seismic risk mitigation for port systemsa seismic risk mitigation framework that uses the...
TRANSCRIPT
The George E. Brown, Jr. Network for
Earthquake Engineering Simulation Glenn J. Rix
Reginald DesRochesAnn BostromAlan EreraGeorgia Institute of Technology
Stuart WernerSeismic Systems & Engineering Consu
Glenn J. RixReginald DesRochesAnn BostromAlan EreraGeorgia Institute of Technology
Stuart WernerSeismic Systems & Engineering Consu
Seismic Risk Mitigation for Port Systems
Seismic Risk Mitigation for Port Systems
2
SeattleSeattle
OaklandOakland
Los AngelesLos AngelesLong BeachLong Beach
New OrleansNew Orleans
HoustonHouston SavannahSavannahCharlestonCharleston
NorfolkNorfolkBaltimoreBaltimore
New YorkNew York
Seismic HazardSeismic Hazard
3
Current PracticeCurrent Practice
•Vaguely defined performance requirements
–e.g., “minimal” damage and “no downtime” for ground motions with 50% probability of exceedance in 50 years; “repairable/controllable”damage and “acceptable downtime” for ground motions with 10% probability of exceedance in 50 years
•No direct consideration of business interruption losses
•Vaguely defined performance requirements
–e.g., “minimal” damage and “no downtime” for ground motions with 50% probability of exceedance in 50 years; “repairable/controllable”damage and “acceptable downtime” for ground motions with 10% probability of exceedance in 50 years
•No direct consideration of business interruption losses
i i
4
This NEESR Grand Challenge project integrates civil engineering, logistics, risk analysis, and behavioral decision disciplines to develop a seismic risk mitigation framework that uses the performance of the port system rather than its individual components as the basis of h i i k iti ti
This NEESR Grand Challenge project integrates civil engineering, logistics, risk analysis, and behavioral decision disciplines to develop a seismic risk mitigation framework that uses the performance of the port system rather than its individual components as the basis of h i i k iti ti
VisionVision
5
NEES ResourcesNEES Resources• Experimental facilities
– Centrifuges
– Large-scale tests
– Shake tables
– Mobile field equipment
– Tsunami wave basin
• Cyberinfrastructure
– Curated, central data repository
– Tele-presence capabilities
– Computational
• Experimental facilities
– Centrifuges
– Large-scale tests
– Shake tables
– Mobile field equipment
– Tsunami wave basin
• Cyberinfrastructure
– Curated, central data repository
– Tele-presence capabilities
– Computational
NEES Equipment SitesNEES Equipment Sites
6
Civil EngineeringCivil Engineering
LogisticsLogistics
Decision and Risk AnalysisDecision and Risk Analysis
University of WashingtonUniversity of Washington
Decision Research, Inc.Decision Research, Inc.
University of California - DavisUniversity of California - Davis
Seismic Systems & EngineeringConsultants, Inc.Seismic Systems & EngineeringConsultants, Inc.
University ofSouthern CaliforniaUniversity ofSouthern CaliforniaUniversity of
TexasUniversity ofTexas
Georgia TechGeorgia Tech
University ofIllinoisUniversity ofIllinois Drexel
UniversityDrexelUniversity
MITMIT
Project TeamProject Team
7
Structured, Decision-Aiding Evaluation of
Risks
Structured, Decision-Aiding Evaluation of
Risks1. Define the port system including
stakeholders, physical infrastructure, and operational data
2. Define fundamental stakeholder objectives,alternative means of achieving them, and appropriate metrics
1. Define the port system including stakeholders, physical infrastructure, and operational data
2. Define fundamental stakeholder objectives,alternative means of achieving them, and appropriate metrics
8
Means-Ends NetworkMeans-Ends Network
FundamentalStakeholder Objectives
(Hypothetical)
FundamentalStakeholder Objectives
(Hypothetical)
•Minimize total, construction,retrofit, and repair costs
•Create long-term economic growth
•Assure a continuous supply chain
•Minimize adverse effects on community
•Assure life safety
•Make transparent, opendecisions
•Minimize fear, uncertainty,and doubt
Create Financial Reserves
Create Financial Reserves
Transfer Risk via Insurance
Transfer Risk via Insurance
Plan for Effective Emergency
Response and Recovery
Plan for Effective Emergency
Response and Recovery
Minimize Damage to
Port Facilities
Minimize Damage to
Port Facilities
Restore Operational Capacity Rapidly
Restore Operational Capacity Rapidly
Develop Parametric
Port Performance
Models
Develop Parametric
Port Performance
Models
Develop Liquefaction Remediation Techniques
Develop Liquefaction Remediation Techniques
Improve Seismic
Performance of Soil-Structure Systems
Improve Seismic
Performance of Soil-Structure Systems
Develop Structural Design and
Retrofitting Techniques
Develop Structural Design and
Retrofitting Techniques
Develop Real-Time
Operational Decision Support Models
Develop Real-Time
Operational Decision Support Models
9
Structured, Decision-Aiding Evaluation of
Risks
Structured, Decision-Aiding Evaluation of
Risks1. Define the port system including stakeholders,
physical infrastructure, and operational data
2. Define fundamental stakeholder objectives,alternative means of achieving them, and appropriate metrics
3. Evaluate component and systems-level performance of each alternative including uncertainties
1. Define the port system including stakeholders, physical infrastructure, and operational data
2. Define fundamental stakeholder objectives,alternative means of achieving them, and appropriate metrics
3. Evaluate component and systems-level performance of each alternative including uncertainties
10
Component PerformanceComponent Performance
Liquefiable soilLiquefiable soil
Pile-deck connectionPile-deck connection
Crane responseCrane response
11
Component PerformanceComponent Performance
12
System PerformanceSystem Performance
Berthallocation
Berthallocation
Cranescheduling
Cranescheduling
ContainerlocationContainerlocation
13
System PerformanceSystem Performance
• Develop functional relationships between port performance metrics (such as container throughput) and the state of operational components
– Approximate port performance given parametric representation of a damage state
– Rapid evaluation
– Potential integration within risk-based decision framework
• Why not just simulate?
– Always an option, but usually difficult to integrate into risk decision models
– Requires enumerating a potentially large space of possible damage states and
• Develop functional relationships between port performance metrics (such as container throughput) and the state of operational components
– Approximate port performance given parametric representation of a damage state
– Rapid evaluation
– Potential integration within risk-based decision framework
• Why not just simulate?
– Always an option, but usually difficult to integrate into risk decision models
– Requires enumerating a potentially large space of possible damage states and
14
System PerformanceSystem Performance
• Develop real-time operational decision support tools to improve port system performance given a (potentially restricted) state of port operational resources
– Existing port operational models are not equipped to:
– Handle dynamic and stochastic information
– Integrate decisions for multiple port components
– Solve large-scale problems faced by modern ports
– Real-time systems optimization has the potential to dramatically improve decisions
• Develop real-time operational decision support tools to improve port system performance given a (potentially restricted) state of port operational resources
– Existing port operational models are not equipped to:
– Handle dynamic and stochastic information
– Integrate decisions for multiple port components
– Solve large-scale problems faced by modern ports
– Real-time systems optimization has the potential to dramatically improve decisions
15
Structured, Decision-Aiding Evaluation of
Risks
Structured, Decision-Aiding Evaluation of
Risks1. Define the port system including stakeholders,
physical infrastructure, and operational data
2. Define fundamental stakeholder objectives,alternative means of achieving them, and appropriate metrics
3. Evaluate component and systems-level performance of each alternative including uncertainties
4. Present results in a manner to enhance stakeholder comprehension, clarify underlying choices, and explicitly address tradeoffs
1. Define the port system including stakeholders, physical infrastructure, and operational data
2. Define fundamental stakeholder objectives,alternative means of achieving them, and appropriate metrics
3. Evaluate component and systems-level performance of each alternative including uncertainties
4. Present results in a manner to enhance stakeholder comprehension, clarify underlying choices, and explicitly address tradeoffs
16
Consequence MatrixConsequence Matrix
• Consequence matrices help to develop an understanding of how stakeholders respond to each alternative mitigation strategy and inform the decision-making process
• Consequence matrices help to develop an understanding of how stakeholders respond to each alternative mitigation strategy and inform the decision-making process
✔✖✖3
✔✔✔2
✔✔✖1
CBA
AlternativesAlternatives
Objectives
Objectives
17
Structured, Decision-Aiding Evaluation of
Risks
Structured, Decision-Aiding Evaluation of
Risks1. Define the port system including stakeholders,
physical infrastructure, and operational data
2. Define fundamental stakeholder objectives,alternative means of achieving them, and appropriate metrics
3. Evaluate component and systems-level performance of each alternative including uncertainties
4. Present results in a manner to enhance stakeholder comprehension, clarify underlying choices, and explicitly address tradeoffs
5. Learn and iterate
1. Define the port system including stakeholders, physical infrastructure, and operational data
2. Define fundamental stakeholder objectives,alternative means of achieving them, and appropriate metrics
3. Evaluate component and systems-level performance of each alternative including uncertainties
4. Present results in a manner to enhance stakeholder comprehension, clarify underlying choices, and explicitly address tradeoffs
5. Learn and iterate
18
EngineeringEngineering
•Develop soil remediation techniques, pile and pile-deck connection configurations, and crane design and retrofitting techniques that improve seismic performance
•Develop fragility relationships to discern and communicate the effects of engineering-based mitigation options
•Develop soil remediation techniques, pile and pile-deck connection configurations, and crane design and retrofitting techniques that improve seismic performance
•Develop fragility relationships to discern and communicate the effects of engineering-based mitigation options
19
Port Operations and Logistics
Port Operations and Logistics
•Develop parametric approximation models to predict port system performance metrics as a function of the time-dependent functionality of port components
•Develop real-time decision-support tools to optimize vessel berthing, crane scheduling, and containerlocation following a disruptive event
•Develop parametric approximation models to predict port system performance metrics as a function of the time-dependent functionality of port components
•Develop real-time decision-support tools to optimize vessel berthing, crane scheduling, and containerlocation following a disruptive event
20
Decision Researchand Risk AnalysisDecision Researchand Risk Analysis
•Integrate value-focused, behavioral decision research, research on mental models of seismic risks, enterprise risk criteria, and formal port stakeholder participation to develop:
–a means-ends network with alternative risk mitigation actions and their effect on performance objectives for ports.
–consequence-by-alternatives matrices illustrating the tradeoffs port stakeholders are willing to make
•Integrate value-focused, behavioral decision research, research on mental models of seismic risks, enterprise risk criteria, and formal port stakeholder participation to develop:
–a means-ends network with alternative risk mitigation actions and their effect on performance objectives for ports.
–consequence-by-alternatives matrices illustrating the tradeoffs port stakeholders are willing to make
21
SummarySummary
•The overall goal is to develop a seismic risk mitigation framework that uses the performance of the port system rather than its individual components as the basis for choosing among risk mitigation options
•We believe that such a framework will have applications to other civil infrastructure systems and other natural and man-made hazards
•The overall goal is to develop a seismic risk mitigation framework that uses the performance of the port system rather than its individual components as the basis for choosing among risk mitigation options
•We believe that such a framework will have applications to other civil infrastructure systems and other natural and man-made hazards