Content
Preface ......................................................................................................................................................................
Chapter 1 Introduction ...........................................................................................................................................
Chapter 2 Disasters in the City ..............................................................................................................................
2.1 Historic records of disasters .............................................................................................................................
2.2 Future disaster possibility ................................................................................................................................
2.3 Comparison with other possible disasters ........................................................................................................
2.4 Present disaster policy .....................................................................................................................................
2.5 Motivation for the RADIUS project ................................................................................................................
Chapter 3 Preparation of the Case Study..............................................................................................................
3.1 Objectives of the case study.............................................................................................................................
3.2 Scope of Work .................................................................................................................................................
3.3 Work Force ......................................................................................................................................................
3.4 Work Schedule ................................................................................................................................................
3.5 Kick-off meeting .............................................................................................................................................
Chapter 4 Seismic Hazard and Risk Assessment ..................................................................................................
4.1 Seismic hazard assessment for the city of Tashkent ........................................................................................
4.2 Vulnerability and seismic risk assessment.......................................................................................................
4.2.1 Residential Buildings. ...............................................................................................................................
4.2.2 Public buildings. .......................................................................................................................................
4.2.3 Industrial buildings. ..................................................................................................................................
4.2.4 Recommendations on simple ways to reduce damage ..............................................................................
4.3 Vulnerability and seismic risk assessment for lifelines ...................................................................................
4.4 Interview procedure and results .......................................................................................................................
4.5 Earthquake scenario .........................................................................................................................................
4.6 Scenario Workshop ..........................................................................................................................................
Chapter 5 Risk Management Plan .........................................................................................................................
5.1 Objectives of the risk management plan. .........................................................................................................
5.2 Development of the risk management plan......................................................................................................
5.3 Interviews and discussion of the action plan in groups....................................................................................
5.4 Activity of the working groups connected with preparation of the preliminary action plan. ........................
5.5 Action plan workshop ......................................................................................................................................
5.6 Action plan for Tashkent .................................................................................................................................
Chapter 6 Related Activities ...................................................................................................................................
6.1 Connection with the community. .....................................................................................................................
6.2 Training in the country. ...................................................................................................................................
6.3 Participation in seminars, conferences, and workshops. ..................................................................................
6.4 Training and dissemination of information. .....................................................................................................
Chapter 7 Conclusion ..............................................................................................................................................
7.1 Review. ............................................................................................................................................................
7.2 How the objects were achieved. ......................................................................................................................
7.3 Problems. .........................................................................................................................................................
7.4 How the problems were solved. .......................................................................................................................
7.5 Unsolved problems. .........................................................................................................................................
7.6 Necessary future initiatives and plans ..............................................................................................................
7.7 Authors of the report ........................................................................................................................................
Appendices ...............................................................................................................................................................
Appendix A. Participants .......................................................................................................................................
Appendix B. Building types
Appendix C. Characteristics of the lifelines system ..............................................................................................
Appendix D. Interview results ...............................................................................................................................
Appendix E. Current activities and responsibilities of urban services ...................................................................
2
Preface
The United Nations declared the 1990s as the International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction
(IDNDR). Taking into account the importance of the growing earthquake risk for cities located in seismicprone areas of the world and the urgency of mitigation measures, the IDNDR Secretariat launched the
RADIUS project (Risk Assessment Tools for Diagnosis of Urban Areas against Seismic Disasters) with the
financial assistance of the Government of Japanese.
Out of 58 cities worldwide that applied for participation to the project, the Secretariat selected 9 cities for
case studies. The city of Tashkent was selected for a full case study under a grant of US$ 50,000. A grant
agreement was concluded between the IDNDR Secretariat and the Khokimiyat (municipality) of the city of
Tashkent for implementation of the RADIUS for the period from 1 February 1998 to 31 July 1999. For
implementation of the project the steering committee was appointed by Khokim (mayor) and a working
group was formed of leading scientists and specialists in the fields of seismology, earthquake engineering
and emergency management. The work programme was divided into 4 parts: seismic hazard assessment,
seismic vulnerability and risk for buildings, seismic vulnerability and risk for lifelines, and earthquake
scenario and emergency plan.
During implementation of the project the steering committee and the working groups submitted to the
IDNDR Secretariat semi-annual reports (July 1998 and January 1999), with the preliminary results of the
case study. This final report integrates all the results obtained by the 4 parts during the eighteen months of
the RADIUS project in Tashkent. The authors of the final report followed the format proposed by the
IDNDR Secretariat.
The steering committee and the working group of the RADIUS project in Tashkent express their gratitude
to the IDNDR Secretariat, the international experts (INCEDE/OYO), consultants (Asian Advisory
Committee), and to the City of Khokimiyat and its departments, urban services, research and design
institutes for their participation and contribution to the realization of the RADIUS project in Tashkent.
3
Chapter 1 Introduction
The city of Tashkent IS one of the world’s largest cities and is located in the Tashkent oasis in Central
Asia. It is the capital of the Republic of Uzbekistan. The area of the city is about 33,000 hectares and its
population is about 2.2 million residents. The city is divided into 11 administrative districts. Tashkent is a large
diversified industrial centre of Uzbekistan producing a quarter of country’s industrial production. The industrial
complex of the city is comprised of mechanical engineering and metalworking (51.3 percent), light industry
(19.9 percent), food industry (6.5 percent), and other branches (22.4 percent). The main branches are aircraft,
electronics, electrotechnical engineering, tractor construction, agricultural engineering, and metalworking. The
factories of the city produce aeroplanes, spinning machines, tractors, excavating machines, paper, varnish and
painting materials, cranes, cables, light-industry equipment and other production. There are 426 large industrial
enterprises, 5,385 small-size enterprises, 5,270 private companies, and 888 joint ventures, with about 200,000
workers. The city is the scientific and educational centre of Uzbekistan, where the Academy of Sciences is
located, about 100 research institutions, 25 higher educational establishments, 44 special schools, 360 schools of
general education and more than 640 pre-school establishments. There are 171 clinics and 91 hospitals, which
belong to the public health department of the municipality of Tashkent. The city has about 3,000 shops, 1,700
public enterprises and about 1,200 service enterprises. There are about 100 government offices, ministries and
departments, more than 200 embassies and representative offices of foreign countries and private businesses, and
also 1,414 enterprises with foreign investments, many theatres, and about 200 libraries and other cultural
institutions. There are more than 50 banks and investment funds. All the important questions related to the
political, economical, social life of the country are dealt with in Tashkent. Tashkent is an important tourist
centre for the region.
The city has about 36,000,000 square metres of housing, that is an average of 16.8 square metres of dwelling
space per inhabitant. These are different structural types of buildings. About 5 percent are houses constructed
more than 50 years ago.
The city has a complicated system of lifelines and infrastructure. There are more than 2,000 kilometres of roads,
more than 130 bridges, as well as many tunnels and grade-crossing elimination structures. It is expected that total
length of the three subway lines will reach 50 kilometres by the year of 2000. There are two airports, two large
railway stations, and several railway freight stations. There are about 30 kilometres of large diameter tunnels.
The total length of the water-supply system is more than 3,600 kilometres, and 2,300 kilometres of sewage
system. The city consumes about 2.5 thousand cubic meters of water per day about one cubic meter per
inhabitant. About 60 percent of the population uses the centralized heating system, and the majority of the
population uses the gas supply system. The city supplies power from 5 internal sources and 3 external sources,
124 distributing stations supply voltage to 3,200 transformers, connected with each other with more than 5000
underground cables and 2500 aerial cables.
There are 8 large railway stations in the city, two of them are for passengers. Trains go to 8 destinations inside
the country and 4 trains go abroad. Urban passenger transport is provided by motor vehicles (55 percent), electric
(30 percent), subway (15 percent). Everyday 2,300,000 passengers are carried by public urban transport.
Figures 1.1 to 1.3 present diagrams showing growth of the city, its population and provision with main lifelines
as well as main earthquakes. It is obvious that at the time of past earthquakes Tashkent was much smaller in area
and considerably less populated.
In the beginning of the twentieth century a considerable part, even in the centre of the city, was buildings
constructed with air-dried materials. There are still many adobe houses in the old part of the city. On the fig. 1.4
-1.5 buildings are presented which were built in the nineteenth century and are still safe.
By the beginning of 1940, there were about 500,000 inhabitants, but during the 4 years of the Great Patriotic
War (1941-1945) the population increased threefold. During the war, more than one million people and
hundreds of industrial units were moved to Tashkent from the western parts of the former Soviet Union, located
in the zones.
4
Population (in
3
millions)
2.5
Sce nario
e arthquak e
Population growth and major
historical earthquakes in Tashkent
1966
2
1924
1.5
1868
1
182
0.5
0
1800
Year
1850
1900
1950
2000
Figure 1.1
Territory (in thousands of hectars)
40
Growth of Tashkent in area
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1800
1850
1900
1950
Year
2000
Figure 1.2
Growth
12
10
Weighted provision of the city with
power, gas, water, heat
8
6
4
2
0
1900
Year
1925
1950
1975
Figure 1.3
5
2000
Figure 1.4
Figure 1.5
The accommodation of an increasing population and industrial sites led to the proliferation of weak
slap-dash buildings and structures. Anti-seismic construction norms were not taken into consideration and
immigrants to the area has no awareness of the seismic threat. Residential and industrial buildings were
constructed in unsuitable areas, areas of landfill slopes and in other unfavourable conditions which has not
previously been occupied.
Only a short time ago the first maps of seismic microzoning were compiled for the city. As data and
seismological information were gathered seismic microzoning maps and the seismic code were revised. Now all
new buildings are constructed taking into consideration design intensities VIII and IX.
If a large earthquake strikes today, it will affect a much larger and more populated area than during
past earthquakes. The city it is interesting to know that the city of Tashkent is more than 2,000 years old, it was
formerly called Shash or Chach. In the middle ages, the name Tashkent was adopted meaning “Stone City.”
One of branches of the Great Silky Route went through the city. The nature of Tashkent is determined by its
location in the foothills of western Tien Shan on the spacious right bank of the Chirchik river, in slightly hilly,
flat country. The highest elevation level 515 metres and the lowest is less than 380 metres. Slope is oriented to
the southwest.
The continental climate of Tashkent is characterized by cold winters and dry, hot summers. Average
annual temperature is 13.3 degrees (Celsius). The average temperature in July is 26.9, in January it is minus 0.9.
Absolute minimum is minus 30, and maximum 44. Average annual precipitation is 387 mm.
The city is supplied by the
Bozsu water system. There are
5 canals: Bozsu, Karasu, Salar,
Ankhor, and Kalkauz. The
total length of the canals
within the city is 137
kilometres, 57 kilometres of
which are lined with concrete.
On these canals, Tashkent
hydroelectric
stations
are
located.
Tashkent is a multinational
city. Radio and television are
broadcast in many languages.
The Tashkent TV tower is the
highest structure in the
Figure 1.6
earthquake-prone zones of
Central Asia with an intensity
of IX. It is a metal structure
375 metres in height.
The building of the National
bank of Uzbekistan is known as the highest building in Central Asia. It is
Figure
constructed of monolithic reinforced concrete to design intensity IX. It rises more than 100 metres above the
1.6
ground.
6
Figure 1.7
Figure 1. 8
7
Chapter 2 Disasters in the City
2.1. Historic records of disasters
Among the natural and technological disasters endangering the city, a special place belongs to
earthquakes. Throughout its long history, the city of Tashkent has been shaken by many earthquakes that have
destroyed buildings and caused casualties. The first reliable information on a large earthquake in the city is
from 1866. Before the end of the last century the city suffered several other strong earthquakes. Records give
their severity at the level of MSK intensity VII-VIII.
Weak seismic shocks causing no visible harm to the city are frequent phenomena. More intensive
ground motions, as shown on the following table have been familiar to many generations of people in Tashkent.
The table presents the chronology of seismic events with an intensity of VI or higher.
Earthquake
Tashkent, 1868
Tashkent, 1886
Kostakoz, 1888
Ura-Tyube, 1897
Tashkent, 1924
Pskem, 1937
Chatkal, 1946
Tashkent, 1966
Tavaksay, 1977
Nazarbek, 1980
Susamyr, 1992
Magnitude
6.5
6.7
6.4
6.6
4.3
6.5
7.5
5.3
5.0
5.1
7.3
Effect in
Tashkent
(MSK)
VII-VIII
VII
VI-VII
VI-VII
VII
VI
VII-VIII
VIII
VI
VI-VII
VI
Scheme of seismic effect distribution resulting from
the Tashkent earthquake of 26 April 1966
(M.Urazbaev,V.Rasskazovsky, T.Rashidov, et al.)
Table 2.1Historical earthquakes and their effect in Tashkent.
The well-known earthquake of 1966 was studied in great detail. Several monographs were published
on this event and its consequences. Figures 2.1 and 2.2 were taken after that earthquake.
Figure 2.1. Damaging earthquake on 26 April 1966.
8
Figure 2.2. One of tent cities in Tashkent after the
earthquake of 1966.
2.2. Future disaster possibility
Taking into consideration the past seismic history of the city it is quite reasonable to conclude that
earthquakes will be a dangerous and unavoidable disaster in Tashkent’s future. There are seismological
indications that the capital of Uzbekistan, located in an earthquake prone region, could suffer a more severe
earthquake than the earthquake of 1966 (magnitude 5.3). According to current seismological knowledge,
maximum expected seismic intensity in Tashkent is estimated to be a level VIII. Estimated recurrence periods
given in the seismic code are for a future earthquake intensity VIII (every 100 years) and intensity VII (every 25
years). It should be mentioned that a large part of the city has unfavorable soil conditions in terms of seismic
influence. Such soils magnify seismic effects. According to engineering-seismological estimations on the map
of seismic microzoning of Tashkent, the city can be divided into 2 zones of maximum expected (design) seismic
intensity at the level of MSK VIII and IX. This represents a rather serious danger for urban construction and city
inhabitants.
2.3. Comparison with other possible disasters
Until now there have been no other natural or technological disasters in the city. Though along with
the seismic threat there are other kinds of risks; for example floods, fires, or contamination of the environment
from industries near the city. It should be mentioned that the dangerous phenomena might be triggered by
earthquakes adding to the disaster.
Located 12 kilometres outside the city is the Institute of Nuclear Physics with a nuclear reactor, 30
kilometres away is the town of Chirchik with large chemical industry plants, and 60 kilometres away is the
Charvak Dam.
2.4. Present disaster policy
The government and the community of Tashkent have been aware of the seismic threat for many years
and have taken certain steps to increase earthquake disaster preparedness. Seismic hazard assessment has been
carried out for the region of Tashkent. The seismic microzoning map for the region of Tashkent has been
revised three times as new data were accumulated and knowledge improved. The current map of seismic
microzoning for the city of Tashkent was developed by the Institute of Seismology in 1984. Along with the
Institute of Seismology, there are also Institute of Geology and Geophysics and the Institute of Mechanics and
Seismic Stability of Structures under the Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Uzbekistan. These three
research institutes carry out fundamental and applied research in the fields of seismology and earthquake
engineering.
For the coordination of field work for earthquake-proof design and construction, there is the State
Committee for Architecture and Construction. It has several design and research institutes attached. AO
UzLITTI is responsible for the design and construction of typical and experimental dwellings and public
buildings.
For the purposes of anti-seismic design, all the design institutes use the new seismic code КМК
2.01.03-96 “Construction in seismic prone regions” and КМК 2.07.01-94 “Town-planning, lay-out and building
of urban and village settlements”, put into operation by the State Committee for Architecture and Construction in
1994 and 1996. The enforcement of design rules is under the responsibility of the general state expert
commission and the city expert commission. The monitoring of construction is carried out under the
architectural supervision of design organisations, technical service builders, and the General ArchitecturalBuilding Inspection of the State Committee for Architecture and Construction.
The responsibility for emergency planning and response in the city is given to the City Emergency
Department, a municipality agency since 1996. Recently, a subdivision of the emergency department the city
rescue service was established. The appropriate emergency detachments are in the structure of all urban
services. The City Emergency Department conducts its activity in the framework of the state system of
emergency prevention and response.
An emergency management plan has been prepared for the city, which is being constantly improved,
taking into account current situation. The persons responsible for management in emergency situations in the
city are Khokim (mayor) of Tashkent and the head of the city emergency department.
9
2.5. Motivation for the RADIUS project
Despite constant attention to the problem and considerable progress in preparedness for future
earthquakes, detailed analysis shows that the city of Tashkent is not fully ready for probable future large
earthquakes. Among the factors contributing to the existing high-risk level for Tashkent are the following:
*
*
*
*
*
*
High level of seismic hazard;
Complicated and seismically unfavourable engineering-geological conditions;
A rather high density of population, most of which live in zones of design intensity IX;
A considerable vulnerable individual houses and buildings of old construction, built without modern
seismic considerations and in need of retrofitting;
A rather developed and complicated infrastructure; and
Inadequate awareness among city dwellers.
All these factors have motivated the city to participate in the RADIUS project, to promote seismic vulnerability
and reduce risk in Tashkent. In addition, the city of Tashkent has practical experience in elimination of
consequences of the 1966 earthquake, many qualified specialists and a pool of research material, for
achievement of such an important objective as the RADIUS initiatives goal to develop an efficient tool for
earthquake risk assessment and management.
10
Chapter 3 Preparation of the Case Study
3.1 Objectives of the case study
The main objectives of the Tashkent case study were the same as the goals of the IDNDR RADIUS
project:





Attraction of attention and raising of awareness of decision-makers and the city to the earthquake threat;
Preparation of an earthquake damage scenario describing possible consequences of a large earthquake;
Preparation of a comprehensive action plan aimed at reducing potential earthquake damage;
Promotion of cooperation among local authorities, urban services, emergency services, scientists,
planners, and builders; and
Use of international experience and interaction with other cities located in earthquake-prone zones
worldwide.
3.2 Scope of work
To attain these ends the following tasks must be carried out:









Use of data about the seismic history of the region and geological information to prepare an estimate of
seismic hazard and potential influence on Tashkent of probable future earthquakes;
Selection of a scenario earthquake as an event of considerable probability, presenting a real threat for
the city;
Compilation of a map of seismic intensity distribution on the city from the scenario earthquake, taking
into account local ground conditions;
An inventory of residential and public buildings, lifelines and infrastructure for identification of the
most vulnerable areas and structural types;
Estimation of damage to residential and public property, lifelines, and infrastructure resulting from the
scenario earthquake;
Development of a earthquake scenario for the selected seismic event;
Presentation of the results and estimations to representatives of urban services involved in earthquake
disaster preparedness and for their comments;
Preparation of an action plan for seismic risk mitigation; and
Preparation of recommendations on earthquake preparedness and risk mitigation for use in other cities
in seismic-prone areas.
3.3 Work force
For the realization of the RADIUS project a steering committee for the city of Tashkent was appointed. The Cochairmen of the steering committee are the vice-mayor of Tashkent, Mr. A.D. Mirjalilov and the Director of
INCEDE, Tokyo, Japan, Professor Ken Sudo. The work of the working group was divided into 4 sections:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Seismic hazard assessment;
Assessment of vulnerability and seismic risk for buildings;
Assessment of vulnerability and seismic risk for lifelines; and
Earthquake scenario and emergency response plan.
The working group included more than 50 engineers, scientists and experts in the field of seismology,
earthquake engineering and emergency response. It was the task of the steering committee to coordinate and
monitor implementation of the project. For harboring of reports special summarizing groups were established of
members of all 4 sections. The list of participants is attached in the appendix.
11
3.4 Work Schedule
Planned
Completed
1998
Activity
1999
Month
4
5
6
7
8
1. Project management
1.1 Preparation
1.2 Kick-off meeting
1.3 Supervision, control, Sessions of
the working group ,preparation of
reports
1.4 Scenario workshop
1.5 Action plan workshop
2. Assessment of seismic hazard
2.1 Analysis of potential hazardous
source zones, expected intensity
level, and construction of attenuation
curves
2.2 Analysis of local ground conditions
and probable seismic site effects
2.3 Entering data into computer
3. Vulnerability and seismic risk for buildings
3.1 Inventory of existing
building
3.2 Vulnerability classification
for different types of buildings
3.3 Damage estimation and
construction of vulnerability curves
3.4 Preparation of damage
distribution maps
3.5 Development of simple methods
of vulnerability assessment and
retrofitting
3.6 Entry of data into computer
4. VULNERABILITY AND SEISMIC RISK FOR LIFELINES
4.1 Inventory of elements of
lifeline systems
4.2 Vulnerability classification
4.3 Damage assessment from
the scenario earthquake
4.4 Compiling damage
distribution maps
4.5 Entry of data into computer
5. Earthquake scenario and action plan
5.1 Description of earthquake
consequences in time
5.2 Response plan preparation
5.3 Recommendations on
preventive measures
6. Preparation of progress and financial reports
6.1 Semi-annual and final technical
reports
12
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
3.5 Kick-off Meeting
The first city conference on the RADIUS project (the kick-off meeting) entitled “Problems of
implementation of the international IDNDR-RADIUS project on reduction of seismic risk for the city of
Tashkent” was held on 19 May 1998 in the City Hall of Tashkent. The meeting was presided over by the vicemayor of the city of Tashkent and co-chairman of the RADIUS-Tashkent project A.J. Mirjalilov.
Invitations were sent to 123 organisations in Tashkent. Representatives of more than 60 of them attended
the kick-off meeting. Among the participants were representatives of the municipality, urban services, the
Emergency Ministry of Uzbekistan, the City Emergency Department, business leaders and representatives of
large industrial enterprises, banks, scientists and specialists from research, design and educational institutes, and
the media; in total about 100 people.
The main purposes of the kick-off meeting were to inform the community about the objectives and
problems of the RADIUS project, to give an initial impetus to it, to arrange cooperation and interaction of related
organisations, and to seek financial support and technical assistance, international cooperation and mutual aid for
successful implementation of the project.
The floor was taken by the co-chairman of the steering committee, vice-mayor of Tashkent, Mr. A.J.
Mirjalilov, Head of Department of the Institute of Mechanics and Seismic Stability of Structures, Acad. T.R.
Rashidov, Director of the Institute of Seismology, Professor K.N. Abdullabekov, General Director of AO
«UzLITTI» Dr. S.A. Khojaev, consultant to the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic of Uzbekistan V.O.
Sosnovsky, Head of Division of Mechanics and Processes of Management and Informatics of the Academy of
Sciences of the Republic of Uzbekistan, Acad. Ya.N. Muborakov, and Deputy Director of the Tashkent aircraft
works L.P. Samartsev.
The address to the government, local authority, mass media, and business leaders of the city was a
request to pay more attention to problems of the RADIUS project and to render engineering, financial, and
information assistance to its realization. Participants adopted the resolution and address of the steering
committee and Secretariat with regards to the implementation of the RADIUS project in Tashkent.
It was noted that seismic danger, the vulnerability of buildings and lifelines plays an important role in
determining socioeconomic vulnerability of urban areas. Earthquake damage and the vulnerability of new and
existing buildings should be studied. Knowledge in the field of seismology, earthquake engineering and
management of seismic risk accumulated in the world should be used for design and construction. This
information should be used by people making economic, political, and administrative decisions.
Representatives of the press, radio, and television attended the kick-off meeting. Detailed information
about the RADIUS project and the kick-off meeting was presented on the national TV channel news
“AKHBOROT”. Information on the RADIUS project was presented in the newspapers “Vecherny Tashkent”,
“Narodnoe slovo”, “Pravda Vostoka”, and others.
13
Chapter 4 Seismic Hazard and Risk Assessment
4.1 Seismic hazard assessment for the city of Tashkent
In the first section of the programme the following work has been carried out:








Assessment of the regions seismic hazard, analysis of dangerous zones and selection of potential
earthquake sources capable of causing strong and destructive ground shaking;
Localization of potential sources and determination of their probable parameters;
Assessment of parameters of attenuation of seismic energy and seismic intensity with the distance and
Construction of theoretical isoseisms for selected variants of potential earthquakes;
Analysis of variants of potential earthquakes and selection of a scenario event;
Analysis of engineering and geological conditions in the city and estimation of their probable influence
on site amplification and seismic effects;
Identification of dangerous sites with probable collateral seismogeological effects;
Estimation of expected intensity of ground shaking in Tashkent for the scenario earthquake and
mapping of seismic effect distribution in the city; and
Generation of scenario accelerograms for zones of different shaking intensity.
According to the seismic microzoning map compiled for the city taking into account local soil
conditions, the maximum seismic effect expected in Tashkent could reach intensity VIII-IX (MSK scale). The
research team selected for the scenario an earthquake capable of causing seismic activity of an intensity of VIIIX. These zones were considered capable of generating earthquakes resulting in severe shaking in the city.
Another criterion for selection was probability of earthquake occurrence. Variants of potential earthquakes for
the scenario were conducted using 2 criteria: first, possible destruction of the city close to upper possible
estimations and, second, maximum probability of such an event.
For each zone, potential sources of earthquakes were selected. Taking into account the attenuation of
seismic energy over distance, theoretical isoseisms were constructed and possible seismic effects on the city of
Tashkent were evaluated. Seismologists considered a total of 7 variants of hypothetical earthquakes, from which
3 potential events were selected. Figure 4.1.1 shows theoretical isoseisms for these three potential earthquakes.
Having compared variants of potential earthquakes and their effect on the city, the research team concluded
that the worst case with high probability of occurrence could be from a local earthquake. This earthquake
was selected as the scenario event. The scenario earthquake has a magnitude of M=6.1 of a depth H=10 km
related to Tashkent flexural-ruptured zone. This zone belongs to the Karzhantau Fault, which is responsible
for more then 20 percent of strong earthquakes in the Tashkent region. The influence of ground conditions
was determined from consideration of such factors as:





Type of soil composing the upper part of the ground cross-section;
Thickness of the stratum;
Seismic properties of soil and their seismic response;
Level of ground waters; and
Possibility of manifestation of seismogeological effects.
According to the estimations obtained, there are zones of probable seismic effect of intensity VII,
VIII and IX (MSK scale) within the boundaries of the city.
14
1.
2.
3.
4.
isoseismals of earthquake with M=6.7, h=20 km
isoseismals of earthquake with M=6.5, h=15 km
isoseismals of earthquake with M=6.1, h=10 km
probable earthquake hypocenters
Figure 4.1 1 Distribution of seismic intensities
Distribution of seismic intensities and seismic effects resulting from the scenario earthquake is
shown in Figure 4.1.2.
Thus, analysis of the compiled map shows that distribution of seismic effects within the boundaries of the city is as follows:
approximately 20 percent - intensity VII, 40 percent - VIII, 40 percent - IX. Within the zone of intensity IX about 10 percent - the
territory with probable seismogeological effects (including 8 percent - ground failure due to liquefaction and 2 percent - slope
phenomena, such as landslides and rockfalls).
For the dynamic analysis of buildings and structures under seismic excitation and to provide the
possibility of more accurate assessment of damage to critical buildings located in different zones of the scenario
macroseismic field, artificial accelerograms were modelled corresponding to different levels of seismic intensity
(VII, VIII and IX).
Seismic input presenting influence of the scenario earthquake on buildings, structures and infrastructures
is given in the form of intensity values (MSK) and accelerograms. The results presented in this section describe
the hypothetical influence on the city of the scenario earthquake. The purpose of the RADIUS project is to
assess possible seismic influence on an urban area, to diagnose how well the city is prepared for such an event,
and to learn what should be done for seismic disaster mitigation. These aspects, including seismic vulnerability
of the city and losses expected from the scenario earthquake will be considered in the following sections.
15
Figure 4.1.2. Ground shaking intensities and seismic effect distribution for the scenario earthquake.
16
4.2 Vulnerability and seismic risk assessment
The following types of buildings were considered:



Residential buildings, both those constructed by state building organizations and self-built ones;
Public buildings, including schools, kindergartens and other establishments for children (group 1);
hospitals (group 2); buildings of shops and services (group 3); clubs, cinemas, theaters (group 4);
institutes, colleges, polyclinics, research and design institutions, administrative buildings, offices (group
5); hotels (group 6); and
Industrial buildings and factories, including one story and multi story.
4.2.1 Residential buildings
Information about buildings with various design systems has been collected. Urban housing on 1 July
1999 consists of 36.74 million square meters of housing, where 2,120,000 people are living.
The parameters of the residential fund on main design systems and number of stories are presented in
figure 4.2.1. Within urban housing, large-panel and masonry buildings are dominant in buildings constructed of
local materials. There are too few monolithic reinforced concrete buildings. Buildings of 1 to 5 stories prevail.
According to types of construction, all the buildings were classified according to vulnerability class. All the
residential and public buildings in Tashkent can be divided into 6 main design systems:
1. dwellings built using local materials and brick buildings and constructed without anti-seismic measures;
Figure 4.2.1
2.
3.
4.
5.
brick buildings;
mixed design systems;
frame buildings;
frameless buildings with planar bearing
elements; and
6. wooden apartment houses.
Buildings can be divided into 24 types, which
use 5 to 6 design systems. These design systems are
common not only for the city of Tashkent but also for
all cities of Central Asia. The buildings are classified
by number of floors and material of bearing structural
elements.
Using results of macroseismic analysis of past
earthquakes,
experimental
investigations
and
theoretical calculations for each building design type,
damage matrices and vulnerability curves were
constructed. Depending on designed level of seismic
protection, damage is described by five damage grades
according to the macroseismic scale MSK-98. As an
example, figure 4.2.2 presents vulnerability curves for
masonry buildings (2.1 - brick buildings, 2.2 - brick
buildings with walls of complex construction).
Depending on the damage grade for each of the design
types of buildings, cost functions were constructed
(percentage of recovery cost of one square meter of
common space versus damage grade). An example is
presented on figure 4.2.3.
Types of buildings according to design systems were identified on the map of the city of Tashkent (figure
4.2.4).
Using data on buildings of different design types, the vulnerability curves and loss functions, describing
possible losses in dependence on seismic intensity and protection level (figure 4.2.5), economic losses resulting
17
from the scenario earthquake for each type of buildings were calculated (figure 4.2.6), and the scenario map of
building damage distribution in Tashkent was compiled (figure 4.2.7).
Building type and bearing elements
Average value
of damageability
index
3.95
1.
Residential buildings of weak local materials
2.
One-storey frameless adobe (“guvalyk” and “pakhsa”)
3.68
3.
3-5 storey frameless brick buildings with wooden floors
3.84
4.
Prefabricated RC frame with linear elements with welded joints in the zone of
2.96
maximum loads or with rigid walls in one direction (series 111, IIS-04)
5.
1-2 storey frameless brick buildings with wooden floors
3.15
6.
Frames without girder or lift slab construction (frame without rigidity core)
2.75
7.
Buildings with flexible ground floor and rigid upper floors
2.70
8.
Brick walls of concrete or natural stones. Prefabricated RC slab
2.62
9.
Large panels without antiseismic measures
2.61
10.
Buildings with external bearing walls, inner walls –RC frame
2.58
11.
Prefabricated frame of planar cross-shaped RC, H-shaped elements with monolithic
2.56
nodes
12.
Monolithic RC frames
2.55
13.
Walls of large blocks (concrete, vibrated and reinforced brick panels)
2.50
14.
RC frame with brick filling
2.41
15.
1-2 storey wooden frame with adobe fill
2.37
16.
Walls of complex construction (with RC elements included). Prefabricated RC
2.33
slabs
17.
Prefabricated RC frame braced with monolithic nodes with rigid walls in two
2.22
directions of with stiffness core
18.
Frame from blocks (volume cross) with monolithic nodes
2.17
19.
Large panel buildings with external brick walls
2.00
20.
Monolithic walls
1.86
21.
Large panel walls
1.73
22.
Room shaped volume blocks
1.67
23.
1-2 storey wooden houses
1.16
24.
Metal frame
1.16
Note: 1. Average value of damageability index corresponds to mean value of total sum of the damage grades
for the structural type of the buildings under consideration where site intensity is equal to design
intensity of the building
2. Building types are presented in the table from most vulnerable to least vulnerable
Table 4.2.1 Classification of buildings in Tashkent by vulnerability index (Sh. Khakimov).
18
Figure 4.2. 2
Figure 4.2. 3 Cost function
19
Figure 4.2. 4
20
Figure 4.2. 5
Figure 4.2. 6
21
Figure 4.2. 7
22
Analysis shows, that adobe houses collapse, buildings constructed without antiseismic measures are
seriously damaged, and there is a great deal of destroyed brick buildings. This damaged will be located within
zones of intensity IX of the scenario earthquake. Percentage of damage to frame reinforced concrete buildings
constructed using design system IIS-004 is rather high. Less damaged are reinforced concrete large-panel
buildings, monolithic, volume-block and wooden houses. 1 to 2 storey buildings constructed using wooden
frame of the type "sinch" with adobe-brick filling performed well in zones of intensity VIII and remained in
repairable condition. Brick houses of complex construction suffer less damage, however the main cause of
damage was poor-quality workmanship. More than 12 percent of destroyed buildings fall in zones of soil
liquefaction.
Common economic losses to residential buildings make up about 49 percent of the total cost of the whole
residential stock of the city, and economic losses from completely destroyed houses make up more than 30
percent of the total cost of the residential stock. About 40 percent of common residential space of the city turns
out to be unrecoverable. The structure of common economic losses was analyzed, including losses of dwelling
space and number of people made homeless by building design type. Analysis shows that the main losses are
due to damage to:





Buildings with brick bearing walls;
Buildings built using local clay materials;
Masonry buildings constructed without anti-seismic measures with wooden floors;
Buildings built using prefabricated reinforced concrete frames of construction series IIS-004; and
Large-panel buildings located in zones of soil liquefaction.
In cases of high-frequency seismic excitation T = 0.1 to 0.3 sec, the most vulnerable are:




Buildings of 1 to 2 floors constructed from local materials (without anti-seismic measures)
Brick buildings with 2 to 4 wooden floors constructed before 1958;
Buildings of mixed design (external brick walls and internal reinforced concrete elements); and
Large-panel buildings without anti-seismic protection.
In case of seismic excitation of low-frequency, T = 0.5 to 1.0 sec, the most vulnerable are:




Buildings constructed by the method of floor rising;
Girderless frame buildings and buildings with flexible ground floor;
Buildings of combined system; and
Prefabricated reinforced concrete frame buildings of construction design series IIS 004 and its
modifications.
These buildings are not seismic resistant and present potential danger to inhabitants. Construction of these
buildings in regions subject to seismicity of intensity level VII or higher can not be tolerated. A considerable
part of the city of Tashkent is covered by zones of intensity IX with grounds, which can lose their bearing
capacity under seismic excitation. These areas are densely built up with buildings of local weak materials and
modern buildings. Buildings located here are potentially dangerous for inhabitants. It is necessary either to
conduct complex measures to strengthen foundations and to take other precautions such as the demolition of the
buildings and moving of the inhabitants to less dangerous areas of the city.
4.2.2 Public buildings
Public buildings are represented by a considerably smaller number of design types. They are primarily
brick buildings, brick buildings with complex construction of walls strengthened with reinforce concrete
elements and frame-panel systems. Public buildings have 2 to 5 floors. However, there are some tall buildings
with more than 5 floors.
These are administrative offices, hotels, and hospitals. Over the past 5 to 10 years a few monolithic
buildings with metal frames have been constructed in the city.
23
Chronologically, public buildings can be divided into two parts: buildings constructed before the
earthquake of 1966, when the maximum expected intensity was VII-VIII, and second, after 1966. Before 1966,
public buildings were built mainly with brick bearing walls and walls of complex construction. Some parts of
those are frame buildings. About 35 percent of all public buildings were constructed before 1966. Those
buildings are mainly schools, preschool establishments, institutes, colleges, and hospitals, built with brick walls
and wooden floors.
Seismic resistance of the buildings constructed before 1966 correspond to a level of intensity of VI to
VIII.
Public buildings constructed after 1966 are mainly brick buildings with complex walls, frame-panel
buildings or frame buildings with self-supporting brick walls. The most widespread are vulnerable reinforced
concrete frame of series IIS-04. At the same time construction of monolithic buildings with metal frames is
gaining acceptance.
The stock of public buildings in Tashkent represents more than 42,385 cubic meters or more than 11,000
square meters of common space. In these buildings, more than one million people work. Loss of public
buildings were estimated for 15 most spread types of public buildings, which were divided into the following 6
groups:
I. Schools, preschool establishments;
II. Hospitals;
III. Shops, services;
IV. Clubs, cinemas, theaters;
V. Institutes, colleges, polyclinics, research and design institutions, administrative buildings, offices; and
VI. Hotels.
For calculation of economical loss, we used damage matrices for different structural types of buildings and cost
functions for different functional types of public buildings. We took into consideration the recovery repair cost
per cubic meter for these functional and structural types of buildings.
From the analysis, it follows that economic losses for public buildings from the scenario earthquake make
up more than 40 percent of the total cost of the stock. About 24 percent of the loss is related to destroyed
buildings with damage grade higher than 3. In this content, 16 percent belong to brick buildings. Losses from
completely destroyed brick school buildings (first group of public buildings) come to 21 percent, frame panel
buildings more than 4 percent of the total cost of the buildings in the first group. The same data calculated for the
buildings of hospitals are 19 percent and 5 percent correspondingly. Of the total losses, more than 6 percent
correspond to buildings located in subzones with probable ground failure. The rest is distributed among brick
buildings built before 1966 and frame buildings of series IIS-004.
4.2.3 Industrial buildings
Industry in the city of Tashkent is concentrated in 11 industrial areas and 8 industrial groups. To assess
performance of industrial buildings in Tashkent, a study was made. It contains the main industrial businesses of
Tashkent including 120 factories and 15 industrial associations. Based on an analysis of architectural and
structural design solutions, the following types of industrial buildings were identified:
1. One-storey buildings
1.1. With bearing brick walls;
1.2. With reinforced concrete frame;
1.3. With metal frame;
1.4. With reinforced concrete columns and metal trusses; and
1.5. With mixed design system.
2. Multistoried buildings
2.1. With bearing brick walls;
2.2. Frame with prefabricated reinforced concrete elements;
2.3. With metal frame; and
2.4. Frame with enlarged grid of columns on the upper floor.
In order to rank types of industrial buildings by their degree of vulnerability and to use them for
evaluation of expected damage, results of engineering studies were analyzed based on the consequences of a
number of strong earthquakes in Uzbekistan and around the world. In the scenario earthquake, more than 12
percent of industrial buildings are expected to be destroyed. Brick buildings will be responsible for more than 8
percent of them. Total direct economic losses for industrial buildings comprises more than 30 percent of the total
cost of all industrial businesses. A considerable part of the losses falls on buildings in the textile, food, and light
industrial sectors.
24
Assessment of probable economic losses due to damage to buildings resulting from the scenario
earthquake in Tashkent shows how important it is to improve the seismic performance of buildings and risk
mitigation.
Fig.4.2.8
25
Distribution of damage to public buildings by zones of different
intensity resulting from the scenario earthquakes in Tashkent
50
45
40
17,5
35
> 70%
9,93
56-70%
30
25
41-55%
6,5
7,44
20
26-40%
11-25%
6,2
0-10%
15
10
5
0
20,63
1,16
4,23
15,8
6
4,31
VII
VIII
IX
IX geo-effects
Economical losses due to damage to public buildings resulting
from the scenario earthquake in Tashkent
45
40,66
40
35
30
23,5
25
20
16,43
15
8,9
10
5
6,2
4,31
0
0-10%
11-25%
26-40%
41-55%
Fig.4.2. 9
26
56-70%
> 70%
4.2.4 Recommendations on simple ways to reduce damage
The recommendations below are made in order to reduce damage from future earthquakes. The minimum
group of measures proposed is to improve the seismic resistance of buildings. This means the capability of a
structural system to withstand design level of seismic intensity without harm to human life. It is considered that
there is no threat to human life if the damage grade is not higher than 3. This level of possible damage could be
taken as a criterion of design limit for any type of buildings. Buildings above damage grade 3.5 that have lost 70
percent of their bearing capability should not be reconstructed, as the cost of repair would be higher than the cost
of new construction. Taking into account the results of the seismic risk analysis buildings from local materials,
multistoried brick buildings and frame buildings should be .
Parts of old houses from low-strength materials should be demolished. For some buildings, simple
techniques of retrofitting are recommended for homeowners. Retrofitting includes wooden or steel braces at the
floor level, window and door casings, support walls, and strengthening of foundations. Special attention should
be paid to strengthening the bedrooms of individual houses. It is recommended that multistoried buildings
constructed before 1958 should be retrofitted without eviction of the inhabitants. This is possible using threedimensional bracing with internal pre-stressed steel elements along bearing walls. This technique provides
stability of for the inhabitants, though the building could be damaged considerably.
Frame-systems are less often retrofittable. Their total rigidity can be increased by installing elements.
Existing partitions can be strengthened with additional steel bars or rigid elements used as braces. An efficient
way to increase seismic resistance of frame buildings is to strengthen joints of beams and columns with metal
fittings. These methods are carried out during temporary evacuation of the residents. Buildings with flexible
ground floors can be strengthened by the use of rigid elements. Most dangerous for people are buildings located
in areas of weak soils with probable ground failure. This is why a set of measures should be taken to strengthen
soil foundations or to demolish buildings and relocate the inhabitants.
Economic loss for residential buildings was recalculated taking into account implementation of the
recommended measures. For this, damage matrices for retrofitted buildings were reconstructed. New
calculations show the effectiveness of the proposed plan of measures to reduce risk for surface buildings and
structures. On figure 4.2.11, a map of Tashkent is presented with distribution of economic losses from damage
to residential buildings after implementation of the principal measures of the proposed plan of actions for surface
buildings in the scenario earthquake. Analysis of this map shows that completely destroyed buildings will be
three times less, loss from damage of different structural types of buildings is reduced by 50 percent. For new
construction, structural types are recommended that are less vulnerable seismically. Among these are frame
systems with elimination of welded joints at points of maximum stress, planar-walls reinforced concrete systems
(large-panel, volume-block, monolithic buildings). It is recommended that hand-made masonry not be used for
multistoried brick buildings.
For individual construction, special rules have been developed that require simple techniques of
retrofitting one to two storey buildings constructed of low-strength local materials. The improvement of the
earthquake performance of existing buildings depends greatly on the economic position of the government.
Preliminary calculations show that expenditures on retrofitting of buildings could vary depending on the
damageability index within a wide range and constitutes 10 to 40 percent of the cost of new construction.
27
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
Damage distribution by structural systems
(percentage of the total amount)
40
35
30
Total losses
Economical losses
Losses in space
Population
25
20
15
10
5
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Strucrural system types
Before retrofitting
Distribution of losses by structural systems
(percentage of the total amount)
16
14
Total losses
12
Economical losses from
destroyed buildings
10
8
Losses in space
6
Homeless people
4
2
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Structural system types
After retrofitting
Figure 4.2.10 Percentage of distribution of losses
Structural system types: 1 (large-panel); 2 (brick); 3 (frame-panel); 4 (monolithic); 5 (volume blocks); 6 (other
including adobe).
28
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
Fig. 4.2.11
29
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
4.3 Vulnerability and seismic risk assessment for lifelines
Extent, km
Extent of the underground communications
on the territory of city
4000
3500
2274
1584
1481
The hot
waterpipes
The
natural
gaspipes
Vital activity of the city,
especially for the past 30 years,
is provided with a complicated
system of lifelines (figure
4.3.1). In the city, there is more
than 3,600 km of water supply,
2,300 km of sewerage system,
1,600 km of heat supply lines,
134 bridges of small, medium
and large size, and 20 large
overpasses.
0
The
waterpipes
The
water
drain
Figure 4.3.1
Water-supply system:
Total volume of water supply is 2,457 thousand cubic meters a day, that is on average about 1 cubic meter
per citizen. The total water supply system consists of 6 large water intakes, 86 pumping stations. Within the
urban water supply network there are 29,867 wells and chambers, 30,021 valves, and 11,506 fire hydrants.
Within the city there are 281 crossings with canals and ravines, 108 crossings with railways, and 351 spillways.
There are 105 crossings with operational subway lines and with 38 of those under construction.
Sewerage system:
There are 6 large sewage water pumping stations. Within the urban network there are 78 thousand wells
and chambers, 30 emergency spillways, 40 artificial crossings of large diameters under railways and main roads,
and 48 crossings with subway lines.
Heat-supply:
The heat supply system of the city of Tashkent consists of 12 heat centers, 130 small local boiler houses,
and 59 pump stations, providing heat to 70 percent of the population. An essential part of the heat supply system
is presented by heat pipelines transferring heat as well as hot water to users, residences as well as administrative
and industrial buildings and facilities.
Gas-supply:
The gas supply system of the city is a complex of 3 gas distribution stations, 49 high-pressure control
stations, 18 pump stations, and more than 100 medium-pressure control stations. For gas lines, steel pipes are
used for diameters from 57 to 1,020 mm.
Power-supply:
The city is supplied with electric power from 5 internal sources and 3 external sources. There are 124
distribution stations that supply voltage to 3200 transformers, connected to each other with more than 5,000
underground cables and 2,500 aerial cables.
Main large facilities have loop networks from different power sources to maintain the continuity of
supply. Main cable lines were put into operation during the period of 1950-1970 and most of those lines have
been deteriorated. About 50 percent of underground lines and transformers were put into operation before 1966
and 35 to 40 percent of them were constructed without antiseismic measures.
It was found that seismic influence of intensity IX would produce the following unrecoverable losses:
substations 15 percent, transformers 50 percent, aerial cables 100 percent and about 15,000 punctures along the
cable routes.
The Subway:
30
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
The disposition of Tashkent in a seismic active zone with loess soils having hydro-consolidation
properties and high levels of underground water has motivated the choice of certain design solutions for
withstanding seismic influence. The main conditions of assuring the seismic stability were constructive solutions
providing braces in longitudinal and transverse directions. Using an open-cut technique of construction of
subway tunnels the whole-section casing with damping braces was first applied for the Tashkent subway. To
provide uniform distribution of load on the bed of loess soils the foundation was designed in the form of
monolithic reinforced concrete plate, station tray. Special anti-seismic measures were taken as well against
sinking There are 2 anti-seismic joints along the length of the stations.
Based on materials from interviews done by the members of research team and from visual observations
it was revealed that in the course of construction of the subway some deviates from design solutions took place
as well as poor quality of workmanship. It makes some sections of the underground lines rather vulnerable in
case of a destructive earthquake. In particular, as the cause for anxiety should be considered the state of the leg
between the stations “Pushkin” and “Buyuk Ipak Yuli”. In case of the scenario earthquake this leg could be
damaged and cause economical losses up to US $2.25 million. Special recommendations of RADIUS
investigators have been sent to the management of the subway.
Bridges:
There are 134 bridges within the city, 17 of which were built before 1947, 30 during the period of 19471966, and 87 after 1966. Results of investigations show that 17 out of 47 bridges built before 1966 have
vulnerable points and are subject to destruction under seismic excitation of intensity IX.
The handling ability of many bridges and overpasses does not meet intensive road traffic. Approaches to
bridges do not provide proper drainage and often supports are found to be bare, resulting in defects of bearing
structures.
Interview materials show that shaking of intensity IX could produce destruction of 10 percent of the city
bridges.
Pedestrian underpasses:
Construction of pedestrian underpasses has been activated for recent years because of construction of
highways and the subway. Underpasses that serve as entrances to the underground stations are designed seismic
resistant along with other station structures. As for other pedestrian underpasses not connected with the subway,
interview materials show that they are seismically vulnerable.
Transport tunnels:
Tunnels have received wide extension in recent years. They are designed using seismic considerations,
but workmanship quality often does not meet proper requirements.
Engineering tunnels (collectors):
To improve laying of engineering lines (water, gas, heat, and power supply) in the last 25-30 years about
30 km of tunnels have been constructed. They have circular cross-sections with diameter of 3.6 m. Tunnels are
assembled of 8 blocks mounted over stud bolts. Anti-seismic braces for these blocks have not been considered in
the design. Engineering tunnels of shallow laying run through loess soils having hydro-consolidation properties.
Investigations conducted show that in case of seismic influence of intensity IX about 30 percent of engineering
tunnels would be damaged.
Urban roads:
There are more than 2,000 km of urban roads. Automobile roads are situated on plain areas. After the
1966 earthquake damages to roads did not occur. Some cases of cracking of roadway covering did not influence
on the vital activity of the city. However there were side effects at places of crossings with ruptured pipelines,
where large parts of roads subsided. That is why crossings areas should be provided with additional jackets to
prevent possible leakage of liquids and safeguard the roads.
The issues of seismic vulnerability are drawing attention especially in recent years as far as growth of
cities is related to development and complication of lifeline systems. For the city of Tashkent this question
became a critical one after the earthquake of 1966. At that time a detailed collection of information about
damages to lifelines and their consequent analysis was implemented with the purpose to determine
characteristics and criteria of damageability of different underground structures, mainly pipelines with different
characteristics.
It was found that damages to pipelines occurred mainly due to the following:

Places close to sharp turns, intersections through the rivers and ravines, and also at complicated
junctions;
31
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent



Places of rigid junctions (using flanges and welding);
Places of laying of pipelines in water-saturated soft soils having distinctive physical and mechanical
properties; and
Unsatisfactory quality of construction and lack of observance of building rules and standards.
Vulnerability depends on:





Depth of the underground pipelines;
Diameter and material of pipelines;
Fluid pressure of liquid in the pipeline;
Type of junction; and
Service life and maintaining conditions.
On the basis of the study of factual damage data from Tashkent earthquake and its aftershocks, numerous
data from other earthquakes around the world and as result of calculations, relationships between specific
breakage ratio for lifelines and seismic intensity were obtained. For these purposes all pipelines were classified
into three categories A, B, and C:



A socket-pipes of ceramic and concrete materials in lines without pressure;
B socket-pipes of cast iron and reinforced concrete elements in lines without pressure; and
C steel and reinforced concrete pipes in lines with pressure.
For each of the categories a graph presenting specific breakage ratio (vulnerability) versus seismic
intensity was constructed as shown in figure 4.3.2.
Dependence of vulnerability of seismic effect
for various categories of pipelines
Namber (average) of
failures on 1 km
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0,05
А
Б
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
Seismic intensity,
0,5
0,6
g
В
Figure 4.3.2
Damage grades of pipelines was classified in the following manner:
 Minor to slight damage. Hairline cracks in sandy or asbestos stuffing of
pipe coupling which have no influence on serviceability.
 Moderate damage. Deformation of joints of socket-pipes and breakage in
pressure pipelines. Cracks in plaster of brick wells and chambers. Sometimes cracks in joints
of reinforced concrete pipes. Mortar falls from the joints.
 Heavy damage. Bulging of bell-mouthed cast iron joints and cracks in
ceramic pipes, circular cracks in joints of concrete and reinforced concrete pipes and
collectors. Breakages in pressure pipelines causing the cutting of damaged units. Cracks in
walls of the wells and chambers, constructed of blocks and prefabricated elements. Cracks in
siphons. Shearing of ceramic pipes at places of their connection to inspection chambers.
Disruption of gate valves on pressure pipelines.
32
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
 Destruction. Considerable number of breakage of ceramic, cast iron and
asbestos pipes. Circular cracks in reinforced concrete pressure pipelines, longitudinal and
cross cracks in walls of brick collectors, some disruptions of joints of asbestos and steel
pipelines. Damage to siphons and steel reducers. Deformations in structural elements of wells
and chambers. Vertical shear of ceramic pipes oriented perpendicular to main pipeline,
chipping-off parts of bell-mouthed joints. Considerable damage to gate valves and fittings.
Estimations of damages to lifelines resulting from the scenario earthquake were obtained on the base of
using the scenario map of seismic intensity distribution, prepared by the Institute of Seismology and taking
into consideration localization of lifeline networks on the territory of the city. Specific breakage level and
damage to elements of lifeline systems were calculated and damage maps were compiled for the watersupply system, sewerage system, heat-supply system, gas-supply system, and infrastructure of roads,
bridges, tunnels, and subway lines (shown in the Appendix).
On the base of these maps, graphs of damage versus intensity constructed, data about cost of repair
and restoration of different elements of lifelines we calculated estimations of damage to lifelines: water-supply,
sewerage, heat-supply, gas-supply, power-supply are shown in the Appendix.
Damage assessment for facilities and equipment of lifeline systems and infrastructure was
implemented using data about their localization on the territory of the city and estimate cost. The integrated data
on damage to lifelines and infrastructure are given in the Appendix.
33
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
NO.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Lifelines and infrastructures
Water-supply
pipelines;
facilities and equipment
Sewerage:
pipelines;
equipment
Heat-supply:
pipelines;
facilities and equipment
Gas-supply:
pipelines;
facilities and equipment
Power supply
Subway
Bridges, tunnels, inter-crossings
Automobile roads
Overpasses
Underpasses
Engineering collectors
TOTAL
Calculated losses
US$
110.0
20.0
80.0
13.0
55.0
45.0
65.0
1.5
231.0
15.0
78.6
17.4
5.6
8.4
24.6
770.1
Table 4.3.1 Integrated table of estimated damage to lifelines and infrastructure.
In view of lack of data there have not been taken into account possible losses from the scenario
earthquake from such units as airports, railway stations and terminals, tram and trolley-bus lines, heat-centers,
and some other urban elements, damage to which may cause additional losses of about US$ 230 million. For
numbers 1 to 4 of the table, taking into account transition to national currency and extremely low rate of basic
funds fixed at the level of 1991, a coefficient 5 was applied. Thus, total losses for lifeline systems and
infrastructure from the scenario earthquake are estimated as equal to US$ 1 billion.
34
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
4.4 Interview procedure and results
The interviews with the urban services in the city of Tashkent were conducted in accordance with the
general methodology for interviews, prepared by Dr. R. Shaw and Dr. F. Kaneko. For the interview, we used
materials from the Tashkent earthquake of 1966, the experience of municipal agencies, and scientific knowledge
in the field of Earthquake Engineering. We took into account the experience of post-disaster recovery gained in
Tashkent after the 1966 earthquake.
In preparing questionnaires for interview, we considered four groups:




Engineering lifeline systems (transportation, power supply, water and sewerage, and subway);
Social infrastructure (medical service, insurance companies, etc.);
Internal affairs (militia and fire-fighting department); and
Individual home owners and local housing committees.
First, the questionnaires were sent to leaders of municipal services and urban agencies. Then during
meetings we described the RADIUS project, its objectives, and explained the aims of the interview. After initial
analysis we visited many of the organisations repeatedly for further information.
It should be mentioned that 80 percent of those interviewed were well informed about lessons of the 1966
earthquake, except younger persons. We also used lessons from disastrous earthquakes around the world,
explaining the consequences expected in the event of the scenario earthquake.
Results of the interviews show that many representatives of urban services have a good understanding
about earthquakes and their consequences. Existing economic difficulties do not allow the quick elimination of
all vulnerable points. The to reconstruct and strengthen some parts of their services, however is well understood.
In emergency drills, they pay proper attention to the most vulnerable points of their services.
The following urban services have already been interviewed:














Fire-fighting department;
Urban transport service;
Water supply and sewerage service;
Heat supply service;
Power supply service;
Gas supply service;
Town planning department;
Public health service department;
Sanitary-Epidemic Department;
Insurance Company “Kafolat”;
Department of the subway;
Department of Economics and Statistics;
Department of Internal Affairs; and
Local committees of residential areas (makhallya committees).
Results of interviews were analyzed and tabulated. They are presented in Appendix C.
There is no need to describe all the interviews. Taking into consideration the results obtained, the
following can be concluded.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
A considerable part (40-50 percent) of underground structures of lifeline facilities are old and worn
out and in reases seismic risk.
About 2 percent of residences in the city are old and dangerous to use. These buildings are very
vulnerable and could collapse under earthquakes.
A lack of equipment for the testing of underground structures (corrosion, leakage, and breaks)
contributes to the risk and prevents maintainence.
It is advisable to replace aerial lines with underground lines, decreasing seismic risk.
It is necessary to improve inspection of workmanship and observance of the seismic code for
construction of schools, pre-school establishments, lifeline facilities, and residential buildings.
35
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
Preparation of legislation determining the responsibility of builders, designers and clients for nonobservance of the seismic code.
Preparation of standard design solutions and rules for individual builders, circulating them and
providing inspection to monitor owner built construction by district Khokimiyats.
Inclusion in every loan agreement for individual construction of an item requires observance of the
seismic code.
Creation of a single agency for the design of structures such as pedestrian underpasses, tunnels and
underground entrances.
Establishment of regular training courses in earthquake engineering by research and design institutes.
Support studies on the development of databases on soil conditions and the seismic behavior of
structures, in order to improve potential damage assessment from earthquakes taking into account
local peculiarities.
Increase seismic insurance coverage. To develop insurance tariffs considering seismic risk and make
them acceptable for city dwellers.
Establishment of a committee attached to the Khokimiyat responsible for coordination of efforts for
the provision of seismic safety of existing buildings and those under construction and their inspection.
The results of the interviews were used to prepare a earthquake scenario.
36
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
4.5 Earthquake scenario
The following scenario describes possible impact of the potential local earthquake selected
as the scenario event. The goal of this description, based on technical analysis, is to give to decisionmakers and the general public a view of the possible consequences of a major earthquake on the city, to
make it possible to understand better problems and to stimulate them into taking preventive measures.
It should be taken into account that the scenario below illustrates only some possible consequences
resulting from a particular earthquake in Tashkent. Other earthquakes not considered in this study
would produce different consequences. They are not evaluated in this scenario.
Nobody knows when the earthquake strikes.
It is an early spring morning, just after 5:00 AM. It is rather cool, 7 centigrade. The city is
slowly awakening. Some people are engaged in the morning pray and ablution, others are doing
morning exercises or preparing for the workday, but most people are still in bed sleeping peacefully.
There is no warning of danger. Pets may become uneasy, but no one pays attention to them. Nobody
knows that all of a sudden the time allotted to seismic risk management and disaster preparedness is
over. The time has come to check how well it has been done. The timer is on.
Seconds go by...
There is a slight jolt, then a heavier one. Hard shaking begins to break the peace and pleasant
dreams of citizens. Seismic hazard has found real and hard incarnation. A large earthquake strikes
Tashkent. The whole city begins to tremble and ground motions grows in amplitude. The central and
western parts of the city are shaken most violently, because of the proximity to the epicentre that, as in
the case of the 1966 earthquake, is located underneath the city and, second, owing to the unfavorable
soil conditions of the area. Intensity decreases with an increase of distance from the epicentre,
nevertheless, strong shaking is felt throughout the city indoors and outdoors. Sleeping people are
awaken They are frightened and try to run outdoors. Many find it difficult to stand. Half-awake people
lose their balance. In the epicentral zone, the shaking level is so severe that some people are thrown to
the floor and are unable to escape. Lights and other hanging objects swing considerably. Plates and
dishes crash to the floor from cabinets. Furniture is shifted or overturned. Falling objects injure people
while they are trying to run outdoors. Some doors are jammed because of deformed frames, trapping
people inside. For the inhabitants of tall buildings, it is impossible to run from their homes because
stairways and elevators become dangerous under continued shaking. Buildings behave differently.
Individual and adobe homes located in the epicentral zone are devastated. Some modern
reinforced concrete buildings are damaged considerably, with cracks in walls and bearing elements.
Self-built adobe homes located in the old part of Shaykhantahur and Sabir-Rakhimov districts collapse
killing their inhabitants. Narrow streets in the Old City of Tashkent become blocked with debris.
Housing areas of self-built homes, such as Yangiabad and Beshagach, are heavily damaged, because
most of them were built in a hurry without anti-seismic considerations and supervision of the
municipality preoccupied with the problem of providing people with residences after the earthquake of
1966. Modern houses built after that earthquake that took into account anti-seismic requirements are
only lightly damaged, but masonry buildings in the epicentral zone suffer considerable damage. The
central part of the city has been reconstructed and most adobe buildings have been pulled down, newly
built modern buildings and structures escape serious damage.
Many medical establishments of Sabir-Rakhimov, Shaykhantahur, Yunusabad and Chilanzar
districts suffer considerable damage. About 20 of 171 polyclinics located in those districts collapse, and
10 of 91 hospitals built before 1966 and situated within the epicentral zone are destroyed.
The Tashkent and Sergeli airports suffer minor damage, but remain operational. Railway
stations are practically undamaged and remain operable. However, some access roads to the cargo
railway stations Kizil Tukimachi and Shumilov are blocked making access difficult.
Many factories and warehouses built earlier suffer heavy damage resulting, in some cases, in
release of hazardous materials. Water supply pipelines are damaged throughout the city, in particular,
at places of rigid joints and where they cross ravines and channels. Some sewer pipes are ruptured
polluting the city. Water and sewage flood telephone manholes resulting in damage to the
communication systems. The power supply system is considerably damaged. About 1,500
transformers, 20 distribution stations and 10 substations are damaged. Underground transmission
cables are out of order because of numerous punctures. Electrical short-circuits are responsible for
37
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
fires at substations. Damage to the power supply system immediately leaves the city without
electricity.
The shaking continues for about half a minute and then gradually dies down. In these seconds,
the earthquake has created a disaster. Once on its way to future prosperity, the young independent state
has been struck in the heart. The capital has suffered very seriously.
Minutes and hours go by...
Uninjured survivors are engaged in searching the ruins of destroyed houses for their relatives,
trying to free victims from under destroyed structures. Some people are trapped but still alive. The
death toll is frightening. There is blood on the fragments of collapsed buildings, which are removed by
hand and with makeshift tools. Many people are injured. They make their own way to the nearest
polyclinics and hospitals. The uninjured, because of fear of aftershocks and uncertain strength of their
houses, go to the nearest parks and open areas, such as Mustakillik Square, Alisher Navoiy Park, and
the Amir Temur Public Garden.
Many older houses catch fire as a result of short-circuits. Many houses catch fire from the
explosion of broken gas pipes. There are explosions at some gas-distribution stations of high and
medium-pressure creating numerous fires in different parts of the city.
The fire-fighting brigades cannot reach all burning buildings in Sabir-Rakhimov and
Shaykhantahur districts because the narrow streets of this area are clogged with rubble. Fire-fighting is
complicated by a lack of water because of breakage of many water supply pipelines. Many fire
hydrants were out of operation before the earthquake. There is confusion among city-dwellers because
of the lack of information. Some spread false rumors that the next shock will be more severe. Taking
advantage of the destruction and disorder, some individuals maraud, loot unprotected homes, shops,
and offices. Hospitals are overcrowded with injured patients. There is a lack of medication in many
medical establishments and a great deal of medical equipment has been damaged. Medical staff on
duty is working selflessly, but there is a lack of hands. Relief doctors and nurses cannot reach hospitals
and polyclinics because of the transport and road conditions. As there is no emergency cut-off device
in the water-supply system, a large quantity of water is lost. The water supply is interrupted. Many
streets in the lower parts of the city are flooded. No official statements about the severity of the
earthquake and losses incurred have been made by the government, because information is still being
gathered. There is no information from the central seismic station “Tashkent” because the old building
of the station was destroyed damaging computers and other equipment.
Hours and days go by...
Emergency Department services have begun their work, but rescue operations are delayed
because of a shortage of equipment and blocked roads. People form their own rescue groups to search
for victims. Some people return to their damaged homes, but most do not take the risk because of fear
of aftershocks. Despite the cool weather, they stay outdoors until reliable shelter can be found. Their
situation is made worse by a cool spring drizzle. Banks and insurance companies are not open, partly
because of damage, partly because of the absence of staff. People have no possibility of withdrawing
money they urgently need.
Emergency Department services broadcast instructions and
recommendations to the population. Public motor transport functions, but electric transport does not
because power is cut off. Driving and transportation is limited because of blocked or settled roads.
Traffic lights are out of service resulting in confusion and traffic jams. The President of the Republic
of Uzbekistan declares the city a disaster area and proclaims a state of emergency. In the country,
mourning is announced. The military forces and units of the Ministry of Internal Affairs are mobilized
to carry out emergency rescue operations and recovery work. The City Emergency Committee is
established, headed by the mayor (Hokim) of Tashkent, to coordinate disaster recovery-solving
financial and legal material and other problems.
38
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
The Committee has the following structure:
Operating staff.
Emergency department of the city.
Emergency committee on construction
Emergency committee on protection of public order
Emergency committee on distribution of housing space
Emergency committee on public health
Emergency committee on material and technical provision
Emergency committee on industry
Emergency committee on trade and public catering
Emergency committee on information and press
Emergency committee on social problems
Emergency committee on sanitary supervision
Emergency committee on evacuation and resettlement
Days and weeks go by...
For the first days after the earthquake rescue teams are still engaged in search for people and
rescue those still alive. But most people found under the ruins are dead. The death toll increases.
Aftershocks keep people from returning to their homes, resulting in additional destruction of buildings
damaged by the main shock. Tens of thousands of people are homeless. Temporal shelters located in
undamaged public buildings are unable to accommodate all of them. Many people sleeping outdoors
catch cold because of cool and damp weather. Some city-dwellers leave Tashkent for other cities and
their relatives. There is an increasing demand for food and medicine, but most shops and drug stores
are damaged. The price of food and medicine rises. As the water supply system is damaged, city
emergency services organize distribution of clean water with 40 tank trucks. There is no garbage
collection, and so it accumulates on the streets. Roads are being cleared of rubble. Despite official
information from city and district emergency committees, there are negative rumors that in
combination with frequent aftershocks further distress the population. Most injured people receive
medical aid. However, lack of medication, power, and clean water results in poor medical treatment.
The death toll still increases. About half of the city is still without electricity, although work is
underway 24-hours a day to restore power. Humanitarian supplies from other parts of the country and
the international community begin to arrive. Some stations and relief services are overloaded with
supplies. Distribution goes slowly. Medical care is improving as additional medical staff and
medication arrive. Public transportation is improving. Some lines of electric transport and the subway
start to function. Most electrical transmission lines are returned to service using emergency circuits,
and electricity is available for undamaged housing, public health services, and lifeline systems.
Macroseismic studies are carried out in the city by local experts, as well as specialists from other
countries.
Weeks and months go by...
Emergency Committee of Tashkent and its subcommittees implement recovery plans. Confusion
has subsided and citizens receiving objective information from governmental sources start to adjust to
the circumstances. As most houses are damaged, people are still living in small tent cities in open areas.
Many city-dwellers develop gastrointestinal and respiratory diseases. Emergency services
supply these tent cities with food, water, power, and heat. They also organise storage and distribution
centers for supplies arriving from around the world.
Lifeline systems are still being repaired. Water and power supply for most of the city have been
provided using temporal circuits. In areas with heavier damage, it will take more time to restore regular
service. Damaged roads and bridges are being restored by the army. The Emergency Committee is
gathering information on damage to buildings and infrastructure. There are preliminary estimates of
damage. The worst hit are Sabir-Rakhimov, Shaykhantahur, Akmal-Ikramov, and Chilanzar districts,
located close to the epicenter of the earthquake. In the table below, preliminary estimations of shaking
intensity distribution by districts are given.
39
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
Seismic intensity distribution by districts
District
Akmal-Ikramov
Chilanzar
Shaykhantahur
Sabir-Rakhimov
Yunusabad
Yakkasaray
Mirzo-Ulugbek
Mirabad
Hamza
Sergeli
Bektemir
Intensity VII
Intensity VIII
Intensity IX
22
48
45
100
4
12
7
16
35
50
81
74
52
54
-
96
88
93
84
65
50
19
4
1
-
Distribution of losses would be different, depending on location, cost, and vulnerability, but
estimations are still being calculated. The authorities begin to prepare plans for restoration and
reconstruction of the city, and provision of assistance to city-dwellers. In turn, citizens start planning
for a new live and seek assistance for repair and reconstruction of their houses damaged by the
earthquake. However, the recovery assistance is completely insufficient. As seismic insurance coverage
in the country is very limited, there is no insurance pool to take some of the burden from the
government. State agencies do not have enough funds to help all victims. Many private businesses have
suffered considerable loss and some of them will be unable to recover. Questions and complaints are
raised. In comparison to the earthquake of 1966, there is no support from the outside, and the damage
and losses are greater than in 1966.
40
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
Comparison of damage to the city of Tashkent
resulting from the earthquake of 1966 and the scenario earthquake
Earthquake of 1966
Total
Scenario earthquake
Destroyed
1.Dwelling space
(mln.sq.m.)
Total
Destroyed
1. Dwelling space ,
(mln.sq.m.)
one-storied, adobe
one-storied, brick
two-storied, brick
multistoried (3-5 floors)
2.97
1.88
0.796
1.56
1.7
0.4
0.2
0.1
individual dwelling stock
aged dwelling stock
9.43
1.52
7.55
1.52
multistoried
24.6
4.93
TOTAL
2. Schools (units)
3. Industrial buildings
7.21
300
540
2.4
207
240
4. Administrative and
cultural buildings
536
236
TOTAL
2. Schools (units)
3. Preschool establishments
4. Large industrial enterprises
5. Small industrial businesses
6. Administrative and cultural
buildings
35.6
360
640
426
12000
1100
13.0
70
100
70
1200
100
7. Water supply system
Mln.
Uzbek
soum.
2.012
Mln.
Uzbek
soum
654
Sewerage
2.004
566
TOTAL
4.022
Water supply and
sewerage systems
6. Power supply
7. Heating supply
8. GUB objects
9. Gas supply
10. Urban transport
1200
km
No data
800 km
1200km
40% of
need
300
No data
No data
No data
No data
No data
8. Power supply system
9. Heating system
10. GUB objects
11. Gas supply system
-
1.220
Mln. US$
231
3.4
2.5
14.5
No data
12. Urban transport
-
10.0
Apart from these estimations, loss from business interruption is expected to be about US$
one billion. Analysis shows that the scenario earthquake would have a severe impact on the city
causing losses more then US$ 10 billion, taking into account today’s prices.
The number of casualties from the scenario earthquake depends on the time that it strikes. It
would take years to recover. The effects of such an earthquake would be felt across the whole country.
Uzbekistan would be shaken in its development. Nobody knows when such an earthquake might occur,
but there is no doubt that Tashkent will experience strong earthquakes in the future. Their impact on the
city may be different from those described in the scenario. However, it is obvious that Tashkent is
unprepared for strong earthquakes and proper steps to reduce its vulnerability and manage seismic risk
should be taken immediately. One of the most important goals of the RADIUS project is to develop
recommendations for managing seismic risk in Tashkent, based on the results obtained during
implementation of the project.
41
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
4.6 Scenario Workshop
The city of Tashkent organized an earthquake scenario workshop from 11 to 13 November, 1998.
The workshop was held in the City Hall of Tashkent with 78 participants, in particular, the participants.









