Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Required Readings:
1. Vulnerability & Risk Assessment UNDP Disaster Management Training Program
Additional Readings:
Landslide Risk Assessment by Lee and Jones (2004), Telford Books
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
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
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)
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)
Site Effects
Vibration of Structures
Ground Settlement
Flooding
Fault Displacement
Site Losses
Vulnerability Factors
Vulnerability Factors
Vulnerability Factors
Vulnerability Factors
Vulnerability Factors
*
Ground motion severity,
1 5
10 10
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%
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).
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
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
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.
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 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
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.
F = [K] X
Sa
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
Damage
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.
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.
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: 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.
Seismic Retrofits
diagonal
CPU
(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
MITIGATION
RESULT
Faulting, Shaking, Liquefaction, Landsliding, Faulting, Shaking, Liquefaction, Landsliding, Tsunami Tsunami
SECONDARY HAZARD / DAMAGE: SECONDARY HAZARD / DAMAGE: Fire, Hazardous Materials, Flooding
Fire, Hazardous Materials, Flooding
Life / Injury, Repair Costs, Communications/Control Function, Communications/Control Loss avoided Loss or shared avoided or shared
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
Acceptable?
Acceptable? Y
Perform first a risk screening and then, for selected structures, a more detailed review.
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.
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.