提高基础设施韧性

IF 1.7 3区 工程技术 Q3 ENGINEERING, CIVIL
D. Elms, I. McCahon, Robert E. Dewhirst
{"title":"提高基础设施韧性","authors":"D. Elms, I. McCahon, Robert E. Dewhirst","doi":"10.1080/10286608.2019.1615479","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Most formal engineering approaches to uncertainty use risk-based methods. Because risk formulations have a number of limitations there are situations where a resilience approach is preferable. A problem with resilience is the difficulty of measuring it. The paper discusses the issue and shows how a resilience formulation was used to prioritise actions to improve infrastructure resilience in an extensive region of New Zealand. The region was a complex system-of-systems so a systems approach was used. Once modelled, the infrastructure system was probed using three natural-hazard scenarios to determine system-element vulnerabilities. The vulnerability of each element was then matched with an importance value reflecting the effect of an element failure on community resilience. Community resilience was quantified in terms of overall income coming from three main sources each of which could be characterised by flow in a virtual pipeline. The pipelines were complex: tourism, for instance, required not only roads but also accommodation, communication, access and so on. The effect of infrastructure failures on pipeline flow and hence income quantified the relative importance of each infrastructure element. The vulnerability and importance values as a pair prioritised resilience-improving intervention for the element.","PeriodicalId":50689,"journal":{"name":"Civil Engineering and Environmental Systems","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Improving infrastructure resilience\",\"authors\":\"D. Elms, I. McCahon, Robert E. Dewhirst\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10286608.2019.1615479\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Most formal engineering approaches to uncertainty use risk-based methods. Because risk formulations have a number of limitations there are situations where a resilience approach is preferable. A problem with resilience is the difficulty of measuring it. The paper discusses the issue and shows how a resilience formulation was used to prioritise actions to improve infrastructure resilience in an extensive region of New Zealand. The region was a complex system-of-systems so a systems approach was used. Once modelled, the infrastructure system was probed using three natural-hazard scenarios to determine system-element vulnerabilities. The vulnerability of each element was then matched with an importance value reflecting the effect of an element failure on community resilience. Community resilience was quantified in terms of overall income coming from three main sources each of which could be characterised by flow in a virtual pipeline. The pipelines were complex: tourism, for instance, required not only roads but also accommodation, communication, access and so on. The effect of infrastructure failures on pipeline flow and hence income quantified the relative importance of each infrastructure element. The vulnerability and importance values as a pair prioritised resilience-improving intervention for the element.\",\"PeriodicalId\":50689,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Civil Engineering and Environmental Systems\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Civil Engineering and Environmental Systems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10286608.2019.1615479\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, CIVIL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Civil Engineering and Environmental Systems","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10286608.2019.1615479","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, CIVIL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

大多数正式的不确定性工程方法使用基于风险的方法。由于风险公式有许多局限性,因此在某些情况下,弹性方法更可取。弹性的一个问题是难以衡量它。本文讨论了这一问题,并展示了如何使用弹性公式来优先考虑行动,以提高新西兰广大地区的基础设施弹性。该地区是一个复杂的系统的系统,因此使用了系统方法。一旦建模,基础设施系统将使用三种自然灾害情景来确定系统元素的脆弱性。然后将每个元素的脆弱性与反映元素失效对社区恢复力影响的重要值进行匹配。社区恢复力是根据来自三个主要来源的总收入来量化的,每个主要来源都可以用虚拟管道中的流量来表征。这些管道很复杂:例如,旅游业不仅需要道路,还需要住宿、通讯、通道等。基础设施故障对管道流量和收入的影响量化了每个基础设施要素的相对重要性。脆弱性和重要性值作为一对优先考虑元素的弹性改善干预措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Improving infrastructure resilience
ABSTRACT Most formal engineering approaches to uncertainty use risk-based methods. Because risk formulations have a number of limitations there are situations where a resilience approach is preferable. A problem with resilience is the difficulty of measuring it. The paper discusses the issue and shows how a resilience formulation was used to prioritise actions to improve infrastructure resilience in an extensive region of New Zealand. The region was a complex system-of-systems so a systems approach was used. Once modelled, the infrastructure system was probed using three natural-hazard scenarios to determine system-element vulnerabilities. The vulnerability of each element was then matched with an importance value reflecting the effect of an element failure on community resilience. Community resilience was quantified in terms of overall income coming from three main sources each of which could be characterised by flow in a virtual pipeline. The pipelines were complex: tourism, for instance, required not only roads but also accommodation, communication, access and so on. The effect of infrastructure failures on pipeline flow and hence income quantified the relative importance of each infrastructure element. The vulnerability and importance values as a pair prioritised resilience-improving intervention for the element.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Civil Engineering and Environmental Systems
Civil Engineering and Environmental Systems 工程技术-工程:土木
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
16.70%
发文量
10
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Civil Engineering and Environmental Systems is devoted to the advancement of systems thinking and systems techniques throughout systems engineering, environmental engineering decision-making, and engineering management. We do this by publishing the practical applications and developments of "hard" and "soft" systems techniques and thinking. Submissions that allow for better analysis of civil engineering and environmental systems might look at: -Civil Engineering optimization -Risk assessment in engineering -Civil engineering decision analysis -System identification in engineering -Civil engineering numerical simulation -Uncertainty modelling in engineering -Qualitative modelling of complex engineering systems
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信