A Probabilistic Approach to the Evaluation of Seismic Resilience in Road Asset Management

Abstract

Road networks are classified as critical infrastructure systems. Their loss of functionality not only hinders residential and commercial activities, but also compromises evacuation and rescue after disasters. Dealing with risks to key strategic objectives is not new to asset management, and risk management is considered one of the core elements of asset management. Risk analysis has recently focused on understanding and designing strategies for resilience, especially in the case of seismic events that present a significant hazard to highway transportation networks. Following a review of risk and resilience concepts and metrics, an innovative methodology to stochastically assess the economic resources needed to restore damaged infrastructures, one that is a relevant and complementary element within a wider resilience-based framework, is proposed. The original methodology is based on collecting and analyzing ex post reconstruction and hazard data and was calibrated on data measured during the earthquake that struck central Italy in 2016 and collected in the following recovery phase. Although further improvements are needed, the proposed approach can be used effectively by road managers to provide useful information in developing seismic retrofitting plans.

Keywords

Italy / Resilience metrics / Road asset management / Road network resilience / Seismic hazards

References

[1] AASHTO (American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials) LRFD bridge design specifications, 2010 5 Washington, DC: AASHTO

[2] Adjetey-Bahun K, Birregah B, Châtelet E, Planchet JL. A model to quantify the resilience of mass railway transportation systems. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 2016, 153: 1-14

[3] Aydin NY, Duzgun HS, Wenzel F, Heinimann HR. Integration of stress testing with graph theory to assess the resilience of urban road networks under seismic hazards. Natural Hazards, 2018, 91(1): 37-68

[4] Berche B, von Ferber C, Holovatch T, Holovatch Y. Resilience of public transport networks against attacks. The European Physical Journal B, 2009, 71(1): 125-137

[5] Bocchini P, Frangopol DM. Optimal resilience- and cost-based postdisaster intervention prioritization for bridges along a highway segment. Journal of Bridge Engineering, 2012, 17(1): 117-129

[6] D’Apuzzo, M., A. Esposito, A. Evangelisti, R.-L. Spacagna, L. Paolella, and G. Modoni. 2019. Strategies for the assessment of risk induced by seismic liquefaction on road networks. In Proceedings of the 29th European Safety and Reliability Conference, ed. M. Beer, and E. Zio, 1651–1659. Singapore: Research Publishing.

[7] D’Apuzzo M, Evangelisti A, Modoni G, Spacagna R-L, Paolella L, Santilli D, Nicolosi V Gervasi O, Murgante B, Misra S, Garau C, Blečić I, Taniar D, Apduhan BO, Rocha AMAC Simplified approach for liquefaction risk assessment of transportation systems: Preliminary outcomes. Computational science and its applications–ICCSA 2020, 2020, Cham, Switzerland: Springer 130-145

[8] D’Apuzzo, M., A. Evangelisti, V. Nicolosi, A. Rasulo, D. Santilli, and M. Zullo. 2019. Simplified approach for the prioritization of bridge stock seismic retrofitting. In Proceedings of the 29th European Safety and Reliability Conference, ed. M. Beer, and E. Zio, 3277–3284. Singapore: Research Publishing.

[9] EN 1998-1. 2004. Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance–Part 1: General rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings. Brussels: European Committee for Standardization.

[10] Fekete A, Hufschmidt G, Kruse S. Benefits and challenges of resilience and vulnerability for disaster risk management. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2014, 5(1): 3-20

[11] FHWA (Federal Highway Administration). 2014. LRFD seismic analysis and design of bridges: Reference manual. FHWA-NHI-15-004. Washington, DC: FHWA. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/seismic/nhi130093.pdf. Accessed 13 Jan 2022.

[12] Flannery A, Pena MA, Manns J. Resilience in transportation planning, engineering, management, policy, and administration, 2018, Washington, DC: The National Academies Press

[13] ISO 31000. 2018. Risk management—Guidelines. Technical committee: ISO/TC 262 risk management. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization (ISO).

[14] ISO 55001. 2014. Asset management–Management systems—Requirements. Geneva, Switzerland: International Standards for Organisation (ISO).

[15] ISO 55002. 2018. Asset management–Management systems—Guidelines for the application of ISO 55001. Geneva, Switzerland: International Standards for Organisation (ISO).

[16] Keller S, Atzl A. Mapping natural hazard impacts on road infrastructure—the extreme precipitation in Baden-Württemberg, Germany, June 2013. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2014, 5(3): 227-241

[17] Liao T-Y, Hu T-Y, Ko Y-N. A resilience optimization model for transportation networks under disasters. Natural Hazards, 2018, 93(1): 469-489

[18] Luzi L, Puglia R, Russo E, D'Amico M, Felicetta C, Pacor F, Lanzano G, Çeken U The engineering strong-motion database: A platform to access Pan-European accelerometric data. Seismological Research Letters, 2016, 87(4): 987-997

[19] NTC (Norme tecniche per le costruzioni). 2018. Italian regulation. Decreto Ministeriale 17 Gennaio 2018. Aggiornamento delle “Norme tecniche per le costruzioni”. G.U. n.42 del 20 Febbraio 2018 (in Italian).

[20] NZSEE (New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering) Assessment and improvement of the structural performance of buildings in earthquakes: Prioritisation, initial evaluation, detailed assessment, improvement measures: Recommendations of a NZSEE study group on earthquake risk buildings, 2014, Wellington: New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering

[21] Petruzzelli F, Iervolino I. NODE: A large-scale seismic risk prioritization tool for Italy based on nominal structural performance. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 2021, 19(7): 2763-2796

[22] Schintler LA, Kulkarni R, Gorman S, Stough R. Using raster-based GIS and graph theory to analyze complex networks. Networks and Spatial Economics, 2007, 7(4): 301-313

[23] Shabani, A., M. Kioumarsi, and M. Zucconi. 2021. State of the art of simplified analytical methods for seismic vulnerability assessment of unreinforced masonry buildings. Engineering Structures 239: Article 112280.

[24] Testa AC, Furtado MN, Alipour A. Resilience of coastal transportation networks faced with extreme climatic events. Transportation Research Record, 2015, 2532(1): 29-36

[25] Twumasi-Boakye, R., and J.O. Sobanjo. 2018. Resilience of regional transportation networks subjected to hazard-induced bridge damages. Journal of Transportation Engineering, Part A: Systems 144(10): Article 04018062.

[26] Utasse M, Jomelli V, Grancher D, Leone F, Brunstein D, Virmoux C. Territorial accessibility and decision-making structure related to debris flow impacts on roads in the French Alps. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2016, 7(2): 186-197

[27] Vugrin ED, Turnquist MA, Brown NJK. Optimal recovery sequencing for enhanced resilience and service restoration in transportation networks. International Journal of Critical Infrastructures, 2014, 10(3–4): 218-246

[28] Zhou Y, Wang J, Yang H. Resilience of transportation systems: Concepts and comprehensive review. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2019, 20(12): 4262-4276