当前位置:首页 >> 信息与通信 >>

第十四届世界地震工程国际会议论文集9


The 14 World Conference on Earthquake Engineering October 12-17, 2008, Beijing, China

th

HUMAN CASUALTY AND DAMAGE DISTRIBUTION IN RELATION TO SEISMIC INTENSITY IN THE 2006 CENTRAL JAVA EARTHQUAKE IN INDONESIA
H. Murakami , D. Pramitasari , and R. Ohno
1

1

2

3

Associate Professor, Division of. of Environmental Science and Engr., Graduate School of Sci. and Engr., Yamaguchi University, Ube, Japan 2 Lecturer, Department of Architecture and Planning, Faculty of Engineering, Gadjah Mada University, Yogyakarta, 55281, Indonesia 3 Professor, Dept. of Architecture, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Yokohama, Japan Email: hitomim@yamaguchi-u.ac.jp, dpramitasari@ugm.ac.id , rohno@n.cc.titech.ac.jp

ABSTRACT : The 2006 Central Java (Jogyakarta) earthquake occurred on May 27, and caused 140 thousand dwellings collapsed 190 thousand dwellings heavily damaged, and 5,800 human lives lost. The authors made reconnaissance field survey in June, 2006, collected damage statistics and examined GIS distribution. The seismic intensities were estimated by means of questionnaire survey. Obtained results are as follows. (1) Dwelling collapse rate reached 60% and human loss rate exceeded 1.6% along 20km in NNE direction around epicenter. Human loss rates tend to be smaller for the similar levels of dwelling collapse rates in Java where single story dwellings are common, than in the 1995 Kobe earthquake region. (2) Maximum MSK intensity of 8 or larger is estimated in the epicenter area, while it decreases toward the west direction. Probability of human casualty increases while dwelling damage levels worsened and human loss occurred in approximately 12% of households, when a single wall collapsed or two or more walls totally collapsed. (3) Comparison of building types in damage levels indicated that brick houses are more vulnerable than RC buildings and wooden houses. At MSK intensity 8, responses of many brick houses collapsed reaches 0.77 and the highest, while that of RC buildings is 0.44 and that of wooden houses is 0.11. KEYWORDS: seismic intensity, building vulnerability, human loss, Java earthquake

1. INTRODUCTION The 2006 Central Java Earthquake with magnitude 6.3 occurred on Saturday May 27th at 5:53 a.m., local time, or Friday, May 26, 2006 at 22:53:58 (UTC) in Bantul district of Yogyakarta Special State, Indonesia (USGS, 2006). Dwelling damages and human casualty were very severe affecting densely populated farming villages and towns in the State and also urban area of Yogyakarta city. The authors conducted field reconnaissance survey joining a team of Kyushu University in June, 2006. This study aims to elucidate dwelling damages vulnerability and human casualty in relation with seismic intensity and other factors. 2. GIS DISTRIBUTION OF DAMAGE BASED ON STATISTICS 2.1. GIS Distribution of Damage and Human Loss According to the report by the Indonesian Government Disaster Management Center, total human casualty numbered 5,778 people killed and 37,883 people injured, while dwelling damage numbered 139,859 dwellings totally collapsed and 190,025 dwellings heavily damaged. The area affected by this earthquake is the special state of Yogyakarta and Klaten district, which belongs to Central Java State. GIS files for the affected area, which contains ARC-GIS shape file layers of polygons are used to map damage distribution. We collected damage statistics of dwelling damage and human casualty in sub-district or village levels by visiting district or sub-district offices. Dwelling damage and human casualty were investigated officially at

