1. Application of SASHA for Portugal cases: mainland Portugal Carvalho A. (LNEC), Albarello D. (Un. Siena), Meroni F. (INGV) and Zonno G. (INGV)

2. Elements used for a preliminary application evaluate the Seismic Hazard of Portugal using SASHA2.0.3 seismic catalog with Intensity Io attenuation parameters SASHA2.0.3 program code At the moment, local seismic histories have not been considered

3. Using SASHA2.0.3 completeness is accounted for during hazard computations no effect of uncertain seismotectonic zoning evetual clustering is accounted for and no aftershock removal is required Hazard Mapping Based on Macroseismic Data Considering the influence of Geological Conditions By M.L. Sousa and C.S. Oliveira Natural Hazards 14: 2007-225, 1997

4. Lisboa 1755 Distribution of seismic seismicity around Mainland Portugal, Lower Tagus Valley and Algarve Seismic catalogue

5. Seismic catalog SHARE The seismic catalog from the European project SHARE has been considered converted the Mw into intensity Io using the published relationship Only Moment Magnitude Mw >= 5.5 Only more about 100 events Completed the SHARE catalog with the Events used for attenuation parameters that were NOT in the SHARE catalog

6. Seismic catalog SHARE finding the intensity I0 Used the SCR relationship to evaluate Io from Mw

7. by courtesy Varini et al., 2013 3°General Meeting UPStrat-MAFA Attenuation distributions

8. by courtesy Varini et al., 2013 3°General Meeting UPStrat-MAFA Attenuation distributions

9. by courtesy Varini et al., 2013 3°General Meeting UPStrat-MAFA

10. by courtesy Varini et al., 2013 3°General Meeting UPStrat-MAFA

11. Example of seismic catalog input for SASHA2.0.3

12. Previous results by Sousa and Oliveira, 2007 Basic Cornell approach

13. Hazard evaluation Portugal by SASHA2.0.3 20 y Average Return Time 50 y Average Return Time

14. Hazard evaluation Portugal by SASHA2.0.3 95 y Average Return TimePrevious estimates (Sousa and Oliveira, 2007)

15. Hazard evaluation Portugal by SASHA2.0.3 475 y Average Return Time Previous estimates (Sousa and Oliveira, 2007)

16. Hazard evaluation Portugal by SASHA2.0.3 475 y Average Return Time Previous estimates (Sousa 2006)

17. Comparison with previous results Results using the Cornell approach

18. Comparison with SASHA outcomes

19. Hazard evaluation Portugal by SASHA2.0.3 475 y Average Return Time Previous estimates (Sousa and Oliveira, 2007) Deggregation

21. The use of the SASHA code provides hazard estimates for Portugal that are significantly different from the ones provided by the standard Cornell-McGuire approach These differences also relies on the different use of available information (seismic history, seismotectonic zoning) The ones here illustrated just represent a first preliminary application of SASHA code: local seismic histories will be considered along with a more accurate revision of available apicentral information Conclusions (very preliminary)