Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Authors: Cultrera, G.* 
Faenza, L.* 
Meletti, C.* 
D'Amico, V.* 
Michelini, A.* 
Amato, A.* 
Title: Shakemaps uncertainties and their effects in the post-seismic actions for the 2012 Emilia (Italy) earthquakes
Issue Date: 2014
Series/Report no.: 5/12 (2014)
DOI: 10.1007/s10518-013-9577-6
Keywords: Emilia earthquake
Strong ground motion
Seismic hazard
Subject Classification04. Solid Earth::04.06. Seismology::04.06.04. Ground motion 
04. Solid Earth::04.06. Seismology::04.06.06. Surveys, measurements, and monitoring 
04. Solid Earth::04.06. Seismology::04.06.11. Seismic risk 
Abstract: The May 20, 2012, Emilia Ml 5.9 earthquake was followed by some major aftershocks, well recorded by a large number of temporary stations that were installed to monitor the sequence. These additional recordings allowed us a thorough testing of the performance of the ShakeMap—a procedure designed to provide rapid information on the experienced ground motion. We found that the shakemaps for the May 29, 2012, Ml 5.8 earthquake, obtained using the permanent stations only, underestimate significantly the ground motion computed with the highest station density, especially for PSA at long periods (T=3.0 s). This low-frequency motion is controlled primarily by the surface waves recorded in the Po plain: the observed site effects are likely not accounted properly by the site correction coefficient based on Vs30 as implemented in the ShakeMap procedure. The shakemaps determined during the seismic sequence have been included in an Italian national law that was passed after the 2012 earthquake. According to this law, the factories safety verifications were bound to the comparison between the shakemaps and the design acceleration required by the current national seismic code.We then decide to appraise the impact of the shakemap accuracy on the law provisions. Following the law ecommendations, we have estimated the possible errors resulting from the incomplete evaluation of the ground shaking: our results show that, if the complete dataset were available at the time of the law approval, the number of buildings for which the safety check was required would have been significantly smaller.
Appears in Collections:Papers Published / Papers in press

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Cultrera_BEE2014b.pdfMain article2.2 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show full item record

Page view(s)

Last Week
Last month
checked on Jul 19, 2018


checked on Jul 19, 2018

Google ScholarTM