Sie sind auf Seite 1von 11

References

Required Readings:
1. Vulnerability & Risk Assessment UNDP Disaster Management Training Program

Earthquake Risk Reduction


Earthquake Engg Notes Andres W.C. Oreta DLSU 1.

Additional Readings:
Landslide Risk Assessment by Lee and Jones (2004), Telford Books

Risk = Hazard x Vulnerability


The official definition of terms for risk assessment in natural disasters: The term risk refers to the expected losses from a given hazard to a given element at risk, over a specified future time period. Risk is the expected losses to a community when a hazard event occurs, including lives lost, persons injured, property damaged and economic activities or livelihoods disrupted. Risk is a function of hazard and vulnerability. The greater the potential occurrence of a hazard and the more vulnerable an element (e.g. people, buildings), then the greater the risk. Risk can be described qualitatively (e.g. high, medium, low) or quantitavely (e.g. %Losses, In terms probabilities)

Loss Parameters for Risk Analysis


Consequences Deaths Injuries Physical damage Emergency operations Measure of Losses Number of people Number & injury severity Number of damaged elements & damage level Volume of manpower, man-days employed, equipment & resources used Number of working days, Volume of production lost Number of displaced persons, homeless Scale and severity

Disruption to economy Social disruption Environmental impact

Examples of Quantitative Risk Statements


Risk may be expressed in terms of average expected losses, such as:
25,000 lives lost over a 30 year period 75,000 houses experiencing heavy damage or destruction within 25 years

Specific Risk
The term specific risk is used to refer to risks or loss estimations of either type which are expressed as a proportion of the total. Examples are:
10% of the population (of the given settlement) killed by natural hazards within 30 years 50% of houses (in a given region) heavily damaged or destroyed in the next 25 years

Risk may also be expressed on a probabilistic basis:


a 75% probability of economic losses to property exceeding 50 million dollars in the town XYZ within the next 10 years

Relative Risk
Risk can expressed relatively or qualitatively and is used for comparison among items (e.g. buildings, sites, cities, etc.) and for prioritization and decision making.
Example: The risk of structural failure of buildings is assessed due to ground shaking: High Risk Structural failure may occur in columns and connections Conduct detailed Inspection and seismic retrofitting of columns Medium Risk Structural failure may occur in beams and CHB walls Inspect walls/beams & retrofit Low Risk Non-structural failure only Conduct maintenance

Quantifying Seismic Risk


Seismic risk = (Seismic hazard) x (Vulnerability) x (Value) Seismic hazard is any physical phenomenon associated with an earthquake that may produce adverse effects on human activities.
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) Ground shaking Tsunami Liquefaction Landslide Ground failure or faulting Fire

Vulnerability is the amount of damage or losses, induced by a given degree of hazard, and expressed as a fraction of the Value of the elements or assets at risk.

Seismic Hazards
tsunami shaking liquefaction faulting

landslide

Determining Risk
Risk is a function of hazard and vulnerability. Risk assessment aims to develop useful estimates of the degree of risk for any type of hazard in any geographic location. There are three essential components to the determination of risk, each of which should be separately quantified: 1. The hazard occurrence probability: the likelihood of experiencing a particular hazard in a given location or region within a specific time frame. 2. The elements at risk: identifying and making an inventory of people or buildings or other elements which would be affected by the hazard if it occurred, and, where required, estimating their economic value. 3. The vulnerability of the elements at risk: determining the potential level of injury to people or damage that buildings or other elements would sustain if they experience a particular hazard.

fire

faulting

Hazard
Seismic hazards can be expressed quantitatively or qualitatively. Hazard maps are useful for spatial risk analysis. The severity of a seismic hazard (ground shaking, tsunami, liquefaction, landslide, etc.) can be represented by a site parameter (e.g. PGA, MM Intensity, wave height)

Elements or Assets at Risk


Community risk encompasses all potential losses from a hazard event. The elements at risk consist of a wide range of things that make up a society.
People (life and health) Structures (buildings, roads, bridges) Infrastructures (water, electricity, communication, transportation) Economy (jobs, agricultural land and products) Services (schools, hospitals, religious institutions) Natural environment (forest, beaches)

Vulnerability
Vulnerability: The losses caused by a hazard, such as a storm or earthquake, will be proportionally much greater to more vulnerable populations those living in poverty, with weak structures, and without adequate coping strategies. Human vulnerability is the relative lack of capacity of a person or community to anticipate, cope with, resist, and recover from the impact of a hazard. Structural or physical vulnerability is the extent to which a structure or service is likely to be damaged or disrupted by a hazard event. Community vulnerability exists when the elements at risk are in the path or area of the hazard and susceptible to damage by it.
Site Parameter (PGA, MMI)

Seismic Vulnerability Analysis Based on Hazards


Source Parameter (Magnitude) Earthquake

Ground Shaking Intensity of Ground Shaking

Liquefaction Intensity of Ground Shaking

Tsunami Height of Wave and Depth Of Flood Water

Landslide Intensity of Ground Shaking

Fault Rupture Intensity of Ground Shaking

Site Effects

Vibration of Structures

Ground Settlement

Flooding

Debris & Rock falls

Fault Displacement

Site Losses

Vulnerability Factors

Vulnerability Factors

Vulnerability Factors

Vulnerability Factors

Vulnerability Factors

Quantitative Risk Analysis


Risk can be expressed in terms of probabilities. Example: P = probability of a particular intensity or PGA of an earthquake occurring within the specified area and time frame V = proportion of elements (E) at risk to be affected detrimentally by the given earthquake intensity or PGA, expressed as either percentage of E or on scale of 0-1. Risk can then be quantified as R = P x V
For more examples of Quantitative Risk Analysis, read: Landslide Risk Assessment by Lee and Jones (2004), Telford Books

Quantitative Risk Analysis


Risk, probabilistic distribution of loss, can be estimated by combining vulnerability functions with the hazard data as shown in the following schematic figure. Total annual expected cost experiencing severity of ground motion larger than is derived from a product of hazard and vulnerability. Hatched area is risk.
Annual probability of experiencing severity larger than Hazard p Vulnerability Risk

1.0 0.5 0.0 Ground motion severity,

*
Ground motion severity,

Contribution of each level of severity to total annual cost

Damage (cost ratio) when experience severity,

* Ground motion severity,

Quantitative (Probabilistic) Risk Assessment


An Example A sites seismicity is equivalent to MMI-6 every 10 years, MMI7 every 50 years, etc. On the site, a building will experience 0.1% loss given MMI 6, 10% loss at MMI-7 etc, see Table and graph.
MMI 6 7 8 9 10 Pe pa 0.1 0.02 0.002 0.001 0.0005 pdf pa 0.08 0.018 0.001 0.0005 0.0005
Prob of Exceedance pa Prob of Exceedance pa

Loss Estimation Software


There are several software programs that can be used to estimate seismic risk. These include: REDAS
(Rapid Earthquake Damage Assessment System), PHIVOLCS)
Dam age Dam age

1 5

10 10

0.1 0.1 0.01 0.01 0.001 0.001

Pe pa Pe pa Damage | MMI Damage | MMI

11 11 100.0% 100.0% 80.0% 80.0% 60.0% 60.0% 40.0% 40.0% 20.0% 20.0% 0.0% 0.0%

120.0% 120.0%

HAZUS, available from www.nibs.org RADIUS, available from www.unisdr.org or

0.0001 0.0001
MMI MMI

Damage | MMI Damage 0.1% 0.00008 10% 0.0018 20% 0.0002 50% 0.00025 100% 0.0005 E(D) = 0.00283

Due to the range of seismicity, the average loss per year is 0.28%, as shown in the Table.

Note that the Probability of exceedance is not multiplied by the loss, but rather its derivative (ie, the probability density function).

Qualitative/Semi-Quantitative Relative Risk Assessment


Used when risk can not be express in absolute terms When difficult to assign meaningful values for the hazard, assets and consequences. Assess the relative levels of the threat or relative risk to diff. sites posed by particular hazards based on factual and subjective appraisal The value of relative risk assessment various sites can be compared quickly and allows early decisions especially when financial resources are limited

Qualitative/Semi-Quantitative Relative Risk Assessment Relative risk scoring approach:


Risk Number = (Hazard Number) x (Adverse Consequences) Where Hazard Number = (Hazard Score x Probability Score) Adverse Consequences = (Risk Value x Vulnerability) A scale of risk classes can be used to compare various items (e.g. sites, buildings) and serve as a basis for management decsions.

Qualitative/Semi-Quantitative Relative Risk Assessment


Example: A detailed geomorphological and geotechnical mapping exercise was undertaken to collect information on the cliff conditions and failure mechanism to divide the site into zones based on landslide risk. Risk Number = H x P x R x V
Number Hazard H Probability P Risk Value R Vulnerability V

Qualitative/Semi-Quantitative Relative Risk Assessment


Risk Number = H x P x R x V
Risk Number RN > 100 RN: 60 - 100 RN: 30 - 60 RN: 10 30 RN < 10 Risk Class V IV III II I Description Highest Risk Moderate Risk Lowest Risk

1 2 3 4 5

Small failure, erosion Moderate failure, Occasional small falling rocks Sustantial failure, Occasinal large falling rocks Deep failure, Larg rock fall Major failure

Unlikely Possible Likely

Open area, not Little or no effect in use Unoccupied Minor damage building, public right of way Roads, footpath Major damage Major Loss of life structure, mine buildings Residential area

Risk assessment of five sites (cliffs)


Site H (1-5) P (1-3) R (1-5) V (1-4) Risk Number RN(4300) Risk Class

A B C D E

4 3 3 4 2

2 3 2 3 2

3 2 2 3 2

3 3 2 3 2

72 54 24 108 16

IV III II V II

Ref: Example 3.2. Landslide Risk Assessment by Lee and Jones (2004), Telford Books

Ref: Example 3.2. Landslide Risk Assessment by Lee and Jones (2004), Telford Books

Qualitative/Semi-Quantitative Relative Risk Assessment Using the Risk Classes, a risk map can be developed with appropriate color coding.
Risk Class V IV III II I
Description Highest Risk Moderate Risk Lowest Risk

Presenting Risk
1. Curves show probabilities or magnitude of losses/deaths vs earthquake intensity 2. Risk Maps attempts to show the spatial or geographical distribution of expected losses from one or more natural hazards.

Zoning can be applied based on risk. Regulations based on the zoning can be imposed. Risk mitigation can be appropriately apllied based on risk.

Example of Seismic Risk Analysis


Map1. Maximum Intensity of earthquake at the site

Assessing vulnerability
The purpose of assessing vulnerability is to be able to take appropriate actions to reduce vulnerability before the potential for damage becomes actual. To assess vulnerability, one must understand what makes either a physical element or a person or social group vulnerable. Correctly assessing vulnerability is important for making meaningful risk assessments and risk mitigation strategies to ultimately reduce the impact of disasters.

Map 2. Population at the site living in Bldgs

Map 3. Casualties due to building collapse. Buildings are group accdg to type.

Map 4. Potential loss of lives per bldg type. One map per bldg type and per earthquake intensity

The Disaster Crunch Model


The figure below illustrates how the interface between vulnerable conditions and natural hazards can cause a disaster.

Earthquake Vulnerability of the Built Environment


(Ref: Chapter 6. Earthquake Resistant Design & Risk Reduction by David Dowrick, 2Ed, 2009)

Ground shaking is the principal cause of seismic damage. The other causes of damage are due to secondary hazards subsidence, landlslides, liquefaction, fires, tsunami. Hence, vulnerability may be defined as the degree of damage of a given item of the built environment to a given strength of shaking.

Qualitative Measures of Vulnerability


Vulnerability of different classes of construction can be described in words in the subjective intensity scales. For each type of construction (e.g. RC Bldg)
MM Scale : Damage State MM11 : All destroyed MM10 : All destroyed MM09 : Heavily Damaged, some collapse MM08 : Damaged, some with partial collapse MM07 : A few damaged MM06 : No structural damage

Quantitative Measures of Vulnerability


For most purposes in risk assessment, it is necessary to have quantitative measures of vulnerability of the classes of property under consideration. Vulnerability is usually in this case is termed fragility. The usual measures are:
Damage ratio = ratio of (cost of damage to an item) to (value of that item) Percentage of buildings damaged

Seismic Vulnerability - Buildings


Seismic Vulnerability is the degree of damage or loss caused by a given level of seismic intensity. Seismic vulnerability depends on the materials, age, condition and structural layout of a building or other structure. Weak brittle materials, such as adobe, unreinforced masonry, and older reinforced concrete buildings, are very likely to be damaged in an earthquake they have high vulnerability. Steel, wood and newer reinforced concrete buildings that have sufficient ductility are less likely to be damaged in an earthquake they have low vulnerability.

Seismic Vulnerability - Buildings


Analytical Approach
Quantifying, or measuring, seismic vulnerability, can be done in several ways basically, analytically, or statistically. Analytical models involve development of detailed engineering analysis models of a structure, based on detailed data for that structure, which is compiled in equations, analyzed in a computer and presented in terms of displacements as a function of accelerations (Sa). This work needs to be done by an engineer it is rather time-consuming and expensive, but is very accurate. It is justified when the structure is important or essential, such as a school, hospital, highrise buildings, dam, powerplant, etc.

F = [K] X

Detailed engineering model

Sa

Seismic Vulnerability - Buildings


An Example of Analytical Approach

Statistical approach
This approach is involves collecting damage data from several earthquakes, for similar types of buildings, such as houses, and analyzing these statistics to develop correlations of the damage. This approach is less expensive, but is rather general, and provides only average damageability or vulnerability information for a specific building, based on its structural type. The two approaches are analogous to a detailed physical exam by a doctor, versus determining a persons likelihood of a heart attack based only on age and weight. Seismic vulnerability is a function of ground motion or other hazard intensities. RC Building Type

% damage

MMI or a/g

Seismic Vulnerability Buildings


Example of seismic vulnerability functions or fragility curves of three general building types
URM is unreinforced masonry, which will have on average about 50% damage at MMI X; RC Shear Wall is a reinforced concrete building with shear walls, which will have on average 30% damage at MMI X, and Wood Frame is a typical stud wall house, which will on average have about 20% damage at MMI X.
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 4

Seismic Vulnerability - Buildings


Example of seismic vulnerability functions or fragility curves of general building types of various materials
Mean Damage Functions
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% MED RI SE R MOM RESI STG . NON-DUCT. RC FRAME-D URM (BRG. WALL) LOW RI SE (1-3 ) MED RI SE RC SHEAR WALL (W/O MRF) MED RI SE BRACED STL FRAME LOW RI SE WOOD FRAME

Damage

Wood Frame RC Shear Wall URM

MMI

10

12

40% 30%

Sources of information on structural vulnerability include the literature (eg, the ATC-13 and HAZUS publications), empirical data, and detailed structural evaluations. Structural engineers determine structural vulnerability.

20% 10% 0% VI VII VI II MMI IX X

Building Vulnerabilities Map

Damage Estimate Map

Casualties Estimate Map

Risk Reduction
Reducing hazards vs. Reducing vulnerability Risk reduction can be achieved
1. By removing its causes (reducing or modifying the hazard) Impossible to do for earthquakes! 2. By reducing the consequences of the hazard effects if it occurs or reducing the vulnerability of elements at risk.

Risk reduction or mitigation practices for seismic hazards is primarily on reducing the vulnerability of elements that are likely to be affected.

Four Basic Methods of Mitigation


Mitigation

Structural Mitigation
Structural are engineering-dependent mitigation activities and are of two types. 1. Those that result in stronger individual structures that are more resistant to hazards.

Examples: Improve ductility of structural members, retrofitting, pile foundations vs liquefaction,


1. Those that create structures whose primary function is to protect against disaster

Examples: Base isolation & damping devices to reduce vibrations, tsunami barriers, retaining walls vs landslide

Structural

Locational

Operational

Economic

Methods for achieving risk reduction through engineering measures also include increased training for engineers, designers, and builders; explanatory manuals to interpret code requirements and the establishment of an effective administration to check code compliance in practice.

Structural (using buildings as an example)


Bracing Types K V Chevron eccentric X

Seismic Retrofits

(a) moment frame

(b) braced frame

diagonal

(c) shear wall

(d) base isolation

CPU

(e) damped frame

(f) active control system: ground motion sensor, processor, and controlled mass

Locational Mitigation
Locational mitigation is generally a physical planning approach. Many hazards are localized with their likely effects confined to specific well defined areas. Example: Floods occur in flood plains, landslides occur on steep, soft slopes The effects of hazards can be greatly reduced if it is possible to avoid the use of hazardous areas for settlements or as sites for important structures. Example of measures: Land use zoning Careful location of public sector facilities Reducing the concentration of essential elements at risk Prohibitions, or other measures to clear settlers from hazardous areas Making safer land available or making alternative locations more attractive

Locational
Locational risk reduction simply means avoiding the risk. This can be accomplished for example by not building in areas of high shaking intensity, or on an earthquake fault, or in an area of liquefaction. Locational techniques are usually employed by planners. Planning a citys development is ways to avoid tsunami zones, landslides, liquefaction and other earthquake hazards is very effective. Hazard maps are needed for this kind of planning.
Liquefaction hazard map Fault map

Operational Mitigation
Operational mitigation addresses the preparedness and resilience of people and society in general. Operational mitigation should aim to develop a safety culture in which people are aware of the hazards they face, assume a responsibility to protect themselves as fully as they can, and continuously support public and institutional efforts made to protect their community.
Public education and awareness Training for emergency Disaster preparedness and drills Community involvement in mitigation planning processes

Economic Mitigation & Risk Transfer


Some aspects of economic planning are directly relevant to reducing disaster risk. Diversification of economic activity is as important an economic principle as reducing concentration is in physical planning. A single industry (or single-crop) economy is always more vulnerable than an economy made up of many different activities. Economic incentives and penalties can used to influence risk reduction programs. Example: higher taxes for vulnerable structures. Grants and loans can be offered to assist owners in upgrading their property and making buildings more disaster resistant. Risk Transfer does not reduce the risk in absolute terms, but shares it, so that it is reduced in relative terms for each party. Insurance is a major economic protection device to transfer the risk.

Risk Reduction Strategies Based on Hazard

Risk Reduction Strategies Based on Hazard

Risk Reduction Strategies Based on Hazard

Risk Reduction Strategies Based on Hazard

Risk Reduction Strategies Based on Hazard

Risk Mitigation Alternatives


Mitigation of damage and loss is possible at each step of earthquake loss process; earthquake occurs, primary hazards, primary damage, secondary hazard/damage, primary loss, and secondary loss.
EARTHQUAKE OCCURS EARTHQUAKE OCCURS

MITIGATION

RESULT

Hazard mapping; ground remediation; tsunami walls

PRIMARY HAZARDS: PRIMARY HAZARDS:

Faulting, Shaking, Liquefaction, Landsliding, Faulting, Shaking, Liquefaction, Landsliding, Tsunami Tsunami

Demand (hazard) Demand reduced eliminated or(hazard) eliminated or reduced

Bracing and strengthening, reduction of mass, base isolation, structural control

PRIMARY DAMAGE: PRIMARY DAMAGE: Building / Structural


Building / Structural Nonstructural / Equipment Nonstructural / Equipment

Capacity Capacity (strength) (strength) increased increased

Improved storage/infrastructure, better emergency response

SECONDARY HAZARD / DAMAGE: SECONDARY HAZARD / DAMAGE: Fire, Hazardous Materials, Flooding
Fire, Hazardous Materials, Flooding

Secondary demands Secondary reduced eliminated or demands eliminated or reduced

PRIMARY LOSS: PRIMARY LOSS: Life / Injury, Repair Costs, Function,


Improved emergency planning Improved emergency planning and response; insurance and response; insurance

Life / Injury, Repair Costs, Communications/Control Function, Communications/Control Loss avoided Loss or shared avoided or shared

SECONDARY LOSS: SECONDARY LOSS: Business / Operations Interruption

Business / Operations Interruption Market Share, Reputation Market Share, Reputation

Earthquake Risk Reduction Program


Stop

Pre-program

Factors - Seismic environment? - Organization / decisionmaking - Responsibility / liability Data - Seismic hazard - Exposure - life - property - business / function - revenue - data - market share - reputation / image - Vulnerability - Assessment Mitigation Options - Locational - Redundancy / backup - Move - Structural - Strengthen structures - Brace equpment / furnishings - Operational - Emergency Plan - Backup data - Economic/Risk Transfer - Insurance - Contracts

Assess the Risk


Identify the assets (people, property, function) at risk.
The corresponding losses for people, property and function are death and injury, financial loss, and business interruption, revenue, market share.

Assess the Risk


Y

Acceptable?

Establishing (i.e. quantifying) the seismic hazard


It is a representation of how strongly the ground will shake and how often it is likely to do so.

N Develop the Program

Developing performance objectives


No loss of life (no significant collapse hazard), limited property loss, no loss of essential equipment, and restoration of operation onsite or backup site within the time appropriate for the organization.

Acceptable? Y

Implement the Program Maintain the Program

Perform first a risk screening and then, for selected structures, a more detailed review.

Develop the Program


Developing the program, which consists of determining the acceptable risk, the opinions that exist for reducing the current risk to an acceptable level, the costs of doing that, and how it should be accomplished. Having performed risk screening, facilities may be usefully grouped into several categories, such as
I. II. III. Probable high risk Possible high risk Probable low risk

Implement the Program


Retaining seismic retrofit design professionals: Initial investigation and screening Detailed investigation and conceptual retrofit design Construction documents and construction support Funding the program; the following sources should generally considered when planning programs of seismic mitigation. General operating and maintenance funds Bond issues Special use fee Hazard mitigation grants Tax preferences and credits Coordinating with other parts of the organization; it is very important to include earthquake risk mitigation measures with other facets of an organizations asset management program.

The category I and category II facilities should be subjected to a more detailed analysis. All the category I and II facilities can be ranked according to their risk, mitigation costs, or other criteria. The ranking is based on a benefitcost ratio. The final decision as to what facilities to mitigate will depend on available budget and is the final expression of the organizations acceptable risk.

Maintain the Program


Organizations are dynamic and facilities, operations, and personnel are constantly changing. Thus documentation of the step taken, including the process and criteria, is an important step to complete. As new facilities or operations are developed, the same or enhanced criteria can be applied to them, thus retaining the overall balance of earthquake mitigation program. As new personnel join the organization, they can review the earthquake mitigation program documentation and maintain the overall goals.

Summary
An Earthquake Risk Reduction Program involves the following steps: 1. ASSETS: Identify and map the assets at risk the people, property, business and cultural treasures. Where are they, how many are they, what is their value? HAZARDS: Map the earthquake hazards that threaten these assets. Hazards include faulting, shaking, liquefaction, tsunami, landslide, fire. VULNERABILITY: Assess the vulnerability of each asset to the hazards is the asset highly vulnerable, moderately, or just low? ANALYZE: Combine the information on Assets, Hazards and Vulnerability into a Risk Analysis. Map the areas of High Risk. MITIGATION: Based on the assets, hazards and vulnerabilities, identify various ways in which the risk can be lowered. Select the mitigation method that makes the most sense ie, is most effective for the least cost. DEVELOP THE PROGRAM: Having a mitigation package, gather community support and find ways to pay for the mitigation. Develop a Plan for doing the mitigation over a several year timeframe. IMPLEMENT THE PROGRAM: Do it. Dont stop. Earthquakes wont wait.

2. 3. 4. 5.

6.

7.

Taking timely action to mitigate the impacts of potential hazards can transform a problematic future into one that is manageable.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen