Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Availableonline
Available onlineatatwww.sciencedirect.com
www.sciencedirect.com
Energy Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000

ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

Energy
EnergyProcedia
Procedia139 (2017) 000–000
00 (2017) 624–630
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

International Conference On Materials And Energy 2015, ICOME 15, 19-22 May 2015, Tetouan,
Morocco, and the International Conference On Materials And Energy 2016, ICOME 16, 17-20 May
2016, La Rochelle, France
The 15th International Symposium on District Heating and Cooling
Seismic vulnerability classification of roads
Assessing the feasibility aof using the heat demand-outdoor
Sonia Adafer *, Mahmoud Bensaibia
temperature function for a long-term district heat demand forecast
(a)
Ecole Nationale Supérieure des Travaux Publics –ENSTP
National School of Built and Ground Works Engineering Algiers, Algeria
I. Andrića,b,c*, A. Pina , P. Ferrão , J. Fournier ., B. Lacarrièrec, O. Le Correc
a a b
1, Rue Garidi BP 32, Vieux Kouba , 16051 , Alger Algérie

a
IN+ Center for Innovation, Technology and Policy Research - Instituto Superior Técnico, Av. Rovisco Pais 1, 1049-001 Lisbon, Portugal
b
Abstract Veolia Recherche & Innovation, 291 Avenue Dreyfous Daniel, 78520 Limay, France
c
Département Systèmes Énergétiques et Environnement - IMT Atlantique, 4 rue Alfred Kastler, 44300 Nantes, France
Experience from past earthquakes all over the world showed that the road network could undergo heavy damages. To prevent
these damages, vulnerability studies must be carried out.
The purpose of this study is to develop a seismic vulnerability assessment method for roads. The methodology is based on
Abstract
determination of a numerical indicator called Vulnerability Index (VI). To achieve this, the main parameters that influence the
seismic behaviour of roads are identified on the basis of the worldwide seismic feedback experience and data from past Algerian
District heating
earthquakes. networks the
Furthermore, are Analytical
commonlyHierarchyaddressedProcess
in the literature
(AHP) is as onetoofquantify
used the mosttheeffective
identifiedsolutions
parameters for and
decreasing
define anthe
greenhouse
analytical gas emissions
expression of thefrom
‘VI’.theA building sector.ofThese
classification systemsvulnerability
the seismic require high of
investments which
road sections is are returnedaccording
proposed, through theto heat
the
obtained Vulnerability
sales. Due Index (VI)
to the changed value.
climate conditions and building renovation policies, heat demand in the future could decrease,
To exhibit the
prolonging theefficiency
investmentof the developed
return period. method, several road sections are studied and the obtained results are in good adequacy
with
The in-situ observations.
main scope Moreover,
of this paper in order
is to assess to assess of
the feasibility theusing
seismic
the vulnerability
heat demand –ofoutdoor
an urban city road function
temperature network,for theheat
developed
demand
model is combined
forecast. The district to of
a GIS (Geographical
Alvalade, located in Information System) to
Lisbon (Portugal), wasperform
used asseveral
a caseearthquake
study. Thescenarios
district isand the results
consisted of
of 665
Tipaza city that
buildings are presented.
vary in both construction period and typology. Three weather scenarios (low, medium, high) and three district
renovation scenarios were developed (shallow, intermediate, deep). To estimate the error, obtained heat demand values were
compared with results from a dynamic heat demand model, previously developed and validated by the authors.
©The
2017 The Authors.
results showed thatPublished by Elsevier
when only weatherLtd.change is considered, the margin of error could be acceptable for some applications
Peer-review
(the error inunder
annualresponsibility
demand was of lower
the scientific
than 20% committee of ICOME
for all weather 2015 and
scenarios ICOME 2016.
considered). However, after introducing renovation
scenarios, the error value increased up to 59.5% (depending on the weather and renovation scenarios combination considered).
Keywords:
The valueEarthquake;
of slope roads; vulnerability
coefficient increasedindexon(VI); Analytical
average Hierarchy
within Process
the range of(AHP);seismic
3.8% up to 8% scenarios;classification
per decade, that corresponds to the
decrease in the number of heating hours of 22-139h during the heating season (depending on the combination of weather and
renovation scenarios considered). On the other hand, function intercept increased for 7.8-12.7% per decade (depending on the
1.coupled
Introduction
scenarios). The values suggested could be used to modify the function parameters for the scenarios considered, and
improve the accuracy of heat demand estimations.
Among lifelines, road network plays an important role in the daily life. It assures services such as transportation
© 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific Committee of The 15th International Symposium on District Heating and
Cooling.
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +213-055-286-5764; fax:+213-023-901-738.
Keywords: Heat demand; Forecast; Climate change
E-mail address:s.bouafia@enstp.edu.dz

