Earthquake damage estimation systems: Literature review

K.A.R.V.D. Kahandawaa, N.D. Domingo, Kenneth Sungho Park, S.R. Uma

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

Abstract

Earthquake is an unpredictable natural phenomenon that create a vast amount of damage, affecting communities and their environment. To reduce the effects of such hazards, frameworks like building resilience have emerged. These frameworks target
on increasing recovery after such disaster, by introducing new designs, technologies, and components to the building. To calculate the value of such improvements, use of loss estimation systems are essential. This paper compares and contrasts two most widely adopted loss assessment tools available, namely PACT and SLAT. Comparison of these tools mainly focuses on the consequence functions of the two methods. Recommendations are suggested to improve and complement these tools in future use.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationProcedia Engineering
PublisherElsevier
Pages622
Number of pages628
Volume212
ISBN (Print)1877-7058
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 22 Feb 2018

Fingerprint

Earthquakes
Disasters
Hazards
Recovery

Bibliographical note

© 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

Keywords

  • Earthquake
  • Cost estimation
  • Time estimation
  • Consequence functions

Cite this

Kahandawaa, K. A. R. V. D., Domingo, N. D., Park, K. S., & Uma, S. R. (2018). Earthquake damage estimation systems: Literature review. In Procedia Engineering (Vol. 212, pp. 622). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2018.01.080
Kahandawaa, K.A.R.V.D. ; Domingo, N.D. ; Park, Kenneth Sungho ; Uma, S.R. / Earthquake damage estimation systems: Literature review. Procedia Engineering. Vol. 212 Elsevier, 2018. pp. 622
@inproceedings{a1bf5c8dc1d5451f97c83bbd742c5eb5,
title = "Earthquake damage estimation systems: Literature review",
abstract = "Earthquake is an unpredictable natural phenomenon that create a vast amount of damage, affecting communities and their environment. To reduce the effects of such hazards, frameworks like building resilience have emerged. These frameworks targeton increasing recovery after such disaster, by introducing new designs, technologies, and components to the building. To calculate the value of such improvements, use of loss estimation systems are essential. This paper compares and contrasts two most widely adopted loss assessment tools available, namely PACT and SLAT. Comparison of these tools mainly focuses on the consequence functions of the two methods. Recommendations are suggested to improve and complement these tools in future use.",
keywords = "Earthquake, Cost estimation, Time estimation, Consequence functions",
author = "K.A.R.V.D. Kahandawaa and N.D. Domingo and Park, {Kenneth Sungho} and S.R. Uma",
note = "{\circledC} 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)",
year = "2018",
month = "2",
day = "22",
doi = "10.1016/j.proeng.2018.01.080",
language = "English",
isbn = "1877-7058",
volume = "212",
pages = "622",
booktitle = "Procedia Engineering",
publisher = "Elsevier",
address = "Netherlands",

}

Kahandawaa, KARVD, Domingo, ND, Park, KS & Uma, SR 2018, Earthquake damage estimation systems: Literature review. in Procedia Engineering. vol. 212, Elsevier, pp. 622. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2018.01.080

Earthquake damage estimation systems: Literature review. / Kahandawaa, K.A.R.V.D.; Domingo, N.D.; Park, Kenneth Sungho; Uma, S.R.

Procedia Engineering. Vol. 212 Elsevier, 2018. p. 622.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

TY - GEN

T1 - Earthquake damage estimation systems: Literature review

AU - Kahandawaa, K.A.R.V.D.

AU - Domingo, N.D.

AU - Park, Kenneth Sungho

AU - Uma, S.R.

N1 - © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

PY - 2018/2/22

Y1 - 2018/2/22

N2 - Earthquake is an unpredictable natural phenomenon that create a vast amount of damage, affecting communities and their environment. To reduce the effects of such hazards, frameworks like building resilience have emerged. These frameworks targeton increasing recovery after such disaster, by introducing new designs, technologies, and components to the building. To calculate the value of such improvements, use of loss estimation systems are essential. This paper compares and contrasts two most widely adopted loss assessment tools available, namely PACT and SLAT. Comparison of these tools mainly focuses on the consequence functions of the two methods. Recommendations are suggested to improve and complement these tools in future use.

AB - Earthquake is an unpredictable natural phenomenon that create a vast amount of damage, affecting communities and their environment. To reduce the effects of such hazards, frameworks like building resilience have emerged. These frameworks targeton increasing recovery after such disaster, by introducing new designs, technologies, and components to the building. To calculate the value of such improvements, use of loss estimation systems are essential. This paper compares and contrasts two most widely adopted loss assessment tools available, namely PACT and SLAT. Comparison of these tools mainly focuses on the consequence functions of the two methods. Recommendations are suggested to improve and complement these tools in future use.

KW - Earthquake

KW - Cost estimation

KW - Time estimation

KW - Consequence functions

UR - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877705818300985

U2 - 10.1016/j.proeng.2018.01.080

DO - 10.1016/j.proeng.2018.01.080

M3 - Conference contribution

SN - 1877-7058

VL - 212

SP - 622

BT - Procedia Engineering

PB - Elsevier

ER -

Kahandawaa KARVD, Domingo ND, Park KS, Uma SR. Earthquake damage estimation systems: Literature review. In Procedia Engineering. Vol. 212. Elsevier. 2018. p. 622 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2018.01.080