HISTORY OF ENGINEERING-BASED EARTHQUAKE CASUALTY MODELING.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Museum Presentation Intermuseum Conservation Association.
Advertisements

Recent Experience in Turkey for Building Vulnerability and Estimating Damage Losses P. Gülkan and A. Yakut Middle East Technical University.
Establishing Basic Parameters: Risk Assessment
1 Comprehensive Disaster Risk Management Framework National Disaster Management Systems 1111 Introduction to Damage and Reconstruction Needs Assessment.
Using Mitigation Planning to Reduce Disaster Losses Karen Helbrecht and Kathleen W. Smith United States: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) May.
Project #4 Energy Dissipation Capacity of a Wood-frame Shear Wall CEE Numerical Analysis.
Presentation on Software Development
A Brief Introduction to Epidemiology - VII (Epidemiologic Research Designs: Demographic, Mortality & Morbidity Studies) Betty C. Jung, RN, MPH, CHES.
Chamaiparn Santikarn, MD., MPH.1Ministry of Public Health, Thailand From Provincial to National: The Development of Thailand Injury Surveillance Chamaiparn.
Assessing Disease Frequency
Prague, March 18, 2005Antonio Emolo1 Seismic Hazard Assessment for a Characteristic Earthquake Scenario: Integrating Probabilistic and Deterministic Approaches.
Slovenian National Building and Civil Engineering Institute
Introduction to the State-Level Mitigation 20/20 TM Software for Management of State-Level Hazard Mitigation Planning and Programming A software program.
Abstract Earthquakes are hazardous to people and the economy. Potential loss impacts include lives, homes, office buildings, manufacturing plants, schools,
FEMA HAZUS Risk Assessment Capabilities Project, SCEC Presentation Damage Estimation for Buildings and Lifelines Brian Kehoe, S.E. Wiss, Janney, Elstner.
Risk Decision Making for Buildings – From Owners to Society Mary Comerio University of California, Berkeley PEER Summative Meeting 13 June 2007.
The use of risk in design: ATC 58 performance assessment procedure Craig D. Comartin.
Modeling Decision Variables: Dollars, Deaths, and Downtime Judith Mitrani-Reiser (JHU) James L. Beck (Caltech) PEER Annual Meeting San Francisco, CA January.
SURFACE FAULT RUPTURE, GROUND SHAKING, GROUND FAILURE (LIQUEFACTION, LANDSLIDES), AFTERSHOCKS.
Use of epidemiologic methods in disaster management Dr AA Abubakar Dept of Community Medicine Ahmadu Bello University Zaria Nigeria.
TRAUMA SYSTEM Mazen S. Zenati, M.D, MPH, Ph.D. University of Pittsburgh Department of Surgery and Epidemiology.
BC Jung A Brief Introduction to Epidemiology - IV ( Overview of Vital Statistics & Demographic Methods) Betty C. Jung, RN, MPH, CHES.
Incident Response Mechanism for Chemical Facilities By Stephen Fortier and Greg Shaw George Washington University, Institute for Crisis, Disaster and Risk.
Gambling Research Think Tank December 7, About NSHRF Speaking the Same Language –Evidence, research and evaluation –Types of gambling research strategies.
Earthquake Loss Estimation
Epidemiology The Basics Only… Adapted with permission from a class presentation developed by Dr. Charles Lynch – University of Iowa, Iowa City.
Risk Management - the process of identifying and controlling hazards to protect the force.  It’s five steps represent a logical thought process from.
Linda Noson AGRA Earth & Environmental (425) Nonstructural Protection Guide for Schools and.
Real World Applications of USGS EQ Science: Stacy Bartoletti Degenkolb Engineers Structural Engineers Association of Washington Cascadia Region Earthquake.
Hospital Preparedness & Epi’s as partners in support of Public Health Preparedness Richard Bartlett, B.S., M.Ed. Emergency Preparedness & Trauma Coordinator.
Adnan Hyder, David Sugerman, Prasanthi Puvanachandra, Junaid Razzak, Hesham El-Sayed, Andres Isaza, Fazlur Rahmang & Margie Peden.
HAZUS-MH is a multi-hazard risk assessment and loss estimation software program developed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). (animate on.
Chris Tokas S.E. Manager, Hospital Seismic Retrofit Program Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development Status of the California Hospital Seismic.
Earthquake Vulnerability and Exposure Analysis Session 2 Mr. James Daniell Risk Analysis Earthquake Risk Analysis 1.
Updating the Guidelines for the Seismic Design of Highway Bridges Status update for the Mid-America Ground Motion Workshop February 2003.
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Natural Hazards Science – Reducing the World’s.
REDUCING DISASTER RISK THROUGH EFFECTIVE USE OF EARTH OBSERVATIONS Helen M. Wood Chair, U.S. Subcommittee on Disaster Reduction August.
Earthquake Risk and the Workplace David Bonowitz, S.E. Chair, SEAONC Existing Buildings Committee Commission on Health and Safety and Workers’ Compensation.
Studying Injuries Using the National Hospital Discharge Survey Marni Hall, Ph.D. Hospital Care Statistics Branch, Division of Health Care Statistics.
Estimation of Future Earthquake Annualized Losses in California B. Rowshandel, M. Reichle, C. Wills, T. Cao, M. Petersen, and J. Davis California Geological.
ALTCI Actuarial Study — Final Results September 14, 2005.
SEISMIC HAZARD. Seismic risk versus seismic hazard Seismic Hazard is the probability of occurrence of a specified level of ground shaking in a specified.
JASON MASTERS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SENIOR ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES - PUBLIC POLICY AND MANAGEMENT.
Overview of the “Recommended LRFD Seismic Design Specifications for Highway Bridges” Ian M. Friedland, P.E. Bridge Technology Engineer Federal Highway.
The Great Southern California ShakeOut November 12-16, 2008 A week of special events to inspire southern Californians to get ready for big earthquakes.
Irina Vasilyeva, Moscow, Russia Russian National Research Medical University Clinical and Research Institute of Emergency Children’s Surgery and Trauma.
Health Emergency Risk Management Pir Mohammad Paya MD, MPH,DCBHD Senior Technical Specialist Public Health in Emergencies Asian Disaster Preparedness Center.
Villanova University Dept. of Civil & Environmental Engineering CEE 3704 Statistical and Numerical Analysis 1 Group Project #2 Energy Dissipation Capacity.
Older People’s Services The Single Assessment Process.
WHAT CONTRIBUTES TO THE BUILDING OF RESILIENT COMMUNITIES?: INTEGRATION OF KNOWLEDGE, RISK PERCEPTION, AND AWARENESS OF SOCIAL VULNERABILITY Pamela McMullin-Messier.
MAGNITUDE 6.7 EARTHQUAKE STRIKES CENTRAL JAPAN Saturday, November 22, 2014 Walter Hays, Global Alliance for Disaster Reduction, Vienna, Virginia, USA.
The Spatial Patterns Of Earthquake Casualties (Damages) And Social Vulnerability Zahra Golshani Natural Resource & Environmental Science University of.
ICE Collaboration with EU Anne Mette T. Johansen & Birthe Frimodt-Møller Denmark International Collaborative Effort on Injury Statistics May.
PEER 2003 Meeting 03/08/031 Interdisciplinary Framework Major focus areas Structural Representation Fault Systems Earthquake Source Physics Ground Motions.
2010 State Trauma Update Kansas Medical Society Paul B. Harrison, MD FACS Chair, Advisory Committee on Trauma.
1 Disaster epidemiology Professor Vilius Grabauskas Kaunas University of Medicine, Kaunas, Lithuania NATO supported advanced research workshop, Kaunas,
1 USDA Forest Service Hurricane Preparedness Data Sets Developed Southern Wildland Fire Risk Assessment GIS data sets for use during emergency response.
Risk Assessment: A Practical Guide to Assessing Operational Risk
Table 1. Methodological Evaluation of Observational Research (MORE) – observational studies of incidence or prevalence of chronic diseases Tatyana Shamliyan.
QuakeCore Alpine Fault case study
Workers’ Compensation Loss Estimation due to Earthquakes and Terrorism
Quantitative Risk Assessment
Effect of Earthquake on Fire Protection Systems
The Problem with KSI: Using Trauma Data to Analyse Injury Severity
VII. Earthquake Mitigation
Earthquake and Tsunami Program Governor’s Office of Emergency Services
Dr. Praveen K. Malhotra, P.E.
Concepts of Nursing NUR 212
Component 11 Unit 7: Building Order Sets
Presentation transcript:

HISTORY OF ENGINEERING-BASED EARTHQUAKE CASUALTY MODELING

Research Participants & Sponsor Hope A. Seligson, Kimberley I. Shoaf, Corinne Peek-Asa, And Maya Mahue- Giangreco Support for this research was provided by National Science Foundation Grant Numbers CMS and CMS

Definitions Engineering-based earthquake casualty models predict building damage-related casualties (and in some cases, other types of casualties). These models have typically been developed by engineers from limited anecdotal, historical data (not from epidemiological studies, nor involving health-related researchers). These models are typically used for emergency response, planning and mitigation by government agencies at various levels, but are less useful for health preparedness planning.

1970’s: NOAA Scenarios NOAA published scenarios in 1972 (SF Bay area) and 1973 (LA area) that estimated building-related casualties. Tabulated aggregate damage and casualty statistics for historic earthquakes. Used generalized casualty rates per 100,000 population based on previous earthquakes. “Mystery” ratios of 4:1 serious injuries (i.e., requiring hospitalization) to deaths and 30:1 minor injuries to deaths. Included estimates for sidewalk deaths and freeway collapse. The final results were judgment-based, scenario specific casualty estimates, rather than a broadly applicable casualty estimation methodology

1980’s: ATC-13 and Expert Opinion In 1985, the Applied Technology Council (ATC-13) took a more comprehensive look at estimating building damage for classes of structures using expert opinion. Percent damage and damage state for 17 structural classes are estimated from Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI), similar to earlier work by Whitman, et. al (1974). Mean casualty rates associated with damage states, were applied to the exposed population. Rates based on historic EQs, previous models and “judgmental evaluation” “Mystery” ratios still in use.

ATC-13 Casualty Rates Note: for light steel and wood-frame construction, multiply all numerators by 0.1

1990’s: “State of the Art” Computer Models - HAZUS (NIBS/FEMA) Uses advanced ground motion parameters and detailed engineering analyses to determine building damage states and associated damage state probabilities. Represents a significant advance in the automated application of loss estimation techniques. Indoor and outdoor casualty rates by damage state and model building type, based on ATC-13 and “limited historical data” for 4 injury severity levels: »Injuries requiring basic medical aid »Hospitalized »Life threatening Injuries »Deaths

HAZUS® Earthquake Loss Estimation Methodology - Indoor Casualty Rates (HAZUS®99, SR-2) Notes: URM = unreinforced masonry, LRWF = low-rise wood frame, HR URMI = high rise steel or concrete frame structures with URM Infill walls, MH = mobile home, SLF = steel, light frame, HR PC = high rise precast concrete structures

More “State of the Art” Computer Models: EPEDAT EPEDAT (Early Post-Earthquake Damage Assessment Tool) was developed by ABS Consulting/ EQE International for the CA Office of Emergency Services. It is a GIS-based program designed to produce regional damage and casualty estimates for emergency response and planning purposes. For casualty models, Beta distribution applied to ATC-13 and Whitman casualty rates to distribute casualties within range of potential damage in each damage state (i.e., more injuries with more damage in a given damage state).

Current Research: Earthquake Data and Opportunities for Improvement NSF (and other funding) allowed researchers (inter-disciplinary team from UCLA, LA County DHS, and ABS/EQE) to collect and correlate data from the Northridge and other earthquakes: building characteristics and damage data coroner’s data hospital admission data ED logs Survey data on damage and injuries Research goal: capitalize on the high-quality data to improve the way engineering-based models estimate building-related casualties, and make the results more meaningful to health care providers.

Application of Northridge Data Comparison of model prediction to actual Northridge data to develop “after-market” modifications that make results more useful to medical community. Translates estimates of “Injuries” and “Deaths” to: –Fatalities (non-hospital, i.e., DOA) –Fatalities requiring hospital care (i.e., ICU) –Trauma cases –Non-Trauma Hospital Admissions –ED Treat & Release –Out of Hospital Treatment

Refinements to EPEDAT’s casualty models for injury planning and response

Additional Research Products A literature review of the medical, epidemiological, public health, and engineering literature. See: Development of a standardized classification scheme for all aspects of earthquake-related casualties (e.g., injury mechanism, building damage). See: An integrated review of available casualty and damage data (e.g., Northridge, Kobe, Nisqually EQs) classified according to the new classification scheme - in progress.

Conclusions Engineering-based casualty models allow for rapid estimation of regional population impacts for response, planning and mitigation purposes. While many advances have been made in the area of loss estimation, casualty modeling has not received the attention dedicated to the development of other model components. Future enhancement of the such models will benefit greatly from coordinated data collection and analysis, as well as inter-disciplinary research incorporating medical and public health perspectives. This integrated approach will facilitate the use of data from recent and future events to refine engineering-based casualty models.

Standardized Classification Scheme for Earthquake-Related Injuries

Purpose of Standardized Classification Scheme To establish a systematic, multi-disciplinary and collaborative approach to the study of risk assessment, loss estimation for earthquakes To create a common language to define the event, the victims and responses for any given earthquake Reduce variability of data for reported deaths and injuries

Components of Classification Scheme Individual Level Building Level Hazard Level DemographicsBuilding Description Earthquake Source InjuryBuilding Damage Local Site Hazard Location Activity

Use of Existing Measures Abbreviated Injury Score International Classification of Diseases, 9 th. Revision ATC 20

Hazard Level Variables Earthquake Source –Earthquake Name –Event Number or ID –Magnitude –Magnitude Scale –Date –Time –Day of Week –Earthquake Location –Rupture Length –Rupture Area –Presence of Surface Rupture –Deepest Point of Rupture –Shallowest Point of Rupture –Fault Source Local Site Hazard –Earthquake ground motion –Local Site Conditions

Building Level Variables Building Description –Structural System –Building Height –Building Size –Building Year –Seismic Design Quality –Debris Generation Potential –Occupancy Type –Estimated Occupancy –Actual Occupancy Building Damage –Building Safety Inspection Status –Safety Tag –Dollar Damage –Damage Percent –Damage State –Building Collapse

Individual Level Variables Demographics –Age –Gender –Race/Ethnicity –Level of Education –Occupation –Income –Disabilities and Pre- existing Conditions Injury Characteristics –Cause of Injury Relation of EQ Structural Relatedness Secondary Hazards Injury Mechanisms –Injury Severity –Treatment Level of Treatment Immediacy –Diagnoses –Costs Direct Medical Care Costs Indirect Costs

Individual Level Variables, cont. Location –Injured individual’s physical location –Injured individual’s geographic location Activity –Starting position –Activity