regions

Use simple measurement to classify specific locations
NEHRP site classification

National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP)

Site Class A B C D E F Generic Description Hard Rock Rock Very dense soil and soft rock Stiff soil Soil profile with soft clay Site-specific geotechnical investigation required (sensitive and liquefiable soil) Range of Vs30 (m/s) >1500 760 - 1500 360 - 760 180 - 360 < 180

Vs30 site classification for seismic site response as defined by NEHRP (1994) and adapted by the 2005 National Building Code of Canada

Microzonation of Ottawa

Source: Dr. Motazedian, Carleton University, shown with permission

Microzonation
Other high risk areas are microzoned as well;
Examples are Vancouver, Montreal

Helps to specify expected ground shaking in a highly variable region Map does not include site class F locations!

Mitigation: Buildings
Avoid matching natural frequency of building and natural frequency of the site
Design to be able to withstand certain levels of seismic loading (minimum levels in NBCC)

Fundamental Period Map

Avoid Building High-Rises Here

National Building Code of Canada

Includes a uniform hazard spectrum which buildings must be designed to withstand
Different for each city

Amplification factors for the different site classes

Current Research
Modelling basin effects
3D vs 1D amplification

Soil strength and amplification Large scale velocity mapping

Basin Effects
Can see several subsurface basins from microzonation and fundamental period maps
Currently have 3 soil/rock seismometer pairs in these basins Objective: separate 1-D amplification from 3-D amplification

References
Abbott, P.L. 2004. Natural disasters. McGraw Hill. th 4 Edition. Kramer, S.L. 1996. Geotechnical earthquake engineering. Prentice Hall. Zebrowski, E. 1997. Perils of a restless planet. Cambridge University Press.
Interesting websites:
Earthquakes Canada earthquakescanada.nrcan.gc.ca/index_e.php USGS Earthquakes http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/