Two co-chairmen of the steering committee of the Tashkent RADIUS project: vice mayor of the
city Atham Mirjalilov and Professor Ken Sudo (INCEDE, Japan);
Ambassador of Japan to the Republic of Uzbekistan Mr.Koichi Obata.
International experts and advisors: Dr. Rajib Shaw (Japan), Professor Anand Arya (India), Dr.
Tsunehisa Tsugawa (Japan), and Dr. Jack Rynn (Australia);
Members of the Steering Committee and the Working Group;
Representatives of institutes of the Academy of Sciences of Uzbekistan;
Representatives of Emergency Department;
Representatives of design institutes;
Representatives of urban services; and
Representatives of mass-media.
Figure 4.6.1 Participants of the scenario workshop
The main goals of the scenario workshop were to:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Present results obtained by groups of the RADIUS-Tashkent project during the first stage of the
working program;
Present the earthquake damage scenario prepared by the working group;
Discuss the damage scenario with representatives from urban organisations and obtain comments
from other specialists; and
Initiate a discussion to determine the development of an action plan.
The vice mayor of Tashkent, Mr. Atham Mirjalilov, opened the workshop and described the purpose
and high importance of the workshop. The Ambassador of Japan to Uzbekistan, Mr. Koichi Obato outlined
the urgent earthquake problems in Japan and stressed the importance of activities related to earthquake
disaster mitigation.. The opening remarks from IDNDR came from Professor Ken Sudo, followed by
42
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
Professor Anand Arya and Dr. Jack Rynn. They shared their experience in the field of disaster preparedness
and earthquake risk mitigation.
Then presentations from the working group were made by:





Dr. Sergey Tyagunov (Group 1: Seismic hazard of the region, the scenario earthquake and
seismic effects distribution in the city);
Dr. Shamil Khakimov (Group 2: Characteristics of the residential stock of Tashkent and
vulnerability of different structural types of dwellings);
Acad. Tursunbay Rashidov (Group 3: Main lifelines of the city of Tashkent, their vulnerability
and damage from a potential earthquake);
Mr. Latif Achilov (Group 4: Characteristics of the city, the earthquake scenario, and
emergency response actions); and
Dr. Telman Abdullaev presented the results of the interview with urban services.
For three days, the participants presented the results of their work and discussed different aspects of
implementation of the RADIUS project in Tashkent. Visits were organised for members of the international
team to give them an overview of vulnerable areas of the city. International experts and advisors also visited
some organisations involved in earthquake preparedness policy. International experts and advisors praised
progress of the RADIUS project in Tashkent during the first stage and concluded that activities were being
implemented according to the programme and the spirit of RADIUS. At the evaluating meeting, they
pointed out that the technical level was high, but the knowledge should be distributed to the public and more
participation sould be welcome.
43
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
Chapter 5 Risk Management Plan
5.1 Objectives of the risk management plan
Results of the RADIUS project show that the Tashkent scenario earthquake would cause considerable
greater economic damage and casualties than previous earthquakes. Today, seismic risk is higher than
before. Results of the work also show that it is necessary to develop an action plan in order to reduce
possible damage in Tashkent caused by future calamities such as earthquakes. The main purpose of the
action plan is to help the government and city population to reduce economic loss and especially casualties
caused by the scenario earthquake. Society cannot invest so much means to prevent completely damage
caused by earthquakes, but we must prevent casualties. Results of the RADIUS project show that the
problem of protecting the city requires a large-scale solution. The problem became more actual because
of necessity to receive new reliable assessment of seismic hazard. Such processes as city growth,
complication of the infrastructure, correct exploitation of buildings, ageing of buildings, the negative
influence of the anthropogenous factors, insufficient control of individual houses, and use of unreliable
constructive systems create many factors which increase vulnerability of the buildings to earthquakes.
Vulnerability is the key factor influencing the heaviness of the scenario earthquake consequences. Society
can and must take control of this in advance.
To achieve the objectives it is necessary to take the following steps:






Setting of priorities and activities in questions related to the seismic risk management in Tashkent;
Establishment of the programs, tasks, and steps to be carried out in every part of the seismic risk
management programme;
Appointment of city co-ordinators and executors of the work in the main parts of the seismic risk
management programme;
Preparation of a calendar for implementation of projects;
Discussion with
specialists, the community, interested organisations, departments, and city
services of the risk management programme for Tashkent; and
Development of an action plan for consideration and ratification by the city government.
5.2 Development of the risk management plan
The projects in the action plan should cover the 3 stages of the expected event:



Pre-earthquake: a long period of preparation and promotion of awareness. During this period, it
is necessary to prepare for a future earthquake by reducing the seismic vulnerability of the city;
Immediately after the earthquake: a short-term period (not more than 1 month) during which
urgent steps for meeting the emergency should be taken; and
Post-earthquake: a long period lasting several years for elimination of the earthquake’s
consequences.
In the course of work on the action plan, the following main trends of the seismic risk management
programme for Tashkent were fixed by the working groups:




Improvement of seismic hazard assessment in the city;
Reduction of constructive vulnerability of both the ageing and growing parts of the city;
Improvement of seismic reliability and the safety of urban lifeline elements;
Improvement of effectiveness of emergency services, provision of information to people about
natural calamities, organisation of services for training all the urban population how to protect
themselves against earthquakes.
These trends cover practically all parts of the seismic risk management in Tashkent. After that, it was
necessary to pass from the chosen trends to concrete draft projects fixing priority programmes, tasks, and
steps for the seismic risk management. Preparation of draft projects was done by the working groups. After
discussion of the draft projects, it was necessary to create an action plan for Tashkent.
44
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
5.3 Interviews and discussion of the action plan in groups
The draft projects in which the main aspects of risk management were identified and which were
developed by the working groups became the basis for development of the action plan. For that purpose,
draft projects were discussed by the working groups at special meetings during the workshop with the
participation of representatives of interested city organisations and city services, including nongovernmental
organisations. International experts, consultants and the IDNDR secretariat took part in the work of the
groups.
To prepare for the meeting properly, every participant received in advance the following materials:



