| | 40 | |
| | 41 | == Example Applications == |
| | 42 | === Post-earthquake Building Assessment === |
| | 43 | By Gavin Treadgold |
| | 44 | A colleague of mine lead a New Zealand team of earthquake engineers to Padang last October following the earthquake to assess their structures. Whilst the assessment process worked well, management of the captured information was not as good as it could have been (they used a spreadsheet), and as a result, I'd like to suggest a project to develop a module to capture assessment information about buildings and structures. Any given building/structure may have multiple assessments through response and recovery and they will vary in detail (e.g. first may be very quick, second may be 72 hours later, and a detailed assessment may to 2-3 weeks or more to occur). As far as I'm aware, there are 2-3 key assessment processes and forms being used: |
| | 45 | |
| | 46 | 1. US Applied Technology Council - ATC-20-1 Field Manual: Postearthquake Safety Evaluation of Buildings: Second Edition <http://www.atcouncil.org/> - note that this appears to be non-free. |
| | 47 | 2. New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering - Building Safety Evaluation in a State of Emergency (note that this has been derived from the ATC work) <http://db.nzsee.org.nz/Publications.xml> |
| | 48 | 3. Italy - some Italians have also developed a methodology for assessment, but other than awareness of it, I don't have more details to hand. I do know it was used following the L-Aquila earthquake <http://en..wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_L%27Aquila_earthquake> |
| | 49 | |
| | 50 | My preferred and selfish approach would be to have a student implement the NZSEE forms for GSOC, as I have ready access to a number of members that went to Padang, have their spreadsheet that they used, and can obtain their feedback. In addition, the NZSEE methodology is more recent (2009 vs 2005) than the ATC material. It is also more openly accessible. |
| | 51 | |
| | 52 | In addition to capturing assessment information about buildings based upon the forms contained in the guidelines, there also needs to be the ability capture scanned sketches (e.g. basic plan views - these may be photographed/more likely or scanned/less likely) and attach images (non-georeferenced and georeferenced) showing the building and structural damge. The NZ team took 6 Garmin Oregon 550 GPS units that have built-in 3.2MP geotagging cameras - so implementation of support for geotagged images would need to be implemented (if not already in place). I would also like some thought given as to how we can package multiple assessments up in XML that can be packaged in EDXL to make it easier to share this assessment information. |
