2


Grand Challenges in Earthquake Engineering Research

A fundamental goal of the workshop was to describe the high-priority grand challenges in earthquake engineering research, which are represented by the problems, barriers, and bottlenecks in the earthquake engineering field that hinder realization of the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) vision. Thirteen grand challenge problems emerged over the course of the workshop. The committee has summarized them in terms of five overarching Grand Challenges to capture interrelationships and crossovers among the 13 problems and to highlight the interdisciplinary nature of their potential solutions. Participants noted that grand challenge problems do not stand alone; they are complex, and this complexity exists not only within earthquake engineering but also in earthquake engineering’s position among other competing social challenges. As such, addressing a grand challenge problem involves consideration of a variety of barriers—economic, regulatory, policy, societal, and professional—along with the scientific and technological solutions. The five overarching Grand Challenges are intended to serve as useful focal points for discussions among stakeholders and decision makers planning future investment.

Table 2.1 shows the grouping of the 13 problems into the five overarching Grand Challenges, and it also maps each grand challenge problem to the disciplinary breakout group from which it originated. These Grand Challenges are:

1. Community Resilience Framework: A common theme noted by workshop participants was that the earthquake engineering community currently lacks an interactive and comprehensive framework for measuring, monitoring, and evaluating community resilience. Such a framework could apply innovative methodologies, models, and data to measure community performance at various scales, build on the experience and lessons of past events, and ensure that past and future advances in building, lifelines, urban design, technology, and socioeconomic research result in improved community resilience. Such a framework also could advance understanding of both the direct and indirect impacts of earthquakes so that community-level interactions and impacts can be better characterized.

2. Decision Making: Another sentiment reiterated during the workshop was that current research findings related to community resilience do not adequately influence decisions and actions on the part of key decision makers, such as private-sector facility owners and public-sector institutions. Communities typically build based on traditional standards, and when affected by major earthquakes, they respond and recover based on intuition, improvisation, and adaptive behaviors that are drawn from the individuals available to participate. Consequently, the lessons learned in one community and event rarely translate to the next community affected. Participants suggested that achieving earthquake resilience could involve a community-based, holistic approach that includes decisions and actions that are based on overarching goals, a clear understanding of the built environment, rapid and informed assessment data, and planned reconstruction and recovery. Mechanisms for motivating action could include developing incentives to promote community development and pre-event planning; simulation-based decision-making strategies for use in community development, pre-event planning, early response post event, and through the long-term recovery process; state-of-the-art decision-making tools that will lead to more efficient resource allocations; and methodologies and tools that allow decision makers to compare different strategies for post-earthquake reconstruction and long-term pre-earthquake mitigation.

3. Simulation: Participants noted that knowledge of the inventory of infrastructure components and points



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 11
2 Grand Challenges in Earthquake Engineering Research A fundamental goal of the workshop was to describe framework also could advance understanding of both the high-priority grand challenges in earthquake engineering the direct and indirect impacts of earthquakes so that research, which are represented by the problems, barriers, and community-level interactions and impacts can be bottlenecks in the earthquake engineering field that hinder better characterized. realization of the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction 2. Decision Making: Another sentiment reiterated dur- Program (NEHRP) vision. Thirteen grand challenge problems emerged over the course of the workshop. The committee has ing the workshop was that current research findings summarized them in terms of five overarching Grand Chal- related to community resilience do not adequately lenges to capture interrelationships and crossovers among influence decisions and actions on the part of key the 13 problems and to highlight the interdisciplinary nature d ecision makers, such as private-sector facility of their potential solutions. Participants noted that grand owners and public-sector institutions. Communities challenge problems do not stand alone; they are complex, typically build based on traditional standards, and and this complexity exists not only within earthquake engi- when affected by major earthquakes, they respond neering but also in earthquake engineering’s position among and recover based on intuition, improvisation, and other competing social challenges. As such, addressing a adaptive behaviors that are drawn from the individu- grand challenge problem involves consideration of a variety als available to participate. Consequently, the lessons of barriers—economic, regulatory, policy, societal, and learned in one community and event rarely translate professional—along with the scientific and technological to the next community affected. Participants suggest- solutions. The five overarching Grand Challenges are in- ed that achieving earthquake resilience could involve tended to serve as useful focal points for discussions among a community-based, holistic approach that includes stakeholders and decision makers planning future investment. decisions and actions that are based on overarching Table 2.1 shows the grouping of the 13 problems into goals, a clear understanding of the built environment, the five overarching Grand Challenges, and it also maps each rapid and informed assessment data, and planned grand challenge problem to the disciplinary breakout group reconstruction and recovery. Mechanisms for mo- from which it originated. These Grand Challenges are: tivating action could include developing incentives to promote community development and pre-event 1. Community Resilience Framework: A common planning; simulation-based decision-making strate- theme noted by workshop participants was that the gies for use in community development, pre-event earthquake engineering community currently lacks planning, early response post event, and through the an interactive and comprehensive framework for long-term recovery process; state-of-the-art decision- measuring, monitoring, and evaluating community making tools that will lead to more efficient resource resilience. Such a framework could apply innovative allocations; and methodologies and tools that allow methodologies, models, and data to measure com- decision makers to compare different strategies for munity performance at various scales, build on the post-earthquake reconstruction and long-term pre- experience and lessons of past events, and ensure that earthquake mitigation. past and future advances in building, lifelines, urban 3. Simulation: Participants noted that knowledge of the design, technology, and socioeconomic research result in improved community resilience. Such a inventory of infrastructure components and points 11

OCR for page 11
12 GRAND CHALLENGES IN EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING RESEARCH TABLE 2.1 Grouping of 13 Grand Challenge Problems into the Five Overarching Grand Challenges. OVERARCHING GRAND CHALLENGES Community Dimension Resilience Decision (Breakout Group) Grand Challenge Problem Framework Making Simulation Mitigation Design Tools √ √ √ √ √ Community 1. Framework for Measuring, Monitoring, and Resilience Evaluating Community Resilience √ √ √ √ 2. Motivating Action to Enhance Community Resilience √ √ √ √ Pre-event 3. Develop a National Built Environment Inventory Prediction and √ √ √ 4. Multi-Scale Seismic Simulation of the Built Planning Environment √ √ √ 5. Integrated Seismic Decision Support √ √ √ √ √ 6. Risk Assessment and Mitigation of Vulnerable Infrastructure √ √ √ √ 7. Protect Coastal Communities √ √ √ √ Design of 8. Regional Disaster Simulator Infrastructure √ √ √ 9. High Fidelity Simulation √ √ √ √ 10. New Sustainable Materials and Systems for Earthquake Resilience √ √ √ √ 11. Harnessing the Power of Performance Based Earthquake Engineering (PBEE) to Achieve Resilient Communities √ √ √ Post-event 12. Rapid Post-Earthquake Assessment Response and √ √ √ √ 13. Reconstruction and Recovery Recovery NOTE: The dimension column on the left maps each grand challenge problem to the breakout group from which it originated; note that the grand challenge problems do not represent consensus views of the breakout groups, but rather suggestions by individuals or groups of individuals during the breakout group discussions (see Appendix A). of connection between different infrastructure types ability, motivations, and mitigation strategies, and is lacking within the earthquake engineering com- establishing mitigation solutions for the community’s munity. They identified a need for scalable tools most vulnerable sectors. Participants suggested that that autonomously create an accurate database of all mitigation solutions could be based on the use of a infrastructure components, including points of inter- new generation of simulation tools and design solu- dependency with other infrastructure components. tions coupled with up-to-date information available Empowered with this complete mapping of an urban from distributed sensing systems. Development of center’s infrastructure systems, powerful simula- better approaches for renewal and retrofit of the tion technologies could model the time and spatial built environment’s most vulnerable sectors would impacts of a seismic event at all length scales span- help ensure a safer environment and a more resilient ning from the component scale to the regional scale, community. and from disaster response to community recovery. 5. Design Tools: Participants suggested that developing 4. Mitigation: A large earthquake or tsunami in a highly and exploiting new emerging materials and innova- populated region of the United States would cause tive structural concepts and integrating them within massive damage to the built environment and com- design tools could dramatically improve the per- munities in the region, and the resulting social and formance of all types of infrastructure and increase economic consequences would cascade across the earthquake resilience in ways that are also sustain- country, particularly if major energy, transportation, able. There is a wide range of sustainable highly or supply hubs are affected. Key characteristics of resilient, new materials that can offer opportunities this Grand Challenge include developing strategies to significantly change the way infrastructure is to measure, monitor, and model community vulner- designed and constructed. Harnessing the power of

OCR for page 11
13 GRAND CHALLENGES IN EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING RESEARCH performance-based earthquake engineering (PBEE) standard methods or measures for resiliency, it is difficult to could achieve a resilient infrastructure that incorpo- determine when resiliency has been achieved. This is because rates these innovative new materials and structural current engineering approaches are limited in their ability to systems. characterize resilience outcomes or to characterize them in ways that are meaningful for end users. The five overarching Grand Challenges are summarized in the sections that follow. Characteristics of each Grand Transformative Approaches to the Solution Challenge are given, along with transformative approaches to solving the grand challenge problems and the potential result- Many workshop participants emphasized that character- ing impacts. Appendix A contains the original descriptions of izing community resilience will require a significant shift in the 13 grand challenge problems from the breakout sessions. how the performance of communities is quantified. For ex- ample, existing research programs in earthquake engineering mainly focus on the performance of individual components COMMUNITY RESILIENCE FRAMEWORK or systems (e.g., buildings and specific lifeline systems), whereas understanding the performance of a community Description of the Problem requires an understanding of the interactions among all of Participants noted that although research has yielded these components. Many questions still exist, including: how numerous findings related to community resilience, many does the performance of an electric power system affect the of these findings do not influence decisions or actions performance of other lifeline systems? How does the disrup- by key decision makers including private-sector facility tion of power affect local and regional businesses? How does owners and public-sector institutions.1 Characterizing the an industry in an affected region impact other industries that interactions and impacts at a community level necessitates may not have been directly impacted by damage? Multi-scale an understanding of both the direct and indirect impacts of modeling of resilience could effectively relate these diverse earthquakes, and a framework for measuring, monitoring, interactions. and evaluating community resilience could help ensure that Another issue that has impeded the ability to measure past and future advances in building, lifelines, urban design, and understand community resilience is the lack of historical technology, and socioeconomic research result in improved data on recovery of communities from past disasters. Par- c ommunity resilience. Such a framework could apply ticipants discussed the potential for a national observatory innovative methodologies, models, and data to measure network to address the disaster vulnerability and resilience community performance at various scales—e.g., building, of communities using methodologies applied consistently lifeline, and community—and build on the experience and over time and space, with attention to complex interactions lessons of past events. Participants reiterated that such an between changes in social systems, the built environment, interactive and comprehensive framework is lacking within and the natural environment. They cited a 2008 workshop the earthquake engineering community. In addition, many sponsored by the U.S. Geological Survey and the National participants noted a need for basic research on the different Science Foundation that discussed the structure of such a mechanisms for motivating action. This includes information network, called the Resiliency and Vulnerability Observatory that stakeholders may use to quantify the costs and benefits Network (Peacock et al., 2008). Output from this network of various mitigation strategies and the incentives for action could help foster many research projects on community that are meaningful to various constituencies, ranging from resilience including: laws and regulations to informally applied norms. • Developing and testing community resiliency metrics at different scales (e.g., communities, regions) and Characteristics of the Grand Challenge for different community components (e.g., buildings, Because resilience is multi-dimensional and multi-scale, lifelines, social networks, economy). achieving resilience requires a multi-disciplinary approach. • Researching, developing, and testing various meth- The earthquake engineering research community is, for ods for quantifying resilience and determining the example, unable at this time to define and measure multiple best method for stakeholder decision making. dimensions of resilience. Workshop participants discussed • Creating a resilience observation pilot study, which the need for a characterization of resiliency in terms of scale could be a candidate city, neighborhood, or group of and metrics that are both applicable for diverse systems and buildings (see “Instrumented City”), setting a base- for their interdependencies. Because researchers do not have line, and observing actions/changes over time to de- fine metrics and timeframes of resiliency dynamics. • Encouraging the development of quantitative recov- 1 See the white paper in Appendix B by Laurie Johnson, the keynote ery models and developing theoretically and em- speaker on community resilience: “Transformative Earthquake Engineering pirically based models of post-earthquake recovery Research and Solutions for Achieving Earthquake-Resilient Communities.”

OCR for page 11
14 GRAND CHALLENGES IN EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING RESEARCH DECISION MAKING processes. For example, participants noted that m odels could be integrated across dimensions Description of the Problem o f recovery—infrastructures, housing, business/ commercial facilities, public institutions, social/ Many workshop participants noted that achieving earth- economic processes—and incorporated into simula- quake resilience requires a community-based, holistic ap- tion models that forecast recovery rates and patterns proach that includes decisions and actions that are based on after major earthquakes. These models could be overarching goals, a clear understanding of the built environ- designed to consider resilience, adaptation, sustain - ment, rapid and informed assessment data, and planned re- ability, and mitigation. construction and recovery processes. Communities typically • Developing multi-scale simulation models that build based on traditional standards, and when affected by link the performance of buildings and lifelines to major earthquakes, respond and recover based on intuition, communities. improvisation, and adaptive behaviors that are drawn from • Developing data-intensive methods for using public the individuals available to participate. Consequently, the and social network information and online network lessons learned in one community and event rarely translate activity to determine and develop resiliency metrics. to the next community affected. In order to facilitate better decision making, participants explained, meaningful data are Impacts of the Solution to the Grand Challenge needed that allow end users to quantify current and improved levels of community resilience. They stressed the importance Many participants stated that a critical need for evaluat- of using historical data when testing and validating strate- ing community resilience is an understanding of “baseline” gies for translating the results of quantitative and qualitative m easures of resilience to enable measurements of the studies on community resilience. changes in resilience that take place over time. Such changes could include reductions in expected losses that accompany Characteristics of the Grand Challenge the adoption and implementation of new codes, retrofit pro- grams, and other improvements in the earthquake resistance An observation reiterated during the workshop is that of the built environment. They also could include changes research on community resilience has not made a significant in social vulnerability and resilience (such as those related impact on the decisions and actions of decision makers. Prior to fluctuations in income levels, migration patterns, and the to a seismic event, for example, interest in seismic mitiga- size of at-risk populations) and changes in exposure to risk tion and preparedness is often limited or non-existent. Im- (e.g., due to decisions to develop or to restrict development mediately following an event, the environment within which in hazardous areas). Participants stressed that observatory decisions must be made by first responders and the public can networks are needed, in part, because vulnerability and re- be chaotic and complex, hindering optimal decision making. silience are continually in flux. Research and methodological A number of participants suggested that the scientific and approaches that take into account ever-changing community engineering community should explore the complexities vulnerability and resilience profiles, in their view, would of these operational environments and how they evolve on be genuinely transformational. The lack of longitudinal multiple length and time scales. They also expressed a need resilience data makes it difficult or impossible to determine for basic research to explore a variety of mechanisms for whether measures that are intended to reduce future losses motivating action, including: actually make a difference. Such data could also reveal social factors that affect resilience independent of the kinds of engi- • Providing information and developing incentives for neering advances that were emphasized during the workshop. action. Participants noted that the impact of a more holistic • Developing simulation-based decision-making strat- framework for measuring, monitoring, and evaluating com- egies for use in community development, pre-event munity resilience could be enormous. Better models and data planning, early post-event response, and through the for understanding community resilience could facilitate more long-term recovery process. effective decision making, and in turn, improved community • Providing incentives to promote community develop- resilience. Validated profiles of community performance that ment and pre-event planning. result from detailed and rich datasets from past events could • Using state-of-the-art decision-making tools that enhance the confidence of decision makers in the tools and would lead to more efficient resource allocations. methodologies developed by the research community. This, • Developing methodologies and tools that allow in turn, could enhance their use both before and after major decision makers to compare different strategies for earthquakes. post-earthquake reconstruction and long-term pre- earthquake mitigation.

OCR for page 11
15 GRAND CHALLENGES IN EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING RESEARCH • Performing case studies that demonstrate the efficacy expanded technology transfer that includes education studies of proper planning and response after damaging to facilitate close collaboration between researchers and deci- events. sion makers. Application of advanced information technology (e.g., cloud computing, apps, and HTML5-enabled web) and Participants suggested that exploring how society ap- social networking-style approaches could help to improve proaches preparedness and post-event response and recovery resiliency communication, education, and decision support. could help ensure that lessons are learned from past seismic Participants also noted that the current links between events and applied to community development and rebuild- ubiquitous data streams, high-fidelity modeling, and effec- ing, requiring a transition to a community-based risk man- tive decision making are weak or non-existent. These connec- agement and resilience paradigm. tions could be enhanced by the development of an integrated system that identifies events, creates and monitors real-time data, updates models, incorporates crowd sourcing technolo- Transformative Approaches to the Solution gies, and informs decision makers. Real-time assessment of Many participants expressed a need for more funda- damage to buildings and infrastructure could help in defining mental research on decision making under conditions of effective recovery strategies that emphasize the rebuilding uncertainty, and decision making for low-probability/high- of community sectors that promote rapid economic as well consequence events, along with basic research and research as social development. This could lead to a paradigm shift integration in areas such as public administration and public away from solely engineering solutions to a holistic suite of policy, communication theory and practice, knowledge and resilience options including land use planning, performance- technology transfer, and decision science. They suggested based construction standards, and different configurations of that this research relate both to pre-event (planning, con- post-event reconstruction. However, participants also noted struction standards, prioritization, simulators, training) and the challenges involved with developing such a system—the post-event scenarios (emergency response and recovery). linkage between technological solutions and effective deci- Ubiquitous sensor data would be required to drive the deci- sion making would need to address a number of fundamental sion support engines. In the post-event period, heterogeneous social science and policy questions (e.g., in the context of inputs and outputs from a range of linked simulation systems competing community needs, when is the most appropriate (coupled with field sensor data) could be managed and as- time to promote an earthquake resiliency policy agenda?). sessment information used to inform first responders for Participants stressed the importance of developing an inte- efficient resource allocation. Precise quantitative assessment grated system that addresses loss reduction, decision mak- of the damage state would be critical, along with an assess- ing, and complex cognitive, social, political, and economic ment of the impact of damaged systems/components on other dimensions in this process. interdependent systems. A partnership between engineers, scientists, and the emergency management community Impacts of the Solution to the Grand Challenge could remove barriers for adopting new technologies, and cyberinfrastructure could support the near-real-time delivery Workshop participants highlighted potential impacts of information that supports post-event recovery activities. associated with meeting this Grand Challenge. Comprehen- New information technologies could allow decision makers sive support engines for decision makers would likely lead to share information across organizations without the threat to significant savings of lives and losses, transformative of security leaks or breaches. potential for training and educating the next generation of Many participants noted that efficient and accelerated professionals, direct dissemination of research into practice, recovery requires timely post-event repair and rebuilding more rapid and accurate post-earthquake assessments (in decisions that take into account models and tools to forecast terms of both response and recovery), and measurable output long-term consequences and the impacts of potential mitiga- that allows decision makers to track and evaluate the impact tion options (such as land buyouts, redesign/reconstruction of their decisions. changes). In their view, current models do not adequately reflect longer-term cascading impacts of large-scale disas- SIMULATION ters, and the resilience of repair technologies is not well understood. An effective system of post-disaster mitigation Description of the Problem and recovery assistance could utilize a “resilience basis” to determine best use of public funds. Participants noted that large-scale seismic events pose Participants suggested that the integration of research countless safety and logistical challenges to dense urban on risk communication and decision making with methods communities populated with both people and critical infra- developed for resilience assessment, including simulation structure systems. Many dense urban centers have grown and visualization studies, could lead to new approaches to over decades with multiple stakeholders involved in the planning and stimulate action. Deployment could involve planning, construction, and management of the infrastructure

OCR for page 11
16 GRAND CHALLENGES IN EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING RESEARCH systems that support the economic prosperity and quality of could be created to link a heterogeneous array of simulation life of the society. With these considerations in mind, work- tools to provide a complete toolset for regional simulation of shop participants discussed the need for a new generation the impact of an earthquake and tsunami. High-performance of high-performance simulation technologies to accurately computing technology that enables repeated simulation for forecast the physical, social, and economic impacts of large- stochastic modeling of earthquake responses and commu- scale seismic events on dense urban regions. nity responses would likely be a key technology. To update and verify the multi-scale simulation environment, the data generated by sensors embedded in the built environment for Characteristics of the Grand Challenge both seismic and infrastructure monitoring may be explicitly Because of the complex growth patterns in urban utilized. A sensor fusion approach could incorporate other regions, knowledge of the inventory of infrastructure com- forms of data including data derived from remote sensing ponents and points of connection between different infra- technologies and crowd sourcing datasets. structure types is lacking (NRC, 2011). Although individual state agencies and utilities may maintain databases of their Impacts of the Solution to the Grand Challenge infrastructure systems, many of these databases are propri- etary and use a myriad of database standards, making inter- Participants discussed the enormous potential benefits operability challenging. Provided that infrastructure systems of such a rich and expressive simulator toolbox. A means of are interconnected and have vulnerabilities at their points autonomously creating an accurate inventory of infrastruc- of interconnection, there is an opportunity for new methods ture systems without relying upon the sharing of information focused on autonomously creating a comprehensive data- from the many owners of the infrastructure components, base that provides a complete mapping of all infrastructure some noted, would offer the engineering and social science systems in a region. Hence, a number of workshop partici- community an unprecedented opportunity to utilize invento- pants stressed the need for scalable tools that autonomously ries of infrastructure systems that enable regional modeling create an accurate database of all infrastructure components, of the short- and long-term impacts of large earthquakes including points of interdependency with other infrastructure and tsunamis. The tools that link simulation across multiple components. Empowered with this complete mapping of an length and timescales could enable predictive modeling urban center’s infrastructure systems, powerful simulation that could shape the community’s efforts in preparedness technologies could model the time and spatial impacts of a yet allow emergency response officials to create optimal seismic event at all length scales, spanning from the compo- plans that most efficiently allocate their scarce resources nent scale to the regional scale, and from disaster response immediately after an event. Furthermore, simulation of how to community recovery. infrastructure systems are interdependent, both in operation and failure, could provide a wealth of new knowledge on how complex, regionally distributed infrastructure systems are Transformative Approaches to the Solution vulnerable to regionally destructive events such as tsunamis. Several participants noted that to effectively address the Beyond earthquake engineering, fundamental science aimed Grand Challenge, wide gaps of scientific and engineering toward linking heterogeneous simulation tools that incor- knowledge will need to be bridged to create transformative porate physical models with the simulation of community solutions. These gaps were highlighted in the presentation response to disasters could facilitate discovery for other by Omar Ghattas2 and in the “pre-event prediction and forms of natural and man-made hazards. planning” breakout group discussions. For example, it will be important to explore new technologies aimed toward the MITIGATION creation of a comprehensive urban infrastructure database from both proprietary data sources (e.g., utilities’ inventory Description of the Problem databases) as well as from analysis of socioeconomic data sources (e.g., census data, economic indicators). The end Community resilience, as described by participants result will be the creation of an infrastructure “genome,” in the “pre-event prediction and planning” breakout group, much like the genome used to map the fundamental protein fundamentally depends on developing risk assessment and structures that make up life. Tools that allow the genome to mitigation strategies for the renewal and retrofit of the infra - evolve with the growth patterns of the urban region itself structure sectors most highly vulnerable to earthquakes and could be created to ensure long-term accuracy and validity. tsunamis. These sectors include water and wastewater supply Powerful new forms of multi-scale computing architectures and distribution systems, power and energy infrastructure, communication systems, transportation systems, at-risk 2 buildings, and coastal communities in seismic zones. A See the white paper in Appendix B by Omar Ghattas, the keynote speaker on Modeling and Simulation: “Uncertainty Quantification and number of participants noted that improvement in mitigation E xascale Computing: Opportunities and Challenges for Earthquake requires proactive changes in public policy that facilitate new Engineering.”

OCR for page 11
17 GRAND CHALLENGES IN EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING RESEARCH strategies for safe and robust design and construction; pro- based on forecasting of future inventory, population posals for innovative funding strategies to upgrade vulner- dynamics, and trends in design and construction. able sectors of the built environment; and a range of options • Modeling interconnected and interdependent distrib- available to create resilient designs for both existing and new uted systems, including lifelines. systems. Consequently, it would be important to document • Accessing distributed sensor sets to update model the current vulnerabilities within the built environment; to parameters to ensure accurate data for simulations, prioritize the most crucial mitigation needs; and to develop and coupling simulations with sensor inputs. cost-effective and sustainable mitigation strategies that are • Establishing a broad range of performance metrics to embraced by the communities at risk. ensure decisions related to mitigation priorities. • Integrating uncertainty modeling to facilitate in- formed decisions. Characteristics of the Grand Challenge • Developing quantitative approaches that facilitate A large earthquake or tsunami in a highly populated incorporation of individual and organizational moti- region of the United States would cause massive damage vations for promoting mitigation. to the built environment and communities in the region. • Modeling public and private funding strategies for The resulting social and economic consequences would mitigation to enable thorough assessment of options. cascade across the country, particularly if major energy, • Developing aggregate inventories of community risk/ transportation or supply hubs are affected. As an example, resiliency for use in land use planning and emergency Kobe, Japan, has yet to recover completely from the 1995 planning. Great Hanshin earthquake. Participants noted that the po- • Integrating mitigation strategies and new design tential consequences of inadequate mitigation of the built solutions to reduce seismic and tsunami risks that environment’s most vulnerable sectors are acute. Therefore, incorporate new developments in sustainable mate- this Grand Challenge includes developing strategies for rials and technologies. identifying and prioritizing the sectors of the national built environment that are most vulnerable to catastrophic losses Transformative Approaches to the Solution from earthquakes and tsunamis, in addition to developing approaches for renewal and retrofit of these sectors to ensure Participants suggested that the most effective strategies a safer environment and a more resilient community. As for assessing risk and prioritizing mitigation strategies would important, meeting this Grand Challenge involves provid- integrate related key elements that influence decisions on ing fundamental strategies that mesh with related national renewal and facility retrofit or replacement. These elements priorities—such as ensuring national competitiveness and might include, but are not limited to: economic growth in key regions of the country that are vul- nerable to seismic risk—as well as enabling new solutions • Strategic prioritization to achieve economic growth for reviving the built infrastructure to ensure more sustain- and urban redevelopment. able and secure communities. • Regional or local security. Key characteristics of this Grand Challenge include • Public health objectives related to clean air and water. developing strategies to measure, monitor, and model a • Energy policies and priorities. community’s vulnerability, motivations, and mitigation • New methods of infrastructure procurement to maxi- strategies, and establishing mitigation solutions for its most mize the amount of seismic and tsunami mitigation vulnerable sectors. Strategies could be based on the use of that may be achieved within limited budgets. a new generation of simulation tools and design solutions coupled with up-to-date information available from distrib- Vulnerability assessment and prioritization of renewal uted sensing systems. Individual participants noted that these options could be achieved through regional simulations and strategies would require: design strategies that access data from an array of distributed databases and sensor networks and link layered simulations • Accessing an accurate inventory of built assets (e.g., of seismic and tsunami events. Participants indicated this buildings, lifeline networks, socioeconomic data, could result in documentation of direct damage and socio- policy data, natural environment, and topology). economic impacts as well as enhanced performance based • Understanding the scope of possible seismic and on scenario mitigation solutions. New mitigation solutions tsunami hazards, including the range of likely mag- could enable cost-effective retrofit and renewal options for nitudes, locations, recurrence intervals, and ground the most vulnerable sectors of the community. Open access motion characteristics. data architecture could enable access and use of distributed • Developing advanced simulation tools that provide databases and sensor arrays. A number of participants noted a range of information on potential catastrophic that new strategies to understand the linkages between the consequences of scenario seismic and tsunami events physics-based phenomena that lead to infrastructure damage,

OCR for page 11
18 GRAND CHALLENGES IN EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING RESEARCH and socioeconomic and policy phenomena that result, are of potential repair, retrofit, and new construction important for prioritizing the vulnerability of sectors of the methods. infrastructure and regional populations. • Utilization of new materials and systems to develop better, less-expensive options for repair and retrofit. • Many constraints (e.g., complexity) that limit the use Impacts of the Solution to the Grand Challenge of PBEE in the design of new structures. Solving this Grand Challenge could directly enhance • Extension of PBEE to incorporate a holistic assess- community resilience. New strategies for identifying the ment of fragility including the involvement of non- most vulnerable sectors of the built environment could help structural elements, foundations and soil-structure communities to better mitigate seismic, tsunami, and related interaction, structure, building content, services, cascading hazards. and the adjacent buildings. A more developed PBEE could take into account multiple hazards—such as fire, tsunami, and aftershocks—and consequence DESIGN TOOLS functions that consider the wider societal impact of damage, including business interruptions and Description of the Problem downtime. This Grand Challenge involves developing and exploit- • Reliable fragility data for the full range of infrastruc- ing new materials and innovative structural concepts and ture types, including bridges, lifelines, and critical integrating them within design tools to improve the perfor- structures requiring physical testing of components mance of all types of infrastructure and to increase earth- and complete systems (some participants stated that quake resilience in a sustainable manner. Participants noted although such systems are complex multi-scale prob- a wide range of sustainable, highly resilient, new materials lems, a move away from empirical data is needed). that offer opportunities to change the way infrastructure is • Fundamental research to understand the influence designed and constructed.3 Innovative types of structural of aging and degradation of infrastructure in order systems, such as self-centering systems with replaceable to develop appropriate fragility data for existing fuses, could exploit these new stronger but more brittle ma- infrastructure. terials. The power of PBEE could be harnessed to achieve resilient infrastructure incorporating these innovative new Transformative Approaches to the Solution materials and structural systems. Participants emphasized that fundamental research is needed to extend existing Participants acknowledged that achieving a high level PBEE techniques for buildings to cover the full range of of confidence in performance prediction for materials, infrastructures, including lifelines and other critical facilities. subsystems, and complete structures requires the avail- Supporting all these developments in high-fidelity testing ability of high-fidelity testing and simulation techniques, and modeling techniques would likely achieve a high level encompassing: of confidence in performance prediction for the complete range of infrastructure types. • The development of detailed mechanics-based models for modeling materials and subsystems using high-performance computing or parallel computing Characteristics of the Grand Challenge facilities to study system behavior over a wide range Participants noted that this Grand Challenge would re- of scales. quire fundamental research into new materials and structural • Creation of reference datasets from experimental systems that have the potential to transform the construction, tests for analysis comparisons and blind predic - repair, and seismic performance of infrastructure. Extensive tion studies to increase confidence in the numerical testing and modeling would be needed before such develop- simulations. ments could be implemented within existing PBEE method- • Development of methods for automated validation of ologies. Some specific challenges to be addressed include: proposed analytical models against existing empiri- cal datasets. • New validated physics/mechanics-based models for • Development of software platforms and hardware- the many new materials becoming available to the in-the-loop techniques for testing materials and earthquake engineering community. structural components with realistic boundary con- • Methodologies to assess the environmental (e.g., ditions and permitting physics-based modeling of carbon footprint) and performance-related impact interdependencies among lifeline systems. A number of participants also emphasized the need 3 See the white paper in Appendix B by John Halloran, the keynote for development of new and emerging materials normally speaker on Materials: “A Built Environment from Fossil Carbon.”

OCR for page 11
19 GRAND CHALLENGES IN EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING RESEARCH Impacts of the Solution to the Grand Challenge used outside the construction sector (such as ultra-high- performance concrete, carbon products, green binders, Workshop participants noted that the development of recycled materials, autoadaptive self-healing materials) that new materials, systems, and design tools offers many oppor- could be used for retrofit and construction of sustainable yet tunities to create more resilient and sustainable societies. The highly resilient infrastructure systems. This would require composites—utilizing carbon or other materials—currently research into innovative ways to incorporate such materials being developed and used within other engineering sectors in structures, energy capture, and brittle fuses, along with have the potential to transform the way infrastructure is research into methods for using these new materials and designed and dramatically improve the resilience of infra- techniques to create economical retrofitting systems and structure systems in an earthquake. Participants expressed protection systems. Participants noted that new methods the view that most existing composites are not appropriate would also be needed for incorporating reparability into for infrastructure use, but more economical construction new designs and the development of performance metrics to grade variants of these materials would still be significantly quantify resilience and sustainability in a holistic manner. stronger and lighter than standard construction materials Benchmarking could ensure reliable development of PBEE, while being appreciably more sustainable. New materials along with better analysis techniques and statistical methods also offer opportunities to design economical retrofitting for characterization of uncertainties. The development of systems that could be appropriate for any community. Full reliable fragility curves for bridges, lifelines, and critical acceptance and implementation of PBEE has the potential to systems would also be important. Extension of the building transform the way all types of infrastructure are designed. information management systems developed for building New high-fidelity testing techniques could reduce the de- infrastructure for the modeling lifeline systems could open pendence of larger scale simulations on empirical evidence up new ways to characterize such systems. and support the development of more accurate decision support tools. The potential exists to design and build vastly improved protective systems, which might also incorporate innovative features such as energy capture from the earth- quake motion.

OCR for page 11