hazus deep dive into methodology and applications

Hazus Deep Dive into Methodology and Applications

Date January 30, 2019

National Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program Workshop

Hazus Future (2018-2022)

OpenHazus

• Open and transparent methodology • Vetted by the scientific community • Made freely available to all • Directly integrate enhanced hazard data • Streamlined site-specific data inventory • Modular architecture • Improve loss estimation methodologies • Align with FEMA programmatic needs • Move to open source technologies

Based on 2012 expert-developed methodology, endorsed by NTHMP Coastal areas of 5 High risk States and 5 Territories (National Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program) Hazus leverages hazard inundation data from authoritative sources: • NOAA (SIFT) (Hazus-ready sample data from FEMA MSC) • Alaska Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys • Washington Department of Natural Resources • Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries • California Geological Survey, California Emergency Management Agency • University of Hawaii, Hawaii Emergency Management Agency – Great

Aleutian Tsunami (GAT)

Hazus

Tsunami Module

• Hazus Tsunami Capabilities:

• Integrates external hazard data + quick look capability

• GBS and site-specific building losses.

• Evacuation (USGS) and Casualty modules.

• No harbor infrastructure capability.

Hazus

Tsunami Modules

GAPS

Hazus

Tsunami Module Coverage

Hazard

Integrates external authoritative hazard data at 3 Levels:

Hazard

GUI helps prepare and convert data to required Flux and Depth input:

Estimating Velocity from Runup – Level 1

Comparing numerical modeling velocity grid (SIFT) vs empirical (P646 and ASCE)

Testing of ASCE Equation:

Testing of P-646 Equation:

Hazus National Structure Inventory

• Pilots: Kenai Peninsula, Grays Harbor, Tillamook

• School locations, teachers, students (ORNL, HIFLD Open)

• Day/night population (LEHD) • Over/Under 65 population • Foundation type/height

(pre/post NFIP) • Design levels based on

median year built • Leverage area thresholds to

assign med and high rise • Hotel Pop from FEMA P-58

Damage Functions Structural Losses Based on Momentum Flux (feet3/sec2) • Earthquake

Building Type (28)

• Seismic Design Level (8)

Tsunami Damage Analysis Methodology – Leverage SQL Tables

Slight Median

Slight BetaModerate

MedianModerate

BetaExtensive Median

Extensive Beta

Complete Median

Complete Beta

W1 494 0.74 494 0.74 494 0.74 494 0.74High Code Seismic Design

Flux_ (ft3/sec2)

Probability of Exceeding

Slight

Probability of Exceeding

Moderate

Probability of Exceeding

Extensive

Probability of Exceeding

Complete

Probabilty of No Damage

Probability of Slight Damage

Probability of Moderate

Damage

Probability of Extensive

Damage

Probability of Complete

Damage50 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00100 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.98 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02150 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.95 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05200 0.111 0.111 0.111 0.111 0.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.11250 0.179 0.179 0.179 0.179 0.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.18300 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.25350 0.321 0.321 0.321 0.321 0.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.32400 0.388 0.388 0.388 0.388 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.39450 0.450 0.450 0.450 0.450 0.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.45500 0.507 0.507 0.507 0.507 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.51550 0.558 0.558 0.558 0.558 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.56600 0.604 0.604 0.604 0.604 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.60650 0.645 0.645 0.645 0.645 0.36 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.64700 0.681 0.681 0.681 0.681 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.68750 0.714 0.714 0.714 0.714 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.71800 0.743 0.743 0.743 0.743 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.74850 0.768 0.768 0.768 0.768 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.77900 0.791 0.791 0.791 0.791 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.79950 0.812 0.812 0.812 0.812 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.81

1000 0.830 0.830 0.830 0.830 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.83

Structural Damage

Exceeding Damage State Probabilities Discrete Damage State Probabilities

W-High Code Seismic Design W-High Code Seismic Design

Developed DepthID and FluxID with precalcuated damage states (~130K rows)

All 28 bldg. types and 7 seismic design levels

Hazus Tsunami – Combined TSU – EQ Losses (UDF and GBS)

Earthquake results for this study region are not up to date. Switch to earthquake hazard and run analysis based on the same earthquake scenario that generated the current tsunami hazard.

1)Run earthquake first

2)Run tsunami and combined losses

3)Very fast analysis leveraging SQL look up tables

1 2

3

Combined Loss Example P[CSTR|EQ+TS] = P[CSTR|EQ] + P[CSTR|TS] - P[CSTR|EQ] P[CSTR|TS] +

(P[≥ESTR|EQ] - P[CSTR|EQ]) (P[≥ESTR|TS] - P[CSTR|TS])

Structural Losses

Non-Structural Losses

Bldg Loss Ratio Contents

Content Loss Ratio

Total Building Losses

Grays Harbor, Earthquake Only 360,960,000$ 1,267,352,000$ 21% 458,383,000$ 9% 2,086,695,000$ Grays Harbor, Tsunami Only 207,937,000$ 382,284,000$ 8% 590,984,000$ 12% 1,181,205,000$ Grays Harbor, Combined Losses 456,632,737$ 1,795,299,752$ 29% 1,403,765,861$ 28% 3,655,698,350$

Tsunami Casualty Model 2 Steps: 1. Evacuation Travel Time Ttravel from USGS Pedestrian Evacuation

Analyst 2. Probability of Casualties – Rfatality Rcasualty FEMA (2013), Yeh (2014) –

based on Community Preparedness Levels

Hazus Evacuation Travel Time Analysis – Level 1

Level 1: Safe but conservative approach 1. Add road network: ftp://ftp2.census.gov/geo/tiger/TIGER2016/ 2. Determine Safe Zones (area of study region not inundated, >0-

2m and >2m)

Marsh

Hazus Evacuation Travel Time Analysis – Level 1

Hazus Evacuation Travel Time Analysis – Level 2

Level 2: Analysis performed using USGS tool

Level 2 – Import to Hazus

Pedestrian Travel Time Reporting

Casualty Model Probability Step 2 (“Reaction Time”)

Good

Fair Poor

Good

Fair Poor

Community Preparedness: • Largest source

of uncertainty in casualty model.

• Uncertainty incorporated throughout.

Probability Density Functions (PDF) created from user parameters. • Median = half react

Casualty Model – Casualty Parameters

Good

Fair Poor

Median Reaction Time (Tprep): • Local Example: 30 min travel, 0 min warn time

Good (0.2*30=6min); Fair (0.6*30=18min); Poor (1.0*30=30min)

• Distant Example: 240 min travel, 60 min warn time Good (0.2*180=36min); Fair (0.6*180=108min); Poor (1.0*180=180min)

Casualty Model Probability Step 2

Requires assessment of time to safety and time to “partial” safety Results in probability that population is impacted in these zones

Rcasualty = probability in this zone

Zone = 99% fatality, 1% injury

Zone = 50% fatality, 50% injury

Rfatality = probability in this zone

Travel Time Mapping

1) Summarized at Census Block Combined with Night/Day & Under and Over 65 Population walking speeds

2) Maximum pedestrian travel times for each block are applied

Application Examples

PMEL - SIFT • NOAA's Pacific Marine

Environmental Laboratory (PMEL) and specifically their Short-term Inundation Forecast for Tsunami (SIFT) product.

• PMEL SIFT for five localities: Crescent City, CA; Garibaldi, OR; Homer, AK; Kahului, HI; and Westport, WA.

• Each state folder contains Tsunami hazard input data required for Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3 analysis in Hazus.

Honolulu County Inventory Updates

• Essential Facility Updates - Leveraged previous survey work, including detailed UH building data.

• New Site-Specific Building Inventory:

• DLNR Sea Level Rise building data ~20K

• Expanded to 80K based on footprints, assessor data

• More accurate building floor areas and valuations increased exposures over default (~90%)

Hazus “3,500 year” Tsunami $1.8 Billion Essential Facility Losses Population Exposed: • Day: 404K • Night: 294K

$41.5 Billion

Total Building Economic Loss

Hazus “1,500 year” Great Aleutian Tsunami Extreme Evacuation Zone $396 Million Essential Facility Building Losses Population Exposed: • Day: 298K • Night: 217K

$18.2 Billion Total Building Economic Loss

Hazus “400 year” Standard Evacuation Zone Standard Evacuation Zone $67 Million Essential Facility Building Losses Population Exposed: • Day: 86K • Night: 59K

$2.3 Billion Total Building Economic Loss

Honolulu County Annualized Tsunami Losses

$81.2M Annual Tsunami Losses: • ~1/4th Hurricane Wind • ~2x greater than Coastal

Flooding

Total Building Economic Losses

$81.2 Million

Annual Building Economic Loss

$43,257,017 $1,545,724,492

$2,76

400 year1,500 year3,500 year

Total Education Building Losses

$4.4 Million Annual Education Building Economic Loss

$6,044,243 $87,081,385

$525,565,0

400 year1,500 year3,500 year

Total Government Building Losses

$0.5 Million Annual Government Building Economic Loss

$2,253,128,683

$18,208,896,659

$41,501,040,666

400 year

1,500 year

3,500 year

Hazus Tsunami Essential Facility Losses

• Significant losses in extreme zones

• Mostly schools and government occupancy types

[CELLRANGE]

[VALUE] [PERCENTAGE

]

[CELLRANGE] [VALUE]

[PERCENTAGE]

[CELLRANGE], [VALUE],

[PERCENTAGE]

Hawaii’s Great Aleutian Tsunami Scenario

• “East Aleutian” scenario energy directed to Hawaii

• Geologic evidence on Kauai – 30 foot runup, ~500 years ago

• 3x greater than 1946 – Hawaii’s deadliest tsunami

Hazus GAT Statewide Loss by Count Summary Assessed by Loss Ratio: • (Hazus bldg. loss/Hazus bldg. value)

Hazus GAT Statewide Building Economic Loss Summary

• Highest countywide loss ratios: Maui and Kauai

• Greatest total losses: Oahu

• Building only losses: Does not include damage to Harbor Facilities

Hazus Tsunami Model LossesState of Hawaii - Max Aluetian ScenarioBuilding Economic Loss ($K)County Structural Non Structural Contents Income Total Bldg Loss Loss RatioHawaii 271,326$ 686,223$ 992,391$ 608,395$ 2,558,336$ 4.5%Honolulu 2,478,743$ 8,556,046$ 7,174,106$ 1,891,767$ 18,208,896$ 3.4%Kauai 252,452$ 494,485$ 571,793$ 292,312$ 1,611,041$ 8.9%Maui 655,124$ 1,139,508$ 1,691,499$ 997,428$ 4,483,560$ 9.0%

Total 3,657,645$ 10,876,262$ 10,429,789$ 3,789,902$ 26,861,833$

Honolulu Ped Travel Times

Hazus GAT Statewide Evacuation and Casualty Summary

• 4.5 hour tsunami travel time

• Large exposed populations.

• No casualties at “Good” preparedness level.

• Casualties could occur in poorly prepared communities (eg. tourist, cruise ship)

San Diego Tijuana EQ Scenario – M6.9 Rose Canyon

Triggered landslide scenario, Coronado escarpment

Tsunami casualties could exceed EQ casualties

Model Support hazus-support@riskmapcds.com