* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Advances in Natural and Applied Sciences
Casualties of the 2010 Haiti earthquake wikipedia , lookup
Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Nuclear Power Plant wikipedia , lookup
2009–18 Oklahoma earthquake swarms wikipedia , lookup
1908 Messina earthquake wikipedia , lookup
2011 Christchurch earthquake wikipedia , lookup
2008 Sichuan earthquake wikipedia , lookup
1992 Cape Mendocino earthquakes wikipedia , lookup
2010 Canterbury earthquake wikipedia , lookup
2010 Pichilemu earthquake wikipedia , lookup
April 2015 Nepal earthquake wikipedia , lookup
Seismic retrofit wikipedia , lookup
Earthquake engineering wikipedia , lookup
2009 L'Aquila earthquake wikipedia , lookup
1906 San Francisco earthquake wikipedia , lookup
1880 Luzon earthquakes wikipedia , lookup
Advances in Natural and Applied Sciences, 9(1) January 2015, Pages: 36-42 AENSI Journals Advances in Natural and Applied Sciences ISSN:1995-0772 EISSN: 1998-1090 Journal home page: www.aensiweb.com/ANAS Earthquake Risk Modeling using GIS for urban buildings, Case study: Tehran Municipality, District 3 ¹Ali Reza Vafaei Nejad, ²Shahrbanou Esmaeili, ³Hossein Aghamohammadi ¹Department of Environment and Energy, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran. ²Department of GIS/RS, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran. ³Department of Environment and Energy, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran. ARTICLE INFO Article history: Received 10 September 2014 Received in revised form 23 October 2014 Accepted 15 November 2014 Available online 23 November 2014 Keywords: vulnerability of buildings, Tehran, earthquake, seismic zonation, vulnerability, GIS. ABSTRACT Inadequate preparedness against earthquakes burden for human settlements in seismic areas such as Iran would cause a lot of life and property damage. Several parameters affecting the seismic evaluation makes the appropriate model that has features such as a summary of the data and predicting the risks. This paper aims to use the physical parameters and programming the model-driven approach to provide location. In this study the most important factors contributing to the vulnerability of urban buildings due to the characteristics of the study area, which includes six indicators of internal and external factors in combination with the four indicators are taken into consideration for expressing the seismic vulnerability of the region. This applied study is with a quantitative method using survey techniques. In this regard, GIS Analytic Hierarchy Process is used. The results show that, as expected, the damage increases with increasing severity of earthquake. The vulnerability based on the number of buildings is located in regions 2, 3, 5, 4, 1 and 6. © 2015 AENSI Publisher All rights reserved. To Cite This Article: Ali Reza Vafaei Nejad, Shahrbanou Esmaeili, Hossein Aghamohammadi, Earthquake Risk Modeling using GIS for urban buildings, Case study: Tehran Municipality, District 3. Adv. in Nat. Appl. Sci., 9(1): 36-42, 2015 INTRODUCTION Many of the largest urban disaster in which many people are killed and injured, and many infrastructures are damaged by an earthquake and a hurricane (Dodman et al., 2013). Because of this, the most serious natural disaster is flood disaster and after that is the earthquake. Research centers of epidemiological studies estimate the mortality events in the last one hundred years of earthquake approximately% 2/2 more than hurricanes, volcanic eruptions, landslides and avalanches. (Solano and Scaruzzo, 2013). The earthquake is known as the most common natural disaster, because many earthquakes are registered with different dimensions during decades which caused many damages. Due to the earthquakes registered, the rate of mortality is estimated approximately 800000 people (Rastivies et al., 2013). During 20th century, more than 1100 destructive earthquakes occurred in 75 countries around the world, and more than one million people were killed and caused many of damages for humanity. It is predicted that in twenty-first century at least 2 million people lost their lives and the damages caused by the earthquake also grow very fast (Nicholas, 2005). It is estimated that natural disasters in developing countries create losses twenty times higher than in developed countries (Western, 2004). Achieving sustainable development in countries prone to earthquake, it is possible to consider effective measures to reduce vulnerability to earthquake (Hashemi and Alesheikh, 2012). Iran is also one of the regions that most seismic activation of the belt of the Alpine - Himalayan with many destructive earthquakes are recorded using scientific instruments and historical documents, this is due to its location in the folding area in three million kilometers of the Arabia-Eurasia (Gourabi and Yamani, 2011). Although Iran's population is 1% of the world population, losses due to the earthquake are about 6 percent of deaths worldwide (Carrion, 1384). According to a report by the United Nations Office of Planning in 2003, Iran rank is assigned first in the number of earthquakes with an intensity of 5.5 on the Richter scale in the one of the highest ratings in the area of earthquake damage (UNDP, 2004). In seismic zones like Iran, the seismic risk assessment in urban expansion is necessary and crucial. Urban development without considering the effect of the earthquake will lead to a humanitarian catastrophe, and in this situation, the city is greater, the greater the magnitude of the disaster. Corresponding Author: Ali Reza Vafaei Nejad, Department of Environment and Energy, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran. E-mail: [email protected] 37 Ali Reza Vafaei Nejad et al, 2015 Advances in Natural and Applied Sciences, 9(1) January 2015, Pages: 36-42 Seismic hazard assessment is of great importance, because inappropriate and unrealistic plans can cause huge losses of life and property and on the other hand, very careful design, higher reliability coefficients than necessary will impose unnecessary costs and wasted materials and labor. Reliable estimates of seismic hazard in the region requires knowledge and understanding of both the seismicity and ground motion during earthquakes (Ghosh and Mahajan, 2013). Many factors such as the use of inappropriate placement, construction, and improper construction and inadequate infrastructure, urban design, urban settlements are at increased risk (Tucker, 1994; Zetter and Hamza, 1998). Assessing the seismic vulnerability of the required losses needs the estimation under the assumption of an earthquake at different levels and in different regions of the potential damage. The three municipalities in the region where are located several faults, are important. In addition, there are numerous factors such as construction in recent years, especially in high-rise buildings, retrofit of non-compliance with laws and regulations; high concentration of population in the old context, the Supreme peddling illegal and nonnormative, using low-durable and non-durable materials, using unsustainable land for urban development particularly in the northwest region, the construction of the aqueduct route, the narrow streets in the old regions, and lack of proper plans to tackle financial crisis increased the region's vulnerability to earthquakes. Accordingly, the existence of earthquakes in region 3 is need to be researched in order to assess the damage caused by earthquakes and the distribution of the areas. Therefore, this study pursues three goals: identifying the physical condition of Tehran District 3 against potential vulnerability to earthquakes, identification of areas vulnerable to earthquakes and providing a hierarchical model to reduce the vulnerability of different parts of a model to assess the physical vulnerability of the earthquake. Area of study: District 3 of Tehran Municipality is one of the 22 districts. This area is located in the northeast of Tehran. The area has 6 regions and 11 district with an area of 2945 ha (Hectares), respectively. This area is one of the largest urban areas of Tehran that is limited to the north by Shahid Chamran Highway, Shahid Modarres Highway and Sadr Highway and to the east to Pasdaran, part of Shariati Street and to the South to the Resalat highway and to the West to Shahid Chamran Highway (Sharan Consultant Engineers, 2006, 1) Fig. 1: Study area (author) The area 3 in the suburbs of Tehran Municipality aside the affecting faults is located in the vulnerability of Tehran such as the North Tehran fault and fault of Fasham – Masha, and to the south of Tehran the Ray fault, and Tehran Plain and its surrounding smaller faults within the Plain of Tehran such as Mahmudiyeh, Davudyyeh fault, Fault stagger down, and Kowsar and Shian fault. The faults in the development of seismic hazard in this area can aggravate the vulnerability. Theoretical basis: The literature review found that the assessment of natural hazards was performed at different scales in the world (Van Weston, 2006). However, it is one of the most controversial issues of vulnerability and risk issues that is done in the crisis field and its dimensions are still unknown (Alca'ntara - Ayala, 2008). Some studies that the author has concluded are as follows; Zangiabadi et al. analyzed the indicators of vulnerability to earthquakes in that study showed the vulnerability of buildings against earthquake risk is high in Isfahan. In assessing the vulnerability of urban structures and assessing their vulnerability form the earthquake using hierarchical analysis of urban vulnerability mapping and GIS can be achieved (ZANGIABADI and others, 2008). 