Abstract
Most earthquake loss estimation models follow a modular process (e.g., US Geological Survey’s (USGS) PAGER semi-empirical, LNEC-Loss, and SELENA), similar to the one described in Fig. 2.1 where estimated ground motion parameters, in this case taken from USGS ShakeMaps are fed into the population exposure and building inventories of the affected region. The probabilities of collapse are described by a set of vulnerability functions for particular building types for a specific location, and fatality estimates are then derived from the estimated proportion of collapses. The model will then produce loss estimates, whether in terms of numbers of building damage, human casualties or economic losses.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Coburn AW, Spence RJS (2002) Earthquake protection, 2nd edn. Wiley, Chichester, p 436
Coburn AW, Spence RJS, Pomonis A. (1992) Factors determining casualty levels in earthquakes: mortality prediction in building collapse, In: Proceedings of the 10th world conference of earthquake engineering, Madrid, Spain, 19–25 July, 1992
EEFIT (Earthquake Engineering Field Investigation Team) (2009) The L’Aquila, Italy Earthquake of 6 April 2009: a field report by EEFIT: earthquake engineering field investigation team, Institution of Structural Engineers, London
Foulser-Piggott R. (2014) 2009 L’Aquila Italy: geoarchive photgraphic study (CAR) – Location 96, EEPI Map, Cambridge Architectural Research Ltd. http://snapandmap.com/photo/13312
Galetzka J, Melgar D, Genrich JF et al. (2015) Slip pulse and resonance of the Kathmandu basin during the 2015 Gorkha earthquake, Nepal. Science 349(6252):1091–1095. doi:10.1126/science.aac6383
Jaiswal K, Wald DJ, Hearne M (2009) Estimating casualties for large earthquakes worldwide using an empirical approach: US geological survey open-file report, 2009–1136, 83 p. http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2009/1136/
Marano KD, Wald DJ, Allen TI (2009) Global earthquake casualties due to secondary effects: a quantitative analysis for improving rapid loss analyses. Nat. Hazards 49. doi:10.1007/s11069-009-9372-5
NIBS-FEMA (National Institute of Building Sciences-Federal Emergency Management Agency) (2006) HAZUS-MH MR2 Technical Manual
Okada S, Takai N (2000) Classifications of structural types and damage patterns of buildings for earthquake field investigation. In: Proceedings of the 12th world conference on earthquake engineering, Auckland, New Zealand, 30 January–4 February, 2000–6, 2004. Paper No. 705
Pomonis A (2011) Director, Cambridge Architectural Research Ltd
Schweier C, Markus M (2006) Classification of collapsed buildings for fast damage and loss assessment. Bull Earthq Eng 4(2):177–192
So EKM (2009) The assessment of casualties for earthquake loss estimation: Cambridge, University of Cambridge, PhD dissertation
Yong P, Yu J (2008) Wenchaun Reconnaissance Report #2, NZSEE, Wellington, New Zealand. http://www.nzsee.org.nz/projects/past-earthquakes/2008-wenchuan-earthquake/wenchuan-reconnaissance-report-2/
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
So, E. (2016). Main Assumptions of the Assignment Process. In: Estimating Fatality Rates for Earthquake Loss Models. SpringerBriefs in Earth Sciences. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26838-5_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26838-5_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-26837-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-26838-5
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)