Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Seismic risk and loss estimation for the building stock in Isfahan. Part I: exposure and vulnerability

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper focuses on the exposure and fragility/vulnerability of the residential, mixed residential/commercial, and public building stock of the city of Isfahan, in Central Iran, and constitutes the first part of a seismic risk assessment study for that city. To determine the assets at risk, we first summarize the details of the building stock and population from the available georeferenced 2011 Census data. From this dataset and from a local survey of the city, we categorize the building taxonomy in 27 construction classes characterized by age, height, and material/lateral-load-resisting system. A building exposure model is then assembled by first dividing Isfahan in city blocks and then by assigning the appropriate statistical properties to the buildings, such as construction class, built area, and replacement cost. The population of each city block is also estimated and accounted for. To assess the fragility and vulnerability to earthquake ground motion, for each building class we performed nonlinear dynamic analysis of multiple equivalent single-degree-of-freedom systems. This process generated a set of class- and region-specific fragility and vulnerability functions that considered both record-to-record and building-to-building response variability. In the companion paper we used the exposure model and the fragility and vulnerability curves generated for all these asset classes to probabilistically assess the seismic risk of Isfahan.

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
Fig. 2

adapted from Standard 2800, version 4 (> 2012) that shows the reference PGA on rock with values of 0.35, 0.30, 0.25, 0.20 g corresponding to “Very High”, “High”, “Moderate” and “Low” seismic zones; b evolution of the seismic design spectrum for Isfahan for a hypothetic site located on rock

Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Notes

  1. http://www.irceo.net/.

References

  • Abrahamson NA, Silva WJ, Kamai R (2014) Summary of the ASK14 ground motion relation for active crustal regions. Earthq Spectra 30:1025–1055. https://doi.org/10.1193/070913eqs198m

  • Alavi E, Mahootchian A, Yadegari S, Shamsodin M, Babania Nouri M, Ordoubadi B (2018) Report of M7.3 Ezgele, Kermanshah, Iran Earthquake on November 12, 2017, EERI reports.

  • ASCE7, (2016) Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures. Reston, VA

  • Aschheim M (2002) Seismic design based on the yield displacement. Earthq Spectra 18:581–600. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1516754

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aschheim M, Maurer EP, Browning J (2007) Dependency of COD on ground motion intensity and stiffness distribution. Struct Eng Mech 27:425–438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aslani H, Cabrera C, Rahnama M (2012) Analysis of the sources of uncertainty for portfolio-level earthquake loss estimation. Earthq Eng Struct Dynam 41:1549–1568. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker J, Cornell C (2006) Spectral shape, epsilon and record selection. Earthq Eng Struct Dynam 35:1077–1095

  • Baker JW (2015) Efficient analytical fragility function fitting using dynamic structural analysis. Earthq Spectra 31:579–599. https://doi.org/10.1193/021113eqs025m

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bal İE, Crowley H, Pinho R, Gülay FG (2008) Detailed assessment of structural characteristics of Turkish RC building stock for loss assessment models. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 28:914–932. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2007.10.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bazzurro P, Luco N (2005) Accounting for uncertainty and correlation in earthquake loss estimation. In: Proceedings of the ninth international conference on structural safety and reliability, Rome, Italy, 2005, pp 2687–2694

  • Bazzurro P, Park J (2007) The effects of portfolio manipulation on earthquake portfolio loss estimates. In: Proceedings of the 10th international conference on applications of statistics and probability in civil engineering, Tokyo, Japan

  • Borzi B, Crowley H, Pinho R (2008) Simplified Pushover-based earthquake loss assessment (SP-BELA) method for masonry buildings. Int J Archit Herit 2:353–376. https://doi.org/10.1080/15583050701828178

  • Chiou B, Darragh R, Gregor N, Silva W (2008) NGA Project Strong-Motion Database Earthquake Spectra 24:23–44. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.2894831

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Ayala D, Meslem A, Vamvatsikos D, Porter K, Rossetto T, Crowley H, Silva V (2014) Guidelines for analytical vulnerability assessment of low-mid-rise buildings – methodology. Vulnerability Global Component Project, GEM Foundation, Pavia, Italy

