Modified Mercalli intensity scale facts for kids

"Mercalli" redirects here. For the scientist whom the scale is named after, see Giuseppe Mercalli.

The Modified Mercalli intensity scale (MM, MMI, or MCS) measures the effects of an earthquake at a given location. This is in contrast with the seismic magnitude usually reported for an earthquake.

Magnitude scales measure the inherent force or strength of an earthquake – an event occurring at greater or lesser depth. (The "M_w" scale is widely used.) The MM scale measures intensity of shaking, at any particular location, on the surface. It was developed from Giuseppe Mercalli's Mercalli intensity scale of 1902.

While shaking experienced at the surface is caused by the seismic energy released by an earthquake, earthquakes differ in how much of their energy is radiated as seismic waves. They also differ in the depth at which they occur; deeper earthquakes have less interaction with the surface, their energy is spread throughout a larger volume, and the energy reaching the surface is spread across a larger area. Shaking intensity is localized. It generally diminishes with distance from the earthquake's epicenter, but it can be amplified in sedimentary basins and in certain kinds of unconsolidated soils.

Intensity scales categorize intensity empirically, based on the effects reported by untrained observers, and are adapted for the effects that might be observed in a particular region. By not requiring instrumental measurements, they are useful for estimating the magnitude and location of historical (preinstrumental) earthquakes: the greatest intensities generally correspond to the epicentral area, and their degree and extent (possibly augmented by knowledge of local geological conditions) can be compared with other local earthquakes to estimate the magnitude.

History
Modified Mercalli intensity scale
See also

History

Italian volcanologist Giuseppe Mercalli formulated his first intensity scale in 1883. It had six degrees or categories, has been described as "merely an adaptation" of the then-standard Rossi–Forel scale of 10 degrees, and is now "more or less forgotten". Mercalli's second scale, published in 1902, was also an adaptation of the Rossi–Forel scale, retaining the 10 degrees and expanding the descriptions of each degree. This version "found favour with the users", and was adopted by the Italian Central Office of Meteorology and Geodynamics.

In 1904, Adolfo Cancani proposed adding two additional degrees for very strong earthquakes, "catastrophe" and "enormous catastrophe", thus creating a 12-degree scale. His descriptions being deficient, August Heinrich Sieberg augmented them during 1912 and 1923, and indicated a peak ground acceleration for each degree. This became known as the "Mercalli–Cancani scale, formulated by Sieberg", or the "Mercalli–Cancani–Sieberg scale", or simply "MCS", and was used extensively in Europe and remains in use in Italy by the National Institute of Geophysics and Volcanology (INGV).

When Harry O. Wood and Frank Neumann translated this into English in 1931 (along with modification and condensation of the descriptions, and removal of the acceleration criteria), they named it the "modified Mercalli intensity scale of 1931" (MM31). Some seismologists refer to this version the "Wood–Neumann scale". Wood and Neumann also had an abridged version, with fewer criteria for assessing the degree of intensity.

The Wood–Neumann scale was revised in 1956 by Charles Francis Richter and published in his influential textbook Elementary Seismology. Not wanting to have this intensity scale confused with the Richter magnitude scale he had developed, he proposed calling it the "modified Mercalli scale of 1956" (MM56).

In their 1993 compendium of historical seismicity in the United States, Carl Stover and Jerry Coffman ignored Richter's revision, and assigned intensities according to their slightly modified interpretation of Wood and Neumann's 1931 scale, effectively creating a new, but largely undocumented version of the scale.

The basis by which the U.S. Geological Survey (and other agencies) assigns intensities is nominally Wood and Neumann's MM31. However, this is generally interpreted with the modifications summarized by Stover and Coffman because in the decades since 1931, "some criteria are more reliable than others as indicators of the level of ground shaking". Also, construction codes and methods have evolved, making much of built environment stronger; these make a given intensity of ground shaking seem weaker. Also, some of the original criteria of the most intense degrees (X and above), such as bent rails, ground fissures, landslides, etc., are "related less to the level of ground shaking than to the presence of ground conditions susceptible to spectacular failure".

The categories "catastrophe" and "enormous catastrophe" added by Cancani (XI and XII) are used so infrequently that current USGS practice is to merge them into a single category "Extreme" abbreviated as "X+".

