Bertero, R D (2014) Great 2010 American earthquakes: Lessons for seismic design and construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 140(4): B4013003, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
At the beginning of 2010, two large earthquakes struck the Americas. The January 12 Haiti earthquake with a magnitude Mw = 7.0 produced about 300,000 deaths (second by the number of fatalities in the world history after the 1556 Shaanxi China earthquake). A month later, the February 27 Maule Chilean earthquake with a magnitude Mw = 8.8 (an energy release 500 times larger than that from the Haiti earthquake) produced 500 deaths, most due to the resulting tsunami. However, the Chilean earthquake caused more than $30 billion of direct damage, left nonoperational dozens of hospitals and thousands of schools, and caused for several hours a general blackout as well as the loss of service of essential communications facilities, crucial to take control of the chaotic after-earthquake situation. In this paper, the severity of both earthquakes is compared. It is shown that their effects on the life and economy of the affected countries as well as the features of the seismic codes or the absence of codes offer important lessons regarding the seismic design and construction. From these lessons, specific and distinctive recommendations regarding the seismic design and construction of essential facilities, conventional buildings, and nonengineered, auto constructed low-income houses are offered.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | history, China, seismic design, income, tsunami, fatalities, Haiti, earthquake |
| Subjects: | structural engineering, environmental hazards, architectural and construction history, economic analysis, Geography, health risk and incident analysis |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Sustainability, Health and Safety, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here