Upload
trinhnhan
View
213
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
2011/8/4
1
Lessons Learnt from the Recent Off the Pacific Coast of Tohoku Earthquake in
International Platform for Reducing Earthquake Disasters (IPRED)26~28-07-2011 UNESCO-IPRED 4th Workshop, in Santiago, CHILE
Pacific Coast of Tohoku Earthquake in Japan
Nobuo HURUKAWANobuo HURUKAWAResearch Coordinator
Building Research InstituteIncorporated Administrative Agency, Japan
1
• The Mw 9.0 earthquake occurred off the Pacific coast of Tohoku, Japan at 14:46 JST on 11th March 2011.• This magnitude ranked fourth
IntroductionIntroduction
A
40°N
Tohoku
NAM PAC
gamong the earthquakes in the world since 1900.• The earthquake caused extremely destructive tsunami.
• In addition to loss of lives and
Mw 9.0
B
38°N
36°N
142°E140°E 146°144°E
JT
destruction of buildings, the tsunami induced nuclear serious accidents in Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plants, where the response activity is still in process.
2
050
100150D
epth
(km
)
-100 0 100 200 300Distance (km)
A B
Relocated aftershocks by Hurukawa (2011 EPS)
http://www.terrapub.co.jp/journals/EPS/pdf/free/inpress/201105027.pdf
2011/8/4
2
The 2011 Tohoku Earthquake Tsunami Joint Survey Grouphttp://www.coastal.jp/tsunami2011/ 3
I’ll present “The Tohoku Earthquake and its Tsunami Simulation” by Hurukawa and Fujii this afternoon.
Deaths 15,562
Missing 5,306
Casualties
IntroductionIntroduction
Missing 5,306
Injured 5,690
Total collapse 108,557
Damage to buildings
Source: National Police Agency, as of 15 July 2011
Total collapse 108,557
Partial collapse 120,186
4
2011/8/4
3
1. Strong motion observations for building structures2. Field Surveys of damage to buildings
1) Outline2) Damage to buildings caused by Seismic motion3) Damage to buildings caused by Tsunami3) Damage to buildings caused by Tsunami4) Damage to buildings caused by Fire
3. Technical support to the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism
4. Information uploads5. Activities on going
*Many research activities and field survey were carried out jointly by National Institute for Land and Infrastructure Management (NILIM) and
Building Research Institute (BRI).
I’ll introduce results obtained by staff members of NILIM and BRI.
5
1. Strong motion observations for building structures
54 among 74 sites observed the mainshock
134˚ 135˚ 136˚ 137˚ 138˚ 139˚ 140˚ 141˚ 142˚ 143˚ 144˚ 145˚ 146˚44˚ 44˚
38˚ 38˚
39˚ 39˚
40˚ 40˚
41˚ 41˚
42˚ 42˚
43˚ 43˚
2011/03/1114:46(JST)THU, SND
HCN2, HCNHRH
AKT
TRO
NIG
HKD
HKUKGC
HRO
MYK
139˚20' 139˚40' 140˚00' 140˚20' 140˚40'
35˚40' 35˚40'
36˚00' 36˚00'
36˚20' 36˚20'
ANX, BRI
NIT
TUS
ICK
TKC
YCYFNB
EDG
UTK,NMW,SMD
TKD
ADC
MSTTDSAKB
KDI NKN
SITA, SIT2
6
134˚ 135˚ 136˚ 137˚ 138˚ 139˚ 140˚ 141˚ 142˚ 143˚ 144˚ 145˚ 146˚34˚ 34˚
35˚ 35˚
36˚ 36˚
37˚ 37˚
0 100 200
km
h=24 km, M9.0
NGN
YMN
SMZSMS
NGY
MTSOSK
KSOMIZ
IWK
139˚20' 139˚40' 140˚00' 140˚20' 140˚40'35˚20' 35˚20'
35 40 35 40
0 50
km
CGC,CG2,CG3
ICKCHB
TKD
TUF
KWS
http://smo.kenken.go.jp/
2011/8/4
4
Strong ground motions with large seismic intensities
138˚ 139˚ 140˚ 141˚ 142˚ 143˚
40˚
Acceleration
-3000
0
3000
(cm
/s2 )
N-S (peak: 2679 cm/s2)
0
3000
(cm
/s2)
E-W (peak:- 1285 cm/s2)
Pseudo Vel. Resp. Spectrum (h=5%)
50
100
500
loci
tyRe
spon
se(c
m/s
)
100
)
100
1000
1000
0K-Net
37˚
38˚
39˚
-3000
-3000
0
3000
(cm
/s2 )
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200Time (sec)
U-D (peak: 1886 cm/s2)
2
5
10
Pseu
doVe
l
0.1 0.5 1 5 10Period (sec)
0.1(cm) 1
1010(cm
/s/s)
N-SE-WU-D
MYG004: K-NET TsukidateAcceleration
-3000
0
3000
(cm
/s2)
N-S (peak: 1520 cm/s2)
-3000
0
3000
(cm
/s2 )
E-W (peak: 987 cm/s2)
-3000
0
3000
(cm
/s2)
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200Time (sec)
U-D (peak:- 299 cm/s2)
Pseudo Vel. Resp. Spectrum (h=5%)
2
5
10
50
100
500
Pseu
doVe
loci
tyR
espo
nse
(cm
/s)
0.1 0.5 1 5 10Period (sec)
0.1(cm) 1
10
100
10(cm
/s/s)
100
1000
1000
0
N-SE-WU-D
K-NET Tsukidate(MYG004)
K-NET Sendai(MYG013)
K-NET Hitachi(IBR003)
7
138˚ 139˚ 140˚ 141˚ 142˚ 143˚
35 ˚
36˚
0 50 100
km
Time (sec) Period (sec)MYG013: K-NET SendaiAcceleration
-3000
0
3000
(cm
/s2)
N-S (peak:- 1599 cm/s2)
-3000
0
3000
(cm
/s2)
E-W (peak:- 1187 cm/s2)
-3000
0
3000
(cm
/s2 )
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200Time (sec)
U-D (peak: 1159 cm/s2)
Pseudo Vel. Resp. Spectrum (h=5%)
2
5
10
50
100
500
Pseu
doVe
loci
tyRe
spon
se(c
m/s
)
0.1 0.5 1 5 10Period (sec)
0.1(cm) 1
10
100
10(cm
/s/s)
100
1000
1000
0
N-SE-WU-D
IBR003: K-NET Hitachi
(IBR003)
1 G or more at 20 sites. But less damage to buildings. Due to shorter predominant periods.
Nine-story school building of Tohoku Univ., Sendai
0
1000
c(g
al)
(a) Acc. in N192E01F(N192E)09F(N192E)
−1000
Acc
−1000
0
1000
Acc
(gal
)
(b) Acc. in N282E
−40
0
40
Dis
p(c
m) (c) Rel.Disp. in N192E
0
40
p(c
m) (d) Rel.Disp. in N282E
01F(N282E)09F(N282E)
8
−40
Dis
p
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
T(s
)
0 50 100 150 200Time (s)
(e) Natural period
N192E N282E
Lessons:We could observe a damage process of the building. It leads to1) Application to health monitoring.2) Testing of non-linear response analysis method.
Temporal change of national period of the building.
2011/8/4
5
Long-period motions in Tokyo and Osaka Bay areas
Displacement
-30
0
30
Dis
p. (c
m) 180-01F (peak:- 20.490 cm)
30
0
30
Dis
p. (c
m) 270-01F (peak:- 17.564 cm)
Displacement
-200
0
200
Dis
p. (c
m) 229-01F (peak:- 9.103 cm)
200
0
200
Dis
p. (c
m) 319-01F (peak: 7.828 cm)
Tokyo bay (01F) Osaka bay (01F)
01F-X
01F-Y
01F-X
01F-Y
10 cm
-30
-30
0
30
Disp
. (cm
) 180-37F (peak:- 32.114 cm)
-30
0
30
Disp
. (cm
) 270-37F (peak:- 27.909 cm)
-30
0
30
Dis
p. (c
m) 180-37F-01F (peak:- 14.742 cm)
-30
0
30
Dis
p. (c
m)
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800Time (sec)
270-37F-01F (peak:- 16.689 cm)
-200
-200
0
200
Disp
. (cm
) 229-52FN (peak: 131.856 cm)
-200
0
200
Disp
. (cm
) 319-52FN (peak:- 86.409 cm)
-200
0
200
Dis
p. (c
m) 229-52F-01F (peak: 132.966 cm)
-200
0
200
Dis
p. (c
m)
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800Time (sec)
319-52F-01F (peak:- 87.427 cm)
Pseudo Vel. Resp. Spectrum (h=5%)5010
010
00Pseudo Vel. Resp. Spectrum (h=5%)50
100
1000229-01F
319-01FUP-01F
37F-X
37F-Y
(37F-01F)-X
(37F-01F)-Y
52F-X
52F-Y
(52F-01F)-X
(52F-01F)-Y
10 min.
130 cm
9
0.5
1
5
10
Pseu
do V
eloc
ity R
espo
nse
(cm
/s)
0.1 0.5 1 5 10Period (sec)
0.1(cm)
1
10
1(cm/s/
s)
10
180-01F270-01FUP-01F
0.5
1
5
10
Pseu
do V
eloc
ity R
espo
nse
(cm
/s)
0.1 0.5 1 5 10Period (sec)
0.1(cm)
1
10
1(cm/s/
s)
10
UP-01F 7 sec
D = 770 kmD = 390 km
Lessons: Resonance, Damping, Health Monitoring To be retrofitted
2011theGreatEastJapanEarthquakeSendaiMYG013,OgawaTCG006,I hi kiMYG010
600h=0.05 Kawaguchi(b)JR Takatori(a)
Wajima(c)K-netKashiwazaki(d)
Analysis of Seismic Response Properties(Comparison with the past records using Pseudo-velocity response spectrum)
IshinomakiMYG010
1995 Kobe EarthquakeJMAKobe (a),JRTakatori (a)
2004 NiigataChuetsu EarthquakeKawaguchi (b)
2007 N t H t E th k100
200
300
400
500
pSv(
cm/s
)
SendaiMYG013
IshinomakiMYG010
JMA Kobe(a) OgawaTCG006
Wajima(c)
2007 Noto Hanto EarthquakeWajima (c)
2007NiigataChuetsu-okiEarthquakeK-net Kashiwazaki (d)
00.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 Period(s)
10
1995 Kobe EQLessons:Building damage was caused by strong 1.0 – 1.5 s seismic waves mainly.The Kobe EQ caused much severe damage than the Tohoku EQ.
2011/8/4
6
2. Field Surveys of damage to buildings
1) Outline
2) Damage to buildings caused by Seismic motionTimber StructureReinforced Concrete StructureSteel Structure, Non-Structural ElementsHousing-Site Ground, Foundations
3) Damage to buildings caused by Tsunami3) Damage to buildings caused by Tsunami
4) Damage to buildings caused by Fire
11
1) Outline
• Organizing field survey teams to learn lessons from structural damage
Miyako City
Otsuchi TownYamada Town
Ofunato City
Kamaishi City
Rikuzentakata CityKesennuma City
Minamisanriku Town
Ishinomaki City
Kitakami City
Hiraizumi Town
Tono City
Kurihara City
Iwate
Miyagifrom structural damage state, BRI and NILIM are dispatching more than140 experts to the survey areas since March 12.
Onagawa TownHigashi matsushima CityMatsushima TownShiogama City
Shichigahama TownTagajo CitySendai CityNatori City
Watari TownIwanuma City
Yamamoto TownShiroishi City
Nihonmatsu CityFukushima City
Miharu TownKoriyama City
Nasu Town
Yaita City
Shi t T
y g
Fukushima
12Survey Areas in Citiesand Towns Names
Sukagawa CityShirakawa City
Hitachiota CityHitachi CityNaka CityHitachinaka City
Mito CityOarai TownOmitama CityHokota City
Shirosato TownKasama City
Chikusei CityShimotsuma City
Koga CityBando CityJoso City
Tsuchiura CityRyugasaki City
Urayasu City
Kashima CityItako City
Kamisu CityInashiki CitySakae Town
BRI / NILIM
Ibaraki
Tochigi
Chiba0 50km
Tokyo
2011/8/4
7
2) Damage to buildings caused by seismic motion• Damage to Timber Structure
13
• Damage to RC Structure
14
• Cracks in columns and exterior walls
• Shear failure of non-structural wall next to entrance
2011/8/4
8
• Damage to RC Structure
15
• 1st story of 3 storied RC building was collapsed. Front side is frame structure and back side is frame with wall structure.
• Shear failure in columns on 1st story of 4 storied RC building which shows 180 degree hooks of main bars.
• Damage to Steel Structure and Non-Structural Elements
16
2011/8/4
9
• Damage to Housing-Site Groundand Foundations
17
Damage to buildings caused by seismic motion<Summary>
• Damage to buildings is not so severe whereas the seismic intensities were high and the disaster areas were extended to extremely large.
• Timber Structure:Typical seismic damage was observed.• RC Structure:Significant difference appears between before and
after the new seismic design code (1981). Typical seismic damage was observed.
• Steel Structure:Damage to vertical / horizontal braces and joints was observed.
• Non-structural Elements:The fall of exterior walls, suspendedNon structural Elements The fall of exterior walls, suspended ceilings in large-scale spaces, and interior materials were observed.
• Damage occurred in some grounds of developed residential areas and sloping areas.
• The severe liquefaction damage occurred in very wide areas.
18
2011/8/4
10
3) Damage to buildings caused by Tsunami• BRI and NILIM have jointly carried out
damage surveys three times since March 11th
to understand the general status of damage to buildingsIwate to buildings.
Team #1 30 March – 2 AprilRikuzentakata (IWATE) , Kesennuma, Minami-sanriku,
Onagawa, Ishinomaki, Natori (MIYAGI)Team #2 6 -9 April
Yamada, Ohtsuchi, Kamaishi, Ohfunato, Rikuzentakata (IWATE), Onagawa (MIYAGII) etc.
Team #3 6 – 8 AprilSendai Natori Watari Yamamoto (MIYAGI) etc
Iwate
Miyagi
19
Sendai, Natori, Watari, Yamamoto (MIYAGI) etc.
• Data related to water depth and dimension in damaged buildings were also extensively collected. They are supposed to be much informative for the estimation of the effect of tsunami loads and also for the verification of the current design guidelines.
Fukushima
Survey areas
• Damage to RC Structure
• Collapse of 1st story of 2 • Falling over of 4 storied RC
20
p ystoried RC frame building with concrete brick wall. The 2nd
story was supported by 4 RC columns.
gframe building with shear wall. This building was flowed 70 meters.•Photo shows the undersurface and a façade.
2011/8/4
11
・Damage to RC StructureBuildings swept-away and fallen-over
4-story frame with shear wall structurePile foundation (pulled-out ruptured)Pile foundation (pulled out, ruptured) Few OpeningsSwept-away (70 m, no traces of dragged)Fallen-over
Distance from the coast:~200 mDepth of inundation:~15 m 21
・Damage to RC StructureBuildings swept-away and fallen-over
22
2-story frame structure (refrigerators)Few openings Swept-away and fallen-over
Distance from the coast:~200 mDepth of inundation:Over 6.5 m
2011/8/4
12
• Damage to RC Structure3 storied RC factory building4 storied RC frame building
• Soil flowed away by tsunami • Out of plane collapse of
23
• Soil flowed away by tsunami.• Photo shows the footing basement under columns.
p pexterior wall with frame and without inside floor.• The right side of photo shows no collapse of wall with floor.
• Damage to Steel Structure
24
2011/8/4
13
• Damage to Timber Structure
25
building z
Review for Tsunami Evacuation Building
Evaluation Method of Tsunami Evacuation BuildingThe Cabinet Office : Proposal equation of ‘Guideline for tsunami evacuation buildings’ to which the hydrostatic
3h
3ρgh
zqbuildings to which the hydrostatic pressure is applied using the threefold depth of design wave depth.
Design wave depth: h
( )zhgq −= 3ρDesign wave pressure
Based on the surveyed results, the validity of the above-mentioned Tsunami Load (Tsunami Wave Pressure) is under reviewing.
26
( )zhgqz = 3ρ
2011/8/4
14
4) Damage to buildings caused by fire• Grasping the damage state of large-scale fire and fire in buildings
caused by the earthquake and the following tsunami in cooperation with other institutes and universities
27
2011 Miyako, Iwate (IISEE/BRI)
2011/8/4
15
2011 Miyako, Iwate (IISEE/BRI)
Break water in Miyako
2011 Miyako, Iwate (IISEE/BRI)
May 14, 2010
April 2011
2011/8/4
16
World largest break water in Kamaishi
PortPort
1,660 m long & 63 m height
1/3 collapsed, butTsunami height was reduced 40 %.Arrival time delayed 6 min.(Kamaishi Port Office)
2011 Miyako, Iwate (IISEE/BRI)
2011/8/4
17
2011 Miyako, Iwate (IISEE/BRI)
2011 Miyako, Iwate (IISEE/BRI)
2011/8/4
18
2011 Ootsuchi, Iwate (IISEE/BRI)
2011 Onagawa, Miyagi (IISEE/BRI)
2011/8/4
19
2011 Onagawa, Miyagi (IISEE/BRI)
2011 Onagawa, Miyagi (IISEE/BRI)
2011/8/4
20
2011 Onagawa, Miyagi (IISEE/BRI)
2011 Onagawa, Miyagi (IISEE/BRI)
2011/8/4
21
2011 Onagawa, Miyagi (IISEE/BRI)
2011 Onagawa, Miyagi (IISEE/BRI)
2011/8/4
22
2011 Onagawa, Miyagi (IISEE/BRI)
2011 Onagawa, Miyagi (IISEE/BRI)
2011/8/4
23
2011 Sendai, Miyagi (IISEE/BRI)
2011 Sendai, Miyagi (IISEE/BRI)
2011/8/4
24
2011 Sendai, Miyagi (IISEE/BRI)
2011 Sendai, Miyagi (IISEE/BRI)
2011/8/4
25
2011 Sendai, Miyagi (IISEE/BRI)
2011 Iwaki, Fukushima (IISEE/BRI)
2011/8/4
26
2011 Iwaki, Fukushima (IISEE/BRI)
2011 Iwaki, Fukushima (IISEE/BRI)
2011/8/4
27
2011 Iwaki, Fukushima (IISEE/BRI)
2011 Iwaki, Fukushima (IISEE/BRI)
2011/8/4
28
2011 Iwaki, Fukushima (IISEE/BRI)
2011 Iwaki, Fukushima (IISEE/BRI)
2011/8/4
29
3. Technical support to the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MILIT)
• Collaborative Research with private companies in the development and promotion project of building standards.
1: Consideration of contributing to the development of building standards in tsunami hazard areas
2: Consideration of contributing to the development of non-structural elements standard based on earthquake damage
3: Consideration of the effect of long-period seismic motion on super high-rise buildings
• Building Structural Standard Committee (NILIM)
57
Cooperate in research surveys and investigations of this committee appointed to consider the draft of building structural standard
• Committee of Technical Countermeasure against Liquefaction (MILIT)
Participate as a member in this committee appointed to consider technical issues common in each infrastructure
4. Information uploads・Established the special website to provide official information
http://iisee.kenken.go.jp/special2/20110311 h k h20110311tohoku.htm
58
http://www.kenken.go.jp/japanese/contents/topics/20110311
2011/8/4
30
・Produced “Quick Report of the Field Survey and Research on The 2011 Off the Pacific coast of Tohoku Earthquake” jointly q j ywith NILIM and announced on the special web site on May 13, 2011.
* English version will be released on the end of August.
59
5. Activities on going
• Continuation and expansion of the field survey and research works, and quick release and dissemination of their res ltstheir results.
• Active participation and technical support to activities by the national government.
• Close cooperation with concerned organizations such as p gArchitectural Institute of Japan (AIJ).
60