Search for: All records

Abstract Recovery‐based design links building‐level engineering and broader community resilience objectives. However, the relationship between above‐code engineering improvements and recovery performance is highly nonlinear and varies on a building‐ and site‐specific basis, presenting a challenge to both individual owners and code developers. In addition, downtime simulations are computationally expensive and hinder exploration of the full design space. In this paper, we present an optimization framework to identify optimal above‐code design improvements to achieve building‐specific recovery objectives. We supplement the optimization with a workflow to develop surrogate models that (i) rapidly estimate recovery performance under a range of user‐defined improvements, and (ii) enable complex and informative optimization techniques that can be repeated for different stakeholder priorities. We explore the implementation of the framework using a case study office building, with a 50th percentile baseline functional recovery time of 155 days at the 475‐year ground‐motion return period. To optimally achieve a target recovery time of 21 days, we find that nonstructural component enhancements are required, and that increasing structural strength (through increase of the importance factor) can be detrimental. However, for less ambitious target recovery times, we find that the use of larger importance factors eliminates the need for nonstructural component improvements. Such results demonstrate that the relative efficacy of a given recovery‐based design strategy will depend strongly on the design criteria set by the user. 

Following the Ridgecrest Earthquake Sequence, consisting of a M6.4 foreshock and M7.1 mainshock along with many other foreshocks and aftershocks, the Geotechnical Extreme Events Reconnaissance (GEER) Association deployed a team to gather perishable data. The team focused their efforts on documenting ground deformations including surface fault rupture south of the Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake, and liquefaction features in Trona and Argus. The team published a report within two weeks of the M7.1 mainshock. This paper presents data products gathered by the team, which are now published and publicly accessible. The data products presented herein include ground-based observations using GPS trackers, digital cameras, and hand measuring devices, as well as UAV-based imaging products using Structure from Motion to create point clouds and digital surface models. The paper describes the data products, as well as tools available for interacting with the products.