Science and Technology Research Partnershipfor Sustainable Development : SATREPSCOUNTRY REPORTPERUDr. Carlos ZAVALA
Dr. Miguel ESTRADA ‐ Dr. Zenon AGUILAR – Eng. Alberto BISBALCISMID‐FIC‐UNICONIDA CONUNMSM

DHN

IGP

INDECI

UPT

Centro Nacional de Estimación, Prevención y Reducción del Riesgo deDesastres ‐ CENEPRED

Political level

National System for Disaster Risk Management (SINAGERD):
A new strategic decision model to reduce the disaster risk
(LAW 29664 )National Development Plan with
DRR approach at the 3
government levels ‐ CEPLAN

SECTORS, REGIONAL & LOCAL GVMTs

Strategic level

Financial Management on DRM

TECHNICAL TOOLS FOR PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT THE RISK(SOURCE: CENEPRED)RISK REDUCTION PLAN BY SECTORFOR EXAMPLE: EDUCATIONRISK REDUCTION PLAN BY SECTORFOR EXAMPLE: HOUSING ANDCONSTRUCTION

NATIONAL PLAN OF RISKREDUCTIONRISK REDUCTION PLAN FORDRAIN SYSTEMS AND WATERSUPPLYRISK REDUCTION PLAN OF
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM AND
HIGWAYS AND BRIDGESACTIONS TAKEN BY CISMID‐FIC‐UNI AFTERPISCO EARTHQUAKE 15/8/2007

THE PISCO QUAKE AUGUST 15TH 2007
Geophysical Institute of Peru (IGP) reports the following parameters (2007)
Time: 18 hrs, 40 min, 53.6 sec.
Location : Latitude -13.49°Longitude : -76.85°
DepthMagnitude

:
:

26 km
7.0 ML (Richter)
7.9Mw (moment magnitude)

Epicenter at 74 km on West direction from
Pisco. La circle represents a focal inverse
mechanism (Tavera, et al 2007)
COLOMBIAECUADORZONA 1

BRASILNA
BOLIVIA

2

3
NA
ZO

ZO
CHILE

EXPLORATION OF SOILSAFTER QUAKE MICROZONING MAP ‐ PISCO

Zone I: with load capacity between 2.0 kg/cm2 to 3.5 kg/cm2
and natural periods less than 0.1 sec.
Zone II: with load capacity between 1.5 kg/cm2 to 2.0 kg/cm2
and natural periods less than 0.1 sec.
Zone III: with load capacity between 0.8 kg/cm2 to 1.0 kg/cm2
and natural periods between 0.1 sec to 0.16 sec.
Zone IV‐A: conformed of soils of debris and wet mud,
Zone IV‐B: wet, loose sand with high liquefaction potential

PROGRESS AND IMPLEMENTATION OF RESULTS
OF SATREPS PROJECTACTIVITIES DEVELOPED G1 ‐ Seismology• Seismic monitoring by the cismid ground motion networkat lima city
• Ground response analysis for lima city
• Ground motion accelerograph instalation in tacna city
• Ground response analysis for tacna city
• Updating of the ground motion network monitoring center• Advice to SENCICO for improvement of the peruvian
seismic code

CISMID’S STRONG GROUND MOTIONNETWORK AT LIMA CITY

SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY (m/s)
0

500

1000

1500

2000

0

PPI

DEPTH (m)

50
100
150
200
250

SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY (m/s)
0

500

1000

1500

2000

0
50

SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY (m/s)
0

500

1000

1500

2000

0
150

MOL
50

DEPTH (m)

200
250

100
150
200
250

SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY (m/s)
0
500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

EMO

DEPTH (m)

50

CMA

400

1000

3500

0
200

500

0

SHEAR VELOCITY (m/s)
0

100
150

600

200

800

250

1000

SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY (m/s)
0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

0
200

DEPTH (m)DEPTH (m)DEPTH(m)

CSM
100

400
600
800
1000

VSV

3500

ACCELEROGRAPH INSTALLATION AT UPT STATION ‐ TACNA CITYGPS
ANTENNAGROUND RESPONSE ANALYSIS FOR TACNA CITYPROFILES

DISTRICT

TAC1, TAC3, TAC5CIUDAD NUEVA

TAC6

TACNA

TAC2, TAC4POCOLLAYREAL TIME MONITORING OF GROUND MOTION ACCELEROGRAPHS ‐ REDACISIMPROVEMENT OF SEISMIC NEW STANDARDS WITH SATREPS OUTPUTSTARGET RESPONSE SPECTRA FOR SEISMIC ZONE 3 IN PERUCOMPARACIÓN DE ESPECTROS DE DISEÑO - E-030 - IBC - EPU - TR=475 AÑOS1.6

Norma E030 Suelo Tipo 1
Norma E030 Suelo Tipo 2

1.4

ACELERACIÓN ESPECTRAL (g)Norma E030 Suelo Tipo 3
IBC Suelo Tipo B

1.2

IBC Suelo Tipo C
1.0

IBC Suelo Tipo D
Espectro Peligro Uniforme Suelo Tipo B

0.8

Espectro Peligro uniforme Suelo Tipo C
Espectro Peligro Uniforme Suelo Tipo D

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0
0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

PERIODO (s)

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

IMPLEMENTACION DE LA REDSSAT - IGP

ACTIVITIES DEVELOPED G2 ‐ Tsunami• Elaborate tsunami scenarios using theseismic source.
• To develop propagation and inundation
models• Evaluate the probable impact over thebuildings.
• Propose countermeasures to reduce theimpact.

TSUNAMI SIMULATION FOR EACH EARTHQUAKE SCENARIO
Propagation and Inundation modeling for the 4th Scenario

ReGiD, IRIDeS, Tohoku University

TSUNAMI SIMULATION FOR EACH EARTHQUAKE SCENARIO
Model_01

Model_02

Model_03

Model_04

Model_05

Model_06

Max. = 6.87

Max. = 7.82

Max. = 6.46

Max. = 7.98

Max. = 6.09

Max. = 7.55

Model_07

Model_08

Model_09

Model_10

Model_11

Model_12

Max. = 6.93

Max. = 6.21

Max. = 7.00

Max. = 6.15

Max. = 7.86

Max. = 6.59

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Inund. depth (m)Inund. depth (m)Inund. depth (m)Inund. depth (m)Inund. depth (m)Inund. depth (m)ReGiD, IRIDeS, Tohoku University

DAMAGE ESTIMATION – La Punta
Applying fragility curve (FC) for a probabilistic estimation

RC
Masonry

Suppasri et al, 2012 Nat Hazards

Low

Medium

High

54
35

32
399

0
113

Wood

3

9

126

Total

92

440

239

B. Adriano, E. Mas, S. Koshimura, Y. Fujii (2013). Proceedings of International Sessions in
Coastal Engineering, JSCE, Vol.4, 2013, JAPANSIMULATION OF HORIZONTAL – VERTICALEVACUATION AND CASUALTIES ASSESTMENT

Casualty Estimation Results
Horizontal
VerticalHoriz. & Vertical
Avrg. S.D. Max Avrg. S.D. Max Avrg. S.D. Max
Kids
38
2
42
4
1
7
4
1
7
Teens
29
3
34
4
1
7
4
1
8
Adult
28
1
30
4
0
5
4
0
5
Elder
47
1
50
4
1
6
4
1
6
Car
32
34 87
34
35 100Total (pers.) 271
16
153(*) Unit: person / vehicle
Type

ACTIVITIES DEVELOPED G3 ‐ Buildings• Implementation of seismic monitoring building network• Verification of materials for masonry buildings• Implementation of data base for masonry & concrete walls• Test of walls considering perpendicular wall contribution

NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERINGFACULTY OF CIVIL ENGINEERING
JAPAN-PERU CENTER FOR EARTHQUAKEENGINEERING RESEARCH AND
DISASTER MITIGATION - CISMIDITK Sensor Building Monitoring Network
ITK1‐00x (CentUNI)

ITK3‐00x (HOSP)

ITK2‐00x (G2‐FIC)

3 Buildings in LimaE = 439f'm
80000
70000
60000
50000

E (kg/cm2)

MASONRY BUILDINGS
Material conventional. Widely used for
housing• Low cost
• Good sound and heat insulation• Easy availability of materials andskilled labour

40000

Artesanal

30000
20000

Industrial

10000
0
0

50
100
Compresion Stress (kg/cm2)

150

TEST PROGRAM

Prism(48 specimens)

Wallets(48 specimens)

Direct shear specimen(48 specimens)

E= 500 f´m Current value of NTE‐070 Standards should be modified

EXPERIMENTALDATABASE
OF MASONRYWALLS TEST

Typical Wall

QUAD-LINEAR MODEL• 4 Linear segments• Craking Point• Yielding Point• Maximun Point• Ultimate Point

WS-SATREPS March, 2014 @ Tokyo, Japan

Cyclic Load Test Plane and H – Masonry and
Low Ductility Concrete WallCISMID/FIC/UNI - SATREPS Confined Masonry Wall Tests
Influence of Brick type use- Thickness 15 cm
Comparison with Plane and H wall

10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00

Stress (kg/cm2)

2.00
0.00
-0.015 -0.012 -0.009 -0.006 -0.003

0

0.003

0.006

0.009

0.012

0.015

-2.00
-4.00

15

-6.00

10
5

‐5

1
201
401
601
801
1,001
1,201
1,401
1,601
1,801
2,001
2,201
2,401
2,601
2,801
3,001
3,201
3,401
3,601
3,801
4,001
4,201
4,401
4,601
4,801
5,001
5,201
5,401
5,601
5,801
6,001
6,201
6,401
6,601
6,801
7,001
7,201
7,401

0

-8.00

‐10
‐15

-10.00Drift

SolidHandmade
SolidFactory
TubularFactory

ACTIVITIES DEVELOPED G4 – Damage Assessment• Geo‐spatial dataset construction from satellite imagery (PRISM,
Landsat, IKONOS, WV‐2, etc.)• Building inventory construction and vulnerability assessment
using spatial information such as satellite image and census
data• Building damage estimation for scenario earthquake based oninventory data
• Development of damage detection methodologies using
remotely sensed dataDamage Assessment of Scenario Earthquake
Flow of Building Damage
Assessment(Tokyo Tech., Chiba Univ. and CISMID)

Scenario Earthquake
Ground Motion

Building Inventory• Field survey• GIS and Remote sensing data

Fragility Curve
Building Damage Ratio

Building Damage Distribution

Field Survey Data
・Number of buildings, Stories,
Household, and Use type

INEI Census Data

Block

+

Lima 8 districts （50 block ）(2010～2013)

CISMID Field Survey Data・Building Stories, Structure, Use typeof typical block.
Block

+

Stories：16F
Structure：RC
Use：Apartment

Lima 11 districts (5500 blocks)(2007～)+

Satellite Data

・Digital surface model(DSM) by Stereo images toestimate building height
Estimated
Height(m)Social Class1～5 (Low～high)Whole Lima (75000blocks)(2007)

Estimated
Height of
block

Block

＋

⇒

whole Lima (66000 blocks)(2006～2008)

Total number of households in Lima: 1,840,000
Distribution of‐ Adobe etc: 290,000 (A)Vulnerable Buildings ‐ Low earthquake‐resistant masonry: 370,000 (M1+M2)
A
Building Construction
TypeA‐ High earthquake‐resistant masonry: 1,100,000 (M3+M4)‐ RC building: 80,000 (M5+M6)

Adobe etc.
(Low-rise)
M2

M1

Reinforced or confined
masonry with flexible
Non‐engineered masonry slabs (Low-rise)(Low-rise)

M3

M4

Reinforced or confined masonry with rigid slabs(Low-rise)
M5(Mid-rise)
M6

Reinforced concrete frames(Mid-rise)(High-rise)

Ratio of Low Earthquake‐resistant Building( A + M1 + M2 ) / ALL

Scenario Earthquake
Mw 8.9 Gigantic Earthquake

12 broadband slip models

Pulido (2013) estimated PGA maps of 108(12 x 9) scenario earthquakes, theiraverage, and standard deviation

9 possible starting points consideringof rupture for each slip modelGround Motion (PGA Map)
Average

PGA(cm/s2)

Average + one s.d.

PGA(cm/s2)

MAX : 684gal

MAX : 1036gal

5km

5km

Development of fragility function for RC buildings
Numerical model

Fragility function

Light

Moderate

SevereCollapse

40
35
30

0.6

25

Count

0.4

20
15
10

0.2

5

2

PGA (cm/s )2

PGA (cm/s )

800

800

700

600

600

400

500

200

400

0

300

0

0.0

100

P[DS > DSi, PGA]

0.8

No damage200

DS > LDS > M
DS > SDS = C0

Number of occurrences of each damage state

1.0

Fragility Curve (Serious Damage)
Probability

Probability of Damage (%)

100%

(1)

80%

(2)

(3)

60%

(5)

(1) & (3): Matsuzaki et al(2013)(4) & (5): Quiroz and Maruyama (2014)(2): Estimated from (1)&(3)
(4)

40%
20%
0%

0

200

400

600

800

1000

Classification ofvisual interpretation：
By EMS1998

Classification offield survey：
By CISMID

Grade1

Fall of small
piecesonly

SIN DAÑO
(No damage)

Grade2Moderate nonstructural
damageLEVE(Slight damage)

Grade3Large cracks,
non-structural
damageSEVERO(moderatelySevere)

Grade4

Serious failureof walls, partial
failure of roofs
and floors

GRAVE(Serious)

Grade5

Total collapse

1200

PGA (cm/s/s)( (1) Adobe etc. (A)( (2) Low quake‐resistant masonry (M1+M2)( (3) High quake‐resistant masonry (M3+M4)( (4) RC mid‐rise building (M5)
( (5) RC high‐rise building (M6)Ground Motion Map (PGA)

Damage Estimation
Total Number of Serious Damage
Households : 430,000

PGA (Average + one s.d.)

Ratio of Low
Earthquake‐resistant
Building( A + M1 + M2 ) / ALL

Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Observation for
Earthquake Damage Detection(a) 2007/7/12 [before Earthq.](b) 2007/8/27 [after Earthq.]

ALOS/PALSAR Images

Schematic Figure of Backscattering
Characteristics of Buildings

ACTIVITIES DEVELOPED G5 – Disaster Mitigation Planning

1. Formulate Land-use Policies for Disaster Mitigation
2. Develop Local Disaster Mitigation Plans for the Study Areas
3. Awareness Raising and Dissemination Activities

1.

Formulate Land-use Policies for Disaster
Mitigation• POPULATION RESETTLEMENT ACT FOR AREAS WITH VERYHIGH RISK CAN NOT BE MITIGATED.
Law 29869. Regulated on October 23, 2013 by Supreme
Decree No. 115-2013-PCM
Local governments will submitted to Ministry of Housing andSanitation, the feasibility of the resettlement plan. Otherwise,
suggest measures to reduce damage to any disaster.
On going Activities:• Standard for Construction Earthquake Resistant (in adoption).
National Building Regulations. Ministry of Housing• Guidelines for mapping seismic hazard. CENEPRED• Technical guidance for the post-disaster damage assessment using
geoespacial information. INDECI-CISMID

2.

Develop Local Disaster Mitigation Plans
for the Study Areas• GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION TSUNAMIDRILLS FOR NATIONWIDEDIRECTIVE Nº 001-2014-INDECI/10.3 (formulation)
This directive regulates the steps for the development of drills
Tsunami Evacuation in coastal areas. It also includes
guidelines for vertical evacuation in coastal urban areas withbuildings over 3 floors.

New macrozonation• Includes work developed by researches fromSATREPS Project.
• Changes in acceleration values. (Proposed by G1)

2.

Develop Local Disaster Mitigation Plans
for the Study Areas• 2 AWARENESS CENTER IN PERU
• Lima Awareness Center in CISMID• Arequipa Awareness Center in INDECI

3.

Awareness Raising and Dissemination Activities
Installation Place:
CISMID Awareness Center Hall
INDECI Arequipa Public Awareness Center

Schedule:
Procurement- June and July, 2013
Delivery- in February, 2014

CISMID

INDECI Arequipa

EWBS PROJECTINDECICOEN

MTC - IRTP

IRTP

DHN

WL LAN

Control
PC

COEN

Internet

EWBS
ServerDigital
TV
UP
Link

IGP

IRD

Receptor

COE• Activación• Código de Área• Mensaje de Texto

TRANSMISSIONSTATIONS
9

Lima

9

Pisco

9

Trujillo

9

Arequipa

9Yungay9

Camaná

9

Cañete9

Ilo

TIDE GAGES
9La Cruz

9

Cerro Azul

9

Bayovar

9

Atico

9

Huarmey 9

Caleta Grau

9

HuachoLa Planchada

9Technical Tools for planning and management
the risk in Peru Using SATREPS OUTPUTSNATIONAL PLAN OF RISKREDUCTIONRISK REDUCTION PLAN BY SECTORFOR EXAMPLE: LOCAL GOVERNMENTLand use: Movement
Location of Æ
Schools,
Hospitals,
Recreational
G1: Superficial
Microzoning
Map
Vertical andHorizontalÆEvacuation
Routes and countermeasures
G2: Superficial
Movement
Tsunami Propagation
Map
Vulnerabilityof Buildings
Retrofit
policies
G3:
Geoespacial
Data Base– ÆCapacity& Behavior of
Limit of Story Height – Recommendations
for New buildings
Building = Vulnerability
Identificationof Risk&zones– Plans
Relocations
G4: Damage
Evaluation
Detection
Æfor
Risk
Map
Identification of number of casualties prior event
Plans
for countermeasuresattention
G5:
Disaster
Mitigation Plan forÆ disaster
Stakeholder
Plan
Emergency budget for restoration‐ Emergency action plan

Final Remarks• The goals has been achieved on SATREPS project.
• The develop of methodologies and rules for the evaluation of theearthquake and tsunami risk under SATREPS project, has been
adopted for the National Government by the Program PREVAED
PP‐068 and assure sustainability on time for the project.
• The dissemination of the achievements of SATREPS project must be
conducted to promote a disaster risk reduction culture among
decision makers and also general public for safe and sustainable cities

Machu Picchu ‐ Cuzco

Santa Catalina ‐ Arequipa
VISIT PERUSan Isidro
Lima

GraciasThank You
ありがとう