TY - JOUR
T1 - Review of the State of the Art in Assessing Earthquake-Induced Loss of Functionality in Buildings
AU - Mieler, M. W.
AU - Mitrani-Reiser, J.
N1 - Funding Information:
FEMA P-58, however, is better known for its methodology for computing earthquake-induced casualties, financial losses, and repair time. In 2001, FEMA began the planning phase to develop guidelines for performance-based seismic design (PBSD), as outlined in FEMA 349 (EERI 2000). Two workshops were held during the planning phase to receive outside input on project needs and develop consensus on performance metrics. In 2006, FEMA and the Applied Technology Council (ATC) began developing the PBSD methodology, guided by expertise from the three National Science Foundation (NSF)-funded earthquake engineering research centers, private industry, construction materials trade associations, and individual product manufacturers. Specifically, the repair time procedures outlined in volume I of FEMA P-58 (ATC 2012) were informed by researchers at the Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (see Porter 2003; Moehle and Deierlein 2004; Goulet et al. 2007), practicing structural engineers, and cost estimators. As such, it is a consensus document and, since its publication in 2012, it has become the industry standard for computing casualties, repair costs, and repair time. In overview, the methodology uses fragility curves and consequence functions to estimate the total amount of time required to repair earthquake-induced damage. Fragility curves, which quantify the probability that a building component is in a particular damage state when subjected to increasing intensities of seismic demand, are an essential input in this process and have been used widely by both researchers and practitioners (Ditlevsen and Madsen 1996; Porter et al. 2001; Wen and Ellingwood 2005; Porter et al. 2007; Bai et al. 2011; Molina Hutt et al. 2015; Terzic and Mahin 2017, to list only a few). Equally important are consequence functions, which link each damage state to the length of time required to repair or replace the damaged component. Although the FEMA P-58 methodology represents a significant advance in the ability to predict repair times, it does not attempt to quantify the impact of the irrational components of downtime. Furthermore, the quality of fragility and consequence functions is uneven; many functions are based on limited data. Consequently, the accuracy of its downtime predictions still needs to be validated.
Funding Information:
This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 1441209. The authors greatly appreciate the thoughtful feedback from esteemed colleagues Megan Boston, Mary Comerio, Caitlin Jacques, S.R. Uma, and Xilei Zhao.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 American Society of Civil Engineers.
PY - 2018/3/1
Y1 - 2018/3/1
N2 - Earthquake-induced damage to the built infrastructure can generate enormous societal impact, ranging from displacement of individual families and businesses to disruption of entire economic sectors and public services. Consequently, engineers play a critical role in mitigating these cascading, multiscale earthquake impacts. A significant component in this effort involves designing buildings and other structures to avoid the types of damage that can lead to loss of functionality and downtime after an earthquake. Toward this end, this paper describes the state of the art in assessing earthquake-induced loss of functionality in individual buildings. More specifically, it details how earthquake-induced loss of functionality within the built infrastructure can generate multiscale impacts that cascade through a community across space and time. It also compiles from various sources a consistent hierarchy of definitions for building functionality, and examines the myriad combinations of events and failures that can impact it, culminating with the development of functionality-restoration curves that graphically depict how the availability of various building components and systems affect recovery. The paper then reviews, both recently developed analytical models for evaluating loss of functionality in individual buildings and also current practice for designing buildings to maintain or regain functionality after earthquakes. Lastly, the paper identifies several critical gaps in knowledge and areas of future research that need to be addressed in order for the engineering profession to, both design buildings to quickly regain functionality after a major earthquake and also more effectively communicate risk with community stakeholders (e.g., building owners, emergency managers, and city planners).
AB - Earthquake-induced damage to the built infrastructure can generate enormous societal impact, ranging from displacement of individual families and businesses to disruption of entire economic sectors and public services. Consequently, engineers play a critical role in mitigating these cascading, multiscale earthquake impacts. A significant component in this effort involves designing buildings and other structures to avoid the types of damage that can lead to loss of functionality and downtime after an earthquake. Toward this end, this paper describes the state of the art in assessing earthquake-induced loss of functionality in individual buildings. More specifically, it details how earthquake-induced loss of functionality within the built infrastructure can generate multiscale impacts that cascade through a community across space and time. It also compiles from various sources a consistent hierarchy of definitions for building functionality, and examines the myriad combinations of events and failures that can impact it, culminating with the development of functionality-restoration curves that graphically depict how the availability of various building components and systems affect recovery. The paper then reviews, both recently developed analytical models for evaluating loss of functionality in individual buildings and also current practice for designing buildings to maintain or regain functionality after earthquakes. Lastly, the paper identifies several critical gaps in knowledge and areas of future research that need to be addressed in order for the engineering profession to, both design buildings to quickly regain functionality after a major earthquake and also more effectively communicate risk with community stakeholders (e.g., building owners, emergency managers, and city planners).
KW - Built infrastructure
KW - Disasters
KW - Downtime
KW - Fault trees
KW - Functionality
KW - Multiscale impacts
KW - Resilience
KW - Safety and reliability
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85038620778&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85038620778&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001959
DO - 10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001959
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85038620778
SN - 0733-9445
VL - 144
JO - Journal of Structural Engineering (United States)
JF - Journal of Structural Engineering (United States)
IS - 3
M1 - 04017218
ER -