Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Earthquake risk assessment for the building inventory of Muscat, Sultanate of Oman

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Natural Hazards Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Earthquake risk can be quantified in terms of the estimated numbers of human casualties and of damaged buildings as well as the monetary losses. The information required for the assessment of earthquake risk in a given region includes the expected level of ground shaking intensity (i.e., the seismic hazard), inventory data for building stock at risk, identification of predominant building typologies and of their vulnerability characteristics, and spatial distribution of number of inhabitants. This study presents an indicative assessment of earthquake risk associated with the building stock in Muscat, the capital city of the Sultanate of Oman. For this purpose, building inventory and demographic data for the city are compiled in GIS environment. The buildings are classified to identify their damageability/vulnerability characteristics, and predominant building typologies are determined. For the estimation of casualties, Muscat population data are further analyzed to calculate number of occupants in the exposed building stock. Spectral acceleration–displacement based damage estimation methodology is implemented for risk calculations. Site-specific ground motions in terms spectral accelerations obtained from the probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for 475- and 2475-year return periods are considered for the representation of earthquake demand in damage analyses. Assessment of damage to buildings and estimation of casualties are obtained using analytical fragility relationships and building damage related casualty–vulnerability models, respectively. Earthquake risk maps illustrating the spatial distribution of number of damaged buildings at different damage states are presented for the considered levels of seismic hazard.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

(modified after Gunes 2015)

Fig. 2

(source: Hancilar et al. 2010)

Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aldama BG, Bommer JJ, Fenton CH, Staford PJ (2009) Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis for rock sites in the cities Abu Dhabi, Dubai and Ra’s Al Khymah, United Arab Emirates. Georisk 3:1–29

    Google Scholar 

  • ASCE/SEI 41-06 (2006) Seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston

    Google Scholar 

  • ATC 40 (1996) Seismic evaluation and retrofit of concrete buildings. Applied Technology Council, Redwood City

    Google Scholar 

  • Borcherdt RD (1997) Foreword. Earthq Spectra 13(4):v

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borzi B, Crowley H, Pinho R (2008) The influence of infill panels on vulnerability curves for RC buildings. In: 14th World conference on earthquake engineering, Beijing, China

  • Cakti E, Safak E, Erdik M, Sesetyan HU (2013) Preparedness and emergency planning elements. In: 3rd Workshop on seismic risk and loss estimation in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, pp 24–26, March 2013

  • Cakti E, El-Hussain I, Sesetyan K, Deif A, Hancilar U, Al-Rawas G, Kamer Y, Al-Jabri K (2016) Development of ground shaking maps for the Sultanate of Oman. Nat Hazards 82(2):1357–1373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calvi GM, Pinho R, Magenes G, Bommer JJ, Restrepo-Vélez LF, Crowley H (2006) Development of seismic vulnerability assessment methodologies over the past 30 years. ISET J Earthq Technol 43(3):75–104

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheu DH (1995) Northridge earthquake—January 17, 1994: the hospital response, Universal City, CA, FEMA report: Northridge earthquake: one year later, pp 1–15

  • Coburn AW, Spence RJS (1992) Factors determining human casualty levels in earthquakes: mortality prediction in building collapse. In: Proceedings of the 10 WCEE, Madrid, Spain, pp 5989–5994

  • Colombi M, Borzi B, Crowley H, Onida M, Meroni F, Pinho R (2008) Deriving vulnerability curves using Italian earthquake damage data. Bull Earthq Eng 6(3):485–504

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbane C, Hancilar U, Ehrlich D, De Groeve T (2017) Pan-European seismic risk assessment: a proof of concept using the earthquake loss estimation routine (ELER). Bull Earthq Eng 15(3):1057–1083

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durkin ME, Thiel CC (1991) Integrating earthquake casualty and loss estimation. In: Proceedings of the workshop on modeling earthquake casualties for planning and response, Sacramento

  • ELER-v3.1 (2010) Earthquake loss estimation routine, technical manual and users guide, Bogazici University, Department of Earthquake Engineering, Istanbul. http://www.koeri.boun.edu.tr/Haberler/NERIES%20ELER%20V3.1_6_176.depmuh. Accessed 2 Oct 2016

  • El-Hussain I, Deif A, Al-Jabri K, Al-Hashmi S, Al-Toubi K, Alshijbi Y, Al-Saifi M (2010) Probabilistic and deterministic seismic hazard assessment for Sultanate of Oman. Project report. Sultan Qaboos University, Earthquake Monitoring Center

  • El-Hussain I, Deif A, Al-Jabri K, Toksoz N, El-Hady S, Al-Hashmi S, Al-Toubi K, Al-Shijby Y, Al-Saify M, Kuleli S (2012) Probabilistic seismic hazard maps for the Sultanate of Oman. Nat Hazards 64:173–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • El-Hussain I, Deif A, Al-Jabri K, Mohamed AME, Al-Rawas G, Toksöz N, Sundararajan N, El-Hady S, Al-Hashmi S, Al-Toubi K, Al-Saify M, Al-Habsi Z (2013) Seismic microzonation for Muscat region, Sultanate of Oman. Nat Hazards 69(3):1919–1950

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erberik MA (2008) Fragility-based assessment of typical mid-rise and low-rise RC buildings in Turkey. Eng Struct 30(5):1360–1374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erdik M, Sesetyan K, Demircioglu MB, Hancilar U, Zulfikar C, Cakti E, Kamer Y, Yenidogan C, Tuzun C, Cagnan Z, Harmandar E (2010) Rapid earthquake hazard and loss assessment for Euro-Mediterranean Region. Acta Geophys 58(5):855–892

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erdik M, Sesetyan K, Demircioglu MB, Hancilar U, Zulfikar C (2011) Rapid earthquake loss assessment after damaging earthquakes. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 31:247–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FEMA 440 (2005) Improvement of nonlinear static seismic analysis procedures, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Applied Technology Council, Washington DC, USA, report no. 440

  • GHS-POP: Global human settlement population grid by the global human settlement layer (GHSL) initiative of the European Commission. http://ghsl.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ghs_pop.php

  • Gunes O (2015) Turkey’s grand challenge: disaster-proof building inventory within 20 years. Case Stud Constr Mater 2:18–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hancilar U, Tuzun C, Yenidogan C, Erdik M (2010) ELER software—a new tool for urban earthquake loss assessment. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 10:2677–2696

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hancilar U, Taucer F, Corbane C (2013) Empirical fragility functions based on remote sensing and field data after the January 12, 2010 Haiti earthquake. Earthq Spectra 29(4):1275–1310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hancilar U, Cakti E, Erdik M, Franco G, Deodatis G (2014) Earthquake vulnerability of school buildings: probabilistic structural fragility analyses. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 67:169–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hancilar U, Safak E, Cakti E (2017) An exercise on the derivation of fragility functions for tall buildings. In: 16th World conference on earthquake engineering, Santiago, Chile, 2017

  • HAZUS (1999) Earthquake loss estimation methodology, user and technical manuals. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • HAZUS-MH (2003) Multi-hazard loss estimation methodology—earthquake model, technical manual. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • IBC (2006) International building code. International Code Council, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Idriss IM, Sun JI (1992) User’s manual for SHAKE91, computer program for conducting equivalent linear seismic response analyses of horizontally layered soil deposits. University of California, Davis

    Google Scholar 

  • Kircher CA, Nassar AA, Kustu O, Holmes WT (1997) Development of building damage functions for earthquake loss estimation. Earthq Spectra 13(4):663–682

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milutinovic Z, Garevski M, Salic R, Megahed A, Almulla H (2014) Abu Dhabi Emirate, UAE, system for seismic risk monitoring and management. In: 2nd European conference on earthquake engineering and seismology, Istanbul

  • NERIES: Network of Research Infrastructures for European Seismology, Sixth Framework Program (FP6) of the European Commission, EC contract No. 026130 (2006–2010)

  • Orsini G (1999) A model for buildings’ vulnerability assessment using the parameterless scale of seismic intensity (PSI). Earthq Spectra 15(3):463–483

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rossetto T, Elnashai A (2003) Derivation of vulnerability functions for European-type RC structures based on observational data. Eng Struct 25:1241–1263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sabetta F, Goretti A, Lucantoni A (1998) Empirical fragility curves from damage surveys and estimated strong ground-motion. In: 11th European conference on earthquake engineering, Paris, France

  • Spence R, Coburn AW, Pomonis A (1992) Correlation of ground-motion with building damage: the definition of a new damage-based seismic intensity scale. In: 10th World conference on earthquake engineering, pp 551–556

  • Toma-Danila D, Zulfikar C, Manea EF, Cioflan CO (2015) Improved seismic risk estimation for Bucharest, based on multiple hazard scenarios and analytical methods. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 73:1–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UBC: Uniform building code. In: International Conference of Building Officials, USA

  • Vacareanu R, Radoi R, Negulescu C, Aldea A (2004) Seismic vulnerability of RC buildings in Bucharest, Romania. In: 13th World conference on earthquake engineering, Vancouver, Canada

  • WordPOP: High resolution, age-structured population distribution maps. http://www.worldpop.org.uk/data/summary/?doi=10.5258/SOTON/WP00203

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the Government of Oman for providing financial support under the Project Number 22409017.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Earthquake Engineering, Kandilli Observatory and Earthquake Research Institute, Bogazici University and REC Int., Bogazici University Teknopark, Istanbul, Turkey

    Ufuk Hancilar, Karin Sesetyan, Eser Cakti & Erdal Safak

  2. Earthquake Monitoring Center, Sultan Qaboos University (SQU), Muscat, Oman

    Issa El-Hussain & Ahmed Deif

  3. Department of Civil and Architectural Engineering, Sultan Qaboos University (SQU), Muscat, Oman

    Ghazi Al-Rawas & Khalifa Al-Jabri

Authors
  1. Ufuk Hancilar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Issa El-Hussain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Karin Sesetyan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ahmed Deif
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Eser Cakti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ghazi Al-Rawas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Erdal Safak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Khalifa Al-Jabri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ufuk Hancilar.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hancilar, U., El-Hussain, I., Sesetyan, K. et al. Earthquake risk assessment for the building inventory of Muscat, Sultanate of Oman. Nat Hazards 93, 1419–1434 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-018-3357-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-018-3357-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation