Hazard Risk Mitigation in Europe and Central Asia
WORLD BANK Workshop Istanbul, October 26-28, 2004
Seismic risk mitigation in the Seismic risk mitigation in the
Vrancea region, RomaniaVrancea region, Romania
Dan Lungu
Technical University of Civil Engineering, Bucharest and
National Institute for Building Research, Bucharest
Original Presentation has been modified for Internet Use.
Contents
1. The Romanian earthquake hazard and the 1977 disaster
in Bucharest
2. Vulnerability (fragility) of existing building stock and Codes for
earthquake resistance of buildings
3. National programs and international projects for seismic risk
mitigation in Romania
"Nowhere else in the world is a center of population so exposed to earthquakes originating repeatedly from the same source"
Charles Richter. 15 March 1977, Letter to the Romanian government
World Map of Natural Hazards prepared by the Münich Re, 1998 indicates for Bucharest: “Large city with Mexico-city effect”
1. The Romanian earthquake hazard and the 1977
disaster in Bucharest
“The unusual nature of the ground motion and the extent and distribution of the structural damage have important bearing on earthquake engineering efforts in the United States.”
Jennings & Blume, NRC & EERI Report
1000 yr catalogue of Vrancea earthquakes
• Major historical events and major 20 century earthquakes
• Number of events/century, having intensity larger than 9 and 7
Catalogue time span, years
Obs Epicentral intensity
(MSK) 984 - 1900 1901 - 2000
I0 9.0 1 2
I0 7.0 10 16
20 century shows the highest seismic activity of the Vrancea
source
≥
≥
Event
Epicentral intensity Io
Focus depth.
km
Moment
magnitude Mw
Obs
1802, October 26 1829, November 20 1838, June 23
> 9 8 8
7.9 Largest Vrancea event ever occurred
1940, November 10 1977, March 4 1986, August 30
9 8/9 7/8
150 109 133
7.7 7.5 7.2
Largest seismic losses ever experienced
≥≥
• Destroyed or seriously damaged 33,000 housing units and
caused lesser damage to 182,000 other dwellings
•Destroyed 11 hospitals and damaged 448 others hospitals, etc.
March 4, 1977 earthquake
Mw = 7.7 ; h = 109 km
Killed 1,578 people (1424 in Bucharest)
Injured 11,221 people (7598 in Bucharest)
The World Bank estimation of losses (Report 16.P-2240-RO, 1978):
• Total losses in Romania : 2.05 billion USD (100%)
Construction losses : 1.42 (70%)
Building and housing losses : 1.02 (50%)
PSHA, Probabilistic seismic hazard assessmentLungu, Demetriu, 1994-2004
1. Recurrence of Vrancea magnitude
D a t e
M o m e n t
m a g n i t u d e , M w
M e a n r e c u r r e n c e i n t e r v a l 1
)w,o
Mw,max
.687(M1e1
)w
Mw,max
1.687(Me1w
1.687M8.654e1Mw) (
2 6 O c t 1 8 0 2
8 . 0 7 . 9
1 0 N o v 1 9 4 0
7 . 7 7 . 6
4 M a r c h 1 9 7 7
3 0 A u g 1 9 8 6
7 . 5 7 . 3 7 . 2
8 2 5 0 4 0
5 0 y r
1 4 8 1 0 8
1 0 0 y r
7 7 8 y r 3 5 6
4 7 5 y r
2. Attenuation of Vrancea strong ground motion
0.5020.006h0.0005R1.000lnR1.053M3.098lnPGAw
PGA - peak ground acceleration at the site
Mw- moment magnitude: Mw,0 = 6.3 Lower threshold magnitude; Mw, max= 8.1 Max credible
R - hypocentral distance to the site; h - focal depth;
ln PGA= 0.502- standard deviation of lnPGA
Database: 80 triaxial records at 48 free-field stations in Romania, R. of Moldavia, Bulgaria
MSK intensity,from seismic zonation map
Period of construction of building
before 1940
1941-1963 1964-1977 1978-1990 after 1990
VI
VII
VIII, Bucharest
IX
Pre-code Low-
code Moderate-highcode
Quality of seismic design incorporated into existing buildings stock is modeled by four categories :
Pre-code; Low-code; Moderate-code; High-code.
