KEM-34 Vulnerability of infrastructures and the potential use of sensor information

Information on the earthquake (location, intensity) and on the impact of it on (Infra-)structures is essential to asset owners and authorities in Groningen. Now this information is limited to KNMI shake maps produced within minutes of the earthquake. In the current HRA toolbox no infrastructures are taken into account. Information on the state and vulnerability of infrastructures is lacking for Groningen or at least scattered around between different owners. It is assumed furthermore that having sensors on infrastructures can improve the assessment of the impact of a future earthquake.
This project investigates the possibilities of including the infrastructures in the HRA model by assessing methods to determine the vulnerability of the infrastructures as well as investigates the potential of receiving relevant information from connecting (low cost) sensors to infrastructures. All together this will provide (near) real time information to stakeholders regarding the essential infrastructures in Groningen.

Specific research questions to be answered are:
1) Which infrastructures are most critical for authorities / first responders?
2) What are the most probable damage scenarios for infrastructures in Groningen?
3) What is the vulnerability of the relevant infrastructures in the area that are necessary for the first period (minutes, hours, days) after a large earthquake has occurred? This includes gas pipes, water, electricity cables and telecommunication.
4) How to integrate information about vulnerability of infrastructures to tackle cascading effects in the Groningen system?
5) Is it possible to gain relevant information from existing or specifically placed (low cost) sensors on infrastructural objects?
6) What kind of information related to the infrastructure is necessary, for whom (e.g. first responders and other operational parties), at what moment (after the event) and in which form?
7) How can infrastructures be taken into the HRA toolbox?

RESEARCH REQUEST FULL TEXT

The project has delivered a large series of research products, mostly documented via report-type deliverables and peer-review publications available at Turnkey publications and Turnkey deliverables.

The project considered Groningen as one of the test-bed of the Turnkey project and planned – for this region - a series of action somewhat compatible with the delivering scheme of KEM 34.

At the end of the project a series of Groningen-sprecific deliverables resulted nominally relevant for Groningen and KEM 34:

D2.3 Report on seismic ground motion and urban infrastructure monitoring systems across testbeds

D4.2: Report on recommendations on fragility functions for buildings and infrastructure components to be used in rapid response context

D4.3: Report on simplified models for the estimation of seismic functional and systemic losses

Other deliverables, including publications by Deltares and KNMI, can also be considered of interest to the authorities of The Netherlands about infrastructural risk.

The KEM scientific expert panel reviewed the project.

KEM PROJECT EVALUATION

The team involved in the TUNRKEY project is believed to be very good, with some excellence at the European level, with respect to the questions raised by the KEM 34 research question. It is also undeniable that the TURNKEY project has developed a large amount of knowledge related to its objectives. On the other hand, it seems that most of the added value of KEM 34 is more in the involvement of the Groningen region and related Netherlands’ scientific and governmental network with the European research community of engineering seismology and earthquake engineering, rather than the delivery of operational tools for seismic risk management and/or direct answers to the questions above.

The deliverables of KEM 34 partially delivered comprehensive tools to carry out risk analysis for infrastructure and guidelines to gather vulnerability information from monitoring systems of infrastructural components. Some of these tools also still need consolidation. 

Nevertheless, the interaction of The Netherlands with a wide and high-level research community in Europe, with the exposure of the Groningen case as a testbed for the TURNKEY project, is considered significant added value and knowledge investment, such that KEM 34 can be considered successful anyway, in terms of capacity building.