Abstract
AbstractAcknowledging the devastating consequences of past earthquakes, current research efforts focus on the development of tools for assessing and controlling the risk and losses associated with future earthquakes, in addition to trying to minimize construction costs. Apart from providing a control of these levels, earthquake engineering can also provide solutions to manage the financial implications of the expected hazardous events. The first part of this article focuses on the management of the expected losses through the mechanism of transfer of the financial risk via earthquake insurance. Various insurance models are explained and applied in different case studies, and numerous analyses are performed across Europe, for a benchmark four-storey reinforced-concrete frame building. The results highlight significant variation in the premiums with seismicity, design practices and properties of the insurance model. It is crucial that any mitigation or transfer framework should use probabilistic methods to consider the uncertainties inherent in the hazard and structural response estimates. For example, different studies for the same region often indicate considerable differences in seismic hazard estimates. The uncertainty inherent in the hazard input model is transferred to and affects the results of the structural design and the performance assessment. Thus, the second part of the article investigates the impact of the epistemic uncertainty in the hazard model on the structural design and consequently the estimated future losses and risk levels, again for the benchmark building. First, a comparison is performed between the hazard data from two studies for different locations in Italy, in order to assess the possible range of variation in estimated hazard levels amongst different studies. The effects of these hazard variations on the seismic design and risk and loss metrics for the benchmark building are also investigated for these locations. Finally, a simplified approach for modelling hazard uncertainty is introduced and various sensitivity analyses are performed to investigate the effects of the hazard uncertainty across Europe. It is shown that hazard uncertainty can be of differing importance for the various involved stakeholders.
Funder
University of Strathclyde
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Earth and Planetary Sciences (miscellaneous),Atmospheric Science,Water Science and Technology
Reference39 articles.
1. Belvaux M, Douglas J, Ulrich T (2014) Comparisons between SHARE and current national seismic hazard maps for France. In: Seismic Hazard Harmonization in Europe (SHARE): DGEB-workshop
2. Bommer J, Spence R, Erdik M, Tabuchi S, Aydinoglu N, Booth E, Del Re D, Peterken O (2002) Development of an earthquake loss model for Turkish catastrophe insurance. J Seismolog 6:431–446
3. Bradley BA (2009) Seismic hazard epistemic uncertainty in the San Francisco bay area and its role in performance-based assessment. Earthq Spectra 25(4):733–753
4. CEN (2004a) EN 1992-1-1:2004 Eurocode 2: design of concrete structures—Part 1–1: general rules and rules for buildings. European Committee for Standardization, Brussels
5. CEN (2004b) EN 1998–1:2004 Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance—Part 1: general rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings. European Committee for Standardization, Brussels
Cited by
15 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献