The 3rd International Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Disaster Mitigation 2016 (ICEEDM-III 2016)

Isovolcanic Map Application for Identifying Attenuation

of Damage Intensity in the 2010 Merapi Eruption
Meassa Monikha Sari*
Serang Raya University, Serang City and 42111, Indonesia

Abstract
The eruption of Merapi Volcano in 2010 caused so many damages of building and environment, financial losses, and
fatalities. The primary hazard of Merapi explosion is pyroclastic flow and other causes greatly increased the impact. The
pyroclastic flow which mostly leads to the Gendol River caused the damage intensity in the spot was much greater than
other places in Merapi surrounding. The objective of this research was to identify the attenuation of damage intensity of
the 2010 Merapi eruption around the Gendol River. The research took purposive samplings based on the isovolcanic map
then analyzed using Arc Map. The result shown that the damage intensity in the west of the Gendol River - or the left
side of the Merapi Peak - was greater than the east side - or the right side of the Merapi Peak. In the contrary, the
intensity attenuation decrease faster on the east side than the west side of Gendol River. It meant that the hazard of
Merapi eruption was dominant to the west of the Gendol River - or left side of the Merapi Peak, so the damages and
losses in this area was also worse than the others.

Keywords: isovolcanic; eruption; Merapi; damage; intensity; attenuation.

1. BACKGROUND

Merapi Volcano is one of the most active volcano which located in Sleman District, Province of D.I.Jogjakarta,
Magelang District, Klaten District and Boyolali District in Province of Jawa Tengah. Merapi Volcano is famous enough
as tourism destination and became more popular after it exploded during October-November 2010. As we know the
primary hazard of Merapi eruption is pyroclastic flow and the secondary hazards are lava, tephra falls, volcanic ash and
volcanic mudflow or lahar. The hazards of the 2010 Merapi Volcano eruption caused so many casualties, damages of
building and infrastructure, and big amount of losses in several sectors as well. The damage level occurred in the whole
impacted area were not homogeneous even in the same radius from peak of Merapi. Similarly, the damage intensity in a
location were not same, even differ with the one in other location. The difference of damage intensity could be happened
by some factors. In the case of volcano eruption, the direction of pyroclastic flow, volcanic mudflow, the volcanic

*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +62-813-2888-6445; Fax.: +62-254-823-5008.
E-mail address: khasanny@yahoo.com
tremor, the topography, the distance to the peak, the reach of river flow, the direction and speed of wind, etc. were factors
could affect that intensity differences. Some of damages are shown by Figure 1.

Fig. 1. The damages of 2010 Merapi eruption around Gendol River

The area along Gendol River became the most damaged one compared to the other rivers around Merapi. After it
erupted on 2006, this is due to Gendol River was the mainstream of pyroclastic flow which was the main hazard of
Merapi eruption. Beside of pyroclastic flow, the mudflow after raining brought any size of stones, woods and debris then
struck hard anything it went through. That is why the damage intensity around the Gendol River where was densely
populated was so high, not only caused by pyroclastic flow but also the volcanic mudflow. The objective of this research
is to obtain how the correlation of distance to the damage intensity attenuation in the 2010 Merapi eruption along Gendol
River.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

The isovolcanic map was a map made by similarity of intensity raised by volcano eruption which formed contour
lines. In the event of earthquake, this intensity similarity map was known as isoseismal map. The locations which have
same or almost same intensity could be connected each other, hence when the intensity data was pretty much then they
would form intensity similarity lines or contour lines. The intensity of a location was defined by using an intensity scale
involved response of people, response of object, building damage, and environment damage. The intensity scale used in
an earthquake was totally different with the one used in a volcano eruption, and the contour lines formed as well. In the
event of earthquake there were several intensity scale could be used such as RF (Rossi Forrel), MSK-64 (Medvedev-
Sponheur-Karnik), JMA (Japanese Meteorological Agency), and the most popular one; MMI (Modified Mercally
Intensity). Meanwhile in the event of volcano eruption, the Intensity of Volcano Eruption scale (IVE) referred to the
research result of Sari (2013), who made a volcano eruption intensity scale by dividing the levels into 12 based on
response of people, response of object, building damage, and environment damage. In the event of earthquake, it was a
common sense that the pattern of intensity similarity was more regular, tend to lengthwise, ellips, or radial. Differ to
isovolcanic lines, Sari (2013) in her research described that the isovolcanic map of Merapi eruption tend to be irregular.
It was divided into 8 areas, i.e. area with intensity less than V (IVE < V), which were area with the smallest intensity, and
area with the greatest intensity, that was on intensity XII. Refer to Figure 2.

Fig. 2. The Isovolcanic Map of the 2010 Merapi Volcano Eruption (Sari, 2013)

Sari (2013) had conducted research to obtain how was the correlation between intensity to the distance or isovolcanic
attenuation by taking 3 points in the Gendol River stream which in respectively has distance 8.2 km; 9.8 km; and 11.7
km of the Merapi Volcano peak, in the right side (Eastern) and left side (Western) of Gendol River seen from South side.
The analyze result obtained in this research showed that on the distance 8.2 km of the Merapi peak, the intensity on the
right side (Eastern) decreased to VI scale, meanwhile on left left side (Western) decreased to VII scale in the 2 km
distance to the Gendol River stream. On the 9.8 km distance of Merapi peak, the intensity in the right side (Eastern)
Gendol River decreased significantly into the scale V in the distance less than 2 km to the Gendol River stream,
meanwhilw in the left side (Western), the intensity reduction into scale V occured in the distance less than 4 km. It
showed that the damage level in the left side (Western) of Gendol River in the 9.8 km distance of Merapi peak was
greater than then one in the left side (Eastern). The attenuation in the third spot, i.e. in the 11.7 km of Merapi peak
showed that intensity on the left side (Western) was greater than the one in the right side (Eastern) of Gendol River,
where the scale VI reached in the distance less than 3 km, meanwhile in the right side it reached in the distance more
than 3 km, with the damage level was smaller, i.e. scale V. It meant that pyroclastic flow, lava melt, and vaious material
as a result of eruption, including lava itself, tend to flow to the left side (Western) of Gendol River. The result of the
research is shown in the Figure 3.
 (a) (b)

(c)
Fig. 3. The isovolcanic attenuation research (Sari, 2013)

In this research, Sari only took 3 (three) location points, hence the distance among the points would be distantly each
other. That was why it would be need to add other points to shorten the distance and to increase the accuracy of the
intensity as the mathematical function of the distance.

