IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i5p2583-d756714.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Conventional RVS Methods for Seismic Risk Assessment for Estimating the Current Situation of Existing Buildings: A State-of-the-Art Review

Author

Listed:
  • Nurullah Bektaş

    (Department of Structural Engineering and Geotechnics, Széchenyi István University, 9026 Győr, Hungary)

  • Orsolya Kegyes-Brassai

    (Department of Structural Engineering and Geotechnics, Széchenyi István University, 9026 Győr, Hungary)

Abstract

Developments in the field of earthquake engineering over the past few decades have contributed to the development of new methods for evaluating the risk levels in buildings. These research methods are rapid visual screening (RVS), seismic risk indexes, and vulnerability assessments, which have been developed to assess the levels of damage in a building or its structural components. RVS methods have been proposed for the rapid pre- and/or post-earthquake screening of existing large building stock in earthquake-prone areas on the basis of sidewalk surveys. The site seismicity, the soil type, the building type, and the corresponding building characteristic features are to be separately examined, and the vulnerability level of each building can be identified by employing the RVS methods. This study describes, evaluates, and compares the findings of previous investigations that utilized conventional RVS methods within a framework. It also suggests the methods to be used for specific goals and proposes prospective enhancement strategies. Furthermore, the article discusses the time-consuming RVS methods (such as FEMA 154, which requires from 15 to 30 min, while NRCC requires one hour), and provides an overview of the application areas of the methods (pre-earthquake: FEMA 154, NRCC, NZEE, etc.; postearthquake: GNDT, EMS, etc.). This review of the traditional RVS methods offers a comprehensive guide and reference for field practitioners (e.g., engineers, architects), and recommends enhancement techniques (e.g., machine learning, fuzzy logic) for researchers to be used in future improvements.

Suggested Citation

  • Nurullah Bektaş & Orsolya Kegyes-Brassai, 2022. "Conventional RVS Methods for Seismic Risk Assessment for Estimating the Current Situation of Existing Buildings: A State-of-the-Art Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-40, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:5:p:2583-:d:756714
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/5/2583/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/5/2583/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sreerama Ajay Kumar & Chenna Rajaram & Shashank Mishra & Ramancharla Pradeep Kumar & Anoop Karnath, 2017. "Rapid visual screening of different housing typologies in Himachal Pradesh, India," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 85(3), pages 1851-1875, February.
    2. Ahmad Mohamad El-Maissi & Sotirios A. Argyroudis & Fadzli Mohamed Nazri, 2020. "Seismic Vulnerability Assessment Methodologies for Roadway Assets and Networks: A State-of-the-Art Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-31, December.
    3. S. Rajarathnam & A. Santhakumar, 2015. "Assessment of seismic building vulnerability based on rapid visual screening technique aided by aerial photographs on a GIS platform," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 78(2), pages 779-802, September.
    4. Yeudy F. Vargas-Alzate & Nieves Lantada & Ramón González-Drigo & Luis G. Pujades, 2020. "Seismic Risk Assessment Using Stochastic Nonlinear Models," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-21, February.
    5. N. Alam & M. Alam & S. Tesfamariam, 2012. "Buildings’ seismic vulnerability assessment methods: a comparative study," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 62(2), pages 405-424, June.
    6. Seif-eddine Cherif & Mimoun Chourak & Mohamed Abed & Luis Pujades, 2017. "Seismic risk in the city of Al Hoceima (north of Morocco) using the vulnerability index method, applied in Risk-UE project," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 85(1), pages 329-347, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nurullah Bektaş & Ferenc Lilik & Orsolya Kegyes-Brassai, 2022. "Development of a Fuzzy Inference System Based Rapid Visual Screening Method for Seismic Assessment of Buildings Presented on a Case Study of URM Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-27, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yu Zhao & Bo Huang & Zhizhong Zhu & Jiachen Guo & Jianqun Jiang, 2024. "Building information extraction and earthquake damage prediction in an old urban area based on UAV oblique photogrammetry," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 120(13), pages 11665-11692, October.
    2. Ploutarchos N. Kerpelis & Spyridon K. Golfinopoulos & Dimitrios E. Alexakis, 2021. "A Proposed Theoretical Approach for the Estimation of Seismic Structural Vulnerability of Wastewater Treatment Plants," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-18, April.
    3. Armando Aguilar-Meléndez & Lluis G. Pujades & Alex H. Barbat & Marisol Monterrubio-Velasco & Josep Puente & Nieves Lantada, 2022. "Comparative analysis of a new assessment of the seismic risk of residential buildings of two districts of Barcelona," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 110(3), pages 1649-1691, February.
    4. Eliana Fischer & Giovanni Barreca & Annalisa Greco & Francesco Martinico & Alessandro Pluchino & Andrea Rapisarda, 2023. "Seismic risk assessment of a large metropolitan area by means of simulated earthquakes," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 118(1), pages 117-153, August.
    5. Chen, Weiyi & Zhang, Limao, 2021. "Resilience assessment of regional areas against earthquakes using multi-source information fusion," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 215(C).
    6. Md. Mashrur Rahman & Uttama Barua & Farzana Khatun & Ishrat Islam & Rezwana Rafiq, 2018. "Participatory Vulnerability Reduction (PVR): an urban community-based approach for earthquake management," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 93(3), pages 1479-1505, September.
    7. Nurullah Bektaş & Ferenc Lilik & Orsolya Kegyes-Brassai, 2022. "Development of a Fuzzy Inference System Based Rapid Visual Screening Method for Seismic Assessment of Buildings Presented on a Case Study of URM Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-27, December.
    8. Ahmad Mohamad El-Maissi & Sotirios A. Argyroudis & Moustafa Moufid Kassem & Lee Vien Leong & Fadzli Mohamed Nazri, 2022. "An Integrated Framework for the Quantification of Road Network Seismic Vulnerability and Accessibility to Critical Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-27, September.
    9. Navdeep Agrawal & Laxmi Gupta & Jagabandhu Dixit, 2021. "Assessment of the Socioeconomic Vulnerability to Seismic Hazards in the National Capital Region of India Using Factor Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-19, August.
    10. Eliana Fischer & Alessio Emanuele Biondo & Annalisa Greco & Francesco Martinico & Alessandro Pluchino & Andrea Rapisarda, 2022. "Objective and Perceived Risk in Seismic Vulnerability Assessment at an Urban Scale," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-24, July.
    11. Guangyun Gao & Shaofeng Yao & Yujun Cui & Qingsheng Chen & Xianlin Zhang & Kewen Wang, 2018. "Zoning of confined aquifers inrush and quicksand in Shanghai region," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 91(3), pages 1341-1363, April.
    12. Xiaoming Lei & Limin Sun & Ye Xia & Tiantao He, 2020. "Vibration-Based Seismic Damage States Evaluation for Regional Concrete Beam Bridges Using Random Forest Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-18, June.
    13. Onur Coskun & Alper Aldemir, 2023. "Machine learning network suitable for accurate rapid seismic risk estimation of masonry building stocks," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 115(1), pages 261-287, January.
    14. Alexandru Banica & Lucian Rosu & Ionel Muntele & Adrian Grozavu, 2017. "Towards Urban Resilience: A Multi-Criteria Analysis of Seismic Vulnerability in Iasi City (Romania)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-17, February.
    15. Jose Manuel Diaz-Sarachaga & Daniel Jato-Espino, 2020. "Analysis of vulnerability assessment frameworks and methodologies in urban areas," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 100(1), pages 437-457, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:5:p:2583-:d:756714. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.