A Rapid Estimation Method for Post-earthquake Building Losses

Abstract

Rapid estimation of post-earthquake building damage and loss is very important in urgent response efforts. The current approach leaves much room for improvement in estimating ground motion and correctly incorporating the uncertainty and spatial correlation of the loss. This study proposed a new approach for rapidly estimating post-earthquake building loss with reasonable accuracy. The proposed method interpolates ground motion based on the observed ground motion using the Ground Motion Prediction Equation (GMPE) as the weight. It samples the building seismic loss quantile considering the spatial loss correlation that is expressed by Gaussian copula, and kriging is applied to reduce the dimension of direct sampling for estimation speed. The proposed approach was validated using three historical earthquake events in Japan with actual loss reports, and was then applied to predict the building loss amount for the March 2022 Fukushima Mw7.3 earthquake. The proposed method has high potential in future emergency efforts such as search, rescue, and evacuation planning.

Keywords

Earthquake building loss estimation / Fukushima earthquake 2022 / Gaussian copula sampling / Japan / Spatial correlation of earthquake losses / Spatial interpolation of ground motion

References

[1] Abbasnejadfard M, Bastami M, Fallah A. Investigation of anisotropic spatial correlations of intra-event residuals of multiple earthquake intensity measures using latent dimensions method. Geophysical Journal International, 2020, 222(2): 1449-1469

[2] Abbasnejadfard M, Bastami M, Fallah A, Garakaninezhad A. Analyzing the effect of anisotropic spatial correlations of earthquake intensity measures on the result of seismic risk and resilience assessment of the portfolio of buildings and infrastructure systems. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 2021, 19(14): 5791-5817

[3] Angus JE. The probability integral transform and related results. SIAM Review, 1994, 36(4): 652-654

[4] Armas I, Toma-Danila D, Ionescu R, Gavris A. Vulnerability to earthquake hazard: Bucharest case study, Romania. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2017, 8(2): 182-195

[5] Bird JF, Bommer JJ. Earthquake losses due to ground failure. Engineering Geology, 2004, 75(2): 147-179

[6] Bora SS, Scherbaum F, Kuehn N, Stafford P, Edwards B. Development of a response spectral ground-motion prediction equation (GMPE) for seismic-hazard analysis from empirical Fourier spectral and duration models. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 2015, 105(4): 2192-2218

[7] Calvi GM, Pinho R, Magenes G, Bommer JJ, Restrepo-Vélez LF, Crowley H. Development of seismic vulnerability assessment methodologies over the past 30 years. ISET Journal of Earthquake Technology, 2006, 43(3): 75-104.

[8] Crowley H, Pinho R, Bommer JJ. A probabilistic displacement-based vulnerability assessment procedure for earthquake loss estimation. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 2004, 2(2): 173-219

[9] Dell’Acqua F, Gamba P. Remote sensing and earthquake damage assessment: Experiences, limits, and perspectives. Proceedings of the IEEE, 2012, 100(10): 2876-2890

[10] Garakaninezhad A, Bastami M. A novel spatial correlation model based on anisotropy of earthquake ground-motion intensity. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 2017, 107(6): 2809-2820

[11] Gatti PL. Probability theory and mathematical statistics for engineers, 2004, Boca Raton: CRC Press

[12] Ghasemof, A., M. Mirtaheri, and R.K. Mohammadi. 2022. Multi-objective optimization for probabilistic performance-based design of buildings using FEMA P-58 methodology. Engineering Structures 254: Article 113856.

[13] GIAJ (Geospatial Information Authority of Japan). 2021. Source fault model for the May 1, 2021 Miyagi-ken-oki earthquake. https://www.gsi.go.jp/cais/topic20210501-index.html. Accessed 3 Oct 2022.

[14] Goda K, Tesfamariam S. Multi-variate seismic demand modelling using copulas: Application to non-ductile reinforced concrete frame in Victoria, Canada. Structural Safety, 2015, 56: 39-51

[15] Gómez Zapata JC, Pittore M, Cotton F, Lilienkamp H, Shinde S, Aguirre P, Santa María H. Epistemic uncertainty of probabilistic building exposure compositions in scenario-based earthquake loss models. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 2022, 20: 2401-2438

[16] Hata Y, Nozu A, Ichii K. A practical method to estimate strong ground motions after an earthquake, based on site amplification and phase characteristics. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 2011, 101(2): 688-700

[17] HAZUS-MH (Hazards U.S. Multi-Hazard). 2022. Multi-hazard loss estimation methodology: Hazus5.1 earthquake model technical manual. Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

[18] Hochrainer-Stigler S, Pflug G, Dieckmann U, Rovenskaya E, Thurner S, Poledna S, Boza G, Linnerooth-Bayer J, Brännström A. Integrating systemic risk and risk analysis using copulas. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2018, 9(4): 561-567

[19] Hosseinpour, V., A. Saeidi, M.J. Nollet, and M. Nastev. 2021. Seismic loss estimation software: a comprehensive review of risk assessment steps, software development and limitations. Engineering Structures 232: Article 111866.

[20] Hu S, Sun B, Wang D. Approach to making empirical earthquake damage matrix. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Dynamics, 2007, 27(6): 46-50 in Chinese

[21] Hu J, Hu L, Zhang H, Jin C, Wang Z, Ding Y. Uncertainty analysis and spatial correlation of ground motion in the Kanto Basin. Japan. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 2022, 26(13): 7056-7072

[22] Imamura, S., and A. Furuta. 2015. A practical method of nation wide Vs30 mapping with 250m grids for developing countries by automated topographical classification and published data in Japan. In Proceedings of the 12th SEGJ International Symposium, 18–20 November 2015, Tokyo, Japan.

[23] Jaiswal K, Wald D, Porter K. A global building inventory for earthquake loss estimation and risk management. Earthquake Spectra, 2010, 26(3): 731-748

[24] Jaiswal, K., and D.J. Wald. 2011. Rapid estimation of the economic consequences of global earthquakes. Reston, VA: US Department of the Interior, US Geological Survey.

[25] JERC (Japan Earthquake Research Committee). 2022. Assessment of the March 16, 2022, earthquake off the coast of Fukushima Prefecture. https://www.static.jishin.go.jp/resource/monthly/2022/20220316_fukushima_1.pdf. Accessed 7 Oct 2022.

[26] Jiang L, Ye J. Quantifying the effects of various uncertainties on seismic risk assessment of CFS structures. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 2020, 18(1): 241-272

[27] Kalakonas P, Silva V. Earthquake scenarios for building portfolios using artificial neural networks: Part II—damage and loss assessment. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 2022

[28] Krausmann E, Cruz AM. Impact of the 11 March 2011, Great East Japan earthquake and tsunami on the chemical industry. Natural Hazards, 2013, 67(2): 811-828

[29] Lallemant D, Kiremidjian A. A beta distribution model for characterizing earthquake damage state distribution. Earthquake Spectra, 2015, 31(3): 1337-1352

[30] Lane, M., and O. Mahul. 2008. Catastrophe risk pricing: An empirical analysis. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 4765. Washington, DC: World Bank.

[31] Paolucci R, Aimar M, Ciancimino A, Dotti M, Foti S, Lanzano G, Mattevi P, Pacor F, Vanini M. Checking the site categorization criteria and amplification factors of the 2021 draft of Eurocode 8 Part 1–1. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 2021, 19(11): 4199-4234

[32] Pnevmatikos, N., F. Konstandakopoulou, and N. Koumoutsos. 2020. Seismic vulnerability assessment and loss estimation in Cephalonia and Ithaca islands, Greece, due to earthquake events: A case study. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 136: Article 106252.

[33] Rohmer J, Douglas J, Bertil D, Monfort D, Sedan O. Weighing the importance of model uncertainty against parameter uncertainty in earthquake loss assessments. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2014, 58: 1-9

[34] Rusanen J, Naukkarinen A, Colpaert A. Square kilometer grid system: An efficient database in rural studies. Geography Research Forum, 1993, 13: 129-138.

[35] Stojadinović Z, Kovačević M, Marinković D, Stojadinović B. Rapid earthquake loss assessment based on machine learning and representative sampling. Earthquake Spectra, 2022, 38(1): 152-177

[36] Tong W, Wang Z, Zhao D, Zhang X. Comparison of vulnerability based on detailed loss data from the March 11, 2011 Japan earthquake. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Dynamics, 2022, 42(3): 171-179 in Chinese

[37] USGS (U.S. Geological Survey). 2022. M7.3-57 km ENE of Namie, Japan 2022. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Fukushima_earthquake . Accessed 9 Oct 2022

[38] Wang Z. A preliminary report on the Great Wenchuan Earthquake. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 2008, 7(2): 225-234

[39] Wang, Z. 2020. Spatial correlation of earthquake loss and its impact on loss aggregation. In Proceedings of the 17th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Paper No. C000089, 27 September–2 October 2021, Sendai, Japan.

[40] Wikipedia. 2021. 2021 Fukushima earthquake. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Fukushima_earthquake. Accessed 15 Oct 2022.

[41] Wikipedia. 2022. 2022 Fukushima earthquake. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Fukushima_earthquake. Accessed 15 Oct 2022.

[42] Yong C, Chen Q.-F., Ling C. Vulnerability analysis in earthquake loss estimate. Natural Hazards, 2001, 23(2): 349-364

[43] Zeng X, Lu X, Yang TY, Xu X. Application of the FEMA-P58 methodology for regional earthquake loss prediction. Natural Hazards, 2016, 83(1): 177-192

[44] Zenkyoren (Japan National Mutual Insurance Federation of Agricultural Cooperatives). 2022. 2022 Annual Report. https://www.ja-kyosai.or.jp/about/annual_report/pdf/2022annual.pdf. Accessed 21 Oct 2022.

[45] Zhang Y, Zheng S, Sun L, Long L, Yang W, Li L. Developing GIS-based earthquake loss model: A case study of Baqiao District. China. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 2021, 19(5): 2045-2079

[46] Zhao JX, Liang X, Jiang F, Xing H, Zhu M, Hou R, Zhang Y, Lan X Ground-motion prediction equations for subduction interface earthquakes in Japan using site class and simple geometric attenuation functions. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 2016, 106(4): 1518-1534

[47] Zhao D, Wang Z, Liu Y, Tong W. Earthquake loss uncertainty based on detailed loss data in New Zealand. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Dynamics, 2021, 41(2): 84-95 in Chinese

[48] Zhou Y, Wang Z, Shi L, Tong W. Spatial correlation of earthquake damage and its influence on earthquake loss distribution estimation. World Earthquake Engineering, 2022, 38(2): 151-159 in Chinese