    Google Scholar 

  • Di Pasquale G, Goretti A (2001) Vulnerabilità funzionale ed economica degli edifici residenziali colpiti dai recenti eventi sismici italiani. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 10th national conference “L’ingegneria Sismica in Italia”, Potenza-Matera, Italy,

  • Dolšek M, Fajfar P (2008) The effect of masonry infills on the seismic response of a four-storey reinforced concrete frame: a deterministic assessment. Eng Struct 30:1991–2001 doi:https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.01.001

  • Eurocode8 (2004) design of structures for earthquake Resistance. Comité Européen de Normalisation, Brussels, Belgium

  • Fallah Tafti M, Amini Hosseini K, Mansouri B (2020) Generation of new fragility curves for common types of buildings in Iran. Bull Earthq Eng 18:3079–3099. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-020-00811-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FEMA356 FEMA (2000) Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. D.C., FEMA, Washington, p 356

    Google Scholar 

  • FEMA440a (2009) Effects of strength and stiffness degradation on seismic response. Applied Technology Council, 201 Redwood Shores Parkway, Suite 240, Redwood City, California 94065

  • FEMA-443 (2003) HAZUS-MH technical manual. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington DC, USA

  • FEMA-P58 (2012) Federal emergency management agency: seismic performance assessment of buildings. Prepared by the Applied Technology Council for the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Washington, DC

  • Ghayamghamian M, Khanzadeh K (2008) Fragility curves for masonry buildings in Iran. Paper presented at the 1st International Conference on Seismic Retrofitting, Tabriz, Iran,

  • Ghodrati Amiri G, Razeghi H, Doosti L (2014) Development of Analytical Fragility Curves for Iran’s Masonry school Buildings SHARIF: CIVIL ENINEERING 31:145–156

    Google Scholar 

  • Goda K, Yoshikawa H (2012) Earthquake insurance portfolio analysis of wood-frame houses in south-western British Columbia. Can Bull Earthq Eng 10:615–643. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-011-9296-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta A, Krawinkler H (2000) Estimation of seismic drift demands for frame structures. Earthq Eng Struct Dynam 29:1287–1305. https://doi.org/10.1002/1096-9845(200009)29:9%3c1287::AID-EQE971%3e3.0.CO;2-B

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hisada Y, Shibayama A, Ghayamghamian M (2005) Building damage and seismic intensity in Bam city from the 2003 Bam earthquake Bull Earthquake Res Inst. Univ Tokyo 79:81–93

    Google Scholar 

  • Hosseini M, Majd M (2011) Developing fragility curves for regular steel buildings with X-bracing using nonlinear time history Sharif J Civil Eng 27:3–13

    Google Scholar 

  • ICSRDB (2014) Iranian code of practice for earthquake resistant design of buildings (Standard 2800), 4th Edition. PN S 253, Building and Housing Research Center of Iran,

  • Jalayer F, Cornell C (2009) Alternative nonlinear demand estimation methods for probability-based seismic assessments. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 38:951–972

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jayaram N, Lin T, Baker J (2011) A computationally efficient ground-motion selection algorithm for matching a target response spectrum mean and variance. Earthq Spectra 27:797–815

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • JICA (2000) The study on seismic microzoning of the greater Tehran area in the Islamic Republic of Iran.

  • Jorge RG, Eduardo M (2007) Probabilistic estimation of maximum inelastic displacement demands for performance-based design. Earthq Eng Struct Dynam 36:1235–1254. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.680

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kappos AJ, Panagopoulos G, Panagiotopoulos C, Penelis G (2006) A hybrid method for the vulnerability assessment of R/C and URM buildings. Bull Earthq Eng 4:391–413. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-006-9023-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katsanos EI, Vamvatsikos D (2017) Yield frequency spectra and seismic design of code-compatible RC structures: an illustrative example. Earthq Eng Struct Dynam 46:1727–1745. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2877

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kazemi H, Ghafory-Ashtiany M, Azarbakht A (2013) Effect of epsilon-based record selection on fragility curves of typical irregular steel frames with concrete shear walls in Mashhad city. Int J Adv Struct Eng 5:23. https://doi.org/10.1186/2008-6695-5-23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohrangi M, Vamvatsikos D, Bazzurro P (2016) Implications of intensity measure selection for seismic loss assessment of 3-d buildings. Earthq Spectra 32:2167–2189 doi:https://doi.org/10.1193/112215eqs177m

  • Kohrangi M, Vamvatsikos D, Bazzurro P (2017) Site dependence and record selection schemes for building fragility and regional loss assessment. Earthq Eng Struct Dynam 46:1625–1643. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2873

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohrangi M, Bazzurro P, Vamvatsikos D (2021) Seismic risk and loss estimation for building stock in Isfahan. Part II: Hazard analysis and risk assessment. Bull Earthq Eng. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-020-01037-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lagomarsino S, Giovinazzi S (2006) Macroseismic and mechanical models for the vulnerability and damage assessment of current buildings. Bull Earthq Eng 4:415–443. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-006-9024-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin T, Harmsen S, Baker J, Luco N (2013) Conditional spectrum computation incorporating multiple causal earthquakes and ground motion prediction models BSSA 103:1103–1116

    Google Scholar 

  • Luco N, Cornell C (2007) Structure-specific scalar intensity measures for near-source and ordinary earthquake ground motions. Earthq Spectra 23:357–392

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mansouri B, Ghafory-Ashtiany M, Amini-Hosseini K, Nourjou R, Mousavi M (2010) Building seismic loss model for Tehran. Earthquake Spectra 26:153–168. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.3280377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matjaž D, Peter F (2005) Simplified non-linear seismic analysis of infilled reinforced concrete frames. Earthq Eng Struct Dynam 34:49–66. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miranda E, Heresi P (2018) Seismic risk comparison between 1- and 2- story houses for performance-based earthquake engineering. Paper presented at the 16th European Conference in Earthquake Engineering, Thessaloniki, 18–21 June,

  • Miranda E, Taghavi S (2005) Approximate floor acceleration demands in multistory buildings. I: Formulation. J Struct Eng 131:203–211 doi:doi:https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2005)131:2(203)

  • Mitrani-Reiser J (2007) An ounce of prediction: probabilistic loss estimation for performance-based earthquake engineering. Calofornia Institute of Technology.

  • Moehle JP (1992) Displacement-based design of RC structures subjected to earthquakes. Earthq Spectra 8:403–428. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585688

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mostafaei H (2003) Kabeyasawa T (2004) Investigation and analysis of damage to buildings during the. Bam earthquake Bulletin of the Earthquake Research Institute 79:107–132

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly GJ, Sullivan TJ (2018) Probabilistic seismic assessment and retrofit considerations for Italian RC frame buildings. Bull Earthq Eng 16:1447–1485. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-017-0257-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter K, Farokhnia K, Vamvatsikos D, Cho I (2014) Guidelines for component-based analytical vulnerability assessment of buildings and nonstructural elements. Global Earthq Model Found Pavia, Italy. https://doi.org/10.13117/GEM.VULN-MOD.TR2014.13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter K, Kiremidjian A, LeGrue J (2001) Assembly-based vulnerability of buildings and its use in performance evaluation. Earthq Spectra 17:290–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ranjbaran F, Hosseini M (2012) Analytical fragility curves of confided masonry buildings. Paper presented at the 15th world conference on earthquake engineering and seismology, 15WCEE secretariat, Lisbon, 24–28 September

  • Repapis C, Zeris C, Vintzileou E (2006) Evaluation of the seismic performance of existing RC buildings: II. A case study for regular and irregular buildings. J Earthq Eng 10:429–452. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460609350604

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rota M, Penna A, Strobbia CL (2008) Processing Italian damage data to derive typological fragility curves. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 28:933–947. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2007.10.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadeghi M, Ghafory-Ashtiany M, Pakdel-Lahiji N (2015) Developing seismic vulnerability curves for typical Iranian buildings. In: Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part O: Journal of Risk and Reliability 229:627–640 doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1748006X15596085

  • Şeşetyan K et al. (2018) The 2014 seismic hazard model of the Middle East: overview and results. Bull Earthq Eng.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-018-0346-4

