The Determination of Peak Ground Acceleration at Bantul

Regency, Yogyakarta Province, Indonesia

Teuku Faisal Fathani
Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Gadjah Mada
University, Yogyakarta, Indonesia, 55281, email: fathani@tsipil.ugm.ac.id
Agus Darmawan Adi
Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Gadjah Mada
University, Yogyakarta, Indonesia, 55281, email: adadhi2@yahoo.com
Subagyo Pramumijoyo
Geological Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Gadjah Mada University,
Yogyakarta, Indonesia, 55281, email: bagyo@ugm.ac.id
Dwikorita Karnawati
Geological Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Gadjah Mada University,
Yogyakarta, Indonesia, 55281, email: dwiko@indosat.net.id, dwiko2007@yahoo.co.id

ABSTRACT

The horizontal peak ground acceleration at Bantul area, Yogyakarta

Province is calculated based on the Indonesian code of SNI-1726-2002
coupled with the local soil conditions determined from Standard
Penetration Test (SPT) results and based on empirical prediction by using
attenuation relationships. The average value of SPT until a depth of 30 m at
the 10 sites surrounding Bantul area was investigated. The SPT values
varied from 18.60 to 36.85. Accordingly, by referring to SNI-1726-2002, the
soil at 10 study sites was classified as medium soil with peak ground
acceleration from 0.225g to 0.288g. The empirical prediction of peak
ground acceleration at Bantul area is determined based on the Mw 6.3
Yogyakarta earthquake of May 27, 2006, considering two Scenarios of
epicenter coordinate and hypocenter depth based on the Indonesia
Meteorological and Geophysical Agency (BMG) and United States
Geological Survey (USGS). According to the attenuation relationships, the
peak ground accelerations at the study sites vary from 0.209g to 0.322g. An
attenuation relationship based on the dominant period at the observed sites,
earthquake magnitude and hypocenter distance has been used to estimate
the peak ground acceleration. The dominant period of the ground is
assumed as the ground period produced by the micro-tremor survey
conducted on the study area. As the result, the peak ground accelerations
vary from 0.140g to 0.534g. In the south and east part of the study area, the
peak ground accelerations produced by the Indonesian code of SNI-17262002 are considerably lower than those produced by the attenuation
relationships based on the Yogyakarta earthquake of May 27, 2006 and the
results of micro-tremor survey. Therefore, it is prudent to reconsider and
revise the Indonesian building code based on the local soil condition and
ground amplification, for use in regional planning and development
projects.

THE DETERMINATION OF PEAK GROUND ACCELERATION

12-1

INTRODUCTION
Peak Ground Acceleration is one of the
most difficult parameters to determine. It
represents an acceleration that will be
induced sometime in the future by an
earthquake on a particular area. Since it is
not possible to predict earthquakes, the
value of peak ground acceleration must be
based on prior earthquakes and faults
studies. The peak ground acceleration is
determined based on source, seismicity, and
attenuation relationships. Some of the more
commonly used methods to determine the
peak ground acceleration at a site are
historical earthquake, maximum credible
earthquake, maximum probable earthquake,
code or other regulatory requirement, and
earthquake maps (Day, 2002).
In response to the Mw 6.3 Yogyakarta
earthquake of May 27, 2006 an
investigation to determine horizontal peak
ground acceleration in the area affected
earthquake
was
conducted.
The
investigation was done by core drilling,
Standard Penetration Test (SPT) and microtremor survey in the area surrounding
Bantul Regency, Yogyakarta Province. This
research deals with the analysis of peak
ground acceleration based on (1) the
Indonesian code of SNI-1726-2002 coupled
with local soil conditions determined from
Standard Penetration Test (SPT) results; (2)
the empirical prediction by using
attenuation relationships, which relate the
peak ground acceleration to the earthquake
magnitude and the distance between the site
and the seismic source; and (3) the
attenuation relationship based on the
dominant period at the observed sites
produced by the micro-tremor survey.
INDONESIAN CODE OF SNI-17262002
In each country, there is a local building
code that specifies design values of peak
ground acceleration. In Indonesia, the peak
ground acceleration can be obtained by
using the building code of SNI-1726-2002.
This code divided Indonesia into 6 seismic

