Seismic risk prioritization of residential buildings in Istanbul

SUMMARY A large scale seismic risk prioritization study was conducted for medium-rise, gravity-designed reinforced concrete residential buildings in Istanbul. The implemented procedure was based on evaluating selected building parameters that could be easily observed or measured during a systematic sidewalk survey. The survey was actually conducted on approximately 100,000 buildings in the six subprovinces of Istanbul over the period 2004–2009 by a large team of trained surveyors. The collected data were processed to calculate a safety score for each building, which is in turn used for ranking the surveyed buildings with respect to their expected seismic performance under the calculated ground motion intensities produced for a scenario earthquake of M7.5 along the Marmara Sea Fault. The basic objective of this laborious study was to identify the buildings that would be likely to sustain severe damage or suffer collapse during the expected Istanbul earthquake. Accordingly, a rational risk reduction planning can be conducted for minimizing the life and property losses. This paper presents the methodology, results of field surveys and risks evaluated in 100,000 buildings. As a result, 52,000 buildings have been classified as ‘high risk’, that is, expected to sustain severe damage or collapse during the scenario event. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  Julian J. Bommer,et al.  Why Do Modern Probabilistic Seismic-Hazard Analyses Often Lead to Increased Hazard Estimates? , 2006 .

[2]  Julian J. Bommer,et al.  Empirical Prediction Equations for Peak Ground Velocity Derived from Strong-Motion Records from Europe and the Middle East , 2007 .

[3]  Thomas H. Heaton,et al.  TriNet “ShakeMaps”: Rapid Generation of Peak Ground Motion and Intensity Maps for Earthquakes in Southern California , 1999 .

[4]  Reza Nourjou,et al.  Building Seismic Loss Model for Tehran , 2010 .

[5]  S. Akkar,et al.  Effect of peak ground velocity on deformation demands for SDOF systems , 2005 .

[6]  A. Şengör,et al.  The North Anatolian transform fault: its age, offset and tectonic significance , 1979, Journal of the Geological Society.

[7]  N. N. Ambraseys,et al.  The Seismic Activity of the Marmara Sea Region over the Last 2000 Years , 2002 .

[8]  A. Barka,et al.  Heightened odds of large earthquakes near istanbul: An interaction-based probability calculation , 2000, Science.

[9]  N. Abrahamson,et al.  Orientation-Independent Measures of Ground Motion , 2006 .

[10]  Eser Durukal,et al.  Earthquake hazard in Marmara Region, Turkey , 2004 .

[11]  N. N. Ambraseys,et al.  Comparison of frequency of occurrence of earthquakes with slip rates from long-term seismicity data: the cases of Gulf of Corinth, Sea of Marmara and Dead Sea Fault Zone , 2006 .

[12]  Maurice S. Power,et al.  An Overview of the NGA Project , 2008 .

[13]  Tom Parsons,et al.  Recalculated probability of M >= 7 earthquakes beneath the Sea of Marmara, Turkey , 2004 .

[14]  Friedemann Wenzel,et al.  Megacities – megarisks , 2007 .

[15]  G. Atkinson,et al.  Ground-Motion Prediction Equations for the Average Horizontal Component of PGA, PGV, and 5%-Damped PSA at Spectral Periods between 0.01 s and 10.0 s , 2008 .

[16]  A. Barka,et al.  Strike‐slip fault geometry in Turkey and its influence on earthquake activity , 1988 .

[17]  Ahmet Yakut,et al.  A Screening Procedure for Seismic Risk Assessment in Urban Building Stocks , 2007 .

[18]  Eser Durukal,et al.  Earthquake hazard in Marmara region , 2003 .

[19]  Shunsuke Otani.  Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of Reinforced Concrete Buildings , 2000 .

[20]  Benjamin Edwards,et al.  Development of a Response Spectral Ground‐Motion Prediction Equation (GMPE) for Seismic‐Hazard Analysis from Empirical Fourier Spectral and Duration Models , 2015 .

[21]  Yoshimori Honkura,et al.  Moment tensor inversion of recent small to moderate sized earthquakes: implications for seismic hazard and active tectonics beneath the Sea of Marmara , 2003 .

[22]  Mustafa Aktar,et al.  The 1999 İzmit Earthquake Sequence in Turkey: Seismological and Tectonic Aspects , 2002 .

[23]  Bertrand Meyer,et al.  Asymmetric slip partitioning in the Sea of Marmara pull‐apart: a clue to propagation processes of the North Anatolian Fault? , 2001 .

[24]  Halûk Sucuoğlu,et al.  Peak Ground Velocity Sensitive Deformation Demands and a Rapid Damage Assessment Approach , 2003 .

[25]  J. Bommer,et al.  Relationships between Median Values and between Aleatory Variabilities for Different Definitions of the Horizontal Component of Motion , 2006 .

[26]  R. Bilham,et al.  Urban Earthquake Fatalities: A Safer World, or Worse to Come? , 2004 .

[27]  Mustafa Ergün,et al.  Structural relationship between the Sea of Marmara Basin and the North Anatolian Fault Zone , 1995 .

[28]  D. Wells,et al.  New empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, rupture area, and surface displacement , 1994, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America.

[29]  James Jackson,et al.  Seismicity of the Sea of Marmara (Turkey) since 1500 , 2000 .

[30]  Mehmet Çelebi,et al.  Reassessment of probabilistic seismic hazard in the Marmara region , 2009 .