Seismic microzonation and earthquake damage scenarios for urban areas

A methodology for seismic microzonation and earthquake damage scenarios may be considered as composed of two stages. In the first stage, microzonation maps with respect to estimated earthquake characteristics on the ground surface are generated for an investigated urban area. The effects of local geological and geotechnical site conditions are taken into account based on site characterization with respect to representative soil profiles extending down to the engineering bedrock. 1D site response analyses are performed to calculate earthquake characteristics on the ground surface using as many as possible, hazard compatible real acceleration time histories. In the second stage, vulnerability of buildings and pipeline systems are estimated based on site-specific ground motion parameters. A pilot study is carried out to evaluate seismic damage in a district in Istanbul, Turkey. The results demonstrate the significance of site characterization and site response analysis in calculating the earthquake characteristics on the ground surface in comparison to simplified empirical procedures.

[1]  K. Pitilakis,et al.  Earthquake Disaster Scenario Prediction and Loss Modelling for Urban Areas , 2007 .

[2]  D. Giardini,et al.  Seismic microzonation for earthquake risk mitigation in turkey , 2004 .

[3]  Mehmet Baris Darendeli,et al.  Development of a new family of normalized modulus reduction and material damping curves , 2001 .

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

[5]  R. Dobry,et al.  Effect of Soil Plasticity on Cyclic Response , 1991 .

[6]  G. Zonno,et al.  The SERGISAI procedure for seismic risk assessment , 2003 .

[7]  M. Erdik,et al.  Earthquake risk assessment for Istanbul metropolitan area , 2003 .

[8]  Ernesto A. Avila,et al.  Guidelines for the seismic evaluation and upgrade of water transmission facilities , 1999 .

[9]  Charles A. Kircher,et al.  Development of Building Damage Functions for Earthquake Loss Estimation , 1997 .

[10]  Alexandra CARVALHO,et al.  AN AUTOMATIC SEISMIC SCENARIO LOSS METHODOLOGY INTEGRATED ON A GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM , 2002 .

[11]  I. M. Idriss,et al.  Moduli and Damping Factors for Dynamic Analyses of Cohesionless Soils , 1986 .

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

[13]  Kenneth H. Stokoe,et al.  Linear dynamic properties of sandy and gravelly soils from large-scale resonant tests , 2003 .

[14]  M. Erdik,et al.  Site Characterization and Site Amplification for a Seismic Microzonation Study in Turkey , 2004 .

[15]  Michael J. O'Rourke,et al.  Seismic Damage to Segmented Buried Pipe , 2004 .

[16]  M. Erdik,et al.  Loss estimation in Istanbul based on deterministic earthquake scenarios of the Marmara Sea region (Turkey) , 2009 .

[17]  M. O'rourke,et al.  Pipeline damage due to wave propagation , 1993 .

[18]  Roger D. Borcherdt,et al.  Estimates of Site-Dependent Response Spectra for Design (Methodology and Justification) , 1994 .