Effect of Seismic Site Response on Damage Distribution in Sarpol-e Zahab City Caused by 12 November 2017 Mw 7.3 Strong Ground Motion: Fooladi area

Document Type : Research Article


1 M.Sc. Graduate of Earthquake Engineering, Geotechnical Engineering Research Center, International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES), Tehran, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Geotechnical Engineering Research Center, International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES), Tehran, Iran


The event of Sarpol-e Zahab with magnitude of 7.3 severely struck the border area of Iran an Iraq in Kermanshah province, leading to catastrophic damages to a wide region, specially Sarpol-e Zahab city. Douts arous whether the damage distribution allover the city stemed from seismic ground response or superficial loose fill material. The issue was explord in this study by especial attention to an area with high damages in Sarpol-e Zahab, called Fooladi. Since the seismic bedrock motion was not available, it was first deconvoluted from the recorded acceleration on the ground surface. Then ground response analysis was conducted at three different locations in Fooladi area, by applying deconvolved motion. It was determined that the local site condotion was accountable for damage severity specially in Fooladi area.


Main Subjects

  1. Askari, F., Azadi, A., Davoodi, M., Ghayamghamian, M.R., Haghshenas, E., Hamzehloo, H., and Shafiee, A. (2004) Preliminary seismic microzonation of Bam. Journal of Seismology and Earthquake Engineering, 5(4), 69-80.
  2. Chen, Y., Huanng, H., Wu, C. (2015) Site-effect estimation for Taipei Basin based on shallow S-wave velocity structures. Journal of Asian Earth Science, 117, 135-145.
  3. Iran Strong Motion Network (ISMN) Road, Housing and Urban Development Research Center (BHRC), www.bhrc.ac.ir.
  4. Moosavi,M., Hahgshenas, E.,Ashayeri, I., Tajik, V.,Memarian, P., and Zare,M.A. (2017) Ezgeleh - Sarpol-e Zahab Earthquake Reconnaissance Report (3rd edition). International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES), www.iiees.ac.ir (in Persian).
  5. Moosavi, M., Ashayeri, I., Haghshenas, E., Biglari, M., Kamalian, M., Jalili, J. (2019) Preliminary Seismic Site Classification Map of Sarpol-e Zahab. Journal of Seismology and Earthquake Engineering, 20(4).
  6. Moosavi, M., Taleshi Ahangari, H., Hosseinian, O. (2018) Investigation of Site Response Analyses of the Ezgeleh - Sarpol-e Zahab Earthquake, Iran, in West of Sarpol-e Zahab Town. Journal of Seismology and Earthquake Engineering, 20(4).
  7. Zafarani, H., Jafarian, Y., Eskandarnejad, A., Lashgari, A., Soghrat, M.R., Sharafi, H., Afraz-e Haji Saraei, M. (2020) Seismic Hazard Analysis and Local Site Effect of the 2017 Mw 7.3 Sarpol-e Zahab, Iran, Earthquake. Natural Hazard, 103, 1783-1805.
  8. Ashayeri, I., Memari, M.A., Haghshenas, E. (2020) Seismic Microzonation of Sarpol-eZahab after Mw 7.3 2017 Iran Earthquake: 1D-Equivalent Linear Approach. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering,19, 605–622.
  9. Sharafi, H., Raeisi, N. (2022) Numerical Study of Site Effects on the Amplification of Earthquake Waves in the Fooladi Area of Sarpol-e-Zahab City. Journal of Structural and Construction Engineering, 8(6), 97-113.
  10. Ashayeri, I., Biglari, M., Sadr, A. and Haghshenas E. (2019) 'Importance of revisiting (Vs)30 site class index, Sarpol-e-zahab Mw=7.3 earthquake'. In: Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering for Protection and Development of Environment and Constructions, Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering, (ICEGE 2019), June 17-20, 2019, Rome, Italy.
  11. Islamic Republic of Iran Housing Foundation (2018) Performance Report and Soil Mechanics Studies in Earthquake- hit Areas of Sarpol-e Zahab Country.
  12. Vucetic, M. and Dobry, R. (1991) Effect of soil plasticity on cyclic response. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 117(1), 89-107.
  13. Seed, H.B. and Idriss, I.M. (1970) Soil moduli and damping factors for dynamic response analyses, Technical repot, College of Engineering University of California Berkeley, U.S.A., 41pp.
  14. Shima, E. (1977) On the Base Rock of Tokyo Metropolis. Proceedings of the 6th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 2, pp. 433-443.
  15. Ishihara, K. and Ansal, A.M. (1982) Dynamic Behavior of Soil, Soil Amplification and Soil Structure Interaction. Final Report for Working Group D, UNDP/UNESCO Project on Earthquake Risk Reduction in the Balkan Region.
  16. Building and Housing Research Center (2014) Standard No. 2800 Iranian Code of Practice for Seismic Resistant Design of Buildings. Fourth Revision, Tehran.
  17. Khazaei Pour, M., Zerva, A. (2018) Efficient time-domain deconvolution of seismic ground motions using the equivalent-linear method for soil-structure interaction analyses. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 112, 138-151.
  18. Sooch, G., Bagchi, A. (2014) A New Iterative Procedure for Deconvolution of Seismic Ground Motion in Dam-Reservoir-Foundation Systems.Journal of Applied Mathematics, Article ID 287605. 
  19. Idriss, I.M. and Sun, J.I. (1992) User’s Manual for SHAKE91, A Computer Program for Conducting Equivalent Linear Seismic Response Analyses of Horizontally Layered Soil Deposits.
  20. Jalili, J., Mousavi, M., Pakniat, S. (2022) Generation and development of a comprehensive site-response analysis code in time and frequency domain – part 1: frequency domain analysis. Research project fulfilled at the International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology.
  21. Hashash, Y.M.A., Musgrove, M.I., Harmon, J.A., Groholski, D.R., Phillips, C.A., and Park, D. (2016) DEEPSOIL 6.1, User Manual.
  22. United Nations Institute for Training and Research, Satellite image and analysis (2017) Maps and Data.
  23. NBCC (1995) National Building Code of Canada. National Research Council of Canada, Canadian Commission on Building and Fire Codes.