AQUILA, MICHOACÁN, MEXICO SEPTEMBER 19, 2022, Mw 7.6 EARTHQUAKEPRELIMINARY VIRTUAL RECONNAISSANCE REPORT (PVRR)

Virtual Earthquake Reconnaissance Team (VERT) Lead:
Eduardo Miranda, Stanford University
Virtual Earthquake Reconnaissance Team (VERT) Authors:(in alphabetical order)
Verónica Abuchar, U del Norte, Colombia
Sergio Alcocer, Instituto de Ingeniería, UNAM, México
Sofía Aldea, U Técnica Federico Santa María, Chile
Juan Álvarez Vargas, UNAM, México
Jorge Archbold, U del Norte, Colombia
Orlando Arroyo, Universidad de la Sabana
Carlos Arteta, U del Norte, Colombia
Eriberto Ballinas, UNAM, México
Diego Benavides, U del Norte, Colombia
Carlos Blandón, Universidad EIA
Miguel Bravo, University of Cambridge, UK
Jesús Caballero, U del Norte, Colombia
Julián Carrillo, U Militar Nueva Granada, Colombia
Cristian Cruz, U Técnica Federico Santa María, Chile
Ulises Espinoza, Instituto de Ingeniería, UNAM, México

Paola Gil, Instituto de Ingeniería, UNAM, México
Héctor Guerrero, Instituto de Ingeniería, UNAM, México
Selim Gunay, UC Berkeley
Pablo Heresi, U Técnica Federico Santa María, Chile
Cyprien Lubin, Instituto de Ingeniería, UNAM, México
Juan Mayoral, Instituto de Ingeniería, UNAM, México
Sebastián Miranda, Universidad del Desarrollo, Chile
César Pájaro, U del Norte, Colombia
Carlos Piscal, U de la Salle, Colombia
Juliana Rivera, U del Norte, Colombia
Vladimir Rodríguez Moreno, UNAM, México
Angie Urango, U del Norte, Colombia
Jáver Vargas Ortiz, Instituto de Ingeniería, UNAM, México
Luis Velasco, Instituto de Ingeniería, UNAM, MéxicoPVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 20221

Virtual Reconnaissance Assessment Team (VRAT) Editor:(in alphabetical order)
Jorge Archbold, U del Norte, Colombia
Pablo Heresi, U Técnica Federico Santa María, Chile
Ian Robertson, U of Hawaii
Michael Mieler, Arup

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

2

PREFACE
The Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (EERI) is the leading non-profit membershiporganization in the United States that connects those dedicated to reducing earthquake risk. Its
multidisciplinary members include engineers, geoscientists, social scientists, architects, planners,
emergency managers, academics, students, and other like-minded professionals. EERI has beenbringing people and disciplines together since 1948. EERI’s mission is to provide members withthe technical knowledge, leadership and advocacy skills, collaborative networks, andmultidisciplinary context to achieve earthquake resilience in their communities worldwide. EERI
has members not only in the U.S. but worldwide.
This report has been produced by EERI’s Learning From Earthquakes (LFE) program. The
mission of the LFE Program is to accelerate and increase learning from earthquake-induced
disasters that affect the natural, built, social and political environments worldwide. This mission isaccomplished through field, remote or hybrid reconnaissance, data collection and archiving, anddissemination of lessons and opportunities for reducing earthquake losses and increasing
community
resilience.
For
more
informationon
LFE,
pleasevisit
http://www.learningfromearthquakes.org/about
Sociedad Mexicana de Ingeniería Sísmica, SMIS, (Mexican Society for Earthquake Engineering),
founded in 1962, is a scientific and technical society, whose mission is to promote, disseminate
and exchange knowledge, experiences and scientific and technological research on Earthquake
Engineering in a multidisciplinary context. Its objectives include: (1) Investigate and develop
technology to study, analyze, detect and evaluate seismic phenomena, prepare and develop
projects to promote research, data collection and experiences related to Earthquake Engineering,
Natural Risk Engineering and others; (2) Bring together people interested in earthquake
engineering problems with the purpose of exchanging knowledge, experiences and technologicalresearch; (3) Organize scientific events, such as workshops, courses, seminars, round tables,
conferences, congresses, symposiums, among others, to fulfill its mission; (4) Promote thepublication of technical reports, newsletters, magazines or others; (5) Exchange, experiences
derived from the occurrence of earthquakes and investigations with other interested associations
or institutions, and participate in efforts to acquire data and knowledge and its subsequent
applications; (6) Collaborate with related institutions in order to fulfill its mission. More details
about SMIS can be found in https://smis.org.mx/

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

3

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The EERI Learning from Earthquakes program is funded through the support of EERI members
and the generous contributions of LFE Endowment Fund Donors. Any opinions, findings,
conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this report are the authors’ and do not necessarilyreflect the views of EERI, the authors’ organizations, or donors.
Special thanks are given to the Colombian Earthquake Engineering Research (CEER) Network
who enthusiastically reached out to us immediately after the earthquake to offer their assistance.
Many faculty members and students, all fully bilingual, from seven different Universities inColombia doing research in Earthquake Engineering actively participated in gathering informationand in producing this report. Their contributions are greatly acknowledged. To learn more about
CEER please visit http://ceer.co/
Many individuals in Mexico in addition to those coauthoring this report also contributed withinformation and enthusiastic work in producing this reconnaissance report. In particular, we would
like to thank the following students at UNAM who contributed to the section on geotechnicaleffects on this earthquake: Daniel De La Rosa Arenas and José Mauricio Alcaraz Barranco.

For more information about the Earthquake Engineering Research Institute please visit the
EERI website: https://www.eeri.org/
In particular, for a full listing of resources including Virtual Earthquake Reconnaissance Team(VERT) reports, datasets, and publications for over 300 different earthquakes occurring in morethan 50 countries during the last 70 years of EERI’s Learning From Earthquakes program,please visit the EERI LFE earthquake archive:
https://learningfromearthquakes.org/archive/table-view

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

4

TABLE OF CONTENTSPREFACE................................................................................................................................... 3
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................................. 4
TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................................................. 5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 7
1

Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 82

Seismological Aspects ......................................................................................................... 9
2.1

Tectonic summary ........................................................................................................ 9

2.2

Earthquake Details ..................................................................................................... 13

2.2.1

3

M 6.8 – Michoacán Aftershock............................................................................. 17

2.3

Earthquake Early Warning (EEW)............................................................................... 19

2.4

Tsunami and Tsunami Warning .................................................................................. 20

Recorded Ground Motions ................................................................................................. 25
3.1

Comparison with ground motion models ..................................................................... 31

4"Did you feel it?" Reports ................................................................................................... 33

5

Local Codes and Construction Practices ........................................................................... 35

6

Impacts .............................................................................................................................. 39

7

6.1

Estimated Population Exposed ................................................................................... 39

6.2

Estimated Loss of Life and Injures .............................................................................. 40

Damage (Michoacán, Colima and Surrounding States) ..................................................... 42
7.1

Single-Family Residential Buildings ............................................................................ 43

7.2

Multi-Family Residential Buildings .............................................................................. 48

7.3

Commercial Buildings ................................................................................................. 49

7.4

Healthcare/Medical Facilities ...................................................................................... 54

7.5

Religious and Historical Buildings ............................................................................... 59

7.6

Government Buildings ................................................................................................ 65

7.7

School Buildings ......................................................................................................... 68

7.8

Non-structural Components ........................................................................................ 73

7.9

Geotechnical Observations ......................................................................................... 75

7.10

Industrial Facilities ...................................................................................................... 79

7.11

Infrastructure .............................................................................................................. 79

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

5

8

9

Damage (Mexico City and State of Mexico) ....................................................................... 82
8.1

Buildings ..................................................................................................................... 83

8.2

Healthcare / Medical Facilities .................................................................................... 91

8.3

Religious and Historical Buildings ............................................................................... 92

8.4

Non-structural Components ........................................................................................ 92

8.5

Infrastructure .............................................................................................................. 93

8.6

School buildings ......................................................................................................... 93

Videos Documenting Live Earthquake Shaking and Damage ............................................ 96

10. Recommended Response Strategy.................................................................................. 100
References ............................................................................................................................. 101

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

6

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On September 19th, 2022, a moment magnitude 7.6 earthquake struck the Pacific coast of Mexicoin the state of Michoacán between the cities of Manzanillo and Zihuantanejo. This is the third
major earthquake that has occurred in Mexico on September 19th in the last 40 years. A large
earthquake drill in Mexico City is carried out annually on the anniversary of the great Mw 8.0
September 19th 1985 earthquake. On September 19th 2017 a magnitude 7.1 occurred on the 32nd
anniversary of the 1985 earthquake a few hours after the city wide earthquake drill. Thismagnitude 7.6 earthquake struck again on the anniversary of the 1985 earthquake but now only
about 45 min after the city-wide earthquake drill. The Seismic Early Warning System of Mexico(SASMEX) was triggered as a result of this event working as expected and provided a 98 second
warning in Mexico City.
The earthquake mechanism corresponds to a reverse faulting mechanism characteristic ofearthquakes that occur on or near the plate boundary between the Cocos and North American
Plates. USGS focal mechanism solutions indicate that rupture occurred on a shallowly dipping(i.e., 18.0°) thrust fault. The rupture of this earthquake is located approximately between therupture of the great Mw8.0 September 19, 1985 to the South and the rupture of the great Mw8.0
October 9, 1995 to the North. The earthquake produced a small tsunami with a maximum
measured wave amplitude of 1.7m in the port of Manzanillo.
Three deaths were reported as a result of the main shock, one of them a minor who was severely
injured and subsequently died in the hospital as a result of the injuries. Additionally, two otherpersons in Mexico City died as result of an aftershock on September 22nd: one from injuries tothe head when she fell on the stairs and another as a result of a heart attack. Several hundredinjuries were reported as a result of the main earthquake.

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

7

1 Introduction
On September 19th, 2022, at approximately 1:05 pm local time, a moment magnitude 7.6
earthquake struck 37 km southwest of the Aquila municipality in the state of Michoacán, Mexico.
The epicentral coordinates reported by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS, 2022a) and theServicio Sismológico Nacional de México (National Seismological System of Mexico) (SSN,
2022a) were 18.367°N 103.252°W and 18.22°N 103.290°W, respectively. The USGS reported ahypocenter depth of 15.1 km, almost the same as that reported by SSN which reported a depthof 15.0 km. At the time of the writing of this report, over 1229 aftershocks have occurred (SSN,
2022b).
The largest aftershock occurred on September 22nd, three days after the main event, atapproximately 1:16 am local time. For this second event, the USGS reported a moment magnitudeof 6.8. According to the USGS the epicenter was located at 18.308°N 102.923°W, approximately
39 km southeast of that of the September 19th earthquake.
A tsunami warning was triggered by the Mw 7.6 earthquake for Mexican Pacific Coast, and theearthquake triggered waves at various locations with the largest waves reported in the port ofManzanillo where an amplitude of 1.7m was measured.
The main event and its aftershocks caused moderate to extensive damage to structures near the
epicenter, mainly affecting the states of Colima and Michoacán. Furthermore, reports of somedamage were found in cities located farther away from the epicentral region, as far as Mexico
City, which is located approximately 453 km from the epicenter of the main event.
There was a total of five fatalities reported as a result of the two events, three were caused by themain event on September 19th, and the other two occurred in Mexico City after the Mw 6.8
aftershock on September 22nd. Two of the fatalities produced by the main shock occurred during
the earthquake, one as a result of the collapse of a large facade element and the other of a partial
collapse of the roof of a gymnasium. The other was a minor who was injured as a result of a gas
explosion triggered by the earthquake and subsequently died in the hospital as a result of his
injuries. Of the fatalities produced by the aftershock one was produced by a heart attack and theother by head injuries to a person who fell on the stairs while evacuating her residence. Several
hundred people have been reported injured (CNN, 2022).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

8

2 Seismological Aspects
2.1 Tectonic summary
Mexico is located in a complex seismological region with active seismicity, as the result of theinteraction between six tectonic plates: North American (where most of the country sits), Cocos,
Rivera, Orozco, Pacific, and Caribbean plates, as shown in Figure 2.1. The high seismicity of the
Pacific Coast of Mexico is mainly controlled by the subduction process of the Cocos plate beneaththe North American plate, in a northeast direction, at an approximate rate of 70 mm/yr, with arelatively shallow dip angle (lower than 30°, according to Singh et al. 1981).
Since 1900, Mexico has experienced 235 earthquakes with magnitudes equal to or greater than
6.5 (USGS, 2022b), as shown in Figure 2.2. This gives an average of approximately two eventswith magnitudes equal to or greater than 6.5 per year. To put this seismicity into perspective,
during the same period the contiguous United States have only experienced 45 earthquakes withmagnitudes equal to or greater than 6.5, for an average of one every 2.7 years. Of the 235
earthquakes in Mexico, 83 had magnitudes between 7 and 8, and five had magnitudes equal toor greater than 8. Mexico, therefore, experiences roughly a magnitude 7 or larger event every 1.4
years.
The largest earthquakes in Mexico usually correspond to interplate thrust subduction events that
occur in the interface between the Cocos and the North American Plates. Two recent examplesof this type of event are the 1985 Mw 8.0 Michoacán earthquake and the 1995 Mw 8.0 Colima
earthquake. Intermediate depth intraplate events, which occur within the subducted Cocos Plate,
are also common in the region and have caused significant damage, as evidenced by the 2017
Mw 7.1 Puebla-Morelos earthquake (Galvis et al. 2020). An example of a subduction event
between the Rivera and North American plates is the 1932 Mw 8.1 Jalisco earthquake (Singh et
al. 1984). Meanwhile, in the northwest of Mexico, shallow crustal strike-slip earthquakes are also
generated in the boundary between the Pacific and the North American plates, such as the 2010
Mw 7.2 El Mayor–Cucapah earthquake. Additionally, crustal events have occurred within the
North American Plate, especially in the Trans-Mexican Volcanic Belt (e.g., the 1912 M∼7.0
Acambay earthquake).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

9Figure 2.1. Tectonic setting around Mexico. Source: Geo-Mexico (2012).

Figure 2.2. Epicenters of events with magnitudes greater than 6.5, since 1900 (USGS, 2022b).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

10

Other significant interplate and intraplate earthquakes in Mexico, causing widespread damage inthe country, are listed below:
●
●

●

●
●
●
●

●
●

●

1932: A Mw 8.4 thrust earthquake occurred in the region of Jalisco, about 165 km to thenorthwest of the Michoacán September 19, 2022, Mw 7.6 earthquake.
1980: On October 24, 1980, a Ms 7.0 earthquake severely damaged the city of Huajuapan
de León, Oaxaca, where 90% of the built environment had some type of damage;
particularly, 10 churches, 2 hotels, and the municipality building collapsed because of theearthquake. According to official reports, there were 50 deaths and more than 300 injured
inhabitants.
1985: The deadliest earthquake in Mexico happened on September 19, 1985, in the
Michoacán region, approximately 90 km to the east of the September 19, 2022 event. This
Mw 8.0 earthquake resulted in at least 9,500 fatalities, injured about 30,000 people, andleft 100,000 people homeless.
1995: On October 9, a Mw 8.0 earthquake struck the Colima-Jalisco region and resulted
in at least 49 fatalities and left 1,000 people homeless.
2003: A Mw 7.6 earthquake in Colima, Mexico, resulted in 29 fatalities, destroyed morethan 2,000 homes, and left more than 10,000 people homeless.
2012: A Mw 7.4 earthquake that occurred 560 km to the southeast of the 2022 Michoacán
event killed two people and injured 11 others in the Oaxaca region.
2017: On September 8th, a Mw 8.2 earthquake occurred offshore Chiapas, several
hundred kilometers to the southeast of the 2022 Michoacán event. That earthquake
caused at least 78 fatalities and 250 injuries in Oaxaca, and also 16 deaths in Chiapas.
Eleven days later, a Mw 7.1 earthquake struck closer to Mexico City, 620 km to thesoutheast of the 2022 Michoacán earthquake, resulting in over 300 fatalities andsignificant damage in Mexico City and the surrounding region (Arteta et al. 2019; Galvis
et al. 2020).
2018: In February, a Mw 7.2 event struck 750 km to the southeast of the 2022 Michoacánearthquake that injured four people and damaged 1,000 homes in Oaxaca.
2020: On June 23rd, a Mw 7.4 earthquake occurred in Oaxaca, producing 10 deaths,
hundreds of injuries, damage to more than 2,000 residential buildings, and damage toseveral commercial structures and infrastructure.
2021: On September 7th, a Mw 7.0 earthquake struck about 550 km to the southeast of
the 2022 Michoacán event. This event killed 13 people and injured 23 others.

Figure 2.3 shows the location of the Mw ≥ 7.0 events that impacted Mexico in the last decade(USGS, 2022b), confirming the high seismicity rate of the region (i.e., 0.7 events/year). Except for
the Puebla (2017) earthquake, the epicenter of these events aligns with the subduction zone
along the Pacific Coast. The subduction events Northeast to the Tehuantepec Gulf are shallow,
with depths in the range of 15-24 km (Table 2.1).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 202211

Figure 2.3. Epicenter of major events affecting Mexico in the last decade (adapted with data from
USGS, 2022b).

Table 2.1. Major events in Mexico in the last decade.

