13 research outputs found

    Improving Loss Estimation for Woodframe Buildings. Volume 2: Appendices

    Get PDF
    This report documents Tasks 4.1 and 4.5 of the CUREE-Caltech Woodframe Project. It presents a theoretical and empirical methodology for creating probabilistic relationships between seismic shaking severity and physical damage and loss for buildings in general, and for woodframe buildings in particular. The methodology, called assembly-based vulnerability (ABV), is illustrated for 19 specific woodframe buildings of varying ages, sizes, configuration, quality of construction, and retrofit and redesign conditions. The study employs variations on four basic floorplans, called index buildings. These include a small house and a large house, a townhouse and an apartment building. The resulting seismic vulnerability functions give the probability distribution of repair cost as a function of instrumental ground-motion severity. These vulnerability functions are useful by themselves, and are also transformed to seismic fragility functions compatible with the HAZUS software. The methods and data employed here use well-accepted structural engineering techniques, laboratory test data and computer programs produced by Element 1 of the CUREE-Caltech Woodframe Project, other recently published research, and standard construction cost-estimating methods. While based on such well established principles, this report represents a substantially new contribution to the field of earthquake loss estimation. Its methodology is notable in that it calculates detailed structural response using nonlinear time-history structural analysis as opposed to the simplifying assumptions required by nonlinear pushover methods. It models physical damage at the level of individual building assemblies such as individual windows, segments of wall, etc., for which detailed laboratory testing is available, as opposed to two or three broad component categories that cannot be directly tested. And it explicitly models uncertainty in ground motion, structural response, component damageability, and contractor costs. Consequently, a very detailed, verifiable, probabilistic picture of physical performance and repair cost is produced, capable of informing a variety of decisions regarding seismic retrofit, code development, code enforcement, performance-based design for above-code applications, and insurance practices

    Real-time earthquake hazard assessment in California; the early post-earthquake damage assessment tool and the Caltech-USGS broadcast of earthquakes

    Get PDF
    A real-time earthquake monitoring system which provides source parameters to user groups through a commercial paging service is now in place in California. A GIS-based system to predict and display near real-time damage and casualty estimates is currently being developed by EQE International under contract with the State of California. These new technologies offer immediate tangible benefits to state and local governments, utilities, lifelines and corporations with facilities or operations at risk. This paper will outline the development of these new technologies, identify the contributions they will make to emergency management and explore some directions these innovative systems may take in the future

    Improving Loss Estimation for Woodframe Buildings. Volume 1: Report

    Get PDF
    This report documents Tasks 4.1 and 4.5 of the CUREE-Caltech Woodframe Project. It presents a theoretical and empirical methodology for creating probabilistic relationships between seismic shaking severity and physical damage and loss for buildings in general, and for woodframe buildings in particular. The methodology, called assembly-based vulnerability (ABV), is illustrated for 19 specific woodframe buildings of varying ages, sizes, configuration, quality of construction, and retrofit and redesign conditions. The study employs variations on four basic floorplans, called index buildings. These include a small house and a large house, a townhouse and an apartment building. The resulting seismic vulnerability functions give the probability distribution of repair cost as a function of instrumental ground-motion severity. These vulnerability functions are useful by themselves, and are also transformed to seismic fragility functions compatible with the HAZUS software. The methods and data employed here use well-accepted structural engineering techniques, laboratory test data and computer programs produced by Element 1 of the CUREE-Caltech Woodframe Project, other recently published research, and standard construction cost-estimating methods. While based on such well established principles, this report represents a substantially new contribution to the field of earthquake loss estimation. Its methodology is notable in that it calculates detailed structural response using nonlinear time-history structural analysis as opposed to the simplifying assumptions required by nonlinear pushover methods. It models physical damage at the level of individual building assemblies such as individual windows, segments of wall, etc., for which detailed laboratory testing is available, as opposed to two or three broad component categories that cannot be directly tested. And it explicitly models uncertainty in ground motion, structural response, component damageability, and contractor costs. Consequently, a very detailed, verifiable, probabilistic picture of physical performance and repair cost is produced, capable of informing a variety of decisions regarding seismic retrofit, code development, code enforcement, performance-based design for above-code applications, and insurance practices

    Real-Time Loss Estimation as an Emergency Response Decision Support System: The Early Post-Earthquake Damage Assessment Tool (EPEDAT)

    Get PDF
    At the time of the Northridge earthquake, a number of new technologies, including real-time availability of earthquake source data, improved loss estimation techniques, Geographic Information Systems and various satellite-based monitoring systems, were either available or under consideration as emergency management resources. The potential benefits from these technologies for earthquake hazard mitigation, response and recovery, however, were largely conceptual. One of the major lessons learned from the January 17, 1994 earthquake was that these technologies could confer significant advantages in understanding and managing a major disaster, and that their integration would contribute a significant additional increment of utility. In the two and half years since the Northridge earthquake, important strides have been taken toward the integration of relatively discrete technologies in a system which provides real-time estimates of regional damage, losses and population impacts. This paper will describe the development, operation and application of the first real-time loss estimation system to be utilized by an emergency services organization

    Direct Economic Losses in the Northridge Earthquake: A Three-Year Post-Event Perspective

    Get PDF
    The Northridge earthquake will long be remembered for the unprecedented losses incurred as a result of a moderate-size event in a suburban area of Los Angeles. Current documented costs indicate that this event is the costliest disaster in U.S. history. Although it is difficult to estimate the full cost of this event, it is quite possible that total losses, excluding indirect effects, could reach as much as $40 billion. This would make the Northridge earthquake less severe than the Kobe event, which occurred exactly one year after the Northridge earthquake, but adds a bit of realism that a Kobe-type disaster is possible in the U.S. This paper attempts to put into perspective the direct capital losses associated with the Northridge earthquake. In doing so, we introduce the concept of hidden and/or undocumented costs that could double current estimates. In addition, we present the notion that a final estimate of loss may be impossible to achieve, although costs do begin to level off two years after the earthquake. Finally, we attempt to reconcile apparent differences between loss totals for two databases tracking similar information
    corecore