  • Shabakhti N, Biari M (2013) Seismic vulnerability assessment of dual system of steel moment resistant frame and shear wall with fragility curves. Paper presented at the 7th national conference of civil engineering, Zahedan, Iran,

  • Silva V (2017) Critical issues on probabilistic earthquake loss assessment. J Earthq Eng 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2017.1297264

  • Silva V, Crowley H, Pagani M, Monelli D, Pinho R (2014a) Development of the OpenQuake engine, the Global Earthquake Model’s open-source software for seismic risk assessment. Nat Hazards 72:1409–1427. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-013-0618-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silva V, Crowley H, Varum H, Pinho R, Sousa L (2015) Investigation of the characteristics of Portuguese regular moment-frame RC buildings and development of a vulnerability model. Bull Earthq Eng 13:1455–1490. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-014-9669-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silva V, Crowley H, Varum H, Pinho R, Sousa R (2014b) Evaluation of analytical methodologies used to derive vulnerability functions. Earthq Eng Struct Dynam 43:181–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence R (2007) Earthquake disaster scenario prediction and loss modelling for urban areas. IUSS Press, Pavia

  • Tavakoli B, Favakoli A (1993) Estimating the vulnerability and loss functions of residential buildings. Nat Hazards 7:155–171. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00680428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tobita T, Miyajima M, Fallahi A, Alaghebandian R, Ghayamghamian MR (2007) Seismic intensity estimation through questionnaire survey and collapse rates of various building types in the 2003 Bam Iran, Earthquake. Earthq Spectra 23:841–865. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.2790490

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uva G, Porco F, Fiore A (2012) Appraisal of masonry infill walls effect in the seismic response of RC framed buildings: a case study. Eng Struct 34:514–526. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2011.08.043

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vamvatsikos D, Aschheim MA (2016) Performance-based seismic design via yield frequency spectra. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 45:1759–1778 doi:doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2727

  • Villar-Vega M et al (2017) Development of a fragility model for the residential building stock in South America. Earthq Spectra 33:581–604. https://doi.org/10.1193/010716eqs005m

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weatherill GA, Silva V, Crowley H, Bazzurro P (2015) Exploring the impact of spatial correlations and uncertainties for portfolio analysis in probabilistic seismic loss estimation. Bull Earthq Eng 13:957–981. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-015-9730-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xue Q, Wu C-W (2006) Preliminary detailing for displacement-based seismic design of buildings. Eng Struct 28:431–440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2005.08.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Dr. Hossein Tajmir Riahi for his kind help and insightful suggestions in the process of exploring the building stock data for Isfahan. We also thank the Municipality of Isfahan and the related sectors of Isfahan Municipality ICT Organization and Urban Development and Architecture Assistance for providing the GIS-based data of 2011 Census to be used within the scope of this study. Finally, we thank the associate editor and three anonymous reviewers whose comments and suggestions significantly increased the quality and the clarity of this manuscript.

Funding

The first author is grateful for the financial support provided by the Iranian National Elites Foundation and by the Scuola Universitaria Superiore IUSS Pavia. Additional financial support has been provided by the Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (EASME) under the powers delegated by the European Commission through the Horizon 2020 program “HYPERION- Development of a decision support system for improved resilience & sustainable reconstruction of historic areas to cope with climate change & extreme events based on novel sensors and modelling tools”, Grant Agreement number 821054.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. RED, Risk Engineering + Development, Pavia, Italy

    Mohsen Kohrangi

  2. Scuola Universitaria Superiore IUSS Pavia, Pavia, Italy

    Paolo Bazzurro

  3. School of Civil Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, Athens, Greece

    Dimitrios Vamvatsikos

Authors
  1. Mohsen Kohrangi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Paolo Bazzurro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dimitrios Vamvatsikos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohsen Kohrangi.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author declares that they have no conflict of interest.

Code availability

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Mohsen Kohrangi: Formerly at: Scuola Universitaria Superiore IUSS Pavia, Pavia, Italy.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kohrangi, M., Bazzurro, P. & Vamvatsikos, D. Seismic risk and loss estimation for the building stock in Isfahan. Part I: exposure and vulnerability. Bull Earthquake Eng 19, 1709–1737 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-020-01036-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-020-01036-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation