Earthquake damage estimation systems: Literature review

Kahandawa, Ravindu; Domingo, Niluka; Park, Sung Ho; Uma, S.R.

doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2018.01.080

Cited by 23 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…PACT is the original implementer of P-58 methodology. When compared with SLAT, PACT has an additional 600 fragility curves and consequence functions, considers different building categories, higher transparency and uses a standard classification system, which makes PACT more superior than SLAT (Kahandawa et al , 2018). SP3 is a commercially available product, which is an upgraded version of PACT.…”

Section: Pact Slat Vs Sp3mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, a new model is required for post-earthquake cost estimation, which comprises the functions of P-58 models. Furthermore, there are circumstances that need consideration in earthquake damage repair work situations, some of which were pointed out by Kahandawa et al (2018), which have not been considered in any of the P-58 methodology based models.…”

Section: Pact Slat Vs Sp3mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, P-58 models calculate the repair cost by cumulating the cost of smaller items. However, repair cost should be estimated based on the total project rather than summing up repair cost for each element, for example, preliminary costs (Ashworth and Perera, 2015; Kahandawa et al , 2018). Overall, costs should be ideally calculated based on the total project and some classification of costs like preliminaries cannot be included in elemental rates.…”

Section: Functions Not Covered By Pre-earthquake Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In summary, cost fluctuation because of changes in demand, total repair costs, that include; preliminaries, professional fees, margins, etc., are not considered in PACT, SLAT or SP3 models (Kahandawa et al , 2018). There is also no indication that these factors are considered in HAZUS either.…”

Section: Functions Not Covered By Pre-earthquake Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Even though these limitations were indicated by Kahandawa et al (2018), only a literature review and document analysis of the models was conducted to verify the factors that are not considered in these models. Therefore, an investigation must be conducted to identify the factors that need to be considered in cost estimation for post-earthquake damage repair work and to verify the above-mentioned factors.…”

Section: Functions Not Covered By Pre-earthquake Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Factors impacting post-earthquake damage repair cost estimations

Kahandawa

Domingo

Chawynski

et al. 2020

IJDRBE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Reconstruction processes after an earthquake require estimating repair costs to decide on whether to repair or rebuild. This requires an accurate post-earthquake cost estimation tool. Currently, there are no post-earthquake loss estimation models to estimate repair costs accurately. There are loss assessment tools available, namely, HAZUS, performance assessment calculation tool (PACT), seismic performance and loss assessment tool (SLAT) and seismic performance prediction tool, which have not been specifically used for post-earthquake repair cost estimation. This paper aims to focus on identifying factors that need to be considered when upgrading these tools for post-earthquake repair cost estimation. Design/methodology/approach The research was conducted as an exploratory study using a literature review, document analysis of the PACT, SLAT and HAZUS software and 18 semi-structured interviews. Findings The research identified information sources available for estimation and factors to be considered when developing estimations based on the information sources. Research limitations/implications The data was collected from professionals who were involved mostly in housing repair work in New Zealand. Therefore, impact of these repair work factors might vary in other forms of structures such as civil structures include bridges and the country as a result of varying construction details and standards. Practical implications The identified factors will be used to improve the loss estimation tools are such as PACT and HAZUS, as well as to develop a post-earthquake repair cost estimation tool. Originality/value Currently, the identified factors impacting post-earthquake damage repair cost estimations are not considered in loss estimation tools. Factors identified in this research will help to develop a more accurate cost estimation tool for post-earthquake repair work.

show abstract

Section: Pact Slat Vs Sp3mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Pact Slat Vs Sp3mentioning

confidence: 99%