ارزیابی سناریوهای مختلف زلزله در شهر تهران با رویکرد انعطاف پذیری شهری

محورهای موضوعی : فصلنامه علمی برنامه ریزی منطقه ای

کیانوش ذاکرحقیقی ¹ (دانشیار گروه شهرسازی، واحد همدان، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، همدان، ایران)
محسن مهرجو ² (دانشجوی دکتری شهرسازی، واحد شهر قدس، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران ، ایران)

تاریخ دریافت : 1399/08/19 تاریخ پذیرش : 1399/09/25 تاریخ انتشار : 1399/11/01

کلید واژه: زلزله, انعطاف شهری, سناریوهای محتمل, Raduis,

چکیده مقاله :

زلزله در مناطق شهری در سراسر جهان به یک نگرانی عمده برای ساکنین و مدیران شهری به دلیل خسارتهای بالقوه به زندگی و آسیب گسترده به زیر ساختهای شهری که پس از زلزله رخ می‌دهد، تبدیل شده است. کشور ایران یکی از لرزه خیزترین کشورهای جهان محسوب شده که تقریبا تمامی مناطق آن در معرض وقوع زلزله‌های متوسط تا بزرگ قرار دارند شهر تهران نیز به عنوان پایتخت کشور، از این قائده مستثنی نبوده. از سال 1830 میلادی ( زلزله 7 ریشتر شمیرانات ) تاکنون هیچ زلزله شدیدی را تجربه نکرده است. بر طبق آمار، دوره بازگشت زلزله شدید در تهران 150 سال می‌باشد. شهر تهران براساس سرشماری نفوس و مسکن با جمعیتی بالغ بر 8.5 میلیون نفر درخود جای داده است این در حالی است که در شهر تهران 3268 هکتار از نواحی شهر تهران به عنوان بافت فرسوده شناسایی گردیده است. پیش بینی آسیب‌های لرزه ای مبتنی بر سناریوهای محتمل در شهر تهران می‌تواند تصمیم گیران را جهت شناسایی اولویتهای برنامه ریزی جهت کاهش خسارت کمک نماید. در این پژوهش سعی بر آن است با استفاده از سناریوهای محتمل زلزله شهر تهران با استفاده از نرم افزارهای تحلیل، میزان خسارات وارده را ارزیابی و درانتها بر اساس نقشه‌های موجود، پهنه‌های در اولویت اقدام جهت برنامه ریزی مشخص گردد تا از این طریق بتوان انعطاف شهر در برابر بحران‌های طبیعی را مورد ارزیابی قرار داد. روش کار در این پژوهش به اینصورت است که با توجه به آخرین اطلاعات موجود و استفاده از نرم افزار ARCGIS تمامی شهر تهران به سلولهای500 *500 تبدیل گردیده و تمامی اطلاعات موجود در این سلولها در نرم افزار Raduis وارد گردیده است که براساس سناریوهای احتمالی زلزله نقشه‌های متفاوتی تهیه گردیده است. در انتها با مقایسه هر سلول بحرانی ترین حالت در نظر گرفته شده و در انتها نقشه بحرانی زلزله و مشخص کردن مناطق بحرانی ارائه گردیده است.

چکیده انگلیسی:

Objective: Earthquakes in urban areas worldwide have become a significant concern for residents and city administrators because of potential losses to life and widespread damage to urban infrastructure that occurs after the earthquake. Iran is considered one of the most critical countries globally. Almost all of its regions are subject to medium to large earthquakes. Tehran, as the capital of the country, is no exception to this rule. Since 1830, no earthquake has ever experienced severe earthquakes.
Methods: This study aims to prepare an earthquake scenario and identify regions prone to earthquake risk in Tehran City.
Results: The information about the earthquake in Tehran is calculated based on the previous studies of the prevention and management of the Tehran crisis, according to distance and fault arrangement, and the depth of the earthquake. The results were calculated based on three seismic scenarios of Parchin, Niavaran, Moshae, and Varmin, and for each of these scenarios, there was a map of human and construction loss. Considering that the point is given to each of the 500 x 500 networks in each scenario, the most considerable amount obtained in each scenario is presented to the networks mentioned above as the resultant of scenarios, and the consequent result is presented as the resulting maps of an earthquake.
Conclusion: Different maps have been prepared based on possible earthquake scenarios. The most critical situation is considered by comparing each cell, and in the end, the critical map of the earthquake and the identification of critical areas are presented. As a simple software and with the help of GIS software, RADIUS software can help managers and urban planners reach a flexible urban environment. In the earthquake, most of the earthquake damage and the earthquake-related to the fault will be Niavaran. Most of the casualties in the northeast of Tehran will be due to the population density, which is required to pay attention to urban managers in these areas to emergency housing centers, hospitals, and more attention to construction considerations in these areas.

منابع و مأخذ:

1. Abdollahi, M. (2001). Disaster Management in Urban Areas, Municipalities Organization Press, First Edition. Tehran. (in Persian language)


2. Ahadnejad, M. (2009), Urban vulnerability’s modelling for earthquake (Case study: Zanjan city), Ph.D. Dissertation for Ph.D. in Geography and urban planning, University of Tehran. (in Persian language)


3. Alam, M. N., Alam, M. S., and Tesfamariam, S. (2011). Buildings’ seismic vulnerability assessment methods: A comparative study. Nat. Hazards, 62(2), 405–424


4. Alexander, D. (2006). The Globalization Of Disasters. Journal of International Affairs. Vol. 59, No. 2


5. Anagnostopoulos, S., Providakis, C., Salvaneschi, P., Athanasopoulos, G., and Bonacina, G. (2008). SEISMOCARE: An efficient GIS tool for scenario-type investigations of seismic risk of existing cities. Soil. Dyn. Earthquake Eng., 28(2), 73–84.


6. Ara, S. (2014). Impact of temporal population distribution on earthquake loss estimation: a case study on Sylhet, Bangladesh. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 5(4), pp.296-312.


7. Asadi, E., & Adeli, H. (2018). Seismic performance factors for low‐to mid‐rise steel diagrid structural systems. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, e1505.


8. Assar, M. & Nadim, A. (1994). Guide to improving the environment to deal with natural disasters, Tehran. (in Persian language)


9. Barbat, A. H., Pujades, L. G., & Lantada, N. (2008). Seismic damage evaluation in urban areas using the capacity spectrum method: application to Barcelona. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 28(10), 851-865.


10. Beck, U. (1992). Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity, New Delhi: Sang (Translated from the German isikogesellschaft).


11. Birkmann, J., 2006, Measuring Vulnerability to Natural Hazards: Towards Disaster Resilient Societies, United Nations University Press, Tokyo.


12. Cardona, O. D., Ordaz Schroder, M. G., Reinoso, E., Yamín, L., & Barbat, H. A. (2010). Comprehensive approach for probabilistic risk assessment (CAPRA): international initiative for disaster risk management effectiveness. In 14th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering (pp. 1-10).


13. Cavallo, A., & Ireland, V. (2014). Preparing for complex interdependent risks: A system of systems approach to building disaster resilience. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 9, 181–193.


14. Collier, M. J., Nedović-Budić, Z., Aerts, J., Connop, S., Foley, D., Foley, K., ... Verburg, P. (2013). Transitioning to resilience and sustainability in urban communities. Cities, 32 , 21–28.


15. Dolce, M., Masi, A., Marino, M. and Vona, M., 2003. Earthquake damage scenarios of the building stock of Potenza (Southern Italy) including site effects. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 1(1), pp.115-140.


16. Federica Battista and Stephan Baas (2004).The Role of Local Institutions in Reducing vulnerability to recurrent natural disasters and in sustainable livelihoods development , consolidated report on case studies and workshop findings and ecommendations.


17. FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). 2003. Multi- hazard loss estimation methodology—Earthquake model. In HAZUS-MH MR4: Technical Manual. Washington, DC: Department of Homeland Security


18. Fischer III, Henry; Charls K, Scharnberger .(1996). Redusing Seismic Vulnerability in low to modarate risk areas. Disaster Prevention and Management.


19. Haji Ali Akbari, K. (2018). Neighborhood Development: a framework for inefficient neighborhoods of Tehran. Research and Planning Center of Tehran. Tehran. (in Persian language)


20. Hassanzadeh, R., Nedović-Budić, Z., Razavi, A. A., Norouzzadeh, M., & Hodhodkian, H. (2013). Interactive approach for GIS-based earthquake scenario development and resource estimation (Karmania hazard model). Computers & geosciences, 51, 324-338


21. ImageCat (2018), http://www.imagecatinc.com/, browsed on September 29, 2018.


22. Jabareen, Y. (2013). Planning the resilient city: Concepts and strategies for coping with climate change and environmental risk. Cities, 31, 220–229.


23. JICA ( Japan International Cooperation Agency) and the TDMMO (Tehran Disaster Mitigation andManagement Organization) ,2004, The comprehensive master plan study on urban seismic disaster prevention and management for the Greater Tehran Area in Iran, Main Final Report. Pacific Consultant International, Tokyo


24. Karimzadeh, S., Miyajima, M., Hassanzadeh, R., Amiraslanzadeh, R., & Kamel, B. (2014). A GIS-based seismic hazard, building vulnerability and human loss assessment for the earthquake scenario in Tabriz. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 66, 263-280.


25. Lantada, N., Irizarry, J., Barbat, A. H., Goula, X., Roca, A., Susagna, T., & Pujades, L. G. (2010). Seismic hazard and risk scenarios for Barcelona, Spain, using the Risk-UE vulnerability index method. Bulletin of earthquake engineering, 8(2), 201-229.


26. Malalgoda, C., Amaratunga, D., & Haigh, R. (2014). Challenges in creating a disaster resilient built environment. Procedia Economics and Finance, 18, 736–744.


27. Mazumder , Ram Krishna., Salman, Abdullahi . ( 2018 ). Seismic Damage Assessment Using RADIUS and GIS: A Case Study of Sylhet City, Bangladesh , International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction


28. Mohammadi Deh cheshmeh, M. (2013). Urban Safety and Passive Deffence. Shahid Chamran Unversity Press. Ahvaz. (in Persian language)


29. Moor, J., 2001, Cities at risk, Habitat Debate, 7(4), 1–6.


30. Naderzadeh, A. (2004). Study for detailed plan of prevention and urban disaster management. Haft Shahr Journal, No.18-19. Tehran. (in Persian language)


31. OECD (2017). http://www.oecd.org/sti/sci-tech/theglobalearthquakemodelgem.htm, browsed on December 19, 2017


32. Okazaki, K. (2000). RADIUS—Risk assessment tools for diagnosis of urban areas against seismic disasters. http://www.unisdr.org/publications/v.php?id=2752æ (browsed on Dec 18, 2).


33. Omand, D., 2005, Developing National Resilience, RUSI Journal, Vol. 50, No. 4, PP. 14-18.


34. Pelling, Mark. The Vulnerability of Cities: Natural Disasters and Social Resilience, London, Earthscan.


35. Poyan, J. & Nategh Elahi, F. (1998). Evaluation of earthquake vulnerability in mega cities (Case study: Tehran City), Third International Conference of Eeartquake Engineering. Tehran. (in Persian language)


36. Rockefeller Foundation, & ARUP (2014). City resilience framework, Ove Arup & Partners International Limited 2014.


37. Smart Mature Resilience (2016a). Smart mature resilience. http://smr-project.eu/home/, Accessed date: 19 December 2017.


38. Tantala,M.W., Nordenson, J. P., Deodatis,G.,2000, Earthquake loss estimation study for the new York city area, New York City Area Consortium for Earthquake Loss Mitigation , Department of civil engineering and environmental engineering Princeton university