A proposed methodology for deriving tsunami fragility functions for buildings using optimum intensity measures

Tsunami fragility curves are statistical models which form a key component of tsunami risk models, as they provide a probabilistic link between a tsunami intensity measure (TIM) and building damage. Existing studies apply different TIMs (e.g. depth, velocity, force etc.) with conflicting recommendations of which to use. This paper presents a rigorous methodology using advanced statistical methods for the selection of the optimal TIM for fragility function derivation for any given dataset. This methodology is demonstrated using a unique, detailed, disaggregated damage dataset from the 2011 Great East Japan earthquake and tsunami (total 67,125 buildings), identifying the optimum TIM for describing observed damage for the case study locations. This paper first presents the proposed methodology, which is broken into three steps: (1) exploratory analysis, (2) statistical model selection and trend analysis and (3) comparison and selection of TIMs. The case study dataset is then presented, and the methodology is then applied to this dataset. In Step 1, exploratory analysis on the case study dataset suggests that fragility curves should be constructed for the sub-categories of engineered (RC and steel) and non-engineered (wood and masonry) construction materials. It is shown that the exclusion of buildings of unknown construction material (common practice in existing studies) may introduce bias in the results; hence, these buildings are estimated as engineered or non-engineered through use of multiple imputation (MI) techniques. In Step 2, a sensitivity analysis of several statistical methods for fragility curve derivation is conducted in order to select multiple statistical models with which to conduct further exploratory analysis and the TIM comparison (to draw conclusions which are non-model-specific). Methods of data aggregation and ordinary least squares parameter estimation (both used in existing studies) are rejected as they are quantitatively shown to reduce fragility curve accuracy and increase uncertainty. Partially ordered probit models and generalised additive models (GAMs) are selected for the TIM comparison of Step 3. In Step 3, fragility curves are then constructed for a number of TIMs, obtained from numerical simulation of the tsunami inundation of the 2011 GEJE. These fragility curves are compared using K-fold cross-validation (KFCV), and it is found that for the case study dataset a force-based measure that considers different flow regimes (indicated by Froude number) proves the most efficient TIM. It is recommended that the methodology proposed in this paper be applied for defining future fragility functions based on optimum TIMs. With the introduction of several concepts novel to the field of fragility assessment (MI, GAMs, KFCV for model optimisation and comparison), this study has significant implications for the future generation of empirical and analytical fragility functions.

[1]  S. Wood Generalized Additive Models: An Introduction with R , 2006 .

[2]  F. Imamura,et al.  Developing Tsunami Fragility Curves from the Surveyed Data of the 2011 Great East Japan Tsunami in Sendai and Ishinomaki Plains , 2012 .

[3]  Kenji Satake,et al.  Time and Space Distribution of Coseismic Slip of the 2011 Tohoku Earthquake as Inferred from Tsunami Waveform Data , 2013 .

[4]  Daniel T. Cox,et al.  Tsunami inundation modeling in constructed environments: A physical and numerical comparison of free-surface elevation, velocity, and momentum flux , 2012 .

[5]  Anne S. Kiremidjian,et al.  Development of empirical and analytical fragility functions using kernel smoothing methods , 2015 .

[6]  Daisuke Sugawara,et al.  A multivariate generalized linear tsunami fragility model for Kesennuma City based on maximum flow depths, velocities and debris impact, with evaluation of predictive accuracy , 2015, Natural Hazards.

[7]  To Lloyd,et al.  An experimental investigation of tsunami forces on coastal structures , 2016 .

[8]  Luis Esteva,et al.  Comparing the adequacy of alternative ground motion intensity measures for the estimation of structural responses , 2004 .

[9]  E. R. Johnson,et al.  Force acting on a square cylinder fixed in a free-surface channel flow , 2014, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[10]  Fumihiko Imamura,et al.  Developing Fragility Functions for Tsunami Damage Estimation Using Numerical Model and Post-Tsunami Data from Banda Aceh, Indonesia , 2009 .

[11]  Stéphane Hans,et al.  First European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology , 2006 .

[12]  Norio Tanaka,et al.  NUMERICAL ANALYSIS CONSIDERING THE EFFECT OF TRAPPING THE FLOATAGE BY COASTAL FORESTS AND FRAGILITY CURVE OF HOUSES , 2015 .

[13]  Fumihiko Imamura,et al.  Fragility Curves Based on Data from the 2011 Tohoku-Oki Tsunami in Ishinomaki City, with Discussion of Parameters Influencing Building Damage , 2015 .

[14]  Susan A. Murphy,et al.  Monographs on statistics and applied probability , 1990 .

[15]  Fumihiko Imamura,et al.  Advanced Tsunami Computation for Urban Regions , 2013 .

[16]  Tiziana Rossetto,et al.  Guidelines for the empirical vulnerability assessment , 2014 .

[17]  F. Imamura,et al.  Building damage characteristics based on surveyed data and fragility curves of the 2011 Great East Japan tsunami , 2012, Natural Hazards.

[18]  Tiziana Rossetto,et al.  Towards the Development of a Method for Generating Analytical Tsunami Fragility Functions , 2014 .

[19]  F. Imamura,et al.  Assessment of tsunami hazards in ports and their impact on marine vessels derived from tsunami models and the observed damage data , 2015, Natural Hazards.

[20]  Fumihiko Imamura,et al.  Damage Characteristic and Field Survey of the 2011 Great East Japan Tsunami in Miyagi Prefecture , 2012 .

[21]  B. Merz,et al.  Is flow velocity a significant parameter in flood damage modelling , 2009 .

[22]  Nicolas Luco,et al.  Structure-Specific Scalar Intensity Measures for Near-Source and Ordinary Earthquake Ground Motions , 2007 .

[23]  R. Tibshirani,et al.  Generalized additive models for medical research , 1986, Statistical methods in medical research.

[24]  Fumihiko Imamura,et al.  Building damage from the 2011 Great East Japan tsunami: quantitative assessment of influential factors , 2014, Natural Hazards.

[25]  Fumihiko Imamura,et al.  Numerical simulation of the 1992 Flores tsunami: Interpretation of tsunami phenomena in northeastern Flores Island and damage at Babi Island , 1995 .

[26]  Richard E. Chandler,et al.  Classical Approaches for Statistical Inference in Model Calibration with Uncertainty , 2014 .

[27]  Isamu Aida,et al.  RELIABILITY OF A TSUNAMI SOURCE MODEL DERIVED FROM FAULT PARAMETERS , 1978 .

[28]  Daniel T. Cox,et al.  TSUNAMI INUNDATION MODELING: SENSITIVITY OF VELOCITY AND MOMENTUM FLUX TO BOTTOM FRICTION WITH APPLICATION TO BUILDING DAMAGE AT SEASIDE, OREGON , 2014 .

[29]  Fumihiko Imamura,et al.  Developing tsunami fragility curves based on the satellite remote sensing and the numerical modeling of the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami in Thailand , 2011 .

[30]  F. Mollaioli,et al.  Preliminary ranking of alternative scalar and vector intensity measures of ground shaking , 2015, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering.

[31]  Fumihiko Imamura,et al.  Empirical fragility assessment of buildings affected by the 2011 Great East Japan tsunami using improved statistical models , 2014, Natural Hazards.

[32]  H. R. Riggs,et al.  Tsunami Bore Forces on Walls , 2011 .

[33]  B. Bradley,et al.  Empirical building fragilities from observed damage in the 2009 South Pacific tsunami , 2011 .