SlideShare ist ein Scribd-Unternehmen logo
1 von 20
Seismic Protection of Schools:
     A New Perspective
 Earthquake Engineering Research Institute
          2013 Annual Meeting
     Michael Mahoney, Senior Geophysicist
        FEMA, Building Science Branch
1933 Long Beach Earthquake
  • The M6.4 Long Beach earthquake was the first major
    earthquake to show the threat of URM school buildings.
  • It collapsed or severely damaging thousands of URM
    buildings, including over 230 school buildings.
  • Fortunately, school was not in session, or hundreds of
    children would have been killed.
  • This event did lead to California passing the Field Act, which
    required special inspection of new school buildings.




Franklin Junior High School before and after the 1933 earthquake. Photo: NICEE and Historical Society of Long Beach
2008 Sichuan China Earthquake
• The M7.9 Sichuan China earthquake caused over 69,000
  fatalities. Many of them were the children who were in the
  thousands of school buildings that collapsed.
• The most riveting images to come out of the event were the
  reactions of parents losing their only child and their protests
  for the government allowing poor construction.




                                                      Photos: guardian.co.uk
2011 Mineral Virginia Earthquake
• The M5.8 Mineral Virginia earthquake was the largest Virginia
  earthquake since 1897 and the most widely felt in US history.
• Two Louisa County schools closed for school year and were
  eventually razed and replaced using FEMA disaster funds.
• Louisa County High School
   • Primarily a 1975 steel frame structure with masonry walls.
   • Most damage to the marginally reinforced masonry walls.
   • The high school was a community center for this depressed county.
• Thomas Jefferson Elementary School
   • Two story URM, near collapse of perpendicular kindergarten wing.
• Louisa County Middle School, built in 1990’s, was undamaged
  and was used to house both middle and high school classes.
• Only minor injuries reported.
Louisa County High School
Seismic Protection of Schools: A New Perspective - Michael Mahoney
Strategies to Reduce School Earthquake Risk

                                      • Highest initial cost
                       Replace
                                      • Substantial disruption
                       Buildings
                                      • Value-added benefits




     Risk Reduction          Single        • Moderate initial cost
        Strategies           Stage         • Substantial disruption
                             Rehab         • Quick resolution




                                      • Lowest initial cost
                      Incremental     • Minimal disruption
                         Rehab
                                      • Longer term solution
Advantages of Incremental Retrofitting

    Single-Stage Retrofitting                    Incremental Retrofitting
•   All costs are concentrated in a short    •   Costs are distributed over multiple
    time period                                  fiscal years
•   Construction is disruptive to school     •   Construction can be phased to occur
    operations                                   during summer breaks to minimize
•   Requires temporary space during              disruption to school operations
    construction to house displaced          •   Students and staff are not displaced
    students and staff                       •   Seismic vulnerabilities are mitigated
•   All seismic vulnerabilities are              in a phased approach, beginning with
    mitigated in a single phase of work          the most severe vulnerabilities first
•   Seismic retrofitting work is generally   •   Seismic mitigation can be integrated
    performed independent of future              with other scheduled maintenance
    maintenance and remodels                     and remodel projects
Mitigation Options
• Complete Seismic Retrofitting of Schools
    – Advantage: complete retrofitting reduces future
      seismic risk to an acceptable level.
    – Disadvantage: Expensive, difficult to justify in low
      seismic areas, potential loss of use during retrofit.
• May be Justifiable for Critical Facilities.
    – Schools also used as shelters, critical to response.
• Retrofitting Process:
    –   Identify candidates using FEMA 154 or ROVER
    –   Evaluate hazardous buildings using ASCE 31 or 41.
    –   Design retrofit using ASCE 41.
    –   Retrofitting techniques provided in FEMA 547.
    –   Comply with IBC Chapter 34 or IEBC.
Mitigation Options
• Incremental Retrofitting
   – Advantage: cost effective, focus on specific risk area,
     and can be done during normal maintenance.
   – Disadvantage: not full retrofit, some risk remains
• Incremental Seismic Rehabilitation series
   –   FEMA 395 – Schools FEMA 396 – Hospitals
   –   FEMA 397 – Offices FEMA 398 – Apartments
   –   FEMA 399 – Retail FEMA 400 – Hotels
   –   FEMA P-420 Engineering Guideline
• Retrofitting done during normal maintenance.
   – Example: bracing parapets during re-roofing.
Mitigation Options
• Nonstructural Retrofitting
     – Nonstructural damage accounts for most damage.
     – It can result in complete loss of use of a building.
• Nonstructural components include:
     – Architectural building components.
     – Mechanical, electrical and plumbing components.
     – Furniture, fixtures and equipment.
• Nonstructural Design Guide (FEMA E-74)
     – Recently improved, web-based design guide.
     – Provides design guidance for over 70 different
       nonstructural components.
     – Provides examples of damage and plans or photos of
       the recommended mitigation technique.
     – Includes technical specifications, risk rating forms
       and sample inventory checklists.
   http://www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/earthquake/fema74/index.shtm
What Has Been Done by State
• There have been notable efforts by some states to identify at-
  risk school buildings and to begin the process of addressing
  the risk they present. For example:
   – California Field Act (which requires peer review of new school buildings) and
     URM laws have resulted in safer school buildings.
   – Oregon initiated a Seismic Rehabilitation Grant Program which awarded $15
     million to 14 schools and 11 emergency services facilities. K-12 grants were
     from $120,000 to $1,490,000, with an average award of about $777,000 for
     high- to very-high risk of collapse buildings.
   – Utah used FEMA state assistance funds for an assessment pilot project for 80
     schools, about 10% of the schools in the Wasach Front. This project will help
     to develop a complete inventory to identify those schools requiring further
     engineering evaluation and future seismic retrofitting.
   – Several other states have funded outreach programs to raise awareness.
• However, they have all been limited by budget issues and the
  day-to-day problems local governments face to just to keep
  their schools operating.
What Has Been Done Nationally
• The U.S. Department of Education has several programs to
  provide funding to improve school buildings, but they do not
  address structural risk from natural hazards.
   – Some examples include meeting the Americans with Disabilities Act
     (ADA) and to wire school buildings for internet capability.
   – While they cannot help seismic retrofit a school building, they could
     possibly help fund a new replacement building.
• FEMA has the post-disaster Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
  (HMGP) that could be used to reduce seismic risk to existing
  school buildings.
   – This would require that states and localities have in place a recognized
     mitigation plan prior to a triggering disaster that includes seismically
     retrofitting school buildings.
What Could Be Done*
• Any action to reduce the seismic risk presented by URM schools
  must be undertaken and supported at the national, state and local
  levels.
• All three are required; the absence of any one will doom any
  initiative to failure.
   – Local involvement is the most critical: schools are local entities
       and this is where any program will succeed or fail. Local
       champions are necessary for any program to work.
   – State involvement is needed as many successful school retrofit
       programs require state funding and leadership.
   – National initiatives can help lead the way and provide a model
       template or target for state and local governments.


    * The views in the this presentation are strictly those of the author and
       do not represent the views of the FEMA, its management, or more
       importantly, those who decide how federal funds are spent.
What Could Be Done has to be
                 Done Locally
• However, any action to address the risk presented by
  URM school buildings must begin at the local level, and
  should include educating, empowering and supporting
  the following partners and advocates:
   –   Concerned parents
   –   Parent Teacher Associations/Organizations
   –   Teachers unions
   –   School administrators
   –   Local/regional seismic safety advocates
   –   Local media outlets
   –   Local building code department
   –   Local elected officials
Impediments
• However, such actions have a hard time succeeding because
  they must fight for public attention and resources in an
  increasingly difficult environment.
• Such initiatives only succeed when there are local
  champions to raise awareness and drive the issue.
• What would help this process and these champions would
  be to establish a national goal that has been endorsed by
  relevant constituents, organizations and others.
• Such a national goal could serve as a rallying cry to help
  state and local efforts get the attention and traction they
  need to succeed.
A Possible Program Goal
• The concept of establishing a long
  term ultimate goal with several
  intermediate goals was effectively
  used to seismically retrofit or
  replace hazardous hospitals under
  California Hospital Bill SB 1953.
• Such a combination of a long-term
  visible end goal along with a series
  of smaller achievable intermediate
  steps could help to keep the risk of
  URM schools and how this risk can
  be addressed in the public eye as it
  moves forward.
A Possible Program Goal
• The year 2033 will mark the 100 year anniversary of
  the 1933 Long Beach earthquake; the first
  earthquake to demonstrate the vulnerability of URM
  school buildings.
• A possible goal to address the risk of URM schools
  could be that by the year 2033, every URM school
  building in our nation’s high seismic zones will have
  been either: 1) fully seismically retrofitted or 2)
  replaced by a new seismically safe school building.
Possible Intermediate Steps
• By 2013: Adoption by seismic advisory organizations.
• By 2018: State adoption of a program to identify and assess all
  of their seismically vulnerable URM school buildings.
• By 2023: 1) A seismic assessment of all URM school
  buildings, 2) State adoption of a program on how seismic
  vulnerabilities of specific URM school buildings will be
  addressed, either by seismic retrofitting or by
  replacement, and 3) State or local adoption of a plan to fund
  that work.
• By 2028: State or local approved funding for all of the schools
  identified in the program.
• By 2033: Completion of all seismic retrofitting or replacement
  construction.
“URM Free by ’33”

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Andere mochten auch

Seismic retrofit of building structures
Seismic retrofit of building structuresSeismic retrofit of building structures
Seismic retrofit of building structuresgopi1991
 
Retrofitting of concrete structure
Retrofitting of concrete structureRetrofitting of concrete structure
Retrofitting of concrete structureshlok patel
 
METHODS OF RETROFITTING EARTHQUAKE DAMAGES
METHODS OF RETROFITTING EARTHQUAKE DAMAGESMETHODS OF RETROFITTING EARTHQUAKE DAMAGES
METHODS OF RETROFITTING EARTHQUAKE DAMAGESUmer Farooq
 
59105128 civil-engineering-objective-type-questions
59105128 civil-engineering-objective-type-questions59105128 civil-engineering-objective-type-questions
59105128 civil-engineering-objective-type-questionsBRJROHIT
 
Seismic Retrofitting Techniques
Seismic Retrofitting TechniquesSeismic Retrofitting Techniques
Seismic Retrofitting TechniquesAritra Banerjee
 
Beam and slab design
Beam and slab designBeam and slab design
Beam and slab designIvan Ferrer
 
Engineering formula sheet
Engineering formula sheetEngineering formula sheet
Engineering formula sheetsankalptiwari
 
Presentation on Slab, Beam & Column
Presentation on Slab, Beam & ColumnPresentation on Slab, Beam & Column
Presentation on Slab, Beam & Columnমু সা
 
Design of two way slab
Design of two way slabDesign of two way slab
Design of two way slabsarani_reza
 
Civil Engineering (Beams,Columns)
Civil Engineering (Beams,Columns)Civil Engineering (Beams,Columns)
Civil Engineering (Beams,Columns)mbrsalman
 

Andere mochten auch (12)

Seismic retrofit of building structures
Seismic retrofit of building structuresSeismic retrofit of building structures
Seismic retrofit of building structures
 
Retrofitting of concrete structure
Retrofitting of concrete structureRetrofitting of concrete structure
Retrofitting of concrete structure
 
METHODS OF RETROFITTING EARTHQUAKE DAMAGES
METHODS OF RETROFITTING EARTHQUAKE DAMAGESMETHODS OF RETROFITTING EARTHQUAKE DAMAGES
METHODS OF RETROFITTING EARTHQUAKE DAMAGES
 
59105128 civil-engineering-objective-type-questions
59105128 civil-engineering-objective-type-questions59105128 civil-engineering-objective-type-questions
59105128 civil-engineering-objective-type-questions
 
Seismic Retrofitting Techniques
Seismic Retrofitting TechniquesSeismic Retrofitting Techniques
Seismic Retrofitting Techniques
 
ONE WAY SLAB DESIGN
ONE WAY SLAB DESIGNONE WAY SLAB DESIGN
ONE WAY SLAB DESIGN
 
Beam and slab design
Beam and slab designBeam and slab design
Beam and slab design
 
Engineering formula sheet
Engineering formula sheetEngineering formula sheet
Engineering formula sheet
 
Presentation on Slab, Beam & Column
Presentation on Slab, Beam & ColumnPresentation on Slab, Beam & Column
Presentation on Slab, Beam & Column
 
Design of two way slab
Design of two way slabDesign of two way slab
Design of two way slab
 
Retrofitting
RetrofittingRetrofitting
Retrofitting
 
Civil Engineering (Beams,Columns)
Civil Engineering (Beams,Columns)Civil Engineering (Beams,Columns)
Civil Engineering (Beams,Columns)
 

Ähnlich wie Seismic Protection of Schools: A New Perspective - Michael Mahoney

Bw12 presentation 1.5 hour with crs and darlingotn
Bw12 presentation 1.5 hour with crs and darlingotnBw12 presentation 1.5 hour with crs and darlingotn
Bw12 presentation 1.5 hour with crs and darlingotnSean Carroll
 
Susanne Rasmussen 2013 masccc
Susanne Rasmussen 2013 mascccSusanne Rasmussen 2013 masccc
Susanne Rasmussen 2013 mascccJen Boudrie
 
Building Resilience to Natural Disasters: Lessons from Indonesia
Building Resilience to Natural Disasters: Lessons from IndonesiaBuilding Resilience to Natural Disasters: Lessons from Indonesia
Building Resilience to Natural Disasters: Lessons from Indonesia2020resilience
 
Portland public schools
Portland public schoolsPortland public schools
Portland public schoolsAIA Portland
 
Flood Proofing, Land-Watershed Management, Flood Hazard.pdf
Flood Proofing, Land-Watershed Management, Flood Hazard.pdfFlood Proofing, Land-Watershed Management, Flood Hazard.pdf
Flood Proofing, Land-Watershed Management, Flood Hazard.pdfSJAADHIWDW
 
The Twig Light: Ultra low-cost lighting in Ghana
The Twig Light: Ultra low-cost lighting in GhanaThe Twig Light: Ultra low-cost lighting in Ghana
The Twig Light: Ultra low-cost lighting in Ghanathe nciia
 
Interfacing Architectural Education &Disaster Mangement
Interfacing Architectural Education &Disaster MangementInterfacing Architectural Education &Disaster Mangement
Interfacing Architectural Education &Disaster MangementJIT KUMAR GUPTA
 
Interfacing Architectural Education & Disaster Management
Interfacing Architectural Education & Disaster ManagementInterfacing Architectural Education & Disaster Management
Interfacing Architectural Education & Disaster ManagementJIT KUMAR GUPTA
 
Strategies and Techniques for Seismic Risk Reduction of School Buildings in D...
Strategies and Techniques for Seismic Risk Reduction of School Buildings in D...Strategies and Techniques for Seismic Risk Reduction of School Buildings in D...
Strategies and Techniques for Seismic Risk Reduction of School Buildings in D...AIT Solutions
 
NDRC18 | Breakout Panel - Big Science & Engineering: Dr. David O. Prevatt, P.E.
NDRC18 | Breakout Panel - Big Science & Engineering: Dr. David O. Prevatt, P.E.NDRC18 | Breakout Panel - Big Science & Engineering: Dr. David O. Prevatt, P.E.
NDRC18 | Breakout Panel - Big Science & Engineering: Dr. David O. Prevatt, P.E.Federal Alliance for Safe Homes (FLASH)
 
Measuring Community Disaster Resilience, presented by Olivia Chilora, GOAL Ma...
Measuring Community Disaster Resilience, presented by Olivia Chilora, GOAL Ma...Measuring Community Disaster Resilience, presented by Olivia Chilora, GOAL Ma...
Measuring Community Disaster Resilience, presented by Olivia Chilora, GOAL Ma...IFPRIMaSSP
 
Resilient by nature update 27012017
Resilient by nature update 27012017Resilient by nature update 27012017
Resilient by nature update 27012017Marco Pluijm
 
Green needham sustainable communities
Green needham sustainable communitiesGreen needham sustainable communities
Green needham sustainable communitiesGreen Needham
 
ICLR Friday Forum: Functional Recovery for Lifeline Infrastructure Systems (F...
ICLR Friday Forum: Functional Recovery for Lifeline Infrastructure Systems (F...ICLR Friday Forum: Functional Recovery for Lifeline Infrastructure Systems (F...
ICLR Friday Forum: Functional Recovery for Lifeline Infrastructure Systems (F...glennmcgillivray
 

Ähnlich wie Seismic Protection of Schools: A New Perspective - Michael Mahoney (20)

Bw12 presentation 1.5 hour with crs and darlingotn
Bw12 presentation 1.5 hour with crs and darlingotnBw12 presentation 1.5 hour with crs and darlingotn
Bw12 presentation 1.5 hour with crs and darlingotn
 
Futures - blue sky dreaming 2010
Futures - blue sky dreaming 2010Futures - blue sky dreaming 2010
Futures - blue sky dreaming 2010
 
Susanne Rasmussen 2013 masccc
Susanne Rasmussen 2013 mascccSusanne Rasmussen 2013 masccc
Susanne Rasmussen 2013 masccc
 
Building Resilience to Natural Disasters: Lessons from Indonesia
Building Resilience to Natural Disasters: Lessons from IndonesiaBuilding Resilience to Natural Disasters: Lessons from Indonesia
Building Resilience to Natural Disasters: Lessons from Indonesia
 
Portland public schools
Portland public schoolsPortland public schools
Portland public schools
 
Flood Proofing, Land-Watershed Management, Flood Hazard.pdf
Flood Proofing, Land-Watershed Management, Flood Hazard.pdfFlood Proofing, Land-Watershed Management, Flood Hazard.pdf
Flood Proofing, Land-Watershed Management, Flood Hazard.pdf
 
The Twig Light: Ultra low-cost lighting in Ghana
The Twig Light: Ultra low-cost lighting in GhanaThe Twig Light: Ultra low-cost lighting in Ghana
The Twig Light: Ultra low-cost lighting in Ghana
 
Interfacing Architectural Education &Disaster Mangement
Interfacing Architectural Education &Disaster MangementInterfacing Architectural Education &Disaster Mangement
Interfacing Architectural Education &Disaster Mangement
 
Interfacing Architectural Education & Disaster Management
Interfacing Architectural Education & Disaster ManagementInterfacing Architectural Education & Disaster Management
Interfacing Architectural Education & Disaster Management
 
DWF Lessons from Vietnam
DWF Lessons from VietnamDWF Lessons from Vietnam
DWF Lessons from Vietnam
 
Strategies and Techniques for Seismic Risk Reduction of School Buildings in D...
Strategies and Techniques for Seismic Risk Reduction of School Buildings in D...Strategies and Techniques for Seismic Risk Reduction of School Buildings in D...
Strategies and Techniques for Seismic Risk Reduction of School Buildings in D...
 
NDRC18 | Breakout Panel - Big Science & Engineering: Dr. David O. Prevatt, P.E.
NDRC18 | Breakout Panel - Big Science & Engineering: Dr. David O. Prevatt, P.E.NDRC18 | Breakout Panel - Big Science & Engineering: Dr. David O. Prevatt, P.E.
NDRC18 | Breakout Panel - Big Science & Engineering: Dr. David O. Prevatt, P.E.
 
Lecture earthquake-3
Lecture earthquake-3Lecture earthquake-3
Lecture earthquake-3
 
Measuring Community Disaster Resilience, presented by Olivia Chilora, GOAL Ma...
Measuring Community Disaster Resilience, presented by Olivia Chilora, GOAL Ma...Measuring Community Disaster Resilience, presented by Olivia Chilora, GOAL Ma...
Measuring Community Disaster Resilience, presented by Olivia Chilora, GOAL Ma...
 
Resilient by nature update 27012017
Resilient by nature update 27012017Resilient by nature update 27012017
Resilient by nature update 27012017
 
archamedies v3
archamedies v3archamedies v3
archamedies v3
 
Green needham sustainable communities
Green needham sustainable communitiesGreen needham sustainable communities
Green needham sustainable communities
 
Vinalhaven, Maine Resilience Strategy
Vinalhaven, Maine Resilience StrategyVinalhaven, Maine Resilience Strategy
Vinalhaven, Maine Resilience Strategy
 
ENTRANCE PP
ENTRANCE PPENTRANCE PP
ENTRANCE PP
 
ICLR Friday Forum: Functional Recovery for Lifeline Infrastructure Systems (F...
ICLR Friday Forum: Functional Recovery for Lifeline Infrastructure Systems (F...ICLR Friday Forum: Functional Recovery for Lifeline Infrastructure Systems (F...
ICLR Friday Forum: Functional Recovery for Lifeline Infrastructure Systems (F...
 

Mehr von EERI

Masonry Construction Around the World
Masonry Construction Around the WorldMasonry Construction Around the World
Masonry Construction Around the WorldEERI
 
Analysis of Confined Masonry part 1
Analysis of Confined Masonry part 1Analysis of Confined Masonry part 1
Analysis of Confined Masonry part 1EERI
 
Analysis of Confined Masonry part 2
Analysis of Confined Masonry part 2Analysis of Confined Masonry part 2
Analysis of Confined Masonry part 2EERI
 
Intro to Confined Masonry
Intro to Confined MasonryIntro to Confined Masonry
Intro to Confined MasonryEERI
 
Virtual sidewalk survey
Virtual sidewalk surveyVirtual sidewalk survey
Virtual sidewalk surveyEERI
 
Sidewalk survey
Sidewalk surveySidewalk survey
Sidewalk surveyEERI
 
Policy document review
Policy document reviewPolicy document review
Policy document reviewEERI
 
Visual categorization
Visual categorizationVisual categorization
Visual categorizationEERI
 
Policy document review
Policy document reviewPolicy document review
Policy document reviewEERI
 
Policy document review
Policy document reviewPolicy document review
Policy document reviewEERI
 
Visual inspection
Visual inspectionVisual inspection
Visual inspectionEERI
 
Sidewalk survey
Sidewalk surveySidewalk survey
Sidewalk surveyEERI
 
Concrete Coalition
Concrete CoalitionConcrete Coalition
Concrete CoalitionEERI
 
What to Count
What to CountWhat to Count
What to CountEERI
 
Tips to tell Concrete Buildings
Tips to tell Concrete BuildingsTips to tell Concrete Buildings
Tips to tell Concrete BuildingsEERI
 
Shannon Van Zandt, Texas A & M University – “Poor and Minority Impacts from H...
Shannon Van Zandt, Texas A & M University – “Poor and Minority Impacts from H...Shannon Van Zandt, Texas A & M University – “Poor and Minority Impacts from H...
Shannon Van Zandt, Texas A & M University – “Poor and Minority Impacts from H...EERI
 
Nate Wood, United States Geological Survey – “Population Vulnerability to Ts...
Nate Wood, United States Geological Survey  – “Population Vulnerability to Ts...Nate Wood, United States Geological Survey  – “Population Vulnerability to Ts...
Nate Wood, United States Geological Survey – “Population Vulnerability to Ts...EERI
 
“Nursing Home Vulnerability in Hurricane Irene” - Samantha Penta, University ...
“Nursing Home Vulnerability in Hurricane Irene” - Samantha Penta, University ...“Nursing Home Vulnerability in Hurricane Irene” - Samantha Penta, University ...
“Nursing Home Vulnerability in Hurricane Irene” - Samantha Penta, University ...EERI
 
John Marshall, Georgia State University – “Large-scale Disasters and Federal...
 John Marshall, Georgia State University – “Large-scale Disasters and Federal... John Marshall, Georgia State University – “Large-scale Disasters and Federal...
John Marshall, Georgia State University – “Large-scale Disasters and Federal...EERI
 
California Geological Survey – “Probabilistic Tsunami Modeling and Public Pol...
California Geological Survey – “Probabilistic Tsunami Modeling and Public Pol...California Geological Survey – “Probabilistic Tsunami Modeling and Public Pol...
California Geological Survey – “Probabilistic Tsunami Modeling and Public Pol...EERI
 

Mehr von EERI (20)

Masonry Construction Around the World
Masonry Construction Around the WorldMasonry Construction Around the World
Masonry Construction Around the World
 
Analysis of Confined Masonry part 1
Analysis of Confined Masonry part 1Analysis of Confined Masonry part 1
Analysis of Confined Masonry part 1
 
Analysis of Confined Masonry part 2
Analysis of Confined Masonry part 2Analysis of Confined Masonry part 2
Analysis of Confined Masonry part 2
 
Intro to Confined Masonry
Intro to Confined MasonryIntro to Confined Masonry
Intro to Confined Masonry
 
Virtual sidewalk survey
Virtual sidewalk surveyVirtual sidewalk survey
Virtual sidewalk survey
 
Sidewalk survey
Sidewalk surveySidewalk survey
Sidewalk survey
 
Policy document review
Policy document reviewPolicy document review
Policy document review
 
Visual categorization
Visual categorizationVisual categorization
Visual categorization
 
Policy document review
Policy document reviewPolicy document review
Policy document review
 
Policy document review
Policy document reviewPolicy document review
Policy document review
 
Visual inspection
Visual inspectionVisual inspection
Visual inspection
 
Sidewalk survey
Sidewalk surveySidewalk survey
Sidewalk survey
 
Concrete Coalition
Concrete CoalitionConcrete Coalition
Concrete Coalition
 
What to Count
What to CountWhat to Count
What to Count
 
Tips to tell Concrete Buildings
Tips to tell Concrete BuildingsTips to tell Concrete Buildings
Tips to tell Concrete Buildings
 
Shannon Van Zandt, Texas A & M University – “Poor and Minority Impacts from H...
Shannon Van Zandt, Texas A & M University – “Poor and Minority Impacts from H...Shannon Van Zandt, Texas A & M University – “Poor and Minority Impacts from H...
Shannon Van Zandt, Texas A & M University – “Poor and Minority Impacts from H...
 
Nate Wood, United States Geological Survey – “Population Vulnerability to Ts...
Nate Wood, United States Geological Survey  – “Population Vulnerability to Ts...Nate Wood, United States Geological Survey  – “Population Vulnerability to Ts...
Nate Wood, United States Geological Survey – “Population Vulnerability to Ts...
 
“Nursing Home Vulnerability in Hurricane Irene” - Samantha Penta, University ...
“Nursing Home Vulnerability in Hurricane Irene” - Samantha Penta, University ...“Nursing Home Vulnerability in Hurricane Irene” - Samantha Penta, University ...
“Nursing Home Vulnerability in Hurricane Irene” - Samantha Penta, University ...
 
John Marshall, Georgia State University – “Large-scale Disasters and Federal...
 John Marshall, Georgia State University – “Large-scale Disasters and Federal... John Marshall, Georgia State University – “Large-scale Disasters and Federal...
John Marshall, Georgia State University – “Large-scale Disasters and Federal...
 
California Geological Survey – “Probabilistic Tsunami Modeling and Public Pol...
California Geological Survey – “Probabilistic Tsunami Modeling and Public Pol...California Geological Survey – “Probabilistic Tsunami Modeling and Public Pol...
California Geological Survey – “Probabilistic Tsunami Modeling and Public Pol...
 

Seismic Protection of Schools: A New Perspective - Michael Mahoney

  • 1. Seismic Protection of Schools: A New Perspective Earthquake Engineering Research Institute 2013 Annual Meeting Michael Mahoney, Senior Geophysicist FEMA, Building Science Branch
  • 2. 1933 Long Beach Earthquake • The M6.4 Long Beach earthquake was the first major earthquake to show the threat of URM school buildings. • It collapsed or severely damaging thousands of URM buildings, including over 230 school buildings. • Fortunately, school was not in session, or hundreds of children would have been killed. • This event did lead to California passing the Field Act, which required special inspection of new school buildings. Franklin Junior High School before and after the 1933 earthquake. Photo: NICEE and Historical Society of Long Beach
  • 3. 2008 Sichuan China Earthquake • The M7.9 Sichuan China earthquake caused over 69,000 fatalities. Many of them were the children who were in the thousands of school buildings that collapsed. • The most riveting images to come out of the event were the reactions of parents losing their only child and their protests for the government allowing poor construction. Photos: guardian.co.uk
  • 4. 2011 Mineral Virginia Earthquake • The M5.8 Mineral Virginia earthquake was the largest Virginia earthquake since 1897 and the most widely felt in US history. • Two Louisa County schools closed for school year and were eventually razed and replaced using FEMA disaster funds. • Louisa County High School • Primarily a 1975 steel frame structure with masonry walls. • Most damage to the marginally reinforced masonry walls. • The high school was a community center for this depressed county. • Thomas Jefferson Elementary School • Two story URM, near collapse of perpendicular kindergarten wing. • Louisa County Middle School, built in 1990’s, was undamaged and was used to house both middle and high school classes. • Only minor injuries reported.
  • 7. Strategies to Reduce School Earthquake Risk • Highest initial cost Replace • Substantial disruption Buildings • Value-added benefits Risk Reduction Single • Moderate initial cost Strategies Stage • Substantial disruption Rehab • Quick resolution • Lowest initial cost Incremental • Minimal disruption Rehab • Longer term solution
  • 8. Advantages of Incremental Retrofitting Single-Stage Retrofitting Incremental Retrofitting • All costs are concentrated in a short • Costs are distributed over multiple time period fiscal years • Construction is disruptive to school • Construction can be phased to occur operations during summer breaks to minimize • Requires temporary space during disruption to school operations construction to house displaced • Students and staff are not displaced students and staff • Seismic vulnerabilities are mitigated • All seismic vulnerabilities are in a phased approach, beginning with mitigated in a single phase of work the most severe vulnerabilities first • Seismic retrofitting work is generally • Seismic mitigation can be integrated performed independent of future with other scheduled maintenance maintenance and remodels and remodel projects
  • 9. Mitigation Options • Complete Seismic Retrofitting of Schools – Advantage: complete retrofitting reduces future seismic risk to an acceptable level. – Disadvantage: Expensive, difficult to justify in low seismic areas, potential loss of use during retrofit. • May be Justifiable for Critical Facilities. – Schools also used as shelters, critical to response. • Retrofitting Process: – Identify candidates using FEMA 154 or ROVER – Evaluate hazardous buildings using ASCE 31 or 41. – Design retrofit using ASCE 41. – Retrofitting techniques provided in FEMA 547. – Comply with IBC Chapter 34 or IEBC.
  • 10. Mitigation Options • Incremental Retrofitting – Advantage: cost effective, focus on specific risk area, and can be done during normal maintenance. – Disadvantage: not full retrofit, some risk remains • Incremental Seismic Rehabilitation series – FEMA 395 – Schools FEMA 396 – Hospitals – FEMA 397 – Offices FEMA 398 – Apartments – FEMA 399 – Retail FEMA 400 – Hotels – FEMA P-420 Engineering Guideline • Retrofitting done during normal maintenance. – Example: bracing parapets during re-roofing.
  • 11. Mitigation Options • Nonstructural Retrofitting – Nonstructural damage accounts for most damage. – It can result in complete loss of use of a building. • Nonstructural components include: – Architectural building components. – Mechanical, electrical and plumbing components. – Furniture, fixtures and equipment. • Nonstructural Design Guide (FEMA E-74) – Recently improved, web-based design guide. – Provides design guidance for over 70 different nonstructural components. – Provides examples of damage and plans or photos of the recommended mitigation technique. – Includes technical specifications, risk rating forms and sample inventory checklists.  http://www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/earthquake/fema74/index.shtm
  • 12. What Has Been Done by State • There have been notable efforts by some states to identify at- risk school buildings and to begin the process of addressing the risk they present. For example: – California Field Act (which requires peer review of new school buildings) and URM laws have resulted in safer school buildings. – Oregon initiated a Seismic Rehabilitation Grant Program which awarded $15 million to 14 schools and 11 emergency services facilities. K-12 grants were from $120,000 to $1,490,000, with an average award of about $777,000 for high- to very-high risk of collapse buildings. – Utah used FEMA state assistance funds for an assessment pilot project for 80 schools, about 10% of the schools in the Wasach Front. This project will help to develop a complete inventory to identify those schools requiring further engineering evaluation and future seismic retrofitting. – Several other states have funded outreach programs to raise awareness. • However, they have all been limited by budget issues and the day-to-day problems local governments face to just to keep their schools operating.
  • 13. What Has Been Done Nationally • The U.S. Department of Education has several programs to provide funding to improve school buildings, but they do not address structural risk from natural hazards. – Some examples include meeting the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and to wire school buildings for internet capability. – While they cannot help seismic retrofit a school building, they could possibly help fund a new replacement building. • FEMA has the post-disaster Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) that could be used to reduce seismic risk to existing school buildings. – This would require that states and localities have in place a recognized mitigation plan prior to a triggering disaster that includes seismically retrofitting school buildings.
  • 14. What Could Be Done* • Any action to reduce the seismic risk presented by URM schools must be undertaken and supported at the national, state and local levels. • All three are required; the absence of any one will doom any initiative to failure. – Local involvement is the most critical: schools are local entities and this is where any program will succeed or fail. Local champions are necessary for any program to work. – State involvement is needed as many successful school retrofit programs require state funding and leadership. – National initiatives can help lead the way and provide a model template or target for state and local governments. * The views in the this presentation are strictly those of the author and do not represent the views of the FEMA, its management, or more importantly, those who decide how federal funds are spent.
  • 15. What Could Be Done has to be Done Locally • However, any action to address the risk presented by URM school buildings must begin at the local level, and should include educating, empowering and supporting the following partners and advocates: – Concerned parents – Parent Teacher Associations/Organizations – Teachers unions – School administrators – Local/regional seismic safety advocates – Local media outlets – Local building code department – Local elected officials
  • 16. Impediments • However, such actions have a hard time succeeding because they must fight for public attention and resources in an increasingly difficult environment. • Such initiatives only succeed when there are local champions to raise awareness and drive the issue. • What would help this process and these champions would be to establish a national goal that has been endorsed by relevant constituents, organizations and others. • Such a national goal could serve as a rallying cry to help state and local efforts get the attention and traction they need to succeed.
  • 17. A Possible Program Goal • The concept of establishing a long term ultimate goal with several intermediate goals was effectively used to seismically retrofit or replace hazardous hospitals under California Hospital Bill SB 1953. • Such a combination of a long-term visible end goal along with a series of smaller achievable intermediate steps could help to keep the risk of URM schools and how this risk can be addressed in the public eye as it moves forward.
  • 18. A Possible Program Goal • The year 2033 will mark the 100 year anniversary of the 1933 Long Beach earthquake; the first earthquake to demonstrate the vulnerability of URM school buildings. • A possible goal to address the risk of URM schools could be that by the year 2033, every URM school building in our nation’s high seismic zones will have been either: 1) fully seismically retrofitted or 2) replaced by a new seismically safe school building.
  • 19. Possible Intermediate Steps • By 2013: Adoption by seismic advisory organizations. • By 2018: State adoption of a program to identify and assess all of their seismically vulnerable URM school buildings. • By 2023: 1) A seismic assessment of all URM school buildings, 2) State adoption of a program on how seismic vulnerabilities of specific URM school buildings will be addressed, either by seismic retrofitting or by replacement, and 3) State or local adoption of a plan to fund that work. • By 2028: State or local approved funding for all of the schools identified in the program. • By 2033: Completion of all seismic retrofitting or replacement construction.
  • 20. “URM Free by ’33”

Hinweis der Redaktion

  1. One strategy not presented here is to move the building/campus away from the EQ Hazard (fault trace, poor soil, etc.) to another site. Generally this is too impractical, unless consideration of alternate sites is part of the District long term facilities Master Plan- Incremental Rehabilitation is the strategy with the greatest FINANCIAL FLEXIBILITY.