ASCE Infrastructure Resilience Division and Earthquake-Flood Multihazard Impacts on Lifeline Systems Craig A. Davis Ph.D., PE, GE Los Angeles Department of Water and Power Chair, ASCE Infrastructure Resilience Division Towards More Resilient Cities 3rd UC Lifelines Week Critical Infrastructure and Urban Resilience
April 21, 2015
Infrastructure Resilience Division (IRD)
Merging three ASCE units and redirecting towards improving resilience:
Committee on Critical Infrastructure (CCI)
Council on Disaster Risk Management (CDRM)
Technical Council on Lifeline Earthquake Engineering (TCLEE)
IRD Vision Improve the resilience of civil infrastructure and lifeline systems
IRD Mission Serve the civil engineering profession in advancing civil infrastructure and lifeline systems for local, regional, and national resilience against all hazards. All hazards and resilience are defined in ASCE Policy Statement 518
Infrastructure Resilience Division (IRD)
IRD Charge Develop products and services to include but not be limited to standards, guidelines, manuals of practice, journals, webinars, seminars, and conferences to advance resilient practices related to civil infrastructure and lifeline systems recognizing their dependency relationships and using risk and uncertainty principles. Promote and perform investigations, research, policy development, and application of resilience activities by collaborating with ASCE Divisions, Institutes, and Committees
ExCom: Craig Davis (Chair), Marsha Anderson Bomar (Vice Chair), Bilal Ayyub, Forrest Masters, Chris Poland, and Kent Yu
ASCE Staff lead: Catherine Tehan
Why Resilience?
Local
Regional
National
Infrastructure Resilience Division (IRD)
Infrastructure Resilience: Ability to absorb, withstand, and rapidly recover from hazard strikes impacting the local, regional, or national level.
May be large hazard strikes affecting large areas/populations, and/or
Smaller hazard strikes impacting infrastructure supporting larger regions, states, the nation or even at the international level.
Note: infrastructure in this context may be “physical/built” or “soft”
Built: building structures, water networks, transportation systems, etc.
Soft: governmental processes, social infrastructure, economic, etc.
The IRD focuses on built civil infrastructure and lifeline systems and how they interact with other infrastructure systems to support the greater local, regional, and national resilience.
The ability to “absorb” and “rapidly recover” requires the core services from all essential infrastructure systems to be provided to key areas/locations at critical times.
Infrastructure Resilience
Davis, 2014
Infrastructure Resilience
A Poisson process with rate l leading to an incident occurrence Performance “as new” Target
Performance (Q)
Failure event definitions: f1. Brittle f2. Ductile f3. Graceful
f3 f1 f2
r1 r2 r3 r4
Performance after recovery
r5 r6
Recovery event definitions: r1. E. better than new r2. E. as good as new r3. E. better than old r4. E. as good as old r5. As good as old r6. Worse than old E. = Expeditiously
Robustness, i.e., residual performance (Qr) Estimated performance with aging effects
Disruption duration DTd Recovery duration DTr Failure duration DTf Tr = Time to recovery Tf = Time to failure Ti = Time to incident
Not to scale
0
ti
0
Recovery costs
Ayyub, 2013 0
tf
tr
Time Indirect impacts including loss of performance Direct failure impacts
Impacts valuated
Vision for the IRD Infrastructure Systems Resilience Model
... ... ... ... ... ...
Fire
} Severe Storms
Hurricane
Tornado
Tsunami
Climate Change
Flood
Volcanic
Earthquake
Technological
All-Hazard and Multihazard
System
Develop integrated tools and network of supporting resources to enhance civil infrastructure and lifeline systems resilience and ensure proper support to the greater local, regional, and national resilience objectives.
