improving usgs input into hazus & other loss estimation tools
DESCRIPTION
Improving USGS Input into HAZUS & Other Loss Estimation Tools. Nicolas Luco – Research Structural Engineer Erdem Karaca – Mendenhall Postdoctoral Researcher USGS Geologic Hazards Team, Golden, CO. USGS/MAEC Workshop in Memphis, TN October 11, 2006. Presentation Topics. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
U.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological Survey
Improving USGS Input into HAZUS & Other Loss Estimation Tools
Nicolas Luco – Research Structural Engineer
Erdem Karaca – Mendenhall Postdoctoral Researcher
USGS Geologic Hazards Team, Golden, CO
USGS/MAEC Workshop in Memphis, TNOctober 11, 2006
Presentation Topics
1) Improving USGS Input into HAZUSa) USGS-FEMA Plan on Future Opportunities
b) Probabilistic Building Damage & Risk Maps
2) Cost-Benefit Analysis of Earthquake Provisions in Building Codes
3) Prompt Assessment of Global Earthquake for Response (PAGER) – D. Wald & P. Earle
4) An Interactive Web Tool for Quantitative Seismic Risk Assessment of Woodframe Houses (ResRisk-WH)
5) Open-Source Risk Modeling Software ("OpenRisk") – K. Porter & C. Scawthorn
Multi-hazard loss estimation methodology
Earthquake, flood, wind
Default databases
Building inventory, bridge inventory, …
Possible ground motion inputs
Scenario earthquakes, USGS hazard curves, ShakeMaps
Losses
Repair costs, casualties, direct & indirect economic losses
HAZUS - Pros
Integrated earthquake loss estimation methodology
Default databases
Losses for a scenario earthquakes or ground-shaking maps
Various loss measures (repair costs, number of casualties, …)
HAZUS - Cons
Not fully probabilistic (expected scenario/annual losses only)
Computational efficiency (GIS overhead)
Flexibility (not open-source)
Presentation Topics
1) Improving USGS Input into HAZUSa) USGS-FEMA Plan on Future Opportunities
b) Probabilistic Building Damage & Risk Maps
2) Cost-Benefit Analysis of Earthquake Provisions in Building Codes
3) Prompt Assessment of Global Earthquake for Response (PAGER) – D. Wald & P. Earle
4) An Interactive Web Tool for Quantitative Seismic Risk Assessment of Woodframe Houses (ResRisk-WH)
5) Open-Source Risk Modeling Software ("OpenRisk") – K. Porter & C. Scawthorn
1) Improving USGS Input into HAZUS
FY06 & FY07 OMB Recommendation:
Improve earthquake risk estimates by integrating the USGS Geologic Hazards Program seismic monitoring with FEMA hazard loss estimation capabilities.
FY06 Milestones (USGS Response):
Establish USGS-FEMA workgroup to develop joint plan for collaboration
Combine USGS National Seismic Hazard Maps with HAZUS methodology to generate probabilistic loss estimates
Produce prototype HAZUS-formatted ShakeMaps for destructive earthquake scenarios to facilitate generating loss estimates for the scenarios
1) Improving USGS Input into HAZUS
USGS-FEMA Plan on Future Opportunities:
Integration of USGS Seismic Monitoring with HAZUS for Earthquake Response
USGS Ground Motion “Plug-In” for HAZUS
Coordination of USGS/FEMA Earthquake Damage Research (“HAZUS-R”)
Joint Earthquake Risk Publications, Maps, and Associated Products
Example: Regional probabilistic loss distributions (i.e., beyond expected losses)
Regional Probabilistic Loss Distributions: Goal
Exceedance probability curves for total losses to a portfolio/region.
Combination of ground motion hazard, building exposure, and building fragilities.
10-4
10-3
10-2
10-1
100
10-6
10-5
10-4
10-3
10-2
10-1
Loss / Total Value
Ann
ual E
xcee
danc
e F
requ
ency
San Francisco Bay Region
Probabilistic Seismic Loss Analysis (PSLA)
PSHA-analogous methodology described in Wesson, Perkins, and Luco (2006): "Direct Calculation of the Probability Distribution for Earthquake Losses to a Portfolio"
Applications to date:
San Francisco Bay Area Residential Woodframe Losses (Luco et al for 2006 AGU Fall Meeting, manuscript in preparation)
Shelby County & Memphis Metro Bridges (Karaca & Luco for 5th National Seismic Conference on Bridges & Highways)
Next applications will couple USGS hazard information with HAZUS exposure data and "revamped" HAZUS fragilities (described later in presentation)
For each individual building of the exposure, the output of PSHA (i.e., a hazard curve for the site) can be coupled with the building fragility to arrive at its “loss curve”:
If the losses for individual buildings were independent, a combined loss curve could be obtained via a simple convolution, e.g., …
But the losses for individual buildings are not independent, since their sites are shaken by the same earthquake events.
Bottom Line: We can’t simply start from the output of PSHA.
Methodology: Motivation
a
aGMaGMlLPlL ][]|'[]'[ 11
PSHA OutputFragility“Loss Curve”
2
][]|[][ 22222121l
lLPlLlLLPlLLP
indep. were & if ][ 2121 LLllLP ][][ 21 lLPlLP
Recall that Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA) conditions on and sums over “all” potential earthquake events:
For a given "event" (defined below), the losses for individual buildings can be considered independent, and hence, e.g., …
Each “event” is defined here by:
(i) M = magnitude of earthquake
(ii) R = location of earthquake & corresponding distances to sites
(iii) inter = measure of average ground motion relative to other
similar earthquake events (i.e., # of inter’s)
Methodology: Extending PSHA
i
iEventiEventaGMPaGM ][]|[][
]|[]|[]|[ 2121 EventlLPEventlLPEventlLLP
In summary, an exceedance curve for the sum of losses to all buildings in the exposure can be obtained via the following steps:
1) For each potential event, combine the fragility and site hazard for each building to obtain individual loss curves, i.e., …
2) Convolve the individual conditional loss curves to obtain a combined loss curve for each event, e.g., …
3) Sum (with event weights) the loss curves for each event, e.g., …
Methodology: PSLA Summary
a
ii EventaGMPaGMlLPEventlLP ]|[]|[]|[
]|[]|[]|[ 2121 EventlLPEventlLPEventlLLP
i
iEventiEventlLLPlLL ][]|[][ 2121
Fragility Hazard
1) Input on USGS Role in Risk Field
FY05 USGS Venture Capital Fund Project
Proposed “National Seismic Risk Maps”
M. Petersen and N. Luco met with …
FM Global AIR Worldwide Corporation RMS (Risk Management Solutions) ABS Consulting (formerly EQE) CGS (California Geological Survey) CEA (California Earthquake Authority) FEMA & NIBS (with D. Applegate)
1) Input on USGS Role in Risk Field
Stakeholders encouraged …
Research into vulnerabilities and risk analysis, in addition to hazard
Results that they could compare with and/or utilize
Transparent risk calculations for sensitivity studies
Contribution to exposure data (e.g., by USGS Geography)
Evaluations of available vulnerabilities
Analyses for “public” buildings (e.g., homes)
1) Input on USGS Role in Risk Field
Stakeholders discouraged …
Development of risk modeling software
Risk results that become de facto standard (i.e., do be clear about uncertainties/shortcomings of results)
Competition
Stakeholders willing to cooperate, if not collaborate (similar to response to open-source risk-modeling software)
Presentation Topics
1) Improving USGS Input into HAZUSa) USGS-FEMA Plan on Future Opportunities
b) Probabilistic Building Damage & Risk Maps
2) Cost-Benefit Analysis of Earthquake Provisions in Building Codes
3) Prompt Assessment of Global Earthquake for Response (PAGER) – D. Wald & P. Earle
4) An Interactive Web Tool for Quantitative Seismic Risk Assessment of Woodframe Houses (ResRisk-WH)
5) Open-Source Risk Modeling Software ("OpenRisk") – K. Porter & C. Scawthorn
Building Risk Maps
Building risk maps show the mean annual frequencies (MAFs) of exceeding different structural damage states (or losses) for each of the 36 building types in HAZUS designed to 4 different code levels
sa
saSAsaSAdsDSPdsDS |][d|]|[][
(Memphis, TN)
=
Building Risk Maps
Spectral acceleration, PGA, MMI, Inelastic spectral displacement,
Inter-story drift ratio, …
Fragility Curve
P(DS = ds | Sa)
P(DS ≥ ds | Sa)
(Loss | DS = ds)
Vulnerability Curve
P(Loss ≥ loss | Sa)
Example Building Risk Maps
Low Rise Steel Moment Frame Building, Low Code
Example Building Risk Maps
Slight Damage
Example Building Risk Maps
Extensive Damage
Example Building Risk Maps
Low-Code
High-Code
Slight Damage
Building Damage Maps
sa
SA sasafsaSAdsDSPdsDSP d)(]|[][
Building damage maps show the probabilities of different
structural damage states (or losses) for each of the 36 building
types in HAZUS designed to 4 different code levels
Seismic HazardFragility Curve
Example Building Damage Maps: Northridge Eq.