12-2

zones considering the probability of

exceedance of buildings with 50 years life
time is 10 percent and seismic design load
of 500 years return period. The
determination of national standard for peak
ground acceleration in this code was based
on the historical earthquakes, maximum
probable earthquakes, and local soil
conditions.
The maximum probable earthquake is
the largest predicted earthquake that a fault
is capable of generating within a specified
time period based on a study of nearby
active
faults.
Maximum
probable
earthquake are most likely to occur within
the design life of the project, therefore they
have been commonly used in assessing
seismic risk. The peak ground acceleration
is determined as the value that has a certain
probability of exceedance in a specific
number of years. A commonly used
definition of a maximum probable
earthquake is an earthquake that will
produce a peak ground acceleration with a
50 percent probability of exceedance in 50
years (USCOLD, 1985). The design basis
ground motion can often be determined by
a site-specific hazard analysis, or from a
hazard map. Various maps showing peak
ground acceleration with a 2, 5, or 10
percent probability of exceedance in 50
years provide the choice of the appropriate
level of hazard or risk. Such an approach is
termed the probabilistic method, with the
choice of peak ground acceleration based
on the concept of acceptable risk.
Earthquake Return Period
Earthquake return period for lifelines
facilities should be based on the following
criteria (Ferritto, 1992).
1) Ordinary category of construction on
average seismicity sites
Ordinary facilities can be designed
based
on
earthquake
with
an
approximate 10 percent probability of
exceedance in 50 years.
2) High seismicity or essential category of
construction
Facilities that are deemed important

THE YOGYAKARTA EARTHQUAKE OF MAY 27, 2006

and essential shall use a two-earthquake

procedure. Level 1 earthquake has a 50
percent probability of exceedance in 50
years. Level 2 earthquake has a 10
percent probability of exceedance in 100
years.
3) Facilities containing polluting or
hazardous material
Facilities containing polluting or
hazardous material should be designed
based on Level 3 earthquake having a 10
percent probability of exceedance in 250
years.
In any case, a design load less than
suggested by a code is not permitted. The
seismic load in Indonesian building code of
SNI-1726-2002 is based on three factors: a
probability of exceedance in a certain
period, ductility factor, and structural over

strength factor. In the explanation above,

the relation between probability of
exceedance, facility life time and the
earthquake return period are as follows.
L

p = 1 e

100% ... (1)

or

T=

L log(e )
log(1 p )

.... (2)

Seismic Zones
According to plate tectonic theory,
earthquakes commonly occur at the
locations around the plate boundaries. The
plate boundaries in Indonesia can be seen in
Figure 1.

Plate Boundaries

Earthquakes

Figure 1 Earthquake epicenter and plate boundaries in and adjacent to Indonesia (USGS).

According to SNI-1726-2002, Indonesia

is divided into 6 seismic zones and its
response spectra is shown in Figure 2,
where seismic zone 1 has the lowest
earthquake hazard and seismic zone 6 has
the highest earthquake hazard. These
seismic zones are divided based on the peak
ground acceleration of earthquake with 500
years return period, where the average
values of peak bedrock acceleration and

peak ground acceleration for each seismic

zone can be seen in Figure 2 and Table 1.
From Figure 2, it can be seen that the study
site is located in Bantul Regency
Yogyakarta, which is in seismic zone 3. If
the peak ground acceleration cannot be
analyzed using the wave propagation
theory, the peak ground acceleration in each
zone for each type of soil can be taken from
Table 1.

THE DETERMINATION OF PEAK GROUND ACCELERATION

12-3

94

96

98

100

102

104

106

108

110

112

114

116

118

120

122

124

126

128

130

132

134

136

138

140

10 o

10 o

8o

80

200

400

8o

Kilometer

Banda Aceh
1

2o

2o
Manado
Ternate

Pekanbaru

o
Samarinda

2o
3

Palu

Biak
Palangkaraya

Bengkulu

Kendari

Ambon
4

Tual
2
Bandung
Semarang
Garut
Tasikmalaya
Solo
Jogjakarta
Cilacap

Sukabumi
o

o
Jakarta

Makasar

Bandarlampung

Jayapura

6
Banjarmasin

Palembang

2o

Manokwari
Sorong

Jambi

1
Padang

Surabaya
3
Blitar Malang
Banyuwangi

Denpasar

Mataram

4
Merauke
5
6

10

o
5

Kupang

10

12

14

12

14

Wilayah
Zone

: 0,03 g

Wilayah
Zone
Wilayah
Zone

: 0,10 g

: 0,15 g

Wilayah
Zone
Wilayah
Zone

: 0,20 g

: 0,25 g

Wilayah
Zone

: 0,30 g

3
2
1

16 o

16 o
94 o

96 o

98 o

100 o

102 o

104 o

106 o

108 o

110 o

112 o

114 o

116 o

118 o

120 o

122 o

124 o

126 o

128 o

130 o

132 o

134 o

136 o

138 o

140 o

Figure 2. Seismic zones in Indonesia (SNI-1726-2002).

Table 1. Bedrock acceleration and peak ground acceleration for each seismic zone and type of soil in
Indonesia

Seismic Zones

Bedrock
acceleration (g)

1
2
3
4
5
6

0,03
0,10
0,15
0,20
0,25
0,30

Peak ground acceleration amax (g)

Hard Soil
Medium
Soft Soil Special Soil
Soil
0,04
0,05
0,08
Required
special
0,12
0,15
0,20
evaluation in
0,18
0,23
0,30
each zone
0,24
0,28
0,34
0,28
0,32
0,36
0,33
0,36
0,38

Soil Classification
Soil condition, where a structure is built
on it, has a very significant influence to the
level of seismic load to be considered.
According
to
SNI-1726-2002,
soil
conditions can be classified into three
types: soft soil, medium soil, and hard soil.
These three soil classifications can be
determined if the top 30 m of soil thickness
satisfies one of the requirements listed on
Table 2.
In Table 2, v s , N and S u are the
average values of each soil layer that can be
determined by using a weighting method
with the following equations:

12-4

vs

ti

i =1
m

... (3)

t i / v si

i =1
m

ti

i =1

..... (4)

ti / N i

i =1
m

Su

ti

i =1
m

..... (5)

ti / Sui

i =1

where ti is the soil thickness of the ith soil

layer, vsi is the shear wave velocity through
the ith soil layer, Ni is the value of SPT of
the ith soil layer, Sui is the undrained shear
strength of the ith soil layer and m is the

THE YOGYAKARTA EARTHQUAKE OF MAY 27, 2006

number of soil layer above the bedrock. In

Table 2, PI is the Plasticity Index of the
clay, wn is natural moisture content and Su
is undrained shear strength of the soil. The
special soil mentioned in Table 2 is a soil
type that does not satisfy any requirement
in the table. Moreover, the special soil can
also be classified as a soil that has a high
potential for liquefaction, or may be
sensitive clay, or a deteriorated cemented

sand, or a soil with a high content of

organic matter where the thickness is more
than 3 m, or is a soft clay with a PI of more
than 75% and the thickness is more than 10
m, clay layer with 25 kPa < Su < 50 kPa and
the thickness is more than 30 m. The peak
ground acceleration of special soil must be
determined from a wave propagation
analysis.

Table 2. Soil classification based on SNI-1726-2002

Type of soil

Hard soil
Medium Soil
Soft Soil

Special Soil

Average shear wave

velocity, v s (m/s)

Average Standard
Penetration Test (SPT),
N

Average undrained
shear strength, S u
(kPa)

v s > 350

N > 50

S u > 100

175 < v s < 350

15 < N < 50

50 < S u < 100

v s < 175
N < 15
S u < 50
or, any soft soil profile where the total thickness is more than 3 m with
PI > 20%, wn > 40 % and Su < 25 kPa
Required special examination on every site

EMPIRICAL GROUND MOTION

PREDICTION
Empirical prediction of peak ground
acceleration invariably incorporates a
dependence on the earthquake size and
distance to the hypocenter or active faulting.
Based on the past recordings of strong
earthquake motion, the peak ground
acceleration can be described by a ground
motion prediction equation as a function of
the earthquake magnitude, distance from
the hypocenter or the fault to the site, and
general site conditions parameter. Figure 3
shows one of such relationships, developed
by Abrahamson and Silva (1997) for crustal
earthquakes in tectonically active areas.
Since peak ground acceleration is the
most commonly used ground motion
parameter, many peak ground acceleration
relationships have been developed. The
most broadly based relationship between
local magnitude (Richter scale), hypocenter
distance and peak ground acceleration was
provided by Donovan (1973) as shown in
Equation 6. The equation expresses the

mean of 678 acceleration values of Western

U.S., Japan and Papua New Guinea, and
represents a conservative estimation of
mean peak ground acceleration on sites
with 6 m or more of soil overlying the rock.

Figure 3. Peak ground acceleration as a

function of magnitude and distance from the
hypocenter or the fault (Abrahamson and
Silva, 1997).

a max =

1080 e 0.5 M

(R + 25)1.32

. (6)

where amax is peak ground acceleration

(cm/sec2), R is distance from the hypocenter

THE DETERMINATION OF PEAK GROUND ACCELERATION

12-5

(km), and M is earthquake local magnitude

of Richter scale.
Another attenuation relationship based
on statistically evaluated data is that of
Esteva (1974), who gives the expression for
peak ground acceleration based on
California data and is valid for focal
distances in excess of 15 km, as shown in
Equation 7. Matuschka (1980) also
provided
the
similar
attenuation
relationship in Equation 8.
5600 e0.8 M
amax =
. (7)
(R + 40)2

a max =

119 e 0.81M

(R + 25)1.15

.. (8)

It should be noted that attenuation

equations are generally inappropriate for
the epicentral area, i.e. within a distance of
about 15-20 km from the epicenter. This
area needs special consideration, and the
understanding of it is still very limited.
Moreover,
Campbell
(1981)
used
worldwide data to develop an attenuation
relationship for the mean peak ground
acceleration for sites within 50 km of the
fault rupture in magnitude 5.0 to 7.7
earthquakes:

ln a max = 4.141 + 0.868M 1.09 ln R + 0.606 0.7 M

. (9)

where M is the local magnitude or surface

wave magnitude for magnitudes less than or
greater than 6, respectively, and R is the
closest distance to the hypocenter or the
fault rupture in kilometers.
An attenuation equation for peak
horizontal acceleration applicable to the
near source region in Japan was developed
by Fukushima and Tanaka (1990). The data
base consists of 1372 horizontal
components of peak ground acceleration
from 28 earthquakes in Japan and 15
earthquakes in the United States and other
countries. Coefficients describing the
decrease in acceleration with increasing
distance found by most previous studies of
Japanese data are significantly smaller than
those found by analyzing individual

