Istanbul earthquake rapid response system: Methods and practices

Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering

Volumn 31, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 170-180

  Sesetyan, Karin ^a   Zulfikar, Can ^a   Demircioglu, Mine ^a   Hancilar, Ufuk ^a   Kamer, Yaver ^a   Erdik, Mustafa ^a  

^a BOGAZICI UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

Earthquake rapid response; Istanbul; Loss map; Shake map

Indexed keywords

BUILDING DAMAGE; DAMAGE ESTIMATION; DISASTROUS EARTHQUAKE; EARTHQUAKE DAMAGES; EARTHQUAKE PARAMETERS; EARTHQUAKE RISK; GROUND MOTIONS; GROUND-SHAKING; ISTANBUL; MODERN TECHNOLOGIES; NEAR-REAL TIME; POTENTIAL IMPACTS; PROCESSING CENTER; RAPID ESTIMATION; RAPID RESPONSE; SHAKE-MAP; STRONG GROUND MOTION; URBAN AREAS; VALIDATION AND VERIFICATION;

DATA PROCESSING; ESTIMATION;

EARTHQUAKES;

EARTHQUAKE DAMAGE; EARTHQUAKE EVENT; GROUND MOTION; HAZARD ASSESSMENT; RISK ASSESSMENT; SEISMIC RESPONSE; SHAKING TABLE TEST; SOCIAL IMPACT; STRONG MOTION;

ISTANBUL [ISTANBUL (PRV)]; ISTANBUL [TURKEY]; TURKEY;

EID: 78649477898     PISSN: 02677261     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2010.02.012     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Erdik M., Fahjan Y., Ozel O., Alcik H., Mert A., Gul M. Istanbul earthquake rapid response and the early warning system. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 2003, 1:157-163.
2. Erdik M., Fahjan Y. Damage scenarios and damage evaluation. Assessing and managing earthquake risk 2006, Springer, 543pp.
3. Le Pichon X, Sengor AMC, Taymaz T. The Marmara fault and the future Istanbul earthquake. In: Karaca M, Ural DN, editors. ITU-IAHS international conference on the Kocaeli earthquake, 17 August 1999, Istanbul Technical University, Turkey, 1999. p. 41-54.
4. Le Pichon X., Chamot-Rooke N., Rangin C., Sengor A.M.C. The North Anatolian Fault in the Sea of Marmara. Journal of Geophysical Research 2003, 108(B4):2179. 10.1029/2002JB001862.
5. Sengor A.M.C., Tuysuz O., Imren C., Sakinc M., Eyidogan H., Gorur N., et al. The North Anatolian Fault. A new look. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences 2005, 33:37-112.
6. Parsons T. Recalculated probability of M>7 earthquakes beneath the Sea of Marmara, Turkey. Journal of Geophysical Research 2004, 109:B05304. 10.1029/2003JB002667.
7. Armijo R., Pondard N., Meyer B., Mercier de Lepinay B., Ucarkus G., Malavieille J., et al. Submarine fault scarps in the Sea of Marmara pull-apart (North Anatolian Fault): implications for seismic hazard in Istanbul. Geochemistry, Geophysics, and Geosystems 2005, 1-29.
8. Ambraseys N.N., Finkel C. The Saros-Marmara earthquake of 9 August 1912. Journal of Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1987, 15/1:189-212.
9. Erdik M., Demircioĝlu M., Sesetyan K., Durukal E., Siyahi B. Earthquake hazard in Marmara region, Turkey. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 2004, 24:605-631.
10. NEHRP NEHRP recommended provisions for seismic regulations for new buildings 1997, FEMA, Washington, DC, USA.
11. FEMA356 Federal Emergency Management Agency, prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings 2000, FEMA Publication 356, Washington, DC, USA.
12. Erdik M., Durukal E., Siyahi B., Fahjan Y., Şeşetyan K., Demircioĝlu M.B., et al. Earthquake risk mitigation in Istanbul. Earthquake science and seismic risk reduction 2003, Kluwer, [chapter 7]. F. Mulargia, R.J. Geller (Eds.).
13. Wald DJ, Worden BC, Quitoriano V, Pankow KL. ShakeMap manual: technical manual, user's guide, and software guide. US Geological Survey, Techniques and Methods, Book 12, Section A-1, Reston, Virginia, USA, 2005.
14. Wells D.L., Coppersmith K.J. New empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, rupture area, and surface displacement. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 1994, 84:974-1002.
15. Boore D.M., Joyner W.B., Fumal T.E. Equations for estimating horizontal response spectra and peak accelerations from western North American earthquakes: a summary of recent work. Seismological Research Letters 1997, 68:128-153.
16. Akkar S., Bommer J.J. New empirical prediction equations for peak ground velocity derived from strong-motion records from Europe and the Middle East. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 2007, 97:511-530.
17. Campbell K.W., Bozorgnia Y. Campbell-Bozorgnia NGA horizontal ground motion model for PGA, PGV, PGD and 5% damped linear elastic response spectra. Earthquake Spectra 2008, 24:139-171.
18. Chiou B., Youngs R.R. An NGA model for the average horizontal component of peak ground motion and response spectra. Earthquake Spectra 2008, 24:173-215.
19. Boore D.M., Atkinson G.M. Ground-motion prediction equations for the average horizontal component of PGA, PGV, and 5%-damped PSA at spectral periods between 0.01s and 10.0s. Earthquake Spectra 2008, 24:99-138.
20. Borcherdt R.D. Estimates of site-dependent response spectra for design (methodology and justification). Earthquake Spectra 1994, 10:617-654.
21. Demircioglu MB, Erdik M, Hancilar U, Sesetyan K, Tuzun C, Yenidogan, et al. Technical manual-earthquake loss estimation routine ELER-v1.0. Bogazici University, Department of Earthquake Engineering, Istanbul, March 2009.
22. Boatwright J., Bundock H., Luetgert J., Seekins L., Gee L., Lombard P. The dependence of PGA and PGV on distance and magnitude inferred from Northern California ShakeMap data. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 2003, 93:2043-2055.
23. Wald D.J., Quitoriano V., Heaton T.H., Kanamori H. Relationship between peak ground acceleration, peak ground velocity, and modified Mercalli intensity for earthquakes in California. Earthquake Spectra 1999, 15:557-564.
24. Atkinson GM, Kaka SI. Relationships between felt intensity and instrumental ground motion for New Madrid ShakeMap. Carleton University Working Paper, 2006.
25. Sokolov V.Y. Seismic intensity and Fourier acceleration spectra: revised relationship. Earthquake Spectra 2002, 18:161-187.
26. Sesetyan K, Durukal E, Demircioglu M, Erdik M. A revised intensity attenuation relationship for Turkey. Poster Presentation, European Geosciences Union General Assembly 2005, Vienna, Austria, Abstract no. 7-05037, 2005.
27. Sokolov V.Y., Wald D.J. Instrumental intensity distribution for the Hector Mine, California, and the Chi-Chi, Taiwan, earthquakes: comparison of two methods. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 2002, 92:2145-2162.
28. Boore D.M. Simulation of ground motion using the stochastic method. Pure and Applied Geophysics 2003, 160:635-676.
29. Allen TI, Wald DJ. Evaluation of ground-motion modeling techniques for use in global ShakeMap-a critique of instrumental ground-motion prediction equations, peak ground motion to macroseismic intensity conversions, and macroseismic intensity predictions in different tectonic settings. USGS Open File Report 2009-1047, 2009.
30. Lagomarsino S., Giovinazzi S. Macroseismic and mechanical models for the vulnerability and damage assessment of current buildings. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 2006, 4:415-443.
31. ATC 40 Seismic evaluation and retrofit of concrete buildings 1996, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, California.
32. FEMA, NIBS Earthquake loss estimation methodology-HAZUS 1999 1999, Federal Emergency Management Agency and National Institute of Building Science, Washington, DC, USA.
33. FEMA 440. Improvement of nonlinear static seismic analysis procedures. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Report no. 440, Applied Technology Council, Washington, DC, USA, 2005.
34. Vidic T., Fajfar P., Fischinger M. Consistent inelastic design spectra: strength and displacement. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1994, 23:507-521.
35. Fajfar P. A non linear analysis method for performance-based seismic design. Earthquake Spectra 2000, 16:573-591.
36. ASCE/SEI 41-06. Seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings. American Association of Civil Engineers, ASCE Standard No. ASCE/SEI 41-06, Washington, DC, USA, 2007.