38 Ali Reza Vafaei Nejad et al, 2015 Advances in Natural and Applied Sciences, 9(1) January 2015, Pages: 36-42 Ahadnejad in his doctoral thesis entitled urban earthquake vulnerability using model (RISK-UE) and the method of AHP, they reached to the conclusion that the Tehran Municipality's area 3 and 2, respectively, have the highest and lowest vulnerability (Ahadnejad, 2009). Also Giovinazzi et al. conducted the designing the scenarios and earthquakes using (RISK-UE) model to the region of Liguria in Italy vulnerability assessment. (Giovinazzi et al., 2006), Rashid et al, in their study first assessed the role of GIS and remote sensing, focused on modeling and predicting vulnerability and they concluded that Geographic Information System, a comprehensive database could have a major role in vulnerability modeling. (Rashed et al., 2003, 6) Seen from above, Urban vulnerability can be defined as the amount of the difference between urban communities' capacity to deal with the effects of natural hazards based on its location in the physical world (Spatial structure of the city), and social characteristics of communities (social structure of the city) defined (Ahadnejad, 2009, 43). The quantitative vulnerability assessment seeks to create a cumulative measure that is classified from zero (meaning free of vulnerability) to one (complete vulnerability). The scale cumulative sum of the various elements of vulnerability compared with steady state are dynamic aspects of the urban environment. These elements can be classified as follows: Physical elements such as buildings, infrastructures, resources, ecosystems, and such economic factors such as land use, economic investment, and such social factors such as socio - economic status, morality, class, disability, age, and so on. MATERIALS AND METHODS Analytical approach and collecting data have been conducted through library and field studies. To analyze the data and evaluate the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and fuzzy logic is used to insert data into GIS software. Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) is a powerful tool that is widely used for evaluating and ranking problems usually can be used for multiple conflicting criteria (Bilsel et al.2006). Multi-criteria decision making models generally divided into two categories: multi-objective models (MODM) and Multi-Attribute models (MADM). Many methods have been proposed for multi-criteria decision making. Analytical Hierarchy Process which was first proposed by Saati, is of the branches of multi-criteria decision making (MADM). This method is based on paired comparisons. Evaluation criteria and their weights must be determined according to their importance. This model involves the following steps; (Saati, 1990) 1) Create a hierarchy of problem 2) Paired comparison matrix determined by imposing judgments 3) Calculate the relative weights of the criteria and weighting options Final options 4) Check System Compatibility The research for vulnerability assessment of 10 indicators used in the seismic data. Six indicators of internal factors, including: Type building material, old building, quality of construction, ground floor area, number of floors and the soil type and the four indicators of external factors including: Compatible land uses, directions Canal, close to the fault and width of streets that each of the following criteria are divided into internal and external factors. To calculate the weight of indexes and interference susceptibility factor for each of the indicators used in the software Expert Choice 2000. Total buildings assessed were 28,939 that their composition is shown in Table 1. Table 1: Examines the breakdown of plaque areas (writer) Area 1 2 3 Number 4000 6175 5921 4 4512 5 5818 6 2513 Total 28939 Discussion and Analysis: In this study, factors and criteria and detailed criteria are shown in table 2. That their representation is used as a rating system and the analysis by the Expert Choice software was designed based on the results are shown in Figure 2. Table 2: details the main criteria and quantitative measures (author) main criteria Tiny criteria Building Materials Mud, brick and Brick and Cement wood Dating back building Before 1350 1360 -1351 Building quality New construction Maintainable Number of floors 1 3و2 Compatibility with Completely Relatively adjacent land uses incompatible incompatible Surface area occupied Less than 100 m2 250 -100 m2 Brick and Iron Reinforced concrete Steel structure 1370-1361 Destructive 5و4 Indifferent 1380-1371 After 1380 250 300 m2 Higher than 6 Relatively compatible 500 - 300 m2 Completely Compatible Higher than 500 m2 39 Ali Reza Vafaei Nejad et al, 2015 Advances in Natural and Applied Sciences, 9(1) January 2015, Pages: 36-42 Less than 5 meters 10 -5 m 20 -10 m 100 -50 m 300 -100m Genus of Land Less than meters Alluvial fans More than meters 500 – 300 m Width of access road Less than 4 m Heterogeneous alluvium 8- 4 m Homogeneous alluvium 12-8 m Formation of thousands Valley 20-12 m Privacy subterranean track