Earthquake damage to residential buildings in South Iceland Rajesh Rupakhety Ragnar Sigbjörnsson.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Recent Experience in Turkey for Building Vulnerability and Estimating Damage Losses P. Gülkan and A. Yakut Middle East Technical University.
Advertisements

Review of Catalogs and Rate Determination in UCERF2 and Plans for UCERF3 Andy Michael.
Application of SASHA for Mt. Etna case Task D: Probabilistic Hazard Assessment Salvatore D'Amico Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia Osservatorio.
Calibration of the input parameters in pilot test areas D. Galluzzo, F. Bianco, H. Langer, L.Scarfi, G. Tusa & G. Zonno INGV, Catania, Milano, Napoli,
Earthquake NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene Office of Emergency Preparedness and Response.
Ásthildur Elva Bernharðsdóttir. UPStrat-MAFA 3 rd General Meeting July 2013, Selfoss, Iceland  Evaluated by measuring information on risk reduction.
Dr. Benedikt Halldorsson
SPATIAL CORRELATION OF SPECTRAL ACCELERATIONS Paolo Bazzurro, Jaesung Park and Nimal Jayaram 1.
UPStrat-MAFA 3rd General Meeting Selfoss – Iceland July 2013 Fabio Sansivero (INGV) Gaetano Zonno (INGV) Símon Ólafsson (EERC)
Earthquake Terminology. Earthquake Ground shaking resulting from a release of energy when sections of the earth’s crust move in relation to one another.
Prague, March 18, 2005Antonio Emolo1 Seismic Hazard Assessment for a Characteristic Earthquake Scenario: Integrating Probabilistic and Deterministic Approaches.
& CRITERIA FOR MAXIMUM ELEVATION OF RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS IN FLOODPLAINS William L. Coulbourne, P.E. Applied Technology Council
Distant Deep Earthquake Impact on Seismic Hazard in Serbia
Deterministic Seismic Hazard Analysis Earliest approach taken to seismic hazard analysis Originated in nuclear power industry applications Still used for.
GMSM Methodology and Terminology Christine Goulet, UCLA GMSM Core Members.
Framework for Performance-Based Earthquake Engineering Helmut Krawinkler, Stanford U. PEER Summative Meeting – June 13, 2007.
Time-dependent seismic hazard maps for the New Madrid seismic zone and Charleston, South Carolina areas James Hebden Seth Stein Department of Earth and.
Multi hazard approach to design of civil structures April 29 th 2010 Multi hazard approach to design of civil structures Domenico Asprone Dipartimento.
IMPACTS OF EARTHQUAKES ON WATER RESERVOIRS, PIPELINES, AQUEDUCTS, AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS Walter Hays, Global Alliance for Disaster Reduction, University.
Example of Poisson Distribution-Wars by Year Number of wars beginning by year for years Table of Frequency counts and proportions (458 years):
Seismic Upgrade Risk versus Benefit Shawn Callahan Mike Pollard 5/31/11.
DISASTER PREPAREDNESS A KEY ELEMENT OF BECOMING DISASTER RESILIENT Walter Hays, Global Alliance for Disaster Reduction, University of North Carolina,
Earthquakes occur on faults Active Fault. Earthquakes Create Seismic Waves.
Logarithmic Scales Connecting qualitative observations with quantitative measurements.
By Trinidad Arroyo. This gradual accumulation and release of stress and strain is now referred to as the "elastic rebound theory" of earthquakes. Most.
EERC TEAM An Overview Ragnar Sigbjörnsson UPStrat-MAFA Workshop, Selfoss July 2012.
Outline: Lecture 4 Risk Assessment I.The concepts of risk and hazard II.Shaking hazard of Afghanistan III.Seismic zone maps IV.Construction practice What.
Earthquakes. Given information on Earthquakes, you will be able to describe, in writing: a) what an earthquake is; b) what the elastic rebound theory.
Analysis of Earthquake Risk Exposure for China Milan Simic, Benfield 3 June 2003.
Seismic Intensity: a measure of violence of ground shaking (based on damage done to human-made structures, surface changes, and felt reports). Intensity.
Time-dependent vulnerability assessment of RC buildings considering
Structural Engineering Issues for a Large Cascadia Event.
Earthquake Hazard Session 1 Mr. James Daniell Risk Analysis
26 July 2013 Símon Ólafsson, EERC
UPSTrat-MAFA 3rd General Meeting in Selfoss, July 23-26, 2013.
Quantitative risk evaluation and mapping Task F Ragnar Sigbjörnsson.
Part III: Tools for Risk Assessment RADIUS Tool - Simple Damage Estimation Software - Dr. Carlos Villacis.
Michael Hodges, Chris Kohlenberger, Nolan Mattox, and Christian Vanderwall Seismic Hazard Map Plugin Improvement of ShakeMap Plugin Custom Color Maps Team.
Estimation of Future Earthquake Annualized Losses in California B. Rowshandel, M. Reichle, C. Wills, T. Cao, M. Petersen, and J. Davis California Geological.
Application of SASHA for the Icelandic case Vera D’Amico 1, Dario Albarello 2, Ragnar Sigbjörnsson 3, Rajesh Rupakhety 3 1 Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica.
On which faults have major earthquakes have occurred since the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake? The Great California ShakeOut.
Seismology and Earthquake Engineering :Introduction.
Part 3 Seismometers and Seismograms A seismogram is the record produced by a seismometer (or seismograph).
Earthquake Properties
2004 CAS RATEMAKING SEMINAR INCORPORATING CATASTROPHE MODELS IN PROPERTY RATEMAKING (PL - 4) PRICING EARTHQUAKE INSURANCE DAVE BORDER, FCAS, MAAA.
 Seismologists use two scales when classifying earthquakes. 2) Modified Mercalli Scale 1) Richter Scale.
Earthquakes HOW IS IT MEASURED?.  Instrument located at or near the earth’s surface to record seismic waves. (Tool) SEISMOGRAPH.
International Institute for Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation (ITC) ISL 2004 RiskCity Exercise: Quantitative annual multi hazard risk assessment.
Gaetano Festa, Aldo Zollo, Simona Colombelli, Matteo Picozzi, Alessandro Caruso Dipartimento di Fisica; Università di Napoli Federico II.
ПОРТФОЛИО профессиональной деятельности Белово 2015 Таюшовой Натальи Борисовны Преподавателя дисциплин «Химия», «Биология»
Analysis of Residential Claims From the Northridge Earthquake Mary C. Comerio and John D. Landis for California Earthquake Authority.
A SAMPLING OF BRIDGE PERFORMANCE CRITERIA BY MARK YASHINSKY, CALTRANS OFFICE OF EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING Most bridge owners have adopted design criteria.
What are Magnitude and Intensity?
Jesse Lawrance, Stanford University Michael Hubenthal, IRIS Consortium
ShakeAlert CISN Testing Center (CTC) Development
What are earthquakes? Stresses in the crust cause rock to move suddenly The sudden movement causes vibrations that travel as waves inside the Earth and.
Eduardo Ismael Hernández UPAEP University, MEXICO
M7.1 RABOSA EARTHQUAKE 1:15 PM; September 19, 2017
Example of Poisson Distribution-Wars by Year
Section 6.5: Studying Earthquakes
10 DEAD; DOZENS INJURED IN TOWN OF 85,000
P17 SDC* Working Group Meeting 2 *Seismic Design Category
Foreshock(Mj6.5) Main shock(Mj7.3) 28 hrs later
Foreshock(Mj6.5) Main shock(Mj7.3) 28 hrs later
Chapter 12-2 Studying Earthquakes.
Engineering Geology and Seismology
Forces in Earth Earthquakes
My Mercalli Scale TASK: Design your own Mercalli Scale using the descriptions below. Draw a diagram to illustrate the damage caused by the 6 measures highlighted.
Presentation transcript:

Earthquake damage to residential buildings in South Iceland Rajesh Rupakhety Ragnar Sigbjörnsson

UPStrat-MAFA 3 rd General Meeting July 2013, Selfoss, Iceland Contents  The study area : Hveragerði  Hazard scenario: Peak Ground Acceleartion  Hazard scenario: Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI)  Building vulnerability : Damage Probability Matrices  Damage factors: Spatially variable MMI  Damage factors: Constant MMI  Damage factors: ATC-13 DPM  Summary

UPStrat-MAFA 3 rd General Meeting July 2013, Selfoss, Iceland The study area: Iceland

UPStrat-MAFA 3 rd General Meeting July 2013, Selfoss, Iceland The study area: South Iceland Seismic Zone 17 June June May 2008

UPStrat-MAFA 3 rd General Meeting July 2013, Selfoss, Iceland Hazard scenario: PGA

UPStrat-MAFA 3 rd General Meeting July 2013, Selfoss, Iceland Hazard scenario: PGA Peak resultant acceleration is taken as the rotation-invariant measure of PGA M w 6.3, 2008 Ölfus Earthquake

UPStrat-MAFA 3 rd General Meeting July 2013, Selfoss, Iceland Hazard scenario: MMI M w 6.3, 2008 Ölfus Earthquake

UPStrat-MAFA 3 rd General Meeting July 2013, Selfoss, Iceland Building vulnerability: Damage data Vulnerability Study of the South-Iceland Lowland Based on Data from the 2000 Earthquakes - Sólveig Thorvaldsdóttir, Rainrace for the 6th framework EU project FORESIGHT.

UPStrat-MAFA 3 rd General Meeting July 2013, Selfoss, Iceland Building vulnerability: Damage Probability Matrix Damage factor (%) Probability of a given damage factor for a given hazard intensity Modified Mercalli Intensity VVIVIIVIIIIX 0***** 0.5***** 5***** 20***** 45***** 80*****

UPStrat-MAFA 3 rd General Meeting July 2013, Selfoss, Iceland Building vulnerability: Damage Probability Matrices Damage factor (%) Probability of a given damage factor for a given hazard intensity Modified Mercalli Intensity VVIVIIVIIIIX 0***** 0.5***** 5***** 20***** 45***** 80***** Damage factor (%) Empirical probability distribution function 80 1 MMI VII

UPStrat-MAFA 3 rd General Meeting July 2013, Selfoss, Iceland Damage factors: scenario using MMI Timber buildings Count: 454 Mean DF: 3.15 % Max DF: 75 % Std DF: 10 %

UPStrat-MAFA 3 rd General Meeting July 2013, Selfoss, Iceland Damage factors: scenario using MMI Concrete buildings Count: 587 Mean DF: 4.37 % Max DF: 78 % Std DF: 11 %

UPStrat-MAFA 3 rd General Meeting July 2013, Selfoss, Iceland Damage factors: scenario using MMI Masonry buildings Count: 97 Mean DF: 8.42 % Max DF: 78 % Std DF: 16 %

UPStrat-MAFA 3 rd General Meeting July 2013, Selfoss, Iceland Damage factors: scenario using MMI MaterialMean DF (%) Std DF (%) Concrete Timer Masonry All4.2611

UPStrat-MAFA 3 rd General Meeting July 2013, Selfoss, Iceland Damage factors: Using constant MMI 8 and 9 Material Mean DF (%) Variable MMI Constant MMI VIII Constant MMI IX Concrete Timber Masonry All

UPStrat-MAFA 3 rd General Meeting July 2013, Selfoss, Iceland Damage factors : Comparison with ATC-13 Material Mean DF (%) PDM model based on Icelandic damage ratio data ATC 13 model Concrete Timber Masonry All

UPStrat-MAFA 3 rd General Meeting July 2013, Selfoss, Iceland Summary  Timber buildings show the best performance with a mean damage factor of 3.15 %  The simulation results show that the concrete buildings suffer a damage factor of 4.37 % on average  Masonry buildings show the worst performance with a mean damage factor of 8.42 %  ATC 33 damage probability matrices gave similar results as those obtained from damage data in South Iceland  Considering just one value of intensity for the whole town of Hverageði over-estimates the damage factor, almost by a factor of 2  Consideration of spatial variability of ground motion intensity gave results close to the actual damage observed after the M w 6.3, 2008 Ölfus Earthquake

UPStrat-MAFA 3 rd General Meeting July 2013, Selfoss, Iceland Thank You !