Inhaltsbereich
Publications
Abstract (EDOC: 15312)
It is common practice in the seismological community to use, especially for large earthquakes,
the moment magnitude Mw as a unique magnitude parameter to evaluate the earthquake’s
damage potential. However, as a static measure of earthquake size, Mwdoes not provide direct
information about the released seismicwave energy and its high frequency content,which is the
more interesting information both for engineering purposes and for a rapid assessment of the
earthquake’s shaking potential. Therefore, we recommend to provide to disaster management
organizations besides Mw also sufficiently accurate energy magnitude determinations as soon
as possible after large earthquakes. We developed and extensively tested a rapid method for
calculating the energy magnitude Me within about 10–15 min after an earthquake’s occurrence.
The method is based on pre-calculated spectral amplitude decay functions obtained from
numerical simulations of Green’s functions. After empirical validation, the procedure has been
applied offline to a large data set of 767 shallow earthquakes that have been grouped according
to their type of mechanism (strike-slip, normal faulting, thrust faulting, etc.). The suitability of
the proposed approach is discussed by comparing our rapid Me estimates with Mw published
by GCMT as well as with Mw and Me reported by the USGS. Mw is on average slightly
larger than our Me for all types of mechanisms. No clear dependence on source mechanism
is observed for our Me estimates. In contrast, Me from the USGS is generally larger than
Mw for strike-slip earthquakes and generally smaller for the other source types. For ∼67 per
cent of the event data set our Me differs ≤ ±0.3 magnitude units (m.u.) from the respective
Me values published by the USGS. However, larger discrepancies (up to 0.8 m.u.) may occur
for strike-slip events. A reason of that may be the overcorrection of the energy flux applied
by the USGS for this type of earthquakes. We follow the original definition of magnitude
scales, which does not apply a priori mechanism corrections to measured amplitudes, also
since reliable fault-plane solutions are hardly available within 10–15 min after the earthquake
origin time. Notable is that our uncorrected Me data show a better linear correlation and less
scatter with respect to Mw than Me of the USGS. Finally, by analysing the recordings of
representative recent pairs of strong and great earthquakes, we emphasize the importance of
combining Mw and Me in the rapid characterization of the seismic source. They are related
to different aspects of the source and may differ occasionally even more than 1 m.u. This
highlights the usefulness and importance of providing these two magnitude estimates together
for a better assessment of an earthquake’s shaking potential and/or tsunamigenic potential.
(2010): Suitability of rapid energy magnitude determinations for emergency response purposes. Geophysical Journal International, 180, 1, 361-374.
(2010): Suitability of rapid energy magnitude determinations for emergency response purposes. Geophysical Journal International, 180, 1, 361-374.

