اشتراک گذاری

آدرس مقاله


کد مقاله : IJES-2008-1517 (R1) بازدید : 145 صفحه: 77 - 93

10.30495/ijes.2021.678953

نوع مقاله: پژوهشی

Seismic risk assessment for central Indo-Gangetic Plains, India

محورهای موضوعی : Mineralogy

Raghucharan Manikya 1 , Surendra Somala 2 , Olga Erteleva 3 , Rogozhin Evgenii 4

1 - Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad Hyderabad - 502285, India.
2 - Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad, Hyderabad - 502285, India.
3 - Schmidt Institute of Physics of the Earth, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow – 123242, Russia
4 - Schmidt Institute of Physics of the Earth, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow – 123242, Russia

تاریخ دریافت : 1399/05/13 تاریخ پذیرش : 1399/10/09 تاریخ انتشار : 1400/01/12

کلید واژه: Central Indo-Gangetic Plains (CIGP), Seismic Hazard, OpenQuake engine, SELENA, Seismic risk,

چکیده مقاله :

Seismic hazard for the central indo-gangetic plains (CIGP) is either available in terms of generalized hazard spectrum as per IS 1893:2016 or in terms of only Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) at the city level. Also, the study region falls in the seismic gap region, which has a potential for an earthquake of Mw>8.0. Hence, in this study, the seismic risk is assessed for the first time at the district level in the seismically critical region of India, the CIGP. In addition, the relative contribution of parametric and model uncertainties is also quantified from sensitivity analysis. Seismic risk results reveal that mud mortar bricks with temporary roofing (MMB) have the highest collapse probability of ~0.6. Further, brick walls with stone roof (BSR) and brick walls with metal sheet roof (BMS) also have high extensive and collapse damage compared to other building groups. These building types need immediate retrofitting / replacement for effective disaster mitigation. Also, geo-unit Allahabad, even though lying in zone II as per IS 1893:2016, has the most number of homeless and uninhabitable dwellings. Further, for a future earthquake of magnitude in the range of Mw 7.5 and 8.5, the expected financial loss might vary from 60 to 150 billion dollars, and the human loss might vary between 0.8 and 2.8 lakhs, respectively. Finally, results from this study will create awareness in the general public, policymakers, and structural engineers for taking up necessary mitigation measures on the existing buildings of CIGP for better preparedness from a future strong earthquake.

چکیده انگلیسی:

منابع و مأخذ:


  1. Abrahamson N, Silva W (2008) Summary of the Abrahamson & Silva NGA ground-motion relations, Earthquake spectra 24:67-97.
    2.
  2. Anbazhagan P, Kumar A, Sitharam TG (2013) Ground motion prediction equation considering combined dataset of recorded and simulated ground motions, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 53:92-108.
    3.
  3. ATC A 40 (1996) Seismic evaluation and retrofit of concrete buildings. Applied Technology Council, report ATC-40. Redwood City.
    4.
  4. Atkinson GM, Boore DM (2006) Earthquake ground-motion prediction equations for eastern North America, Bulletin of Seismological Society of America 96:2181-2205.
    5.
  5. Bagchi S, Raghukanth STG (2017) Seismic Response of the Central Part of Indo-Gangetic Plain, Journal of Earthquake Engineering 23:183-207.
    6.
  6. Bahadori H, Hasheminezhad A, Karimi A (2017) Development of an integrated model for seismic vulnerability assessment of residential buildings: Application to Mahabad City, Iran, Journal of Building Engineering 12:118-31.
    7.
  7. Basu S, Nigam NC (1977) Seismic risk analysis of Indian peninsula. In Proceedings of sixth world conference on earthquake engineering, New Delhi 1:782–788.
    8.
  8. Bhatia SC, Kumar MR, Gupta HK (1999) A probabilistic seismic hazard map of India and adjoining regions.
    9.
  9. Bilham R (2009) The seismic future of cities, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 7:839.
    10.
  10. Bilham R, Bodin P, Jackson M (1995) Entertaining a great earthquake in western Nepal: historic inactivity and geodetic tests for the present state of strain, Journal of Nepal Geological Society 11:73-78.
    11.
  11. Bilham R, Wallace K (2005) Future Mw> 8 earthquakes in the Himalaya: implications from the 26 Dec 2004 Mw= 9.0 earthquake on India’s eastern plate margin, Geological Survey of India Special Publication 85:1-4.
    12.
  12. BIS (Bureau of Indian Standards) (2016) Indian Standard Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures: General Provisions and Buildings, IS 1893-Part 1, Fifth Revision. BIS, New Delhi, India.
    13.
  13. Boore DM, Atkinson GM (2008) Ground-motion prediction equations for the average horizontal component of PGA, PGV, and 5%-damped PSA at spectral periods between 0.01 s and 10.0 s, Earthquake Spectra 24:99-138.
    14.
  14. Bozorgnia Y, Abrahamson NA, Atik LA, Ancheta TD, Atkinson GM, Baker JW, Baltay A, Boore DM, Campbell KW, Chiou BSJ, Darragh R (2014) NGA-West2 research project, Earthquake Spectra 30:973-987.
    15.
  15. Campbell KW, Bozorgnia Y (2003) Updated near-source ground-motion (attenuation) relations for the horizontal and vertical components of peak ground acceleration and acceleration response spectra, Bulletin of Seismological Society of America 93:314-331.
    16.
  16. Cattari S, Curti E, Giovinazzi S, Lagomarsino S, Parodi S, Penna A (2004) A mechanical model for the vulnerability assessment of masonry buildings in urban areas. In Proceedings of the VI Congreso nazionale “L’ingegneria Sismica in Italia”, Genova, Italy
    17.
  17. Chadha RK, Srinagesh D, Srinivas D, Suresh G, Sateesh A, Singh SK, Pérez‐Campos X, Suresh G, Koketsu K, Masuda T, Domen, K (2015) CIGN, a strong‐motion seismic network in central Indo‐Gangetic plains, foothills of Himalayas: First results, Seismological Research Letters 87:37-46.
    18.
  18. Cornell CA (1968) Engineering seismic risk analysis, Bulletin of Seismological Society of America 58:1583-1606.
    19.
  19. Das S, Gupta ID, Gupta VK (2006) A probabilistic seismic hazard analysis of northeast India, Earthquake Spectra 22: 1-27.
    20.
  20. Duzgun HS, Yucemen MS, Kalaycioglu HS, Celik KE, Kemec S, Ertugay K, Deniz A (2011) An integrated earthquake vulnerability assessment framework for urban areas, Natural hazards 59(2):917-47.
    21.
  21. Federal Emergency Management Agency FEMA (1997) NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings, FEMA 273, Washington DC, United States.
    22.
  22. Federal Emergency Management Agency FEMA (2000). commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings (FEMA356). Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency, 7.
    23.
  23. Federal Emergency Management Agency FEMA (2003) HAZUS‐MH. Multi‐hazard Loss Estimation Methodology, Technical manual., Washington DC, United States.
    24.
  24. Federal Emergency Management Agency FEMA (2005) Improvement of nonlinear static seismic analysis procedures, FEMA 440. Technical report, Applied Technology Council, California, United States.
    25.
  25. Freeman SA (1975) Evaluations of existing buildings for seismic risk-A case study of Puget Sound Naval Shipyard. In Proc. 1st US National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Bremerton, Washington: 113-122.
    26.
  26. Freeman SA (1978) Prediction of response of concrete buildings to severe earthquake motion. Special Publication 55:589-606.
    27.
  27. Gandomi AH, Alavi AH, Mousavi M, Tabatabaei SM (2011) A hybrid computational approach to derive new ground-motion prediction equations, Engineering Application of Artificial Intelligence 24:717-732.
    28.
  28. Ghatak C, Nath SK, Devaraj N (2017) Earthquake induced deterministic damage and economic loss estimation for Kolkata India, Journal of Rehabilitation in Civil Engineering 5:1-24.
    29.
  29. Ghosh B, Pappin JW, So MML, Hicyilmaz KMO (2012) Seismic hazard assessment in India. In Proc. of the Fifteenth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering-2012.
    30.
  30. Jaiswal K, Sinha R (2007) Probabilistic seismic-hazard estimation for peninsular India, Bulletin of Seismological Society of America 97:318-330.
    31.
  31. Kappos AJ, Panagopoulos G, Penelis GG (2008) Development of a seismic damage and loss scenario for contemporary and historical buildings in Thessaloniki, Greece, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 28(10-11):836-50.
    32.
  32. Kappos AJ, Panagopoulos G (2010) Fragility curves for reinforced concrete buildings in Greece, Structural and Infrastructure Engineering 6(1-2):39-53.
    33.
  33. Khattri KN, Rogers AM, Perkins DM, Algermissen ST (1984) A seismic hazard map of India and adjacent areas, Tectonophysics 108:93-134.
    34.
  34. Khattri KN (1999) An evaluation of earthquakes hazard and risk in northern India, Himalayan Geology 20:1-46.
    35.
  35. Krawinkler H, Seneviratna GDPK (1998) Pros and cons of a pushover analysis of seismic performance evaluation, Engineering Structures 20:452-464.
    36.
  36. Kumar A, Anbazhagan P, Sitharam TG (2013) Seismic hazard analysis of Lucknow considering local and active seismic gaps, Natural Hazards 69:327-350.
    37.
  37. Kumar A, Mittal H, Sachdeva R, Kumar A (2012) Indian strong motion instrumentation network, Seismological Research Letters 83:59-66.
    38.
  38. Lang DH, Singh Y, Prasad JSR (2012) Comparing empirical and analytical estimates of earthquake loss assessment studies for the city of Dehradun, India, Earthquake Spectra 28:595-619.
    39.
  39. Lang DH (2013) Earthquake damage and loss assessment–predicting the unpredictable.
    40.
  40. Li S, Wang Q, Chen G, He P, Ding K, Chen Y, Zou R (2019) Interseismic Coupling in the Central Nepalese Himalaya: Spatial Correlation with the 2015 Mw 7.9 Gorkha Earthquake, Pure and Applied Geophysics 1-9.
    41.
  41. Mahajan AK, Thakur VC, Sharma ML, Chauhan M (2010) Probabilistic seismic hazard map of NW Himalaya and its adjoining area, India, Natural Hazards 53:443-457.
    42.
  42. Molina S, Lindholm C (2005) A logic tree extension of the capacity spectrum method developed to estimate seismic risk in Oslo, Norway, Journal of Earthquake Engineering 9:877-97.
    43.
  43. Molina S, Lang DH, Lindholm CD (2010) SELENA–An open-source tool for seismic risk and loss assessment using a logic tree computation procedure, Computers and Geosciences 36(3):257-69.
    44.
  44. Molina S, Lang DH, Meslem A, and Lindholm C (2015) SELENA v6.5-User and Technical Manual v6.5. Report no. 15‐008, Kjeller (Norway) – Alicante (Spain).
    45.
  45. McGuire RK (1976) FORTRAN computer program for seismic risk analysis (No. 76-67). US Geological Survey.
    46.
  46. McGuire RK (2004) Seismic hazard and risk analysis, EERI Original Monograph Series MNO-10, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, U.S., 221 pp.
    47.
  47. Nanda RP, Paul NK, Chanu NM, Rout S (2015) Seismic risk assessment of building stocks in Indian context, Natural Hazards 78:2035-51.
    48.
  48. Nath SK, Adhikari MD, Maiti SK, Ghatak C (2019) Earthquake hazard potential of Indo-Gangetic Foredeep: its seismotectonism, hazard, and damage modeling for the cities of Patna, Lucknow, and Varanasi, Journal of Seismology 1-45.
    49.
  49. Nath SK, Raj A, Thingbaijam KKS, Kumar A (2009) Ground motion synthesis and seismic scenario in Guwahati city; a stochastic approach, Seismological Research Letters 80:233–242.
    50.
  50. Nath SK, Thingbaijam KKS (2012) Probabilistic seismic hazard assessment of India, Seismological Research Letters 83:136–149.
    51.
  51. NDMA (2011) Development of probabilistic seismic hazard map of India, Technical Report, Working Committee of Experts (WCE), National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA), New Delhi, India.
    52.
  52. Parvez IA, Vaccari F, Panza GF (2003) A deterministic seismic hazard map of India and adjacent areas, Geophysics Journal International 155:489-508.
    53.
  53. PESMOS Department of Earthquake Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee.
    54.
  54. Petersen MD, Rastogi BK, Schweig ES, Harmsen SC, Gomberg JS (2004) Sensitivity analysis of seismic hazard for the northwestern portion of the state of Gujarat, India, Tectonophysics 390:105-115.
    55.
  55. Porter K, Scawthorn C (2007) Open-source risk estimation software. Technical Report, SPA Risk, Pasadena, United States of America.
    56.
  56. Prasad JS, Singh Y, Kaynia AM, Lindholm C (2009) Socioeconomic clustering in seismic risk assessment of urban housing stock, Earthquake spectra 25(3):619-41.
    57.
  57. Prasad J (2010) Seismic vulnerability and risk assessment of Indian urban housing. Ph.D Thesis, Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee (IITR).
    58.
  58. Raghucharan MC, Somala SN (2018) Seismic damage and loss estimation for central Indo-Gangetic Plains, India, Natural Hazards 94:883-904.
    59.
  59. Raghucharan MC, Somala SN, Rodina S (2019) Seismic attenuation model using artificial neural networks, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 126:105828.
    60.
  60. Rajendran CP, Rajendran K (2005) The status of central seismic gap: a perspective based on the spatial and temporal aspects of the large Himalayan earthquakes, Tectonophysics 395(1-2):19-39.
    61.
  61. Rajendran CP, John B, Rajendran K (2015) Medieval pulse of great earthquakes in the central Himalaya: Viewing past activities on the frontal thrust, Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth 120(3):1623-41
    62.
  62. Registrar General & Census Commissioner, India (2012) Census of India 2011
    63.
  63. Rong Y, Pagani M, Magistrale H, Weatherill G (2017) Modeling seismic hazard by integrating historical earthquake, fault, and strain rate data. In 16th international conference on earthquake engineering.
    64.
  64. Sharma ML, Malik S (2006) Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis and estimation of spectral strong ground motion on bed rock in north east India. In 4th international conference on earthquake engineering (pp. 12-13).
    65.
  65. Sitharam TG, Kolathayar S (2013) Seismic hazard analysis of India using areal sources, Journal of Asian Earth Science 62:647–653.
    66.
  66. The MathWorks Inc. (2017).  MATLAB R2017a - academic use, the language of technical computing.
    67.
  67. Verma M, Bansal BK (2013) Seismic hazard assessment and mitigation in India: an overview, International Journal of Earth Sciences 102:1203-18.
    68.
  68. Wyss M, Gupta S, Rosset P (2017) Casualty estimates in two up‐dip complementary Himalayan earthquakes, Seismological Research Letters 88:1508-1515.
    69.
  69. Wyss M, Gupta S, Rosset P (2018) Casualty estimates in repeat Himalayan earthquakes in India, Bulletin of Seismological Society of America 108:2877-2893.
    70.
  70. Wald DJ, Allen TI (2007) Topographic slope as a proxy for seismic site conditions and amplification, Bulletin of Seismological Society of America  97:1379–1395.
    71.
  71. Xu X, Zhou X, Huang X, Xu L (2017) Wedge-failure analysis of the seismic slope using the pseudodynamic method, International Journal of Geomechanics 17(12):04017108.
    72.
  72. Xu ZX, Zhou XP (2018) Three-dimensional reliability analysis of seismic slopes using the copula-based sampling method, Engineering Geology 242:81-91.
    73.
  73. Zhou XP, Cheng H (2014) Stability analysis of three-dimensional seismic landslides using the rigorous limit equilibrium method, Engineering geology 174:87-102.
    74.
  74. Zhou X, Qian Q, Cheng H, Zhang H (2015) Stability analysis of two-dimensional landslides subjected to seismic loads, Acta Mechanica Solida Sinica 28(3):262-76.
    75.
  75. Zhou X, Cheng H, Wong LN (2019) Three-dimensional stability analysis of seismically induced landslides using the displacement-based rigorous limit equilibrium method, Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment 78(7):4743-56.
    76.

سکوی نشر دانش

سند یا سکوی نشر دانش ،سامانه ای جهت مدیریت حوزه علمی و پژوهشی نشریات دانشگاه آزاد می باشد

پیوندهای سایت

مراکز مرتبط

پشتیبانی

صفحات رسمی

حقوق این وب‌سایت متعلق به سامانه مدیریت نشریات دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی است.
حق نشر © 1403-1400

صفحه اصلی| عضویت/ ورود| درباره سند| تماس با ما|
[English] [العربية] [en] [ar]