Low Rise Steel Moment Frame Building, Low Code
Example Building Damage Maps
Light Frame Wood Building, Low Code
Presentation Topics
1) Improving USGS Input into HAZUSa) USGS-FEMA Plan on Future Opportunities
b) Probabilistic Building Damage & Risk Maps
2) Cost-Benefit Analysis of Earthquake Provisions in Building Codes
3) Prompt Assessment of Global Earthquake for Response (PAGER) – D. Wald & P. Earle
4) An Interactive Web Tool for Quantitative Seismic Risk Assessment of Woodframe Houses (ResRisk-WH)
5) Open-Source Risk Modeling Software ("OpenRisk") – K. Porter & C. Scawthorn
USGS Mendenhall Postdoctoral Project
“Cost-Benefit Analysis of Earthquake Provisions in Building Codes”
In particular, reduction of losses around New Madrid Seismic Zone via adoption of seismic design maps in International Building Code (IBC)
Involves update of HAZUS fragilities to reflect IBC, and to depend on design ground motion
Also involves revamping of HAZUS fragilities for use in “Probabilistic Seismic Loss Analysis” (Wesson, Perkins & Luco, 2006)
Approach: SBC => IBC
Hazard
Fragility/Vulnerability
Inventory
Loss/Risk
Cost?
Reduced Risk?
HAZUS Building Fragilities
DamageState
Definition
CapacitySpectrumMethod
CapacityCurve
Fragility Curve Input:Inelastic Spectral
Displacement
Revamping HAZUS Fragilities
DamageState
Definition
CapacityCurve
Time History
Analysis
Fragility Curve Input:Elastic Spectral
Acceleration
Revamping HAZUS Fragilities
Revamped HAZUS fragilities are:
1) Based on nonlinear dynamic structural analysis rather than Capacity Spectrum Method.
2) Independent of ground motion variability, which is taken care of in hazard computation.
3) Fully probabilistic with variability in ground motion and building response properly accounted for.
Revamping HAZUS Fragilities
Revamped HAZUS fragilities are (continued):
4) In terms of ground motion parameters for which hazard is typically computed, e.g., Sa(0.3s).
5) Available for a large number of structures (all HAZUS building types and code levels).
6) Can be easily combined with seismic hazard information to …
Evaluate seismic risk, e.g. seismic risk maps.
Estimate losses from a scenario event, e.g. seismic damage maps.
Evaluate building design/mitigation options, e.g. SBC vs IBC design.
Approach: SBC => IBC (Current/Future Work)
Cost
Reduced Risk
Presentation Topics
1) Improving USGS Input into HAZUSa) USGS-FEMA Plan on Future Opportunities
b) Probabilistic Building Damage & Risk Maps
2) Cost-Benefit Analysis of Earthquake Provisions in Building Codes
3) Prompt Assessment of Global Earthquake for Response (PAGER) – D. Wald & P. Earle
4) An Interactive Web Tool for Quantitative Seismic Risk Assessment of Woodframe Houses (ResRisk-WH)
5) Open-Source Risk Modeling Software ("OpenRisk") – K. Porter & C. Scawthorn
Relevant Other USGS Studies/Products: PAGER
Prompt Assessment of Global Earthquakes for Response
is an automated alarm system being developed to rapidly and accurately assess the severity of damage caused by an earthquake and to provide emergency relief organizations, government agencies, and the media with an estimate of the societal impact from the potential catastrophe.
will distribute alarms via pager, mobile phone, and e-mail that will include a concise estimate of the earthquake’s impact.
will also report the earthquake location, magnitude, and depth, an estimate of the number of people exposed to varying levels of shaking, a description of the region’s vulnerability, and a measure of confidence in the system’s impact assessment.
information will be available within minutes of the determination of the earthquakes location and magnitude
Relevant Other USGS Studies/Products: PAGER
Pager Process
1. Ground ShakingEstimate 2. Population
Data
3. Ground Shaking and Exposure
4. Impact Estimate
Presentation Topics
1) Improving USGS Input into HAZUSa) USGS-FEMA Plan on Future Opportunities
b) Probabilistic Building Damage & Risk Maps
2) Cost-Benefit Analysis of Earthquake Provisions in Building Codes
3) Prompt Assessment of Global Earthquake for Response (PAGER) – D. Wald & P. Earle
4) An Interactive Web Tool for Quantitative Seismic Risk Assessment of Woodframe Houses (ResRisk-WH)
5) Open-Source Risk Modeling Software ("OpenRisk") – K. Porter & C. Scawthorn
4) Plan for Residential Risk Web Tool
Ultimate goal: An interactive web tool for quantitative seismic risk assessment of woodframe houses (“ResRisk–WH”)
Phase I plan for FY07 (w/ N. Field & K. Porter)
Java module – Standalone & OpenSHA application
Input: Zip code
Vulnerability relation (dropdown menu)
Output: Loss exceedance probability curve ( including probability of exceeding deductible, expected loss )
Review of IBC Seismic Design Maps
CUREE Small House, Typical QualityCUREE Small House, Braced Cripple WallCUREE Large House, Typical Quality...Wesson et al. Single-Family Home, ShakeMap PGA
Select Vulnerability Relation
Loss Ratio
Loss Exceedance Probability Curve
4) Plan for Residential Risk Web Tool
“Phase II” Plan for Future Work
Supplement available vulnerability relations to adequately represent exposure in Northridge ‘94
Validate/calibrate vulnerability relations using data from Northridge ’94 earthquake
“Phase III” Plan for Future Work
Derive vulnerability relation “on-the-fly” based on user-inputted floor plans
Would result in user-assembled database of vulnerability relations (not tied to an address)
Presentation Topics
1) Improving USGS Input into HAZUSa) USGS-FEMA Plan on Future Opportunities
b) Probabilistic Building Damage & Risk Maps
2) Cost-Benefit Analysis of Earthquake Provisions in Building Codes
3) Prompt Assessment of Global Earthquake for Response (PAGER) – D. Wald & P. Earle
4) An Interactive Web Tool for Quantitative Seismic Risk Assessment of Woodframe Houses (ResRisk-WH)
5) Open-Source Risk Modeling Software ("OpenRisk") – K. Porter & C. Scawthorn
5) "OpenRisk"
Like HAZUS, multi-hazard & freeware Unlike HAZUS, an open-source code base R. Murnane (BBSR-RPI) held a workshop in March
of 2005 (www.open-risk.org) K. Porter & C. Scawthorn (SPA) have …
been funded by SCEC to draft initial plan obtained programming support from Russia
A proposal to further "OpenRisk" is pending with USGS NEHRP External Grants Program
USGS development of ResRisk-WH is contributing to OpenRisk code base (Java)
Presentation Topics
1) Improving USGS Input into HAZUSa) USGS-FEMA Plan on Future Opportunities
b) Probabilistic Building Damage & Risk Maps
2) Cost-Benefit Analysis of Earthquake Provisions in Building Codes
3) Prompt Assessment of Global Earthquake for Response (PAGER) – D. Wald & P. Earle
4) An Interactive Web Tool for Quantitative Seismic Risk Assessment of Woodframe Houses (ResRisk-WH)
5) Open-Source Risk Modeling Software ("OpenRisk") – K. Porter & C. Scawthorn
HAZUS – Example:
Expected Annual Loss (EAL) using USGS PSHMs
Not a true loss exceedance curve
Area under Curve=
EAL
Example: Earthquake Events & GM’s (Hazard)
San Francisco Bay Region
Characteristic and floating earthquake events from USGS Working Group 2002
4 attenuation relations for ground motions
inter based on Lee &
Anderson (BSSA, 2000)
3 different hazard programs used to compute median and dispersion of ground motion for each earthquake event and building site pair
Example: Buildings & Sites (Exposure)
Residential Woodframe Buildings – Inventory from HAZUS
Aggregated at census tract level
Within each census tract, one site per NEHRP site classification
Components of Risk/Loss Analysis
HAZARD
e.g., National Seismic Hazard Maps, ShakeMaps
EXPOSURE
e.g., HAZUS Inventory Data, USGS Geography
FRAGILITY (or VULNERABILITY)
e.g., HAZUS Fragilities, Wesson et al (2004)
RESILIENCY
e.g., Insurance, Cat. Bonds, Emergency Response