The 14 World Conference on Earthquake Engineering October 12-17, 2008, Beijing, China

th

village levels and were reported to sub-districts, to districts, to provinces and to the central government thru administrative hierarchy. Dwelling damage levels in Java were classified into 4 levels as follows; total collapse, heavy damage, moderate or light damage and apparently no damage. In case of MSK seismic intensity definition, building damage levels are classified into 5 as follows: Grade 1 slight damage, Grade 2 moderate damage, Grade 3 heavy damage, Grade 4 destruction, Grade 5 total damage. Total collapse Java may be regarded as corresponding to Grade 4 and 5, heavy damage to Grade 3, and moderate or light damage to Grade 1 and 2. Table 2.1 indicates district-wise damage and human casualty statistics reported by the Indonesian national government. Bantul district suffered by far the heaviest damage with 0.5% human loss, while Klaten district followed with 0.09% human loss. According to the National Population Census in 2000, average household members are 3.4 person / household in Jogyakarta Special Province and 4.0 person / household in Central Java Province. Percentage of urban population is 57.7% in Jogyakarta Special Province, while it is 40.4% in Central Java State. Table 2.1
Province District

Damage statistics reported by Indonesian Government as of June 27, 2006
Population (1000s) Dead Injured Refugee Completely destroyed 71,763 19,113 4,685 6,085 7,454 109,100 29,988 307 386 10 51 17 30,759 139,859 Heavily damaged 71,372 27,687 8,430 5,408 11,033 123,930 62,979 696 386 214 1,808 12 66,095 190,025 Slightly Dead/Popul damaged ation 73,669 49,065 9,672 15,364 27,218 174,988 98,552 708 546 780 2,476 74 103,136 278,124 0.50% 0.03% 0.01% 0.05% 0.01% 0.14% 0.09% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.01%

823.4 4,143 12,026 778,251 955.2 246 3,777 153,596 386.8 24 2,179 205,625 419.2 218 313 74,592 695.7 84 1,086 140,012 3280.2 4,715 19,381 1,352,076 1139.2 1,045 18,127 713,788 941.7 4 300 12,770 1158.1 10 5,108 712.1 1 4 9,806 838.3 3 67 16,302 1010.6 0 4 2,022 32900.0 1,063 18,502 759,796 GRAND TOTA 45260.5 5,778 37,883 2,111,872 damage: http://www.bakornaspbp.go.id/html/buletindijjateng.htm population: the National Population Census in 2000, after BAPPENAS (2006), Source: Data BPS Data Dan Informasi Keminiskan (2004)

Bantul Jogjakarta Sleman Special Kulon progo Province Jogjakarta Gunung Kidul TOTAL Klaten Central Boyolali Jawa Magelang Province Purworejo Sukoharjo Wonogiri TOTAL

Figure 2.1 shows damage distribution obtained by UNOSAT and epicenters. Figure 2.2 shows dwelling damage and fatality distribution using sub-district-wise statistics. Pleret, Jetis, and Pundong sub-districts of Bantul district are in concentrated high damage zone over 60% of collapse ratio extending from NNE to SSW for approximately 20km. Gantiwarno and Wedi sub-districts located in the southern parts of Klaten district depict 30-60% total collapse ratio, which agrees with our field observation. Damage distribution agrees well with UNOSAT (2006) early estimation on their web-site after the earthquake (Fig. 2.1). The earthquake source locations estimated using Real-time-JISNET data by Nakano et al. (2006) agree with the severe damage zone in Fig. 2.2. High damage zone extends to north to Sleman district, in the east of Jogjakarta (Yogyakarta) city. Human loss distribution in Figure 2.2 indicates similar pattern as the dwelling collapse ratio. Human loss ratio in Pleret, Jetis, and

Yogyakarta

Figure 2.1 Damage distribution obtained by UNOSAT[1] and the location of the epicenter by USGS[2] and the mechanism of the moment centroid by NIED[3] (after Kawase, et al., 2006)

The 14 World Conference on Earthquake Engineering October 12-17, 2008, Beijing, China

th

Pundong sub-districts reach 0.8% to 1.6% and that concentration extends approximately 20km along the NNE to SSW direction.
Yogyakarta
TEMPEL SAMIGALUH KALIBAWANG SLEMAN SEYEGAN MLATI TURI

CANGKRINGAN PAKEM Karangnongko Manisrenggo Ngapen Ceper Klaten Utara Pedan Kebonarum Klaten Tengah Karangdowo Klaten Selatan Jagonalan Kali Kotes Trucuk

