understanding resilience through a musical analogy
TRANSCRIPT
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Understanding Resilience through a Musical AnalogyRamon Gilsanz, PE, SE, FSEI
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
A Musical Analogy
Earthquake ↔ Music
Soil ↔ Musician
Seismic Spectrum ↔ Score
Building ↔ Instrument
Bldg. Response ↔ Melody
Occupants ↔ Audience
Social Context ↔ Concert Hall
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Soil
Magnitude
Acceleration
Shaking Duration
Frequency
Musician
Dynamics (Loudness)
Tempo (Speed)
Time (Length of Piece)
Musical Pitch
Soil-Musician
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Soil-MusicianTypes of Waves
Bolt, B. (1993) “Earthquakes and Geological Discovery”
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Soil-MusicianTypes of Waves
Atkinson Physics (YouTube)
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
• Density (Granite): 156-168 lbs/sf3
• P-Waves: 19,700 ft/s• S-Waves: 10,800 ft/s
Soil-Musician Solid Rock
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
• Density: 94 lbs/sf3
• P-Waves: 1,310 ft/s• S-Waves: 330 ft/s
Soil-Musician Sand
Rachel Barton Pine
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Soil-Musician
esmes.com
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Soil-Musician Liquefaction
Christchurch, New Zealand, 2011
nzraw.co.nz
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Soil-Musician Liquefaction
Assam, India, 1897
Oldham, R.D. “Report on the great earthquake of 1897”
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Soil-Musician Clay and Silt
Indiana University Southeast
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Soil-Musician
John Hacket (pintrest)
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Soil-Musician Clay and Silt
Bolt, B. (1993)
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
• Measure of energy an earthquake releases
• An increase in magnitudeof 1 is a 32-fold increasein energy released
• Seismic Moment = (Strength of soil) x (Rupture area) x (Fault displacement)
(Adopted by USGS in 2002)
Soil-MusicianMagnitude
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
• Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA)– Maximum acceleration experienced by
a particle at ground level
• Peak Floor Acceleration (PFA)– Maximum acceleration experienced at
a floor level
Soil-MusicianAccelerations
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Seismic Spectrum - Score
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Seismic Spectrum - Score
Adapted from Bolt, B. (1993)
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Building-InstrumentFrequency
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Building-Instrument
emporis.com
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Building-InstrumentResonance
Missouri S&T, Prof. O. Kwon (YouTube)
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Role of the Engineer
• Static Analysis
• Response Spectrum
• Non-linear / Time History(measures duration)
Building-InstrumentWays to Design
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Approximate acceleration experienced by a building, when modeled as a particle on a vertical mass-less rod, with an identical period as the building
Building-InstrumentWays to DesignAcceleration
T
F ~ m x SA
GMS
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Building-InstrumentWays to DesignAcceleration
PERIOD
SA
T
AC
CEL
ERA
TIO
N
SDS
SD1
PGA
GMS
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
NEHRP SDS SD1
2003 0.24 0.0472000 0.28 0.0631997 0.28 0.063
Design accelerations for
Zip Code: 10016Assuming Site Class B
RockStandard Steel building
Ordinary moment frame
Ie =1R = 3.5Ts = 0.195 seconds
Building-InstrumentWays to DesignAcceleration
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
• Approach: Redundant shear wall construction
• Goal: Immediate occupancy
• Downside: High non-structural damage, architectural constraints
Building-InstrumentDesign Approach:Chile
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Building-Instrument Design Approach:Chile
FEMA-350 (2000)
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Building-Instrument Design Approach:Japan
• Approach: Base isolation
• Goal: Immediate occupancy & minimal damage
• Downside: High cost
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Building-Instrument Design Approach:Japan
Photos: GMS
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Building-InstrumentDesign Approach:Japan
Shimizu Corporation
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Building-Instrument Design Approach:United States
• Approach: Energy dissipation through plastic deformations of the structure
• Goal: Cost effective life safety
• Downside: Significant damage to building
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Building-Instrument Design Approach:United States
Photo: GMS
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Building-Instrument Plastic Hinge
FEMA-350 (2000)
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Building-Instrument Plastic Hinge
FEMA-350 (2000)
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Occupants- Audience
Modified Mercalli Earthquake Intensity Scale
imgur.com
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Collapse
Unusable
Usable
Source: CATDAT Damaging Earthquakes Database (via earthquake-report.com)
Building Damage
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Context-Concert Hall
South African National Youth Orchestra
Chrisian Mehlfurer
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
U.S. Approach
Protects the individual…
• 0.5% of all crashes are fatal• 1.07 fatalities per 100 mil VMT
(US DOT NHTSA)
…but cripples the system (city)
(US DOT FHWA)
Bottle-necks
25%Collisions
Badweather
Workzones
Poor SignalOther
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Context-Concert HallLisbon, 1755
Bettman Archives
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Context-Concert HallLisbon, 1755
Voltaire Rousseau
Nature is so cruel…Look at this
devastation in Lisbon!
Nature did not construct twenty thousand houses of six to seven stories there!
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Context-Concert HallSan Francisco, 1906
Wikimedia Commons
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Context-Concert HallSan Francisco, 1906
Over 3,000 deathsTotal damage ~ $350 million
Estimates of % damage due to earthquake:3% - Colonel Francis W. Fitzpatrick, ISBC, 1906.
About 4% - Horace D. Dunn, engineer, 1906.3 to 10% - Architect and Engineer, 1907.
Less than 5% - A.M. Hunt, insurance adjuster, 1925.20% - Professor Karl Steinbrugge, University of CA, 1982.
5% - Professor Stephen Tobriner, University of CA.
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Great Kantō earthquake struck Tokyo at 11:58:44 a.m September 1, 1923
Because the earthquake struck at lunchtime when many people were cooking meals over fire, many people died as a result of the many large fires that broke out
3 hour
6 hour 12 hour
Building Damage
3 hour
Courtesy of Michigan State University
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Context-Concert HallAdditional Effects
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
• How many instruments must breakbefore a performance gets canceled?
• How important are those instruments?
• Not only individual buildings, but the entire neighborhood must be resilient.
• It is important that the neighbor remains standing
Context-Concert Hall
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
• The most vulnerable elements of the cityare most in need of protection.
• 9/11 attack– Economically strong neighborhood– Newer construction– Localized damage– City is not paralyzed
• Hurricane Sandy– Economically weak neighborhoods– Older construction– Widespread damage– More difficult to respond
Context-Concert Hall
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Credits
Staring
Ramon Gilsanz
Supporting Roles
Verónica CedillosDan EschanasyAyse HortacsuSissy Nikolaou
Len Joseph
Produced by
Petr Vancura
2016 International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure
Thank youGilsanz Murray SteficekEngineers and Architects