Program Outline Barbara Schauer, National Institute of Building Sciences, Moderator

1. The HAZUS Hurricane Model and Its Use in MitigationNational Hurricane ConferenceOrlando, April 2002

2. Program Outline Barbara Schauer, National Institute of Building Sciences, Moderator • HAZUS Program Overview: Ed Laatsch, Federal Emergency Management Agency, • Wind Committee Technical Oversight Role : Joe Minor, Chairman, University of Missouri – Rolla, • Wind Model Methodology Overview: Peter Vickery, Applied Research Associates, Inc. • Wind Model Software Demonstration: Frank Lavelle, Applied Research Associates, Inc.

3. Overview of the HAZUS Multihazard Loss Estimation Program Ed Laatsch, FEMA Mitigation DirectorateWashington, D.C.

4. Vision To Reduce the Loss of Life and Property and Protect Institutions from Natural Hazards by Leading and Supporting the Nation in a Comprehensive, Risk-based, Emergency Management Program of Mitigation, Preparedness, Response, and Recovery.

5. Loss Estimation • Calculation of damage and economic loss to buildings and infrastructure. • Includes determining casualties, shelter requirements and indirect economic loss.

6. Program Accomplishments and Objectives • Developed versions of an earthquake loss estimation program called “HAZUS” in 1997, 1999 and 2000. • Developing HAZUS Multi-Hazard to include loss estimation for hurricane, flood and earthquake hazards. • HAZUS is PC/GIS based software program available from FEMA.

7. HAZUS • Major HAZUS consortiums in San Francisco, Los Angeles and New York. • Over 1,500 copies distributed to federal agencies, local emergency managers, fire departments, universities and others. • Considerable international interest.

8. HAZUS • HAZUS is used for FEMA’s first estimate of losses following an earthquake. • Information used in support of response and recovery operations. • Utilized in the Seattle Earthquake.

9. Multihazard HAZUS • Preview Hurricane and Flood Models to be released with HAZUS in 2002. • Hurricane Model development will continue to 2004/5. • Other wind hazard models - thunderstorm, hail, tornado – to be developed for future releases.

10. ProjectTeam • Funding by FEMA. • Management by the National Institute of Building Sciences. • Technical oversight by Expert Committees. • Technical development and testing by Specialized Consultants. • User involvement throughout development.

11. Technical Oversight • Committees for wind (7), flood (12), earthquake (9) and software (7). • Committee members selected for their national expertise and user interests. • FEMA oversight for program coordination.

12. Developers • Hurricane: Applied Research Associates • Flood: ABS Consulting • Earthquake Software: Durham Technologies • Earthquake Methodology: Charles Kircher Associates, Comartin-Reis • Developers selected based on qualification-based competitive processes

13. Input Hazard Vulnerability Inventory • Damage • Direct Physical • Induced • Social • Direct Economic • Indirect Economic Validation / Calibration Loss Estimates Output HAZUS Methodology Flowchart

14. Potential HAZUS Applications • Mitigation - Study alternatives - Future land use planning • Regional Emergency Management -Post-disaster damage assessment and ground- truthing -Response planning - Risk Assessment for buildings and infrastructure • Recovery Planning - Recovery action planning - Long-term economic recovery planning

15. Mitigation Strategies Response & Recovery Awareness & Preparedness Performance Measures Quick Situation Assessment Planning and Exercise Scenarios Building Code Administration Operational Response Planning Criteria for Sustainable Communities Future Land Use Planning Strategic Planning HAZUS

16. Mitigation Strategies • Simulating Long Term Effects (i.e., Future Disasters) • Study the Cost Impact of Alternative Mitigation Strategies • Examples: • Regulating, Strengthening, or Removing Unsafe Structures • Establishing Safer Sites for Waste Disposal • Improving Land Use Planning

17. Readiness, Response and Recovery • Use of HAZUS Results to Support USACE Mission Assignments: • Temporary Housing • Debris Removal • Emergency Water • Emergency Power • Dam Inspection • Emergency Route Clearance • Readiness & Response Exercises

18. Technical Oversight Role of the HAZUS Wind Committee Joe Minor Wind Committee Chairman

19. Members Arthur Chiu Doug Smits Mark Powell Robert McComb Kishor Mehta Joseph Minor Masoud Zadeh Dale C. Perry Richard D. Marshall

20. Committee Operation Empowered to review and approve approach, technical content, and procedures Directly influenced model concept, methodology, documentation, and results

21. Committee Contributions • Selection of SOTA model components • Approach to wind-damage algorithms • Delineation of vulnerability relationships • Building classification system • Validation of components and ‘end-to-end’

22. Insurance Models HURRICANE BUILDING INVENTORY Velocity vs. $ INSURED LOSS “Black Box”

23. HAZUS Wind Model HURRICANE BUILDING INVENTORY Velocity vs. Damage Physical Damage Documented Cost of Physical Damage HISTORICAL LOSS DATA VALIDATE

24. Overview of HAZUS Wind Loss Estimation MethodologyPeter VickeryApplied Research Associates, Inc.Raleigh, NC

25. Overview • Brief Discussion of the Approach Used to develop the HAZUS wind loss methodology • Example Effect of Mitigation on Reduction in Average Annual Losses • Presentation of the HAZUS Prototype

26. 1. Extreme Wind Hazards Tornadoes Extratropical Cyclones Thunderstorms Hurricanes 2. Structural Load/Response Models Wind Loading Effects Atmospheric Pressure Change Missiles Pressure Structural Response Model 3. Structure/Physical Damage Frame Interior Contents Envelope 4. Risk Assessment and Loss Analysis Buildings Facilities Systems Building Classes Vulnerable Components Mitigation/Retrofit Loss Analysis HAZUS Wind Hazard-Load-Damage-Loss Framework

27. Hazard Validate Wind Loads Validate Resistances Validate Hazard + Loads + Resistances = External Damage Exterior Physical Damage Validate Interior/Contents Physical Damage Validate $ Losses Validate Individual Risk Formulation Methodology Windspeed $

28. Approach has focused on developing wind loss analysis methods for individual buildings as the foundation for building classification and loss studies. The individual building loss methodology has been applied to commercial, residential, and high potential loss facilities. Extensive validation has been performed and is continuing against multiple databases. Individual building analysis provides a standardized method to address mitigation and building code issues, and to develop damage functions for each building class. Individual building risk/loss analysis is the foundation of the HAZUS wind engineering-based loss analysis methodology Wind Loss EstimationApproach Regional PortfolioLoss Analysis Step 4. Building Stock Surveys, Databases, and/or UserSpecific Inputs Step 3. Step 2. Building/Facility WindClassification System Step 1. Individual Building Risk/Loss

29. Mitigation • Because HAZUS uses a load and resistance approach to estimate damage and the ensuing loss it is able to model the effects of mitigation • Preview model will allow for mitigation to be applied to single family residential buildings. • Mitigation methods include: • Addition of hurricane straps • Application of window protection (shutters, laminated glass) • Effects of re-nailing roof sheathing on damage/loss • Application of secondary water protection • Combinations of the above

30. Single Family Residential Buildings • Building Characteristics: • (1) Roof Shape: Hip vs. Gable • (2) Roof Wall Connections: Strap vs. Toe Nail • (3) Roof Sheathing Attachment: 6d vs. 8d • (4) Number of Stories: One vs Two • (5) Effect of Garage Door None, 10 psf, 20 psf • (6) Wall Construction: Wood/URM/RM • Total Number of Potential Classes is: • 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 3 x 3 = 144 • Total Number of Basic Single Family Building Types • 144 x (3 Quality Factors) = 432

31. Single Family Residential Mitigation Studies • Building Damage States vs. Wind Speed Developed varying the following • (1) Add Shutters • (2) Re Nail Roof at 6” OC Throughout and Upgrade Shingles • (3) Upgrade Roof (# 2 Above) and Add Shutters (#1 Above) • Total Number of Mitigation Cases: • 96x3 = 288 • Total Number of ALL Residential Buildings (Mitigated and As Built) • 288 + 432 = 720

32. Effect of Building Parameters on Damage State • Toe Nail to Strap 5% to 30% Increase • Hip to Gable 15% to 25% Increase • One Story to Two Story 40% to 70% Increase • 6d Sheathing Nails to 8d Sheathing Nails 0 - 15% Increase • URM vs. Wood ~0 • RM vs. URM ~0 • No Garage to 20 psf Garage ~0 • No Garage to 10 psf Garage ~0-25% Increase • Shutters 6% to 22% Decrease • Upgrade roof deck/cover 17% to 44% decrease • Shutters and Roof 30% to 60% Decrease • Effect of any one parameter on the building damage is coupled with changes in other parameters. • Wall Construction Does not Impact Average Building Damage States. Information will only be needed for casualty estimates.

33. Effect of Mitigation on Average Annual Losses (Valid in South Florida) • Addition of Shutters • 10% to 30% Reduction in AAL • Upgrade Roof Sheathing and Roof Cover • 7% to 50% Reduction in AAL • Add Shutters, Upgrade Roof Sheathing and Roof Cover • 35% to 65% Reduction in AAL • Add Shutters, Upgrade Roof Sheathing and Roof Cover, add Secondary WaterProtection • 40% to 80% Reduction in AAL