12-6

earthquakes. The resulting relation in Japan

is
log amax = -0.41M log(R+0.032.100.41M)
0.0034R + 1.30 ..(10)
where amax is the mean of peak acceleration
from two horizontal components at each site
(cm/sec2), R is the shortest distance
between the site and hypocenter or fault
rupture (km), and M is the surface-wave
magnitude. Effects of four different ground
conditions (rock, hard-, medium- and softsoils) on the attenuation relation were also
examined. Average peak horizontal
accelerations for the rock and the soft-soil
sites are 60 percent and 140 percent,
respectively of the value predicted from the
equation.
Kanai (1966) proposed an attenuation
relationship for peak ground acceleration
based on the dominant period at the
observed site, earthquake magnitude of
Richter scale and the hypocenter distance,
as shown in Equation 11.
a max =

5
Tg

10

3.6
1,83

0.61M 1.66 +
log R + 0.167
R
R

. (11)

where amax is the peak ground acceleration

at the site (cm/sec2), Tg is the dominant
period or the fundamental period of the
ground (s), R is the shortest distance
between site and the hypocenter or the fault
rupture (km), and M the earthquake
magnitude of Richter scale.
THE CALCULATION RESULTS AND
DISCUSSION

In order to provide a peak ground

acceleration distribution map which can
estimate the zonation of earthquake
vulnerability and susceptibility at various
levels of risk, it is necessary to define a
scoring system representing each value of
peak ground acceleration appropriate with
the local building strength conditions in
Bantul Regency, Yogyakarta. Table 3
shows five levels of scoring system for
peak ground acceleration used in this study.

THE YOGYAKARTA EARTHQUAKE OF MAY 27, 2006

Table 3. Scoring system used in developing peak

ground acceleration distribution map

No
1
2
3
4
5

Peak Ground
Acceleration (g)
amax < 0.10

Level Level of
Score
Risk
Very
1
low risk
Low
0.10 amax < 0.20
2
risk
Medium
3
0.20 amax < 0.30
risk
High
4
0.30 amax < 0.40
risk
Very
5
amax 0.40g
high
risk

Peak ground acceleration based on the

code of SNI-1726-2002

By considering the seismic zones shown

in Figure 2, the study area at Bantul
Regency, Yogyakarta is located in the
seismic zone 3. The peak ground
acceleration in each location for each type
of soil can be taken from Table 1.
Meanwhile, the soil classification is
decided by using the results of site
investigations of standard penetration
testing at 10 bore holes. From SPT results,
the values of N until a depth of 30 m are
shown in Figure 4. The average values of N

are used for determining the soil

classification on each site. By using
Equation 4, the average values of N until a
depth of 30 m at the sites surrounding
Bantul area, Yogyakarta vary from 18.60 to
36.85. Therefore, the soil can be classified
as medium soil. Table 4 shows the
calculation results of peak ground
acceleration based on SNI-1726-2002.
The soil classification system in SNI1726-2002 uses a very rough interval. From
Table 2, the average N-SPT value in the
interval of 15 to 50 at the same seismic
zone produces a similar value of peak
ground acceleration. Likewise, the average
N-SPT values at Watu, Tempuran, Pranti,
BPKP-1,
BPKP-2,
Karangsemut,
Segoroyoso, Bambanglipuro, Wijirejo and
Krajan area differ from 18.60 to 36.85. The
values of peak ground acceleration at these
10 study sites are determined by
interpolating the value in Table 2 based on
the average value of N-SPT. Accordingly,
by referring to SNI-1726-2002, the peak
ground accelerations at 10 study sites are
0.225g to 0.288g. On the basis of the
calculation results shown in Table 4, the 10
study sites are classified of having a
medium level of risk (level 3).

Table 4. The calculation results of peak ground acceleration based on SNI-1726-2002 in seismic zone 3

Boring
No.
BH1
BH2
BH3
BH4
BH5
BH6
BH10
BH11
BH12
BH13

Location

Watu
Tempuran
Pranti
BPKP-1
BPKP-2
Karangsemut
Segoroyoso
Bambanglipuro
Wijirejo
Krajan

Average
Soil
Bedrock
Peak Ground Level
SPT
Classification Acceleration Acceleration
of
Risk
(g)
(g)
(N )
27.53
Medium soil
0.15
0.257
3
0.225
3
36.85
Medium soil
0.15
0.288
3
18.60
Medium soil
0.15
0.269
3
24.00
Medium soil
0.15
0.263
3
25.90
Medium soil
0.15
0.247
3
30.50
Medium soil
0.15
0.15
0.238
3
33.20
Medium soil
0.15
0.261
3
26.47
Medium soil
0.15
0.245
3
31.13
Medium soil
0.259
3
26.93
Medium soil
0.15

THE DETERMINATION OF PEAK GROUND ACCELERATION

12-7

Standard Penetration Test (N )

20

40

20

40

60

10

10

10

15

15

15

20
25

Depth (m)

20
25
30

30

35

35

40

40

40

Location: BH-3 Pranti

N = 18.60

Standard Penetration Test (N )

60

20

40

Standard Penetration Test (N )

60

5
10

15

15

15

Depth (m)

5
10

Depth (m)

25

20
25

30

35

35

35

40

40

Location: BH-5 BPKP-2

N = 25.90

Standard Penetration Test (N )

0

20

40

10

10

15

15

Depth (m)

Depth (m)

20

40

20
25

20
25

30

30

35

35
40

Location: BH-10 Segoroyoso

N = 33.20

Location: BH-11 Bb.lipuro

N = 26.47

Standard Penetration Test (N )

20

40

Standard Penetration Test (N )

60

20

40

0
5

10

10

15

15

Depth (m)

20
25

20
25

30

30

35

35

40

40

Location: BH-12 Wijirejo

N = 31.13

Location: BH-13 Krajan

N = 26.93

Figure 4. Results of Standard Penetration Test.

12-8

60

40

Depth (m)

Location: BH-6 Karangsemut

N = 30.50

Standard Penetration Test (N )

60

60

25

30

Location: BH-4 BPKP-1

N = 24.00

40

20

30

40

20

10

20

60

40

Location: BH-2 Tempuran

N = 36.85

Standard Penetration Test (N )

20

40

25

35

20

20

30

Location: BH-1 Watu

N = 27.53

Depth (m)

Standard Penetration Test (N )

Standard Penetration Test (N )

60

Depth (m)

Depth (m)

THE YOGYAKARTA EARTHQUAKE OF MAY 27, 2006

60

Peak ground acceleration based on the

attenuation relationships

scales become saturated at an ML of about

7.3.

Earthquake Magnitude Scales

The previously described earthquake
magnitude scales are empirical quantities
based
on
various
instrumental
measurements
of
ground
shaking
characteristics. As the total amount of
energy released during an earthquake
increases, however, the ground-shaking
characteristics do not necessarily increase at
the same rate. For strong earthquakes, the
measured ground-shaking characteristics
become less sensitive to the size of the
earthquake than for smaller earthquakes.
This phenomenon is referred to as
saturation; the body wave (mb) and Richter
local magnitudes (ML) saturate at
magnitudes of 6 to 7 and the surface wave
magnitude saturates at about Ms = 8. To
describe the size of very large earthquakes,
the only magnitude of scale that does not
depend on ground-shaking levels, and
consequently does not subject to saturation
is the moment magnitude Mw (Kanamori,
1977; Hanks and Kanamori, 1979), since it
is based on the seismic moment (Mo),
which is a direct measure of the factors that
produce rupture along the fault. Figure 5
shows the approximate relationships
between several earthquake magnitude
scales. Saturation of the instrumental scales
is indicated by their flattening at higher
magnitude values.
The lines drawn in Figure 5 should only
be considered as approximate relationships,
representing a possible wide range in values.
Considering the limitations of Figure 5, it
could be concluded that the local magnitude
(ML) and moment magnitude scale (Mw) are
reasonably close to one another below a
value of about 7 (Day, 2002). Meanwhile,
the surface wave magnitude (Ms) slightly
deviates from the local magnitude (ML) and
moment magnitude scale (Mw) below a
value of about 6. At high magnitude values,
the moment magnitude (Mw) tends to
significantly deviate from these other two
magnitude scales. The local magnitude

Figure 5. Approximate relationships between

moment magnitude scale (Mw) and other
magnitude scales: Richter local magnitude
(ML), surface wave magnitude (Ms), shortperiod body wave magnitude (mb), and
Japanese Meteorological Agency magnitude
(MJMA) (After Idris, 1985).

Empirical Prediction of Peak Ground

Acceleration
The peak ground acceleration at 10 study
sites near the hypocenter of the Yogyakarta
earthquake can be determined roughly
based on Equations 6 ~ 10. By inputting the
hypocenter distance and the local
magnitude or surface wave magnitude of
the earthquake, the peak ground
acceleration (amax) can be calculated. The
empirical prediction of peak ground
acceleration in the study area is determined
based on the Mw 6.3 Yogyakarta earthquake
of May 27, 2006. The calculation was done
by considering two Scenarios of earthquake
magnitude, epicenter coordinate and
hypocenter depth based on the Indonesia
Meteorological and Geophysical Agency
(BMG) and United States Geological
Survey (USGS) reports, as described
below:
a. Scenario 1 (BMG): the epicenter
coordinate was located at 423960.78 E,
9115638.42 N, with the hypocenter
depth of 11.8 km. The short period body
wave magnitude (mb) is 5.9. Based on

