Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Winning the war against apathy, ignorance and forgetting history's lessons
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Introducing the official SlideShare app

Stunning, full-screen experience for iPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Winning the war against apathy, ignorance and forgetting history's lessons

171
views

Published on

Now is a good time to make our world disaster resilient. We can do it through the convergence of realistic thinking and strategic actions that are based on improving community preparedness, …

Now is a good time to make our world disaster resilient. We can do it through the convergence of realistic thinking and strategic actions that are based on improving community preparedness, protection, response, and recovery. Presentation courtesy of Dr. Walter Hays, Global Alliance for Disaster Reduction

Published in: Education, Technology

0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
171
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. SOFT STORY BUILDING ON SLOPING GROUND: CHINA TRIGGERED LANDSLIDES
  • 2. WINNING THE GLOBAL WAR AGAINST APATHY AND IGNORANCE
  • 3. NOW IS A GOOD TIME TO MAKE OUR WORLD DISASTER RESILIENT We can do it through the convergence of realistic thinking and strategic actions that are based on improving community preparedness, protection, response, and recovery.
  • 4. STATUS OF THE WORLD AT THE BEGINNING OF THE 21ST CENTURY • 7 billion people, and counting • Living and competing in an interconnected global economy • Producing $60 trillion of products • Facing many complex problems (e,g.,5 E’s and 2 S’s)
  • 5. OUR COMPLEX GLOBAL PROBLEMS AT THE BEGINNING OF THE 21ST CENTURY •Conflict and terrorism •Health care • Chronic hunger • Increasing risk of pandemic disease • Large-scale migration of people • Environmental degradation • Increased impacts of natural hazards • Threats related to global climate change
  • 6. THE REALITY OF THE 21ST CENTURY Unless we devise and implement a realistic, new strategy, OUR problems may grow worse rapidly, and all of us may share in the blame for an unnecessary reduction in the quality of life on Planet Earth.
  • 7. THE FRAMEWORK OF DISASTER RESILIENCE PROVIDES WORTHY GOALS •To protect and preserve the environment • To build capacity for disaster resilience • To inform, educate, and train • To build equity in all communities in all regions of the World
  • 8. WE KNOW WHAT TO DO, SO JUST DO IT! • Working strategically, we can implement a realistic set of scientific, technical, and political solutions--- within OUR administrative, legal, and economic constraints, --- and become disaster resilient.
  • 9. INADEQUATE RESISTANCE TO HORIZONTAL GROUND SHAKING EARTHQUAKESEARTHQUAKES SOIL AMPLIFICATION PERMANENT DISPLACEMENT (SURFACE FAULTING & GROUND FAILURE) IRREGULARITIES IN ELEVATION AND PLAN TSUNAMI WAVE RUNUP LACK OF DETAILING AND POOR CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS LACK OF ATTENTION TO NON-STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS CAUSES OF DAMAGE CAUSES OF DAMAGE CASE HISTORIESCASE HISTORIES
  • 10. CLARIFY VULNERABILTIES CLARIFY VULNERABILTIES ANY COMMUNITY CAN EVALUATE THE VULNERABILITY OF ITS BUILDINGS EVALUATEEVALUATE INITATE ACTIONS INITATE ACTIONS INDENTIFY OPTIONS INDENTIFY OPTIONS OPTIMIZEOPTIMIZE IMPLEMENT BEST SOLUTION IMPLEMENT BEST SOLUTION • An Incremental ProcessAn Incremental Process
  • 11. SOURCE OF INFORMATION • The following graphicThe following graphic characterizations of buildingcharacterizations of building vulnerability to earthquakevulnerability to earthquake ground shaking were developedground shaking were developed by an insurance company andby an insurance company and provided to facilitate educationprovided to facilitate education and training.and training.
  • 12. BUILDING ELEVATIONS • Horizontal and verticalHorizontal and vertical changes in symmetry, mass,changes in symmetry, mass, and stiffness will increase aand stiffness will increase a building’s vulnerability tobuilding’s vulnerability to ground shakingground shaking..
  • 13. AN IMPORTANT NOTE • NOTE: The local site geologyNOTE: The local site geology and the construction materialsand the construction materials are key parameters inare key parameters in controlling a building’scontrolling a building’s performance; analysis of theirperformance; analysis of their effects is NOT considered here.effects is NOT considered here.
  • 14. RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] 1-21-2 ANALYSIS OF VULNERABILITY LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE None, if attention given to foundation and non-structural elements. Rocking may crack foundation and structure. X- Cracks around windows. BUILDING ELEVATION BUILDING ELEVATION BoxBox
  • 15. DAMAGED HOUSE:CHINA
  • 16. ASYMMETRY AND LATERAL CHANGES: CHINA
  • 17. RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] 11 ANALYSIS OF VULNERABILITY LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE None, if attention given to foundation and non structural elements. Rocking may crack foundation. BUILDING ELEVATION BUILDING ELEVATION PyramidPyramid
  • 18. RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] 4 - 64 - 6 ANALYSIS OF VULNERABILITY LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE Top heavy, asymmetrical structure may fail at foundation due to rocking and overturning. BUILDING ELEVATION BUILDING ELEVATION Inverted PyramidInverted Pyramid
  • 19. RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] 5 - 65 - 6 ANALYSIS OF VULNERABILITY LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE Asymmetry and horizontal transition in mass, stiffness and damping may cause failure where lower and upper structures join. BUILDING ELEVATION BUILDING ELEVATION ““L”- Shaped BuildingL”- Shaped Building
  • 20. RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] 3 - 53 - 5 ANALYSIS OF VULNERABILITY LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE Vertical transition and asymmetry may cause failure where lower part is attached to tower. BUILDING ELEVATION BUILDING ELEVATION Inverted “T”Inverted “T”
  • 21. RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] 2 - 32 - 3 ANALYSIS OF VULNERABILITY LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE Vertical transition in mass, stiffness, and damping may cause failure at foundation and transition points at each floor. BUILDING ELEVATION BUILDING ELEVATION Multiple SetbacksMultiple Setbacks
  • 22. RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] 4 - 54 - 5 ANALYSIS OF VULNERABILITY LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE Top heavy asymmetrical structure may fail at transition point and foundation due to rocking and overturning. BUILDING ELEVATION BUILDING ELEVATION OverhangOverhang
  • 23. RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] 6 - 76 - 7 ANALYSIS OF VULNERABILITY LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE Horizontal and vertical transitions in mass and stiffness may cause failure on soft side of first floor; rocking and overturning. BUILDING ELEVATION BUILDING ELEVATION Partial “Soft” StoryPartial “Soft” Story
  • 24. RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] 8 - 108 - 10 ANALYSIS OF VULNERABILITY LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE Vertical transitions in mass and stiffness may cause failure on transition points between first and second floors. BUILDING ELEVATION BUILDING ELEVATION ““Soft” First FloorSoft” First Floor
  • 25. THE TYPICAL SOFT-STOREY BUILDING IN TURKEY
  • 26. RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] 9 - 109 - 10 ANALYSIS OF VULNERABILITY LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE Horizontal and vertical transitions in mass and stiffness may cause failure at transition points and possible overturning. BUILDING ELEVATION BUILDING ELEVATION Combination of “Soft”Combination of “Soft” Story and OverhangStory and Overhang
  • 27. RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] 1010 ANALYSIS OF VULNERABILITY LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE Horizontal transition in stiffness of soft story columns may cause failure of columns at foundation and/or contact points with structure. BUILDING ELEVATION BUILDING ELEVATION Building on SlopingBuilding on Sloping GroundGround
  • 28. SOFT STORY BUILDING ON SLOPING GROUND: CHINA TRIGGERED LANDSLIDES
  • 29. TUSCALOOSA, AL: EF5 STORM WITH 466 KPH (280 MPH) WINDS APRIL 27, 2011
  • 30. TUSCALOOSA, AL: APRIL 27, 2011
  • 31. PRATT CITY, AL: APRIL 27, 2011
  • 32. PRATT CITY, AL: APRIL 27, 2011
  • 33. PRATT CITY; AL: APRIL 27, 2011
  • 34. PLEASANT GROVE, AL: APRIL 27, 2011
  • 35. DEBRIS ACROSS HIGHWAY
  • 36. MOUNT KARANGETANG ERUPTS The 1,784 m (5,853 ft) volcano, which is one of Indonesia’s 129 active volcan- oes, is located on Siau.
  • 37. VOLCANO HAZARDS (AKA POTENTIAL DISASTER AGENTS) • LAVA FLOWS • LAHARS • EARTHQUAKES (related to movement of lava) • “VOLCANIC WINTER”
  • 38. NATURAL HAZARDS FOR WHICHNATURAL HAZARDS FOR WHICH EVACUATION IS TYPICALEVACUATION IS TYPICAL NATURAL HAZARDS FOR WHICHNATURAL HAZARDS FOR WHICH EVACUATION IS TYPICALEVACUATION IS TYPICAL FLOODS HURRICANES TYPHOONS TSUNAMIS VOLCANIC ERUPTIONS WILDFIRES HIGH BENEFIT/COST FOR SAVING LIVES, BUT LOW BEMEFIT/COST FOR PROTECTING PROPERTY HIGH BENEFIT/COST FOR SAVING LIVES, BUT LOW BEMEFIT/COST FOR PROTECTING PROPERTY GOAL: MOVE PEOPLE OUTGOAL: MOVE PEOPLE OUT OF HARM’S WAYOF HARM’S WAY GOAL: MOVE PEOPLE OUTGOAL: MOVE PEOPLE OUT OF HARM’S WAYOF HARM’S WAY
  • 39. CHRONOLOGY OF THE STORM • Starts in Oklahoma late Thursday (April 14) • Moves to Arkansas on Friday (April 15) • Impacts Mississippi and Alabama
  • 40. TECTONICS OF INDONESIA REGION • The Australian and Eurasian plates meet in Indonesia, creating a tectonic setting favorable for generating earthquakes, tsunamis, and volcanic eruptions.
  • 41. Indonesia has 129 active volcanoes, with two of the most active ones — Mount Kelut and Mount Merapi — on the island of Java, where the Indonesian capital, Jakarta, is.
  • 42. SENSITIZED BY THE 2004 TSUNAMI DISASTER, INDONESIANS HEEDED THE WARNING This time, the tsunami that inundated towns, immobilized air ports, destroyed buildings, and killed 1,000’s in Japan, WAS NOT DEADLY in Indonesia.
  • 43. IN 2004, TSUNAMI WAVES REACHED BANDA ACHE IN1/2 HOUR, THEN TRAVERSED THE INDIAN OCEAN
  • 44. 12 COUNTRIES ADJACENT TO THE INDIAN OCEAN WERE IMPACTED
  • 45. THE 2004 EXPERIENCE • THE TSUNAMI WAS GENERATED BY A SHALLOW, M 9.3 EARTHQUAKE LOCATED 260 KM (155 MI) FROM BANDA ACEH, SUMATRA
  • 46. THE 2004 EXPERIENCE • THE TSUNAMI WAVES HAD HEIGHTS OF 4 TO 10 M AND RUNUP OF 3.3 KM OR MORE ON THE COAST LINES OF 12 NATIONS
  • 47. THE 2004 EXPERIENCE • THE EXISTING TSUNAMI WARNING SYSTEM WAS INEFFECTIVE IN 2004. • RESULT: LITTLE OR NO EVACUATION.
  • 48. THE 2004 EXPERIENCE • AN EXTIMATED 220,000 PEOPLE WERE KILLED (120,000 IN INDONESIA) AND 500,000 WERE INJURED IN 12 COUNTRIES BORDERING THE INDIAN OCEAN