Guilaine Victor - Sector Privado

FORO REGIONAL USAR - 2015
Latinoamérica y El Caribe
Programa Regional de Asistencia para Desastres de USAID/OFDA
Guilaine Victor
Haiti Country Manager
Oct 21 – 24 2015
Miyamoto International
gvictor@miyamotointernational.com
Miyamoto International
Italy
Italy Sacramento
Japan
Japan
Turkey
Turkey
San
San Francisco
Francisco Los
Los Angeles
Angeles
Nepal Bangladesh
Bangladesh Haiti
India Orange County
Thailand
Thailand San Diego
Liberia
Colombia
Colombia
New
New Zealand
Zealand
2
FORO REGIONAL USAR – 2015
Ciudad de Panamá - Octubre 2015
More than 100 Earthquakes Worked on: 1971 - 2014

1998 Adana-Ceyhan, Turkey (M6.2)
1971 San Fernando, CA (M6.5) 1988 Gorman, CA (M5.2)
1999 Armenia, Colombia (M5.0)
1972 Managua, Nicaragua (M6.3) 1988 Alum Rock, CA (M5.1)
1999 Puerto Escondido, Mexico (M7.5)
1973 Point Mugu, CA (M5.9) 1988 Saguenay, Quebec (M6.0)
1999 Western Washington (M5.8)
1973 Managua, Nicaragua (M5.8) 1988 Armenia, USSR (M6.9)
1999 Izmit, Turkey (M7.4)
1975 Ferndale, CA (M5.5) 1989 Acapulco, Mexico (M6.8)
1999 Duzce, Turkey (M7.2)
1975 Lice, Turkey (M6.8) 1989 Loma Prieta, CA (M7.1)
1999 Central Taiwan (M7.6)
1976 Friuli, Italy (M6.5) 1989 Newcastle, Australia (M5.5)
1999 Athens, Greece (M5.9)
1977 Vrancia, Romania (M7.4) 1990 Upland, California (M5.5)
1999 Algeria (M5.5)
1978 Izu Peninsula, Japan (M6.7) 1990 Bishop's Castle, Wales (M5.4)
1999 Hector Mine, California (M7.1)
1978 Miyagi-Ken-oki, Japan (M7.4) 1990 Manjil, Iran (M7.7)
2000 Napa, CA (M5.2)
1978 Santa Barbara, CA (M5.1) 1990 Central Luzon, Philippines (M7.7)
2000 Tottori, Japan (M6.7)
1979 Bishop, CA (M5.8) 1991 Valle de la Estrella, Costa Rica (M7.4)
2001 Gujarat, India (M7.6)
1979 Gilroy, CA (M5.5) 1991 Sierra Madre, CA (M5.8)
2001 Seattle, WA (M6.8)
1979 Imperial Valley, CA (M6.6) 1992 Erzincan, Turkey (M6.8)
2002 San Simeon (Paso Robles), CA (M6.5)
1980 Livermore, CA (M5.5 and 5.8) 1992 Roermond, Netherlands (M5.8)
2007 West Sumatra, Indonesia (M6.3)
1980 Eureka, CA (M7.0) 1992 Desert Hot Springs, CA (M6.1)
2007 Niigata (Kashiwazaki), Japan (M6.8)
1980 Mammoth Mt., CA (M6.5, 6.5, 6.7) 1992 Cape Mendocino, CA (M7.0, 6.0, & 6.5)
2008 Mexicali, Mexico (M5.1)
1981 Brawley, CA (M5.6) 1992 Landers-Big Bear, CA (M7.6 and 6.7)
2008 Wells, Nevada (M6.3)
1983 Coalinga, CA (M6.7) 1992 Cairo, Egypt (M5.9)
2008 Sichuan, China (M8.0)
1983 Borah Mt., Idaho (M6.9) 1993 Scotts Mill, OR (M5.3)
2008 Chino Hills, CA (M5.4)
1984 Morgan Hill, CA (M6.2) 1993 Nansei-oki Hokkaido, Japan, (M7.8)
2009 L’Aquila, Italy (M6.3)
1985 Santiago, Chile (M7.8 and 7.2) 1993 Agana, Guam (M8.2)
2010 Eureka, CA (M6.5)
1985 Mexico City, Mexico (M8.1 and 7.5) 1993 Klamath Falls, OR (M5.7)
2010 Haiti (M6.9)
1986 Painesville, Ohio (M5.0) 1994 Northridge, CA (M6.6)
2010 Chile (M8.8)
1986 Adak Island, Alaska (M7.7 and 6.5) 1994 Tohoko-oki, Hokkaido, Japan (M8.1)
2010 Baja California, Mexico & CA (M7.2)
1986 North Palm Springs, CA (M6.0) 1995 Great Hanshin (Kobe), Japan (M7.2)
2010 Christchurch, New Zealand (M7.2)
1986 Chalfant Valley, CA (M6.0 and 5.5) 1995 Pereira, Colombia (M6.5)
2011 Christchurch, New Zealand (M6.3)
1986 San Salvador, El Salvador (M5.4) 1995 Sakhalin Islands, Russia (M7.2)
2011 Honshu, Japan (M9.0)
1986 Northern Taiwan (M6.8) 1995 Antofagasta, Chile (M7.4)
2011 Van, Turkey (M7.2)
1987 Cerro Prieto, Mexico (M5.4) 1995 Manzanillo, Mexico (M7.6)
2012 Finale Emilia, Italy (M6.0)
1987 Bay of Plenty, New Zealand (M6.2) 1996 Duvall (Seattle,), WA (M5.3)
2013 Philippines (M7.1)
1987 Whittier, CA (M5.9) 1997 Calico, CA (M5.0)
2014 Napa, CA (M6.0)
1987 Superstition Hills, CA (M6.3) 1997 Umbria, Italy (M5.5)
• Implementations beyond what is!

• Meet with key people, Government,
International donors, NGO, private sector, civil
society
• Identify missing element or gap in existing
plan
• Talk to all and discuss possible support
• Respect all input but ready to step up
• Relevant Expertise for Haiti
• 2010 Earthquake
• Following EQ, 100,000s of people displaced
and resided in temporary shelters
• Cause of concern because of disease, living
conditions, hurricanes
• Quickly assess (and repair) buildings so people
can return
• Haiti 2010 - Miyamoto identify Gap
• Little knowledge of buildings spectrum -

Assessment needed per Int’l Code
Modify ATC20 to address construction in
Haiti
• Pool of engineers capable to assess limited
Train engineers identified by Public Works
• Leader not clearly define
Government take the lead with the support
of all
• Lack of proper design & poor construction

• Vulnerable type of buildings
• School Buildings
Occupancy Damaged
Residential 46%
Schools 51%
Healthcare 36%
Civic 44%
Commercial 36%
• Damage Assessment Program
• 600 Haitian engineers

trained
• 17 teams to perform
inspection
• 3,000 buildings a day
• 400,000 buildings
inspected
• ATC20 modified for
Haiti construction
• PDA-based and reviewed
• Develop database
• Damage Assessment Program Coding

• Inspected (“green-tagged”), building is
structurally undamaged OK for occupancy
• Restricted Entry (“yellow-tagged”), building
should not be occupied for extended periods
and that parts of the building might be
considered off-limits.
• Unsafe”(“red-tagged”), meaning that the
building cannot be safely inhabited.
• Sample Building
Category Green Yellow Red Overall

No. of buildings 213,100 102,100 79,500 398,800
Percentage 53% 26% 20% 100%
Median damage 0 –1% 10-30% 60-100% -
• New Gap identified

• Debris slowing all reconstruction and access
vulnerable zone and bring help to population
With data obtained during the buildings
assessments Miyamoto did an estimation of debris in
capital of Haiti, which allowed the Government of Haiti
with the support of the International community and
civil Society to elaborated plan to remove debris and
actually remove it
• Reconstruction Program
• Based on database from assessment

• Cost-effective and simple repair for typical residential
buildings
• Programs to communicate and train contractors and
communities to repair and reconstruct
• Repair assessment method and construction
inspection plan
• Implement project communications program
• Progress is Made
•
• Preparedness
How? Before event
• Identify and Optimize Seismic Risk

Seismic Building Building
Hazard Vulnerability Data
Probabilistic
Evaluation
Risk Identification of
Buildings
• North of Haiti
• Plan for Reduction of Seismic Risks for

Northern Haiti
• Miyamoto International qualifications

• Key project personnel expertise
• Earthquake danger in Northern Haiti
• Project methodology
Make the world a better place.

• Miyamoto International Qualifications

• International firm with offices in key
seismic regions
• Proven record of risk assessment
and seismic strengthening
• Key participant in earthquake surveys
worldwide
• Well respected by academia, public and
private sectors
• Haiti Fault Lines

• Tectonics
• North American & Caribbean plates
• Movement of ~ 40 mm per year
– North: Septentrional-Oriente fault zone
– South: Enriquillo–Plantain Garden fault zone
• Seismicity
• Past large earthquakes

– ~ 1230, 1562, 1842.
• Recurrence of ~ 300 years
• Plate Movement
• 1842 Earthquake
• M 8.1
• Major damages in Cap-Haitien
• Followed by Tsunami
– M4.6 at Port-de-Paix
– M2.0 along most of north coast
– Flooding
• Consequences
• Cap-Haitien
– Reduced to ruins
– 5,000 fatalities (pop 10,000)
• Môle-Saint-Nicolas
– Almost all
buildings
collapsed
• Port-de-Paix
– 300 tsunami
fatalities
(pop. 3,000)
• Loss Estimation

hazard vulnerability data
Impact
Evaluation
Buildings
• Seismic Hazard
• Review of available data

• Develop seismic hazard for sites
• Scenarios
– M 8 similar to 1842
– >1946 event
• Site conditions
• Data Collection: Overview

• Define limits of urban areas
• Field survey collect number of structures in a sector
• Extrapolate to total by using satellite imagery
• Define building types: 3 to 5
• Data Collection: General information
• GPS coordinates
• Occupancy type
– Schools, hospitals, residential, etc.
• Number of stories
• Date of construction
• Number of occupants
• Data Collection: Building specific
• Type of construction
– Concrete, RC, infills
• Framing
– Moment frame, wall
• Foundation
• Roof and floor type
• Irregularity
• Building Vulnerability
• Use Database from 2010 event

• Correlate damage to
– Building construction
– Earthquake intensity at site
• Develop vulnerability functions
• Develop fatality/casualty functions
• Outcome
• Obtain damage and fatality index for
individual buildings
• Identify vulnerable structures
• Prioritize mitigation
• Project communication
• Meetings with
government
representatives
• Sessions with
stakeholders including
the public
• Informative brochures
• Global Practices in
Earthquake Structural Engineering
• Christchurch 2010
• Post-earthquake
• Post-earthquake
• Miyamoto Response in NZ
• Work with insurance industry, private sector,

and government
• Provide in-depth knowledge of building codes
worldwide
• Investment strategy
2015 Nepal Earthquake

2.8 Million
People affected
Number of people killed

As of 16/08/2015 8,881
602,254
Houses Collapsed
288,255
• Earthquake Overview Houses partially damaged

M7.8, April 25, 2015

0.2
• Strong motion data

0.15
0.1
0.05
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
-0.05
-0.1
-0.15
-0.2
• Kathmandu Valley
Damage Assessments
Assessed more than 30 commercial and residential high-rise,

hospitals and hotels for earthquake-related damage
• Non-ductile concrete
• Villages
• Villages
• Nepal temporary shelters

• Bridges
Everest
• Everest
• Schools
• Identify and Optimize Seismic Risk

Hazard Vulnerability Data
Probabilistic
Evaluation
Buildings
• Manila Schools Risk Identification
Total projected
fatalities : 24,404
• Risk Reduction schools

• Risk reduction schools

• Airport Earthquake Risk Assessment

• Conclusions
• Just conforming to minimum code is

not good enough
• Engineering innovation is critical for cost
effectiveness to get things done
Structural engineers make a

difference in society.
• All sectors should prepare

• Government needs to lead all sectors
supporting (NGO, Civil Society etc)
• Better construction
• Communication is key
• Have a plan

Guilaine Victor - Sector Privado

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Guilaine Victor - Sector Privado

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

FORO REGIONAL USAR - 2015

More than 100 Earthquakes Worked on: 1971 - 2014

• Implementations beyond what is!

• Relevant Expertise for Haiti

• Haiti 2010 - Miyamoto identify Gap

• Little knowledge of buildings spectrum -

• Lack of proper design & poor construction

• Damage Assessment Program

• 600 Haitian engineers

• Damage Assessment Program Coding

Category Green Yellow Red Overall

• New Gap identified

• Based on database from assessment

• Identify and Optimize Seismic Risk

• Plan for Reduction of Seismic Risks for

• Miyamoto International qualifications

Make the world a better place.

• Miyamoto International Qualifications

• Haiti Fault Lines

• Past large earthquakes

Seismic Building Building

• Review of available data

• Data Collection: Overview

• Data Collection: General information

• Data Collection: Building specific

• Use Database from 2010 event

• Work with insurance industry, private sector,

2015 Nepal Earthquake

Number of people killed

• Earthquake Overview Houses partially damaged

M7.8, April 25, 2015

• Strong motion data

Assessed more than 30 commercial and residential high-rise,

• Nepal temporary shelters

• Identify and Optimize Seismic Risk

• Manila Schools Risk Identification

• Risk Reduction schools

• Risk reduction schools

• Airport Earthquake Risk Assessment

• Just conforming to minimum code is

Structural engineers make a

• All sectors should prepare

You might also like