3. METHODOLOGY

The research was conducted by observing and surveying to affected location, especially Gendol River. The
isovolcanic attenuation was observed in along streams of Gendol River, because it became the main track of pyroclastic
flow. The interview was addressed to the victims, the village officials, and stakeholder as the data support. The location
point determination was based on isovolcanic map, where every points representated at least five intensity level both in
the left side (Western) and also in the right side (Eastern) of the Gendol River. The analyzed location points are in the
distance 6.9 km; 8.5 km; 9.6 km; 10.7 km; 11.5 km; and 12.6 km of the Merapi peak. The points were taken by purposive
sampling which each distance included several intensity levels both in the Western and also in the Eastern of Merapi.
Then data analysis was conducted by using Arc Map software and Excel hence the intensity attentuation graphic could be
obtained.

4. RESULT AND DISCUSSION

The attenuation equation of correlation between intensity to distance was used by linear regression which will yield
exponential equation using a common equation as follows:

(4.1)
Hence it will be obtained 12 exponential equations which could be described in the curve in Figure 4 below.
 (a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)

Fig. 4. The intensity attenuation in 6 points of Merapi Peak

In the distance 6.9 km of Merapi view on Figure 4(a) shown that the intensity on the left side (Western) just reached VII
scale in the distance 5 km of Gendol River, meanwhile on the right side (Eastern), intensity decreased faster, which
reached V scale in the distance 4 km of Gendol River. Figure 4(b) shown that attenuation in the distance 8.5 km of
Merapi peak, it reach VII intensity in the distance 2 km on the left side of Gendol River, meanwhile on the right side it
already reached below VI scale. The damage intensity attenuation occured faster on the left side of Gendol River in the
distance 9,3 km of Gendol River on Figure 4(c), in the contrary it was still in VI scale in the distance 4 km on the
Western side of Gendol River. It can be concluded that the Western side of Gendol River in that distance was exposed
damage much heavier than the one in the Eastern side.
Figure 4(d) showed that attenuation on the distance 10.7 km of Merapi peak on the left side decreased faster thatn the
one on the Western side, where the intensity has reach V scale in the distance 1 km of Gendol River, meanwhile at the
same distance on the Western side it was still above VIII scale. Similar case also occured in the distance 11.5 km of
Merapi peak on the Figure 4(e), where the intensity on the left side (Western) was greater than the one on the right side
(Eastern) of Gendol River. However the intensity attenuation occured faster on the left side of Gendol River, where it
already reached under V scale in the distance 3 km of Gendol River. The intensity attenuation in the distance 12.6 km is
showed in the Figure 4(f). According to this figure, it can be observed that the intensity on the right side of Gendol River
has reached VI scale in the distance 1 km of Gendol River, whereas on the left side it won’t be reached until the distance
2 km away.
Generally the damage intensity on the Western side of Gendol River was higher than on the Eastern side, hence the
damage on the Western side was greater than the one in the Eastern side. In the distance below 8 km of Merapi peak, the
damage was mostly caused by pyroclastic flow burnt the buildings, sabo dam, environment, and also farm field. The first
eruption on October 26, 2010 destroyed the village where Mbah Maridjan (key person of Merapi Volcano) lived and
caused some fatalities included Mbah Maridjan. The second eruption happened on November 5, 2016, was greater than
the first one. The pyroclastic were more dominant flow to the Gendol River (Southeast), with amount reached 30 million
metre cubic, exposed to 15 km far away from the peak (Subandriyo, 2011). On the area more than 8 km from Merapi
Peak around Gendol River, the damages were more suffered and many more casualties were not caused only by
pyroclastic flow but also volcanic mudflow after raining which destroyed densely resident around Gendol River. Because
of that the intensity scale on the area around Gendol River was higher than other location. The damages and losses on
the Western side of Gendol River more than the eastern side because there were some hills as barriers of pyroclastic flow
to the west direction.

5. CONCLUSION

Attenuation of damage intensity on the east of Gendol River (right side of Merapi Volcano) was faster than on the
west (left side of Merapi Volcano), and it caused the damages and losses on west of Gendol River many more than the
east.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The author would like to thank to Serang Raya University for any kind of attention and support.

REFERENCES

[1] Sari, M.M, 2013, “Skala Intensitas Erupsi Gunungapi dan Aplikasinya pada Peta Isovulkanik Letusan Gunungapi
Merapi 2010”, Magister Teknik Sipil, Indonesia Islamic University, Jogjakarta

[2] Subandriyo, 2011, “Sintesis Umum Erupsi Gunung Merapi 2006, Edisi Khusus Erupsi Merapi 2006: Laporan dan
kajian Vulkanisme Erupsi”, Kementrian Energi Dan Sumber daya Mineral, Badan Geologi, Pusat Vulkanologi Dan
Mitigasi Bencana Geologi, BPPTK, Jogjakarta