1876-6102 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of ICOME 2015 and ICOME 2016.
1876-6102 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific Committee of The 15th International Symposium on District Heating and Cooling.
1876-6102 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of ICOME 2015 and ICOME 2016
10.1016/j.egypro.2017.11.263
 Sonia Adafer et al. / Energy Procedia 139 (2017) 624–630 625
2 Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000

and socio-economic exchanges. Moreover, during major disasters such as earthquakes, it allows emergency
response, repair operations and recovery activities. Nevertheless, the road network may as well as other structures
suffer heavy damages due to seismic event. As a result, these damages induce delay in the rescue operations and
extensive socio-economic losses.
In order to reduce road seismic vulnerability, several studies have been carried out [1,2,3,4,5]. Methods for
performing seismic scenario have been developed taking into consideration road networks [6,7,8,9,10,11].
Among vulnerability assessment methods, the vulnerability index method is used for different lifelines [12]. It
consists in determining a value resulting from an analytical expression that contains several parameters. These
parameters are either qualitative or quantitative which differentially affect the system vulnerability. Furthermore, the
expression of the VI generally contains weighting coefficients. These weights may be calculated by applying
MCDM (Multi Criterion Decision Making) methods. These could take into account many parameters with different
nature and unequal importance [13].
Among the MCDM methods, the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) is commonly used. It was developed by Saaty
[14] and was used in different fields. Recently, many researchers have applied this method to assess seismic
vulnerability of tunnels [15], bridges [16], buildings [17], buildings construction site [18], lifelines [19] and urban
areas [20].
In this study, the vulnerability index method is applied to assess the seismic vulnerability of roads. Based on
feedback from past earthquakes over the world [21,22,23,24,25,26], and Algerian observations from AinTemouchent
and Zemmouri earthquakes [27,28], most important parameters that have an influence on seismic behavior of road
network are identified. Moreover, to take into consideration their relative importance, the AHP method is used to
derive weighting coefficient for each identified parameter.

Nomenclature

Cijkl Score of category

LP Liquefaction Potential
MMI Mercalli Modified Intensity
RSVI Road Seismic Vulnerability Index program
VI Vulnerability Index
VR Vulnerability Range
Wi weighting coefficient of structural or hazard parameters
Wij weighting coefficient of items
Wijk weighting coefficient of factors

2. Background of the proposed method

The developed methodology is based on the use of; firstly the vulnerability index method to identify the main
parameters affecting the seismic behavior of road structures and then the AHP method which allows determining the
weights of every identified parameter. The methodology consists in four basic steps. The description of each step is
given hereafter.

2.1. Identification of vulnerability parameters

Roads vulnerability depends on their geometric and structural characteristics as well as geotechnical and seismic
proprieties of the location site. Factors that affect the seismic behaviour of the road are defined on the basis of
seismic experience of past earthquakes all over the world and in Algeria, thus, two types of parameters are identified:
Structural and Hazard ones. These parameters are divided into items. In turn, the identified items are divided into
factors and factors are subdivided in categories, as given in Table 1 (Appendix. A).
626 Sonia Adafer et al. / Energy Procedia 139 (2017) 624–630
Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000 3

2.2. Quantification of identified parameters

Using the AHP method, a hierarchical structure is built in order to model the problem. The hierarchical structure
is established through the defined parameters and their characteristics. Then, pairwise comparisons are performed
and the validated weighting coefficients are determined for each parameter, item and factor (Table1).

Table 1.Weighting coefficients.