Name

Date

LocationDepth

M 7.6 - 37 km SE of Aquila, Mexico2022-09-19

18.367°N, 103.252°W

15.1 km

M 7.0 - Acapulco, Mexico2021-09-08

16.947°N, 99.753°W

20.0 km

M 7.4 - 9 km SE of Santa María Xadani, Mexico

2020-06-23

15.886°N, 96.008°W

20.0 km

M 7.2 - 4 km S of Pinotepa de Don Luis, Mexico

2018-02-16

16.386°N, 97.979°W

22.0 km

M 7.1 - 1 km S of Matzaco, Mexico

2017-09-19

18.550°N, 98.489°W

48.0 km

M 8.2 - Near the coast of Chiapas, Mexico

2017-09-08

15.022°N, 93.899°W

47.4 km

M 7.2 - 9 km ENE of Coyuquilla Norte, Mexico

2014-04-18

17.397°N, 100.972°W

24.0 km

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 202212

2.2 Earthquake Details
On September 19, 2022 on the annual commemoration of the 1985 earthquake that caused thelargest death toll in the country, at 01:05 pm local time, a subduction earthquake occurred at theinterface between the Cocos and North America plates on the pacific coast of Mexico. According
to the USGS (2022a) the epicenter was located at 18.367°N, 103.252°W, 37 km southwest of the
Aquila municipality in the state of Michoacán, while the reported moment magnitude andhypocenter depth are Mw 7.6 and 15.1 km, respectively. On the other hand, the SSN (2022a)
reported a Mw 7.7 for the event and a hypocenter located at 18.22°N 103.29°W with a 15 km
depth. According to SSN, the earthquake was followed by more than 1436 aftershocks having
moment magnitudes up to Mw 6.8 (up to 12 h of September 22, 2022). The location of the event
along with the stations used for the preliminary report developed by UIS (2022a) are presented in
Figure 2.4.

Figure 2.4. Map of the epicenter and stations reported by UIS (2022a).

The earthquake mechanism reported by SNN corresponds to a reverse faulting mechanism
characteristic of earthquakes on or near the plate boundary between the Cocos and North
American Plates. USGS focal mechanism solutions indicate that rupture occurred on either ashallowly dipping (i.e., 18.0°) thrust fault striking towards the West or on a steeply dipping (i.e.,
72.0°) reverse fault striking towards the ESE (Error! Reference source not found.). A summaryof these mechanism solutions is shown in
Table 2.2 along with principal axes information

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 202213

displayed in Table 2.3. Although earthquakes of this magnitude have rupture areas of about 70 x
35 km (length x width), the USGS computed a larger rupture plane of about 100 x 90 km (USGS,
2022a). The rupture plane found by USGS also had a strike of 295.0° and a dip angle of 18.0°,
with a maximum slip of 1.2 m (USGS, 2022a). Figure 2.6 shows the dimensions of the fault plane
and the slip distribution, as well as its surface projection.

Table 2.2. Nodal Planes.

Plane

Strike

Dip

Rake

NP1

287°

18°

86°

NP2

112°

72°

91°

Table 2.3. Principal Axes.

Axis

Value

PlungeAzimuthT

2.735e+20 N-m

63°

24°

N

-0.127e+20 N-m

1°

292°

P

-2.609e+20 N-m

27°

201°

Figure 2.5. Fault plane solutions by USGS (2022a).

The finite fault model developed by USGS (2022a) indicates maximum slip values along the fault
plane of 1.2 m towards the Northwest of the epicenter. The reported seismic moment estimate isM0 = 2.7 x1020 Nm

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

14Figure 2.6. Cross-section and surface projection of slip distribution (USGS, 2022a).

The USGS Shakemap estimates a MMI of VII around the epicenter as presented in Figure 2.7.
Similarly, Figure 2.8 presents the contours for PGA, PGV, and Sa(T=1s). Both PGA and Sa(T=1s)
values estimated around the epicenter are close to 0.5g while the estimated PGV is approximately
20.

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 202215

Figure 2.7. Intensities estimated from ShakeMap (USGS, 2022a).

Figure 2.8. Intensity map estimated from recorded PGAs, PGVs, and Spectral acceleration at T =1s
estimated from ShakeMap (USGS, 2022a).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

16

2.2.1 M 6.8 – Michoacán Aftershock
Only three days after the M7.6 Aquila earthquake, at around 01:16:09 am local time, a M6.8
earthquake hit the state of Michoacán on the Pacific coast of Mexico. According to the USGS
(2022c), the earthquake is also a subduction event at the interface between the Cocos and North
America Plate and is considered an aftershock of the main event. The epicenter location reportedby the USGS is 18.308°N, 102.923°W, and had a 24.1 km depth. The SSN (2022a) reported amoment magnitude of 6.9 and a hypocentral depth of 12 km with an epicenter located at 18.01°N,
103.18°W. Table 2.4 summarize the focal mechanism solutions estimated by USGS, the solutions
indicate that the rupture occurred on either a steeply dipping (i.e., 72.0°) reverse fault striking
towards the ESE or a shallowly dipping (i.e., 18.0°) thrust fault striking towards the West. Lastly,
the principal axes information for the M6.8 earthquake is presented in Table 2.5, and the fault
plane solution provided by the USGS is presented in Figure 2.9.

Table 2.4. Nodal Planes.

Plane

Strike

Dip

Rake

NP1

291°

18°

90°

NP2

111°

72°

90°

Table 2.5. Principal Axes.

Axis

Value

PlungeAzimuthT

1.909e+19 N-m

63°

24°

N

-0.012e+19 N-m

1°

292°

P

-1.897+19 N-m

27°

201°

Figure 2.9. Fault plane solutions by USGS
(2022c).

The USGS ShakeMap products for the M6.8 aftershock are presented in Figure 2.10 (MMI) and
Figure 2.11 (PGA, PGV, and Sa(T=1s). Although the released energy during this earthquake isconsiderably lower than the energy released during the M7.6 earthquake, the estimated MMI
around the epicenter for both earthquakes is the same (VII). Furthermore, the estimated PGA,
PGV, and Sa(T=1s) are 0.5g. 20 cm/s and 0.2g, respectively.

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 202217Figure 2.10. Intensities estimated from ShakeMap for the M6.8 Michoacán earthquake (USGS,
2022c).

Figure 2.11. Intensity map estimated from recorded PGAs, PGVs, and, and Spectral acceleration at
T =1s estimated from ShakeMap for the M6.8 Michoacán earthquake (USGS, 2022c).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 202218

2.3 Earthquake Early Warning (EEW)
Mexico’s EEW system is one of the oldest in the world, which began operating in 1991 with
Mexico’s strong-motion accelerometer network that monitors the subduction zone on the western
coast and was originally designed just to alert citizens in Mexico City of earthquake shaking (Allenet al., 2009). The Mexican Seismic Warning System (SASMEX by its acronym in Spanish)currently sends alerts to Mexico City, and the cities of Oaxaca, Acapulco, Chilpancingo, andMorelia via TV, AM/FM radio, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration weather radios,and the Mexican Hazard Alert System (Suarez et al., 2018). Similar to the other EEW systems,
SASMEX detects the occurrence of an earthquake and sends this information to the managers ofdifferent infrastructure operating systems. As an example, the Public Electric Transportation
System and the METRO have used the Seismic Alert System (SAS) warnings by means of radio
receivers in their control center since 1992, but they do not share the warning with the passengers.
The SASMEX was triggered in both the main event and the Mw 6.8 aftershock that occurred on
22 September 2022. The main shock was registered on 26 stations of the system while theaftershock was registered at 35 seismic sensor stations and generated a Seismic Alert warningfor Mexico City and other cities. Table 2.6 lists the warning times that were issued for different
locations before the arrival of s-waves and the beginning of strong motion in both events. Thesewarning times are long primarily because of the large distances between the epicenter and thelisted locations but also because of a relatively fast algorithm that is used as soon as theearthquake is detected in recording stations near the epicenter.

Table 2.6. Warning times for different locations during the main event.

Location
Morelia
Acapulco
Chipalcingo
Cuernavaca
Mexico City
PueblaOaxacaWarning time (sec) on the Warning time (sec) on the Mw
Mw7.6 9/19/2022 event
6.8 9/22/2022 event
58
56
84
76
88
80
94
87
98
92
120
113
159
151

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

19

2.4 Tsunami and Tsunami Warning
The earthquake triggered variations of the sea level along the Mexican Pacific coast causing a
relatively small tsunami. The effects of these variations were observed as anomalous waves
breaking on beaches and floods affecting portions of Manzanillo City, in the State of Colima.
Tsunami wave observations from coastal and/or deep-ocean sea level gauges, reported by the
Pacific Tsunami Warning Center (PTWC), determined a maximum tsunami height of 79 cm,
measured with respect to the normal tide level, in the coast of Manzanillo, MX. Details of thesemeasures are listed in Figure 2.12. The PTWC broadcasted tsunami warnings starting at 1:09 PM
local time (Figure 2.13). Furthermore, the National Autonomous University of Mexico reported
that the monitoring stations in the region near the earthquake, in the Mexican Pacific, recorded
an increase in the sea level, as shown in Figure 2.14 andTable 2.7. In particular, the Manzanillo station detected the maximum amplitude. Similarly, Figure
2.15 presents the geographical distribution of the stations of Vallarta, Manzanillo, Lázaro
Cárdenas and Zihuatanejo recorded at sea level.

Figure 2.12. Tsunami observations reported by the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center, PTWC
(2022b).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

20

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

21

Figure 2.13. Tsunami warning from Pacific Tsunami Warning Center (PTWC, 2022a)

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

22

Figure 2.14. Records of the sea level in the stations of Vallarta, Manzanillo, Lázaro Cárdenas,
Zihuatanejo and Acapulco. The arrival of the tsunami waves after the earthquake (indicated by ablack dotted line) can be observed. (Twitter, 2022p)

Figure 2.15. Tsunami amplitudes at four stations (Gonzalez-Huizar et al., 2022).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

23

Table 2.7. Maximum amplitudes with respect to the sea level in the stations of Vallarta, Manzanillo,
Lázaro Cárdenas, Zihuatanejo and Acapulco, produced by the M7.6 earthquake of September 19,
2022 (Twitter, 2022q).
Tsunami arrival
time (central Mexico
CDT)

Maximum
recorded
amplitude (m)Maximum
recorded
amplitude time

Period(minutes)

Puerto Vallarta, Jalisco

19/09/2022 13:10

0.417

19/09/2022 13:20

10

Manzanillo, Colima

19/09/2022 13:26

1.749

19/09/2022 14:05

30

Lázaro Cárdenas, Michoacán

19/09/2022 13:15

0.425

19/09/2022 15:59

15

Zihuatanejo, Guerrero

19/09/2022 13:36

1.000

19/09/2022 14:42

15

Acapulco API, Guerrero

19/09/2022 13:48

0.635

19/09/2022 15:38

30

StationThe first bulletin by the Tsunami Warning Center of the Mexican Secretary of the Navy was issued
approximately at 1:32 pm local time. According to their bulletin, sea level variations were notexpected due to the location of the epicenter (Twitter, 2022r). However, about 40 minutes later,
they predicted anomalous variations of 82 centimeters in sea level in the region of earthquake
generation, warning the population to stay away from the coastline, expecting strong currents at
the entrance of ports (Twitter, 2022s). On the other hand, the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center,
PTWC, issued their first report four minutes after the 7.6 earthquake, stating the possibility ofhazardous tsunami waves for coastal areas located within 300 km of the earthquake epicenter.
Further reports forecast waves reaching 1 to 3 meters above the tide level for some coasts of
Mexico, and waves less than 0.3 meters above the tide level for other Pacific coasts. (PTWC,
2022a)PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 202224

3Recorded Ground Motions

In Mexico there are several seismic networks. The Institute of Geophysics and the Servicio
Sismológico Nacional (SSN) of UNAM operates a national network of broadband instruments.
The Instituto de Ingenieria at UNAM also operates a network of strong motion accelerographs.
The M7.6 event was recorded by 20 stations of the accelerograph network of the Institute ofEngineering at UNAM (RAII-UNAM). At the time of writing this report, response spectra values
are available only for 13 stations, 9 of which are in Mexico City. At the time of this report, further
information is being collected. Table 3.1 summarizes spectral acceleration intensities, including
PGA, of three-component ground motions recorded by UIS (2022a). The geographical distributionof the geomean of the horizontal components for PGA and spectral acceleration at the 1 s period(Sa(T=1s)) are presented in Figure 3.1a and Figure 3.2a, respectively. Maximum values of PGA
and Sa(T=1s) recorded during the earthquake were 0.16 and 0.18 g, respectively, recorded at the
COMA station, located at a rupture distance of 55 km from the fault plane. Maximum recorded
values in Mexico City were 0.043 and 0.089 g, recorded at the CMEN station at about 450 km of
hypocentral distance (see Figure 3.3).
On Sept 22, 2022, an aftershock struck about 20 km to the south of the main shock. Table 3.2
summarizes spectral acceleration intensities, including PGA, of three-component ground motions
provided by UIS (2022b) and recorded during the M6.8 Aftershock. The geographical distributionof the geomean of the horizontal components for PGA and spectral acceleration at the 1 s period(Sa(T=1s)) are presented in Figure 3.1b and Figure 3.2b, respectively for the M6.8 aftershock.
The maximum values of PGA and Sa(T=1s) recorded during the M6.8 aftershock were 0.030 and
0.026 g, respectively, recorded at the COMA station. A comparison of the PGA values recorded
for both main and aftershock is presented in Figure 3.4. It is noted that not all records wereavailable. PGA values larger than 300 Gal were seen in ZIIG and MMIG stations.

Figure 3.1. Geographical distribution of the geomean of PGA in the (a) M7.6 earthquake; (b) M6.8
aftershock.
PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

25

Figure 3.2. Geographical distribution of the geomean of 5%-damped 1s spectral accelerations,
Sa(T=1s), in the (a) M7.6 earthquake; (b) M6.8 aftershock.

Figure 3.3. Geographical distribution of the stations within Mexico City that recorded the M7.6
earthquake (a) PGA geomean; (b) Sa(T=1s) geomean.

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

26

Figure 3.4. Comparison of PGAs in various stations in the main shock and in the aftershock.

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

27

Table 3.1. Recorded three-component ground motions during the M7.6 Earthquake (UIS, 2022a).
StationChannel

COMA

ENZ

0.077

0.124

0.233

0.126

ENN

0.119

0.290

0.430

ENE

0.211

0.281

0.677

ENZ

0.009

0.015

ENN

0.018

0.020

ENE

0.025

ENZ
ENN

GDLC

ATYC

VNTA

CUP5

CMCU

CMBM

TACY

CMP1

CMMG

CMRC

CMEN

CTCL

PGA [g]T=0.1s [g] T=0.3s [g] T=0.5 [g] T=1s [g]T=1.5s [g]T=2s [g]T=3s [g]TAmax [s]Samax [g]

0.057

0.074

0.039

0.027

0.320

0.253

0.216

0.221

0.085

0.081

0.041

0.400

0.491

0.227

0.15

0.126

0.084

0.041

0.320

0.695

0.019

0.016

0.014

0.011

0.012

0.011

0.150

0.027

0.035

0.057

0.026

0.016

0.013

0.012

0.660

0.066

0.028

0.033

0.088

0.027

0.018

0.017

0.019

0.560

0.122

0.002

0.004

0.006

0.006

0.005

0.005

0.003

0.002

0.640

0.008

0.003

0.005

0.007

0.008

0.005

0.004

0.004

0.001

0.540

0.009

ENE

0.003

0.005

0.005

0.008

0.006

0.005

0.002

0.001

0.600

0.009

HNZ

0.001

0.001

0.002

0.004

0.004

0.003

0.002

0.001

1.000

0.004

HNN

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.003

0.004

0.003

0.002

0.001

1.200

0.004

HNE

0.001

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.004

0.002

0.002

0.001

0.880

0.006

ENZ

0.003

0.003

0.004

0.006

0.008

0.008

0.009

0.005

1.800

0.012

ENN

0.006

0.006

0.010

0.012

0.011

0.018

0.018

0.009

2.400

0.022

ENE

0.005

0.005

0.007

0.009

0.014

0.015

0.014

0.007

1.500

0.015

HNZ

0.003

0.003

0.004

0.006

0.008

0.008

0.010

0.005

1.800

0.012

HNN

0.006

0.006

0.010

0.012

0.012

0.017

0.018

0.008

2.400

0.022

HNE

0.005

0.005

0.007

0.009

0.015

0.015

0.014

0.007

1.500

0.015

HNZ

0.003

0.003

0.005

0.007

0.011

0.006

0.008

0.006

0.980

0.011

HNN

0.005

0.005

0.008

0.011

0.013

0.016

0.012

0.007

1.500

0.016

HNW

0.005

0.005

0.008

0.010

0.014

0.010

0.010

0.005

0.980

0.014

HNZ

0.003

0.003

0.004

0.006

0.010

0.006

0.009

0.005

2.200

0.011

HNN

0.007

0.007

0.008

0.013

0.017

0.013

0.015

0.007

0.960

0.017

HNE

0.006

0.006

0.008

0.011

0.021

0.011

0.009

0.006

1.000

0.021

HNZ

0.006

0.007

0.009

0.014

0.011

0.020

0.016

0.007

0.600

0.021

HNN

0.018

0.019

0.024

0.032

0.036

0.073

0.079

0.018

1.600

0.105

HNE

0.043

0.043

0.046

0.047

0.081

0.184

0.124

0.025

1.600

0.222

HNZ

0.003

0.003

0.004

0.006

0.008

0.008

0.005

0.006

0.440

0.011

HNN

0.021

0.021

0.023

0.029

0.065

0.064

0.028

0.009

1.200

0.126

HNE

0.017

0.018

0.020

0.022

0.043

0.085

0.026

0.013

1.400

0.107

HNZ

0.005

0.007

0.009

0.013

0.012

0.011

0.014

0.005

1.800

0.017

HNN

0.017

0.017

0.018

0.029

0.029

0.095

0.057

0.016

1.600

0.110

HNE

0.023

0.023

0.023

0.024

0.044

0.101

0.072

0.019

1.600

0.119

HNZ

0.009

0.010

0.010

0.017

0.033

0.017

0.018

0.009

1.000

0.033

HNN

0.047

0.048

0.049

0.051

0.096

0.101

0.178

0.104

2.600

0.257

HNE

0.04

0.041

0.042

0.046

0.083

0.083

0.131

0.081

2.400

0.255

HNZ

0.006

0.006

0.008

0.014

0.010

0.010

0.009

0.005

0.500

0.014

HNN

0.016

0.016

0.016

0.019

0.023

0.049

0.055

0.031

2.400

0.069

HNE

0.022

0.022

0.024

0.026

0.032

0.057

0.099

0.029

2.000

0.099

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

28

Table 3.2. Recorded three-component ground motions during the M6.8 Aftershock (UIS, 2022b).

StationChannel PGA [g]T=0.1s [g]T=0.3s [g] T=0.5 [g] T=1s [g]T=1.5s [g]T=2s [g] T=3s [g] TAmax[s]Samax [g]

COMA

ENZ

0.011

0.020

0.036

0.025

0.022

0.010

0.014

0.006

0.320

0.040

ENN

0.029

0.044

0.118

0.079

0.026

0.020

0.021

0.011

0.260

0.127

ENE

0.030

0.055

0.106

0.073

0.027

0.018

0.033

0.013

0.260

0.109

ENZ

0.010

0.015

0.028

0.025

0.024

0.014

0.005

0.003

0.940

0.029

ENE

0.031

0.038

0.158

0.071

0.024

0.015

0.007

0.004

0.300

0.158

ENN

0.019

0.024

0.096

0.063

0.019

0.015

0.006

0.003

0.280

0.098

ENZ

0.004

0.005

0.010

0.006

0.005

0.004

0.006

0.006

0.220

0.010

ENN

0.007

0.009

0.015

0.024

0.012

0.006

0.007

0.003

0.640

0.032

ENE

0.008

0.010

0.012

0.027

0.009

0.011

0.008

0.003

0.560

0.033

ENZ

0.003

0.003

0.007

0.009

0.004

0.006

0.003

0.001

0.480

0.011

ENN

0.002

0.003

0.007

0.006

0.005

0.003

0.001

0.001

0.580

0.007

ENE

0.002

0.004

0.006

0.007

0.004

0.004

0.001

0.001

0.760

0.007

ENZ

0.003

0.003

0.003

0.004

0.007

0.006

0.006

0.008

2.800

0.008

ENN

0.007

0.007

0.008

0.011

0.009

0.016

0.018

0.007

1.800

0.023

ENE

0.004

0.004

0.006

0.006

0.010

0.011

0.012

0.009

1.800

0.015

HNZ

0.003

0.003

0.003

0.004

0.007

0.006

0.006

0.008

2.800

0.008

HNN

0.006

0.007

0.008

0.011

0.009

0.015

0.018

0.007

1.800

0.023

HNE

0.004

0.004

0.006

0.006

0.010

0.011

0.012

0.010

1.800

0.015

HNZ

0.002

0.002

0.004

0.004

0.004

0.006

0.005

0.006

2.200

0.008

HNE

0.004

0.005

0.007

0.006

0.006

0.006

0.007

0.010

3.000

0.010

HNN

0.004

0.004

0.007

0.009

0.012

0.011

0.009

0.006

0.840

0.015

HNZ

0.003

0.003

0.004

0.005

0.003

0.005

0.005

0.007

2.800

0.008

HNN

0.004

0.004

0.005

0.008

0.010

0.014

0.008

0.006

1.500

0.014

HNW

0.004

0.004

0.005

0.007

0.007

0.005

0.009

0.009

0.680

0.011

HNZ

0.003

0.003

0.004

0.006

0.005

0.005

0.006

0.007

0.620

0.008

HNE

0.012

0.012

0.014

0.022

0.040

0.023

0.022

0.026

0.880

0.055

HNN

0.009

0.009

0.011

0.016

0.043

0.022

0.015

0.011

0.980

0.044

HNZ

0.005

0.006

0.008

0.015

0.009

0.013

0.014

0.013

2.400

0.017

HNN

0.017

0.019

0.021

0.025

0.026

0.053

0.070

0.033

1.800

0.092

HNE

0.026

0.026

0.027

0.037

0.046

0.145

0.080

0.045

1.600

0.151

HNZ

0.004

0.005

0.006

0.010

0.007

0.007

0.007

0.007

0.560

0.019

HNN

0.012

0.012

0.013

0.016

0.027

0.044

0.039

0.015

1.800

0.056

HNE

0.012

0.012

0.013

0.018

0.022

0.063

0.044

0.032

1.600

0.081

HNZ

0.004

0.005

0.006

0.009

0.008

0.007

0.009

0.006

0.700

0.019

HNE

0.021

0.021

0.021

0.023

0.032

0.064

0.056

0.036

1.600

0.077

HNN

0.016

0.016

0.017

0.019

0.033

0.059

0.103

0.019

2.000

0.103

HNZ

0.008

0.008

0.008

0.015

0.019

0.012

0.021

0.020

2.600

0.029

HNN

0.029

0.029

0.031

0.030

0.057

0.045

0.097

0.087

2.600

0.122

HNE

0.038

0.038

0.039

0.048

0.074

0.066

0.115

0.145

2.600

0.231

URUA

GDLC

ATYC

CUP5

CMCU

TACY

CMBM

CMP5

CMP1

SCT2

CMCL

CMEN

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

29

Station

Channel PGA [g]T=0.1s [g]T=0.3s [g] T=0.5 [g] T=1s [g]T=1.5s [g]T=2s [g] T=3s [g] TAmax[s]Samax [g]

CMRC

HNZ

0.003

0.003

0.006

0.014

0.006

0.010

0.010

0.004

0.520

0.016

HNE

0.022

0.023

0.025

0.028

0.041

0.155

0.053

0.032

1.500

0.155

HNN

0.017

0.017

0.018

0.030

0.029

0.101

0.039

0.016

1.600

0.108

HNZ

0.003

0.004

0.004

0.006

0.007

0.007

0.010

0.007

2.200

0.011

HNE

0.024

0.024

0.026

0.030

0.031

0.039

0.068

0.087

2.800

0.093

HNN

0.021

0.021

0.021

0.027

0.028

0.045

0.056

0.057

2.600

0.123

HNZ

0.003

0.003

0.005

0.009

0.006

0.008

0.008

0.008

0.420

0.012

HNN

0.010

0.010

0.010

0.014

0.018

0.047

0.040

0.018

2.200

0.049

HNE

0.014

0.014

0.016

0.018

0.019

0.036

0.038

0.048

1.800

0.053

HNZ

0.006

0.006

0.006

0.008

0.009

0.011

0.010

0.011

0.860

0.015

HNE

0.023

0.023

0.024

0.029

0.028

0.057

0.073

0.077

2.400

0.093

HNN

0.019

0.020

0.021

0.026

0.027

0.070

0.061

0.034

1.500

0.070

HNZ

0.004

0.004

0.005

0.011

0.008

0.010

0.009

0.005

2.400

0.013

HNE

0.010

0.010

0.014

0.013

0.020

0.031

0.029

0.032

1.400

0.040

HNN

0.010

0.010

0.011

0.013

0.022

0.033

0.029

0.015

1.600

0.037

HNZ

0.002

0.003

0.004

0.006

0.005

0.005

0.004

0.003

0.680

0.011

HNN

0.008

0.008

0.009

0.011

0.034

0.037

0.020

0.012

1.500

0.037

HNE

0.008

0.009

0.009

0.012

0.026

0.023

0.020

0.009

0.920

0.029

HNZ

0.004

0.004

0.005

0.007

0.009

0.016

0.021

0.018

2.000

0.021

HNN

0.006

0.006

0.008

0.009

0.015

0.011

0.018

0.017

2.400

0.019

HNE

0.007

0.007

0.009

0.011

0.017

0.015

0.019

0.024

2.800

0.025

HNZ

0.004

0.004

0.004

0.005

0.006

0.011

0.013

0.011

2.600

0.016

HNN

0.003

0.003

0.005

0.005

0.005

0.009

0.009

0.008

1.600

0.012

HNE

0.005

0.005

0.006

0.006

0.005

0.009

0.015

0.014

2.000

0.015

HNZ

0.003

0.003

0.003

0.006

0.011

0.007

0.008

0.004

1.000

0.011

HNN

0.018

0.018

0.020

0.021

0.027

0.037

0.063

0.058

2.200

0.069

HNE

0.017

0.018

0.018

0.021

0.028

0.040

0.054

0.059

2.200

0.074

HNZ

0.008

0.008

0.010

0.017

0.022

0.017

0.020

0.012

2.600

0.026

HNE

0.014

0.014

0.019

0.017

0.023

0.034

0.055

0.033

2.000

0.055

HNN

0.013

0.013

0.014

0.017

0.024

0.035

0.045

0.028

1.800

0.048

HNZ

0.002

0.003

0.004

0.006

0.004

0.003

0.004

0.003

0.640

0.011

HNN

0.007

0.008

0.008

0.010

0.015

0.029

0.033

0.011

1.800

0.035

HNE

0.009

0.009

0.010

0.014

0.014

0.025

0.037

0.014

2.400

0.039

HNZ

0.003

0.003

0.004

0.005

0.007

0.008

0.007

0.012

2.800

0.015

HNN

0.010

0.010

0.010

0.012

0.014

0.020

0.021

0.042

4.000

0.043

HNE

0.009

0.009

0.010

0.012

0.018

0.021

0.022

0.031

1.200

0.049

HNZ

0.007

0.007

0.009

0.012

0.020

0.014

0.023

0.019

2.400

0.025

HNN

0.025

0.025

0.026

0.026

0.032

0.039

0.075

0.078

2.400

0.119

HNE

0.016

0.016

0.018

0.023

0.021

0.033

0.062

0.068

2.600

0.073

HNZ

0.004

0.004

0.004

0.007

0.009

0.012

0.007

0.007

1.200

0.018

HNN

0.012

0.012

0.014

0.018

0.018

0.031

0.033

0.042

2.200

0.055

HNE

0.013

0.013

0.013

0.019

0.020

0.036

0.039

0.045

3.000

0.045

CMRA

CTCL

CMP7

CMCT

CMP9

CMSG

CMJR

CMJC

CMTD

CMP3

CM55

CMRM

CMPR

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

30

Station

Channel PGA [g]T=0.1s [g]T=0.3s [g] T=0.5 [g] T=1s [g]T=1.5s [g]T=2s [g] T=3s [g] TAmax[s]Samax [g]

CMFZ

HNZ

0.009

0.009

0.010

0.012

0.012

0.019

0.019

0.016

2.400

0.024

HNE

0.018

0.018

0.019

0.025

0.043

0.041

0.042

0.076

3.000

0.076

HNN

0.022

0.022

0.026

0.026

0.041

0.070

0.030

0.060

1.400

0.087

ENZ

0.001

0.001

0.003

0.004

0.002

0.004

0.004

0.002

0.600

0.007

ENN

0.003

0.003

0.005

0.010

0.006

0.007

0.008

0.002

0.600

0.015

ENE

0.002

0.002

0.003

0.008

0.004

0.007

0.004

0.001

0.560

0.008

ENZ

0.000

0.001

0.001

0.001

0.001

0.002

0.001

0.001

1.200

0.002

ENE

0.001

0.001

0.001

0.001

0.001

0.001

0.003

0.001

2.000

0.003

ENN

0.001

0.001

0.001

0.001

0.002

0.001

0.001

0.002

2.200

0.002

PHPU

OXBJ

3.1 Comparison with ground motion models
The recorded ground motion intensities were compared against the predictions of two groundmotion prediction models (GMPMs) for PGA (Figure 3.5a and Figure 3.5b) and Sa(T=1s) (Figure
3.5c and Figure 3.5d).The comparisons are made with respect to a local model developed by
Arroyo et al. (2010) for rock sites in Figure 3.5a and Figure 3.5c., and for the geometric mean of
the KBCG (Kuehn et al., 2020) and PSHAB (Parker et al., 2021) NGA-Subduction GMPMs in
Figure 3.5b and Figure 3.5d. The selected models used different definitions of the horizontal
component of the pseudo-acceleration spectral ordinates (PSA), both KBCG and PSHABGMPMS estimates RotD50 PSA while Arroyo et al. (2010) estimate the random (sometimes also
referred to as arbitrary) horizontal component PSA. Hence, for each station both as-recorded
horizontal components are compared against the Arroyo et al. (2010) estimates. On the other
hand, the geomean of the as-recorded horizontal components is compared against the NGA-Sub
models as a proxy to RotD50, because at the time of this writing the acceleration records were
not available. Note that intensities at soil sites in Mexico City are significantly higher than thoserecorded at rock sites in Mexico City due to large site effects that occur there. All the PGAs
recorded outside Mexico City fall in the 16/84th percentiles of the Arroyo et al. (2010) model whilst
the model presents a slightly lower performance for T=1s. Regarding the stations located in
Mexico the recorded ground motions at rock sites for T=1s, are in the 50 to 84th percentiles of
the Arroyo et al (2010) estimates. The remaining recorded ground motions in Mexico City (i.e.,
PGA and soil sites at T=1s) are above the 84th percentiles of the Arroyo et al (2010) estimates.
All the recorded PGA values at soil sites in Mexico City are higher than the 84th percentile of the
NGA-Sub GMPMs estimations, while for Sa(T=1s) half of those stations lies in the 50-84th
percentile of the NGA-Sub GMPMs estimations for soils. Regarding the stations located at rocksites in Mexico for PGA the recorded values are in 50-84th percentile of the NGA-Sub GMPMs
estimations for rocks, whilst for Sa(T=1s) there is one station above the 84th percentile of GMPMs
estimates. Lastly, there is also a fairly good agreement between the recorded intensities and the
NGA-Sub GMPMs estimates.

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

31

Figure 3.5. Comparison of pseudo-acceleration data computed from recorded accelerations withestimates of Arroyo et al. (2010) and NGA-Sub GMMs. Shaded regions represent the 16/84th
percentiles of the GMMs.

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

32

4

"Did you feel it?" Reports

Did You Feel It? (DYFI), is a system developed by the USGS that allows people who felt theearthquake to report it. It helps describe people's experience during and after the event, which
may be correlated with a distribution of intensities or damage (USGS, 2022b). The DYFI Map andrelated products by the USGS are created within minutes of each earthquake of magnitude 1.9
or greater. The origin information (location and time) of each earthquake is provided by the
Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS) and its regional and national network partners in theU.S.
For this event, the DYFI survey available on the USGS website had over 600 responses within
the first hour after the earthquake. The evolution over time of these responses is shown in Figure4.1. It can be seen from the figure that the number of responses reached about 1000 responses
after eight hours. It is worth noting that not many people know about USGS’s DYFI in Mexico andmost of those aware of it are typically located in the capital, Mexico City.

Figure 4.1. “Did you feel it?” (DYFI) responses collected by the USGS up to 9/21 (USGS, 2022b).

A map of intensities inferred from DYFI responses and the spatial variation of intensity for the Mw
7.6 earthquake is plotted in Figure 4.2. The highest intensity levels range from VIII to IX of the
Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) scale, close to the epicenter (e.g., Colima). These large
intensities are consistent with the observed damage in the epicentral zone. The attenuation of
intensity with distance shows levels VII, VI, and IV close to Guadalajara.

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

33

The attenuation of intensity with increasing hypocentral distance shows large dispersion and canbe found in Figure 4.3.

(a)

(b)

Figure 4.2. (a) Geocoded location and (b) City map of Intensities inferred from DYFI responses(USGS, 2022b).

Figure 4.3. Attenuation of earthquake intensity with increasing hypocentral distance comparedwith empirical relationships (USGS, 2022b).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

34

5

Local Codes and Construction Practices

Seismic design codes have existed in Mexico for more than 80 years. The first Mexican code forstructural design was issued in 1920, but the first to include seismic loading was the 1942 Mexico
City code. Some of the country's more recent versions of seismic provisions originated in the firstseismic maps based on probabilistic hazard analyses by professors Luis Esteva and Emilio
Rosenblueth in the late sixties (Esteva and Rosenblueth, 1972). However, most efforts to develop
and improve the Mexican building codes have primarily been focused on Mexico City. The Mexico
City Building Code has included several important innovations over the years, such as the firstcode with a seismic microzonation (since 1957), modal combination rules accounting for modal
correlation, simplified rules for bidirectional loading, period-dependent reduction factors, use of
response history analyses as an analysis method, etc. For example, many of these innovations
at the time were implemented in the Mexico City code soon after the publication of the ATC 3-06
report (ATC, 1978) in the United States and before their adoption in U.S. seismic codes. Thus,
the Mexico City Building Code (MCBC) for seismic design of buildings is often used as a model
code for the drafting of most of the municipal codes in the country, which, by law, are of themunicipal (county) competence (Ordaz and Meli, 2004). For a summary of the innovations
introduced in the 1976 code, the reader is referred to Rosenblueth (1979). For excellent
summaries of changes in seismic codes and practice in Mexico after the great 1985 earthquake,the reader is referred to Esteva (1987, 1988). On average, the MCBC has been updated every
13 years; modifications have typically occurred after significant events.
Some Federal government agencies have issued standards and manuals to be used within theirprojects. The best example is the Manual of Civil Structures, MOC, of the Federal Electrical
Commission, first published in 1969, also known as MOC-CFE. The MOC-CFE is acomprehensive document that includes analysis and design provisions of several structures(buildings, bridges, dams, power stations, industrial facilities, etc.) for hazards such as
earthquakes and wind. Its use is mandatory only for designing structures owned or operated by
the Comisión Federal de Electricidad (Federal Electrical Commission). Still, it often serves as amodel design code in Mexico (Tena-Colunga et al., 2009). For states, counties, or cities withouta seismic code, two common alternatives are to use the MOC-CFE or use the seismic hazard
maps included in MOC-CFE combined with the Mexico City code design criteria. The evolution ofseismic codes in Mexico is also available in Ordaz et al. (2004) and Alcocer et al. (2008).
Similar to other developing countries, there is a significant amount of construction, primarily inrural areas but also within urban areas that do not comply with any code requirement and aremainly self-construction. This self-construction is commonly used in low-income one and twostory residential housing. Unreinforced masonry (URM) is frequently used for this type of
construction in urban areas, but adobe construction is still used in some rural areas.
Since its first edition in 1969, the MDOF-CFE has been updated and improved in 1981, 1993,
2008, and 2015. Figure 5.1 shows the seismic zonation of Mexico in the 1993 version of thisdocument, in which the country was divided into four seismic zones from A (low seismic hazard)
to D (highest seismic hazard). The epicenter of the September 19, 2022, event falls within zone
D, with the highest hazard level.
PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

35

Figure 5.1. Seismic zonation of Mexico according to the 1993 edition of the Manual for Civil Worksof the Federal Commission Electricity (MOC-CFE, 1993).

The 2015 edition of the MOC-CFE seismic guidelines provide design spectra for any location
within Mexico and considers three soil types according to a combination of the shear wave
velocities and thicknesses of soil deposits at the site. In this classification, site class I corresponds
to stiffer and shallower soil, whereas site class III corresponds to deeper and softer soils. In thisversion of the MOC-CFE, the software tool PRODISIS, shown in Error! Reference source notfound., is used to obtain the seismic design spectra similarly to recent USGS tools.

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

36

Figure 5.2. Seismic hazard map to compute the seismic design spectra according to the 2015
edition of the Manual for Civil Works of the Federal Commission Electricity (MOC-CFE) obtained
from software PRODISIS V4.1.

Figure 5.3 presents the design spectra for the two soil classes (I and III) of the MOC-CFE 2015
standard in the cities of Coalcomán de Vázquez, Lázaro Cárdenas, Manzanillo, Guadalajara andMorelia, located approximately 60 km, 120 km, 140 km, 260 km, and 270 km, respectively, fromthe epicenter.

Figure 5.3. Elastic design spectrum for soil classes I and III for the cities of Manzanillo,
Guadalajara, Coalcomán de Vázquez, Lázaro Cárdenas, and Morelia according to MDC CFE 2015.

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

37

Figure 5.4 compares the design spectra for soil class I, with the response spectra of bothhorizontal components recorded at COMA station in the city of Comala, located 132 km from theepicenter of the 09/19/22 earthquake (UIS, 2022a). Particular values of the response spectra forboth 09/19/22 and 09/22/22 events were reported by the Unidad de Instrumentación Sísmica
reports (UIS, 2022b), which include spectral accelerations at periods of 0.1 s, 0.3 s, 0.5 s, 1.0 s,
1.5 s, 2.0 s and 3.0 s and maximum values of Sa (see Table 3.1 and Table 3.2). In Figure 5.4,
ENE and ENN correspond to the west-east and north-south components of the records. Figure
5.4 shows that the ENE component of the 09/19/22 event slightly overpassed the design spectra.
Table 5.1 summarizes the recorded PGAs at the COMA station for both events.

Table 5.1. PGAs recorded in COMA station for both events (UIS, 2022a and 2022b).

Event

Magnitude

Epicentral distance, km

PGA, g

09/19/22

7.7

132

0.211

09/22/22

6.9

157

0.030

Figure 5.4. Comparison of response spectra computed from recorded horizontal accelerations at
COMA station in the City of Comala to the elastic design spectra for soil class I according to
MDOC CFE 2015.

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

38

6 Impacts
6.1 Estimated Population Exposed
PAGER (Prompt Assessment of Global Earthquakes for Response) is a product of the USGS that
produces automatic reports on estimates of the possible impacts of large earthquakes bycombining information from the spatial distribution of population and isoseismals of Modified
Mercalli intensity (MMI) estimated by ShakeMap. This section discusses the population exposure.
Figure 6.1 shows the isoseismals estimated for the Mw 7.6 earthquake, and Figure 6.2 shows thenumber of people exposed to each shaking intensity in selected cities. These figures illustratethat 13.6 million people (83% of the total population exposed) were subjected to an MMI lower or
equal to IV. Of this population, 1.64M were in Guadalajara and nearly 1M in Zapopan. Two million
people experienced a moderate intensity (V), highlighting Ciudad Guzmán among the cities
exposed to this MMI. Colima is the city with the highest population exposed to a strong (VI)shaking in the MMI, with over 127000 people exposed, with three killed people and several
hundred injured recorded at the time of writing this report.

Figure 6.1. Isoseismals (curves of equal MMI) estimated for the Mw 7.6 earthquake (USGS, 2022a).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

39

Figure 6.2. The number of people exposed to different ground shaking intensities (MMI) in
selected cities resulted from the earthquake (USGS, 2022a).

6.2 Estimated Loss of Life and Injures
PAGER produces rough estimates of the probability density functions of the number of fatalities
and economic losses in U.S. dollars. More specifically, these approximate probability density
functions provide estimates of the order of magnitude of the number of fatalities and economic
losses by providing probabilities within specific ranges, each varying an order of magnitude fromthe previous one.
The number of shaking-related fatalities in this event was projected to be low to intermediate,according to the USGS, compared to previous earthquakes with similar magnitudes. Past eventswith an equivalent level of projected fatalities require a local or regional response. In particular,
as shown in Figure 6.3, the USGS PAGER tool estimated fatalities to be 0, 1 to 10, 10 to 100,
100 to 1000, and over 1000 with probabilities of 6%, 24%, 40%, and 6% for the Mw 7.6 event.
Furthermore, at the time of the writing of this report, three fatalities have been reported from themain event and two from the aftershock (Diario de Colima, 2022a; El Universal, 2022b). Also,
PAGER estimated economic losses due to damage to be between $1 million and $10 million,
between $10 million and $100 million, between $100 million and $1,000 million, and between$1,000 million and $10,000 million with probabilities of 6%, 23%, 38%, 25%, and 7%, respectively(USGS, 2022).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

40

(a)

(b)

Figure 6.3. PAGER Estimated probability of (a) fatalities and (b) economic losses for the
September 19, 2022, Michoacán Earthquake (USGS, 2022a).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

41

7 Damage (Michoacán, Colima and Surrounding States)
Most of the damage was concentrated in the states of Michoacán and Colima. On September 20,
National Coordination of Civil Protection reported the following fatalities and structural damage inseveral states (Twitter, 2022a):
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●

Two people died and nine were injured in Manzanillo (western state of Colima).
Seven medical centers suffered structural and non-structural damage in the state ofColima and twenty-one medical centers experienced damage in the state of Michoacán.
Two churches suffered some structural damage.
More than 150 houses and other buildings suffered damage in the state of Colima.
Eight state highways, and five bridges suffered damage in the state of Colima, but theirfunctionality has been restored.
Thirty schools suffered damage in the state of Michoacán.
Government buildings suffered damage in the state of Michoacán.
Slight damage was reported in Jalisco, Aguascalientes, Nayarit, the State of Mexico and
Mexico City.

In a press conference given by the governor of Colima the morning of September 20th, thefollowing structural damage was reported (Facebook, 2022a):
●
●
●
●
●

●
●
●
●

Major structural damage at the ISSSTE Miguel Trejo Ochoa medical center, Colima.
Major structural damage at the General Hospital at Ixtlahaucán.
Major structural damage at the General Hospital at Tecomán after the explosion of an
oxygen tank. This explosion left four people injured.
Structural damage at the Torre Médica from Plaza Sendera building.
Minor structural damage (pending evaluation) at the blood bank building, the No. 1
sanitary jurisdiction building, the COEPRIS (State Commission for the Protection against
Sanitary Risks) building, the State Cancer Institute building, and the Infant-Maternal
hospital. All these buildings are in Colima city.
Landslides in the roads to Minatitlan and La Becerrera.
Wall cracks of the Coquimatlán church.
Minor structural damage at Zentralia Shopping Center
Minor damage at the Licenco and Armeria bridges.

The States of Michoacán and Colima experienced several partial and full collapses of nonengineered structures, especially unreinforced masonry construction. Cracking, dislodging andcrushing damage of masonry walls were evident in many buildings as seen from the photos inthis section. Structural and non-structural damage was observed in commercial buildings,
including glass shattering, and furniture and contents damage. Several hospitals experienced
structural and non-structural damage. According to National Coordination of Civil Protection(Twitter, 2022a), 153 households and nine medical centers had some damage. Additionally, ninecollapses/landslides were reported in highways (this includes damage in the states of Michoacán

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 202242and Colima). Highway authorities reported that a landslide caused a blockage on the highway
between Coalcoman and Villa Victoria on the Coalcoman-Tepalcatepec section (Quadratin,
2022a).
Damage to the electrical infrastructure in Michoacán was reported by Federal Electricity
Commission (CFE by its initial in Spanish) (Twitter, 2022b): (i) Power outage affected 106,037
users in Michoacán, which was restored at 15:40 local time, approximately 2.5 hours after theearthquake, (ii) power outage affected 145,808 users in Colima, and 77% of those affected were
restored at 15:40 local time. According to the Federal Electricity Commission (CFE), 1.2 million
users were affected by power outages throughout several states. However, by 19:39 local timeon September 19th, around 6.5 hours after the earthquake, power had been restored to 95% of
those that were affected (Twitter, 2022b).
In Guadalajara, Jalisco, authorities reported damage to several historic buildings, as well as
campuses of the University of Guadalajara (UdeG) and government offices (Proceso, 2022a).
Masonry pieces fell from the temples of La Merced and San Agustín.
According to El Consejero (2022) a local newspaper in Puerto Vallarta, Jalisco, the Civil
Protection and Fire Department released a preliminary report after the earthquake reporting
damage in some buildings and hotels in this city and no casualties. The government buildings ofthe county (municipio in Spanish) were evacuated without incident, but some nonstructural
damaged occurred. In the UNIRSE building, there were fallen light fixtures, but without causing
injuries to the occupants. The building housing the Office of the State Prosecutor was evacuated
without incident, as was the Secondary School No. 29. The traffic lights on Francisco Medina
Ascencio Avenue were reported temporarily out of service.

7.1 Single-Family Residential Buildings
Most of the damage was concentrated in single-family residential buildings that were mainly nonengineered construction. Several single-family residential buildings experienced various levels ofdamage ranging from minor wall cracking to complete collapse.
According to Nelson Bautista Gómez, director of Roads and Highways (“Caminos y Carreteras”),
the damage to single-family residential buildings per district was as follows (AM, 2022):● Coahuayana 1,143 damaged units - 398 collapsed● Aquila
1,133 damaged units - 400 collapsed● Chinicuila
24 damaged units - no collapses● Coalcomán
63 damaged units - no collapses

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

43

The images of collapsed residential buildings (Figure 7.1 - Figure 7.3) show vulnerable
unreinforced masonry (URM) structures, which are known to have low in-plane and out-of-plane
displacement capacity. There were also cases of severe URM damage in the form of shear failureof short piers due to the low in-plane masonry strength (Figure 7.4), collapsed roofs (Figure 7.5),
and cracked walls (Figure 7.6). Reinforced concrete building collapses also occurred possibly due
to system irregularities and non-ductile concrete characteristics (Figure 7.7 and Figure 7.8). Intact
columns are observed in Figure 7.7, indicating potential failure of beam-column joints, leading tocollapse.

Figure 7.1. Collapsed building in Coahuayana, Michoacán (El Sol de Morelia, 2022a).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

44

Figure 7.2. URM single-family house completely collapsed in Coalcoman, Colima (PBS, 2022).

Figure 7.3. Collapsed URM wall in single-family buildings in Morelia, Michoacán (Quadratin,
2022b).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

45

Figure 7.4. Collapsed URM wall in single-family house in Tecomán, Colima (Twitter, 2022f).

Figure 7.5. Single-family building in Armería, Colima with collapsed wooden roof. The state
governor visited affected regions. Many single-family buildings are made of unreinforced
masonry, which are highly vulnerable to ground motions. This type of damage is typical in theaffected regions (Facebook, 2022c)

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

46

Figure 7.6. Cracking wall in a unreinforced masonry house in Tolimán, Colima (Imagen Noticias,
2022)

Figure 7.7. Total collapse of a reinforced concrete single-family building with masonry infill walls
in San Vicente, Michoacán (Twitter, 2022c).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

47

Figure 7.8. Total collapse of a reinforced concrete single-family building with masonry infill walls
in San Isidro, Tecomán, Colima (Facebook 2022d)

7.2 Multi-Family Residential Buildings
Multi-family residential buildings are not common in small municipalities like those close to theepicentral region. They are more common in large cities like Puerto Vallarta, Colima or Manzanillo.
Some media reports indicate that damage in this type of construction was mostly non-structural(Figure 7.9 and Figure 7.10).

Figure 7.9. Portofino Condominium, Puerto Vallarta, Jalisco. No structural damage was observed.
Only minor damage to ceilings, partition walls and ornaments was reported (Contralinea, 2022)

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

48

Figure 7.10. Tres Mares Condominium in Puerto Vallarta, Jalisco. Only nonstructural damage wasobserved and mainly occurred in facades, tiles and ceilings (Informador.Mx, 2022).

7.3 Commercial Buildings
Many commercial buildings experienced damage. The collapsed roof at Plaza Punto Bahia is oneof the most relevant as it caused the death of one occupant. According to the pictures in Figure
7.11 to Figure 7.13, the steel structure seems to have failed when the beams detached from theconcrete structure during the earthquake (Figure 7.11). The other case which also resulted in a
fatality was the out-of-plane partial collapse of the facade of the Valle de Garzas store as shownin Figure 7.14 to Figure 7.16. It is likely that the heavy masonry sections that fell were noteffectively anchored to the main structure.

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

49

Figure 7.11. Collapsed roof in Plaza Punto Bahía in Manzanillo, Colima (Twitter, 2022d).

Figure 7.12. Collapsed roof in Plaza Punto Bahía in Manzanillo, Colima (Twitter, 2022e)

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

50

Figure 7.13. Collapsed roof in Plaza Punto Bahía in Manzanillo, Colima (Diario de Colima, 2022a)

Figure 7.14. Out-of-plane wall failure in the Coppel store at Valle de las Garzas in Manzanillo,
Colima (Diario de Colima, 2022b)

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

51

Figure 7.15. Out-of-plane wall failure in the Coppel store at Valle de las Garzas in Manzanillo,
Colima which resulted in one fatality (Twitter, 2022e).

Figure 7.16. Out-of-plane wall failure in the Coppel store at Valle de las Garzas in Manzanillo,
Colima (BBC, 2022).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

52

Figure 7.17. Sheraton Buganvilias hotel, Puerto Vallarta, Jalisco. Damage in facades and interior
walls. (El Financiero, 2022a).

Minor to moderate facade / interior wall damage was also observed in the Sheraton Buganvilias
in Puerto Vallarta (Figure 7.17) and in the Telmex building in Colima (Figure 7.18). On the other
hand, the Grand Pacífico Hotel in Colima experienced severe damage in the walls at the lower
stories (Figure 7.19) and severe cracking was observed on the facade of Plaza Country in Colima(Figure 7.20).

Figure 7.18. Damage on Telmex building in Colima, Colima: left (Credits: Rafael Cruz, Facebook
2022f) right (Credits: Rafael Cruz, Facebook 2022e); .

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

53

Figure 7.19. Severe wall damage in Gran Pacífico Hotel in Manzanillo, Colima (Colima Noticias,2022).

Figure 7.20. Severe cracking on the facade of Plaza Country in Colima, Colima (Facebook, 2022g).

7.4 Healthcare/Medical Facilities
At least 28 hospitals and medical facilities in the Mexican States of Michoacán and Colima werereported as having sustained some type of structural damage. Temporary or mobile medical units
were deployed to provide healthcare services. The Maruata hospital in Michoacán (Figure 7.21
and Error! Reference source not found.), located in the region of highest intensity, suffered
severe damage, in particular due to the extensive collapse of the masonry facade. Significant
steel corrosion is observed in Error! Reference source not found. with clear traces of ferrous
oxide. The health center at Aquila, in the epicentral region also experienced extensive damage
and was closed for further inspection. Figure 7.23 shows wide shear cracks in a facade spandrel.

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

54

Figure 7.21. Maruata Hospital, Maruata, Michoacán: Frontal facade before the earthquake shownwith a photo taken in 2019 (Gobierno de Michoacán, 2019).

Figure 7.22. Exterior of the Maruata Hospital, Maruata, Michoacán after the earthquake: Masonry
facade collapse, exposing significant steel corrosion in columns (Twitter, 2022g)

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

55

Figure 7.23. Health center at Aquila, Michoacán. The building was evacuated due to structural
damage. (El Sol de Morelia, 2022b)

There was structural and nonstructural damage in various hospital buildings in locations as far as
100 km from the epicenter. One example is the Puerta de Hierro Hospital, in Colima shown in
Figure 7.24 where extensive cracking of masonry, mainly around the perimeter of infill masonrywalls, in the interface with the structural concrete frame was observed. It is possible that thesewalls were isolated from the frame or they got separated from the frame due to interstory drift
demands. Severe shear diagonal cracking was observed in some of the walls. Cracking andspalling observed in a few other facilities are shown in Figure 7.25 - Figure 7.27.

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

56

Figure 7.24. Damage to walls of the Hospital Puerta de Hierro in Colima, Colima (Twitter, 2022k).

Figure 7.25. Cracked walls of the Institute of Security and Social Services for State Workers, which
is a major government health services provider in Mexico for government employees and theirfamilies (ISSSTE) in Apatzingán, Michoacán (Twitter, 2022j).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

57

Figure 7.26. Minor cracking in Tecomán General Hospital in Colima (Twitter, 2022h).

Figure 7.27. Damage in ISSSTE Hospital “Dr. Miguel Trejo Ochoa” in Colima, Colima: left
(Facebook, 2022h); center (Facebook, 2022i); right (Facebook, 2022j).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

58

7.5 Damage to Religious and Historical Buildings
According to National Coordination of Civil Protection in the state of Colima, two churches
suffered severe damage (Twitter, 2022a). Some examples of religious buildings that suffereddamage are presented in this section. It is noted that old churches were typically built withunreinforced masonry (Figures 7.28 -7.36).

Figure 7.28. Damage to roof and walls in historical buildings in Coalcomán, Michoacán (Twitter,
2022w)PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

59

Figure 7.29. Cracks in the Basilica de Nuestra Señora de la Salud in Patzcuaro, Michoacán(Twitter, 2022i).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

60

Figure 7.30. Damage caused by the earthquake is observed in the church of San Miguel Arcángel
in Tacatzcuaro, Michoacán (Facebook, 2022b)

In the downtown area of Guadalajara two churches were damaged. First, in La Merced Church(Av. Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla 412, Zona Centro, 44100 Guadalajara, Jal.), where some stone
masonry was detached from the ornamentation (Figure 7.31). Currently, the authorities arecollecting and storing some of these pieces because of their historical value. Secondly, in San
Agustin Temple (C. Morelos 202, Zona Centro, 44100 Guadalajara, Jal.), a piece of quarry
detached from the dome and fell over a car (Figure 7.32).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

61

Figure 7.31. Detachment of an ornamentation in the La Merced Church in downtown Guadalajara,
Jalisco (Reforma, 2022)

Figure 7.32. Detachment of an ornamentation in San Agustín Church in downtown Guadalajara,
Jalisco (El Occidental, 2022)
PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

62

In the downtown area of Tepic, in the state of Nayarit, The Asunción Maria Cathedral (Av. México
Nte. 246, Centro, 63000 Tepic, Nayarit) was damaged (Figure 7.33). The damage consisted of
failure of concrete in the columns at the top of the bell tower.

Figure 7.33. Damage at the upper portion of the bell tower in the Asunción Maria Cathedral in
Tepic, Nayarit (Meridiano.mx, 2022)

Figure 7.34. Damage on the bell tower of the Minor Basilica Cathedral of Colima, Colima(AFmedios, 2022a).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

63

Figure 7.35. Parroquia de Santiago Apóstol in Tecomán, Colima (24 Horas, 2022).

Figure 7.36. Damage on the bell tower of the Nogueras Church in Colima, Colima (Facebook,2022).
PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 202264

7.6 Government Buildings
According to El Sol de Morelia a local newspaper in the state of Michoacán (2022c), themunicipality government building of Patzcuaro experienced several cracks; however, no photos
or images have been found. There were varying levels of damage experienced in the walls andnonstructural components of several other government buildings (Figures 7.37-7.40).

Figure 7.37. Cracks and damaged walls of the “Presidencia municipal de Tecoman” in Michoacán(Diario de Colima, 2022c)

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

65

Figure 7.38. Minor cracks in walls of the government building in Villa Alvarez, Colima (Archivo
Digital, 2022)

Figure 7.39. Damage in construction joints and ceilings in the Administrative Complex of theGovernment of the State of Colima: left (Facebook, 2022m); center (Facebook, 2022n); right(Facebook, 2022o)

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

66

Figure 7.40. Damage to ceilings and severe cracking on walls in the Culturas del Occidente
Museum in Colima, Colima (Facebook, 2022p)

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 202267

7.7 School Buildings
Until the 1940s, the Mexican school infrastructure had been built following state and local designand construction practices. In many cases, schools were merely adapted from old houses without
any pedagogical criteria. In 1944, the Federal Government of Mexico established CAPFCE, as anational (federal) agency in charge of developing and building archetypical school projects
throughout the country. Over the past 78 years, joint teams of architects, engineers and educators
have developed distinctly different prototypes, built with masonry, concrete and steel for rural andurban communities. Buildings included all levels of schooling, including higher education
institutions. In rural communities, one-story load-bearing masonry wall structures are prevalent.
In the cities, one-to-four story structures can be found, although most common schools have one
and two stories. The largest proportion of schools were built in the 1970s to address the problem
of a deficit of school buildings in several parts of the country.
In 1985, in the aftermath of the Mexico City earthquake, designs were modified. Larger column
and beam sizes, greater amounts of longitudinal and transverse steel and, in some cases,
addition of walls or braces were implemented. Existing school buildings, whether damaged or
undamaged, were rehabilitated in Mexico City. In 2008, CAPFCE was transformed into INIFED(National Institute for School Infrastructure) as a coordination agency aimed at establishingmandatory requirements and criteria for the design and construction of school buildings, but nolonger in charge of their construction. Unfortunately, at present, INIFED is being dissolved by thegovernment, thus losing the expertise and best practices learned and implemented over many
years in Mexico.
Mexico has experienced vast damage in school buildings in previous earthquakes. As aconsequence of the January 21, 2003 earthquake (EERI & SMIS, 2006), damage concentrated
in masonry infill walls in the form of diagonal cracking and/or localized crushing next to theconcrete or steel frame structure. In some cases, out-of-plane failures of unreinforced masonry
parapets were observed. Shear failures in columns due to the short-column effect were also
commonly observed. Other forms of nonstructural damage included broken glass windows withlittle or no damage to contents and equipment. The percentage of damaged school buildings fromthat earthquake was 12.4, 9.3 and 4.3% of the total in the states of Colima, Jalisco and Michoacán,
respectively (EERI & SMIS, 2006).
In 2017 the September 7th and 19th events caused widespread damage to school buildings inwhich 19,194 school campuses were damaged: 12,014 were reported with minor damages (forexample, only broken glass windows), 6,970 with moderate and moderate/severe damage, and
210 with very severe damage that prompted their reconstruction (Alcocer et al., 2020). No
casualties were recorded in school facilities. All prototype school buildings withstood the temblors
without collapse. Only four collapses were recorded of buildings that were either built informally(following self-construction procedures) and that were used as accessory buildings, not forclassrooms (Ramírez et al., 2018).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

68

With support from the Institute of Engineering at UNAM, INIFED has developed a very
comprehensive post-earthquake assessment methodology and a comprehensive technical guidefor seismic retrofit (information is available at INIFED, 2021a, b, c, d; which are also available at
http://www.resilienciasismica.unam.mx/normas_guias.html).
Table 7.1 summarizes the total number of public school campuses reported with some level ofdamage during the September 19th earthquake (INIFED, 2022). Data includes damage reported
up to September 22 at 18 h, local time. A typical public school campus consists of three to fourbuildings. It is quite common to find school campus buildings constructed from different vintage,and even built with distinct structural systems and construction materials due to the need for
growth of the school.
The total number of schools damaged from this earthquake is 515 which is significantly smaller
than the almost 20,000 schools damaged in the September 19th 2017 earthquake. However, onemust keep in mind that the September 19, 2017 event occurred much closer to Mexico City andits surrounding cities which concentrate a large portion of school buildings in the country.
Most damaged school buildings in this earthquake are elementary schools. This is not a surpriseas the largest number of schools are in this category. It will be of interest to further assess damagein schools in Nayarit, which were located several kilometers north of the epicenter.
In general, damage consisted of wall cracking (in many cases only in the mortar or stucco cover),cracking of reinforced concrete columns and beams, cracks in floor/roof slabs, and cracking andtilting of wall fences. Wall fences have shown to be vulnerable to seismically-induced forces inprevious earthquakes (Alcocer et al., 2020). Wall fences are often built next to ornament gardensthat lead to corrosion of vertical wall reinforcement. Corrosion often facilitates the occurrence ofout-of-plane failures. A more detailed analysis of wall fence behavior is warranted for this event.

Table 7.1. Total number of damaged school campuses in the states of Colima, Jalisco, Michoacán
and Nayarit (September 22, 2022; 1800 h local time) (INIFED, 2022)

Total number of school campuses damaged
Level

COLIMA

JALISCOMICHOACÁN NAYARITTOTALElementary

131

57

54

145

387

Elementary (Rural) 20

7

10

0

37

High school

18

12

38

0

68

Higher education

0

1

16

0

17

Other (offices)

1

4

1

0

6

Total

170

81

119

145

515

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

69

After damaging earthquakes, the Mexican Government has typically implemented a Recovery
Plan for School Buildings, coordinated by INIFED. At the time of this writing, there is no
information about such a plan or the origin of the financial resources for the recovery (rehabilitation
and reconstruction).
Classes were canceled in the states of Colima, Jalisco and Michoacán while schools are being
inspected.

Figure 7.41. Cracked walls in the school of Jiquilpan, Michoacán (Cambio de Michoacán, 2022).

Damage experienced in school buildings mainly concentrated on the walls (Figures 7.41-7.45).
School buildings in Figure 7.42 and Figure 7.43 show typical characteristics of facades with large
openings and stiff short walls that restrain the lateral in-plane deformation of the lower section of
the columns. Note the significant damage of the walls in spite of the fact that these are single
story buildings. There are shear cracks in the walls due to the in-plane deformations and thedamage was more extensive in the sections above the short walls than at the bottom section.
The two cases in the figures do not seem to have had any out of plane damage to the walls.
Damage shown in these images is very similar to the damage observed in other school buildings
in previous earthquakes.

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

70

Figure 7.42. Cracked walls of a school in Coalcoman, Michoacán (MiMorelia, 2022).

Figure 7.43. Cracked walls of a school in Coalcoman, Michoacán (Notivideo, 2022).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

71

Figure 7.44. Cracked walls of Macario G. Barbosa school in Tecoman, Colima (Twitter, 2022l)

The case of the kindergarten Josefina Beas in Figure 7.45 shows the importance of carefully
evaluating not only school buildings but also their neighboring structures. This kindergarten
building was severely damaged by the partial collapse of the parapets and wall of an old structure,apparently made out of a combination of unreinforced masonry and adobe.

Figure 7.45. Collapsed walls of neighboring structure next to the kindergarten Joseffina Beas in
Coquimatlan Colima (Twitter, 2022m)

According to state officials in the state of Michoacán, 334 schools were damaged in that state(Noventagrados, 2022). At the time of the writing of this report, damage levels in those buildings
is unknown.

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 202272

7.8 Non-structural Components
Damage to non-structural components was reported by several newspapers, news agencies andin social networks. Dislodging of ceiling tiles, as shown in Figure 7.46 and Figure 7.47, anddamage to partition walls were the most common damages reported. Collapse of windows andglass facades, as the one in Figure 7.48, were also widely reported. At the public square Jardin
Alvaro Obegón extensive damage to the decorative pavement was noted apparently due to theabsence of a movement joint between the shore and the wharf structure (see Figure 7.49).

Figure 7.46. Non-structural damage in the Institute of Security and Social Services for State
Workers (ISSSTE) in Apatzingan, Michoacán (Twitter, 2022j).

Figure 7.47. Non-structural damage in Condusef Morelos office in Cuernavaca, Morelos (Twitter,
2022n).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

73

Figure 7.48. Non-structural damage of the mall in Colima, Colima (Publimetro, 2022).

Figure 7.49. Public square Jardín Álvaro Obregón in Manzanillo, Colima (Facebook, 2022q).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

74

7.9 Geotechnical Observations
The earthquake triggered dozens of landslides and falling of large rock blocks along the entire
epicentral area (Figure 7.50 and Figure 7.51). A massive landslide, shown in Figure 7.52) was
reported near Colima, around 50 km from the epicenter. The Central Control, Communications,
Computers, Cybersecurity and Intelligence Command (C5i) monitored several points along theroads and reported landslides as far as 70 km from the epicenter (See Figure 7.53). The USGS
reports PGA values around 0.15g in this region. There were also multiple landslides along the
Tecoman-Colima Federal Highway (Figure 7.54 and Figure 7.55) which is approximately 80 kmfrom the epicenter and had PGA values around 0.1g according to the USGS.

Figure 7.50. Landslide in Coalcoman-Aquila road in Michoacán (La Jornada, 2022).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

75

Figure 7.51. Landslide in Coalcomán-Villa Victoria road in Michoacán (El Sol de Morelia, 2022a).

Figure 7.52. Landslide in Colima (La Jornada, 2022).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

76

Figure 7.53. Landslides on the highway in Michoacán (Revolución 3.0, 2022).

Figure 7.54. Landslide on the Tecomán-Colima Federal Highway (Uno TV, 2022)

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

77Figure 7.55. Landslide on the Tecomán-Colima Federal Highway in La Salada, Colima: left (Sentido
Común, 2022); right (right (Facebook, 2022r)

Figure 7.56. Landslide on Villa de Álvarez-Minatitlán road in Villa de Álvarez, Colima (Facebook,2022s)PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

78

7.10 Industrial Facilities
The earthquake caused some water supply problems in the city of Colima . Gov. Indira Vizcaínosuggested rationing water for the following days. According to the Head of the Potable Water
Commission, the earthquake did not cause structural damage to infrastructure, but caused upliftof sediments. Consequently, it was not possible to pump water.
San Pedrito Port, in Manzanillo, an important port for Mexican trade and communications, whichsuffered extensive damage in the 1995 Mw8 Manzanillo Earthquake (as described in Rodríguez
et al. 1997), temporarily ceased to function after the September 19, 2022 earthquake. According
to Noticias Manzanillo (2022), after a reconnaissance of facilities, port activities were restarted
that same afternoon, and as of the morning of September 21, it was fully operational.

7.11 Infrastructure
The following roads and bridges were reported with damage, along with the causes and/or formof damage:● Autopista Siglo 21: Rocks/Landslide● Carretera Costera: Cracking in several places● Coahuayana Bridge : Superstructure Damage● Ticuiz Bridge: Superstructure Damage
The Coahuayana bridge had suffered damage in previous earthquakes (EERI & SMIS, 2006).

Figure 7.57. Damage in Ortega-Callejones road (K2+000 to K3+300) in Colima. (Twitter, 2022o).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

79

Figure 7.58. Damage in bridge “Puente Cortés” in Colima, Colima (El Comentario, 2022).

Figure 7.59. Damage at a joint in the Armería bridge located on the federal highway ColimaManzanillo en Tecomán, Colima (Facebook, 2022k).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

80Figure 7.60. Damage on the Campos-Punta Grande federal highway in Manzanillo, Colima(Afmedios, 2022b).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

81

8 Damage (Mexico City and State of Mexico)

Peak-ground accelerations recorded in Mexico City for the main event of September 19, and theaftershock of September 22 are shown in Figure 8.1a and Figure 8.1b, respectively. In the main
event, one of the stations recorded accelerations classified as Very Strong ("Muy Fuerte" inSpanish) ranging from 50 to 120 gal (cm/seg2). In the September 22 aftershock several stations
recorded peak-grounds accelerations classified as Strong ("Fuerte" in Spanish), ranging from 10
to 50 gal.

a)b)

Figure 8.1. Report of peak-ground accelerations in Mexico City: a) 19/09/2022, main event, and b)
22/09/2022 aftershock (cires, 2022).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

82

8.1 Buildings
According to the information provided by the Mexico City Government, only twenty one buildings
were damaged by the earthquake and none of them was severely damaged. The followingbuildings were reported damaged by local authorities: (Gobierno CDMX, 2022):
Minor structural damage:● Pino Suárez No. 81, Cuauhtémoc● Palma No. 34, Centro, Cuauhtémoc● Uruguay No. 73, Centro, Cuauhtémoc● Uruguay No. 75, Centro, Cuauhtémoc● Isabel La Católica No. 85, Centro, Cuauhtémoc● República de Brasil No. 8, Centro, Cuauhtémoc● Eje Central No. 11, Centro, Cuauhtémoc● Paseo de la Reforma No. 389, Centro, Cuauhtémoc● Insurgentes No. 423, San Simón Tolnahuac, Cuauhtémoc● Zaragoza No. 31, Buena Vista, Cuauhtémoc● Dr. Liceaga No. 115, Doctores, Cuauhtémoc● Dr. Río de la Loza, No. 156, Doctores, Cuauhtémoc● San Antonio Abad No. 32, Centro, Cuauhtémoc● Edificio del PRI, Av. Aquiles Serdán y Pdte. Madero, Azcapotzalco● Edificio de la Lotería Nacional, Av. Paseo de la Reforma No. 1, Tabacalera, Cuauhtémoc● Atenas y Vesalles, Juárez, Cuauhtémoc● Antonio Caso No. 130, San Rafael, Cuauhtémoc
Moderate structural damage:● Edif. Virreinal, Plaza de la Constitución No. 2, Centro,Cuauhtémoc● Argentina No. 8, Centro, Cuauhtémoc● Dr. Navarro No. 182, Doctores, Cuauhtémoc● Filipinas No. 178, Portales, Benito Juárez
People reported falling debris during the earthquake at the building located in Palma 34 in Mexico
City Downtown (Figure 8.2). It is worth mentioning that the crack shown in the picture wasobserved before the seismic event. However, users commented in different twitter posts that its
size increased during the earthquake.

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

83

Figure 8.2. Building located at Palma 34, in Downtown Mexico City (Twitter, 2022x).

The buildings shown in Figure 8.3 to Figure 8.7 were damaged during the Sep 19, 2017
earthquake, and they have not yet been repaired. In this earthquake (Sep 19, 2022), thesebuildings reported new damage, including cracking on structural and non-structural walls, broken
windows and detached facades.

Figure 8.3. Building located at Doctor Navarro # 182, Alcaldía Cuauhtémoc, Mexico City
(Ciudadanos en red, 2022).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

84

Figure 8.4. Building located at Calz. San Antonio Abad 32, Obrera, Cuauhtémoc, Mexico City
(Twitter, 2022y).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

85

Figure 8.5. Building of the Lotería Nacional (National Lotery). Avenida Paseo de la Reforma,
México City (Twitter 2022z and Wradio 2022).

Figure 8.6. Building in República de Uruguay 73, Cuauhtémoc, Mexico City (Wradio 2022).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

86Figure 8.7. Building located at Filipinas 178, Portales Nte, Benito Juárez, Mexico City (Twitter,
2022aa).

Figure 8.8 and Figure 8.9 show two buildings where cracks were observed in the facades after
the earthquake. It is unclear whether the observed cracks correspond to structural elements.

Figure 8.8. Building in the Juarez neighborhood between Atenas and Versalles Streets (Milenio
2022a and Twitter 2022t).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

87Figure 8.9. Building # 23, housing unit Lindavista Vallejo, Sección 2, Gustavo A. Madero, Mexico
City (Twitter, 2022u).

During the seismic event, in Ecatepec, State of Mexico, it was reported that some facade elements
had partially collapsed (Figure 8.10). Local firefighters assessed the damage and demolition tasks
were carried out on the rest of the elements that presented structural failures.

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

88Figure 8.10. Marketplace “5 de mayo”, in Col. La Michoacána, Ecatepec, State of Mexico (Milenio,
2022b).

Figure 8.11 to Figure 8.14 show several damaged buildings.

Figure 8.11. Building in Calle Gral. Gabriel Hernández # 56, Col. Doctores, Cuauhtémoc, Mexico
City (Excelsior, 2022b).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

89

Figure 8.12. Building located at José María Marroquín # 10, Downtown, Mexico City (Excelsior,2022c).

Figure 8.13. Building located at Canal de Churubusco # 351 with some cracks and damage in thefacade (Twitter, 2022v).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

90

Figure 8.14. Building located at Calzada San Antonio Abad # 66, Alc. Cuauhtémoc, Mexico City
(Newtral, 2022).

8.2 Healthcare / Medical Facilities
No damage was reported in the Hospitals of Mexico City and the State of Mexico. However, inthe hospital "Siglo XXI" there were failures in the electricity supply, which caused delays to provide
medical services. Figure 8.15 shows a photo of an electrical energy supply failure during a baby’ssurgery, according to information presented by El Heraldo de México (2020a).

Figure 8.15. Hospital Siglo XXI, Mexico City (El Heraldo de México, 2022a).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

91

8.3 Religious and Historical Buildings
The Metropolitan Cathedral of Mexico City (Figure 8.16) did not present visible structural damage.
However, people reported material spalling. As a consequence, the facilities were temporarilyclosed. According to Guatemala Times (2022), the General Directorate of Cultural Heritage Sites
and Monuments indicated that current rehabilitation works were suspended in order to carry out
a structural review. Reactivation of old cracks in the Metropolitan Sagrario was confirmed.

Figure 8.16. Cathedral of Mexico City (El Financiero, 2022b).

8.4 Non-structural Components
Only a small amount of non-structural damage was reported in Mexico City or the State of Mexico.

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

92

8.5 Infrastructure
No damage to infrastructure was reported in Mexico City or the State of Mexico. A bridge in
Huixquilucan (Figure 8.17) was closed to traffic after the earthquake. After a preliminary
assessment, severe structural damage was not detected (?)discarded; however, the bridge has
not yet been opened to traffic. (El Universal, 2022a).
After the M6.8 aftershock, electricity supply failures were reported in Mexico City, but power was
restored within a few hours.

Figure 8.17. Bridge at Palma Criolla, Huixquilucan, State of Mexico, closed to traffic after theearthquake. (La Razón, 2022a).

8.6 School buildings
After the earthquake, the “Autoridad Educativa Federal en la Ciudad de México (AEFCM)” visited
all the 6849 schools in the city and found that at least 76 of them were affected during the event
but were not seriously compromised (Once Noticias, 2022). Additionally, the Secretaría de Obrasy Servicios de la Ciudad de México (Sobse) reported that 70 schools suffered minor damage, 5schools presented moderate damage and only 1 school was severely damaged. (El Universal,
2022c). The schools in the most critical damage categories are:

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

93

Moderate damage in:● Secundaria José María Velasco, en Iztapalapa.
● Primaria Mártires de Reforma, en Iztapalapa.
● Primaria, Doctor Jaime Torres Bodet, en Tláhuac.
● Primaria Luis González obregón, en Benito Juárez.
● Primaria Adriana García corral, en Cuauhtémoc.
Severe damage in:● Primaria Albino García, en Iztapalapa

Figure 8.18. Diagonal cracking in masonry infill wall in a school. (La Razón, 2022b)

Two days after the main shock, according to local government officials, damaged schools
increased to 120. Seven schools suffered medium damage, while the remainder 113 exhibited
light damage. There are 56 other public schools pending to be revised (Excelsior, 2022a). Only
one school (“Albino García”, in Iztapalapa County) interrupted activities because of thenonstructural damage in window framing and doors (Proceso, 2022b) (Figure 8.19).

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

94

Figure 8.19. Albino García school in Mexico City with nonstructural damage in window framing(Proceso, 2022b)

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

95

9 Videos Documenting Live Earthquake Shaking and Damage
State of Colima
Collapsed gym in Blvd. Miguel de la Madrid, 1555, Manzanillo, Colima:
https://twitter.com/DDMexico/status/1571966521618092032?s=20
https://twitter.com/Spainiranpress/status/1572193584027402242

Waves in Manzanillo, Colima:
https://twitter.com/AlertaCambio/status/1571970285825576960

Pátzcuaro-Lázaro Cárdenas Highway, km 228:https://twitter.com/Pepetonozam/status/1571948606449647617

State of MichoacánNews summary Michoacán:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjRzFeVzaMc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1f4R_7M5A0
https://twitter.com/i/status/1572427910186946561

Single-family building, Coacolman, Michoacán:https://twitter.com/AztecaNoticias/status/1571943777845284869?s=20

Shaking in building, Uruapan, Michoacán:https://twitter.com/i/status/1571956699623211016

Movement

of

a

fence

in

Apatzingan.

Michoacán:https://twitter.com/TerraGeaNews/status/1571940110299729920

Church in Michoacán:https://twitter.com/i/status/1571969658051338240

Hardware Store:
https://twitter.com/AztecaNoticias/status/1571945983982063616?s=20

State of Jalisco
IMSS Hospital General Regional No. 46:
https://twitter.com/montse_rgz29/status/1571957106198319104

Centro Universitario del Sur:PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 202296

https://twitter.com/adrianalunacruz/status/1571949841236000769

Buildings, Puerto Vallarta:
https://twitter.com/RochexRB27/status/1572009389845893121?s=20

Hotels, Puerto Vallarta:
https://twitter.com/itspapajon/status/1571932400648880128?s=20

https://twitter.com/intxrnetclips/status/1571961182298472448?s=20 (The Westin, Resort & Spa,
Puerto Vallarta)
https://twitter.com/i/status/1572246989894742018 (Blvd Francisco Medina Ascencio, 999, Puerto
Vallarta, Jalisco).
Monument “A Pio Noveno” movement in Jamay, Jalisco :https://twitter.com/i/status/1571946983186735105 (Francisco I. Madero 57A, Centro, 47900
Jamay, Jal.)

Mexico City
Shaking of multistory buildings, Mexico City:
https://twitter.com/edsoncentricus/status/1571927092518080512?s=48&t=zk1Qir-FYgc9Dv3R291TKA(Hotel Holiday Inn Express Mexico, Paseo de la Reforma, Mexico City)
https://twitter.com/paolagalletta/status/1571938610076864512?s=48&t=zk1QirFYgc9Dv3R291TKA (Roma Norte, Mexico City).
https://twitter.com/alexvilasss/status/1572048938059841536?s=48&t=zk1QirFYgc9Dv3R291TKA (Reforma, Mexico City)
https://twitter.com/azucenau/status/1571985098907553792?s=48&t=zk1QirFYgc9Dv3R291TKA (Dr. Lucio, 123, Cuauhtemoc, Mexico City).
Shaking inside buildings, Mexico City:
https://twitter.com/cmjimenezxto/status/1571950902692515840?s=48&t=zk1QirFYgc9Dv3R291TKA (Centro Historico, Mexico City).
https://twitter.com/sergio_carreno/status/1571926230949298176?s=48&t=zk1QirFYgc9Dv3R291TKA (Paseo de la Reforma, 373, Cuauhtémoc, Mexico City).
https://twitter.com/mr_civico/status/1572280525934723072?s=48&t=zk1Qir-FYgc9Dv3R291TKA(Reforma, Mexico City).
https://twitter.com/melaniesouza18/status/1572001825334915072?s=48&t=zk1QirFYgc9Dv3R291TKA (Lago Zurich, 245, Miguel Hidalgo, Mexico City).
https://twitter.com/i_alaniis/status/1572021094621810691?s=48&t=zk1Qir-FYgc9Dv3R291TKA(Tlapan, Mexico City).
PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 202297https://twitter.com/lacostillarota_/status/1571933603180990464?s=48&t=zk1QirFYgc9Dv3R291TKA (Paseo de la Reforma, Cuauhtémoc, Mexico City).
https://twitter.com/aldofuego/status/1571941474635218945 (Centro Historico, Mexico City).
https://twitter.com/Sof_Cervon/status/1571967874096574465
Mexico City).

(Santa Fe, Álvaro Obregón,

https://twitter.com/interludiohaq/status/1572250788885307392?s=48&t=zk1QirFYgc9Dv3R291TKA (Paseo de la Reforma, 26, Cuauhtémoc, Mexico City).
Shaking in public places, Mexico City:
https://twitter.com/cuauhtemoc_1521/status/1572052400499818498?s=48&t=zk1QirFYgc9Dv3R291TKA (Lake in Xochimilco).
https://twitter.com/quepocamadremex/status/1572324523298689024?s=48&t=zk1QirFYgc9Dv3R291TKA (Filming from cableway).
https://twitter.com/diariodemorelos/status/1571931140449046528?s=48&t=zk1QirFYgc9Dv3R291TKA (Subway station).
https://twitter.com/lalohuant/status/1571935321679450113?s=48&t=zk1Qir-FYgc9Dv3R291TKA(Valle Norte, Benito Juárez, Mexico City)
https://twitter.com/radio_formula/status/1571939424812036096?s=48&t=zk1QirFYgc9Dv3R291TKA, República de Uruguay, 73, Cuauhtémoc, Mexico City)
https://twitter.com/AztecaNoticias/status/1571970272412192769?s=20(MexicoInternational Airport, Capitán Carlos León, s/n, Venustiano Carranza, Mexico City).

City

Damage in buildings
https://twitter.com/sarahiuribeg/status/1571941006081392641?s=48&t=zk1QirFYgc9Dv3R291TKA (Calle de la Palma, 39, Cuauhtemoc, Mexico City).
Damage in Non-structural components
https://twitter.com/ElMundoSV/status/1571951894112751618?s=20 (Shopping Center, Colima)
Shaking in hospitals and clinics
https://www.tiktok.com/@chorizomx/video/7145170253285166341?is_from_webapp=v1&item_id=714517
0253285166341 (Michoacán)

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

98

Damage to infrastructure
https://twitter.com/lopezdoriga/status/1571943436843982849 (Bridge connecting Bosque Real from
Magnocentro at Palma Criolla, Interlomas, Mexico City)

Sloshing of water bodies
https://twitter.com/Jalisco_Rojo/status/1571931641903304705?s=20 (Diag. San Jorge, 93, Guadalajara,
Jalisco)https://twitter.com/i/status/1571972347690721280 (Paseo de la Reforma, 27, Cuauhtémoc, Mexico City).
https://twitter.com/ChrisFLTornado/status/1571954525413707776?s=20 (Michoacán)https://twitter.com/soteloyafte/status/1571990092297736195?s=48&t=zk1Qir-FYgc9Dv3R291TKA(Mexico City).
https://twitter.com/i/status/1571973850795053058 (Liverpool, Cuauhtémoc, Mexico City).
https://twitter.com/i/status/1571944050433077248 (Teacapán, Escuinapa, Sinaloa)

Compilations (several locations)
A fairly complete and narrated compilation is available athttps://youtu.be/Opl5WaX3btI
Other compilations
https://twitter.com/adn40/status/1572045278441529344?s=48&t=zk1Qir-FYgc9Dv3R291TKA
https://twitter.com/tembloralerta/status/1571961707953790976?s=48&t=zk1Qir-FYgc9Dv3R291TKA

M6.9 Aftershock (September 22, 2022)
https://twitter.com/i/status/1572920388534796289 (Uruapan, Michoacán)https://twitter.com/i/status/1572836593538301952 (Coalcomán,Michoacán).
https://twitter.com/i/status/1572839477588131841 (Apatzingán,Michoacán)https://twitter.com/i/status/1572854625916825600
Camino Real, Colima, Colima)(Hospital

Regional

Universitario,

Blvrd

https://twitter.com/i/status/1572856894636822530 (Carretera Tecoman - Tecuanillo, Colima)
https://twitter.com/i/status/1572847282436902912 (Villa de Alvarez, Colima)
https://youtu.be/XEeeTdOz2Sw (Asunción Maria Cathedral, Tepic, Nayarit)

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

99

10 Recommended Response Strategy
Based on the information gathered in this Preliminary Virtual Reconnaissance Report (PVRR),EERI’s LFE and StEER offer the following recommendations for future study.
Study of recorded ground motions: The earthquake produced a valuable set of records
obtained in the different seismic networks: the broadband network operated by the Institute ofGeophysics at UNAM, the strong motion accelerograph network operated by the Institute ofEngineering at UNAM and the Mexico City Accelerograph Network operated by the Center ofSeismic Instrumentation and Seismic Recording (CIRES). These sets of earthquake records offer
the possibility to further improve our understanding of attenuation of seismic waves duringsubduction earthquakes as well as the response of soft soil basins.
Study of the operation and response to the Early Warning System: Mexico has operated an
Early Warning System for Mexico City since 1990. The warning system provided a 58s warning
to Morelia the capital of the state of Michacán and 98s warning in Mexico City. This event provides
an opportunity to continue to learn about technical aspects of the operation of the early warning
system as well as to learn more about the public response to the warnings. While the system wasinitially developed to provide warning to Mexico City, it now provides warning to 8 major cities
providing an opportunity to learn about differences in response in these various cities.
Study of the Seismic Performance of Hospital Facilities: Similar to the U.S. and othercountries, hospitals in Mexico are designed to higher levels of seismic forces compared tobuildings of regular importance (typically forces are 50% larger). However, this does not appear
to have prevented damage in many hospitals in the states of Michoacán and Colima and severalof them had to be evacuated. In particular, damage in many of these hospitals was related tomasonry infills which are known to be vulnerable to damage at very low levels of interstory drift
such as 0.002 (Chiozzi and Miranda, 2019). This type of infill is commonly used both in the facadeand as interior partitions throughout Latin America, countries around the Mediterranean Sea, andmany Asian countries.
Despite the large magnitude of this event, the damage to the built environment produced by thisevent was limited and therefore it is not recommended at this point that EERI LFE or StEER sendteams to conduct field reconnaissance. However, it is recommended to coordinate withorganizations in Mexico responding to this event.

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

100

References
24 Horas (2022) “Sismo pega a inmuebles de Colima, Jalisco y Michoacán” Url: https://www.24horas.mx/2022/09/20/sismo-pega-a-inmuebles-de-colima-jalisco-y-Michoacán/(Last
Accessed September 21, 2022)
AFmedios (2022a) “La Diócesis de Colima lamenta pérdidas de vida por sismo”. Url:
https://www.afmedios.com/la-diocesis-de-colima-lamenta-perdidas-de-vida-por-sismosenala-que-al-momento-no-hay-templos-con-danos-en-estructura/?fbclid=IwAR2l2gzS8_dRJvb9i1rleyRyFK_cXpxkOdqQUwx4d3uJNMlvzxha9I2Y3M (Last Accessed September 21,
2022)
AFmedios (2022b) “Libramiento Campos a El Rocío, en Manzanillo, con visibles afectaciones tras
sismo 19-S” Url: https://www.afmedios.com/libramiento-campos-a-el-rocio-en-manzanillocon-visibles-afectaciones-tras-sismo-19s/?fbclid=IwAR2PkXGCijEYLCMxaCxnW4RYQ46Qu_aessdK8BIHlKHeDyepknFYssW1mUE(Last Accessed September 21, 2022)
Alcocer, S. M., & Castaño, V. M. (2008). Evolution of codes for structural design in Mexico. Structural
Survey.
Alcocer, S.M., Murià-Vila, D., Fernández-Sola, L.R., Ordaz, M., and Arce, J.C., (2020). “Observed
damage in public school buildings during the 2017 Mexico earthquakes,” Earthquake Spectradel Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, ISSN 8755-2930, July, 20 pp. doi:
10.1177/8755293020926183
Allen, R. M., Gasparini, P., Kamigaichi, O., & Bose, M. (2009). The status of earthquake early warning
around the world: An introductory overview. Seismological research letters, 80(5), 682-693.
AM (2022). “Michoacán: Reportan tres mil casas con daños, 800 de ellas en ruinas, tras sismo deayer” Url: https://www.am.com.mx/Michoacán/2022/9/20/Michoacán-reportan-tres-mil-casascon-danos-800-de-ellas-en-ruinas-tras-sismo-de-ayer-623806.html(Last
Accessed:
September 21, 2022)
Applied Technology Council. (1978). Tentative Provisions for the Development of Seismic Regulations for
Buildings, Report ATC 3-06, National Bureau of Standards, U.S. Government Printing Office,Washington, D.C.
Archivo Digital (2022). “Derrumbes en carretera a Minatitlán, bardas caídas e icendio e vivienda,
principales daños en la Villa” Url: https://www.adcolima.com/2022/09/19/derrumbes-encarretera-a-minatitlan-bardas-caidas-e-incendio-en-vivienda-principales-danos-en-la-villa/(Last Accessed September 21, 2022)
Arroyo, D., García, D., Ordaz, M. et al. Strong ground-motion relations for Mexican interplate
earthquakes. J Seismol 14, 769–785 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10950-010-9200-0
Arteta, C.A., Carrillo, J., Archbold, J., Gaspar, D., Pájaro, C., Araujo, G., Torregroza, A., Bonett, R.,
Blandon, C., Fernandez-Sola, L. Correal, J.F., Mosalam, K. M. (2019). Response of Mid-Rise
Reinforced Concrete Frame Buildings to the 2017 Puebla Earthquake. Earthquake Spectra;
35 (4): 1763–1793. doi: https://doi.org/10.1193/061218EQS144M
BBC (2022). “Un fuerte terremoto de magnitud 7.7 sacude el centro de México en el aniversario dedos grandes sismos” Url: https://www.bbc.com/mundo/noticias-america-latina-62963416(Last Accessed September 21, 2022)
Cambio de Michoacán (2022). “En seis municipios se concentran mayoría de daños por el sismo;supenden clases en cuatro” Url: https://cambiodeMichoacán.com.mx/2022/09/19/en-seismunicipios-se-concentran-mayoria-de-danos-por-el-sismo-suspenden-clases-en-cuatro/(Last Accessed: sep 21, 2022)
PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

101

Chiozzi, A., & Miranda, E. (2017). Fragility functions for masonry infill walls with in-plane loading.
Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 46(15), 2831-2850.
CIRES (2022) “Efectos del Sismo M6.9 del 2022/09/22 a las 01:16:09 hrs., profundidad de 12.00 kmyepicentro
a
468
km
de
la
CiudaddeMéxico”
Url:
http://www.cires.org.mx/racm_mapainteractivo/. (Last Accessed September 21, 2022)
Ciudadanos en red (2022) “Reportan al menos 21 edificios con daños tras el sismo en CDMX” Url:
https://ciudadanosenred.com.mx/cdmx/reportan-al-menos-21-edificios-con-danos-tras-elsismo-en-cdmx/. (Last Accessed September 21, 2022)
CNN en Español (2022) “Al menos 2 muertos por sismo de magnitud 7,7 que sacudió a México. ¿Qué
otros daños se registraron?”. Url: https://cnnespanol.cnn.com/video/temblor-19s-victimasafectacion-danos-perspectivas-mexico-muertos-heridos/ (Last Accessed September 22,
2022)
Colima Noticias (2022) “Con fracturas en gran parte de su estructura luce el Hotel gran Pacífico deManzanillo”
Url:
https://www.colimanoticias.com/con-fracturas-en-gran-parte-de-suestructura-luce-el-hotel-gran-pacifico-de-manzanillo-video/ (Last Accessed September 21,
2022)
Comisión Federal de Electricidad (1993) “Manual de diseño de obras civiles. Diseño por sismo”,
Departamento de Ingeniería Civil Instituto de Investigaciones Eléctricas, México
Comisión Federal de Electricidad (2015) “Manual de diseño de obras civiles. Diseño por sismo”,
Departamento de Ingeniería Civil Instituto de Investigaciones Eléctricas, México.
Contralinea (2022). “Determina perito inexistencia de daños estructurales en condominios de Porto
Fino en Marina Vallarta” Url: https://contralinea.net/determina-perito-inexistencia-de-danosestructurales-en-condominios-de-porto-fino-en-marina-vallarta/ (Last Accessed: September
21, 2022)
Diario de Colima (2022a). “Deja sismo dos muertos y daños materiales en Manzanillo” Url:
https://diariodecolima.com/noticias/detalle/2022-09-19-deja-sismo-dos-muertos-y-daosmateriales-en-manzanillo (Last Accessed September 21, 2022)
Diario de Colima (2022b). “Hay un persona muerta en Manzanillo tras sismo, informa López Obrador”
Url:
https://diariodecolima.com/noticias/detalle/2022-09-19-hay-una-persona-muerta-enmanzanillo-tras-sismo-informa-lpez-obrador (Last Accessed September 21, 2022)
Diario de Colima (2022c). “Cerraran temporalmente la presidencia Municipal de Tecomán” Url:
https://diariodecolima.com/noticias/detalle/2022-09-19-cerrarn-temporalmente-lapresidencia-municipal-de-tecomn (Last Accessed September 21, 2022)
Earthquake Engineering Research Institute and Sociedad Mexicana de Ingeniería Sísmica, (2006).
“The January 21st, 2003 Tecomán earthquake,” S.M. Alcocer and R.E. Klingner (editors).
ISBN 1-932884-08-4, March, 288 pp.
El Comentario (2022) “Puente Cortés no presenta daño estructural; será reabierto en las próximas
horas” Url: https://elcomentario.ucol.mx/sin-dano-estructural-puente-cortes-sera-reabiertoen-las-proximas-horas/ (Last Accessed September 21, 2022)
El Consejero (2022). “Daños Menores en Edificios y Hoteles en Puerto Vallarta: Protección Civil” Url:
https://elconsejero.com.mx/danos-menores-en-edificios-y-hoteles-en-puerto-vallartaproteccion-civil/ (Last Accessed: September 21, 2022)
El Financiero (2022a). “Sismo en México: Hotel en Puerto Vallarta niega acceso a Protección Civil
tras registrar daños” Url: https://www.elfinanciero.com.mx/estados/2022/09/20/sismo-enmexico-hotel-en-puerto-vallarta-niega-acceso-a-proteccion-civil-tras-registrar-danos/ (Last
Accessed September 21, 2022)

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

102

El Financiero (2022b) “Sismo magnitud 7.7: Cierra Catedral de CDMX por afectaciones” Url:
https://www.elfinanciero.com.mx/cdmx/2022/09/21/sismo-magnitud-77-cierra-catedral-decdmx-porafectaciones/?fbclid=IwAR3GTET8T5iNFoUWo5C_EW_N7H6J4czzNfSy6QPqTmkgRQ3gHn
s9kWZfx9I (Last accesed September 21, 2022).
El Heraldo de México (2022a) “VIDEO | Médicos fueron sorprendidos por el sismo de 7.7 mientras
operaban a un bebé” Url: https://heraldodemexico.com.mx/nacional/2022/9/20/videomedicos-fueron-sorprendidos-por-el-sismo-de-77-mientras-operaban-un-bebe-441405.html(Last Accessed September 21, 2022)
El

Occidental (2022) “Dos templos afectados por caída de cantera tras sismo” Url:
https://www.eloccidental.com.mx/local/dos-templos-afectados-por-caida-de-cantera-trassismo-8910910.html (Las Accessed September 21,2022)

El Sol de Morelia (2022a). “Sismo deja daños en hospitales, casas, iglesias y escuelas en Michoacán”
Url:
https://www.elsoldemorelia.com.mx/local/sismo-deja-danos-en-hospitales-casasiglesias-y-escuelas-en-Michoacán-8913718.html (Last Accessed: September 20, 2022).
El

Sol

de Morelia (2022b). “Verifican daños en Centro de Salud de Aquila” Url:
https://www.elsoldemorelia.com.mx/local/verifican-danos-en-centro-de-salud-de-aquila8920354.html (Last Accessed September 21, 2022).

El Sol de Morelia (2022c). “Sismo de este lunes deja daños estructurales en Pátzcuaro”. Url:
https://www.elsoldemorelia.com.mx/local/municipios/sismo-de-este-lunes-deja-danosestructurales-en-patzcuaro-8911931.html (Last Accessed September 21, 2022).
El Universal (2022a). Puente de Interlomas sin daños, fue más bien "foto mal enfocada". Url:
https://www.eluniversal.com.mx/metropoli/dano-en-puente-de-interlomas-es-por-foto-malenfocada-lo-mantendran-cerrado (Last Accessed September 22, 2022).
El

Universal(2022b).
“Confirman
terceravíctima por
sismo
en
Colima”
Url:
https://www.eluniversal.com.mx/estados/confirman-tercera-victima-por-sismo-en-colima(Last Accessed: September 22, 2022).

El Universal (2022c). “Sobse reporta 70 escuelas con riesgo bajo, cinco medio y una alto, tras sismo
de 7.7 en CDMX” Url: https://www.eluniversal.com.mx/metropoli/sobse-reporta-70-escuelascon-riesgo-bajo-cinco-medio-y-una-alto-tras-sismo-de-77-en-cdmx(Last
Accessed
September 22, 2022).
Esteva, L. (1987). Earthquake engineering research and practice in Mexico after the 1985
earthquakes. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, 20(3), 159200.
Esteva, L. (1988). The Mexico earthquake of September 19, 1985—Consequences, lessons, andimpact on research and practice. Earthquake Spectra, 4(3), 413-426.
Excelsior (2022a). “Daños por sismos en escuelas de CDMX ascienden a 40 millones de pesos” Url:
https://www.excelsior.com.mx/comunidad/danos-por-sismos-en-escuelas-de-cdmxascienden-a-40-millones-de-pesos/1541296 (Last Accessed September 22, 2022).
Excelsior (2022b) “Sismo registrado el pasado lunes deja daños en 76 escuelas de la CDMX” Url:
https://www.excelsior.com.mx/comunidad/sismo-registrado-el-pasado-lunes-deja-danos-en76-escuelas-de-la-cdmx/1540908 (Last accessed September 21, 2022).
Excelsior (2022c) “Edificio en colonia Centro presenta daños tras el sismo de 7.1 grados” Url:
https://www.excelsior.com.mx/comunidad/edificio-en-colonia-centro-presenta-danos-tras-elsismo-de-71-grados/1470464 (Last accessed September 21, 2022)
Facebook (2022a). Reporte del Consejo Estatal de Protección Civil
https://fb.watch/fEFvFc7MoT/ (Last Accessed: September 20, 2022)

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

deColima.

Url:

103

Facebook (2022b). “Así la parroquia de San Miguel Arcángel en Tacátzcuaro, Michoacán tras el sismo
de
esta
tarde
de
magnitud
7.7”.
Url:
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=788006915643255&t=3 (Last Accessed September 20,
2022)
Facebook(2022c).
“Gobernadora
ConstitucionaldelEstadodeColima”.
Url:
https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=641433730672762&set=pcb.641449244004544 (Last
Accessed: September 21, 2022)
Facebook(2022d)“En
segundos
se
viene
abajo
su
vivienda”.
Url:
https://www.facebook.com/EditoraDiariodeColima/posts/pfbid0Rs8ymJ9vPdE5CSwjKF6EEY
rEKwjVwfFUY9PiCPnoBULtcF4qjt4jYesUgaygGYRXl (Last Accessed September 21, 2022)
Facebook(2022e)https://www.facebook.com/guiacolimaonline/photos/pcb.5701842159860770/570184026652
7626 (Last Accessed September 21, 2022)
Facebook(2022f)https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=425961869521695&set=pcb.425963922854823 (Last
Accessed September 21, 2022)
Facebook (2022g) “Daños visibles en el exterior del edificio de Plaza Country en Colima”. Url:
https://www.facebook.com/afmedios/posts/pfbid0ZvtKkZKkSPnPN7Y3zfhfGCi2wzswtsiDgLSi
GgXGdxLMEQPN5HpL7Yvqn8ph4gHxl (Last Accessed September 21, 2022)
Facebook(2022h)https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=520659030062932&set=pcb.520659200062915 (Last
Accessed September 21, 2022)
Facebook(2022i)https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=520658983396270&set=pcb.520659200062915 (Last
Accessed September 21, 2022)
Facebook(2022j)https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=520659136729588&set=pcb.520659200062915 (Last
Accessed September 21, 2022)
Facebook(2022l)https://www.facebook.com/Colimaalaire/posts/pfbid0bvKXwYSRtGx8t377MHM7egfuC2NFY1NLjquvbv7KjiRJk6J8Wk4hSwcWrTFvD3ACl (Last Accessed September 21, 2022)
Facebook(2022m)https://www.facebook.com/ColimaMovimiento/photos/pcb.5512707648806594/55127022121
40471 (Last Accessed September 21, 2022)
Facebook(2022n)https://www.facebook.com/ColimaMovimiento/photos/pcb.5512707648806594/55127047054
73555 (Last Accessed September 21, 2022)
Facebook(2022o)https://www.facebook.com/ColimaMovimiento/photos/pcb.5512707648806594/55127048921
40203 (Last Accessed September 21, 2022)
Facebook (2022p) “Museo de las Culturas de Occidente cerrará sus puertas al sufrir daños en su
estructura,principalmente
pilares,
muros
y
caída
de
plafones”
Url:
https://www.facebook.com/colimanoticias/posts/pfbid03Fxjp4okPJKCZwnt3W9QizrEatqLDxJ
jvPgCniNDUsTNtMKacEHDCHrUoz82Y8tgl (Last Accessed September 21, 2022)
Facebook(2022q)https://www.facebook.com/ColimaMovimiento/photos/pcb.5512707648806594/55127064388
06715 (Last Accessed September 21, 2022)

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

104

Facebook(2022r)Url:
https://www.facebook.com/111747786891119/photos/a.111753303557234/10124021268256
76/ (Last Accessed September 21, 2022)
Facebook(2022s)Url:
https://www.facebook.com/depoliticapoliticosyalgomas/posts/pfbid0dDEoyopvazm9CUysPt9
hbeCYdZbxpGynb1FcmH7UAq9kLmbqQoTWygyZKVYKEYaul (Last Accessed September
21, 2022)
Galvis, F. A., Miranda, E., Heresi, P., Dávalos, H., & Ruiz-García, J. (2020). Overview of collapsedbuildings in Mexico City after the 19 September 2017 (Mw7.1) earthquake. Earthquake
Spectra, 36(S2), 83-109.
Geo-Mexico. (2012). “Which tectonic plates affect Mexico? | Geo-Mexico, the geography of Mexico.”
Url: http://geo-mexico.com/?p=6277 (Last Accessed Semptember 20, 2022)
Gobierno CDMX (2022) “REGISTRO PREELIMINAR DE INMUEBLES REPORTADOS COMO
DAÑADOS POR EL SISMO DEL 19 DE SEPTIEMBRE DE 2022” Url:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1DuG0Culq7ALrFlNmhaFfrSFFkET6ISduxC4oEqp_wQ/edit#gid=423781846 (Last accessed September 21, 2022)
Gobierno de Michoacán (2019). “Con cirugías gratuitas y consulta de especialidad, 148 beneficiados
en Maruata: SSM” Url: https://salud.Michoacán.gob.mx/con-cirugias-gratuitas-y-consulta-deespecialidad-148-beneficiados-en-maruata-ssm/ (Last Accessed September 20, 2022)
Gonzalez-Huizar, H., Pérez-Campos, X., Melgar, D., 2022, Mexico rattled by pair of earthquakes,
Temblor, http://doi.org/10.32858/temblor.271
Guatemala Times (2022). “Terremoto Afecta Patrimonio Del Occidente Del
https://guatemalatimes.com/terremoto-afecta-patrimonio-del-occidente-del-pas
Accessed September 22, 2022)

País”

Url:
(Last

Imagen Noticias. ( 2022, September 21). Así azotó el sismo de magnitud 7.7 a Tolimán, Jalisco |NoticiasconFrancisco
Zea[Video].
Youtube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZemowUHzCQ&ab_channel=ImagenNoticias
Informador.Mx (2022).“Temblor hoy: Tras sismo, Puerto Vallarta reporta daños en fachadas yplafones” Url: https://www.informador.mx/jalisco/Temblor-hoy-Tras-sismo-Puerto-Vallartareporta-danos-en-fachadas-y-plafones-20220919-0132.html (Last Accessed September 21,2022).
INIFED (2021a). “Evaluación postsísmica de la infraestructura física educativa de México. Volumen
1: Metodología,” (in Spanish), January, 232 pp.
INIFED (2021b).“Evaluación postsísmica de la infraestructura física educativa de México. Volumen
2: Introducción al comportamiento sísmico de estructuras para fines de evaluación,” (inSpanish), January, 174 pp.
INIFED (2021c).“Evaluación postsísmica de la infraestructura física educativa de México. Manual deCampo,”(in Spanish), January, 122 pp.
INIFED (2021d).“Rehabilitación sísmica de la infraestructura física educativa de México. Guía
Técnica,” (in Spanish), January, 288 pp.
INIFED (2022).“Acciones de seguimiento al impacto del sismo 7.7 con epicentro en Coalcoman,
Michoacán, en la infraestructura física educativa nacional”.
Kuehn N, Bozorgnia Y, Campbell KW and Gregor N (2020) Partially non-ergodic ground-motion model
for subduction regions using NGA-Subduction database. Pacific Earthquake Engineering
Research Center Rept. No. 2020/04. University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California..

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

105

La

Jornada (2022).“ Daños en varios estados tras sismo de magnitud 7.7”
https://www.jornada.com.mx/notas/2022/09/19/galeria_imagenes/danos-en-diversosestados-tras-sismo-de-magnitud-7.7/ (Last Accessed September 21, 2022)

Url:

La Razón (2022a) “ Cierran puente "El Yaqui" en Cuajimalpa tras sismo; fisura afecta el pavimento”
Url: https://www.razon.com.mx/ciudad/cierran-puente-yaqui-cuajimalpa-sismo-fisura-afectapavimento-498913 (Last accessed September 21, 2022)
La

Razón
(2022b)https://imagenes.razon.com.mx/files/image_940_470/uploads/2020/06/02/5ed62df507b28.jp
eg (Last accessed September 21, 2022)

Meridiano.mx (2022) “A punto de caer cúpula de la Catedral de Tepic tras el sismo” Url:
https://meridiano.mx/2022/09/19/a-punto-de-caer-cupula-de-la-catedral-de-tepic-tras-elsismo/ (Last accessed September 21, 2022)
MiMorelia (2022). “Suspensión de clases por sismo se extiende a 10 municipios en Michoacán” Url:
https://mimorelia.com/noticias/educacion/suspensión-de-clases-se-extiende-a-10municipios-en-michoacán (Last Accessed September 21, 2022)
Milenio (2022a) “Así quedaron los edificios tras el sismo de 19 de septiembre: grietas, inclinaciones
y muebles en la calle” Url: https://www.milenio.com/politica/comunidad/quedaron-edificiossismo-19-septiembre-2022. (Last accesed September 21, 2022).
Milenio (2022b). “Daños en Edomex por el temblor del 19 de septiembre 2022; esto sabemos” Url:
https://www.milenio.com/politica/comunidad/estos-son-los-danos-que-dejo-el-temblor-enedomex-hoy-19-de-septiembre (Last accesed September 21, 2022).
Newtral (2022) “México y el día 19 de septiembre: tres terremotos en casi 50 años marcan elcalendario” Url: https://www.newtral.es/terremoto-mexico/20220920/ (Last accessed
September 21, 2022)
Noticias Manzanillo (2022). “Tras el Sismo, el Puerto de Manzanillo ya Opera al 100 por Ciento este
Miércoles 21 de Septiembre”. Url: https://noticiasmanzanillo.com/tras-el-sismo-el-puerto-demanzanillo-ya-opera-al-100-por-ciento-este-miercoles-21-de-septiembre/. (Last Accessed
September 21, 2022).
Notivideo (2022). https://www.notivideo.com/fotos/notas/09-2022/33710-big.jpg (Last Accessed
September 21, 2022)
Noventagrados (2022). “SEE contabiliza 334 escuelas dañadas en por el sismo” Url:
https://www.noventagrados.com.mx/politica/see-contabiliza-334-escuelas-danadas-en-porel-sismo.htm (Last Accessed September 22, 2022)
Once Noticias (2022) “CDMX contabiliza afectaciones en 76 escuelas públicas tras sismo” Url:
https://oncenoticias.digital/cdmx/autoridad-educativa-federal-registra-en-cdmx-afectacionesen-76-escuelas-publicas-tras-sismo/166210/ (Last accessed September 21, 2022)
Ordaz, M., & Meli, R. (2004, August). Seismic design and codes in Mexico. In Proceedings of theThirteenth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering (CD-ROM). Canadian Association
for Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, BC, Canada (No. 4000).
Pacific

Tsunami Warning Center (PTWC) (2022a). Tsunami message number 1.
https://www.tsunami.gov/events/PHEB/2022/09/19/22262001/1/WEPA40/WEPA40.txt

Url:

Pacific

Tsunami Warning Center (PTWC) (2022b). Tsunami message number 7.
https://www.tsunami.gov/events/PHEB/2022/09/19/22262001/7/WEPA40/WEPA40.txt

Url:

Parker, G. A., Stewart, J. P., Boore, D. M., Atkinson, G. M., & Hassani, B. (2022). NGA-subduction
global ground motion models with regional adjustment factors. Earthquake Spectra, 38(1),456-493.

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

106

PBS (2022) https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FdISerfXoAgmN1_?format=jpg&name=large (Last accessed
September 22, 2022).
Proceso (2022a). “Jalisco reporta daños en edificios históricos y en planteles de la UdeG por sismo
de 7.7” Url: https://www.proceso.com.mx/nacional/2022/9/19/jalisco-reporta-danos-enedificios-historicos-en-planteles-de-la-udeg-por-sismo-de-77-293576.html (Last Accessed
September 21, 2022)
Proceso (2022b). “Primaria de Iztapalapa afectada por sismo no tiene daño estructural” Url:
https://www.proceso.com.mx/nacional/2022/9/21/primaria-de-iztapalapa-afectada-por-sismono-tiene-dano-estructural-293769.html (Last Accessed September 22, 2022)
Publimetro (2022). “Estos son los daños por el sismo del 19 de septiembre en Colima” Url:
https://www.publimetro.com.mx/noticias/2022/09/19/asi-se-vivio-el-sismo-en-el-estado-decolima/galeria/ (Last Accessed September 21, 2022)
Ramírez,F.,
Alcocer,S.M.,
and
Murià,
D.
(2018).
https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/496651571052786670/pdf/Advisory-Servicesto-Support-the-Recovery-of-School-Infrastructure-in-Mexico-Affected-by-the-September2017-Earthquakes-Executive-Summary.pdf (Last Accessed September 21, 2022)
Reforma (2022). “Daño al patrimonio en cuatro estados por sismo 19S” Url:
https://www.reforma.com/aplicacioneslibre/preacceso/articulo/default.aspx?__rval=1&urlredi
rect=/dano-al-patrimonio-en-cuatro-estados-por-sismo-19s/ar2472931(Last
Accessed
September 24, 2022)
Revolución 3.0 (2022). “Sin pérdida de vidas humanas, saldo del sismo en Michoacán: gobiernos
evaluan daños materiales” Url: https://revolucion.news/sin-perdida-de-vidas-humanas-saldodel-sismo-en-michoacan-gobiernos-evaluan-danos-materiales/ (Last Accessed September
21, 2022)
Rodríguez, M, de la Torre, Ó, Sáenz de Miera, M, and Zamudio, R. (1997). 6 Instalaciones Portuarias.
In El macrosismo de Manzanillo del 9 de octubre de 1995 (pp. 148-158). Colima, México:
Sociedad Mexicana de Ingeniería Sísmica/Arturo Tena Colunga. ISBN 968-6190-83-X.
Rosenblueth, E. (1979). Seismic design requirements in a Mexican 1976 code. Earthquake
Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 7(1), 49-61.
Sentido Común (2022) “Sismo de 7.7 grados en Colima deja un muerto, daños y marea elevada en
Manzanillo” Url: https://sentido-comun.com.mx/2022/09/20/sismo-de-7-7-grados-en-colimadeja-un-muerto-danos-y-marea-elevada-en-manzanillo-imagenes-fuertes/ (Last Accessed
September 21, 2022)
Servicio Sismológico Nacional (SSN) (2022a), Instituto de Geofísica, Universidad Nacional Autónoma
de México, México. (19 de septiembre de 2022) http://www.ssn.unam.mx
Servicio Sismológico Nacional (SSN) (2022b) Reporte Especial - Sismo del 19 de Septiembre de
2022,
Michoacán
(M
7.7).
IGEF
UNAM,
México.
(http://www.ssn.unam.mx/sismicidad/reportesespeciales/2022/SSNMX_rep_esp_20220919_Michoacán_M74.pdf)
Singh, S. K., Astiz, L., & Havskov, J. (1981). Seismic gaps and recurrence periods of large
earthquakes along the Mexican subduction zone: A reexamination. Bulletin of the
Seismological Society of America, 71(3), 827–843.
Singh, S. K., Rodríguez, M., & Espindola, J. M. (1984). A catalog of shallow earthquakes of Mexicofrom 1900 to 1981. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 74(1), 267-279.
Suárez, G., Espinosa-Aranda, J. M., Cuéllar, A., Ibarrola, G., García, A., Zavala, M., ... & Islas, R.
(2018). A dedicated seismic early warning network: The Mexican Seismic Alert System(SASMEX). Seismological Research Letters, 89(2A), 382-391.

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

107

Tena-Colunga, A., Mena-Hernández, U., Pérez-Rocha, L., Avilés, J., Ordaz, M., & Vilar, J. (2009).
Updated seismic design guidelines for model building code of Mexico. Earthquake Spectra,
25(4), 869-898.
Twitter(2022a).
https://twitter.com/CNPC_MX/status/1572238401633394689/photo/1
Accessed September 21, 2022)(Last

Twitter (2022b). https://twitter.com/CFEmx/status/1572318009955614720/photo/1 (Last Accessed
September 21, 2022)
Twitter (2022c). https://mobile.twitter.com/Quadratin_/status/1571961756372856832 (Last Accessed
September 21, 2022)
Twitter(2022d). https://twitter.com/Diario_deColima/status/1572057958137368576?s=20
Accessed September 21, 2022)(Last

Twitter (2022e). https://twitter.com/ElMundoSV/status/1571950206492774401?s=20 (Last Accessed
September 21, 2022)
Twitter (2022f). https://twitter.com/indira_vizcaino/status/1572330145880608768 (Last Accessed
September 21, 2022)
Twitter (2022g). https://twitter.com/Quadratin_/status/1571936767334354944
September 21, 2022)(Last Accessed

Twitter(2022h). https://twitter.com/indira_vizcaino/status/1572043725702049793/photo/1
Accessed September 21, 2022)(Last

Twitter(2022i).
https://twitter.com/vozMichoacán/status/1572078359688904704?s=204
Accessed September 21, 2022)(Last

Twitter (2022j). https://twitter.com/Quadratin_/status/1571941766433214464?s=20 (Last Accessed
September 21, 2022)
Twitter (2022k). https://twitter.com/erikabecerrar/status/1571977298869354500 (Last Accessed
September 21, 2022)
Twitter (2022l). https://twitter.com/indira_vizcaino/status/1572298945015218176 (Last Accessed
September 21, 2022)
Twitter(2022m). https://twitter.com/indira_vizcaino/status/1572274309758087170?s=20
Accessed September 21, 2022)(Last

Twitter(2022n).
https://twitter.com/CarlosCuerna/status/1571980553527631873?s=20
Accessed September 21, 2022)(Last

Twitter (2022o). https://twitter.com/indira_vizcaino/status/1572387937689702400 (Last Accessed
September 21, 2022)
Twitter (2022p). https://twitter.com/SMareograficoN/status/1572009493134987264/photo/1 (Last
Accessed September 22, 2022)
Twitter (2022q). https://twitter.com/SMareograficoN/status/1572007475695718401/photo/1 (Last
Accessed September 22, 2022)
Twitter(2022r). https://twitter.com/CNPC_MX/status/1571930172454014982
September 22, 2022)(Last

Accessed

Twitter(2022s). https://twitter.com/CNPC_MX/status/1571940576123322370
September 22, 2022)(Last

Accessed

Twitter(2022t)https://twitter.com/RuidoEnLaRed/status/1571951418445029377?s=20&t=BmOf5ocZTfjD6n_DfayDdg. (Last accesed September 21, 2022).
PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

108

Twitter(2022u)https://twitter.com/roxarut/status/1571934753443713025?s=20&t=2R59PNWlvE4_7MCdOu
XlRw. (Last accesed September 21, 2022).

Twitter(2022v)https://twitter.com/fer_marsars/status/1571932117935788032?s=48&t=zk1QirFYgc9Dv3R291TKA. (Last accesed September 21, 2022)

Twitter (2022w) https://mobile.twitter.com/Quadratin_/status/1571934695075487744 (Last Accessed
September 21, 2022)
Twitter(2022x)https://twitter.com/SarahiUribeG/status/1571941006081392641?s=20&t=PxSRzbqWorsOKd
V0sBgwZw. (Last Accessed September 21, 2022)

Twitter(2022y)https://twitter.com/keyrasaram/status/1572435624866750467?s=48&t=HRIOjMApC8TjdN4q
52nZ3w. (Last accesed September 21, 2022)

Twitter(2022z)https://twitter.com/EnFocoNoticias1/status/1572021624320278528?s=20&t=jIANrZfm7we7b
maPOE0xIg. (Last accesed September 21, 2022).

Twitter(2022aa)
https://twitter.com/elsolde_mexico/status/1572616773631086592?s=20&t=SftaY57qvQYEhx
A0rhnRAQ. (Last accesed September 21, 2022).

Unidad de Instrumentación Sísmica (UIS) (2022a) Sismo del 19 de septiembre de 2022 Coalcomán,Mich, México (M7.4) 13:05:09 Hora Local - Reporte Preliminar, Parámetros del Movimientodel Suelo. Instituto de Ingeniería UNAM.
Unidad de Instrumentación Sísmica (UIS) (2022b) Sismo del 22 de septiembre de 2022 Coalcomán,Mich, México (M6.9) 01:16:09 Hora Local - Reporte Preliminar, Parámetros del Movimientodel Terreno. Instituto de Ingeniería UNAM.
Uno TV (2022) “Éstos son los hospitales y carreteras afectados por el sismo de 7.7 en Colima” Url:
https://www.unotv.com/estados/colima/colima-sismo-dejo-dano-en-estos-hospitales-ycarreteras/ (Last Accessed September 21, 2022)
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) (2022a) “M 7.6 - 37 km SE of Aquila, Mexico” September 19, 2022.
https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/us7000i9bw/executive
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) (2022b). ANSS Comprehensive Earthquake Catalog (ComCat)
Documentation.
Retrieved
September
20,
2022,
from
https://earthquake.usgs.gov/data/comcat/
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) (2022c) “M 6.8 - Michoacán, Mexico” September 22, 2022.
https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/us7000ia36/executive
WRadio (2022) “Suman 21 inmuebles dañados a causa del sismo del 19S en CDMX” Url:
https://wradio.com.mx/radio/2022/09/20/nacional/1663693126_921896.html (Last accesed
September 21, 2022).
Quadratin (2022a). “Se derrumba parte del cerro sobre carretera a Villa Victoria en Michoacán”. Url:
https://sinaloa.quadratin.com.mx/nacionales/se-derrumba-parte-del-cerro-sobre-carretera-avilla-victoria-en-Michoacán/ (Last Accessed: September 21, 2022)
Quadratin (2022b). “Suspenden SEE clases en 8 municipios por sismo de este lunes”. Url:
https://www.quadratin.com.mx/educativas/suspende-see-clases-en-8-municipios-por-sismode-este-lunes (Last Accessed: September 21, 2022)

PVRR Aquila, Michoacan, Mexico September 19, 2022
Release date: September 30, 2022

109