2. Vulnerability (fragility) of existing building stock
and Codes for earthquake resistance of buildings
3 International lessons unlearnt from the 1977 earthquake
1
“A systematic evaluation should be made of all buildings in Bucharest erected prior to the adoption of earthquake design requirements and a hazard abatement plan should be developed.”
From:
“Observation on the behaviour of buildings in the Romanian earthquake of March 4, 1977” by G. Fattal, E. Simiu and Ch. Cluver. Edited as the NBS Special Publication 490, US Dept of Commerce, National Bureau of Standards, Sept 1977.
2“Tentative provisions for consolidation solutions would preferably be developed
urgently”. From:
“The Romanian earthquake. Survey report by Survey group of experts and specialists dispatched by the Government of Japan (K. Nakano). Edited by JICA, Japan International Cooperation Agency, June 1977.
3
“Bucharest had been microzoned as part of UNESCO Balkan Project, with microzones denoting three levels of risk. The worst destruction occurred in lowest-risk microzone.”
From:
“”Earthquake in Romania March 4,1977. An Engineering Report” by G. Berg, B. Bolt, M. Sozen, Ch. Rojahn. Edited by National Academy Press, Washington, D.C. 1980
The 1977 National strategy for strengthening
damaged buildings
“The retrofitting of buildings must provide: (i) For the old buildings – the same resistance the have before 1940 earthquake (when they survived!);(ii) For the new buildings – the same resistance the have when they were designed”
Letter to the Municipality of Bucharest of the General Inspector for Construction of Romania, based on March 30, 1977, Order of Romanian Government
“Retrofitting of the buildings damaged by the 1977 earthquake will consist of strict local repairing of damaged elements. Additional measures for seismic protection are not allowed.”
Letter to the technical University of Civil Engineering, Bucharest from General Inspector for Construction of Romania and General
Director of Central Institute for Research Design and Coordinator for Construction, July 11, 1977
Importance and exposure class Vulnerability class I II III IV
i 1 1 2 3 ii 1 2 3 3 iii 3
Seismic risk class Matrix
“Seismic risk class 1 buildings”
Building to be immediately retrofitted!
City
Number of vulnerable
buildings
Number of inhabitants
Bacau 6 208.643
Barlad 6 78.786
Braila 4 232.409
Brasov 8 312.481
Bucharest 123+ ... 2.011.305
Buzau 1 146.926
Campina 2 40.297
Iasi 49 347.606
Roman 1 81.731
Suceava 1 118.183
Targu-Mures 1 164.132
Vaslui 6 78.735
Vulnerable residential buildings-from Ministry of Transports, Constructions and Tourism of Romania-
Number of vulnerable schools
City Requiring technical
assessment
Having a technical
report
Having technical
documents
Total
Bacau 1 - - 1 Barlad 11 - - 11 Brasov 7 2 - 9 Bucharest 13 7 2 22 Constanta - - 1 1 Craiova 2 - 5 7 Galati 1 2 - 3 Giurgiu 2 - - 2 Iasi 3 5 - 8 Pitesti - 1 1 2 Ploiesti 1 5 - 6 Sibiu 3 1 - 4 Vaslui 10 - - 10 Total 54 23 9 86
Vulnerable school buildings -from Ministry of Education and Research of Romania-
Vulnerable hospital buildings -from Ministry of Health and Family of Romania-
Number of vulnerable hospitals
CITY Severely damaged.
Requiring immediate technical assessment
Having a technical report
Approved project for retrofitting
Retrofitting in work
Total
Bacau 3 3 Barlad 2 2 Bucharest 13 16 6 10 45 Buzau 9 9 Constanta 7 7 Craiova 4 4 Focsani 2 2 Galati 6 2 1 9 Giurgiu 1 1 Iasi 21 17 2 5 45 Pitesti 2 7 9 Ploiesti 2 2 Sibiu 1 1 Targu-Mures 2 2 Vaslui 4 1 5 Total 68 47 12 19 146
Objectives:
1. Strengthening of “seismic risk class 1” buildings: Legislation + Construction
work;
2. Upgrading of the code for seismic design of buildings and
structures;
3. Seismic instrumentation
3. National programs and International projects for
seismic risk mitigation in Romania
Strengthening work for the 123 highly
vulnerable buildings in Bucharest
October 2004:
3 buildings are fully retrofitted
8 buildings are under retrofitting
16 buildings have retrofitting projects ready
8 buildings are on the waiting list for retrofitting
Upgrading the code for seismic design of buildings and structures
The draft of the New code for earthquake resistance of new structures,
P100-2004, following EUROCODE 8 format, was just issued (Jan 2004)
The draft of the New code for earthquake resistance of existing buildings
and structures: to be prepared !
Name of network Bucharest Romania
(including Bucharest) INCERC & ISC, State Inspectorate for Construction
7 ETNA 31 ETNA New digital networks, installed in 2003
CNRRS & JICA, Japan International Cooperation Agency Project1
11 K2 16 instruments: -11 K2; - 5 ETNA
INCERC
21 instruments: -10 SMA-1 (analog) -9 ADS (digital) -2 digital stations for continuous monitoring
70 instruments: -58 SMA-1(analog) -9 ADS (digital) 3 digital station for continuous monitoring Existing seismic
networks, in 2002 INFP/SFB 461 German Science Foundation Project at University of Karlsruhe
15 K2 41 K2
TOTAL 54 digital instruments 158 instrumentsinstruments
100 digital
Seismic instrumentation in Romania, 2004
JICA technical cooperation project :
“Reduction of seismic risk for buildings and structures in Romania”
• Project signed in 2002, when 100 years of diplomatic relations between
Japan and Romania were celebrated
• Project duration: 5 yr
JICA Project in Romania is based on partnership of 3 institutions:
NCSRR, National Center for Seismic Risk Reduction
UTCB, Technical University of Civil Engineering Bucharest
INCERC, National Institute for Building Research, Bucharest
under the authority of:
MTCT, Ministry of Transports, Constructions and Tourism.
Total cost of the project
5.27 mill. USD
• Equipment cost 2.7 mill. USD:
- Soil testing laboratory
- Structure testing laboratory
- Seismic instrumentation network in Bucharest and Romania
(free field, borehole, buildings)
• 16 Romanian young students/engineer to be trained in Japan
• 34 Japanese short term and long term experts in Romania
Equipments for soil testing
and investigation
Triaxial testing equipment
Drilling equipment
SPT/CPT testing equipment
Equipment delivered by JICA and installed together with two OYO technicians
and one Japanese expert:
- Altus K2 accelerometer (11)
- borehole sensors FBA-23DH (14+1)
- sensors EPISENSOR ES-T (9+1)
- ETNA accelerometer (5+1)
Seismic network
Free fieldoutside Bucharest
ETNA6 sites
BoreholeBucharest
K27 sites
3 sensors(surface +
2 in borehole)
BuildingBucharest
K24 sites
Equipment for strong ground motion observation
Borehole sensor
Altus K2 accelerometer
Borehole sensor
Free field
Shallow borehole 24÷30m
Deep borehole
60÷153m
Surface and borehole cables
Borehole seismic instrumentation
Bucharest - Location of borehole instrumented sites
Instrumented buildings in Bucharest
RISK U.E. Project
An advanced approach to earthquake risk scenarios with applications to
different European towns
Flow charts of RISK UE Project (P. Mouroux)
Workpackage 1 of RISK-UE
European distinctive features, inventory database and typology
Objective 1 - Distinctive features of European towns
• Town identity
• Population characteristics
• Urbanised area and elements at risk
• Impact of past earthquakes on elements at risk
• Strong motion data in the city and seismic hazard
• Geological, geophysical and geotechnical information
• Evolution of earthquake resistant design codes• Earthquake risk management efforts
References
Classification of buildings occupancy
1) Buildings with capacity greater than 150 people2) Buildings with capacity greater than 300 people or where more than 300 people congregate in one area
Objective 2 - Europe inventory database and typology
Building typology matrix, BTMLabel Building type description Height description Code level*
Name No. ofstories
Height h,m
N L M H
RC Reinforced concrete structures
RC1 Concrete moment frames Low-riseMid-riseHigh-rise
1 - 34 - 78+
h 99 < h 21
h > 21RC2 Concrete shear walls Low-rise
Mid-riseHigh-rise
1 - 34 - 78+
h 99 < h 21
h > 21RC3
3.1
3.2
Concrete frames with unreinforced masonryinfill walls
Regularly infilled frames
Irregularly frames (i.e., irregular structuralsystem, irregular infills, soft/weak story)
Low-riseMid-riseHigh-rise
Low-riseMid-riseHigh-rise
1 - 34 - 78+
1 - 34 - 78+
h 99 < h 21
h > 21
h 99 < h 21
h > 21
RC4 RC Dual systems (RC frames and walls) Low-riseMid-riseHigh-rise
1 - 34 - 78+
h 99 < h 21
h > 21RC5 Precast Concrete Tilt-Up Walls Low-rise
Mid-riseHigh-rise
1 - 34 - 78+
h 99 < h 21
h > 21RC6 Precast Concrete Frames with Concrete
shear wallsLow-riseMid-riseHigh-rise
1 - 34 - 78+
h 99 < h 21
h > 21
*Code level N - no code; L - low-code (designed with unique arbitrary base shear seismic coefficient); M - moderate-code; H - high-code (code comparable with Eurocode 8)
Town Inhabitants Population density,persons/km2
Population growth,20th century*
GDP/person(approx.)
EuroBarcelona 1,503,451 15,176 1970 22,000Bitola 79,456 12,600 1990 1,620Bucharest 2,011,305 10,806 1989 1,980Catania 333,075 6,125 1971-1991 9,000-15,000Nice 342,738 4,766 1980 20,000Sofia 1,133,183 4,680 1985 1,630Thessaloniki 1,048,151 21,600 1991 15,290
Population and yearly GDP
I. Population and Building exposure
Comparative study for 7 towns
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
Barcelona Bitola Bucharest Catania Nice Sofia Thessaloniki
WP1. UTCB
Population
Population of the 7 towns
Barcelona Bitola Bucharest Catania Nice Sofia Thessaloniki
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
WP1. UTCB
Population density, persons/km2
Population density in the 7 towns
Barcelona Bitola Bucharest Catania Nice Sofia Thessaloniki0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
NA NA
WP1. UTCB
Number of
buildings
Number of buildings for the 7 towns
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
700,000
800,000
900,000
Barcelona Bitola Bucharest Catania Nice Sofia Thessaloniki
WP1. UTCB
Number of
housing units
Number of housing units for 7 towns
Barcelona Bitola Bucharest Catania Nice Sofia Thessaloniki3.5
4.5
5.5
6.5
7.5
8.5
9.5
10.5
NA
WP1. UTCB
LARGEST HISTORICALEVENT
3.5
4.5
5.5
6.5
7.5
8.5
9.5
10.5
WP1. UTCB
Barcelona Bitola Bucharest Catania Nice Sofia Thessaloniki
20th CENTURY
MSK local-intensity of largest experienced earthquake for the 7 towns
II. Earthquake hazard and earthquake instrumentation
Building stock age in the 7 towns versus
Seismic codes inter-benchmark periods
III. Vulnerability and typology of European buildings stock
Masonry buildings types for the 7 towns
Buildings typology
World Bank project in Romania
Component B:
Earthquake Risk Reduction ~35%
Subcomponents:
•Strengthening of high priority buildings and lifelines
•Design & supervision
•Building code review and study of code enforcement
•Professional training in cost effective retrofitting
Component A:
Strengthening of Disaster management capacity ~5%
Components C D& E: Flood, Pollution & Project Management 60%
Implementation unit for Component B at
MTCT, Ministry of Transports, Construction and Tourism
Romanian Government has been approved the following list of
buildings to be retrofitted on April 7, 2004
Type of buildings In
Bucharest In seismic counties
of Romania Total
Emergency bldg 12 18 30 Hospitals bldg 13 9 22 Educational bldg 6 6 12 Important public bldg 6 - 6 Essential facilities - 14 14
Total 37 47 84
The buildings list is splitted in two lists: priority list and additional list.
