A physical approach on flood risk vulnerability of buildings

The design of efficient hydrological risk mitigation strategies and their subsequent implementation relies on a careful vulnerability analysis of the elements exposed. Recently, extensive research efforts were undertaken to develop and refine empirical relationships linking the structural vulnerability of buildings to the impact forces of the hazard processes. These empirical vulnerability functions allow estimating the expected direct losses as a result of the hazard scenario based on spatially explicit representation of the process patterns and the elements at risk classified into defined typological categories. However, due to the underlying empiricism of such vulnerability functions, the physics of the damage-generating mechanisms for a well-defined element at risk with its peculiar geometry and structural characteristics remain unveiled, and, as such, the applicability of the empirical approach for planning hazard-proof residential buildings is limited. Therefore, we propose a conceptual assessment scheme to close this gap. This assessment scheme encompasses distinct analytical steps: modelling (a) the process intensity, (b) the impact on the element at risk exposed and (c) the physical response of the building envelope. Furthermore, these results provide the input data for the subsequent damage evaluation and economic damage valuation. This dynamic assessment supports all relevant planning activities with respect to a minimisation of losses, and can be implemented in the operational risk assessment procedure.

[1]  S. Cutter,et al.  Temporal and spatial changes in social vulnerability to natural hazards , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[2]  Olav Slaymaker,et al.  The distinctive attributes of debris torrents , 1988 .

[3]  Margreth Keiler,et al.  Challenges of analyzing multi-hazard risk: a review , 2012, Natural Hazards.

[4]  M. Jakob,et al.  Vulnerability of buildings to debris flow impact , 2011, Natural Hazards.

[5]  T. Glade,et al.  Physical vulnerability assessment for alpine hazards: state of the art and future needs , 2011 .

[6]  Hans Kienholz,et al.  Aspects of integral risk management in practice: Considerations with respect to mountain hazards in Switzerland , 2004 .

[7]  Jörn Birkmann,et al.  Vulnerability assessment in natural hazard and risk analysis: current approaches and future challenges , 2012, Natural Hazards.

[8]  Long Le,et al.  A two-fluid model for avalanche and debris flows , 2005, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[9]  O. C. Zienkiewicz,et al.  The Finite Element Method: Its Basis and Fundamentals , 2005 .

[10]  Bruno Mazzorana,et al.  Towards dynamics in flood risk assessment , 2012 .

[11]  Aronne Armanini,et al.  Two-dimensional simulation of debris flows in erodible channels , 2009, Comput. Geosci..

[12]  M. L. Carreño,et al.  Framing vulnerability, risk and societal responses: the MOVE framework , 2013, Natural Hazards.

[13]  Thomas C. Pierson,et al.  A rheologic classification of subaerial sediment-water flows , 1987 .

[14]  Luigi Fraccarollo,et al.  A well-balanced approach for flows over mobile-bed with high sediment-transport , 2006, J. Comput. Phys..

[15]  H. Gulvanessian,et al.  Designers' guide to Eurocode : basis of structural design EN 1990 , 2012 .

[16]  Bruno Mazzorana,et al.  Physical Vulnerability Assessment Based on Fluid and Classical Mechanics to Support Cost-Benefit Analysis of Flood Risk Mitigation Strategies , 2012 .

[17]  Prospect Theory by Peter P. Wakker , 2010 .

[18]  R. Iverson,et al.  U. S. Geological Survey , 1967, Radiocarbon.

[19]  Gabi Hufschmidt,et al.  A comparative analysis of several vulnerability concepts , 2011 .

[20]  M. Holub,et al.  Benefits Of Local Structural Protection ToMitigate Torrent-related Hazards , 2008 .

[21]  M. Jakob Events on Fans and Cones: Recurrence Interval and Magnitude , 2013 .

[22]  Giacomo Bertoldi,et al.  The geomorphic structure of the runoff peak , 2011 .

[23]  Sven Fuchs,et al.  Spatial scan statistics in vulnerability assessment: an application to mountain hazards , 2012, Natural Hazards.

[24]  Sven Fuchs,et al.  A quantitative vulnerability function for fluvial sediment transport , 2011 .

[25]  Visiting Professor Haig Gulvanessian Prof. EN 1990 Eurocode “Basis of structural design” – the innovative head Eurocode , 2009 .

[26]  Markus Holub,et al.  Mitigating mountain hazards in Austria – legislation, risk transfer, and awareness building , 2009 .

[27]  The effects of large wood elements during an extreme flood in a small tropical basin of Costa Rica , 2010 .

[28]  B Mazzorana,et al.  Developing consistent scenarios to assess flood hazards in mountain streams. , 2012, Journal of environmental management.

[29]  Haig Gulvanessian EN 1990 Eurocode “Basis of structural design” – the innovative head Eurocode , 2009 .

[30]  Sven Fuchs,et al.  Mountain hazards: reducing vulnerability by adapted building design , 2012, Environmental Earth Sciences.

[31]  P. Wakker Prospect Theory: For Risk and Ambiguity , 2010 .

[32]  C. J. van Westen,et al.  The application of numerical debris flow modelling for the generation of physical vulnerability curves , 2011 .

[33]  Susan L. Cutter,et al.  When do losses count? Six fallacies of natural hazards loss data. , 2009 .

[34]  P. Wakker Prospect Theory: Frontmatter , 2010 .

[35]  J. Hübl,et al.  Towards an empirical vulnerability function for use in debris flow risk assessment , 2007 .

[36]  M. Keiler,et al.  Assessing physical vulnerability for multi-hazards using an indicator-based methodology , 2012 .

[37]  W. Z. Savage,et al.  Guidelines for landslide susceptibility, hazard and risk zoning for land-use planning , 2008 .

[38]  Bruno Mazzorana,et al.  A structured approach to enhance flood hazard assessment in mountain streams , 2013, Natural Hazards.

[39]  Sven Fuchs,et al.  Spatiotemporal dynamics: the need for an innovative approach in mountain hazard risk management , 2013, Natural Hazards.

[40]  T. Glade,et al.  Improvement of vulnerability curves using data from extreme events: debris flow event in South Tyrol , 2012, Natural Hazards.

[41]  Lorenzo Marchi,et al.  Large Wood And Flash Floods: Evidence From The2007 Event In The Davča Basin (Slovenia) , 2008 .

[42]  Sven Fuchs,et al.  Fuzzy Formative Scenario Analysis for woody material transport related risks in mountain torrents , 2010, Environ. Model. Softw..

[43]  Giorgio Rosatti,et al.  Two-dimensional simulation of debris flows over mobile bed: Enhancing the TRENT2D model by using a well-balanced Generalized Roe-type solver , 2013 .

[44]  Sven Fuchs,et al.  Susceptibility versus resilience to mountain hazards in Austria - paradigms of vulnerability revisited , 2009 .

[45]  D. Dinkler,et al.  Fluid-structure coupling within a monolithic model involving free surface flows , 2005 .

[46]  F. Comiti,et al.  Determining flood hazard patterns through a combined stochastic–deterministic approach , 2011 .

[47]  A. Armanini,et al.  Dynamic impact of a debris flow front against a vertical wall , 2011 .

[48]  Sven Fuchs,et al.  Mountain torrents: Quantifying vulnerability and assessing uncertainties , 2013, Engineering geology.