Modified Mercalli intensity scale

The lower degrees of the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale generally deal with the manner in which the earthquake is felt by people. The higher numbers of the scale are based on observed damage to structures

The large table gives Modified Mercalli scale intensities that are typically observed at locations near the epicenter of the earthquake.

I. Not felt	Not felt by humans but technology is capable of sensing it.
II. Weak	Felt only by a few persons during sleep, especially on upper floors of buildings.
III. Weak	Felt quite noticeably by persons indoors, especially on upper floors of buildings. Many people do not recognize it as an earthquake. Standing motor cars may rock slightly. Vibrations similar to the passing of a truck. Duration estimated.
IV. Light	Felt indoors by many, outdoors by few during the day. At night, some awakened. Dishes, windows, doors disturbed; walls make cracking sound. Sensation like heavy truck striking building. Standing motor cars rocked noticeably.
V. Moderate	Felt by nearly everyone; many awakened. Some dishes, windows broken. Unstable objects overturned. Pendulum clocks may stop.
VI. Strong	Felt by all, many frightened. Some heavy furniture moved; a few instances of fallen plaster. Damage slight.
VII. Very Strong	Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction; slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures; considerable damage in poorly built or badly designed structures; some chimneys broken.
VIII. Severe	Damage slight in specially designed structures; considerable damage in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse. Damage great in poorly built structures. Fall of chimneys, factory stacks, columns, monuments, walls. Heavy furniture overturned.
IX. Violent	Damage considerable in specially designed structures; well-designed frame structures thrown out of plumb. Damage great in substantial buildings, with partial collapse. Buildings shifted off foundations.
X. Extreme	Some well-built wooden structures destroyed; most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations. Rails bent.
XI. Extremely Dangerous	Few, if any, (masonry) structures remain standing. Bridges destroyed. Broad fissures in ground. Underground pipe lines completely out of service. Earth slumps and land slips in soft ground. Rails bent greatly.
XII. Catastrophic	Damage total. Waves seen on ground surfaces. Lines of sight and level distorted. Objects thrown upward into the air.

Correlation with magnitude

There is a correlation between the magitude and the intensity of the earthquake. Even though this correlation is there, it may be difficult to link one to the other: This correlation depends on several factors, such as the depth of the earthquake, terrain, population density, and damage.

For example, on May 19, 2011, an earthquake of magnitude 0.7 in Central California, United States 4 km deep was classified as of intensity III by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) over 100 miles (160 km) away from the epicenter (and II intensity almost 300 miles (480 km) from the epicenter), while a 4.5 magnitude quake in Salta, Argentina 164 km deep was of intensity I.

Magnitude	Typical Maximum Modified Mercalli Intensity
Under 2.0	I
2.0 – 2.9	II – III
3.0 – 3.9	III – IV
4.0 – 4.9	IV – V
5.0 – 5.9	V – VI
6.0 – 6.9	VI – VII
7.0 – 7.9	VII – VIII
8.0 or higher	VIII or higher

Estimating site intensity and its use in seismic hazard assessment

Dozens of intensity-prediction equations have been published to estimate the macroseismic intensity at a location given the magnitude, source-to-site distance, and perhaps other parameters (e.g. local site conditions). These are similar to ground motion-prediction equations for the estimation of instrumental strong-motion parameters such as peak ground acceleration. A summary of intensity prediction equations is available. Such equations can be used to estimate the seismic hazard in terms of macroseismic intensity, which has the advantage of being related more closely to seismic risk than instrumental strong-motion parameters.

Correlation with physical quantities

The MMI scale is not defined in terms of more rigorous, objectively quantifiable measurements such as shake amplitude, shake frequency, peak velocity, or peak acceleration. Human-perceived shaking and building damage are best correlated with peak acceleration for lower-intensity events, and with peak velocity for higher-intensity events.

Comparison to the moment magnitude scale

The effects of any one earthquake can vary greatly from place to place, so many MMI values may be measured for the same earthquake. These values can be displayed best using a contoured map of equal intensity, known as an isoseismal map. However, each earthquake has only one magnitude.