Priority list of buildings contains 65 buildings i.e:
Type of buildings In
Bucharest In seismic counties
of Romania Total
Emergency bldg 11 187 28 Hospitals bldg 12 7 19 Educational bldg 6 6 12 Important public bldg 6 - 6
Total 35 30 65
E m e r g e n c y fa c i l i t ie s
3 0 %
P u b l ic1 2 %
E d u c a t io n a l1 8 %
H o s p ita ls4 0 %
B u c h a r e s t
C o m m u n ic a t io n2 6 % E m e r g e n c y
fa c i l i t ie s3 9 %
P u b lic4 % E d u c a t io n a l
1 1 %H o s p ita ls
2 0 %
O th e r c i t ie s
Distribution of buildings with occupancy
O t h e r c i t ie s6 2 %
B u c h a r e s t3 8 %
O t h e r c i t ie s3 3 %
B u c h a r e s t6 7 %
Distribution of number of buildings to be retrofitted
Distribution of cost for buildings to be retrofitted
0
1 0
2 0
3 0
4 0
5 0
6 0
N u m b e r o f s t o r i e s
Nu
mb
er o
f b
uild
ing
s
5 8
B u c h a r e s t
0
1 0
2 0
3 0
4 0
5 0
6 0
N u m b e r o f s t o r i e s
Nu
mb
er o
f b
uild
ing
s
5 8
O t h e rc i t i e s
Distribution of buildings with number of stories
Distribution of buildings with floor area
0
5
1 0
1 5
T o t a l f l o o r a r e a , m ²
Num
ber o
f bui
ldin
gs
2 5 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 5 0 0 2 0 0 0 3 0 0 02 5 0 0
B u c h a r e s t
0
5
1 0
1 5
T o t a l f l o o r a r e a , m ²
Num
ber o
f bui
ldin
gs
2 5 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 5 0 0 2 0 0 0 3 0 0 02 5 0 0
O t h e rc i t i e s
0
2
4
6
8
1 0
1 2
1 4
1 6
1 8
Num
ber o
f bui
ldin
gs
Y e a r o f c o n s t r . 1 9 0 0 1 9 4 0 1 9 6 3 1 9 7 8 1 9 9 2
P 1 3 - 6 3 P 1 0 0 - 7 8
. . .
P 1 0 0 - 9 2B u i l d i n g c o d e N o c o d e
5 9 %
4 1 %
0
2
4
6
8
1 0
1 2
1 4
1 6
1 8
Num
ber o
f bui
ldin
gsY e a r o f c o n s t r . 1 9 0 0 1 9 4 0 1 9 6 3 1 9 7 8 1 9 9 2
P 1 3 - 6 3 P 1 0 0 - 7 8
. . .
P 1 0 0 - 9 2B u i l d i n g c o d e N o c o d e
4 0 %
5 6 %
4 %
Distribution of buildings with year of construction
Distribution of buildings with present seismic intensity map
1
77
9
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
7 8 9
Seismic intensity
Num
ber o
f bui
ldin
gs
VII VIII IX MSK
World Bank report
“Preventable Losses: Saving Lives and Property through Hazard
Risk Management”
Strategic Framework for reducing the Social and Economic Impact of
Earthquake, Flood and Landslide Hazards in the Europe and Central Asia
Region
Draft, May 2004
• Romania is regarded as one the most seismically active countries in
Europe
• Bucharest is one of the 10 most vulnerable cities in the world.
Recommendations for Romania:
• Upgrade the legal framework for hazard specific management;
• Review the existing buildings code for the retrofitting of vulnerable
buildings;
• Conduct a comprehensive public awareness campaign for the
earthquake risk;
• Invest in hazard mitigation activities in order to reduce the risks
caused by earthquakes;
• Develop financing strategy for catastrophic events.