Privacy of fault 50 20 More than 500 m2 More than 20 m Comparison of binary indicators show that, due to its importance in the construction of earthquake has achieved highest score. The recent earthquake experience has shown that type of building materials used in the construction of earthquake damage than other parameters is important. The more durable materials used in the construction of earthquake decreases vulnerability severity. After mapping the overall vulnerability index using AHP method was with three levels 6, 7 and 8 on Merkaly scale modified calculated and applied using the model proposed by Milutinovic and Trendafiloski (Milutinovic and Trendafiloski, 2003: 65). μD = average degree of damage I= Indicator of the intensity of an earthquake based on the modified Mrkaly I= the amount resulting from applying the AHP and attribute vulnerability. The results of map 1 shows the vulnerability of 6 regional-scale corrected Merkaly that the vulnerability of buildings is low, very low and moderate in 2,3 and 5 municipalities areas which are more metal skeleton, then the most resistant structures in earthquake of zone 3 of Tehran are in areas 2,3 and 5, respectively. 14.73% of the buildings in the area are in the range of high vulnerability, most of them are in zone 3 in the neighborhood of Rostamabad, and 5 municipality in the region are in the neighborhood of Chalhorz which has the traditional context. Buildings that are highly vulnerable were the final regional headquarters, 0.21 percent are the majority of mud brick structures have been scattered in the neighborhood of Vanak and Zargandeh. The regional vulnerability to earthquake in the study area with the intensity of modified 6 Merkaly showed that 53/88% of buildings in earthquake intensity with 6 Merkaly faced with very little vulnerability. Most of the buildings in the 2 area of municipality in the eastern neighborhood of Zargandeh, in 3 municipality in the NorthWest area of zone 5 is optional and municipality in the northeastern neighborhood of Ehteshamiyeh are respectively 11.39, 10.09 and 10.82 percent vulnerability. 45.81% of the buildings have moderate and low vulnerability that the maximum number of them are located in zone 2 area in the North – West in neighborhood of Amani. Map 1 shows the details of their distribution. Map. 1: damage to buildings in the district 3 of Tehran in the earthquake of intensity 6 Mrkaly amended (the author) Map 2 shows that the seismic intensity of 6 to 7 Merkaly, degradation is very high, so that 43.46 percent of the building with three floors of the vulnerability are of very low, low and moderate, the frequency of buildings is due to resistant materials of construction and standards prevailing in the country, including the 2800 code. However, compared to the previous state shows a decrease in resistance state. Most of the buildings are located in three areas 2, 3 and 5 municipalities. The most vulnerable area in the region 2 of Zargandeh and Vanak, as already mentioned, very narrow streets and rural textured materials, mud brick and buildings of brick and cement can be observed. 40 Ali Reza Vafaei Nejad et al, 2015 Advances in Natural and Applied Sciences, 9(1) January 2015, Pages: 36-42 Map. 2: Damage to buildings in the district 3 of Tehran in the earthquake of intensity 7 Merkaly amended (author) 8 Merkaly severity of the vulnerability curve shows an upward increase in the magnitude of the complete destruction. Accordingly, when faced with an earthquake of 8 Mrkaly any of the six areas of study will not be safe of the damage but the damage to the order drops of 2, 3, 5, 4, 1, and 6. 22/87% of the buildings in the area affected would be low or negligible that most of these business units or buildings, renovated buildings that are mostly metal structures, and engineering principles and standards are observed in the Code of 2800 in the construction of these structures. Map 3 shows the details. Map. 3: The damage to buildings in the district 3 of Tehran in the earthquake of intensity 8 Merkaly amended (author) Conclusion: As expected casualty rate also increased with increasing severity of the earthquake. But the scale of the damage zone 8 does not protect against earthquake damage, it was something that was not understood at first glance, the result of this study shows this. Also, due to the neighborhood of Zargandeh and Vanak even with lower intensity of earthquake damage was much greater than in other places, it seems that certain policies should be taken to remedy the situation of their buildings and the priorities to be correct. According to Figure 2, it is seen that the seismic intensity scale in each case is the same as low damage with little tolerance for intermediate situation is also applicable. However, the results indicate that behavior of structures against different intensities of the vulnerability of low, high and complete destruction of the reasons could be different in the subject of future studies. 41 Ali Reza Vafaei Nejad et al, 2015 Advances in Natural and Applied Sciences, 9(1) January 2015, Pages: 36-42 Fig. 2: Graph comparing the damage to buildings during earthquakes with intensities of 6, 7 and scale Mrkaly amended (author) In the current study, it was found that the obtained data to analyze the vulnerability of the infrastructure is not available or has not been collected. Therefore require access to a complete database of vulnerabilities, including bridges, roads, hospitals, gas, power, water, telecommunications and industrial centers, and nonhazardous chemical that is needed in this area will be provided by the organizations and recorded in a centralized database. REFERENCES Alca'ntara Ayala, I., 2008. On the historical account of disastrous land slide in Mexico: The challenge of risk management and disaster prevention, advance in Geoscience, 14: 159-164 Armillas, I., 1989. Forwards methodology for seismic risk mitigation in urban planning: pilot work in Mexico City. UNCNS Report, Japan. Bilsel, R.U., G. Buyukozkan, D. Ruan, 2006. A fuzzy preference-ranking model for a quality evaluation of hospital web sites. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 21: 1181-1197. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/int.20177 Dodman, David et al. 2013. understanding the nature and scale of urban risk in low- and middle – income countries and its implications for humanitarian preparedness, planning and response, International Institute for environment and development. Ghosh, G.K., and A.K. Mahajan, 2013. Intensity attenuation relation at Chamba–Garhwal area in northwest Himalaya with epicentral distance and magnitude. Journal of Earth System Science, pp: 1-16. Giovinazzi, S., S. Lagomarsino and S. Pampanin, 2006. Vulnerability Methods and Damage Scenario for Seismic Risk Analysis as Support to Retrofit Strategies:a European Perspective, NZSEE Conference. Gourabi, A., and M. Yamani, 2011. Active Faulting and Quaternary Landforms Deformation Related to the Nain Fault. American Journal of Environmental Sciences, 7)5(. Hashemi, M. and A.A. Alesheikh, 2012. Development and implementation of a GIS-based tool for spatial modeling of seismic vulnerability of Tehran, Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 12: 3659-3670. Milutinovic Zoran, V., S. Trendafiloski Goran, 2003. an Advanced Approach to Earthquake Risk Scenarios with Applications to Different European Towns, Riskue- Evk4-ct 2000-00014 Nichols, John M., 2005. A major urban earthquake: planning for Armageddon, Landscape and Urban Planning, 73(2-3): 136-154. Rashed, T., WEEKS John. 2003. Assesssing vulnerability to Earthpuake hazards thorugh spatial Multi criteria analysis of urban areas, Geographical information Science, 7. Rastiveis, H., F. Samadzadegan and P. Reinartz, 2013. A fuzzy decision making system for building damage map creation using high resolution satellite imagery, Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 13: 455-472. Reja, Md. Yousuf, and Shajahan, Amreen, 2011. Analyzing the earthquake vulnerabilities for urban areas: In the context of Chittagong city, Disaster, Risk and Vulnerability Conference, pp: 48-54. Saaty, T.L., 1990. Decision making for leaders, RWS Publications, USA. Solano, E and M. Scavuzzo, 2013. Remote sensing to assessment damage post-earthquake, focusing in urban structure, CONAE/UNC. 42 Ali Reza Vafaei Nejad et al, 2015 Advances in Natural and Applied Sciences, 9(1) January 2015, Pages: 36-42 Tucker, B.E., 1994. Some Remark Concerning Worldwide Earthquake mitigation, Issues in urban Earthquake Risk, pp: 1-10. UNDP. 2004. Reducing disaster risk, A challenge for development, NewYork. Van Westen, c.y. et al., 2006. Land Slide-Hazard and risk Zonation- why is it still so difficult?" B.E.ng.Geo. Environ., 65(2): 167-184. Westen, C.V., 2004. Geoinformation science and earth observation for municipal risk management; The SLARIM project, International Institute for Geoinformation Science and Earth Observation, ITC. Zetter, Roger, and Hamza, Mohamed, 1998 Structural Adjustment, Urban Systems and Disaster vulnerability in Developing Countries, Cities, 15(4): 291- 299. Carrion, A.R., 2005. Note Editor, Journal of seven cities (Urban Development and Improvement), No. 19 Ahadnejad, M., 2009. Modeling of seismic vulnerability of urban city case study, PhD thesis, Geography and Urban Planning. Tehran University. Leaf, David V., 1994 crisis management first. Translated by A. Zvalfqaryan principle. Tehran: the tradition. ZANGIABADI, A., J. Mohammadi, H. and pleasant; Qaydrhmty Saffar 2008. Indices of urban housing vulnerability against earthquake risk analysis (case study: housing. Isfahan), Geography and Development. Number 12 Sharan Consultants 2005. 3 Study of Regional Development, Planning Center of Tehran (joint entity responsible for providing a comprehensive and detailed plan of Tehran).