Recovery and reconstruction of schools after M 7.3 Ezgeleh-Sarpole-Zahab earthquake; part II: Recovery process and resiliency calculation

被引:21
作者
Eghbali, Mahdi [1 ]
Samadian, Delbaz [2 ]
Ghafory-Ashtiany, Mohsen [3 ]
Dehkordi, Morteza Raissi [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Zanjan, Fac Engn, Dept Civil Engn, Zanjan, Iran
[2] Semnan Univ, Fac Civil Engn, Dept Struct Engn, Semnan, Iran
[3] Int Inst Earthquake Engn & Seismol, Tehran, Iran
[4] Iran Univ Sci & Technol, Sch Civil Engn, Tehran, Iran
关键词
Ezgeleh earthquake; School buildings; Seismic resilience; Recovery process; Data collection; Functionality curves; SEISMIC RESILIENCE; LAQUILA; FRAMEWORK;
D O I
10.1016/j.soildyn.2020.106327
中图分类号
P5 [地质学];
学科分类号
0709 ; 081803 ;
摘要
After presenting a taxonomy of schools in part one and their modes of behavior during the Ezgeleh earthquake in November 2017, this paper quantifies the seismic resilience index of Iranian school buildings, including post-recovery and retrofitting processes. Six schools having different structural properties as being representative of the 3029 Iranian school buildings in the affected area were chosen for resilience evaluation. Field observations were made at the selected schools and the collected data on the earthquake recovery process were used to calculate the seismic resilience index for the different types of school buildings. Functionality curves were developed to illustrate the process of recovery three years after the event. The Ezgeleh earthquake caused slight to moderate damage to masonry schools that otherwise had acceptable levels of resilience. School buildings that had been retrofitted before the Ezgeleh earthquake remained intact and showed a high level of resilience and robustness. Those which had been slated for retrofitting but had not been reinforced suffered serious structural and nonstructural damage. The school buildings which recorded the lowest resilience values required reconstruction after the earthquake. Comparison of the resilience parameters of school buildings, including robustness, rapidity, recovery time, resilience index, and delay time indicated that buildings that were retrofitted earlier recorded the highest resilience factors.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 35 条
[1]   Toward quantification of seismic resilience in Iran: Developing an integrated indicator system [J].
Atrachali, Mohammad ;
Ghafory-Ashtiany, Mohsen ;
Amini-Hosseini, Kambod ;
Arian-Moghaddam, Salar .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DISASTER RISK REDUCTION, 2019, 39
[2]  
Bevington, 2010, DISASTER RECOVERY IN
[3]   Seismic resilience of concrete structures under corrosion [J].
Biondini, Fabio ;
Camnasio, Elena ;
Titi, Andrea .
EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING & STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS, 2015, 44 (14) :2445-2466
[4]   A framework to quantitatively assess and enhance the seismic resilience of communities [J].
Bruneau, M ;
Chang, SE ;
Eguchi, RT ;
Lee, GC ;
O'Rourke, TD ;
Reinhorn, AM ;
Shinozuka, M ;
Tierney, K ;
Wallace, WA ;
von Winterfeldt, D .
EARTHQUAKE SPECTRA, 2003, 19 (04) :733-752
[5]   Exploring the concept of seismic resilience for acute care facilities [J].
Bruneau, Michel ;
Reinhorn, Andrei .
EARTHQUAKE SPECTRA, 2007, 23 (01) :41-62
[6]  
Building Housing Research Center (BHRC), 2017, REP NOV 12 2017 SARP
[7]   Building urban resilience with nature-based solutions: How can urban planning contribute? [J].
Bush, Judy ;
Doyon, Andreanne .
CITIES, 2019, 95
[8]   Mapping urban resilience to disasters - A review [J].
Cariolet, Jean-Marie ;
Vuillet, Marc ;
Diab, Youssef .
SUSTAINABLE CITIES AND SOCIETY, 2019, 51
[9]   Urban disaster recovery: a measurement framework and its application to the 1995 Kobe earthquake [J].
Chang, Stephanie E. .
DISASTERS, 2010, 34 (02) :303-327
[10]   Disaster Resilience Assessment of Building and Transportation System [J].
Cimellaro, G. P. ;
Arcidiacono, V ;
Reinhorn, A. M. .
JOURNAL OF EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING, 2021, 25 (04) :703-729