Dependency Relationships Post-Event Investigations Data Collection Policy and Regulation Social Sciences Economics Research and Development Decision Making Education
Potable Water Transportation Solid Waste Management
Performance objectives
All systems of systems
Civil Inf. & Lifeline Systems
Issues effecting resilience
Guidelines & standards
Basic education on how to engineer for resilience
Spatial variations of hazard impacts & efficiently address multiple hazards
Liquid Fuels Natural Gas Inundation Protection Information Technology Electric Power Communications Planning/Preparedness Mitigation Response Recovery Rebuild
Risk & Uncertainty
Apply risk & uncertainty methods for effective use of matrix
}
Cross-Cutting & External Considerations
Wastewater
A EV DV EN ER T SE CY CL E
}
HAZARD Data Collection Policy Social Sciences Research and Development Decision Making Economics Education
Inside each box lye other resilience dimensions and characteristics, examples below. Some dimensions do not exist in all boxes within the matrix (e.g., project lifecycle mostly resides in mitigation and rebuild phases of disaster cycle). Redundancy International Rapidity Federal Resourcefullness State Robustness Regional Adaptation Local
Etc. Each box has a geographc location of impact/use
Project Lifecycle Planning Analysis Design Construct Operate Maintain
Infrastructure Resilience Division (IRD)
IRD organized into committees as follows:
ASCE INFRASTRUCTURE RESILIENCE DIVISION Executive Committee
Natural Hazard Review Journal
Administrative Committees
Three awards: Duke, Lund & Ang Awards Committee Technical Committees
Civil Infrastructure and Lifeline Systems Committee (CILSC) Subcommittees Hazards Communications and Information Technology Systems Electric Power Systems Gas and Liquid Fuel Systems Solid Waste Management Transportation Systems Water, Wastewater, and Inundation Protection Systems Dependency Relationships Critical Facilities
Risk and Resilience Measurements Committee (RRMC) Subcommittees Risk, Uncertainty and Resilience Quantification Performance Objectives Microeconomics of Infrastructure and Community Resilience
Disaster Response and Recovery Committee (DRRC)
Emerging Technologies Committee (ETC)
Subcommittees Response and Recovery Planning Response Capabilities Disaster Investigations
Note: Subcommittees are project/product oriented
Social Science, Policy, Economics, Education, and Decision (SPEED) for Community Resilience Committee Subcommittees Social Science Policy Economics Education Decision Making
Earthquake-Flood Multihazard Impacts on Lifeline Systems An International Collaboration Project
Craig A. Davis Ph.D., PE, GE
Purpose and Goal Step
1 (now): Investigate and document case studies for the on-going multihazard earthquake-flood interaction that is impacting lifeline systems and community wide recovery in:
Christchurch, NZ, following Canterbury earthquake sequence, Tohoku, Japan region follow the magnitude 9.0 Great East Earthquake and Tsunami, and Sichuan, China following 2008 Wenchuan Earthquake
Step
2 (near future): Develop recommendations and guidelines for handling the post-earthquake flood and inundation risks.
Basis of Project Need Recent
earthquakes expose the significant need for investigating earthquake-flood and earthquake-tsunamiflood multihazard interaction
Earthquakes
in New Zealand (2010-2011), Japan (2011), and China (2008) provide an unprecedented data set to document and demonstrate the issues impacting lifeline systems in relation to the multihazard interaction between earthquakes and flooding
Problem No
is not unique to Christchurch, Tohoku, or Sichuan,
significant study or documentation presently exists
International Organizational Structure
United States/ASCE
New Zealand
TCLEE – Project Lead (Craig Davis) Geo-Institute (G-I)
University of Canterbury (Dr. S. Giovinazzi; Dr. D. Hart, & others)
Japan
Japan Society of Civil Engineers TCLEE
Professor Kazuo Konagai of the University of Tokyo
Professor Yasuko Kuwata of Kobe University
Dr. Nagahisa Hirayama, NIES
International Society for Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering (ISSMGE) Technical Committee 303 (TC303) on Floods
Professor Susumu Iai from Kyoto University DPRI
China
Chengdu University of Technology, Geohazard Prevention Key Laboratory Professors Qiang, Tianbin, and Fan
Christchurch, NZ Examples Liquefaction-Induced Flooding and Sedimentation 9/2010, 2/2011, 6/2011, 12, 2011 events Original Ground Surface Final Ground Surface d1 Soil Liquefied From Water Flow (initially unsaturated)
Bexley Feb. 22, 2011 NZ Defence Force
Ferrymead June. 13, 2011 TheEpochTimes, 2011
Settlement
Standing Water (post-liquefaction) Water Flow at critical hydraulic gradient icrit
Ground Water Table (pre-earthquake) d2 Soil Liquefied From Shaking
Bexley Sept. 4, 2010 M. Esslemont
Christchurch, NZ Examples River Stopbank/levee performance
Christchurch, NZ Examples Post-Earthquake Flood events
Flockton March, 2013
Tonkin & Taylor 2014 Avon River at Gayhurst Road March, 2014
Christchurch Monograph Content (DRAFT)
Historical Perspective of Flooding in Christchurch, NZ
Canterbury Earthquake Sequence
Liquefaction Induced Flooding and Sedimentation
Tectonic Deformations and Liquefaction-Induced Ground Settlement
Pre and Post-Earthquake Sequence Flood Risk
Coastal and River City Environment Multihazard Vulnerabilities
Damage and Restoration to River Stopbanks
Shallow Groundwater effects on Flooding
Storm Drainage and Sewage Systems
Lifeline Systems (each with separate chapters)
Post-Liquefaction Sedimentation Effects on Flooding
March 2014 Case Study and other case studies
Policy
Mitigation Alternatives to Reduce Post-Earthquake Flood Risks
Conclusions and Recommendations
Tohoku Region, Japan Examples
Kensen River Subsided 5.5m of 7.5m
Tohoku Region, Japan Examples Tsunami (Overflow and/or Back rush), Courtesy MLIT
Tohoku Region, Japan Examples Sendai Airport Courtesy MLIT
Tohoku Region, Japan Examples
April 17 – 18, 2011
Tohoku Japan Monograph Content (DRAFT)
March 11, 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake
Tectonic Deformations
Damage to Seawall and Barriers and Impacts on Coastal Flooding
Response and Restoration of River Levees
Kitakami River
Storm Drainage and Sewer Systems
Lifeline Systems (each with separate chapters)
Fujinuma Dam Failure
Natural Eco-Systems
Tsunami Sedimentation
Case Studies
Policy
Conclusions and Recommendations
Wenchuan Region, China Examples Landslide Dams and Breach (Fan)
Wenchuan Region, China Examples Beichuan City
before earthquake
after earthquake and mutihazard attacks
Wenchuan Region, China Examples Dams and Levees
Credits: J. Sun, http://peer.berkeley.edu/events/2008/200818-08_WenchuanSeminar/presentations/UC-PGE-short.pdf
Wenchuan Region, China Examples Flooded Power Plant, Lushan Earthquake, 2013
Wenchuan China Monograph Content (DRAFT)
Historical Perspective of Rivers and Flooding in Wenchuan China Region
2008 Wenchuan Earthquake
Earthquake Induced Landslides and Landslide Dams
Post-Landslide Sedimentation Effects on Flooding
Tangjiashan Landslide Dam Case Study
Beichuan and Minyang, China Case Study
River City Environment Multihazard Vulnerabilities
Damage and Restoration to River Levees
Damage and Restoration to Dams
Lifeline Systems (each with separate chapters)
Other Case Studies
Policy
Conclusions and Recommendations
Project Status Drafting New
monographs for each event
Zealand Investigations,
July 2012
December 2013
March 2014
New
Zealand
University Program for Master Students
Significant local involvement
2014 event documentation
Japan
Investigation, June 2013
China
Investigation, October 2013
Proposed Products
3 monographs published by ASCE
Develop case studies and data documentation for
Christchurch, NZ
Tohoku Region, Japan
Sichuan Region, China
Focus more on data documentation and less on analysis
Recommendations and guidelines for engineering use (next phase)
Publish 2017