Parameter Weight (Wi) Item Weight (Wij) Factor Weight (Wijk)
Structural 0.250 Pavement 0.108 Number of lanes 0.667
Pavement Type 0.333
Embankment 0.283 Height 0.648
Compaction Quality 0.122
Slope 0.230
Ground conditions 0.561 Ground type 0.200
Landslides potential 0.800
Maintenance conditions 0.048 Pavement conditions 0.667
Slope protection measures 0.333
Hazard 0.750 Seismic intensity 0.633 - -
Liquefaction Potential 0.106 - -
Intersection with fault 0.261 - -

2.3. Determination of the Vulnerability Index (VI)

Based on the results of the previous stages, the analytical expression of the vulnerability index (VI) is developed
as follows:
2 3 or 4 2 or 3
VI = ∑ W i ∑ W ij ∑ W ijk . C ijkl (1)
i =1 j =1 k =1
With:
Wi the weighting coefficient of structural or hazard parameter,
Wij the weighting coefficient of item,
Wijk the weighting coefficient of factor, where Wijk=1 if i=2
And Cijkl the score of category, where l = 2 or 3 or 4 or 5.

2.4. Proposal of a vulnerability classification of road

According to the value obtained for the vulnerability index, three vulnerability ranges VR1, VR2 and VR3 are
proposed (Table 2):

Table 2.Vulnearability index ranges.

Range VR1 VR2 VR3
VI value 10-20 20-35 35-50
Assigned color Green Orange Red

The VR1 range associated to the green colour classifies the road section as safe; it suffers a little or no damages. No
requirement to any repairs is necessary.
The VR2 range associated to the orange colour classifies the road section as moderately resistant; it suffers moderate
 Sonia Adafer et al. / Energy Procedia 139 (2017) 624–630 627
4 Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000

damages. Some components need retrofitting operations.

The VR3 range associated to the red colour classifies the road section as weak with low resistant; it suffers heavy
damages. Many components need retrofitting or rebuilding operations.

3. Developed program

A program under Matlab software is developed in order to compute the vulnerability index. This program is
called RSVI ‘Road Seismic Vulnerability Index’. The flow chart of this program is given in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1.flow chart of RSVI program.

4. Application

To show the efficiency and validate the developed model, using the RSVI program, several road sections have
been studied. Furthermore, this model can be used to achieve seismic scenarios in order to predict the behaviour of
roads under seismic event.

4.1. Post-earthquake assessment

Several road sections have been treated using the developed model of VI. Two case studies are presented in this
section.
• Case study 1: It is about a road in AinTemouchent a town located in West of Algiers (about 360 km). It is a
section of the national road (RN35) located in Ain Temouchent at the kilometer marker 19+500. This road
section crosses a soft soil and includes a high embankment (H=7m).
On 22 December 1999, the North of Algeria was struck by a shallow earthquake, namely Ain Temouchent
earthquake [29]. Its Mercalli Modified Intensity was VII and caused considerable damages to Ain Temouchent
and its suburb [27].
Using the RSVI program, the obtained vulnerability index (VI) is equal 13.58. This value is included in range
VR1; hence the road section is classified green. The results of this study are in a good adequacy with in-situ
observations. In fact, this road section did not suffer any damages after the quake [27].
• Case study 2: The studied road is situated nearby the town of Boumerdes in East Algiers (about 70 km). It is
related to a section of the national road (RN68) located in the suburb of Boumerdes. This road section crosses a
liquefiable silts and sand and includes a low embankment (H=4m).
On 21 May 2003 Boumerdes earthquake struck Zemmouri region in the north of Algeria (MMI=X). It damaged
many structures, bridges and roads through the town and the region nearby [30].
628 Sonia Adafer et al. / Energy Procedia 139 (2017) 624–630
Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000 5

Using the RSVI program, the obtained vulnerability index (VI) is equal 28.99. This value is included in range
VR2; hence the road section is classified orange. The seismic vulnerability of this section road is mainly due to
the liquefaction phenomenon in the area. The result of this study is in a good adequacy with in-situ observations.
In fact, this road section needed recovery operations after the quake [28].

4.2. Seismic scenarios

The road network of Tipaza city has been chosen to be investigated. This town is located in the North of Algeria.
It experienced some moderate to strong earthquakes and is well-known for its active faults [31] .
In order to assess the seismic vulnerability of the main road network of Tipaza, several earthquake scenarios were
performed. The road network about 9518 meters was decomposed into 73 road sections according to their features.
Then, using the RSVI program, a VI was obtained for each road section. Using a GIS, a vulnerability map of the
road network was carried out for every seismic scenario. Hereafter, the results of two performed seismic scenarios
are presented.

