GNGTS 2017 - 36° Convegno Nazionale

248 GNGTS 2017 S essione 2.1 Cocco, M. and Rovelli, A.; 1989: Evidence for the variation of stress drop between normal and thrust faulting earthquakes in Italy . Journal of Geophysical Research, 94, 9399-9416, doi: 10.1029/89JB00468. issn: 0148- 0227. Di Giacomo, D., Parolai, S., Bormann P., Grosser, H., Saul, J., Wang, R., and Zschau, J.; 2010: Suitability of rapid Energy magnitude estimations for emergency response purposes. Geophys. J. Int., 180, 361-374, doi: 10.1111/ j.1365-246X.2009.04416.x. Hanks, T. C., and Kanamori H.; 1979: A moment magnitude scale . J. Geophys. Res., 84, 5, 2348–2350, doi:10.1029/ JB084iB05p02348. Kanamori, H.; 1983: Magnitude scale and quantification of earthquakes . Tectonophysics, 93, 185-199. Kanamori, H., E. Hauksson, L. K. Hutton, and Jones L. M.; 1993: Determination of earthquake energy release and ML using TERRAscope . Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 83, 330–346. Kanamori, H., and Anderson, D. L.; 1975: Theoretical basis of some empirical relations in seismology. Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 65, 1073-1095. Festa, G., A. Zollo, and Lancieri M.; 2008: Earthquake magnitude estimation from early radiated energy . Geophys. Res. Lett., 35, L22307, doi:10.1029/2008GL035576. Picozzi, M., D. Bindi, P. Brondi, D. Di Giacomo, S. Parolai, and Zollo A.; 2017: Rapid determination of P wave- based energy magnitude: Insights on source parameter scaling of the 2016 Central Italy earthquake sequence . Geophys. Res. Lett., 44, doi:10.1002/ 2017GL073228. Singh S.K., and Ordaz M.; 1994: Seismic Energy Release in Mexican Subduction Zone Earthquakes . Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., Vol. 84, No. 5, pp. 1533-1550. Thatcher W., and Hanks T.; 1973: Source parameters of southern California earthquakes . J. Geophys. Res. Vol. 78, No. 35, pp. 8547–8576, doi: 10.1029/JB078i035p08547. Zollo, A., A. Orefice, and Convertito V.; 2014: Source parameter scaling and radiation efficiency of microearthquakes along the Irpinia fault zone in southern Apennines, Italy . J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth, 119, 3256–3275, doi:10.1002/2013JB010116. Bayesian estimation of macroseismic intensity from post-earthquake rapid damage mapping M. Pittore¹, L. Graziani², A. Maramai², M. Haas¹, S. Parolai¹ ³, A. Tertulliani² 1 Helmholtzcentre Potsdam – German Research Centre for Geosciences, Potsdam, Germany ² Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia (INGV), Rome, Italy ³ Istituto Nazionale di Oceanografia e di Geofisica Sperimentale (OGS), Trieste, Italy Introduction. The Macroseismic Intensity (MI) is a measure of the overall shaking that a complex environment has been exposed to, and is based on the observation of the effects of the ground motion on built structures, environment and the people. The seismological community acknowledges the essential contribution of macroseismic assessment to the compilation of the seismic catalogues for seismic hazard assessment, and macroseismic observations are also routinely employed by Civil Protection authorities in the aftermath of damaging events to improve their situational awareness. As for 2017 in Italy two types of macroseismic assessment are carried out in response to an event. A first survey, in collaboration with the Department of Civil Protection, uses the Mercally-Cancani-Sieberg (MCS, see Sieberg, 1930) intensity scale to have a first mapping of the earthquake´s consequences and assist in the management of the emergency phase. The use of this scale has been motivated so far by its simpler implementation, and prompt estimation. A separate assessment is then carried out in terms of European Macroseismic Scale (EMS-98, see Grünthal et al ., 1998) to obtain a more refined damage scenario. The EMS-98 scale allows a better consideration of the type and vulnerability of the buildings, and a more precise description of the physical damage with respect to MCS, but being based on building-building assessment,