Download as PDF, PPTX
![MDOF
Simplification of 3D or 2D structures into a SDOF
lent SDOF system can be either elastic or inelastic de-
n the chosen inelastic analysis method (see Section
tation of the pushover curve and the subsequent deter-
the properties of the equivalent SDOF system are thor-
cussed in Section 7.2.
bal deformations ∆
Detailed
model
nically
m*
h*k*
Equivalent SDOF
system
0
1
2
3
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3
Global deformation ∆ [m]
HorizontalforceV[MN]
ve“
stic
ationship
ntals of Seismic Design”
Substitute SDoF structure
ive displacement
gn displacement)
ive mass
ive height ( ) ( )¦¦ ∆∆=
n
ii
n
iiie
mHmH /
( ) ( )¦¦
==
∆∆=∆
n
i
ii
n
i
iid
mm
11
2
/
( ) d
n
i
iie
mm ∆∆= ¦
=
/
1
He
me
He
me ∆d
∆i
∆i-1
∆3
∆2
∆1
He
me
He
me ∆d
∆i
∆i-1
∆3
∆2
∆1
SDOF
Definition of structural models for vulnerability
analysis
−0.25 −0.2 −0.15 −0.1 −0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
−0.5
−0.4
−0.3
−0.2
−0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Sd [m]
Sa[g]
sdof
pinching4
Hysteresis model](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/02-ccararisk-180517141426/85/02-ccara-risk-30-320.jpg)
Uploaded bySergio Navarro Hudiel
02 ccara risk
This document summarizes the Caribbean and Central American Seismic Risk Assessment Project. The project uses an integrated framework to model seismic risk by assessing seismic hazard, exposure of the built environment, and physical and socioeconomic vulnerability. Building inventories and fragility curves have been developed for the Dominican Republic to estimate potential earthquake losses and inform risk reduction efforts. Calibration of vulnerability models is important to ensure realistic estimated losses that match observations from past earthquakes.
More Related Content
More from Sergio Navarro Hudiel
02 ccara risk
- 1. Caribbean and CentralAmerican Seismic Risk Assessment Project March 21, 2018 Santo Domingo, República Alejandro Calderón, MSc.
- 3. • unique approach • cohesive pathway • actionable solutions Scientific Framework INTEGRATED SEISMIC RISK PHYSICAL SEISMIC RISK Probability of damage and loss to people and structures due to earthquakes EXPOSURE Elements at risk PHYSICAL VULNERABILITY Vulnerability of structures and their occupants to seismic hazard SEISMIC HAZARD Probability of ground shaking due to earthquakes SOCIO-ECONOMIC VULNERABILITY AND RESILIENCE Vulnerability of society and economy and their capacity to cope with earthquake events
- 4. Characterization of thebuilt-up environment
- 5. How is thebuilding stock? How many people? How much does it cost? Where is the building stock? Characterization of the built-up environment
- 6. Where is thebuilding stock? How many people? Geographical position of the assets derived from: ü Census Data ü Cadaster Data ü Satellite Imagery
- 7. Where is thebuilding stock? How many people?
- 8. How is thebuilding stock? Building class derivation: ü Existing Literature ü Oficial construction statistics ü Visual inspection ü Structural code ü Level of informality
- 9. How is thebuilding stock?
- 10. How is thebuilding stock? ¿Las construcciones residenciales de su país satisfacen los requisitos establecidos en la normativa sísmica? Siempre 0 Casi siempre 0 5 12 Rara vez 0 Nunca 0 Otros 0 17 ¿Cuál era el sistema estructural más usado en construcción de vivienda antes de la implementación del código sísmico? Hormigón armado y mampostería en bloque de concreto 5 Mampostería reforzada en bloque concreto 4 Mampostería en bloque concreto 4 Madera, mampostería en concreto (algunas veces) y techos de zinc 2 Combinación de todas las anteriores 1 16 ¿Cuál es la forma más común de construcción en hogares de altos recursos económicos (material y sistema estructural)? Pórticos de hormigón armado y mampostería de bloque de concreto 7 Pórticos de hormigón armado 2 Mampostería reforzada en bloque concreto con diafragma rígico 3 Mampostería confinada y con refuerzo 3 Mixto: Mampostería reforzada con muros de hormigón armado 2 17 ¿Cuál es la forma más común de construcción en hogares de moderados recursos económicos (material y sistema estructural)? Mampostería sin reforzar (bloque concreto) 2 Mampostería confinada (bloque concreto) 4 Mampostería reforzada (bloque concreto) con diafragma rígido 7 Mampostería bloque concreto 4 17 ¿Cuál es la forma más común de construcción en hogares de bajos recursos económicos (material y sistema estructural)? Madera y mampostería no reforzada en bloque de concreto 3 Madera y techos de zinc 3 Mampostería no reforzada y techo de zinc 2 Mampostería reforzada en bloque de concreto y losas flexibles 4 Mampostería confinada en bloque de concreto 1 4 17 En su país, las viviendas en mampostería (albañilería) son generalmente Mampostería reforzada dúctil Mampostería NO reforzada Hogares de bajos recursos económicos 0 8 1 9 12 Hogares de moderados recursos económicos 7 4 4 6 1 Hogares de altos recursos económicos 8 0 10 1 0 No aplica 2 5 2 1 4 República Dominicana VIVIENDA Casi siempre en viviendas de altos/moderados ingresos económicos, y en algunos casos en viviendas de bajos ingresos económicos En algunos casos en viviendas de altos/moderados ingresos económicos, y rara vez en viviendas de bajos ingresos económicos Mampostería reforzada NO dúctil Mampostería confinada dúctil Mampostería confinada NO dúctil Madera, mampostería en bloque de concreto (sin reforzar o con poco refuerzo), y techo en planchas de zinc (alucin) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 2 4 6 8 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Mampostería reforzada dúctil Mampostería reforzada NO dúctil Mampostería confinada dúctil Mampostería confinada NO dúctil Mampostería NO reforzada Hogares de bajos recursos económicos Hogares de moderados recursos económicos Hogares de altos recursos económicos No aplica
- 11. How is thebuilding stock?
- 12. How is thebuilding stock?
- 13. Building class derivation: ü Existing Literature ü Oficial construction statistics ü Visual inspection ü Structural code ü Level of informality How is the building stock?
- 14. Building class derivation: ü Existing Literature ü Oficial construction statistics ü Visual inspection ü Structural code ü Level of informality How is the building stock?
- 15. Number of Dwellings Number of Buildings Mapping Scheme Structural Attributes BuildingClassification and Distribution
- 16. Building Classification andDistribution
- 17. Final Building ClassDefinition ü Material: CR ü Type: LWALL + DUC ü Height: 1 ü Avg. Area: 51 m² ü Avg. Cost: $ 22,593
- 18. Estimation of capital stock: ü Central Bank Data ü Government Housing Programs ü Construction statistics How much does it cost?
- 19. Building Inventories: Residencial –Comercial - Industrial
- 20. Directory of Establishments– Dominican Republic
- 21. Exposure results: ü Totalbuilding classes: +86
- 22. • Number ofbuildings • Area of a building typology • Economic value – Structural components – Non-structural components – Contents – Business interruption • Occupants – Day/Night/Transit Current exposure modelling capabilities
- 23. Exposure results forthe Dominican Republic RES 60% COM 26% IND 14% 210 USD Billion
- 24. RES 60% COM 26% IND 14% 210 USD Billion Exposure resultsfor the Dominican Republic
- 25. Exposure Results forthe Dominican Republic RES 64% COM 23% IND 13% 960 USD Billion
- 26. Ground shaking Exposure 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 00.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 Probabilityofexceedance Peak ground acceleration (g) Slight Moderate Extensive Collapse Fragilidad Estimation of earthquake losses
- 27. Seismic Intensity 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 0 0.2 0.40.6 0.8 1 1.2 Probabilityofexceedance Peak ground acceleration (g) Slight Moderate Extensive Collapse Estimation of earthquake losses
- 28. Using the characteristicsof past seismic events 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 Probabilityofexceedance Peak ground acceleration (g) Slight Moderate Extensive Collapse Ground shaking Exposure Estimation of earthquake losses
- 29. Estimation of earthquakelosses Using the characteristics of past seismic events 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 Probabilityofexceedance Peak ground acceleration (g) Slight Moderate Extensive Collapse Ground shaking Exposure Damage Loss
- 30. MDOF Simplification of 3Dor 2D structures into a SDOF lent SDOF system can be either elastic or inelastic de- n the chosen inelastic analysis method (see Section tation of the pushover curve and the subsequent deter- the properties of the equivalent SDOF system are thor- cussed in Section 7.2. bal deformations ∆ Detailed model nically m* h*k* Equivalent SDOF system 0 1 2 3 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Global deformation ∆ [m] HorizontalforceV[MN] ve“ stic ationship ntals of Seismic Design” Substitute SDoF structure ive displacement gn displacement) ive mass ive height ( ) ( )¦¦ ∆∆= n ii n iiie mHmH / ( ) ( )¦¦ == ∆∆=∆ n i ii n i iid mm 11 2 / ( ) d n i iie mm ∆∆= ¦ = / 1 He me He me ∆d ∆i ∆i-1 ∆3 ∆2 ∆1 He me He me ∆d ∆i ∆i-1 ∆3 ∆2 ∆1 SDOF Definition of structural models for vulnerability analysis −0.25 −0.2 −0.15 −0.1 −0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 −0.5 −0.4 −0.3 −0.2 −0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 Sd [m] Sa[g] sdof pinching4 Hysteresis model
- 31. o +100 peer-reviewedpublications o +20 technical reports o +500 fragility functions and capacity curves Definition of structural models for vulnerability analysis Experimental data Numerical modelling
- 32. Vulnerability Modelling –Costa Rica 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0 Probability of excedense MCF/DUC/H:1 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0 Probability of excedense MCF/DUC/H:2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0 Probability of excedense CR+PC/DUC/H:1 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0 Probability of excedense CR+PC/DLO/H:1 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0 Probability of excedense W+WLI/DLO/H:1 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0 Probability of excedense MCF/DLO/H:1 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0 Probability of excedense UNK 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 Probability of Exceedance MCF/DUC/H:3-6 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 Probability of Exceedance MUR+ADO/DNO/H:1 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 Probability of Exceedance CR+CIP/DUH/H:6-12 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 Probability of Exceedance CR+CIP/DUH/H:3-6 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 ProbabilityofExceedance CR+CIP/DLO/H:3-6 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 ProbabilityofExceedance CR/LINF+DUH/H:2-6 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 ProbabilityofExceedance CR+CIP/LFM+DLO/H:1 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 Probability of Exceedance CR+CIP/LFM+DLO/H:2-6 Slight Moderate Extensive Collpase
- 33. The need forvulnerability calibration/verification ”Often, all the model ingredients look fine, but their combination makes no sense. Calibration is key” Alex Allmann, Heard of GeoRisk at Munich Re 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 Model A Model B Model C Model D Model E Number of collapses Thousands Observed Estimated collapses for adobe buildings due to the 2007 M8.7 Pisco event
- 34. Calibration process forGuatemala Fragility Curves 0.00% 0.20% 0.40% 0.60% 0.80% 1.00% V1 V2 V3 V4 V5 The need for vulnerability calibration/verification
- 35. Using the characteristicsof past seismic events 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 Probabilityofexceedance Peak ground acceleration (g) Slight Moderate Extensive Collapse Hazard ExposureFragility & vulnerability Estimation of earthquake losses
- 36. Vs30 derived from topographyand geological units Estimation of earthquake losses
- 37. Earthquake event–based riskanalisys Hazard Model
- 38. Synthetic Catalogue Earthquake event–basedrisk analisys
- 39. 0 4 8 12 1 10 1001000 Loss(USD)Billions Return Period (years) Average Annual Loss Exceedance Loss Curve Earthquake event–based risk analisys
- 40. Loss exceedance curves– the Caribbean
- 41. Loss exceedance curves– the Caribbean (%)
- 42. Loss exceedance curves– Central America
- 43. Loss exceedance curves– Central America (%)
- 44. Average Annual Losses 0.01% 0.03% 0.03% 0.06% 0.07% 0.10% 0.11% 0.12% 0.14% 0.25% 0.29% 0.31% 0.00%0.10% 0.20% 0.30% 0.40% Belize Barbados Trinidad & Tobago Panama Jamaica R. Dominicana Honduras Costa Rica Haiti Nicaragua Guatemala Salvador Average Annual Loss Ration (AALR) 0.17 2 5 33 23 145 43 105 28 76 341 155 - 100 200 300 Belize Barbados Trinidad & Tobago Panama Jamaica R. Dominicana Honduras Costa Rica Haiti Nicaragua Guatemala Salvador Millions Average Annual Loss (AAL)
- 45.
- 46. 0.00% 0.20% 0.40% 0.60% 0.80% 1.00% Losses disaggregated bybuilding class - Guatemala Earthquake event–based risk results
- 47. Earthquake Risk Profilefor Panama
- 48. Caribbean and CentralAmerican Earthquake Risk Profiles
- 49. Dissimination and validationmodel, datasets and results
- 50. Dissimination and validationmodel, datasets and results
- 51.