Systemic Seismic Vulnerability and Risk Analysis of Urban Systems, Lifelines and Infrastructures

Conference paper

Abstract

The basic concepts and some representative results of the work carried out within the European collaborative research project SYNER-G (http://www.syner-g.eu) are presented in this paper. The overall goal is to develop an integrated methodology for systemic seismic vulnerability and risk analysis of urban systems, transportation and utility networks and critical facilities. SYNER-G developed an innovative methodological framework for the assessment of physical as well as socio-economic seismic vulnerability and loss assessment at urban and regional level. The built environment is modeled according to a detailed taxonomy into its components and sub-systems, grouped into the following categories: buildings, transportation and utility networks, and critical facilities. Each category may have several types of components. The framework encompasses in an integrated way all aspects in the chain, from regional hazard to vulnerability assessment of components to the socioeconomic impacts of an earthquake, accounting for relevant uncertainties within an efficient quantitative simulation scheme, and modeling interactions between the multiple component systems in the taxonomy. The prototype software (OOFIMS) together with several complementary tools are implemented in the SYNER-G platform, which provides several pre and postprocessing capabilities. The methodology and software tools are applied and validated in selected sites and systems in urban and regional scale. Representative results of the application in the city of Thessaloniki are presented here.

Keywords

Europe Attenuation Transportation Liquefaction 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    SYNER-G: Systemic Seismic Vulnerability and Risk Analysis for Buildings, Lifeline Networks and Infrastructures Safety Gain. European Collaborative research Project (FP7-ENV-2009- 1-244061) http://www.syner-g.euGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Franchin P. (ed.): Methodology for systemic seismic vulnerability assessment of buildings, infrastructures, networks and socio-economic impacts. SYNER-G Reference Report 1, Publications Office of the European Union, (2013), ISBN 978-92-79-28975-0.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Khazai B. (ed.): Guidelines for the consideration of socio-economic impacts in seismic risk analysis. SYNER-G Reference Report 5, Publications Office of the European Union, (2013), ISBN 978-92-79-28968-2.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Hancilar U., Taucer F. (eds): Guidelines for typology definition of European physical assets for earthquake risk assessment. SYNER-G Reference Report 2, Publications Office of the European Union, (2013), ISBN 978-92-79-28973-6.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Weatherhill G., Crowley H., Pinho R.: D2.12- Efficient intensity measures for components within a number of infrastructures. Deliverable of SYNER-G EC project, (2011), available in www.syner-g.euGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS): HAZUS-MH: Users’ Manual and Technical Manuals. Report prepared for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C, (2004).Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Pitilakis K., Riga E., Anastasiadis A.: Design spectra and amplification factors for Eurocode 8. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 10 (2012), 1377-1400. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    Pitilakis K., Riga E., Anastasiadis A.: New code site classification, amplification factors and normalized response spectra based on a worldwide ground-motion database. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, (2013), doi: 10.1007/s10518-013-9429-4.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Kaynia A.M. (ed.): Guidelines for deriving seismic fragility functions of elements at risk: Buildings, lifelines, transportation networks and critical facilities. SYNER-G Reference Report 4, Publications Office of the European Union, (2013), ISBN 978-92-79-28966-8. Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Gehl P., Desramaut N., Monfort-Climent D., Argyroudis S.: D5.1-Systemic vulnerability and loss for building aggregates in urban scale, Deliverable of SYNER-G EC project, (2011), in www.syner-g.eu. Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Schäfer D., Bosi A. (2013): Systemic seismic vulnerability assessment: Software users manual. SYNER-G Reference Report 7, Publications Office of the European Union, (2013), in press.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Fardis M.N., Papailia A., Tsionis G.: Seismic fragility of RC framed and wall-frame buildings designed to the EN-Eurocodes, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 10 (2012), 1767-1793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    Arvidsson R., Grünthal G. and the SHARE Working Group on the Seismic Source Zone Model: Compilation of existing regional and national seismic source zones, Deliverable of SHARE EC project (2010). Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Akkar S., Bommer J.J.: Empirical equations for the prediction of PGA, PGV and spectral accelerations in Europe, the Mediterranean Region and the Middle East. Seismological Research Letters, 81 (2010), 195-206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    EC8 Eurocode 8: Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance, Brussels, Belgium, European Committee for Standardisation, The European Standard EN 1998–1, (2004).Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Franchin et al.: D2.1- General methodology for systemic vulnerability assessment, Deliverable of SYNER-G EC project, (2011), available in www.syner-g.eu.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Weatherhill G., Crowley H., Pinho R., Franchin P., Cavalieri F. Iervolino I., Esposito S.: D2.13-A review and preliminary application of methodologies for the generation of earthquake scenarios for spatially distributed systems, Deliverable of SYNER-G EC project, (2011), available in www.syner-g.eu. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringAristotle University of ThessalonikiThessalonikiGreece

Personalised recommendations