• Seismic scenario 1: It corresponds to a seismic intensity MMI=VIII. As it can be noticed in Fig.2 (a), the 73 road
sections are classified in VR1 (green class). Accordingly, the whole of the road network has a low seismic
vulnerability. These results are in a good adequacy with in-situ observations after Chenoua Earthquake of 1989,
the road network of the city had undergone no damages [32].
• Seismic scenario 2: It is for a seismic intensity MMI=IX. As it can be seen in Fig.2 (b), all the road sections are
classified in VR2 (orange class). Accordingly, the whole of the road network has a moderate seismic
vulnerability. This is due to the features of the road network: location on hard soil, no high embankments, no
landslides, no liquefaction phenomenon and the latest retrofitting in 2009 was compliant with the standards.

5. Conclusion

From this study, it can be drawn that a seismic vulnerability classification for roads is developed on the basis of a
defined Vulnerability Index (VI). Its efficiency is established in several studies. This method allows defining the
prioritization of the retrofitting operations during an earthquake to safeguard the functionality of the road network.
The developed model is also used to perform seismic scenario that is very useful to highlight which seismic event
could seriously damage a given road. Moreover, the outcomes of this pre-earthquake assessment enable to propose
recommendations or actions to improve weak features of studied roads in order to ensure their performance against
future earthquakes. Additionally, this tool is very useful for emergency management and urban planning.

Fig. 2. Vulnerability Map of the road network: (a) Seismic scenario 1; (b) Seismic scenario 2.
 Sonia Adafer et al. / Energy Procedia 139 (2017) 624–630 629
6 Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000

Appendix A. Vulnerability parameters

Table 1.Vulnerability parameters.

Parameter Item Factor Category
Structural Pavement Number of lanes > 2 lanes
≤ 2 lanes
Pavement Type Paved
Unpaved
Embankment Height H ≤ 2m
2m < H ≤ 5m
5m < H ≤ 8m
H > 8m
Compaction quality Compliant with standards
Compliant with technical provisions
Other
Slope < 2/3
= 2/3
> 2/3
Ground conditions Ground type Rock
Hard soil
Soft soil
Very soft soil
Landslide potential Low
Medium
High
Maintenance conditions Pavement conditions High
Medium
Low
Slope protection measures Compliant with standards
Compliant with technical provisions
Without any protections
Hazard Seismic intensity - MMI < VIII
VIII ≤ MM I < IX
IX ≤ MMI < X
X ≤ MMI < XI
XI ≤ MMI
Liquefaction potential - LP = 0
0 < LP ≤ 5
5 < LP ≤ 15
15 < LP
Intersection with fault - No intersection
Intersection
630 Sonia Adafer et al. / Energy Procedia 139 (2017) 624–630
Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000 7

References

[1] Argyroudis SA, Pitilakis KD, Anastasiadis AI. Roadway Network Seismic Risk Analysis in Urban Areas : The case of Thessaloniki - Greece.
Geoline; 23-25 May; Lyon, France 2005.
[2] D’Andrea A, Cafiso S, Condorelli A. Methodological Considerations for the Evaluation of Seismic Risk on Road Network. Pure and Applied
Geophysics. 2005;162(4):767-82.
[3] Arsık I, Sibel Salman F. Modeling Earthquake Vulnerability of Highway Networks. Electronic Notes in Discrete Mathematics 2013;41
(1):319-26.
[4] Yang L, Qian D. Vulnerability Analysis of Road Networks. Journal of transportation systems engeneering and information technology.
2012;12 (1):105-10.
[5] Shoji G, Nakamura T. Development of Damage Functions on Road Infrastructures Subjected to Extreme Ground Excitations by Analyzing
Damage in the 2011 off the Pacific Coast of Tohoku Earthquake. Journal of Disaster Research 2014;9(2):121-2.
[6] ATC-25. Seismic Vulnerability and Impact of Disruption of Lifelines in the Conterminous United States, Applied Technology Council. USA
1991.
[7] FEMA-NIBS. Hazard US Earthquake Loss Estimation Methodology. National Institute of Building Sciences. NIBS document 5200-
03,Washington, DC 2004.
[8] JICA. The study on earthquake disaster mitigation in the Kathmandu Valley. Nippon Koei Co LTD,Final report,Kingdom of Nepal 2002.
[9] RADIUS. Assessment Tools for Diagnostic of Urban Areas against Seismic Disasters. Secrétariat IDNDR (International Decade for Natural
Disaster Reduction ),United Nations 1996.
[10] RISK-UE. Vulnerability assessment of lifelines and essential facilities (WP06): methodological handbook - Appendix 1:Roadway
transportation system. Report n°GTR-RSK 0101-152av7/Geo Ter,UE 2003.
[11] Syner-G. Systemic Seismic Vulnerability and Risk Analysis for Buildings, Lifeline Networks and Infrastructures Safety Gain, Delivrable
D3.7 - Fragility functions for roadway system elements. Norwegian Geotechnical Institute (NGI) - Seventh Framework Programme,UE 2009.
[12] Pitilakis K, Alexoudi A, Argyroudis S, Monge O, Martin C. Earthquake Risk Assessment of Lifelines. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering.
2006;4(4, Special Issue: The Risk-Ue Project (Ed. Atilla Ansal)):365-90.
[13] Bhushan N, Rai K. Strategic Decision Making - Applying the Analytic Hierarchy Process 2004. 183 p.
[14] Saaty TL. The analytic hierarchy processess : planning, priority setting resource. Mc Grew, Hill, New York 1980.
[15] Wang ZZ, Zhang Z. Seismic damage classification and risk assessment of mountain tunnels with a validation for the 2008 Wenchuan
earthquake. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering. 2013;45:45-55.
[16] Yadollah M, Rosli MZ, Vafaei M. A Model for Seismic Vulnerability Score Assignment of Road Infrastructure Using Linear Regression
Technique. Applied Mechanics and Materials 2012;147:266-9.
[17] Panahi M, Rezaie F, Meshkani S. Seismic vulnerability assessment of school buildings in Tehran city based on AHP and GIS. Nat Hazards
Earth Syst Sci Discuss. 2013;1:4511-38.
[18] Zahaf A, Bensaibi M. Seismic Vulnerability of Building Construction Site. Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture. 2014;8(1):37-46.
[19] Jia Q, Bai P, Duan Q. Risk Assessment on Beijing Urban Infrastructure Vulnerability. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference On
Systems Engineering and Modeling (ICSEM-13). 2013:45-50. Published by Atlantis Press, Paris, France.
[20] Sarvar H, Amini J, Laleh-Poor M. Assessment of Risk Caused By Earthquake in Region 1 of Tehran Using the Combination of RADIUS,
TOPSIS and AHP Models. Journal of Civil Engineering and Urbanism. 2011;1(1):39-48
[21] Anbazhagan P, Srinivas S, Chandran D. Classification of road damage due to earthquakes. Natural Hazards. 2011;60(2):425-60.
[22] Edwards CL. Zemmouri, Algeria, Mw 6.8 Earthquake of may 21, 2003. Technical Council of lifeline Earthquake Enginnering TCLEE
Monographs 27,USA 2004. 120 p.
[23] EERI. Earthquake of Boumerdes May, 21 2003- Learning from Earthquakes, Reconnaissance Report. 2003 5104510905.
[24] EERI/CTC. Preliminary Reconnaissance Report El Asnam Earthquake, Algeria 10th 1980. Earthquake Enginnering Research Institute,USA
1980.
[25] FHWA. Seismic Retrofitting Manual for Highway Structures. Federal Highway Administration Part 2,US Departement of
transportation,USA 2004.
[26] O'Connor JS, Mesa L, Nykamp M. Damage to the highway system from the Pisco, Peru earthquake of August 15,2007. Technical report
MCEER-07-0021,New York,USA 2007.
[27] CTTP. Road networks expertise of Ain Temouchent following the earthquake of December 22,1999. Algeria 1999.
[28] CTTP. Road networks diagnosis of Boumedes following the earthquake of May 21, 2003. Algeria 2003.
[29] Yelles C, A. K., Djellit H, Beldjoudi H, Bezzeghoud M, Buforn E. The Ain Temouchent (Algeria) Earthquake of December 22 nd , 1999.
Pure and Applied Geophysics. 2004;161:607-21.
[30] JRT. Boumerdes Earthquake May 21, 2003 - Japanese Reconnaissance Team-. 2004 October. Report No.
[31] Bounif A, Bezzeghoud M, Dorbath L, Legrand D. Seismic source study of the 1989 , October 29 , Chenoua ( Algeria ) earthquake from
aftershocks , broad-band and strong ground motion records. Annals of Geophysics. 2003;46.
[32] Ambraseys NN, Elnashai AS, Bommer JJ, Haddar F, Madas P, Elghazouli A, et al. The Chenoua (Algeria) Earhquake of 29 October 1989.
Engineering Seismology and Earthquake Engineering (ESEE), research report, 1990.