Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Space and Time Visualisation pp 281–302Cite as

Limits and Possibilities of Computer Support in Priority Setting for Earthquake Risk Reduction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

Several computer-aided methodologies are available to select buildings or urban areas for priority action by those involved in earthquake preparedness measures. These serve to measure the criteria after which structural engineers, project managers, or regional planners will set priorities. The potential for interactivity between the computer tool and its user decides the possibilities and limits in meeting the optimal solution. Usage of strong motion data to predict damage to buildings and urban areas is exemplified. The development of tools suitable to set priority criteria to protect urban settlements from earthquake impact is shown.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alexander C, Ishikawa S, Silverstein M (1977) A pattern language: towns, buildings, construction. Oxford University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambraseys N, Smit P, Sigbjornsson R, Suhadolc P, Margaris B (2002) Internet-site for European Strong-Motion Data, European Commission, Research-Directorate General, Environment and Climate Programme

    Google Scholar 

  • Aou T, Ohmori H (2005) Computational morphogenesis of structures by extended ESO method ~ Application to dynamic problems. Proceedings of International Symposium on Shell and Spatial Structures, Bucharest and Poiana Braşov, Romania, pp 175–178

    Google Scholar 

  • Armas I (2012) Multi-criteria vulnerability analysis to earthquake hazard of Bucharest, Romania. Nat Hazards 63:1129–1156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bălan Ș, Cristescu V, Cornea I (eds) (1982) Cutremurul de pământ din România de la 4 martie 1977. Academia Republicii Socialiste România, Bucharest

    Google Scholar 

  • Bögle A (2004) Zur Morphologie komplexer Formen in Bauwesen. Doctorate thesis, Universität Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  • Borzi B, Crowley H, Pinho R (2008) Simplified Pushover-Based Earthquake Loss Assessment (SP-BELA) method for masonry buildings. Int J Archit Heritage 2(4):353–376(24)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bosi A, Pegon P (2009) The ELSA database and what can be done regarding SERIES networking activities, OPOCE. http://elsa.jrc.ec.europa.eu/publications/JRC52127.pdf

  • Bostenaru (2010) Assessment of structural performance of retrofit measures on characteristic “interwar” structures in Bucharest, Romania. Cuvillier Verlag, Göttingen

    Google Scholar 

  • Bostenaru (2013) Interwar architecture with reinforced concrete structure exposed to multihazard in European context. Intervention in the Romanian and Italian context. LIT Verlag, Münster

    Google Scholar 

  • Bostenaru Dan M (2004) Multi-criteria decision model for retrofitting existing buildings. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 4:485–499

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bostenaru Dan M (2005) Multidisciplinary co-operation in building design according to urbanistic zonification and seismic microzonation. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 5(3):397–411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bostenaru Dan M (2006) Wirtschaftlichkeit und Umsetzbarkeit von Gebäudeverstärkungsmaßnahmen zur Erdbebenertüchtigung. Shaker Verlag, Aachen

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruneau M, Chang SE, Eguchi RT, Lee GC, O’Rourke TD, Reinhorn AM, Shinozuka M, Tierney K, Wallace WA, von Winterfeldt D (2003) A framework to quantitatively assess and enhance the seismic resilience of communities. Earthquake Spectra 19:733–752

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brzev S, Greene M (eds) (2004) World housing encyclopedia summary publication. Earthquake Engineering Reseach Institute, Oakland

    Google Scholar 

  • Caterino N, Iervolino I, Manfredi G, Cosenza E (2006) Multi-criteria decision making for seis-mic retrofitting of an underdesigned rc structure, First European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Geneva, Switzerland, 3–8 Sept 2006

    Google Scholar 

  • Caterino N, Iervolino I, Occhiuzzi A, Manfredi G, Cosenza E (2007) Dissipazione passiva nella selezione dell’intervento di adeguamento sismico di un edificio in c.a. mediante analisi decisionale, L’Ingegneria Sismica in Italia–XII Convegno Nazionale dell’ANIDIS, Pisa, Italy

    Google Scholar 

  • Caterino N, Iervolino I, Manfredi G, Cosenza E (2009) Comparative analysis of multi-criteria decision-making methods for seismic structural retrofitting. Comput Aided Civ Infrastruct Eng 24:432–445

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deleuze G (1980) Mille plateaux. Minuit, Paris, pp 592–625

    Google Scholar 

  • Faccioli E, Paolucci R, Rey J (2004) Displacement spectra for long periods. Earthquake Spectra 20(2):347–376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Federal Emergeny Management Agency (1989) Establishing programs and priorities for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. Handbook FEMA, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Florescu T (2009) Formă şi transformare urbană, Editura Universitară „Ion Mincu”, Bucharest

    Google Scholar 

  • Frampton K (2001) Studies in tectonic culture. The poetics of construction in nineteenth and twentieth century architecture, MIT Press (first edition: 1995)

    Google Scholar 

  • Giovanazzi S, Lagomarsino S (2004) A macroseismic method for the vulnerability assessment of buildings. 13th World conference on earthquake engineering, Vancouver, B.C., Canada, Paper No. 896

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaister S, Pinho R (2003) Period-height relationship for existing european reinforced concrete buildings. J Earthq Eng 7(S1):107–140, 1559-808X

    Google Scholar 

  • Gociman CO (2006) Managementul reducerii riscului la dezastre: strategii de arhitectură şi urbanism. Editura Universitară „Ion Mincu”, Bucharest

    Google Scholar 

  • Goethe JW (1891) Schriften zur Naturwissenschaft – Zur Morphologie

    Google Scholar 

  • Kappos AJ, Dimitrakopoulos EG (2008) Feasibility of pre-earthquake strengthening of buildings based on cost-benefit and life-cycle cost analysis, with the aid of fragility curves. Nat Hazards 45(1):33–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kappos AJ, Stylianidis KC, Pitilakis K (1998) Development of seismic risk scenarios based on a hybrid method of vulnerability assessment. Nat Hazards 17:177–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kappos A, Lekidis V, Panagopoulos G, Sous I, Theodulidis N, Karakostas C, Anastasiadis T, Salonikios T, Margaris B (2007) Analytical estimation of economic loss for buildings in the area struck by the 1999 Athens Earthquake and Comparison with Statistical Repair Costs. Earthquake Spectra 23(2):333–355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lagomarsino S (1998) A new methodology for the post-earthquake investigation of ancient churches. 11th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Balkema, Rotterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Levy JK, Hipel KW, Howard N (2009) Advances in drama theory for managing global hazards and disasters. Part I: theoretical foundation. Group Decis Negot 18(4):303–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynch K (2000) The image of the city. MIT Press, Cambridge MA (27th edition, 1st edition 1960)

    Google Scholar 

  • Mouroux P, Le Brun B (2006a) Presentation of RISK-UE Project, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, From the issue entitled “Special Issue: Earthquake Scenarios for European Cities - The RISK-UE Project (Guest Editors: Robin Spence and Benoît Le Brun)” 4(4):323–339.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mouroux P, Le Brun B (2006b) Risk-UE project: An advanced approach to earthquake risk scenarios with application to different European towns. In: Assessing and managing earthquake risk, geotechnical, geological, and earthquake engineering, Vol 2, V, pp 479-508.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ohmori H, Futai H, Iijima T, Mutoh A, Hasegwa Y (2005) Computational morphogenesis and its application to structural design. Proceedings of international symposium on shell and spatial structures, Bucharest and Poiana Braşov, Romania, pp 13–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Strassert G (1996) Das Abwägung bei multikriteriellen Entscheidungen, Grundlagen und Lösungsansatz – unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Regionalplanung. Peter Lang edition, Frankfurt am Main

    Google Scholar 

  • Penelis GG, Kappos AJ (1997) Earthquake resistant concrete structures. E & FN Spon, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Romano C (2014) Gli edifici del periodo razionalista in Italia: Modello per la valutazione della vulnerabilità sismica. PhD thesis, Sapienzia University, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • Xie YM, Steven GP (1997) Evolutionary structural optimization. Springer, London

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the strategic grant POSDRU/159/1.5/S/133391, Project ‘Doctoral and Post-doctoral programs of excellence for highly qualified human resources training for research in the field of Life sciences, Environment and Earth Science’ cofinanced by the European Social Found within the Sectorial Operational Program Human Resources Development 2007–2013.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. “Ion Mincu” University of Architecture and Urban Planning, 18-20, Academiei Street, 010014, Bucharest, Romania

    Maria Boştenaru Dan

Authors
  1. Maria Boştenaru Dan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maria Boştenaru Dan .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. "Ion Mincu” University of Architecture and Urban Planning, Bucharest, Romania

    Maria Boştenaru Dan

  2. Urban and Landscape Design, "Ion Mincu" University of Architecture and Urban Planning, Bucharest, Romania

    Cerasella Crăciun

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Boştenaru Dan, M. (2016). Limits and Possibilities of Computer Support in Priority Setting for Earthquake Risk Reduction. In: Boştenaru Dan, M., Crăciun, C. (eds) Space and Time Visualisation. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24942-1_16

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation