International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES) SOME LESSONS FROM THE SARPOL-E ZAHAB EARTHQUAKE OF NOVEMBER 2017 Mahmoud Reza MAHERI Professor of Civil Engineering, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran maheri@shirazu.ac.ir Sahar ZARANDI M.Sc. Graduate, Department of Civil Engineering, Shiraz University, Iran Zarandi.sahar@yahoo.com Keywords: Sarpol-e Zahab earthquake, Site effects, Earthquake damage, Seismic response The Sarpol-e Zahab, Kermanshah earthquake of November 12, 2017, with a moment magnitude of 7.3, was one of the most destructive earthquakes in the past two decades in Iran. This earthquake was felt over more than half of the country and resulted in a large number of casualties in Kermanshah province (estimated as between 600 to 700 people) in addition to extensive financial losses. The earthquake epicentre was located 10 kilometres south of Ezgeleh and about 37 kilometres northwest of Sarpol-e Zahab with an estimated depth of 18 kilometres. Damage was extensive in both the traditional and confined masonry buildings, as well as, the code-designed framed buildings. The reason for the extensive damage may primarily be attributed to the poor workmanship as has been reported from other major earthquakes of the past three decades in Iran (Maheri, 1990, 1992, 1998; Maheri et al., 2005). However, some shortcomings of the current seismic codes, such as Standard 2800 and Discussions 8, 9 and 10 of the Iranian National Building codes could be noted regarding the performance of the buildings during the Kermanshah earthquake. In the proposed paper, a critical look is made on some aspects of the seismic and other Iranian building design codes regarding both the code-recommended confined masonry, as well as the RC and steel framed buildings. Some of the highlights of discussion include: 1. Inefficiency of the current levels of confinement in masonry buildings specified in Standard 2800 and version 2 of the Discussion 8 of the National Building Code to provide adequate seismic resistance for masonry buildings taller than one storey (see Figure 1). Figure 1. Inadequacy of the code provisions for confined masonry. 2. The severe damage to some code-designed framed buildings was unexpected. The damage to framed buildings were evidently a function of the type of soil the buildings were built upon. In Sarpol-e Zahab, the seven-storey RC framed buildings of the Maskan Mehr complex situated on the alluvial soft soil near the river were severely damaged and SV-08870937