NGAGLIK NGEMPLAK MINGGIR GIRIMULYO

KALASANPrambanan Cawas Bayat GODEAN TEGALREJO DEPOK Gantiwarno Wedi JETIS NANGGULANMOYUDAN GAMPINGGONDOKUSUMAN Weru PRAMBANAN KRATONKOTAGEDE WIROBRAJANUMBULHARJO BERBAH GEDANG SARI KOKAP MANTRIJERONBANGUNTAPAN SEDAYU NGAWEN PENGASIH KASIHAN PIYUNGAN SEWON SEMIN SENTOLO PATUK PAJANGAN NGLIPAR PLERET JETIS TEMON BANTUL WATES PANJATAN WATES LENDAH PANDAK BAMBANG LIPURO IMOGIRI DLINGO PLAYEN WONOSARI KARANGMOJO PONJONG

GALUR SRANDAKAN PUNDONG SANDEN KRETEK

Dwelling Collapse %
subdistrict_2
COLLAPSE_R
0.0 - 5.5 5.6 - 17.9

PALIYAN PURWOSARI SEMANU

20km
SAPTO SARI TANJUNGSARI GIRISUBO

18.0 - 34.5 34.6 - 62.4 62.5 - 73.2

Yogyakarta
TEMPEL SAMIGALUH KALIBAWANG

TURI

CANGKRINGAN Karangnongko Manisrenggo Ngapen Ceper Klaten Utara Pedan Kebonarum Klaten Tengah Karangdowo Klaten Selatan Jagonalan Kali Kotes Trucuk

PAKEM SLEMAN SEYEGAN MLATI

NGAGLIK NGEMPLAK GIRIMULYO MINGGIR

KALASAN Prambanan Cawas Bayat GODEAN TEGALREJO DEPOK Gantiwarno Wedi JETIS NANGGULANMOYUDAN GAMPING GONDOKUSUMAN Weru PRAMBANAN KRATON KOTAGEDE WIROBRAJAN UMBULHARJO BERBAH GEDANG SARI KOKAP MANTRIJERON BANGUNTAPAN SEDAYU NGAWEN PENGASIH KASIHAN PIYUNGAN SEWON SEMIN PATUK SENTOLO PAJANGAN NGLIPAR PLERET JETIS TEMON BANTUL WATES PANJATAN WATES LENDAH PANDAK DLINGO PLAYEN WONOSARI KARANGMOJO PONJONG

Human Loss (%)
subdistrict_2
HUMAN_L_R
0.00 - 0.03 0.04 - 0.23 0.24 - 0.48

BAMBANG LIPURO IMOGIRI GALUR SRANDAKAN PUNDONG SANDEN KRETEK PURWOSARI

PALIYAN SEMANU

SAPTO SARI TANJUNGSARI GIRISUBO

0.49 - 0.81 0.82 - 1.64

Figure 2.2 GIS distribution of dwelling collapse rate (%) above and human loss rate (%) below using sub-district damage statistics data.

The 14 World Conference on Earthquake Engineering October 12-17, 2008, Beijing, China

th

% human loss

2.2. Relation of dwelling collapse and human loss Figure 2.3 shows the relation between rate of dwellings totally collapsed and rate of human loss for village statistics in Bantul District. Normal correlation is obvious with correlation coefficient R=0.896 and human loss rate further increases while total collapse rate exceeds 60%. Linear regression equation is obtained as follows. FR = 0.023 CR – 0.17 (2.1)

3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 -0.5 % total collapse 20 40 60 80 100

where FR: Fatality Rate (%), CR: Dwelling Collapse Damage Rate (%) Based on the damage report of the 1995 Kobe earthquake by Fire Research Institute of Japan, the following relation between dwelling heavy damage rate and human loss rate is given for earthquake damage estimation manual (Fig. 2.4). FRW = 0.0359 x CHR (2.2)

Figure 2.3 Relation of total collapse % and human loss % in the Java earthquake

where FRW: Fatality Ratio in Wooden Buildings (%) CHR: Wooden Dwelling Collapse and Heavy Damage Ratio (%) For the same levels of dwelling damages, fatality ratio in Java is approximately half of that in the Kobe earthquake, probably because single story dwellings are majority in Java, while two story dwellings were common in Kobe. In Central Java, more two story dwellings have been constructed along urban sprawl and economic development of the area. It is very important to provide education and training of dwelling earthquake safety (seismic resistance) for local residents (home owners) and carpenters, otherwise we are afraid that human casualty could be doubled in future earthquakes.

Human loss % in wooden buildings

Wooden building heavy damage %

Figure 2.4 Relation of dwelling heavy damage rate (%) and human loss rate (%) for the 1995 Kobe earthquake (Disaster Mitigation Division of Cabinet Office, Japan).

3. SEISMIC INTENSITY ESTIMATION BY QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY 3.1. Survey Method In order to estimate strength of seismic shaking in the disaster area, we conducted questionnaire survey of seismic intensity. The author (H.M.) made the questionnaire based on MSK intensity scale definition and utilized for the field reconnaissance survey of the 2001 Gujarat, India earthquake (Murakami, 2001). Out of the 26 questions, 16 are used to estimate seismic intensity as indicated in Table 3.1. Based on the 12 scale MSK seismic intensity definition, each item category is given a respective intensity coefficient in the form of

The 14 World Conference on Earthquake Engineering October 12-17, 2008, Beijing, China

th

fuzzy membership functions, corresponding to likelihood of seismic intensity.
Table 3.2 Locations where intensity questionnaire survey was conducted along Pleret, Imogiri, and Klaten observation lines and MSK intensities estimated
No. MSK MSK Sub-district District Epic. Subvillage Village Code effective intensity intensity KECAMATA KABUDist ** DUSUN DESA data (mean) (st.dev) N PATEN (km) Pleret Loc03 KEDUN 8 8.2 0.2 Kedungpring Bawuran Pleret Bantul 1.8 obs. Loc04 TEGAL 9 9.1 1.5 Tegalrejo Bawuran Pleret Bantul 1.8 line Loc02 KAUM 3 8.5 0.3 Kauman Pleret Pleret Bantul 2.5 Loc01 WONO 4 7.0 1.0 Ketonggo Wonokromo Pleret Bantul 3.1 Loc05 PACAR 10 8.8 1.2 Bibis Timbulharjo Sewon Bantul 3.9 Loc06 KOWEN 4 7.8 0.5 Kowen II Timbulharjo Sewon Bantul 5.5 Loc07 MELIK 3 7.5 0.3 Gandekan Bantl Bantul Bantul 8.8 Imogiri Loc08 KARAN 7 8.4 1.4 Mojohuro Sriharjo Imogiri Bantul 4.8 obs. Loc09 SRIHA 0 Minggiran Imogiri Imogiri Bantul 7.3 line Loc10 MANGG 8 7.4 0.7 Maggung Wukirsari Imogiri Bantul 3.7 Loc11 PULOK 8 8.3 0.6 Pulokadang Canden Jetis Bantul 5.3 Loc12 BAKUL 8 7.7 0.6 Bakulan Patalan Jetis Bantul 7.2 Loc13 PENI 5 7.9 0.6 Peni Palbapang Bantul Bantul 8.9 Bantul 10.9 Loc14 GILAN 3 7.7 0.1 Srandakan KaGilangharo Pandak Klaten Loc16 CUCUK 10 7.9 0.6 Gupala Cucukan Prambanan Klaten 18.3 obs. Loc17 MLESE 9 8.2 0.7 Mlese Mlese Gantiwarno Klaten 20.6 line Loc18 PASUN 10 8.0 0.3 Jabung Jabung Gantiwarno Klaten 23.8 Loc19 JABUN 8 8.0 0.5 Pasung Pasung Wedi Klaten 22 Loc20 NGAD 0 Jenon Ngandong Gantiwarno Klaten 19 6.9 Survey Loc21 16 7.0 0.4 Purbayan Kotagedhe Yogyakart Imogiri Bantul 4.4 by R. Loc22 16 6.9 0.4 Payaman UtarGirirejo Ohno Loc23 16 8.1 Segoroyoso Pleret Bantul 1.1 1.1 Loc24 15 8.5 Bawuran Pleret Bantul 1.8 1.5 Tegalrejo Loc25 16 7.3 0.2 Bungasan Karangturi Gantiwarno Klaten 22 Loc26 16 7.3 0.4 Kaligayam Wedi Klaten 25.5 Total 212 *: Address of each respondent was examined and effective data for each village were selected. ** Distance from Epicenter (7.89 deg.S, 110.41 deg.E, depth 10km, by Nakano, M. et al. (2006)) Loc. No.

The previous questionnaire was revised considering common dwelling types and living environment in the Central Java region and was translated to Indonesian and Javanese language. The questionnaire of 4 page long contains 26 questions, in which 6 ask location and dwelling type at the time of earthquake occurrence, 8 ask intensity of shaking by observation of people, hanging objects and furniture, 6 ask building damages, 2 ask road damage and ground failure, 2 ask entrapment and human casualty of oneself or family members, 2 ask personal attributes.

Table 3.1 Intensity coefficients covered by different question items and categories
Intensity Coefficients Coverage Range Question Items 1 1. Feel eq 4. Shaking indoors 5. Shaking 10. Awaken 11. Frightened 12. Hanging objects 13. Furniture 14. Noises 15. Plaster damage 16. Damage to outer walls 17. Roof tile damage 18. Damage to brick houses 19. Damage to wooden houses 20. Damage to RC buildings 21. Damage to roads 22. Ground deformation 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

10.5

In the field reconnaissance, four senior students in the Department of Architecture and Planning, Gadjah Mada University worked as interviewers for three days. The students met villagers and local people evacuating and asked questions of the seismic intensity form. Prof. Kawase made microtremor observation on the ground of elementary schools along Prelet, Imogiri, and Klaten observation lines that is EW direction and transverse to the fault line. The intensity questionnaire survey was conducted at the same locations. Altogether, 150 questionnaire responses were obtained covering 17 locations as indicated in Table 3.2.

6.5

9.5

The 14 World Conference on Earthquake Engineering October 12-17, 2008, Beijing, China

th

MSK Intensity

Ohno, R. et al. (2007) conducted interview survey for human response during and after the earthquake and recovery and reconstruction process of the affected people in November and December, 2006. They made seismic intensity survey using the same questionnaire. Table 3.2 includes their survey results. The effective intensity questionnaire data collected are 212 cases from 23 locations. 32. MSK Seismic Intensity Estimated Seismic intensity for each questionnaire is estimated using fuzzy set intensity coefficients and mean value for each location is obtained (Table3.2). Standard deviation is 0.7 or less for 17 locations, while it exceeds 1.0 for 6 other locations. The table indicates also epicentral distances measured using epicenter decided by Nakano et al (2006), that is, Latitude 7.89 deg S, and Longitude 110.41 deg E. For Pleret and Imogiri observation lines, estimated seismic intensities are around 8.6 and are largest at the far east village of Bawuran, which seems to be the nearest to the epicenter. The seismic intensities decrease from east to west and are 7.5 to 7.7 around Bantul city in the western most location. Seismic intensities of Gantiwarno and Wedi in Klaten district are around 7.9 to 8.2, where dwelling damages were severe. MSK intensity vs. epicentral distance is plotted in Fig. 3.1. Intensities attenuate from the epicenter to 10km distance, though they are largely scattered, probably due to the effects of source and local soil conditions. Villages at around 20km epicentral distance are located in Klaten district and they show high intensities.

9.5 9.0 8.5 8.0 7.5 7.0 6.5 6.0 0 10 20 30 Epicentral Distance, km

Figure 3.1 MSK epicentral distance.

intensity

vs.

1 no damage 3 large cracks of walls 5 many collapsed 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% brick houses

2 little damage 4 some collapsed

RC buildings

wooden houses

Figure 3.2 Comparison of damage levels of 3.3. Building types and seismic vulnerability dwellings in your neighborhood among brick Structural types of buildings one was located at the houses (Q18), wooden houses (Q19), and RC time of the earthquake, that is, mostly dwellings (Q6) buildings are brick masonry (21%), half timber and masonry (37%), wood (15%), and RC frame (27%). It seems that not many respondents actually live in traditional type of timber frame dwellings. As for the number of stories, 97% answered single story, while 3% answered two stories. Locations at the time of earthquake occurrence are inside (71%), outside (28%), and in a vehicle (1%). Those who were awake before the earthquake occurrence are 66%. Movement of furniture in rooms indicates that most fell (39%), many moved and some fell (24%). Wall damages of a building one was located suggest severe damage levels as a single wall collapsed (19%), and two or more walls collapsed (41%). Figure 3.2 shows comparison of the damage levels of different types of dwellings or buildings in the neibourhood (Q18, Q19, and Q20). Damage categories in Fig. 3.1 may correspond to official damage statistics as follows; 2. little damage corresponds to slightly or moderately damaged, 3. large cracks of walls and 4. some collapsed correspond to heavily damaged, and 5. many collapsed corresponds to completely destroyed. It clearly indicates that brick masonry suffered heaviest level of damage with most collapsed, followed by RC dwellings and by wooden dwellings. In case of wooden dwellings, responses of large cracks

The 14 World Conference on Earthquake Engineering October 12-17, 2008, Beijing, China

th

of walls count few, suggesting there were either no damage or serious damage. If wooden dwellings mean traditional type of timber frame with woven bamboo wall panels, they are not likely to suffer many cracks. We may need more information regarding damage patterns of traditional timber frame dwellings, however, it is very important that traditional timber frame dwellings with bamboo net wall panels and light tile roofing are lighter in weight than masonry dwellings and are reasonable to be more seismic resistant and are less lethal to the occupants even when heavily damaged. Construction method and damage characteristics of traditional timber dwellings are described by Ohno et al. (2006). Figure 3.3 shows relations of human casualty of family members against the damage levels of dwellings. Entrapment probability significantly increases while damage level reaches to large cracks and partial wall collapse and it reaches to 60% in case of total collapse of a dwelling. In the same manner, human casualty increases as wall damage deteriorates and human loss occurred in approximately 12% of households, when a single wall collapsed or two or more walls totally collapsed. Using the intensity questionnaire data, rate of “many collapsed” response for brick, wooden, and RC dwellings are plotted vs. MSK intensity of the locations (Fig. 3.4). It is clearly observed that brick houses suffered highest rate of collapse, while RC buildings and wooden dwellings follow with lower rates of collapse. Data plotted in Fig. 3.3 are divided into MSK levels and average ratio of people who observed many of houses or buildings of each type collapsed are indicated in Table 3.3.
1 no 3 yes treated by doctor 5 deceased 0% no damage small cracks large deep cracks collapse single wall total collapse 20% 2 yes lightly injured 4 yes hospitalized
1.0 Brick house collpased Wooden house collapsed RC collapsed MSK intensity vs many collapse 2006 Jogyakarta Eq

40%

60%

80%

100%
Ratio of "many collapsed"

0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 6 7 8 MSK Intensity 9 10

Figure 3.3 Casualty of family members in relation to the damage levels of dwellings according to the questionnaire data.

Figure 3.4 MSK intensity vs. rate of “many collapsed” response to neighborhood dwellings.

4.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

Table 3.3 Average ratio of people who observed many of houses or buildings of that type collapsed.
MSK 7 MSK 8 MSK 9

We made GIS maps to indicate distribution of dwelling Brick houses 0.32 0.77 0.92 collapse rate and human loss rate and clarified that there is RC 0.12 0.44 0.72 intensive damage zone extending for 18km in NS Wooden houses 0.08 0.11 0.69 No of locations 6 13 4 direction along Prelet, Jetis, and Pundong sub-districts with total collapse rate over 60% and human loss rate over 1.6%. Fatality rate against dwelling collapse rate in Java is approximately half of that in Kobe earthquake, possibly because single story dwellings are the majority in Java while many two story dwellings in Kobe were collapsed.

The 14 World Conference on Earthquake Engineering October 12-17, 2008, Beijing, China

th

Seismic intensity survey by questionnaire method was conducted during the field reconnaissance and intensity was estimated using fuzzy set intensity coefficients based on MSK intensity definition. It was found that damage levels of brick masonry dwellings are severer than RC dwellings and wooden dwellings in the same neibourhood suggesting traditional timber frame dwellings are lighter and more earthquake resistant. Probability of entrapment and casualty of oneself or family members clearly increases along damage level of dwellings. Twelve % of human losses in households were observed in case of total collapse with two or more walls collapsed. Study results indicate that traditional timber frame dwellings sustained less collapse and damage than brick houses in this earthquake. However, many people seem still prefer to reconstruct brick houses due to modern and urban image, security, easy maintenance and/or availability of building materials. It is very important to extend education and training how to build earthquake resistant houses to people and local home builders in recovery and restoration stages. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors wish to express hearty gratitude for those people in disaster area for cooperation to the questionnaire survey. We appreciate the kind support provided by the faculty members of the Department of Architecture and Planning, Faculty of Engineering of Gadjah Mada University for their help for the survey. GIS data of disaster area were kindly provided by Geological Engineering Department of Gadjar Mada University. The authors wish to express great appreciation to the other members of our team, namely, Prof. K. Watanabe, Prof. H. Kawase of Kyushu University. REFERENCES BAPPENAS (2006). Preliminary Damage and Loss Assessemnt, Yogyakarta and Central Jawa Natural Disaster, A Joint report of BAPPENAS, the Provincial and Local Governments of D.I. Yogyakarta, the Provincial and Local Governments of Central Java, and international partners, June 2006, 140pp. Disaster Mitigation Divison of Cabinet Office, Government of Japan: Manual for earthquake damage estimation, http://www.bousai.go.jp/manual/ Indonesian Government Disaster Management Center: http://www.bakornaspbp.go.id/ Kawase, H., et al. (2006). Investigation on the damage by the May 27, 2006 Central Java earthquake, Symposium of Natural Disaster Sciences, Japan. Murakami, H. (2001). 6.2 Estimation of MSK Seismic Intensity by Questionnaire Method, A comprehensive survey of the 26 January 2001 earthquake (Mw7.7) in the State of Gujarat, India, Report by the Research Team Supported by the Grant-in-aid for Specially Promoted Research (pp.64-70). Murakami, H., D. Pramitasari (2007). 4.1 Damage distribution based on statistical data, 4.2 Seismic intensity estimation by questionnaire survey, Report on the Damage Investigation of the 2006 Central Java Earthquake, Architectural Institute of Japan, pp.84-97. Nakano, M. et al. (2006). The 2006 Java Earthquake revealed by the broadband seismograph network in Indonesia, Submitted for publication in EOS, Transactions, American Geophysical Union. Ohno, R., and S. R. Marcillia (2006). Field survey of the damage caused by the Central Java earthquake of May 27, 2006, Research Reports on Earthquake Engineering, CUEE, Tokyo Institute of Technology,No.99, pp.65-76. Ohno, R., and S. R. Marcillia (2007). 4.3 Analyses of the residents’ condition and behavior based on interview, Report on the Damage Investigation of the 2006 Central Java Earthquake, Architectural Institute of Japan, pp.103-113. Statistics Indonesia http://www.bps.go.id/sector/population/pop2000.htm UNOSAT (2006). http://unosat.web.cern.ch/unosat/asp/ USGS (2006). http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/eqinthenews/2006/usneb6/


赞助商链接
相关文章:
更多相关标签: