Probabilistic Assessment of Earthquake Damage and Loss for the City of Tehran, Iran

Authors

1 Professor, Center of Excellence for Fundamental Studies in Structural Engineering, College of Civil Engineering, Iran University of Science & Technology, Postal Code: 16846-13114, Tehran, Iran

2 College of Civil Engineering, Iran University of Science & Technology, Narmak, Tehran 16846, Iran

3 Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Tehran is one of the densely populated metropolises located in earthquake-prone regions. Tehran, the population of which surpasses 8 million people, is the most populated area in Iran. There are historical evidences confirming that catastrophic earthquakes have destroyed the city in past years. In the present paper, our study covers all parts of Tehran because there is the potential of significant earthquake damage and loss for the entire city. In other words, the development of high-rise building construction in the northern part, the high density of population in the southern area including old masonry buildings, and the existence of important structures in central regions, prevent us from omitting any particular part of the city from damage assessment process. We have used two sets of last available formal data published in 1996 and 2006. To consider the influence of soil conditions, Tehran has been divided into 1246 sub regions; however, in our study the results have been presented using municipality regions and in cumulative manner. Since there is no acceptable statistical data involving estimation of non-structural damage, only structural damages have been assessed. The open source software SELENA is applied to perform probabilistic loss estimates. Due to the lack of studies providing required information from structural point of view in our country, and the existence of similarity between structural codes of Iran and that of United States, HAZUS-MH (Hazard Us – Multi Hazard Loss) structures coefficients are used. According to the results, from 1996 to 2006, the mean damage ratio and number of casualties have been reduced, while the economic loss has been increased.

Keywords


[1] Ghodrati Amiri, G., Razavian Amrei, S.A., Motamed, R., Ganjavi, B. (2007). “Uniform hazard spectra for different northern part of Tehran, IRAN”. Journal of Applied Sciences, Vol. 7, No. 22, pp. 3368-3380.

[2] BHRC, (2005). “Iranian code of practice for seismic resistant design of buildings, standard No. 2800”. 3rd Revision, Building & Housing Research Center, Tehran, Iran.

[3] JICA, CEST, (2000). “The study on seismic microzoning of the greater Tehran area in the Islamic Republic of Iran”. Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), Centre for Earthquake and Environmental Studies of Tehran (CEST), Tehran Municipality, Pacific Consultants International OYO Corporation. Iran.

[4] Tehran Municipality, (2011). “Fact sheet: Atlas of Tehran Metropolis”. Available at: http://atlas.tehran.ir/Default.aspx?tabid=227, Accessed on November 1.

[5] Jafari, M. (2002). “Seismic macro zonation complementary research project for Tehran, Iran”. International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology.

[6] Molina, S., Lang, D.H., Lindholm, C.D. (2010). “SELENA – An open-source tool for seismic risk and loss assessment using a logic tree computation procedure”. Computers & Geosciences, Vol. 36, Issue 3, pp. 257-269.

[7] NIBS/FEMA. (2003). “Multi-hazard loss estimation methodology”. HAZUS®MH Technical Manual, National Institute of Building Sciences and Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C., 712 pp.

[8] Lang, D., Molina-Palacios, S., Lindholm, C., Balan, S. (2012). “Deterministic earthquake damage and loss assessment for the city of Bucharest”. Romania. Journal of seismology, Vol. 16, Issue 1, pp. 67-88.

[9] McGuire, RK. ( 2004). “Seismic hazard and risk analysis, Oakland. EERI publication no.MNO-10”. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, 221 pp.

[10] Crowley, H., Pinho, R., Bommer, J.J. (2004). “A probabilistic displacement-based vulnerability assessment procedure for earthquake loss estimation”. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 173-219.

[11] ATC, A. (1996). “40, Seismic evaluation and retrofit of concrete buildings”. Applied Technology Council, report ATC-40. Redwood City, 346 pp.

[12] FEMA, A. (2005). “440, Improvement of nonlinear static seismic analysis procedures”. FEMA-440, Redwood City. 392 pp.

[13] IBC-2006, (2006). “International Building Code (IBC-2006)”. International Code Council, United States. 678 pp.