Detailed information about conditions in the city relative to every question under consideration;
information about assessment of economic losses caused by the scenario earthquake and ways to
reduce earthquake damage;
Draft action plan with concrete programmes of tasks and steps for implementation; and
Draft resolution on the draft plan.
Participants of the group discussions passed a resolution on the plan of risk management in Tashkent.
The actions proposed were unanimously approved. Some proposals were connected with improvement and
detailing of the action plan, and they were taken into account in the final version of the action plan.
5.4 Activity of the working groups connected with preparation of
the preliminary action plan
On the basis of the resolutions, 4 priority projects of the action plan were formulated by the working
groups:
Project 1. Seismic hazard assessment
Project 2. Seismic stability of buildings and structures
Project 3. Seismic stability of lifeline systems
Project 4. Emergency management
Preliminary action plans were prepared for every project. These plans include a
brief description of their purposes, steps towards seismic risk reduction, and their results
for the city before, during, and after the scenario earthquake. Measures prepared by
services, scientific, and design organisations were used in the projects. It was
recommended that a national programme of seismic stability of buildings and structures
be prepared.
Every project has its own specific purpose and is directed at achievement of the global object of the
action plan. Within the limits of the RADIUS project, the main concepts and ideas for projects 1-4, main
programmes, tasks, steps, participants, approximate duration, and main results are discussed. Detail of
projects 1-4 and coordination of action for their realization require special consideration and study.
Detail of the projects should be studied immediately after completion of the RADIUS project. They should
be adopted by city Khokimiat under the leadership of coordinators of every project with the participation
of interested city organisations and Tashkent Emergency Department. A description of current activities
and responsibilities of urban services including preparation for possible earthquakes, activity during
emergency connected with earthquake consequence liquidation, and long-term activity after earthquakes is
given in Appendix D.
5.5 Action plan workshop
The action plan workshop was held on 25-28 May 1999. It was devoted to the action plan and risk management
for Tashkent in the event of a strong earthquake. The workshop was held in the Tashkent city hall. The total number
of participants was more than 200.
45
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
Foreign participants: Mrs. Etsuko Tsunozaki (assistant to the IDNDR Secretary), Dr. Rajib Shaw (RADIUS Expert,
OYO Corporation, Japan), Professor Anand Arya (member of the Asian Regional Advisory Committee, India),
Professor M. Nuray Aydinoglu (Co-ordinator of the RADIUS project for Izmir, Bogazici University, Turkey), Dr.
Atsuhiro Dodo (UNCRD, Japan), Dr. Akira Akazawa (UNCRD, Japan). Representatives from international
organisations in Tashkent: JICA, UNDP, and UNESCO attended the workshop.
Participants included: representatives from the State Committee for Science and Techniques, Emergency Ministry,
Tashkent Emergency Department, academic institutions (Institute of Mechanics and Seismic Stability of Structures,
Institute of Seismology, Institute of Geology and Geophysics), design, educational and other city organisations;
representatives from city services such as water main, sewerage, heat, gas, electricrity, fire, medical, home affairs,
trade, sanitary, and epidemiological, statistics departments; popular education (schools, technical schools,
universities); representatives of the media (radio, television, press); and representatives from other organisations:
makhalla (district) committees, lighting service, state committee for nature.
Figure 5.5.1
Figure 5.5.2
On May 25, before the workshop, there were exercises conducted by the City Emergency Department. Actions by
district services and large enterprises in case of earthquake were demonstrated in the Mirzo Ulugbek district of
Tashkent. The exercises were attended by the members of the foreign delegations, the steering committee, and media
representatives.
Actions of leading staff, civil protection service, non militarized units in case of accidental release of ammonia
caused by an earthquake were demonstrated in the afternoon at the dairy factory Tashkent-Sut. Rescues were
demonstrated by personnel of the National Multi-profile Rescue Center of the Emergency Ministry of Uzbekistan.
On 26 May 1999 Deputy Khokim, Mr. A.Kh.Tokhtaev opened the workshop by welcoming the participants. He
noted the role and importance of the project for Tashkent, thanked the IDNDR Secretariat for selecting Tashkent for a
RADIUS case study and for financial support, and mentioning the objectives of the workshop. After that the floor
was taken by Mrs. Etsuko Tsunozaki. She described the objectives of the RADIUS initiatives and praised the work of
the Tashkent specialists and expressed confidence in the successful implementation of the RADIUS programme.
The floor was then taken by Mr. H. Nino (JICA), Dr. A. Akazawa (UNCRD), and Dr. Rajib Shaw (OYO). The latter
is coordinator of the case study and noted that considerable progress in work on the RADIUS project had been
achieved after the last workshop in 1998. He thanked all project participants and expressed confidence in the
successful implementation of the work.
Review report on objectives of the RADIUS project was given by the scientific head of the case study. Academician
T. R. Rashidov. He described the main results of every block and assessed them. Most detailed information was given
on results of the third block connected with risk and damage assessment in lifeline systems of the city.
46
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
Report of the head of the second group Dr. Sh.A.Khakimov was devoted to consideration of seismic stability of
dwellings and public buildings.
Concrete
recommendations
for
reinforcement of existing building were
proposed by the specialists of the
second group with assistance of a
number of design and research
institutes.
Interesting practical results of work
and response actions of urban services
during possible disastrous earthquake
were presented by the head of the
fourth group coordinated by Colonel
E.D. Ikramov. Actions of rescue
services in different parts of the city suffered from the scenario earthquake were described in detail. Dr.
Figure 5.5.3
T.K.Abdullaev presented results of interviews conducted with urban services. He suggested some useful
ideas for risk management.
Then participants of the workshop were divided into four groups and discussed the action plan.
Group 1. Actions of the Territorial Subsystem of the City Emergency Department during Disastrous Earthquake.
Discussion was led by Colonel E.D. Ikramov.
Group 2. Lifeline and Infrastructure Systems. Discussion was led by Academician T.R.Rashidov.
Group 3. System of Education, Mass-Media. Discussion was led by Academician Ya.N.Mubarakov.
Group 4. Seismic Stability of Buildings. Discussion was led by Dr. Sh.A.Khakimov.
The results of the discussions turned out to be very fruitful giving practical orientation for risk management in the
city.
An evaluation meeting on the workshop’s results was held on 28 May 1999 at the Institute of Mechanics and Seismic
Stability of Structures. The results of the action plan discussion by the four groups were discussed at the meeting.
Then the main directions for the development of an integrated action plan were discussed taking into account the
workshop results. It was mentioned that the results of the group discussions were useful and could promote
improvement of the integrated action plan. The foreign experts emphasized the necessity to select priorities in the
action plan and to have them ratified by the city administration. The experts noted that in spite of the short duration of
the RADIUS project a lot of work had been done and that experience should be disseminated to other cities. The main
factor of the successful work was the close multidisciplinary co-operation of different organisations.
Then the strategy and schedule for the final stage of the RADIUS project in Tashkent was determined, including
final preparation of the report.
47
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
5.6 Action plan for Tashkent
1
No
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
Project 1. Improvement of the seismological expert base and seismic hazard assessment.
Co-ordinator of the work - Institute of Seismology of the Uzbekistan Academy of Sciences (IS)
2
3
4
5
Name of the work
Executors of the work
Period
Results expected
DEVELOPMENT AND OPTIMIZATION OF THE Institute of Seismology, Complex 2001 - 2005 Reliable control of seismic situation. Improvement of exactness
SEISMIC MONITORING IN TASHKENT AND
Expedition of the Institute of
and reliability of the estimations of seismic hazard, seismic effects,
TASHKENT REGION
Seismology, Institute of Geology
and seismic risk.
- Development of the seismic station network for
and Geophysics (IGG)
seismic motion registration
- Optimization and technical re-equipment of the
existing forecast network
DEVELOPMENT AND IMPROVEMENT OF THE Institute of Seismology, Institute
2000 - 2002 Digital data bases and maps as a basis for seismic hazard and risk
DATA BASE FOR SEISMIC RISK ANALYSIS
of Geology and Geophysics,
assessment of urban territories and building sites.
- Promoting and using the GIS-technology for
Uzbek and Tashkent Institutes of
seismic hazard mapping, including macroseismic
Engineering and Technical
intensity and probable ground motion parameters,
Investigations (UzGIITI and
identification of dangerous areas with possible
TashGIITI)
manifestation of seismogeological effect
IMPROVEMENT OF THE PRACTICAL
Institute of Seismology, Uzbek
2000 - 2002 Increase in efficiency of the initial engineering-seismological
METHODS OF SEIMIC HAZARD, SEISMIC
Scientific and Designing Institute
input, providing comprehensive data for the purposes of
EFFECT, AND SEISMIC RISK ASSESSMENT
of Standard and Experimental
calculation, analysis and reliable aseismic design buildings and
- Development and practical use of methods for
Design of Dwelling and Public
structures.
analysis, quantitative estimation and mapping of
Buildings (AO UzLITTI)
seismic effects in terms of the macroseismic
intensity and and parameters of seismic ground
motions
IMPROVEMENT OF SEISMIC HAZARD
Institute of Seismology
2000 - 2005 Improved and reliable maps of seismic microzoning of the city as
ASSESSMENT AND MICROZONING MAP FOR
a tool for earthquake risk management.
THE CITY OF TASHKENT
- Improvement of the existing deterministic map of
seismic microzoning of the city (using not only
integer units of the macrosesmic intensity scale, but
also PGA and other ground motion parameters)
- Development of probabilistic maps of seismic
microzoning for seismic risk assessment
48
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
1
2
No
1.5
Name of the work
DEVELOPMENT OF THE DATA BANK FOR
SEISMIC EFFECTS IN TASHKENT
- Development of data bank for ground motion
parameters expected in Tashkent (the real records
and synthetical accelerograms corresponding to
different ground conditions and different levels of
seismic intensity) for the dynamic analysis of
buildings and structures
DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATION OF THE
PROGRAM FOR IMPROVEMENT OF SKILLS
AND EXPERT KNOWLEDGE OF LOCAL
SPECIALISTS
- Entering of subjects on engineering seismology
and methods of risk analysis in education and
training programmes for local specialists
- Preparation of textbooks and educational
pamphlets on methods for assessment of seismic
hazard, seismic effect, and seismic risk
INTEGRATION INTO PRACTICE THE
CONCEPT AND METHODOLOGY OF SEISMIC
RISK ASSESSMENT
- Development and introduction into practice of
methodology of seismic risk assessment for building
sites and analysis of optimum design decisions
- Development and introduction into practice of
methodology for seismic risk assessment for urban
areas for optimisation of city-planning decisions and
effective landuse
RAISING GENERAL AWARENESS ABOUT
SEISMIC THREAT
- Preparation of information pamphlets about
existing seismic hazards and recommendations for
decision-makers on risk mitigation
- Public educational activity among the community
of Tashkent through the media
- Preparation and distribution of printed and video
materials
1.6
1.7
1.8
3
4
5
Executors of the work
Institute of Seismology, Institute
of Geology and Geophysics, AO
UzLITTI
Period
Results expected
2000 - 2002 Data bank of expected seismic effects providing the possibility to
conduct comprehensive dynamical analysis of unique and critical
buildings and structures.
Institute of Seismology, Ministry
of Higher Education
2001 - 2003 Improvement of skills and expert knowledge of local specialists in
the field of engineering seismology and earthquake engineering.
Institute of Seismology, AO
UzLITTI
2001 - 2005 Improvement of the efficiency of antiseismic construction and city
planning due to optimization of design and landuse decisions.
Institute of Seismology,
Emergency Department, AO
UzLITTI
Constantly
Because of an increase of general awareness about seismic threat,
the level of preparedness for possible future earthquakes will
increase and this can lead to reduction of possible economical
losses and casualties.
49
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
1
No
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
Project 2. Seismic Stability of Buildings and Structures
Coordinator of the work – UzLITTI (Uzbek Scientific and Designing Institute of Standard and Experimental Designing of Dwelling and Public Buildings)
(Structure of the proposed action plan corresponding to the Project 2 is given in Appendix E)
2
3
4
5
Name of the work
Executors of the work
Period
Results expected
More precise definition of the seismic effect and
IGG, IS, TashGIITI, AO UzLITTI 1999 - 2003 Development of the data bank on detailed engineering geology and
seismic hazard parameters and organisation of
seismology for Tashkent. Creation of the microseimozoning map
engineering geological and engineering
with broadened seismic hazard parameters including possibility of
seismological monitoring in Tashkent
engineering geological and seismological monitoring.
Improvement of the seismic stability of individual
AO UzLITTI, TashGIITI,
1999 - 2001 Creation of methods of seismic safety regulation of individual
dwelling houses
Tashkent Research Institute of the
houses. Development of simple and more complex methods for
General Planning, State Committee
protection of dwelling houses against earthquakes.
on Architecture, City and district
Creation of legislative base for safety construction of individual
Khokimiats, Fund Makhalla,
houses. Examination of seismostability and reinforcement in
Makhalla Committees
individual houses. Preparation of long-term plan for the program
realization.
Improvement of the seismic stability of multi-storied Ministry of Housing and
1999 - 2002 Development of new methods for improvement of seismic stability
brick buildings including those constructed before
Communal Services, State
of standard brick buildings without eviction of inhabitants.
1966
Committee on Architecture, AO
Realization of 1 or 2 projects on reinforcement. Creation of a
UzLITTI, Designing Institute of
legislative base. Creation of a long-term plan of the programme
City-Building (TashGIPROGOR),
realization.
Design Institute TashZhilProekt,
Trust Tashkilochi, Khokimiats
Improvement of seismic stability of reinforced
Ministry of Housing and
1999 - 2002 Development of new methods for reinforcement of frame building
concrete prefabricated frame buildings
Communal Services, State
realized without eviction and stoppage of work.
Committee on Architecture, AO
Realization of the first project of residences and the first project of
UzLITTI, TashGIPROGOR,
public buildings. Carrying out of natural dynamic tests.
Design Institute TashZhilProekt,
Preparation of a normative base. Preparation of a long-term plan of
Trust Tashkilochi, Khokimiats
implementation of the results obtained.
50
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
1
No
2.5
2
Name of the work
Increase of the safety of schools and pre-school
institutions
2.6
Improvement of seismic stability of hospitals and
medical institutions including buildings of medical
research institutes
2.7
Improvement of seismic stability of existing
buildings including urban industrial zones
2.8
Seismic monitoring in unique buildings and
structures including architectural and historical
monuments
2.9
Conception and strategy for the development of
building and constructive systems of minimal
seismic hazard
2.10 Acceptable seismic risk in constructions and
improvement of seismic stability of standard
buildings Tashkent
3
Executors of the work
Ministry for Popular Education,
Emergency Department, Ministry
for Housing and Communal
Services, State Committee on
Architecture, AO UzLITTI,
TashGIPROGOR, Design Institute
TashZhilProekt, Trust Tashkilochi,
Khokimiats
Health Department, Emergency
Department, Ministry of Housing
and Communal Services, State
Committee on Architecture, AO
UzLITTI, (TashGIPROGOR),
Design Institute TashZhilProekt,
Trust Tashkilochi, Khokimiats
Emergency Department, Ministry
of Housing and Communal
Services, State Committee on
Architecture, AO UzLITTI,
TashGIPROGOR, Design Institute
TashZhilProekt, Trust Tashkilochi,
Khokimiats
Institute of Geology and
Geophysics, AO UzLITTI,
Institute of Macroeconomy and
Statistics
City Khokimiat, Ministry of
Housing and Communal Services,
State Committee on Architecture,
AO UzLITTI, TashGIPROGOR,
Design Institute TashZhilProekt,
Trust Tashkilochi, Khokimiats
IGG, IS
4
5
Period
Results expected
1999 - 2000 Preparation of training programmes and films for teachers and
pupils. Creation of methods to prevent building collapse caused by
strong earthquakes. Preparation of the long-term action plan.
1999 - 2000 Preparation of the normative base for ensuring safety of medical
institutions. Development of methods for the protection of medical
buildings from seismological damage. Preparation of a long-term
action plan.
1999 - 2000 Creation of a legislative base for safety during earthquakes.
City planning concepts. Methods for introducing a pass system for
all buildings. Methods for protecting buildings on unstable
grounds. Improvement of safety in industrial buildings. Training
programmes for industries. Preparation of a long-term action plan.
1999 - 2001 Legislative base for the monitoring of unique buildings. Normative
and methodical base for monitoring. Long-term action plan for the
organisation of engineering and seismic monitoring in buildings.
1999 - 2002 Creation of design and construction standards. Long-term action
plan for transition to new safety construction systems in Tashkent.
Research and design work.
1999 - 2004 Creation of the normative and methodical base of buildings with
admissible seismic risk and improvement of seismic stability of
existing and new buildings.
51
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
1
2
No.
Name of the work
2.11 Restoration and reinforcement of buildings after the
destructive scenario earthquake
3
4
5
Executors of the work
Period
Results expected
Ministry of Housing and
1999 - 2001 Creation of the normative base for temporary and long-term
Communal Services, State
restoration and reinforcement of buildings including unique
Committee on Architecture, AO
architectural and historical monuments after destructive
UzLITTI, TashGIPROGOR,
earthquake. Creation of training films. Preparation of technical
Designing Institute
decisions for restoration and reinforcement of different types of
TashZhilProekt, Trust Tashkilochi,
buildings.
Khokimiats
2.12 Material, technical, and financial support of project Committee for macroeconomy and 1999 - 2000 Long-term planning of the material and financial support for
1, detailing of its implementation
statistics of the Cabinet of
project 2. Legislative acts development of project 2. Detailing and
Ministers, Cabinet of Ministers,
co-ordination of the project implementation.
Ministry of Housing and
Communal Services, AO UzLITTI
Project 3. Seismic stability of lifeline systems
Coordinator of the work - M.T.Urazbaev Institute of Mechanics and Seismic Stability of Structures of the Uzbekistan Academy of Sciences (IMSSS)
1. Electricity, gas, heat, water supply, and sewerage.
3.1 To make the total inventory of the energy, gas,
Tashkent Committee for Electric
1999 -2000 Creation of a map showing the most vulnerable sections of these
water, heat supply networks, sewerage, buildings,
Power Stations, Tashkent
networks. Preparation of a work programme for their
equipment, gas-distributive stations, and all pumping Committee for Gas Supply,
reinforcement.
stations
Tashkent Committee for Energy
and Heat Supply, Trust
TashSuvSoz (Water-Canal)
3.2 Substitution of all aerial lines of electricity, gas, heat City Khokimiat, Ministry of
1999 - 2005 These measures will reduce losses in the city by several million
with the underground lines taking into account
Housing and Communal Services,
dollars.
antiseismic measures
Ministry of Energetic,
corresponding city services
3.3
Improvement of the seismic stability of underground City Khokimiat, Ministry of
networks by substitution of old underground lines
Housing and Communal Services,
Ministry of Energetic,
corresponding city services
2000 - 2005 Preparation of a work programme for gradual substitution of
underground networks depending on their wear.
52
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
1
No.
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
2
Name of the work
Improvement of the seismic stability and safety of
places of crossing of engineering networks with the
most important constructions (metro, bridges,
tunnels, overpasses, and pedestrian passages)
Improvement of new energy supply lines
3
Executors of the work
IMSSS, Institute of the General
Planning, TashGIITI, Metro
Designing Institute, corresponding
city services
Tashkent Committee for Electric
Power Stations, Tashkent
Committee for Gas Supply,
Tashkent Trust for Heat and
Energy Supply TashSUVSOZ,
TashGIITI, Institute of the General
Planning,
Improvement of the seismic stability of substations, Tashkent Committee for Electric
pumping stations in the system of electricity, gas,
Power Stations, Tashkent
heat, and water supply
Committee for Gas Supply,
Tashkent Trust for Heat and
Energy Supply TashSUVSOZ,
TashGIITI, Institute of the General
Planning
Improvement of seismic stability of the heat
Tashkent Committee for Heat and
networks and reduction of heat loss
Energy (Tashteplokommunenergo)
Reduction of risk and losses in the lifelines caused
Uzbek Designing Institute of
by the secondary sources of disasters (fire, floods,
Energy, TashGIITI, Uzbek
and explosions)
Designing Institute of Gas,
Institute of the General Planning,
corresponding city services
Scientific and experimental studies of the ground
IMSSS, IGG, TashGIITI, Institute
conditions for laying engineering communications
of the General Planning, State
with maintenance of seismic precautionary measures Committee for Science and
Technics, corresponding city
services
4
Period
1999 -2001
5
Results expected
Development of methods for reinforcement and their entry into the
Construction Code.
1999 -2000
Development of the legislative base enhancing requests for seismic
stability and safety functioning of new constructions and
reconstruction.
2000 - 2005 Development of methods for reinforcement of existing buildings in
which antiseismic measures were not applied.
2000 - 2003 Introduction of pre-stressed heat pipelines with polyethylene
protective layer and with due regard for heat insulation.
2000 - 2003 Use of equipment registering ruptures in energy, gas, water, heat
supply systems.
2000 - 2003 Recommendations and concrete instructions on seismostable
laying of engineering communications in soils of different physical
and mechanical properties.
53
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
1
2
No.
Name of the work
3.10 Creation of research centre for underground lifeline
systems of Tashkent
No.
3.11
3.12
3.13
3.14
3.15
4.1
4.2
4.3
3
Executors of the work
City Khokimiat, IMSSS, IGG,
Main Architectural and Designing
Administration (GlavAPU)
4
5
Period
Results expected
1999 - 2000 Organize the Tashkent Research Institute of Engineering and
Technical Investigations on the basis of the Tashkent Institute of
Engineering and Technical Investigations for detailed study of
underground communications.
2. Metro, bridges, overpasses, tunnels, pedestrian passages
Name of the work
Executors of the work
Period
Results expected
Improvement of seismic stability of the Tashkent
State Committee for Construction, 2000 - 2002 Development of a Construction Code for the metro constructed in
metro
IMSSS, Designing Institute of
the seismoactive zones on the basis of existing research and design
Metro, Institute of Metro
decisions.
Construction, the Tashkent metro
Improvement of seismic stability of engineering
Department of City Services,
2000 - 2001 Development of constructive systems for manifolds meeting
communications
Designing Institute of Metro,
seismic standards on the basis of tunnel systems.
IMSSS
Enhancement of the responsibility for infringement City Khokimiat, Department of
1999 - 2000 Development of the legislative base, enhancing the responsibility
of the norms of seismostability when constructing
City Services, Institute of Metro
of construction and engineering organizations for quality of works
unique underground constructions and
Construction, the Tashkent metro,
and maintenance of norms of seismostability.
communications
GlavAPU and its Institutes
Improvement of seismic stability of pedestrian
City Khokimiat, GlavAPU,
2000 - 2001 Development and implementation of a standard design of
passages and standardization of their design
Department of City Services,
pedestrian passages in practice of the city construction meeting the
Designing Institute of Metro,
requirements of the norms of seismostability
Institute of the General Planning
Monitoring of large-scale constructions and their
Department of City Services, the
2000 - 2001 Development and installation of monitoring devices for
elements
Tashkent metro, Emergency
determination of the vulnerable places.
Department, GlavAPU, designing
organizations.
Project 4. Emergency response
Co-ordinator of the work - Tashkent Emergency Department
Acceptance of the law of the Republic of Uzbekistan Ministry of Emergency,
1999 - 2000 The law will regulate the actions of all state and private
on Emergency Situations
Department of Emergency, City
organisations, and population during an emergency.
Khokimiat, city services
Creation of a centralized system for communication Emergency Department, Institute
1999 - 2000 The system will allow notification heads of government agencies,
and notification for the Tashkent population
of Communication, Tashkent
services, and the urban population about possible emergencies and
Telephone Exchange
necessary actions.
Creation and equipment of the Tashkent Rescue
Ministry of Emergency,
1999 - 2001 Supply the Rescue Service with all necessary equipment for rescue
Service
Emergency Department, City
work during an emergency similar to US Rescue Service 911.
Khokimiat, city services
54
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
Chapter 6 Related Activities
6.1 Connection with the community
During implementation of the RADIUS project, the steering committee organised a working group
to work with the city community. Representatives from the following organisations participated:





City Emergency Department;
City Makhalla (district) Committees;
Department of Popular Education;
Ministry of Higher and Secondary Education; and
Television, radio, and press companies.
There were 5 meetings of working groups where the objectives of all civil protection services
connected with earthquakes emergencies were fixed. Work plans for coordination with the community
were proposed in common with the City Emergency Department. Specialists from the civil protection
services work with all departments and organisations. The head of department or organization is in
charge of civil protection. This staff plans and coordinates the work of medical, police, fire,
communication, and other services. Students study civil protection in training programmes (university
level: 50-hours, secondary schools, colleges: 27-hours). Objectives of the RADIUS project were
systematically explained by the Tashkent radio and television in programs “Akhborot” and “Davr”.
There were 23 radio and television broadcasts organised by members of the steering committee and the
international experts.
6.2 Training in the country
Training on civil defence on the regional, city, and district levels are
constantly carried out. This training helps to master through practice of emergency
actions. The Tashkent Emergency Department prepares and carries out training in
the city. One training section during the earthquake coincided with the international
workshop of the RADIUS project. Materials of the RADIUS project were used in the
course. It was attended by members of the steering committee and international
experts. As a rule, the results of these training sessions are reported in the mass
media.
6.3 Participation in seminars, conferences, and workshops
Results of the RADIUS project were reported in the international workshops on the scenario
earthquake and seismic risk reduction (November 1998) and on action plan (May 1999); at the 2nd
International Conference on Seismic Hazard and Seismic Risk on the occasion of the 10th anniversary
of the Spitak earthquake (15-21 September 1998, participants: T.R. Rashidov, and Sh.A. Khakimov);
the International Scientific and Practical Conference Urbanization and Earthquake devoted to the
50th anniversary of the Ashkhabad earthquake of 1948 (1-4 October 1998, participants: T.R. Rashidov,
and Sh.A. Khsakimov); International Conference on Strong Ground Motions organized by NATO
(Istanbul, participant: T.R. Rashidov); at the meeting of representatives from twin cities in Frankfurt
am Main (Germany); at the meeting of experts on seismic risk reduction in cities (Belgium, participant:
T.R.Rashidov); at the International Seminar Seismic on Risk in Large Cities (Ankara, Turkey, May
1999, participants: Sh.A. Khakimov, L.M. Plotnikova, S.A. Tyagunov, and R.S. Ibragimov); at the
International Seminar on Human Settlements and Natural Calamities (Istanbul, Turkey, May 1999,
participants: Sh.A. Khakimov, and B.S.Nurtaev); at the World Congress of Architects (Beijing, China,
June 1999, participants: Sh.A. Khakimov, and S.A.Khojaev); at the enlarged session of the
Emergency Ministry (Tashkent, 1999, participant: Ya.N.Mubarakov); at the Republican Conference
devoted to the 80th anniversary of Academician Kh.R. Rakhmatulin (21-23 April, 1999, participants:
55
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
T.R. Rashidov, Ya.N. Mubarakov, Kh. Sagdiev, M. Akhmedov, and others); of the International
Seminar on the RADIUS project (Japan, participants: L.Achilov, and B.Nurtaev).
6.4 Training and dissemination of information
Copies (60) of the booklet on the action plan were published before the Workshop (25 May 1999) in
Russian and English and were distributed among organisations in Tashkent. Press-releases were prepared for
the kick-off meeting and two workshops and were distributed to the participants of the workshops.
Approximately 150 copies of the booklet “Earthquakes and Action of Population During Earthquake” were
printed in Uzbek and were distributed to all participants of the workshop on 25 May 1999. Radio, television,
and the press reported on the results of the workshop. The reports were prepared by members of the
RADIUS steering committee and international experts. The Tashkent Emergency Department publishes
weekly information about actions during emergency in the newspapers Toshkent Okshomi and Vecherny
Tashkent. Besides that, there is information about the RADIUS project. Television prepares monthly
programmes about different types of training. Material shot by cameramen from the rescue service is the
basis for the programmes.
The Republican Government gives much attention to civil protection and especially to actions during an
emergency. On 7 October 1998 the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic of Uzbekistan passed Decree No.
427 on “Training of Population of the Republic of Uzbekistan for Protection Against Emergency”. Training
for protection against an emergency applies to:





Heads of the government bodies (annual training and assemblies connected by Head of Civil
Protection;
First Deputy Prime-Minister of the Republic of Uzbekistan);
heads and specialists of government agencies, ministries, institutions, and organisations (at
the Institute of Civil Protection of the Ministry of Emergency);
Heads of non-military agencies; and
Workers of institutions and organisations (at their institutions).
Training of population engaged in industry is in the form of discussions, lectures, and review
of training films.
On 26 May 1999, the final meeting was held. The meeting was attended by 17 representatives from the
working group, 8 of whom took part in the discussions. The following resolution was adopted:
RESOLUTION
Educational System for Ensuring the Safety of Children
and Adults of the City under Strong Earthquakes
Participants of the working group understanding the extreme urgency to train children and adults of
the city for ensuring their of safety under strong earthquakes recommend:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Television and radio committee of the Republic of Uzbekistan in common with specialists should
prepare a training programme under the heading “Everybody Must Know That.”
Mass media should give information under the heading “Actions During Earthquakes, How to
Secure Dwellings, Man and Earthquake.”
The Educational Department, especially the newspapers “Vecherny Tashkent” and “Toshkent
Okshomi” in conjunction with specialists, should prepare special original educational programmes
on actions for administration, teachers and pupils before, during, and after earthquakes.
The Emergency Department in coordination with specialists should prepare special training
programmes for working and nonworking populations.
Film studios, radio, and television in cooperation with specialists should prepare a series of original
and attractive short educational films including films for children about actions during earthquakes
for possible distribution to the population in the form of video and audiocassettes.
The Ministry of Emergency should prepare laws requiring the introduction in the Republic of
Uzbekistan of a system of special education connected with child and adult safety during natural
disasters.
Coordination and assistance should be given to Institute of Mechanics and Seismic Stability of
Structures. Apply to city Khokimiat for assistance.
56
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
Chapter 7 Conclusion
7.1 Review
The RADIUS project was carried out during 18 months. Leading scientists in seismology, earthquake
engineering, representatives of scientific and design institutes, leading specialists of city services and
departments participated in the project. Coordination of the work was realized by city Khokimiat by
A.Mirjalilov, First Deputy Khokim, co-chairman of the steering committee. All the time, members of the
steering committee, group specialists and heads of city services showed interest and enthusiasm in this work.
Assistance providing information about the RADIUS project was given by the mass media. Many city
organisations did the work free of charge.
7.2 How the objects were achieved
Problems on the RADIUS project were solved by four groups which reported their results in the workshops.
All intermediate reports were sent to experts from Japan and the IDNDR secretariat and received high
appraisal. In addition to the work stipulated in the project, the Tashkent Emergency Department organised
training in districts and in city enterprises for practical realisation of the RADIUS project objectives.
Specialists from the steering committee and experts appeared many times on radio and television and wrote
releases for the press. Programme RADIUS was prepared by the Republican television. Many city enterprises
and organisations gave interviews. All these facts were reflected in the consciousness of the Tashkent
inhabitants and they again realized the importance of the problem.
As a result of the RADIUS project implementation the following objects were achieved:






understanding of seismic risk, responsibility, preparedness of the public organisations (Red Crescent,
fund Makhalla, etc.) for risk mitigation are raised considerably;
the scenario developed is not abstract. It describes consequences of a possible Tashkent earthquake in
the proper way;
the action plan includes all questions connected with seismic risk management described in groups 1-4;
for the first time, big successes are scored in organisation of broadened co-ordinated actions of
different institutions for elimination of earthquake consequences;
more than 20 city services, 8 engineering and research institutes, a few ministries and departments,
public city organisations participated in the international project; and
international experience in seismic risk assessment and mitigation was used for the first time. It was
submitted by the IDNDR Secretariat, INCEDE International Advisory Committee, and OYO. An
exchange of experience was realised in the conferences and workshops with participation of case study
cities. Contact with other cities located in seismic zones are maintained for dissemination of the
RADIUS project’ result.
7.3 Problems
Different problems appeared in the course of implementation of the RADIUS project. Some of them are
listed below:





Lack of sponsor support;
Insufficient number of specialists speaking English;
Insufficiency of computer techniques and materials;
Impossibility to receive payment in foreign currency; and
Complications in solution of practical and technical problems.
7.4 How the problems were solved
The steering committee held a special meeting at its own expense and disseminated information about the
RADIUS project to 120 city organisations. Besides that, the committee applied to these organisations for
financial support. Unfortunately, only 1 organisation (Assaka-Bank) provided financial support amounting to
30,000 sums (about US$ 250 at the official rate of exchange).
57
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
In spite of difficulties connected with English this problem was solved in proper time.
Difficulties connected with computater equipment were solved by participating organisations themselves.
Problems connected with payment in foreign currency were not solved in spite of repeated attempts by the
steering committee.
7.5 Unsolved problems



An advisory committee for the city Khokimiat was not organised;
Problems connected with financial support were not solved; and
The GIS program was not used.
7.6 Necessary future initiatives and plans
1.
2.
3.
4.
Preparation of decision of Tashkent mayor for realization of the RADIUS project recommendations
connected with seismic risk mitigation.
Control of implementation of projects 1-4 of the action plan in Tashkent.
Dissemination of experience of the RADIUS project in other cities of Uzbekistan, Central Asia, and
Kazakhstan.
International co-operation with other cities participating in the RADIUS project and with cities located
in active seismic zones.
7.7 Authors of the report
Primary authors:
Rashidov T.R.
Khakimov Sh.A.
Secondary authors:
Mirjalilov A.D. (general management and advice)
Sudo K. (advice)
Shaw R. (advice)
Ikramov E.D. (4.4, 4.6, 5.5, 5.6 (4))
Abdullaev T.K. (chapter 1, 4.4-4.6, 5.6 (3))
Mubarakov Y.N. (5.5, chapter 6)
Tyagunov S.A. (chapter 2, 4.1, 4.5, 5.6 (1))
Kuzmina E.N. (chapter 3, 4.3, 5.6 (3))
Photos: Galiev R., Nurtaev B.S., and Khakimov Sh.A.
Design and printing: Bichuk E.V., and Kuzmina E.N.
Contributors:
Group 1: Plotnikova L.M., Seyduzova S.S., Nurtaev B.S., Ismailov V.A., and Ibragimov R.S.
Group 2: Ibragimov R.S., Abdurashidov K.S., Khodjaev S.A., Plachty K.A., Mamysheva D., Mardyeva D.,
and Kwentzel S.M..
Group 3: Kryghenkov V.A., Yusupov A., Ishankhodjaev A.A., Khoghmetov G.Kh., Chestnov V., and Azizov D.
Group 4: Achilov L.A., and Jigalin S.A.
To prepare the final report, the authors used all the results of the work received in all four
groups of the RADIUS project.
Translated (into English): S. Tyagunov (chapters 1-4) and D. Kramarovsky (chapters 5-7).
58
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
59
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
Appendices
Appendix A. Participants
Steering Committee:
Co-chairmen:
 A.J. Mirjalilov, Vice-mayor of the city of Tashkent
 K. Sudo, Director of INCEDE, Japan
Members:





L.A. Achilov, Head of the Emergency Department, (April 1998 - January 1999)
E.D. Ikramov, Head of the Emergency Department, (February 1999 - July 1999)
Sh.A. Khakimov, Head of Department of the Joint-Stock Company AO «UzLITTI»
S. Khodjaev, General Director of the Joint-Stock Company AO «UzLITTI»
Ya. Mubarakov, Academician-Secretary of the Division of Mechanics and Data Control Processes of the
Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Uzbekistan
 T. Rashidov, Academician, Head of the Department for Seismic Dynamics of Structures of the Institute of
Mechanics and Seismic Stability of Structures of the Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Uzbekistan
Secretariat:



E.V. Bichuk, City Emergency Department
E.N. Kuzmina, Senior Researcher, Institute of Mechanics and Seismic Stability of Structures
B.S. Nurtaev, Deputy Director, Institute of Geology and Geophysics
Treasurer
 O.V. Tretyakova, Chief Accountant, City Investment Department
The Working Group was formed by four groups:
Group 1. Seismic hazard assessment.
Leader: Professor K.N. Abdullabekov, IS.
Principal Investigators: Professor L.M. Plotnikova, IGG; Dr. S.A. Tyagunov, IS.
Investigators: Dr. R.S. Ibragimov, IS, Dr.R.Sh.Inagamov, IS, Dr.V.A.Ismailov, IS, Dr.D.B.Jamalov, IGG, Dr.
A. Juraev, IS, L.M. Matasova, IGG, Dr. K.Sh. Nurmuhamedov, IS, Dr. B.S. Nurtaev, IGG, Dr. S.S. Seiduzova,
IGG, N.N. Yankovskaya, IGG.
Group 2. Assessment of vulnerability and seismic risk for buildings
Leaders: Dr.S.A.Khodjaev, UzLITTI; Dr.S.A.Khakimov, UzLITTI; Prof.K.S.Abdurashidov, TASI;
Principal Investigators: Dr.R.S.Ibragimov, UzLITTI; Dr.S.A.Saidiy, TASI; Dr.H.Sagdiev, IMSS.
Investigators: Dr.K.A.Plahtiy, UzLITTI; Dr.Yu.A.Gamburg, UzLITTI; A.I.Musurmankulov, UzLITTI;
Dr.Sh.R.Muhamedaminov, UzLITTI; E.K.Toulyaganov, UzLITTI; Z.M.Galimzyanova, UzLITTI; Dr. S.M.
Kwentzel, UzTyajProm; Dr.B.E.Adilkhodjaev; TashNIPIgenplan; Dr.Yu.K.Akopjanyan, TashNIPIgenplan;
Dr.D.U.Mardyeva, TashNIPIgenplan; Dr.D.H.Mamysheva, TashNIPIgenplan; Dr.U.Sh.Shamsiev, IMSS;
Dr.M.Akhmedov, IMSS; Dr.S.A.Tyagunov, IS; Dr.V.N.Belogujev, UzGIPROTsvetmet.
Group 3. Assessment of vulnerability and seismic risk for lifelines
Leader: Acad. T.Rashidov, Head of Department, Institute of Mechanics and Seismic Stability of Structures
(IMSS).
Principal Investigators: Dr. T.K.Abdullaev; Dr. V.A.Kryjenkov, Trust «Tashvodokanal»; Dr. A.Yu.Yusupov,
IMSS.
Investigators: S.S.Bashirov, Trust «TashGas»; Dr.A.Juraev, IS; Prof.A.Ishankhodjaev, TADI; O.Zakirov,
Institute «Tasmetroproject»; Dr.M.A.Kuzmin, IMSS; Dr.E.N.Kuzmina, IMSS; Dr.V.A.Omelyanenko, IMSS;
Dr.I.R.Rashidov, IMSS; Prof.G.Khodjmetov, TADI; V.A.Chestnov, «Tashteploenergo».
Group 4. Earthquake scenario and emergency response plan
Leader: E.D.Ikramov, Emergency Department
60
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
Principal Investigators: Dr. T.K.Abdullaev; L.Achilov, Emergency Department
Investigators: F.N.Maksudkhanov, Emergency Department; V.V.Skorobogatov, Emergency Department;
E.V.Bichuk, Emergency Department; S.A.Jigalin, Emergency Department; T.R.Rashidov, IMSS;
Ya.N.Mubarakov, Academy of Sciences; E.G.Jumanov, Emergency Department; V.Lifanov, Emergency
Department; A.A.Evminov, Emergency Department; G.I.Kuznetsov, Emergency Department; V.P.Bobrik,
Emergency Department
61
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
Appendix B. Building types
Figure. B.1. Reinforced concrete large-panel buildings.
Figure. B.2. Volume-block buildings.
62
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
Figure. B.3. Building using prefabricated reinforced concrete
frames of construction series IIS-004.
Figure. B.4. Two-story building constructed with local materials (without seismic measures).
63
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
Figure. B.5. Brick building of 2-4 wooden floors constructed before 1958.
Figure. B.6. Building using the floor rising method.
Figure. B.7. School built before 1966.
64
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
Appendix C. Characteristics of the lifelines system
Length of the water pipes of the various diameter on years
of the service
The length of water drain pipes from various materials
Steel D = 200-2000mm
1800mm
1600mm
1400mm
1000mm
909
900
900mm
1200
Ceramic D = 150-500mm
1000
1200mm
1400
800mm
Pig-iron D = 150-200mm
800
Asbestcement D=150200mm
700mm
700
600mm
1000
400mm
800
350mm
325mm
300mm
600
250mm
200mm
400
150mm
125mm
200
100mm
75mm
63mm
0
Till 5 years
Till 10 years
Till 20 years
Service life
Till 30 years
Till 50 years
50mm
Length
, km
Length, km
500mm
Ferro-concrete D = 2002000mm
600
500
Polyethylene D = 150-315mm
373
400
Brick D = 500-800mm
300
200
100
58
49 37
Polychlorineblamed D =
225mm
6
0
3 0,2
1
< 50 mm
Materials of pipes
Figure. C. 1
Figure. C.2
65
Pipelines of average diameter 200600mm 28.4%
141
132
150
Pipelines of small diameter 25-150mm
66.4%
314
309
350
300
210
250
200
113
150
100
50
0
Till 10
10-20
20-30
30-40
years
years
years
years
7.9 % 22.1 % 21.7 % 14.7 %
The length, km
100
68
61
50
0
Till 10
years
4.3 %
10-20
years
9.3 %
20-30
years
9.9 %
30-40
years
4,8 %
Service life
Service life
b
a
Extent of gas pipelines on service life in %
from total
Till 10 years
9%
Pipelines of large diameter 700-1000mm
5.2%
The extent, km
The length, km
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
10-15 years
11%
28%
15-20 years
20-25 years
25-30 years
More than 30 years
24
20
17
12
Till 10
years
1.2 %
c
10-20
years
1.7 %
20-30
years
0.84 %
14%
30-40
years
4,8 %
22%
16%
Service life
Figure. C.3
Figure. C.4
66
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
Number of failures per 1 rm
Dependence of v ulnerability of pipelines of a
w ater-supply on the diameter and depht
100-200mm
200-400mm
400-600mm
600-800mm
Number of failures per 1
km
0,8
0,7
0,6
0,5
0,4
0,3
0,2
Dependence of v ulnerability of pipelines of a
w ater-supply on internal pressure
1
0,8
0,6
0,4
0,2
0
1
0,1
2
3
4
Internal pressure, athmospheres
0
1m
1.5m
2m
3m
4m
Depth, m
b
a
Vulnerability (average) of pipelines from
various materials
0,45
0,4
0,35
0,3
0,25
0,2
0,15
0,1
0,05
0
7
Number of failures on 1
km
Number (av erage) of
failure per 1 km
Dependence of v ulnerability of pipelines of w atersupply on serv ice-life
T ill 5 years
T ill 10
T ill 15
years
years
Serv ice life
c
> 20 years
6,22
6
5
4
3
1,9
2
1
0,34
0,43
Steel
Asbestcement
0
Pig-iron
Ferro-concrete
Materials of pipelines
Figure. C. 5
d
67
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
Total number of pumping stations
Total length of pipes with diameter 700-1400mm (km)
Total length of pipes with diameter 200-600mm (km)
Total length of pipes with diameter 50-150mm (km)
No Intensity
Area of city Water supply
in %
86
422
1495
1615
Total number of valves
30021
Total number of wells and chambers
Total number of fire hydrants
Water intake facilities
Pump stations
29867
11506
6
86
Number of failures
per km of pipe
Disposition on territory in %
K1
700-1400mm 200600mm
1
2
3
4
7001400mm
50-150mm
VII
VIII
IX
IX with potential
ground failure
20
40
30
8
60
90
90
60
60
90
90
60
70
90
90
70
12.0
36.0
27.0
4.8
5 IX with potential
slope failure
2
20
30
30
0.4
TOTAL:
Degree of damage
% of a total number
of damages
Minor
Easy
Moderate
Heavy
Destruction
TOTAL:
100
VII
80.2
VIII
75
20
5
0
0
100
12.0 14.0
36.0 36.0
27.0 27.0
4.8 5.6
13
22
30
20
15
100
200600mm
Length (km)
50-150mm 7001400mm
200600mm
15.0
44.9
33.7
6.0
14.9
44.8
33.6
6.0
16.8
43.3
32.5
6.7
63.1
189.4
142.1
25.3
223.1
669.4
502.1
89.3
0.6
0.5
0.7
0.7
2.1
11.2
80.4 83.2
100.0
100.0
100.0
422.0
1495.0
0.6
Intensity
IX with potential
ground failure
IX
30
43
15
9
3
100
In percentage of general
K3 length
K2
Total number of failures
50-150mm 7001400mm
200600mm
50-150mm 7001400mm
0.18
0.50
1.80
4.70
0,22
0,70
2,00
5,00
0,25
0,70
2,20
5,20
11
95
256
119
49
469
1004
446
68
489
1153
565
11.6 5.20
5,60
6,00
11
62
70
491
2031
2345
271.8
698.8
524.1
108.7
1615.0
200600mm
50-150mm
IX with potential
slope failure
0
0
5
50
45
100
0
0
0
4
96
100
Table C.1. Calculation of damage to water supply system resulting from the scenario earthquake in Tashkent.
68
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
Continuation of table C.1
VII
VIII
IX
IX with potential
ground failure
IX with potential
slope failure
TOTAL
Cost of repair or
replacement
(Thousands of Uzbek
sum)
Degree of damage
7001400mm
Minor
Easy
Moderate
Heavy
Destruction
TOTAL:
200600mm
50150mm
7001400mm
200600mm
50150m
m
7001400mm
200600mm
50150mm
7001400mm
200600mm
50150mm
7002001400mm 600mm
50150mm
7001400mm
200600mm
50150mm
9
2
1
0
0
37
10
2
0
0
51
14
3
0
0
28
41
14
9
3
141
201
70
42
14
147
210
73
44
15
33
56
77
51
38
131
221
301
201
151
150
254
346
231
173
0
0
6
59
53
0
0
22
223
201
0
0
28
283
254
0
0
0
0
11
0
0
0
2
60
0
0
0
3
67
70
99
97
119
105
308
432
396
469
425
348
478
451
560
509
11
49
68
95
469
489
256
1004
1153
119
446
565
11
62
70
491
2031
2345
Structures of water-supply
system
Cost of main Funds
Seismic intensity
of region
Head structures
of Kadirya water-pipe system
Head structures
of Bozsu water-pipe system
Head structures
of Kibray water-pipe system
Head structures
of southern water-pipe system
TOTAL:
712.0
VIII
11
78.3
292.0
VIII
11
32.1
1320.0
IX
22
290.4
170.0
VII
5
8.5
In %
7001400mm
50
200
750
1500
2000
200600mm
30
100
400
800
1500
TOTAL
50150mm
15
50
100
300
500
17960.8
86952.5
276679.7
722106.8
1102996.7
2206696.5
Irrevocable losses
Thousands of Uzbek sum
409.3
69
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
Total number of pumping stations
6
Total length of collectors (km)
Total length of distribution pipelines (km)
Intensity
N
409
1865
Territory of city
Collectors
of total area)
5 IX with
potential
slope failure
TOTAL:
KMn
Percentage of total
KRn
Disposition on territory in %
Collectors
Length (km)
Network
Collectors
Total number of
per km of pipe
Network
Collectors
failures
Network
Collectors
Network
SRn
19
38
32
9.5
40
90
90
85
50
90
90
85
7.6
34.2
28.8
8.075
9.5
34.2
28.8
8.075
9.5
42.8
36.1
10.1
11.6
41.8
35.2
9.9
38.9
175.1
147.5
41.3
216.7
780.0
656.8
184.2
0
0.4
1.1
3
0.4
1.1
3
6
0
70
162
124
87
858
1970
1105
1.5
80
80
1.2
1.2
1.5
1.5
6.1
27.4
3
6
18
164
79.875
81.775
100.0
100.0
409.0
1865.0
374
4184
TOTAL:
Degree of damage
% of a total number
of damages
Minor
Easy
Moderate
Heavy
Destruction
Amount of failures
Network
SMn
VII
VIII
IX
IX with
potential
ground failure
78000
30
Sewerage
(percentage
1
2
3
4
Total number of
valves
Total number of wells and chambers
Emergency dumping
89
VII
KM, KR =
VIII
75
20
5
0
0
30
43
15
9
3
100
100
Zones of different intensity
IX
IX with potential
ground failure
13
22
30
20
15
100
IX with potential
slope failure
0
0
5
50
45
0
0
0
4
96
100
100
Table C.2. Calculation of damage to sewage system of Tashkent resulting from the scenario earthquake.
70
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
Continuation of table C.2
VII
VIII
IX
IX with potential
IX with potential
ground failure
slope failure
IN TOTAL
Cost of
TOTAL
Degree of damage
Minor
Easy
Average
Force
Destruction
Collectors Network Collectors Network Collectors Network Collectors
Network Collectors Network Collectors Network
0
65
21
257
21
256
0
0
0
0
42
579
0
17
30
369
36
434
0
0
0
0
66
820
0
4
11
129
49
591
6
55
0
0
65
779
0
0
6
77
32
394
62
552
1
7
102
1030
0
0
2
26
24
296
56
497
18
158
100
976
TOTAL:
Sewerage system
0
87
70
858
162
1970
124
1105
18
Cost of main
Funds, (in
thousands of
uzbek sum)
Seismic intensity
of region
(%)
Salar Aeration Station
1529.6
VIII
11
168.3
Bozsu Aeration Station
829.4
VIII
11
91.2
TOTAL:
164
375
4184
Of the repair or replacement in
thousand uzbek sum
Collectors
Network
40
15
150
60
600
120
1200
400
2000
640
10362,4
59057,5
132755,6
533956,5
824661,1
1560793,2
Irrevocable losses
(in thousands uzbek sum)
259.5
71
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
12 Total length of pipes by diameter 200-600mm (km)
Total of thermal centres
Total of pumping stations
Total length of pipes by diameter 700-1000mm, km
Intensity
No.
1
2
3
4
5
Hot water supply
% of total
Disposition on territory in %
In percentage of total
7001000mm
7001000mm
200-600mm
25-150mm
K1
VII
7001000mm
Number of failures on 1 km
200600mm
50
70
70
60
6.0
20.0
15.0
3.2
8.0
24.0
18.0
4.0
10,0
28,0
21,0
4,8
13.5
44.8
33.6
7.2
14.7
44.0
33.0
7.3
15.5
43.5
32.6
7.5
22.6
75.3
56.5
12.1
131.9
395.6
296.7
65.9
2
20
30
30
0.4
0.6
0,6
0.9
1.1
0.9
1.5
9.9
44.6
54.6
64.4
100.0
100.0
100.0
168.0
Intensity
IX
30
43
15
9
3
100
VIII
IX
25150mm
Njnfk number of failures
7001000mm
200600mm
25150mm
7002001000m 600mm
m
25150mm
0.08
0.25
1.40
4.00
0.10
0.28
1.50
4.30
0.12
0.30
1.60
4.50
2
19
79
48
13
111
445
284
39
274
1097
705
19.6 6.00
6.00
6.00
9
59
118
157
912
2233
K3
40
60
60
50
75
20
5
0
0
100
VII
Length (km)
25150mm
30
50
50
40
VIII
Minor
Easy
Moderate
Heavy
Destruction
TOTAL:
K2
200600mm
20
40
30
8
100
TOTAL:
Degree of damage
(% of a tota)l
2102
159
Territory of city
Sn
In
VII
VIII
IX
IX with potential
ground failure
IX with potential
slope failure
900
59 Total length of pipes by diameter 25-150mm (km)
168 Total of boilers
IX with potential
ground failure
13
22
30
20
15
100
IX with potential
ground failure
326.4
913.9
685.4
156.7
900.0 2102.0
IX with potential
slope failure
0
0
5
50
45
100
IX with potential
slope failure
0
0
0
4
96
100
TOTAL
Cost of repair or replacement
(in thousands Uzbek sum)
TOTAL
Degree of damage
7001000mm
Minor
Easy
Moderate
Heavy
Destruction
TOTAL:
200600mm
1
0
0
0
0
2
25150mm
10
3
1
0
0
13
7001000mm
29
8
2
0
0
39
6
8
3
2
1
19
200600mm
33
48
17
10
3
111
25150mm
82
118
41
25
8
274
7002002570020025700200257002002570020025-150mm
1000mm 600mm
150mm
1000mm 600mm
150mm
1000mm 600mm
150mm
1000mm 600mm
150mm
1000mm
600mm
10
58
143
0
0
0
0
0
0
100
40
25
17
101
254
17
98
241
0
0
0
0
0
0
300
120
60
26
148
367
24
134
329
2
14
35
0
0
0
1000
500
150
29
165
407
16
89
219
24
142
353
0
2
5
2000
1000
500
42
243
601
12
67
165
22
128
317
9
57
113
3000
2000
750
43
255
603
79
445
1097
48
284
705
9
59
118
157
912
2233
12123,0
47560,6
172642,4
627694,1
1089773,0
1949793,1
Table C.3. Calculation of damage to networks of the hot water supply system of Tashkent from the scenario earthquake.
72
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
Total length of gas pipes by a diameter 700-1020mm
Total length of gas pipes by a diameter 200-600mm
Total length of gas pipes by a diameter 25-150mm
Natural gas pumping station
Station of distribution of natural gas
Stations of regulation of high pressure
Stations of regulation of medium pressure
No
Intensity
Territory of the
Natural gas supply
city percentage
from total
In
Sn
700-1020mm
200600mm
390
1310
2718
18
3
49
1226
In percentage of total
K1
K2
Length (km)
Number of failures
per km of pipe
Total number of
failures
K3
25150mm
7001020mm
Disposition on territory in %
200600mm
25150mm
7001020mm
200- 25-150mm
600mm
7001020mm
20025600mm 150mm
7001020mm
20025600mm 150mm
1
VII
2 VIII
3 IX
4 IX with potential
ground failure
5 IX with potential
slope failure
TOTAL:
Degree of damage
(% of a tota)l
Minor
Easy
Moderate
Heavy
Destruction
TOTAL:
20
40
30
8.5
40
20
30
20
50
80
80
80
70
90
90
80
8.0
8.0
9.0
1.7
20.0
16.0
24.0
16.0
14.0
36.0
27.0
6.8
29.9
29.9
33.6
6.3
26.1
20.9
31.4
20.9
16.6
42.8
32.1
8.1
391.4
391.4
440.3
83.2
102.0
81.6
122.4
81.6
452.5
1163.5
872.6
219.8
0
0.1
0.3
1.5
0
0.2
0.7
2.4
0.1
0.3
1.5
4.5
0
39
132
125
0
16
86
196
45
349
1309
989
1.5
5
10
20
0.1
0.5
0.3
0.3
0.7
0.4
3.7
2.5
9.7
1.5
2.4
4.5
6
6
44
26.8
76.5
84.1
100.0
100.0
100.0
1310.0
390.0
2718.0
302
304
2736
90
KM,
KR =
VII
Intensity
IX
VIII
75
20
5
0
0
100
30
43
15
9
3
100
IX with potential
ground failure
13
22
30
20
15
100
IX with potential
slope failure
0
0
5
50
45
100
0
0
0
4
96
100
Table C.4. Calculation of damage to natural gas-supply system of Tashkent from the scenario earthquake.
73
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
Continuation of the table C.4
VII
Degree of
damage
7001020mm
IX
IX with potential
ground failure
IX with potential
slope failure
Cost of repair or replacement
thousands Uzbek sum
TOTAL
TOTAL
Minor
Easy
Moderate
0
0
0
257002002570020025700-1020mm 200-600mm 257002002570020025700-1020ìì
200-600ìì
25-150ìì
150mm 1020mm 600mm 150mm 1020mm 600mm 150mm
150mm 1020mm 600mm 150mm 1020mm 600mm 150mm
0
34
12
5
105
17
11
170
0
0
0
0
0
0
50
30
15
29
16
309
0
9
17
7
150
29
19
288
0
0
0
0
0
0
200
100
50
46
26
447
0
2
6
2
52
40
26
393
6
10
49
0
0
0
750
400
100
52
38
497
Heavy
Destruction
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
1
1
0
31
10
26
20
17
13
262
196
62
56
98
88
494
445
0
5
0
6
2
42
93
82
117
107
789
694
TOTAL:
0
0
45
39
16
349
132
86
1309
125
196
989
6
6
44
302
304
2736
Structures of natural
gas supply
200600mm
VIII
Number
Cost of a unit
(in thousands uzbek
sum)
800
1500
300
500
469020,5
672647,9
1285996,3
Irrevocable losses
(% of total)
Stations for
regulation of high
pressure
1500
2000
6558,7
34119,1
103650,2
(In million of
uzbek sum)
49
200
15
1.5
Stations for
regulation of
medium pressure
1226
80
15
14.7
Natural gas
pumping stations
TOTAL:
18
8900
10
16.0
32.2
74
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
Total
Volume of damage
No.
Elements of the power supply
system
Unit
Number
Irrevocable losses
(in thousands of
Total
uzbek sum)
(in millions of uzbek
sum)
In %
1
2
3
4
5
6
Substations 110kv
Substations 35kv
Distributive stations
Transformer stations
High-voltage lines
Underground cable lines
TOTAL:
Piece
Piece
Piece
Piece
Km
Km
34
31
152
4168
2610
6618
US$
Amount
15
15
15
30
100
2
4,5
5,5
20
1450
2491
158
120
75
20
14
0.5
0.6
540.0
412.5
400.0
20300.0
1245.5
94.8
22992.8
4.3
3.2
3.1
159.8
9.8
0.7
181.0
Table C.5. Calculation of damage to elements of the power supply system of Tashkent from the scenario earthquake.
75
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
76
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
Figure. C.6. Damage map for water system.
77
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
78
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
Figure. C.7. Damage map for sewage system.
79
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
Figure. C.8. Damage map for lot water pipelines.
80
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
Figure. C.9. Damage map for natural gas pipelines.
81
Final report on IDNDR-RADIUS Project for city of Tashkent
Figure. C.10. Damage map for major roads, bridges, railroads, tramway, metro, airport.
82