Comparative Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of Residential Buildings in Chattogram Using Multiple RVS Methods with Post-seismic Vulnerability Parameters
Maruful Hasan Mazumder *
Department of Disaster Engineering and Management, Chittagong University of Engineering and Technology, Raozan, Chattogram-4349, Bangladesh.
Md. Ridwan Alam Adnan
Arcline & Noor Albyrak Technical Service Co. L.L.C, AR Shopping Centre Muradpur, Chattogram-4211, Bangladesh.
Md. Naim Sarker
Department of Disaster Engineering and Management, Chittagong University of Engineering and Technology, Raozan, Chattogram-4349, Bangladesh.
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
Bangladesh is located on several geological fault lines, and its second biggest city, Chattogram, has been expanding at a rapid rate, often without adequate planning and engineering supervision. Consequently, many residential structures are now in critical condition when faced with even moderate earthquakes. To evaluate the seismic vulnerability of typical residential buildings, an investigation of 100 residential buildings was conducted in Jalalabad Ward of Chattogram City Corporation. Three internationally recognised rapid visual screening procedures (FEMA 154, FEMA 310, and ASCE 41-23) were applied, and post‑seismic safety factors as per the country’s building code, such as road width, availability of rescue facilities, and distance from gas and electric lines, were also considered. Over one‑third of the buildings evaluated as not meeting the safety cut‑off level when using FEMA 154 required detailed engineering evaluation. Even worse was the situation with the more thorough checklists, with almost half of the buildings non‑compliant with FEMA 310 requirements and 60% non‑compliant with the more stringent ASCE 41-23 Life Safety structural checklist. A statistically significant moderate negative relationship was found between lower FEMA 154 scores and a higher count of non‑compliant parameters on the detailed checklists. Less than 3 meters of front road width was found in 59% of buildings, and almost three‑quarters of buildings lacked proper rescue facilities. Narrow roads were significantly associated with increased building vulnerability (r= 0.54, odds ratio= 3.2), making such buildings more than three times as likely to be highly vulnerable. Thus, it is concluded that a few parameters of building weakness which are important locally are not yet being identified by standard screening methods. The study suggests that post‑seismic vulnerability parameters should be incorporated into the rapid assessment protocol for adaptation to Bangladesh. Chattogram city authorities should focus on the most vulnerable areas, including Baizid Bostami, for detailed assessment.
Keywords: Seismic vulnerability assessment, Rapid Visual Screening (RVS), post-seismic hazards, residential buildings, earthquakes