2. Earthquake and Ground Motions
2.1. Consideration on the interface of seismological topics to building damages
Seismology can contribute to the construction engineering in the ways: 1)
Estimation of probability of earthquake occurrence and 2) Estimation of Ground
Motion (Fig. 2.1-1). As every seismic damages are due to ground shaking except thedirect ground destruction by appearance of fault scarp, the latter is necessary for bothprobabilistic and deterministic analyses of seismic hazard and for the setting of design
seismic force.
The damage survey of buildings is conducted after devastating earthquake
with, at least two motivations. One is to grasp the reality of disaster: damage statistics,
classification of the damaged buildings, etc. Another is collection of the information
for improvement of buildings' quality. In latter case, it is necessary to know how thecollapsed or damaged buildings have behaved at the devastating ground shaking.
Seismology can contribute in this case via estimation of the devastating ground motion.
If the disaster took place because of weakness of houses due to being badly constructed
or not well designed, the same disaster may take place on all of houses constructed ordesigned in the same way. The appropriate counter measure may be improvement ofconstruction technologies or renewal of design code in nation wide level. If thedisaster took place because of stronger ground motion than expected, it may be

Fig. 2.1-1 Contribution of Seismology to the construction engineering
5necessary to know which effect has played the main role.
The ground motion that destroys buildings consists of source, path and site
effects as shown in Table2.1-1 and Fig. 2.1-2. If ground motion is stronger in an area
than surroundings due to the site effect, the same disaster may repeat in the same siteand other sites in the similar ground condition. If that is due to source effect, thedisaster may repeat everywhere without any dependence on ground condition. In thesecases, the appropriate countermeasures may different each other. Usually, these effects
appear in combined way, therefore it is important to estimate the contribution of each
effect quantitatively, for an accurate analysis.

Table 2.1-1 Three effects of Seismic Ground Motion
+

Model

Examples of EffectDirectivity EffectSource EffectSource Model

Radiation PatternComplex Source Process
Geometrical Spreading

Path EffectAttenuation

Energy Absorption
Scattering
Response of Shallow Soil

Site Effect

Amplification

Topographic EffectBasin Edge Effect6

Fig. 2.1-2 Three effect composing ground motion at the surface
If ground motion data of devastating earthquake are available with damage
survey results, analyses of dynamic characteristics of houses can be more accurate thanthe present level. Among various research topics related with seismic source, thoserelated with building damages is classified as shown in Table 2.1-2.
Considering on the techniques used by seismologists for study of seismic
source, the seismological topics related with source effect that shall be handled in theguideline are the followings: Hypocenter location & Magnitude, Focal Mechanism(including, Radiation Pattern, etc.) and Rupture Process (including Directivity,
Asperity, etc.). For path effect: Wave Propagation in the crust and in the deep sediment(Quality factor, Attenuation Relation, etc) must be handled. Crustal Deformation is
also necessary, because this causes damage independently from ground shaking andprovides information about seismic source.

7

Table 2.1-2 Contribution of Information about Earthquake Source
for Ground Motion Estimation
Seismological

Seismological

SourceGround Motion Estimation

Data

Information

Model

Item

Point Source

PGA, PGV andModel

Intensity (Far field)

Travel Time

Hypocenter
Location

Peak Amplitude

Magnitude

Polarity of

Focal

Initial Motion

Mechanism

Aftershock
Distribution

Necessary Data

Fault Plane

Complex

Strong Motion

RuptureRecords

Process

Relation or
Empirical formula

PGA, PGV and

Attenuation

Intensity (Not in

Relation orsource area)

Empirical formula

Strong Ground

Ground Motion

Asperity

Motion due to the

Records due to theModelmain shock in theaftershock in thedevastated area.

devastated area.

Finite Fault
Model

Teleseismic
Records

Attenuation

Geodetic Data

Besides of them, a topic is necessary to connect these seismological ones tobuilding damage: Estimation of devastating ground motion. It seems better to put this
topic in the group of "Seismic Motion". The topic: "site effect" must be included in thisgroup. "Site effect" studies are usually done to clear up the cause of damage
concentration and to detect the risky area for future earthquakes (Fig. 2.1-3).
A draft of the part of the guideline related with seismology is shown in thefollowing pages. The sorting has been done especially by consideration on connecting
these topics to building damages through seismic ground motion. Only exception is thefault scarp.

8

Outlineof Guideline
for Damage
Survey Methods
Outlineof Guideline
for Damage
Survey Method
Guideline

Seismology

Earthquake Source+Hypocenter & Magnitude+Focal Mechanisms+Crustal Deformation(including Fault Scarp)+Rupture Process

Propagation Path

Earthquake
Engineering

Seismic Motion+Intensity+Estimation of Devastating
Ground Motion+Site effectGround &GroundFoundation
DamageBuilding
Structure &Element
DamageBuilding
Foundation
Non-structural
Element
Damage+Intspection+Damage
Rank+Damage+Broadarearank+Foundation+Building
Site
+Pile
+Restoration+Restoration+Intspection+Inspection+DamageRankrank+Damage+Structual Element+Structural+Restoration
Element+Non-Structural
Element+Restoration+Int spection+Inspection+Damage rank
+Damage Rank
+Non-Structual+Foundation
Element+Pile+Restoration+Restoration+Crust+Deep SedimentFig. 2.1-3 Outline of Guideline for Damage Survey Methods

92. Earthquake Source
2.2.1. Hypocenter Location and Magnitude
1) Terminology
Hypocenter: Also known as the focus. The hypocenter is an underground pointof the origin of an earthquake and where the fault moved.
Magnitude: A measure of the energy released in an earthquake.
Epicenter: The location on Earth's surface directly above the hypocenter or focus,of an earthquake. Typically, the area where the potential for the greatest
damage occurs.
Aftershocks: Earthquakes less intense (weaker) than the main (strongest)
earthquake. Typically seismic events begin with foreshocks, followed by
the main shock and finally aftershocks.
2) Purpose or Target
Determination of location of earthquake and its size.
3) Grade

Table 2.2.1-1 Classification of topics
Accuracy

Item

Input Data or techniques

Examples or references
Earthquakes in history

1

Epicentral Area

Intensity Distribution

Small & Shallow event outside of
local network

Hypocenter location2(insufficient

Global Network

accuracy)

NEIC
CTBTO
JMA(Japan)

3

Hypocenter location(within the coverage)

Local Network

NRIAG(Egypt)
BMG(Indonesia)
PHIVOLCS(Philippine)

4) Examples (Description with figures)
Several global seismic observation networks (Fig.2.2.1-1)
Several national seismic observation networks (Fig.2.2.1-2)
5) Special Topics
Rough estimation of Distance & Direction with 1 station 3 components Data
(DIMAS)
10

Joint Hypocenter Determination
determination & its variety
6) Referencesforaftershock

sequence

Magnitude<Hypocenter Location>
Aki, K. and Richards, P. (1980): Quantitative Seismology, Vol. 2, Freeman.
Geiger, L. (1912): Probability method for the determination of earthquake epicenters from thearrival time only. Bull. St. Louis Univ. , 8, 60-71.
Klein, F. W. (1978) : Hypocenter location program HYPOINVERSE Part 1: Users guide to versions
1,2,3 and 4, USGS Open File Report, 78-694.
Lee, W. H. K. and Lahr, J. C. (1975): HYPO71 (revised): A computer program for determining
hypocenter, magnitude and first motion pattern of local earthquakes, USGS Open File
Report, 1-116.
Lee, L. H. K. and Stewart, S. W. (1981): Principles and Applications of Microearthquake
Networks, Academic Press.
Lee, W. H. K. and Valdes, C. M. (1989): User Manual for HYPO71PC, in IASPEI Software
Library Volume 1. Toolbox for Seismic Data Acquisition, Processing and Analysis, Part III.
Off-line Data Analysis, Edited by W. H. K. Lee, Published by International Association ofSeismology and Physics of the Earth's Interior (IASPEI) in collaboration with
Seismological Society of America, 203-236.
Lienert, B. R., Berg, E., and Frazer, N. (1986): HYPOCENTER: An earthquake location method
using centered, scaled, and adaptively damped least squares, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. , 76 (No.
5), 771-783.
Lienert, B. R. and J. Havskov (1995): A computer program for locating earthquakes both locallyand globally, Seism. Res. Lett., 66, 26-36.
(ftp://elepaio.soest.hawaii.edu/pub/lienert/)<Magnitude>
Gutenberg, B. (1945). Amplitudes of surface waves and magnitudes of shallow earthquakes. Bull.
Seismol. Soc. Am. 35, 3-12.
Kanamori, H. (1977). The energy release in great earthquakes, J. Geophy. Res. 82, 2981-2987.
Lee, W. H. K., Bennett, R. E., and Meagher, K. L. (1972): A method of estimating magnitude of
local earthquakes from signal duration, Geol. Surv. Open-File Rep.(U.S.), 28.
Richter, C. F. (1935): An instrumental earthquake magnitude scale. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 25,
1-32.
Tsumura, K. (1967): Determination of earthquake magnitude from total duration of oscillation,
Bull. Earthq. Res. Inst., Univ. Tokyo, 45, 7-18.

11

1999 January - November Reporting Stations
Maps at a

North

South
Europelarger scale:America

CentralEastern

Australia &

Asia

Asia

SW Pacific

AfricaAmerica

In each year of the late 1990's, phase readings from around 2500 seismic stations were contributed to the
ISC. Since these stations are operated independently, practices probably vary from one station to anothertoo much to refer to them network. Nevertheless, the geographic distribution of reporting stations limits
the detection threshold and location accuracy of events in the ISC Bulletin.
The world map above is one view of the joint capability of reporting stations. The shading on the map shows
the smallest distance around each point that includes stations with a second azimuthal gap less than 180°.
A second azimuthal gap smaller than 180° should ensure that no single arrival time controls a trade ‑off
between origin time and epicentre. It also means that even if data from a critical station are unavailable,
the first azimuthal gap at that location will still be less than 180°. Thus, earthquakes large enough to
produce reliably measurable arrival times to these distances are most likely to have reliable epicentres
computed by the ISC.
All of the stations (shown as blue triangles) that reported even a single phase reading during 1999 January‑ November are used to compute the distances. Reports for many stations are received by the ISC only
occasionally; the assumption in preparing the map is that a report will be sent if there is any nearby seismic
activity for which the data from a station will be important.

Intern ational Seismological Centre
Pipers Lane, Thatcham, Berkshire
United Kingdom RG19 4NS+44 (0)1635 861022, voice; +44 (0)1635 872351, fax
admin@isc.ac.uk, e-mail
Last modified: Mon Feb 4 09:16:49 GMT 2002

Fig.2.2.1-1 Global seismic observation network

12

Fig.2.2.1-2 National seismic observation network(http://www.ovsicori.una.ac.cr/estamap.html)

13

2.2.2. Focal Mechanism
1) Terminology
Fault plane solution: When an earthquake occurs, it is recorded on seismographs
worldwide. Seismologists study the seismograph records (seismogram).
By comparing the delay between the arriva ls of the waves, they candetermine the location of the focus and epicenter. By studying whether
the needle on the seismograph first went up or went down for eachseismogram, they can determine what kind of fault it was (strike- slip,
dip- slip, etc.). By combining these two pieces of information,
seismologists can determine the fault plane solution or focal mechanism
for the earthquake, that is, where and how the fault moved.
Moment tensor: Generalized point source of an earthquake. Actual source ofearthquake is not point but has finite space. However, considering the
low frequency seismic waves, the source can be approximated by the
moment tensor of the center of gravity.
Radiation Pattern: The phase and amplitude of seismic wave and wave front
have their regularities corresponding to the direction of propagation.
These regularities (patterns) are called Radiation pattern.
Multiples: Heterogeneous rock dose not collapse smoothly but has breaks. Suchcollapse process is called Multiples.
2) Purpose or Target
Determination of source mechanisms and fault plane3) Grade

Table 2.2.2-1 Classification of topics
Accuracy

Item

Input Data or techniques

Examples or references

1

Two Nodal Plane

Polarity of P and S waves

Local Seismic Observation
Harvard CMT

2Moment Tensor

Waveforms or

Automated ERI CMTPolarity/Amplitude of

USGS Moment tensor

seismic waves

solutionsFreesia CMT (NIED)

3

Source Mechanisms ofMultiplets

Waveforms or
Polarity/Amplitude ofseismic waves

14

Kikuchi & Kanamori (1991)
Kuge (1999)

3) Examples (Description with figures)
Several WEB service for focal mechanism (Fig.2.2.2-1)
http://www.eri.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~http/AUTO_CMT/auto_cmt.html
http://www.seismology.harvard.edu/CMTsearch.html
http://wwwneic.cr.usgs.gov/neis/FM/qmom.html
http://argent.geo.bosai.go.jp/freesia/event/hypo/joho.html

4) Special Topic
Fault plane selection based on aftershock distribution
Empirical Green's tensor Method
5) References
Billington, S. (1982): A method to objectively sort P-wave first motion data for composite focal
mechanism solutions, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 72, 399-411.
Brillinger, D.R., A. Udias, , and B.A., Bolt (1980): A probability model for regional focal
mechanism solutions, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 70, 149-170.
Dreger, D. and D.H. Helmber ger (1993): Determination of source parameters at regional distanceswith three-component sparse network data, J. Geophys. Res., 98, 8107-8125.
Dziewonski, A.M., T.-A. Chou and J.H. Woodhouse (1981): Determination of earthquake source
parameters from wavef orm data for studies of global and regional seismicity, J. Geophys.
Res., 86, 2825-2852.
Dziewonski, A.M. and J.H. Woodhouse (1983): Studies of the seismic source using normal-mode
theory, in Kanamori, H. and E. Boschi, eds., Earthquakes: observation, theory, andinterpretation: notes from the International School of Physics "Enrico Fermi" (1982:
Varenna, Italy) , North-Holland Publ. Co., Amsterdam, pp. 45-137.
Fukuyama, E. Ishida, M., Dreger, D.S., and K. Kawai (1998): Automated Seismic Moment Tensor
Determination by Using On-line Broadband Seismic Waveforms, Zisin 2, vol.51,
149-156.
Fukuyama, E. and D.S. Dreger (2000): Performance test of an automated moment tensor
determination system for the future "Tokai" earthquake, Earth Planets Space, 52,
383-392.
Jost, M.L. and R.B. Hermann (1989): A student’s guide to and review of moment tensors, Seismol.
Res. Lett., 60, 37-57.
Gubbins, D. (1990): Seismology and plate tectonics, Cambridge Univ. Press.
Kasahara, K. (1981): Earthquake mechanics, Cambridge Univ. Press.
Kawakatsu, H. (1995): Automated near -realtime CMT inversion, Geophys. Res. Lett., 22,2569-2572.
Kostrov, B.V. and S. Das (1988): Principles of earthquake source mechanics, Academic Press.
15

Lay, T. and T.C. Wallace, 1995, Modern global seismology, Academic Press.
Lee, W.H.K., and S.W. Stewart, 1981, Principles and applications of microearthquake networks,
Academic Press.
Mendingren, J.A. (1980): A procedure to resolve areas of different source mechanism when using
the method of composite nodal plane solution, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 70, 985-998.
Sipkin, S.A. (1982): Estimation of earthquake source parameters by the inversion of waveform
data: synthetic seismograms, Phys. Earth Planet. Inter., 30, 242-259.
Stauder, W. (1960): S waves and focal mechanisms: The state of the question, Bull. Seismol. Soc.
Am., 50, 333-346.
Thio, H.K. and Kanamori,H. (1995): Moment-tensor inversions for local earthquakes using
surface waves recorded at TERRAscope, Bull. seism. Soc. Am., 85, 1021-1038.
Udias, A. and E. Buforn (1988): Single and joint fault-plane solutions from first-motion
data, in Seismological Algorithms (ed. D.J. Doornbos), 443-453.

16

Fig.2.2.2-1 Several WEB service for focal mechanism(http://www.eri.u-tokyo.ac.jp/)172.2.3. Crustal Deformation (including Fault Scarp)
1) Terminology
Leveling: A survey used to ascertain which point on a survey rod is at the sameelevation.
Triangulation: A trigonometric method of determining the position of a fixed
point from the angles to it from two fixed points a known distance apart.
GPS (Global Positioning System): A system of satellites, computers, andreceivers that is able to determine the latitude and longitude of a receiveron Earth by calculating the time difference for signals from different
satellites to reach the receiver.
SAR (Synthetic Aperture Radar): Synthetic aperture radar complements
photographic and other optical imaging capabilities because of theminimum constrains on time- of- day and atmospheric conditions andbecause of the unique response of terrain and cultural targets to radar
frequencies.
2) Purpose or Target
Determination of Surface displacement due to earthquake3) Grade

Table 2.2.3-1 Classification of topics
Accuracy

Item

Input Data or techniques

Examples or references

1

Existence

Eye witness

Historical descriptions

Relative displacement

Leveling

between two side of

Triangulation

surface fault

Trilateration2

3

Displacement relative
to a far reference point

Luzon Eq.(1990)

GPS, SAR
Tidal observation

Chi-Chi Eq.(1999)

Strong Motion Seismograms

4) Examples (Description with figures)
Result of field survey of the fault scarp (Fig. 2.2.3-1)
Result of secular displacement obtained by geometrical methods and by GPS(Fig. 2.2.3-2)

195) References<Result of field survey of the fault scarp>l

See web site by the survey reports and photos of 1990 Luzon-EQ.
http://www.phivolcs.dost.gov.ph/071690-LuzonEQ/LuzonEQ-Main.htmllSurvey reports for the fault scarp
The 16 July 1990 Luzon earthquake ground rupture, Raymundo S. Punongbayan, Rolly
E. Rimando, Jessie A. Daligdig, Glenda M. Besana, Arturos S. Daag, Takeshi Nakarta,
and Hiroyuki Tatsumi.

lPhotos for the fault scarp in the ground surface
http://www.phivolcs.dost.gov.ph/071690-LuzonEQ/GroundRuptures-Images.htm
http://www.phivolcs.dost.gov.ph/071690-LuzonEQ/DaltonPassFault-Images.htm
http://www.phivolcs.dost.gov.ph/071690-LuzonEQ/DigdigFault-Images.htm<Result of secular displacement obtained by geometrical methods and by GPS>(a) Geometrical methods
Bawden G. W. (2001): Source parameters for the 1952 Kern Country earthquake, California: A
joint inversion of leveling and triangulation observations, J. Geophys. Res., 106,771-785.
Genrich J.F.,Y. Bock, and R. G. Mason (1997): Crustal deformation across the Imperial Fault:
Results from kinematic GPS surveys and trilateration of a densely spaced,small-aperture network, J. Geophys. Res, 102, 4985-5004.
Hodgkinson K. M,R. S. Stein, and G. Marshall (1996): Geometry of the 1954 Fairview
Peak-Dixie Valley earthquake sequence from a joint inversion of leveling andtriangulation data, , J. Geophys. Res., 101, 25437-25457.
Yu E,and P. Segall (1996): Slip in the 1868 Hayward earthquake from the analysis of historicaltriangulation data, J. Geophys. Res, 101, 16101-16118.

(b) GPS
Hurst K. J, D. F. Argus, A. Donnellan, M. B. Heflin, D.C. Jefferson, G. A. Lyzenga, J. W. Parker,
M. Smith, F. H. Webb, and J. F. Zumberge (2000): The coseismic geodetic signature of
the 1999 Hector Mine Earthquake, Geophys. Res. Lett., 27, 2733-2736.
http://mekira.gsi.go.jp/gps/gps.html：Explanation of GPS
http://vldb.gsi-mc.go.jp/sokuchi/gps/chikaku.html： Crustal movement of Hyogo-ken Nambu
Earthquake 1995.
http://www.scign.org/：Original data for above site
http://quake.geo.berkeley.edu/bard/bard.html：Network for North California
20http://cais.gsi.go.jp/HENDOU/hendou.html：Crustal movement of the recent seismic activities
by the Geographical Survey Institute.
http://vancouver-webpages.com/peter/：Several links
http://www.colorado.edu/geography/gcraft/notes/gps/gps_f.html：Explanation of GPS(c) SAR
Baer G, D. Sandwell, S. Williams, and Y. Bock (1999): Coseismic deformation associated with
the November 1995, Mw =7.1 Nuweiba earthquake, Gulf of Elat (Aqaba), detected bysynthetic aperture radar interferometry, J. Geophys. Res., 104, 25221-25232.
Delouis B, P. Lundgren, J. Salichon, and D. Giardini (2000): Joint inversion of InSAR andteleseismic data for the slip history of the 1999 Izmit (Turkey) earthquake, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 27, 3389-339.
Fujiwara S., T. Nishimura, M. Murakami, H. Nakagawa, and M. Tobita (2000): 2.5-D surface
deformation of M6.1 earthquake near Mt Iwate detected by SAR interferometry,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 27, 2049-2052.
Klinger Y., R. Michel, and J. Avouac (2000): Co-seismic deformation during the Mw 7.3 Aqaba
earthquake (1995) from ERS-SAR interferometry, Geophys. Res. Lett., 27, 3651-3654,.
Massonnet D., M. Rossi, C. Carmona, F. Adragna, G. Peltzer, K. Feigl and T. Rabaute (1993):
The displacement field of the Landers earthquake mapped by radar interferometry,
Nature, 364, 138-142.
Massonnet D. and K. L. Feigl (1998): Application of ERS-1 radar interferometry to the Landers
Earthquake, Review of Geophysics, 36, 4, 441-500.
Michel R., J. Avouac, and J. Taboury (1999): Measuring near field coseismic displacementsfrom SAR images: application to the Landers earthquake, Geophys. Res. Lett., 26,
3017-3020.
Stramonde S., M. Tesauro, P. Briole, E. Sansosti, S. Salvi, R. Lanari, M. Anzidei, P. Baldi, G.
Fornaro, A. Avallone, M F. Buongiorno, G. Franceschetti, and E. Boschi (1999): The
September 26, 1997 Colfiorito, Italy, earthquake: modeled coseismic surface
displacement from SAR interferometry and GPS, Geophys. Res. Lett., 26, 883-886.
http://www-radar.jpl.nasa.gov/sect323/InSar4crust/home.html ： Jet Propulsion Laboratory in
California web site.
web site for Landers Earthquake in 1992：
http://www-radar.jpl.nasa.gov/sect323/InSar4crust/LandersCo.html
http://topex.ucsd.edu/SAR/sar.html：UCSD-IGPP SAR Research Group
http://southport.jpl.nasa.gov/science/SAR_REFS.html：References web site for SAR(d) Geodesy
Applications of Satellites to Geodesy, William M. Kaula, Dover Pubns.
21

Gps for Geodesy, Peter J. G. Teunissen (Editor), Alfred Kleusberg (Editor), Springer Verlag.
Geodesy: The Concepts, P. Vanicek, E. J. Krakwsky, Elsevier Science.
The History and Concepts of Modern Geodesy (Wiley Series in Surveying and Boundary
Control), James R. Smith, John Wiley & Sons.
Satellite Altimetry and Earth Sciences: A Handbook of Techniques and Applications, Lee-LuengFu (Editor), Anny Cazenave, Academic Pr.
Practical Geodesy: Using Computers, Maarten Hooijberg, Marrten Hooijberg, Springer Verlag.
Geodesy, Wolfgang Torge, Walter De Gruyter.

22

Photo‑1

Aerial Photo at Hokudan‑
town in Hyogo prefecture
Fault scarp on thesurface ground during
1995 Hyogo‑ken Nambu
Earthquake

Photo‑2
Fault scarp on thesurface ground at
Hokudan‑town
Right‑lateral strike ‑slip
fault
Horizontal displacement
about 1.5m
Vertical displacement
about 1.0m

Photo‑3
Fault scarp on thesurface ground at
Hokudan‑town
Cut off the U‑shapedside ditch by thedisplacement of the
fault
Horizontal displacement
about 1.2m
Vertical displacement
about 0.9m

Fig. 2.2.3-1 Result of field survey of the fault scarp(The fault scarp of the Hyogo-ken Nambu Earthquake 1995)
23

Fig. 2.2.3-2 Result of sec ular displacement obtained by geometricalmethods and by GPS (http://www.gsi.go.jp/MAP/index.html)

24

2.2.4. Rupture Process
1) Terminology:
Source Process: Processes regarding to a seismic source are known generally as
Source Process. As a theory that faults cause earthquakes became popular,a model which a source has not only a point but also the finite area,
established. Then not only the geometric feature of the fault, but also
process of the fault’s motion, namely expansion of a fault plane or slip
direction, became the theme of the studies.
Green's function: Solution of a differential equation with an impulse as theexciting force. Exact seismograms in a given medium can be viewed as
the convolution of the source wavelet and medium’s Green’s function.
Inversion Technique: The process of solving the inverse problem. The
determination of a distribution of parameters whose calculated response
matches observations within given tolerance. In contrast to the direct,
forward, or normal problem, which involves calculating what would havebeen observed from given model.
Source Time Function: Source time function is led by time differentiation of theseismic moment which is equivalent to displacement (wave) immediately
after earthquake occurred.
2) Purpose or Target
Estimation of Fault Rupture Process3) Grade

Table 2.2.4-1 Classification of topics
Accuracy
1
2

3

Item

Input Data or techniques

Examples or references

Result of Far-Field

Far-field Broad-Band

Kikuchi & Kanamori (1982,

Waveform Inversion

Seismograms

1986)

Strong Motion Seismograms

Ide and Takeo (1996)

Result of Near-Field
Waveform Inversion
Result of Joint

Far-field Broad-Band

Inversion of far andSeismogramsnear -field

Strong Motion Seismograms

seismograms withGeodetic Data (including

geodetic data

GPS)

25

Yoshida et al. (1996)

4) Examples (Description with figures)
Research papers of rupture process (Fig. 2.2.4-1)
5) References
Ide S., and M. Takeo (1997): Determination of constitutive relations of fault slip based on seismic
wave analysis, J. Geophys. Res., 102, 27379-27391.
Fukuyama E., and K. Irikura (1986): Rupture process of the 1983 Japan Sea (Akita-oki)earthquake using a waveform inversion method, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 76, 1623-1640.
Kikuchi M., and H. Kanamori (1991): Inversion of complex body waves -III, Bull. Seismol, Soc.
Am., 81, 2335-2350.
Yoshida S. (1995): Waveform Inversion Methods the Earthquake Source, J. phys. Earth,43, 183-209.
Yoshida S., K. Koketsu, B. Shibazaki, T. Sagiya, T. Kato, and Y. Yoshida (1996): Joint Inversion
of Near- and Far-field Waveforms and Geodetic Data for the Rupture Process of the 1995
Kobe Earthquake, J. phys. Earth, 44, 437-454.

26

Fig. 2.2.4-1 Research papers of rupture process(Yoshida S., K. Koketsu, B. Shibazaki, T. Sagiya, T. Kato, and Y. Yoshida (1996): Joint Inversion of
Near- and Far-field Waveforms and Geodetic Data for the Rupture Process of the 1995 Kobe Earthquake,
J. phys. Earth, 44, 437-454.)

Fig. 2.2.4-1 Research papers of rupture process(Yoshida S., K. Koketsu, B. Shibazaki, T. Sagiya, T. Kato, and Y. Yoshida (1996): Joint Inversion of
Near- and Far-field Waveforms and Geodetic Data for the Rupture Process of the 1995 Kobe Earthquake,
J. phys. Earth, 44, 437-454.)

27

2.3. Propagation Path2.3.1. Crust (Propagation & Attenuation)
1) Terminology
Attenuation Relation: A reduction in amplitude or energy caused by the physicalcharacteristics of the transmitting media or system. Usually includes
geometric effects such as the decrease in amplitude of a wave withincreasing distance from a source. It is shown by the formula as to the
maximum amplitude, magnitude and epicentral distance.
Geometric spreading: The decrease in wave strength(energy per unit area ofwave front) with distance as a result of geometric spreading. A sphericalwave traveling through the body of a medium continually spreads out sothat the energy density decreases. For a point source the energy density
decreases inversely as the square of the distance the wave has traveled.
For energy which travels along a surface, the analogous term iscylindrical divergence, which varies inversely as the distance. Other
mechanisms by which a seismic wave loses energy involve absorption
and loss at interfaces by reflection (including diffraction, mode
conversion, and scattering).
Reflection & Transmission: The energy or wave from a seismic source which
has been reflected (returned) from an acoustic impedance contrast(reflector) or series of contrasts within the Earth. The objective of mostreflection seismic work is to determine the location and attitude ofreflectors from measurements of the arrival time of primary reflections
and to infer the geologic structure and stratigraphy. A wave transmitted
through an interface to that of the wave incident upon it.
Scattering and Attenuation: The irregular and diffuse dispersion of energy
caused by inhomogeneities in the medium through which the energy istraveling. A reduction in amplitude or energy caused by the physicalcharacteristics of the transmitting media or system. Usually includes
geometric effects such as the decrease in amplitude of a wave withincreasing distance from a source.
Quality factor: The ratio of 2π times the peak energy to the energy dissipatedin a cycle; the ratio of 2 π times the power stored to the power
dissipated. The Quality factor of rocks is of the order of 50 to 300.
Quality factor is related to other measures of absorption.

28

Guided Wave: An elastic wave propagated in a layer where the energy is trapped.
The layer may (a) have lower velocity than those on either side of it (sothat total reflection can occur at the boundaries) or (b) a layer boundary
may be a free surface (so that the Reflectivity is nearly one). Instead of
having sharp interfaces as boundaries, channels may also be produced byan increasing velocity gradient in either direction. Energy is largely
prevented from escaping the channel because of repeated total reflection
at the channel boundaries or because rays which tend to escape are bent
back toward the Channel.
Lg-Wave: A short- period guided surface wave which travels in the continental
crust. The ‘’ g ’’ refers to granitic layer.
2) Purpose or target
Description of wave propagation in the crust3) Grade

Table 2.3.1-1 Classification of topics
Accuracy
1

Item

Data or techniques

Examples or References

Attenuation Relation

Peak Values (PGA,

Several Attenuation
Relations

PGV)
Velocity Structure2

Regional Q-value
Velocity Structure

Conventional Methods
Travel Time Inversion
Technique3

Q-Structure

Research Papers of
Q-structure
Research Papers of
Q-structure

Spectral ShapeInversion Technique4) Examples (Description with figures)
Several Attenuation Relations frequently used. (Fig. 2.3.1-1)
5) Special Topics
Coda Wave Analyses
6) References
Molas, G. L. and F. Yamazaki (1995): Attenuation of earthquake ground motion in Japan
including deep focus events, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 85, 1343-1358.
Fukushima, Y. (1996): Scaling Relations for Strong Ground Motion Prediction Models with M2

29

Terms, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 86, 329-336.
Youngs, R. R., S. -J. Chiu, W. J. Silva and J. R. Humphrey (1997): Strong ground motion
attenuation relationships for subduction zone earthquakes, Seism. Res. Lett., 68, 58-73.
Somerville, P. G., N. F. Smith, R. W. Graves and N. A. Abrahamson (1997): Modification of
Empirical strong motion attenuation relations to include the amplitude and duration
effects of rupture directivity, Seism. Res. Lett., 68, 199-222.

30

Fig. 2.3.1-1 Several Attenuation Relations frequently used.
(Manual for Zonation on Seismic Geotechnical Hazards (1999), Technical Committee for Earthquake
Geotechnical Engineering, TC4, ISSMGE)

31

Table. 2.3.1-2 Several Attenuation Relations frequently used
(Manual for Zonation on Seismic Geotechnical Hazards (1999), Technical Committee for Earthquake
Geotechnical Engineering, TC4, ISSMGE)

32

2.3.2. Deep Sediment (Propagation & Attenuation)
1) Terminology
Basin induced Surface Wave : Generally bedrock in a basin is not flat andneither sediments over the bedrock. Therefore, as the body wave inserts
into the basin, a secondary wave occurs from the place where the shapeof the bedrock changes, like its edge. Greater the ratio of impedance
between sediment and base rock, greater the surface wave.
Basin Edge Effect:
The effect the secondary wave occurs at the edge
departments of the basin.
2) Purpose or Target
Cause of damage concentration and estimation of input motion
at the engineering bedrock3) Grade

Table 2.3.2-1 Classification of topics
Accuracy

Item

Data or techniques

Examples or references

1

Ignore+Boore (1983)

Estimation of Velocity

Geophysical

San Fernando Basin

Structure

Prospecting

Kanto Basin

2

Euroseistest at Thessaroniki
Calibration of Velocity
3

Numerical Simulation

Ashigara Valley
etc.

Structure using observed
earthquake records4) Examples
Geophysical Prospecting: Refraction Method (Fig. 2.3.2-1)
Reflection Survey (Fig. 2.3.2-2)
Array Microtremor Observation (Fig. 2.3.2-3)
5) References
Kawase H. (1996): The cause of damage belt in Ko be: “ The basin -edge effect,” Constructive
interference of the direct S-wave with the basin-induced diffracted/Rayleigh waves,
Seismological Research letters, Vol67, No.5, pp.25-34.
Graves, R. W., A. Pitarka and P. G. Somerville (1998): Ground-motion amplification in the Santa
Monica area: Effects of shallow basin -edge structure, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. Vol88,

33

No.5, pp.1224-1242.
Wald, D. J. and R. W. Graves (1998): The seismic response of Los Angeles basin,
California, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., Vol.88, pp.337-356.
Sato, T., R. W. Graves and P. G. Somerville (1999): Tree-dimensional Finite-difference
simulations of long-period strong motions in the Tokyo metropolitan area, Bull.
Seismol. Soc. Am., Vol.89, 3, pp.579-607.
Seo, K. (1978): Earthquake motions modulated by deep soil structure, Proceeding of the fifth
Japan earthquake engineering symposium, pp.281-288.
Yamanaka, H., K. Seo, and T. Samano (1989): Effects of sedimentary layers on surface-wave
propagation, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., Vol.79, pp.631-644.
Ohba, T., and I. Toriumi (1992): Influence of size of plains on earthquake motion characteristics,
Proceeding of 10th World conference on Earthquake Engineering, 2, pp.623-628.

34

Fig. 2.3.2-1 Geophysical Prospecting-Refraction Method35

Cross section from seismic reflection survey at Shimohsa seismic observation point.
The VSP results also are shown in the center of this figure.
(Yamamizu, F., Kasahara, K., Suzuki, H., Ikawa, T., Adachi, I.(1993): Seis mic Reflection Profilingaround the Simohasa Deep-Well, PROGRAMME and ABSTRACTS, S.S.J., 1993-No.2.)

The sonic prospecting cross section at the Tokyo -Bay.The North Tokyo-Bay fault is crossing in
the bedrock at the center of the figure.

Fig. 2.3.2-2 Geophysical Prospecting -Reflection Survey(Kato, S. (1994): Structure of the North Tokyo-Bay fault, Symposium on Future Science Technology)

36

.

Fig. 2.3.2-3 Geophysical Prospecting-Array Microtremor Observation(Yamanaka, H., Sato, H,. Kurita, K. and Seo, K. (1999): Array Measurements of Long-period Microtremors inSouthern Kanto Plain, Japan, Journal of the Seismological Society of Japan)

37

2.4. Seismic Motion
2.4.1. Intensity
1) Terminology:
Intensity: In seismology, intensity refers to an earthquakes effect at a particularlocation. Intensity, which may be measured by factors such as thepresence (or absence) of cracks in walls, and even of mass panic, isdistinguished from magnitude, which refers to the amount of energy
released by an earthquake. Magnitude is expressed by the strength of thevibrations of the ground. Several scales are used to measure earthquake
intensity, including the famous Mercalli scale.
History of Intensity: The intensity of the earthquakes is valued according to theRichter scale (Charles Francis Richter 26/4/1900 - 30/9/1985) or themodified Mercalli scale (Giuseppe Mercalli 21/5/1850 - 19/3/1914). The
first scale furnishes an evaluation (magnitude ) of the quantity of freed
energy, while the seconds scale assigns a degree to the effects on theenvironment. In the 1902 Mercalli proposed the first composed scalefrom 10 degrees, in succession the Americans H.O. Wood and F.
Neumann modified it adding 2 degrees at the end of adapt it to theconstructive customs in California conventions. For the same motive inWestern Europe is in use the MCS scale (Mercalli, Cancani, Sieberg),
but in Oriental Europe be used the MKS scale (Medvedv, Karnik,
Sponheuer). For a real comparison of the intensity of the earthquakes,
and not only of the effects, has stayed introduced the scale of themagnitudo or Richter. From notice that already the Cancani (1856- 1904),
had introduced a gradation not empirical, assigning at 1° of the own
scale the value of 2.5 mm/s2 , and at 12° the value of 10000 mm/s2 .
2) Purpose or Target
Simplified measure of seismic ground motion3) Important Points:
Simplicity for determination
Relation with damages that depends on the construction type
Relation with other intensity scales384) Grade

Table 2.4.1-1 Classification of topics
Accuracy

Item

Input Data or

Examples or references

techniques
Reports of Eye witness &1

Feelings by Local
Habitants, non-specialist

Explanation Table ofIntensity Scale
Explanation Table of2

Systematic Damage

Intensity Scale

Survey by Specialists

Explanation Table ofDamage of Buildings

Strong Motion

3

Observation

Strong Motion
Observation Networkwith Broadcast System

MM Scale, MSK Scale,
JMA Scale, PEIS Scale
Questionnaire Survey
MM Scale, MSK Scale, JMA
Scale, PEIS Scale
Damage Index (P.R.China)
JMA-Intensity Information
Taiwan-Strong Motion
Network
Tri-NET

5) Examples: (Description with figures)
Intensity Scale (Explanation table) (Table 2.4.1-2)
Modified Melcali Scale
MSK Scale
Europian Macro Seismic Scale
JMA Intensity Scale, based on digital strong motion record
Intensity Scale based on Damage Index, P. R. China
Intensity Scale based on PGA, Chinese Taipei
PEIS (PHIVOLCS Earthquake Intensity Scale)
Format and method for in-site survey of Intensity (Fig.2.4.1-1)
Study results of relation with other intensity scales (Fig.2.4.1-2)
Intensity information system with strong motion observation network(Fig.2.4.1-3)
6) References<Intensity>
Grunthal, G. (ed.) (1993): Europian Macro Seismic Scale 1992, Cahiers du Centre Europeen deGeodynamique et de Seismologique, Vol. 7, Luxemborg.
Grunthal, G. (ed.) (1998): Europian Macro Seismic Scale 1998, Cahiers du Centre Europeen deGeodynamique et de Seismologique, Vol. 15, Luxemborg.
( http://www.gfz-potsdam.de/pb5/pb53/projekt/ems/index.html )39

A Reference of MSK Intensity Scale (MSK-64):
Modified Melcali Intensity Scale of 1931:( http://quake.ualr.edu/public/mercalli.htm )Modified Melcali Intensity Scale of 1956:( http://www.abag.ca.gov/bayarea/eqmaps/doc/mmi_plain.html )A Reference of CSB Intensity Scale based on Damage Index
PHIVOLCS Home Page ( http://www.phivolcs.dost.gov.ph/)
JMA Home Page:( http://www.kishou.go.jp/english/index.html )JWA intensity information service ( http://tenki.or.jp/quake.html )Udias, A. (1999): Principles of Seismology, Cambridge University Press,.

<Data for comparison of intensity scales>
Explanation Table of Rossi Forel Intensity Scale(http://www.seismo.nrcan.gc.ca/magnitudes/rossi_e.html)
Explanation Table of MSK Intensity Scale(http://www.uea.ac.uk/env/all/teaching/env3a02/MSK_SCA.doc)
Explanation Table of Modified Melcali Intensity Scale of 1931 in(http://quake.ualr.edu/public/mercalli.htm )Explanation Table of Modified Melcali Intensity Scale of 1956 in(http://www.abag.ca.gov/bayarea/eqmaps/doc/mmi_plain.html)
Short form of Europian Macro Seismic Scale 1992 in Udias (1999).
Short form of Europian Macro Seismic Scale 1998, in(http://www.gfz-potsdam.de/pb5/pb53/projekt/ems/index.html)
CSB (P. R. China) Intensity Scale based on Damage Index
CSB (P. R. China) Damage Index
PHIVOLCS Earthquake Intensity Scale(http://www.phivolcs.dost.gov.ph/soepd2/index_peis.html)
JMA Intensity Scale by Intensity Meter( http://www.kishou.go.jp/know/shindo/keisoku.html )Explanation Table of Intensity Scale (JMA)(http://www.kishou.go.jp/know/shindo/shindokai.html )40

Table 2.4.1-2(1) Intensity Scale (Explanation table)(Manual for Zonation on Seismic Geotechnical Hazards (1999), Technical Committee for
Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering, TC4, ISSMGE)

41

Table 2.4.1-2(2) Intensity Scale (Explanation table) http://www.kishou.go.jp/know/shindo/explane.html
JMA Scale People

Indoor Situations

Outdoor Situations

０

Imperceptible to people.

１

Felt by only some people
in the building.

２

Felt by most people in the Hanging objects
building. Some people
such as lamps swing
awake.
slightly.

３Felt by most people in the Dishes in a cupboard
building. Some people
rattle occasionally.
are frightened.

Electric wires swing
slightly.

４

Many people arefrightened. Some people
try to escape fromdanger. Most sleeping
people awake.

Electric wires swing
considerably. People
walking on a street andsome people driving
automobiles notice thetremor.

５
Lower

Most people try to escape Hanging objects
from a danger. Someswing violently. Most
people find it difficult to
Unstable ornaments
move.
fall. Occasionally,dishes in a cupboard
and books on a
bookshelf fall andfurniture moves.
Many people areconsiderably frightened
and find it difficult to
move.

５
Upper

Hanging objects
swing considerably
and dishes in acupboard rattle.
Unstable ornaments
fall occasionally.

People noticeelectric-light poles
swing. occasionally,
windowpanes are broken
and fall, unreinforced
concrete-block walls
collapse, and roads
suffer damage.

Most dishes in a
In many cases,
cupboard and most
unreinforced
books on a bookshelf concrete-block walls
fall. Occasionally, a
collapse and tombstones
TV set on a rack
overturn. Many
falls, heavy furniture automobiles stopsuch as a chest of
because it becomes
drawers falls, sliding difficult to drive.
doors slip out of their Occasionally,groove and thepoorly-installed vending
deformation of a door machines fall.
frame makes it
impossible to open
the door.

Wooden Houses

Reinforced-Concrete
Buildings

Occasionally, lessearthquake-resistanthouses suffer damage towalls and pillars.

Occasionally, lessearthquake-resistanthouses suffer heavy
damage to walls andpillars and lean.

42

Lifelines

Ground and Slopes

Occasionally, cracks areformed in walls of lessearthquake-resistantbuildings.

A Safety device cuts off
the gas service at somehouses. On rareoccasions water pipes
are damaged and water
service isinterrupted.(Electricalservice is interrupted atsome houses)

Occasionally,
cracksappear in soft ground.
and rockfalls and small
slope failures take placein mountainous districts.

Occasionally, large cracks
are formed in walls,
crossbeams and pillars ofless earthquake-resistantbuildings and even highly
earthquake-resistantbuildings have cracks inwalls.

Occasionally, gas pipes
and / or water mains aredamaged.(Occasionally,gas service and / orwater service areinterrupted in someregions)Difficult to keep standing.

A lot of heavy andunfixed furniture
moves and falls. It is
impossible to open
the door in manycases.

In some buildings, walltiles and windowpanes
are damaged and fall.

Occasionally, lessearthquake-resistanthouses collapse andeven walls and pillars ofhighlyearthquake-resistanthouses are damaged

Occasionally, walls andpillars of lessearthquake-resistantbuildings are destroyed andeven highly
earthquake-resistantbuildings have large cracks
in walls, crossbeams andpillars.

Gas pipes and / or water
mains are damaged.(Insome regions, gas
service and water
service are interrupted
and electrical service isinterrupted
occasionally.)

Impossible to keep
standing and to move
without crawling.

Most heavy andunfixed furniture
moves and falls.
Occasionally, sliding
doors are thrownfrom their groove.

In many buildings, walltiles and windowpanes
are damaged and fall.
Most unreinforced
concrete-block walls
collapse.

Many, lessearthquake-resistanthouses collapse. In
some cases, even walls
and pillars of highly
earthquake-resistanthouses are heavy
damaged

Occasionally, lessearthquake-resistantbuildings collapse. In somecases, even highly
earthquake-resistantbuildings suffer damage towalls and pillars.

Occasionally, gas mains
and / or water mains aredamaged.(Electricalservice is interrupted insome regions.
Occasionally, gas
service and / or water
service are interrupted
over a large area.)Thrown by the shaking
and impossible to moveat will.

Most furniture moves
to a large extent andsome jumps up.

In most buildings, walltiles and windowpanes
are damaged and fall. In
some cases, reinforced
concrete-block walls
collapse.

Occasionally, evenhighlyearthquake-resistantbuildings are severely
damaged and lean.

Occasionally, even highly
earthquake-resistantbuildings are severely
damaged and lean.

(Electrical service gas
service and water
service are interrupted
over a large area.)

６
Lower

６
Upper

７

Occasionally, cracks
appear in the ground,and landslides takeplace.

The ground isconsiderably distorted
by large cracks andfissures, and slope
failures and landslides
take place, whichoccasionally change
topographic features.

(1) Instrumental seismic intensity is a numerical one indicating the strength of the seismic motion at a site and measured with a seismic
intensity meter. The JMA seismic intensity scale announced officially is obtained from the instrumental seismic intensity.
(2) Lifelines are utilities for power, communication, transportation and water supply.
(3) The descriptions given in ( ) of the "lifelines" describe situations concerning electrical, gas and water service in particular for
information.

43

Table 2.4.1-2(3) Intensity Scale (Explanation table)（http://www.gfz-potsdam.de/pb5/pb53/projekt/ems/core/emsa_cor.htm）
Classifications used in the European Macroseismic Scale (EMS)
Differentiation of structures (buildings) into vulnerability classes(Vulnerability Table)

The masonry types of structures are to be read as, e.g., simple stone masonry, whereas thereinforced concrete (RC) structure types are to be read as, e.g., RC frame or RC wall.

See section 2 of the Guidelines and Background Materials for more details,
also with respect to the use of structures with earthquake resistant design

44Classification of damage
Note: the way in which a building deforms under earthquake loading depends on the building type. Asa broad categorisation one can group together types of masonry buildings as well as buildings ofreinforced concrete.

Classification of damage to masonry buildings
Grade 1: Negligible to slight damage(no strucutural damage, slight non-structural damage)Hair-line cracks in very few walls.
Fall of small pieces of plaster only.
Fall of loose stones from upper parts of buildings in very few cases.

Grade 2: Moderate damage(slight structural damage, moderatenon-structural damage)
Cracks in many walls.
Fall of fairly large pieces of plaster.
Partial collapse of chimneys.
Grade 3: Substantial to heavy damage (moderate structural
damage, heavy non-structural damage)
Large and extensive cracks in most walls.
Roof tiles detach. Chimneys fracture at the roof line; failure ofindividual non-structural elements (partitions, gable walls).

Grade 4: Very heavy damage(heavy structural damage,very heavynon-structural damage)
Serious failure of walls; partial structural failure of roofs and floors

Grade 5: Destruction(very heavy structural damage)
Total or near total collapse.

45Classification of damage to buildings of reinforced concrete
Grade 1: Negligible to slight damage(no structural damage,slight non-structural damage)Fine cracks in plaster over frame members or in walls at the base.
Fine cracks in partitions and infills.

Grade 2: Moderate damage(slightstructuraldamage,moderatenon-structural damage)

Cracks in columns and beams of frames and in str uctural
walls.
Cracks in partition and infill walls; fall of brittle cladding
and plaster. Falling mortar from the joints of wall panels.
Grade 3: Substantial to heavy damage(moderatestructuraldamage,heavynon-structural damage)

Cracks in columns and beam column joints of frames atthe base and at joints of coupled walls. Spalling of conrete
cover, buckling of reinforced rods.
Large cracks in partition and infill walls, failure ofindividual infill panels.
Grade 4: Very heavy damage(heavy structural damage,very heavy non-structural damage)
Large cracks in structural elements with compression failure ofconcrete and fracture of rebars; bond failure of beam reinforced
bars; tilting of columns. Collapse of a few columns or of a single
upper floor.
Grade 5: Destruction(very heavy structural damage)Collapse of ground floor or parts (e. g. wings) of buildings.

46

Definitions of quantity

Definitions of intensity degrees
Arrangement of the scale:a) Effects on humansb) Effects on objects and on nature(effects on ground and ground failure are dealt with especially in Section 7)c) Damage to buildings
Introductory remark:The single intensity degrees can include the effects of shaking of the respective lower intensity
degree(s) also, when these effects are not mentioned explicitly.
I. Not felta) Not felt, even under the most favourable circumstances.
b) No effect.
c) No damage.
II. Scarcely felta) The tremor is felt only at isolated instances (<1%) of individuals at rest and ina specially receptive position indoors.
b) No effect.
c) No damage.
III. Weaka) The earthquake is felt indoors by a few. People at rest feel a swaying or light trembling.
b) Hanging objects swing slightly.
c) No damage.
IV. Largely observeda) The earthquake is felt indoors by many and felt outdoors only by very few. A few people areawakened. The level of vibration is not frightening. The vibration is moderate. Observers feel aslight trembling or swaying of the building, room or bed, chair etc.
b) China, glasses, windows and doors rattle. Hanging objects swing. Light furniture shakes visibly
in a few cases. Woodwork creaks in a few cases.
c) No damage.
V. Stronga) The earthquake is felt indoors by most, outdoors by few. A few people are frightened and run
outdoors. Many sleeping people awake. Observers feel a strong shaking or rocking of the wholebuilding, room or furniture.
b) Hanging objects swing considerably. China and glasses clatter together. Small, top-heavy
and/or precariously supported objects may be shifted or fall down. Doors and windows swing openor shut. In a few cases window panes break. Liquids oscillate and may spill from well-filledcontainers. Animals indoors may become uneasy.
c) Damage of grade 1 to a few buildings of vulnerability class A and B.
VI. Slightly damaginga) Felt by most indoors and by many outdoors. A few persons lose their balanc e. Many people arefrightened and run outdoors.
b) Small objects of ordinary stability may fall and furniture may be shifted. In few instances
dishes and glassware may break. Farm animals (even outdoors) may be frightened.
c) Damage of grade 1 is sustained by many buildings of vulnerability class A and B; a few of class
A and B suffer damage of grade 2; a few of class C suffer damage of grade 1.

47

VII. Damaginga) Most people are frightened and try to run outdoors. Many find it difficult to stand, especially on
upper floors.
b) Furniture is shifted and top-heavy furniture may be overturned. Objects fall from shelves inlarge numbers. Water splashes from containers, tanks and pools.
c) Many buildings of vulnerability class A suffer damage of grade 3; a few of grade 4.
Many buildings of vulnerability class B suffer damage of grade 2; a few of grade 3.
A few buildings of vulnerability class C sustain damage of grade 2.
A few buildings of vulnerability class D sustain damage of grade 1.
VIII. Heavily damaginga) Many people find it difficult to stand, even outdoors.
b) Furniture may be overturned. Objects like TV sets, typewriters etc. fall to the ground.
Tombstones may occasionally be displaced, twisted or overturned. Waves may be seen on very soft
ground.
c) Many buildings of vulnerability class A suffer damage of grade 4; a few of grade 5.
Many buildings of vulnerability class B suffer damage of grade 3; a few of grade 4.
Many buildings of vulnerability class C suffer damage of grade 2; a few of grade 3.
A few buildings of vulnerability class D sustain damage of grade 2.
IX. Destructivea) General panic. People may be forcibly thrown to the ground.
b) Many monuments and columns fall or are twisted. Waves are seen on soft ground.
c) Many buildings of vulnerability class A sustain damage of grade 5.
Many buildings of vulnerability class B suffer damage of grade 4; a few of grade 5.
Many buildings of vulnerability class C suffer damage of grade 3; a few of grade 4.
Many buildings of vulnerability class D suffer damage of grade 2; a few of grade 3.
A few buildings of vulnerability class E sustain damage of grade 2.
X. Very destructivec) Most buildings of vulnerability class A sustain damage of grade 5.
Many buildings of vulnerability class B sustain damage of grade 5.
Many buildings of vulnerability class C suffer damage of grade 4; a few of grade 5.
Many buildings of vulnerability class D suffer damage of grade 3; a few of grade 4.
Many buildings of vulnerability class E suffer damage of grade 2; a few of grade 3.
A few buildings of vulnerability class F sustain damage of grade 2.
XI. Devastatingc) Most buildings of vulnerability class B sustain damage of grade 5.
Most buildings of vulnerability class C suffer damage of grade 4; many of grade 5.
Many buildings of vulnerability class D suffer damage of grade 4; a few of grade 5.
Many buildings of vulnerability class E suffer damage of grade 3; a few of grade 4.
Many buildings of vulnerability class F suffer damage of grade 2; a few of grade 3.
XII. Completely devastatingc) All buildings of vulnerability class A, B and practically all of vulnerability class C are
destroyed. Most buildings of vulnerability class D, E and F are destroyed. The earthquake effects
have reached the maximum conceivable effects.

48

Table 2.4.1-2(4) Intensity Scale (Explanation table)(http://www.phivolcs.dost.gov.ph/soepd2/index_peis.html)

Intensity
Scale

Description

I

Scarcely Perceptible - Perceptible to people under favorable circumstances. Delicately balanced
objects are disturbed slightly. Still Water in containers oscillates slowly.

II

Slightly Felt - Felt by few individuals at rest indoors. Hanging objects swing slightly. Still Water incontainers oscillates noticeably.

III

Weak - Felt by many people indoors especially in upper floors of buildings. Vibration is felt like one
passing of a light truck. Dizziness and nausea are experienced by some people. Hanging objects
swing moderately. Still water in containers oscillates moderately.

IV

Moderately Strong - Felt generally by people indoors and by some people outdoors. Light sleepers
are awakened. Vibration is felt like a passing of heavy truck. Hanging objectsswing considerably.
Dinner, plates, glasses, windows and doors rattle. Floors and walls of wood framed buildings creak.
Standing motor cars may rock slightly. Liquids in containers are slightly disturbed. Water incontainers oscillate strongly. Rumbling sound may sometimes be heard.

V

Strong - Generally felt by most people indoors and outdoors. Many sleeping people are awakened.
Some are frightened, some run outdoors. Strong shaking and rocking felt throughout building.
Hanging objects swing violently. Dining utensils clatter and clink; some are broken. Small, light andunstable objects may fall or overturn. Liquids spill from filled open containers. Standing vehicles
rock noticeably. Shaking of leaves and twigs of trees are noticeable.

VI

Very Strong - Many people are frightened; many run outdoors. Some people lose their balance.
motorists feel like driving in flat tires. Heavy objects or furniture move or may be shifted. Small
church bells may ring. Wall plaster may crack. Very old or poorly built houses and man-madestructures are slightly damaged though well-built structures are not affected. Limited rockfalls androlling boulders occur in hilly to mountainous areas and escarpments. Trees are noticeably shaken.

VII

Destructive - Most people are frightened and run outdoors. People find it difficult to stand in upper
floors. Heavy objects and furniture overturn or topple. Big church bells may ring. Old or poorly-built
structures suffer considerably damage. Some well-built structures are slightly damaged. Some
cracks may appear on dikes, fish ponds, road surface, or concrete hollow block walls. Limitedliquefaction, lateral spreading and landslides are observed. Trees are shaken strongly. (Liquefaction
is a process by which loose saturated sand lose strength during an earthquake and behave likeliquid).

VIII

Very Destructive - People panicky. People find it difficult to stand even outdoors. Many well-built
buildings are considerably damaged. Concrete dikes and foundation of bridges are destroyed byground settling or toppling. Railway tracks are bent or broken. Tombstones may be displaced,
twisted or overturned. Utility posts, towers and monuments mat tilt or topple. Water and sewer pipes
may be bent, twisted or broken. Liquefaction and lateral spreading cause man- made structure tosink, tilt or topple. Numerous landslides and rockfalls occur in mountainous and hilly areas. Boulders
are thrown out from their positions particularly near the epicenter. Fissures and faults rapture may
be observed. Trees are violently shaken. Water splash or stop over dikes or banks of rivers.

IX

Devastating - People are forcibly thrown to ground. Many cry and shake with fear. Most buildings
are totally damaged. bridges and elevated concrete structures are toppled or destroyed. Numerous
utility posts, towers and monument are tilted, toppled or broken. Water sewer pipes are bent, twisted
or broken. Landslides and liquefaction with lateral spreadings and sandboils are widespread. theground is distorted into undulations. Trees are shaken very violently with some toppled or broken.
Boulders are commonly thrown out. River water splashes violently on slops over dikes and banks.

X

Completely Devastating - Practically all man-made structures are destroyed. Massive landslides
and liquefaction, large scale subsidence and uplifting of land forms and many ground fissures areobserved. Changes in river courses and destructive seiches in large lakes occur. Many trees aretoppled, broken and uprooted.

49

Table 2.4.1-2(5) Intensity Scale (Explanation table)(http://www.seismo.nrcan.gc.ca/magnitudes/rossi_e.html)

1883 Rossi-Forel Scale of Earthquake Intensity
Note: The Rossi-Forel scale is one of the first scales designed to describe theeffects of an earthquake, at a given place, on natural features, on industrial
installations and on human beings. The intensity differs from themagnitude which is a quantity describing the strength of an earthquake.
Due to its limitations, particularly in respect to the relation with groundacceleration, it has been replaced by the Modified Mercalli scale.
oI. Recorded by a single seismograph or by some seismographs of the same pattern, but
not by several seismographs of different kinds; the shock felt by an experienced
observer.

o

II. Recorded by seismographs of different kinds; felt by a small number of persons at
rest.

o

III. Felt by several persons at rest; strong enough for the duration or direction to beappreciable.

oIV. Felt by several persons in motion; disturbance of moveable objects, doors,
windows, creaking of floors.

oV. Felt generally by everyone; disturbance of furniture and beds; ringing of some bells.

oVI. General awakening of those asleep; general ringing of bells; oscillation ofchandeliers, stopping of clocks; visible disturbance of trees and shrubs; some startled
persons leave their dwellings.

oVII. Overthrow of moveable objects, fall of plaster, ringing of churchbells, generalpanic, without damage to buildingsoVIII. Fall of chimneys, cracks in the walls of buildings.

o

IX. Partial or total destruction of some buildings.

oX. Great disasters, ruins, disturbance of strata, fissures in the earth's crust, rockfalls
from mountains.

50

Table 2.4.1-2(6) Intensity Scale (Explanation table)(http://www.uea.ac.uk/env/all/teaching/env3a02/MSK_SCA.doc)

Seismic Intensity Scale MSK (up-dated version from 19801)
Classification of the Scale
I.

Types of Structures (buildings not antiseismic)
A:
B:
C:

II.

buildings of fieldstone, rural structures, adobe houses, clay houses;
ordinary brick buildings, large block construction, half-timbered structures, structures of hewn
blocks of stone;
precast concrete skeleton construction, precast large panel construction, well-built wooden
structures.

Definition of quantity
Single, few
Many
Most

III.

IV.

< 10%
20-50%> 60%

Classification of damage to buildings
Grade 1:Slight damage:

Grade 2:Moderate damage:

Grade 3:Heavy damage:

Grade 4:

Destruction:

Grade 5:

Total damage:Fine cracks in plaster; fall of small piecesof plaster
Small cracks in walls, fall of fairly large
pieces of plaster; pantiles slip off; cracks in chimneys;
parts of chimneys fall down.
Large and deep cracks in walls; fall ofchimneys.
Gaps in walls; parts of buildings may
collapse; separate parts of the buildings lose theircohesion; inner walls and filled-in walls of the frame
collapse.
Total collapse of buildings.

Arrangement of the scale
a)
b)
c)

1

:
:
:

Persons and surroundings
Structures
NatureAfter: Report on the Ad-hoc Panel Meeting of Experts on Up-dating of the MSK-64 Seismic Intensity Scale, Jena
(GDR), 10-14 March 1980, Gerl. Beitr. Geophys., Leipzig (GDR), 90 (1981) 3, p.261-268.

51

Intensity degrees
I.

Not noticeable
a)
b)
c)

II.

The intensity of the vibration is below the limit of sensibility; the tremor is detected and recordedby seismographs only.
-

Scarcely noticeable (very slight)
a)
b)
c)

Vibration is felt only by individual people at rest in houses, especially on upper floors of buildings.
–
–

III.

Weak
a) The earthquake is felt indoors by a few people, outdoors only in favourable circumstances. The
vibration is weak. Attentive observers notice a slight swinging of hanging objects, somewhat moreheavily on upper floors.
b) c) -IV.

Largely observeda) The earthquake is felt indoors by many people, outdoors by few. Here and there people awake, but
none is frightened. The vibration is mod erate. Windows, doors and dishes rattle. Floors and walls
creak. Furniture begins to shake. Hanging objects swing slightly. Liquids in open vessels areslightly disturbed. In standing motor cars the shock is noticeable.
b) c) -

V.

Stronga)
The earthquake is felt indoors by most, outdoors by many. Many sleeping people awake. A few run
outdoors. Animal become uneasy. Buildings tremble throughout. Hanging objects swing
considerably. Pictures swing out of place. Occasionally pendulum clocks stop. Unstable objects
may be overturned or shifted. Open doors and windows are thrust open and slam back again.
Liquids spill in small amounts from well-filled open containers. The vibration is strong,resembling sometimes the fall of a heavy object in the building.
b)Damages of grade 1 in few buildings of type A is possible.
c)
Sometimes change in flow of springs.

VI.

Slight damage
a)

b)
c)

VII.

Felt by most indoors and outdoors. Many people in buildings are frightened and run outdoors.
A few persons lose their balance. Domestic animals run out of their stalls. In few instances
dishes and glassware may break, books fall down. Heavy furniture may possibly move andsmall steeple bells may ring.
Damage of grade 1 is sustained in single buildings of type B and in many of type A. Damage infew buildings of type A is of grade 2.
In few cases cracks up to widths of 1 cm are possible in wet ground; in mountains occasional
land-slips; change in flow of springs and in level of well-water are observed.

Damage to buildinga)b)

Most people ar e frightened and run outdoors. Many find it difficult to stand. The vibration isnoticed by persons driving motor cars. Large bells ring.
In many buildings of type C damage of grade 1 is caused; in many buildings of type B damage

52

c)

VIII.

Destruction of buildings
a)

b)

c)

IX.

c)

c)

Many buildings of type C suffer damage of grade 4, a few of grade 5. Many buildings of type B
show damage of grade 5, most of type A collapse. Dams, dykes and bridges may show severe to
critical damage. Railway lines are bent slightly. Road pavement and asphalt show waves.
In ground, cracks up to widths of several decimetres, sometimes up to 1 metre. Broad fissuresoccur parallel to water courses. Loose ground slides from steep slopes. Considerable landslides
are possible from river banks and steep coast. In coastal areas displacement of sand and mud;water from canals, lakes, rivers etc. thrown on land. New lakes occur.

Catastrophe
b)

c)

XII.

General panic; considerable damage of furniture. Animals run to and fro in confusion and cry.
Many buildings of type C suffer damage of grade 3, a few of grade 4. Many buildings of type B
show damage of grade 4, a few of grade 5. Many buildings of type A suffer damage of grade 5.
Monuments and columns fall. Reservoirs may show heavy damage. In individual cases railway
lines are bent and roadways damaged.
On flat land overflow of water, sand and mud is often observed. Ground cracks to widths of up
to 10cm, in slopes and river banks more than 10cm; furthermore a large number of slight cracks
in ground; falls of rock, many landslides and earth flows; large waves on water.

General destruction of buildingsb)

XI.

General fright; few people show panic, also persons driving motor cars are disturbed. Here andthere branches of trees break off. Even heavy furniture moves and partly overturns. Hanging
lamps are in part damaged.
Many buildings of type C suffer damage of grade 2, and few of grade 3. Many buildings of typeB suffer damage of grade 3, and few of grade 4. Many buildings of type A suffer damage of
grade 4, and few of grade 5. Memorials and monuments move and twist. Tombstones overturn.
Stone walls collapse.
Small land -slips in hollows and on banked roads on steep slopes; cracks in ground up to widthsof several centimetres. New reservoirs come into existence. Sometimes dry wells refill andexisting wells become dry. In many cases change in flow and level of water or wells.

General damage to buildings
a)
b)

X.

is of grade 2. Many buildings of type A suffer damage to grade 3, few of grade 4. In single
instances land-slips of roadway on steep slopes; locally cracks in roads and stone walls.
Waves are formed on water, and water is made turbid by mud stirred up. Water levels in wellschange, and the flow of springs changes. In few cases dry springs have their flow restored andexisting springs stop flowing. In isolated instances parts of sandy or gravelly banks slip off.

Destruction of most and collapse of many buildings of type C. Even well built bridges anddams may be destroyed and railway lines largely bent, thrusted or buckled; highways become
unusable; underground pipes destroyed.
Ground fractured considerably by broad cracks and fissures, as well as by movement inhorizontal and vertical directions; numerous landslides and falls of rock. The intensity of theearthquake requires to be investigated specially.

Landscape changesb)c)

Practically all structures above and below ground are heavily damaged or destroyed.
The surface of the ground is radically changed. Considerable ground cracks with extensive
vertical and horizontal movement are observed. Falls of rock and slumping of river banks overwide areas; lakes are dammed; waterfalls appear, and rivers are deflected. The intensity of theearthquake requires to be investigated specially.

53

Seismic Intensity is now measured with "Seismic Intensity Meters"

In the past,seismic intensity was estimated from a compilation of human perception and theresultant casualties.
Since 1 April 1996, it has been measured automatically with seismic intensity meters andannounced rapidly to the public and officials. There are about 600 JMA seismic intensity
observation stations throughout Japan as of April 1996

The Seismic Intensity is now divided into 10 scales.

Because "intensity 5" or "intensity 6" didn't necessarily correspond to the same degree ofdamage, "intensity 5" and "intensity 6" have been divided into two scales "intensity 5 Lower"and "intensity 5 Upper" and "intensity 6 Lower" and "intensity 6 Upper" respectively, since 1
October 1996. The intensity is now divided into 10 scales as a result.

Fig.2.4.1-1 Format and method for in-site survey of Intensity(http://www.kishou.go.jp/know/shindo/shindokai.html)

54

Fig.2.4.1-1(2) Format and method for in-site survey of Intensity(Manual for Zonation on Seismic Geotechnical Hazards (1999), Technical Committee for Earthquake
Geotechnical Engineering, TC4, ISSMGE)

55

Fig.2.4.1-2 Study results of relation with other intensity scales(Manual for Zonation on Seismic Geotechnical Hazards (1999), Technical Committee for Earthquake
Geotechnical Engineering, TC4, ISSMGE)

56

The observation networks of JMA with 574 observation points.

The observation networks of K-NET with 1000 observation points.

Fig.2.4.1-3 Intensity information system with strong motion observation
network in Japan ( Yamazaki, H. (1999): Ground motion monitoring for Real-time Eart hquake
Disaster Prevention, Proceeding of the first Real-time Earthquake Disaster Prevention Symposium, p 7)

57

2.4.2. Estimation of devastating ground motion
1) Terminology
ω -2 Spectral Model: Proposed by Aki(1967) and Brune (1970). Source spectraS(f) is determined as follows;
S(f)=Mo ・(2πf)2 ／(1+(f/fc)2 )where
fc: Corner Frequency
Mo: Seismic moment
This model is used to explain the spectra of observed ground motion.
Osaki Spectra: A method of analysis. Characteristics of seismic frequency at the
Brock are determined from a set of observed spectra, magnitude andepicenter. Mainly, it is used for an earthquake- proof design of a nuclear
power plant.
Near Field Ground Motion: The ground motion in the field near a source.
Relationships near a source involve both effects which attenuate rapidly
with distance as well as those which attenuate more slowly (such as
geometrical spreading).
Empirical Green's Function Method: Seismic records of micro earthquakes
contain characteristics of the path between focus and an observing point,
and of observing site. When large earthquake occurs at the same focal
point, the path of large a earthquake is the same as the path of a micro
earthquake. Considering that the micro earthquakes are calculated byusing Green’s function, we can estimate the seismic waves of the large
earthquake by employing the rule of the scaling.
2) Purpose or Target
Estimation of ground motion due to the main shock in the devastated area583) Grade

Table 2.4.2-1 Classification of topics
Accuracy

Input Data or

Item

techniques

Estimated Peak Value
Estimated Response
1

Spectra by Empirical
FormulaeInterpolation
Attenuation Relation
Empirical Formulae
Spectral Model

Stochastic modeling
Synthetic Strong Motion
2in the time domain basedon complex source model

3

Recorded or Simulated
Aftershock Records

Examples or references

Osaki Spectraω Spectral Model-2

Boore(1983)

Irikura & Kamae. (1996)

Observed Strong Motion

Dense Strong Motion

Chi-Chi Eq.(1999)

in the time domain

Observation Network

Tottori-Seisbu (2000)

4) Examples (Description with figures)
Research papers of strong ground motion estimation (Fig.2.4.2-1)
5) Special topics
Effect of Surface Geology on Seismic Ground Motion
6) References<Empirical Techniques><Empirical Estimation in the Frequency Domain>
Boore, D. M., W. B. Joyner and T. E. Fumal (1997): Equations for estimating horizontal response
spectra and peak acceleration from western North American earthquakes: a summary ofrecent work, Seism. Res. Lett, 68, 128-153.
Spudich, P., W. B. Joyner, A. G. Lindth, D. M. Boore, B. M. Margaris and J. B. Fletcher (1999):
SEA99 A revised ground motion prediction relation for use in extensional tectonic
regimes, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 89, 1156-1170.
Satoh, T., H. Kawase, and T. Sato (1997): Statistical Spectral Model of Earthquakes in the
Eastern Tohoku District, Japan, Based on the Surface and Borehole Records Observedin Sendai, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 87, 446 - 462.

<Wave Form Synthesis: Stochastic Methods>
Boore, D. M. (1983): Stochastic simulation of high-frequency ground motions based onseismological models of the radiation spectra, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 73, 1865-1894.
Herrero, A. and P. Bernard (1994): A kinematic self-similar rupture process for earthquakes, Bull.
Seism. Soc. Am., 84, 1216-1228.
Zeng, Y., J. G. Anderson and G. Yu (1994): A composite source model for computing realistic
59synthetic strong ground motions, Geophys. Res. Lett., 65, 725-728.

<Wave Form Synthesis Based on Seismic Fault Model: Deterministic Methods>
Irikura, K. and K. Kamae (1994): Estimation of strong ground motion in broad-frequency band
based on a seismic source scaling model and an empirical Green's function technique,
ANNALI DI GEOFISICA, XXXVII, 1721-1743.
Kamae, K., K. Irikura and A. Pitarka (1998): A technique for simulating strong ground motion
using hybrid Green's function, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 88, 357-367.

<Data provided by Dense Strong Ground Motion Net Work>
Taiwan Strong Motion Instrumentation Program (TSMIP) ( http://www.cwb.gov.tw/ )TriNET Home Page ( http://www.trinet.org/ )Kyoshin Net (K-NET) ( http://www.k-net.bosai.go.jp/index_e.html )Digital Strong-Motion Seismograph Network (KiK-net)( http://www.kik.bosai.go.jp/kik/index_en.shtml )Yokohama City Dense Strong Motion Observation Network( http://www.city.yokohama.jp/me/bousai/eq/index.html )60

Fig.2.4.2-1 Research papers of strong ground motion estimation

Fig.2.4.2-1 Research papers of strong ground motion estimation(Shima, E. and Imai, T. (1982): Estimation of Strong Ground Motions due to the Future Earthquakes, A
Short Technical Report, Proc. Third Intern’l Conf. On Recent Microzonation, Vol.3, pp.1417-1427.)

61

2.4.3. Site effect
1) Terminology
Seismic Bedrock: Any solid rock, such that exposing at the surface or overlain
by unconsolidated material. Shear wave velocity of such layers is shown
about 3 km/s.
Engineering Bedrock: A layer which would be a foundation of a building. In
most of the cases, S- wave velocity of Engineering Bedrock is the range
between 300 m/s and 700 m/s.
2) Purpose or Target
Cause of Damage Concentration and Detection of the risky areafor future earthquakes
3) Grade

Table 2.4.3-1 Classification of topics
Accuracy

Item

Input Data or

Examples or references

techniques

1

Amplification factor based

Geological Mapson the statistical estimation

Geomorphologicalof geological andMapsgeomorphological units

Aerophotographs

Existent Microzonation Maps

Intensity Distribution

2

Amplification factor based

Microtremor

Predominant Periodon the groundobservartion

Nakamura's H/V spectral ration

classification or

Simplified GeotechnicalGeological Column,

predominant period

Study for ground

PS-Logging, Geophysicalclassification

Prospecting etc.

Dynamic response of

Geotechnical Study for

Soil Test in Laboratory andgroundnon-linear soil

in-siteproperties
3

Non Linear Analyses ofNumerical Simulation

Ground Response
Strong Motion
Observation

62

Vertical Strong Motion Array

4) Examples (Description with figures)
EuroSeis test (Fig.2.4.3-1)
Ashigara Valley (Fig.2.4.3-2)
5) References
Gutierrez, C. and S. K. Singh (1992): A site effect study in Acapulco, Guerrero, Mexcico:Comparison of results from strong-motion and microtremor data, BSSA Vol.82, No.2,
pp.642-659.
Sato, T., H., Kawase, and T. Sato (1995): Evaluation of Local Site Effect and Their Remo val from
Borehole Records Observed in the Sendai Region, Japan, BSSA, Vol.85, No.6,
pp.1770-1789.
Sato, T., H., Kawase, and T. Sato (1997): Statistical Spectral Model of Earthquakes in the Eastern
Tohoku District, Japan, Based on Surface and Borehole Recor ds Observed in Sendai,
BSSA, Vol.87, No.2, pp.446-462.
Okawa, I., Y. Kitagawa and T. Kashima (1991): EARTHQUAKE OBSERBATION ON VARIOUS
SOIL CONDITIONS AND ANALYSIS OF THE RECORDS, Proc of FourthInternational conference on Seismic Zonation, Sep,Vol.Ⅱ, pp.295-302.
Lachet C. and P. Y. Bard (1994): Numerical and Theoretical Investigation on the
Possibilities and Limitations of Nakamura's Technique, Jour. Phys. Earth, 42,
pp.377-397.
Wakamatsu, K. and Y. Yasui (1996): Possibility of Estimation for Amplification Characteristics ofSoil Deposits Based on Ratio of Horizontal to Vertical Spectra of Microtremors, Proc
of Eleventh World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vol.Ⅱ, pp.215-220.
Chavez-Garcia F. J. and J.Cuenca (1998): Site effects and microzonation in Acapulco, Earthquake
Spectra, Vol.14, 1, pp.75-93.
Sengara, I.W. and I. G. M. Susila (2000): Macrozonation Methodology and Soil Characteristics
Parameters in the Newest Proposed Indonesia Seismic Code, Proc. of Indonesia
Earthquake & Tsunami Disaster in Building and Housing.

63Fig.2.4.3-1 EuroSeis test
(S.V.Tolis, (1998): A2D simulation of Euroseistest near Thessaloniki, Greece, The effects of Surface Geology on
Seismic Motion)

64

Fig.2.4.3-2 Ashigara Valley(Symposium on THE EFFECTS OF SURFACE GEOLOGY SEISMIC MOTION, 1992)

65