Journal of Transportation Research

Journal of Transportation Research

Determination of Acceptable Risk by Considering Direct Damage caused Earthquake Incident in Lifeline (Road Transport)

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
maghsood pouryari 1
kiarash naser asadi 2
1 Head of Logistic,Systems Management&Disaster Dept Road, Housing&Urban Development Research Center
2 zanjan university
10.22034/tri.2023.366197.3092
Abstract
Direct damage calculation is one of the main steps in determining the risk of road transport network against unexpected events such as earthquakes. The appropriate measure of the amount of damage is provided; the cost of improvement is proportional. Setting less than risk acceptable will increase future losses and setting more than needed, although it increases safety but also increases costs. In this research, based on the amount of possible damage to a road and infrastructures due to the earthquake in terms of the percentage of replacement
(in case of complete damage, the replacement cost is 100 units) the amount of direct damage has been investigated. Earthquake intensity is considered in three categories: severe, moderate and mild according to different return periods, and the performance of the road is considered in four categories: freeway, highway, First Rate main road and second Rate Main Road. In this regard, based on Opinions of experts and officials, a method for calculating direct damage is provided and by implementing the method in 14 cases, the necessary validation was done. The results showed that among the effective parameters, four parameters: topography, the road infrastructures, the alternative roads or without it and the importance of the origin-destination had More impact on the amount of damage. Among these, the topography has the greatest impact and its effect is more severe by changing the degree of road performance from the freeway to the other roads.
Keywords
Direct Damage
Earthquake
Road Transport
Risk
Subjects
-مرکز تحقیقات راه، مسکن و شهرسازی، بخش لجستیک، مدیریت سیتم و بحران (1401). تعیین معیارهای خطر پذیری قابل قبول در شبکه حمل و نقل جاده‌ای در مقابل سوانح طبیعی. شماره نشر: گ-1000.
-ناصراسدی کیارش (1385). مدل برآورد خطرپذیری لرزه‌ای در صنایع، رساله دکتری. پژوهشگاه بین المللی زلزله شناسی و مهندسی زلزله.
-پوریاری مقصود، ناصراسدی کیارش، حسنی نعمت، ایار پویان. (1400). تعیین خطرپذیری قابل قبول با ملاحظه خسارت غیر مستقیم قابل قبول ناشی از حادثه زلزله در شریان حیاتی (حمل ونقل جاده­ای). پژوهشنامه حمل و نقل. سال هجدهم دوره 4، شماره 69.
-Anbazhagan, P., Srinivas, S., & Chandran, D. (2012). Classification of road damage due to earthquakes. Natural Hazards. doi.org/10.1007/s11069-011-0025-0
-Brookshire, D. S., Chang, S. E., Cochrane, H., Olson, R. A., Rose, A., & Steenson, J. (1997). Direct and indirect economic losses from earthquake damage. Earthquake Spectra. doi.org/10.1193/1.1585975
-California Transportation Center, Univ. of California, Berkeley, Calif. Boisvert, R. (1992). Indirect economic consequences of a catastrophic.
-D. Shaw (2000). Emergency Relief Measures and Rehabilitation Policies in the Aftermath of the 921 Chi-Chi (Taiwan) Earthquake. in EuroConference on Global Change and Catastrophe Risk Management. Laxenburg, Austria, Austria, July 6-9.
-Enke, D. L., Tirasirichai, C., & Luna, R. (2008). Estimation of Earthquake Loss due to Bridge Damage in the St. Louis Metropolitan Area. II: Indirect Losses. Natural Hazards Review.
doi.org/10.1061/(asce)1527-6988(2008)9:1(12)
https://www.tinn.ir/fa/tiny/news-172296,1397.
- https://irna.ir/xjGDsP.
-Kilanitis, I., & Sextos, A. (2019). Impact of earthquake-induced bridge damage and time evolving traffic demand on the road network resilience. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering (English Edition). doi.org/10.1016/j.jtte.2018.07.002
-Lesson for Local Governments on Hazard Mitigation Strategies and Human Needs Response Planning - 1999 Kocaeli and Duzce, Turkey, Earthquake (2002). Association of Bay Area Governments, March.
-Lin Junqi, Li Zuohua, Hu Mingyi Post-Earthquake Field Loss Evaluation of Earthquake Hazard, 2004.
 https://www.eeri.org/images/archived/wp-content/uploads/China/lin_jq_iem.pdf
-Lindell, M. K., & Prater, C. S. (2003). Assessing Community Impacts of Natural Disasters. Natural Hazards Review. doi.org/10.1061/(asce)1527-6988(2003)4:4(176)
-Multi-hazard Loss Estimation Methodology Earthquake Model HAZUS-MH MR3-Technical Manual (2003). [Performance]. Department of Homeland Security Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate FEMA Mitigation Division.
-National Research Council (1999). The Impacts of Natural Disasters: A Framework for Loss Estimation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi.org/10.17226/6425
-Piarc Technical Committee 3.2 Risk Management for Roads (2010). Towards Development of a Risk Management Approach. World Road Association. La Défense Cedex, France.
-Rose, A., & Lim, D. (2002). Business interruption losses from natural hazards: Conceptual and methodological issues in the case of the northridge earthquake. Environmental Hazards. doi.org/10.3763/ehaz.2002.0401
-S.E. Chang, N. Nojima (1998). Measuring Lifeline System Performance: Highway Transportation Systems in Recent Earthquakes. In 6th U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Seattle, USA.
-Sorensen, Paul, Martin Wachs, Endy M. Daehner, Aaron Kofner, Liisa Ecola, Mark Alan Hanson, Allison Yoh, Thomas Light, and James Griffin (2008). Moving Los Angeles: Short-Term Policy Options for Improving Transportation. Santa Monica. CA: RAND Corporation.
https://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG748.html. Also available in print form.
-U. Gupta (2001). Earthquake Loss Estimation Including Transportation Network Damage. Massachusetts Institute of Technology 2001, Massachusetts, June.