THE DETERMINATION OF PEAK GROUND ACCELERATION

12-9

Figure 5, the value of mb = 5.9 is

approximately equal to Mw = 6.3.
b. Scenario 2 (USGS): the epicenter
coordinate was located at 440265.66 E,
9119863.97 N, with the hypocenter
depth of 10 km and the moment
magnitude Mw is 6.3.
The attenuation relationships between
peak ground acceleration, hypocenter
distance and earthquake magnitude in
Equations 6 ~ 10 are used to calculate the

peak ground acceleration surrounding

Bantul area. Table 5 shows the calculation
results of peak ground accelerations based
on Scenario 1 (BMG). The calculation
results of peak ground accelerations based
on Scenario 2 (USGS) are shown in Table 6.
The peak ground acceleration distribution
maps on each site based on two Scenarios
mentioned above are shown in Figure 6 and
Figure 7 for Scenario 1 (BMG) and
Scenario
2
(USGS),
respectively.

Table 5. The calculation results of peak ground acceleration based on Scenario 1 (BMG)

Boring
No.

BH1
BH2
BH3
BH4
BH5
BH6
BH10
BH11
BH12
BH13

Location

Peak Ground Acceleration (amax)

Donovan Esteva Matuschka Campbell Fukushima
(1973) (1974)
(1980)
(1981) & Tanaka
(1990)
(g)
(g)
(g)
(g)
(g)
Watu
0.216 0.322
0.311
0.241
0.287
Tempuran
0.204 0.302
0.295
0.210
0.265
Pranti
0.202 0.300
0.293
0.207
0.263
BPKP-1
0.161 0.233
0.241
0.132
0.195
BPKP-2
0.161 0.233
0.241
0.132
0.194
Karang semut 0.179 0.261
0.263
0.160
0.223
Segoroyoso
0.164 0.238
0.245
0.136
0.199
Bambang0.213 0.316
0.306
0.232
0.281
lipuro
Wijirejo
0.191 0.281
0.279
0.182
0.243
Krajan
0.196 0.289
0.285
0.192
0.252

From Table 5 and 6, the highest peak

ground accelerations at 10 study sites which
are underlain by the medium soil vary from
0.241g to 0.322g and from 0.209g to 0.302g
for Scenario 1 and Scenario 2, respectively.
The highest values of peak ground
acceleration are provided by Esteva (1974),
Matuschka (1980) as well as the Indonesian
code of SNI-1726-2002. The Donovan
(1973) equation yields lower values of peak
ground acceleration since this method
represents a conservative estimation of
mean peak ground acceleration on sites
with 6 m or more of soil overlying the rock.
Meanwhile, Fukushima and Tanaka (1990)
equation produces higher values of peak
ground acceleration compared with
Donovan (1973) and Campbell (1981)
equations. Average peak horizontal

Highest Level
of
amax
Risk
(g)
0.322
4
0.302
4
0.300
4
0.241
3
0.241
3
0.263
3
0.245
3
0.316

0.281
0.289

3
3

accelerations for the rock and the soft-soil

sites are 60% and 140% respectively of the
value predicted from the Fukushima and
Tanaka (1990) method. Hence, the mean
peak ground acceleration for medium soil at
10 study sites is assumed 100% of the value
predicted from this equation.
From Figures 6 and 7, the peak ground
accelerations at 10 study sites in the Bantul
area are dominated by the value higher than
0.25g. Therefore, the study sites are
classified from high to very high levels of
risk. The epicenter of BMG version is
located at the southern part of the study area,
hence, the very high risk area located at the
south-east part of the study area. On the
other hand, the epicenter of USGS version
is located at the east part, subsequently the
east and south-east part of the study area is

12-10 THE YOGYAKARTA EARTHQUAKE OF MAY 27, 2006

classified as a very high risk area. The

results reveal that the distance between the
site and the seismic source greatly affects

the peak ground acceleration determined by

the attenuation relationship.

Table 6. The calculation results of peak ground acceleration based on Scenario 2 (USGS)

Boring
No.

BH1
BH2
BH3
BH4
BH5
BH6
BH10
BH11
BH12
BH13

Location

Peak Ground Acceleration (amax)

Donovan Esteva Matuschka Campbell Fukushima
(1973) (1974)
(1980)
(1981) & Tanaka
(1990)
(g)
(g)
(g)
(g)
(g)
Watu
0.184 0.270
0.270
0.170
0.232
Tempuran
0.201 0.300
0.291
0.203
0.260
Pranti
0.201 0.300
0.292
0.204
0.261
BPKP-1
0.172 0.249
0.254
0.147
0.211
BPKP-2
0.171 0.249
0.254
0.147
0.210
Karang semut 0.202 0.301
0.292
0.205
0.262
Segoroyoso
0.202 0.302
0.293
0.206
0.262
Bambang0.173 0.251
0.256
0.149
0.213
lipuro
Wijirejo
0.163 0.235
0.243
0.134
0.197
Krajan
0.137 0.193
0.209
0.101
0.157

Highest Level
of
amax
Risk
(g)
0.270
3
0.300
4
0.300
4
0.254
3
0.254
3
0.301
4
0.302
4
0.256

0.243
0.209

3
3

Peak Ground Acceleration

amax < 0.10g
0.10g amax < 0.20g
0.20g amax < 0.30g
0.30g amax < 0.40g
amax 0.40g

BH-4
BH-5
BH-10

BH-6

BH-12

BH-3
BH-11

BH-2
BH-1

BH-13
Epicenter
(BMG Version)

Figure 6. Peak ground acceleration distribution map based on Scenario 1 (BMG).

THE DETERMINATION OF PEAK GROUND ACCELERATION 12-11

Peak Ground Acceleration

amax < 0.10g
0.10g amax < 0.20g
0.20g amax < 0.30g
0.30g amax < 0.40g
amax 0.40g

BH-4
BH-5
BH-10

BH-12

BH-6

BH-3
BH-2

BH-11
BH-13

Epicenter
(USGS Version)

BH-1

Figure 7. Peak ground acceleration distribution map based on Scenario 2 (USGS).

Based on the calculation results of peak

ground acceleration by using SNI-17262002 (Table 4) and attenuation relationships
(Table 5 and 6), it is prudent to provide an
earthquake microzonation and hazard map
based on the local condition in order to
revise the Indonesian code of SNI-17262002.
By
using
this
earthquake
microzonation and hazard map, the
zonation of earthquake vulnerability and
susceptibility at various levels of risk can
be estimated.
Attenuation Relationship based on the
dominant period at the observed sites
An attenuation relationship based on the
dominant period at the observed site,
earthquake magnitude of Richter scale and
the hypocenter distance proposed by Kanai
(1966) is used to estimate the peak ground
acceleration. The resonant frequency
calculated from the micro-tremor data
theoretically has a close value with the
frequency calculated from the standard
analysis of direct measurement of high

magnitude earthquakes. In Equation 11, the

dominant period of the ground (Tg) is
assumed as the ground period produced by
a micro-tremor survey. In this study, microtremor survey was conducted at 243 sites
by Ratdomopurbo (2006) from the Volcanic
Survey of Indonesia (VSI), Yogyakarta.
By using the attenuation relationship
based on the dominant period at the
observed
sites,
the
peak
ground
accelerations at 10 study sites in the Bantul
area vary from 0.140g to 0.480g and from
0.146g to 0.534g for Scenario 1 (BMG) and
Scenario 2 (USGS), respectively. By
considering Table 3, the distribution map of
peak ground acceleration based on the data
from micro-tremor survey Scenario 1
(BMG) and the Scenario 2 (USGS) are
shown in Figure 8 and 9.
From Figure 8 and 9, the study sites
consist of the low risk to very high level of
risk, depending on the dominant period at
the observed site based on the micro-tremor
survey and the distance between the site
and the seismic source.

12-12 THE YOGYAKARTA EARTHQUAKE OF MAY 27, 2006

Peak Ground Acceleration

amax < 0.10g
0.10g amax < 0.20g
0.20g amax < 0.30g
0.30g amax < 0.40g
amax 0.40g

Epicenter
(BMG Version)

Figure 8. Peak ground acceleration distribution map based on the data from micro-tremor
survey for Scenario 1 (BMG).
Peak Ground Acceleration
amax < 0.10g
0.10g amax < 0.20g
0.20g amax < 0.30g
0.30g amax < 0.40g
amax 0.40g

Epicenter
(USGS Version)

Figure 9. Peak ground acceleration distribution map based on the data from micro-tremor
survey for Scenario 2 (USGS).

THE DETERMINATION OF PEAK GROUND ACCELERATION 12-13

According to the attenuation relationship

based on the dominant period in the
observed site for Scenario 1 (BMG), the
south-west and the center part of the study
site has a very high level of risk, whilst the
south and south-east part have a high level
of risk and the north part of the study area
has a low to medium level of risk.
Meanwhile, Scenario 2 (USGS), the south
and south-east of the study area have a high
to very high level of risk, while the north
part has a low to medium level of risk. The
results show that Scenario 2 (USGS) yields
a better distribution of the peak ground
acceleration, since the high to very high
level of risk reflects the presence of
structures related to the Opak-Oya fault
system. The peak ground accelerations
based on the data from micro-tremor survey
produced considerably higher values than
those produced by the Indonesia code of
SNI-1726-2002 and the other attenuation
equations.
CONCLUSIONS

The peak ground acceleration at Bantul

area, Yogyakarta was determined based on
the Indonesian code of SNI-1726-2002
coupled with the local soil conditions
determined from SPT results and based on
empirical prediction by using attenuation
relationships. The SNI-1726-2002 divided
Indonesia into 6 seismic zones based on the
peak bedrock acceleration of earthquake
considering the probability of exceedance
of buildings with 50 years life time is 10%
and seismic design load of 500 years return
period. The average values of N until a
depth of 30 m at the 10 study sites vary
from 18.60 to 36.85. According to SNI1726-2002, the soil at the study sites can be
classified into medium soil, the peak
ground accelerations are 0.225g to 0.288g,
and having a medium level of risk.
The empirical prediction of peak ground
acceleration in the study area was
determined based on the Mw 6.3 Yogyakarta
earthquake of May 27, 2006. The
calculation was done by considering two

Scenarios of earthquake magnitude,

epicenter coordinate and hypocenter depth
based on the BMG and USGS version. The
attenuation relationships between peak
ground acceleration, hypocenter distance
and earthquake magnitude are used to
calculate the peak ground acceleration
surrounding Bantul area. The highest values
of peak ground acceleration are provided by
Esteva (1974), Matuschka (1980) and the
Indonesian code of SNI-1726-2002. As the
results of calculation, the peak ground
accelerations at 10 sites vary from 0.241g
to 0.322g and from 0.209g to 0.302g for
Scenario 1 and Scenario 2, respectively.
Moreover, the peak ground accelerations at
10 study sites are dominated by the value
higher than 0.25g and therefore could be
classified as medium risk to high level of
risk. An attenuation relationship based on
the dominant period at the observed site,
proposed by Kanai (1966) was used to
estimate the peak ground acceleration. The
results indicate that the peak ground
acceleration vary from 0.140g to 0.480g
and from 0.146g to 0.534g for Scenario 1
and Scenario 2, respectively. Based on this
attenuation relationship, the study sites are
classified as the low risk to very high level
of risk. It is prudent to provide an
earthquake microzonation and hazard map
at the study sites in order to revise the
Indonesian code of SNI-1726-2002, which
can estimate the zonation of earthquake
susceptibility at various levels of risk.
REFERENCES
Abrahamson, N.A. and Silva, W.J., 1997, Empirical
Response Spectral Attenuation Relations for
Shallow Crustal Earthquake, Seismol. Res. Lett.
Campbell, K.W., 1981, Near Source Attenuation of
Peak horizontal Acceleration, Bulletin of the
Seismology Society of America 71.
Day, R.W., 2002, Geotechnical Earthquake
Engineering Handbook, Mc Graw-Hill, New
York.
Donovan, N.C., 1973, A Statistical Evaluation of
Strong Motion Data Including the February 9,
1971 San Fernando Earthquake, Proc. 5th
World Conference on Earthquake Engineering,
Rome.

12-14 THE YOGYAKARTA EARTHQUAKE OF MAY 27, 2006

Esteva, L., 1974, Geology and Predictability in the

Assessment of Seismic Risk, Proc. 2nd Int.
Conf. Assoc. Eng. Geologist, Sao Paolo.
Ferritto, J.M., 1992, Optimized Earthquake Time
History and Response Spectra, Users guide,
Report UG-0025, Naval Civil Eng. Laboratory,
Port Hueneme, California
Fukushima, Y. and Tanaka, T., A, 1990, A New
Attenuation Relation for Peak Horizontal
Acceleration of Strong Earthquake Ground
Motion in Japan, Bulletin of the Seismological
Society of America; v. 80; no. 4; p. 757-783.
Hanks, T.C. and Kanamori, H., 1979, A Moment
Magnitude Scale, Journal of Geophysical
Research, Vol. 84, p. 2348-2350.
Idriss, I.M., 1985, Evaluating Seismic Risk in
Engineering Practice, Proc. Of the Eleventh
International Conference on Soil Mechanics
and Foundation Engineering, Vol. 1, San
Francisco, p. 255-320.
Kanai, K., 1966, Improved Empirical Formula for
the Characteristics of Strong Earthquake

Motions, Proceeding of Japan Earthquake

Engineering Symposium, Tokyo, 1-4.
Kanamori, H., 1977, The Energy Release in Great
Earthquakes, Journal of Geophysical Research,
Vol. 82, p. 2981-2987.
Matuschka, T., Berryman, K.R., OLeary, A.J.,
McVerry, G.H., Mulholland, W.M., Skinner,
R.I., 1985, New Zealand Seismic Hazard
Analysis, Bulletin of the New Zealand National
Society
for
Earthquake
Engineering, vol. 18, no. 4, p. 313-322.
Ministry of Public Works Republic of Indonesia,
2002, National Standard of Seismic Design for
Building Structure- SNI-1726-2002.
Ratdomopurbo, A., 2006, Micro-tremor Survey: the
Measurement of Ground Amplification at
Bantul Regency Yogyakarta, Reports, Volcanic
Survey of Indonesia, Yogyakarta (in
Indonesian).
USCOLD, 1985, Guidelines for Selecting Seismic
Parameters for Dams Projects, Report of
Committee on Earthquakes, U.S. Committee on
Large Dams.

THE DETERMINATION OF PEAK GROUND ACCELERATION 12-15