Validating the current state-of-practice for seismic risk (and resilience) analysis

Abstract

Regional risk analysis provides information for decisions made by communities, state and federal agencies, and the insurance industry. Model validation and updating are crucial since inaccurate predictions may lead to suboptimal decisions. Seismic risk (and resilience) analyses feature some of the most comprehensive prediction models, including nested models in complex multi-step procedures. While several models and methods have been developed, due to limited data and computational challenges, validation of seismic risk analysis models has been limited. Typical attempts at model validation focus on ground motion prediction equations and damage models for buildings and pipelines (Bai et al. 2014; Liu et al. 2017; Bellagamba et al. 2019). In addition, most recent studies on seismic risk and resilience analysis have concentrated on more complex formulations for infrastructure functionality, interdependencies, or resilience optimization, while implicitly relying on tools like HAZUS (FEMA 2014) and MAEViz (MAE Center 2011) to predict damage and recovery times. However, evaluating the credibility of sources that have become the standard of practice is essential. This paper assesses the state-of-the-art for analyzing the seismic risk (and resilience) analysis of physical infrastructures, such as buildings, roads, bridges, water, and wastewater systems. The paper uses data from the 2016 Kumamoto earthquake in Japan and compares the predicted and recorded impacts. The comparison demonstrates the actual predictive ability of the available models and drives future research toward essential enhancements.

Keywords: Risk, Resilience, Validation, Earthquakes, Infrastructure.

References

Bai, J. W., Hueste, M. B. D., and Gardoni, P. (2014). Case study: Scenario-based seismic loss estimation for concrete buildings in Mid-America. Earthquake Spectra, 30(4), 1585-1599.

Bellagamba, X., Bradley, B. A., Wotherspoon, L. M., and Hughes, M. W. (2019). Development and validation of fragility functions for buried pipelines based on Canterbury earthquake sequence data. Earthquake Spectra, 35(3), 1061-1086.

FEMA. (2014). Multi-hazard loss estimation methodology: Earthquake model HAZUS-MH 2.1. Technical Manual. Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency.

Liu, W., Miao, H., Wang, C., and Li, J. (2017). Experimental validation of a model for seismic simulation and interaction analysis of buried pipe networks. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 100, 113-130.

MAE Center. (2011) Software and Tools. http://mae.cee.illinois.edu/software/