Risk-based Resilience Assessment Model Focusing on Urban Infrastructure System Restoration

被引:12
|
作者
Ongkowijoyo, Citra S. [1 ]
Doloi, Hemanta [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Melbourne, Parkville, Vic 3010, Australia
来源
7TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON BUILDING RESILIENCE: USING SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE TO INFORM POLICY AND PRACTICE IN DISASTER RISK REDUCTION | 2018年 / 212卷
关键词
Risk assessment; Resilience analysis; Infrastructure system; Urban community; FRAMEWORK;
D O I
10.1016/j.proeng.2018.01.144
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
A number of metrics in the past studies have been proposed and numerically implemented to assess particular system resilience during natural disaster and their recovery in the aftermath of the events. Among such performance measures, resilience is a reliable metric. The resilience assessment on the urban infrastructure system facing disturbances depends on comprehensive risk assessment. Nonetheless, it is found that previous studies lack of putting the risk assessment processes within the resilience assessment bodies. This study proposes a risk criticality-based resilient assessment model for scenario-based resilience assessment of infrastructure systems. The model accounts for uncertainties in the process including; the people expressions towards risks measures, risks magnitude and its impact to community estimation, and the dynamic of causality propagation pattern simulation. The proposed model is applied to water supply infrastructure case study with a hypothetical restoration scenario. The resilience level is assessed and determined based on the maximum resilience level the system can reach. Results of this analysis have shown that a holistic and integrated mitigation plans and strategies that seek to address complex phenomena towards system restoration is a critical requirement. The model will enable stakeholders to systemically assess the most-likely performance of the system during expected risk events. (C) 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:1115 / 1122
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Editorial: Water infrastructure in the US: The need for a risk-based management system
    Moghissi, A. Alan
    Technology, 2006, 9 (5-6): : 223 - 224
  • [22] A risk-based decision model and risk assessment of invasive mussels
    Wu, Yegang
    Bartell, Steve M.
    Orr, Jim
    Ragland, Jared
    Anderson, Dennis
    ECOLOGICAL COMPLEXITY, 2010, 7 (02) : 243 - 255
  • [23] Risk-Based Probabilistic Quantification of Power Distribution System Operational Resilience
    Poudel, Shiva
    Dubey, Anamika
    Bose, Anjan
    IEEE SYSTEMS JOURNAL, 2020, 14 (03): : 3506 - 3517
  • [24] Risk-Based Approach for Informing Sustainable Infrastructure Resilience Enhancement and Potential Resilience Implication in Terms of Emergency Service Perspective
    Gromek, Pawel
    Sobolewski, Grzegorz
    SUSTAINABILITY, 2020, 12 (11)
  • [25] Evaluating computer-based assessment in a risk-based model
    Zakrzewski, Stan
    Steven, Christine
    Ricketts, Chris
    ASSESSMENT & EVALUATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION, 2009, 34 (04) : 439 - 454
  • [26] A Unified Assessment Approach for Urban Infrastructure Sustainability and Resilience
    Wang, Liang
    Xue, Xiaolong
    Wang, Zeyu
    Zhang, Linshuang
    ADVANCES IN CIVIL ENGINEERING, 2018, 2018
  • [27] Risk-Based Expenditure Allocation for Infrastructure Improvement
    Ayyub, Bilal M.
    Popescu, Clara
    JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING, 2003, 8 (06) : 394 - 404
  • [28] Constructing resilience model of port infrastructure based on system dynamics
    Cho H.
    Park H.
    International Journal of Safety and Security Engineering, 2017, 7 (03) : 352 - 360
  • [29] The Beijing Case Study of Risk-Based Resilience Planning for Urban Local Flooding Management
    Zhou, Yuwen
    Liu, Zilong
    Liu, ShanShan
    Liu, Chan
    Tang, Ying
    Wang, Hongli
    ADVANCES IN HYDROINFORMATICS, 2016, : 275 - 284
  • [30] Risk-based investment allocation for infrastructure networks
    Kunttu, S.
    Valisalo, T.
    Pirttimaki, J.
    RISK, RELIABILITY AND SAFETY: INNOVATING THEORY AND PRACTICE, 2017, : 526 - 531