Advertisement

Earthquake risk assessment for Istanbul metropolitan area

  • M. ErdikEmail author
  • N. Aydinoglu
  • Y. Fahjan
  • K. Sesetyan
  • M. Demircioglu
  • B. Siyahi
  • E. Durukal
  • C. Ozbey
  • Y. Biro
  • H. Akman
  • O. Yuzugullu
Article

Abstract

The impact of earthquakes in urban centers prone to disastrous earthquakes necessitates the analysis of associated risk for rational formulation of contingency plans and mitigation strategies. In urban centers, the seismic risk is best quantified and portrayed through the preparation of “Earthquake Damage and Loss Scenarios.” The components of such scenarios are the assessment of the hazard, inventories and the vulnerabilities of elements at risk. For the development of the earthquake risk scenario in Istanbul, two independent approaches, one based on intensities and the second on spectral displacements, are utilized. This paper will present the important features of a comprehensive study, highlight the methodology, discuss the results and provide insights to future developments.

Keywords

earthquake risk assessment metropolitan area intensity spectral displacement earthquake damage loss scenario 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ambraseys NN and Finkel CF (1991), “Longterm Seismicity of Istanbul and of the Marmara Sea Region,”Terra Nova, 3: 527–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ambraseys NN and Jackson JA (1981), “Earthquake Hazard and Vulnerability in the Northeastern Mediterranean; the Corinth Earthquake Sequence of February-March 1981,”Disasters,5 (4): 355–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. ATC 55 (2001), “Project to Evaluate and Improve Inelastic Seismic Analysis Procedures, for FEMA 2001 —present,” Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, California.Google Scholar
  4. ATC —40 (1996), “Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete Buildings,”Report ATC —40, Applied TechnologyCouncil, Redwood City, California.Google Scholar
  5. Armijo R, Meyer B, Hubert A and Barka AA (1999), “Westward Propagation of the North Anatolian Fault into the Northern Aegean Timing and Kinematics,”Geology, 27: 267–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Aydinoglu N and Kacmaz U (2002), “Displacement Modification Factor for Seismic Inelastic Evaluation,” submitted for publication in Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics.Google Scholar
  7. Barbat AH, Moya FY and Canas JA (1996), “Damage Scenarios Simulation for Seismic Risk Assessment in Urban Zone,”Earthquake Spectra,12 (3): 371–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boore DM., Joyner WB, Fumai TE (1997), “Equations for Estimating Horizontal Response Spectra and Peak Acceleration from Western North American Earthquakes: A Summary of Recent Work,”Seismological Research Letters,68 (1) : 128–153.Google Scholar
  9. Chopra AK and Goel RK (1999), “Capacity-Demand-Diagram Methods Based on Inelastic Design Spectrum,”Earthquake Spectra,15 (4): 637–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Coburn A and Spence R (1992),Earthquake Protection; John Wiley and Sons Ltd., Chichester, 355.Google Scholar
  11. Department of Earthquake Engineering (2002), “Earthquake Risk Assessment For Istanbul Metropolitan Area,”Report prepared for American Red Cross and Turkish Red Crescent, Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey.Google Scholar
  12. Durukal E, Erdik M (1994), “Strong Motion Instrumentation of Aya Sofya and the Analysis of Earthquake Response,”Proceedings of the Fifth US. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, July 10–14 1994, Chicago, pp. 343–352.Google Scholar
  13. Eguchi RT, Goltz JD, Seligson HA, Flores PJ, Heaton TH and Bortugno E (1997), “Real-time Loss Estimation as an Emergency Response Descision Support System; The Early Post-Earthquake Damage Assessment Tool (EPEDAT),”Earthquake Spectra, 13: 815–832.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. ENSeRVES (2000), “European Network on Seismic Risk, Vulnerability and Earthquake Scenarios,”Proc. International Workshop on Seismic Risk and Earthquake Scenarios of Potenza, University of Basilicata.Google Scholar
  15. Erdik M, Avc? J, Durukal E (1995), “Developing an Earthquake Damage Scenario for Istanbul,”Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Seismic Zonation, 17–19 October 1995, Nice: 1297–1304.Google Scholar
  16. Erdik M. (2001),Report on 1999Kocaeli and Duzce (Turkey) Earthquakes, in Structural Control for Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, Ed. by, F. Casciati, G. Magonette, World Scientific.Google Scholar
  17. Erdik M., Ansal A, Aydinoglu N, Barka A, Yuzugullu O, Birgoren G, Swift J, Alpay Y, Sesetyan K (2000), “Development of Earthquake Masterplan for the Municipality of Izmir,”Proc., Sixth International Conference on Seismic Zonation, Palm Springs, November 12–15, 2000, EERI, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  18. Erdik M, Doyuran V, Akkas P and Gulkan P (1985),“Assessment of the Earthquake Hazard in Turkey and Neighboring Regions,”Tectonophysics,117: 295–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Erdik M, Yuzugullu O, Yilmaz C and Akkas N (1992), “March 13, 1992 (Ms = 6.8) Erzincan Earthquake ; A Preliminary Reconnaissance Report,”Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, volume 11 (5): 279–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Evernden JF and Thomson JM (1985), “Predicting Seismic Intensities,”U. S. Geological Survey Profes. Paper 1360: 151–202.Google Scholar
  21. Faccioli E (Coordinatore)et al. (1997), “Scenari di danno da terremoto per il comune di Catania,” Gruppe Nazionale per la Difesa dei Terremoti, Italy.Google Scholar
  22. Faeh D, Kind F, Lang K and Giardini D (2001), “Earthquake Scenarios for the City of Basel,”Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 21: 405–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. FEMA 273 (1997), “Federal Emergency Management Agency, NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings,”FEMA Publication 273, Washington DC.Google Scholar
  24. FEMA 356 (2000), “Federal Emergency Management Agency, Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings,”FEMA Publication 356, Washington DC.Google Scholar
  25. Fernandez J, Valverde J, Yepes H, Tucker B, Bustamante G, Chatelain JL, Kaneko F, Villacis C, Yamada T (1994), “The Quito, Equador, Earthquake Risk Management Project, an Overview” Published by Geohazards International, pp. 34.Google Scholar
  26. Gruenthal G (1998), “European Macroseismic Scale 1998. Cahiers du Centre Europ en de G odynamique et de Séismologie,” 15, Luxembourg, pp.99.Google Scholar
  27. HAZUS (1999), “Earthquake Loss Estimation Methodology,Technical Manual, RMS, NIBS and FE-MA.”Google Scholar
  28. IDNDR-Radius, http://www. reliefweb. int/ocha ol/programs/idndr/radius. html.Google Scholar
  29. Joyner WB and DM Boore (1988), “Measurement, Characterization, and Prediction of Strong Ground Motion,”Proceedings of Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics II, GT DIV/ASCE, Park City Utah, June 27–30, 1988, pp.43-102.Google Scholar
  30. Komaru Y, Yamada T, Segawa S and Villacis C (1995), “Development of an Earthquake Damage Estimation System,”Proc. of the 10thECEE, Vienna, 1994.Google Scholar
  31. Leyendecker EV, Hunt RJ, Frankel AD and Rukstales KS (2000),“Development of Maximum Considered Earthquake Ground Motion Maps,”Earthquake Spectra, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland.Google Scholar
  32. Mapinfo Professional® Software, http://www. mapinfo. com.Google Scholar
  33. NEHRP (1997), “Recommended Provisions For Seismic Regulations For New Buildings and Other Structures, FEMA-303,” Prepared by the Building Seismic Safety Council for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  34. Ohta Y (1983), “A Comprehensive Study on Earthquake Disaster in Turkey,” Hokkaido University, Japan.Google Scholar
  35. Ozbey C (2001), “Empirical Peak Horizontal Acceleration Attenuation Relationship for Northwestern Turkey,”M. Sc. Thesis, KOERI, Bogazici University.Google Scholar
  36. Parsons T, Toda S, Stein RS, Barka A and Dieterich JH (2000), “Heightened Odds of Large Earthquakes Near Istanbul; An Interaction-based Probability Calculation,”Science, 288: 661–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sadigh K, Chang CY, Egan JA, Makdisi F, Youngs RR (1997), “Attenuation Relationships for Shallow Crustal Earthquakes Based on California Strong Motion Data,”Seismological Research Letters,68: 180–189.Google Scholar
  38. Somerville PG, Smith NF, Graves RW and Abrahamson NA (1997),“Modification of Empirical Strong Ground Motion Attenuation Relations to Include the Amplitude and Duration Effects of Rupture Directivity,”Seismological Research Letters,68: 199–222.Google Scholar
  39. Tucker B and Erdik M (1994),Issues in Urban Earthquake Risk, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1994.Google Scholar
  40. Wenzel F, Lungu D. and Novak O. (1998), “Vrancea Earthquakes: Tectonics, Hazard and Risk Mitigation,”selected papers of the First International Workshop on Vrancea Earthquakes, Bucharest, November 1–4, 1997, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Netherlands, pp. 374.Google Scholar
  41. Whitman RV and Lagorio HJ (1999), “The FEMANIBS Methodology For Earthquake Loss Estimation,” (http ://www. fema. gov/hazus/hazus4a. htm).Google Scholar
  42. WGCEP90 (1990), “Probabilities of large earthquakes in the san Francisco Bay region,” California, U.S. geol. Surv. Circ, pp.1053.Google Scholar
  43. Youd L and Perkins DM (1978), “Mapping of Liquefaction Induced Ground Failure Potential,”J. GED, ASCE,104 (4): 433–446.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute of Engineering Mechanics, China Earthquake Administration 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Erdik
    • 1
    Email author
  • N. Aydinoglu
    • 1
  • Y. Fahjan
    • 1
  • K. Sesetyan
    • 1
  • M. Demircioglu
    • 1
  • B. Siyahi
    • 1
  • E. Durukal
    • 1
  • C. Ozbey
    • 1
  • Y. Biro
    • 1
  • H. Akman
    • 1
  • O. Yuzugullu
    • 1
  1. 1.Kandilli Observatory and Earthquake Research Institute, Department of Earthquake EngineeringBogazici UniversityIstanbulTurkey

Personalised recommendations