Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Computational Framework for Systemic Seismic Risk Analysis of Civil Infrastructural Systems

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
SYNER-G: Systemic Seismic Vulnerability and Risk Assessment of Complex Urban, Utility, Lifeline Systems and Critical Facilities

Part of the book series: Geotechnical, Geological and Earthquake Engineering ((GGEE,volume 31))

Abstract

This chapter presents the general framework for systemic analysis of a set of interconnected civil infrastructural systems described in this book. While the relevant following chapters provide details on specific aspects of distributed seismic hazard (Chap. 3), vulnerability of components (the companion book), functional model of each system and their interactions (Chap. 5), and socio-economic impact evaluation (Chap. 4), this chapter focuses mainly on how the overall model has been developed according to the object-oriented paradigm, and on the way uncertainty in all factors is modelled.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    The term ‘Infrastructure’ is a short-hand used in the following for the phrase ‘set of interconnected civil infrastructural systems’, this use being introduced first in (PCCIP 1997).

  2. 2.

    The term ‘program’ is used here after Booch et~al. (2007). The modelling paradigm was born in the computer science community and it is intimately related to software design. This chapter, however, does not describe a software but, rather, the conceptual design of the platform-independent model that can (and indeed has been) implemented in a platform-specific application. This separation between platform-independent conceptual models and platform-specific implementation(s) is typical of the OOP.

  3. 3.

    Figure 2.7 shows also a class not yet developed, included to allow for “generalized ground motion prediction models”, i.e. models that based on the same input of GMPE provide the full one- or multi-component time-series of motion at the site. The class is called GMTS, which stands for Ground Motion Time Series.

  4. 4.

    Crowley and Bommer (2006) were probably the first to point out the need to use GMPEs with separate characterization of inter- and intra-event variability in the analysis of spatially distributed systems.

  5. 5.

    Previous attempts to drastically reduce the number of scenarios to represent the regional seismicity, e.g. Shiraki et~al. (2007), were characterized by a more or less high degree of subjectivity.

  6. 6.

    Kiremidjian et al. (2007) are the first to employ IS to selectively sample in the larger magnitude range.

References

  • Akkar S, Bommer JJ (2010) Empirical equations for the prediction of PGA, PGV and spectral accelerations in Europe, the Mediterranean Region, and the Middle East. Seismol Res Lett 81(2):195–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ALA (American Lifelines Alliance) (2001) Seismic fragility formulations for water systems. Part 1 – Guideline. ASCE-FEMA, Reston, 104 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashby WR (1964) An introduction to cybernetics. Methuen, London

    Google Scholar 

  • ATC (2007) Development of next generation performance-based seismic design procedures for new and existing buildings, Applied Technology Council, report no. ATC-58, Redwood City, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Booch G, Maksimchuk RA, Engle MW, Young BJ, Conallen J, Houston KA (2007) Object-oriented analysis and design with applications, 3rd edn. Addison Wesley, Reading

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang SE, Chamberlin C (2004) Assessing the role of lifeline systems in community disaster resilience, MCEER research progress and accomplishments: 2003–2004, MCEER-04-SP01. MCEER, Buffalo, pp 87–94

    Google Scholar 

  • Crowley H, Bommer JJ (2006) Modelling seismic hazard in earthquake loss models with spatially distributed exposure. Bull Earthq Eng 4(3):249–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Der Kiureghian A (2009) Seismic risk assessment and management of infrastructure systems: re-view and new perspectives. In: Proceedings of the 10th international conference on structural safety and reliability, Osaka, Japan, 13–17 Sept

    Google Scholar 

  • Dueñas-Osorio L, Craig JI, Goodno BJ (2007a) Seismic response of critical interdependent networks. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 36:285–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dueñas-Osorio L, Craig JI, Goodno BJ, Bostrom A (2007b) Interdependent response of net-worked systems. ASCE J Infrastruct Syst 13:185–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FEMA (2003) HAZUSMH MR4 multi-hazard loss estimation methodology – earthquake model – technical manual FEMA and NIBS, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Jayaram N, Baker JW (2010) Efficient sampling and data reduction techniques for probabilistic seismic lifelines assessment. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 39(10):1109–1131

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiremidjian AS, Stergiou E, Lee R (2007) Chapter 19: Issues in seismic risk assessment of transportation networks. In: Earthquake geotechnical engineering. Springer, Berlin, pp 939–964

    Google Scholar 

  • McQueen JB (1967) Some methods for classification and analysis of multivariate observations. In: Proceedings of the 5th Berkeley symposium on mathematical statistics and probability, Berkeley, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen J (2007) Bayesian networks and decision graphs, 2nd edn. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • PCCIP (1997) Critical foundations: protecting America’s infrastructures, report of the President’s Commission on critical infrastructure protection. Available from: http://www.fas.org/sgp/library/pccip.pdf. Last accessed 7 Sept 2011

  • Rubinstein RY (1981) Simulation and Monte Carlo method. Wiley, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sánchez-Silva M, Gómez C (2013) Risk assessment and management of civil infrastructure networks: a systems approach. In: Tesfamariam S, Goda K (eds) Handbook of seismic risk analysis and management of civil infrastructure systems. Woodhead Publishing Limited, Cambridge/Philadelphia. doi:10.1533/9780857098986.4.437

    Google Scholar 

  • Schläpfer M, Kessler T, Kröger W (2008) Reliability analysis of electric power systems using an object-oriented hybrid modeling approach. In: Proceedings of the 16th power systems computation conference, Glasgow, Scotland

    Google Scholar 

  • Shiraki N, Shinozuka M, Moore JE II, Chang SE, Kameda H, Tanaka S (2007) System risk curves: probabilistic performance scenarios for highway networks subject to earthquake damage. J Infrastruct Syst 213(1):43–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Straub D, Bensi M, Der Kiureghian A (2008) Spatial modelling of earthquake hazard and infrastructure performance through Bayesian network. In: Proceedings of the inaugural international conference of the Engineering Mechanics Institute ASCE, Minneapolis MN, USA, 19–21 May 2002

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Structural and Geotechnical Engineering, Sapienza University of Rome, Via Gramsci 53, 00197, Rome, Italy

    Paolo Franchin

Authors
  1. Paolo Franchin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paolo Franchin .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Aristotle University, Thessaloniki, Greece

    K. Pitilakis

  2. Department of Structural and Geotechnical Engineering, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy

    P. Franchin

  3. Geophysical Institute, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany

    B. Khazai

  4. VCE - Vienna Consulting Engineers, Vienna, Austria

    H. Wenzel

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Franchin, P. (2014). A Computational Framework for Systemic Seismic Risk Analysis of Civil Infrastructural Systems. In: Pitilakis, K., Franchin, P., Khazai, B., Wenzel, H. (eds) SYNER-G: Systemic Seismic Vulnerability and Risk Assessment of Complex Urban, Utility, Lifeline Systems and Critical Facilities. Geotechnical, Geological and Earthquake Engineering, vol 31. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8835-9_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation