• Earthquakes and Structures
• /
• v.12 no.1
• /
• pp.47-54
• /
• 2017

Introduction of robustness index in the structure is done in three ways: deterministic robustness index, probabilistic robustness index, and risk-based robustness index. In past decades, there have been numerous researches to evaluate robustness index in both deterministic and probabilistic ways. In this research, by using a risk analysis, a risk-based robustness index has been defined for the structure. By creating scenarios in accordance with uncertainty parameters of critical and unexpected gas blast accident, a new method has been suggested for evaluating risk-based robustness index. Finally, a numerical example for the evaluation of risk-based robustness index of a four-storey reinforced concrete moment frame, designed and built based on Eurocode 8 code, has been presented with results showing a lower risk of robustness.

• International journal of steel structures
• /
• v.18 no.5
• /
• pp.1710-1722
• /
• 2018

Investigating remained damages from terrible earthquakes, it could be concluded that some events including explosion because of defect and failure in the building mechanical facilities or caused by gas leak, firing, aftershocks, etc., which are occurred during or a few time after the earthquake, will increase the effects of damages. In this paper, by introducing a complete risk analysis which included direct and indirect risks for earthquake (the main shock) and aftershock, the corresponding robustness index was created that called as "robustness index sequential critical events risk-based". One of the main properties of the intended robustness index is using progressive collapse percentage in its evaluation. Then, in a numerical example for a 4-storey moment resisting steel frame structure, a method is presented for obtaining all effective parameters in robustness index evaluation based on the intended risk and at last its results were reported.

• Structural Engineering and Mechanics
• /
• v.76 no.2
• /
• pp.193-205
• /
• 2020

The growing need for assuring efficient and sustainable investments in civil engineering structures has determined a renovated interest in the rational design of such structures from designers, clients and authorities. As a result, risk-informed decision-making methodologies are increasingly being used as a direct decision tool or as an upper-level layer from which performance-based approaches are then calibrated against. One of the most important and challenging aspects of today's structural design is to adequately handle the system-level effects, the known unknowns and the unknown unknowns. These aspects revolve around assessing and evaluating relevant damage scenarios, namely those involving unacceptable/intolerable damage levels. Hence, the importance of risk analysis of disproportionate collapse, and along with it of robustness. However, the way robustness has been used in modern design codes varies substantially, from simple provisions of prescriptive rules to complex risk analysis of the disproportionate collapse. As a result, implementing design for robustness is still very much a grey area and more so when it comes to defining means to quantify robustness. This paper revisits the most common robustness frameworks, highlighting their merits and limitations, and identifies one among them which is very promising as a way forward to solve the still open challenges.

• Journal of Environmental Science International
• /
• v.18 no.7
• /
• pp.781-796
• /
• 2009

The current standard level of Heat Health Watch Warning System consider both daily maximum temperature and daily maximum heat index(HI), but current standard could not consider daily maximum HI due to the difficulties in forecasting when we consider both daily maximum temperature and daily maximum HI and no considering HI because relative humidity could not observed for some regions. So, Newly established standard level of Heat Health Watch Warning System is based on daily maximum temperature exceeding $30^{\circ}C$ for two consecutive days or daily minimum temperature exceeding $25^{\circ}C$ and daily maximum temperature exceeding $30^{\circ}C$. These days are called "extreme heat days". On extreme heat days, the standard of extreme heat advisory is based on daily maximum temperature among exceeding $32.7^{\circ}C$ and not exceeding $34.8^{\circ}C$, and extreme heat warning is based on daily maximum temperature exceeding $34.8^{\circ}C$. ANOVA analysis was carried out using the data of Seoul Metropolitan City in 1994 to check the robustness of the new standard level of Heat Health Watch Warning System from this study, in particular for mortality variable. The results reveal that the new standard specifies excess mortality well, showing significance level of 0.05 in the difference of excess mortality for each phase.

• KDI Journal of Economic Policy
• /
• v.36 no.4
• /
• pp.135-169
• /
• 2014

This study empirically analyzes changes in production patterns of farmers by agricultural disaster insurance. The aim of this project is to achieve stability of farm management by paying insurance in case of a natural disaster. However, it causes farmers to change production patterns in the direction of increasing production, and leads the crop price to drop. This can be explained by producers' risk reduction through the disaster insurance. The empirical analysis is based on IV approach with using two stage least squares method. The first stage estimates by difference-in-differences methodology indicate that the production of insurable crops increases more about 80,000ton on average than that of non-insurable crops. In addition, to solve the endogeneity problem caused by general supply and demand model, I use the first stage estimates and find that the price index of the crops drops about 2.3% according to the production increase by 10,000ton. The credibility of these results is also attained by various robustness checks. These findings suggest that it is necessary for government to analyze the whole economy which consists of producer and consumer welfare when it determines the policy. Besides, it implies that it is essential to develop a new market to cope with the unintended effect.